normanchateau

When Harper left Reform after his falling out with Preston Manning, he went on to head the National Citizens Coalition. He probably won't be going there this time. Here's what the National Citizens Coalition has to say about the Harper budget: "This (budget) is going to be a disaster for Stephen Harper," said Gerry Nicholls, who worked with Harper at the National Citizens Coalition. "It will shatter his credibility because just a couple of months ago he was talking about balanced budgets. He's doing a complete 180." http://www.metronews.ca/halifax/canada/article/172505 No wonder Manning fired Harper as Reform's Finance critic and replaced him with Herb Grubel, an economist. Unlike Harper, Grubel was actually employed as an economist.

It's outright delusional just like the false belief that Harper has principles.

I agree completely and you might be interested in knowing that there are pharmaceutical companies right now engaged in clinical trials employing exactly the approach that you advocate. Other companies have synthesized drugs, known as cannabinoid agonists, which stimulate brain cannabinoid receptors. Those drugs act in a manner similar to THC, the most psychoactive component of marijuana.

I see that Harper has been far less visible today and yesterday. He might even loosen the leash on some of his own MPs as his grows tighter..

:lol: :lol:

Best of all, Harper exposed as having only one remaining principle...holding office at any cost.

Serotonin and dopamine are not the only neurotransmitters involved in depression. There is a growing number of published studies showing that endocannabinoids, the natural cannabinoids produced by the brain, are reduced in clinical depression. Stimulating cannabinoid receptors, either with endocannabinoids or marijuana, reduces depression. Here's one of many references on this topic: http://biblioteca.universia.net/html_bura/...d/31474228.html Furthermore, there are published studies which now show that serotonin and dopamine act via cannabinoid receptors to play a role in depression. Furthermore, dopamine regulates brain levels of endocannabinoids: http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/306/3/880 It often astounds me just how little people know about brain endocannabinoids and cannabinoid receptors, including even those people who promote the benefits of marijuana. It's a good thing ignorant men like Harper don't know about endocannabinoids. He'd want to criminalize them.

So you think that Canadians would rather have another election or a Liberal/NDP/Bloc government than Harper on a short leash?

That would violate the one and only principle that Harper continues to espouse...holding on to power at all costs.

There is no shortage of evidence to indicate that marijuana acts on the brain's cannabinoid receptors to stimulate appetite. Furthermore, blocking cannabinoid receptors has been used as a treatment for obesity. Rimonabant is a cannabinoid blocker which has been used in clinical trials to reduce obesity: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/493901 Of course there are fat marijuana users.

The same could be said about Harper and his November "economic update". That's why Ignatieff now has him on a short leash.

OTTAWA — Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff plans to move an amendment to the budget requiring periodic economic status reports to Parliament starting in March: http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...t_4FuKjf1qgH4sw Excellent! Ignatieff will continue to keep Harper on a much-needed short leash.

What a difference between December and January. In December, Canadians were so outraged at a Dion-lead coalition, that polls indicated they wanted an election and Harper's popularity soared in those polls. So the Liberals dumped Dion and replaced him with the far more strategic Ignatieff. Ignatieff now walks Harper, canine-like, on a leash. Harper is so desperate to keep his job, as demonstrated by his grovelling to the GG in December, that Ignatieff now knows exactly what he needs to do to maintain control. He just needs to threaten Harper and Harper's professed principles of a lifetime are completely abandoned. The National Citizens Coalition is outraged at today's budget. Harper, who once lead the National Citizens Coalition, has shown that his principles, be they fiscal conservatism or social conservatism, mean nothing if they cost him his job. In the months to come, as Ignatieff continues to pull the leash and control Harper, Harper's image with Canadians will more closely resemble that of Dion...weak. Moreover, just as Dion could never explain his carbon tax to the average Canadian, Harper will find it increasingly difficult to explain what exactly it is that he stands for, other than clasping and grasping for the only high-paying job he's ever had in his life. Ignatieff knows that bringing down the government now could backfire on him. He's far wiser to allow Harper to continue to self-destruct before he finally pulls the plug. Harper had his chance of a lifetime in October when he campaigned against Dion. Now he will face Ignatieff and the weak leader ads won't work. Instead, he'll need to rely on "too urbane", "too intellectual", "too-out-of-touch", "too elitist", "too-long-outside-Canada", ad nauseam. Doesn't quite have the same ring to it as "weak". Now that Ignatieff has Harper on a leash, perhaps we'll finally see Liberal ads decrying the weak CPC leader. CPC's only hope now of winning a majority next time is dumping Harper for someone like Charest, Lord, etc. Or maybe Harper will do the honourable thing, if he actually cares about his party more than himself, and resign.

