BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 04:08 PM

Well... maybe that is where Superman comes in.... if anyone can do it, Frank can do it. And if he did, it would be just the kind of challenge Frank would relish. But... I wonder because he is so smooth that maybe (??) he will want to wait for something more secure. I can't see him just sitting around waiting to be annoited to the Senate... which is a given.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 03:40 PM

I think it's gonna be a case of the Liberals NOT stepping on their cranks for the next year. Give the Conservatives some time to step on their own. If the LIBS can manage that and present reasonable arguments in the House, then I expect they'll take the next election in say a year and a half (tops). I expect they'll win with a plurality just a half dozen seats shy of 155. That will be enough to give them, in effect, a majority.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 03:34 PM

"McKenna maybe. But how friendly is he with US policies? And is his support of Meech Lake gonna hinder his ability to unite this place?"

Very (un)friendly, depending. Not even for a NY minute.

I'm serious when I say he's got the cape. This guy is so fucking smoooooooth, he's beyond exlax. I watched him govern this province for ten years and I was in awe at "the smooth". And results? Simple history. New Brunswick has, pound for pound, outpaced all other provinces for years... well after he left, becuase of what he started. Sweet sufferin... the only thing that might fuck him is the jealousy of the other Premiers who looked pale in comparison. He made a few enemies when he started stealing jobs from the big boys.

Look at his statement giving reason for his resignation. It leaves Stevie behind the eight ball with no leaves (sorry, couldn't resist).

Still, no word about leading the Liberals. As a matter of fact, after some more thought, he might just back off and wait until the time is right... until we really need him.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 11:38 AM

McKenna maybe. But how friendly is he with US policies? And is his support of Meech Lake gonna hinder his ability to unite this place?

"Time will tell just who has fell
And who's been left behind"

However, he looks better than most.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 09:48 AM

HeHe .... I'll try and stay quiet on this one gnu ... but it is exciting news today .... hopefully for the Liberal Party and Canada.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 09:38 AM

Now... who will Stevie select for cabinet? Who will replace Paul?

I don't know squat about who Stevie will annoint, but I still stand by Superman for the next Liberal leader. He tendered his resignation as Ambassador to the U.S. yesterday. Think Stevie will accept it immediately? Think Frank will actually offer his services as the next Liberal leader? Does anyone know who Frank is? (sIx... you are disqualified from answering.)

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 09:29 AM

Yo, Metchosin... how's yer mum doing?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 09:28 AM

Ah... Raptor....

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu - PM
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:32 AM

I am sure someone who knows will be along very shortly to point out my error, but...

Ridings A, B and C each have 100 voters. A votes 100 Lib and 0 Con. B and C vote 49 Lib and 51 Con. One Lib and two Con elected by real vote. Lib get 198/300 = 66 % of the popular vote.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 08:40 AM

Thanks Peace, Six

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6
Date: 26 Jan 06 - 12:03 AM

"OK still don't get the Popular vote thing, but I guess I'm not alone."

If you don't get it by now Raptor ... don't worry, it means squat ... just something for Monday Morning quaterbacks and work shop analysts to talk about, thinking that they know it all when after all they'd be better off talking about the weather.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 11:31 PM

What the flip are you on about, eh? You got a problem? You wanna take it outside, flipface? Who the flip are you anyways?

In my experyence..and it is huge and vast...Liberal women are looser than Conservatives on the whole...unlest you get them drunk! Then the conservtives are way looser because, like, they got a lot of pent up sexual energy that got held in too long, eh? From bein' too conserviateive.

Then there are French girls. Hoo-Wee! "Loose" don't desribe it.

This is why I would hang arownd with the Bloc Quebecwha if they were arond here, but they are not. Too flippin' bad, eh?

Buy the way, Flipface took it in my riding. That was the Liberal candidate. It was a woman. I was ticked off about that, coz I bet on Bolthole to win. That was the Conservative guy.

I can't believe there is a woman runnin' this municipalaty now. I hope she don't make it illegal to get drunk. If she does, I am movin' to...Alberta. Or Timmins. Somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 10:48 PM

Just how loose are the Libs? Can they be tightened up or is that really needed. I don't see where that has been addressed on this thread at all.

