Hopefully the NDP will resist the Liberals who will surely be starting a "unite the left" movement. If the NDP merged with the Liberals in this manner it will be their demise. The Liberal machine will devour the NDP in this sort of move.

The NDP just has to hang tough and let the Liberals wither and die on their own. This will allow the NDP to be the assimilators rather than the assimilatees.

Posted by: Reid at October 1, 2007 01:10 PM

---

this post should be good Cherniak bait...

here fishy fishy fishy (to quote Ernie)

Posted by: mungman at October 1, 2007 01:19 PM

---

I have often lamented in the past to some of my left leaning friends that a vote for the Liberal Party was really a vote for nothing. What do they stand for, really...?

At least with the NDP you can say they are principled. I may disagree 100% with those principles, but I know what they are and what arguments the NDP uses to defend them. And they are quite open and honest about their motivations.

I am saddened by the fact that the CPC has moved further from principles towards 'power accumulation' policies. But that's the game that Canadian politics has become.

Posted by: Truth at October 1, 2007 02:22 PM

---

"this post should be good Cherniak bait..."

You might think so, but Cherniak is too busy attacking John Tory.
The Ontario Liberals seem to be on cruise control toward another victory. Meanwhile, the discussion du jour is how the NDP will consume the federal Liberals. It is indeed difficult to set priorities.

Posted by: Concerned Torontonian at October 1, 2007 02:37 PM

---

Steve,

I think there is a lot of truth in what you say about the Liberals, particularly their addiction to power and relative lack of principles, but we need to recognize that the desire for power alone has not always achieved it for them. Up to and including the lamentable Trudeau era they were able to express some sort of vision, perhaps far from the best vision for Canada, but a vision nonetheless. Subsequent to that time they became long term chronic borrowers of the visions of others: sometimes conservative, sometimes NDP. Today they are certainly borrowing heavily from the left side, and you recognize that in your post when you state: " I expect a majority will gravitate to the NDP."

Your prognostication of Liberal demise in the near term may have a certain romantic appeal, but those wily Liberals have rescued themselves in the past. Their party has long been the refuge of the mushy middle in Canadian politics, those voters who fear strong prescriptions of either the left or the right. With the Conservatives encroaching on some of that middle ground, and the current Liberal leadership acting as if it has to compete with the NDP on the left, the near term future may look bleak for them. Ironically, a real gift to the Liberals would be a period of Conservative majority government that will give them the opportunity they need to redefine themselves by borrowing the right mix of policies, and perhaps reclaim their traditional ground in the mushy middle. That would also give them the chance to find a leader who is articulate, capable and attractive to mainstream Canadians, qualities largely absent in their current leader or any of the leading contenders from their last leadership contest. Oh, and it would also give them time for Canadians to forget how pathetic the last ten years of Liberal Government were.

Canadians may latch on to a well-articulated vision of either the left or the right for a brief time, but they always come back to wanting to be comfortable and not to take serious risks. As long as we can avoid having to respond to an external challenge as serious and immediate as a World War II, the mushy middle will spring back, and the Liberal power brokers will be there to take advantage of it.

Posted by: felis corpulentis at October 1, 2007 04:33 PM

---

That's why I have been saying that we don't need the Liberals anymore. Tories and NDP is good enough. Besides, as I wrote on my blog a while ago, the NDP are idealists and truly believe what they fight for -- Liberals don't care about the common good, but only about whether they can personally profit in terms of power and money. Sick!

Posted by: Werner Patels at October 1, 2007 04:45 PM

---

Nice idealizing Steve, but you ignore one inescapable reality in Canadian politics ... as long as the Liberal Beast exists, the NDP will be relegated to rump status. There must be a united front to destroy the Beast.

The Beast has it's ardent worshipers in places like Toronto, W-peg, Van-C, firmly rooted in the multiculti communities .. after all it was the Liberals who let them, their family, their village, their tribe immigrate to Canada, and these multicultis fear being sent back by Conservatives and NDP commies. Community and religious leaders are quite specific when it comes to guiding their flock to voting for their beloved Liberal bribers and crooks.

Before the NDP can ascend to Official Opposition Party, there must be a majority Conservative government to root out the Liberal detritus embedded in the Ottawa civil service and sweep out the Senate, thus apply the final coup de grace to the Liberal Beast.

