Layton Already Backing Down From an Election

What's the matter Jack? Down in the polls? Burned all your resources in the by-elections? I suspect so.

In the meantime, Dion is all about action, Jackson.

Maxime Bernier is Doing an Excellent Job

Just as Deepak Obhrai.

Here he is on Politics with Don Newman.

Conservatives...Doin' it Old Style

We need a change of government to replace old style politics with a new vision. We need to replace a culture of entitlement and corruption with a culture of accountability. We need to replace benefits for a privileged few with government for all.
Everyday Canadians – the hardworking people who pay their taxes and play by the rules – want and deserve a new government that will put the people’s interest ahead of self-interest.

Replace old school? Privileged few? People's interest ahead of self-interest?

An unelected cabinet minister. A cabinet minister vying for a Federal Court appointment. A finance minister making policy to protect his retirement. Privileged few in deed.

Harper and Bernier to Embarrass Canada...AGAIN!

Here's what Harper said in his Stand On the Backs of Canadians 2006 Campaign Manual


advance our interests on the world stage

And here is more of what this brutal foreign affairs twosome plan to do next. Abandon a bid for a spot on the UN Security Council. Why? To save themselves from international embarrassment.

Do these jokers remember anything they said during their last campaign?

More Conservative STAND UP Comedy

Here are a couple more entry discrepancies from The Conservative Election Manual for 2006. The manual's title? Stand Up...There's the comedy!

On POLLING the Conservatives said this under the Accountability section

I guess technically they aren't hypocritical then if they've screwed taxpayers on election rebates claimed for polling by transfers from 50 of their candidates.

On ACCESS TO INFORMATION the Conservatives said this under the Accountability section

I guess technically the Conservatives getting rid of CAIRS doesn't fall under this category either. But really, I think it kinda does, don't you.

Danny Williams' ABC Campaign to Continue

Today on Question Period Danny Williams was discussing Equalization. Craig Oliver, bolder than ever, ended the segment by asking Danny Boy if he was going to continue his ABC - Anyone But Conservative - campaign. And, further, will Danny Boy be campaigning openly against the Harper Conservatives.

Danny's answer: You bet. He made that pledge and he's sticking to it (my words).

Stephane Dion...The Next Prime Minister

From La Presse
My Vision of Quebec Within Canada
October 24, 2007

I want to become Prime Minister of Canada to help our country become richer, fairer and greener.

My intent is to strengthen our economy by eradicating our productivity and innovation deficit, investing in research and development and infrastructures, and making our tax system more competitive.

I will launch an unprecedented offensive to combat poverty by helping one million children escape its bonds, taking steps to ensure that our aging society provides better care for our most disadvantaged seniors, eliminating the barriers that prevent too many women, Aboriginal people and newcomers from unleashing their full potential.

I will do all I can to help a greener Canada tackle the most important task of our era, which is to adjust our lifestyle to what our natural environment is able to support. We must meet the challenges of sustainable development and become champions of the fight against climate change.

These are ambitious objectives, which we can meet thanks to a united Liberal Party of Canada, and with significant support from every part of the country, including - and I dare say especially - Quebec. Almost all the great and influential achievements in the history of Canada happened because many Quebecers invested their energy, talents and culture within the Liberal Party of Canada.

For our country to become truly richer, fairer and greener, there has to be a meeting of minds and hearts between Quebecers and the leadership I represent. I will not miss my "rendez-vous" with Quebecers.

As a child of the quiet revolution, with the deep roots I have in Quebec, I have always been deeply attached to our culture and self-made institutions. I defended Canadian unity but refused to diminish provincial autonomy. It is perfectly possible and coherent to believe that Canada must remain decentralized to function well. That is why, like so many other Quebecers, I supported the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords. I was a passionate advocate for provincial powers In Cabinet, as many of my Cabinet colleagues have attested.

One of my major accomplishments as Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs was the Clarity Act. This is meant to prevent a separatist government from attempting to secede by making believe that this is what Quebecers want even though there is no such will. The Act is in the best interests of all Quebecers, including sincere and convinced separatists. An action as serious as secession must not be undertaken in a state of confusion. When Ms. Marois says that she will only hold a referendum after Quebecers are convinced they are ready for independence, she respects the spirit of the Clarity Act. Of course, she will never admit that.

