# Liberal leadership potentials and bailouts



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

One gone



> McKenna expected to skip leadership bid
> By TERRY WEBER
> Monday, January 30, 2006 Posted at 12:37 PM EST
> Globe and Mail Update
> ...


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060130.wmckenna0130/BNStory/National/


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

uh oh.....

he's just confirmed macdoc's post at a press conference broadcast on CBC NW 

Libeals are in big trouble

cue "iggy the piggy"

i think i'm looking for a new federal party to support


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Too bad Macdoc does not want Lewis back....


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

What was wrong with Stephen Lewis?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

his 15 minutes were up a long, long time ago

sad day when my choices are "iggy the piggy" and "these shoes were made for walking" belinda stronach


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> i think i'm looking for a new federal party to support


Well, there are plenty of others to choose from (Conservative, Green, NDP), pick the one that best represents your views and go for it!

Nobody says you *have* to support one federal party in "sickness and in health"...


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

In fact, I daresay our democracy would be a lot healthier if people did think of party support one election at a time. Would force us to actually think before voting.


----------



## NBiBooker (Apr 3, 2004)

Actually it's two that are confirmed out: Manley and McKenna.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

NBiBooker said:


> Actually it's two that are confirmed out: Manley and McKenna.


Manley's withdrawl was so 72 hours ago


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> Manley's withdrawl was so 72 hours ago


Talk to the hand.  

Still, enough talent left from within and without their current MPs. Without McKenna, a wide open race could serve the party quite well. Get those policy juices flowing instead of internal politicking...hopefully.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

i don't see the Liberals stopping their infighting
too many little people with big egos
mckenna seemed more like an avg. canadian unlike;
iggy, i'm a mis-understood academic and besides you people are too stupid to appreciate my brillance - damn, is this thing on?

and

belinda "i feel your pain as a poor single mother" stronach, but not only were these 4" stilettos made for walking, but walking all over peter mckay


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Wonder if Stéphane Dion is available?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

ArtistSeries said:


> Wonder if Stéphane Dion is available?


i sure as hell hope he;s not related to celine
and i really think it's a great time to NOT have a Liberal leader from ON or QC


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> iggy, i'm a mis-understood academic and besides you people are too stupid to appreciate my brillance - damn, is this thing on?
> ...
> but not only were these 4" stilettos made for walking, but walking all over peter mckay


But how do you really feel about Ignatieff?  

The MacKay thing was a good media play by honest Peter. Pure politics, him and his little dog too.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

HowEver said:


> What was wrong with Stephen Lewis?


I think he's a great man, but I also think he wouldn't consider leading any party other than the NDP. He also has never given so much as a public hint hint in what, 20 years at least, of the slightest interest in returning to politics.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

ArtistSeries said:


> Wonder if Stéphane Dion is available?


Wouldn't he be an extremely hard sell in Quebec? Engineer of the Clarity Act. Smart, principled guy though, but probably too professorial to sell to the masses. 

Cotler is the same, always giving thoughtful, intelligent answers instead of sound bites. Has a spectacular CV.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> Wouldn't he be an extremely hard sell in Quebec? Engineer of the Clarity Act. Smart, principled guy though, but probably too professorial to sell to the masses.
> 
> Cotler is the same, always giving thoughtful, intelligent answers instead of sound bites. Has a spectacular CV.


Cotler may want to review his lack of investigation of all war criminals living in Canada. Even those that boast about their "actions"

_
Two of this gang of four exposed themselves with autobiographies, in 
1980 and1981. Another penned an article, in 1988, and our matron from 
Moscow gave public interviews, throughout 2002. They weren't hiding. One 
was even an informant for the Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals, 
headed by the late Justice Jules Deschenes. Perhaps that's why the feds 
got nervy over protests against their use of "Soviet evidence." Who knew 
they had a NKVD snitch out back?

Two of these immigrants-who-became-Canadians are residents of Montreal's 
trendy Mont Royal, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler's riding. A catchy 
title for this story might be The Murderers and the Minister but that 
would be unfair. Regardless of what they claim they did, innocence is 
presumed until guilt is proven. That principle applies even when one is 
dealing with miscreants who meted out "Soviet justice," an oxymoronic 
term if ever there was one.
_
http://www.ukemonde.com/luciuk/onetoomany.html

_
in May 2002, The Montreal Gazette 
published a story about a Red Army veteran who also served in a SMERSH 
punitive battalion. As executioners shot deserters, and anyone else 
deemed an enemy of Stalin’s regime, she would jump into their open 
graves, confirming all occupants were dead. This matron moved from 
Moscow to Montreal, only a few years ago. No Canadian official ever 
asked her what she had done in the war. Is she a scoundrel? Not for 
me to judge. Suffice that her story is in the public domain (see “A 
war crime is a war crime,” 2 July 2002, The Montreal Gazette.)
...
No credible evidence ever confirmed there were any Nazis here. Mr. 
Cotler is a lawyer. He knows that. He probably also recalls, 
although he won’t likely relish a reminder, that the Commission of 
Inquiry on War Criminals, headed by the late Mr. Justice Jules 
Deschenes, caustically noted how proponents of such allegations, 
including the Congress, B’Nai Brith and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, 
spread “grossly exaggerated figures…no less than a 400% over-estimate.”
_

http://www.ukemonde.com/luciuk/culprits.html


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

nxnw said:


