Neal.F.

Anything to avoid accountability..... Jesus had more influence over the course of history than anyone else who ever lived.... And as for unbelief in the resuurection, if the authorities ever wanted to put an end to Christianity before it was born, all they would have to do is produce the body, something they could have done easily, since it would be impossible to steal the body away as the Pharisees and the Romans tried to get people to believe. Producing the corpse would have ended it right there. Firstly Jesus was seen by many who testified to seeing him at the risk of their very lives. There was a Roman Guard of, if I remmeber correctly 12 men at the tomb. Outside of divine intervention what are the Odds of 12 professional soldiers, charged with a task carrying death as the penalty for failure, falling asleep at the same time, and not being awakened by the sound of the stone which weighed several tonnes being moved? And Vercingetorix, what makes your links holy writ, and discount the Biblical account as worthless? I return to my original pouint is that militant secularists want to do what they want with whom they want and not have to answer for it.

One way or another, you will ALL find out that not only did Jesus exist, but that he still exists! I pray you don't find out the hard way!!!! Let's look at some other factors not already mentioned by others. Look at Paul. He persecuted Christians. He existed. that is historical fact. He was nearly killed by stoning (left for dead, and dragged out of town) he was also spirted out of another place, lowered down in a basket outside the walls. Untimately he was decapitated in Rome. Would he have gone through all he did, if Jesus did not exist and reveal himself to him? Peter is another example. He is historically verifiable, as is the manner of his death, to wit, being crucified upside down, because he did not consider himself worthy of dying in the same manner as Jesus did. Why would he do that if he did not walk with Jesus? John was totured by being boiled in oil. All he would have had to do was deny the whole story. It is even said that over 500 people in the time of Paul testified to seeing Jesus ressurrected. a claim that cost many their lives. I think the problem with those who wish to turn him into a myth, is that they do not want to be held accountable for their actions, especially where sex is concerned. But as Churchill said, the thing about the truth is, that it is.... and wishing Jesus away or pretending that you will not be held accountable is a dangerous, and erroneous course of action. This begs another question: What kind of society will you end up with if ever you succeed in convincing enough people of your fraud, to wit that there is no accounting at the end of one's life? If I will not be held responsible for what I've done, then why should i not go and kill those who are inconvenient... Shortchange people in business, lie cheat and steal ,and trample others...after all, it's the law of the jungle isn't it? Do anything... just don't get caught. And Pellaken, Jesus did and does exist.... Son of God. Joseph was his stepfather.

