Boss:
As you know, there’s an election about to pop in Saskatchewan. I realize how we both feel about Dippers. But I gotta tell ya, these NDP marketing guys are onto something. Chow. (This is why you pay me the big bucks.) — G
Recognize anyone?
Memo to Stephane
November 7th, 2007 | Canadian Politics
120 comments ↓
Garth, talk to Dion about writing a blog. Imagine the publicity, especially if he promises to maintain it when he becomes Prime Minister!
I’m sure most journalists would find it interesting, which would help them understand Dion better and perhaps give them something else to write about, other than what Harper dishes out.
Someone’s in loooove!
You might want to wait on the memo that relays the success of the above, Mr Turner: a thumping is about to be laid on those NDP wunderkinds, not least because of such insults to the voters’ intelligence.
Don’t get all political on me. I just like the puppy. — Garth
Garth, that was a nice emotional , sensitive, blog you had yesterday. Had everyone in tears. What was the title? Lost?
Seems like you’re back on track today.
By A Quantum Liberal on 11.07.07 9:08 am
I agree. Stephane would have to allot the time, and I would guess his schedule is somewhat of a nightmare.
He would also be subjected to every lunatic troll out there…BUT, he would also get an insight into Canada that is almost impossible to acquire otherwise.
Harper could never stomach such openness. Caesar Disgustus requires no input from the infidels. He is a god by his own decree. (Where have we heard that before, eh?)
Someone’s in loooove!
By bert on 11.07.07 9:10 am
Scottish, eh? LMAO!
Another memo to M. Dion:
“A backbench member of Parliament would likely introduce anti-abortion legislation if the Conservatives form the next government, the party’s president said.
“When we form a government, we can be [sic] rest assured that there will be a private member’s bill on this,” Don Plett wrote in an e-mail in November to a Conservative Party member in Quebec…” Macleans blogger Kady O’Malley
AND our latest stand on capital punishment?
http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dip&tt=&pid=86248&tid=86248&eid=48&so=&ps=&sb=&tso=&tps=&tsb=
Something for M. Dion to think about in his spare time. I WANT MY CANADA BACK!
Well this is the last straw for me:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071106/death_penalty_071106/20071106?hub=Politics
I tore up my CPC membership and won’t get involved with them again until they get rid of Harper.
Great NDP election video ad:
http://www.sameoldsaskparty.com/?Videos
Garth, are you advocating an immediate counter video ad attack on the Harper government using this NDP ad but with a Liberal voice-over ???
You should grace us on your forum with what you would say on this great NDP video. Go ahead .. we are waiting.
By Harry S on 11.07.07 10:53 am
Gee
Just substitute “The CPC said” over the “Sask Party” andit sure seem to apply!
Recognize anyone?
Is that Cheka in sheeps clothing?
RE: the image
Obviously a living metaphor reflecting the ravishing of all the good things Canadian take for granted and the dimishing of the democratic system we all cherish. No doubt the fleece is from a living animal and represents the fleecing of seinors through the destruction of the IT sector. The beedy eyes are those of Flaherity looking for a new target and, no doubt, the pointy ears belong to Harper and are listening for any voice of dissent in the ranks. The teeth are for biting off the heads of those who might rise up in support of democracy and good government or oppose the Harper agenda which is represented by the hidden back end of the wolf. No feet are visible thus representing the lack of principles employed by the cons. The red tongue is just another way of flipping the bird at Dion.
By KPK on 11.07.07 10:47 am
Hey KPK, that conservatives want to reinstate the death penalty is not a surprise. The value of life is a progressive value, not a conservative one. Progressive values and politics are committed to preserving and nurturing life. Conservatives values and politics are are not.
That said, do CPC death mongers know there’s a de facto death penalty moratorium in place in the USA?
Wouldn’t want them to be out of step with moral issues.
-R
Political Genetic Engineering…deadly.
Just wait until someone messes with CRAP CELLS.
RThe teeth are for biting off the heads of those who might rise up in support of democracy and good government or oppose the Harper agenda which is represented by the hidden back end of the wolf.
By Michael on 11.07.07 12:05 pm
So is that Harper’s hidden end-genda? Groan.
Garth, upon reflection, is this your only way to influence the dunces within the Liberal party to smarten up?
Whazzup ..??!!!
You did say you sit just behind and to Dion’s right .. and you are his Special Advisor for Riding and Constituency
Outreach, a key political and fundraising role.
Well,,,
we know that this is not a portrayal of Dion, as it would then be a lamb in wolfs clothing.
Speaking of lambs,,,
As we all know, a rocket landed in our base in Afghanistan yesterday during Peter Mackay’s visit and it occurred to me that Dion has not visited Afghanistan yet.
He was criticized for not visiting there a number of months ago during a one on one CBC interview. Dion said he would go ASAP and that he thought it was a priority.
I know it is “not easy setting priorities” but, I wonder what happened to that trip.
Please liberals, don’t respond by saying that Denis Coderre went, because that trip was a disaster from the start as he did not go through proper channels to set up his visit.
Any update on how you plan to pay for your Liberal socialist agenda consisting of a new $15 billion social program, while simultaneously introducing tax breaks for rich seniors and rich married people, all while balancing the budget, Garth? No? OK, I’ll ask again tomorrow where you will come up with the magical $25 billion dollars needed to pay for your socialist agenda
Ha, ha – Milton Man seems to assume he knows all doesn’t he? Dion had been scheduled for sometime in November, but in case you haven’t notice there’s a crisis over there right now – Pakistan. What a dork.
One problem with negative ads is that they run the risk of a voter reaction along the lines of:
“Yep, that Harper sure is scary. Thanks for pointing that out to me. So now I’m going to vote NDP”
Listen to the advice Liberal pollster Michael Marzolini gave at your caucus retreat.
Talk about policy. What would the LPC actually do as the government. The negativity and nit-picking about Harper will get you nowhere.
Please liberals, don’t respond by saying that Denis Coderre went, because that trip was a disaster from the start as he did not go through proper channels to set up his visit.
By Milton man on 11.07.07 12:33 pm
Maybe because when he tried to go through proper channels, namely the Minister for Defense, they said “no!”
Nice spin though.. Milton!
KPK on 11.07.07 10:47 am,
Although the media have tried to give us the impression that Stephen Harper has moderated his positions anyone who has followed his career and writings would understand that his direction has not changed. They confuse political strategies with changes in ideological direction. The gradual changes in policy with regard to the death penalty illustrates the difference between strategy and ideology.
In discussing social conservative issues in 2003, he made it clear that he would adopt what he referred to as the “imcremental approach.” Re-establishment of the death penalty is considered to be asocial conservative issue.