Remember that 52% of the GTA did not live in Canada 12 years ago, and in a sense:

TORONTO IS NOT CANADA ..!!

Posted by: Observer at October 1, 2007 06:38 PM

---

Canada needs to have the NDP succeed ... I mean for Canada's political health ...[Liberals] two most imporant goals [are]: 1. Power 2. Money

But you are a tad naïve if you think that these are not also the goals of the other parties. Conservatives give themselves and their cronies the same, fat salaries and perks as other parties whenever they're in power, they almost never cut anything in government but they find many ways of increasing government - same as the other parties. They inflate the currency just as much, they stick Canadian troops into just as many idiotic wars and peacekeeping missions, and there are just as many corruption scandals left over in their wake when they are finally swept from power.

Think of it this way: government steals from people. The bigger the government, the bigger the theft. Some parties brand themselves as parties of big government, and actually brag about it. That's the NDP. Other parties brand themslves as being against big government, so they act ashamed when they promote policies which make government bigger and they try to diguise their socialism with bafflegab about "fairness" and "choice". It's the difference between a mugger and a pickpocket.

The Liberals have been trying to find a niche in between these two positions, sometimes acting like dyed-in-the-wool commies and sometimes pretending to be fiscally responsible pragmatists. Evidently this is greatly annoying to the other thieves, who seem to hate inconsistency above all other faults.

If you think you can find a great difference between both sides and the middle of the same coin, then good luck to you. I'm not buying it.

Posted by: at October 1, 2007 07:15 PM

---

I've wished for a two party system like the US for years, but I'd never have thought of ditching the Fiberals. Brilliant, Steve! It makes sense. We could rid ourselves of the powermongers and the loony Layton/May left at the same time.

Observer, you're sadly correct. You must include other cities like Brampton, though. I was born in TO and in 67 we moved to Caledon; our company has been in Brampton since 1986. I have watched the transformation of this area. I feel like a foreigner in parts of Brampton now. We've had Liberal Indian/Sikh etc MPs and MPPs for a long while because they have concentrated their migration patterns and parked their votes with the Fiberals that let them in.

Don't get me started on the thousands of family immigrants like the elderly that don't even speak english but are allowed to vote!

Posted by: Larry at October 1, 2007 07:31 PM

---

"there are just as many corruption scandals left over in their wake when they are finally swept from power.

Nope. The Fiberals blew the bank on Adscam, my friend!

Posted by: Larry at October 1, 2007 07:35 PM

---

Speaking of young Jason Borque has it up . Ouch !

Posted by: Bill D.Cat at October 1, 2007 07:56 PM

---

Thanks for that Bill - my wife is now wondering why I'm cackling hysterically at the laptop with tears running down my face!

man that was good!

Posted by: mjolnir at October 1, 2007 10:13 PM

---

Give your head a shake Steve Janke !!! Oh my gawd. The NDP is NOT very rational. We have watched this time and time again. I do not want the Liberals to rise...and certainly frightens me to think the NDP could get in any position where they had influence. They shoot first...think later....recently they thought they had found something....dialed the media right away...shaking all over with glee....turns out now...the Afghan President is demanding an apology. They do not get it right..... no !!! Mulcair can glad hand and do his sales talk till the cows are driven home for milking....they do not have it...and do not get it...period.
I cannot agree with you all the time :-) - this idea of good for Canada scares me silly.

Posted by: NB Tory Lady at October 2, 2007 07:02 AM

---

Steve, I think you're being a bit duplicitous in suggesting that the Left be represented by the NDP. With a mandate that includes state ownership of industry, Canadians by-and-large will reject them resulting in Tory wins forever. In the UK, Labour was spinning its wheels until Tony Blair succeeded in having the party expunge clause 4 from their manifesto calling for state ownership of enterprise. Bingo, Labour wins.

Rather than the Liberals crash and burn and the NDP take its place, I'd suggest the NDP fold into the Liberals and try to draw that new party as left as it could. As you say, certain Liberals would bleed to the Conservatives and we'd be left with a Left/Right dichotomy much like in the U.S.

