The Integrity Challenged #1

Liberal Admits No Conservative Abortion Agenda posted by invomag

From the Toronto Star's Pundit Forum
http://thestar.blogs.com/the_pundits/2006/01/20/index.html

Sheila - can you please tell me and the readers why Paul Martin keeps being so dishonest about social policy and in particular abortion?

It infuriates me to no end that Paul Martin falsely, completely falsely, charges that the Conservative party would change the laws on abortion in this country. At our policy convention in March the party spoke strongly on this matter. We would not recriminalize abortion. The great irony here is that the only people who have brought forward bills to limit choice were LIBERALS. Yes LIBERALS. Including one who ended up in cabinet, Don Boudria. Tom Wappel was the other one.

Have a look at what they proposed: [. . . . ]

Sheila Gervais, Liberal, admits the truth of the above.



Ezra Levant revealed that it was George Laliberte, Chris Axworthy's chum, who made the anonymous phone call smearing a Tory candidate. The Western Standard/Shotgun, Jan. 20, 06



The Manitoba Child Care Association has been trying to scare people so they wouldn't vote Conservative; however, "The federal government has no jurisdiction whatsoever over child care. It's a provincial jurisdiction." -- The feds simply send money to the provinces and, if costs rise, it is the provincial government that is allowing it. Tom Brodbeck, Jan. 20, 06

[. . . . ] "None of that funding will change under a Conservative, Liberal or NDP federal government. And to suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

What the Conservatives are proposing is to take new, future federal dollars and give some of it directly to parents -- $1,200 a year for each child under six." [. . . . ]

A few days ago, the Laurie Hawn campaign was alerted, via e-mail, by an Edmonton lawyer that:

"Lots of [Anne McLellan] supporters are enumerated at their downtown office address instead of at their houses. One of them was bragging about how many times he could vote liberal (sic) based on the number of leases he had in her riding." Small Dead Animals, Jan. 20, 06 -- There is much more detail on the site.

Also, see Captain's Quarters on this.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006191.php



What has happened in Canada over the last many years?

How could the mainstream media have missed this? -- evidence, February 3, 2005, and why -- What has happened?


Ezra Levant: Gagliano's criminal background check -- And here, for the first time, by way of Access to Information, is the RCMP's background check on Gagliano done before Jean Chretien first appointed him to the cabinet. It is in the form of a multi-page letter from the RCMP Commissioner of the day, and is marked "SECRET" on every page. -- a pdf you may download to enjoy



218 reasons NOT to vote for the Liberals Linda Williamson, Jan. 22, 06

After 12 years, we at the Sun think it's self-evident that the Liberals have to go, and polls show most Canadians agree.

But just in case you're still not sure, we've compiled a list of the lowlights of Liberal rule since 1993.

There's plenty more where these came from, but we've narrowed it to 218 reasons not to vote Liberal. Take your pick: You really only need one.

THIS ELECTION -- WE DID NOT MAKE THIS UP [assume [....] after each]
MINORITY MADNESS, SPRING FEVER 2005: 27-37
PAUL MARTIN'S LEGACY -- MR. DITHERS TAKES THE HELM: 38-63
MARTIN'S TURNCOAT MINISTERS: 64-67
LAST ELECTION, JUNE 2004, MAJORITY TO MINORITY: 68-75
Promises, Promises -- Grit Moments in Dithering: 76-85
Patronage, Piggery and 'Entitlements': 86-98
INTEGRITY -- FAMOUS GRIT WORDS: 99-103
MINISTERIAL AND MP MISDEEDS: 104-125
ADSCAM, THE MOTHER OF ALL SCANDALS: 126-137
Speaking of Scandals: 138-158
OVERALL LIBERAL RECORD 159-183
JEAN CHRETIEN'S LEGACY -- 'A PROOF IS A PROOF' 184-199
2000 ELECTION -- CHRETIEN'S LAST LAUGH: 200-207
1997 ELECTION -- LIBERAL MAJORITY SHRINKS: 208-210
WHERE CANADA STANDS NOW: 211-218 [. . . . ]

For those working at the polls ...

Expect the most base tricks. I could enumerate a few I have watched. You cannot trust the ones close to power, especially when they smile ... INCREDIBLY CORRUPT AND DISHONOURABLE.

I suppose the van is being gassed up to truck certain groups to the poll(s) and to instruct them how to vote -- the group(s) to which the local lad panders, in order to keep the long-term plans in place. This time, watch as the "voter" turns toward the doorway for instructions. There will be some evidence of alcohol, perhaps one laughingly informing you that they will all be back to vote again; then,later you may note a group going to another poll, but if you don't recognize each individual, you will be left wondering. Is it the same group back to vote again? ... Figure it out.

Watch for all manner of despicable and corrupt behaviour; note it and be aware that, if you go out for a minute, the lad's workers will go through anything you had written (integrity challenged). Watch for the hand of any Librano$ worker to quickly go under the table. ... You'll figure it out. There is no depth to which they will not stoop to keep power, perqs and pork.