September 26, 2007

Malicious Mother Syndrome. ( The Drama Part 1)

Here is my experience of being a Father of one child in which the marriage ended in divorce and the Mother is suffering from Malicious Mother Syndrome.

The "One" I speak of is my son, aged 9, born on August 12 1998. I'll never forget the day he was born in St.Paul's Hospital in Vancouver. It was raining as I drove from Port Moody to Downtown Vancouver along the Bartlet Highway. It was eleven in the evening on August the eleven and I had been asleep for about an hour prior to the obvious need to get to the hospital with an expected arrival. My son due date was August 12th so there was really no surprise that we could be making the journey very soon. Unusual for Downtown Vancouver was that parking was a breeze and so we sailed into the hospital and had to deal with the usual admitting questions from the intake clerk. After being hooked up to the monitors a doctor came in to see if the membranes had broken and what should have been a usual procedure turned into a very scary moment when Ryan's heart rate dropped down to 40 beats per minute. Quickly, oxygen was administered and Ryan's heart rate accelerated back up to about 140 BPM after about 3 minutes on continuous oxygen at 10 liters per minute. Those three minutes haunt me to this day for reasons I will get into later.

My sons Moms and I had been married for three years at the time of the birth she did not want to change her name to mine. My feelings about women changing their name at marriage are pretty neutral so I discussed it once in the context of greater family harmony and it went no where so I left it alone. My own mother had the last name of Scott and it didn't affect me, or at least I thought it didn't.

At three in morning the contractions are about 15 to 20 minutes apart and after a real intense one Caren falls off to sleep or a semi-sleep. A chance for me to go outside for some fresh air. alright, for those who know me I wanted a smoke and a stretch as I find hospitals very hard to be in. Too much pain, physical and otherwise. I find a phone to call my Mom in Winnipeg while enjoying a few puffs on cigarette. I explain what had happened, "Ryan's heart rate dropped to 40 BPM". My Mom's a nurse as well so she would understand my concern. She calmed me down and reassured me that all would be fine. I took a few more deep breathes and realized the stars has come out from the rainy dark night. As I studied deep into space for a recognizable constellation I observed a shooting star. To my amazement I saw two more before I darted back into the hospital thinking, what are the odds? The odds are actually very good as I learned two years later. The Perseid's meteor shower puts on a great show every year for my son's birthday.

my son was born at about 8:00 a.m. and I fell asleep on the sofa at about 10:00 a.m. as mother and baby were both fast asleep. By all accounts all seemed pretty normal with the new little family. The following day we returned home and the countless visitors came from all over, "Gotta see the baby!" As ones reads this it is strikingly apparent there was nothing malicious going on at the time of birth. During the three years of marriage prior to the birth there was some indications of malicious behavior but I'll focus this series of post on the events leading to divorce and the events after the divorce. The syndrome is called Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome for a reason. Stay Tuned

September 15, 2007

Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome

The summer of 2007 should be remembered as one that saw a set back for estranged fathers from their children. In the last 3 months 4 fathers in my tiny circle of friends and acquaintances have been dealt with by courts and enforcement agencies in a matter that begs for closer scrutiny.

First, Deadbeat Mom sounds horrible but hey, I'm all for equality and I didn't invent the phrase. The phrase does need a definition. The phrase evokes all kinds of emotional responses and I'm not the least bit interested in such a charged debate but rather a clear definition of the phrase. When applied to the male, the definition is simple, it means the father of a child is not paying an equal or greater share of the costs of raising a child or children.

The problem of deadbeat Moms involves a much greater sphere of influence than financial. The impact on all aspects of what it means to be a father through the eyes of the children is negatively skewed. The word deadbeat does not do justice for the all encompassing negative impact. The social, psychological, and emotional development and well being of the children and father suffers greatly.

In searching for a definition that accurately depicts what has happened to me and many other fathers can now be called what it is, "A Syndrome". Like many other syndromes left unchecked can rapidly become a plague in our society. From what I have witnessed in the last three months it is time to sound the alarm bells.

First one must be able to identify the problem so I will publish a paper on the topic written by someone with much more credibility than myself.


Ira Daniel Turkat, Ph.D.

With the increasing commonality of divorce involving children, a pattern of abnormal behaviour has emerged that has received little attention. The present paper defines the Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome. Specific nosologic criteria are provided with abundant clinical examples. Given the lack of scientific data available on the disorder, issues of classification, etiology, treatment, and prevention appear ripe for investigation.


A divorced man gains custody of his children and his ex-wife burns down his home. A woman in a custody battle buys a cat for her offspring because her divorcing husband is highly allergic to cats. A mother forces her children to sleep in a car to "prove" their father has bankrupted them. These actions illustrate a pattern of abnormal behavior that has emerged as the divorce rate involving children has grown.

Today, half of all marriages will end in divorce (Beal and Hochman, 1991). The number of children involved in divorce has grown dramatically (e.g., Hetherington and Arastah, 1988) as well. While the majority of such cases are "settled" from a legal perspective, outside the courtroom the battle continues.

The media has spent considerable effort raising public awareness about the problem posed by divorced fathers who do not provide court ordered child support payments. Hedges (1991) has noted that less than 20% of divorced fathers provide child support payments three years after their divorce. Research on the decline of women's economic status following divorce (e.g., Hernandez, 1988; Laosa, 1988) has contributed to recent legislation to address the "Deadbeat Dad" problem.

While the media correctly portrays the difficulties imposed upon women and children by the "Deadbeat Dad" phenomenon, the cameras have yet to capture the warfare waged by a select group of mothers against child support paying, law abiding fathers. Every day, attorneys and therapists are exposed to horror stories in which vicious behaviors are lodged against innocent fathers and children. Unfortunately, there are no scientific data on the subject. Similarly, the clinical literature has relatively ignored the problem.

A notable exception can be found in the clinical writings of Gardner (1987, 1989) who has provided excellent descriptions of the Parental Alienation Syndrome. Here, a custodial parent successfully engages in a variety of maneuvers to alienate the child from the non-residential parent. Once successfully manipulated, the child becomes "...preoccupied with deprecation and criticism of a parent-denigration that is unjustified and/or exaggerated" (Gardner, 1989 p. 226). In the typical case of Parental Alienation Syndrome, both mother and child engage in an array of abnormal actions against the rather. Gardner views "brainwashing" as a concept "too narrow" (Gardner, 1989) to capture the psychological manipulation involved in turning a child against his/her non-residential parent.

