Mike Duffy on JGL

118 Replies to “Mike Duffy on JGL”

1. “What I wish for is a Democratically elected government that respects you and I, represents the wishes of individual ridings and the much touted principles of the will of the People.”
   Then, you should vote Conservative.
   After nearly 80 years of unbroken rule, the Liberals have created something other than democracy. Collusion between the Liberal party, the bureaucracy, justice, senate and state media is fully entrenched, whether they are in power, or in opposition.
   It will take a Conservative majority, a lot of will and some time to correct this Liberal tyranny at the federal level.
   For true democracy in this country, I hope you believe your own words.

2. How about a woman’s right to choose . . . to keep going in her car at a STOP sign, to drive as fast as she likes, to avoid paying her taxes, to abuse her children or husband, to . . .
   In Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons, Thomas More said, “This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you [his son in law, Roper] cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?”
   It’s squeamish and illogical to think that women have a duty to abide by the other laws of this country—isn’t that often interference with their own choice?—while being entirely exempt from their responsibility for the children they conceive or the deliberate killing of those children?
   Yes, there are understandable reasons for women to choose abortion—as there are understandable reasons for people to steal, commit adultery, kill, bear false witness, etc. However, if we excuse these serious shortcomings—which, due to “victimitis”, we now do all too regularly—we seriously debase our moral currency.
   ET and Indiana Homez, could it be that your view on abortion and the law encompasses a double standard? I think so, but your views are perfectly in sync with those of all the political parties in this country.
   Oh oh Canada.

3. Sorry, my above post is missing my first paragraph. Here’s the complete post:
   ET, I appreciate your comments. However, I cannot reconcile your and Indiana Homez’s idea that, though personally opposed to abortion, you cannot support the state “interfering” in a woman’s right to choose . . . the deliberate, violent killing of the unborn human being in her womb (and at taxpayer expense—in PRIVATE, medical clinics).
   How about a woman’s right to choose . . . to keep going in her car at a STOP sign, to drive as fast as she likes, to avoid paying her taxes, to abuse her children or husband, to . . .
   In Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons, Thomas More said, “This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you [his son in law, Roper] cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?”
   It’s squeamish and illogical to think that women have a duty to abide by the other laws of this country—isn’t that often interference with their own choice?—while being entirely exempt from their responsibility for the children they conceive or the deliberate killing of those children?
   Yes, there are understandable reasons for women to choose abortion—as there are understandable reasons for people to steal, commit adultery, kill, bear false witness, etc. However, if we excuse these serious shortcomings—which, due to “victimitis”, we now do all too regularly—we seriously debase our moral currency.
   ET and Indiana Homez, could it be that your view on abortion and the law encompasses a double standard? I think so, but your views are perfectly in sync with those of all the political parties in this country.
   Oh oh Canada.

4. I choose life.

5. I agree with whoever said that a Conservative majority would be helpful to the Liberals. They really need a time-out to rebuild. In a minority context their game becomes trying to knock off the government and political posturing, rather than productive governing takes over Parliament. Quite frankly, all of the parties behaved rather badly in the previous minority context. A Conservative majority would provide some breathing space for everyone, allow Liberals time enough to put their house in order, and make for a more civilized governing process. No need for concern re a Conservative majority — they know that they still need to please most of the people most of the time to stay in office.

6. David — My understanding is that the Conservatives do not have an official policy on abortion. It is considered too divisive an issue. Hence, the issue will not be introduced by the caucus under their mandate (minority or majority). Having said that, Harper’s position on issue of conscience is that there should be a “free vote”. This makes sense to me. I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality. That is why Harper re-introduced the gay marriage question — the original passage of this bill was not a free vote. Finally, though it is not particularly relevant since we won’t see abortion being brought up in the next Parliament — regardless of who wins by how much — it is worth noting that MOST Canadians have a problem with late-term abortions. Perhaps at some point in the future we as a society will be brave enough to admit that late term abortions, partial birth abortions, and “genetic terminations” (ala Foothills hostpital) are nothing short of barbaric.

7. Irwin Daisy:” Collusion between the Liberal party, the bureaucracy, justice, senate and state media is fully entrenched, whether they are in power, or in opposition.” — You forgot to mention Power corporation and the Chinese mafia.