Craig, with all due respect, and I do respect most of the points you make in your posts, I majored in Slavic studies. I am therefore well versed in the Russian language, culture and history, and believe that I have a good understanding of the mindset that Vladimir Putin has to deal with. Let's start with looking at Russia as a case of arrested develoment at several points in its history. While Western Europe was developoing nicely, Russia was a collection of Principalities, duchies cities and other types of units which had yet to coalesce. One of the primary reasons for this were Mongols and tatars which ran over what was to become Russia for a considerable period of time. The Tatars and Mongol raids rached into Poland and Hunagry where they were stopped, thus leaving most of western Europe untouched by their ravages. So after thr Mongols and tatars ceased to be a force, the Russian states, if you will started to coalesce around Muscovy. There were as a consequence of being a diverse collection of entities various forms of givernments, including a rudimentary democracy in Novgorod, which we can discuss at another time, nevertheless, Russia emerged as an autocracy. Reformers like Peter Romanov notwithstanding, it would remain autocratic. If I may spend a few moments on the subject of Peter, without him, it is questionable whether Russia would have become a modern nation. For the first time, a country which had long been suspicious and closed to the west and its influences had ita doors flung open wide to embrace it. Peter himself went out incognito to the great seafaring trading nation of Holland to learn about shipbuilding so he could build a navy. He learened firsthand by working in a shipyard. yes. manual labour. He then set out to build a western capital to replace Moscow, and built Saint Petersburg on the swamplands on the Neva, so that Russia could escape its past and have a window on the west. He spent much of his time in the German quarter with the foreigners who established themselves there so he could learn, and reform. Unfortunately Peter's life ended all too soon when he died in his early fifties, of pneumonia after divinginto cold water to rescue someone. Had Peter lived a full life, Russian history would probably have turned out much better. Over the next while, Russia unfortunately had a succession of weak and corrupt Romanov Tsars. They did nothing to keep up with the west, and Russia lagged behind, being the last major European country to abolish serfdom. Nicholas II (aka "the last") tried to bring in some last minute reforms , which might have worked were it not for The Mad monk Grigori rasputin, and the onset of WWI, for which Russia with its emerging democracy was ill prepared to deal with. The result was the October revolution, which ushered in yet another autocracy, that of the Communists, who ruled with an iron fist for seventy four years. In a country where nobody ever had any rights, it is difficult to instill the sense of civics that have developed in the west since the time of Magna Carta. And even then the events and development triggered by the MC took hundreds of years to evolve and mature. IN Russia, as with all countries ruled by the Iron fist, the only way to rise to the top is to be more ruthless and brutal than the next guy. It will take some time, at least a generation (at minimum) to eradicate this mentality in Russia, so Putin is dealing with the mafia (mostly old communist elites) in the only language theuy understand: Force. I think that thusfar, he has done a magnificent job of walking the tightrope, and guiding Russia through a time of massive change , change on a scale that western countries have not had to deal with in modern times. Unlike Farnce and Germany, I do not condemn putin for the stance he has taken on Iraq, for instance. As a former Superpower, which remains formidable, and must remain so for the purpose of maintaining balance in the world, he needs to, one one hand maintain constructive , friendly relations with the US, a country which 3 generations of Russians were indoctrinated to believe was their enemy, and on the other maintain a strong independent foreign policy. Make no mistake about it Craig, Putin is in a tight spot, and is taking the neccesaary steps. The Russian culture, like the Arab one, is very macho, and the worst thing any leader can do is show signs of weakness. While Putin has established some ground rules whereby former aparatchiki can prosper in commerce, thus stimulate an economy ruined by socialism, he must at all times, hold them to their end of the bargain, and keep them out of politics, AND keep them strictly with the agreed upon guidelines. Give them an inch, they won't take a mile... they'll take everything. Russian history is chock-full of violence and treachery, from Peter's takeover of the throne after the regency of Sophia, to Catherine the Great eliminating her weak husband Peter III, to the Stolypin era, and the communists with their infamous purges, no leader can concede a single point to an opponent, and ultimately live to tell the tale. Putin must first create the type of social, economic and political environment whereby a legitimate democrcy may take root, but it will take a long time, during which the lessons of history must not be forgotten, or it is certain in Russia, they will be repeated, and even more bloodily than before.

Anyone entertaining illusions that Paul MArtin will lead an essentially conservative government and restore a modicum of sanity to the government of this country, think again. Meet Maurice Strong a man destined to shape canadian policy more than one would care to imagine, should Paul Martin be given a massive majority. Maurice Strong has been a mover and shaker, behind the scenes , however in the upper echelons of the United Nations, virtually since the corrupt organization was founded. He believes in a vision of the world under a benevolent social democratic, but somewhat capitalistic government. One world, one government. With Martin, who, through smoke and mirrors, and whether we like him or not, has gained respect in the world financial community, Strong will have the means to move forward with his plans of further economic integration of all the economies of the world, and move us inexorably toward a one world state. If you think Kyoto was a bad thing, wait until you see what these guys have in store! So when Paul Matiin says that he would review Kyoto in order to get western votes, it would be worthwhile to look back on the words of Jacques Parizeau in 1995, when he said something to the effect that the referendum question would be something that could lure the "lobsters into the pot, and once they're in there, there's no turning back". You can be certain that Martin would review Kyoto, but that he'd be seeking advice not from those who would be affected, but rather from his mentor, Maurice Strong. Mr Strong is also reported to be into New Age religion, and is said to be supportive of the initiative to create a United Religions Organization. If conservatives ever needed a reason to unite, Maurice Strong lurking behind the scenes, pulling strings, provides it. Very few people in the media have been working to expose this. You can find lots more about Strong on the Net.

