The Terrible Sweal

When the handful is the most senior people in the party they represent the whole party. The people involved in Adscam are geographically confined and not big players in the Liberal party outside of Quebec. Please. When did he deny knowledge that conversations were taking place? I don't think he said that anywhere. More precisely, if you see another member of cabinet with you doing something wrong it is your responsibility to stop it. If you see it.

Doublespeak. You really mean: 'we should all have healthcare choices according to our means'. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The reality is that this is the situation today, just as it was yesterday, just as it will be tomorrow. So we fix it, not succumb flapping our hands feebly.

Doublespeak. You really mean: 'we should all have healthcare choices according to our means'. BTW, I'm not one to complain about 'judicial activism', but if you ever wanted an egregious example of it, this case is one. Why? Well, the court majority is clearly wandering in the territory of public policy. That's bad enough, but they have chosen to do so with a partial bench, on an unclear question, with a questionable majority. From the point of view of judicial administration, this decision was a blunder.

So the Tories claim to have finally released the 'real' tapes. (With yet more previously unreleased minutes too.) And their credibility is now so low they had to hire someone to vouch for them. Great. How on Earth this is can be bad for the Liberals escapes me. But it sure undermines the CPC yet further. All the questions still remain. Why the delay and the piecemeal selective release? Who had the tapes and what were they doing with them? When did the Tory leadership get knowledge and control of the tapes? Why did Harper make faulty accusations based on fake evidence? Why has he not retracted such scurillous slander?

And this from an old Socred right winger. He is ... Dude, it's bad enough you clog the threads with long quotes, but you really don't need to repeat the same text. BTW, the healthcare ruling is not a great opportunity for the tories. They will grasp a handful of nettles if they try to do aything with it. The ruling is a great opportunity for the NDP if they have they smarts to use it.

Increasing gov. spending is not the only way of fighting unemployment. And deficit spending, though an inflationary influence, need not produce substantial actual inflation. But more fundamentally, there isn't really anything that wrong with a little inflation. In fact, without some inflation, you are probaly experiencing no growth.

How are things in Lethbridge (home of Mapleleafweb)?

Okay then, I vote to fight unemployment. Unemployment is permantently forgone productivity. Inflation is only bad if it's unpredictable.

Today's decision is a political gift the like of which the Liberals have rarely ever seen, as lucky as they have been. With medicare under assault by the courts and the radical right, where will the Canadian voter turn? Don't rule out the possibility of the biggest Liberal majority in history coming in 2006.

The Court should be slapped for this decision. It does nothing but create but chaos.

I could scarecely have said it better myself, kimmy. Though I might have added a longer list, and a few harsh jibes. While all of these move have been disastrous, I still say one must consider why they came about. In each case, I submit, you see a strategic calculation based on a desire to rush or hustle the public into a CPC government they don't really want. The voter can feel that the motive is not the voter's interests, but the CPC's interests. And the tory response to this is not to change, not to accede, but to dismiss, deny, and try the same kinds of hustle over again. The 'Conserative' brand in Canada has become confused (at best) in the public eye. Reform? "No, Alliance". Progressive Conservative? "Sorry we don't support that version anymore." And don't even mention Stockwell Day. His whole leadership was based on the conservative misapprehension that voters would let (pretend) youth, and (fake) excitement hide theocratic absurdity. But Conservatives don't realized the problems they have with their brand. It's like they can't even conceive of such a thing. And so, they try sleazy things like falsifying tapes, imagining somehow that they won't be scrutinized.

Obviously. But if you consider the problems that produced the current strategy, you see the seeds that will continue to produce faulty strategy. In other words, any strategy is the product of deeper fundamentals. That's the wrong stratgy move now too. It just adds weakness and flipfloping to the existing appearance of unreason and social conservatism.

story I predicted this weeks ago, when the Gomery stuff firs got really hot. I knew right away that the Tories' tin ears would lead then right into the buzz-saw, and sure enough, their blood is now all up the walls and across the ceiling. As usual, an intelligent observer can tell them exactly where they blew it. But part of why they blew it is also why they will deny, and bury their heads in the sand rather than absorb the truth.

I don't understand the question. If I vote 'unemployment' am I saying I want to accept unemployment or fight unemployment?

Foreign aid should be halted. Every dollar spent on foreign aid is a theft from the mouth of a hungry child in Canada. Stephen Lewis should be ashamed of himself. Livng in comfort while he pisses away the taxes paid by poor Canadians. He and his kind sicken me.

I hear there's flooding in Alberta. How are you guys keeping out there?

Oh yeah. You're really seeing right to the heart of that one -- not.

Even if this was purely to buy off Clement from pursuing the leadership, I don't uderstand what deficency of character it represents. *If* it was to buy off Clement from pursuing the leadership, I don't think it's a very good sign. I think a more noble person would prefer to defeat a rival with words and ideas, not by writing a cheque. I think that's a reasonable criticism. I notice something like this happens often in public discourse -- Overstated arguments can obscure related but reasonable ones. Suggestions that Belinda.ca's move was corrupt obscured the fact that it was unflattering.

Even if this was purely to buy off Clement from pursuing the leadership, I don't uderstand what deficency of character it represents. How comfortable am I with reality?

I don't condone over-regulation or excessive government. But neither do I measure the overness or excess from an ideologocal presumption that our government is necessarily malevolent or incompetent, or an external force acting against us. I agree that our government has substantial folly and inefficency. I'm pissed at the Liberals for their many faults. But our realistic options are not better. The Liberals are imperfectly liberal, but neither the CPC nor NDP are liberal at all. A one issue voter? No, 'fraid not. As for SSM, my main interest is what it represents in terms of unreasoning theocratic influences creeping into mainstream politics.

If she'd used her vast personal wealth to purchase political support from Clement, is that something that you'd admire? Doesn't sound like a very small-L liberal thing to me. Do you mean corrupting a public official? That's differnt than wat we have here. Clement is a private citizen.

The Fraser Institute are distortionists par excellence. Consider: In other words, almost 60% of reports were neutral or favourable.

For some reason. For a reason. For the reason that one party is to a much greater extent a match for her intention to implement her religion. alrkjgvj o;rsav Sorry, it's hard to type when I'm laughing out loud. What 'rational' argument has he tendered for opposing SSM, pray tell?

Because the issue has nothing to do with whether you 'have Christians'. It is whether you are a party 'of dogmatic Christian intent'. Probably the CPC isn't. But why take the chance?

What difference does it make now? Why mention it now? Because Belinda.ca's character has been a hotly debated subject since her defection. -k <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe, but in what possible way does this reflect on her character?