kimmy

I'm confused. What is the "2014 Healthcare Apocalypse"? Is that when Paul Martin's "I saved healthcare for a generation" deal ends? Did the Mayans predict this and carve it on a stone calendar? What are we actually talking about? -k

That's much more interesting than rehashing the "left wing media" meme for the 200th time. Story here... One life lesson I usually keep in mind is to not attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence. I wouldn't assume some grand scheme by the CBC to influence the election. Still, this just adds to the controversy that was first raised by the twitter/facebook threats made by Elections Canada. Why doesn't Elections Canada solve the problem by keeping the results secret until the polls close everywhere? -k

The "plenty of time" thing is kind of key. With the minority situation, they've been in a cycle of trying to pick a leader, build his reputation, and build the brand in the space of months because the next election (and the next wave of attack ads) were always just around the corner. Now Jack Layton will be the guy in the spotlight, the Liberals are kind of on the sidelines for 4+ years, and they need it. One quibble I have. People keep referencing the 1993 election and saying "well, the PCs were down to 2 seats, and they came back..." But the PCs never really came back. They stumbled along on their own for a few years, but they "came back" only by merging with a larger party with a base in parts of the country they were no longer viable in. -k

And it took all of seven hours. I think the burning question on peoples minds is ... now that he's not an MP, and now that he's not the Liberal leader... are we now allowed to refer to him as "Count Igula"? -k

I thought they were Progressive Conservatives who left Mulroney's caucus during his 2nd term. -k

Mulroney 50.03% of popular support in 1984. It was Turner who had 28%. -k

For some reason I was expecting Gilles to be pretty drunk, slurring his speech, and spewing invective at any and all. "You stupeed votaires... you don' come crawling to me when Jack Layton turn his back on you! You don' have Gilles Duceppe to keeck aroun' no more!" -k

He's going to resign. He might not know it yet, but he'll resign before long. He said he'd step down when they ask him to... and they're going to ask soon. -k

Dobbins announced his retirement from this forum quite some time ago. It was shortly after he'd gone around threatening to refer people to Warren Kinsella for lawsuits if they posted speculation about Liberal insiders being involved in "Wafergate". I suspect that he realized he'd burned some bridges during that episode. I hope he doesn't sue me for speculating that's the reason for his absence. -k

Aside from maybe Nicky10013... who vanished from the message board about 3 weeks ago. Either he's been extremely busy on the campaign trail, or he's become so depressed that he doesn't even want to try to hold up the party banner anymore. -k

I doubt anybody outside of card-carrying Liberals feels too badly about Usual Dosage being gone. I notice Joe Volpe is also gone, which probably everybody except for the Volpe family is probably very happy to see. Hedy Fry survived the massacre, which I find both inexplicable and unfortunate. Brad Trost won comfortably. Did any MPs you wish were gone win their seats tonight? -k

I've always enjoyed Chantel and have been reading her column since I was a kimlet. The other comment she made that I found interesting was to suggest that it might be more than coincidence that the BQ's near-annihilation comes right on the heels of Pauline Marois making big noises about language and sovereignty after winning her confidence vote recently. The BQ will have 4 years of non-official party status, and no recognizable face in the House of Commons. That'll be tough for them. It will be interesting to see whether Quebec voters get "buyers remorse". A couple of the commentators on CBC tonight suggested that Quebec votes might be very much "in play" next election, and that it would be presumptuous to assume Quebec is suddenly some sort of NDP fortress. -k

Yeah... Stephen is 6'2, and Ben looks a couple of inches taller. This seems like just a couple of years ago, doesn't it? -k

It's (as Chantel Hebert put it) a "Chretien majority". Chretien got 41%, 38%, 40% of the popular vote... and it gave him 11 straight years of majority government, because the votes split the right way. -k