> Wouldn't he be an extremely hard sell in Quebec? Engineer of the Clarity Act. Smart, principled guy though, but probably too professorial to sell to the masses.
> 
> Cotler is the same, always giving thoughtful, intelligent answers instead of sound bites. Has a spectacular CV.


Dion is a hard sell - and probably too much of a smart geek.

Cotler, has not always impressed me - and would be another hard sell.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> _
> No credible evidence ever confirmed there were any Nazis here. Mr.
> Cotler is a lawyer. He knows that. He probably also recalls,
> although he won’t likely relish a reminder, that the Commission of
> ...


Perhaps you have some credible journalist sources you can cite instead of this dreck. Get a grip.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Dion is a hard sell - and probably too much of a smart geek.
> 
> Cotler, has not always impressed me - and would be another hard sell.


AS -- unrelated to this, check your PMs.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

HowEver said:


> Perhaps you have some credible journalist sources you can cite instead of this dreck. Get a grip.


BYLINE: LUBOMYR LUCIUK 
PUBLICATION: The Winnipeg Sun 
DATE: 2005.04.30

Lubomyr Luciuk 
The Kingston Whig-Standard 
January 19, 2003

also from the Deschnes Commission report itself;


> The Report found that public estimates of the number of war criminals allegedly living in Canada had become grossly exaggerated, expanding from a "handful" or "several hundred" in the mid-1970s to "thousands" by the mid-1980s. Some exaggeration may have resulted from the casual lumping together of "war criminals" and "war-time collaborators," some from blanket accusations against all members of certain military units such as the "Galicia" or "Halychyna" Division (which the Commission formally cleared of collective war crimes), and still more from duplication. Nevertheless, the master list of possible suspects compiled by the Commission contained the names of just 774 individuals; an addendum listed 38 names, and there was a further list of 71 German scientists and technicians. Of the 774 suspects on the master list, 341 were found never to have landed or resided in Canada, 21 had landed in Canada but had left for another country, 86 had died in Canada, and 4 could not be located in this country. The Commission could find no prima facie evidence of war crimes in the files of 154 further suspects. Therefore, it recommended that 606 files be closed.


http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/873-e.htm


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> PUBLICATION: The Winnipeg Sun


Darn, I wish I got the 'Peg Sun. I'm sure it would come in handy for future reference to help convince you of my point of view.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> Cotler may want to review his lack of investigation of all war criminals living in Canada...


First, just to out our personal backgrounds, I am Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors. You are of Ukranian background.

It would be nice if someone of your background would not look for ways to drive wedges between our communities. It does you no credit you to go on the offensive as a response to the involvement of Ukrainians in nazi war crimes, antisemitic pogroms, etc. That's history. Get used to it.

Your bizarre attack on Cotler, of all people  (see resume while it's still here) is shameful, given the accomplishments he has to his credit.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> _ Extract from Deschenes Commission_


So what? An incorrect public perception of the number of war criminals in Canada proved your point (Cotler is bad?) not even slightly, and does not remotely back up the "salient" point of the previously quoted article.

Moreover, there were, and still are Nazis here. That's what the Deschenes Commission actually concluded. The great shame is that not one has been punished.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

nxnw said:


> First, just to out our personal backgrounds, I am Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors. You are of Ukranian background.


I'm a halfbreed (Indian/Brit-sorta). Anyone else?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I welcome the day that Irwin Cotler would treat all suspected war criminals in Canada equally.

It is my position that all war criminals be prosecuted to the fullest extent of Canadian criminal law.

I do not agree with de-naturalization and deportation.

As for driving wedges you can thank Sol Littman for that. His accusation of thousands of Ukrainian war criminals in Canada was, and is, offensive and inaccurate.

I await a CJC News editorial denouncing Littman's inflamatory opinion which he still supports, as per his 2003 book.



