Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Liberals continue on like pit bulls

After several days (I believe it is day 5 of the alleged "dog" comment), the Liberals are still pushing for an apology to something they think they heard that might have been inappropriate.

(Boy is that warped, how about some apologies for the income trust scandal, or the adscam boondogle. I think the Liberals should either put up or shut up personally.)

But opinion being set aside we need to understand that human nature is to change memories to suit the desires of the individual: when you take into account the only Liberal desire is to be in power, we should understand where their "facts" are coming from. The Speaker of the House has reviewed this matter twice now, The first time with the official Hansard reports, and the second with video of the period in question. In both of these incidents there was no conclusive evidence that Peter Mackay made any remarks about Stronach being a dog.

So where does that leave us? First off remember that we are dealing with politicians here, and although I have far more respect for the Conservative party than I ever will for the Liberals, I am honest enough with myself to understand that they all play the political games. If it was said it was said, Stronach should deal with it like the man she wants to be (but then Mackay should also apologize). If it wasn't said, are the Liberals willing to apologize for their aggressive attack on Peter Mackay? Further still are the Liberals willing to apologize for recorded comments that were inappropriate? Either way they all need to start living up to the "Honourable" title that precedes there names, it’s not just for show but can actually be a standard for even political lives.

It should by now be pretty obvious to most people that this is political wrangling to try and foster support for the ailing party. I’ve said it before; the Liberals are unscrupulous power mad politicians that will do anything to regain their communistic dominance over Canadians.

Bob

Saturday, October 21, 2006

Feminism, sexism and equality don't mix.

First I'm going to start by bluntly saying, if women want to be treated like men they had better forget about “sexist” comments. You can't have it both ways. If you want to be treated like a man, you need to suck it up and take slurs like one. Let’s face facts, what you're really after is an elite status and not equality! There is absolutely no way that you can say on one hand that you want to be treated as equal to men and on the other hand say that you can’t take a comment like a man.

Equality means that you will be treated exactly like men (if that’s your wish) physically, emotionally and verbally. HOWEVER that isn’t what feminazi’s want. What they are after is to be treated like women when it suits them and treated like men when it might benefit them. Well you can’t have it both ways, you either deal with manly things in a manly way or else you get treated like a woman. It’s your choice, but let’s have the lines clearly drawn.

Oh by the way Belinda, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…… I’ve made my feelings well known about Belinda’s immoral actions, and the sheer audacity she has that makes her think she deserves an apology is unbelievable. Has she apologized to Tie Domi’s wife? Whether she believes that she was the issue or not, Leanne Domi obviously sees her as a major contributor to the marital collapse, and that is enough to warrant an apology.

Has she apologized to the Conservative constituents she betrayed by her defection?

Demanding an apology in this situation is just another cheap politically motivated tactic to bolster support of a corrupt and immoral Liberal party. It’s time for the women out there that are supporting her to use their own minds and see this for what it is, instead of being pawns in a political chess game. (For those feminists out there I’ll say it like I would to a guy, get your heads out of your butts and wake up, you boneheads.)

Bob

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Items not conducive to sleep.

As I was trying to sleep my mind kept mulling over today’s session of “Question Period” in the House of Commons (hence the title of the post), and two things kept jumping out at me that the Liberal opposition kept mentioning.

The first and foremost of these things was how they kept using the term “most vulnerable in society” in reference to those less fortunate in our country. I think that the Liberal’s have no idea what this phrase means or how to use it, simply because they fail to recognize that in 13 years of power they have endorsed murdering the truly most vulnerable in society, the unborn. I mean let’s get real, sure there are those among us that can’t read or write, but does this warrant them the moniker of “most vulnerable in society”? Hell NO! (Excuse the expletive, but it was needed for proper emphasis.) The most vulnerable people in society are those that are unable to protect themselves like children, ESPECIALLY those that you don’t even have to face to kill!!!! So while these illiterate masses that the Liberal party keep referring to may be unfortunate, they are NOT the most vulnerable and are fully capable to seek help for and by themselves.

