scribblet

That's the crux of it isn't it, they will never admit there was anything wrong, they just keep on insisting they are the 'natural governing party' - by some divine right of Kings (or maybe that should be the divine right of Liberals) to rule. What liberal media bias? http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/000717.html Last year, Liberal Environment Minister Stephane Dion was given the "fossil of the day" award for not doing enough for the environment. Number of news stories in Canada on this embarrassment? Zero. This year, Conservative Environment Minister Rona Ambrose was given the "fossil of the day" award by for not doing enough for the environment. Number of news stories in Canada on this embarrassment? 193.

Did you know that Dion is a French Citizen (we know the GG gave hers up after it hit the fan) so does this make him a French poodle - cos we know if Harper had U.S. citizenship he would be a U.S. poodle. LOL and Dion was born here, not in France.

IMO there is an arrogant assumption among the Liberals (including the CBC) that they will "stop Harper" and easily win the next election. On Cross Country Checkup yesterday, Dion said to Rex Murphy "thank you to invite me" Now, given that he was to be on national radio, don't you think Dion would make sure the first English words out of his mouth were grammatically correct? After all, he wasn't responding to an out-of- left-field question. He was responding to the entirely predicatable question. He's an oldschool Chretien crony who survived Martin's short reign by being fairly invisible. I don't think he will convert any Conservative voters. In fact, I would think he will turn off a a lot of people due to the fact that he's a throw back to Chretien era, and heavens to betsy, even sounds like him. Hasta La Vista baby!

Can you clarify that, I don't know what you are referring to, Peter Mackay alone had no say in the membership process, any agreement was reached by concensus From a Canoe report on the Alberta PC election : "Not everyone who voted Saturday was an ardent Tory. One couple emerged from a polling station with big frowns on their faces and admitted they are members of another political party. They said they bought Tory memberships in the hope their votes might help thwart a Morton victory. "We are going to get together with friends when this is over and burn our Tory party cards," said a woman who declined to give her name or her political affiliation. " I agree we need to design around the abuse of the membership process - do away with these different scenarios and restrict party voting rights to those that have been party members for a minimum period of say 6 months. Every new member should also sign a statement affirming that he/she is not a member of any competing party and be subject to penalties in the event of a false declaration. That is if we don't want a registration process for all voters. Fixed election dates and a standardized leadership election system would help, especially if run by Elections Canada. Delegated voting is for the elite and for only those who can afford to attend a convention, might be fun and all, but not democratic. The best thing would be for all registered voters to vote for a PM.

Mine are off LOL I agree there can be a problem with memberships but the system can be fixed, (e.g. no new memberships less than say 30 days prior to the vote) The delgated conventions has its problems too, and can be manipulated. Special interest groups - like who at a leadership convention, we all have our special interests, each riding has its own interests. Rural ridings usually have different isues than city ridings. Either that or we register for a party, therefore any registered person can vote for the leadership.

Your definition of democratic votes is pretty narrow as is your view of corruption. Is the U.S. electoral college democratic? Most people would say it is. Delegate selection is democratic. Is the one person, one member system democratic? Yes, but it is also corrupted by selling membership and from taking members who are not really members of the party. Really - I don't know about the U.S. electoral college system other than it was supposed to level the playing field between large and small states, but it is not relevant here. Old style delegate brokered conventions might be more exciting but why should a member need or want a representative to vote for them, I can make up my own mind and prefer to be directly involved in the process. And if you think the Liberals use similar tactics you need to take off your rose coloured glasses.

I have to question the journalism here "Just seconds after Rae was knocked out, a prominent Tory MP wandering the convention floor pulled out a handful of buttons mocking Rae and winked mischievously." If they can't even give a name of the person handing out buttons then this can't be taken as serious journalism. And isn't this a private event? How did he get in? Rae lost because the votes on teh floor weren't there due to the corrupt LIberal electoral system plain and simple. It also means we should never believe everything we read in the media, golly gee, who knows how many memos and scenarios the Liberals have conjured up... To think that a few buttons swung the delegates is quite funny really, and yes it is interesting to note that the Liberal party once again rejected the democratic leadership process, opting to stay with the corrupt status quo.

Yup! Yup! The devil will sell us out and the people will be cold and naked in the streets. Borg It is pretty hard to believe that people actually still buy into the chicken little fictional scaremongering.

ROTFLMAO Maybe you could point out where Harper has said he will privatize health care and which policy that would be etc. etc. I suppose it is better to bet rabidly anti American than to have a good working relationship with our largest trading partner. You also might want to back up that statement with some facts. booga booga .