While Gardner's pioneering descriptions of the Parental Alienation Syndrome provide an important contribution to our understanding of divorce related child involved hostilities, the present paper is concerned with a more global abnormality. As noted in the examples provided in the beginning of this manuscript, serious attacks on divorcing husbands take place which are beyond merely manipulating the children. Further, these actions include a willingness by some mothers to violate societal law. Finally, there are mothers who persistently engage in malicious behaviors designed to alienate their offspring from the father, despite being unable to successfully cause alienation. In sum, these cases do not meet the criteria for Parental Alienation Syndrome. Nevertheless, they portray a serious abnormality.

The purpose of the present paper is to define and illustrate this more global abnormality with the hope of generating increased scientific and clinical investigation of this problem.


The present section provides a beginning definition of the Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, which has been derived from clinical and legal cases. As in all initial proposals, it is anticipated that future research will lead to greater refinement in the taxonomic criteria. The proposed definition encompasses four major criteria, as follows:


A mother who unjustifiably punishes her divorcing or divorced husband by:
1. Attempting to alienate their mutual child(ren) from the father
2. Involving others in malicious actions against the father
3. Engaging in excessive litigation


The mother specifically attempts to deny her child(ren):
1. Regular uninterrupted visitation with the father
2. Uninhibited telephone access to the father
3. paternal participation in the child(ren)'s school life and extra-curricular activities


Tile pattern is pervasive and includes malicious acts towards the husband including:
1. Lying to the children
2. Lying to others
3. Violations of law


The disorder is not specifically due to another mental disorder although a separate mental disorder may co-exist.


In this section, I will provide clinical illustrations for each criterion using the reference numbers provided above. As criteria 1-3 are behavior specific to the Malicious Mother Syndrome, I will provide a series of clinical examples. The fourth criterion which addresses the relationship of the proposed syndrome to other mental disorders, will be discussed more generally.

Criterion 1A: Alienating the Children

The range of actions taken by a mother to attempt to alienate her children from their father is impressive. For example:

One mother lied to her children that she could no longer buy food because their father had spent all of their money on women at topless bars.

A doctor's wife forced her 10 year old son to apply for federally funded free school lunches to delude the boy that his "daddy has made us poor."

A woman who for years was very close to the children in a custody battle, was asked by their mother to give up neutrality and join her campaign against the father to "dance on his grave." When the friend refused to give up her neutrality, the mother falsely informed her children that their father was having an affair with this woman.

These behaviors, if successful, could lead a child to not only hate the father but perhaps go years without seeing him. As Cartwright (1993) has noted: "The goal of the alienator is crystalline: to deprive the lost parent, not only of the child's time, but of the time of childhood" (p. 210).

Criterion 1B: Involving Others in Malicious Actions

The second component of the first major criterion where the mother attempts to punish the husband, involves manipulating other individuals to engage in malicious acts against the father. Examples of this kind are as follows:

During a custody battle, a mother lied to a therapist about the father's behaviour. The therapist, having never spoken with the father, appeared as an "expert" witness to inform the Judge that the mother should be the primary residential parent and that the father needed to be in therapy.

One angry mother manipulated teenagers to leave anonymous threatening notes at the ex-husband's home.

A mother who had lost legal custody of her child, manipulated a secretary at the child's school to assist in kidnapping the child.

In the above examples, it is important to note that the person manipulated by the angry mother has, in a way, been "alienated" against the divorcing husband. Typically, the individual "duped" takes on a righteous indignation, contributing to a rewarding climate for the mother initiating malicious actions.

Criterion 1C: Excessive Litigation

There is little question that either party in a divorce or custody proceeding is entitled to appropriate legal representation and action. Individuals suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, however, attempt to punish the divorcing husband by engaging in excessive litigation.

A belligerent and unreasonable mother verbally attacked her ex-husband whenever she saw him. Over time, his response was to ignore her. She then took him to court, asking the judge to require the ex-husband to talk with her.

One mother told a judge that her daughter was not really her divorcing husband's child.

One woman refused to stop attacking her ex-husband through the courts despite numerous attorneys being fired or voluntarily leaving the case. Over a three year period, seven different attorneys were utilized.

Data exist which can help in determining the range of excessive litigation. For example, Keel et al. (1988) report on the frequency of post-divorce litigation in a sample of 700 families. Their data indicate that only 12.7% of families file one post-divorce petition to the court, whereas less than 5% file two or more petitions (Keel at al. 1988); less than 1% file four or more petitions.

Criterion 2A: Denying Regular Visitation

Experts are in relative agreement that regular and uninterrupted visitation with the non-residential parent is desirable and beneficial for children, except in extreme circumstances (Hedges, 1991). In fact, some states, such as Florida, have laws written to reflect this view (Keane, 1990). Unfortunately, even when the father and children have legal rights to visitation, individuals with Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome continue to interfere with it.

A mother who previously attacked her ex-husband physically during visitation transfers of the children, refused to provide the children when the ex-husband had the police attend to monitor exchanges.

When one divorced father arrived to pick up his children for visitation, the mother arranged for her and the children to be elsewhere so that the father could not visit with the children.

One mother had her physically intimidating boyfriend assault her ex-husband when he came to pick up his children for visitation.

The President of The Council for Children's Rights (Washington, D.C.) notes that such alienation is considered a form of child abuse (Levy, 1992). Unfortunately, the police typically avoid involving themselves in such situations. Furthermore, unless a victimized father is financially capable of returning to court on an ongoing basis, there is little that can be done to prevent such mothers' behavior. Finally, even when such cases are brought to trial, the courts are often inadequate in supporting fathers' visitation rights (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992).

Criterion 2B: Denying Uninhibited Telephone Access

Given the physical absence of one parent, the telephone plays an important role in maintaining the bond between child and non-residential parent. Individuals suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome engage in an array of actions designed to circumvent telephone access.

A father called to speak to his children and was told that they were not at home when in bet he could hear their voices in the background.

When one father called to speak with his children, the mother put him on "hold," informed no one, and then left him there.

Knowing that the children's father was away on vacation, one mother encouraged them to leave several messages on his answering machine to call back immediately only if he would like some additional visitation time with his children.

Some fathers find the alienation attempts so painful and fruitless that they eventually are extinguished from calling their children; they simply "give up." Placed in a no-win scenario, the father's "abandonment" (Hedges, 1991) unfortunately achieves the precise result aimed for by the individual suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

Criterion 2C: Denying Participation in Extra-Curricular Activities

An integral part of the process of maintaining one's bond with one's child is to participate in activities that one did before the parents separated. School plays, team sports, and religious events are just some of the types of activities of importance. Malicious Mothers frequently engage in maneuvers designed to prevent participation in these activities.

