Guilty Before Proven

"First they plan to overthrow the government in a budget bill..."

And we are neglecting something very important in this. The budget arguably the single most important bill in the house, because it allows the business of government to proceed, or not.

I have a colleague in a (small) federal department who had around 5 full-time staff, dedicated for 8 months, preparing that department's budget proposal. One must assume other departments do likewise, larger ones proportionately. In the event that the budget does not pass, all that work is pretty much out the window and you have to almost start over. Not to mention, programs have significant current funds and other resource allocations (people) covering "budget risk"--you essentially sit on your hands waiting for the budget to be approved, in some cases afraid to even proceed with existing allocations in case you get cut back and thus end up wasting your existing time and money. Some of the people involved are worried about their jobs, many of these are highly-skilled professionals who are at understandable risk of flight to the private sector while waiting around.

So. Small department, 5 employees working full time on budget proposal. Conservative resource allocations (ie: inefficient) due to budgetary uncertainty. Start multiplying that across the federal public service.

Sure, the sponsorship scandal cost us a lot of money, and those responsible for malfeasance must lose their jobs, their seats, do time, and whetever else it takes to gain justice (let's not forget recovering misappropriated funds via legal means, which IS worth investing tax dollars in).

How much would scuttling the budget have cost Canadians IRRECOVERABLY, Mr. Harper? Canadians need to weigh the value of such an investment in *his* leadership, since it was almost what we were forced to pay.

come on editors, fix the spelling and grammar when you approve a story!

---
Every time you complain about the moderators, god kills a kitten.

In a case like this how can you "prove" anything? What you can do is make a comment on the "evidence" and the comments of the various players in the events. Based on the evidence I have seen this is a seedy affair and no one involved comes out looking good.

Paul Martin admits that he was aware that negotiations were going on. While he may not have specifically authorized what Dosanjh or Murphy told Grewal is irrelevant once he supports them. By defending what they did, and by not asking them to step aside while under investigation as Judy Sgro did, he has assumed responsibility.

On the other hand, Stephen Harper has done exactly the same thing as far as Gurmant Grewal is concerned. While he claims that he was unaware that Grewal was negotiating with the Liberals and taping the conversations, he has come out in full support of what Grewal did. He admitted to taping some of his own conversations, for what reason we do not know. By defending Grewal's actions, like Martin, Harper has deeply involved himself in the tawdry affair.

As far as I am concerned, no one involved comes out of this looking ethical, and no one defending the actions on either side comes off any better. The ends never justify unethical means.

This is just getting ridiculous. Why must this site continue to post articles that are in essence poorly worded and poorly written posts that do a half assed job at defending the Liberals? I guess half-assed defenses go hand in hand with half-assed attempts to govern. If space is given for Liberals to defend themselves on this website, then why not give equal space to Conservative, New Democrat, or even Bloc supporters?

In this website's eyes Stephen Harper may not be the man to govern this country, but that doesn't mean Paul Martin is. So let's stop posting his excuses? I'd really love to log onto this website one day and find an article written about the Toxic Centre as opposed to the Toxic Right we see on here so often. I guess all I'm saying is that I keep seeing articles that attack the Conservatives and make excuses for the Liberals and so I wonder are we in the business of promoting Paul Martin or what?

First there was the letter defending Paul Martin as some sort of Saint and how we shouldn't rush to judgement for 'the sake of the children'. And then last week there was the 'soul searching reasons' why a member of this site decided to join the Liberal Party. And now this nonsense.

I can go into a long winded post here. I could start by saying that it is not the Gomery Trial but the Gomery Inquiry, and that there is a clear difference between an inquiry and a trial. The Liberals have already been found guilty, it's just a matter of sorting out the who's, the why's, the how's, and the when's. And that yes, it would be better to wait to have all the facts in front of us so we can be completely informed when we make our trip to the ballot box.

As for the tapes. I haven't paid much attention to them. To be honest my faith in this government...well, it never really existed to begin with. Allegations that the Liberals make back room deals in order to stave off exection is nothing surprising to me or to many Canadians for that matter. This would only confirm what we already suspect.

What it would confirm is that the Liberals haven't learnt their lesson despite ADSCAM. Two years on since ADSCAM ended and they're still operating as a corrupt government, even under new leadership. All this does is confirm what many people have been saying all a long; that keeping the Liberals in power only ensures that they will continue to govern this country in their corrupt and mismanaged fashion. We'll just have to wait and see what Mr. Gomery and the RCMP have to say.

And by the way, you can always spot a Liberal with the line that goes a little like "that's not my way, and it's not the Canadian way". I think when you're training to become a Liberal, this must be apart of the handbook or something?



