tml12

Damn that hidden agenda, this guy's amazing.

Well, I thought it was Harper's moral upstanding and clean campaign that put the cons in power. Well, you've had a taste today of the REAL Stephen Harper. More hidden agenda to follow. Newbie, I think you are being overly pessimistic. I won't play a double standard here. I criticized's Belinda's defection and I agree that Harper's decision is quite beyond me and looks really bad. But if you think you are ready to bring the government down over this then you need to just relax.

Does Harper think that, should something happen to him, his wife or son will replace him? Dream on, Stephen! Harper's son is like 8...

Maybe it will be for the better. But the day the man is sworn in, and Emerson was in Liberal TV commercials saying the Liberals were the best party for the province. The whole thing just does not sit right with me.

I agree it wasn't a great move overall.

When did Harper say he wouldn't do this?

A big government Republican reminds me of a social fascist.

Dosanjh was provincial NDP, Emerson was elected as federal Liberal although I understand your point.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited. Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me. I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone). Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement. All right then all you right wing anti-abortionists. How many of you will stay home to take care of that baby, giving up your salary to do it? (please, answer the question). The average Canadian women's salary in this country is somewhere under 20K per year. And suppose that woman already has two children to support. And suppose that woman is single (in which case her income is somewhere under 14K per year), and has one of those tax evading husbands that show as little as possible on the bottom line so as to avoid child support for the two children that she already has? Now how about the baby being diagnosed mentally handicapped. And the risk of autism which cannot be detected prior to birth, this problem is not even supported by government funding or social programs. You are all ok to have women living in poverty and take care of this child under these circumstances, while you go off to work and criticize. I'm not saying at all that I am pro abortion for birth control. I am saying that woman deserve the right to choose and the circumstances, and her doctors advice, will help her with that choice. There are many women out there that would go through with the pregnancy if she had the support of the father, and she does not. As far as the dithering is concerned have you guys thought about that one? The guy that says ah, lets have it, then offers little or no emotional or financial support? If women are dithering, you are so quick to blame the woman !! How about the abusive husband?? She loves him, she wants to have his baby, and suddenly she finds herself pregnant and vulnerable to his violent rages. Men that are violent are often bullies, and the worst of it comes out when the woman is pregnant. Your attitudes represent precisely why women didn't run for the CPC and why Canadian women now do not have adequate representation in parliament. If the Canadian population wants reformed abortion policy and regulation, let's hear about it now, put it on the table, so that we can all cast our votes without speculation at the next election. For the record, I never stated that I was anti-abortion, etc. Abortion should be legal but not after the first month or so. I worked with a woman who had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret. Soon she found she was pregnant (about two weeks after the sexual encounter). She said she was afraid to have an abortion but I encouraged her to have one because I told her that she did not want to get into trouble with her husband. She had one, came back, and told me the baby was like "a drop of water." So before the first month, OK. After that, sticking needles into a baby deliberately born prematurely is vile and sinful and most certainly is murder, regardless of financial circumstances. If you takes you more than a month to decide, put the baby up for adoption... TML, If a woman is over 35 years of age it is recommended that she get something called a triple screen to see if she is at risk for 3 problems that can severely affect a baby's life: Spinal bifida, Trisomy and Down Syndrome. This screen test is done at about 22 weeks. If the test comes in "high risk" the doctor will often recommend amniocentesis. In order to ensure that a healthy baby is not put a risk by the amnio, it is recommended that the woman wait until at least 15 weeks, however the triple screen doesn't normally get done until 22. So then the woman goes for the amnio and has to wait another 2 weeks for results. Then if severe abnormalities are found, the woman could be faced with an abortion decision and by the time she is booked to have the procedure, she is almost 5 months pregnant. Very scary, but those are the medical facts, and this is procedure for pregnant women over 35, which as we know, is growing to be a very high ratio of women today. Doing things any earlier in the pregnancy causes undue risk to a healthy fetus. I have never had an abortion and would never wish it upon anybody, but having just been through this (healthy baby due in March)...I know the emotional trauma that it can cause a woman. However many of us are not fit to bring up a child who is severely handicapped, I being one of them, would have been forced with a very difficult decision. The example of your friend is only one. There are so many cases of why abortion should or could have to be performed and to me the decision has got to be left to the individuals who are directly responsible for that child's life. Education, information and guidance, as well as community support are all requirements of supporting a women to "choose-life"...and unfortunately with governments downsizing and programs being slashed and underfunded, this is not going to happen in a way that could possibly support all women under every circumstance.....(oh, and did I mention that 100 bucks per month daycare won't help either ?????) Certainly if I were PM I would not make a law that would be so naive as to make a black and white law that says "abortion within first month then it's a killing." Abortion is not a black and white issue. Certainly, there would have to be exceptions to the rule. That being said, I do think there needs to be some abortion law in this country. Inevitably, Parliament will have to make such a law. I think the law should protect a women's right to choose but also protect the life of the unborn. I am not ready, without proper background and research, to identify what such a law should be. I know about the tests you speak of, as my mother had me at age 45. I know it is not an easy issue to deal with...

