Fortunata

Harper likes to use the military as props for his and his cabinet's photo-ops. Other than that they should shut up and do as they are told. McKay wears a CF uniform (where's the outrage in that Harper followers?) to show how he is "as one" with the troops. Harper is going to buy billions of dollars worth of fighter jets, billions of dollars worth of ships (still no ice breaker though), he's going to protect our Arctic (with what?) but he won't support those veterans in need. It has to be a high-profile, attention and vote getter for his support. Harper is as narcissistic as any leader in any country ever. He doesn't mind using anyone but don't let them get in his way.

If Parties want to monitor forums and add responses, which they all probably do, then fine - they pay for it. But when the government starts using my tax money for purposeful propaganda (you know, the truth as they want you to see it) then we should all object. Brainwashing should be on their own dime, not ours. Trust Harper to come up with another self-aggrandizing stunt paid for by us.

I'm quite sure that Blackburn was aware of the rules. I'm also sure that he thought since he was a cabinet Minister that security would let him get away with it. That they didn't must have come as a big surprise. The sense of entitlement is growing among the Harper government. It usually takes about 5 years but the Cons seem very good at catching on to some things.

By take a stand, do you mean like the stands Conservatives take: yelling, attacking, foaming at the mouth with spittle spewing forth, accusing you of anything from supporting child pornography to being a Taliban sympathizer or dupe? I guess you are so used to this methodology you miss or discount quiet words saying serious things.

Nope, hope it never passes. That is just a bogus feel-good measure that doesn't do anything to benefit society in the long term. The Con sheep parrot this as a panacea to all the crime ills (which have been going steadily down) but without understanding that this could lead to more societal harm than good. Nice to be a sheep and just see things in black and white.

That's bs and it's a phoney issue. Whether or not Ignatieff personally agrees with seal hunting or not, it's doubtful he will support this bill. As far as I know he's not vegetarian or a member of PETA. Just because he doesn't jump up and down over it means nothing until the vote. By the way, vilifying, stomping and attacking seems to be Conservative's jurisdiction. I would hope that Ignatieff, Layton or May would not copy that style.

What? Ex-Conservative MPs too? Unfortunately Conservative people like Vic Toews don't agree with you; it seems they will defend Jaffer's escape from justice. But that's because "he made a mistake and will probably pay for it for the rest of his life." If that were a non-Con making a mistake , that mistake should wind you up in jail because, obviously, that's the only way you'll pay for it .... I guess the moral of this story, according to Conservatives, is non-Cons aren't smart enough to learn without jail. Blah, blah, blah. Still bad optics for the Harper Party. Entitlements abound ..

One Liberal is vocally against the seal hunt but this is an indication of what a Liberal government would do with the industry? Wow, that's not stretching it or anything.

The Senate does nothing? And Senators should be kept in line by the Party Leader? Ah, you must be a Conservative.

One has nothing to do with the other but they both have connections to the ruling Party. As I said, it may not be fair, but both have the appearance of either having special treatment or wanting special treatment. And being within a week of each other? By the way it isn't just the "Liberal" partisans you Cons so seem to like to blame for everything, it has everybody other than the "Conservative" partisans talking.

There are some awful people in any Party, I agree. But this is not just about the person. It is about what is right for one should be right for all. If the Conservatives continue to act like they think this sentence is fine, after screaming for hardline punitive measures for others then the optics are that there may have been political favours or interference. It won't matter to Joe Public whether it's true or not, it will look plausible (to quote the esteemed Harper mentor Tom Flanagan). And that's what will count. Either the Conservatives "appear" to be tough on crime for everybody or they will look like they like being entitled.

punked, I think you'll always hate the Liberal Party regardless of leaders, however, that's neither here nor there. I won't answer your question because I do not know the answer. I don't agree with any Party whipping the vote as it takes my voice away. It also takes your voice away. If you agree with every Party decision that has been made by your MP then I have a label for you. The bottom line is (or my bottom line is) we need Parliamentary reform and electoral reform. And we are getting further in democratic deficit with every successive PM. It doesn't sit well with me and, increasingly, with the general population. Our system is PM made and can be people undone (I hope).

This is an issue of perceptions. Jaffer is a public figure, anyone that has held public office will always be. The perception is that there is a double standard of justice; one for the connected and one for Mr. & Mrs. Everyday Citizen. This is further propagated by the lack of usual screaming about "Liberal" judges, "Liberal" justice by members of the "get tough on crime" Conservatives. It's all very bad optics and, as such, becomes front and center in people's minds. It may not be fair but the Cons will wear this as voters associate the incident with this government. It doesn't help that Guergis just showed (and expected) entitlement at a Halifax airport. One entitlement after another and you know how people react to that.