One father was deliberately given the wrong date and time for an important event for the child. The child was asked by the mother, "I wonder why your father didn't want to come to see you today"?

One mother refused to provide the father with any information about any extra-curricular activities in which the children were engaged.

Prior to a child's soccer game, one mother told many of the team parents disparaging falsehoods about the visiting lather. When he came to watch his son's soccer game, many of these parents looked at him with angry eyes, refused to talk with him, and walked away when he moved toward them.

Malicious Mothers who engage in such behaviors rarely have to face penalties for such actions. Judges, attorneys, and policemen cannot involve themselves in every instance of blocked paternal access. Furthermore, most fathers cannot afford the financial requirements involved. As such, the cycle of access interference perpetuates itself.

Criterion 3A: Malicious Lying to the Children

Given their developmental status, children in a disputed divorce situation are quite vulnerable. When one parent decides to attack the other by lying to the children, examples of this type of malicious behavior may include some of the following.

One divorcing mother told her very young daughter that her father was "not really" her father even though he was.

An eight year old girl was forced by her mother to hand unpaid bills to her lather when he visited because the mother had falsely told the daughter that the father had not provided any economic means of support to the family.

One mother falsely told her children that their father had repeatedly beat her up in the past.

These examples of malicious lying can be contrasted with the more subtle maneuvers typically seen in Parental Alienation Syndrome, such as "virtual allegations" (Cartwright, 1993). Here, the mother setting up a Parental Alienation Syndrome may hint that abuse may have occurred, whereas the individual suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome falsely claims that abuse has actually occurred.

Criterion 3B: Malicious Lying to Others

Individuals suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome may engage a wide range of other individuals in their attacks upon the ex-husband. However, with this particular criterion, the individual with Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome specifically lies to other individuals in the belligerency against the father. Some examples include the following.

One furious mother called the president of the (1500 employee) workplace of her divorcing husband, claiming falsely that he was using business property for personal gain and was abusing their mutual children at his work locale.

One woman falsely told slate officials that her ex-husband was sexually abusing their daughter. The child was immediately taken away from him and his access to her was denied.

During the course of a custody dispute, one mother falsely informed the guardian, who was investigating the parenting skills of each parent, that the father had physically abused her.

Snyder (1986) has reported on the difficulty imposed upon legal authorities when confronted with someone who is an excellent liar. Consistent with research on the inability of "specialists" to detect lying (Ekman and O'Sullivan, 1991), a skilled fabricator can be a compelling witness in the courtroom (Snyder, 1986). While sometimes seen in borderline personalities, Snyder (1986) notes that pathological lying (Pseudologia Fantastica) is not restricted to that particular character disorder.

Criterion 3C: Violating Law to Attack the Husband

Individuals suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome have few if any boundaries in their campaign against the divorcing husband. Violations of law are common in many cases, although the laws broken may be relatively minor. However, in some cases, the violations of law may be quite serious.

One woman deliberately drove her automobile into the house of her ex-husband where their mutual children resided.

In the midst of a custody battle, one woman broke into the residence of her divorcing husband and stole important business papers.

An angry divorcing mother called a Christian evangelical television station and pledged $1000, giving the name, address, and phone number of her divorcing Jewish husband as the pledgee.

The above descriptions may remind the reader of certain personality disorders (e.g., antisocial, borderline, sadistic) but these behaviors may be demonstrated by individuals with Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome who do not appear to meet official diagnostic criteria for an Axis II disorder. Further, in each of the four examples provided above, none of the Malicious Mothers involved was sentenced for such behavior by a Judge.

Criterion 4: Not Due to Another Disorder

In assessing the Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, it is important to note that many of the above clinical examples seem to have occurred in individuals who had no prior mental disorder diagnosis or treatment. In fact, one mother who engaged in extreme maliciousness toward her divorcing husband had several mental health professionals testify that she was not suffering from any type of mental disorder. Clearly, it would seem that individuals who have Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome may or may not have a concomitant mental disorder.

In the author's experience, for each mental disorder that might come to mind to account for some of this behavior, an exceptional case presents. For example, in some cases an Adjustment Disorder might seem an appropriate diagnosis, yet one woman still denied her ex-husband visitation 10 years after the divorce. Other cases might suggest a possibility of a personality disorder diagnosis, yet one woman who repeatedly violated the law in attacking her ex-husband, received no personality disorder diagnosis despite being evaluated by masters level and doctoral level examiners. In some instances, Intermittent Explosive Disorder might be considered, yet the anger for many of the mothers does not appear to be intermittent.

Finally, the reader should appreciate that while diagnostic accuracy for certain psychiatric difficulties is not as good as one would like (e.g., the personality disorders, see Turkat, 1990), the problem is compounded in family law where incompetent mental health examiners sometimes become involved in the judicial process (Turkat, 195)3). Clearly, the relationship between Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome and other mental disorders is a complex one which requires significant investigation.


The above description of the Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome raises a variety of important clinical, legal, and scientific issues.

From a clinical perspective, families that involve a Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome are subject to serious episodes of stress and distress. Yet, there is no scientific evidence on how to treat this phenomenon. It is particularly compromised by the fact that many of these cases that appear to meet the proposed diagnostic criteria deny that there is anything wrong with them.

An additional difficulty is that many therapists are unaware of this pattern of malicious behavior (Heinz and Heinz, 1993). As such, there are therapists who are "fooled" by such cases and, as noted earlier, will come to court testifying that there is nothing wrong with the mother involved.

From a legal perspective, there are some attorneys who may unintentionally encourage this type of behavior (Gardner, 1989). On the other hand, there are some attorneys who deliberately encourage such behavior, as the financial rewards for them are time dependent. In other words, the more involved the litigation process, the greater the profits for the attorney (Grotman and Thomas, 1990). However, even for the subset of attorneys for whom this may be true, there is a point of diminishing returns. Furthermore, independent of economic considerations, many who become involved with family law courtrooms find that these types of cases are not handled well (Greif, 1985; Levy, 1992).

The woman who is not disturbed "enough" to lose custody of her children in the courtroom will not have money denied to her because she engages in this behavior; nor will she go to jail. Thus, many clients report significant frustration when they and their children are exposed to this type of behavior, and the courts seem to do little if anything about.