I guess now we know why Emerson voted against that particula motion. This is the exact same scenario as went down with Stronach. The difference is, this guy didn't wait until the ink was dry on the ballots. I wonder: will Emerson's move be met by accusations of political opportunism or worse, "political prostitution" from members of his new caucus? No? Uh...why not? If it was a sleazy move for Belinda to pull, its equally sleazy in this case. Kudos to geoffery for consistency. What was that word they used BD ??? Belinda the ..........Whore ???????? So we call Emerson a gigalo? I prefer "pimp" but whatver. I hope the story burns over but I am scratching my head...

Agreed, but the Libs will use this in the next election and, probably, the NDP has the most to gain from it.

Uhh progress, development and democracy are bad things tml. Social justice can ONLY be allowed in Canada, Iraqi's don't deserve this... Get on board the left train and start being liberal!

Don't be surprised if they do... As for Iran, how do you figure it is related to Iraq? The Iraqis would rather have Bush as PM over anyone from Iran...

"American companies get dibs on exploration and construction conracts and the United States gets a new military foothold in the region to safeguard that supply for tehmselves. That was the idea, anyway." And a Conservative government in Ottawa means we get our share now too... And the Iraqi people get a democracy...

Sentencing is supposed to be about the three things: deterrent, rehabilitation and retribution. Although, I can agree that the lock them up and throw away the key approach may not be that effective in terms of deterrant or rehabilitation - I certainly feel that we have forgotten about the need for retribution. A strong retribution component is essential to maintaining the faith in the system and respect for the law in general among people who would never likely commit a crime. People feel like they are getting screwed by the system if they see people commiting serious crimes and getting no meaningful punishment. The most recent example was Coffin of Gomery fame. I don't care that if the facts and legal precendents suggest that Coffin's sentance was 'fair' - the reality is the overwhelming majority of people do not think it is fair and that is a problem no matter what the legal experts say. I am a conservative so I have to stick this in: Rehabilitation is the #1 priority. But if they can't be rehabilitated, then death penalty should be an option.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited. Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me. I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone). Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement. All right then all you right wing anti-abortionists. How many of you will stay home to take care of that baby, giving up your salary to do it? (please, answer the question). The average Canadian women's salary in this country is somewhere under 20K per year. And suppose that woman already has two children to support. And suppose that woman is single (in which case her income is somewhere under 14K per year), and has one of those tax evading husbands that show as little as possible on the bottom line so as to avoid child support for the two children that she already has? Now how about the baby being diagnosed mentally handicapped. And the risk of autism which cannot be detected prior to birth, this problem is not even supported by government funding or social programs. You are all ok to have women living in poverty and take care of this child under these circumstances, while you go off to work and criticize. I'm not saying at all that I am pro abortion for birth control. I am saying that woman deserve the right to choose and the circumstances, and her doctors advice, will help her with that choice. There are many women out there that would go through with the pregnancy if she had the support of the father, and she does not. As far as the dithering is concerned have you guys thought about that one? The guy that says ah, lets have it, then offers little or no emotional or financial support? If women are dithering, you are so quick to blame the woman !! How about the abusive husband?? She loves him, she wants to have his baby, and suddenly she finds herself pregnant and vulnerable to his violent rages. Men that are violent are often bullies, and the worst of it comes out when the woman is pregnant. Your attitudes represent precisely why women didn't run for the CPC and why Canadian women now do not have adequate representation in parliament. If the Canadian population wants reformed abortion policy and regulation, let's hear about it now, put it on the table, so that we can all cast our votes without speculation at the next election. For the record, I never stated that I was anti-abortion, etc. Abortion should be legal but not after the first month or so. I worked with a woman who had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret. Soon she found she was pregnant (about two weeks after the sexual encounter). She said she was afraid to have an abortion but I encouraged her to have one because I told her that she did not want to get into trouble with her husband. She had one, came back, and told me the baby was like "a drop of water." So before the first month, OK. After that, sticking needles into a baby deliberately born prematurely is vile and sinful and most certainly is murder, regardless of financial circumstances. If you takes you more than a month to decide, put the baby up for adoption...

