noahbody

It's their platform that draws socialist comparisons. Harper has been dogged for years for having a hidden platform.

Maybe that's where Jack first heard, "And I won't stop until the job's done."

Maybe his closest friends call him "John" or maybe he just likes puns. I agree, but that's because his platform would hurt the economy. What Clinton did in the oral office didn't bother me either. That was nothing compared to Bush... he screwed the whole world.

As I said, it doesn't bother me if Jack got a rub and tug or not. It doesn't sound like she was a RMT. In a place like that they'd likely ask for you to get naked in order to help their sell job (no pun intended) at the end. From what I know about Jack Layton's character, he is the type to want you to know he's a big wheel. He did sign in as "John." If I was a gossip reporter I'd ask him: 1. was this your first time? 2. why did you check in as "John"? 3. How did you pay? 4. Were massages covered by/submitted to your health insurance plan? If he was found to be lying about the incident, the column could be titled, "What a Jerk."

Is Harper going to end our right to vote? Harper regime? Our democracy is based on Canadians selecting an MP to represent their riding. Vote swapping is threatening that.

That's probably similar to the conclusion of the researcher mentioned in the article. What I've found working with researchers is the anyone can collect statistics, far fewer can interpret it well. Coming to the conclusion that our justice system is fine and dandy because crime is declining is a misnomer. One thing stats can show is the ages in which people are most likely to commit crimes. The bulk of our population is now older. Our health care system isn't getting worse because more people are dying either. If I recall correctly, I believe stats also show that violent crime is on the rise for the 18-25 age group. As I alluded to before, the type of measures in Harper's crime bill have only been shown ineffective as a deterrent (though saying it will not deter anyone is short-sighted, but that's not my point). They can still be seen as effective punishment. People still try to avoid jail for that reason. Again, he's not ignoring the facts, he just disagrees with the conclusion the researcher came to as I and many others do. If we're routinely letting people out before their time is served because 'there's no room,' we have a problem with prison space or usage. That's silly. At least building prisons creating jobs for Canadians.

What you've stated isn't a fact for starters. And Lawrence Martin is out to lunch on this one. He cites two examples: one having to do with mandatory minimum sentences; the other having to do with incarceration rates. Both were said to be ineffective in lowering crime rates. If Harper's policy was focused solely on deterring crime, the two citations would be meaningful and Harper could be criticized. The thing is though, Harper's policy also focuses on punishment. Mandatory sentencing and incarceration in general are forms of punishment.

How do you know he didn't get jacked off? I could actually care less if he did or didn't, by the way. His sexual habits won't ruin the economy. I think his platform would be disastrous.

I think the headline should be "Jack's a John" or "Jacked off!"

I think the media had an "Oh my God, what have we done?" realization.

Yes, it's the Asian Gangs that built Canada.

Because their platform might be to castrate any poster with the moniker "ToadBrother." The other parties might not agree, but the PM can say "This is the platform we were elected on." So I guess it depends whether you mind a high-pitched voice.

In actual practice, Ignatieff campaigned on implementing the Green Shift during a recession. In actual practice, Jack's campaigning to sacrifice our economy. You can judge Harper on his budget. What you said is actual practice, ironically, is something you must've heard from a PR machine. As pointed out, you can't compare Canadian Conservatives to American Republicans. Nor should you generalize Canadian Conservative governments. Each one is different. Mulroney implemented the GST and was behind the Free Trade Agreement. That's just not reality. Politicians and activists always want you to think of 'big oil' as greedy billionaires. Aside from the revenues they generate for government coffers though royalties/taxes, they are a major Canadian employer and countless small and medium sized business, that are also employers, exist because of them. Behind corporations are investors who are ordinary Canadians as well. What Jack is proposing is to use the oil sands as a tax grab. If he stops development all of the jobs that will be created due to Obama wanting to lessen the US's dependency on the Middle East won't be created and many Canadians will be laid off. All Canadians will be paying more at the pumps. I'm talking about real jobs about to be created and 240,000 that already exist due to the oil sands. The trickle down effect is that if you tax heavily, the taxes will trickle down to the poor who can least afford it and Canadians will lose their jobs creating poor. We are talking about good jobs. Real ones; not the promise of 'green jobs' that Dion promised would be created out of thin air. Whoever becomes PM of Canada needs to support our industry and tell the world and how it's taking measures to become more environmentally responsible. That Jack is Canadian leadership.