> Between 1950 and 1955, thousands of veterans from the notorious German-led, Ukrainian 14th Waffen-SS Division emigrated to North America with the full consent of the respective governments despite immigration regulations in force at the time that forbade entry to all who served in any branch of the SS. The Jewish community fought a brief, but futile, battle to persuade those governments to deny them entry, denouncing them as a "sinister legion" of "bloodthirsty murderers"--war criminals who had engaged in the mass murder of thousands of innocent civilians.


unfortunately this thread has been derailed and for me brings up all too unhappy memories of seeing buildings spray painted and personal threats by telephone.

perhaps it would be better to start a new thread on the topic of jewish-ukrainian relations and why they fell on hard times

it's interesting to note many similarities between ukrainian and jewish culture

I didn't realize my ethnic background needed to be outed, but nontheless it has been out there for all to see


----------



## Dreambird (Jan 24, 2006)

> I didn't realize my ethnic background needed to be outed, but nontheless it has been out there for all to see


*ouch**

I agree... perhaps there's something to be said for keeping some details pertaining to oneself private?



> It would be nice if someone of your background would not look for ways to drive wedges between our communities. It does you no credit you to go on the offensive as a response to the involvement of Ukrainians in nazi war crimes, antisemitic pogroms, etc. That's history. Get used to it.


FWIW... I really detest personal attacks based on ethnic backgrounds etc. period. It does not lend credibility in any way, shape or form to anything or anyone... 

My 2 cents...


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Just to get this thread back onto it's actual title here:

Frank McKenna has just announced that he will NOT be seeking the leadership of the Liberal party of Canada.

He has looked at it's future, and he doesn't want to tie himself to the mainmast of a rapidly sinking ship.

Soooo...who do all of you think will actually end up running this train wreck for the next few months? Or years. And can they guide it back from the brink of disaster?

If so, how? (be specific)

Time to step up and make your predictions.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Beej said:


> I'm a halfbreed (Indian/Brit-sorta). Anyone else?


I'm a mongrel. Although my family name comes from Germans who were originally American, but left as United Empire Loyalists. So I have a family history of being anti-American 

And maybe this thread got off track because so much wild speculation with no actualy factual basis is hard to maintain?


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

nxnw said:


> First, just to out our personal backgrounds, I am Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors. You are of Ukranian background.
> 
> It would be nice if someone of your background would not look for ways to drive wedges between our communities.


Nice insinuations there...
Have anything to do with:?
http://www.ukar.org/chrc/cjc01.html


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"it's interesting to note many similarities between ukrainian and jewish culture". My grandparents were forced from their small village outside of Kyiv in 1903 by the Czar's pogroms. So, I guess I have both Jewish and Ukrainian heritage within me.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> And maybe this thread got off track because so much wild speculation with no actualy factual basis is hard to maintain?


No, that is impossible. Never has happened before on ehmac, never will happen. Prove me wrong!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Tobin bows out of leadership race
> Tuesday, January 31, 2006 Posted at 5:36 PM EST
> Canadian Press
> 
> ...


Not a job in high demand it appears...


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> Not a job in high demand it appears...


seems it's coming down to a choice between iggy or belinda
iggy would be bad for canada and would end my being able to vote Liberal

belinda would lose an election against harper, she's still too green for the big chair just yet and her crossing the floor will probably not sit well with canadian voters
if only she started out as a Liberal


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Tobin dropping out was a surprise for us here in NL.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Seems that no one with any smarts wants to take over a worn and corrupt party. 
(Except Belinda or Iggy that is.)


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> ...seems it's coming down to a choice between iggy or belinda...


Don't worry, Sheila Copps will come save you.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

The Doug said:


> Don't worry, Sheila Copps will come save you.


:-( 

At least it would make voting easier for most by eliminating yet another choice as remotely desirable.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

The Doug said:


> Don't worry, Sheila Copps will come save you.


Just shoot me...


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

ArtistSeries said:


> Nice insinuations there...


No insinuations. The CJC has pressed the government to prosecute/deport war criminals. There is anger among some members of the Ukrainian community, who have circled their wagons because some suspects are of Ukrainian background. Some of those people lash out at the Jews, the _victims_ of the Holocaust because, you know, if we would just shut up, those Ukrainian suspects would be left alone. 

Some — like the guy Michael quoted to malign Cotler — go so far as strike at us in a particularly unconscionable way: to single out Jews who were in the Russian Army and accuse them of being war criminals. Imagine that, not one Nazi war criminal convicted or kicked out of Canada, hardly any prosecutions, and this guy wants to go after the people who were being exterminated! This guy has accused 4 people of war crimes against Ukrainians, all Jews. 

Michael expressed his own anger about this issue by tearing into Cotler for no reason other than the fact he has advocated prosecution of Nazi war criminals. The attack was unseemly and wholly undeserved, particularly given all of Cotler's exemplary accomplishments as a human rights advocate, etc.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

FeXL said:


> Just shoot me...


C'mon, you don't mean that; you'd miss all the fun.  

Someone please refresh my memory: wasn't Sheila the one who spent a gazillion bucks many years ago to buy and distribute flags to boost Canadian patriotism?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

ComputerIdiot said:


> Someone please refresh my memory: wasn't Sheila the one who spent a gazillion bucks many years ago to buy and distribute flags to boost Canadian patriotism?



