The Conservatives in Calgary: Everything's fine, go away -

The Conservatives in Calgary: Everything’s fine, go away

Paul Wells reports from quarantine in the land of blue-clad volunteers


(CP photo)

There are five big halls in the BMO Centre at the Calgary Stampede grounds. For the duration of the Conservative Party’s biennial convention, reporters and news photographers are permitted to enter Hall D. It’s a lovely hall. It will be empty of official party activity until Friday night, when Stephen Harper will give a big speech. Also those of us who cased the joint learned that if we want to stroll up and down the hallway outside Hall D, we’re free to do that. But if we cross into the part of the venue that contains halls A, B, and C, we are soon stopped by warily smiling volunteers in blue shirts who hastily remind us that our presence is requested back in quarantine. NOW.

“I’m glad I don’t cover federal politics,” a Calgary newspaper writer said to me. I won’t say who it was, but read Rick Bell tomorrow. “Is this what it’s always like for you?” Well, no, because I normally don’t bother to try, but this is what it’s normally like in my absence.

This is how Stephen Harper likes to run a shop, especially given The Current Troubles.

The polls, even in often-clement venues, are discouraging. Conservatives of one sort and, well, another are offering the PM advice or, as the case may be, walking papers. The Ottawa Citizen demanded Harper resign the other day, which started a clock ticking, I suppose, because that paper’s editorial paper called for Jean Chrétien’s head in 1998, and five years later, by God, they had it.

So things are medium-tense out there in the land, and the blue-clad volunteers at the BMO Centre are doing a pretty good group imitation of the prime ministerial sphincter: a little tighter than usual. Which is perhaps unfortunate, because when I buttonholed nearly a dozen delegates over a couple of hours this afternoon (all in the Approved Hall D Hallway! Back off, blue guys), they said the sort of things I’m pretty sure the Conservatives would want reporters to hear, mostly.

No names. What’s your mood heading into the weekend, I asked two Southern Alberta delegates. “Better than a lot of columnists tell me it should be,” one said. He was glad the party was finally holding a convention in the west. It’s true, I said: the party’s first policy convention was in Montreal in 2005, then Winnipeg in 2008 and Ottawa in 2011. So except for Winnipeg, this is the first. “Winnipeg’s not the west,” the other fellow said. “It’s the centre.”

How were they feeling about the Senate business? Mixed. The first delegate doesn’t trust Mike Duffy as far as he can throw him, and he wondered why we’re all treating the ex-CTV Senator’s stories with such credulity. The other wondered why Nigel Wright got into trouble, since all he did was to make sure private money replaced the taxpayer money Duffy had pocketed. I said there are rules against that sort of thing, and I reminded everyone that the PM’s line on much of what happened has changed, and they agreed that’s so.

So these delegates could fit among the 2011 CPC voters in the Sun/Abacus poll I linked above who aren’t sure they believe the PM on the Senate stuff. But that doesn’t mean they are eager for him to stop being prime minister. They’re nowhere close to that upset at him. Nowhere close.

A third delegate regaled me with tales of Ralph Klein, his common touch, his skill at surrounding himself with smart advisors, his confidence. “Now tell me about Stephen Harper,” I said.

She stared into the middle distance for several seconds, pursed her lips. “Well, Stephen Harper is — interesting,” she said, after a while. There was a general sense that the party structures are distant from the concerns of grassroots members, and everybody I told about the media-control stuff here was amazed to hear it and thought it a bit silly, even though they were mostly willing to believe that reporters would rather report on the Senate conflict than anything else. In other words, the delegates I talked with were capable of entertaining complex notions: that the press might be a bunch of Ottawashed lefties and that we still might be permitted to wander about and do our jobs.

Various delegates have various preoccupations. Some were buried deep in the policy book, preparing to debate a bunch of resolutions Friday (in reporters’ absence) and again at the plenary session Saturday (in our presence). Others are keeping an eye on Conservative Party National Council elections. One, wearing a John Walsh button, told me there could be a move to replace Walsh as party president. “He’s aloof, he’s Toronto,” this delegate said, even as she prepared to defend him. (It’s always fun to note that the Conservatives’ president could probably not be named by most Conservatives, whereas the Liberals have had a succession of presidents who used the post to self-aggrandize. The latter party’s current president, Mike Crawley, is a relatively self-effacing exception to that Liberal trend.)