In a review of pertinent law literature on bias against men in family law proceedings, Tillitski (1992) concluded that there is widespread discrimination. This is well illustrated by one family law Judge's statement that, "I ain't never seen the calves follow the bulls, they always follow the cow; therefore, I always give custody to the mamas" (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992 p. 742). Similarly, it is noted that visitation rights of fathers are not enforced as rigidly as are child support orders (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992). Such bias against men in family law proceedings results in a unique group of fathers who unintentionally become relatively helpless victims of the system (Tillitski, 1992). This situation would seem to reinforce much of the vicious behavior displayed by women suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

The issue of sex distribution of the disorder certainly needs to be addressed. The overwhelming majority of custodial parents are female (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992). Gardner (1989) has noted that Parental Alienation Syndrome appears most commonly in females, although it is possible for a male who has custody of the children to engage in the same type of alienating behaviors. The author's experience with Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome is similar to Gardner's. However, the present writer has yet to see a case of a father engaging in all of the criteria listed. This does not mean that it is not possible for there to be a "Malicious Father" Syndrome. In fact, Shepard (1992) reports that there is significant abuse of some custodial mothers by non-residential fathers. On the other hand, it should be noted that there are females who are required to pay chiltl support, but we have yet to heara about "Deadbeat Moms." Given at the present time that a case in which the father met all of the criteria for Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syntlrome has yet to be documented, it appears advisable to await scientific evidence to guide issues of nosologic labeling.

How prevalent is the Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome? The answer is unknown. Gardner (1989) reports that approximately 90% of all custody battles involve some aspects of parental alienation. Further, Kressel (1985) reviewed data indicating that up to 40% of maternal custodians denied visitation to the ex-husband in order to punish him. Relatedly, Arditti (1992) reported that 50% of a sample of divorced fathers (N = 125) indicated that visitation was interfered with by the mother. While aspects of parental alienation may be common, it is highly unlikely that such a percentage of maternal custodians would meet all of the criteria for Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

In regard to incidence, it would appear through the title of this syndrome that the malicious behavior is precipitated by the divorce process.

However, this is clearly an empirical question. While the malicious actions may first be noted during a divorce process, it is possible that maliciousness may have been present earlier but undetected. Research on pre-divorce parental conflict (Enos and Handal, 1986) supports this speculation. Relatedly, it may also be that there are some cases of pre-existing mental disorder that have not been discovered until the stress of the divorce itself unfolds.

Finally, it should be noted that research on the nature of post-divorce family functioning is beginning to emerge. Some data exist on the role of parental conflict in children's postdivorce functioning (e.g., Frost and Pakiz, 1990; Furstenberg et al., 1987; Healy, Malley and Stewart, 1990; Kudek, 1988), but studies have yet to appear on the more extreme cases of Parental Alienation Syndrome and Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

The Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome represents an important societal phenomenon. The disorder affects children, parents, attorneys, judges, guardians, mental health professionals, and others. Until this phenomenon is explored more thoroughly in the scientific and clinical literature, the problems imposed by individuals suffering from Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome will continue to plague us. Hopefully, the present manuscript will stimulate research so that clinical and legal management guidelines can be developed.


Artlitli, J. A. (1992). Factors related to custody, visitation, and child support for divorced fathers: An exploratory analysis. J. Div. Remarr. 17: 23-42.

Beal, E. W., and Hockman, D. (1991). Adult Children of Divorce, Delacorte Press, New York.

Cartwright, D. F. (1993), Expanding the parameters of parental alienation syndrome. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 21: 205-215.

Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System. (1992). Gender and justice in the courts: A report to the supreme court of Georgia. Georgia State Univ. Law Rev. 8: 539-807.

Ekman, P., and O'Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar? American Psychologist, 46: 913-920.

Enos, D. M., and Handal, P. J. (1986). The relation of parental marital status and perceived family conflict to adjustment in white adolescents. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 54: 820-824.

Frost, A. K., and Pakiz, U. (1990). The effects of marital disruption on adolescence: Time as a dynamic. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 60: 544-555.

Furstenberg, F. F., Morgan, S. P., and Allison, P. D. (1987). Paternal participation and children's well being after marital dissolution. Am. Sociological Rev. 52: 695-701.

Gardner, R. A. (1987). The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse, Creative Therapeutics, Cresskill, NJ.

Gardner, R. A. (1989). Family Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation, Creative Therapeutics, Cresskill, NJ.

Greif, G. L. (1985). Single Fathers, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.

Grutman, R., and Thomas, B. (1990). Lawyers and Thieves. Simon & Schuster, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Healy, J. M., Malley, J. E., and Stewart, A. J. (1900). Children and their fathers after parental separation. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 60: 531-543.

Hetherington, E. N., and Arasteh, J. D. (eds.). (1988). Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Heinz, H. R., and Heinz, S. A. (1993). Emotional incest: The tragedy of divorcing families. Am. J. Fam. Law 7: 169-174.

Hernandez, D. J. (1988). The demographics of divorce and remarriage. In Hetherington, E. M., and Arasteh, J. D. (eds.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 3-22.

Hodges, W. E (1991). Interventions for Children of Divorce, (second edition), Wiley, New York.

Keane, G. (1990). Florida Divorce Handbook, Pineapple Press, Sarasota, FL.

Koel, A., Clark, S. C., Phear, W. P., and Hauser, B. B. (1988). A comparison of joint and sole legal custody agreements. In Hetherington, E. M., and Arasteh, J. D. (eds.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 73-90.

Kressel, K. (1985). The Process of Divorce, Basic Books, New York.

Kurdek, L. (1988). Custodial mothers' perceptions of visitation and payment of child support by non-custodial fathers in families with low and high levels of pre-separation interparental conflict. J. Appl. Devel. Psychol. 9: 315-328.

Laosa, L. N. (1988). Ethnicity and single parenting in the United Stales. In Hetherington, E. M., and Arasteh, J. D. (eds.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 23-49.

Shepard, N. (1992). Child-visiting and domestic abuse. Child Welfare 71: 357-367.

Snyder, S. (1986). Pseudologia Fantastica in the borderline patient. Am. J. Psychiatry 143: 1287-1289.

Tillitski C. J. (1992). Fathers and child custody: Issues, trends, and implications for counseling. J. Ment. Health Counsel. 14: 351-361.

Turkat I. D. (1990). The Personality Disorders: A Psychological Approach to Clinical Management, Pergamon, New York.

Turkal, I. D. (1993). Questioning the mental health expert's custody report. Am. J. Fam. Law 7: 175-179.

Labels: , ,

July 24, 2006

A Healing Leap

Watching ABC's Primetime Live featuring Adam, also known as ,"The Dreamhealer" I was astounded at the double speak masked as commentary in attempts to discredit this 20 year old Canadian.

