The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Canada's Opposition Parties Vow to Bring Down Government, 1 month into its term...
Originally posted by Wezil
Is there any precedent for a GG to allow Parliament to be prorogued so a government can avoid a vote of non-confidence?
I can't believe this is what you're fixating on. Power is about to be usurped in this country by a man who was just categorically rejected by voters just a month ago, and you're fixating on a delay in a confidence vote?
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
Seriously. a Liberal-appointed governor general may put in a Liberal Prime Minister who utterly failed in an election just a month before.
My mind is reeling.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
I can't believe this is what you're fixating on. Power is about to be usurped in this country by a man who was just categorically rejected by voters just a month ago, and you're fixating on a delay in a confidence vote?
I'm not as fond of beating dead horses as you are. I'm looking ahead not back.
edit - Besides. It's a good question. What does she do with such a request? The GG may have two tough calls to make in the coming weeks.
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
Let's assume the coalition gets into power and starts enacting Jack and Stephane's crazy ideas. They cripple the energy sector, spend to record deficits, and boot out a Western-learning legitimate government with some crazy bizarro-world coalition of bat**** crazy people.
How quickly do you think Alberta will get a legitimate separatist movement?
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
I think Canada is a failed experiment anyway. I'm the wrong person for that point.
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
Following the rules and spirit of our democracy constitutes "democratic process". Subverting an election result is fundamentally undemocratic. ***** all you want, but when a leader seizes power without being elected, it's undemocratic by definition.
Stop banging on this dead horse, your point is retarded.
Stop banging on this dead horse, your point is retarded.
It's perfectly constitutional.
I never said it was unconstitutional.
It is patently undemocratic to utterly fail to win a mandate from the voters, then go usurp it anyway. That's not a retarded point, it's just one you want to ignore to further your agenda.
What is going on right now is pissing me off on so many levels that I'm considering moving to Seattle or the Bay Area once the SO graduates rather than deal with this gongshow.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
Following the rules and spirit of our democracy constitutes "democratic process". Subverting an election result is fundamentally undemocratic. ***** all you want, but when a leader seizes power without being elected, it's undemocratic by definition.
How is subverting a somewhat undemocratic process to obtain a more democratic result "undemocratic"? I'm not asking for a moral judgement on the action, I'm asking how giving control to parties representing a greater share of the electorate is undemocratic.
I mean, you've attached certain moral judgements to democratic (good) and undemocratic (bad) and are now using those words to express your disapproval of certain actions. This would be fine if the words actually fit. I guess my point is that more democratic isn't always good, and less isn't always bad. It's more an argument about the moral judgement you assigned to certain words.
I've never been so ashamed of my country. This is just like student ****ing government.
No, in student government some coalition of hippies and communists would easily field a majority.
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
-Joan Robinson
How is subverting a somewhat undemocratic process to obtain a more democratic result "undemocratic"?
In democracy, the voters elect the Prime Minister. The voters did elect the Prime Minister, just a month ago.
It is not "more democratic" to discard the results of the election and ask the Liberal-appointed governor general to make them leaders again.
I'm not asking for a moral judgement on the action, I'm asking how giving control to parties representing a greater share of the electorate is undemocratic.
Because Canadians just elected a Prime Minister as per our rules and customs. The Liberals had a 37% majority as well, it's just how our country works.
When you essentially nullify the results of the election to seize power, it's a joke. The Prime Minister who would be named in this coalition was CATEGORICALLY REJECTED by voters. Terrible performance. He's even resigning as leader of his party due to it, yet that makes him QUALIFIED to be our Prime Minister? No, that's not moral NOR is it democratic.
It's a pure manipulation of the system to seize power.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
It is patently undemocratic to utterly fail to win a mandate from the voters, then go usurp it anyway. That's not a retarded point, it's just one you want to ignore to further your agenda.
You win a mandate with MPs. The system is made as such that the MPs can elect a new PM. Get over it.
You win a mandate with MPs. The system is made as such that the MPs can elect a new PM. Get over it.
It's really displaying Canada has functioned on some conventions -- rather than laws. The Liberals are abusing these conventions which have never been enshrined in law.
It's high time to reform this in law. The PM is so powerful that we need to be able to vote for them explicitly, as right now we do anyway but technically that's not how it works.
I really want to see poll numbers. Even the Liberal supporters around my office feel very dirty about the whole thing and wished it wasn't happening, though these tend to be the educated and intelligent Liberals in contrast to people like Oncle Boris who fellate Dion at every opportunity.
Edit: The comments on www.thestar.ca were also overwhelmingly negative, but the comments have all disappeared from the article (though the frontpage indicates 392 comments already).
globeandmail.com and nationalpost.com's comments also overwhelmingly negative.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
In democracy, the voters elect the Prime Minister. The voters did elect the Prime Minister, just a month ago.
No, the voters elected local MPs. The prime minister isn't directly elected.
It is not "more democratic" to discard the results of the election and ask the Liberal-appointed governor general to make them leaders again.
I refer you to the vote share argument again. While a plurality of people may have voted for Harper, a majority voted for someone to his left. The left just happens to be less united because the Liberals do not include the bat**** insane crowd to the left of them politically.
Because Canadians just elected a Prime Minister as per our rules and customs. The Liberals had a 37% majority as well, it's just how our country works.
And if that government can't survive a confidence vote someone else should get a shot at it before the country has to go to the polls again. You talked about our system not needing a majority, well our system also allows a majority of MPs to make a government fall.
And yes, the timing is just awful, it would have been better to have replaced Dion before this all happened, but Stephen Harper thought that it was more important to cut public financing for campaigns than it was to deal with the economy.
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
-Joan Robinson
Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Conclusion: people are idiots who don't understand the political implications of their votes.
People must be idiots not to have given Harper a majority. This is just proving it.
Look at the ****ing plan in the coalition bill. It's absurd! We're not even in a recession and they want to spend us into record-setting deficits. What the ****.
"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "
From a stability perspective, the best thing to do would be to get Harper to promise not to do certain things, which the other parties strongly oppose, and for the other parties to promise not to take down his government as long as he doesn't do those things.
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
-Joan Robinson
Tweet
Comment