To Thread - Forum Home

The Mudcat Café TM
https://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=88266
237 messages

BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan

23 Jan 06 - 11:15 AM (#1654186)
Subject: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Lucky Pierre

Conservative Win in Canada Could Help Repair Ties to US
New York Times, United States - 12 hours ago
... The Liberals won the last four national elections, governing Canada for 13 years - as the party did for three-quarters of the past century. ...
Conservative Party in Canada Appears Poised for Election Victory
New York Times, United States - 20 hours ago
... The Liberals won the last four national elections, governing Canada for 13 years - as the party did for three-quarters of the last century. ...
A Conservative Evolves, and Leads a Canadian Race
New York Times, United States - Jan 15, 2006
... Conservative Party as the main opposition to the long-dominant Liberals. He once led a conservative research organization and referred to Canada 10 years ago ...
Liberals' TV Ads Bring Some Heat to Canada's Election Campaign
New York Times, United States - Jan 11, 2006
... One has a voice reading a Washington Times article saying: "Canada may elect the most ... and their anti-Bush overtones are similar to a drive the Liberals made in ...
World Briefing: Americas, Europe and Asia
New York Times, United States - Jan 11, 2006
CANADA: POLL SHOWS CONSERVATIVES SURGING AHEAD A new poll indicates that Stephen Harper ... Star and La Presse, shows the Conservatives leading the Liberals in the ...

Vive La France!

23 Jan 06 - 02:12 PM (#1654225)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Pffffftt!!!

23 Jan 06 - 02:16 PM (#1654229)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

It's getting real deep in here.

When the polls close it will look like
125, 100, 53, and 30 for Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc and New Democrats. MINORITY GOVERNMENT.

23 Jan 06 - 02:21 PM (#1654236)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Clinton Hammond

Like it matters one way or the other....

23 Jan 06 - 02:33 PM (#1654245)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: pdq

Seems that the words 'loosing' and 'hypocracy' are among the most commonly used terms on Mudcat.

Maybe we should attempt to define them. Here goes:

          loosing - Opening the gates of the corral and letting the cattle out.

          hypocracy - Rule by hypocrites

23 Jan 06 - 02:57 PM (#1654259)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"Vive La France!"

Seems it's a very nice thought, given that France needs all the prayers it can garner these days.

23 Jan 06 - 04:35 PM (#1654314)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion

Good one, pdq. Bad spelling makes me wince, so I'm always glad for a little re-interpretation.

23 Jan 06 - 04:56 PM (#1654329)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

"When the polls close it will look like
125, 100, 53, and 30 for Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc and New Democrats. MINORITY GOVERNMENT."

how do you know that Peace ??

sIx

23 Jan 06 - 05:07 PM (#1654343)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Just wait. You'll see. I got high friends in places.

23 Jan 06 - 07:23 PM (#1654433)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Less than 45 minutes here until we begin to see who's lacking in social graces............

23 Jan 06 - 07:28 PM (#1654438)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River

That would be...like...just about everyone around this town, eh? You won't hafta wait 45 minutes neeither.

- Shane

23 Jan 06 - 07:37 PM (#1654444)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Shite... I had just woke up... I meant 15 minutes... which are up... it has BEGUN!!! Of course, I cannot report anything I see on the TV as it is highly illegal.

23 Jan 06 - 07:42 PM (#1654447)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River

By the way, I like voted for a laff, eh? The choice here was between:

Bolthole - Conserbative
Flipface - Libaral
Corkpuller - NDP
Bible Thumper - Chiristian Flippin' Heritge party (talk about MAJOR LOOOSERS!)
Green Thumb - Green party (buncha veg-heads that love whales and stuff like that)

Now hte way it goes in this town...Only Bolthole and Flipface got a hope of being elected here. Corkpuller is just in it so she can say she ran. Big flippin' deal! Bible Thumper is a skinny old flippin' religionous nut who runs every time in this riding and dong't never get more than 35 or 40 votes! One of his votes is from my Aunt. she is a religious nut too. She says I am goin' to hell. I say, "I already BEEN there...that weekend long ago when I got babysat by YOU!" Then ya got yer Green Thumb who is praobally a planted agent from Europe because she can't be a real Canadian! Hell no. Real Canadians eat back backon, not Humous and Taheenies and crap like that. Real Canadians wear work boots, not Birkenstocks. Real Canadians read Don Cherry's hockey books, not Deepaki flippin' Chopra!

So...tomorrow either Bolthole or Flipface gets to run this flippin' municipality for a while. Whichever one it is...he has my flippin' sympathy, lemme tell ya. I say it's gonna be Bolthole. 3 to 1 odds, eh? I voted for Bolthole, like I said...for a laff...but I figger my winner-type instinks will propeller the conservatives to victory. I have a gut feeling that dont' never lead me astray, eh?