The Liberals think they can win the election and the CPC is gearing up for a spring election, possibly April. What bugs me is the arrogance of the liberals who think the have a divine right to rule, and getting back into power at any cost.

According to Warren Kinsella a lot of delegates havn't been able to make it for the registration process due to bad weather, some people are breaking down in tears. I guess this could make a big difference, too bad they don't have the one vote per member process - which btw they've turned down again.

I believe the reason for this is because suicide bombings are not specifically mentioned in the terrorist act. I also feel that many of the liberal or more radical left wingers support it, or at least refuse to condemn it. http://www.canasb.ca/Breaking%20News.aspx

Sounds good to me, I'm all for it, that is specifically referring to suicide bombings as terrorism. http://www.canasb.ca/Speeches/Segal.aspx GOOD NEWS FOR CANADIANS AGAINST SUICIDE BOMBING • CANASB is in regular contact with Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Minister Stockwell Day and the Prime Minister’s office. The Conservative Canadian government told us they would help Liberal Senator Grafstein’s Bill S-206, considered a “Made in Canada Solution”, to specifically cover suicide bombing as terrorism. Click links to read. • Bill S-206 was referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs for Hearings. See “Breaking News” in our www.canasb.ca web site as many leading Liberal and Conservative Senators support the Bill. • CANASB’s Letter to the Senate supporting the Bill is signed by “A remarkable collection” of prominent Canadian political, religious and business leaders including Bob Rae, John Tory, Ed Broadbent, David Peterson, General MacKenzie, Gerald Schwartz, Salim Mansur and the Anglican primate. We will send it to the Senate and publicize it nationally when the Hearings start. • Passing Bill S-206 to declare “suicide bombing as terrorism” would be a first for any parliament in the world. • The Australian Parliament became the first in the world to pass a bipartisan motion urging suicide terrorism be declared a "crime against humanity”. Many experts consider suicide bombing as “terrorism” and as a “crime against humanity” interchangeable concepts

I'd like to ask you norman not to use the deaths of these men to further your cause. You may have your reasons not to support the mission, and although we may disagree i respect your rights and opinions. So i ask you please do not use the deaths of my comrads to make your piont, as it dishonors they're commitment and sacrafice. Thank you. Well said: Killing Canadian soldiers and breaking the will of Canadians is the best weapon the Taliban has. what we need to do is communicate and get out the good messages. From the NP (subscription required) more than four million refugees have returned to Afghanistan. GDP growth in the legitimate economy (excluding the drug trade) in 2002 was 29%, 16% in 2003, 8% in 2004, 14% in 2005, and it is estimated GDP will grow by 14% in 2006. I 2004, only 9% of Afghans had reliable medical facilities. Today, 77% do. Over 4,000 medical facilities, 661 basic health centres, 413 medical community centres, 66 district hospitals and 33 provincial hospitals have been opened since 2004. More than 4,000 kilometres of highway projects have been built. Major power station projects are under way and more than 1-billion square metres of land has been cleared of land mines, opening up new farm land for cultivation. In Afghanistan's September, 2005 election, close to seven million people went to the polls. The civil service is growing. There is more press freedom now than ever before, supported by five independent TV channels, one-government run TV channel and 290 newspapers. Close to six million Afghan children are in school, a six-fold increase since 2001. Afghans support the presence of NATO troops in their country as they rebuild their lives. This story of success has gone untold at the price of public support for the Afghan mission in Canada. Support is also wavering in other NATO countries. The Environics poll in November showed that 60% of Canadians would support the mission in Afghanistan if they could be assured it was helping that country get back on its feet and that it guarded against a return of the Taliban. But most mistakenly believe the mission is making little progress. Asked why more has not been done to take these successes to Canadians and other NATO countries through media campaigns, a NATO official responded "that's not our job." It's about time it was.

Does anyone find this statement by Phil Fontaine (Phil Fontaine, national chief of the Assembly of First Nations)a little puzzling, to say the least not to mention a double standard and hypocritical. "Any action that elevates the status of one segment of Canadian society over another is completely wrong. There is a real appreciation in Canada that we don't do nation building in this way."