8. Hugger:
   You responded politely, so I’ll try to do the same.
   OK, let’s ignore Dion’s inability to speak the same language as the majority of his countrymen. And let’s also ignore the question of whether his countrymen are Canadian or French.
   Let’s get to the most important plank of the Liberal campaign: the “Green Shift”, or as those of us with long memories might refer to it, “NEP II”. An increasing number of climate scientists are disputing the existence of any link between man-made CO2 and global warming. http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=756766
   M. Dion is intent on forcing the one sector of our economy that is growing into bankruptcy ON THE BASIS OF COMPLETELY SPURIOUS SCIENCE.
   I don’t care whether he speaks English, French, or Urdu; the fact that he swallows the AGW hypothesis hook, line, and sinker, is evidence to me that he not only does not deserve to lead this country, he doesn’t deserve to lead a local Boy Scout troop.

9. LindaL:
   “I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality.”
   Agreed.
   “– it is worth noting that MOST Canadians have a problem with late-term abortions. Perhaps at some point in the future we as a society will be brave enough to admit that late term abortions, partial birth abortions, and “genetic terminations” (ala Foothills hostpital) are nothing short of barbaric.”
   What is late term? What is partial birth?
   Posted by: at September 9, 2008 12:39 AM

10. LindaL says, “I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality” and David agrees.
    The confusion, double standards, muddled thinking, and ignorance—I’ll fill you in later, David, about the two kinds of abortion you appear to be in the dark about. (BTW, our whole culture conspires to keep the populace ignorant of this crucial and unpleasant issue. “We want to do what we want to do, so don’t inconvenience us with the details that might make us feel uncomfortable.” Also, follow the money. Abortion is big, big business.)
    Re “legislating morality”, in case you hadn’t noticed, the horse has already left the barn: we do it all the time. Virtually all laws “legislate morality”, as they encode those behaviours we, as a society, either approve of or proscribe. The (il)logical conclusion of the above statement is that you disapprove of laws against such things as paedophilia, murder, stealing, graft, fraud, speeding, polygamy (for now), etc. The laws concerning these behaviours all legislate morality.
    David, I described late term abortions above: “As a result [of the Supreme Court striking down Canada’s abortion law], Canada is the only democratic country in the world with no law concerning abortion: there is no protection of any kind for the unborn human being in this country, for the full nine months of gestation. E.g., If a doctor should perform an abortion in Canada before the birth, at a full nine months, he/she would be perfectly within his/her rights to do so.”
    Partial birth abortion? (Google it, David, and have a look.) Here’s how it’s done (via Google), usually on a later term creature, which looks suspiciously like a baby:
    “Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby’s leg with forceps.
    “The baby’s leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
    “The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head.
    “The abortionist jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.
    “The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.”
    “The partial birth abortion has been performed legally in the United States for years. It is neither a ‘rare’ procedure, nor is it done only for babies who are severely deformed or dying. It is, essentially, a variant of the even more common and equally gruesome Dilation and Evacuation (D and E) procedure.”
    And you think that legislating morality here is objectionable? E.g., President Bush has been excoriated for vetoing bills to allow this barbaric procedure. (LindaL, we agree on most of this.)
    The propaganda and suppression of information about abortion is jealously manipulated by our elites at all levels. In this case, IMO, bring on the “legislation of morality” in order to protect our unborn children.
    If that makes me a fanatic, so be it.

11. KevinB:
    Yes, let’s ignore the language issue as that furthers nothing really. Criticizing what he says and his policy is fair ball as it is for any political leader.
    Given you want to talk about carbon tax etc. I will first say that IMO, announcing that program was probably the dumbest political move I have ever seen. I’ll write about something else for a moment then get back to Carbon tax.
    Harper accuses the liberals of being tax and spend artists, which is true but so is his pack. GST came from the CP and the Libs were most pleased to inherit it. Obviously. Harper says Dion “said” he would raise the GST back to previous levels. That’s not true. I listened to the video being referred to and Dion did not say that. What Harper is saying is untrue.
    What’s more likely is that Dion’s troops intended to use Carbon tax monies for things that the 2% GST cuts were funding.