23 Jan 06 - 08:06 PM (#1654469)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

18 11 2

23 Jan 06 - 08:14 PM (#1654479)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

Hike!

23 Jan 06 - 08:32 PM (#1654506)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Right end runs behind the left halfback. Takes the ball. Sends a 40 yarder to the left end who does a beautiful layup and misses the crease by centimeters. They discuss it at the 19th hole.

23 Jan 06 - 08:40 PM (#1654508)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Beer

Despite all the crap going on I did vote today as i have ever since I was old enough to do so. Did I win? Did I loose? For me it really doesn't matter. But I voted. No one shot at me. I was welcomed by folks that voted in all likelyhood for someone I did not vote for.

23 Jan 06 - 08:40 PM (#1654509)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River

Flippin' A! Bolthole makes a fast break for the centre, fakes left, then DRIVES for right flippin' field! Flipface tries for the tackel, misses it...and eats dirt! But here comes Corkpuller! She has dtiched the birikenstocks and is wearin' cleats! Holy flip! This could get flippin' nasty.

"REPENT!" yells Bible Thumper. "The END IS NEAR!!!"

Just as...Green Thumb whips out a bucket of veggie queeche and pitches it all over Bolthole's path, causin' Bolthole to slip, stagger, and...DROP THE BALL!!!!!!!!!

FUMBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The crowd goes NUTS!!!

Gonna be quite a flippin' night, eh?

23 Jan 06 - 08:57 PM (#1654528)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

'"REPENT!" yells Bible Thumper. "The END IS NEAR!!!"'

The end should have been covered by the safety.

23 Jan 06 - 08:58 PM (#1654529)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

Why is it that no one who hates "liberals" knows how to correctly spell the word "loser"?

23 Jan 06 - 09:09 PM (#1654543)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Bobert

You all ain't going to go talking about making a nuke, is ya???

You know how conservatives like to have lots of bombs....

23 Jan 06 - 09:17 PM (#1654548)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

I think we already have some American nukes positioned to "defend" us. In other words, if the Russians send some over the pole, then the USA sends some back the other way and tries to blow up the Russian ones right over our heads. Makes for a great light show.

23 Jan 06 - 09:19 PM (#1654554)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

I think we should be making thermonuclear weapons. We get invaded and we set them off.

23 Jan 06 - 09:22 PM (#1654557)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

I think we should take up yogic flying - that'll show 'em.

23 Jan 06 - 09:24 PM (#1654560)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Hey, yeah. Where the heck are the yogic flyers this election?

23 Jan 06 - 09:26 PM (#1654562)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

They overdid it and ascended right out of this plane of existence.

23 Jan 06 - 09:26 PM (#1654563)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

It's a winter election, remember, they would have to get de-iced.

23 Jan 06 - 09:27 PM (#1654565)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Oh!

23 Jan 06 - 10:00 PM (#1654590)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

BTW: We got squat for snow here. Even the weather's been clement.

23 Jan 06 - 10:32 PM (#1654640)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Bobert

Can ya ski on sqat, Bruce?

23 Jan 06 - 10:49 PM (#1654650)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

"125, 100, 53, and 30 for Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc and New Democrats. MINORITY GOVERNMENT.""

pretty close on the count so far Peace.

122 102 50 30.

sIx

23 Jan 06 - 11:24 PM (#1654658)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

NDP have 31.

24 Jan 06 - 12:25 AM (#1654670)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Stephen Harper and Stockwell Day? That's almost funny if it weren't so real.

Oh well, its a minority government. If they go too far right or try to change social policy, they will have a very, hard time.

I'll give them two years at the most.

A senator remarked that, by then, people will realize that they are only disguised as liberal.

I hope the opposition watches them like hawks.

The best thing is that the Conservatives are out-numbered!

We have been spared the nightmare of a majority Conservative government.

24 Jan 06 - 10:42 AM (#1654831)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

No reason to sweat. 64% of the public did not vote conservative. Canada is still Canada.

24 Jan 06 - 12:49 PM (#1654919)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Greg F.

by then, people will realize that they are only disguised as liberal.

BY THEN ??? they've not been attempting to hide their true character all along.

Its really disheartening to learn that a significant number of Canadians are every bit as moronic as their counterparts south of the border.

I'd expected better of 'em, in light of past experience.

24 Jan 06 - 06:08 PM (#1654986)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

A significant number of people anywhere are moronic...(although I don't think they were born that way...they just got that way due to various factors around them).

Anyway, voting for either the Liberals or the Conservatives in this country is fairly moronic when you get right down to it. Kind of similar to Democrats and Republicans. They represent the major lobbyists, not the people.

