Will Brian Mulroney kill Stephen Harper's political career like he

[DrGreenthumb]

This thread sure shows the divisions between the cradle to grave leftists and the individualistic right. I'm sure no one is in any doubt as to where I sit, but just in case: Margrace, what planet do you hail from? "We don't want bullies, we want people in government who care about us." Errrr, no, but it sounds like what "we" (meaning "you") want is a kindly shepherd. The rest of us want an honest politician who does his best to withdraw the tentacles of the state from around our wallets. So far that's what Harper is doing.

Is this the same "individualistic right" that thinks it has the right to decide for us who we may marry, and what medicines we may consume?

AS far as I can tell Harper and his fascist ilk are the most authoritarian government Canada has ever had. I quit voting Conservative because of him. Blows my mind that I had to turn to the NDP to protect my civil liberties. Harper may remove a tentacle or two from our wallets but only so he can use them to strangle the last breath of freedom from us. Sorry but my freedom to choose my own path in life is much much more important to me than money.

[Shakeyhands]

Steve has been used repeatedly here to refer to Mr. Harper, so why not Steph for Mr. Dion? The moderators have seen no need to step in and stop either. Quid pro quo.

When you make an assertion of fact it should be supportable. You didn't make it sound like it was just your experience when you made the original statement. Try coming from the hinterland and talking politics with a Torontonian. I've run into lots of people who take a party's leaders origin into consideration when they vote. You must run with a very enlightened crowd. Alas, not all Canadians are that enlightened.

I said from the beginning that I could assure you. Perhaps you require some help:

as·sure (-shr)

tr.v. as·sured, as·sur·ing, as·sures

1. To inform positively, as to remove doubt: assured us that the train would be on time.

2. To cause to feel sure: assured her of his devotion.

3. To give confidence to; reassure.

4. To make certain; ensure: "Nothing in history assures the success of our civilization" Herbert J. Muller.

5. To make safe or secure.

6. Chiefly British To insure, as against loss.

Pretty sure I don't need to post a link or citation to 'assure', in my opinion what I am saying is correct, I assure you.

By asking why you felt the need to swear and use ALL CAPS? I posed an honest question, you aren't being fair if you interpreted it as a personal attack.

Swearing??? All caps??? You're definitely losing it my friend.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/

[jbg]

Is this the same "individualistic right" that thinks it has the right to decide for us who we may marry, and what medicines we may consume?

AS far as I can tell Harper and his fascist ilk are the most authoritarian government Canada has ever had. I quit voting Conservative because of him. Blows my mind that I had to turn to the NDP to protect my civil liberties. Harper may remove a tentacle or two from our wallets but only so he can use them to strangle the last breath of freedom from us. Sorry but my freedom to choose my own path in life is much much more important to me than money.

Prove it!!!

Can you name any civil liberties that the CPC have restricted?

[DrGreenthumb]

Prove it!!!

Can you name any civil liberties that the CPC have restricted?

Fortuneately for Canadians the fascists only have a minority government. They have tried to dictate who can marry,tried to remove a woman's right to choose , and are attempting to bring in mandatory minimum sentences, for drug "crimes".

Any government that tries to tell us what we can eat, what medicines we can use, and who we can love, is WAY overstepping their bounds. ALL the opposition parties were finally ready to at least decriminalize pot and now we have the Fascist Harper ramping up the War on Drugs, which is really a war on people who use medicines unprofitable to the pharma companies.

Everything about the War on Plants is an attack on our privacy and civil liberties. The cons want to steal our freedom and our property because we use a plant that they don't like. We don't need religious right morals forced down our throats. It is none of anybodies f*ckin business what I consume, especially the government's. Drug use/abuse is not a crime even when it is a hard drug like alcohol. When someone has a substance abuse problem it is sad, but does not make them a criminal. The fascist cons can not see the difference between a vice(sin?) and a crime( the victimization of a third party).

Even selling drugs is no crime, it is a consensual act between 2 willing participants and no business of the Government.

Prying into the private business of Canadians is what will kill Fascist Harper's political career, he can't blame Mulroney(whom I voted for) for that, it will be his own doing. The days of the "progressive" conservative party are long gone, all that is left are the authoritarian control freaks from the reform party, and their bible belt followers.

[jbg]

Fortuneately for Canadians the fascists only have a minority government. They have tried to dictate who can marry,tried to remove a woman's right to choose , and are attempting to bring in mandatory minimum sentences, for drug "crimes".