My favourite was, "Is this Adam healing or a placebo effect, mind over matter?". Adam claims to use his intention or mind to make corrections in the flow of energy that surrounds a body, an ailing body will most definately have a disruption in the flow of electricity that feeds and forms it. I would say that Adam healing and the placebo effect are one and the same and the only difference is who's intention is involved. What didn't get explored was the emotional state of the ill people Adam was making corrections on.

If I were to say, avoid anger as you would the plague. The anger you hold is making you sick and consuming your liver in the form of cancer or cirrhosis, how many would immediately give up the anger? Without proper counsel, as in AA, I don't think many would, for anger is as addictive as alcohol and tobacco. As anger disrupts life energy in support of the liver, what of envy, greed, sorrow, grief? By who's intention do people hold on to these destructive emotions. Yes, mind over matter, or the placebo effect is real and unfortunatly we see the self destructive side effects of the minds of the masses everyday in the healing industry. So if Adam is a placebo then the intentions of the ill are anti-placebo, that which causes themselves harm, and those intentions show up in their body.

March 25, 2006

Spiritual reasons for abolishing the seal hunt.

In the Universe of laws we find that which is all consuming at the expense of others to be considered negative. As humans we strive to create abundance in our lives and the lives of others at the expense of no one. Humans passing through creation, observed as evolution, did in fact, have the necessity to be consumers of energy at the expense of others. These practices have diminished over time and are now considered primitive and even barbaric and predatory.

Given that the seal hunt is a consumption of life energy in exchange for material benefit, a benefit that has no spiritual gain, I would expect that evolution or the continued progress of creation, will, in time, resolve this imbalance. The aboriginal understood this law and gave thanks and gratitude and ceremony to the Earth and animal used for survival. Homo Sapiens were very good at negative consumption of life energy for material gain without giving it a second thought.

Homo Spiritus values life above all else and has respect for the laws of the Universe. Homo Spiritus creates abundance in lives using the laws of the Universe and not by breaking them. The law; each action has an equal and opposite reaction, when placed in the context of the seal hunt, means to me, that the Universe will balance the consumption of 320,000 seals. How? I'm not even going to guess but a butterfly just flapped it's wings off the coast of Africa and Canada seems to owe the Universe a debt.

Perhaps we will just end the seal hunt but my guess is that some Homo Sapiens will blame God and CNN will get a spike in ratings when the debt is being paid.

March 17, 2006

Wangari's Invitation, The Green Belt Movement.

What do trees have to do with peace?

Thirty years ago, in the country of Kenya, 90% of the forest had been chopped down. Without trees to hold the topsoil in place, the land became like a desert. When the women and girls would go in search of firewood in order to prepare the meals, they would have to spend hours and hours looking for what few branches remained.

A woman named Wangari watched all of this happening. She decided that there must be a way to take better care of the land and take better care of the women and girls. So she planted a tree.And then she planted another. She wanted to plant thousands of trees, but she realized that it would take a very long time if she was the only one doing it.So she taught the women who were looking for firewood to plant trees,
and they were paid a small amount for each sapling they grew. Soon she organized women all over the country to plant trees, and a movement took hold. It was called the Green Belt Movement, and with each passing year, more and more trees covered the land.

But something else was happening as the women planted those trees.Something else besides those trees was taking root. The women began to have confidence in themselves. They began to see that they could make a difference. They began to see that they were capable of many things, and that they were equal to the men. They began to recognize that they were deserving of being treated with respect and dignity.

Changes like these were threatening to some. The president of the country didn't like any of this. So police were sent to intimidate and beat Wangari for planting trees,
and for planting ideas of equality and democracy in people's heads, especially in women's. She was accused of "subversion" and arrested many times. Once, while Wangari was trying to plant trees, she was clubbed by guards hired by developers who wanted the lands cleared. She was hospitalized with head injuries. But she survived, and it only made her realize that she was on the right path.

For almost thirty years, she was threatened physically, and she was often made fun of in the press. But she didn't flinch. She only had to look in the eyes of her three children, and in the eyes of the thousands of women and girls who were blossoming right along with the trees, and she found the strength to continue.

And that is how it came to be that 30 million trees have been planted in Africa, one tree at a time. The landscapes--both the external one of the land and the internal one of the people--have been transformed.

In 2002, the people of Kenya held a democratic election, and the president who opposed Wangari and her Green Belt Movement is no longer in office. And Wangari is now Kenya's Assistant Minister for the Environment.

She is 65 years old, and this year she planted one more tree in celebration and thanksgiving for being given a very great honour:
Wangari Maathai has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. She is the first African woman to receive this award.

After she was notified, she gave a speech entitled, "What Do Trees Have To Do With Peace?" She pointed out how most wars are fought over limited natural resources, such as oil, land, coal or diamonds. She called for an end to corporate greed, and for leaders to build more just societies. She added: "Our recent experience in Kenya gives hope to all who have been struggling for a better future. It shows it is possible to bring about positive change, and still do it peacefully. All it takes is courage and perseverance, and a belief that positive change is possible. That is why the slogan for our campaign was 'It is Possible!' "On behalf of all African women, I want to express my profound appreciation for this honour, which will serve to encourage women in Kenya, in Africa, and around the world to raise their voices and not to be deterred."

"When we plant trees, we plant the seeds of peace and seeds of hope. We also secure the future for our children. I call on those around the world to celebrate by planting a tree wherever you are."
As she received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, she invited all to get involved:
"Today we are faced with a challenge that calls for a shift in our
thinking, so that humanity stops threatening its life-support system.
We are called to assist the Earth to heal her wounds and in the process heal our own."

* * *

Can we accept Wangari's invitation?

As we look around our neighborhood or city,
as we look at our own country, What is needed?
Where are women and children suffering?
Where are people feeling disempowered?
Where does the Earth need our help?
What is our equivalent of planting one tree?

Holding you in your highest; honouring you where you are; and
inspiring you to go beyond!

In the Oneness of Awakening.

Margrit Bayer. Special thanks to Remi Thivierge

March 10, 2006

Image of Christ turns Anti-Christ.

I pulled this picture of a holy image off of creekside, I guess it is supposed to show an image of Christ. I wouldn't have believed it but I have come to the conclusion that it is an image of Christ because when I created a negative of it.... well look at the picture below. Creepy.

Yes that is an image of, if you look real close you can make out a ghostly face of the Anti-Christ.

This post is for satirical purposes only. It is not intended to imply that Warren Kinsella is the actual Anti-Christ, even though he makes that claim himself.

