Wild Bill

You're missing the point. Again, perhaps because your first thought was not for the soldiers feelings. Soldiers have already come out and said they feel slurred by this picture! Who cares what you or I think or how we may debate if the Liberals cast a slur or not. The soldiers were offended. To me, that's enough. When something like that happens, people like Hedy Fry should not first mount a lawyer's style defense. They should immediately apologize directly to the military folks! AFTERWARDS they can make excuses as to how they never had any negative intentions!

Actually, I believe Hedy Fry when she says that this ad was coined with no thought of slurring the military. Perfectly plausible! I've no doubt the Liberals never think about the feelings of our soldiers, pilots and sailors at all! Except at photo op times, of course.

Speaking only for myself, I would resent any portion of my taxes being spent on the teaching of any second language but French in the province of Ontario, based on the fact that only English and French are official languages of Canada. I would make an exception for the teaching of Latin and Greek as credit courses to better understand the history and roots of our official languages. I would not expect it to be mandatory for the teaching of Latin and Greek to result in full 'second language' fluency in those tongues. I would not object to the teaching of other languages in Ontario schools, just having my taxes paying for it. If it were paid for as an afterschool course by voluntary subscription of interested parents ONLY I would have no objection to loaning the school's resources as a meeting centre. If the proposal became a sufficiently serious enough issue it would definitely affect my choices at the ballot box.

Well Molly, I'm almost 58 years old. I've been waiting all my life for a true, classic Liberal party so I can vote for them. It's been a long time and still not the slightest sign it's going to happen!

Don't count on the 'disgruntled' vote, jdobbin. You've heard me rail often enough about 'disenfranchised conservatives'. All the grumblers (including myself, sadly!) will still vote for the New Progressive Conservative Party because all the other options are even less palatable! Do you really think that someone who thinks Harper adopts "less than Tory politicies" would turn to the Liberals or the NDP, who are even further left of Tory policies? It just doesn't make sense. Even having that portion of the vote stay home doesn't make sense. You have to understand that these folks view a Liberal win to be just as injurious to the country as Liberal and NDP supporters feel about Harper.

Wishes again, Molly! If my granny had wheels she would bang her ass when she hopped! Yes, you're technically correct. We choose individuals, not parties. Again, most Canadians don't think as you do. They DO vote for the PARTY! They don't necessarily care who the individual MP is on the ballot. This is not totally a wrong strategy. While it is true that there are hard working and lazy MP's from any party, it's a fact of the universe that an Opposition MP usually can do little or nothing for his riding! He or she can look into problems getting your EI cheques on time but as far as serious funding for his riding it just doesn't happen. Last election my home area of Hamilton, ON locked out any Tory MP's. Only one on each side of the area was CPC. Afterwards, they suddenly realized that they weren't likely to get any big financial help with federal money! They started sucking up to the suburban Tory MP's, calling them "Hamilton's Voice in Ottawa!" I laughed at first, then I felt very, very sad. They were true to their principles but now were complaining about going hungry. The world works the way the world works, Molly. Not by our wishes.

This is what the 60's were all about! God bless the Fugs!

That's my point though, Molly! Most folks DON'T have a decent understanding. What's more, they don't care! The common man has his own wants and his own sense of right and wrong. This determines how he will vote. Nobody ever got voted in by lecturing or scolding people about the way things SHOULD be! You know, when you try to be a rock against the waves you just get worn down. Much better to be a surf board if you want to get anywhere!

Yes, I believe they do! The other parties can't claim the entirety of that percentage who DIDN'T vote for the Tories. That's just as illogical. That other 62.35% is made up of various interests and a big portion of apathy. The apathetic chose to have no voice and so are irrelevant. Among the other parties, the Tories still had the most Canadians in favour of having them as the government. I could accept your math under a two party system but then, the winner would have had a majority!