By prohibiting candidates from expressing their positions on social conservative issues this ensures that the social conservative agenda is not in the face of voters but remains hidden.
Harper is merely following his incremental approach to re-establishing the death penalty. By adopting the incremental approach with regard to the death penalty, he can satisfy his social conservative supporters that, as he indicated in 2003 that: “the agenda is moving in the right direction, even if slowly.”
The perceived social conservative position is support for the death penalty, the political strategy is the incremental or gradual approach to changing national policy on the issue.
The problem is that many social conservatives, notably many Christians, are opposed to the death penalty. As well, the “hidden agenda” begins to peak out.
While I agree there’s more to the CPC than we’ve seen in terms of a far-right agenda, that CANNOT be the message for the Liberals. Simply put they got flat footed in the last election when they hammered HarperCo on hidden agendas and the like while the Cons were announcing new policy every day. Horrid campaign strategy.
I’m sure things are being kicked around policy wise by Rae, Brison and the other policy chiefs in the party and that has to be the message next time out. The Steve is Evil line didn’t work last time and it won’t again.
To C.B. Innes
I just read your comments. You are contributing to all that is wrong with debate and honest discussion. Everything you wrote is speculation, wild assumption and unsubstantiated. It is all for the purpose of fuelling rumours against a politician who you obviously oppose. You can nail Harper on income trusts because there is evidence but this capital punishment stuff is nonsense. Aren’t you getting sick of this hidden agenda line or the Bush lite line? If you are really trying to sway minds you are going to have to do better than that. Your partisan friends will stand up and cheer but the overwhelming majority want substance based on factual information.
By C. B. Innes on 11.07.07 1:59 pm
With respect, reintroducing the death penalty is hardly “incremental”. It’s sudden, radical and hardcore and definitely NOT hidden – it’s in your face.
I could never understand how social conservatives could be for “the right to life” and yet accept state sanctioned murder.
The Bible says thou shalt not kill. I assume that also covers killing by proxy thru the State.
Further memo to M. Dion: “Now we have something else with which to hit those Cons over the head!”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071107.wpollution1107/CommentStory/National/home
Apparently, the environment is at the TOP of every Canadian’s list as the file that is the MOST important and all we’ve seen from Steve and John “Big Bag of Hot Air” Baird is just that, hot air.
By Harry S on 11.07.07 10:53 am
Thanks for the video link. That is a perfect commercial for all the Sheeple.
You know what though, I think the NDP are wrong with this ad campaign. The Saskatchewan Party was a merger of Liberals and Progressive Conservatives who felt that they need to present a strong alternative to the powerful NDP. While their previous leader was a former Reform MP who was on the far right, Brad Wall seems to be a much more moderate leader, so I don’t know if this Wolf in Sheep’s clothing ad really flies with the voters there. Compare that with the Conservative Party merger. Even though I was a card carrying member of the Liberals at that time, I supported it because I thought it would moderate the right, and would present a clear alternative to the Liberals. But the reality was that the Canadian Alliance party was significantly larger than the PC party at the time of the merger, and it essentially was a hijacking. Moderate Red Tories seem like they’re thrown out of the party left, right and centre (no pun intended), which leads me to conclude the only catch-all party is the Liberal Party. In fact, I like to tell my friends, that essentially the Conservative Party was really the Alliance with a changed name, and the real merger that took place was the amount of Red Tories that joined the Liberals.
BTW Garth, as per my facebook quote: you truly are the greatest finance minister Canada’s never had.
Apparently, the environment is at the TOP of every Canadian’s list as the file that is the MOST important and all we’ve seen from Steve and John “Big Bag of Hot Air†Baird is just that, hot air.
By CAL on 11.07.07 2:39 pm
This has been my BIGGEST pet peeve with this government – it doesn’t give a damn about the environment.
Now as a former Tory(Red), I’m homeless.
Maybe the Greens will take me in…
The Liberal campaign was over the minute Zaccardelli spoke out of turn about Goodale. Before that the Liberals were even marginally ahead in the polls despite the Adscam fallout, losing six points on the word of a Mountie. Everything after that has been a relentless effort to deny the public retrospection on that single, solitary, fact.
Secret Agenda: Well, looking back at the election campaign that the CPC ran in 2006, and comparing that with what they eventually did (as a minority gov, mind ya), is proof enough that they are hiding their true ideological bend for the time being.
The point is this: If Harper is so fickle that he accepts floor-crossers the day after the election, blasts the Senate only to use it to nominate a cabinet Minister (completely unelected), claims to respect the environment without moving on ANY environment plan, challenges to bring accountability to the HOC and then muzzles MPs and candidates, talks of fair and open federalism and then offers Quebec $750mil in transfer payments all the while screwing over less influencial provinces (Sask and NFL), cuts services to women and natives, plays US-style games with the UN (Native rights/death penalty)…
Imagine what he’ll do with a majority. You think it’s far-fetched to think he’ll try to repeal the right to abortion, or gay marriage, or native treaties, etc?
All the spin in the world can’t cover this man’s obvious BS. The only people defending this man as a true consensus builder and a fair minded leader are those with a vested interested in seeing him in power.
If you don’t support abortion/women’s/native/minority rights, just say so. Don’t hide behind false sympathies just to get elected.
My, my – Bill Casey apparently has proof that Harper/Flaherty have been lying….hmmmm. Also, apparently Baird is lying about the environment figures.
The CPC sewage is starting to ooze.
McGuinty’s Throne Speech leaked:
Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, screw the farmers, Toronto, Toronto and Toronto. Toronto needs, we will give. Toronto, Toronto and more Toronto. Screw the rural folks they’re too stupid to know the difference. Toronto, Toronto, Toronto we will look after Toronto, because Toronto is Toronto. Toronto.
Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, screw the farmers, Toronto, Toronto and Toronto. Toronto needs, we will give. Toronto, Toronto and more Toronto. Screw the rural folks they’re too stupid to know the difference. Toronto, Toronto, Toronto we will look after Toronto, because Toronto is Toronto. Toronto.
Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, Toronto, screw the farmers, Toronto, Toronto and Toronto. Toronto needs, we will give. Toronto, Toronto and more Toronto. Screw the rural folks they’re too stupid to know the difference. Toronto, Toronto, Toronto we will look after Toronto, because Toronto is Toronto. Toronto.
Thank you Toronto. We promise to keep the Province of Toronto propped up for all time.
The Bible says thou shalt not kill. I assume that also covers killing by proxy thru the State.
