Kiraly

Agreed. I probably wouldn't of voted for a green candidate anyways but I would've looked into it. At this point they're no longer an option in my opinion. Greens need a new leader. I don't think the Liberals will see alot of benefit from this. I doubt many of those that voted for Green as a form of protest will now switch their vote to the Liberals. I also think the Liberals will lose some of their own soft vote to the NDP and the Conservatives. I think many Canadians will feel uneasy voting for a party so preoccupied with one issue.

In my opinion, this was not a good decision by Dion. None of his actions to date give me an impression that Dion will listen to the grassroots of his party. I imagine they are alot of Liberals annoyed with their leader today. As for May, this was a terrible decision. If I were a member of the Green party, I would demand she step down. May is doing serious damage to this party. Conservatives and NDP will benefit the most from this and the Greens will be hurt most by this.

There is nothing preventing her from continuing to donate to these charities.

Looking at transfers to provinces, the Conservatives will be good for Alberta and Ontario longer term.

One poll has already said that people didn't like the ads. How do you know that Harper's numbers might not have gone higher without the ads? I think most people will always say that they do not like negative ads and that advertisements generally do not affect them. Yet millions are spent on sending these messages to the masses. I don't think anyone can know for sure how the advertisements really affected how those that viewed them perceive Dion and if their feelings towards the Conservatives have changed as a result.

Now this is qute a rosy outlook... ...if not realistic.

Considering the latest numbers, maybe not so ill.

My question is: Why were the Liberals buying his goods? I can understand why Turner made the move, but why did Dion take him in? If Turner ran as an independent, the seat may as well be gift-wrapped and delivered to the Liberals. Based on Turner's history, I don't feel this one seat is worth the potential problems this guy could bring to Dion and his party.

Doubtful Graham would want to draw attention to that story.

From what I've seen so far, I would have to agree... ...but then I'm a small "c" conservative so I'm not sure if liberals would want him to lead their party.

I read something similar to this last year. I was quite surprised at the ranking. It is also quite surprising how this myth (Canada being a nation of peacekeepers) is ingrained in the average Canadian. Visiting my parents in Europe last year, they were entertaining guests and the discussion evolved into international politics. The subject specifically turned to peackkeeping and my old man claimed that Canada ranked no less than the top three in peace keeping nations. He could not accept my assertion that Canada is nowhere near the top three. This would simply go against everything he has been led to believe.

Not sure many are familiar with the term "petulant". Try "scary" Harper... ...you'll get over half a million hits.

The Auditor General. I think Daniel Leblanc and Campbell Calrk of the Globe & Mail, along with the persistent questioning of the Bloc Quebecois in the House, brought Adscam to public attention and arguably made the AG's report necessary. Some Left Wing LinkI am also inclined to think that PM PM's desire to stick it to Chretien played a role too. I wonder who tipped off these two reporters? From the link you provided, it almost seems to me the media would be more effective with their investigative journalism if access to information laws were more favourable as opposed to governing the questioning process at press conferences.

Double post

The Auditor General.

Aahhh.... ....so you admit its a word. By the way, did you read the definition? I'll repost it highlighting the relevant terms. Obviously not a word to be used in a report to the Board of Directors, but on a message board me thinks it is a-ok.

Yeah... ...that's why.

Exactly. Buying a Costa Rican forest or investing in dilapidated Russian factories will do nothing to lower emissions. This I cannot support. I wonder how many realize that this is how the previous government intended to fulfull its Kyoto commitment.

I think the Liberals realize that it will do almost nothing to solve the problem... ...however, it does give the appearance that they are doing something.

I'm still waiting to hear from the pro-Kyoto contingent what needs to be done to reduce our emissions to 6% below 1990 levels.

Difference is one can be kept, the other, realistically cannot. Care to elaborate how these programs were going to help us drastically reduce our emissions? I think Canada loses credibility when it criticizes a country that is doing a better job then it in cutting its emissions.

Maintain our current troop commitment and take over command.

The Harper government loses vote in Parliament on Kyoto commitments How do the opposition parties suggest we reach this near impossible objective? 6% below 1990 levels? This is simply not realistic. I would love to see a detailed plan of what would need to be done for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to this level. I think it would open the eyes of many Canadians.

0 for 4 With San Jose out and their big guns having scored very little, I still have chance to win my pool, but Buffalo must beat Carolina. Winner of this series determines our pool winner. Conference Final Predictions: Buffalo in 7 Edmonton in 6

Some good points. Some others: NDP seems to always poll higher than what they actually receive at the ballot box. Primary cause in my opinion is many NDP supporters vote Liberal in an attempt to prevent the Conservatives from gaining power. Liberal support right now is likely to remain understated until their leadership convention. They don't have a leader so I would expect their polling numbers to be on the low side.