I'm surprised nobody has commented on this. If they get their way what would you do, would you go back to rabbit ears, would you protest and cancel TV until it is reversed? This is just another tax, more money for the CBC too. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/11/27/carriage.html A proposal by Canada's broadcasting networks to charge cable and satellite companies fees to carry their signals is one of the more contentious items on the agenda as the CRTC begins a major TV policy review Monday. The broadcast regulator is hearing submissions on what the networks call "subscription fees." The cable and satellite industry has another name for them — a "tax" on TV signals that Canadians now get for free. So-called carriage fees, if approved, would see Canadians pay several dollars more a month on their cable or satellite bills for local channels from such broadcasters as CTV, CanWest, CBC and CHUMCity. In its submission to the CRTC, CanWest proposes a 50-cent-a-month fee per subscriber for each private, local or regional over-the-air TV station, when their signals are carried by satellite or cable systems. ..... The CBC — which also supports the idea of subscription fees — says conventional broadcasters face tough times as audiences fragment and advertising growth slows.

According to other MP's he was consulted and briefed, "He and the PM discussed this over the course of the summer on at least two occasions if not more. And the PM did not make the decision about proceeding with this until he had the caucus discussion last Wednesday." Chong is now declinging an interview.

Maybe he read your post LOL What actually has been done is given the Quebecois people recognition as one of the two founding people groups when Canada was created. The notion that this gives the Province of Quebec increased governance is misleading. The other founding group is the people of British background and I suppose this group does receive recognition on our money and parliamentary system etc. Maybe this one motion (no powers, no const. change) to recognize the Quebecois, wherever they live in Canada, is not too much. If I remember correctly wasn't Quebecois coined by Bouchard who was trying todraw a distinction between the French in Quebec, the English in Quebec, the French and English outside Quebec. Done with the intention of separating Quebec and setting bar bar for separation. The real issue would be if Province of Quebec starts enacting new laws with which to distinguish the French people more then the english people in Quebec, thus eventually driving out the non Quebecois, giving themselves a majority in the next referendum.

Bogging down parliament? What would you recommend be done when the Bloc put forth its motion? Roll over and play dead? Take a look at Rick Mercer's blog.. http://rickmercer.blogspot.com/ Pawn to King Four Well you got to hand it to Stephen Harper the man is on a roll. The Tories love to say he’s great at his job because he is, above all, a chess player.

What do you mean by a 'progressive party', the Tories are progressive conservatives? If you are talking about a middle of the road party isn't that supposed to be the Liberals? Also I believe the NDP lost votes too. The CPC party today and Harper is certainly far more moderate than was predicted (all the doom and gloom hasn't materialized) if you read MLW it starts out with; the movement towards a more moderate Conservative Party under Harper carries with it both opportunities and risks... and afterall, he is a graduate of economics. CTV.ca article said.... Harper has now remade himself as a Conservative moderate etc. etc. Harper is and always has been a fiscal conservative and is running a risk of alienating some of the social conservatives. Look at their policies, a hard core social conservatives wouldn't promise not to discuss abortions, or fully support national health care among other things. Actually so far what were are seeing these days is Liberal lite. The only thing that could be considered a 'socon' issue is SSM, and at that, he has only promised to vote on whether to re-open the issue, nothing more. Did you know that Trudeau was one of the young Stephen Harper's earliest political inspirations, in fact. he (Harper) actually joined the Liberal student club a friend founded in the mid-1970s at Richview Collegiate in Etobicoke.

I wasn't going to comment on this, but you might want to take a look at your own highly partisan and often insulting posts. Meanwhile, check out the resolution and take it up with them:

Chong was a Cabinet Minister, and required to vote with the government that he was part of. He did not resign from the party - only from cabinet so that he can abstain from voting on the motion. He stated in his press conference that Harper was very gracious to him and understood his reasons. While it is too bad that he felt this way, he dealt with the situation in an admirable way. I sometimes wonder how many ranting from various directions have read the PM's statement and reacting to what the press tells us what it says, and not reading it for ourselves. The statement is quite cleverly worded, in fact its an argument for one nation, there is no slippery slope, it removes a slippery slope. Neither does it open a constitutional debate. That being said I think the Prime Minister should have allowed all members, including cabinet, to vote their conscience with no level of whip. Interesting vote though, only 16 in total voted against the motion,

I was pretty sure it passed although I don't have a link for it. That's why I keep saying that 14 year olds are protected. Thats the confusion I guess, I phoned Vic Toews const. office who told me it hasn't passed into law yet. I went to the Justice website but couldn't find anything, well, didn't have much time to really search. I'm 99.9% sure it is still with the justice committee.

Part of the problem is complanency and the fact that only 40% came out. This was a string Liberal Seat and the Greens increased their vote because it was able to get its people out, also heard they ran a very good campaign.

The current CPC bill to raise the age of consent to 16 passed second reading in October and went to the Justice committe, I didn't hear anything since then - as far as I know it is not yet passed into law.