By KPK on 11.07.07 2:38 pm
Does it? I haven’t read the book, but I have heard that it’s full of striking people dead, eye for an eye, bashing and slashing and hanging and all that jazz. Personally, I support the death penalty under the condition that the person is found guilty on hard evidence (not circumstantial)and it must be 1st degree (planned and deliberate). I know I would have loved to see Karla & Paul’s lights put out. It isn’t revenge, it’s justice. Show them the same mercy they gave to their young victims. I’d gladly flip the switch. L
The typical fear mongering of the liberals shows up whenever the conservatives come up with policy that is endorsed by the majority of Canadians. That is, the government is not going to waste resources repatriating murders from other countries.
If one wants to murder and not suffer the consequences of it, one must murder in a jurisdiction that operates as such. If one murders in a country with the death penalty, its a choice they made and must face the music. I for one do not want that individual brought back to Canada.
Does that mean Canada is going to bring back the death penalty? Thats the fear libs want to create. It won’t happen. In fact, Canada will be supporting the UN motion to abolish capital punishment.
The fear is numerous libs have been saying they will be considering raising the GST including McCallum who is the finance critic. Garth says they won’t but I think we know how much influence Garth has within the party.
The libs are the ones with the hidden agenda. Carbon tax (NEP), GST increase. Oh yeah, they have an agenda. Where Chretien failed at breaking up the country last time, Dion would succeed.
Does it? I haven’t read the book, but I have heard that it’s full of striking people dead, eye for an eye, bashing and slashing and hanging and all that jazz. Personally, I support the death penalty under the condition that the person is found guilty on hard evidence (not circumstantial)and it must be 1st degree (planned and deliberate).
By Leasa on 11.07.07 3:06 pm
Ah.. there have been many people convicted in so called cases with “hard” evidence that turned out to be innocent. David Milgaard for example. Imagine if they flipped the switch back in ‘70 knowing what we know today. Big mistake….
Does it? I haven’t read the book, but I have heard that it’s full of striking people dead, eye for an eye, bashing and slashing and hanging and all that jazz.
By Leasa on 11.07.07 3:06 pm
Actually – that’s the old testiment. Jesus (whose teachings Christians are supposed to follow) was all about love and forgiveness.
Oh, and “Show them the same mercy…” is revenge, not justice.
By This just in… on 11.07.07 3:00 pm
This just in…
Don’t forget the bigot vote.
No hidden agenda?
Perhaps…but let’s talk about “reinstatement” of the death penalty.
The CPC (apparently) understands and has stated that the death penalty is “the law of the land”. It is important to note that they never say that they support it. Indeed, on record the Public Safety minister Day, the Justice minister Nicholson, and the Defense minister aka Rice’s boy-toy MacKay all support it.
So what does the CPC do rather than what they say:
First, they no longer seek commutation for Canadian citizens on death row, at least for those in purportedly “democratic” countries.
Second, they sureptitiously commission a survey to the tune of $150K see what support the death penalty may have among the Canadian population (20%).
And third, they withdraw sponsorship for a UN resolution on abolition of the death penalty.
No hidden agenda there…at least not anymore…
How can anyone still fall for this garbage?
Austin
P.S. Leasa…out of curiosity…how do you feel that your desire for killing differs than than that of a murderer? Murderers often find ways to justify the act of killing, not unlike the justification that you placed on it.
Ken on 11.07.07 2:36 pm,
Harper’s promise to social conservatives is not speculation but based on his own writings. In June 2003, only months before he took over the new Conservative Party he published an article in the Alberta Report that set out the political strategy he would follow.
I am sure that Harper’s followers do not want to hear how he set out this agenda quite publicly at one time. In reference to social conservative issues he wrote: “…we must realize that real gains are inevitably incremental. This, im ny experience, is harder for social conservatives than for enconomic conservatives. The explicitly moral orientation of social conservatives makes it difficult for many to accept the incremental approach. Yet, in democratic politics, any other approach will certainly fail.”
It is not difficult to move from the above strategy to the policy changes with regard to the death penalty. The changes to Canadian policy represent an incremental change in support for state sanctioned executions. The withdrawal of the sponsorship of the resolution on a death penalty moratorium is consistent with that incremental policy change.
The concept behind incrementalism is that the public will gradually accept turning back the clock as long as it is done in easy stages. Once those stages are accepted then all that has to be done is to wait for some incident that will create sufficient shock and outrage to make it easy to get capital punishment back on the books.
This is how the Bush administration was successful in using the tragedy of 9/11 to override human rights, international law, and maybe even the U.S. Constitution without debate or opposition.
Apparently, the environment is at the TOP of every Canadian’s list as the file that is the MOST important …
By CAL on 11.07.07 2:39 pm
according to whom?
The only people defending this man as a true consensus builder and a fair minded leader are those with a vested interested in seeing him in power.
By Deny Trudel on 11.07.07 2:57 pm
Oh RAELLY? You’re suggesting that we not clone him then? Gosh, we wanted to claim he was our most successful experiment. Je suis désolée! Sheepish sourire.
Does it? I haven’t read the book, but I have heard that it’s full of striking people dead, eye for an eye, bashing and slashing and hanging and all that jazz.
By Leasa on 11.07.07 3:06 pm
That’s only the first book! Maybe you and any Christians out there who support the death penalty should read the second one. After all, its the second half that tells how Christianity started and what the Person we’re supposed to emulate would say about the issue. (Instead of an eye for an eye, love thine enemy comes to mind!)
Completely off topic but boy did Jack Layton give me a laugh out loud moment last night. He was talking to Don Newman about his motion re the abolition
of the senate when Don asked him what he would do if PMSH made it a confidence vote “Vote against it of course”. Here is this man who would use one of his opposition days to bring in this motion but if the government agreed and made in a confidence vote then he would back away from his own motion and vote against it. I’m not sure that I follow that logic!
Is that Kyoto, Mr.Dion’s dog, LMAO
The argument about Harper having a hidden agenda is beginning to wear pretty thin especially when the accusations are not supported by facts. So folks either put up or shut up and tray another tactic because it just isn’t resonating withe the voters.
I think those supporting Dion is flogging a dead horse. He just can’t seem to connect with the public. Unfortunately many academics like himself suffer with the same problem.
TO KPK.
Point well taken. It is equally confusing how people who oppose the death penalty support abortion??
As for the Bible – the point presented is that if someone takes another life then their life is to be taken. I believe it is Genesis 9:6. This is done to actually show the value of life and the greatest way to show the value of life is by making death the ultimate punishment for taking a life.
However, that being said I am opposed to the death penalty mostly because we are so imperfect in our justice system! I do support life means life sentences!