Or, you fuckin' moron, did you mean LOSING? THe amount and quantity of bullshit that has taken over here is bad enough but the quality and intelligence of the gawddamn bullshit has continued to sink deeper into the abyss.

Any chance of bringing back the days of literate bullshit?...........yeah.........I didn't think so.........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:54 PM

"Western Liberals: In the prairie provinces, Conservatives got three times as many votes as Liberals did, but won nearly ten times as many seats. In Alberta, the Conservative Party won 100% of the seats with 65% of the votes. The 500,000 Albertans who voted otherwise elected no one.

Urban Conservatives: The 400,000-plus Conservative voters in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver should have been able to elect about nine MPs, but instead elected no one. The three cities together will not have a single MP in the governing caucus, let alone the cabinet.

New Democrats: The NDP attracted a million more votes than the Bloc, but the voting system gave the Bloc 51 seats, the NDP 29. Nearly 18% of Canadians voted NDP, but the party won less than 10% of the seats and does not hold the balance of power, unlike the Liberals and the Bloc.

Green Party: More than 650,000 Green Party voters across the country elected no one, while 475,000 Liberal voters in Atlantic Canada elected 20 MPs."

The above are examples of Popular vote vs Real vote.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:47 PM

OK still don't get the Popular vote thing, but I guess I'm not alone.

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 06:15 PM

Now you've done it, Charmion. DougR will never dare set foot in Vanier if he visits Ottawa, and it's your fault.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 06:09 PM

We live in Ottawa-Vanier, a "red pig" riding -- you know, one of those places where they'd elect a boar hog if it was nominated by the Liberal riding association. Sure enough, Mauril Bélanger was re-elected for the third time, unlike the rest of Ottawa's Liberal MPs except the federal McGuinty in Ottawa South. (Members of the McGuinty family are also to be found at Queen's Park and Ottawa City Hall.) And there I go again, reminding myself of how the Liberal Party machine works around here -- why do I depress myself like that?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 04:17 PM

I'd be happy having Josee Verner representing my riding :) !! ... who cares if she is a f'n consertative.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 03:28 PM

I think it will probably mean the end of her living independantly in her little mobile home, gnu, which will be a double whammy for her because she will have to give up her dog too. Old Beau is her constant companion and without him her incentive to continue will most likely diminish.

Gotta run, they still haven't set her arm, let alone dealt with her pelvis because of a bottle neck in operating room use. I'm on my way to find out how she fared through another night again. Not feeling too kindly towards either Liberals or Conservatives at the moment.....my ideas regarding the priorities for the citizens of this country don't seem to be theirs......funny how things deteriorate when you get lax about oiling the machine.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 03:08 PM

No politician, Bruce, does absolutely everything that a majority of his constituents want him to do at any given moment. If he did, he wouldn't be a human being, he'd be a lever on a slot machine or a trigger on a gun. ;-)

For one thing, a politician usually has access to a lot more specific information than the general public does. That's his job. This may cause him to see it differently when it comes to making a decision. For another, mere obedience to the will of the most voices in the crowd at any given time is not what I call "leadership". A leader does what he truly believes is the best thing to do...if he IS a leader...and what he thinks is possible under the circumstances.

For instance, FDR wanted to get the USA into WWII a lot earlier, but he had an isolationist public and Congress to deal with. Accordingly, he did what was possible. He gave the British a whole lot of assistance in various ways, economic and otherwise. American forces were involved in helping to track down the Bismark in 1941, for instance...unofficially. American forces were already assisting in various ways in the fight against U-Boats in 1941...unofficially. America was preparing for the inevitable, while officially staying out of the war.

You vote for a person not because you think he'll always do exactly what you want on every single issue, but because you regard him as capable of making good decisions in a general sense and handling the job well, and because you respect his or her character.