Here are the facts Mr.C Chretien proposed $1000 for unions and corporations, $5000 for individual donations.

Backpedaling and revising a hypothesis are not equivalent. I presented a hypothesis. You refuted it with actual evidence. I revised it and you discovered that you could not refute the revised hypothesis. Your response to that was to call me a fool. Your personal attack was entirely inappropriate but you appear incapable of acknowledging that. Show me where I said that uneducated=ignorant. I don't have this stereotypical belief. Perhaps you do.

Bill C-250 does not say that you can't be critical of homosexuals. What it says is that you can't advocate the murder (or genocide) of homosexuals. What the amendment to C-250 does is it allows you to say, solely on religious grounds, that it's OK to murder homosexuals. However, with the passage of C-250, it's no longer acceptable to advocate the murder of homosexuals for nonreligious reasons. So, Mr. Canada, since you appear to be a religious person, you are free to promote the killing of homosexuals as long as you acknowledge that you are doing so because of your sincere belief in the Bible.

It's not clear whether Harper opposes decriminalization because he buys the discredited gateway argument or if he opposes it for ideological, i.e., socon, reasons. What's clear is that his position inexplicably shifted. In 2003, the Liberal government introduced a bill to decriminalize possession of less than 15 grams, making it subject to a fine but no criminal record. In 2004, Stephen Harper said he opposed decriminalization but that "we can look at fines rather than jail terms for possession under five grams." Most Canadians agreed, and continue to agree, with that position. In 2006, when Harper came to power, he killed the Liberal bill even though it was supported by opposition parties and the majority of Canadians. Thanks to Harper, courts now can continue to sentence offenders to jail for possession of even trace quantities of marijuana. Clearly Harper's rationale in ignoring the wishes of most Canadians has yet to be explained by Harper. Perhaps playing to his socon supporters is more important to him than his civil libertarian supporters who sincerely believe in less rather than more government.

Religious zealots and homophobes such as Harper conveniently fail to acknowledge that an amendment was put into C-250 to safeguard the religious rights of those who discriminate against homosexuals for religious reasons. Since the passage of C-250, the Bible, Koran and other religious tracts which advocate death or other forms of punishment against homosexuals has not once been challenged as hate literature on the grounds of C-250. Harper's opposition to C-250 was motivated either by homophobia or his bible-thumping zealotry given that the amendment protected Harper's freedom of religion to continue to condemn homosexuality to the point of advocating death by stoning to homosexuals.

Thanks. I rarely learn something on this discussion board that I didn't already know but this is news to me. By the way, Stephen Harper has actually written articles in Alberta Report including one on advancing the social conservative agenda while appearing not to.

Bob Rae in Foreign Affairs will also neutralize the claim of CPC that they are more pro-Israel than the Liberals.

Let's hope you don't actually grow any marijuana. If that anti-civil libertarian Harper's legislation passes, you face a MANDATORY six month jail sentence for growing one marijuana plant: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...31-3411c2619f58 The only reason that legislation has not passed is because it was stalled in committee by the opposition who kept raising the issue of Harper's alleged criminal behaviour in the Cadman affair. Each time the opposition raised the issue, the Conservative Committee Chair, Art Hangar, called the meeting to an end. It shows just how morally bankrupt Harper is. He'd rather not see his beloved omnibus crime bill pass than have to answer questions about his alleged criminal behaviour. I predict he'll continue to avoid questions about what he said on the tape and use the economy as an excuse.

Sure he is http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2...adman-tape.html Stephen Harper and Conrad Black, two honest men who had no idea what the Northern Foundation was all about when they joined it.

Good point. I had forgotten that Peter MacKay would be a problem for the socons in CPC. Remember Bill C-250? That was the legislation which made it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of homosexuals. Showing their true socon colours, Stephen Harper and the Alliance Party voted against C-250. Most Liberals, NDP, Bloc and PCs voted for it so the legislation passed. Peter MacKay of course voted for C-250 just as he voted for same sex marriage. Unlike the soon-to-be-dumped Harper, MacKay is a centrist like Ignatieff.

I actually like Stock Day. He's far more personable in my opinion than Stephen Harper. However, notice that Stock no longer talks to the media about the world being 6,000 years old nor does he discuss his Fred Flintstone view of early history. It's a lesson he learned well from his successor, Stephen Harper. Had Stock pretended not to be a religious nut when he was party leader, he might today be Prime Minister.