Cartman

I agree with you to an extent. In fact, I would add that the Chretien/Martin Liberals have done much to harm our welfare state. So, why are people voting for them as opposed to say, voting Conservative, NDP or even forming another political party? I reject your suggestion that only stupid or paranoid people vote Liberal. And I am no Liberal BTW.

Eureka, what's not enlightening about the use of "slime", "disgusting hypocrite", "morons", "simplton", "lying", "thieving", "shut your mouth"? And in only one thread.

Klein has spoken about this Reagan. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...esex050629.html

I noticed that Sweal was banned. May I ask how long this ban is to be in place? Is it permanent?

I would like to know your views on immigration Hugo. If the state is to be eradicated, would this essentially mean the eradication of borders? He was banned.

This thread clearly belongs in federal politics.

Taxes do drive businesses away especially from socialist havens like the tax and spend Bush liberals in the United States. That is why large US corporations like Stanley Tools are moving to places like Bermuda with no taxes and no social welfare policies. Don't believe me? Click on the link. http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0522/p01s01-uspo.html Why is this considered "un-American" when it is just plain economics?

Yeah, I am going nuts with all this rain. I removed the statement as it was over the top. But, there must be many Conservatives who are frustrated when these statements are made because, I will agree to an extent, that the Cons. are watched more carefully than are the Liberals. The same goes for the NDP which must also walk on water. This comes with being the Official Opposition I suspect. The Conservatives do have considerable problems though and I fail to see why Harper does not draw upon what appears to be his greatest strength. That is, focus on ways to expand the growth of the economy while carefully cutting some programs like a surgeon. Nobody likes bureaucratic growth. If an economic plan were clearly presented (something like the Redbook plan) and it was made clear that he would prioritize social program funding, they would have a much greater chance of winning. It is always the kooks that set the media agenda and he cannot stop the media. Look, few people are actually voting FOR the Liberals. Many are simply voting against the Conservatives. Harper needs to muffle the renegades, look patient and professional, and present a balanced plan of growth and efficiency for the entire nation. The current approach of chest beating does not work for him.

Hey, Eureka, Reagan and Newfie are all not there! Why not? :angry:

What!? Do you own a home? I doubt that anyone is happy about this particular policy change. Do you run a business? I was a manager for a meduim-sized business when they deregulated and I nearly fell on my head when I looked at how much it cut into profits. This was no small increase for businesses buddy.

Greg may have to make some tough calls, but a blatant ban because of your views? C'mon, you are not fooling anyone rightwinger. BTW, he has also banned people on the left.

Why on earth would you give Harper any credit? IMO this is one dog that does alot of barking and never bites. As long as he is ineffective at restraining his own members from openly referring to other MP's as whores, dipsticks and Nazi's etc. etc., he may as well forget about trying to become PM. It is this kind of barbaric "Trailer Park Boys" crap that Canadians reject and Conservatives cannot resist. The inability to stop these moronic comments in the context of Canadians already being leery about their socially conservative agenda, his inexplicable stance on the Grewal tapes (which is not over BTW), the offer to exchange budget votes for delays on SSM and the Liberals little dance on procedure make him look weak, disorganized and too power hungry. We should not forget that the Stronach affair combined with MacKay's pathetic and somber talk to the media made them look really bad. Right now, the Conservatives do not come across as a government in waiting. Their only hope is that the Liberals completely implode with Gomery and Harper gets lucky in a debate (which should not be hard considering he will be debating Martin). Forget about blaming the communist media that brainwashes everyone, forget about Liberals profound yet unique ability to generate fear amongst delicate Canadians, or people just not really knowing Harper. Canadians are not tricked by the media, the Liberals run good campaigns (not evil genius ones) and Canadians know enough about Harper. They simply reject the Conservative Party as it is currently constituted. The last charismatic and influential leader the right had was Preston Manning and Harper is no Manning. [Edited to remove a sarcastic yet very funny slight against some Conservatives]

My understanding is that he was appointed.

On June 17th, I said: Too bad Conservative candidate Laurie Hawn was not listening because on the 24th he said: http://strongandfree.blogspot.com/2005/06/...ypocrisies.html Apparently, the post was edited from "National Socialist" (with capitals) to "national socialist". Harper should muffle yet another pinhead in his party.

I recall when Manning got a makeover. It did not go over well in Alberta because it was so fake. Though his hair looks like a painted-on helmut, it is better to be down-to-earth.

Though I appreciate your humour, you often state that others are closed minded on the issue of health care. Specifically, you state that people are not willing to consider creative options to state funded health; that any alternatives are inevitably dismissed as equivalent to US health care. I assumed that you would have something to offer on this subject. The Liberals will keep getting into office partly because of the mentality described by August.

Well put NC. Your posts are always so well balanced.

Even though I made an attempt, I do not believe August's initial question was ever truly answered. It is a very good question too.

Gee, kinda makes you wonder what might have happened during those 8 years of Mulroney that has terrified Canadians so badly.

As a self-declared english lefty I am not sure why I am laughing. Hey, I thought the right was sexually frustrated and the left too promiscuous (i.e. hippies). Is French Canada's left truly sexually satisfied August (i.e. Lévesque, Duceppe)?

True enough. Self-righteous people (moral crusaders) often bug me too but this is not a quality unique to gay activists or lefty types. The right has also been self-righteous when it comes to deficit/debt reduction.

I dunno. What about Trudeau? Was he not polished and precise? Would you consider Mulroney "a regular guy"? Is McGuinty folksy? What about Campbell, Filmon and Doer?

I agree. Let them marry and be done with it. I really fail to see what is the big deal here. We are talking about a small number of people who want to have the same symbolic and legal representation that heterosexuals enjoy. Why should marriage be an exclusive club? I could see if a person was angry if they started selling Nobel Peace prizes at Wal-Mart for $29.94, but when you marry, you have not really done something unique. Get over yourself 'cuz many people marry. It is not like including a section of society into the definition of marriage tarnishes your marriage. I for one will find my marriage just as important as ever. Life will go on folks. If you disagree, I suggest you consider the impact of heterosexual divorce upon the stellar, flawless image of marriage. Why is this considered a "circus" anyways?

Looks like the Mayor of Calgary agrees with me calling such people "dopes" and "fools". http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/N...099000-sun.html