If the Liberals think it can get the votes, you won't have to wait long

Could it be that that Warren & the boys in the Liberal war room have been busy?.... or is it the Orchardistas (aka luddites).... In any case, If it is the handiwork of PROGRESSIVE conservatives then I think to refer to TRUE BLUE tories in connection with it would be something of a misnomer. Let the red Tories rot with their Liberal brethren whom they help to keep in power. BTW, the PROGRESSIVE conservative party did not exist in 1867. It was NOT actually the Party of Sir John A. The PC Party was born of a merger with another western-based party. Furthermore, this new party can, just as easily as the PCs did, lay claim to the 137 year old heritage..... Or they can quit ruminating over in the past with Joe Clark and his ilk, and get on with moving the country forward.

Here's another poll the Lieberals don't want to see, or the rest of us to see either.... Four in 10 would vote for merged party: poll CTV.ca News Staff While support for a merged Canadian Alliance-Progressive Conservative Party has slipped slightly since early October, a recent polls suggests four in ten Canadians would still vote for the united party in the next federal election. The Ipsos-Reid poll, conducted for CTV and The Globe and Mail, shows that 39 per cent of those polled said they would likely vote for the new Conservative Party of Canada. However, that's a decline of seven points since early October, when the merger was just speculation. "It should be noted, however, that at this level of support, they could present a formidable challenge to the governing Liberal Party," an Ipsos-Reid news release said. A challenge is exactly what Alliance Leader Stephen Harper and Tory Leader Peter MacKay were planning when they inked the merger proposal in mid-October. "This division of conservatives is ending. Our swords will henceforth be pointed at the Liberals, not at each other," Harper said on Oct. 16. There are problems, however. While Harper has been able to grab support for the merger from his caucus, MacKay is having a harder time. Contributing to his dissent is David Orchard, whose support at the Tory leadership convention ensured his leadership win. The deal MacKay agreed to with Orchard included a pledge not to engage in unite-the-right talks. Now Orchard is calling on Tory MPs to reject the merger. "This creature ... is an illegitimate creation conceived in deception and born in betrayal," Orchard said after the merger was announced. That might not be the only problem. The Ipsos-Reid poll shows Canadians believe the Alliance will continue to have problems trying to break through in seat-rich Ontario and Quebec. Seven in ten (68%) of those surveyed said the new Conservative Party is just the Alliance taking over the Progressive Conservatives. One in four (26%) disagree. Regionally, Quebecers were the most likely to feel this way, with 73 per cent reporting such a response. Atlantic Canada came in with 61 per cent and Alberta 58 per cent. Ontario reflects the national average. Regardless of the problems, the two sides seem determined to try and see the merger through. The timetable calls for a ratification vote by the respective members by Dec. 12. It also aims to pick a new leader by March 21. There has been much speculation that former Ontario premier Mike Harris will run for the leadership of the party. He has said he would more than likely make a decision in early November. According to the Ipsos-Reid poll, 32 per cent of those surveyed said they would seriously consider voting for the Conservative Party if Harris becomes the new leader. About half (46%) strongly disagree they would vote for the new party under Harris. Others eyeing the leadership bid include MacKay, Harper, Ontario Health Minister Tony Clement and former Alberta treasurer Jim Dinning. New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord and former Alliance leader Stockwell Day have already ruled themselves out. The Ipsos-Reid poll was conducted between Oct. 21-24. The telephone survey is based ona randomly selected sample of 1,056 adults. Results are considered accurate to plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Internet Jourlaist Pierre Bourque ( a defeated Liberal candidate in the 1993 election) whose site no doubt many of you visit has at this moment, a headline that reads " Libs 46 Right 29%" "Martin Libs would crush a United Right under Harris" Now lets cut through the fog: what do you suppose would happen with a 10% voter swing? Also why are the Liberals exxaggerating so much? because they know, that if the united right is not derailed, they may actually lose the election. If they weren't worried, they'd ignore a poll which showed the right at 29%... Wait... werent the lying Liberals at 51% last week? Now cut to the actual NAtional Post Article that is linked to: The headline reads: United right can hurt Martin: poll Merged parties would steal votes from Liberals The poll makes no mention of Harris, but rather says this: The results were 49% for the Liberals to 29% for the new party with Mr. Harper as leader, and 50% Liberal to 28% Conservative under Peter MacKay, the current Tory leader. It also says: Fears of a Tory exodus to the Liberals were partially borne out by the poll, which suggested that about a quarter of the current Tory vote would leak to the Liberals. But the new party would gain far more Liberals than it would lose Conservatives, the survey indicated. "Many of the people joining the PC party are PCs who have been sitting on the sideline waiting for their party to do this and now they're back involved." yes indeed... it seems there is now PANIC in the Liberal ranks.... And just shows how utterly useless to the cause of government change are "red Tories"

It will be too late by then the f-ing hippie comunards will have ruined the next generations. There's a special spot in hell reserved for them. Pierre Trudeau is heating those coals right now. It's common sense rev. Now, or it's too late.

