Molly

Wow. You donèt have to wander off into soppy notions of women being excdeptionally emotuional in their love-lives to call it outrageously unfair. Maxime Bernier strikes me as being a current sample of extremely doubtful judgement on the subject. Mr. MacKay is the one who has most recently let over-emotionality show. Æt the time that Ms. Campbell may have discreetly kept a boyfriend in tow... well, letès just say that she was a very far shot from being the only one.

Yeah, but Montana is all yours. We donèt really want it. And to you, Rick Mercer is just another damned furriner. When you hang out with damned furriners, sometimes they talk about other damned furriners.

Yep. Meaningless anecdotes.

Yep. Weève done a lot of US road travel over the years, particularly tending to the west. I canèt tell you how many cheery, curious people had no clue where Saskatchewan was. As disappointing as that is we quit describing it as being north of Montana because for all too many, that provided no enlightenment whatsoever. Lots surprise you with what they do know, but there are enough to make Rick Mercerès schtick easy to produce.

Ask him what a toboggan is.

From the link: Deputy Liberal Leader Ralph Goodale told The House that argument is in line with the Conservatives' approach. "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," Goodale said. "When they're trying to duck an issue, well, find a public servant and throw them under the bus. That appears to be their tactic." Yep.

Ooh, Wilber, that one is sweet! I like it. I also appreciate your description of her, and tend to agree. It was my contention from the getgo that the only reason she was there at all was that she was too much of a neophyte to know any better... and she was eaten alive. Yes, made to look very bad by (those rats who were too slow to excape the sinking ship).

We see so much through the same eyes, Bill- all except the part where, even though the utter abandonment of those democratic principles and those principles of honour and decency was unforgiveable, you forgave them! *sigh*

Does it not occur to you that majority governments would also therefore have committee majorities, and those committee majorities would be exactly as representative of the will of parliament- of the will of voters- as parliament itself? Minority parties do not get to hold majority control of committees because the voters didn't trust them enough to give them that control, choosing instead to keep them well-checked by the opposition. Majority parties do, because voters trusted them enough to give them that much weight. Why would we wish to restrict the will of parliament, second-guessing our own ballots? Such restrictions fly in the face of democracy. If the Conservatives can come up with the trust of enough voters to achieve a majority government, them I'd probably want to upchuck, but I'd still answer your question, "YES!" The voters, by way of parliament, get what they want. It's called 'democracy'.

Meh. I always took her as a sacrificial lamb. There had to be blood on the floor to atone for Mulroney, and there she was. I had high hopes that the first woman prime minister would be a political amazon, but we got a handmaid- a holder of the bag- instead. So sad a thing. She's not a wretch by a long shot, but she is/was not really credible and thus a terrible disappointment.

..about the same behind chubby-cheeks Harper, or three times as many behind Mr. Kenny, then. Good to know.

You mean stuff like... submitting reports to Elections Canada, to claiming 'refunds' to which they aren't entitled? Yeah. Me too.

There should be some sort of rule against posting crud like that without a current photograph of yourself attatched to it. Tell us, Moonbox, how saggy is your butt? How large your beer belly? Have you waxed your back this week?

Good grief! As though they aren't in all-out campaign mode (using a lot of taxpayers $ as well as their own) already. And your link? The most important word in it is 'majority'. It's the difference between the will of parliament and contempt of parliament.

Refusing to vote for them, though, doesn't put all those tax credits for political donations back into general revenues. I don't have a problem with the $2/vote, but it bugs the heck out of me that I, as a taxpayer, am forced to cough up cash to refund other folks' political donations. Bad enough we do it for individual candidates at election time!

That first bit... AYE! If that doesn't scare the crap out of people, it certainly should. The second bit, I honestly hope they take your advice. Folks are finally waking up to what they are watching- that each of these events is not an exception or a minor oops or poor communication, that everyone does not do 'it' and that so many events and statements run dead contrary to our parliamentary system, and dead contrary to their own claimed philosophy and intent. That growing awareness needs to ripen enough to stick as it should.

Did you expect any other rulings? The transgressions were pretty darned 'in your face'. I can't believe they had the nerve to try to brazen them out. It all has been carried with the same kind of clodhopper hubris as the 'disfunctional' election, the 'bet you won't' budget that followed it, and the 'reinvent the structure of our government' prorogation they then needed to save their sorry butts. More nerve than a bad tooth, these guys.

If they believed it was unethical enough to require checking the details with their lawyers to make sure they wouldn't get arrested, then it was clearly an attempt to get away with something they knew they shouldn't do.

(Nitpicker me, though, I figure that long, long term stuff like the supremacy of parliament is a big deal, too.)

'Xcuse me? Is not the deficit from Hell "a big file"?

You think so, do you? I'm not fond of the NDP in general, or Pat Martin in particular, but my take on that was that he practiced inappropriate self control. His language was downright parliamentary compared to the way I might have replied to her. By the way, to be patronized is not one of the goals of the women's movement.

Yes, and an economy less robust than the one Mr. Martin handed to him might not have survived such 'oversight'.

http://www.desmogblog.com/canada-already-track-be-fossil-year-cancun-cleans-day-one-talks "30 November 10 Canada Already on Track to be Fossil of the Year in Cancun; Cleans up on Day One of the Talks"

Sooo.... wiping my coffee off the monitor.... Good'un.