The second point was this new trend in the Liberal ranks of calling the Prime Minister (or the Conservatives in general) “mean spirited” and it’s almost like a party requirement to call them this at least once by every member! But let’s think about this, “mean spirited” doesn’t even come close to what the Liberal’s did even in their last turn “at bat”. I’m talking specifically about taking away the right for children to have a Mother and a Father! Homosexuality is all about self gratification through unnatural sex, not about love or family, so why on earth would any sane and rational person even consider saying that a homosexual couple are “married” or a “family”? I mean first off they cannot have children in the relationship they chose (other than by traditional or conventional means, even IVF requires both male and female reproduction units and is thereby a traditional method), so this disqualifies them as a family to begin with. Secondly the mere act of homosexual sex is a perversion of the natural act, and really for the participant and not for any other purpose than satisfying their lusts. Finally the only difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals is the sexual partners they prefer; and since true love seems to come and go with today’s societal values at a whim, one must conclude that homosexuality is about the act and not about love.

I can not fathom how anyone with a conscience could support a party as immoral and objectionable as the Liberal’s. Unless you have no clear idea of what they have done, or how they have eroded Canadian values by bad policy and legislations, you could not support them with a clear conscience. They have attacked family values, supported murder of the truly most vulnerable in society both through abortion and feminist agendas. They have told us that Canadians are too stupid to see through their lies (and they may be right, look at all the people out there that still support them) by favouring their wealthy friends with government contracts and moneys. And they have forgotten what this Country was built on, the values and morals of the people who fought and died for it. Shame on them, and shame on you if you don’t look at the facts before you decide who you’ll support.

It’s a late night, with many thoughts and very little tact available. I believe fully that sometime people need a kick in the pants to get their heads on straight; I hope this was yours.

Bob

Now that this is off my chest, I leave with a few profound quotes to ponder;

“The official's heart must stand at attention before his mind.”
A. A. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky

“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.”
Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)

“Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.”
Aristotle

“It is far more honest to be undeservedly ignored than to be honoured without merit.”
Denis Fonvizin

‘The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy; the best weapon of a democracy is openness.”
Edvard Teller

“In free countries, every man is entitled to express his opinions and every other man is entitled not to listen.”
G. Norman Collie

“It is hard to believe that a man is telling the truth when you know that you would lie if you were in his place.”
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Friday, October 13, 2006

Judy Sgro, are you deaf and blind?

Yet another Liberal MP came out today to tell us how the PM is using smear campaigns...... WHAT????? I guess it's not liberal policy to watch their own speeches or campaign techniques! If only the Liberals would stop being such hypocrites and start taking responsibility for their own mistakes!

“It is better to have people assume you’re an idiot, rather than open your mouth and prove them right”, this would be a good ideology for the Liberal party to adopt.

Bob

Ignatieff, showing true liberalism.

New possible leader of the liberal party, but the same lack of accountability being shown.

Instead of apologizing for singling out Israel in his allegation of war crimes, front runner for the Liberal leadership Michael Ignatieff decided to take the same old Liberal stance and attack the Conservatives for pointing out his egregious error. It seems that this is modus operandi for Liberals, and since it's worked before, they'll stick to it.

So why didn't he apologize for accusing Israel of war crimes? (Whether or not he now says that both sides committed these crimes, he needs to apologize for singling out one side only.) It goes to show that Liberals speak first and attack the Conservatives later to cover their blunders. Ignatieff even went so far as to accuse the Prime Minister of being power hungry (paraphrased), but looking at Liberal history of doing anything to stay in power this is the pot calling the kettle black!

If there was any irresponsibility in what was said, it falls directly on Michael Ignatieff. Alternately it was very responsible of the Prime Minister to admonish the Liberal hopeful for his obviously one sided view.

Bob