I can agree with all of your posts, some points more than others. Trudeau literally sissified a once respectable country, and handed it over onn a silver platter to the courts. My father was one of those veterans who fought in WWII. He VOLUNTEERED, because he wanted the values cited by Alliance fanatic to survive against Hitler's sinister regime which threatened the whole western world. (Did you know that German submarines were in the waters around Montreal?) He looks back now and wonders why he bothered to fight for a country that puts homosexuality on a pedestal and sneers at the traditional family. That permits the slaughter of babies as a method of retroactive birth control....that taxes the productive and gives it to the lazy....that castrated a military that served with the utmost distinction in WWI (in which my grandfather fought, and lied about his age in order to go) and WWII. HOlland still sends boxes of tulips to thousands of cities and people in Canada to this day in recognition of Canadians' sacrifices. (Meanwhile france sneers) . While on the subject of the Eunuch military, which goes around in rusted out vehicles, and flies Sea King helicopters (which would have been replaced by now if not for that horse's ass puked-up excuse for a Prime minister) which put men in more danger than they'd be in actual combat, the canadian government sits there smugly knowing the US has to defend us, so why bother? All the while, Liberal MPs praise France to the sky and verbally defecate on the US on whome they depend for defense. a country that cannot defend itself and relies on other countries for that, is not an independent sovereign nation. Yes, this is what veterans are thinking about the country they once so proudly served, putting their lives on the line. Now is canada really that socially liberal, or is it that the social engineers through Trudeau's socialist (dare i say communist) beliefs, and the infrastructure he set up, have taken over the media, and all government offices to the point where the impression is created that social conservatism is dead, neanderthal and archaic? Have their indoctrination policies been actually working? In any case, once the Conservatives take power again, they MUST swing the axe at the civil service with such force as to level it to the ground, and effectively re-create it, albeit a much smaller version. I fully believe the reason why the Tories got into so much trouble back in the '80's was that Brian Mulroney failed to deal with the blaoted civil service created by Trudeau. the civil service was chock full of his lefist appointees, and the ranks of workers dictated by hiring policy. Therefore, when a tory would commit a faux-pas, he would be instantly exposed and pilloried by the Liberal infrastucture left in place by Trudeau, which would have winked at the same indiscretion committed by a Liberal. So, in effect, what we need is a common sense revolution in this country. ALL civil servants will have to be accountable for their past decisions and behaviour, and those who have shown ANY partisan behaviour in the course of carrying out their duties should be immediately purged. The size, and number of government departments needs to be reduced greatly as well. One department that needs to be wiped out altogether is Heritage. NEver again must Sheila Copps or anyone like her, be given such sweeping power to mold culture by taking tax dollars to promote leftist "art", and push the agendae of leftist social groups. The Trudeau Charter of Rights must be SCRAPPED. What was wrong with the Diefenbaker Bill of Rights that existed before? And finally, we need to have leadership that will tell the courts where to go, and give power back to the people through their representatives in Parliament. (Note that Jeb Bush stood up to the court in Florida, and ordered the feeding tube to be reconnected to Terri Sciavo. ) If the Liberals are thrown out in the next election by the conservatives (more and more I'm convinced that Mike Harris is the only one with the combination of electability backed up by the cojones to make the unpopular decisions that must be made) we have a chance to turn this country around. If not, it will be more difficult , if not impossible to undo the damage caused to this country by the legacy of Pierre Eliott Trudeau.

