Cameron

Was that ever proven?

"Oh no! Conservatives! Hide the children and puppies!"

I'd have to agree. A scandal is something like Watergate, Adscam...etc...

It's in my signature.

You can play with the percentage numbers all you want...80% of Canada DID NOT vote for the NDP to be in government and 70% DID NOT vote for the Liberals to be in government. You can spin all you want. It all comes down to after the Christmas break what the GG will do. If the coalition still stands and askes to run parliment, then she could grant them that request, she could also call another election. It's a dead issue until then.

So, for now we are still in the black. But Harper needs to cut spending. Now.

Give it up with the % of the vote BS. This country elects MP's from constituencies, not based on the % of people that voted. OMG Numbers!: 1997 - Liberals won 155 seats with 38.5% of the vote (OMG! The majority of the country didn't vote for them, Coalition!) 2000 - Liberals won 172 seats with 40.8% of the vote. (Again! Call the Military!) It doesn't matter what % of the vote you get. It matters where you win. Here are some more numbers to make your heads hurt. 1997 - Bloc 44 seats with 10.7% vs. NDP 21 with 11% (Dippers need a break!) 2000 - Bloc 38 seats with 10.7 % vs. NDP 13 with 8.5% (Whops! Didn't get one!) 2004 - Liberals 135 seats with 43.8% Amazing! Sourced information!

Yup, I know what you mean. I've seen posters on other forums give these long goodbyes that are pages and pages...only to find them posting a week later.

Have a good one.

"Protocol Encryption" - Enabled Solved some of my problems. The reason I download is because I don't get certain American channels and the shows that are on them. There is a service in the states that allows people to view certain shows through streaming technology (hulu.com) but the rights don't extend to Canada.

More info on the public/private partnership: Follow up: The opposition has made a case for public/private partnerships in the fact that they think it will be a "gateway" to a full private system. I personally like the initiative taken by the government in finding a different solution to the problem of wait times. A friend of mine works for the Dept. of Heath here in NS and she says it's full of time wasting BS. Everything from people who don't care to restrictive union contracts.

From the article in post #1

What if people DID demand better only to be shot down by other groups that play on a sympathetic note with the public. Here in NS I am privy to the Provincial Government workings (President of a Constituency) and have seen the negative push by opposition parties work. Example: The NS government started to look at alternatives to the public system to alleviate some of the pressure that was building up. One option that they looked at was a private clinic that did kneed surgeries. This clinic provided the service for profit but charged the government. They studied the outcome of the venture and found that; 1) The cost to do a surgery in the public system was est. $3000 vs. est. $1500 for the private system. 2) Standards were the same for the private clinic as were found in the public system. The government had strict regulations to ensure that the level of service was the same if not better. The negative push came form the NS NDP party in the form of the usual public/privatization rant. People would buy it up because the NDP pushed those buttons that would get people angry. People would form opinions that were not based on sound information and that could lead to a vote swing. The media this end of the country always leans towards the party that is not in power. There seems to be this mentality that if you are conservative you are part of the "bad guys" (using the PC's who are in power). This all comes back to the amount of information and the level of accuracy that is being reported. Another example: The media can dig up the coffee budget for the Department of Community Services but can find out how much knee surgery costs at a private clinic or even report of weather that clinic does a better job than the public service.

Micheal, the government does have a dedicated page to the Afghan war. CF Page on Afghanistan Sources like this are filled with useful information on the the war. Most people are either too lazy or just don't care to take the time to read through to get information. People are becoming more and more used to being spoon fed information and if you get used to that, then you loose the ability to be objective when you make arguments.

A new book by Chris Wattie outlines the poor media coverage of the war in Afghanistan. Chris Wattie was one of the first reporters embedded with the Canadian Military in 2003 and went back in 2006. The book raises some good points about coverage and the outcome. One area I wanted to focus on was the media coverage that the Taliban look for. From the article: This part intrigued me because of the fact that the Taliban is looking for advantages to raise the anti-war sentiment. With the current events that have taken place, I ask the question about timing and, taking into account the above quote, the possibility that the Taliban is looking to stir up anger in Canadians around the Christmas period. For months we have heard nothing from the media on the war. I haven't seen any reports on the progress that is being made or what struggles NATO forces are facing. The only time Canadians pay attention is when troops die and that brings out strong feelings about the mission. With those strong feelings there are usually calls to stop our involvement that may be based on poor information, or a knee jerk reaction to the massive amount of negative information pouring out for a short period of time. If the Taliban is exploiting certain times of the year to get sympathy votes, how are Canadians supposed to get reliable information on the true progress of the war? This is a concerning factor because of the decisions that could be made and the outcomes of those decisions. Link

John Stewart Makes Fun of Canada John Stewart Makes Fun of Canada John Stewart Makes Fun of Canada So John Stewart of the Daily Show decides to do a nine minute piece on Canada's Constitutional Wranglings. Why is it making news? Why is it every time someone in the US pays attention to Canada we get giddy and clap our hands? Do we have some sort of problem with our image? Are we self conscious?

Good for Manning, he deserves it.

That's Montreal, a city that is very charged-up.

I wish you the best Army Guy. I know sometimes it gets frustrating reading the news from back home, and I know it's frustrating for me to read the news from over there. I know you guys are putting 100% in everyday, and I wish you victory in your mission. Enjoy your time with your family and friends.

The word comes in, and the word goes out. This makes it all hard to believe what is really going on over there.

Has the thought been put forward that the NDP or Liberals never intended to co-operate with the CPC? When the CPC put forth the concept of cutting the vote subsidy, it started a fire that the NDP and LPC fanned until it got to this level.

I watched a bit of the National and one piece had the CBC making talking points about the CPC using the word "Separatists vs. Sovereignist".

I'm on the phone with CTV to have camera's follow the MP's and leaders. It's going to be like "Big Brother". Canadians will get to vote...oh wait...no they won't. Sorry.

Since Quebec didn't sign the constitution, would they be considered guests in Canada? Also, didn't they loose to the English back in the day and then permitted to stay? My history is rusty.

Link to article The second quote really got me. Interesting insight on what he was thinking during the election.