I found nobody who thinks Harper should be out as leader. (I hear there are some such delegates here.) The ones I talked to draw a distinction which is pretty clear to them: they worry about the Senate mess and wonder why Harper can’t put it behind them, and they think the message discipline is a bit silly, but they notice they’re close to eight years in power with Harper and they do not think he’s played out his hand yet.

When the great moment comes on Friday night that reporters and delegates are invited by the party into the same room, and the blue volunteers hold hands and sing, and Harper begins his speech to delegates, his task will not actually be all that daunting. Outside the hall, across the country, are millions of voters who are pretty sure, in many cases, that a Conservative government is a bad idea. But inside the hall will be a few thousand who think a Conservative idea is a good idea, and Harper needs to speak to them. He needs to make the generic case he would make to any audience — economy and trade — and the narrower case that works best with Conservatives — Wheat Board, long-gun registry, resource exports, crime. He needs to tell them the news they haven’t been getting in the newspapers for a while. My hunch is that they’ll leave the hall in a pretty good mood tomorrow night. We’ll still be grumpy. Harper can live with that.


The Conservatives in Calgary: Everything’s fine, go away

  1. Replace FPTP voting with MMP & you put the CPC into the opposition benches for a long time.

    • And that tells the six to eight million Canadians who *like* the occasional CPC government exactly what?

      • That you would then have actually to win an election in order to have one?

        • tough love indeed

      • It will tell CONservative voters that for every 4 votes you got, others got 6. It will tell CONservative voters that a MMP elected parliament truly represents the values of all Canadians, instead of the Canadian government today that excludes the values of the majority of Canadians.
        With MMP we can still have a CONservative PM, but that government would be a coalition government & that these junior coalition partners will have a say in the government. This is how the UK is government today. This is how Germany is governed today.

        • Wow, writing CONservative is pretty much as clever as writing LIEberal. How did you become so witty and erudite?

          • I like to think that he’s saying it like “KHAAAANN!!!!” à la Captain Kirk. So it becomes “CCOOOONNN!!!!servative” every time. (With a fist-shake, to add effect.)

          • Given Del Mastro, Duffy, Wallin & Brazeau may be going to jail for their crimes, I find CONs to be a apropos for current events in Ottawa.

          • except there is no “E” as the third letter in L-i-b-e-r-a-l. You guys in short pants really gott’a learn to spell too.

          • Lol, that went flying right over your head didn’t it.

          • You didn’t really think you were making some kind of a pun, did you? Really??? I knew you strikers for the Cons weren’t a brilliant lot, but I’m beginning to realize just how shallow you are.

        • You disagree with Gov’t. Got it. CPC has won 3 elections in a row, you cannot argue that this government hasn’t earned the right to govern as it thinks it should. Thats why we count the votes.

    • Actually i think a PR systen might guarantee that truly Conservative voters might be reasonably assured of some representation that matched their actual numbers in the country. It’s true they would have to compromise anyway to get anything done, but isn’t that better then being welded forever to the notion of being a perpetual and truculent outsider who feel they always have to push the envelope to get a fair hearing in this country? A PR system would not at all guarantee liberal govts for instance, although it might ensure a coalition of the centre left in general got a lot of govt time federally. But really, what’s to stop a smart politician from forming a centre right one of their very own?
      Still, the arctic will thaw before you see the CPC endorse PR at a federal level, they’d have to pretty abandon any hope of ever getting a much smaller federal govt for one thing.

      • Give give you we may still have CPC government with MMP, but at least a strong leash would be in place to prevent Harper’s unfettered reign. Harper’s alternative would be sit in opposition as the 2nd 3rd 4th place parties govern in coalition. One where in the constitution does it say the 1st place party must govern. That is a myth the Harperites are spreading.

    • be careful what you wish for…PR is inherently unstable and may give the conservatives disproportionate power due to the constant need to form coalitions

      • Since 1949 when the modern German state was formed I don’t think a single coalition government has fallen on a confidence issue, since the moving party must show it can form government. This prevents wannabees from using this tactic, without the muscle to use it. I would call that very stable.

        Now if CONservatives can form government with the support of a minority partner, I may not like it but given it’s supported by 50% +1 voters I would call it legit. Harper’s 39% false majority government is illegitimate.

