sharkman

I beg to differ, most Canadians don't want their hard earned dollars wasted and can put 2 and 2 together. If an administration has all kinds of corruption and waste, there won't be as much hard earned cash around for Health Care, Social Infrastructure, etc.

Uh, Norman, did Harper say that on this board?(No) These rules don't apply to those not posting on this board. However, Harper has been called a lot worse in the media than a law breaker so if you want to compare "statements that don't show respect and common decency", be prepared to defend a ton of Liberal quotes and others calling him all sorts of names.

And what no one seems to notice is that as a finance minister, Martin had 8 years(or whatever it was) of balanced budgets during a prolonged growth period in the 90s and they still had to gut the military and slash transfer payments to the provinces (health care line ups anyone) get these balanced budgets. Hardly a spotless record.

Harper is a madman? I know you think little of the CPC, but to think they could elect a leader who is mad in any particular sense only shows your bias is blinding you. And to claim that the CPC is dedicated to the exacerbation of social and economic inequality and enshrinement of priveledge makes you sound quite shrill. At least you could have some evidence to back up your wild claims. Perhaps none exists? Although, to be fair, someone had threatened you so perhaps your response was affected by this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's alright Shoop, the CBC has become the Conservative Bashing Corporation and it's good to hear that at least some of us can see it. And most lefties are sounding awfully shrill, have you noticed? Nothing like an election to get people's knickers bunched up.

I wonder what Quebec's standards are, being that they are going to do what we all should do and throw the bums out. When a government resorts to paying by envelopes of cash to remove a paper trail, then their 'standards' are too low.

Look, we Canadians are WAY overtaxed, even under the Liberals with all the waste and corruption they get monsterous surpluses. We need all kinds of taxes reduced, not just business or personal. I find it interesting that norman is willing to use numbers from conservative sources when it suits his purposes, but the rest of the time conservatives are homophobes.

Gord, add to that the NDP were willing to sell their votes to the highest bidder and then when the Liberals wouldn't play no more THEN all of a sudden they can see the corruption and vote to bring them down. Meanwhile the Liberals put back the corporate tax cuts they previously rescinded for the NDP. Their word is no good either.

The PMO has more than ten people in it....... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, we should be picking a gov. based on past performance, and the Liberals have to be judged for what they have done and covered up. Geez, when you hire an employee you look at their resume, you don't just ask them for their 'visions for where we want the company to go and move forward'.

Your support of freedom of religion is a mile wide but only skin deep since you use words to describe religious people like bible thumpers, religious zealots and haters of lesbians. Please cite examples about the Bible saying hateful things about other ethnic groups, I suspect your use of the word 'hate' might simply mean descriptions you don't agree with.

Norman, you ascribe my comment of Harper taking the high road to something I clearly didn't connect it to, then point to it as wrong? If you continue to think this way you will end up confusing yourself. The Liberals have done so much damage in Quebec with their scandal, Quebec may seperate. Can you get your head around that? The laws that were broken will probably never come to the light of day since there isn't much of a paper trail, the Liberals were paying in CASH to avoid paper trails. But support them all you want. I don't really care if they get arrested, right now I just want to throw the bums out.

It just shows how little his words mean, even to himself. He talks about how incredibly bright Canadian future is and how much he loves Canada, but he would rather not invest in it himself. That was a great line by Harper and I hope there's more where that came from.

BD the question is who decides if the religious person is being in 'good faith' or not. The judge, that's who. There is already a climate of intolerance towards religious comment toward gay topics in Canada and examples have already been cited where non religious comments have been slapped down. Soon the question will rise why can the religious types say things about gays that everybody else can't.

We know the media brought up the gay marriage issue on day one of the campaign, but what questions of substance did they ask? They asked Harper if he loves Canada. I read it today in the National Post. Obviously trying to get some kind of rise out of him. *Sigh* If anything it will be the Canadian media that makes this an ugly campaign. All of us conservatives know they hate conservatives in general and the CPC in particular.