Ignatieff should absolutely not insist on unanimity. That's whats wrong with our Parliament. We elect MPs expecting them to take our voice to Ottawa and then the only voice we hear is the one of the "Party." How does anyone think that's right?

We have many issues and many problems in this country. Stuff like this is part and parcel. If this were an ex_Liberal MP I think you would see a lot of Conservatives expressing opinions about the criminal charges being dropped without proper explanation. I would like to see them speak up about this regardless of Jaffer being one of theirs. Either this is proper for everybody or proper for nobody.

No, Harper prorogued effective December 30, 2009. Parliament's first day back after prorogation was March 3, 2010. You can argue that Parliament was going to be in recess anyways so add the extra days and prorogation was for 22 days but that is just a false and misleading talking point. During a recess life in Parliament can go on: Committees can sit and do official business, the Senate can work. During prorogation none of this happens, or if it does, it is unofficial and does not count. So, you can continue to parrot the lie or you can get with reality.

If Jean really did give Harper a hard time during his slither to keep power, or any type of ultimatum, she will be gone. Harper has surrounded himself with yes people, filled the Senate with sycophants and he will undoubtedly want the same in Rideau Hall in case he needs another ruling in his favour.

Canadians are under a microscope as well. Only it's our microscope instead of the world's. And, I think, our own is more critical than any you face. We always seem to be questioning ourselves over every little thing. This is part of what and who we are, for better or for worse. As for Americans being criticized ... I think when a country proclaims it's the "best and greatest" democracy, institutions, etc. it's only normal you come under fire, if only to dispel the myth that you are superior. Or to make the inferior feel superior. Or a bit of both. Mostly, from where Canadians sit, we don't see you the best and greatest in everything. Some things better, of course. Some worse, undoubtedly. All in all there are quite a few pluses in flying under the radar.

Some years ago there was a survey done in which Americans overwhelmingly thought that all people in the world would like to be American. I think that raised a lot of hackles and maybe Canadians go out of their way to disprove that. In the big scheme, however (which I guess proves the insecurity theory), it matters not what Americans think - why do we believe it does? The continuing over-analyzation proves what the pollster or author wants to prove. If certain questions are asked in certain ways the answer will be negative .. imo, that's what usually happens. And then it's blown out of proportion. I have never been asked what I like about the US; the conversation usually goes the opposite way. I have never been asked if I am happy with being Canadian without being asked why. To me that's immaterial, why do we need specific reasons. Isn't it enough that we are?

You know jbg, I'm sick of this. I've proven time and again that you are lying. Enough, just enough. If you can't add to the topic, just leave. This personal attack is unwarranted and against the rules.

Are you still telling the same lie jbg? I said nothing of the sort and have pointed this out to you more than once. I have quoted exactly what I did say more than once. Your lies say more about you than they do about me. And I don't have to be anti-American to call you on it. I just have to be anti-liar. Your nationality has no bearing in the matter.

I think anti-Americanism is over played here; most people don't give any more thought to Americans than Americans give thought to Canadians. When asked, however, it brings immediately to mind things we don't like as people tend to remember negatives over positives. And the Canadian media dwell on it way too much. It's not a big of a deal as some make it out to be. Furthermore, I'm tired of being told we don't have our own culture, our own identify - that if we didn't identify with not being American we aren't anything. What's the matter with just being Canadian? A mix of every country in the world with a basic English/European background that's changing every year as our population changes, as our ideas change, as the world evolves? I don't think the French are asked ... what is French, or the Germans ... what is German? So why are we asked? It's all phony in my opinion. We are .. Canadian. We don't have to articulate what that means .. we know. Same as every other nationality in every other country.

It's that sense of entitlement to use taxpayer money anyway they want. It only took Harper two years to get his hands on the money, since this supposedly has been going on for two. It appeared to have taken the Liberals longer. Harper just learns faster I guess.

I disagree that Canadians don't want to hear what they have to say. I think we do but we absolutely want to know what is said is not government talking points, military talking points ... no spin. Just say it like you see it and what you believe it to be. Our government is letting down, not only the citizens of this country, but the military as well - big time. We don't want muzzling, secrecy or political correctness about this fight from the government. They should be out giving us as much information as possible, raising the awareness and not keeping mum about things such as costs because they don't want to take the heat. Now, when we need lions, we have scared coyotes as leaders.

When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. -- Abraham Maslow --