As for liking the MPs I elect, I liked our last MP. Not because he was Liberal...because he was a nice man with a good attitude and character. He retired after 3 terms and didn't run this time. The new guy, a Conservative, seems to be a pretty reasonable person too, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 02:40 PM

Oh my goodness!!! I hope she is doing okay.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 11:50 AM

We can all blame the Tory win on my old Mum. We did. LOL

When my husband drove her to her polling place she was in such a rush to exercise her franchise that she bolted from the car, before he could get around to her side to help her out, fell in the unlit parking lot, broke her arm and fractured her pelvis in two places.

Needless to say, they didn't get to vote and we got to watch the results on the TV in the Emergency Room with the disappointed hospital staff.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 11:00 AM

Can't argue with you there. Why, just yesterday on the front page of our Times & Transcript there was a pic of a big, shit-eatin crocodile grin. No sir, can't argue with prima fucia evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 10:17 AM

Truthfully, how often do we get MPs we can be proud of? I think that if all Canadian 'catters posted the names of MPs they were happy to have representing them, the list would be a short one indeed. So, assuming that because a person is elected to public office means that person is a step above the norm on the Darwin scale is, IMO, a mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 10:09 AM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 10:07 AM

Oh.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:55 AM

Here is what "I" am saying. We elect the best and brightest (okay, okay) to do what is best and what is right. We vote them out when we feel thay haven't done their job well enough. It is their duty to serve us by using our resources to address problems, study them and provide solutions. Not every voter has the time to carefully weigh the issues. Do I want people with half the information making decisions?

During poor weather, I take my mother out to grocery and department stores and malls so she can get out of the house and get a walk in, even if it's only for an hour. I live in Moncton, New brunswick, Canada, so this is a common occurence in the winter. I would say, on average, that on at least half of the aisles, some dumb fuck hasn't got the common sense and courtesey to allow enough space for other shoppers to pass. Do I want these people participating in referendums that affect me?

Even worse are the anti-this-or-that assholes who want to have a say in what other people do, whether or not it affects them. Do I want them making laws that affect others that are doing them no harm, except that their opinions or otherwise differ?

No. And that's my final answer.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:33 AM

See? Even before I posted!!!

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:33 AM

In regards to not having a referendum. So then are we saying that in a democracy the only views that are valid are the ones that agree with 'mine'?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:32 AM

I am sure someone who knows will be along very shortly to point out my error, but...

Ridings A, B and C each have 100 voters. A votes 100 Lib and 0 Con. B and C vote 49 Lib and 51 Con. One Lib and two Con elected by real vote. Lib get 198/300 = 66 % of the popular vote.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:27 AM

Raptor, here.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 08:52 AM

Jean, dat guy, was poopoolar. Paul... eeehh.. pas so much, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 07:36 AM

Could somebody explain the Popular vote and the real vote to me I don't get the difference.
Thank you
Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: David C. Carter
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 06:33 AM

Mitterand abolished the death penalty here in France,going against public opinion....fortunately.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 05:02 AM

You got that right, Clary! If we had had referendumbs on the Loonie and and the Toonie, my left lower back wouldn't hurt so much. I am sure my back problem is the result of so much heavy change in my left front pocket. It throws off yer balance and causes yer back and ass muscles to pinch the satanic nerve. Hurts like hell!!! And, the money that has been spent on physiotherapy and wasted by lost work time due to these injuries is staggering.

But, it will never happen. Remember what happened to Doris Day when he suggested the new referendumb laws? 22 Minutes broke the back on that one.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 02:26 AM

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 12:27 AM

"The problem, as I see it, with referenda is the volatility of opinion based on emotion."

That is true. However, other than the Quebec referenda, Canada has not had any that I can recall.

1) Ottawa is maybe too filled with itself to find out what Canadians actually think about the issues
2) Maybe a bit afraid to find out that they have a few things wrong

For instance, I am not pro Capital Punishment. Subsequently, I think we have that right. However, I may be in the minority. I would like to know. Same for legalization of grass, abortion, gun registration, etc. I would like to know.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 12:12 AM

"Well, if I were a politician, Bruce, and I thought that my constituency was emotionally immature enough to vote in favour of capital punishment, I would not give them the chance to."