Norman, the end result of the Liberal party's actions in Quebec will be a loss of all their seats come the election, and a big push towards separation. If the Liberals win a minority or a majority they will have zero credibility in Quebec and may be in power when Quebec walks away. That's far worse an outcome than Harper's description. I'm waiting for the CPC to start drawing this parallel but they will probably take the high road on this one, hoping Quebec changes her mind.

When a situation exists where certain special interest groups get protection above the rest of Canadians, there is no equality. If someone gets murdered because he's hated for being gay, how it that any worse than a straight guy getting murdered because someone hates him. Hate is hate. Both crimes are just as wrong. When a situation exists where a certain group will not be considered for hiring because of their skin colour, and others will be considered because of their skin colour, there is no equality. This was a recent headline in Canada and was only reversed because an election was coming.

The problem with c-250 is the wording is religious organizations are not protected from being able to speak their conscience. It's up to the judges to decide one way or another. 10 years from now judges will be less willing to let freedom of religious speech carry the day in these rulings. c 250 is bad legislation.

At any rate, it is going to get dirty, because the Liberals are desperate to cling to power and will invent any dirt on the CPC that they can. Martin is looking and sounding particularly desperate, Just watch a few clips of him since the vote. Even Jack looks more collected than Paul, but Harper really looks cool as a cucumber. That's why the press are already asking loaded questions, trying to manipulate the news instead of report on it. The unspoken theme of course is that Harper is scary, scary, scary. Except they've used that same strategy since the last election and it doesn't have any impact anymore, and in the light of the Liberal payoffs, payola and lying about it, the CPC looks even better.

Don't you know, lovecanada? Common sense is not that common.

Just a note to those who wrongly think I was using M. Crichton as a source debunking environmentalism. In this post I was preaching to the choir, not trying to convince those in the environmentalism movement of anything. I find that in most cases, no matter how many sources one has regarding just about anything, they are discounted immediately, so only on some occasions do I bother. And it really is a good read.

Excellent post Shady. It's typical of the American media to totally miss simple logic and rabidly attack Bush and the war effort when it's actually going so well. It's pathetic that they could have had Osama and of course Clinton gets a free pass from the media, but Bush is a liar! Just wait, the American public will come back to Bush in spite of the media.

Those in the environmentalism movement are very quick to attack the messenger, anyone who disagrees with their theories. To brow beat them into submission, if you will. But it doesn't help their case any.

So this is the worst thing Harper has ever said? I'm seeing that a lot from liberal supporters in general, but this knee jerk reaction happens every time he says something controversial. Liberal supporters were absolutely 'shocked' when Harper talked about Martin and child porn. But they are only words Harper is using, not actions like the Liberals have been doing, throwing millions at Quebec in some convoluted scheme to 'buy' its place in Canada, and now throwing billions at voters in the hope they don't smell the stench of Liberal corruption. But all Liberal supporters can seem to do is be shocked at the words of Harper. How can words be worse than that?

Of course, the election hasn't even been called yet, there's plenty of time for things to change. I tend to agree with the minority conservative gov. having a difficult time. They'd have to play footsies with the Liberals who would only look for the opportunity to stab them in the back. The Block would be more honest, but it would be a tough sell to the public that you're teaming up with the party that wants to rip Quebec out of Canada.

This topic has been a pet peeve of mine. For instance, as soon as Katrina hit, many in the media started THE END IS NEAR UNLESS WE EMBRACE ENVIRONMENTALISM rant, showing how we've had so many killer storms this year and it's PROOF THAT WE'RE KILLING MOTHER EARTH! As soon as some actually started looking into it they discovered that, lo and behold, back in the mid 1930s, there was also a year when there were as many category 5 storms. The late 60swere bad too. Which kind of blows the whole warming climate change thing out of the water. Since back in the 30s there wasn't 1/10th of the cars and industry on planet earth that there is today. It seems the oceans warm up and cool down based on cycles of 30 years or something. Anywhoo, there's a good novel that explores this topic. Michael Crichton did a lot of research and cites many studies in this work that shows some of the ugly side to the environmentalism. I know it's only a novel, but he really researches his topic well and it refers to studies which disagree with the tree huggers and these people get shunned and worse for disrespecting the religion of mother earth.