err

What's this? You drag up 2 guys that got voted or kicked out of their parties and then quote them as if what they said still stands? You must still have a ton of their quotes and didn't get to use them all while they were still around. Well it's funny that most of the CPC crowd here raves about what a "genius" Preston Manning is, and how Mike Harris was such a good guy. It shows that the CPC crownd agrees with much of the philosopy of these guys, and also with a diametrically opposing view presented by Harper... So who all is lying... It would appear that Harper presenting an image that the Canadian public wants to hear (to get elected) that is not the real position of his party, nor of its supporters.... If you would like to know what Harper's position on this is, go to the CPC website, it's all there in black and white. I know I know, you would rather mischaracterize them instead. You can tell lies in blackand white, in colour, or audibly. The biggest problem with Harper is that nobody trusts him.... He's stated convictions such as those on the abortion issue that he's modified, and re-modified until they're out of the news.... But nobody trusts him... Harper's running around the country acting like a LIBERAL, promising money to everyone.... Completely abandoning fiscal Conservatism... to get elected... but would he change back into a fiscal Conservative if he got in... or a Social Conseravative....

Is English a second language to you? I never said Picasso was or was not a genius. Nor did the original poster. The subject was on mental stability, not genius. Perhaps Picasso was a genius, though I never liked his work, but as to his mental stability and strength, well, history speaks for itself. You said that people like Picasso were mental weaklings: So according to CPC logic, is it possible to be a genius and a "mental weakling" at the same time ????

*Sigh* If only I was a liberal elitist, then I too could enjoy private healthcare. Just curious... Don't the CPC party really agree with Mike Harris and Preston Manning.... who've gone public that "good Conservatives would cancel the Canada Health Act" and get rid of our medicare system ???? Does Harper only tout the "universal health care" postion when he's disguised in granny's dress. (ie. a pre-election lie) .... and not his true Big Bad Wolf character... I'm wondering about the hypocracy in the CPC's stated position on healthcare ???

No hidden agenda... No he's learned from the Liberals, to lie and say whatever it takes to get elected..... Do you remember all the steps in the abortion issue last time.... They were going to ban abortions.... (negative public reaction, so they changed it to: They weren't going to ban abortions, but wouldn't stop a private members' bill.. (nudge nudge, wink wink) (still, negative public reaction, so they again changed it to:) They weren't going to ban abortions... period (at least until elected)... He's not the Big Bad Wolf... look at him... He's wearing Granny's dress... (And for you homophobe Harper fans, I'm not suggesting that Harper is a homosexual, but rather, making a subtle reference to "Little Red Riding Hood", in case it was just a bit too subtle for you.... )

Government is already sticking their noses into to much of our business...Stay out of my decisions for my children! Another black hole has been born if we elect the Liberals..let's throw money at medicare and daycare! :angry: Except to make sure that our kids don't have to put up with any queers or blacks or lesbiens or pay for abortions for those wefare sluts who get pregnant...

And the big $25/week will replace the earnings... or supplement the husband's income sufficiently to allow the wife to stay home.... The only people this will really help is those who don't need it that much... get real... For most people who need the assistance, this is a joke.....

Who opposes legalizing Marijuana and why (Only minor edits) Political Issues - Pot There are many types of people who oppose legalizing Marijuana for a variety of reasons. Many of these groups have some very strange reasons and selfish interests. Many are just ignorant of the facts. Here's some of the opposition: Religion - Anything fun is sin and of the Devil. Churches might lose members as people figure out that God can't be that stupid. Moralizers - The morally superior who enjoy looking down their noses at the less fortunate and get a sadistic thrill in putting people in jail. People who do no Drugs - These people who don't drink, don't smoke, in some cases don't even drink coffee. They just don't understand why anyone would want to smoke anything or do any drug. From their perspective the world would be better off if no one did anything. The Alcohol Lobby - Legalizing Pot would seriously cut into the sales of Beer. Pot would become the recreational drug of choice because it is safer than Beer. The Tobacco Lobby - Pot has the ability in some people to help them break the addiction of nicotine. Pot smoking could actually reduce the number of tobacco addicts. Law Enforcement - There are a lot of people who make a living fighting Pot who would have to go get a real job if Pot were legalized. Police departments get a lot of funding to fight Marijuana and those funds could be returned to the taxpayer if Pot were made legal. Cops would have to chase robbers, rapists, and murderers. Pot Dealers - If Pot were legalized then people making money off of selling Pot illegally would be out of business. Pot prices would drop to $10 a bale. Crime relating to illegal Pot money would vanish. Wood Industry - Hemp would become the primary source of fiber for paper products as well as a new source for building materials. We wouldn't have to cut down every big tree in the world. Trial Lawyers - Normal people caught with a joint spend billions each year on lawyers to get them off of criminal charges after getting caught with a joint. Lawyers get rich off of the Marijuana laws. If Marijuana were legal this money could be spent sending your kids to college. Republicans/CPC - Pot helps you see reality the way it really is. It's harder to con a Pot smoker on political issues. Once you get stoned it's harder to want to hate Liberals, Queers, Blacks, Pregnant Teens, Draft Dodgers, President Clinton, Feminists, Lesbians, Pot Smokers, and other people the Republicans want you to hate. When you're stoned it's harder to like Newt Gingrich, John Ashcroft, the KKK, the Christian Coalition, Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan, Reverend Sun Myung Moon, People who beat Gay's to Death, People who blow up Abortion Clinics, and the morally superior in general. Political Cowards - Politicians like to pose with police as somebody who is "against drugs" promising to lock up all the pot smokers and throw away the key. These people need an artificial issue to be against so they don't have to face real issues like how to protect the public from crooked lawyers and crooked judges. Political cowards cross all party lines when it comes to pot and includes President Clinton.

