scribblet

Bravo to the Tories for taking a firm stand and actually putting resources in the hands of local African opposition in Africa. To be a Canadian at this time is to be proud. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/06/canada-funding-opponents-of-abhorrent-anti-gay-bill-in-uganda/

What about the 1 or 2 billion dollars he had in his piggy bank, or is that not true.. Imagine though, this great socialist who stole billions from the people died as a leader of those nasty "1% ers", while people saw their standard of living decline and corruption/crime get worse. Of course he used their money to buy elections.

The CPC did not campaign on getting rid of the Senate, that is the NDP position. There are some issues before the S.C; now, when their answers come back, the legislation can go forward. The CPC want an elected senate with term limits and Senators they appt. have to agree to that.

I got that message when I quoted someone who had one 1 smiley.. I deleted his smiley then it went through.

Excellent post.

Right on..

Agree, and it was a trap... Flanagan in his own words http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/04/tom-flanagan-in-his-own-words-ex-harper-strategist-explains-controversial-child-pornography-comments/

from the ruling: http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12876/index.do However, I do not think it is inconsistent with these views to find that not all truthful statements must be free from restriction.

You an others seem to ignore what else Flanagan said. He specifically identified the issue as one he and the CPC disagreed on then went on to attack conservatives. He actually identified the conservatives as waging a 'jihad' against pornographers, and that he felt they were wrong in that regard.

I'm inclined to think that way also but the very nature of the subject is enough for him to be thrown under the bus, no matter what. I think anyone trying to defend his comments will also be thrown to the sharks. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/remarks-on-child-porn-defended-by-academics-194456071.html

Actually, not a work computer, at home but you still have a point. I guess we don't really know how much we are being monitored.

You are right, I just thought about it... http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2006/may/06051902

Not sure either but it does exist. http://www.nambla.org/ In fact I recall reading about them asking the U.N. for recognition or something years ago and wanting to lower the age of consent. A thoroughly despicable group of *&*&* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Lesbian_and_Gay_Association#Controversy_and_loss_of_UN_consultative_status In 1993 the United Nations conferred consultive status to the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA). The ILGA included NAMBLA in its membership. As early as 1993, the ILGA wanted all its members to treat all sexual minorities with respect. It wrote, “The recognition of pedophiles as a distinct ‘sexual minority’ is a key demand of advocates of adult-child sex. By making claims as a ‘minority,’ pederasts can essentially follow in the footsteps of homosexual activists and demand legal and societal changes to guarantee their rights.’ I believe ILGA eventually expelled NAMBLA.... there was a big stink at the time but most of the links now don't work.

I agree that not cancelling it two years is weird, but he didn't take out the subscription, someone did it for him. Either way he's made a grave error in judgement and should've known that there are consequences to free speech. It's too bad that this will be inexorably tied to Harper in attempts to paint our PM as having similar thoughts.

He admitted that 'he got put on the mailing list', someone did it for him. He's pretty naive if he thinks looking at those pictures is strictly passive and doesn't harm anyone. I didn't realize that those comments were made in 2009. The link to the 2009 article doesn't work now. http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2013/02/28/pmo-says-flanagans-child-pornography-comments-epugnant-ignorant-and-appalling/33837?page_requested= “It’s a long story,” Prof. Flanagan said. “But I got put on the mailing list of the National Man Boy Love Association and I started getting their mailings for a couple of years, so that’s the closest I ever came to child pornography.”

Bill W., is a 'reformed' homosexual prostitute who found God and has become a zealot. He has a right to express his opinion as long as he doesn't advocate violence but in our society free speech and opinion is fairly limited to politically correct ideas. He plans to continue his pamphleting and will likely end up in jail. The judgement says that there is a valid limit on freedom of expression ---- too bad we don't have the U.S. first amendment rights. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/27/despite-supreme-court-hate-speech-ruling-anti-gay-activist-plans-to-continue-pamphleting/

There was lots of information out there about Ontario's proposal and I wouldn't under estimate the voter's understanding of it. The majority did not want it. Most people I know understand how our current system works, they might bitch about it but know enough of it and what was being proposed to reject it. Maybe in a few years we'll see change, but not right now.

I wouldn't say that. In fact I agree he is more of a Stateman and has done very well for Canada, better than most other countries have been doing.

I agree for the most part. The only people who are raging against it now are those who lost and want the power themselves. Eventually another party will win then watch them change their tune.

Forming an alliance in order to defeat the Tories is hardly 'electoral reform'. It's about using any means necessary to defeat a party and gain power for yourselves. Electoral reform is changing our current system but as the article says, once in power the new gov't isn't likely to do anything. There needs to be a coalition of all parties who can debate and present the options for a referendum. Judging from provincial referendums the public doesn't want it, not yet anway.

This is just another money grab. Even if Deboors agrees to a ton more money it would never be enough, and likely wouldn't see one iota of change in that community. We've known all along there is one set of laws for us and another for aboriginals. Given that De Beers essentially has taken on the role of the welfare state in Attawapiskat, perhaps the blockades shouldn’t come as a surprise: Since the company has been generous in the past, it’s not surprising that protestors are looking to see how far they can push things. No doubt, they’re banking on the knowledge that the easiest course for De Beers would be simply to render payment, in some respectably veiled fashion, to whoever can credibly promise to stop the protests. This is the sort of lawless behaviour that one expects in places such as, say, Nigeria, where Western companies actually budget for such shakedowns. And it’s appalling that it would be tolerated on Canadian soil.

Did the President veto that bill, at the time it was said he would.

Teachers in Ontario are very well paid thank you very much. http://taxpayer.com/ontario/ontario%E2%80%99s-teacher-pay-freeze-doesn%E2%80%99t-go-nearly-far-enough

Not to mention that this issue is being used for political gain by the opposition.

I agree, it is a great compromise. The problem for the conservative gov't is one of perception. If they did enact legislation in line with other countries ( a ban at 20 - 24 weeks) it would give the left the 'secret agenda' ammunition and could undermine the rest of their successful path to economic prosperity. Having said that, I think they will win the next election but it will be the last, because by then most voters want a change of gov't. I would use the next majority term to push through that legislation. It won't mean a thing because doctors won't perform them anyway (except for life or death ).