Progressive Tory

I'm glad we agree on something. In the original thread topic about Sharia Law, the point was made that it infringes on Women's Rights. That may be so, but when living in Canada you can maintain your own culture, but must abide by our laws. My concern however, is another infringement of Women's Rights, from a group whose Canadian branch founder is sitting as a Member of Parliament. He should not be able to debate or vote on women's issues, including abortion. Promoting responsible husbands and fathers is subterfuge for the group's real purpose. Gender entitlement based on archaic notions, since men are told they have the divine right to rule the roost. They are encouraged to ask for it, but it is made clear, that if necessary, he must take it. Their close ties to what is described as a militant anti-abortion organization, also makes them dangerous Christian Extremists, who are almost anti-Christian in their practices.

None. They don't allow women to attend, remember.

265,000 more? I remember the argument for increased immigration was a shortage of workers. However, with mass layoffs here what can we offer newcomers? Not jobs.

You are probably right. However, for unique stimulus packages, the priority should be jobs. I don't care if the companies are China-based or American-based or Canadian-based. I only care about the Canadian employees of those companies. Most government revenue comes from taxes. Unemployment means loss of income tax. Unemployment means reduced buying power which in turn reduces sales tax. Unemployment results in more unemployment. How exactly is giving a contract to a Texas firm to build trucks for our military going to help Canadians, especially when it means the loss of Canadian jobs? When buying any material for infastructure spending we must look first to Canadian suppliers, and only shop elsewhere if the materials are not available here. Cost should not be a factor because we get it back on the other end in the form of tax revenue and a content public.

I'd never really thought about asking. We still have warrantly, but when it's off I'd like to know we have options.

Canada has been a safe haven for centuries. I like that reputation but admit that sometimes we do have to be careful.

The Conservative (social conservative) movement had it's heyday under George Bush, but it's definitely losing momentum. The Religous Right started slowly, with calm reason (Preston Manning); until radicals saw an opening and all hell broke loose. Society and Western civilization has come too far to be dragged back into the middle ages or even the 1950's illusion of family life.

China is definitely on it's way to making it's place it's the so-called 'New World Order'. The U.S. owes China one trillion dollar. They better hope they don't call in the loan.

I support Christianity and I support Muslims, Jews, buddhas, etc.. I just don't support extremists.

Thank you. I had to bring this up when Mr. C suggested that Muslims attacked Women's Rights. Even at the basest level the Promise Keepers are an obamination. They tell men that they are the rightful head of the household. They have retreats where they whip men into a frenzy and he goes home pumped up with testosterone and scripture and is ready to TAKE what he does not deserve. They make it very clear. You can't just ask you must take. With no clear guidelines, what if the wife isn't ready to concede? What if she thought she lived in the 21st century, so didn't have to be subserviant? What does the PK handbook suggest then? The deeds and misdeeds of Operation Rescue are well documented. They and the Promise Keepers are Christian Extremist groups. Let's clean up our own backyard before attacking someone else. David Sweet is in our government, and has no place there unless he agrees to abstain from any vote concerning Women's Rights, including abortion.

You're right. Pulling out all the stops in December only gave Canadians a chance to learn of his own coalition in 2004 with Duceppe and Layton. He can't use that now. He should have waited. Instead the Liberals were able to put their ducks in a row, and present a leader with a much better chance of beating him. It has been said that Stephen Harper usually looks at the picture. For him, if he had let the Coalition take over, with Dion at the helm, in 18 months he would almost be guaranteed a majority. Sitting in Opposition condemning the deficit, is better than sitting in gov't trying to defend it. He panicked and made a lot of mistakes. I don't think he can turn this around. He's put himself in the middle of an economic crisis and the sitting gov't always wears the bad news. BTW. This is not the first article on the subject. Our own newspaper (part of Sun Media) mentioned several weeks ago that the Conservative Party were putting out feelers for a new leader, suggesting, Jim Prentice, Jean Charest, Bernie Lord or Peter MacKay.

It sounds good but I feel like there is something being left out here. Is it a monopoly thing or a patent thing? What if the car manufacturer implemented a small user fee? I really wouldn't want to see independant mechanics and small garages lose out.

A New Poll today agrees with you. Ignatieff making more favourable impression than Harper, Layton: Poll Harper's anti-Coalition campaign was over the top and once the dust settled, he saw the destruction he'd created. If it was just the Canadian public against him, that's one thing, but there have been rumblings for some time from within. The Party blames him and I'm sure he has been given notice. He just needs to find a way to bow out gracefully, because he will never admit defeat. He gambled and lost and the Conservatives need a chance to rebuild.

If it was a blooper, some of the press sure tried to turn it into a breaking news story. Actually, with the economic crisis being so unpredictable, maybe we need regular mini budgets, instead of massive spending and long term projections. That was the key feature of the debate and should have been the important story. With the potential of a further 300,000 jobs lost in the next few months, the budget should be more flexible, to deal with unforseen challenges. I know the U.S. has a different Gov't system than us, but they are dealing with each stimulus package separately. Maybe that's what Canada should have done. One new proposal to deal with each new problem.

