Neal.F.

I am actually surprised that this wasn't already an instituted practice of the Liberal Party already, especially given the Liberal party policy of not allowing a member to concurrently hold a membership in any other federal political party. At least as far back as the last election, the Canadian Alliance had such a form. It asked about criminal offenses (Candidate would be reqd. to submit an "all clear" from the RCMP, or local police detachment), it asked about bankruptcies, personal debts, marital info, and personal debt, as well as anything you think might be used against you. They also asked the prospective nominee to agree to NOT run against the eventual winner eiter for another party or as an independent. However, unlike the Liberals, the information was to be used only for the purpose of the nomination, not for "any purpose whatsoever. I thought this would be standard with all major parties.

Good riddance to a pompous ass who seems to think that she IS the Queen, not merely her representative. This elitist won't be missed.

I realize that Michael. I was disgusted. They were already moving into the vomit of political correctness. It will be the death of them among so-cons

In the NDP, they can have their opinions, so longs as they keep them to themselves, if they are not in lock-step with the party's official position. To wit, you can be pro-life, so long as you shut up about it, and vote the way Jacko tells you. Ask Bev Dejarlais, who was going to vote against gay marriage, but instead refrained from showingh up when Jacko told her to get in line, or else. The party is closed to pro-life ideas, though it does have some pro-life members. It is truly too bad that Bill Blaikie did not win the leadership. However, on the flipside, the CHP does not tolerate anti-life & anti-family positiosn within the party. But I see nothing wrong with that. YOu must sign a statement of principles affirming your pro-life values to become a member.

You mean the one that is the manifestation of the cancer of social liberalism? If so, then Svend Robinson is the Pancreatic cancer of social liberalism. Pel, what do you think of BEv Desjarlais,who refused to vote for gay marriage? or Yvon Godin, who is said to be pro-life?

I voted for the one party that is not infested by the cancer of social liberalism.

That is why Strahl will never be leader. He's burned too many bridges and made too many enemies among both Tories and Reformers. Stick a fork in him. he's done. and so is the CP, if they elect Stronach. anybody seen Olivia Chow talking to interior decorators lately?

Why should a child pay with its life for the actions of its 'parents"? Abortion is merely a way for these people to have their cake and eat it too. They fornicate, then expoect someone else to pay the consequences, instead of beahving prudently to ensure the preganancy doesn't happen in the forst place. BTW, I think the father should be held 50% financially responsible for the costs the woamn will incuer in bringing the pregnancy to fruition. where such is not possible, churches and community organizations, ane even the state should help withthat. And the advantages of pre-marital celibacy should be extolled in the media and pop culture, rather than ridiculed as they are by the likes of Maddonna, Britney, etc.

When a nation's military forces are subject ton the authority of a world body, such a nation ceases to be sovereign. Whether you realize it or not, you have just advocated one-world-government, a concept the UNO since Dag Hammarskjold was killed (probably murdered), has been trying to sneak in through the back door. I would approve of an international center where sovereign nations can meet or submit grievances to non-binding arbitration, but anything beyond that is playing with fire. What do you suppose whould happen if, all nations had surrendered their authority over their armed forces to such an organization (assuming the originators were well intentioned) and then at a later date the organizatioon fell under the control of a ruthless dictator? Let's face it, ruthless dictators often come dressed in sheep's clothing. Those who aspire to leadership, except in very rare cases, do so for the purpose of excercising power, and ruling, rather than serving. Once a one-world governing dictatorship establishes itself, one of its first acts will be to disarm anyone who might threaten their position. At that point, what recourse would you have? There's be nobody else to come to the rescue. Use that in your project.

Many people DO believe this. But is it fair to a child, to be born into an environment where they are a) not wanted, or b)unable to be taken care of properly. Those are the two main reasons for abortion, I would think. Child not wanted, or parent/s unable to care for child. Sounds like a Paul Martin liberal cop-out. All children are wanted, though not neccessarily by their bioplogical parents. There are waiting lists 10 years long for parents who want to adopt. That is why so may are going to Chia and russia to get them. We're aborting ours. Too often, the option of adoption is not properly explained to such people, if mentioned at all. Back to the drawing board for you, udawg.