Great discussion thread. In the same vein, a few years ago, The Economist ran with the cover story, "Why The World Needs The Left."

Posted by: Phil in Ottawa at October 2, 2007 07:46 AM

---

Astute analysis Mr. Janke.

When you have the premier lib-blogger Cherniak bashing the NDP as "sick" on so many occasions, you know they are viewed as a real threat.

Obviously one can see the parallel between what is occuring here in Canada with the Liberal Party and what happened to the Liberal Party in the UK. Yesteryear Laurier Liberals are not today's Trudeau Liberals, which is evidenced by how easily Dion is able to drag this Liberal Party left.

My friends, we are privilidged to be around to witness the evolution of the Canadian political scene. Quebec seperatism is on a sharp decline. Quebecers want in on Canada. The Liberal Party is like a mortally wounded elephant, trampling and killing in its rage, yet doesn't comprehend that it's wound is mortal.

The Tories can easily afford to share some of the limelight with the NDP while both ignore the Liberals as the increasingly irrelevant entity that they are swifly becoming.

Posted by: Lycan Stark at October 2, 2007 08:15 AM

---

I don't the NDP in its current form is the right party for Canada's left. But it is rooted in a real left ideology, and with a moderating influence of ex-Liberals, I think it would work. It is the foundation of that left-wing option for Canadians.

Posted by: Steve Janke at October 2, 2007 08:20 AM

---

"Canada needs the NDP"

Awwww cummon Steve....this is like saying a healthy child needs hemorrhoids. :-P

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at October 2, 2007 08:32 AM

---

I basically disagree with this idea that the Liberals stand for everything as long as it brings them power business. It's a common view, so is the idea that they're somehow a centrist party.

I don't think so.

One of the reasons they pursue power is to keep it away from ideological opponents.

Most people join parties because they believe things. Liberals believe things. Probably most importantly, they hate conservatives — ideologically speaking.

This is much of what drives them. You'll never see them adopt socially conservative views for votes. You'll never see them adopt America friendly attitudes for votes, too.

Why? Because they don't believe in these things, and they desperately want to keep those that do away from the halls of power.

I think it's an important distinction. The more conservatives realize it, the less likely they'll be duped into thinking Liberals can be their political friends or allies. They can't. It's in their blood.

Posted by: Dennis (Second Thots) at October 2, 2007 08:34 AM

---

BTW Steve: I agree with you....as a political cartel the Liberal are an immoral, criminal uncivil entity which exists for its own benefit....I would much rather see dippers in opposition....they may be nutz as hell but at least they are not corrupt and immoral.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at October 2, 2007 08:36 AM

---

Great discussion guys.

Dennis, should that ideological stance include opposing almost anything the Tories do in Government just because they are the Opposition? Does that ideological stance also include, while the Liberals are in power, saying that anything they epouse is absolutley reflective of Canadian values while the Tories opposing such automatically brands them of being "out of touch?"

Posted by: Kai Wolf at October 2, 2007 08:42 AM

---

"The Liberal Party has no higher calling, no vision, no soul. It is made up of individuals who care only to rule, and to enjoy the perks of ruling."

What an utterly stupid, ignorant and unsupported assertion. Painting the millions of Liberals in this country with the same brush while ignoring the blatantly power seeking moves by your own party leadership.

I would rebutt your argument further but your partisanship is so clearly beyond the reaches of logical argument that I wont bother.

Posted by: KC at October 2, 2007 09:33 AM

---

What an utterly stupid, ignorant and unsupported assertion.

We'll keep that in mind; especially everytime a Liberal blathers on and on about about Harper and the Tory's secret "hidden agenda" that everyone Liberal says there is, but just can't seem to say exactly what that is.

Posted by: Lycan Stark at October 2, 2007 09:54 AM

---

Of course, all of this is rooted in the Federal 'spending power'. Oooh, that gives me the chills just saying it. 'Spending power. Oooh.

Go back in time before Trudeau ramped up spending to obscene levels to create his just society and you'll see competent governments and oppositions engaging in the cut and thrust of Parliamentary politics. I have no qualms with that model.