24 Jan 06 - 06:08 PM (#1654989)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: DougR

Congrats to any Conservatives out there!
DougR

24 Jan 06 - 06:12 PM (#1654993)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

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

24 Jan 06 - 06:15 PM (#1654997)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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.

24 Jan 06 - 06:27 PM (#1655011)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad

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.

24 Jan 06 - 06:30 PM (#1655018)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: wysiwyg

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~

24 Jan 06 - 06:33 PM (#1655021)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"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!

24 Jan 06 - 06:38 PM (#1655032)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad

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.

24 Jan 06 - 06:38 PM (#1655033)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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

24 Jan 06 - 06:43 PM (#1655040)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad

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

24 Jan 06 - 06:44 PM (#1655042)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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.

24 Jan 06 - 06:50 PM (#1655050)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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.

24 Jan 06 - 07:00 PM (#1655061)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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?

24 Jan 06 - 07:09 PM (#1655067)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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.

24 Jan 06 - 07:18 PM (#1655070)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

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.

25 Jan 06 - 12:12 AM (#1655212)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"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.

25 Jan 06 - 12:27 AM (#1655216)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"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.

25 Jan 06 - 02:26 AM (#1655240)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

25 Jan 06 - 05:02 AM (#1655292)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

25 Jan 06 - 06:33 AM (#1655336)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: David C. Carter

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

25 Jan 06 - 07:36 AM (#1655359)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

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

25 Jan 06 - 08:52 AM (#1655389)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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

25 Jan 06 - 09:27 AM (#1655407)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Raptor, here.

25 Jan 06 - 09:32 AM (#1655410)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

25 Jan 06 - 09:33 AM (#1655411)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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'?

25 Jan 06 - 09:33 AM (#1655412)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

See? Even before I posted!!!

25 Jan 06 - 09:55 AM (#1655426)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

25 Jan 06 - 10:07 AM (#1655437)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Oh.

25 Jan 06 - 10:09 AM (#1655440)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

LOL

25 Jan 06 - 10:17 AM (#1655448)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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.

25 Jan 06 - 11:00 AM (#1655480)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

25 Jan 06 - 11:50 AM (#1655515)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

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.

25 Jan 06 - 02:40 PM (#1655520)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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

25 Jan 06 - 03:08 PM (#1655543)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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.

25 Jan 06 - 03:28 PM (#1655556)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

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.

25 Jan 06 - 04:17 PM (#1655574)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

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

sIx

25 Jan 06 - 06:09 PM (#1655650)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion

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?

25 Jan 06 - 06:15 PM (#1655653)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

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

25 Jan 06 - 09:47 PM (#1655780)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

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

Raptor

25 Jan 06 - 09:54 PM (#1655784)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"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.

25 Jan 06 - 10:48 PM (#1655794)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: catspaw49

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

25 Jan 06 - 11:31 PM (#1655820)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River

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.

26 Jan 06 - 12:03 AM (#1655842)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

"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

26 Jan 06 - 08:40 AM (#1655870)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

Thanks Peace, Six

Raptor

26 Jan 06 - 09:28 AM (#1655916)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

26 Jan 06 - 09:29 AM (#1655917)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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

26 Jan 06 - 09:38 AM (#1655927)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.)

26 Jan 06 - 09:48 AM (#1655934)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,number 6

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

26 Jan 06 - 11:38 AM (#1655994)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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.

26 Jan 06 - 03:34 PM (#1656106)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

"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.

26 Jan 06 - 03:40 PM (#1656110)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

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.

26 Jan 06 - 04:08 PM (#1656144)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

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.

26 Jan 06 - 04:13 PM (#1656151)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Hehehe... besides... as far as "waiting" goes... look at the guy. He looks like a fuckin nasty old junkyard dog. Like he can't wait to bite somebody's ass. But, real smooth like, smilin an all, ya know?

26 Jan 06 - 04:17 PM (#1656155)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Face like a bulldog lickin' piss off a thistle.

26 Jan 06 - 04:24 PM (#1656157)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Hahaha... when Frank speaks.....

26 Jan 06 - 04:25 PM (#1656159)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

Well said gnu ... especially in your thread at 3:34. If anyone can pull it together it's Frank ... as I said it's exciting news that is developing ... more so than the mediocre election. As per the French issue, look at his stint in law, and in NB politics in regards to the Acadians. he has insight, guts, is a straight shooter, humanity and yes gnu smmmmmoth.

"best social program we have is a job." .... Frank Mckenna

sIx

26 Jan 06 - 04:27 PM (#1656163)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

Yes, I think McKenna would prove to be a very good choice for Liberal leader. Martin was a poor choice from the start. I don't think he had any clear idea why he wanted to be prime minister anymore by the time he got there.