Yep, I sent for my free flag right away. Was the only friggin' thing I ever got from a Liberal, other than yet another tax.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Goodness gracious. My vision for the funniest ever Canadian election (in terms of media coverage) may be one step closer to being a reality:

Liberals: Belinda Stronach
Conservatives: Peter MacKay

Can you imagine the headlines?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

PeterindaStronach?

Well, you DID ask.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Wonder what the children would look/act like?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> No insinuations. The CJC has pressed the government to prosecute/deport war criminals. There is anger among some members of the Ukrainian community, who have circled their wagons because some suspects are of Ukrainian background. Some of those people lash out at the Jews, the _victims_ of the Holocaust because, you know, if we would just shut up, those Ukrainian suspects would be left alone.
> 
> Some — like the guy Michael quoted to malign Cotler — go so far as strike at us in a particularly unconscionable way: to single out Jews who were in the Russian Army and accuse them of being war criminals. Imagine that, not one Nazi war criminal convicted or kicked out of Canada, hardly any prosecutions, and this guy wants to go after the people who were being exterminated! This guy has accused 4 people of war crimes against Ukrainians, all Jews.
> 
> Michael expressed his own anger about this issue by tearing into Cotler for no reason other than the fact he has advocated prosecution of Nazi war criminals. The attack was unseemly and wholly undeserved, particularly given all of Cotler's exemplary accomplishments as a human rights advocate, etc.


That "guy" I quoted just happens to be a professor at Royal Military College and Member of the federal Immigration and Refuge Board and as director of research for the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
http://www.rmc.ca/academic/poli-econ/personnel/luciuk_e.htm



> Professor Lubomyr Luciuk specializes in the political geography of eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, refugee studies, and the ethnic and immigration history of Canada. The author, co-author or co-editor of over a dozen books and booklets, and over 50 editorials in leading Canadian newspapers, Dr Luciuk has served as a Member of the federal Immigration and Refuge Board and as director of research for the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association.


My anger with Cotler as Minister of Justice and Attorney General is that he never dennounced the idea of deportation and de-naturalization of Canadian citizens, which in effect creates two classes of citizens.

Imagine that. You're not found guilty of a criminal offence and yet you are deported for allegedly being party to one.

As an advocate of human rights one would think that Cotler would champion criminal proceedings against all war criminals and not de-naturalization and deportation.

Deportation and de-naturalization hearings are not subject to the same stringent rules of evidence and standard of guilt, since they are civil proceedings and not criminal ones.

The UCC (Ukrainian Canadian Congress) has maintained, since the beginning of the Deschnes Commission, that all war criminals in Canada should be prosecuted in a criminal court of Canada, with Canadian rules of evidence and Canadian judges.

http://www.ucc.ca/Section_5/War_Crimes_Program_Undermines_Canadian_Citizenship/

and a comment from the late John Sopinka, QC who became a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada



> "It is my submission that there is no evidence that Ukrainians were in any general way the allies of Nazi Germany during World War II. Far from being the allies of Nazi Germany, Ukrainians found themselves in the unenviable position of having to battle both Nazi and Soviet repression.


http://www.ucc.ca/Section_5/ukrainians_during_ww2/

Hardly a "circling of the wagons."


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> PeterindaStronach?
> 
> Well, you DID ask.


Technically, SINC, I only asked if you could imagine the headlines, not for an example. 

Though I don't think I can top that one.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Sonal said:


> Technically, SINC, I only asked if you could imagine the headlines, not for an example.
> 
> Though I don't think I can top that one.


I bet Belinda was on top of McKay.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

John Sopinka was a great judge and his premature death was was a tragic loss. It should be recognized, however, that the quote credited to him was from his submissions, made as an _advocate_ to the commission, not as a statement from someone purporting personal knowledge of expertise.

The less said about Luciuk, the better.

In any event, there were certainly elements of Ukrainian society who were allies of the Nazis and committed atrocities. That does not contradict Sopinka's submission that Ukrainians were not "general allies" of the Nazis. Neither does it deny that other elements of Ukrainian society not only fought the Nazis but rescued Jews — many such Ukrainians have been recognized and honoured by Yad Vashem as "Righteous among the Nations".

I agree that it would be ideal to prosecute war criminals here, under our own laws. It was tried, however, and failed. There were four failed prosecutions from '87 to '94, failed because it was impracticable. Mr. Justice LaForest said, "War crimes and crimes against humanity were viewed as so heinous [in Canada] as to require a procedure so unmanageable as to make successful prosecution unlikely." 

It is legitimate to denaturalize someone who obtained his citizenship by fraud, however. The principle is that Canada will not be a safe haven for war criminals, whether from World War II or otherwise. I agree with that. You don't have the same practice and procedure as in criminal proceedings, but you don't have criminal penalties either. You also don't have criminal justice standards in civil and family litigation - it doesn't mean the person does not receive a fair hearing or the procedure is in any way unjust. 