At a time when there is heated debate in Quebec about the place of religion in public institutions, it is worth remembering that in 1997, I guided the constitutional reforms that made it possible to secularize Quebec school boards. Lise Bissonnette, who was editor in chief of Le Devoir at the time, wrote that the only thing that made these reforms possible was my determination. Here again I cared deeply about Quebec's interests, and my view of the situation was the same as that of the vast majority of Quebecers.

I believe, as many do, that federal spending power plays a useful role in social progress but that it needs to be framed so as to respect the provinces and promote partnership with them. In 1999, I was instrumental in establishing the rule according to which the federal government can transfer funds to provincial governments in their areas of sole jurisdiction: this can only be done based on jointly decided objectives to which a majority of the provinces have agreed, and on the understanding that a province that has already met these objectives can spend the federal transfer in a related field. This right to withdraw with full compensation is applicable to all federal transfers to provincial governments in their areas of jurisdiction. It goes much farther than the feeble commitment made by the Conservatives in their recent Speech from the Throne, which would apply only to cost-shared programs, which are becoming obsolete.

Indeed, no federal politician has ever placed tighter restrictions on the federal spending power than I have. And I managed to do so without reducing its usefulness as a force for social progress. For example, the governments of our federation had agreed in 2005 to create a federal child care transfer. Because Quebec already had a more highly developed network of child care centres than elsewhere in Canada, the Quebec government decided to use the funds in areas related to early childhood. Unfortunately, Mr. Harper cancelled the agreement, depriving Quebec and the other provinces of hundreds of millions of dollars that would otherwise have gone to our children and our families.

I have always advocated strong Equalization, a solidarity principle enshrined in the Constitution that gives the less wealthy provinces, including Quebec, the opportunity to provide their people with services comparable to those in the wealthier provinces. All Mr. Harper has done is to implement a reform that was initiated by the Martin government; but in implementing it, he broke a promise he had made to a number of provinces. I have always kept my word. I will always say the same thing to every province. I respect them too much to do otherwise.

I have always been a passionate advocate for the cause of French - in Quebec, elsewhere in Canada, and around the world. A long time ago, I wrote that Bill 101 was a great Canadian statute, a statement for which I am still being criticized in certain circles, but in which I still believe. I drafted a plan to promote official languages, which is still called the Dion Plan in Francophone communities outside Quebec. As Prime Minister, I promise to come up with another Dion plan.

For many years, I have maintained that we Quebecers are a nation, by which I mean a community that is proud of its own identity. Mr. Harper's office consulted me before a resolution was put forward in the House of Commons last November to recognize Quebec as a nation. I voted in favour of the resolution, but my vote was accompanied by a proviso warning people about some aspects of Mr. Harper's political manoeuvring.

The English version of his resolution said "the Québécois form a nation". This suggests an ethnic definition of a nation, that does not include all inhabitants of Quebec, whereas the French wording does not mean the same. It was clearly a attempt to allow Conservative and Bloc politicians to interpret the resolution and comment on it in their own different ways, which of course they did. This kind of political manoeuvring is not in the interest of Canadians and it deserves our disapproval. My Quebec nation includes all inhabitants of Quebec.

We Quebecers, together with other Canadians, have succeeded in building a federation that is the envy of many countries experiencing ethnic, religious, linguistic or other forms of conflict. In 1999, I established the Forum of Federations to enable federations around the world to understand and help one another. I am proud of the contribution of Quebecers like Gil Rémillard, who contributed significantly to making the Forum of Federations a success.

Those who know me well know that I have held these positions for a long time. I am firmly attached to Quebec's identity and to Canada's unity. I believe that there is a Quebec nation, but also think that politicians need to stop playing with words to mislead citizens about what this means. And I believe that all governments in our federation need to work together, while showing full respect for each other's respective areas of jurisdiction.

These are unequivocal positions that closely match the clear interests of the vast majority of Canadians, including our interests as Quebecers. For Canada to truly become richer, fairer and greener, I as a proud Quebecer know just how important it is for Quebecers to be included. We will succeed in this, for ourselves, our children and future generations. I will do everything in my power to achieve it.

Conservative Sponsorship Scandal

It's there just waiting to happen. Dumb a@@es.