Hey, I'm not saying you're right or wrong about the unpleasantness of some of the views he's espoused. We would agree more than disagree about that one! I'm just saying that tolerance is truly judged by being fair not just to people that agree with you! Or as James T. Kirk said to Cloud William: "These words, and the words that follow, were not just written for the Yangs, but for the Kohms as well!" "But the Kohms–" "They must apply to everyone, or they mean nothing! Do you understand?" More simply, if you can't be fair even to those you DON'T like, I don't believe you can be fair at all.

Nope! Too intellectual, Molly. The more deeply you follow politics and (not trying to butter you up! ) frankly, the smarter you are the easier it becomes to be too rational and legally precise about politics and what is possible with it. You can lose the perspective of the common man! He or she is NOT a political junkie but still, he VOTES! The few of us on MLW who debate how many MP's can dance on the head of a pin are hardly representative of the electorate at large. Too many of us slip and let our own opinions cloud our objectivity. Even the best of us do it occasionally. We both know a few posters here that do it continually!

Why, a 'coalition of the other Opposition parties, of course! Who else will vote on the non-confidence motion?

I sincerely hope that if I ever have to go to court I don't find any of the posters who replied to the OP as my judge! What a biased bunch with absolutely no sense of justice! I have exactly the same suspicions about what may have really happened as anyone else but that's all they are, suspicions. At the same time, I find the scenario 'whowhere' laid out as perfectly plausible given today's politically correct times. I myself have personally witnessed similar scenarios. Management can be just as politically correct as we 'proles'. So that being said, I would have expected folks to at least address his claims at face value. I can even accept skeptical questions. Instead, what I see are kneejerk reactions from people racing to insist that he must have provoked the issue, lied and got what was coming to him! All on bias and opinion. It's as if some folks seize every opportunity to point a finger at someone else in order to make it obvious that they themselves stand on the side of the angels. Quite illogical. You don't make yourself 'good' by calling someone else 'evil'. BOTH sides can be in the wrong! I will quite cheerfully pour some gasoline on the flames that are erupting right now by saying that I find this very much to be a modern liberal attitude. Some call it 'situational ethics'. Basically, if you don't like someone (usually because they have different views) they must always be guilty of something. To me true and fair justice requires a judge to consider his personal feelings towards the accused as irrelevant. A case is tried on its own merits, from the evidence. That means that if the preponderance of the evidence says that the accused was telling the truth then you must accept it and acquit, EVEN IF YOU DON'T LIKE HIM OR SOME OF HIS VIEWS! That's not what I see in this thread. And as I said, my own suspicions agree with yours.

This is what I can't understand. If we go to an election it seems quite clear to me that we blame whoever voted to bring down the government. Otherwise, it sounds like a cliche argument where someone does a wrong and then excuses it by saying "You MADE me do it!" I've never been able to understand and certainly not respect that excuse but I hear it all the time. I guess we'll see soon enough if my opinion is mainstream. That's assuming that who brought down whom will be the major issue of the campaign. I suspect that most Canadians hold other issues more important. The Tories will keep throwing it in the Liberals' face but I think it will cause only small wounds and not a knockout blow.

It may be 'a valid, and very important tool' Molly, but do you REALLY believe that more Canadians would approve of being handed a coalition of parties that lost an election than would not? If you do, then you keep such a tool in your tool chest. If you don't, then you treat it like nitroglycerin in an old western movie. You know, something that you don't keep around 'cuz it's so unstable you might blow YOURSELF up!

Thank you, Disney Corp! And 'Disco Duck' was a 'manufactured' song as well. All these years and we still don't have better laws...

That's going to happen anyway, forever! Both the NDP and the Bloc will never form the government. That being said, it's in their interest to continually bring down either the Tories or the Liberals. It will eventually make both parties look incapable of stable government. The Bloc can say to Quebecers that they would be better off as a separate nation and the NDP thinks they would only pick up more seats as voters gradually lose confidence in the two main parties. As a sidebar to that strategy, I've always thought that if Quebec ever did separate it might prove a bit of a "comeuppance" to the BQ/PQ. For the first time in their history they would have to deal with an Opposition!