        • you cite 1 example out of how many possible examples? the exception proves the rule that they’re relatively unstable relative to fptp…an additional problem with pr is that it gives voice to the nuts…the communist parties, christian family coalition parties…with fptp they get stuffed into the back benches of the cons and ndp and are marginal at best…in pr there’s always the potential they become a vital coalition partner almost without regard to how small their numbers…hello PM Charles McVety lol…changing the system might solve some problems, but it’ll create it’s own set of problems

    • and you think thats a SELLING point for MMP?

    • Another lefty fantasy. “If only we changed XXXXX then the Conservatives will never see power again”.

      Have you ever that maybe the reason your party hasn’t won power in such a long time is because you’re so focused on the “other guys” and haven’t put forth any meaningful policy for Canadians? Or that maybe Canadians are disgusted that you’d attempt to rig the game against one particular party?

      • A muzzled Harper in coalition is better for Canada then the current Harper government where there is no checks to his authority. The day will come when the CONs are un the outside looking in & the govenment of the day will have all the authority to ignore them. I want to see that option prevented to be electing legislatures that reflect the electors.

  2. “So things are medium-tense out there in the land, and the blue-clad
    volunteers at the BMO Centre are doing a pretty good group imitation of
    the prime ministerial sphincter: a little tighter than usual.”

    lol Pretty much my experience when Harper came to my small town. The security was oppressive if understandably so. I had the slightly surreal experience of initially being denied entrance to the town arena by the failed CPC candidate who was manning the door.[ this at a public event, not party] She was pleasant but adamant i couldn’t get in, This was in the main due to my idiocy in turning up without id.[ this is a very small tight knit town of barely 3000]
    I pointed out that this was a little silly since all the people sitting on the admissions desk behind her actually knew me. The embarrassed mayor even said he’d take me in – no dice. Eventually a change of mental gears on her part made her bend to the point she would personally escort me into a arena where i probably knew more people then she did – i was sat with the other delinquents and suspects in the back row.[ press and kids] after she had breathlessly told me he[Harper] was just a great guy and all this fuss was just because he was the very last guy in the western world who had not had some kind of attempt made on him.[ who knew]
    Afterwards i stood outside the zamboni doors waiting for another glimpse of the great man, surrounded by his 10 car entourage.Bit of a trouble maker that i am, I couldn’t have been the only person puzzled and amused by all this attention.

    He was very slick and business like, focused and everything. But i couldn’t help thinking some of the flunkies were just a little too in thrall and in awe of him; perhaps even too much to ask too many otherwise reasonable questions?

    • The neoConBot crazy Christian-Right-Wing Trolls just can’t
      help it:

      RWA: Right-Wing
      Authoritarian Followers

      snip snip: So a
      right-wing authoritarian follower doesn’t necessarily have conservative
      political views. Instead he’s someone
      who readily submits to the established authorities in society, attacks others
      in their name, and is highly conventional.

      Which suggests authoritarian followers have a little volcano
      of hostility bubbling away inside them looking for a (safe, approved) way to

      • Makes sense to me, given how his loyalists post on the internet. They seen an unusually angry lot.

        • Not to mention uncommonly stupid. Yeesh, sometimes they make me feel like a genius…pretty sure I’m not.

      • “The neoConBot crazy Christian-Right-Wing Trolls just can’t
        help it: RWA: Right-Wing
        Authoritarian Followers”

        Oh lol, don’t forget the Jews, Illuminati and the reverse vampires. They’re out to steal your soul.

  3. Jennifer Ditchburn


    Snubbed from the #CPC13 rodeo, a group of reporters writes down guesses on Harper’s successor. #cdnpoli


  4. I knew the statisticians would finally turn on Clement.

    • ? Did i miss something good?

      • Photo above…

        • Well spotted. The name must have given it away. It does look like stats Can duffed him over a bit, doesn’t it?
          Truthfully, if they ever get a chance to get a shot without witnesses, it’s likely to be with a Mac truck on the 401

  5. Thank u, Paul Wells. Good start to a convention.

    Oh, and remember when PET once said (and I paraphrase): I speak over the heads of the media, over the heads of the elites. I speak to you directly!

    Harper will do just that.

    • Directly to the party – because he’s pretty much denied the press access so they could relate his message to the people. How are you enjoying the convention, Francie?

    • That must be why lowly citizens are not allowed in the same room as Harper. Only people screened for thought crime and approved by the CPC secret police are permitted in his presence.