And worse. People will ask: Two failed marriages? We can understand one, but at age 37 with two marriages gone south, if she can't manage her home life, how will she manage a government? And the Clinton stories will continue to swirl...... and we will soon hear about everyone she's "known" in the Biblical sense. It's tougher for a woman in this game. A man sleeps around, he's a stud, a woman does it , and she's a whore. That's just the facts. Politics is a blood sport, one where no chivalry exists. Allm that notwithstanding, she's a social liberal, and why would a truly conservative party want a social liberal at the helm?

Could go Conservative, subject to Stronach not winning.

Grant Hill announced back in August or September that he would not seek re-election. A good parliamentarian, and a decent man. A loss for canadian politics. HE too is an MD, and unlike the coward Keith Martin was not shy to tell the truth about the homosexual lifestyle. I also remember the time he tried to save the life of Windsor MP Shaughnessy Cohen, who had a heart attack in the House, and passed away. Deborah Grey also said she will not run again.

Where does Clement stand on social issues? I know libertarians swoon over his fiscal views. As a so-con living anywhere in the country, a social liberal is not acceptable. Can we get past caring about what region a leader comes from? Though I am in Quebec, I have no problem with a westerner leading a party, provided he governs with a national view, and not a regional one. I want to see a break from pork-barrel politics of the past. I am worried this is not going to happen. It really is becoming a rich boy's (or girl's) game. A party that is supposedly "grassroots is demanding prospective candidates ante up 100 K just to run.... I can understand some kind of deposit, but 100 K?

Call me sexist , if you want. I had high hopes for kim Campbell in '93. But she blew it. Catherine Callbeck's carrer as PEI premier was short lived, and went down in flames... Audrey and Alexa left the NDP with little more than a pulse. Let's face it, women have fared poorly in politics in this country. And this one, is carrying baggage., Her whoile sex life will be on display for all to see. Two failed marriages, like it or not will be spun against her. All those negatives notwithstanding, I oppose her, because she is Joe Clark in drag. A social liberal. If I wanted a social liberal, I'd vote for the genuine article: Paul Martin. Elect Stronach, and the merger falls apart. The so-cons won't accept it.

The papers are saying that BM himself may be ready to endorse her. As for Harper, though I think Lord would have been the best choixce electorally and for the unity of the party, I think Harper has managed the CA VERY well.

Smiling Moose, It is not only those in the west who are fed up with that kind of politics. I agree with your assesment on the future-or lack thereof- for the Conservative Party should this elitist be elected. I would wholeheartedly endorse any efforts to destroy it in such an eventuality. It amounts to the hijacking of a legitimate popular movement by the elitist moneyed establishment. Funny how the lefties whined about an Alliance takeover.

Stephen Harper? Pell, you been smoking some of that stuff Jacko wants legalized?

Don't know much about him. He's not "stomachable" , if he's a social liberal.... Nevertheless, he's a write off,since all the Ontario heavy hitters are lining up behind Stronach. Clement will get neither endorsements nor adequate funding. He lost his seat in the last election. That's excusable. he could win one federally. But to lose one's seat, and then lose a leadership race, badly, you're finished in the big leagues. He's yoiung enough to fight another day. And most PC establishment in Quebec is also behind Stronach. Harper had better secure a goodly number of ridings in Ontario, or she'll win by delegate count.

Jack Layton must be delighted. It is certainly shaping up to be a good year for him. Rest assured that if Stronach wins, there won't be a National party. The CA will walk out and reform will be reborn.

Copps will not be alone in going NDP. Toronto seats are ripe for the picking. Those not loyal to His Excellency the Omnipotent Supreme Commander and Autocrat of the Postmodern Nirvana of Canada, all realize they have no future in the LPOC. There could well be more. BC: Keith Martin proved he is the fool i always thought he was. Liberals will be lucky to keep 8 seats indeed. NDP will make gains, the extent of which will be determined by whether Mr Harper wins, or if Clinton's girl takes it. A "Paris Hilton" win would send the message that the Eastern elitist establishment is screwing over westerners once again, and the NDP could do very, very well. A Harper win would likely preserve what the CA currently holds. There is another scenario: Should Stronach win, much if not all of the current CA caucus could walk and like the Bloc, form a new party virtually overnight.