If the merger is voted down by Red tories and Orchardistas, there won't be hell to pay.... the momentum has swung to far and events have passed them by. You will see the Conservative Party formed anyway by up to 12 of the current sitting members (Clark, Borotsik and possibly bachand the exceptions) with the CA. The husk of the PROGRESSIVE Conservative party will cease to be a party in Parliament in any case, and will garner fewer votes than the Greens in the next election. Heck, with Orchard around, they may as well join the Greens! It's too late to turn back now. The truth is, the country could have been spared 7 of 10 years of the Liberal government had they done the right thing in time for '97. The Lieberals only got 38% of the vote, and the little weasel held his majority by a mere 4 seats. The problem then wa the aggressive "Join us, or we'll crush you" attitude of Reform. Had they approached the PCs back then with a Bouquet instead of a machine-gun, we'd have been spared a whole host of boondoggles, and odious pieces of legislation like C-250, gay marriage and legalization of mind-altering substances.

Read further into the article and the bloody Gauls refuseb to have anything ton with religion or any specific mention of Christian heritage in the Constitution. The group of 7 good guys say that not to include it is unacceptable. It would be nice to see the EU fly apart, and individual countries building something new that does not include Gaul and teutonic Prussia.

A challenger jet full of politicians takes off from Ottawa Airport, and is forced to make an emergency crash landing in a farmer's field near Winchester. The Farmer goes out to check out the scene and proceeds to bury them. A few days later a policeman knocks on the farmer's door after spotting the wreckage of the bus, and asked about the condition and wherabouts of the famous occupants. Farmer answers "They were all dead, so I buried them right here in my field." Policeman: "Are you sure they were all dead?" Farmer: "Yes....... though some of them said they were still alive, but I can't believe anything a politician says!"

I thought it was supposed to be the conservatives who would knife their leaders!!!!! I would discount Rockhead and Tequila Sheila at this point both are has-beens who never really were.... I think Martin had better watch out for the McKenna-ites,

Good points Craig... However, if i may be picky, the use of the word "liberal" may be misinterpreted by some readerrs to mean that you support the concepts behind the post-modern definition of liberal, which we hold in disdain. The word has been co-opted, in my view, to the point where it , like "gay" has lost its original meaning, and now means something completely different. That aside, Spain can't counter the Gauls and Teutons alone. It needs to forge strong ties with Poland, Hungary, and even Berluscone's Italy, and of course the UK. Speaking to the issue of the UK, while Tony Blair may be rational, and understand teh importance of maintaining good relations with the USA, his party is NOT with him on this. I would still greatly prefer to see a Conservative government there. It should also be noted that Blair favours joining the Euro. If Spain, Poland , Italy and the UK can form their own faction within the EU, then Gaul and Prussia can be countered and put in their place. I would prefer to see the European Parliament abolished, and have instead a meeting forum in its place where issues can be discussed in the interests of all, but under NO circu,mstances should brussels be able to pass laws that supersede those of the sovereign states in the Union. May Poland, as the Pope has asked, bring Christianity and its heritage back to the Table in Europe, The UK, common law, and Spain & Italy conservative philosophy. Gaul and Prussia , in their current states, have little or nothing of value to contribute but the people in these states can benefit enormously from the input of the others.

Peter MacKay did the right thing. The PROGRESSIVE Conservative Party was not coming back to power agian for another hundred years. Now there is a good chance of the Liberals getting the boot. Both parties took water in their wine, and canadians will be the richer politically for it. If you wanted proof that the Liberals are shaking, note that all the Liberal papers are playing up fringe elements like Orchard and Jurassic Joe. and talking about how bad it would be for Mike Harris to run. The Liberals are truly frightened. Their vaunted "machine" has never really had to FIGHT an election, and the corrupt bunch has never faced an opposition worth a damn.

It seems we have some serious resistance to French/German hegemony in the EU. Spain is taking a stand to ensure that Europe will take a co-operative, rather than confrontational attitude vis-a-vis the United States. evading the use of "Old Europe" The Spanish are standing up for a responsible role for Europe in today's world, where their interests, and those of the new members, such as Poland, Hungary and other former Soviet satellites are taken into account, so Eirope can serve as a constructive participant in world affairs, not just serve a s leverage for French and German interests, which will eventually have to collide, as one of the other seek to do economically and diplomatically what both failed to do by military means.