Today, as you say, it's all about money and power; the power to effect societal change with literally tens of billions of our dollars. It's the same in the US. And in much of Europe. Simply put, it's our politicians out-promising each other to get elected. Really, how would a MP job description look if governments reverted to their basic functions of law, order, defence etc? Pretty dull I'd think. But, throw in a billion dollar budget here and there to effect change, secure satellite constituents and presto, re-election jsut got a heck of a lot easier. The Liberals did it first under Trudeau and became immensely popular for it and they've simply perpetuated that model for a couple of generations now. And why not? After all, we're now a 'just society.' Or we will be if they can just get another chance...

Until governments rein in spending and revert to their core functions, the political dynamic will remain as fierce, ugly and partisan as it is today.

Posted by: Phil in Ottawa at October 2, 2007 10:28 AM

---

Steve Janke: "The Liberal Party has no higher calling, no vision, no soul.

KC: What an utterly stupid, ignorant and unsupported assertion.
KC: I would rebutt your argument further but...

I, for one, would be fascinated to hear you rebut Steve's assertion. Without name-calling. Without pointing to Conservative misdeeds to justify Liberal misdeeds.
Just tell us what "higher calling, vision and soul" we can find in the LPC.
Please.

Posted by: up north at October 2, 2007 10:40 AM

---

Kai Wolf said,

Dennis, should that ideological stance include opposing almost anything the Tories do in Government just because they are the Opposition? Does that ideological stance also include, while the Liberals are in power, saying that anything they epouse is absolutley reflective of Canadian values while the Tories opposing such automatically brands them of being "out of touch?"

Yes, you hit the nail right on the head. Not only are they outraged that they don't have power, but they're outraged that people with even the slightest hint of ideological opposition have that power.

I just think people have to be careful about branding Liberals as being only about power and money. Yet, it's that. But you rarely seem them pursuing power by advancing conservative ideology.

Just take a peak at one of their policy conventions. The difference between Liberals and Dippers is that the former realize that Canadians won't accept their unadulterated ideology. So, they basically sell themselves as something else, and even many conservatives buy it.

Posted by: Dennis (Second Thots) at October 2, 2007 11:11 AM

---

Up North you are right on, KC why don't you come out of your corner and state your case, if you can?

Posted by: Jan at October 2, 2007 12:12 PM

---

http://jamesandkent.blogspot.com/

Posted by: at October 2, 2007 12:28 PM

---

...and with a moderating influence of ex-Liberals, I think it would work. It is the foundation of that left-wing option for Canadians.

I do hope you're right about the "moderating influence of ex-Liberals", Steve.
To me, the NDP seem to be a party of hate. They hate the military. They hate the police. They hate Americans. They hate Christians. They hate conservatives.
You'd think we were talking about the CBC here.

Frankly, I'm so pissed at both the Liberals and the Conservatives in Ontario (where I live) for that pay raise they gave themselves, that I'd almost like to see the NDP get back in. It'd be worth losing my job (which would likely happen under the NDP) and watching Ontario's economy go right down the crapper (which will definitely happen under the NDP) to see an unequivocal message sent to those other yahoos.

As long as the NDP doesn't get too many innocent people killed (like the Liberals have managed to do by ignoring the gang problems while concentrating on law-abiding gun owners and quailing before the spectre of "racial profiling").

But I fear having them take power nationally. This is always a possibility in this country, given the level of awareness (or unawareness) of the average voter.

As loathsome and despicable as the Liberals are, are they that loathsome and despicable ?

Posted by: up north at October 2, 2007 12:29 PM

---

Neither Liberals nor liberals are any more or less "unprincipled" than Conservatives, conservatives, NDPer's or social democrats.

Both Conservatives and New Democrats (the latter only at a provincial level) have demonstrated when they are actually in power or have a shot at power they are more than willing to 'bend' those principles in the interest of power. Somehow the notion of local 'self sufficiency' that Conservatives like to bleat about flew out the window when Quebec wanted increased equalization and the Conservatives wanted votes. Commitment to 'smaller government' is hard to find in a 15% increase in government spending. 'Democratic deficit' has yielded to Stephen Harper getting his way by usurping the power of committees (such as their ability to choose their own chair). 'Simplifying the tax code'? Nope. More like a handful of tax credits for various interests.