  6. Hey Paul

    Just watched CTV News with Leesa whatsername. They ran the Manning interview about the Senate fracas. But here’s the really funny bit- they clipped the last part of his comment “and it ought to be an embarrassment to the press corps,” he said. Just disappeared! Guess the newsroom was operating under pressing time constraints. Hell, you guys belong in Halls A,B &C. (I’d let you in Paul, but not Lisa whatsername).

    • Her name is Lisa LaFemme. She replaced some guy named Floyd or Lloyd…

      • Thanks. They’re both on the network that tells us in their advertising that their job is to “tell us what the news means to us- not just the facts- but how it affects us- makes us laugh- makes us cry.” They’re not just nice hair.

      • Lisa LaFlamme

  7. Hall D, notice anything?

    Apart from the obvious, you have complete access to pretty much no one. Hmmmm, what about those banners, are they kosher?

  8. “…we are soon stopped by warily smiling volunteers in blue shirts who
    hastily remind us that our presence is requested back in quarantine. NOW.”

    C’mon Paul, show a bit of gumption. You and John should beg steal or borrow a couple of those blue shirts and go over the top, get in there and get us the inside scoop. What’s to lose if you’re caught, they’ll just ban you to hall D again? These guys really aren’t that bright, just take off your specs, adopt a Scottish brogue and they’ll think the pair of you are interns from Poland or somewhere foreign. Remember, He Who Dares Wins.[ the motto of the SAS]
    Or at least gets to write something juicy about Harper and this convention.

  9. I understand Nigel Wright has been in the party since a teenager and has probably attended hundreds of these meetings. Not this one I guess.
    The decision to announce he was fired not resigned is huge to the base I would think, since it leaves his reputation in tatters, denied the honourable face saving way out.
    People think apparently that he is an extraordinarily decent honourable ethical christian man.
    So what’s his current standing with the base out there? Most of them likely know him and respect him. And apparently he is held in high regard on Bay Street as well.
    Now summarily dismissed without even the dignity of resigning voluntarily, accepted with regret etc.
    From: “I made a mistake I will do the right thing and resign”; to “you made a mistake and were involved in deception, you’re fired!”

    • Hi, JW, I was wondering the same thing — is Nigel not a CPC insider, and how does “the base” feel about his treatment? I also just read that the Deloitte audit of Wallin, Duffy and Harb cost about $7 – 8 thousand more than the bad expenses. So I also wonder how the infamous CPC base squares that circle.

      Anyway, I don’t expect anyone who would attend a big partisan rally to do anything except “rally” around its leader to the media. Harper is a famous incrementalist, so maybe his downfall is also creeping up, incrementally.

      • patchouli, you know that ability you have to have to find good in your party and defend it no matter what scandal it becomes immersed in? Well so does every other devoted member of every other party. Partisans are the same where ever you go. As for Nigel Wright, he is a hero in the party. Do not kid yourself. He is taking the heat for the PM and he donated $90K to the taxpayers. Nigel is single-handedly propping up the party through this scandal. Would you do less if Justin called on you?

        • What gets into you? You say familiar things to people you don’t know. I do not refer to Justin Trudeau as “Justin,” for heaven’s sake. And trust me: I would do far far less than Nigel Wright if, for some insane, reason Justin Trudeau sought to ask for some kind of assistance from a supporter. Most likely, I’d send in $20.

          And I do identify with Liberal values but much of the time, I find myself voting for a different party because of where I live. So I’m not a very good partisan for any party — I just happen to despise the current government and want to see them ousted. And no, never ever in my life have I defended any party for doing BS, or joined in putting down good and honourable people for the sake of partisanship. I will never make fun of Stephane Dion because he is a good and brilliant and honourable man.

          Finally, just how the hell do you think CPC got in? Clearly enough Liberal supporters were upset about the sponsorship stuff AND CHANGED THEIR VOTE. That is why media and others are speculating about whether or not partisan CPC supporters will change their vote. Which brings us full circle: this article that we are supposedly discussing is about whether or not CPC partisans will publicly acknowledge concern about the antics. Given that they are very partisan, I do not believe they will. What about you: you seem very partisan, and also quite defensive so I would guess you will not admit that you think anything wrong has been done by Stephen — do you refer to him as Stephen?