[Q]and I suspect this could be an example of what's going to happen federally in May. [/Q] From your keyboard to God's ears!!!

Why would someone want to go for Craig Chandler? HE proved to be an idiot, and representative of the typical Liberal caricature they use against the right? Jim Prentice was seen by many as being a pro-merger candidate, and he was far more serious and respected than Mr Chandler. As much as I detest the Liberals, taking a rifle and shooting at the Liberal logo was really a dumbass, childish and churlish move.

It is time for a major change in Ottawa. In fact, The Conservatives could clinch a win if they addressed the Democratic deficit by promising an elected senate, and Mixed Member Proportional Representation. That is an issue which will resonate well with voters sickened by the dictatorial power of the Crouton regime, and the total disdain shown them. Don't forget, most Canadians voted AGAINST the Liberals in the last 3 elections. 38% -42% of the votes should not equal 100% of the power. I think people are quite fed up with politics as usual. and if the Conservatives say that they'll bring in MMPR (Which provides for local representation, as well as slate candidates) , thus sticking out their own necks, and recognizing that they'll have to learn to build coalitions and take water in their wine, I think you will see the Liberals given the much deserved, and LONG overdue, "Order of the Boot". Are the Conservatives smart enough to do this? Thusfar, given that the Liberals have governed 70% of the time for the last century, the Conservatives should be chomping at the bit to dismantle a system that has served the Liberals so well for so long, instead of deluding themselves that they too, will profit from it.

Fast Ned, I read your post with interest. Thankfully, there is the United States of America which still stands for something I was sent an article this morning about a trend in Europe to convert to Islam...voluntarily..... The militant secularists have by & large succeeded in eradicating western Europe's Christian Heritage. The fear of many Christian apologists appears to be coming true...Humans are generally spiritual beings and when people cease to believe in the true God, the problem is not that they'll believe nothing, but rather that they'll believe ANYTHING. And into the vaccuum left by the eradication of Christianity, comes Islam to fill it. It is fashionable to hate the United States in Western Europe, and professing the Islamic faith is one way to manifest that hatred. This is why the Cghristian heritage in the western hemisphere MUST be preserved from all assaults. The result will be first, atheism, then something else, probably Islam, will come and fill the spirtual void. If it becomes really fashionable in Old Europe to convert to Islam, so it will among Liberals over here. Unless the all-out assault on Christianity is halted, Canada if it continues on the craven path it has followed for most of the last 40 years, may well become Islamic one day. I think back to Jan Sobieski leading his Poles in the rout of the Ottomans at the gates of Vienna in 1683, a campaign , which if it had failed would have seen the star & crescent flying over Paris, Berlin & Madrid. Is there a strong enough element in Europe right now to head off this stealthy Muslim invasion? Perhaps.... It is the tiny state of Vatican City where a Pole currently holds sway, and perhaps Poland itself, Christendom's strongest bastion in Europe.

Keith Martin is the Ca's answer to Scott Brison. Pro-abort, pro-gay, pro-pot. If he got it, I would not vote for them. reynolds: the "Don Cherry" of Canadian politics. Strahl: The CA's Peter Mackay. He will be remembered for walking out on the CA, then walking out on the CRC Coalition. Don Getty is seen as a failure as premier. Prentice is too uch of a social liberal. Lougheed: Better as a senior statesman at this point. Borotsik: If he were any more red, he might be mistaken for Joe Clark. I don't want to see anyone who might one day grand marshal a gay pride parade at the helm. Belinda Stonach ruled herself out. Mulroney: 2 thumbs up !!!! Dumont: Not ready for prime time. needs experience in a responsible position. MacKay: Forget it. He should be thinking about NS premier. I think this is Hamm's last kick at the can. Brison: the fact that he IS gay doesn't bother me... the fact that he plays identity politics does. ie: that he supports gay causes. No thanks. I believe he also supports legal pot, and abortion. Don't want him.