I could go on like this butI wouldn't want to suggest that Conservatives are somehow uniquely guilty of this because Im sure both you and I can think of countless instances of principled moves by the Conservatives (ex. continued commitment to the war in Afghanistan in the face of public opposition) and unprincipled Liberals (ex. sponsorship). My point is that in their two years in power the Conservatives have demonstrated with little room for denial that they are willing to sacrafice if the payoff in the form of power is worth it.

As for small l liberals being 'unprincipled', 'visionless', etc. vis-a-vis social democrats and small c conservatives. Balderdash! Having 'vision' and 'principle' does not mean that one must be an extremist. Small l liberals, however, more so than their friends on the left and right recognize that principles such as liberty, democracy, equality, etc. taken in a vacuum lead to chaos, tyranny of the majority, and communism respectively. They know that these various principles must be mediated amongst one another and their ideology reflects this.

Its fine to want a two-party state. Thats a legitimate view and I can see how having three or four major parties simply distorts electoral outcomes. But the notion that those with ideologies and partisan allegiances, left and right, are somehow more principled than the centre is just plain stupid. The fact that Steve is advancing that proposition suggests quite strong that he is lying when he says that none of this is "because of some Machiavellian plot to weaken the Liberals". He hates the Liberals for various reasons and is distorting that parties ideology (and it DOES have one).

Posted by: KC at October 2, 2007 02:05 PM

---

KC,
My compliments. You were challenged, and came back with a good and thoughtful post.

But let's look at the Liberal "vision" for this country.
Liberals are interested in legalizing pot.
Liberals are interested in legalizing prostitution.
Liberals brought in the "faint hope" clause -this allows people like Clifford Olson to taunt the families of the children he murdered.
Liberals brought in the Young Offenders Act and later the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Now we have a constant litany of horror and heartbreak in the papers -compliments of young offenders.
Liberals (and the NDP) watered down the attempts of the Conservatives to tighten up the laws in this country.
It was Liberals who set up the current mission for our troops in Afghanistan. Now they have a problem with it.
Liberals are behind the right of prisoners to vote. What does that say about their constituency ?
How do you feel about all of that ?

The Conservative Party of Canada is far from perfect. I've posted my displeasure with them here. But just where are your priorities ?
And I have yet to hear of the liberal "vision" other than being a utopia for criminals and people who choose to live between their legs.

So, again, where's this soul, this higher calling that we should give heed to ?

Posted by: up north at October 2, 2007 02:50 PM

---

Up North - While I agree with some of the policies you listed (legalizing pot, legalizing prostitution), disagree with the Liberals on others (ie genearlly soft on crime, 180 on Afghanistan), and can't really blame them for others (the prisoners can vote thing was decided by the courts not the Liberals); I don't doubt that each of them was based on what they believe is "right". They are based on a belief in personal choice (legalizing marijuana), reducing harm for prostitutes, giving people a second chance (faint hope, YCJA), democracy (prisoners get to vote no matter how vile we think they are), and peace (Afghanistan). Now absolutely I think they are wrong on some of these fronts. Pulling out of Afghanistan will not bring peace. "Giving people a second chance" has come at the expense of public safety. But on these issues it is simply an incorrect analysis of the facts rather than an absence of principle driving the policy changes.

The same goes with a lot of Conservative policies. I think Conservatives think they are protecting peoples health and society by going "tough on drugs". They are just (IMHO) a) wrong that they will accomplish their objectives, and b) ignoring other countervailing principles (personal freedom for instance). Same with the NDippers. I dont doubt that the NDP believes they are "helping the poor" by wanting to drastically increase public spending. They are just (IMHO again) a) wrong that they will accomplish their objectives, and b) ignoring other countervailing principles (personal freedom for instance).

Frankly I don't see any consistent vision in where the Conservatives are going either. They haven't done anything to reduce the size of government. They talk a lot of talk about "freedom" when it comes to things like Afghanistan and taxes, but can't see why "freedom" might apply to smoking marijuana as well. The democratic deficit continues.

I think the Liberal vision (broadly speaking is):
- A more sustainable approach to the environment,
- Fighting poverty and increasing the prosperity of all citizens.
- All while maintaining the maximum sphere possible for individual freedom.

