scribblet

I guess we knew all along that David Orchard is a Liberal, supported by his attendance at the Liberal convention and support of Dion all the way along. His group delivered some pretty solid support for Stephane Dion. It also confirms that he never ever was a conservative, he just picked a port he thought he could dock in, and use to his own advantage. Seems like a fitting home for him; guess he's still a zealot too.

Maybe they should just ban political correctness and double standards, its backfiring anyway, most groups are against the decision as it could affect their celebrations eventually. Nothing wrong with lighting up our lives at various times of the year, it would be a pretty austere world without it.

US lumber lobby? Or Canadian lumber lobby? Norman Chateau, look me in the face, and tell me honestly that Canadian lumber producers lost that money and not new house buyers in the US. Who paid the money, the $1 billion? Americans or Canadians? Because of these tariffs on softwood lumber, ordinary Americans paid a high price for a new house. We Canadians tried to help them but their Congress prevented us. The $1 billion is not ours, it's theirs. Good thing we got the deal considering there was no deal under the previous gov't. Ignore the spin its out of control LOL

Guess that judge forgot about the Hanukkah lights http://www.ontla.on.ca/hansard/house_debat...ssion1/L098.htm HANUKKAH Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): Tonight, Jewish families across Ontario are going to sit down to celebrate Hanukkah, the festival of lights. In fact, at 5:30 in front of the Legislature, we'll join the Honourable Monte Kwinter in lighting the menorah right here at Queen's Park " Guess it is only Christian symbols which are easy targets for intolerance

Hardly a joke, but then, you wouldn't like anything he did anyway. It is a step in the right direction, one can hardly expect a minority gov't to completely reform the system; particularly when the opposition would reject anything put forward no matter how modest - or how good it would be for the country. Baby steps first, you walk before you run.

Nor in British Columbia where approval for the Afghanistan mission has now dropped to only 37%. http://www.mustelgroup.com/pdf/20061122_fvi_release.pdf I'm sure the Liberals will give all their support to Duceppe. Then who'll be in bed with separatists

I give him credit for starting the democratic process of electable senators, how can anyone oppose that. I also understand (I'm away and behind on my news) that Harper will be putting foward legislation allowing the Canadian voters to decide, through a referendum, whether they wish to elect their Senators. Bill for term limits here http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/P...=2334114&file=4 Sounds good to me.

Innuendo and drive-by smear tactics are indeed the modus Operendi here, I just went to the link. The title and description of this thread are very misleading, Stockwell Day is not doing anything of the kind - he's simply mocking Gore, among other things.

It will likely remind them of Chretien and corruption.

This appears to be the full article and brings up other issues, worth a read. It brings up other issues about delegates. There are two issues really, one of the delegate approaching Mrs. Rae, the other about the flyer. http://www.judeoscope.ca/breve.php3?id_breve=2890 On another website, operated by a Montreal-based pro-Palestinian group, Liberals were urged about a week before the leadership vote: "Do not vote for Bob Rae, we’re not looking or another Zionist PM." The group recommended that delegates vote for Gerard Kennedy, the fourth-place contender whose dramatic decision to throw his support to Stephane Dion after the second ballot clinched the victory for Dion. It said that "voting for Bob Rae is a vote for the daily massacre in Palestine (and) . . . for a new Zionist PM in Canada." Rae could not be reached for comment Thursday but insiders say he was aghast and hurt by the attacks. The smears have raised broader questions about the role that blocs of ethnic delegates played at the convention in securing a stunning, come-from-behind victory for Dion.

Your right, if she had not attacked Martin, she would still likely be a Liberal.