I do not support the current gov’t made up of mostly reformers in CPC clothing. I do, however, support the death penalty. As others have stated, only when there is no doubt about the guilt. I.E. DNA testing, etc. If someone deliberately effects a bahaviour that results in the taking of a life, they should be shown the same consideration. Gee, wonder if such an outlook applied to impaired drivers might help.
I could never understand how social conservatives could be for “the right to life†and yet accept state sanctioned murder.
By KPK on 11.07.07 2:38 pm
Like wise, the socialist who supports abortion but not the death penalty.
I can’t understand that either.
Maybe it boils down to their respective definitions of “unwanted human life,” if there is such a thing.
By KPK on 11.07.07 2:38 pm
Please quote the passage correctly according to the original meaning ‘Thous shalt not commit MURDER!’ not kill. Killing is always justified in self-defense when it becomes necessary. Otherwise you cannot support war…Can you?
as he did not go through proper channels to set up his visit.
By Milton man on 11.07.07 12:33 pm
Oh so now a member of the defense committee has to go through you (=PMO) to go to Afga but not Mackay? Sup wit dat?
But this is not to particularly defend Coderre … he has to do something about the goatee fast 
If you want to use the Bible for your authority on moral values then you have to use the whole Bible not just the parts you agree with. Otherwise YOU become the authority. If thats the case what makes your values any more valid than those that oppose.
Make no mistake, PMSH does have a hidden agenda…..remember that over used the word….”Transparentcy” then he shut down the press, shut down his ministers, shut down all his MP’s and yes shut down “Freedom of Speach” Now lets add Imcome Trust, Kelowna and the Atlantic Accord…..all this and more with a minority goverment.
Can Canadians believe this man does not have a hidden agenda…from just the above I would say NO!
Now Ladies and Gentlemen, if he is so positive and has a good message why the Attack Adds????? seems to me he could have positve adds ….then again perhaps he has nothing to be positive about… Even he says yes he means no and no he means yes….yup as a older man said “When a man has given his word and lies he has lost everthing….and that is the truth….and that he did to this senior ….and their is nothing you nor anyone can do about. So that is why he attacks M. Dion, because a Bully can not stand beside or work with a honest man.
Hey, hardworker, hows about we start with the 25Billion Harper STOLE from income trust owners!
“Any update on how you plan to pay for your Liberal socialist agenda consisting of a new $15 billion social program, while simultaneously introducing tax breaks for rich seniors and rich married people, all while balancing the budget, Garth? No? OK, I’ll ask again tomorrow where you will come up with the magical $25 billion dollars needed to pay for your socialist agenda
By Hardworking Taxpayer on 11.07.07 12:40 pm “
Gee, wonder if such an outlook applied to impaired drivers might help.
By Reg on 11.07.07 4:20 pm
How about this…If it is the first offense, then the current law can be applied, including vehicular manslaughter. They will lose their driving PRIVLEDGES for 5 to 10 years, and must support the victim’s family.
If it is more than a first offense in which there results death of another person due to the DUI’s choice to drive impaired, then they are sent to serve as a Crash Dummy until they no longer are usable?
I dunno , the ad is pretty good . Maybe just get Dion to dress up as a tiger …..
Like wise, the socialist who supports abortion but not the death penalty.
I can’t understand that either.
By James- Chatham on 11.07.07 4:21 pm
It is called a dichotomy.
To voice thoughts of abolishing the Senate speaks to the state of competence and credibility of many current politicians.
As a concrete safeguard against extremism and gross incompetence, its existence is not negotiable. To even muse on this, so greatly degrades confidence in any party leader that it leaves one little choice but to think them lost in the abyss of corrupted self indulgence.
This, in conjunction with his self serving posturing on the Afghanistan situation, serves to illustrate why the NDP , under Jack Layton can never be taken seriously. Topo Gigo Jack!
Elected Senate is fair ball, but speaking aloud of abolishment gives real support to claims of hidden agenda.
Harper is trying to dribble a hard ball, and he isn’t even on the right court.
Here is a prime example of people’s STUPIDITY and D-E-N-I-A-L of THEIR responsibility. Bozo gets BUSTED doing more than 50 kph over the limit, and then BLAMES the government claiming its just a ‘money grab’.
Watch the video Drivers stunned by new speeding law
No Sir, Sorry Bozo…YOU chose to drive without any regard for the law, for others, and NOW you will face the consequences. feeling really special NOW Bozo?
More than 1300 have been nailed so far, about 40 per day.
Please quote the passage correctly according to the original meaning ‘Thous shalt not commit MURDER!’ not kill. Killing is always justified in self-defense when it becomes necessary. Otherwise you cannot support war…Can you?
By Bill-Muskoka on 11.07.07 4:35 pm
Not saying you’re wrong Bill, but we really need a Hebrew scholar on this one, as the meaning of Hebrew is more than the words themselves but also symbolic in the way they wrote them! Any English translation is an approximation at best.
By Jonnay on 11.07.07 4:37 pm
EXACTLY … SUP WIT DAT? NO ANSWER, EH.
NEITHER PENDING NOR POST-PENDING. Typical S-4-B thinking.
Please quote the passage correctly according to the original meaning ‘Thous shalt not commit MURDER!’ not kill. Killing is always justified in self-defense when it becomes necessary. Otherwise you cannot support war…Can you?
By Bill-Muskoka on 11.07.07 4:35 pm
Agreed.
Please liberals, don’t respond by saying that Denis Coderre went, because that trip was a disaster from the start as he did not go through proper channels to set up his visit.
By Milton man on 11.07.07 12:33 pm
WOW, Milty, talking about extreme BS flow. Lets see, Coderre went through proper channels at the beginning of the summer, he was ignored or his requested denied. So he aranged to go outside channels, for which the CPC screamed blood murder about him going. Now his visit doesn’t count because the CPC refused to allow him go via the proper channels.
If you were a native American your name would be Walking Eagle.
Like wise, the socialist who supports abortion but not the death penalty.
I can’t understand that either.
Maybe it boils down to their respective definitions of “unwanted human life,†if there is such a thing.
James- Chatham on 11.07.07 4:21 pm
There is a separate aspect of the “pro choice” issue that most anti-abortion supporters refuse to understand. Most people who support “pro choice” do not support the killing of unborn babies.
On the other hand, they are not ready to judge those women who feel compelled to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy. It is more in line with the failure to condemn someone who kills someone else as a form of self defence.
As Bill says the same rationale applies to war as self-defence. You might call me left on these issues because I find it stretching creditability to try to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
on our side as as “self defence.”