This is, further, not Cotler's policy, who Luciuk seems to single out (and you unfairly attacked), but goes back to Allan Rock and Sergio Marchi. 

After all of this, I don't think even one person has yet to be deported stemming from war crimes in WWII. 

Ironically, a Rwandan — Mugasera — has been ordered deported for involvement in the Rwandan genocide and who do you think he was lashing out at? The "Jewish Conspiracy" to have him deported, led by Madame Justice Abella (who, he claimed, contaminated whole the Supreme Court of Canada), and Irwin Cotler, who (he ranted) appointed her just to get Mugasera. It never ends.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well this has just about got to take the cake for the goulash of threads to equivalently mangle my metaphors 

I suggest as the Mad Hatter would we move along move along to another Liberal Leadership table and let MS and NX flail away.

This looks like an excellent logo for the Liberal brouhaha to come








Looks like an amalgam of PET and Pearson.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> John Sopinka was a great judge and his premature death was was a tragic loss. It should be recognized, however, that the quote credited to him was from his submissions, made as an _advocate_ to the commission, not as a statement from someone purporting personal knowledge of expertise.
> 
> The less said about Luciuk, the better.
> 
> ...


Dismissing Prof. Luciuk out of hand hardly discounts his arguments or supports yours.

As a lawyer you must realize that standards of evidence are far less stringent than in criminal proceedings. A point you seem to gloss over, especially in light of the reams of evidence from the former Soviet Union that is highly suspect as per Zumbakis's book; "Soviet Evidence"

Denaturalization and deportation is not an acceptable way of dealing with alleged war criminals. My Canada doesn't have two classes of citizens. Obviously yours does.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

SINC said:


> Yep, I sent for my free flag right away. Was the only friggin' thing I ever got from a Liberal, other than yet another tax.


You do know that you can request a Canadian flag, free of charge, from your Member of Parliament at any time? You are more likely to receive it in the leadup to Canada Day, though.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

and you can request said flag from your MP by writing to him/her for free
while pariliament is sitting


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

The Canadian version of patriotism: if you want a flag, the government will be glad to buy one for you, with your own money.

However, if you offer to buy it yourself, you're accused of being "unCanadian."


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ontario Flag? Quebec Flag? Alberta flag?.........never know might be worth something on a not so future Antiques Roadshow as pre Canadian diaspora relics


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> ...As a lawyer you must realize that standards of evidence are far less stringent than in criminal proceedings. A point you seem to gloss over, especially in light of the reams of evidence from the former Soviet Union that is highly suspect as per Zumbakis's book; "Soviet Evidence"


I don't gloss over this at all. On the contrary, your sources distort this issue and their thesis is very misleading. Further, Luciuk et al know that what they advocate, clothed in phoney human rights terms to pretty it up, would effectively eliminate all recourse against WWII war criminals in Canada.

The key difference in criminal proceedings is the burden of proof which, in those proceedings, is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. No other proceeding, although many deal with issues of equal or greater importance than denaturalization, applies the criminal law burden of proof. Your sources make it sound like due process and the rules of evidence are thrown out the window. It is completely a groundless and misleading argument.

People facing denaturalization have due process and fair hearings. They have recourse to the Charter, particularly respecting their legal and equality rights, which completely addresses this intellectually counterfeit "two classes of citizens" argument. These denaturalizations could not proceed if the process or procedure violated the subject's rights.

The Charter and the principles it stands for reflects "my" Canada. A haven for war criminals — the demonstrated consequence of Luciuk et al's disingenuous arguments — does not.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Bourque has a poll Appropriately enough, titled "The Leftovers". Rick Mercer is the most common entry under "other", at least when I looked. Well, other than the morons who felt the need to vote for Scott Brison (he's already a poll option, but a LOT of morons put him under other...).


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Bourque has a poll Appropriately enough, titled "The Leftovers". Rick Mercer is the most common entry under "other", at least when I looked. Well, other than the morons who felt the need to vote for Scott Brison (he's already a poll option, but a LOT of morons put him under other...).


Is there something wrong with Scott Brison or were you just refering to the difficulty some had with reading?

What's left from the Calgary Grit's list:
*Likely To Run
*
Michael Ignatieff
Belinda Stronach
Scott Brison
Martin Cauchon
Joe Volpe
Maurizio Bevilacqua

*Possible Candidates
*Ken Dryden
Gerard Kennedy
Bob Rae
Allan Rock
Stephane Dion

*Wild Speculation
*Glen Murray
Jane Stewart
Sheila Copps
George Smitherman
Anne McLellan
Christy Clark
Clyde Wells
Dennis Mills
Denis Coderre
Hedy Fry
David McGuinty


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Iggy and Hedy as front runners. I'm not sure brokeback Brison will even bother to take a shot at it.