Now I acknowledge that they are imperfect in this respect (with goals like that how can you expect perfection?)--as you have acknowledged the Conservatives have been as well. I also think they could do a better job articulating their vision. But I dont for a moment doubt the sincerity of their convictions (most of them of course... there are always some really bad apples).

Posted by: KC at October 2, 2007 03:24 PM

---

KC,
Great post. The thing I like most about this site is that it seems to be one of the few places where I can find a liberal who can actually explain their position -rather than just scream that I am a racist/homophobe/climate change denier/bigot/whatever...

So here's my position as a conservative:
I'm really big on the nuclear family. No doubt you've seen the article re stats Canada, trumpeting the great liberal victory -where married families are now in the minority. The fact that commonlaw marriages are 400 times more likely to break up than traditional marriages is besides the point. As is the constant liberal caterwauling that we are selling out our kids' future if we do not voluntarilarily choose to freeze in the dark in order to conserve energy (frankly, I think we already sold out our kids future with above-mentioned stats, but that's just me).

Remember the 2006 election campaign ? Remember this ? "If Stephen Harper gets elected, Canadians will be on their own!"
One way of looking at this is that Canadians would be expected to be what we used to be -self-reliant. Why is being self-reliant so terrifying ? Who do you think built this country ?
I'm farily sure it wasn't people who were waiting for a government handout.

Legalizing pot.
Sure. As soon as I no longer have to sit and listen to pot-users tell cute stories about them stealing everything that isn't nailed down in order to finance their habit. It's the culture I object to, not the drug itself.

Defence: Every person who says "they should be peacekeeping" should be subjected to an exam of precisely what so-called "peacekeeping" missions like the Balkans entailed. Wrong answers should garner a slap. It is disgusting how utterly pig-ignorant Canadians are about what was done to our military in the 80's and 90's -in the name of peacekeeping.

Crime:
A) Read Winnipeg newspapers for a week.
B) Read up on Melvin Stanton.
Then tell me that the conservative approach to crime is wrong.

Environment: Didn't the first Conservative policy concentrate on killing pollution ? Apparently that's not good enough. Better we do nothing, while tied up in useless partisan arguing, than actually do anything useful.

Posted by: up north at October 2, 2007 04:09 PM

---

KC sez:"What an utterly stupid, ignorant and unsupported assertion. Painting the millions of Liberals in this country with the same brush"

Typical chickenshit camp follower drivel...as usual your partisn blinders do not allow you to see Steve was singling out the Liberal political Hierarchy and NOT individual Canadians who may vote (foolishly) for this corrupt cartel.

The scandal trail of Liberal leadership os long and dark....the current CPC leadership has NO such record....so if we are looking for "utterly stupid, ignorant and unsupported assertions" we should start with your's KC....ya chickenshit Librano camp following whore.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at October 2, 2007 04:27 PM

---

"Neither Liberals nor liberals are any more or less "unprincipled" than Conservatives, conservatives, NDPer's or social democrats."

Wrong-o buddy!

The left succeeds when it convinces the public to tear down its own principles and abandon reliable beliefs. There is nothing principled about destroying your own society. The left essentially hates western society.

