Liberal Party of Canada

Calling for a pot study is so last century and we've been there and done that and it was called the Le Dain Commission. It needs to be regulated similarly to alcohol. No other policy makes any sense from a human rights perspective. 

The stupid stupid line about the pot being more potent now and therefore more harmful is always proof that the person talking doesn't know a lot about actual drug use in the past. I have often heard that line from RCMP officials. Did Mulcair really use that line? There is a very good reason that in the '70's and '80's the soft drug of choice in Canada was hashish.  That's because the pot wasn't potent enough. I am not from there but it is my understanding that the black hash that Ollie's gang used to run out Afghanistan in the '80's was readily available in Montreal.  Just thinking about it makes me want to write an Ode to a Nepalese Temple Ball.

The NDP should let its health critic argue for legalization. Libby has been a strong advocate in the past. The last thing that Mulcair needs is a stern father image.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Calling for a pot study is so last century and we've been there and done that and it was called the Le Dain Commission. It needs to be regulated similarly to alcohol. No other policy makes any sense from a human rights perspective. 

The stupid stupid line about the pot being more potent now and therefore more harmful is always proof that the person talking doesn't know a lot about actual drug use in the past. I have often heard that line from RCMP officials. Did Mulcair really use that line? There is a very good reason that in the '70's and '80's the soft drug of choice in Canada was hashish.  That's because the pot wasn't potent enough. I am not from there but it is my understanding that the black hash that Ollie's gang used to run out Afghanistan in the '80's was readily available in Montreal.  Just thinking about it makes me want to write an Ode to a Nepalese Temple Ball.

The NDP should let its health critic argue for legalization. Libby has been a strong advocate in the past. The last thing that Mulcair needs is a stern father image.

I agree completely. I remember the LeDain commission very clearly because he was the Dean of Osgoode Hall Law School when I was there. In fact, I worked the summer after my graduation as a researcher for the criminologist John Hogarth, who was one of the major contributors to the report. Your point about potency of weed is also well taken. I have read from several medical sources, and also observed personally that cannabis users tend to self-titrate. That is, if the smoke is more potent, they consume less, if less potent, they consume more, to reach their preferred level of effect.

I think a commission is completely unnecessary as well.

But the political process being what it is... do you think ANY party will go straight from weed being completely illegal to completely legal?

It's not my preference to stop at decriminalizatinon. But when someone says we'll start there and launch a study to look into full legalization, it certainly sounds a lot more achievable.

And it remains to be seen whether the Liberals will promise anything better, let alone honor that promise. This is a party that relentlessly pisses on what its base wants. They're a completely different party than they were 30 years ago.

I don't believe the Liberals will legalize marijuana but I do believe that they will decriminalize it.

I'd much rather full out legalization but decriminalization is a good start.

It must be demanded to be on the agenda.

It's going to take alot more activism...420 protests everyday..or atleast every weekend.

I never,ever said the Libs were progressive.

The Liberals are not my first choice....My priority is killing the CPC.

The next election I will vote for whomever can and will defeat the Cons.

mark_alfred wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

I will eat my hat, and post pictures of it here on Babble, if the Liberals actually include legalization of marijuana in their next election platform document.

Great, I may actually have to eat my hat.  Well, we'll see when the Liberals release their election platform in 2015.

Can we at least see pictures of the hat now, before you have time to buy a smaller one?

Most Highly Unionized Countries Top ‘Happiest Countries” List, Again. Why?

Today, the United Nation’s released its second annual “World Happiness Index”.   One thing that is striking about these studies is that the ‘most happy countries’ are always countries with the a long tradition of strong government social welfare programs, high overall tax levels, and of interest to a blog on work law, high levels of collective bargaining coverage.  That is, in happy countries, unions and collective bargaining play a substantial role in the setting of conditions of work, which creates a strong middle class.  Not surprisingly, therefore, the ‘happiest’ countries also tend to be the least unequal societies:  they score well on measures of income inequality.  For example, the top 2 most happiest countries (Denmark, Norway) just happen to have the least income inequality in the Western World. 

- See more at: http://lawofwork.ca/?p=6881#sthash.cbvEOFl4.dpuf

Too funny - Trudeau's MPs first release of detailed expense releases turns out to be a bust. And even the story of not enough lead in time suggests that Canadians are stupid. Why back in the spring Trudeau was riding that pony and his 30 something MPs had like half a year to get that one all figured out.

Liberal parliamentarians post first batch of expense disclosures

Yet the online postings provide few details, and only go back a few weeks. That means there’s no way to tell whether a Liberal MP or senator paid $16 for a glass of orange juice, or who was the biggest spender over the past year.

snip

Simson also noted a lack of context, which means the numbers mean very little to those taxpayers trying to understand how and why their money was spent.

“The numbers themselves don’t always tell the tale,” she said. “If you don’t know where exactly the money was spent and why the money was spent, what you’re getting is just numbers.”

snip

What information is available on the Liberal website shows that the majority of claims posted by the Liberals Tuesday were for travel to and from Ottawa for the party’s caucus meeting late last month.

