Jump to content

Harper getting good ink for SSM timing -


shoop

Recommended Posts

Whether or not you like Harper, stories like this are incredibly good news for the Conservatives.

Random CTV Link

by Wednesday the Conservative leader had shifted to his plan to appoint a special prosecutor to handle sponsorship-like wrongdoing, while Martin was in Montreal launching former astronaut Marc Garneau's campaign. While the Liberals have often tagged the Conservatives with having a hidden social agenda, analyst Faron Ellis says those arguments have lost some of their punch since the Tory policy convention earlier this year. The party was seen as moving to the middle ground on critical issues such as abortion and official bilingualism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

by Wednesday the Conservative leader had shifted to his plan to ....The party was seen as moving to the middle ground on critical issues such as abortion and official bilingualism.

It's a good idea for them not to talk about the unpopular things that they want to do before an election. But once they're in.... It's a good strategy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am guessing you are trying to be sarcastic with this one I don't really get it? How does this story play in to the "hidden agenda" line?
It's a good idea for them not to talk about the unpopular things that they want to do before an election.  But once they're in.... It's a good strategy...

This just in: the NDP has a hidden agenda. They will turn Canada into a communist state and the Americans will come in and invade us.

Jack Layton has a scary hidden agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you like Harper, stories like this are incredibly good news for the Conservatives.

Random CTV Link

by Wednesday the Conservative leader had shifted to his plan to appoint a special prosecutor to handle sponsorship-like wrongdoing, while Martin was in Montreal launching former astronaut Marc Garneau's campaign. While the Liberals have often tagged the Conservatives with having a hidden social agenda, analyst Faron Ellis says those arguments have lost some of their punch since the Tory policy convention earlier this year. The party was seen as moving to the middle ground on critical issues such as abortion and official bilingualism.

I for one am tired of the same sex issue and good for Harper to get it out of the way first and foremost. I do not want to pay for an election based on it as there are far more important issues confronting this country than SS and I hope that Harper delves into issues that need attention and have been left on the back burner for much too long. Enough is enough and let's move on with the issue of medicare, government accountability, change in how government works; elected senate if we must have one; education; and so forth. And I do not want an election spent discussing abortion either. If women want an abortion by all means have one but pay for it [i see that as an elective surgery - form of birth control] unless it is a life threatening situation then it should be part of our publicly paid system.

Enough is enough!! I have had it up to my ying-yang the way this country is being run now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you like Harper, stories like this are incredibly good news for the Conservatives.

Random CTV Link

by Wednesday the Conservative leader had shifted to his plan to appoint a special prosecutor to handle sponsorship-like wrongdoing, while Martin was in Montreal launching former astronaut Marc Garneau's campaign. While the Liberals have often tagged the Conservatives with having a hidden social agenda, analyst Faron Ellis says those arguments have lost some of their punch since the Tory policy convention earlier this year. The party was seen as moving to the middle ground on critical issues such as abortion and official bilingualism.

I for one am tired of the same sex issue and good for Harper to get it out of the way first and foremost. I do not want to pay for an election based on it as there are far more important issues confronting this country than SS and I hope that Harper delves into issues that need attention and have been left on the back burner for much too long. Enough is enough and let's move on with the issue of medicare, government accountability, change in how government works; elected senate if we must have one; education; and so forth. And I do not want an election spent discussing abortion either. If women want an abortion by all means have one but pay for it [i see that as an elective surgery - form of birth control] unless it is a life threatening situation then it should be part of our publicly paid system.

Enough is enough!! I have had it up to my ying-yang the way this country is being run now.

For me, marriage is a religious institution. I am a Catholic but not intensely religious...I have my beliefs and they are personal. But I did support C-38 because I do not believe the state should determine something on religious grounds. Civil unions? For sure. Marriage if OK with religious institution? For sure. Have I and will I attend gay marriages of my gay friends? Definitely. But overall, that is how I feel about the law. I also don't believe it should or can be turned back w/o using the nonwithstanding clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe what you will, but I don't think there is any solid evidence supporting the fact that the government will have to invoke notwithstanding if they change the law. Primarily because the new law would have to be found unconstitutional in the first place.

The law that replaces C-38 needs to provide all the rights of marriage with a different name, which will appease the legitimate concerns of the religious groups that are opposed to SSM. Then it will be very difficult for the Supremes to overturn it.

I also don't believe it should or can be turned back w/o using the nonwithstanding clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe what you will, but I don't think there is any solid evidence supporting the fact that the government will have to invoke notwithstanding if they change the law. Primarily because the new law would have to be found unconstitutional in the first place.

The law that replaces C-38 needs to provide all the rights of marriage with a different name, which will appease the legitimate concerns of the religious groups that are opposed to SSM. Then it will be very difficult for the Supremes to overturn it.

I also don't believe it should or can be turned back w/o using the nonwithstanding clause.

My neighbour is a retired constitution lawyer so I would have to ask him (he rarely comes out though).

I would have to do more research on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe what you will, but I don't think there is any solid evidence supporting the fact that the government will have to invoke notwithstanding if they change the law. Primarily because the new law would have to be found unconstitutional in the first place.
It is highly unlikely that the supreme court would find the constitutional - this is the opinion of almost every constitutional expert who is not a card carrying member of the CPC.