The Conservatives, fresh off their "Ad Scandal" have announced their version of the the sponsorship program. Aren't they just genius?

I think their intent was to interrupt the by-election efforts in Quebec. Can you say backfire? Canada was just waiting for another "sponsorship program". Poor Josee Verner.

Afghanistan Ambassador "Warns" Canada

Samad warns that if the international community ends its assistance to Afghanistan too quickly, the country will once again become a failed nation ruled by war lords, drug dealers and international terrorists.

Yep that's what he said. Aren't there war lords, drug dealers and international terrorists there now? Still? After six years of us being there? How long is "too quickly"? 10 years? 20? 50?

Justice Minister Takes it on the Chin

Rob Nicholson took the brunt of another reporter's opinion today in The Review. It appears Nicholson's attack on Liberal Senators has been met head-on by the truth of the matter.

That's probably why Deceivin" Stephen doesn't like his MPs speaking.

Conservatives not so Accountable

Interesting thing about those little loopholes.

Deceivin' Stephen Does it Again

In an attempt to appear environmentally friendly Stephen Harper announced a rebate for people purchasing fuel efficient cars...up to $2000 worth.

Much to our surprise (NOT), nobody has received a single rebate cheque to date - five months later!

LLPOF!!!

Nicholson on Gun Laws: It's the Liberals Fault

Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious.

Ms. Jennings has the perfect response.

Rob, I have a newsflash for you. Sentencing "after the fact" does not stem the incredible ongoing use of hand guns currently in effect in our major cities. Getting to the root of the problem is the answer.

The key would be to assist inner-city programs that target high risk children in families that are subject to such violence. Another key would be to fund task forces that target gangs, etc. such as Dalton McGuinty just announced for the Golden Horseshoe. McGuinty's plan to meet with the Governors of the border states is another key to stopping the flow of illegal weapons coming in from our neighbour to the south. After the fact legislation is not the answer to ending gun related crimes.

Why isn't the Minister of Justice for the country starting such initiatives? Especially one that represents four international bridges as part of his constituency?

Blaming gun crimes and deaths of 11 year olds on Liberal Senators is a stretch at best Mr. Nicholson.

The O'Connor Scandal???

Coming soon to a front page near you.

You know, I just have to laugh at this. The Conservatives, who don't mind playing the "ADSCAM" card at the drop of a hat, should look into the crystal ball and see what's in store for them.

Spending $22 Billion on "new" military equipment without debate in the House of Commons is one thing. Spending it because it was on "Gordon O'Connors list" is quite another.

Gordon O'Connor. The man who spent 8 years as a military lobbyist. Yes that O'Connor. The same O'Connor that thinks our mission is successful in Afghanistan inspite of little setbacks such as this occurance.

Do ya think it's a conflict that a military lobbyist made up a "things to buy list"? Ya think any of these companies that we're ordering this new equipment from employed O'Connor as a lobbyist?

Looking forward to your responses.

Bert Brown in the Senate....Or, Can You Eat Your Own Words?

Frontier Centre for Public Policy once asked our new Senator Bert Brown a question.


FC: Many Canadians generally don’t understand what the Senate is and they are sympathetic to the idea of simply just getting rid of it. Bert, why do we need a Senate?

Bert Brown: We need it because we have no counter-balance at all to a Prime Minister with a majority in Parliament, who effectively controls not just the House of Commons by party discipline and the threat of expulsion. He also now controls the second chamber through the appointment procedure, which is the longest running system of legalized bribery in the modern world. It’s better than having a 6/49 winning ticket because you don’t even have to buy one, you’re just given it by Prime Minister whose party has been whispering in your ear for ten years or more. You helped us in the last election, we’re putting you on the short list for Senate appointment if you’ll just help us with the next election. Probably there’re ten thousand people on the short list but they’re all working for a party because they all believe that they might end up in the Senate. Very few do, but an awful lot of loyalty is built into that whole equation.

I guess, 1. the Prime Minister has been whispering in his ear for 10 or more years 2. He helped win the last Federal election 3. HE WON THE LOTTERY!!!

I bet old Bert don't wanna do away with the Senate now. BTW does anyone know how old Bert is?

Here's the link where I found the quote.