12. Posted by: irwin daisy at September 8, 2008 10:14 PM
    Hello Irwin,
    Re: voting Conservative.
    I would have some problems with that, for a number of reasons. Not the least of which being their assault on Democracy and the Democratic process. The most recent examples being the appointments of 4 candidates in Nova Scotia including a twice previously failed candidate to carry the banner in Bill Casey’s riding. Additionally, the parachuting of a candidate into Halton. Then there is the Elizabeth May debate thing. As I write, Harper is the only one I have heard stating his position on that via media interview.
    The debate question is a very large one in my view when it comes to measuring what someone does against what they say. Once Democracy is circumvented and the party gets away with it, each time thereafter becomes easier for them until they eventually lose sight of the original principle. This has been a problem during the course of History.
    I don’t know about 80 years Irwin, I seem to remember the names of a number of Conservative PM’s but I think I grasp your intent and I don’t totally reject your premise on collusion. I do wonder though just how inclusive it may be? Does it span party lines?
    Your use of the word “tyranny” made me smile as it a word that I might employ as well. I don’t think it’s necessarily restricted to the Federal level though.
    A last thought. I know the Libs selectively parachute candidates too. Maybe the Outremont, and Orchard experiences taught them something. I doubt it though. When you are born to Rule, you just have the right.

13. hugger, dion HAS said that he would consider raising the GST
    –Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion says he would consider reversing Tory cuts to the goods and services tax if his party wins power.
    Dion said he sides with economists who say the cuts to the GST are bad policy and that income tax cuts are a better way to put money in people’s pockets.
    Toronto Star, Nov 1, 2007
    ” That’s why yesterday, the Liberal leader left the door open to rescinding GST cuts introduced by the minority Conservatives, from 7 per cent to 6 per cent last year and another cut to 5 per cent that will take effect on Jan. 1, 2008.
    “We will consider if in our plan we need to revisit the decision of the government about the GST. We’ll consider it,” Dion told reporters yesterday.
    And in the same speech, Dion said:
    “We will choose the time where we want to defeat this government. Then Canadians will have two plans. Our plan will be very compelling, very comprehensive, very attractive for Canadians,” Dion said.”
    The point is – he never said that this govt HAD to last until 2009; he himself said that it could be at any time – his choice.

14. ET, let me add this. Dion is on the record as opposing carbon taxes; he was against it before he was for it. Then upon breaking that promise (liar, liar pants on fire), he said he would not “change a comma” of his plan, which he then changed, at the behest of his candidates.
    This highlights Dion’s policy dishonesty. He has a lot of nerve calling Harper a liar.
    As far as his party history promises goes ….well, enough said.

15. Posted by: ET at September 9, 2008 2:13 PM
    Well ET, thank you for confirming what I wrote.
    Harper is saying Dion said he would raise the GST back to 7%. That is untrue. Thus the claim of liar I expect.

16. Posted by: Shamrock at September 9, 2008 3:26 PM
    Dion also reversed himself on the date of withdrawal from Afghanistan. On both of these issues he says he changed his mind. I don’t have a razor blade sharp enough to split those hairs.
    Many say Mr. Harper and his party lied about income trusts. I believe the CPC stance on this is they changed their mind.
    Income Trusts weren’t a big issue for me personally, but there has been much said and written on it so I have caught some. Harper won’t talk about it, yes / no?? Now that Brent Fullard of Caiti fame is going to run against Flaherty, someone’s going to have to talk about it.
    Tennis anyone?

17. Hugger, all I’m saying is people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. I understand politicians change their minds, or are forced to by circumstances. It doesn’t mean any of them lied.
    I was just mirroring back what Dion said.
    If he can’t stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
    Cliche generator off

18. Posted by: Shamrock at September 9, 2008 7:05 PM
    Shamrock, I’ve heard the have to approach re: Income Trusts a number of times. I guess Fullard and Flaherty will hammer that one out. My money is on Fullard. He has been rather obsessed with the issue for some considerable time.
    Beyond that, some people say it’s good to be able to change your position after further consideration. I believe that to be true, but on some really important issues one should be very knowledgeable before opening one’s mouth in the first place. That’s what we expect from politicians and senior bureaucrats. High level government isn’t amateur hour.
    Soap box still intact and holding.