In any case, Harper is being duplicitous on this point. If he really believes that SSM should be defined as a seperate concept then he should just say that he would use the notwithstanding clause if necessary and suffer the consequences. If he is not willing to use the notwithstanding clause then he should admit that SSM is not really a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe what you will, but I don't think there is any solid evidence supporting the fact that the government will have to invoke notwithstanding if they change the law. Primarily because the new law would have to be found unconstitutional in the first place.
It is highly unlikely that the supreme court would find the constitutional - this is the opinion of almost every constitutional expert who is not a card carrying member of the CPC.

In any case, Harper is being duplicitous on this point. If he really believes that SSM should be defined as a seperate concept then he should just say that he would use the notwithstanding clause if necessary and suffer the consequences. If he is not willing to use the notwithstanding clause then he should admit that SSM is not really a big deal.

There would be too much pressure on Harper if he is elected and he continues to campaign on SSM. He will have to do something to prove to his voters that he meant business when he campaigned on that issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every one? Seems to me the CBC uses the same guy everytime they say 'constitutional experts'. :lol:

It is highly unlikely that the supreme court would find the constitutional - this is the opinion of almost every constitutional expert who is not a card carrying member of the CPC.

In any case, Harper is being duplicitous on this point. If he really believes that SSM should be defined as a seperate concept then he should just say that he would use the notwithstanding clause if necessary and suffer the consequences. If he is not willing to use the notwithstanding clause then he should admit that SSM is not really a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you like Harper, stories like this are incredibly good news for the Conservatives.

Random CTV Link

I went to the link and what the analysts are saying is that it's good that Harper blurted out now that he'd revisit the same sex issue rather than waited until closer to the election to blurt out this nonsense. That's incredibly good news? The election is in January. Most Canadians can remember what was said two months ago, some even longer.

In any event, according to the link Harper's plan was not to bring up the issue at all but wait until someone else did. Not exactly a brilliant strategy unless he'd really lucked out and no one had brought it up. Having a reporter determine how his campaign unfolds does not bode well for planning skills as a future Prime Minister. It's kind of consistent with how he dealt with Grewal, i.e., did absolutely nothing while Grewal twisted in the wind except hoped that Grewal would resign one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why use the term 'blurt out'? Do you feel like a big man using such infantile terms?

Uhhh, it was painfully obvious it would be a story very, very early in the campaign. It is already old news.

Hmmm, planning skills. Like the 1001 extremely important priorities of Paul Martin? :lol:

I went to the link and what the analysts are saying is that it's good that Harper blurted out now that he'd revisit the same sex issue rather than waited until closer to the election to blurt out this nonsense.  That's incredibly good news? 

In any event, according to the link Harper's plan was not to bring up the issue at all but wait until someone else did. Not exactly a brilliant strategy unless he'd really lucked out and no one had brought it up. Having a reporter determine how his campaign unfolds does not bode well for planning skills as a future Prime Minister.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have listened to Harper speak and he did not blurt anything out. He spoke in a calm, collected and informative manner - in the same manner that Jack Layton made his first commentary. Martin is on the defensive and now in attack mode. Anyhew, should the issue crop up again, I hope Harper will ignore and move on to more pressing issues as there is nothing more to discuss regarding ssm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Anyhew, should the issue crop up again, I hope Harper will ignore and move on to more pressing issues as there is nothing more to discuss regarding ssm.

I agree. Harper should say nothing about his socially conservative agenda and his plans to strip rights away from lesbians until AFTER the election.

Wrong - the issue has been debated to death and we now have to move on to the needs of this country and not the select few who keep on and on about their issue that it become a turnoff. Get over it and get on to things important to ALL canadians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, actually Harper is looking really together.  Martin, on the other hand, looks like he's losing, even though he's not yet.

Martin always looks like he's losing. Don't read anything into that.

Actually Martin has developed huge jowls and wrinkles and looks desperate. Poor guy I wonder how long it will take before he let's out the boogeyman out of the closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Anyhew, should the issue crop up again, I hope Harper will ignore and move on to more pressing issues as there is nothing more to discuss regarding ssm.

I agree. Harper should say nothing about his socially conservative agenda and his plans to strip rights away from lesbians until AFTER the election.

Wrong - the issue has been debated to death and we now have to move on to the needs of this country and not the select few who keep on and on about their issue that it become a turnoff. Get over it and get on to things important to ALL canadians.

He's going to do whaaaattt, strip rights from lesbians..... (wonder if that includes gay men LOL ) maybe Normanchateau has a thing for lesbians hmmmmmm

Man, this guys out to lunch, don't feed the trolls, specially ones who flood the boards with the same crappola. Isn't it spamming or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Anyhew, should the issue crop up again, I hope Harper will ignore and move on to more pressing issues as there is nothing more to discuss regarding ssm.

I agree. Harper should say nothing about his socially conservative agenda and his plans to strip rights away from lesbians until AFTER the election.

Wrong - the issue has been debated to death and we now have to move on to the needs of this country and not the select few who keep on and on about their issue that it become a turnoff. Get over it and get on to things important to ALL canadians.

He's going to do whaaaattt, strip rights from lesbians..... (wonder if that includes gay men LOL ) maybe Normanchateau has a thing for lesbians hmmmmmm

Man, this guys out to lunch, don't feed the trolls, specially ones who flood the boards with the same crappola. Isn't it spamming or something.

No, it's beating his own drum!! :D It only took a few of his posts to see what this person is about. Bet there is no debate but ssm brought into every thread - must be hysteria setting in or what. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,639
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    MikhailinNorthBay
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Griswold earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrakHoBarbie earned a badge
      One Year In
    • marcus earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • diwalikarwa earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Mako went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...