I am mystified how Harper could do such a thing because the upside is so small compared to the downside. Emerson will not get re-elected - the conservatives do very poorly in that part of Vancouver. In addition, the extra vote that Emerson brings won't help get any legislation through. The symbolic value of recruiting a high profile Liberal is lost entirely because of cynical nature of the move.This appointment will anger mostly the traditional Reform supporters who were expecting a higher ethical standard from a CPC gov't. It also undermines the CPC credibility as it tries to bring in reforms to the parlimentary system. If I was Harper I would have told Emerson to cool his heels and sit as an independent if he really wanted out of the Liberal party. I would have only promised him a cabinet seat after he ran and won as an CPC. Emerson needed Harper more than Harper needed Emerson. I don't understand why Harper caved. Well I back you 100% there Sparkawk...and you live in Vancouver, after all you have the authority to speak with expertise on the city. I would have been OK if he had sat as an independent for awhile first. Maybe a month or so. Crossing the floor the way he did undermines party values...I don't care he was right-wing all his life, he was in Liberal TV commercials arguing they were the best party for this country. Was he lying all along? Or like Belinda, did he just not want to be "out of the loop of power?" I liked the Reform Party and I respected people like Chuck Cadman who put there constituents first. Say what you want, this move undermines Harper.

Ha ha TML - you do crack me up. Honestly you must have perverse group of acquaintences from which you are deriving these so called opinions. It kills me when one Canadian can quote the "average Canadian", "most Canadians" or "too many Canadians". I don't doubt that there are Canadians who say that too many Americans are bible thumping rednecks, however I don't think you can quote the averages until you run a statistically adequate survey. The trouble is there are too many LOUD MOUTHED bible thumping rednecks out there, and they tend to get the attention of the media, and the average Canadian. Disagreeing with opinions of the far right does not make the average Canadian Anti-American. Concerned, You are correct that no one should quote the "average American" or "average Canadian." These societies are too complicated to just be stereotyped. However, saying "too many" does not constitute the average person. Bush's father said "I am a conservative, but I am not a nut about it." Well, I say the same thing. I am no fan of President Bush or many of his policies. If a liberal said, "f*ck Bush," of course that would not be anti-American. But when liberal Carolyn Parrish says, "Damn Americans, I hate those bastards," are you telling me she is just criticizing Bush? I do not criticize people who criticize Bush...hell, I criticize him and I know I am not anti-American. But too often criticisms of the Americans and criticisms of Bush fall hand in hand so you can't tell the difference between the two criticisms. And that has been the point of all my posts on this thread.

I was the one and owe nobody an apology. Why, you ask? Because Emerson is guilty of the same. He's a political whore too. And Harper's now guilty of pandering. The senate thing kind of disappointed me, but upon learning that its a temporary to fill the post until an election can be held puts my mind to rest -- for now. Agreed. It's a wonder we have seen individuals affiliating themselves with parties less and less. It has less to do with Putnam's "Bowling Alone" thesis and more to do with the fact that politicians are whores and desire power over integrity.

Well... your ignoring all my main points aswell. Your telling me you still support the NDP even though Bob Rae ran the largest deficit in Ontarios History since the depression. And Layton wants to spend our tax dollars on booze for bums... Wow... I guesse Im the only one here that likes to see my money in my pocket... not in booze for bums. You could look into the history of provincial politics and pull out horror stories about every party. I dont think that type of argument holds much water. What do you know about the 'wine for homless' program? Can you atleast acknowledge what the findings of the program were? Should I assume your completely insensitive to the struggle against homlessness? Study toasts free drinks drinking their way to good health A few weeks ago I read about a program in Ottawa where a man successfully reduced his alcohol consumption from 9 bottles of wine to 9 glasses of wine a day. That is significant and, although a conservative, I would endorse such a program should I read about one here in Montreal. We live in a society where we are literally indicted by alcohol commercials and how we can use alcohol to "relieve stress" and "take refuge." I don't support "free needle" things to avoid AIDS because both can result from carelessness. Alcohol clinics, on the other hand, not a bad idea.

Shoop, I generally agree with you and there is no doubt we needed representation from the big 3 cities but this just looks awful after Harper's promise to bring up accountability. This will be used against us. Likely, the NDP has the most to gain. Harper is better than this and he crossed the floor at a crucial time to get a plum cabinet post, much like Belinda did. It looks awful...

And from what I heard, they sometimes do this to a close to full-term baby. The doctor who would participate in this heinous murder ought to be hanged. This is a classic example of the twisted views of the liberal-thinkers. In Canada, its legal until the baby is coming on out. Even during labour they can change their mind and kill the kid right away. Really? I was unaware of that. That's just scary. That is vile.

I am OK with the cabinet but I agree with you regarding Emerson. That whole things stinks of "Belindaism." I think that was a bad move.

I wouldn't mind a 24 hour corner gas marathon though. OK...you win...

Half of Iraqis want US troops out within 6 months and nearly half approve of attacks on US led forces. So...what about that democracy? The point is that many people are of the opinion - and polls like the one described above support it - that the violence will not abate until the US leaves. In other words...things will improve once the US is out. Iraqi insurgents will focus thier wrath on the terrorists who have been killing Iraqis once the US leaves. The U.S. will leave when Iraq is more stable.