Who is the best choice to manage the Canadian economy at this time? At the end of the day, it's the economy that's the engine behind health care, jobs and social programs. The economy needs to be the focus. It should be about who you'd want to invite to dinner, it should be about what Canada needs. Unfortunately, I think this question, though it should IMO be obvious, has got lost in all of the rhetoric like 'Ignatieff isn't in it for you' or 'Harper wants absolute power.' If you've bought into either of these, you've bought into what the other parties have sold you. Is Harper a control freak? Of course he is. He might not like it, but he needs to be. But if he can make good decisions for the country, that should be what matters. Should it matter if Ignatieff considered the US his country? No. Is Harper a threat to Canadian democracy or universal health care? No. As far as the economy goes, in tough economic times, Ignatieff last ran on the need to implement the Green Shift. He is right when he says Harper doesn't deserve all of the credit for the economy. The real credit belongs to those who voted against that lack of judgment. Though the economy is stronger than most coming out of the recession, it's still fragile and it's not time for drastic changes (the Green Shift/NDP) or for implementing grand programs like the Universal Daycare. Our other universal program is the one that needs the attention. As for Jack, he's another Dion. He'll take on big oil and work for the little guy, which sounds nice until you consider the oil sands is 240,000 jobs. That is the little guy. A vote for Jack, is a vote for putting Canadians out of work, lowering government revenues and having to raise taxes. Now is not the time for that.

The Canadian health care system is a mix of public and private care. Our hospitals are public, but outside of that, doctors operate as private businesses. The government pays no matter which door you open. Like suggesting someone has a hidden agenda or are going to put soldiers on the streets while "Americanizing" health care? The Tories are really no better or worse than the other parties. Jack Layton once accused Paul Martin of murder.

Just like Jack Layton.

I heard an interview with Chretien in which he said he was contemplating not running for re-election. Then they tried to force him out so he said 'screw you' and ran again. The sponsorship scandal killed the party. Lost support made them try to make their tent bigger, moving the party to the left, weakening their brand. Dion/Ignatieff/Rae and the Green Shift just cemented their fate. With the rise of the NDP the Liberals will now move closer to the centre. My guess is John Manly will be the next Liberal leader and PM after Harper. While in opposition, he and Harper will work well together.

Your friend likely owes more money at tax time, because less tax is being deducted during the year.

http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/action/bill_c338.html#SteckleThere is no political will to change abortion laws. Politicians as a general rule, like to be re-elected.

Here's an article from 2010 to which her husband replied in the comments section. http://stephenkimber.com/2010/05/the-teacher-the-hit-man-and-the-questions-that-remain

The article says she contacted police, but it doesn't say what she told them. I can't believe the police wouldn't act if she had told them he held a gun to her head. I imagine the ruling will be appealed as it was when Robert Latimer wasn't convicted, twice. The system let him down too, but the system made an example out of him so others didn't start killing the severely disabled.

I think it's good for Layton as he can lump the liberals and conservatives together. Whenever the liberals attempt to position themselves as an ethical alternative I roll my eyes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/tuvalu/7799503/Pacific-islands-growing-not-shrinking-due-to-climate-change.html Is extreme weather something new? No. Still Gore recently blamed the record snowfall and cold temperatures in the States on global warming. What's extreme is the lengths they'll go to keep their theory alive. Trusting their predictions of what MAY happen in 100 years when their short-term predictions such as predicting a record hurricane season that ended up having a grand total of zero, requires a lot of faith. Pointing to weather events that have been occurring since the beginning of time and labeling them as proof is primitive thinking. It's like when a volcano erupted and people would say it's proof the gods are angry. Some people still believe that. How many people die because of winter each year?

It's really not a big deal for me. She's applied anyway. We did have a PM who avoided paying taxes in Canada.

It made Al Gore a billionaire. Greatest impact? How so?