Other than that...it will be either the janitor or one of the laundry staff running for leadership. Everyone else is deciding to take a quick four year vacation right now while the Liberal party "rebuilds" (self-destructs) itself. :lmao: :clap: 

I suspect that, like the old PC party, the Liberals are in for a long decline and eventual demise. They will likely combine with the nearest ideological group that is on a slight upswing....just as the old PC's did with the Reform/Alliance. Combine their strengths, so to speak.

In the case of the Liberals, that would be the NDP. Together they might just have a shot at some sort of rebirth and re-emergence. And it would give the perpetual bridesmaid NDP their only real chance at some sort of real power.

But this will take YEARS.

Meanwhile the Liberals will be under investigation by everyone with a badge, deeply in debt, and seriously divided bt the Chretien Martin battle. Their credibility is shot and it was only fear of the unknown that allowed them to retain so many seats in this last election.

The Liberals under Paul Martin ran one of the most inept campaigns in Canadian electoral history. They showed all of us that, once again, they are uanable to manage any operations of scale without falling flat on their collective faces.

They blew it. Big time. This is fact.

And they ain't comin back anytime soon, either! 

Which is why all the first string pretenders to the throne are distancing themselves from this slow-motion train wreck right now. And it's only gonna get worse in the coming days.

Trust me on this.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

> The Liberals under Paul Martin ran one of the most inept campaigns in Canadian electoral history. They showed all of us that, once again, they are uanable to manage any operations of scale without falling flat on their collective faces.
> 
> They blew it. Big time. This is fact.


Here's a scary thought for you: The Cons could only get 124 seats while the Liberals ran their worst campaign yet--and they still got 103 seats! Who fell flat on their face, again?









_Haper et al dans la minorité! C'est fun, uh? Weeee!_


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacNutt said:


> Which is why all the first string pretenders to the throne are distancing themselves from this slow-motion train wreck right now. And it's only


Interesting idea. If they know the next leader will get the thankless job of rebuilding, may as well wait to become the next-next leader. The contenders like Tobin, McKenna and others can certainly wait ~4 years for a better shot.

This will be interesting to watch. Will the leadership race energize the party and make them a contender or, maybe, will it just identify who will lose to Harper next time? Politics should at least be entertaining.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Beej - I like Brison, in fact. I was only referring to the difficulty some people apparently have in reading.

Nuttbar - Brokeback Brison? I can't decide whether that is a clever turn of phrase, or a sly slur. In any case, you can count me as one who isn't buying this "teh liburals r teh gonzor OMG" crap, either. 100+ seats does NOT equal a wipeout. Setback, yes. Substantial setback, maybe. But hardly a wipeout. And I say this as one who would have been happy to see a more substantial setback.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Beej - I like Brison, in fact. I was only referring to the difficulty some people apparently have in reading.


So now we have two former Tories running for leadership of the Liberal Party.

So much for the theory of a left leaning Liberal Party.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> So now we have two former Tories running for leadership of the Liberal Party.
> 
> So much for the theory of a left leaning Liberal Party.


They _really_ have evolved....


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave said:


> So much for the theory of a left leaning Liberal Party.


I REALLY need a maniacal laughing emoticon for moments like this.

For now, in my best Monty Burns voice:
"Excellent."


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave - I've never seen the Libs has particularly left leaning. Centre, yes. Left, no. Nothing says centre more than embracing the disenfranchised former members of the opposition. And besides, I'm assuming I remember correctly based on the nutt's joke/slur, that Brison is gay. That would make him quite a leftish choice, no?

Edit - Beej, wouldn't this work just fine?


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Vandave - I've never seen the Libs has particularly left leaning. Centre, yes. Left, no. Nothing says centre more than embracing the disenfranchised former members of the opposition. And besides, I'm assuming I remember correctly based on the nutt's joke/slur, that Brison is gay. That would make him quite a leftish choice, no?


I'm not accusing you of thinking that, but others on this website have made that suggestion. They say the combined vote for the NDP + Liberal + Bloc is all left of centre and therefore, it isn't fair that the Conservatives get to lead the country because they got 37% of the vote vs. 63%.

The fact is the NDP only increased their vote total by less than 2%, while the Conservatives went up by about 7%. If the Liberal Party and their supporters were truly left of centre, surely the NDP would have gained a lot more than 2%. Why did Liberal voters jump to the right at a rate of 3:1 when compared to the left? Maybe because the Liberal Party is centrist with right leaning policy, perhaps.

I don't see how being gay should determine your political view. Not all gay people are left of centre. Brison is right of centre but obviously didn't agree with many Tories on the gay marriage issue / or he was just an opportunist.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Edit - Beej, wouldn't this work just fine?