Here goes the CPC crowd again... If you're against them, you must be for Child Pornography.... Maybe you should look outside your close circle of friends .... You forgot to tell him how it will turn him into a sex-crazed child-porn addict .... You might have a point... Picasso, W.B Yeats, Samuel Taylor Colerage, George Washington (dope smoker), John A. McDonald.... If you consider these to be mental weaklings, you may have a point...

Obviously, she suspects you're not going to vote CPC... So please go out on January 3rd and cancel her vote !!!!

Actually, it was originally going to be called, get this: Operation Iraqi Liberation Unfortunately, someone at the Whitehouse caught it on time.... A little too close to the truth....

I would suggest that a lot of people's minds are "f*cked up" already, and that maybe a toke or two would help them out... A good dose of introversion never hurt anyone... You'll often see people getting drunk and becoming aggressive... often downright abusive to their spouses, families, and anyone else who comes near them. However, it is extremely rare for any violent or aggressive tendencies to come from someone who has smoked a little weed. People drive drunk, think they're invincible, and cause tragic accidents. With weed, you'll probably find that the user doesn't like driving, and if he/she does, it is usually very cautiously (pot has a tenency to make its user a bit paranoid). Where have you been... you can make delicious, nutricious "snapping cake" or cookies, brownies, and a wide variety of other foods with pot and/or its derivatives. I'm sure that you can get a good book at Chapters on the topic...

Most mothers would love to stay home with their children. Unfortuantely, the majority of mothers cannot afford to do so, and have to got to work.... Those who get to stay at home are either very fortunate to be able to do so, or are stuck with no recourse, often on social assistance. So most of them dont "get nothing"... they get to stay with their child, while other mothers have to suffer a day at the grindstone.... As for your suggestion that people would put their kids in daycare because they dont "get nothing".... are you on drugs.... And $25/week is going to fix this ???? It would appear that creating daycare spaces would be a more appropriate solution.... Are these CPC people who you would would stay home because the extra $25/week would make it truly worthwhile and affordable??? The issue at stake here, err, is essentially Leftist and so you should understand it well. The government is proposing, in effect, to tax people without children and transfer that money to people with children. We are debating how that transfer should occur. IOW, how best to get the money to the families with children - should it be a direct grant or should it be provided as a service or some combination of the two? I would think that the most cost-effective method that actually produces the intended result would be the best way. Providing a cheque that is insufficient to pay for a single day out of five will only help people who can afford to pay for the other four days. Thus, the CPC solution does little to accomplish the intended end, and should therefore be struck from serious consideration (at least by intelligent people).

In the last Ontario provincial election, everybody and their dog (just about) voted Liberal to be sure that the Progressive Conservatives would be ousted. Many NDP supporters did the same. There were about 5 ridings that were within 100 votes of an NDP success in the riding.... This strategic got us an overwhelming Liberal majority and nearly lost the NDP its funding due to very low seat count ..... where we could really have used better representation in the house... The moral of the story is "do not strategic vote against the Conservatives ".... Vote Liberal if that is your inclination... and if your inclination is NDP, all the better... give them your vote.... The more NDP seats the better.... Look at what Jack Layton got for Canadian citizens this year .... Could you imagine if he had enough seats to properly control the Liberal minority....