GST aside, I don't , for the life of me , understand why he is so hated by so many. Even the GST, when properly understood, was not a new tax, but a replacement for the old manufaturer's tax, which was hidden. The problem with the GST was that it is there, in your face, every time you buy something. I would not be surprised that if Brian Mulroney was to run for the Conservative leadership, he could not only win it, but his charisma could actually win the party the election again, as this man of substance could expose the would be emperor, Paul martin, as being buck-naked when it comes to ideas. Mulroney could rightly stand there and take credit for putting the economic fundamentals in place, without which, martin could not have pulled off his smoke and mirrors charade as finance minsiter. I think people will also recall how Mulroneyb cut a respected figure on the international stage, and how Canada was a player. He could invoke the EH 101 contract cancelled by Crouton, that has endangered our armed forces personnel. The list goes on. I truly hope Brian Mulroney can be persuaded to run again.

Pellaken, I'm going to toss a whole lot of cold water on your post: I'll agree with you on BC: CAmpbell is not just "happy where he is" but he is also a first term premier. You do NOT bail out in your first term..... That takes Charest out of the picture... BTW, where on earth did you get the idea that Jean Charest and Bernard Lord are anti-Harris? From BC: I wonder if John Reynolds, the high profile MP who served as interim leader might want to give it a go. In Harris' favour, his opponents can sling whatever mud they like at him. He just needs to give his standard reply" Look, I promised I'd do such-and such, within "X" time frame. I did it. I stood for election against what I did, made some more promises, and fulfilled them, according to my mandate. Next question please" From Alberta: I am inclined to believe that Klein's wife has taken him out of the picture. Jim Dinning is known and respected throughout Alberta, but has no national profile. Stock Day, Jason Kenney and Dianne Ablonczy may also consider a run, but Dr. Grant Hill has announced that he is leaving politics and will not run in the next election. Very unfortunate. I hope he changes his mind. Then there's Jim Prentice. He's bilingual, bright, and fiscally conservative, but he favours legalizing pot, gay mariage and is pro-abort. He could do well in Quebec. In fact he took most of the Quebec delegates in the final PC convention. Sask: I like Garry Breitkreuz. But is he interested? He also lacks a national profile. Manitoba: I STRONGLY disagree with your statement alluding to the PCs embarrassed themselves. The PCs did better than anyone thought against a VERY popular NDP govt. under Gary Doer. However, from MAnitoba, there is Brian pallister, Vic Toews, and even gary Filmon who could make a run. All lack significant national profile except 3 term premier Filmon. Ontario: Harris is the best bet from there. Clement could also be good, but he's a bit of a policy wonk. Tom Long is better behind the scenes. I agree that Flaherty probably wants the provincuial leadership, but I would not rule him out, if he smells Liberal bllod, he might go for it, and leave the provincial party for John Baird, who is being touted as a possible successor to Eves. Quebec: I'd LOVE to see Mulroney make a comeback. He was probably the best PM Canada had in the 20th century, but though he is respected here, I don't know whether he has been rehabilitated in the west. he has what it takes to expose martin for what he is- or rather, what he isn't..... Dumont should make the jump to Federal politics, with some of his ADQ crew, such as Marie Gregoire, Francois Corriveau, Sylvie L'esperance and others, but not as leader. Though his name is widely known, he is too young and inexperienced, and Paul Martin will eat his lunch. He should go Federal now with some of his crew so some seats can be won, and he'd be a shoo-in for cabinet, and if he proves himself, is a potential next leader. Jean Charest is out of the running. It'd be suicide for him to jump now. From the Atlantic: Lord has said No, no and no. He couldn't go now, even if he wanted to. Lose one seat, and NB falls to a Liberal/NDP coalition. The Federal MPs from NB are not well enough known except Elsie Wayne, who is better as an eminence grise. From Nova Scotia: Hamm is not PM material. From among the MPs, Bill Casey is probably the brightest of the lot, but is too low key. He's better as an ideas man. "Hay West" was, I believe his brainchild. Forget Brison. while he has fiscal conservative credentials, on social policy, he is a mirror image of Svend Robinson. Pat Binns: as Prime minister? nahhhh. From Newfoundland: Rex Barnes should make a go of it to raise his profile. He's got spark.

It seems that the Bible and other religious literature will probably be banned from Calgary Hospitals. What an outrage! At a place where people need spiritual help & info more than most, the militant secularists want to remove it. I for one, have never objected when i see a Book of Mormon alongside a Gideon Bible in a hotel room find this to be nothing more than a vindictive attempt to stamp out religious faith in Canada. The Story