I need the all-out head-tilted-back animated maniacal laugh, preferably based upon my avatar and with sound. My Will be done.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

I think it is accurate to say that the country has not embraced a right of centre ideology. The Conservatives won the election and the right to govern, but subject to the reality that they have a miniscule minority and that most Canadians do not support their platform.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

nxnw said:


> I think it is accurate to say that the country has not embraced a right of centre ideology. The Conservatives won the election and the right to govern, but subject to the reality that they have a miniscule minority and that most Canadians do not support their platform.


More Canadians supported the Conservatives than any other party. 

The point I am making is that this country is centre-right. It is not centre-left, like the NDP and their supporters would have everybody believe.

I think it is pretty basic and it should send a message to the NDP to start changing the platform to be more centrist. Again, I say, look to Tony Blair. Until then, they will just sit on the sidelines.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

Vandave said:


> More Canadians supported the Conservatives than any other party.


Actually, about 15% "supported" the Conservatives. Another 22% parked their votes there.

If Harper believes as you do, the next election will be sooner than you think, and he will lose it.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

Vandave said:


> The fact is the NDP only increased their vote total by less than 2%, while the Conservatives went up by about 7%. If the Liberal Party and their supporters were truly left of centre, surely the NDP would have gained a lot more than 2%. Why did Liberal voters jump to the right at a rate of 3:1 when compared to the left? Maybe because the Liberal Party is centrist with right leaning policy, perhaps.


Your numbers don't say anything. Really, anything is possible in our silly "first past the post" electoral system.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

nxnw said:


> Actually, about 15% "supported" the Conservatives. Another 22% parked their votes there.
> 
> If Harper believes as you do, the next election will be sooner than you think, and he will lose it.


Where do you get those numbers from?:lmao:


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

the Liberals need to find a leader and some soul

iggy would be an horrible choice
belinda still reeks of her floor crossing
are the Liberals ready for Bryson? would they win with him at the helm?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Perhaps wiser heads.......bail


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Perhaps wiser heads.......bail


Tip of the iceberg comes to mind. I figure that for every scandal we find, there are more that we didn't find.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave said:


> I don't see how being gay should determine your political view. Not all gay people are left of centre. Brison is right of centre but obviously didn't agree with many Tories on the gay marriage issue / or he was just an opportunist.


Missed this. You are right, that's not quite what I meant, although I phrased it badly. When I said that Brison being gay made him a leftish choice, my point was more that only those on the left of the political spectrum are likely to vote for him, given that the majority of those on the right of the spectrum are opposed to his sexuality in some way.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

RevMatt said:


> Missed this. You are right, that's not quite what I meant, although I phrased it badly. When I said that Brison being gay made him a leftish choice, my point was more that only those on the left of the political spectrum are likely to vote for him, given that the majority of those on the right of the spectrum are opposed to his sexuality in some way.


Your post indicates how meaningless most political terminology is.

Most of those on the "right" define themselves that way because they are pro-capitalism. The original usage of left and right had nothing to do with capitalism at all, but it came to mean that in the mid-twentieth century.

So what does pro-capitalism have to do with anti-gay marriage? Why are these completely different ideas lumped into "right-wing."

And "right-wing" tends to denote religion-inspired social positions, like being anti-abortion, pro-capital punishment, anti-gun control, and supporting silly ideas like school prayer. 

I never use words like "right-wing" or "conservative" to describe myself, and much prefer clearer language like "economic liberalism" or "capitalism" or "free enterprise."


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

lpkmckenna said:


> So what does pro-capitalism have to do with anti-gay marriage? Why are these completely different ideas lumped into "right-wing."


Like it or not, people that tend towards the Republican Party and Libertarian Party (pro-capitalism parties) also attract those elements.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

ArtistSeries said:


> Like it or not, people that tend towards the Republican Party and Libertarian Party (pro-capitalism parties) also attract those elements.


So much confusion in such a small post.

The Democratic party is also a pro-capitalist party, no less than the Republicans.

And "religious crusaders" can be found in "left" parties, too. Many members of the NDP are anti-gay marriage and anti-gun control, but do what the party expects.

Add to the fact that an enormous number of "progressive" leaders have come from religious backgrounds. Tommy Douglas? Stanley Knowles? Bill Blaikie? All advocates of the "social gospel." How about Rev Jesse Jackson in the US?

Are fundamentalists any less fanatical than Quakers? I don't think so. But the double standard seems to be: conservative religious leaders are shoving religion down our throats, but progressive religious leaders are "enlightened."

As if.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

It would be interesting to dress up a list of values that some have and see what their political affinities are. 



> Liberal economics is a core belief in the Republican Party and Libertarian Party rather than the more social-market economics of the Democratic Party


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

lpkmckenna said:


> Add to the fact that an enormous number of "progressive" leaders have come from religious backgrounds. Tommy Douglas? Stanley Knowles? Bill Blaikie? All advocates of the "social gospel." How about Rev Jesse Jackson in the US?
> 
> Are fundamentalists any less fanatical than Quakers? I don't think so. But the double standard seems to be: conservative religious leaders are shoving religion down our throats, but progressive religious leaders are "enlightened."
> 
> As if.