February 24, 2006

Long live the beaver, eh.

Cindy Klassen

Chandra Crawford

With the Olympic Winter Games almost done I would like to give an Olympic sized hug to the Canadian women athletes that made this game so enjoyable.

Alanna Kraus

Regan Lauscher

With a proven track record like this and an incredible showing in Italy, I can't wait for 2010 as it should be declared the year of the beaver.

February 14, 2006

The Trampification of Mother Teresa.

Paris Hilton as Mother Teresa, hey it wasn't my idea.

What about John Goodman as Ghandi or Keanu as Albert Einstein? Please fell free to offer more really bad casting ideas in comments.

February 11, 2006

David Emerson, enough already.

Ok, ok, enough already. I'm sure Vancouver-Kingsway really wanted a member of the opposition so badly that they are willing to spend all kinds of money on a by-election to get one. So Ian Waddell, if your still interested in sitting opposite the government on behalf of the constituents of Vancouver-Kingsway in a re-do, have at it.

I'm sure David Emerson could easily sit in one of the seats surrounding Vancouver so he can get some work done on a very important file. Or, the Liberal riding association and other parties and MP's can shut the hell up so Emerson can get on with the work he was doing in November.

UDATE:In the get a life please, lammo use of cyberspace.

February 10, 2006

What would Jesus do ?

An original Cartoon by me, created with the greatest respect.

February 05, 2006

PM Dilbert.

Andrew Coyne wants a nickname for our new PM Harper. I read this cartoon during the election and thought this would be a good nickname for Harper if he became PM. Going from Dithers to Dilbert works for me.

February 04, 2006

Muhammad, The Prophet, The Best Beloved.

Given the unbelievable insensitive nature of some of the cartoons being published that depict one of the great contributors to human civilization, I am reminded of something I read ten years ago.

First one needs to remember the climate in which Muhammad lived.

Muhammad appeared in the desert of Hijaz in the Arab Peninsula, which was a desolate, sterile wilderness, sandy and uninhabited. Some parts, like Mecca and Medina, are extremely hot.Pg 22(1)

The people that Muhammad lived with were gripped in the deepest of savagery and barbarism.

the people are nomads with the manners and customs of dwellers in the desert, and entirely destitute of education and science. The Banu-Tamim tribe would bury their daughters alive, glorying in it as an honorable thing to do. Thus many of the men would threaten their wives, saying, "if a daughter is born to you, I will kill you."Pg.19 (1)

The mission of the Best Beloved Muhammad can only be described as the work of the Holy Spirit. In my opinion, a work that should be likened to a return of the Christ.
His message of love and community and some scientific fact to these people was met with the severest oppression and cruelty as the nomadic tribes united against him.

The first question which He put to them was, "Why do you not accept the Pentateuch and the Gospel, and why do you not believe in Christ and in Moses?" They argued," Our forefathers did not believe in the Pentateuch and the Gospel."
In such a country, and amidst such barbarous tribes, an illiterate Man produced a book in which, in a perfect and eloquent style, he explained the divine attributes and perfections, the prophethood of the messengers of God, the divine laws and some scientific facts
.Pg.23-23 (1)

Muhammad's contribution to humanity is well documented and worthy of everyone's respect. During the middle ages, While Europe was in the lowest depths of barbarism , the Arab peoples were superior to the other nations in learning, in the arts, mathematics, civilization, government and other sciences.

Our Best Beloved Muhammad was the Enlightener and Educator of these different Arab tribes, A Founder of the nation state form of government and Illuminator of human perfections through justice, a corner stone of western civilization.

I'll end this post with Muhammad's direction to his followers about a community of Christian people that lived in Najran and were under his care and protection.

"If anyone infringes on their rights, I myself will be his enemy, and in the presence of God I will bring a charge against him." In the edicts that He promulgated it is clearly stated that the lives, properties and honor of the Christians and Jews are under the protection of God.Pg.21(1)

(1) Some Answered Questions; Abdul Baha,1964 Bahai Publishing Trust, Wilmette, Illinois

February 02, 2006

Another Kelowna Artist.

Listen to Brandon Scott

January 27, 2006

Gerard Kennedy

I would be curious to see how Ontario grapples with having a Western based Ontarian vs an Ontario based Westerner to vote for in the next election, Perplexing indeed.

Could be the biggest gains in NDP history in that province. Bring it on!

Quick hit on Harper.

I bought a house and I'm just finishing up the moving. I think I'll do a post on Zen and the art of packing. Can I get that 1% discount on the GST, huh, even on the lawyers fees.

For now I only have time to note that the first three days has been very good for Prime Minister Dilbert. He has rattled the Americans by standing up for Arctic sovereignty and shown why he has personal reasons for ensuring clean air, regardless of treaties signed. Who better to mind the environment than an asthma suferer.

Quick, somebody check a poll, are they in majority territory yet?

January 25, 2006

New Artist from Kelowna!

This is my Good Buddy, give a listen to Josh's song Sunday Papers

He would like to know what you think so leave a comment.

January 24, 2006

SES gets it right again. Almost exactly!

I would say that SES gets a gold star for the most accurate poll. Just like I said here. Gregg and Bricker where off in 2004. I don't know why SES gets it right but they do.

January 23, 2006

Election day notes, quotes, and nothings.

What a beautiful day in Kelowna, +6 degrees blue sky with a gentle breeze blowing across the shimmering lake. A day not too uncommon here in the heart of BC, a Province the media and pollsters say will decide this election.

On my way to the church to cast my ballot, I stopped into the new Starbucks for a tall Americano long shot. Seems to me everyone else wanted to see the new Starbucks, cause the line was easily 20 deep. I waited a little and asked the guy and gal at the end of the line if they've been here long. They both rolled there eyes and indicated that it seemed like 20 mins already. Really? I said in disbelief. I grumbled that I didn't think anyone should wait that long to pay $2.50 for a cup of coffee and that I was heading to Tim Horton's for an extra large double-double. The frustrated coffee couple agreed and added that it would only cost a buck fifty. As the newly converted coffee couple followed me out of the door I asked, "Did you vote yet", they said, " right after our double -double." Ah well, I chuckled to myself, if only Stephen Harper had it so easy.