26 Jan 06 - 04:50 PM (#1656183)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Sorry LH... he had a clear idea. He was the best man for the job. Honest... didn't need the pay or payback now, did he? Smart. Well educated. Well experienced. Excellent service and track record... balanced the budget... etc... etc... etc. Could have been one of the finest PM's ever. Only thing was, Canucks were ready for a change. Barely.

26 Jan 06 - 05:17 PM (#1656189)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

Well, then, I guess it was just the wrong time for him.

26 Jan 06 - 06:34 PM (#1656237)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Yeah... timing is everthing... that's what she said.

26 Jan 06 - 08:33 PM (#1656252)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

Any thoughts on Michael Ignatieff ? I admire his intelligence and the best thing about him is that he is not a politician - sometimes that is a good thing. When I hear smooth, as applied to a politician, I think oleaginous, as in Brian Mulroney.

26 Jan 06 - 08:58 PM (#1656260)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

The two things he'd have to handle: His support of the Missile Defense Program and the advocacy of limited 'torture'--sleep deprivation and hoods over the heads of prisoners. No doubt that he's bright, intelligent, well-spoken.

27 Jan 06 - 12:53 AM (#1656328)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

gnu, Mum's doing fine considering. She's one tough old bird. They did her surgery this morning and had her up on her feet this afternoon with a walker. She's got a nice steel plate and some pins in her arm and according to her orthopedic surgeon she should be out in about a week. It will take about 11 weeks for her pelvic fractures to fully heal.

I thought the injuries to to her pelvis would finish an 85 year old, but not according according to her doctor. There was no displacement so they are not as serious as a broken hip. They've stuck a nicotine patch on her to keep her from climbing the walls and asked me to keep her supplied with a wee dram as a nightcap while she's in there. Wonders never cease.

27 Jan 06 - 01:13 AM (#1656337)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Wonderful news, Metchosin.

27 Jan 06 - 01:14 AM (#1656338)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

Great news indeed!
Raptor

27 Jan 06 - 09:08 AM (#1656403)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Thanks Metchosin. I hope she does well during the recovery, and, of course, beyond. She does sound like one tough old girl!!!

27 Jan 06 - 09:10 AM (#1656406)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I see that Stevie ended up in hospital yesterday due to an asthma attack. I think it was probably just that he couldn't catch his breath after hearing that Frank submitted his resignation.

27 Jan 06 - 09:38 AM (#1656428)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I just heard.... Bob Rae. From a news article...

"Of the three, Rae is probably the longest shot, since the former New Democrat premier of Ontario has never been a card-carrying Liberal. However, he has formidable connections to the Liberals, not least of whom is brother John Rae, vice-president of Power Corp., and the brains behind former prime minister Jean Chretien's three successful election campaigns.

Both Chretien and Martin wooed Rae in the past to run for the Liberals. As an outsider with admirers in both camps, he might be well placed to heal the schism left from the 10 year Martin-Chretien civil war."

Hmmm.

Ah, Tobin is the third referred to in the article. Hmmm.

27 Jan 06 - 09:39 AM (#1656429)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

I bet he didn't wait long

27 Jan 06 - 09:44 AM (#1656432)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I should hope not... pretty serious stuff when ya can't breathe. Imagine if he had been eating pretzels!! Deja who?

27 Jan 06 - 10:45 AM (#1656469)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Aren't the Liberals by tradition supposed to come up with someone with a French sounding name this time around?

27 Jan 06 - 10:53 AM (#1656471)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

PS thanks for the concern people, very much appreciated.

27 Jan 06 - 10:57 AM (#1656475)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

What could be more French than Frank? Frankaphone he is... he is completely bilangue, en Francais d'Acadie. Il parles witout no accent, him.

27 Jan 06 - 10:59 AM (#1656477)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Tobin, on the other hand, speaks bot wit a h'accent.

27 Jan 06 - 11:18 AM (#1656496)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Larry K

I was hoping that Quebec would separate from canada because than it would be 4 hours quicker to drive to Nova Scotia.

Since the new PM is from the west, is he a "cowboy" like Bush?

27 Jan 06 - 12:51 PM (#1656567)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

Why he sure is LarryK, as can be attested to by this photo.

27 Jan 06 - 02:13 PM (#1656609)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

He almost looks like an extra in a Corb Lund Band video... bring yer truck!

As much as I have shit on the guy, he now has the chance to show us what he is made of. I hope he does some good and I hope he stays around long enough to do so. Surely he won't pull a "Joe Who"??

Hmmm. Joe. There's another guy who could have been a great PM but got fucked by timing and integrity.

Another hmmm... "Petitpet" could be a nickname for Frank... a la "Petit Pierre"? There are similitudes, mostly in a "no bullshit" attitude. He certainly could stink things up for the Con's if he pulls a "Steve Who". (Ah... pour les Anglephone, "pet" en Shaque = "fart" en Anglais.)

