Jerry J. Fortin

You know what...I will grant you your point. You are right he is simply not in the same league as the other thieves. His agenda seems different than theirs as does his methods.

And.... So is that like saying there is rankings in this league where there are degrees of badness?

Where do I go with this.... Yes, I would solve world peace before I worried about sex toy legislation. You want it, then put a sock on it just like the real thing. Last time I checked unprotected sex was not a crime, is that what you really want?

The treaty is rather non-specific. In part it reads;NATO Treaty So the NATO treaty did not compel this nation to go to war in Afghanistan.

Why not throw the Quebec folks a bone....don't run against them. Agree to put a few of them in a cabinet, say positions of heritage and language, or even create positions just for them...include them as what they are and what they represent. Don't forget the Green folks either, invite them even if they don't win a seat to a position related to the environment. The NDP, needs a labour portfolio and perhaps something to do with social programs. Design a huge cabinet, hand out the responsibility to get the jobs done that need to get done.

I too am a fan of the Senate Reform concept. Even so, I think what has been done before and what is being done now in terms of the prorogue of Parliament is just wrong. I will suggest that to reintroduce this legislation being willingly suspended by Harper is a little more tricky than perhaps some would imagine. Now correct me if I am wrong here but, when the House next sits isn't the first order of business a budget? If that is true, is that not a matter of confidence? If that is true, is there a chance that Harper would lose the motion? If that is true, then would not all that legislative effort be lost when an election is called? Lets take this a step further. Would not the proponents of that legislation be a little miffed at its demise? Would the concept of a different sort of coalition not suddenly become a little more feasible under an Iggy design that sought to dislodge Harper? What if the coalition was in fact formed and designed to prevent coalition members from running against each other in an everybody against the Conservatives campaign...... What if a power sharing agreement could be arranged amongst a coalition of the willing? What if this all happened because of the Harper greed for power and control? Would the Conservative movement survive the demise of its government?

One of the few parts about our system I have any use or respect for is the committee work.

I am not trying to distort anything. I am saying that zealots, those people who follow the religious dictates they so strongly believe in are whack jobs. Religion is one thing and politics another.

We went there to support America? But that has since changed to be there because its the right thing to do? Are you serious? Surely we had a better excuse to wage war with a foreign nation than to simply hang onto the coat tails of the Americans. That is not a very damned good excuse to start killing people and destroying the infrastructure of a nation. We followed the Americans off of the cliff....that is what you are saying?

In other words religious zealots, or whackjobs.

I don't think the games have thing one to do with what the government just did. I think it was all about the power and control over the upper sought by Harper. I think that Harper will be held to account for this, there will be a price to pay for it. Yes we all know that those Bills can be reintroduced, but that will take time, time he may not have enough of.

That is an awful lot to throw out the door just to acquire more power and control of legislative matters in the nation. Citizens will have paid hundreds of millions of dollars for the efforts of the House for an entire year to no avail. This from a government who claims they are fiscally conservative.

Renewable energy is the way to go for the future, and we are heading in that direction. The problem is the now. Natural gas can be used as a fuel, saving millions of barrels of oil right now. Conversion costs of under two thousand dollars per vehicle. Conversion from coal to natural gas power plants are also in the designs but the economic viability of coal is the great equalizer, the stuff is plentiful and cheap. There is of course coal gasification, which is something else but also a possible "now" solution. The pipeline is a good idea. It will provide many jobs in its construction and maintenance and is one of the kep first steps in northern development.

I will venture a comment. They, both of them were wrong. Harper less wrong by half but still wrong.

Just a second. Please tell us why you think Canada is involved in Afghanistan?

In my mind a social conservative is a person who bases their political opinions on religious infrastructure.

Most citizens could benefit from a little insightful education and a relaxation of personal morals and standards when confronted with issues of judgment. It would be wise to consider the needs of society instead of the desires of the person.

Honesty in government is very nearly an oxymoron.

The only true definition of the will of the people, is that of the majority of elected members within the House of Commons. So that can be partisan or not with a simple 50% plus one formula. Had Iggy decided to go the coalition route and achieved the support of the NDP and the Bloc in so doing that would have been an expression of the will of the people. As it currently stands, Harper has administrative control at his disposal, but not the expressed will of the people by the definition accepted in Canadian political dogma.

So you are suggesting, or the author was, that this entire mess was a result of an ego trip of the Prime Minister caused by the Upper Chamber of the Senate. This ego of the PM's then decided to halt the business of the lower chamber, and in spite simply change the structure of the upper chamber just to achieve the whims of his own design regardless of the expressed will of the people through their elected representatives in the lower chamber of the House of Commons. Now considering the fact wehile in the position of leading a minority government, he is expected to understand that he governs through the consent of the majority of members in the House of Commons. If he understands this, then he is acting against the interests of the people by design. If he does not then he is merely ignorant of the rules of conduct and incompetent.

Canadians will determine the mans honesty and integrity by what ever means they choose to, their right to an opinion is a given. That said, it is all about how the man plays the game. Arrogance mixed with ignorance will not cut it.

What security issue?

Charter.Rights, we very seldom agree. Yet on this you and I seem to be in agreement. Well said.

Sadly you can make the claim that they are all similiar.

The ploy is an affront to the will of the people. It is a legal and time honoured tactic, but that does not make it right.