scribblet

She was born in Thunder Bay - that's far north to me...

Agreed, but answering trolls is against the rules so I'll ignore him when I come back. Have a good year everyone, and don't feed the trolls, it's against forum rules. cheers

I'm just resolving to stay in Florida longer and continue having a good time until I drop. I'm also resolving to spend less time on the computer and more time painting (not the walls). cheers and Happy New Year

It's too bad that he and others actually believe that a war on religion is needed or justified, it is sad. If people need religion to help them get through a tough life more power to them. Different strokes for different folks, unless of course they want to kill you for not believing.

Happy New Year Richard Dawkins believes the war against religion is being won. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10303705/Professor-Richard-Dawkins-we-are-winning-the-war-against-religion.html

Why do you say that, can you not believe that more than one person has a different view to yours ? I would think if you have an issue you should take it up with admin. Hold the flames please...

No doubt he will. However, Conrad Black, everyone's favourite has always had a way with words and says it very well here. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/12/14/conrad-black-star-values-on-parade/ Now I'll take the less crowded and wide open spaces of the high road. -

That would be putting words in his mouth and I don't read minds. However, If it keeps you happy smearing and casting aspersions on posters go for it, whatever turns you on. I'm not getting into a circle jerk, I gave an opinion, that's it.

What does God have to do with anything? Maybe he'll take some time and find mercy for your soul too.. However, I don't have the time nor the inclination to respond to personal comments or attacks. Read into that anything that keeps you happy. have a good one

Where did I say I 'supported' him, I wouldn't, even if I could vote for him. I just believe that the paper has gone overboard with it's obvious personal vendetta against him. IMO they crossed the line of decency and published articles based strictly on anonymous sources and drug dealers at that. Papers are supposed to be objective and unbiased, I'd sure hate to be the next elected politician they decide shouldn't be in office. The reporter himself btw is the only one using the P word.

Whatever it takes to make your little mind happy.

I'm not willing to get into a circle jerk with you, nor am I willing to spend 24/7 on line trolling for sources to keep you happy. The harassment innuendo and vendetta by one paper in particular has been noteworthy. The media relies on a lot of anonymous sources, innuendo and supposition flinging around a lot of mud on the basis of allegations with no solid proof. If you think I’m going to spend my time searching for articles to keep you happy, think again. I’m not on line 24/7 at your beck and call, but if your beliefs and drive by smears keep you happy that’s your problem. Have a good time. ETA: He didn't call the reporter anything, he inferred something, taken from a link posted earlier. Daniel Dale in my backyard taking pictures. I have little kids. When a guys taking pictures of little kids, I dont want to say the word, but you start thinking, you know, whats this guy all about? Now you are going on ignore. have fun

Talking about baseless attacks hmmmm

I thought personal attacks and comments about posters were not allowed. I'm not obligated to reply to you, nor will I. Imply and misconstrue that anyway you choose.

I don't believe the reporter is a pervert or whatever the word was intended to be, but Ford does know all about being smeared by implication. I'd say it was karma or just retribution.

I didn't realize that, will no longer use it. I doubt Huff Po or any other media outlet has the time or means to confirm real identities, it won't stop people from using an alias. Anyone can open a F/B account under any name they choose as long as the email is verified so how does Huff Po plan to verify it's not your dead dog or ?

There was discussion some time ago about the Heinz plant closing and why. It appears that the Ontario Liberal gov't waste reduction legislation could be part of the reason. Sounds like more reasons for manufacturing and jobs to leave Ontario, a real job killer. This isn't to say the costs won't be downloaded to the consumer eventually which could end up being more than the eco fees at the consumer end. http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2013/12/06/who-really-killed-heinz/ http://www.osler.com/NewsResources/Ontario-Introduces-Waste-Reduction-Strategy-and-Proposed-Waste-Reduction-Act-2013/

Agree we should go back to grassroots power and not the caucus. Warren Kinsella the Liberal attack dog doesn't like it, I'm a bit surprised, he says. Essentially, he wants to denude party leaders of their ability to be, you know, leaders. http://www.ottawasun.com/2013/12/06/michael-chongs-private-members-bill-to-denude-leaders-is-most-unlikeable

There's a piece here in a local rag that expresses my sentiments on some of the issues. http://www.northumberlandtoday.com/2013/12/05/chong-idea-a-misuse-of-parliaments-power

Daniel Dicken has some good questions and valid points, certainly worth a read. http://www.danieldickin.ca/2013/12/a-first-look-at-reform-act.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DanielDickin+%28Daniel+Dickin%29 The Reform Act places a lot of emphasis on EDA-elected nomination officers. Just think about it: the authority of Thomas Mulcair, Justin Trudeau, and Stephen Harper and their headquarters staff to choose their 308 (or 338 in 2015) candidates would be suddenly delegated to 308 (or 338) nominations officers.

Sept. 2003 here..

The CPC adopted a weighted voting process in 2005 for the leadership voting but I would like to see the old one member, one vote system . Party membership and such a voting system gives voice to the leadership issue and adds integrity to the party. The election process for the party leader should be decided by the party and not by parliamentary legislation IMO. If a leader/PM should die in office or steps aside for whatever reason, then I wouldn't have a problem with the caucus appointing someone until the next election and a leadership convention. The candidate nomination process is a different issue where issue of time frames, signing up members from out of riding etc. does need to be addressed.

I think I'll wait for the specifics of the bill, but I still don't like the idea of Caucus overriding the voting of the membership which would result in an internal coup. Especially since the membership recently voted against it. Chong should have taken that into consideration although he has been working on it for years. It could be open to abuse especially with the low (IMO) requirements. 15% for the petition is too low and a majority should be a large majority. Just my opinion, different strokes for different folks.

If the caucus is given the right to remove a leader (by secret ballot) who has been duly elected by the membership at their leadership convention then they are removing the rights of the membership. The membership voted against changing the rules at the last convention. The MPs of a particular party don't represent the entire voter population, they only represent one group/riding. A group which would consist of a variety of opinions so an MP only actually represents a portion of his constituents. Which portion should he represent, I would say the one with which he agrees with, so really, he ends up voting for his own opinion/beliefs. The only true democratic method is for allowing us to vote for a PM, but then we would have to be a Republic I suppose. This would come into effect after the next election and would apply to all parties, as this says, the NDP may not be on board. Private member bills are usually free votes, I doubt it will pass. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/11/30/michael-chong-stephen-harper_n_4364964.html