Originally Posted By Dabob2 <"Douglas and Dabob" or at least there own thread...dang hijackers> Sorry, eh?
Originally Posted By basas Well for anyone keeping track...the second set of debates has ended and there is just under two weeks until election time. As of this point, the Liberals have plummeted in support while the Conservatives have grown hugely in all areas (even Quebec). If the election were today, polls indicate a Conservative minority, or even majority government. One poll had the Conservatives at 12 points ahead (The Libs were 8 points ahead before Christmas so shows how much things have changed). I’m glad Canadians have finally seen what the Liberals really are. Crooks. Let’s hope support continues to rise and we can elect a new Conservative government on Jan 23 (and change back the definition of marriage in the process!)
Originally Posted By Beaumandy As predicted, when you give in to gay marriage, pretty much everything else is soon to follow even though the libs scream thats only a " slippery slope " argument. In Canada, they are taking the next step. Marrying your dog is next. -- Justice Dept Study Urges Canada To Legalize Polygamy No sooner than Canada legalized gender-neutral marriage than a new study commissioned by their Justice Department has concluded that the government should repeal the criminalization of polygamy. In a report that the Canadian Press received confidentially, the Queen's University study not only recommends decriminalization but a regulatory system defining spousal support and inheritance rights based on marriage order and other considerations: A new study for the federal Justice Department says Canada should get rid of its law banning polygamy, and change other legislation to help women and children living in such multiple-spouse relationships. “Criminalization does not address the harms associated with valid foreign polygamous marriages and plural unions, in particular the harms to women,†says the report, obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act. “The report therefore recommends that this provision be repealed.†... Canadian laws should be changed to better accommodate the problems of women in polygamous marriages, providing them clearer spousal support and inheritance rights. <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com" target="_blank">http://www.theglobeandmail.com</a>
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF >>Marrying your dog is next.<< Now why would you want to marry my dog?
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <In Canada, they are taking the next step. Marrying your dog is next.> A Neo-Cons biggest nightmare. People marrying their dogs. oh, brother...
Originally Posted By basas One week until election day, the latest poll shows this: Conservatives: 40 per cent (+8) Liberals: 27 per cent (-5) NDP: 16 per cent (-1) Bloc Quebecois: 11 per cent (-2) Greens: 6 per cent (unchanged) <a href="http://www.ctv.ca//servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060112/elxn_poll_060115/20060116?s_name=election2006&no_ads=" target="_blank">http://www.ctv.ca//servlet/Art icleNews/story/CTVNews/20060112/elxn_poll_060115/20060116?s_name=election2006&no_ads=</a> Basically, the Conservatives continue to go up, the Liberals continue to go down, and the NDP stays about the same.
Originally Posted By Lake Nona >>Inside Montreal, the Liberals lead the Tories 23-19, which makes for a statistical tie. The Bloc has 46 per cent support. Outside Montreal, the Conservatives have emerged as the clear federalist alternative. The Bloc has 41 per cent support, while the Tories sit at 32 per cent and the Liberals at only 12 per cent<< As a regular visitor to Montreal, this is a shock. I remember I was up there 2 weeks before the 1995 October Provenical vote and the Oui's had a slight edge in the polls. It was somthing else driving back to Vermont with all the Oui and Non signs all along the roadside.
Originally Posted By Shooba I wish Quebeccers would vote for a party other than the Bloc. I don't like seeing a separatist party with so much representation in the federal gov't. Man, the Liberals have run a terrible or non-existant campaign. No interesting ideas or promises. It just reeks of desperation. The only thing they have going for them is a reputation of stable and moderate governing. I think they've generally done a good job, but they are not giving anybody good enough reason to vote for them. Anyone I've heard who's voting Liberal is solely because they don't want the Conservatives in power. Of course, the two parties platforms aren't even that dramatically different. They're both offering tax cuts at about the same rate. The Conservatives are offering up a decent right-of-center plan. I prefer the Liberals policies somewhat, but not enough to get worked up over this election. Hopefully we'll see another minority government, with some continued compromise.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<I’m glad Canadians have finally seen what the Liberals really are. Crooks. Let’s hope support continues to rise and we can elect a new Conservative government on Jan 23 (and change back the definition of marriage in the process!)>> It is encouraging to learn that corruption ends at party lines, at least in Canada. Maybe the "Liberals" from Canada can come down here and clean up our problems in D.C. We seem to have the opposite problem. --> Thomas Delay, (R) Texas, Indicted --> I. Lewis (Scooter) Lobby (R) - Chief of Staff for V.P Cheney, Indicted --> Bill Frist, (R) TN, Under investigation for fraud --> Bob Ney (R) Ohio, Suspected of accepting bribes, forced to step down from chair of House Administrative Committee. --> Jim West, (R) - Mayor of Spokane WA - involved in gay sex scandal. --> (insert your "neer-do-well" here. Please include party affiliation.) Boy, howdy! We'll sure have a great country again once we get control of the queers and learn them some respect for "the sanctity of marriage"! Bin-laden? Well, I really don't spend too much time thinking about him. ...And yes, I realize than not all Republicans are evil and that not all Dems have sparkling clean hands. This is just meant to be a "hypocricy check". Pendulum swings left.... Pendulum swings right...Pendulum swings left.... Pendulum swings right... Pendulum swings right... Pendulum swings right... Clock tips over.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<--> Thomas Delay, (R) Texas, Indicted --> I. Lewis (Scooter) Lobby (R) - Chief of Staff for V.P Cheney, Indicted --> Bill Frist, (R) TN, Under investigation for fraud --> Bob Ney (R) Ohio, Suspected of accepting bribes, forced to step down from chair of House Administrative Committee. --> Jim West, (R) - Mayor of Spokane WA - involved in gay sex scandal. --> (insert your "neer-do-well" here. Please include party affiliation.)>> Has anyone been convicted of anything on this list?
