madmax

I really like this paragraph. Particularly the Mulroney reference. That said, people have been bringing out the Stockwell day analogy for Dion and it just didn't work for me because Stockwell appears to be an empty vessel. But you might be closer in linking Dion to Clark for charisma and possibly other factors in leadership.

You can't have it both ways. The Federal Liberals, heavily pressured by the Reform Party, Canadian Alliance and then the Conservative party, put their focus on deficit reduction, then when running surpluses prioritized tax cuts and debt reduction all the while claiming to be the party of public health care while choking the funding to the Provinces. Some Provinces such as Ontarios Mike Harris, couldn't have been happier to start dismantling the system, calling Doctors, Nurses overpaid, and creating PrivatePublic hospitals that are costing an arm and a leg to run. But given any alternatives, with no federal funding keeping up to the costs of the Provincial expenditures, what choice would any government have? The Federal Liberals ignored the Health Care System, denied it the funding required, while holding the Provinces to the CHA for peanuts. Privatizing isn't the way to go, it is clearly not as efficient as the Public System, but to merely blame the Conservatives for wanting to implement their market based ideology on the Health System, vs take responsibility for Liberal Cutbacks is two faced at best.

And Harper responded calling Martin a supporter of Child Pornography. Hardly a way to gain public support. You can't defend the behaviour of this Prime Minister by simply brushing off his childish behaviour. I don't think that Stephen Harper is going to grow up. But then the Liberals create fake outrage and phoney melodrama. But for me I find Stephen Harpers behaviour to be offensive. However, the thread title suggests to be PM do you have to be a BULLY Yet there is no doubt that Chretian was a BULLY in his own party and held it together by his force of will.

You won't find an assessment that say this war can be won militarily. The Taliban are rebuilding. This is largely because the US decided to not consider Afghanistan a priority in security and funding and development and had a larger agenda to invade Iraq, which has completely backfired, and resulted in exactly what the critics said would occur. More people moving toward Islamic Fundamentalism and a strengthening of Al Qaida.I think the operative is on glue if he thinks Iran has the key to peace in Afghanistan. Pakistan is the larger piece of the puzzle. Iran has a key to peace in Iraq, but I have no reason to believe that Iran is going change direction now that they have become a large player on the scene thanks to the US making a complete and utter disaster of Iraq. Our soldiers have participated since early on. The new search and destroy missions were the work of the Liberal Government, and this was a bad idea. The fact that Harper extended this mission, will not result in the betterment of Afghanistan, but continue to put our soldiers in situations were individuals have to make decisions based on their safety first. The fact that the Taliban are stronger today suggests something has been deeply amiss because if anything, the Taliban should not be stronger. He's too fat. Your fears are unfounded. It will not happen. What you will see are large recruiting drives.

Desertion in the ranks?

You never know what the voter is going to do on election day.

Cheeky monkey.

The market drives itself. You are talking about government legislation forcing something upon us before the market will do it itself.

You never work in a corporation? They way you talk, you make it sound like these people are superstars, and that companies are totally efficient. That there are no human characteristics involved, and that no one is trying to stick it to one another within the walls, let alone outside of them. Why make widgets when I can screw somebody and make a pile of money through leverage and litigation.

Oh really? The shareholders have nothing to say about this? That is correct.

IIRC the US has a very subsidized bio fuel industry. I think you are hanging your hat on a myth. Canada has been the biggest sucker playing into the "free market" hype, while other countries cut deals and continue their protectionist ways. The current government walked away from the "free market" and our trade agreement, the moment they cut the forestry deal. The "free market" is topic for Professors locked up in the University making perfect models.

I was there in March 2005 for the CPC convention. Why would you be at a CPC convention?

While the Liberals were quite effective in making Preston Manning, Stockewell Day, and Stephen Harper look like scary leaders, the link you provided definitely outlines the styles used in the US. I do see that that is the style that the Prime Minister wants to lead his party by, and that a handful of others within the party are picking up on these style of attacks. While not unusual for biased forum posters to play attack dog, and fog up the issue, it is different from previous Conservative governments in the use of these tactics inside and out of parliment. If that is the way politics is going to be, it is going to go further downhill then it already is.

Edit your post. Strikeouts through the word aren't that clever.

Therefore behaving no different then Stephen Harper?

I don't know why Stephen Harper likes to play the part of the hatchet man. I was howling when the media reported he got this one wrong. Perhaps he is of the opinion, if you throw enough ..IT some of it is going to stick, whether fact or fiction.

Any posters here near Caledonia, Brantford or Hagersville ?

Double post deleted

Worked pretty good for Henco.

No it won't.

You are correct, except the topic would have neatly fallen into "the latest" and the debate continue there. As it is there are 4 Afghan threads currently on the first page. The newest thread was something like February 26th. So new threads were being created just days before this one. Regardless, you shall hear no more from me with regards to multiple thread posting. You've been around far longer than me.

Yes we do know why. We stopped the Taliban from destroying the opium crop. Its stronger now than it ever was - $ 600 billion per year. Go to the UN web site and see for yourself. We went in after the Taliban cut down production to 10 % of what it was. That is not why. We did not go into Afghanistan to restart the growth of the opium trade. That is the unpredictable side effects of war and anarchy. The warlords and the Taliban all use Opium to fund their arms. The farmers will rebel without compensation. We went into the country for the right reasons, even though we were not responsible for the mess delivered to the country courtesy of the USSR, or the Islamic Fundamentalist insurgency aided by the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The Taliban reduced Opium Production when in Government. However, they are using the Opium trade to wage Jihad against the Infidels because it is considered ok in their religious circles. What troubles me, is that you always have the element of conspiracy in every post you put forth. How can somebody determine whether opium crops are for the Karzai side, the Warlords, or the Taliban? The farmers grow the crops and move them to the markets. There is plenty for everyone.

You have more than two hands tied behind your back. FBI,CIA, Homeland Security, DEA, ATF, and the list goes on. Often the agendas of these organizations cross over at polar opposites of their mandate.

I believe you threw them into the mix earlier. That said, your initial post had nothing to do with the concept of the melting pot. May as well provide an example of yourself for it would be more accurate then the stories you provided.

I agree.