**************

Prying into the private business of Canadians is what will kill Fascist Harper's political career, he can't blame Mulroney(whom I voted for) for that, it will be his own doing. The days of the "progressive" conservative party are long gone, all that is left are the authoritarian control freaks from the reform party, and their bible belt followers.

One of the great things about freedom of speech and the press is that people can be persuaded by good, powerful arguments. I must admire the extremely solid reasoning in this post. I will admit, your case is so compelling that I have changed my mind on the issue.

[Michael Bluth]

Fortuneately for Canadians the fascists only have a minority government. They have tried to dictate who can marry,tried to remove a woman's right to choose , and are attempting to bring in mandatory minimum sentences, for drug "crimes".

Have the Conservatives done something on the abortion file that went unannounced in the media?

So I take it there are no crimes associated with drugs in your world?

[WestViking]

Fortuneately for Canadians the fascists only have a minority government. They have tried to dictate who can marry,tried to remove a woman's right to choose , and are attempting to bring in mandatory minimum sentences, for drug "crimes".

Any government that tries to tell us what we can eat, what medicines we can use, and who we can love, is WAY overstepping their bounds. ALL the opposition parties were finally ready to at least decriminalize pot and now we have the Fascist Harper ramping up the War on Drugs, which is really a war on people who use medicines unprofitable to the pharma companies.

Everything about the War on Plants is an attack on our privacy and civil liberties. The cons want to steal our freedom and our property because we use a plant that they don't like. We don't need religious right morals forced down our throats. It is none of anybodies f*ckin business what I consume, especially the government's. Drug use/abuse is not a crime even when it is a hard drug like alcohol. When someone has a substance abuse problem it is sad, but does not make them a criminal. The fascist cons can not see the difference between a vice(sin?) and a crime( the victimization of a third party).

Even selling drugs is no crime, it is a consensual act between 2 willing participants and no business of the Government.

Prying into the private business of Canadians is what will kill Fascist Harper's political career, he can't blame Mulroney(whom I voted for) for that, it will be his own doing. The days of the "progressive" conservative party are long gone, all that is left are the authoritarian control freaks from the reform party, and their bible belt followers.

Yeah, legalizing marijuana will solve a lot of problems.

Predators will no longer be trying to sell drugs to school students. Urban gangs will stop shooting up the neighbourhood during turf wars.

Addicts will stop committing crimes to get money to feed their habit.

Leftists are already in full cry claiming that criminal addicts are 'entitled' to receive treatment rather than a jail term. I have one comment: "Not on my dime". Individuals are responsible for their actions and behaviour. If you commit the crime you do the time.

We have hardworking people who need a break and help to improve their education and skills. Committing a crime is not a free ticket to jump the lineup for a better place in society.

Explain to us how pandering to potheads will improve our society, productivity and general well-being.

[jbg]

We have hardworking people who need a break and help to improve their education and skills. Committing a crime is not a free ticket to jump the lineup for a better place in society. Explain to us how pandering to potheads will improve our society, productivity and general well-being.

It will improve Canada's cultural diversity.

[Wild Bill]

Yeah, legalizing marijuana will solve a lot of problems.

Predators will no longer be trying to sell drugs to school students. Urban gangs will stop shooting up the neighbourhood during turf wars.

Addicts will stop committing crimes to get money to feed their habit.

Leftists are already in full cry claiming that criminal addicts are 'entitled' to receive treatment rather than a jail term. I have one comment: "Not on my dime". Individuals are responsible for their actions and behaviour. If you commit the crime you do the time.

We have hardworking people who need a break and help to improve their education and skills. Committing a crime is not a free ticket to jump the lineup for a better place in society.

Explain to us how pandering to potheads will improve our society, productivity and general well-being.

Well, I'm not a druggie so it really doesn't affect me personally but I must admit I find something illogical in your premise.

I wasn't aware that potheads were the problem. Mostly they just seem to keep junk and fast food outlets in business. Crackheads are more the real issue.

I'm reminded of a scene from years ago when I went along with my brother's lodge on a fishering trip. Of course there were evening poker games where in conversation we would solve all the problems of the world. The talk turned to drug legalization and one fellow (a cop, if I recall correctly) got all revved up about how legalization would mean the pushers would be in every schoolyard!

I let the talk go round for a while and eventually the cop asked my opinion. I think that because I had been quiet he thought I might be on his side in the argument. Sadly for him I guess I disappointed him. I commented that it seemed to me the pushers were in the school yards already! They were there because they could make a lot of money! If there was no money to be made if drugs were legal why on earth would they continue to push the stuff? Religious conviction?