The government program under discussion is "child care" I thought... not "general tax refunds", etc... We don't elect governments to give us our money back as their top priority... we elect them to provide us with services that as individuals, we cannot provide adequately. The governement can provide a much better health care system than either you or I could with the amount of money that we put into health care out of our own paycheques.... That is a given... So would we be better off paying $100 less per month in deductions and have absolutely no public health care.... With that $100 per month, could you keep your family healthier and safer, and promise a longer life than with our health care system.... I think not.... We can extend this logic to a state-run child-care system that will provide many people in need with child-care assistance. The CPC plan provides nobody with child-care assistance.... not even enough for one day per week in daycare.... So the CPC's plan is a plan where nobody really wins.... whereas with a state-run system many hundreds of thousands would get real assistance... enough to allow them to take a full-time job.... Just calling a spade a spade.... If I have described hatred that I have seen (eminating from CPC policy direction), don't blame me for stating candidly what I have witnessed.....

Well, it seems to take you quite a while to catch on to even the simplest concepts.... Maybe if you showed these posts to your mom, she could help to explain them to you..... If you want plastic surgery to make your boobs bigger, or maybe a bigger pecker so the guys don't laugh at you, well those aren't necessarily medically necessary surgeries, and you can pay for them yourself.If you have cancer and require chemotherapy, and want to "jump the line" because you know that you are more important that all other Canadians, should we allow you, because you are wealthy, to displace the people who were in the line on front of you.... I would say no. Most people would say no.... And if you really wanted to "jump the line" and go to a private clinic, then you should pay the whole shot out of your own pocket. The waiting lines for medical procedures are as long as they are because there aren't enough doctors, equipment, etc.... The obvious solution is to aquire an adequate supply of what is needed to provide timely, high quality service. But since our government has different priorities, such as buying votes with the money that should purchase medical equipment and doctors, it isn't happening. However, if we were to take money from our public system and give it to the private system, plus a few extra dollars to make sure that the private service makes their profit, there will be even less money in our public coffers to purchase the equipment and doctors necessary to meet our requirements.... yes... PUBLIC services, publicly delivered, and publicly paid for.... I would like to see the poorest people in Canada have access to quality PUBLIC care.... rather than giving our public money to private corporations for private profit.... reducing the amount of money for the public system to pay for health care.....

What would you call that ... "two-tier" healthcare? Isn't that funny how, ALL OF A SUDDEN, Jack Layton is a proponent of two-tier healthcare. A two-tier health care system would have some services augmented by the person wanting the "faster care" or "better care". Currently, and pre-dating medicare in this country, we have had private health care clinics, radiology labs, etc... This should not come as a shock to any of you CPC types out there. Private "for profit" health care centres are not supposed to be paid for under the Canada Health Act.... And Jack Layton is trying to ensure that public funds go only to public health care.... not private health care, and not two-tier health care... only public health care. He's not going to try to directly shut down any private service and that seems to be the big conroversial statement .... he just won't give them any public money... If they can survive on their own, good for them... and if they can't... oh well...

The CPC would never try to dictate what's best for Canadians, unless it about telling Canadian women they cant have abortions, or that homosexuals can't marry each other, or that it is ok to hate homosexuals.....

I don't see how your argument that if "parents know best" that this somehow leads to "the CPC's plan being the best.... ". No logic was presented to support your line of thinking... there is no data, no poll, no logic at all in what you've presented... I think that you'll find that a lot of people will prefer non-profit, government run facilities whose prime purpose is not extracting money from taxpayer's pockets (whether directly, or through taxes).,,,,Just as MOST Canadians prefer our government run medicaire over a private system like they have in the USA. And then there's the "purchasing power" of billions of dollars verses lots of installments of $25.... which, incidentally will help someone who can already afford daycare, but isn't enought to help most people put their kids into a daycare... so maybe they can buy diapers with it, or put it towards their Ontario Healthcare premium.... Because it won't help most people afford daycare.... A government run day care can be run much less expensively than can a private one, given the same level of service, as the private centre will demand a considerable profit. Profit that comes from either charging more money for the same service, or by providing less money's worth of service for the same invoiced amount....

The public system pays for public health care.... The private system is privately funded... and that is how it should stay. The public system takes anyone, but does not take money from those being served. The private system doesn't take anyone who doesn't pay money. So, if you dont want to pay money out of your pocket, go to the public system. If you don't mind paying out of your pocket, then go to the private system..... It's pretty simple... like you... you should understand it.... It is not my kind of ideas that condemn people to wait too long for the public system. It's people like Paul Martin who have continually pulled money from our health care system for deficit and corp tax returns that have caused reduction in service. The problems aren't fiscal.... they're fiscal policy.... Noone is telling anyone they cant dip into their pocket to pay for private health care... However, you can't dip into my pocket to pay for private health care for yourself when I've already paid towards the public health care system....

