Paul Martin Named Man of the Year

[Mr.Canada]

There was funding that needed to be restored. To health, to infrastructure, and to the military. But they didn't try to massively cut taxes at the same time. Even a monkey would know that's a bad idea.

Nice to know you support the Liberals being in power at all and any costs no matter what they do or steal. Or how many babies they murder or how many pregnant women lose their babies at the hands of violent offenders who go unpunished. Since the unborn children have no rights. Having the assailant going free and facing no charges.

Smallc, by supporting abortion and being against unborn children having rights, you are for the opposite. There is no other choices. Everyone who is against abortion reform is supporting the status quo of the fetus having no rights therefore making it legal to kick a pregnant woman in the stomach causing her to miscarry, killing the baby. Facing only charges for ther kick but not for the unborn babies death.

This is the point I am making Charles. A. I'm not intentionally being argumentative as the subject matter is that way on its own.

Edited January 3, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[Smallc]

Consider yourself reported. I think you've gone off the deep end or something.

[Mr.Canada]

Consider yourself reported. I think you've gone off the deep end or something.

Smallc, haha I wrote to prove a point and you know it. C'mon man.

Edited January 3, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[punked]

Smallc, by supporting abortion and being against unborn children having rights, you are for the opposite. There is no other choices. Everyone who is against abotion reform is supporting the status quo of the fetus having no rights therefore making it legal to kick a pregnant woman in the stomach causing her to miscarry, killing the baby. Facing only charges for ther kick but not for the unborn babies death.

Is this wrong?

That is the Mosaic law you YOURSELF said our country should live by. Get over it.

[Mr.Canada]

That is the Mosaic law you YOURSELF said our country should live by. Get over it.

I want to understand how you Pro Choicers can support the assault of a pregnant woman resulting in miscarriage and the assailant not being charged with the unborn babies death.

Explain the support of that position to me please.

[punked]

I want to understand how you Pro Choicers can support the assault of a pregnant woman resulting in miscarriage and the assailant not being charged with the unborn babies death.

Explain the support of that position to me please.

I want you to explain how you hate gay marriage on the bases of the old testament. But when it says that one should not be punished for casing a miscarriage you don't fallow that.

[madmax]

Year after year he played games to hide the huge surplus,

Whereas Harper called an election to hide a deficit. Has no surplus to speak of, continued with the same abusive policies of Paul Martin that you claim are not "liberal".

Sounds like a good finance minister for the CPC.

They have broke the bank. They aren't hiding surpluses, they can't figure out how they blew all the money with nothing to show for it.

Paul Martin is not my "Man of the Year". That is Toronto Star Bias.

But this current government is fiscally incompetent.

[Mr.Canada]

Finally some truth.

[Boydfish]

I think that Martin was at best, a mediocre PM. He did follow after an even more mediocre PM in Chretien, but there is little to say that is very positive about either.

He was an economy driven PM, but that's hardly surprising, all things considered. He also had to suffer the indignity of being subordinate to Chretien, whose sole claim to office was that he was simply more politically connected than Martin. Chretien had proven to be a loyal thug during the Trudeau years and cashed in on that heavily, both in actual favours and in terms of knowledge of how to work the system.

Before I draw this comparison, let me make this very clear: There is simply no correlation in terms of degree of evil or actions undertaken between Chretien and the name I'm going to mention. In terms of rise to power, Chretien's career parallels that of Stalin. Just as Lenin used Stalin as an important enforcer in his cabinet, Trudeau used Chretien in a similar fashion. I'd suspect that both Lenin and Trudeau would have been reluctant to name their enforcers to the top position and Trudeau's lukewarm / pro forma support of Chretien spoke volumes.

For Martin, who could actually get a real job in the private sector, being second fiddle to Chretien was not only humiliating, it ended up hurting his political career badly. He would have been wiser to do a Mulroney, get out of politics and simply let Chretien flounder around while he waited for him to fall. I think Martin was afraid of becoming another John Turner with that course of action. Unfortunately for him, he ended up being the Liberal Party's answer to Joe Clark instead.

Martin's greatest strength was his economic management skills. Unlike Chretien or Trudeau before him, he actually understood the operation of economic principles and was able to apply them appropriately. The problem is that much of the economy is like the weather, in that you can adapt to the environment, but can do little to control it. As well, politics involves things that are beyond economic control.

Overall grade as a PM, B. A good, solid, workman B.

[madmax]

Before I draw this comparison, let me make this very clear: There is simply no correlation in terms of degree of evil or actions undertaken between Chretien and the name I'm going to mention. In terms of rise to power, Chretien's career parallels that of Stalin.

Well, this argument just died on the operating table.

[Argus]

There was funding that needed to be restored. To health, to infrastructure, and to the military. But they didn't try to

do it until their poll numbers were threatened because they didn't give a damn.

Fixed it for you.

[Argus]

Whereas Harper called an election to hide a deficit

Pure silliness. He called and election because he figured the time was ripe to win a majority.

They have broke the bank. They aren't hiding surpluses, they can't figure out how they blew all the money with nothing to show for it.

They didn't "blow" it the way all your crazed lefties keep saying. They gave it back to the people.

Well, not all the people, just taxpayers like me. Is that why you're upset at them? There was nothing in it for you?

[Shady]

"Martin was disliked even more by the left than by the right. They thought his approach to deficits was savage and inhumane. Now we know that because of his discipline in the 1990s we are about to go into a recession from a position of strength."

One could say the same of Mike Harris. His approach to deficits was thought to be "savage and inhumane", but because of his discipline in the 1990's, Ontario is in a position of strength. Although, Ontario would be in a much stronger position if the current Premier had at least a bit of taxing and spending control. But alas, he's a liberal, and that's what they do best. Paul Martin was definitely a closet conservative.