It was a Liberal delegate who approached Arlene Rae, http://ottawasun.com/News/National/2006/12...pf-2686071.html December 8, 2006 Raes smeared in race Wife anti-Semitic target By CP Bob Rae was the target of anti-Semitic attacks during the Liberal leadership contest, motivated at least in part by the fact that his wife is Jewish. Sources close to Rae say that his wife, Arlene Perly Rae, was approached during last weekend's convention by a delegate who didn't realize she was the candidate's wife. The delegate told her not to vote for Rae "because his wife is Jewish." Perly Rae stonily informed the delegate that she was the wife in question. The delegate beat a hasty retreat. The incident might have been shrugged off if it had been an isolated event. But Rae team insiders contend it was part of a larger pattern of anti-Semitic smears on Rae, who finished third. A flyer was circulated electronically among convention delegates denouncing Rae for having once delivered a speech to the Jewish National Fund, a group the flyer said was complicit in "war crimes and ethnic cleansing." "Rae's wife is a vice-president of the CJC (Canadian Jewish Congress), a lobby group which supports Israeli apartheid," said the flyer in bold letters superimposed over a close-up of Rae's face. The Canadian Jewish Congress has condemned the flyer and blamed Khaled Mouammar, president of the Canadian Arab Federation for circulating it. The federation has, in turn, accused the CJC of making "a pitiful attempt to discredit" it and has denied producing or distributing the flyer.] Nevertheless, in a release yesterday, the federation supported the content of the flyer. "CAF believes that Canadians have the right to know the factual information provided" in the flyer, the federation said.......

That's the way I saw it. It shouldn't be a problem for Canadians but it sounds like he will give it up if it turns out to be. Just heard this morning that he is considering giving it up - but only if it affects his chances of winning LOL Funny how all of a sudden loyalty to the party transcends all his previous assertions, and winning at any cost is now more important than what 'his mother left him.' I guess it is party, ideology and above all, winning at any cost for that Liberal.

If it is not true, it proves that the conservatives have an unsophisticated smear machine...sort of like the ham fisted attempt to smear Dion by flagging that, although he is Canadian Born and a member of the Privy Council, that he also hold French citizenship and therefore his loyalty is in question. It proves no such thing, you don't know who was behind this, more likely it was Liberal delegates who wanted a different leader.

The only taxes churches are exempt from are property taxes on Church property, if they were required to pay them you would see a lot less charitable work as they would not have the money to do it. That would then require the gov't or individuals to put more money and time into charity. I would think those who oppose this should be careful what they wish for, as once religious groups are no longer constrained by the tax issue, they would be come far more vocal and politically active. Then watch out.

Not a heck of a lot if they want to keep their heads

You don't have to change the traditional definition of marriage to avoid discriminating against people. If someone lives a different lifestyle it's none of my business, but they don't have to go to government and say: our sexual devience is now a legal norm. A person can choose to eat rubber tires, but they shouldn't have the right to change the legal definition of food in order to incorporate their own eccentricity into every day society. Likewise with marriage. I tend to agree, I'm not a religious person but changing the definition of marriage never sat well with me; bno problem with equal rights and civil marriages. I'm also not comfortable with amount of influence homosexuality and the gay agenda is having on our schools. Teaching tolerance and acceptance is one thing, promoting such a lifestyle as perfectly normal is another. I'm happy I have no children in school these days. However, the MSN missed the real story. This was a 'free vote' where MPs could vote their conscience, or preferably in accordance with their constituents' wishes. House debates on a motion under a 'free vote' would only give value if the MPs consult with their constituents. The BQ and NDP apparently don't subscribe to the notion of representation nor of consulting with constituents as they required their members to vote against the motion 'en bloc'. Party discipline was invoked on 80 or 26% of the MPs. The result of all of this is that the SSM debate and vote in Parliament currently reflects political ideology rather than social conscience. I wonder what the results would have been if the 10 members who abstained and those disciplined were given a vote without political repercussions. Either way, there is no going back, I don't see any options for those who are still unhappy unless there is some means of instituting a citizens's referenda but doesn't that still have to go through Parliament? I believe the issue to be dead in the water now.