Apparently, the environment is at the TOP of every Canadian’s list as the file that is the MOST important …
By CAL on 11.07.07 2:39 pm
according to whom?
By phil on 11.07.07 3:44 pm
The info was from a pollster who appeared on Don Newman’s political show the other day. I’ll try to find out his name. He talked for quite a while about the fact that the environment was important to Canadian people and Steve was just not doing anything positive on the file.
I see here that some people mix rel-ion with politics The bible was written by people just like any other book And if you walk in your parent shoes and not in your own that normal .But your the only one who can change that i did I dont believe in dead penalty i believe in abortion that a women’s right I dont live by a book i live by human rights
Van on 11.07.07 4:11 pm,
The problem may be in the definition of “hidden” agenda. Harper’s agenda is not really hidden because he has written about it and discussed it in speeches for years.
On the other hand, since becoming the leader of the new Conservative Party he has been careful to downplay that agenda. That is why he sees it necessary to introduce high levels of control over the message including over who is acceptable as a candidate.
I understand your perspective. You don’t want this agenda to become widely known because it could damage the potential for the majority that would be required for implementing it. The evidence is there and everyone should have the opportunity of judging the evidence for themselves.
Milguard – innocent, that’s not what the court said. They said wrongfully convicted. Don’t confuse the two
I just love it when someone speaks for the majority of Canadians. I guess I wasn’t home when you called to get my view, but that doesn’t really matter, because I speak for the silent majority, and I challenge you to prove otherwise, because well they’re silent, … and they’re the majority. Nevertheless, I will use the government’s own opinion poll to make my own assertions.
According to the numbers, this government is ignoring the population and not upholding Canadian values when it comes to the death penalty. Yes I know how using terms like “silent majority” and “majority of Canadians” immediately call into question the veracity of the remainder of one’s post, like that from which the above excerpt was taken, but in this instance I feel justified to use the blanket “Canadian values” statement because it’s based on the government’s own discretely-conducted poll from this past summer, results of which are:
♦ - 20% of Canadians are in favour of the death penalty (yes, that’s 80%opposed!)
♦ - 33% of Albertans are in favour of the death penalty.
♦ - 21% of Ontarians are in favour of the death penalty.
♦ - 17% of Newfoundlanders are in favour of the death penalty.
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/273531
So first we have the above poll, conducted in the clandestine manner that appears to be the norm with government.
Next, we have the Harper government’s stance last week about remaining mute on death penalty sentences given to Canadians in foreign “democracies”, while at the same time not specifying which countries at present it considers to be democracies, nor what criteria it is employing to make that assessment (so we might know when a country either falls into or out of favour). At the same time that the government is breaking with a long-standing tradition of seeking clemency for its citizens abroad, it claims that it is not in favour of the punishment here. Two-faced.
Now today we have 75 countries at the UN supposedly opposed to the death penalty, yet only 1 of those does not cast a vote to symbolically add its voice to the resolution against it: Canada.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/11/07/death-penalty.html
http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2007/november/7/editorial/
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071106/death_penalty_071106/20071106?hub=Politics
All of this begs the question, when Harper says “In light of this government’s strong initiatives on tackling violent crime, I think that would send a wrong signal to the Canadian population.” in regards to seeking clemency for Canadians facing the death penalty in foreign countries, just which Canadians is he worried about sending that wrong signal to? Certainly not the 80% opposed to such sentences. When Harper promised that he is not going to reopen the death penalty debate, can anyone believe him or trust him not to do so if he ever gained a majority (if he hasn’t noticed, the door to the debate has already been blown open by these events)? The last time this debate was brought to the House was in 1987 when Mulroney tried to revive it 11 years after it was abolished, and 25 years after the last Canadian was executed in this country. Perhaps in his role as Harper’s advisor, he’s getting a second chance, vicariously.
Maybe someone from that base of his who visit here can enlighten us. Harper is yet again making us an embarrassment on the International scene.
Apparently, the environment is at the TOP of every Canadian’s list as the file that is the MOST important …
By CAL on 11.07.07 2:39 pm
according to whom?
By phil on 11.07.07 3:44 pm
Whew! I found it! It was Jeff Walker, senior VP with Harris/Decima who appeared on last Monday’s “Politics” with Don Newman. Mr. Walker said that 70% of the people polled indicated that the environment should be a priority for this government and that it was something that was “not going away” even after a year and a half (and 2 enviro ministers!) He also said that it was above health care, another file that Steve has neglected IMHO, and child care, and…..and……and… He’d rather talk about Senate reform.
Garth:
Your memo to boss with reference to “Chow” and the picture though probably unintended is awfully close to the previous references, not from you, to Olivia Chow being a dog. Careful!!
Garth, talk to Dion about writing a blog. Imagine the publicity, especially if he promises to maintain it when he becomes Prime Minister!
I’m sure most journalists would find it interesting, which would help them understand Dion better and perhaps give them something else to write about, other than what Harper dishes out.
By A Quantum Liberal on 11.07.07 9:08 am
QL – See Red Tory’s site.
Saturday, November 03, 2007
Get Blogging, Mr. Dion!
But, read all the bloggers’ comments.
Initially I thought it sounded good, but I came to the conclusion that it was not a good idea. Maybe, YouTube might be a good option, but even then, we’ve seen how the media in the US & Cda have distorted truth with their 10 sec clips. Sad, but we’re live in a society whereby everything one does/says can be distorted to support the oppositons’s position – i.e. taken totally out of context.
Why a switch? Wouldn’t you prefer a method that would let you feel a little more connected to the whole event? Let you, in contrast, feel very alive.
Forget about the particulars of any given case for a moment and think in more general, abstract terms. The change in policy says that Canada, as a country, is opposed to capital punishment, but when one of our citizens is to be executed by a foreign country, that’s okay, which in turn flies in the face of the original premise and thus demonstrates de facto that the former is false. In other words, it’s okay, at least, when we’re not getting our own hands dirty.
Incidentally, if you’re so supportive of the punishment, it shouldn’t matter to you how the task of becoming human abattoir is carried out. Something cheap, quick and efficient like the bolt guns used against cattle should do nicely. Or maybe beheading; it can be accomplished with very little equipment, just a big knife — do a Google search for the Nick Berg video to if you want a demonstration of this technique. Granted, Berg was sentenced by fanatics, not the state, so if you want something a little more hands-off and state-sponsored, then check out the final moments of the movie “Sophie Scholl” to see if the method used there is more satisfactory.
If you’re offended by the above — and I hope you are — then ask yourself why. Is it because it’s okay for the State murder one of its own, in kind, as long as it’s sanitized and you don’t have to think about it, not have it offend your sensibilities? Or maybe you don’t want to think of yourself as a barbarian, in the same mould as the murderer himself. In the end, dead is dead, so what difference does the means to the end make.
