scribblet

I consider principled gov't to be what is best for Canada, not what is best for the party. Obviously Harper put economics ahead of optics, he obviously knew what the fallout would be. As far as the Liberals go its all feigned outrage anyway as they would have had to tax them eventually. The obvious question is, should a gov't renege on a promise or stick to the promise even if it means the loss of billions and is bad for the country. One cannot call it lying as the promise was made based on the figures and economics etc. of the day, I'd rather have a politician do the right thing under these circumstances. I don't remember anyone wanting a class action suit against Chretien when he promised to cut the GST. The Department of Finance has prepared a sensible backgrounder on this. http://www.fin.gc.ca/news06/06-061e.html#Backgrounder According to Finance tax changes had already been put in place to equalize the taxation of the average Canadian of income from a "trust" vs income from a large corporation. The concern is that out of country investors and tax exempt entities are ending up paying less tax than the hard working Canadian. The TSE lost less than 300 points and is still above the 12,000 level last night, so the sky didn't fall today. Based on what I have read and understand I support the changes. I also think it was good strategy, it shafted Layton and took the heat off the environmental issues, for now anyway.

And actually, what he did say there would be a vote to determine whether the issue of SSM should be re-visited - a no brainer since we know it won't pass. I don't agree that being against gay marriage is gay bashing nor is it 'homophobic' - words used to stifle legitimate debate.

Not sure about this one, can a woman really claim rape after she said yes and consensual sex has started, I guess if she changes her mind it should stop.... but is it actually rape at that point?

5% would be good, and in Ontario they should drop the PST to 5%... a nice round 10%

Agreed, while I'm sure most Palestinians just want peace and jobs, they sure didn't act that way when they voted in Hamas. They seem to reject peace every time with murderous attacks on innocent civilians. Israel general fulfills its cease-fire committments a while back? They opened up the airport in the Gaza Strip opened the borders between Jordan and Egypt and Israel lifted the barricade or the siege beyond the Palestinian city. what the did the PLO do, oh yea, declare a day of rage, it was supposed to be a ceasefire. What where they raging about then - the cease fire, the chance of peace? Then we have Hamas deliberatly sabotaging peace talks when they undermined Abas days after he agreed to implement a new road map to peace. Sharon and Abbas agree to a ceasefire and from Hamas· 'We are not bound by ceasefire' - Hamas

I don't fully understand all of this, apparantly $70 billion in new conversions, with the tipping point being trust conversion by Telus Corp. and BCE Inc.s this could have resulted in a loss of billions if big banks & large energy cos. followed suit An analysis from Eric Reguly in today's Globe: "Mr. Flaherty appears concerned about three things. The first is tax leakage, the second is national competitiveness (because trusts pay out almost all their profits, leaving little behind for reinvestment in the business), the third is tax balance. " don't forget the 'lost'revenues over a five-year period. As Flaherty said "Things changed a great deal this year and we faced a situation where Canada was moving to an income trust economy. Is that a good thing for Canada?" he said at a news conference. "The answer is no, it's a very bad thing for Canada, it's bad for the Canadian economy. We're concerned about competitiveness and productivity." Obviously the situation changed so much in a year they had to look out for Canada's economy, and rethink the game plan, they must also realize the optics on all of this and did what they thought was best for the economy. The Liberals would howl no matter what they did anyway. Smart move to allow income splitting of all senior's income as it gives some back to the shareholders. Personally I'm happy about that one.

I applaud Harper for taking a chance on this and the optics, as the income tax area was starting to create a problem and needed to be done for Canada's future economic health. Even when he does the right thing, he must know there would be howls from the liberals no matter what. The gutless Liberals should have addressed the issue and acted on it about 10 years ago when it first showed its head, maybe kept it to the real estate area, then the problem wouldn't be here today.

“Frankly, I think, though, this is consistent with the anti-Israeli position that has been taken by virtually all of the candidates for the Liberal leadership. And I don’t think it’s helpful or useful.” -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper The only deceit here is that of Iggy and the rest of them, Ignatieff's statement that "war crimes" were committed by Israel at Qana were also equal to Rae's who has been defending such words. Support for Israel should be driven by courage and values, we should be defending freedom while fighting terrorisim, not bending and distorting truth and applying double standards when it comes to the M.E. Look at Liberals comments: re Israel fighting Hezbollah's kidnapping and rocket attacks on Israeli; Rae called for restraint from Israel but none from Hezbollah. He supported Graham's more 'nuanced' position, rather than Harper's unequivocal support for a democratic ally under attack. The Liberals have never had a clear position, they have waffled and spun for years. The Liberals deputy foreign affairs critic and supporter of Gerard Kennedy, went on a fact finding tour of the area, and immediately announced that Israel was practicing "state terror"- Nada about Hezbollah's terrorism which started the war. Liberal MP Denis Coderre, led a "Rally for Peace for Lebanon and Palestine" (more of a pro Hezbollah rally)- no mention of peace for Israel and neither did they include any Israeli or Jewish groups in the rally. Heck the Liberals name was on the org. press release. Paul Martin called Muammar Khaddafi a man "with a philosophical bent of mind" John Manley equated the Israel Defense Forces with Palestinian homicide bombers Jean Chrétien said while in Jerusalem didn't know "North from south or east from west" when asked about Palestine don't forget the 100s of resolutions against Israel our Liberal ambassadors have voted on, in lock step with despotic regimes And who said "none is too many" when referring to Jewish quotas ? We finally have a PM willing to actually take the side of democracy and be against radical Islamist terrorists, so should the Liberals who seem to find it extremely difficult to do so - while trying to play both sides against the middle for votes and power.

