scribblet

Good post, yes indeed. As in Afghanistan and any more troops should die, the blame will end up on Harper. The CPC should be preparing for the next campaign now. Howevever, I guess we will see endless reams of nitpicking and Harper bashing from now on.... YAWN ZZZZZ

Thats a question I wondered about. Why are people asking the gov't to send in troops to Darfur (without the U.N. even). our troops are just as likely or more likely to be killed there. Why is it acceptable for them to be put in harms way in Darfur but not elsewhere? As far as taking out the troops before the job is finished, its politics, the opposition will use dead soldeirs as an excuse to get the CPC, even though they sent in the troops originally. They will lay the blame on Harper.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists...07/1567813.html Imagine, a politician keeping promises You have to admit, whether you agree with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's policies or not, it is refreshing to see a politician make good on his election campaign promises.

t margrace, your definition of a social program is significantly different than anyone elses. For example, would you consider interest cost to service the debt a social program? Most people wouldn't. I doubt that Bush would scrap seniors benefits, it would cut into his power base. Bush actually has never (to my knowledge) said he intends to scrap senior's benefits. I believe there was a proposal to cut survivor benefits, (their social security includes survivor benefits) There was the proposal that individuals have a choice as to how they handle their deductions. (U.S. folks have tax deductions for social security) I think he wanted people to put the money into inidividual RRSP style (400 K ?) accounts rather than have the gov't handle it. I believe their social security fund is almost insolvent, as our CPP was a while ago. I believe the U.S. today defines its social security benefits as a 'defined benefits program' not the sole means of support. The more you pay into it the more you get back (as in our CPP ) However, I don't believe it passed, although I think some republicans said they would vote for it if the old plan was kept and people given a choice - not sure. Either way, I'm not sure where in our constitution it says that people should rely on the government for all things.

Where did he say 'all' Quebec MP's ? He could have just picked all his old Alliance friends, but he didn't, it is more influence from the PC side, and gives much better regional representation in the government. Obviously he has changed his thinking about Quebec, which reflects well for him, whatever he said in 1997 sure doesn't cut any ice with what's being done today. Dragging up old quotes from an anti Harper website, doesn't mean anything either. That link is not from the Bulldog, its another website, supposedly quoting the NCC, however, I don't find anything wrong with it, it was on the mark, particularly when we have theParizeau's comments about the ethnic vote in Quebec.

Interesting article here: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50090 MI6, Britain's secret intelligence service, has identified six Pakistani scientists working in Iran's nuclear bomb program who have been "advising al-Qaida on how to weaponize fissionable materials it has now obtained." MI6 and the International Atomic Energy Agency believe the scientists have played a major role in enabling Iran to be "well advanced in providing uranium enriched materials for nuclear bombs," said Alexander Cirilovic, a nuclear terrorism expert in Paris. Both high-level MI6 and CIA sources have confirmed the scientists would only have been allowed to assist al-Qaida with the authority of Iran's unpredictable President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The revelation comes at a time when Washington has increased pressure on Tehran to give up its nuclear weapons program. The scientists worked for Dr. A.Q. Khan, the "father of the Islamic bomb," who is now under house arrest in Pakistan after confessing he had provided both Iran and North Korea with details of how to make their own nuclear bombs. The MI6 report to other intelligence services followed bin Laden's recent threats to unleash a new wave of terror – with Britain and the United States his prime targets. Recently, from his lair in north Pakistan, bin Laden boasted that "al-Qaida did not find it difficult to obtain the weapons grade material. We have contacts in Russia with other militant groups. Enough material to make a tactical nuke is available for £15 million."