          • Gee patchouli people call the Duchess and Duke, Kate and Will. Sorry it offends you but you have referred to Harper as much worse than Stephen. You really think it is an affront to call a politician by their first name?
            “And no, never in my life have I defended any party for doing BS, or joined in putting down honourable people for the sake of partisanhip.” I really wish you had not made that claim patchouli. Are you really saying you didn’t score over 50 up votes when Macleans ran an article on Justin Trudeau’s handling of a mother who expressed concern for the ease at which her daughter would get cannabis. Did you not say in a comment that the 16 year old daughter had substance abuse problems? Wasn’t that you who was exploiting a young girl who everyone knew due to her mother’s foolishness in approaching Justin Trudeau in front of cameras in the first place. Did you not “put down an honorable KID” for the sake of partisanship or was someone else using your moniker that day?

          • No, I did not, you silly old goose. I said IF the girl had abuse problems the mother should talk to the current government because clearly their laws aren’t working. But I do remember that discussion — isn’t it the one where you declared that you have no power as a parent to stop your teenage daughter from smoking pot and blamed her peers for giving it to her? As though you are a victim. I know that pot smoking is normal, trust me — my kids are older than yours and I grew up in the Seventies too. But you get on here, all expert nurse crap know-it-all, and spew to others while overlooking your own home quarters. Let me just say what I held back from saying that evening: You are not your child’s friend, you are far more important than that: you are a parent and have distinct responsibilities that friends do not have. It’s normal for her to turn to them to complain about you but you have to suck it up and do the right thing anyway. Unless you want to be like that parent who was in the video who wanted to blame everyone else for the troubles her daughter was having. Pot is a reasonably safe buzz, always has been — but in those too young, or in those who overindulge, it can be a real demotivater in life, hard to get started on post secondary and careers if you’re buzzed all the time. As a psych nurse, you already know that. But what about as a parent? Last week, you posted about knowing a teenage girl who was caught in a car with all the boys who had pot, and she too was charged (even though it was not her pot, and everyone else was victimizing her) — and I thought it was likely your daughter. Let me say I have total empathy with parents raising teenagers — it is a difficult task.

            Finally, you should look up the word “partisan” because I am not sure you know what it means.

          • Hahaha! Wow patchouli, nice try at deflection. You are a real class act trying to suggest that I ever said my kids had drug abuse issues. You must be a hell of a lot older than me if you can’t remember that teenagers who are 17 and 18 enjoy going to a party with their peers. That is exactly what I said. Yes, I have failed my kids so dismally that they are both self-sufficient adults who work full time and live on their own. One owns her own home and is in upper management at age 25.
            Which one are you imagining was charged with drug possession? The 18 year old who will be attending university next fall or the happily married 25 year old?
            Are you sure you are even a Liberal? Liberals are supposed to treat people better, at least somewhat ethically or so we have been told. Those Cons are nasty but they don’t have anything on you.

          • I did not mean to offend you and I hope your kids are just great and happy. I misread your remarks. And I know that lots of people enjoy pot with no consequences at all, healthwise or justice wise. I am in support of legalizing the stuff. You just seem to be someone who probably relates to Liberal values, but are an Albertan so you can’t see the forest for the trees — but even though you blindly support CPC and your leadership, your stance on pot is pretty Liberal.

          • “are an Albertan so you can’t see the forest for the trees”
            Oh, that’s right — other Canadians are smarter and more aware than Albertans. That comes up a lot on these comment boards.

    • There is always, “If you don’t resign, I will have to fire you”….meaning a person is gone but they are given the opportunity to resign.
      Further, you are looking at this ALL wrong. Nigel Wright fell on his sword for the government. His reputation is not tattered among Conservatives. They are grateful he is taking the heat and giving the party a chance at survival. What more could a devoted partisan do for their party?

      • This is more than falling on his sword for the party; this is the politics of personal; destruction by Harper; treating a fellow party member the way he would Dion or Ignatieff or Trudeau, destroying his reputation utterly.

        • “Personal destruction”…..hmmm……Yes, after all it isn’t like Michael Ignatieff hasn’t landed on his feet back in academia AND written a best seller.

          • Dion is pretty well respected as a parliamentarian these days too. Father of Clarity Act; seen as one of the victims of Duffy’s successful campaign to win a place in the Senate from Harper!!

      • Harper has a rather odd way of showing his gratitude. Good thing he’s not “really” angry at Nigel for taking a bullet for him.

        • Oh, I can’t wait to read Wright’s memoir. I bet he’ll be set for life when he publishes it and he sure will be angry at Harper for setting him up to make all that glorious money. Meanwhile, the base is indebted to him.