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<Has anyone been convicted of anything on this list?>> Ah, so it's convictions that you want, eh? A scandal by any other name just isn't as sweet. How about... --> Republican uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff - Convicted --> Michael Scanlon, former Tom Delay Press Secretary - Convicted --> Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R) CA, Convicted --> George W. Bush, (R) President, Convicted (of drunk driving) Again, the GOP shares their contempt for the law with collegues across the aisle. But this thread was about Canada and how the "liberals" are so corrupt. My tounge-in-cheek proposal was to have them come down here and show the US how corruption is supposed to be done, but I think we may be equally matched.
Originally Posted By mickeymeg <<Anyone I've heard who's voting Liberal is solely because they don't want the Conservatives in power>> A good enough reason in my opinion.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Ah, so it's convictions that you want, eh?> So the answer to Beaumandy's question is "no". And if you're looking for politicians convicted of corruption, I can easily create a list of Democrats that would dwarf bboisvert's list.
Originally Posted By bboisvert I'm sure that you can, but you're missing the point. It's not about who can create the longest list of corrupt politicians. That's easy and it affects all parties. I selected Republicans because that's who is in the news right now. Oddly enough, it's also the party that is in power right now with control of 2 of the 3 co-equal branches of government. The point is that corruption doesn't just affect liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. With power comes temptation and corruption, but with sufficient checks and balances it can be identified and dealt with quickly and appropriately. Let's agree to call a spade a spade. Politicians have been corrupt since time began. Nothing will change that. In Canada, it's the outgoing leftist party that is scandal ridden. In America, it's the current right-wingers and neo-cons. Canada solved their corruption problem for now by throwing the bad ones out of office. America is next. People are waking up. A recent Zogby poll showed that over 50% would support impeaching the President if he in fact broke the law syping on Americans without a warrant. This too shall pass.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I selected Republicans because that's who is in the news right now.> William Jefferson, Democrat Representative from Louisiana, is in the news, but you didn't list him. <The point is that corruption doesn't just affect liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans.> While I agree with this, that didn't seem to be your point. <In America, it's the current right-wingers and neo-cons.> I disagree. Both sides of the aisle have their share of corruption. <Canada solved their corruption problem for now by throwing the bad ones out of office. America is next.> The way to solve corruption problems is to limit government. Putting the party of big-government back in power won't do it.
Originally Posted By bboisvert A list of the "The 13 most corrupt members in Congress" from <a href="http://www.beyonddelay.org/index.php" target="_blank">http://www.beyonddelay.org/ind ex.php</a> (I don't know, or care, what that site's political leanings are, I'm just using that listing as quick example without predjudice.) * Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) * Rep. Randy Cunningham (R-CA) * Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) * Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) * Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) * Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) * Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA) * Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) * Rep. Charles Taylor (R-NC) * Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) * Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) * Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) * Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) <<The way to solve corruption problems is to limit government. Putting the party of big-government back in power won't do it.>> Corruption comes with power and greed. So called "smaller government" isn't the fix. Even in a dictatorship, there can be corruption. Corrupt politicians aren't a new thing and they aren't going away in my lifetime or yours. The best we can do is keep the system transparent and open. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. The courageous and patrotic are the ones that keep the light focused. Eventually, justice will occur.
Originally Posted By thethe1 <<Anyone I've heard who's voting Liberal is solely because they don't want the Conservatives in power>> >>A good enough reason in my opinion. << Here we have a Liberal, they vote lib but have no reason why, they just do.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Putting the party of big-government back in power won't do it.<< News Flash: The party of big government is in charge right now, and they call themselves Republicans. The Republican party I belong to (smaller government, protecting individual rights, fiscal restraint) is MIA. How I miss them.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Corruption comes with power and greed. So called "smaller government" isn't the fix.> Sure it is. Smaller government means less power for politicians, which means less greed and corruption. The answer is not taking the money out of politics, it's taking the politics out of money. <The best we can do is keep the system transparent and open.> Transparency and openness are good, but they aren't the best we can do.
