jdobbin

I have seen two party politics in Manitoba. It brings out the worst in the province when there was only two choices.

If that happens, I think it is it for the party. We will see only two major parties then. It is the day I drop out of the process.

The riot was based on overcrowded conditions. And it is why I have asked where the growing numbers of prisoners would be kept. I think that is the question I have asked you. How much more is it going to cost for the policy? We have seen elsewhere in Naorth America how budgets are seeing an every growing chunk taken by corrections. You seem to think it is insignificant.

I have cited Manitoba already and gave you the actual numbers this month in jail and the riot that resulted a few weeks ago. I have. And your party has a spending habit that results in deficits.

California for one. Other states are now facing the same problem as you well know. You are so obtuse that you don't have any control over spending desires.

I think I have said that some people ought to be in jail but I don't think Madoff's sentence is a a deterrent to others. What I think is a better deterrent is better regulations and policing. I also think repeat offenders should be in jail. The problem is that some people want to go the other way and remove all the regulations. Last week there was a Republican who said he wanted to remove regulatory oversight. I don't think he should have been allowed to operate period. My feeling is that the Tories will fill the prisons to the rafters and leave it as someone else's problems as we have sen in some other jurisdictions.

Didn't seem to help with him Chretien and the monarchy. I'll be watching closely to see if he sticks to his knitting.

I see a lot of people who don't trust any science or medicine. That seems to be how some reach a decision.

Didn't say that prison wasn't necessary for some crimes. I just think a life sentence for commercial crime is probably more costly than alternatives. And your obstinate approach to building prisons and life sentences no matter the costs has everything to do with your party's lack of control in spending.

I was referring to Van Loan who immediately blamed the Liberals in the news conference despite the fact that it was his former party, the PCs that enacted accelerated parole. Since I have shown you the latest capacities of prisons in the last weeks for Manitoba alone, any change in the legislation has to come with a prison building program. All I have seen here is that people don't care what it costs. Well, that was the same attitude in other places until programs were about to cut on a massive scale elsewhere. Only then did people ask what the alternatives were. I think better policing and regulations are better than hoping for sentencing afterward in deterring crime. Harder to set up a Ponzi scheme if the regulators shut you down for trying to set up a business without a securities license. I think some police have already indicated that the price of the drugs goes up and violence remains steady. Canada has a drug problem. I think repeat offenders should be jailed. However, let's hear the costs of all options and consider alternatives to building ever greater numbers of prisons. Police don't choose not to pursue people because of what the courts do. They often don't go after certain areas of crime as hard because they lack the manpower or because they make violent crime a priority. My belief is that better regulatory and policing are far more useful in stopping commercial crime. And when a commercial crime is committed, I believe it is far more effective in seeking restitution than long sentences. I'd like to hear how many re-offend using the present system. The Tories should produce some of those numbers rather than acting like goons in pushing their plan.

I have. Just curious about some here who don't trust scientists and doctors. How do they make their decision?

I suspect that any talk of opening of the Constitution will be put down like the rabid dog it is likely to come. I won't look kindly to have any backdoor move on bringing about changes.

So given what you have heard, you believe the cons outweigh the pros in getting vaccinated?

That is not is what has happened. There has been no debate. The policy has been announced and legislation put forward. This isn't a concept deliberated in committee with recommendations for legislation afterward. This *is* the legislation. This isn't a concept being discussed. This is what the government will do. As such, the costs have to be discussed.

Why do you think would have made a difference?

There are a few of those. As long as they aren't the primary policy pushers on that matter, I am not overly concerned. Any big push for constitutional change that opens up a can of worms will see me fight any party that brings it up. He has maybe three months to start putting it together before the party is in jeopardy of not only losing but ceasing to be viable in general.

No, that is not what was said. Cost out a plan before plunging into the policy that will incur the costs. Debate it, explain it and compare it to the alternatives. And for Pete's sake, stop acting like a horse's ass about it all when someone raises questions about things like effectiveness, costs or anything else about the plan.

If they are non-violent offenders, I'd rather invest in stronger parole measures, restitution and monitoring. All I see happening with the Tory plan is ever greater costs and capacity being built to the point that we see what is happening in other jurisdictions.

It wouldn't matter who came in as a replacement. If it had been God you would have said, who does he think he is? The evidence that a strong negative campaign in New Jersey has turned things around. I suspect we are going to see the same. Who's to say that Harper won't call an election tomorrow?

We'll see. Given the unhappiness with how the office was working over the summer, I expect Donolo has a pretty wide mandate to get the right people in place. I'm sure there will be rolling eyes but experience is needed in the office to head things off before they become a public problem. We'll see if the Liberals go negative in a big way. The Tories have shown negative works and I expect it is the one way will the Liberals will close the gap. Ignatieff probably has three months to show progress. He could be asked to leave if things get worse.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...ub=TopStoriesV2 He is an experienced operator. It certainly couldn't hurt the leader's officer to have someone as skilled in the position. Look like there will be a new Communications Officer as well. Jill Fairbrother was Ian Davey's girlfriend. There is talk that the position will be filled by someone from Quebec.

Utter nonsense? I think not. In many jurisdictions prisons have started to squeeze all other parts of the budget. So tell us: What taxes will you raise or what cuts will you make to keep Canada from diving deeper into deficit?

Tell us what the expense is and I will tell you whether it is small or laughable. Your political parties hardly have a good record on financial expenses.

Congrats! It does seem this flu had a very heavy impact on pregnant women last year. As far as the last time you had the shot, I wouldn't be surprised if you did get the flu. Around three years ago people had better immune results from flu mist versus the flu shot. I'll probably be getting the shot when more of the priority people have had it. I hate shots. I'd rather be hit with a hockey stick.

So your answer is to have convicted murders escape from overcrowded prisons? The proposed change of law won't have an effect for crimes committed by youth, many as young 10 to 13 years of age. I suppose you want them in adult prisons, right? Didn't say that either. I asked you to produce numbers about how much it will cost and identify how this won't blow up in our faces. You'll get little sympathy from Canadians for producing ever greater deficits. I don't even think Harper wants that to happen but he won't be straight about the costs. He'll leave it for someone ten years from now to make drastic choices. So I keep hearing. Tories will raises taxes and cut services to ensure their policy is put into play. They just won't tell us the costs. Yes, we should scale back health costs to save money. Not the answer you expected? Your party created accelerated parole, not mine. I'm unsure why you want to take away Grandma's old age security? Do yo hate seniors so much? I'm afraid you are too emotional and can't be trusted with money. Tories are going to create even more massive deficits and let Grandma freeze in the dark. They hate Canada.