          • I have a feeling Nigel was pretty much set for life even before he
            signed on with the PMO. The income from a tell-all, even a Canadian best-seller, would just be walkin’-around money for him.

            By all accounts, however, he sounds like the kind of stand-up guy who wouldn’t write a titillating exposé in order to sanitize his own rep. He’ll just go back to making his millions on Bay St., hoping that history will vindicate him.

            I suspect that’s why Harper feels secure in publicly denouncing him – no likely blowback from Nigel.

          • I think you are catching on.

          • My wife never thinks so ;)

          • Haha!

  10. Any delegates who dare speak to the media on the record will be dragged behind the barn and spanked !
    After the trained seals in the H of C, we have the trained seal delegates.
    Isn’t democracy and transparence just dandy in Reform land!
    The Conservative party has indeed been hijacked by Reform-Alliance thugs.

  11. wow, Karl Belanger is Rob Ford’s skinnier doppelganger…

  12. Can they stay in Calgary – for good? Let’s pray all…

  13. Harper is …. “interesting”….. since when?

    • Have you not read these comment boards? It’s mostly the left-wing lunatics that are obsessed with him.

      • . . . and call his supporters Nazis at the drop of a hat. It’s the progressive way of doing politics.

  14. Seems to me the zealous volunteers should be wearing brown shirts.

    • Oh, Conservatives are Nazis. How original of you! I’ve never seen that before on these comment boards. You’re very clever.
      I guess it’s because the Conservative Party of Canada is singular in its persecution of Jews. Somewhere in their platform, there is a proposal to make all Jewish people wear prominent yellow stars on their lapels. This will be followed by mass deportation and, ultimately, extermination. I’m not making this up.

      • A little over the top there, Orson. Take your meds.

        • I’m not the one calling people with whom I disagree Nazis. You are.

          • Nazis?

            I never mentioned the word…you did. Read the thread again.

            Anyway, I prefer the word “authoritarian” to describe Harper’s regime. It’s more accurate.

          • Yeah, your brown shirt reference was not intended as a Nazi reference or allusion. You’re very intellectually honest. I guess you learned that from Harper & Co. And you’re right, under Harper, we are an authoritiarian regime — we have no civil rights, no opposition parties, all political opponents of Harper’s are in jail. We are one of the most oppressive and un-democratic countries in the world. No wonder that nobody in the world wants to live here and that we constantly rank near the top of the world’s least desirable places to live and near the top of the list of human-rights abusers.

          • Need I point out that the Boy Scouts of Canada wear brown shirts, too?

            I’m pretty sure you’d unreservedly agree that they have the same purity of spirit, sense of civic engagement, respect for democratic institutions, and belief in personal accountability as your beloved leader.

            Those volunteers at the CPC convention would have looked quite fetching in Boy Scout brown. They could call themselves the Harper Youth Movement.

          • Scouts in Canada wear green. Venturers wear tan, but have never been referred to as ‘brownshirts’. That reference is specifically for Nazis, and you know it.

            Oh, and the Boy Scouts of Canada hasn’t been around for decades.

          • OK, I give up. The “brown shirt” reference wasn’t completely fair because, as I’ve already said above, the word “authoritarian” is, IMO, a more accurate description of the Harper regime than the N-word.

            Is that better?

          • I love how one of the main lame, juvenile defence mechanisms that people like you exhibit, whenever you’re busted, is to turn around and immediately accuse the other person of being a Harper supporter. In my case, I’ve never liked the guy, I’m on record on these comment boards as opposing all kinds of policies and positions of Harper’s, and I voted Liberal last election. So your assertion is both false and ridiculous. Is that the best you can do?

          • I’m not much interested in your peripatetic political meandering nor in ad hominem slagging, so I’ll let you have the last word on juvenile behaviour. Let’s give it a rest.

  15. insiders tell me that he’ll be gracing the base with a rendition of cowgirl in the sand.

    • cowgirl in the oilsand?

  16. god, the suspense is killing me, when is he gonna appear…i’m gettin all wet down there.

  17. Please Massa Steve, just a little domocracy?

  18. Here we go again, the Conservative denial convention where all is forgotten while they sing and dance and waste tax payers’ money on lavish conventions, posh hotels and all the booze and food one can consume over a weekend of playing politics. And then we wonder why there is no money for basic people needs like health care, social services and pensions. It’s like the father of a family that tells his wife and kids to tighten their belts while he goes off and drinks all his paycheck in the local bar.