All the evils of drugs seem to revolve around the profit margin fostering collateral crime from users needing money. I'm libertarian enough to ask "Why?".

It seems many folks believe we have a duty to keep our neighbour from going to hell his own way. I've never felt this need. I support education and TRUE punishment for crimes committed while "under the influence". I don't buy in to the "inability to form intent" defense. You got yourself drunk, or stoned, or whatever.

Also, for most illegal substances it seems to be only a small portion of the population that becomes addicted. This type of personality seems to always find SOMETHING! Take away their cocaine and they'll become alcoholics.

Meanwhile, I'm getting kinda tired of being told I can't do something because SOMEONE ELSE has a problem! Witness the movement to block casinos and gambling. I'm also not a gambler, BTW.

I used to work at an electrical distributor and all day long I would be selling the same kit of parts for lighting that was used for grow ops. Even the cops admit they find only a few percent of all the operations in the city.

Meanwhile, I'm expected to smile in approval as I pay my taxes for what is essentially just a facade to buy votes from self-appointed "do-gooders". We learned nothing from Prohibition, apparently.

There's even a good argument to be made that, like booze runners such as Al Capone, drug lords donate money to various well placed politicians to keep drugs illegal in order to protect their billion dollar income.

It would seem that Harper's crew is not much different from the old Liberals. They seemed to believe that the Gun Registry Act would actually make a difference with ILLEGAL guns and Harper's bunch think they can make a difference with the amount of illegal drug traffic with a finger in the dike.

I'm not sure if they're trying to fool us or fool themselves but it just doesn't make sense to me!

[Fortunata]

It would seem that Harper's crew is not much different from the old Liberals. They seemed to believe that the Gun Registry Act would actually make a difference with ILLEGAL guns and Harper's bunch think they can make a difference with the amount of illegal drug traffic with a finger in the dike.

Governments have to be seen doing something. (The policy doesn't have to be effective just seen.) To the great unwashed, it doesn't seem to matter whether it is a money pit and useless; they just see .... hey government X is hard on guns, government y is hard on drugs. Too many people don't stop to think and see it's all window dressing and without getting to the root of a problem, the problem will perpetuate. Governments getting to the root would take money, time, upset the status quo and any and all "root" fixing would look like a social programme that would not benefit the middle and upper classes (whether it's true or not) more than the already disenfranchised so they would be against it except maybe the extreme NDP types. Never mind that long term it might be the answer. We want immediate fixes yesterday not something that might work 10 years down the road.

All governments promise and then bring on the superficiality and we wonder why we have the problems that we do.

[Wild Bill]

Governments have to be seen doing something. (The policy doesn't have to be effective just seen.) To the great unwashed, it doesn't seem to matter whether it is a money pit and useless; they just see .... hey government X is hard on guns, government y is hard on drugs. Too many people don't stop to think and see it's all window dressing and without getting to the root of a problem, the problem will perpetuate. Governments getting to the root would take money, time, upset the status quo and any and all "root" fixing would look like a social programme that would not benefit the middle and upper classes (whether it's true or not) more than the already disenfranchised so they would be against it except maybe the extreme NDP types. Never mind that long term it might be the answer. We want immediate fixes yesterday not something that might work 10 years down the road.

All governments promise and then bring on the superficiality and we wonder why we have the problems that we do.

I see. You're quite right!

Like that old joke about Liberal solutions?

"It doesn't have to work, as long as we can say we've got one!"

[Oleg Bach]

It will improve Canada's cultural diversity.

Improve or futher diversify? Or impove the diversity meaning make what is not so good better? Eventually the diversity that divides will as I have said dilute all cultures and that seems to be the agenda aimed at the common dullard. So be it I suppose, just don't attempt to diversify me and mine....back to will Mr. Mulroney kill Harpers career? Probably not because of the fact that these two so-called conservative men are not going to be convicted and found guilty through association in the fact that both are "conservatives" _ Harper is the new breed who has joined a new type of so-called conservatism - the Nova-conservatism..that some refere to as neo-conism.

There is a huge difference between these conservatives....one is more traditional and Harper is still being groomed and is in training...who is doing the grooming are not the old Mulroney gang. So no matter what takes place with Mr. Mulroney and the investigative officals..Brian will keep his mouth shut..and take the fall if neccesary for who ever requests it. Harper is free and clear of the old geezers that seem to still be waging private feuds..and I reinterate - the betrayal of Conrad Black show that someone is playing hard ball and calling in the markers.. As I said - Harper is now an untouchable and a seperate entity. He is well protected - not a bad rise to power for a hockey playing kid from Leaside.