I'm sorry if I unjustifiedly tarred you with the CPC brush, because you are an avid supporter of the CPC and its policies. One could understand why I might suspect that Harper (and his policies) are homophobe... Just because he voted against including hate crimes against homosexuals in our country's hate crime legislation, and he cant stop thinking about same sex marriage, and, and, and... Then we have the redneck posters on this forum who can't wait to use derrogatory (anti-gay) terms to describe Sven... I'm sure you can understand where one might get the impression that the CPC and its supporters are homophobe...

Talk about calling the kettle black .... wasn't it interesting how Jack, out of the blue, turned on a dime and said that private clinics are okey-dokey? Jack never said private clinics are OK... He said that they have been around for a long time, and that he accepts that. He has no problem with private clincs being around, just with PUBLIC funds going to them. Basically, the private, for-profit services are allowed to exist, as long as they do it on PRIVATE funds.... no public funding for them.... And that's always been the NDP position.... Nothing has changed, other than being quoted out of context....

Right, Ernie Eves had nothing to do with the Conservatives losing. Oddly enough your ignorance continues to spill over into this post (shocking), since I'm an adult that doesn't believe in sitting back and collecting government handouts. Nor do I believe in the government arbitrarily deciding the value of goods and services. Just keep them blinders on Cybercoma.....

Thats not true, it is not becoming more popular with foreign muslims it's actually estamated that they make up only 10 % of the insurgents. Number of total insurgents are est at between 10,000 and 30,000. Compare those numbers to ones that are jioning the Iraq military, police,etc and you'll find that more Iraqi's are jioning the US coalitlition side than the insurgents side. What message does that send. That they need jobs ???? Their old jobsite was blown up by a cruise missile ???? I think it would be the former... that most people, Muslim or Christian or Jewish, don't want to fight.... It seems to me that you are looking at Iraq... and Iraq only.... I'm looking at a bigger picture.... people who want to kill "westerners" in England, Spain, the USA, and even Canada.... The invasion of Iraq will have served better than any recruiting campaign that Osama Bin Laden could ever have mounted... You don't get it ...while the liberals were telling you and the rest of Canadians that Canada would have nothing to do with this operation, they ordered the navy our navy into the gulf to assist US naval forces involved in the Invasion of Iraq. They were not sitting in some port awaiting for things to change they were in the gulf assisting US naval forces. So Cretien never keep his word. He lied to all of us. Did Canada have troops invading Iraq ??? I don't think so.... Again it's not about the US it's about the people in Iraq and rebuilding thier country. Why Canadians soldiers because this is what we do...it is what our military is good at. Would oil make any difference, would it justify our actions, would it justify our inactions ...it's not about oil but people. The war was about OIL... and you'd have to be blind not to realize that. The "war" isn't over yet, and Canadian boys shouldn't be cleaning the toilet that the USA has made... It's the USA's mess... the got their access to Iraqi oil, now they can do the cleanup...

Anything has to be better than the existing.... So I'll entertain the notion that the Liberal plan is to build a childcare system. To use a CPC argument, the pitiful $25/week handout will probably buy beer for welfare mothers, because it won't even pay for one day at a real day-care centre.... Should we discount the opinions of those "welfare bums" who just want to buy beer with the handout ???? Because maybe they'd like your suggestion August the most... Or maybe we should only take the opinions of real serious Canadians who vote CPC (for CorPorate Canada).... Or maybe we should listen to people who want a regulated approved day-care centre for their children.... Your suggestion that the Liberal plan is made "without regard to the opinions of parents" does not in any way qualify your argument.... which parents did you mean ???? Where on earth, other than a CPC convention, would you get your opinion from.... I'm all ears....

EXACTLY !!!!! For those parents who need daycare because they both have to work to make ends meet, the CPC will give nearly 20% of what is needed. So this way, NOBODY GETS GOOD CHILDCARE unless they could afford the other 80%. And then, there's the issue of the Big-Box Daycare centre, where they're sure to track down your kid when you go to pick them up.... These fit just fine with both the Liberals and CPCs. The NDP is the only party rallying to keep Walmart-Style-Daycare centres out, Of the two, the Liberal plan sounds more like a real plan. However, enter party #3, the NDP. I think this is where we should look for a child-care plan designed to help Canadians, rather than just "saying something to get elected".... Martin's been talking for how many years ???