Harper is on record as saying that after the vote the issue will be considered settled once and for all. Now that the issue has been settled by two gov'ts its a done deal. Only the most hare brained fanatics would try to re-open it. Neither is it in his or the party's political self interest, and they certainly won't campaign on it again. When Harper was in Reform caucus, he was one of the few to support same-sex marriage benefits and infact, at that time, one of his criticisms of Reform was the emphasis on social issues He is certainly a hardliner when it gets down to fiscal issues. It looks like even Lifesite thinks he is too much of a fiscal conservative LOL theya re not too happy with him http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html

If Harper wins a majority or retains a minority gov't, he will stay on, there are no plans as far as I know for another convention. If he loses badly there possibly ould be a convention as there would be about 4 years to do that. Considering that Harper is not seen by most reasonable people to be anything but a fiscal conservative (some say libertarian) my guess is he will stay on anyway. Most CPC (all that I know) do not want a 'so-con' as a leader, one reason why Diane Ablonsky didn't win. As for the citizenship issue, Dion may not have a choice, according to Bourque: The Government of France may have a bone to pick with one of its citizens. "Steph" Dion, now Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition here in Canada, would seem to no longer be entitled to French citizenship. That, according to French Law (Art.23-8), which states that a citizen loses French nationality when "filling an employment in a foreign army or public service or in an international organization of which France is not a member, or more generally providing his assistance to it, did not relinquish his employment or stop his assistance notwithstanding the order of the Government." On the other hand, who knows, perhaps La Republique will make an exception for the chance to have one of its own become Canada's next PM

It won't be opened, at least not by Harper. I don't know if a backbencher can try something but I doubt it.

Two points are worth considering,. 1. The first point relates to the mainstream media, and their curious lack of interest in the fact that a andidate for a political leadership position, which in turn might result in him becoming the Prime Minister of Canada, is a citizen of both Canada and France. Where were the media on this important issue during the many, many (painful, I might add) months of the Liberal leadership campaign? Where was the MSM's sense of concern, or perhaps their liberal bias led them to ignore it. We know if it had been a conservative what would have happened. I do however, recall how Tom Long was trashed and baited and ridiculed by these same MSM masters, and their "news"-room and op-ed poodles during his Leadership run of the 'readed' Canadian Alliance. The seemingly perpetual double standard, and lefty sentiments of our MSM goes on unchecked, simply another glaring example of their unprincipled bias. If the issue of citizenship was important enough to take the lumber to Tom Long, DURING his leadership bid, then why was it not deemed to be of any importance at all regarding Mr. Dion's leadership run! 2. Secondly, we have the matter of dual citizenship, taken on its own merits when it comes to the Prime Ministership of a country (should I say Nation - ) To be the leader of a country, there can be no question whatsoever, of where your loyalties, your biases, and your responsibilities lie. For me and a whole lot of ther folks (it looks like, according to polls the past few days), there is no question that Mr. Dion will have to/must lose his French citizenship. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

Fine, I wasn't sure. However, the gov't has an obligation to see that health care workers meet our standards, why on earth would any gov't allow a foreign doctor to practice without the proper training and licensing. Unless of course you are suggesting we lower our standards to accommodate them. The first patient to have a problem would be suing the gov't for allowing it to happen. Heck, if you feel that way why have any kind of standard or licensing at all, maybe I'll just put out a shingle and call myself a doctor, buy a few tools and some tonic water and we'll be back to the good old days.

Neither do I and obviously neither does Harper, repeating the same old lie often enough doesn't make it the truth. What evidence do you have that Harper opposes hate crimes legislation based on race, ethnicity or religion? Yawn....zzzzzzzz

Noted by a few people, and that this obsession is totally false. However, as thought, the motion hasn't passed. Interesting to note that without the Bloc it could have, the bloc and the NDP were whipped. So, if Quebec actually separated a lot of issues would be a whole lot different. Anyway, this should be closure. Just realized the bloc wasn't a whipped vote.