Just listening to conversations in Tim Horton's you'd think that the NDP would have a very strong showing in this riding of Kelowna-Lake Country. I imagine what goes on is that people think it trendy to say they'll vote NDP and never actually put the X beside the name. Even in the heart of Conservative country I haven't heard anyone say outright that they are a Conservative. They usually stutter something like," well, I just don't want the Liberals anymore and I like the NDP but they can't do much, maybe I'll go Green". This is probably more pronounced in Ontario and Quebec. So the unofficial Tim's poll is NDP 6, LIB 2, Tory 8 with said disclaimer attached.

I thought this was interesting, on my drive to the polling station, unsure of where the church was, I observed the first direction marker at the corner of Martin St. The very next street that had a direction marker was Stockwell St. That's very odd I thought, did they rename the streets after failed leaders? As I pulled into the parking lot of the place with pictures of dead Popes on the wall I noticed that the church was located at the corner of Gordon and Wilson, See link for those who aren't familiar with BC politics.
It is kinda creepy with the ghosts of failed leaders and dead Popes watching you vote but it got me thinking, instead of hanging Paul Martin's portrait in parliament, why not put up Ed Broadbent's picture?

That was my election day so far and the best part is yet to come. I have one more big decision to make today, who's coverage should I watch? The CTV has had the best coverage of the campaign but I'd love to see the CBC spin wildly like Dan Rather did down south two years ago, that was priceless. Maybe Kevin Newman?

January 20, 2006

A victory for integrity.

I think it is safe to say that Stephen Harper will be the Prime Minister in a safe, workable minority government after all is counted. He will have three new seats in Quebec and greater representation in Ontario. The Conservatives will have prevented the Bloq of Quebec from taking a majority in popular percentages. Duceppe and Martin will talk of seats and the Conservatives and NDP will talk of POP vote increases. Everybody wins!

If I could speak to the the voters in Ontario I would say, " the West is in and so is Quebec, what are you waiting for?" I think it will now be more acceptable to refer to the Rest Of Canada to the exclusion of Ontario. That's right, opposition Ontario, or more precisely, opposition Toronto. The opposition will be filled with those that responded to fear, sovereigns, and socialists. The extreme elements in Canadian society.

I'm glad that Canadians overcame fear and replaced it with integrity. If one could develope a scale of values based on that which is good for society versus that which is bad or destructive. Love for fellow citizens would rate at 500 while murder or war would rate at 0. Integrity would fall at about 200 and fear at 70. This was the great failing of the Liberal Party, they didn't understand that fear , being destructive is ultimately destroyed by that which is progressive. The Universes natural selection for ensuring there is continued progress.

Integrity is a good place to start, but it is just a start. Canada can move forward to trust, hope and greater harmony within our country. Wouldn't that be real progress?

January 19, 2006


warning: we do not consider a single night of tracking to be scientically conclusive. These nightly releases are intended to respond to curiosity about day to day movements. Their true statistical significance will become clearer when analysed as part of a larger weekly sample.

I'm just saying.

I guess on Monday we'll know for sure. I will say that in 2004 SES was the closest at 34 - 32

January 16, 2006

Layton's bad pick-up lines.

I didn't realize that Jack Layton was the kind of guy that would use a line like he did in this news release. "C'mon baby, just this once", sounds really creepy coming from a middle aged bald man with a tickler mustache. I guess Jack is trying to appeal to the female vote with this line but let me offer some free advice. Lines like that almost never work, at least not since high school. If Jack is trying to appeal to the young female swing vote, great but I don't think there are enough to make a difference in this election. Maybe Jack should shoot for the Desperate Housewife demographic and utter something like, "C'mon baby, vote NDP, no one will find out".

The leader of the NDP has gone from looking and sounding like an infomercial during the debates to some creepy little porn star from the 80's. I wonder how Jack would look in an orange leisure suit and gold chains.

Stephen Harper sounding off in Ontario with the old Liberal Mantra, " a vote for the Conservatives is a vote for national unity", made me cringe. Look, I didn't like it when Liberals said it and I don't like it going the other way. That phrase wreaks of arrogance, the fact that Canadians are free to vote from coast to coast to coast on January 23 speaks to our national unity and no single national party can claim a monopoly on it. To make any one feel they are not for Canadian unity because they vote for another party does nothing for national unity and would not stand up to logic. As if 60% of voters are against national unity, such a position is moronic.

I understand that you need to speak about the unity of the Canadian family. For some reason Ontario needs Quebec consent before accepting the Conservatives. A poll rise in Quebec means a rise in Ontario, the so called echo effect.

This would be like having your sister check out your boyfriend to see if he can stand up to the scrutiny before meeting Mom and Dad. I always believed that what the Liberals did in the name of national unity was to slap Quebec across the face in the form of adscam. They slapped Ontario's sister and it was just a matter of time before they dumped the Liberals.

The last thing the Conservatives need to do is alienate her and possibly set her up for another slap. Conservatives need to offer substance and not phony rhetoric for the sister's in confederation.

January 15, 2006

Officially Screwed!

Officially Screwed has a very good blog that should be on the Blogging Tories Blogroll.
I will add my voice to his request to join.

I know the administrators are busy so I will add this site to my blogroll and encourage others to do the same.

January 13, 2006

Conservative Cabinet

Rick Mercer

Minister responsible for scaring homosexuals with scary clips of Christians.

I know it isn't funny but neither is Rick Mercer, lately.

Hey Rick, 36 Liberals voted against or abstained on c-38.

If the Conservatives pick up 25 more seats from Ontario and some in Quebec I'm sure they will balance out those scary Liberals that might still be around after Jan.23.

I look forward to a free vote that doesn't require the cabinet to be whipped. I wouldn't want another's will imposed on anyone.

The British model for resolving this question seems to have worked out just fine. A position very similiar to Mr. Harper's

Une fleur pour la belle dame.

January 11, 2006

Another advertising scandal for Liberals.

1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.

I would suggest that the definition of scandal describes exactly what happened when the Liberals released their negative advertising campaign. What is the opposite of the Midas touch?

I leave you today with this little gem from John Duffy's book "Fights Of Our Lives" pg.194 John commenting on the Tories chances in 1957.

The Tories long-shot wager was simple: put all your money on the leader, as in a Marlboro print ad with 250 square inches of cowboy and three square inches of logo. It was Diefenbaker's only hope. His Party was locked at 30% voter support, barely alive in Quebec and caught out West in endless three way struggles for the anti-Liberal vote.

The Tories went on to shock the Liberals by forming a minority. A year later, that minority went on to form the biggest majority in Canada's history.

John,I know it is not 1957 but clearly there are parallels and you being aware of the result in 1957 why would you let Harper Define himself for a month before attacking him? Why did you let the Prime Minister down? Do you think you should resign or be fired?