Canada has never been strictly a 'peacekeeper', since the end of the Cold War we have been involved in the 1991 Persian Gulf war; the 1993 battle of the Medek pocket in Croatia; the 1999 invasion of Kosovo; and Afghanistan in 2003. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto.../BNStory/Front/ you might want to read this, Canada the peacekeeper? A myth that should die

I do believe existing trusts should have been grandfathered for more than 4 years, only new trusts subject to the taxation. However, I don't think it will hurt the CPC; how many people actually have income trusts, relatively few I would guess; most people will see it as nasty corporations getting theirs.

Sweden is adding its voice to the mix, this woman is Muslim but even she is beling called an 'Islamaphobe' how does that work. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2415525,00.html THE latest media darling of Scandinavian politics is not only black, beautiful and Muslim; she is also firmly against the wearing of the veil. Nyamko Sabuni, 37, has caused a storm as Sweden’s new integration and equality minister by arguing that all girls should be checked for evidence of female circumcision; arranged marriages should be criminalised; religious schools should receive no state funding; and immigrants should learn Swedish and find a job.

Well it seems Swdeden is having its problems too, and they sure are not right wing. You don't think the Swedes are right in having a slight bone to pick too. http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/938 Swedish Welfare State Collapses as Immigrants Wage War From the desk of Fjordman on Tue, 2006-03-28 21:49 Last year I wrote an article about how Swedish society is disintegrating and is in danger of collapsing, at least in certain areas and regions. The country that gave us Bergman, ABBA and Volvo could become known as the Bosnia of northern Europe. The “Swedish model” would no longer refer to a stable and peaceful state with an advanced economy, but to a Eurabian horror story of utopian multiculturalism, socialist mismanagement and runaway immigration. Some thought I was exaggerating, and that talk of the possibility of a future civil war in Sweden was pure paranoia. Was it? In a new sociological survey (pdf in Swedish, with brief English introduction) entitled “Vi krigar mot svenskarna” (“We’re waging a war against the Swedes”), young immigrants in the troubled city of Malmö have been interviewed about why they are involved in crime. Although it is not stated, most of the immigrant perpetrators are Muslims. In one of the rare instances where the Swedish media actually revealed the truth, the newspaper Aftonbladet reported several years ago that 9 out of 10 of the most criminal ethnic groups in Sweden came from Muslim countries. This must be borne in mind whilst reading the following newspaper article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139614,00.html MALMO, Sweden — Swedish authorities in the southern city of Malmo (search) have been busy with a sudden influx of Muslim immigrants — 90 percent of whom are unemployed and many who are angry and taking it out on the country that took them in. "If we park our car it will be damaged — so we have to go very often in two vehicles, one just to protect the other vehicle," said Rolf Landgren, a Malmo police officer. Fear of violence has changed the way police, firemen and emergency workers do their jobs. There are some neighborhoods Swedish ambulance drivers will not go to without a police escort. Angry crowds have threatened them, telling them which patient to take and which ones to leave behind. Because Sweden has some of the most liberal asylum laws in Europe, one quarter of Malmo's 250,000 population is now Muslim, changing the face and the idea of what it means to be Swedish. Asylum seekers may bring spouses, brothers and grandparents with them. Civil servants say the city is swamped.

Well, he's not a social conservative

Maybe Harper should call his bluff then he can rightfully blame it on Jack. Jack must be up to something, he knows the liberal are not a shoo in to back him up.

Sheez, some people don't no nuttin guess we'd better larn em -

Do you mean Liberal? Guess I should have used a capital L.... like I said this whole Straussian thing is a manufactured debate..I'm not all that familiar with it, something that I have never seen or heard discussed anywhere, as it simply is not an issue for most people as it doesn't really relate to actuality.