Oops! A little mising ‘=’ scrubeed the link. Here it is. So sorry!
Watch the video Drivers stunned by new speeding law
Thanks so much Toxic John, you don’t just look like an idiot now, you really are one.
conservative environment minister clears the way for more pollution.
http://wheredthatbuggo.blogspot.com/2007/11/conservative-environment-minister.html
tore up my CPC membership and won’t get involved with them again until they get rid of Harper.
By KPK on 11.07.07 10:47 am
KPK – this was discussed earlier in the week or last week. Surprised you didn’t know this by now, but glad you are starting to see the light.
P.S. Leasa…out of curiosity…how do you feel that your desire for killing differs than than that of a murderer? Murderers often find ways to justify the act of killing, not unlike the justification that you placed on it.
By Austin So on 11.07.07 3:36 pm
Is that you Austin Powers? Gosh, I loved your movies! Anyway, I’ll tell ya what, if some bastard decides he has a right to take away the life of say, a child…their entire life…I say; what possible right do they have to sit and breath and get three squares a day? What right do they have to dream, fantasize, read books, get an education, watch t.v. while that young one lays in a cold grave while their family mourns? None. Yes, I do have a strong desire in my heart to see Karla, Paul and the others dead. Like the babies they killed, in cold blood, knowingly and wantonly. I would flip that switch. If that makes ME a bad person, so be it. Leasa
Here’s an observation on recent polls taken from today’s Winnipeg Free Press:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/subscriber/columnists/top3/story/4072271p-4673770c.html
I note that Ipsos Reid is the polling company employed by the CanWest chain. And it was CanWest that strongly predicted a Blue sweep in the 2004 election that brought Paul Martin to power on the immediate heels of the Sponsorship scandal. Seems like CanWest has forgotten this lesson … or is trying to influence rather than simply report … another reason for my $ not to support that media source.
Things may well turn from murky to black quite soon.
http://www.telegrapah.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/11/07/bcndollar107.xml
Something for M. Dion to think about in his spare time. I WANT MY CANADA BACK!
By CAL on 11.07.07 10:45 am
Yea, and Woolfie in Sheepie clothing wants to get rid of our house of second thought. Just imagine if he ever got a majority without a Senate. Think Pakistan. PMSH rec’d 36%, if that, of the vote and he’s been acting like he’s got a majority. Check out what Tom Flanagan has to say. If the Cdn people are so stupid and ignorant to not see who this theocon PM is, maybe we deserve him. And for all you con trolls who want to see him hold a majority without a Senate, don’t cry for me Argentina.
BTW, re Sarcozy’s visit to the US. He’s a much smarter politician than GWB. He’s playing GWB for political and mostly economic reasons – he’s offered reconstruction help – only – to Iraq after the war is over. Read between the lines. He knows he’d be dead in France if he ever really supported Bush’s policies.
Oops – forgot to post Red Tory’s site – its http://redtory.blogspot.com/
Boy funny how almost everyone on this blog is such a hypocrite. Sanctity of life and all…proposed by ‘progressives’. Funny how these same progressives so enthralled with the sanctity of life can support abortion, right up to the end.
I actually do support abortion, and the death sentence [in cases like Paul & Karla for example – with video proof).
Ed the Hun
I think I have never seen PMSH as ‘human’ as I saw him today when he spoke about Pakistan. He also came across the same way about his talk about the Senate.
I guess his back room guys have been listening to the media and and what the majority of Canadians think about him – he’s a negative, aggressive , unlikeable being. I still don’t trust him.
THE WOLVES ARE HUNGRY!
I see here that some people mix rel-ion with politics The bible was written by people just like any other book And if you walk in your parent shoes and not in your own that normal .But your the only one who can change that i did I dont believe in dead penalty i believe in abortion that a women’s right I dont live by a book i live by human rights
By ann d on 11.07.07 6:21 pm
WOW, that was coherent!?!?
To Harry S: check your computer, it seems to always be leaving the 1st 2 letters, AS, of your last name off.
By Dube on 11.07.07 6:33 pm
Hey Dube, we are not talking about capital punishment in Canada. Do your own poll. Go down to whatever locale you frequent and ask people if they think the government should intervene on behalf of murderers on death row.
Regarding the UN motion, Canada is voting in favour of the motion. They don’t have to co-sponsor it to be in favour of it.
The point is, it is the liberal fear tactics that now say Harper is bringing back the death penalty.
You need a little more evidence than the government voting in favour of abolishing capital punishment to convince me. That very act refutes your argument.
Now today we have 75 countries at the UN supposedly opposed to the death penalty, yet only 1 of those does not cast a vote to symbolically add its voice to the resolution against it: Canada
Dube – believe I posted something similar yesterday. How very sad that Canada is now being seen as a regressive socialist country in the eyes of the world. I have friends overseas who are astounded by Canada’s stance on foreign affairs. We’re becoming a laughing stock by democratic countries. Why are we following Dubya’s ‘death knoll’. Its beyond my comprension. The US is going down the tubes. They are recognised the world over, except by con trolls in the us and canada, as total hyprocrits, supporting undemocratic regimes when it supports thei interests, yet turning aginst theose same regimes, when it doesn’t. And their foreign policy against Cuba is totally absurd. I don’t support dictatorships, but I admire Cuba’s stance against the US and detest their arrogance that if any country does business with Cuba they will be put on a quasi terrorist list by the US.
I shall be very happy when the US loses all of its political clout. They profess to be democratic, but only supports democracies when its in their self-interest.
Gotta go to bed. Disgusted by those who supposedly surport democracy, but want to control everything, without opposition – e.g. the current govt.
Just got a phone call from a Conservative Party Rep.!!!! wanting to speak to one of us.
I replied that why should I (we) answer their questions or give our feedback when they disallow feedback and discussion, not only from parliament, but from their own members as well.
Yes – THE WOLVES ARE HUNGRY!
oh those Russians. (no offense, Pytor)
Ipsos has a way of being off the mark
Dec 28th, btw. That’s when the Zedster let the word out. The trend is there.
It is called a dichotomy.
By Bill-Muskoka on 11.07.07 5:34 pm
Yep, but I still don’t understand it!
You might call me left on these issues because I find it stretching creditability to try to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
on our side as as “self defence.â€
By C. B. Innes on 11.07.07 6:13 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t condemn women who have abortions, I’m not in their shoes. But I do condemn the doctors and parents who don’t tell them they have an alternative. As a result, of two women using that alternative, I have two wonderful kids.