Never mind that you attempted interfere with journalistic integrity and got caught on national TV. You now have an advertising scandal of your own and have failed the Prime Minister of Canada. Shouldn't you resign?

January 10, 2006

The Harper Speech

Harper to the Americans
Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.
Now, having given you a compliment, let me also give you an insult. I was asked to speak about Canadian politics. It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country.

It's called a warm up joke. Self depreciating humor from Mr. Harper about Canada as a Canadian and using the stereotypes they have about us and we have about them.

First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.

Canadians leaving for greener pastures in the U.S. is very frustrating. Using harsh terms, Mr. Harper expresses his dismay that young professionals are leaving Canada. Very much like the backlash that occurred in Edmonton and all across Canada when Wayne Gretzsky was traded to L.A.

Another joke by Harper in the same speech.
It's about a constitutional lawyer who dies and goes to heaven. There, he meets God and gets his questions answered about life. One of his questions is, "God, will this problem between Quebec and the rest of Canada ever be resolved?'' And God thinks very deeply about this, as God is wont to do. God replies, "Yes, but not in my lifetime.''
I'm glad to see you weren't offended by that. I've had the odd religious person who's been offended. I always tell them, "Don't be offended. The joke can't be taken seriously theologically. It is, after all, about a lawyer who goes to heaven.''

I would encourage everyone to read the speech from Citizen Harper. It is brilliant and shows his biting, self depreciating personality and deep understanding of the problems facing Canada, now and into the future. It also shows how he has grown into a more politically sensitive leader, unfortunately.

If Mr.Martin, who spent his entire life wanting to be Prime Minister, can change his position on the use of the notwithstanding clause in a matter of weeks. Imagine what eight years can do to a guy that never wanted to be Prime Minister.

January 09, 2006

Lets be clear on who the tax cutters are. From the CBC

Reality Check

Taxes: whose cuts are the deepest? By Ira Basen, Reality Check Team | Jan. 9, 2006 | More Reality Check

Ever since CBC Reality Check reported on Friday that a Conservative government plans to rescind income tax cuts that have been in effect since Jan. 1, there has been much back and forth on the campaign trail about which party truly has taxpayers’ interests at heart. The Conservatives issued a press release calling our report "misleading" and "false," but agreed that the Liberal cuts to personal income tax would indeed be rolled back by 2007.

On the other hand, our Reality Check promises chart confirms that the Conservatives are correct when they assert that Canadians will be paying less tax under a government led by Stephen Harper. In fact, it’s not even close. As of Friday, Jan. 6, the Conservatives have promised $58.4 billion in tax cuts spread over the next five years, compared to $40.8 billion for the NDP and $33.4 billion for the Liberals

The Liberals and Paul Martin continue to lie to Canadians.

Mercer is back!

Well I'm glad to see Rick Mercer is back posting again.

We hard core Conservatives have missed his funny pokes at Harper and company and that post defending beer over kids was pure genius.

The latest post has him predicting a Conservative cabinet and some of the things they have uttered in the past that may give reasons as to why they probably won't be in a cabinet. Rick should caution about over-confidence, there is two weeks left and pundits don't usually predict a cabinet until after the election results are in. Oh well, seems he is yet another Liberal that has no faith in Paul Martin.

I guess Rick and the rest of the Blogosphere know that Liberals have never uttered anything that sounds as bad as these guys and gal have.

I'll have a look around, in the mean time, I get to use my picture again and relieve some of the pent up frustration Conservatives might have over these hilarious posts.

January 08, 2006

Paul Martin's children.

This is great, After slamming the Star for it's pathetic headline on the musings of Harper, I found the above article that says a lot about the root cause of violence.

"The depth of poverty has increased over the last 10 years, United Way reports have shown," he says. "Poverty combined with income inequality, combined with racism. ... People can barely get by, though their parents are working. Throw in intolerance, they pick up gansta rap, you literally force them into adopting an alternative identity, because they are living under severe material deprivation."

None of this excuses people handling guns, says Michael Mendelson, a senior scholar for the Caledon Institute on Social Policy.

"The (violent teen criminals) have to be found accountable," he says, "but they are also human beings acting as a result of the forces they are subject to."

When it comes to politicians, Marvyn Novick of Ryerson University says if Harris is to blame, then so is Prime Minister Paul Martin. As Jean Chretien's finance minister, he cut the Canada Assistance Plan, under which Ottawa once paid the provinces 50 per cent of social assistance.

"It's unfair to call them Mr. Harris's children," says Novick. "I'm not a fan, but they're also Mr. Martin's children."

Now put that on the front page

The swingers

The Toronto Star's feeble attempt to move the Ontario NDP vote towards the Liberals will hopefully fail this time.

More Bullshit from the Toronto Sun

Both stories have no credibility.

"I don't think we know that yet," Harper said.
"Polls will keep changing. As I said from the beginning, we'll know the result on Election Day. Nobody's voted yet," he said at a campaign event near Kitchener yesterday morning after some 2,000 people attended a London rally Friday.
"Any range of outcomes is possible, so I keep telling our people — stop these games of talking about minorities or majorities.
"It would be crazy for anyone to speculate on any particular outcome. The numbers don't show that," the Tory leader said.
"If you look at all the data that's out there, the best read is that it's a statistical dead heat.""We're nowhere near that yet. We've got ... a little over two weeks left. A lot can change; I suspect a lot will change between now and then.

Where does Stephen Harper muse about a majority? He has simply not ruled out any outcome. The headline could just as well be, Harper muses about having fewer seats than Liberals. Or, Harper muses about a minority. Really now, should Harper come out and say, No thanks, I'll take a minority please? What leader would rule out a majority? A leader that has poor judgment.

Paul Martin said the same thing a few weeks back, almost verbatim. The headline wasn't Martin muses about majority, just that he'd be willing to work with other parties to make parliament work.

As far as I'm concerned, if this kind of crap works on supporters of the NDP in Ontario, or anywhere else for that matter, they should just stay home and hide under their bed and let the grown-ups decide for them.

If a leader, that has united a party with factions as diverse as any, has reached out twice to the leader of the NDP, that is now being accepted in the most socially sensitive region of Canada, if that guy scares you, Just stay home! The scary wolves might get you on the way to the ballot box. Little green men lurk behind every corner.

After the election please do get help for your condition. I have taken the time to provide a link for you.

A phobia, (from Greek φόβος "fear"), is an abnormal, persistent fear of situations, objects, activities, or persons. The main symptom of this disorder is the excessive, unreasonable desire to avoid the feared subject.