Oh for pete's sakes - let sleeping dogs lie -

Margaret Wente has spoken up on this issue and is saying I believe, what a lot of other people are afraid to say. I've posted most of it as you need a log in, she says it well. or logs go to bugmenot.com http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...=Margaret+Wente Twin Sides of the coin MARGARET WENTE -snip- Nobody dared to ask whether it would have been better for them not to have been born at all. Not in public, anyway. In private, the conversation was different. Ten out of 10 people interviewed for this story said that, if it had happened to them, they would have terminated the pregnancy. -snip- This is not a story that should make anyone smile. Instead, it ought to fill us with pity and sorrow. Print Edition - Section Front The twins' mother, Felicia Simms, is a 21-year-old single woman on social assistance. She has two other children, ages 4 and 2. She is unable to work, she has said, because she has severe scoliosis -- curvature of the spine -- and a panic disorder. You get the sense that the twins' father (who hasn't spoken to the media) is not ecstatic, but in shock. Infants such as these would challenge the most resilient family in the world, let alone this one. How do their parents intend to care for them? What will be the impact on their ability to care for the two children they already have? How will they gain access to the highly specialized medical attention the twins will need when they live in Vernon, a town that's hundreds of miles from a major medical centre? Did anyone suggest to Ms. Simms that, for the sake of her family, proceeding with the pregnancy (she learned of the twins' condition at 20 weeks) might not be such a hot idea? Instead of being portrayed as feckless (a reasonable interpretation, under the circumstances), Ms. Simms has been depicted as a model of maternal love, courageously prepared to take on whatever fate has in store. Except that she won't have to. That will be up to the state, which will inevitably step in when she can't cope. The state will also pick up the bills. The cost could well be in the millions. (In 2003, doctors in the United States separated Egyptian twins joined at the head, at a cost of about $4.5-million.) Don't get me wrong. I do not think that anyone in authority had the right to tell Ms. Simms what to do. The choice (if not the consequences) was all hers. And I'm glad that heroic medicine is available to all -- or, at any rate, to those with an exotic, dramatic and life-threatening condition that will provide amazing visuals for the nightly news. -snip- I don't begrudge the expense these poor infants will incur. And I know it's not nice to apply a cost-benefit analysis to human life. But we need to face the fact that not all babies are worth saving, even if we could afford to do it. Developed nations around the world are wrestling with the ethics and stunningly high costs of trying to save seriously premature infants, who (if they survive) have a high chance of developing severe mental or physical handicaps. They're God's children, too. But, sometimes, it's more merciful to let nature take its course.

This is strictly posturing and publicity seeking for Jack, he never met a microphone he didn't like. I can't see him gaining seats if he sent people to the polls now so soon, in fact I would think he'd lose. The liberals don't want one now before they have a leader, would they support a non confidence motion before Spring? People say they care about the environment, but I would wager they don't want an election over it as they don't walk the talk anyway. We still drive big cars, are good consumers etc. etc. IMHO people really don't want it as an election issue. Jack can't hope to gain anything out of bringing down the gov't now.

[quote[ And yesterday, Milleken gave a stinging speech directed to ALL members, (amid what sounded like Liberals gasping)....and gave a clear ruling: he now considers this matter closed. He did indeed, but since the opposition evidently has little else to go on about, I'm betting they'll ignore his ruling.

Huh??? I think I was talking about buzz words. 'Christian right' is a buzz word IMO by the left. It denotes political activity in churches. Republican supporting political activity. Blacks support Democrats in their churches but do not have a comparable negative buzz word, again IMO. It really has nothing to do with religion. I understood what you meant. Various church groups become active and voice opinions, but it is only the 'Christian Fundamentalists' who get the flak. The United church regularly gets involved in the leftwing side of politics, no one castigates them, double standards when it comes to demonizing different church groups.

Left wingers are as much bound to their own ideology, and will of course, attempt to manipulate and scare the voters. I kinda doubt that the majority of voters have ever heard of Strauss, let alone believe any of what is posted on the net or attribute it to the CPC. This is a scare tactic by which their own negative qualities are projected onto the opposition in order to divert attention away from themselves. I find these kind of scare tactics worse than anything Harper might actually come up (not dreamed up by the opposition). I'm guessing that this type of writing is starting to surface again as it look like we may have a spring election - maybe sooner. If you think some sort of Straussian ideology is influencing the CPC, take another look. It's the liberals who are completely Straussian - remember - they are the natural governing party and only they represent Canadian values -

Alberta's Mount Royal College professor Mahfooz Kanwar, a Muslim, has said that niqabs and burqas (which have a mesh that cover the eyes) should be outlawed. "People say they cover their faces to please Allah," says Kanwar. "But there is not even one mention anywhere in the Qur'an that urges women to cover their faces. Not one. It is not a religious requirement, it is a misogynist and patriarchal dictate by fanatic clerics." So, if it's not a religious requirement it cannot be considered a right under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees religious freedom, argues Kanwar. Kanwar also says covering one's face is not a rightm, is an insult and a threat to a free society and particularly threatens women. I agree with him, although just the actual veil and mesh coverings, we can't leglislate how people dress, but this speaks to the issue of security and ability to a job properly. In our society/culture covering one's face totally is usually seen as a mark of intimidation, maybe it is time to respect our culture. Maybe getting the issue out in the open and discussed will give the women a chance to opt out of wearing it, especially if they know they have gov't and public backing.

Best thing to do is not reply, and put the two of them on ignore.

Booga booga