Do we need a constitutional change for an elected Senate, I don't think we do, nor for set terms in Parliament. We may see set terms coming sooner than later. I thought this was funny, another good reason to abolish the Senate as it is now. - Liberals pulled a fast one on the governing Conservatives in the Senate on budget day last Tuesday, but the government leader in the upper chamber, Sen. Marjory LeBreton, got the last word. Ms. LeBreton was absent from Tuesday's question period to attend a special cabinet briefing on the budget. In past years, while the Grits were in power, Tories would not exploit the leader's absence with questions that couldn't be answered by anybody but the leader, who is a member of cabinet. A handful of Liberal senators, however, broke with the practice and stood and directed questions to LeBreton's empty chair for about 20 minutes covering everything from the farm income crisis to the renewal of the North American Aerospace Defence agreement with the U.S. Mustering up his old radio and TV voice, Senator Jim Munson started a question by saying, "Empty chairs leave me with an empty feeling." The next day, back in her seat, Ms. LeBreton fired away, accusing the Liberals who participated in the political sideswipe of bringing the Senate into "disrepute." Then she proceeded to answer every question that was asked in her absence to much hooting and hollering from opposition Senators, who had new questions and said Ms. LeBreton was showing disrespect for the chamber. Ms. LeBreton, not unfamiliar with a good verbal scrap, fended off her attackers saying, "I will refer to a quote from Winston Churchill that applies to you people. He once said, 'There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result' " Toronto Sun Page 27

You are right. He said he would hold a debate followed by a non-binding vote. If the vote was against SSM he would introduce a bill. And I am sure the last thing he wants is to have SSM once again in the front and center of the public's mind. He's trying to show that he's a moderate. I'm sure he will try to euchre it so the resolution supports SSM. I think he will too, just as he had euchred the anti abortion front. Harper is a fiscal conservative, an economic guru, and to my knowledge has never made an issue out of religion. The issue is only brought up by the media and others to scare people off. Even with a majority I doubt Harper would bring religion into any issue.

I certainly do hope you find a link because your insinuation is just that, and you might want to put it in context also. The gist of the article if I remember correctly, was that support for separation would increase in the long term because of 'peaceful ethnic cleansing' becing committed by Quebec.... in other words, the stifling of English/anglophone opposition. This we know to be true. Other than that, it doesn't 'tell' anything. http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/govrel/news.cfm?story=42847 Quebec representation Harper has named four out the 10 new Tory MPs from Quebec to cabinet posts in the hopes of gaining more seats in the province. In addition to Cannon at transport and Bernier at industry, Jean-Pierre Blackburn has been appointed as labour minister, and Josee Verner as the minister of international co-operation.

His promise to have another vote on SSM (something totally unecessary) is clearly pandering to the religious right who are by far and away the group most opposed to gay marriage. While it is true that not all socons are religious, religion is definitely in the forefront of pushing the socon agenda. BTW, I am not religious but consider myself a social conservative. In fact I believe that the religious right is doing conservatism a lot of harm. And I would agree that other than tossing the socons a few bones (like the revisit of SSM) Harper is trying to stay away from them. Religion might be in the forefront of some so-con's agenda, but on the whole it does not drive the CPC nor Harper's agenda. He didn't actually say he would have another vote on SSM, he said he would have a free vote in parliament as to whether or not the issue should be revisited. I'd guess he's pretty sure it won't pass and he's on safe ground there. I'm conservative and am not religious at all, I was active in two different ridings, none of the people on those boards where religious fundamentalists. I just find this whole thing an extention of the Bush hatred so many liberals have, they carry it over to here as if it were on the same level. I don't believe it is, but it can score points.

Everything the gov't pays for is a social program and Bush already wants to scrap seniors benefits,so why would Harper be any different Really. Who in ell cares what Bush does, but you might want to provide a source for that statement and exactly what it has to do with Canada. If you think Harper wants do away with senior's benefits, also please provide proof as to that statement, and provide the policy etc. etc. sniping doesn't make it so, and I'll bet you can't.

Gosh, don't you think there's something wrong with someone that old starting to raise a child? I just hope she can afford a nanny because she's going to need one full time at her age.

It was the right decision IMHO, sad that the lady was not able to get compensation from the driver as he had no insurance. But as quoted from www.smalldeadanimals.com "One feels sympathy for any victim, especially those like Zoe Childs, who was paralyzed as a result of the accident. However, transferring the responsibility for that crime to a third party for the explicit purpose of expanding the damages pool is not justice - it's civil predation."