27 Jan 06 - 03:42 PM (#1656653)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

USD at Cdn 1.1496???? Hmmm? I said HMMM?!

Must scare the crap outta those Canucks what bought yer US$ after Katrina, eh? Can you say softwood up the arse? Hmmm. I wonder.

27 Jan 06 - 04:34 PM (#1656683)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,AR282

I love this:

No sooner did conservatives win in Canada and coservative America high-fived each other. Then the first thing the new govt does is warn the US to stay out of its Arctic waters unless they ask for permission first--something the liberal govt never demanded!

HAHAHA! I love it!

27 Jan 06 - 04:38 PM (#1656686)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

He's just blowing a lot of steam, Canada has no way to enforce the no trespass.

27 Jan 06 - 04:41 PM (#1656687)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion

Conservatives traditionally have no sense of ha-ha on territorial issues -- remember John Diefenbaker and his terrible relationship with Kennedy? Mulroney got away with NAFTA because it was about money, not land.

Mr Harper is in for an interesting if stressful time. I hope he keeps his asthma puffer in his jacket pocket.

27 Jan 06 - 04:43 PM (#1656688)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad

Maybe the laughter will subside when you realize why there's a need to establish sovereignty over the NW passage ... it's only becoming navigable because the f*cking ice is melting!

27 Jan 06 - 04:49 PM (#1656691)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"it's only becoming navigable because the f*cking ice is melting!"

Actually, submarines regularly use it.

27 Jan 06 - 04:57 PM (#1656695)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,AR282

The NW passage has always been navigable for Navy subs and now Canada is saying no. Not because the ice is melting--I don't know if it is or not and I don't know what that has to do with anything. Nor do I care if Canada can enforce the no-trespass or not. I just love the fact that Washington thought Canadian conservatives would be happy to lick their balls and got them bitten instead. Gotta luv it!!

Hey, maybe we should invade Canada via the NW Passage, I'm sure we'll be hailed as lilberators! HAHAHA!

27 Jan 06 - 04:59 PM (#1656697)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

Poor steven didn't have asthma he had a chest cold and had to go to the hospital for that!

That my friends why people have to wait in emerge for hours with serious problems. Because ASSHOLES go in with non threatning conditions like a chest cold. The prick.He could have gone to his doctor.

Is this how he plans to fix the healthcare by abusing it?

Raptor

27 Jan 06 - 05:01 PM (#1656699)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

"...submarines regularly use it." Then there is definitely a tax that can be levied on passage in the Northwest... the Stantax?

27 Jan 06 - 05:25 PM (#1656704)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: TheBigPinkLad

I'd be obliged to have a definition of 'regularly' ...

27 Jan 06 - 08:22 PM (#1656767)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

But that would be telling, TBPL.

I know it's been a bone of contention for years.

27 Jan 06 - 08:25 PM (#1656769)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"Canadians with long memories will recall the nationwide furor that arose in 1969 when the U.S. supertanker Manhattan sailed through the Northwest Passage without seeking Ottawa's permission. In 1985, the U.S. Coast Guard icebreaker Polar Side made a similar trip without telling Ottawa.

And in 1987 American authorities released stunning photographs of three U.S. nuclear-powered submarines surfacing through the ice at the North Pole."

27 Jan 06 - 08:34 PM (#1656770)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

FWIW, I heard from a friend that Canada was having its difficulties with it all during the Cold War because we had no subs that could track or engage either the USSR or the US. They of course knew that and used the passage quite freely--being wary of each other because we had no way to stop them anyway.

That makes sense. Due to the frozen surface, the subs have to be nuclear. Non nuclear subs require regular supplies of O2, and the only way to do that is to surface. Therefore, diesel subs were out. Nuclear subs can stay surfaced for months at a time. (Shanghaiceltic was a submariner, and he could explain this much better than I ever could.)

The situation prompted Ottawa (I think it was Axworthy) to say that they would build ten nuclear subs, That never came about.

28 Jan 06 - 12:57 AM (#1656858)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

AR282, you said, "Then the first thing the new govt does is warn the US to stay out of its Arctic waters unless they ask for permission first--"

Thats just a red herring.

The first thing Harper does is assure the Canadian public that he only has the best interests of Canada in mind. At the same time he is busy assuring Bush that NORAD will be extended perpetually.

While blowing hot-air, he will sell Canada to the highest bidder.

Eventually, he will conspire with Bush (they have two years to do this) to increase security and build up the military.

Harper will probably put nuclear subs in the Arctic (at our expense) to combat terrorism under the guise of defending our shores against U.S. incursions.

God help us all.

28 Jan 06 - 01:02 AM (#1656859)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: number 6

Do you think China will buy us ... or will Harper give his consent to the U.S. that they can include us as a cheap add-on when they finally sell themselves off (lock, stock and barrel) to the Chinese?

sIx

28 Jan 06 - 01:29 AM (#1656872)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

China doesn't have to buy Canada. They just invade and take-over by sheer numbers alone. The Chinese are very Conservative. Why do you think the Conservatives won?