Sorry PC4Ever, but I must disagree with you. Is it really about saying whatever it takes to win power? If it is then this whole system isn't worth a tinker's damn. I am sick of my countyry being the plaything of rich liberal dilettantes, and, I believe, so are most rank and file citizens. notoce how many don't go out to vote? More and more people see the whole damn thing as an elitist sham. And all the establishment PCs jumping on the Stronach bandwagon, and choosing flash over substance swooning over this woman with two failed marriages, who as Morgan points out flaunts her wealth just confirms in my mind that the system is broken, perhaps irreparably. For a truly conservative government to get elected, it must not "go after Liberal supporters" but rather convince the skeptics who stay at home that they really would do things differently. peiople are sick and tired of the pork-barrel politics that have marred every government, party notwithstanding, for the last 40 years. It is these people that must be reached, and convinced. This fraud is fuirther perpetuated on us by the media which, as you just did, pounds it consistently into peoples' heads that "canadians will only elect socially liberal governments" . So a party of principle must convince people that they can win as well. Reform convinced many of the former, but not the latter, no thanks to the massive Liberal smear job done on Stock Day, which Progressive Joe assisted by splitting the vote. Had the vote not been split, an additional 30 some-odd seats would have fallen into Alliance hands, and convinced many that real change was at hand. To go with Stronach, and all the cocktail party elitist endorsements she has will send the message that the system is really broken beyond repair. Reformers will be completely disillusioned., I believe , to the point where they will stay at home in droves. What is needed in this country being destroyed by elitists is to scrap the current first past the post system, and institute a mixed member proportional representation system. However, the elitists will never pay anything more than lip service to the idea of changing a system that has served their selfish interests so well. REmember c-129, the law which (recently ruled unconstitutional by the Supremes, in one of the rare good decisions they have made) effectively strangled smaller parties, by upping a candidate's deposit to $1000.00 (it had been $250.00) which closed the door to many who wanted to exercise their right to at least get on a soapbox and have their say, required them to get 125 signatures (instead of 25) to validate their candidacy and required parties to run a minimum 50 candidates, or lose status withelections Canada, and thus the ability to issue tax receipts for donations. the PROGRESSIVE conservatives introduced this, and it was heartyily supported by the Liberals. Talk about disenfranchising people. No wonder people have no faith in the institutions of this country. IF social conservatives in all parties were to finally say, enough is enough, I will no longer help to prop up this fraudulent system, and banded together, and stood for principle instead of polls, then we MIGHT conceivably take back the country from the Family Compact and Chateau Clique, aka the Liberal and Progressive Conservative Parties

YEs. Lord would have been someone both sidescould live with. Stronach will cause another Schism. if she wins, Jacko should get Olivia to start planning the new look for Stornoway. Goldie, I never called her "evil" I used the colloquialism "evil twin" And as for Day.... If only he were running.

If you like BIG business, vote for Paul Martin, or his evil fraternal twin in the cocktail dress. It happens that most jobs come from small and medium size business. Paul Martin & Belinda Stronach.... The Bobbsey Twins of Bay Street, to borrow Ed Broadbent'as battle cry from 1984. The only way to tell them apart is gender and approximately 30 years. What's good for Bay Street is good for Bay Street. Not for Canadians in general. What's good for Canadians is a business environment that is conducive small entrepreneurs and medium size businesses, and a social environment that fosters community and family.

So what you're telling us is to stay on the plantation and be good little slaves..... Play nice, and maybe we'll toss you a bone..... ------------- Why in hell should we continue to allow social liberals to facilitate the slaughter of the unborn? How many more concessions to we have to make to gays based solely on what they do with each other in the bedroom? How much longer must we allow them to rub our faces in it? If we just decriminalize pot, so we're told, it'll cut down on crime..... so you want us to concede that too.... Next they'll be saying that its time to decriminalize ecstasy... Frankly, it makes no difference whether the Liberals are in power or the conservatives under a socially liberal platform. It's like being offered a choice between arsenic or cyanide. And social conservtaives who think they can make peace with and work with social liberals just don't get it. One side alone will be asked to make all the concessions....all the time. If there was a grouyp that would stand for principle, instead of following the whim of every damned poll and pundit, then people might actually take notice, and believe for a change that there'a a point to this system and that there is a group that actually WILL do things differently.