Fortunata

It seems to me that this is the type of mentality politicians count on from the public. A very short attention span. That's how they get elected and that's how they stay in power. As to the story, who does not want to know if malfeasance took place? Shouldn't we all want to know? Whether or not money was negotiated and paid to let Day run in that riding is the issue. Wrong doing is wrong doing no matter which party. That's if people were really interested in truth, honesty, principles and ethics.

Ahhh claissic. Because i disagree with you it's got nothing to tdo with the quality of my beliefs. It's because I am a sheep. OK. Can you please provide a list of those ideas people are allowed to disagree with in your books? Wouldn't somebody who agrees with everything you do be a sheep too? Rita you haven't changed one bit. That was your mentality previously and it's your mentality now. So I guess the mentality does fit. OMG, you're RickiBobbi. I've been away so long I'd forgotten how you like to follow me around. And since you've changed YOUR name, you think everyone does it hence the Rita. OK. It all makes sense now. Hahaha, must have lost my edge .... RickiBobbi now Michael Bluth. Got it.

That's our new government. Honest, ethical and principled. Gee, kinda makes you wonder what would happen if they weren't.

And I should jump because of your preferences Rita? Why? Or maybe I am just playing games like you do. Hey, I didn't say you should jump because of my preferences. Obviously you have a comprehension problem. Steve doesn't jump because of my (or your) preferences either. You just keep him on that pedestal there Bluthy. You choose to be a sheep, that's your choice. And about you calling me someone else's name - whatever turns your crank there bub. The mentality fits.

LOL back. She is on tv .... now. Her status was hidden; her official employment status is still hidden; her salary is still hidden. LOL. Without a access to information request the public still wouldn't know we pay for a psychic stylist. As it is all information about it is still being kept secret, because of stonewalling by the Steve government. If it isn't important why doesn't Steve just make the information public as it would be for any other civil servant paid by the taxpayer? Jaysus Murphy. A sack of hammers comes to mind.

And I should jump because of his preferences? Why? Why is it so important to you? He is an elected politician. He is fair game and fairer game even because of his lack of ethics and honesty. You can call him King Stephen if you want but to me he is just another politician playing the game for personal and egotistical gain. By the way, Fortunata is my name, the only name I have ever used. Or maybe you are just playing games like Steve does.

You're MOSTLY right. Don't forget Peter McKay.

Coverup is pettiness? Secrecy is pettiness? Not having a taxpaid employee on the employee roster for all to see is pettiness? Oh Michael Bluth, you are such a harpercrite. (PS, I don't put the Prime Minister on a pedestal like so many of you do - only if they are a Conservative PM you say? Steve hasn't earned my respect. When he walks ethical instead of just talking ethical, then we'll see)

I think we should be wary of anyone entering politics period. So very few are doing it for the public good; even if they start out that way it doesn't last long. To them the game is more important than the people back home who elected them.

My gawd Betsy, do you really think this is about pettiness? Wake up, it's about secrecy and coverup. If Steve was sure it would play to the tax crowd it wouldn't have been buried. There is NO RECORD of his psychic stylist on the employee roster. This is a democratic country not a dictatorship (on paper anyways) where everything but national security matters are supposed to be public domain and open to scrutiny. Steve campaigned on it. It appears you are just one of those Harpercrites where anything Stevie does is perfectly fine in your eyes. Take off those partisan blinders and see what little things like this really mean.

C'mon topaz, the Stevie's trust everything he does; they make excuses for each and every stunt that would have produced screams if the Liberals did it. Right from day one with the unaccountable ministerial appointment of Fortier, the coercing and crossing of Emerson, the lie about Income Trusts, not only the lie about the psychic stylist but the fact we are paying her and he's covered it up, and on and on. Anything is ok if Steve does it.

That's the problem with those righties - they never recognize their own hypocrisies, only that of the lefties (or others). That's why Steve is getting this free ride. tsk tsk tsk

It's not an unethical (or illegal?) payout if the Conservatives do it, only if the Liberals do it.

So Michael Bluth, here is a post of yours from another thread. Same old Conservative do what I say not as I do bs. Tsk tsk, talk about hypocrisy.

So Steve's taxpayer paid stylist earned her money today. Steve looked very put together in QP today; nice clothes; great makeup. Yes indeed, very well done............ .............and then he opened his mouth. More taxpayer's money down the drain.

The war on terror is a Bushism to get the American people to rally behind the "need" to invade Iraq. If that's the real thinking behind us being in Afghanistan, hell yeah, pull out. I want no part of Georgie's games. If however, we are in Afghanistan to keep the Taliban from coming back into power, to give the people there a country they can live in without fear then we should stay until we are satisfied we can do no more there to help. That's where our politicians fall down. Steve's there for Bush. Liberals now want out (wth?) in 2009 just because and the NDP are just out to take a stand that no one else took. Not one of them are in or want out for the right reasons; with them it's votes and political posturing.

The Selective Accountability Act? The Half Measures Act that cleans up parties in government (but maybe not Steve's own?) such as this: And where, pray tell, are the other 22 measures that Steve promised? Isn't a promise part of accountability or is that just for other parties?

There is a definite appearance of conflict of interest.

There are only two things the matter with Calgary: the Flames (ok I KNOW they are in the playoffs and the Oilers aren't but I stand by my Oilers) and the Stampeders. Otherwise it's a great city and as friendly of people as you can get in the hectic environment that Calgary has become.

Really? What's this then? On appointment to office, and thereafter, public office holders shall arrange their private affairs in a manner that will prevent real, potential or apparent conflicts of interest from arising ... 7. (1) In addition to the specific compliance measures provided for in this Part, the Ethics Commissioner may impose any compliance measure, including divestment or recusal, in respect of any matter or asset which, in the Ethics Commissioner’s opinion, creates a conflict of interest or the appearance of same. http://www.parl.gc.ca/oec/en/public_office...docs/code_e.pdf

Not for a lot of things he himself presently does but he is more Georgie style, do as I tell you and never mind what I do. Steve thinks he is above everything and he shouldn't be questioned about anything. And the Stevie's think the Liberals were arrogant? Double standard is the name of their game it seems.

The Conflict of Interest rules say no direct or indirect conflicts of interest including the perception of a conflict. Steve's merry band of tax grabbers are in violation; this just being the lastest example. But like most governments he figures he is above any law that has ever been passed.

Yeah, and Steve didn't "bus" in supporters to all his performances in the last election. To attend you had to be invited but he didn't say that in his speeches did he?

The right? Gun ownership should be considered and treated as a privilege same as a driver's license. We have no "right" to drive; we must earn a license, and yes our driving is licensed. Why, when a guns only purpose is for killing should it be considered more of a right than other things we use daily in our society? Stupid simpleton argument. Show me where guns kill without the people behind it. People can kill without guns but guns sure do make it easier.

It's election spending and they'll keep on spending until an election is called. Oh my, is it ... could it be ... same as the Liberals did and were roundly criticized for? OH MY! And they call themselves our NEW government?