Posted by: Larry at October 2, 2007 11:19 PM

---

冷水机 冷水机 密炼机 冷水机 冷水机 冷水机 冷水机 工业冷水机 工业冷水机 工业冷水机 工业冷水机 上海冷水机 上海冷水机 上海冷水机 上海冷水机 昆山冷水机 昆山冷水机 昆山冷水机 昆山冷水机 张家港冷水机 张家港冷水机 张家港冷水机 张家港冷水机 常熟冷水机 常熟冷水机 常熟冷水机 常熟冷水机 吴江冷水机 吴江冷水机 吴江冷水机 吴江冷水机 太仓冷水机 太仓冷水机 太仓冷水机 太仓冷水机 苏州冷水机 苏州冷水机 苏州冷水机 苏州冷水机 无锡冷水机 无锡冷水机 无锡冷水机 无锡冷水机 江阴冷水机 江阴冷水机 江阴冷水机 江阴冷水机 宜兴冷水机 宜兴冷水机 宜兴冷水机 宜兴冷水机 常州冷水机 溧阳冷水机 常州冷水机 溧阳冷水机 常州冷水机 溧阳冷水机 溧阳冷水机 常州冷水机 南京冷水机 南京冷水机 南京冷水机 南京冷水机 杭州冷水机 杭州冷水机 杭州冷水机 杭州冷水机 绍兴冷水机 绍兴冷水机 绍兴冷水机 绍兴冷水机 上虞冷水机 上虞冷水机 上虞冷水机 上虞冷水机 诸暨冷水机 诸暨冷水机 诸暨冷水机 诸暨冷水机 余姚冷水机 余姚冷水机 余姚冷水机 余姚冷水机 慈溪冷水机 慈溪冷水机 慈溪冷水机 慈溪冷水机 宁波冷水机 宁波冷水机 宁波冷水机 宁波冷水机 宁海冷水机 宁海冷水机 宁海冷水机 宁海冷水机 北仑冷水机 北仑冷水机 北仑冷水机 北仑冷水机 温州冷水机 温州冷水机 温州冷水机 温州冷水机 瑞安冷水机 瑞安冷水机 瑞安冷水机 瑞安冷水机 嘉兴冷水机 嘉兴冷水机 嘉兴冷水机 嘉兴冷水机 台州冷水机 台州冷水机 台州冷水机 台州冷水机 青岛冷水机 青岛冷水机 青岛冷水机 青岛冷水机 合肥冷水机 合肥冷水机 合肥冷水机 合肥冷水机 模温机 模温机 模温机 模温机 模温机 上海模温机 上海模温机 上海模温机 上海模温机 昆山模温机 昆山模温机 昆山模温机 昆山模温机 张家港模温机 张家港模温机 张家港模温机 张家港模温机 吴江模温机 吴江模温机 吴江模温机 吴江模温机 常熟模温机 常熟模温机 常熟模温机 常熟模温机 太仓模温机 太仓模温机 太仓模温机 太仓模温机 苏州模温机 苏州模温机 苏州模温机 苏州模温机 模温机 上海模温机 昆山模温机 苏州模温机 南京模温机 模温机 上海模温机 昆山模温机 张家港模温机 常熟模温机 太仓模温机 吴江模温机 苏州模温机 无锡模温机 江阴模温机 宜兴模温机 常州模温机 溧阳模温机 镇江模温机 扬州模温机 南京模温机 江苏模温机 南通模温机 浙江模温机 杭州模温机 绍兴模温机 诸暨模温机 上虞模温机 余姚模温机 慈溪模温机 宁海模温机 北仑模温机 宁波模温机 温州模温机 瑞安模温机 乐清模温机 台州模温机 嘉兴模温机 海宁模温机 金华模温机 义乌模温机 哈尔滨模温机 长春模温机 沈阳模温机 大连模温机 北京模温机 天津模温机 石家庄模温机 郑州模温机 济南模温机 青岛模温机 福州模温机 厦门模温机 武汉模温机 长沙模温机 南昌模温机 太原模温机 西安模温机 合肥模温机 芜湖模温机 马鞍山模温机 油温机 上海水温机 水温机 上海油温机 苏州油温机 苏州水温机 无锡水温机 无锡油温机 常州水温机 常州油温机 南京水温机 南京油温机 杭州水温机 杭州油温机 绍兴水温机 绍兴油温机 宁波水温机 宁波油温机 温州水温机 温州油温机 嘉兴水温机 嘉兴油温机 台州水温机 台州油温机

Posted by: njracks at July 9, 2008 01:52 AM

---

Abstract paintings
Angel painting
animal paintings
ballet paintings
beach painting
Boat painting
building painting
Children painting
Christ painting
church painting
City painting
Cottage painting
Dancer painting
field painting
Floral paintings
Garden painting
Hunting paintings
impressionist painting
Knight painting
Lady painting
Landscape painting
Lighthouse paintings
Music painting
Nude painting
Oriental paintings
Piano painting
Seascapes paintings
Still Life paintings
street painting
sunset painting
Tropical paintings
Venice paintings
Village painting
wine paintingsalvador dali paintings
thomas kinkade paintings
pablo picasso paintings
vincent van gogh paintings
claude monet paintings
diego rivera paintings

Posted by: aswkin at July 17, 2008 06:11 AM

---