---
"I pick the bones of what's been done. I'm the revolution when the door is shut. I bite the hand that slaps me senseless. I am far too Canadian" -SotW

<blockquote> This is just getting ridiculous. Why must this site continue to post articles that are in essence poorly worded and poorly written posts that do a half assed job at defending the Liberals? I guess half-assed defenses go hand in hand with half-assed attempts to govern. If space is given for Liberals to defend themselves on this website, then why not give equal space to Conservative, New Democrat, or even Bloc supporters? </blockquote> Equal space *is* given. If a post defending the conservatives or the green party or John Deifenbaker or were submitted, it would have an equal chance of being posted. This post represents the views of one of our users, who took the time to submit it. If you wish to submit an article with a different viewpoint, go right ahead. <p>---<br>Every time you complain about the moderators, god kills a kitten.

The Liberals stole/misused $350 million and people like this writer don't think they should be held accountable? Can I have his bank account number?

The Inquiry hasn't even been called to find out if these millions went missing or not, everyone agrees the money is gone. The Inquiry is a public relations gimmick and it's designed so that no one can be held accountable - typically Canadian.

It's a good thing that health care, education and the environment are so over-funded in Canada - or the people who paid this money to the government might have suffered.

The writer writes:

"Before we sentence the liberals for any action that they were allegedly involved in, let's let the proper channels decide guilt or innocence."

The commentor writes:

"The Liberals stole/misused $350 million and people like this writer don't think they should be held accountable?"

What an unfortunate thing that the guilty and despicable may hide behind the same rule of law and due process as the innocent!

The writer is clearly one who has a sensible respect for rule of law, bad facts, and a commendable degree of patience in an age where such a thing seems to be regarded as a shortcoming. Hats off to those on this site advocating for more direct democracy, but who at the same time have the guts to point out that torches and pitchforks won't suffice.

Evidence is mounting that Harper's side deliberately altered the recordings that first made the press, no doubt hoping to stay "on message" and appeal to the emotional first-impressions rather than the facts as they unfold.

Or, perhaps we should take him at his word, and he is indeed plauged by some unknown malware in his party's CD burning program, one determined to destroy his credibility by selectively and near-perfectly eliminating digital content which favours the position of his opponents. The nastiest part about this particular malware is that after you are done burning such critical information to disc, and you play it back again to verify its fidelity (as any responsible person would no doubt do), the bug/virus, in its clever treachery, assures that you hear the original media perfectly and does not actually make its effects apparent until delivered to the press.

Members of all our fine political parties: please make generous donations to your respective party, to ensure that they can afford to run latest copy of Norton. Our democracy cannot survive if our faithful politicians are hindered by such annoying technical glitches while fulfilling their solemn duties to the nation.

The dog & pony show known as the Gomery inquiry is not allowed to assign blame or point fingers - you call that following the letter or spirit of the law? It's a well crafted diversion that reveals the Liberals do get some good communications and PR advice for our millions. But something tells me that if some group took every last cent of your money - you would be less than satisfied with a Gomery type inquiry.

The true democratic mind should never be satisfied, nor should it be tempted towards suicide by prehistoric signals from the hypothalamus.

"But something tells me that if some group took every last cent of your money - you would be less than satisfied with a Gomery type inquiry."

You are absolutely correct. Frailty, thy name is anonymous. Hopefully, I would still have the presence of mind to recognize that personal choices exist beyond fight or flight. Or in lieu of that, membership in a humanistic, collective, security, to help me through such dark times.

Anytime Paul Martin tells me that he, too, is fed up waiting for the
trials of Basi, Virk, and the rest of his Liberal campaign workers
charged with drug trafficking, money laundering, fraud, and bribery
... well, that's the day I'll start believing he and his government are
truly concerned about Canada, too.

It's quite interesting that my point was so clearly demonstrated. I suggested that rather then jumping to conclusions, and assuming that the liberals are guilty, we allow the proper channels to figure out as much as they can before we the Canadian people decide in an election whether to punish them or not.

You may be right that everything that is going on is an attempt to sweep it under the carpet, but if you can see that, and I can see that, many Canadians may as well, and may say that they have had enough.

I try very hard to not assume anything without knowing all the information first, and yes I believe that it should be the same in Government. I want our leaders making educated decisions, using all the information they can.

My vote this past election was for the NDP, not the Liberals. So please don't make accusations without knowing the facts or asking the questions first.

If you don't like the way our justice system works then find a way to change it for the better. After all that is the point of all this isn't it? Making Canada better and more fair for all the inhabitants?