28 Jan 06 - 01:39 AM (#1656876)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Yeah, watch out! The Chinese are up there building a new land bridge across the Bering Strait right now.....millions of them.

28 Jan 06 - 01:40 AM (#1656877)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"The Chinese are very Conservative. Why do you think the Conservatives won?"

Because they are Chinese?

28 Jan 06 - 01:43 AM (#1656878)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

I just checked Google maps. There is no bridge there. Of course, the satellite images of Earth are likely eight months old. This is beginning to worry me. Has anyone actually been inside the House of Commons lately, and are there lots of Chinese people there?

28 Jan 06 - 01:44 AM (#1656879)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

OK. Where does a guy get lots of yuan?

28 Jan 06 - 01:46 AM (#1656881)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Now I suppose some clown's gonna say, "But, the yuan's in New York."

28 Jan 06 - 01:49 AM (#1656882)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

The yuan did NOT give George Bush permission to invade Iraq.

28 Jan 06 - 01:59 AM (#1656883)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"China currently maintains a minimal intercontinental nuclear deterrent using land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The Dong Feng-5 (DF-5) liquid-fueled missile, first deployed in 1981, has a range of 13,000 km and carries a single multi-megaton warhead. Twenty are believed to be deployed in central China, southwest of Beijing. Unlike China's earlier ballistic missiles, which were stored in caves and moved out for launch, the DF-5 can be launched directly from vertical silos—but only after a two-hour fueling process. In order to increase the survivability of the DF-5s, dummy silos are placed near the real silos. The DF-5's range gives it coverage of all of Asia and Europe, and most of the United States. The south-eastern US states are at the edge of the missile's range."

28 Jan 06 - 07:50 AM (#1657005)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Hospital for a chest cold... perhaps he does not have a family doctor in Ottawa and went to the hospital like everyone else without a doc? We have about 3000 people here in Moncton without a family doc. Of course, you would think he could go to the local military doc.

28 Jan 06 - 07:59 AM (#1657008)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

When doctors have the choice to work for healthcare or make more at a private clinic how many in Moncton do you supose will be without a doctor?

28 Jan 06 - 10:54 AM (#1657076)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Ain't gonna happen. You, me and the rest of us won't let it happen.

28 Jan 06 - 04:53 PM (#1657275)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Charmion's brother Andrew

"Hospital for a chest cold... perhaps he does not have a family doctor in Ottawa and went to the hospital like everyone else without a doc? We have about 3000 people here in Moncton without a family doc. Of course, you would think he could go to the local military doc."

There are no local military docs available outside of duty hours. During silent hours, members of the CF go to the local ER with special Blue Cross cards.

The surprising thing about Mr. Harper's visit to the ER at the Ottawa General is that it took him only an hour to get through it. My suspicion is that the staff wanted him out before the media made it a zoo.

ABC

28 Jan 06 - 05:00 PM (#1657279)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Good thinking on the part of the triage nurse.

29 Jan 06 - 02:54 PM (#1657473)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

The Chinese voted for Harper in large numbers because they are conservative by nature. Haven't you ever heard of the ethnic vote?

29 Jan 06 - 04:19 PM (#1657520)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Harper who?

30 Jan 06 - 03:06 PM (#1657994)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Ah... Peace. I asked that very same question earlier. Do ya think he would pull a "Joe Who"?

30 Jan 06 - 03:17 PM (#1658001)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

OK. Enough of this stuff. Here is a neat puzzle for y'all.

Google

www.brl.ntt.co.jp/people/hara/fly.swf

30 Jan 06 - 04:34 PM (#1658055)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Search error... ahhhh... very esoteric... allusionary perhaps? (yeah, I made that one up).

More glue.

30 Jan 06 - 04:46 PM (#1658063)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"More glue."

Kid walks into a corner store. Says, "Give me ten cents worth of jelly beans, five cents worth of jujubes, twenty cents worth of honeymoons, fifteen cents worth of bubblegum and 92 tubes of airplane glue.

30 Jan 06 - 05:05 PM (#1658077)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

And, then what happened?

30 Jan 06 - 05:18 PM (#1658087)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"

30 Jan 06 - 06:18 PM (#1658138)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Oh WOW man... I see it too.

30 Jan 06 - 07:08 PM (#1658202)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

31 Jan 06 - 10:14 AM (#1658287)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I doubted Frank would run under these circumstances. Too many pitfalls await the next leader. I wonder if the convention will be delayed until 2007 now?