The meeting was called after Trudeau criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to prorogue Parliament for a month, with Trudeau promising Liberals would return to Ottawa anyway and work for Canadians.

Many Liberals spent thousands of dollars travelling the week of Sept. 16 to return to Ottawa for meetings, press conferences and do other work on Parliament Hill.

But while some stayed the whole week, others returned to their home ridings one or two days later.

Some Liberals show expense claims for lunches, though the only information provided was on where the meal took place and how many “guests” attended.

Other Liberals also asked to be reimbursed for “special travel.”

To wrap, it was a bust and also wasted money going to pretend parliament meetings in Ottawa.

Twitter was cheaper than this nothing happening and detailed expenses on line showed no detail. All fluff and no substance.

Last time I checked I saw that NDP MPs posted their expenses on line but if you are interested you can go look? Love it when the usual come to the rescue for TFB (Trust fund baby) who hoped that nobody actually checked the validity of his latest pronouncements.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The real answer is most but not all NDP MP's post their expenses on line and like Julian they also do it once a year. His expenses are current to March 2012, the end of the last fiscal year. You will also note that there is no way to tell how much Peter paid for a glass of juice or anything else, just how much was spent globally on each category.

Therefore you should have said no their meeting in September is not on line and that their expense reports on line are also not only dated but mere fluff with no substance.  You are the pot calling the kettle black.

http://peterjulian.ndp.ca/members-expenditures-report-april-1-2011-to-ma...

I am all for transparency, but Trudeau did this solely for political gain; its faux populism.

People may be calling the "kettle black" around here K, but the fact remains that if Trudeau didn't think he had something to gain by doing this, he wouldn't have.

THAT, is a fact.

Yes Trudeau likes to grandstand since that seems to be his only skill.  Trying to score cheap polltical points by distorting the facts is something I really despise in partisans of any stripe.

So, I see on Huff Post, the Libs are attacking Harper for deficits. So I note that given the won't raise taxes, the only way the Libs can cut the deficit is by cutting services. So some Lib replies back, no Art, "we'll get the money from transfer" payments? Moronic. My response, "so you are talking about new taxes on oridinary Canadians"? That'll trasnfer money all right. Unbelieveable!

Might have been. Now, that's interesting. I have to admit, I didn't read it that way.

Bizarre and unfortunate timing for the Liberals but when you play with fire you get burned!

RCMP seeks Mac Harb's bank info, alleges ex-senator committed breach of trust

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rcmp-seeks-mac-harb-s-bank-info-alleges-e...

Liberals leading the Cons

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/liberal-support-in-recent-polls-highest-since-2...

.

On Huff Post, I note that Harper is in the pocket of Big Oil and that Trudeau went to Calgary to suck up to them. A Lib posts in reply, better big oil in Trudeau's pocket, then Harper in Big Oil's pocket. How do these guys say things like this with a straight face?

Sears has finally developed some backbone. Amazin'

Maybe he actually does realize Mulcair could become PM next election.

Grits’ byelection night triumph all in the spin

eptions of Question Period, where the media and voters can watch and form their own judgments. And not so much when the spinner is flogging a line that flies in the face of the facts. One feels the pain of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Senate scandal spinners, repeating daily what most Canadians’ common sense tells them to be nonsense.

But byelections are a spinner’s dream. Few national political reporters know much about “flyover” communities like Provencher, Manitoba, so they can be fed spinners’ colourful and compelling tales with ease. Few Canadians or media organizations have any interest in electoral history. So spinners can paint fantastic political landscapes

I guess my question for the Liberals today is what happened in Brandon Souris?

You were polling with a 29% lead and yet you lost the by-election?

What did voters discover about the Liberals that they disliked just before they went into the voting booth?

Liberals were braying like asses that they were going clean up in Brandon Souris before the votes were counted, and Liberals always count their chickens before they are hatched.

According to Trudeau, but according to astute political analysts the Liberals made the same mistakes the BC NDP made in the May '13 BC election, by sending their leader into the wrong ridings. Just count me amongst those who are looking forward to the next federal election, which can come at any time now over the next 2 years. NDPers need to be ready for it.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-liberal-party-resonating-across-t...

Counting chickens

Most importantly, byelections are notoriously poor predictors of what voters will actually do when it comes down to determining who will run the entire country.
While the Liberals increased their vote share dramatically in the two Manitoba byelections, some of the Tory vote clearly stayed home. Whether that was because of candidate selection, the Senate scandal or a homophobic gaffe, it’s not likely to happen in 2015. The Tories identify and mobilize their supporters on election day better than any other party and that’s not likely to change much.
Nor will their level of support. The same 37 per cent to 39 per cent of voters who saw Stéphane Dion as a green nerd were equally sure that Michael Ignatieff didn’t come back for them. If they don’t believe Justin Trudeau is a privileged pot-smoking dilettante with no economic policy now, they will by 2015.

http://www.nsnews.com/news/counting-chickens-1.712123