Right - and all those who make a fuss about it only add to the book's popularity and Brown's bank account. Read it for what it is worth - a passably decent story but with characters as flat as pancakes. A better title would have been "Inspector Clouseau meets Indiana Jones" LOL, he must be laughing all the way to the bank these days. I found it a good read, but never once took it to be anything but fiction. I wonder if he really anticipated all the fuss.

But what would Toronto do when it starts to snow? Mayor Miller will figure that one out, geez, maybe could get some of those 'welfare bum' out shovelling LOL

That proves nothing. The link provided did not quote her directly. If she said "How do you feel about the decision to....", it could still be paraphrased as asking how they feel about the Harper Government's decision. No quotation marks in the article, therefore no solid evidence she used Harper's name. I beg to differ, it quoted her, she specifically referred to 'Harper's gov't " and its was inappropriate for the GG.

I never actually considered the Military a social program. Maybe we should start with the elimination of OAS, after all, its a 'freebie' isn't it.

What sociopaths are running the country - I assume you mean Canada, please clarify ? How many guns are manufactured in canada? It is my understanding that the majority of illegal guns are imported. I don't know do you? So what is your point, I assumed they were imported. What sociopaths are you referring to? ( guess I shouldn't expect an answer to potshots like that. I assumed most were imported, so if that is the case, who is being made rich in Canada from manufacturing firearms ?

If we would all be honest we know that manufacturing guns creates jobs, it makes money for the rich, the same as the marijuana production, just take a look at where the majority of the stuff is grown. Building jails ( schools for crime) does absulutely no good. When we have sociopaths running our country though what do you expect. What sociopaths are running the country - I assume you mean Canada, please clarify ? How many guns are manufactured in canada? It is my understanding that the majority of illegal guns are imported.

Don't forget that after all the shootings in Toronto he Liberals and NDP both promised stronger mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes. (guess that was just for getting votes, they never intended to do anything) Even though CPC have watered down their crime bills and made compromises in response to the NDP/liberal whining, it hasn't stopped that. Too bad they let politics get in the way of reform.. I do give credit to Dalton McGuinty and his AG who have both come out in support of the bill

How is this issue pandering to the religious right ? The engine that drives social conservatism in Canada is the religious right (especially Protestant sects since the RCC is pretty much a spent force politically) and they regard daycare centers up there with abortion and SSM as the works of the devil. It may be the engine that drives social conservatism, but the majority of conservatives are not necessarily religious, or social cons. This is just another scare tactic tacking itself onto hatred of the U.S. and the religious right's support of Bush. Even so, they have a right to a voice as do you and I, or is this part of a voice that says only atheists should have a voice ? Only a minority of people are atheist or agnostic, most people have some faith, or have been brought up in a faith. Harper to my knowledge has never talked about religion or used it as part of a campaign. The CPC does not say nor believe that only 'stay at home' families should receive a subsidy, they are saying all people should have a CHOICE, there should be more than one option for day care. This is getting kind of repetitious...

Don't know about PEI, but why not, as Harper said, all provinces could have a say.

To my knowledge, it was not an actual campaign promise, it was a proposal and was badly received generally, not many people thought it was a wise move at the time, especially the liberals. So why would they want it now. At least the CPC listened to the critics and advisors who thought it wasn't feasible. Whether they will implement it later if the money is there, I don't know.

Of course it wasn't, and these things do seem to be a more unifying force, if it saves us from another separation vote, good for Harper. Harper saysQuebec's participation in the Canadian delegation at UNESCO is not a step toward a new round of constitutional talks nor is it recognition of Quebec as a nation in any form. And don't forget he also told Quebec rhat the UNESCO deal applies only if Quebec is willing to work within the federation, nor does he exclude the possibility of allowing other provinces a voice in other international forums. Charest also said that this agreement is as much about provinces playing a more important role in the federation as it is about Quebec gaining a voice at UNESCO. Not to mention that. Harper also added that Alberta could have a similar status to Quebec in UNESCO within the International Energy Agency