31 Jan 06 - 10:58 AM (#1658311)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

The next leader will have to clean house, rebuild, promise a new way to do politics, he's not going to be like the other guys and blah blah blah blah.......the same old bullshit all over again....IMO of course.

31 Jan 06 - 05:41 PM (#1658519)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Frank... No. John... NO. Brian... NO. Who will be the scrificial lamb?

01 Feb 06 - 01:40 PM (#1659268)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,Sergeant Preston

It's time for Belinda...

02 Feb 06 - 02:05 PM (#1660275)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

For those of you who may not know Stephen Harper or understand why so many Canadians are concerned about his election as PM, take a look at some of his opinions:

http://www.hedyfry.com/harpers_beliefs.php

02 Feb 06 - 02:20 PM (#1660292)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion

To return to a matter raised about 40 posts ago -- Mr. Harper's visit to hospital:

Stephen Harper really is asthmatic; he's notorious for coming down with severe bronchitis precisely when his handlers want him out prancing for the public. An asthmatic with a chest cold often needs to go to the hospital even if he does have a family doctor -- that's where the X-Ray machine is, and the technician to operate it at nine o'clock at night.

Even if we aren't too crazy about the Conservative Party, we must recognize Mr. Harper for what he is -- an economist with a serious calling to serve the public. He hasn't got horns, cloven hooves or a tail, and he isn't out to sell us all down the river.

That was Stockwell Day.

02 Feb 06 - 02:32 PM (#1660298)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"That was Stockwell Day."

We were so happy to have that idiot out of Alberta that sometimes we forget Ottawa got him instead.

02 Feb 06 - 02:57 PM (#1660332)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

and BC.....

02 Feb 06 - 03:29 PM (#1660361)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)

The Liberals are now working on either a sacrificial lamb (sorry, leader) so that they can execute him later and loudly proclaim Jean Charest (superman) as the saviour of Liberal Canada. Or waiting time to annoint Jean Charest as the replacement for Martin who must ignominiously slide into premature retirement. This will happen if and when the time is right; or when the Bloc start to get uppity again....You don't seriously think that Quebecers will allow anyone other than the Old Boys group to rule for long do you? Lets hope Harper does a really great job (despite the planned arrows and knives in the back) and gets re-elected with a majority next time...We live in hope.

Yours, Aye. Dave

02 Feb 06 - 03:41 PM (#1660367)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

This is an opportunity for Harper to demonstrate leadership, bring the four major factions together and accomplish something with this country. If he can do that without selling us to the US, without selling our health care system to drug companies and private corporations, do so and unite this place, then I will vote for him next time 'round. I am 58. Been voting since I was 18. Have NEVER voted Conservative in my life. I hope Harper's the first. I don't think he will be.

02 Feb 06 - 03:52 PM (#1660373)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

In my memory, the only politician who ever did what he said he was going to do was Mike Harris.

More's the pity.

Years ago I used to think we did best in Ontario with a Conservative provincial government and a Liberal federal one (though I usually voted NDP because I liked the local candidates).

That was before Mike Harris and Jean Chretien.

02 Feb 06 - 03:55 PM (#1660375)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Harper cemented his image of the 'wooden man' when he used his children for a photo op. Instead of kissing them as they left for school, he shook their hands! What kind of father shakes hands with his children?

02 Feb 06 - 04:00 PM (#1660379)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)

A lot of children dont like being hugged in public places with friends and other kids around. Definately not in a school playground with other kids watching. They will avoid it like the plague when TV camera's are shoved into their daily routine too. But then you might not have experienced that yourself...Even Harper was uncomfortable being followed by media to his kids school (hardly news is it?)

Yours, Aye. Dave

02 Feb 06 - 04:08 PM (#1660381)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

At this point it is early to hang Harper--just as it is early to sanctify him. IMO, of course.

02 Feb 06 - 04:11 PM (#1660385)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

He didn't want to be accused of sexual abuse, dianavan. While I'm no big fan of the man or most of his policies, for some people, he just can't do anything right.

I find more and more as I get older, I find things in all of the political parties I agree with, but none of them completely. In the good old days, the Liberals were about a balance (in a sense, more conservative, than the Conservatives).

I also don't understand why outgoing party leaders feel it's necessary to screw things up for the next leader who follows. Chretien buggered things up for Martin; Trudeau did it for Turner; Mulroney did it for Campbell... Priorities sure are screwed up in Ottawa.

02 Feb 06 - 05:35 PM (#1660449)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

Cluin - I doubt if giving your elementary school children a hug as they leave for school would ever be construed as sexual abuse.

Dave, kids that young are still pretty attached to their parents. I doubt if they were worried about their image. A hug or a pat on the back would seem appropriate. Shaking hands with a child is stilted.

Cluin - You're right about political leaders who screw it up for the next guy. That is equally true of politicians who take credit for a healthy economy that was the result of fiscal policies introduced by their predecessors. Too often, current politicians reap the benefits of past practices and gloat as if they were in some way responsible.