Then, if you were not going to follow the will of the constituency you were elected to represent, your real moral responsibility would be to resign after having stated why, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 07:18 PM

The problem, as I see it, with referenda is the volatility of opinion based on emotion. For instance if there has just been a horrific child killing prior to a referendum on capital punishment you could be sure that would sway a great number of people to vote in it's favour.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 07:09 PM

And if they really didn't like it, I'd say, "Well, you can vote me out in the next election then if you feel that way, but I am not going to be instrumental in bringing about something I think is totally morally wrong."

Politicians need more guts to stand up for themselves. For instance, Clinton should have simply said, "My sex life is nobody's business." Period. He could have saved himself a whole lot of trouble by not trying to please everybody. You cannot please everybody. When you try to, they just lose respect for you.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 07:00 PM

Hmmm. Well, if I were a politician, Bruce, and I thought that my constituency was emotionally immature enough to vote in favour of capital punishment, I would not give them the chance to. Why? I have a responsibility to my own conscience, to society, and to God...as I see it. If I'm a leader, then I had better lead, hadn't I (rather than just doing what I'm told to do by the largest number of loudest voices)? If a parent is incapable of giving some kind of moral leadership to children, what happens?

Each case, though, is unique, and we all use our judgement as best we can to deal with it.

Accordingly, you can easily shoot holes in the case I just laid out by describing other situations where it totally doesn't wash...and I know that already. ;-) Okay?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:50 PM

Referendum is the way to go, IMO. It doesn't guarantee the right answer, but it would at least let people know how strongly people feel about the issues. BTW, I didn't mean to shout. I forget that CAPITAL letters are interpreted as shouting. I use them for emphasis. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:44 PM

6 - "I guess all those who voted for the Bloc Quebecois, Independants or New Dems are off the moronic list .... and if you voted for the Liberals and Consertatives you are on the list"

Well, no, I wouldn't put it in quite such simple terms as that. I'm sure there are cogent reasons for voting Liberal or Conservative at times. ;-)

But you know I am against the very idea OF political parties, right? The bigger ones are usually the more corrupted of the lot, but they're all self-serving and divisive in their effect.

If there were no f**king parties, then no one could claim that a population had voted either "liberal" or "conservative", and we could deal with actual, real issues instead of phony symbols that divide and mislead people.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:43 PM

It's the sucession of the will of the majority. Not much to do with choice. Although that might be nice ...

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:38 PM

Isn't a true democracy based on freedom of choice rather than on forcing the opinion of one lot on another lot?

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:38 PM

Peace, I think the problem lies in the politicians NOT carrying the predominent opinion of constituents back to Parliament. And the party system means we'll overlook that fault in favour of ingrained anti-[insert-party-you-hate-here] bias.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:33 PM

"60% vote in favour of -- anything -- doesn't necessarily make it right."

True. Nor does 100%. However, the issues have been decided without direct input from Canadians. Each of the issues is contentious. The people who pay the shot deserve to have their opinions recognized by which ever government is in power. For all we know, 20% of Canadians favour gun registration. And that's the thing. WE DO NOT KNOW!

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:30 PM

How do you write your name in pee if you have squat for snow???

And about the the yogic flyers-- easy, silly! Look in Jellystone on the yogic phone poles. See the election posters? There ya go, eh?

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:27 PM

60% vote in favour of -- anything -- doesn't necessarily make it right. One of democracy's glaring faults is that it extends the franchise to people who watch reruns of Gilligan's Island.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:15 PM

There is one thing that either Lib or Cons could have done that would have secured them a majority in the House of Commons:

Offer to hold a national referendum on

1) abortion
2) capital punishment
3) gun registration
4) gay marriage

The party that offered that would have been swamped with votes. I hope a referendum is held on those four issues so that Canadians get to give direct input. That is, everyone who voted would be counted. Make it so that each had to be decided by a majority of 60%. That would shut down the bitchin' and moanin', and the direction on those issues would come directly from Canadians and not bloody lobbyists for this or that. Too bad it didn't happen.

Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6
Date: 24 Jan 06 - 06:12 PM

So L.H. ... I guess all those who voted for the Bloc Quebecois, Independants or New Dems are off the moronic list .... and if you voted for the Liberals and Consertatives you are on the list .... Hmmmmm, always wondered how that list worked.

sIx