-k

I'm also going to vote Liberal tomorrow. I mentioned in another thread that I'm voting Liberal because I prefer my local Liberal candidate to the other candidates, and that it didn't actually matter that much because my local Conservative will win by a large margin whatever I do. But I'm also voting Liberal because, after thinking about it for a long time, I've decided I can't support the Conservatives this time out. I ought to be somebody who would vote Liberal most years. I believe in conservative finances and liberal social views. And yet, for most of my life, voting Liberal hasn't been something I could even consider. My utter contempt for Chretien (although I was never old enough to vote against him) and my disgust over the sponsorship scandal and Paul Martin's comments in that campaign, and my dismay that a twit like Stephane Dion could potentially be our prime minister prevented me from even considering voting Liberal. And, of course, growing up in a typical Alberta home where Liberals were believed to be criminal scum didn't help matters. I believed for a long time that the Liberals needed to be removed from power. I still believe that it was necessary. Not just "good", but necessary. I was very grateful that it happened. And I was excited to see what Stephen Harper would bring to the job. And I believe that he did a pretty good job for a few years. But lately I've become more and more disappointed with the Conservatives. You guys know me and you know that I'm not one to shed crocodile tears for airport workers that Helena Guergis yelled at, or for Omar Khadr, or for Taliban detainees who got transferred to the custody of people almost as vicious as they are. I really couldn't care less about that stuff. My disappointment with the Harper government is just that. I feel like they've been letting me down on the sort of things they promised to do. I'm worried over the cost overruns in the F35 program. I feel like they spent far too much money advertising the Economic Stimulus Plan, which came across more like ads for the Conservatives than useful information for the public. I feel like they're giving away the store to corporations. And the final straw is that I felt disgusted and appalled by the cost of the G8/G20. A billion dollars. I still can't wrap my head around that. People might say "bah, the Liberals would be no better!" ...but neither are the Conservatives. So I was more than willing to consider an alternative, and Michael Ignatieff doesn't seem like a bad guy to me. I'm a little perplexed as to why so many people react negatively to him. His speaking voice? His eyebrows? I hear that he's "arrogant" a lot. I don't know. I made fun of the attempt to portray his family as hardscrabble immigrants who came to Canada with just the lint in their pockets. But that's not an issue. That's a badly thought out branding attempt, somewhere along the lines of Sweater Vests. And I've been laughing my ass off over the "Rise Up!" thing, because it was such a contrived and lame attempt to create some kind of Springsteen Obama vibe that just failed miserably. But again, that's branding, not substance. I've read pieces of a couple of his books (it's perhaps not a great sign that I was able to find them in the super-discount clearance bin at my local bookstore at the height of an election...). I've read over their platform. And aside from the plan to spend billions of dollars caring for withered old baby boomers, there's nothing I really have an issue with. So after thinking about things for a long time, and grappling with long-held prejudices, I've decided that it's time for me to go Liberal. Sadly, that decision comes at a time when every other man woman and child in this country has decided it's time to abandon the Liberals. I also feel like a middle party is a good thing. I've read some people speculating that this election is the first step on the road to a 2-party system, split right and left with no room in the center anymore. I hope that doesn't happen. I think the danger of losing votes to "the center" prevents either the NDP or the Conservatives from being too far to either extreme. I think that's a good thing. I don't want to see a future where extremists rule both sides and voters have to decide which bunch of kooks they fear less. I'm Kimberly Johnson, and I'm voting Liberal tomorrow. Rise Up, Canada! -k

Glad it's almost over. -k

Is there a Price Is Right scoring system? I'll go with 95. -k

I agree. I don't see an issue with a woman selling sexual services if she wants to. And wants is the key word here. If an adult woman (or man, for that matter) is selling sexual services because they choose to, and they can accept or reject clients at their discretion, and can leave that profession at their own volition, I don't see why not. If she (or he) is selling their services because they're afraid for their safety, or because they need to do so to obtain drugs they're addicted to, or because they're afraid they or their family will get deported if they don't cooperate, or if they're otherwise being coerced into it, then it's not okay. That these people are often underage, often in the country illegally, often isolated by language or otherwise disconnected from potential sources of assistance, only makes them more vulnerable. As we all know, criminals and crime organizations (Triad, Hell's Angels, other gangs...) exploit women like this. Somebody who's patronizing an establishment where exploitation like that is occurring is supporting it, whether they ordered the "happy ending" or just a shiatsu. Somebody who'd knowingly support an operation like that is a bad person. Jack says he didn't know, so he might not be a bad person. That's my position exactly. I don't have a problem with someone paying for sexual services. I do have a problem with someone supporting an operation that exploits vulnerable women. And to me, all the conjecture about what services he did or didn't pay for completely misses the mark. It doesn't matter. What matters is that he was (knowingly or unknowingly) at that kind of a place. Jack says he didn't know it was such a place or he wouldn't have been there. If you believe him, that's certainly your right. I'm skeptical of his claim. We'll just leave it at that. -k

It's for real. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/29/suspected-bawdy-house-raided-in-project-cobra -k

Since many legitimate fast food outlets are open late at night, and since few are offering sexual services, you're probably ok. I don't think you can say either of those things about massage establishments, so it's a pretty weak comparison. -k

Huh? If he's frequenting an establishment where vulnerable women are exploited, he's supporting that exploitation whether he's getting the full treatment or not. -k

Thanks for the list! I wonder how many of them are open for business after 9pm? -k

What baseless assumptions? The facts are clear. The only question is whether you believe him when he said he didn't know what kind of place he was at. Well, Olivia said so, at least. So, he knew the place, if not from prior visits then at least by reputation? As I've said a multitude of times in this thread, I'm not claiming he was there for sexual purposes. As I've said a multitude of times in this thread, a real champion of dignity and equality for women wouldn't knowingly go to an outfit like this. The only excuse for it is if he didn't know, and I certainly don't find that believable. Sorry. A champion of dignity and equality for women wouldn't patronize and financially support a rub-and-tug. It's rank hypocrisy comparable to a "family values" politician cheating on his wife or an anti-gay crusader "tapping his foot" in a bathroom stall. -k

It's not about "guilty". It's about what kind of a guy he is. If he was the kind of guy he portrays himself as, he wouldn't have been there in the first place. Doesn't make him a criminal. Just makes him a guy I lost a bunch of respect for. But I wasn't voting for him anyway, so it doesn't matter. I'm interested in how this is going over with people who are voting for him. Clearly, people who do support him are willing to believe that he didn't know what kind of place he was going to. Personally, I think that's just desperation. -k