Here it is, hot off the press! http://news.sympatico.ctv.ca/abc/home/cont...tieff_ei_090911 " 11/09/2009 11:10:35 AM CTV.ca News Staff The Liberal Party will not enter into a deal to form a coalition government with other opposition parties in the next election, according to leader Michael Ignatieff. " Told ya!

Kimmy has me pegged! And I agree they became more wealthy. I liked them when they started out with Peter Green. They were a fantastic blues band! When "the chicks showed up" I liked some of the songs but not the entire albums. I liked "Rhiannon" far more than "Don't Stop" or "Go Your Own Way", but that's just me!

Yeah, it does look like once again a Canadian party is trying to copy a successful American slogan and losing something as they paraphrase it. Sort of like "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" versus "Peace, Order and Good Government". The first is inspirational, suggesting embracing Life and the World. Our slogan makes me think of staying home in a cozy den, never doing much and certainly not anything risky!

Who said that? Talk about putting words in someone's mouth! A segue into a veiled jibe at Harper is hardly an answer to my premises. For the record, of course I believe that parties should work together in a minority government. However, there are limits. I have always resented those situations in our history where a minority government allows the party with the LEAST amount of popular support to call some major shots, just to keep the minority party in power. In effect, a political plank with the least amount of public support gets hammered into the floor of Canada, for the benefit of a party and NOT for Canadians! I'm tempted to put this in capitals but I'll give it one more try. My beef is solely and only with the idea of a coalition being formed by Opposition parties AFTER they've lost an election, in order to prevent the party that DID receive the most votes from taking power, WITHOUT ALLOWING CANADIANS FROM VOTING ON THE IDEA! I'm getting really tired of being hit with all these legalisms about why these is allowed by the rules of our system instead of considering whether or not this is a smart political move to keep people voting for you. Or insinuations that I would find it perfectly acceptable if Harper did the same thing. Again, as I've posted many times, I support the Tories only by default. If I must wear a label it would be Classic Liberal, or perhaps Libertarian. I really don't have any political choice of a party that fits my values and has any chance of becoming an effective force in our government. So a pretty please to some posters. Don't waste my time arguing about Harper's faults. Often I would help you! It's just that I see the faults in the Liberal and NDP choices as well. Being Canadian means we never get to chose a party or Leader that closely matches our own values. At least for me, not since Reform died and Manning retired. The best we can hope for is to make a choice for who smells the least!

Finally! Someone is being objective instead of blindly partisan! Jerry, you keep this up on this board and you're gonna wind up feeling very, very lonely!

Ah, but you have to consider the trend between the trend between the old poll of the OP and the newest from Nanos. Also, the lead you mention in Ontario is trivial, within the margin of error. The lead in Quebec has been cut. This Sept 02 poll is the first from summer's end. It's still early. We should find the next polls even more interesting.

No argument, Molly! However, after Harper brought out the idea he promptly dropped it. Dion and the others went on National TV with a signing ceremony! I believe that if Harper had've pulled off such a coalition he would have paid dearly at the next election too! The difference is that he shut up about it while the others are still muttering! I remain convinced that Ignatieff wants nothing to do with any such idea. A smart politician is like a professional billiards player. You don't just want to sink the ball in front of your face. You want to also leave yourself in good shape by the position of the NEXT ball you want to sink! I just can't believe how so many on this board can't seem to grasp the difference between what's legal and what's popular in politics. It reminds me of the term "commie lawyer", which refers to a leftwing lawyer who continually brings up nitpicking legalisms that nobody cares about. To win in politics you have to get people to WANT to vote for you! You can't spout from a rulebook and DEMAND that they support you!

You should've poked around the Nanos site: http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls...T-S09-T385E.pdf The Tories are up 6 points in Quebec as of Sept 02. In fact, they are up everywhere in Canada! It's the Greens and the NDP who have taken the hit. The Liberals have pretty well stayed the same.