I'm curious. How so?

Ah, but he didn't. Harper and those behind him know exactly what the results of the last election meant. Again, Dion attack ads drove 850,000 votes from the Liberals; but none of those went to the Conservatives. Instead they also lost 170,000 votes from 2006. One million votes up in smoke. Only vote splitting gave the illusion of a stronger mandate that garnered more seats, not more support. If he couldn't get a majority against Dion, he just can't do it. I know his pride may keep him holding on, but he's not doing his party any favours. He should resign.

Sign of the times I guess.

Promise Keepers Pose A Real Threat "The problem is that this hottest religious right marketing tool since televangelism portrays women's equality as the source of society's ills. The Promise Keepers seem to think women will be so thrilled that men are promising to take "responsibility" in our families that we'll take a back seat in this and every other arena of our lives." "Yet the religious right pantheon behind Promise Keepers consists of men who think the Republican party is too liberal. Founder Bill McCartney cut his political teeth speaking at rallies of the violent anti-abortion group Operation Rescue. In impassioned speeches — which are especially chilling when viewed on videotape — McCartney and company have said things like: men must be leaders and women "responders," lesbians and gays are "stark, raving mad," abortion is a "second Civil War" and participants must "take back the nation for Christ."" "Lurk online in a Promise Keepers chat group, as one journalist did, and see if you, too, don't note that abortion is the number one topic — not a woman's right to choose but an abortion opponent's right to kill women and doctors." That's pretty militant to me. Christian Soldiers for Theocracy "In the world of Promise Keepers, men are to submit to a cell group that in turn is closely controlled by a national hierarchy. Most important, women are to submit absolutely to their husbands or fathers." "The manifesto of the movement is Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper...Evangelist Tony Evans, in his contributing essay, explains how to deal with women. "The first thing you do," Brown explains, "is sit down with your wife and say something like this: `Honey, I've made a terrible mistake. I've given you my role. I gave up leading this family, and I forced you to take my place. Now I must reclaim that role.' Don't misunderstand what I'm saying here. I'm not suggesting that you ask for your role back, I'm urging you to take it back." Operation Rescue's Survival In Doubt -- Anti-Abortion Violence, Legal Defeats Hurt Fundamentalist Christian Movement "WASHINGTON - Operation Rescue, a militant anti-abortion group that mobilized a segment of Christian fundamentalists and brought the tactics of civil disobedience to the conservative cause, is on the verge of collapse as a significant political movement." I did not need to use exaggeration to prove my point. This group hit my radar several years ago. So I repeat. As Canadian founder of the Promise Keepers, should David Sweet be allowed to vote on women's issues? He's not a Muslim. He's a white male Christian.

I predicted that he would probably resign within the next few months, and maybe even sooner. The Conservatives must know there's an election on the horizon, so they either have to get a new leader soon or try to run again with Stephen Harper. I don't see him getting in next time. With so much discontent in the West, his base; the writing is on the wall. I never bet any steaks, but...

It doesn't hurt the Bloc. They don't have to fundraise. Also, the Coalition was not formed to opposed the subsidy. It was created to oppose a fictitous economic statement and the failure to act on the economic crisis, as promised. Harper's insane response to the Coalition cost him more than Ignatieff and if Jack Layton doesn't let it go, it could cost him as well. The Conservatives will not use the Coalition in any attack ads next election; with Harper's own 2004 Coalition letter and video, only painting him as a liar.

I agree. He never had any intention of cancelling it. It just made the other parties look bad. The subsidy is one of the most democratic things this country has. It makes sure that every vote counts, and takes some of the power away from those who claim entitlement based on the size of their donation. Based on the amount of taxes I pay, I don't begrudge $ 1.95 It's a cup of coffee.

Conservative MP David Sweet started the Canadian branch of a group called Promise Keepers. His website used to say that, until people looked it up, then was changed to simply starting a non-profit organization. For those of you who don't know, Promise Keepers is an all male Evangelical society who believe that only men can lead, since all of Jesus's disciples were men, and that women in turn must follow. They tell their members that they must be the head of their household. They also order them not to simply ask for this, but to take it. What does that mean? Do they beat their wives for it? The vague command could be interpreted in many ways, but certainly doesn't support women's rights. Should David Sweet be allowed to vote on any women's issues, when he has these preconceived notions? Google David Sweet and Promise Keepers; then google the U.S. parent group. Militant Pro-Lifers in a 'male only' organization. Scarey stuff.

If you were really a Christian, that would be enough. Think about where Jesus was born. What colour do you think his skin would be? Not white.

I believe that would only happen if he raped a women from his own Nation. Wouldn't it? If he raped any other woman, he would have to face a trial the same as everyone else. Natives regard rape as a very serious charge. He may prefer jail.

That's a good one. Culture is one thing, but you have to follow the laws of the land. We would if we went to India or anywhere else.