Reisman, Schwartz, And "He Was On Holiday In Europe And Didn't Know About It"

These 2 neo-cons that have been mugged by reality are movers and shakers in Canada, no doubt about it. They’ll be like reformed smokers. Liberals will be asked to go outside.

Now if only we can get Gerry and Heather to start a Conservative TV News Channel.

Conservative: A liberal who's been mugged.

Schwartz and Reisman are certainly coming late to the Party. They may be influential and if a few GTA Libs vote Harper as a result next election, then good.

But I certainly hope that Harper gives them the access to his office that they are due - which is none.

I can guarantee you that they do not run their businesses on the same Liberal ideology that they have supported through the Chretien/Martin governments (like Martin himself)

That they have chosen now to back Harper, after the Liberal Party has absolutely melted down leaves me feeling a little cynical. Was Harpers support of Isreal the excuse they needed to make the break with the Libs and still maintain their standing with the GTA glitterati?

Rather than come out supporting a single issue, why not get on board with the whole program and endorse the Party fully?

Ward are you saying that these wealthy capitalists like Harvard MBA Gerry Schwartz are acting in their own selfish interests and that that’s wrong?

Or are you simply saying to Harper – watch out; don’t go changing the regulatory environment just to suit a couple of new converts?

Rather than come out supporting a single issue, why not get on board with the whole program and endorse the Party fully?

Bingo, Ward. Keep in mind that the Conservative Party of Canada (as well as the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative Party of Canada) have always supported Israel. Heather Reisman had absolutely no use for the party until it formed a government.

Rather than a Liberal who supports censorship, she's now a Conservative who supports censorship. If she admits that she was wrong to prevent the sale of certain items because they offended her, and works hard to help the party (and that includes party "trench work"), I'll happily retract everything I've said and welcome her with open arms.

Just another example of two more liberals bending, this time for the sake of a buck over their principles. What else is new?

Softtalk;-) Then what am I? Proudly, I've NEVER been a L(l)iberal!

Who to Cheer for:

1. If you have to choose between one side that distributes candy to children when human lives are lost and the other that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

2. If you have to choose between one side that puts up billboards facing the other country showing the decapitated head of one of the other side's soldiers (along with provocative commentary), and the other that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

3. If you have to choose between one side that uses suicide bombers and one that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

4. If you have to choose between one side which seeks the annihilation of its neighbor, and the other that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

5. If you have to choose between one side controlled by Muslim terrorists and the other that isn't, choose the side that isn't.

6. If you have to choose between one side that warns citizens in advance that bombs are on their way, and the other that doesn't, choose the side that does.

7. If you have to choose between one side which locates offensive military weapons in residential areas and one that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

8. If you have to choose between one side whose combatants dress in civilian clothing and the other side which doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

9. If you have to choose between one side which teaches its children to hate their neighbour and instills in them the desire to be suicide bombers and the other side that doesn't, choose the side that doesn't.

10. Finally, if you still can't decide and are religiously inclined: if you have to decide between one side which is God's ancient chosen people restored to the land of their forefathers, and the other side that isn't, choose the side that is.

Richard, well said. Thank you.

Lotta work there Richard but you are absolutely right on! Make a poster please, for all the undecideds out there. Thanks.

Floor-crossers: Emerson... now Khan.

The Liberal Party of Tolerance, Diversity, blah, blah, blah, ... show their true colour: RED, aka hateful, intolerant, coercive; in a word: Socialists.

Furor engulfs PM's new Liberal adviser

CAMPBELL CLARK

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

OTTAWA — Liberal leaders were put on the defensive Wednesday by MPs in their own party for allowing Wajid Khan to take on the role of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's special adviser on the Middle East and Afghanistan.

Some Liberal MPs also called on Mr. Khan to either quit the post or the party.

More:

Vancouver MP Hedy Fry, a candidate for the Liberal leadership, endorsed Ms. Minna's position, writing her own memo calling Mr. Khan's position “a clear conflict of interest and of trust.”

She suggested Mr. Khan's report for a Tory PM might be misinterpreted as some kind of Liberal endorsement for Mr. Harper's stand.

“I am concerned that any advice which Mr. Khan may give to Mr. Harper in his capacity as Special Advisor could be misconstrued as Liberal policy,” she wrote.

Neither Ms. Minna nor Ms. Fry could be reached for comment Wednesday. ...-
http://www.paulding.net/bin/url.cgi/13370.10