As for Afghanistan, I’ll debate you on the reason NATO is there and it had nothing to do with self defence. But Iraq, I will agree with you 100%, in fact I would say there never was and never will be any credibility.
Finally, Americans begin to realize who stole the past two elections.
Gotta stay away from them-thar Diebold electronic voting machines!
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Topping_Nixon_Bush_disapproval_drops_to_1107.html
Three or four minute clip giving two sides of the atheist / christian stuff.
Pity they left out Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism (sp?), etc., because many paths are way older then christianity.
http://www.shoutfile.com/v/6Ru0fdxV/Checkmate_Atheists
Dube:
Good posts. Thanks.
And for all those who believe in the death sentence and think it is compatible with a Christian philosophy, the bible also says, “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord” and “Thou shalt not kill”. It also says, “Judge not that ye be not judged”.
This is, in part, why I cannot understand the CPC’s and the so-called Real Women.
But I do condemn the doctors and parents who don’t tell them they have an alternative.
By James- Chatham on 11.07.07 9:12 pm
What a marvelous statement of reality. Tears almost come to my eyes. That is a thing called TRUTH!
Were all the protesters to sign up to adopt the unborn, there would not be the need for abortion,.
Humans err, and that error should never be transferred to innocents. Likewise, the religious fanatics who see life as black and white, knowing nothng of being human, condemn intelligenmt resolutions to the problem.
HUH??? this guy must be smoking somethin’ –
“Usually I don’t take the time to comment on the low-brow comments of people, especially politicians of a certain ilk. There are certain people in life who believe that any slight or insult levelled at anyone is acceptable on any level, but then gnash their teeth and complain in the most loud terms when the same is done to them. Basically, they seem to feel that they are righteous and that they can do no wrong.
Today a certain Liberal MP on his infamous blog decided to take what could be seen as nothing less than a cheap shot at NDP MP Olivia Chow using an Saskatchewan NDP ad of a wolf in sheep’s clothing as his ammunition. This MP said the following in the blog:
I realize how we both feel about Dippers. But I gotta tell ya, these NDP marketing guys are onto something. Chow. (This is why you pay me the big bucks.) — G
Now, I would assume that someone who has accented to the level of a Member of Parliament would know how to use the proper spelling of “Ciao”, as was pointed out by no less that Steve Janke on his blog. But obviously this MP has not learned any lessons from the Klandar incident from the last election, where prominent Liberal Mike Klandar resigned under pressure after comparing Olivia Chow to a chow chow dog. Coincidence??? With this Liberal MP, there are none.”
http://cameronholmstrom.blogspot.com/2007/11/low-brow-turner.html
(he calls himself ‘Peterborough Politics’)
I too watched PMSH acting all prime ministerial on the news today about Pakistan. To me it seemed that he was talking like he knew what he was talking about. I also detected in all that knowingness a hint of sadness for what the great unwashed is about to inflict on Musharef for the good of the planet. I think that stuck in PMSH’s craw a bit because Harper probably dreams of the day that he too can dominate his country by force. Also, PMSH has to follow the US lead and that too probably stuck in his craw. I can’t imagine the pressure PMSH is under knowing that his greatest ally and partner only has 18 months left to rule. What will become of PMSH without his mentor?
Perhaps PMSH is looking ahead and trying to find a way to be relevant on his own. You know, punch above his weight on the world stage without bringing world dismay to Canada. It will be an interesting winter for Canada, to say the least.
From hardworking taxpayer
This is an interesting comment coming from a conservative supporter of the largest spending budget in Canadian history. So much spent on so little.
I don’t want to wait until next spring’s budget in case I won’t be able to afford it. I can guess fairly accurately that Jim Flaherty won’t be sending any little bundles of joyful tax cuts my way.
I am sure that Harper’s followers do not want to hear how he set out this agenda quite publicly at one time.
By C. B. Innes on 11.07.07 3:38 pm
Unfortunately, in my opinion, many of Harper’s followers believe in that agenda.
I have mixed feelings about the death penalty and abortion, to be honest. In cases like Bernardo and Olsen, our justice system is such that they may once again walk the streets, as Karla is now. There is no doubt about their guilt, because they admitted to their horrific crimes against our most vulnerable people–children.
Colour me grey, but I would rather that than see everything in black and white. One does not have to be a Christian to have reverence for life. In fact, one of the many problems with the Bible is that it is so contradictory.
There is a difference between killing and murder, as Muskoka Bill points out. If I had to kill someone to protect my children or grandchildren, or other loved ones, or myself, I would.
Now, I would assume that someone who has accented to the level of a Member of Parliament would know how to use the proper spelling of “Ciao”, as was pointed out by no less that Steve Janke on his blog. But obviously this MP has not learned any lessons from the Klandar incident from the last election, where prominent Liberal Mike Klandar resigned under pressure after comparing Olivia Chow to a chow chow dog. Coincidence??? With this Liberal MP, there are none.(peterborough blogger)
WHAT A STRETCH! And what about the proper spelling of ascended? I don’t think Garth got to the level of an MP because of his “accent”–or is that an intentional dig about Stephane’s accent?
(just a “play on words” people…same as what Garth did with chow”).
C. B. Innes wrote:
There is a separate aspect of the “pro choice†issue that most anti-abortion supporters refuse to understand. Most people who support “pro choice†do not support the killing of unborn babies.
On the other hand, they are not ready to judge those women who feel compelled to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy. It is more in line with the failure to condemn someone who kills someone else as a form of self defence.
====
I will extend this thought by saying that if we as a society truly want to minimize the impact of abortion, we should be investing in programs that remove the economic impact and the societal stigma of pregnancy as underlying reasons for the consideration of abortion as an option of “choice”. Abortion is really a far easier economic solution for society compared to providing the economic support for enabling true “choice” to occur. It is not “choice” when society has boxed you so completely into a corner so that the only choice is between life and death. Of course, at the other end of the spectrum, it is also far easier to scream that it is “murder” and be happy at one’s personal misguided sense of piety and do absolutely nothing about it.
Abortion is a sad choice of action that can arise when life just happens to crap on you and there are no other options, real or perceived.
So our goal as a society should be to provide these options.
We should be doing things like promoting the notion of healthy and responsible sexuality, instead of burying our heads in the sand and denying that we are sexual beings prone to making mistakes. And that applies more to males in our society as it is our irresponsibility that leads to this “choice” on the part of women, and where we can just run away or just talk out of our asses because we aren’t the ones that are directly affected by this choice. The best way we can support women is by not getting to that point in the first place and being more proactive in our responsibilities when we are sexually active. And this above all requires education.