I don't know much about Stanley Knowles. Tommy Douglas lived in a much different era, and to judge him by today's standards is irrelevant. As for Bill Blaikie, he is indeed an ordained minister, but he has never once promoted religion. He wouldn't be thanking God after every speech. Saying that he shoves religion down your throat is highly dishonest.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Saying that he shoves religion down your throat is highly dishonest.


I didn't get that impression of Blaikie either. He seemed to be a pretty well-reasoned NDPer (as far as well-reasoned can apply in that case  ), but I've only seen him in non-soundbite form a handful of times. I did get the clear impression that he wasn't very pro-beard trimmer, so I would be worried about any haircare policies he brought forward.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

RevMatt said:


> Saying that he shoves religion down your throat is highly dishonest.


I didn't say that. Read what I said again.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> It would be interesting to dress up a list of values that some have and see what their political affinities are.
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism


I'd like to see such a list compared to specific policy stances too. I think it would be interesting to see how details may oppose theoretical appeal.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

A political commentator just noted...on the CBC, no less...that "the silence is deafening while we listen for potential Liberal leadership candidates to speak up and throw their hat into the ring".

It seems no one wants this job right now.

Odd about that, eh?


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

lpkmckenna said:


> I didn't say that. Read what I said again.


I have, three times, and it still sounds the same to me. I accept that that's not what you meant to say, can you rephrase?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacNutt said:


> A political commentator just noted...on the CBC, no less...that "the silence is deafening while we listen for potential Liberal leadership candidates to speak up and throw their hat into the ring".
> 
> It seems no one wants this job right now.
> 
> Odd about that, eh?


oh, so now that the CBC says something that macnutt likes he believes that the CBC is ok to quote?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

this or

•••

Silence........perhaps before the storm......



> At this point, the Liberals have nothing in the leadership window to entice them to precipitate the changing of the guard. *Martin meanwhile remains only a duty call away from his former job.*
> If it came to an early showdown between the opposition and the incoming government, the Liberals and the NDP have enough members between them to cobble together a coalition and offer it up as a replacement.
> That would be a momentous turn of events. It would still leave Canada with a minority government — although one tilted to the left rather than the right — and it could not, of course, happen without the consent of the Bloc Québécois.
> *There was a time when Gilles Duceppe would have gone out of his way to ensure the survival of a non-Liberal government, but that was before Stephen Harper emerged as the biggest threat not only to the Bloc's supremacy in Quebec but to the entire sovereignist agenda.*


63% non Con would be a remarkable mandate......


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

lpkmckenna said:


> Are fundamentalists any less fanatical than Quakers? I don't think so. But the double standard seems to be: conservative religious leaders are shoving religion down our throats, but progressive religious leaders are "enlightened."


My point here was: to suggest all religious conservatives have a religious political agenda, but religious progressives don't, is untrue.

The truth: some religious conservatives and some religious progressives do want to make their religion "the law." The religious right is clearly dangerous, but "liberation theology" or the "social gospel" are also dangerous. 

Can you imagine living in a society that banned the profit motive because "the lilies of the field do not toil" and "that's what Jesus would do."  It's like being condemned to live in a monastery.

The dark ages were an era of church oppression and feudal serfdom. The "social gospel" would be much the same: church oppression and socialist serfdom. Not to mention the end of science and mass starvation, all over again.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_gospel.

I accept that not all ministers and priests are looking to push Jesus on me, and can be good liberals while in office. But pardon me for being a little skeptical whenever they run for office.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

MacNutt said:


> A political commentator just noted...on the CBC, no less...that "the silence is deafening while we listen for potential Liberal leadership candidates to speak up and throw their hat into the ring".
> 
> It seems no one wants this job right now.
> 
> Odd about that, eh?


Ignatieff came back to Canada to lead the Liberals. It will happen once he gets comfortable in the House and in caucus.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

lpkmckenna said:


> Ignatieff came back to Canada to lead the Liberals. It will happen once he gets comfortable in the House and in caucus.



oh good lord i hope not
bigots and fascists disguised as "liberals" are dangerous for Canada and Canadians
especially well a educated bigot and fascist

"my disdain for these 'little russians' "
"Je me souviens," as they say in Quebec.

I can almost, repeat almost, excuse Don Cherry
At least he isn't a professor at Harvard


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Looks like they *finally* found someone who wants the job:


> Ottawa — A relatively obscure Toronto lawyer has become the first declared candidate for the Liberal leadership.
> 
> Martha Hall Findlay threw her hat in the ring Wednesday, undaunted by the fact that much higher profile contenders have been dropping from the race like flies.


source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060208.wleader0208/BNStory/National/home


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Oh my! The one who lost to Belinda then lost her nomination when Belinda crossed. The game's afoot.


----------

