scribblet

Good idea about having another account, it would be best for the facilitator to at least be perceived as being neutral. I don't read all the posts on here so if facilitating means having to read all that blather and nonsense - hmmmm :lol:

Well, certainly not a 'love fantasy' - see that's where you guys go so far over the top you lose credibility. I disagree about bloodyminded, too many insults and biases, I don't see Hardner as unbiased either - is there anyone one here who could really be objective and set an example to other posters, because moderators of any type, should set an example - in good behaviour that is. Actually, what about Rue....

That would be the first thing he would do and will probably campaign on it. I doubt that he'll seriously reduce taxes at this point, and hopefully he will cut back on funding to SIG. HRC powers should be limited as we know that they abuse their powers. Certainly if someone is taken to the HRC, they should have the same benefits of the complainant, that is, no legal fees. He might cut back funding the CBC - and rightly so. Looks like an election in May, the polls still show CPC in majority territory, the Liberals should be careful what they wish for.

Confused - that's putting it mildly, in fact it is quite temperate considering what was suggested. The only thing the CPC would do is try to create an elected Senate, the rest is poppycock and delusional. Maybe 'giddy laughter' is an indication of the poster's state of mind.

Yes, but she didn't 'change' it, she excercised her right as a Minister to veto a document she has a right to veto, all in line with policy.

Only agree with Kimmy,and moonlightgraham - how about Argus and Wild Bill !

Again, she did NOT falsify any documents to deny funding, as much as the opposition might want it to be. She denied funding as is her ministerial right, something that happens in all gov'ts, we don't usually hear about all the thousands of funding decisions, none of which ever make a good story for the papers. The Minister runs the dept., always has, she did nothing illegal or improper, even though the opposition seems to think she used the wrong crayon or something. The only thing improper here is misleading parliament, lying, if that is found to be so, then she should step down. That, is the only newsworthy issue, everything else is foaming at the mouth over a minor funding issue because the wolves are smelling an election. They should be careful what they wish for.

That's why I don't support the Liberals LOL never mind, a couple more days and it's spring break

August is right, most people don't care and are probably happy they aren't getting the 7 milllion. The only people who care about denying funding to a religious group are those baying at the moon with the pack, out for political blood.... Again, if she mislead or lied to Parliament she should step down, as for the rest of it, garbage. Minister Oda does have the power which she used, to deny funding recommendation from her department. Maybe the opposition and their hangers on think they have a case because instead of stamping it declined, she wrote not, they are baying at the wrong moon. The Minister still runs the department, not the bureaucrats and the opposition critics. Kudos for denying that group of **** funding.

Where has Harper abetted and covered up anything, also read the link re: Bob Rae

The standing committee on foreign affairs has been investigating this since last year, just a lot of faux outrage to get the pot boiling before election time.

Agreed, she did the right thing by refusing the funding, too bad she had to do what she did, for which she will pay. IMO the voters are a little more discerning than the hyper-partisan hyperbolic leftwingers.

Yes, she should step down if she's found in contempt, but we should look at what's behind it as well. Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/15/adrian-macnair-the-curious-case-of-bev-oda-and-the-noteworthy-not/#ixzz1E3QMDzLR some deeper reading is in order if any one really cares http://afewfigs.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/lefties-in-a-knot-about-a-naughty-not/

Agree, if there's nothing to defend then why try, if she really did this, she should step down. The opposition is smelling blood of course and baying at the moon, but I doubt it'll help win an election.

LOL - no bad weather.

Why is it paranoid to be cautious about polling numbers, sounds reasonable to ask members not to be too hasty in thinking about an election based on one poll. Seems his knickers are in a knot over something more LOL

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/crtc-plan-to-lift-ban-on-false-news-prompts-political-investigation/article1898147/?service=mobile The joint chairman is Liberal Andrew Kania, so we know that two at least are Liberals so surely they would not cave in to untowards pressure -

Well, it's obvious that the current ruling hasn't been a huge deterrent to those purveyors of falsehoods, especially in some papers. Has there ever been action taken based on violation of the current rules? It seems to me that none of us here are actually aware of the whole concept and decisions made. BTW, does anyone know who else is on this committee recommending the change? http://www.winnipegsun.com/comment/columnists/alan_shanoff/2011/02/11/17245546.html

I'm surprised at the numbers, I thought Egypt was fairly secular, not as radical as some areas. 95% prefer the religion play a "large role in politics.", 84% favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim faith• 82% support stoning adulterers.

Let's get back to the word "Knowingly" - because when this happens some outlets will have a whole mess of complaints leveled against them...they know it... and that's why they hate the proposed rule change. Besides as Liberal MP Derek Lee, a long-time committee member says - Despite the outcry, the joint committee for the scrutiny of regulations is unlikely to back down - and a little more of the truth here http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/opponents-of-crtcs-false-news-proposal-bombard-website/article1902999/

Good idea, but I can't afford it, so maybe the Star or the professors should do it

Anti Christianity rants are simply an attempt to deflect from the actual topic. The tone of this forum is becoming less civil lately with stupid accusations and baseless personal comments etc. how about getting back to the actual topic. Another good piece here that speaks to the issue better than I can. http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/Multiculturalism+failure+Europe/4273602/story.html

Whoever made the request won't get all of the info they asked for, some if it is beyond what can be given out. The linked article is better than that of the Star article, which I've just realized was changed later in the day. Maybe this is all a Liberal plot, you know, Liberals in cahoots with the Star make the call, then the Star reports on it as a disinformation campaign cos there's of talk of a spring election. :lol:

It has also come to my attention so am breathlessly reporting that one of the McGuinty boys was seen in a smoke filled non existent backroom and busty hookers. :lol: The Star gives yellow journalism a bad name. Actually, I've decided it's a big liberal conspiracy in cahoots with the star to discredit the CPC, so it's probably a Liberal making the request but the Star can breathlessly report that it is believed to be the Tories making the request. There's an election in the air so it must be true.

Funny how comments get twisted out of shape and words imputed to people that where never said, no one has even inferred that immigration should be 'whites only'. This is not a Pretzel. This is Canada. http://www.charlesadler.com/2011/02/this-is-not-a-pretzel-this-is-canada.html cont...