Above all, if we truly desire to minimize the incidence of abortions, we really should be creating the infrastructure and providing the legislation that enables sexual equality, awareness and responsibility, so that women (and it is only women) are not punished economically, such as through an inability to advance in the workplace for having a child, or through a dramatic and unforseen change in their living standards. And this absolutely requires that adequate support mechanisms (adequate daycare, maternity/paternity leave) exist that enable one to raise a child.
We do not have a society where such choices are clear and can be easily made, and because of that everyone suffers. And if society is unwilling to create the space and environment to enable true choice, then society does not have the right to make these choices for the individual.
Unfortunately (and perhaps damning for them), this presents a difficult conundrum for social conservatives to resolve, since these are things that require economic intervention by the state in some form, not to mention a tacit acceptance that (horror of horrors) people get laid and mistakes happen, and proper sexual education and contraception are part and parcel of developing an alternative to abortion as an outcome.
As you, although I am strongly against abortion, I also understand that I cannot make the choices for people, in particular, who are faced with the life-changing or perhaps life-threatening event in front of them, and who have become pregnant for whatever reason. I am not so arrogant to believe that I know what is best for these people whose situation has imposed on them this unfortunate choice.
But I do believe that we as a society can do something to truly make abortion an issue of choice and reproductive freedom that is addresses some of the fundamental issues important to both sides of the debate.
Austin
But I do believe that we as a society can do something to truly make abortion an issue of choice and reproductive freedom that is addresses some of the fundamental issues important to both sides of the debate.
Austin
Great post, Austin. I couldn’t agree more.
“A backbench member of Parliament would likely introduce anti-abortion legislation if the Conservatives form the next government, the party’s president said.
“When we form a government, we can be [sic] rest assured that there will be a private member’s bill on this,†Don Plett wrote in an e-mail in November to a Conservative Party member in Quebec…†Macleans blogger Kady O’Malley
Great, the thing is that Harper has stated he won’t allow such a thing to go anywhere. Look what he did to Leon Benoit. I applaud these MPs who speak out for pro-life issues. God bless them.
Good posts. Thanks.
And for all those who believe in the death sentence and think it is compatible with a Christian philosophy, the bible also says, “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord†and “Thou shalt not killâ€. It also says, “Judge not that ye be not judgedâ€.
This is, in part, why I cannot understand the CPC’s and the so-called Real Women.
By Pat. G. on 11.07.07 10:32 pm
Pat, just because you can pick out a small statement within a verse which is within a chapter, within the Bible doesn’t give any context. Judgement is meant for condemnation of a person, not a behaviour.
Tell me, do you judge murderers, rapists, pedophiles?
I could never understand how social conservatives could be for “the right to life†and yet accept state sanctioned murder.
The Bible says thou shalt not kill. I assume that also covers killing by proxy thru the State.
By KPK on 11.07.07 2:38 pm
What social conservatives? I’m a so-con and I don’t believe in the death penalty.
If you want to use the Bible for your authority on moral values then you have to use the whole Bible not just the parts you agree with. Otherwise YOU become the authority. If thats the case what makes your values any more valid than those that oppose.
By Jim on 11.07.07 4:51 pm
So true. One look at Harper, Chretien, Trudeau, Martin and the United Church and most of the Anglican Church, and your point is well proven.
There is a separate aspect of the “pro choice†issue that most anti-abortion supporters refuse to understand. Most people who support “pro choice†do not support the killing of unborn babies.
On the other hand, they are not ready to judge those women who feel compelled to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy. It is more in line with the failure to condemn someone who kills someone else as a form of self defence.
As Bill says the same rationale applies to war as self-defence. You might call me left on these issues because I find it stretching creditability to try to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
on our side as as “self defence.â€
By C. B. Innes on 11.07.07 6:13 pm
Nice change of words there. Terminating pregnancies. So, who are they terminating? Babies. Pro-lifers(anti-abortion is a purposely inaccurate term) already understand what pro-choice means. It means that any woman can kill the baby before its born or not. If you’re pro-choice, then you support either of the 2 choices, basically, its a wishy-washy stance.
I see Sean believes that women get pregnant all by themselves…
Austin
I do.
but I don’t pretend to have a bible in my hand while I’m doing it.
C.B. Innes wrote
I understand your perspective. You don’t want this agenda to become widely known because it could damage the potential for the majority that would be required for implementing it. The evidence is there and everyone should have the opportunity of judging the evidence for themselves. By C. B. Innes’
Where exactly is Harper’s hidden agenda? where is this so called evidence C.B.. Apparently, you appear to bean expert on the subject so perhaps you can enlighten me by the facts. Sorry your interpretations just won’t cut it for me so spell it if you are able.
Van on 11.08.07 7:41 pm,
The evidence is in Harper’s own words. I know there are some people that do not have the ability to comprehend what he says.
It is easy to see why certain individuals are more prone to things like attack ads that are meant to create an impression in the minds of those who do not have the capacity to evaluate them. Harper relies on the fact that those people are too dense to understand his real agenda and as such it remains hidden to them.
I wish I was a better teacher but there are always students who do not have any analytical ability.
Sean P. Hogan on 11.08.07 3:15 pm,
This is not the first time I have been accused me of being “wishy-washy” on an issue. I comes with being able to see things from different points of view. It is impossible for me to see it in black and white terms.
I see Sean believes that women get pregnant all by themselves…
Austin
By Austin So on 11.08.07 4:51 pm
Funny you should say that. I’m not the one who states that the woman only has the choice, after all it takes a man to do his part, or with lesbians, it takes a sperm bank.
I do.
but I don’t pretend to have a bible in my hand while I’m doing it.
By Brian Dondo on 11.08.07 5:44 pm
Ah, so you’re into the ole double standard, all the while having no understanding of scripture, how typical.
Not at all, although I can certainly understand your seeing it that way (heh). Its just that I’ve for the most part (God willing) learned to cope with the ontically dualistic nature of Christological eschatology; of a neoorthodox fashion, of course, since justice is, after all, an Old Testament concept we need to make the best of while we’re waiting.
you?
C.,B Innis. Are you sure you are not a politician? You may be great with the written word but it is of little substance. In fact you didn’t answer my question at all. So I will ask you again but will make it very clear so that there is no misunderstanding on your part.. Here it comes. Are you ready. “What exactly is Harper’s hidden agenda?
Brian, would you mind explaining what you mean by ontically dualistic nature of Christological eshatology; of a neo-orthodox fashion?
Isn’t neo-orthodox redundant?
You’re the one with sufficient expertise to judge the depth of my understanding of scripture. You tell me.