Peace - I would hang Harper based on the statements he has made in the past (see the above link). I doubt if he has changed his opinions significantly.

The only thing that will keep him in check is the opposition. I'm just thankful that its a minority govt.

02 Feb 06 - 05:58 PM (#1660472)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianvan

That last message was mine.

02 Feb 06 - 06:27 PM (#1660490)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

I was being deliberately facetious re the abuse thing, dianavan. (though some deranged people do imagine perversion and abuse in the most innocent circumstances)

But not everybody is huggy-kissy with their kids. I know plenty of guys who insist on an old-school handshake with their young sons instead of a big sloppy kiss (except when they're drunk ;) ). It doesn't make them mutants.

02 Feb 06 - 07:22 PM (#1660548)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Even when the kid is seven years old?

I'm a teacher and I've never seen a dad shake his daughter's hand.

Maybe we're just more affectionate on the westcoast.

I'm glad my dad wasn't afraid to express affection for me.

As far as Harper goes, if he cannot freely express his affection toward his own children, I think it says alot about his ability to empathize with Canadians. I don't think he's a mutant but I do think he is a 'wooden' man, a cold man, capable of almost anything.

03 Feb 06 - 06:08 AM (#1660894)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)

dianavan, The whole thing was a media event unplanned I believe. Kids faced with cameramen and the new experience of security guards are going to act differently. Your hatred of Harper is literally media indoctrination get over it and give him a chance; at least he isnt a theif like the Liberals.

Yours, Aye. Dave

04 Feb 06 - 03:32 PM (#1661510)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

Besides, that's a pretty shallow assessment of a man's character, dianavan. Just because he doesn't put on a show for the cameras of being all Pa Ingalls with his kids doesn't make him a blatant sociopath.

We might as well give him a chance. It's not like we have any choice anyway.

04 Feb 06 - 03:39 PM (#1661514)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"at least he isnt a theif like the Liberals."

We don't know THAT yet, either.

04 Feb 06 - 03:47 PM (#1661525)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I know this is a Canuck thread, but... since the Yanks are also picking a new leader soon... maybe we could broaden the discussion? Well, tell me what you think.

Should a new thread be opened to discuss the next Yankee Pres? To wit...

Today, a snippet....

Rumsfeld said... "The Iranian regime is today the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism," he said. "The world does not want, and must work together to avoid, a nuclear Iran."

Despite Rumsfeld's call for diplomacy, McCain said military action could not be ruled out if diplomatic efforts fail to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.

"Every option must remain on the table," McCain told the security conference after Rumsfeld spoke. "There's only one thing worse than military action, that is a nuclear-armed Iran."

"The Arizona Republican later added that military action is "totally undesirable" and could be considered only after all other options were exhausted."

Looks clear to me.

04 Feb 06 - 04:06 PM (#1661540)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Cluin and Dave - I didn't say I hated Harper or that he was sociopath. If anything, I fear him. I do think he has a neo-con agenda and deserves the nick-name, 'wooden man'.

Give him a chance to do what? Outlaw abortion? Outlaw same sex marriage? Sell our resources to the U.S. without a comprehensive Canadian energy policy? Reduce social services benefits? Introduce private health care? Increase military spending? What else should we give him a chance to do?

No thanks. Give him an inch and he'll take a mile.

Like I said, without a minority government, he would be alot more dangerous.

04 Feb 06 - 04:12 PM (#1661546)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Never happen. Like I said... you will not allow it.

04 Feb 06 - 04:13 PM (#1661547)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

Damn! I can't believe I ended up defending Stephen Harper.

04 Feb 06 - 04:16 PM (#1661553)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

I have that post tucked away for future reference, Cluin.

04 Feb 06 - 04:20 PM (#1661557)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

It wouldn't be the first time my past has come back to haunt me, Peace.

04 Feb 06 - 04:26 PM (#1661563)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Yeah. I know. I was fartin' around somewhere and I posted that I am a Conservative.

04 Feb 06 - 04:36 PM (#1661574)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

I saw that.
And thought "Gee, Bruce must be older than I thought. Senility has begun to set in. I knew he was a westerner, but..."    ;)

04 Feb 06 - 04:43 PM (#1661579)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

A Con who never voted Con in his life? hehehe.

04 Feb 06 - 05:36 PM (#1661661)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"The federal government has paid David Dingwall, the former president of the Royal Canadian Mint, a compensation package for his forced resignation.

The government said it is following a binding arbitration ruling by paying Dingwall, also a one-time Liberal cabinet minister, $417,780 along with associated pension benefits."

I will sleep easier tonight not having to worry that David is doing without.

04 Feb 06 - 05:40 PM (#1661667)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Paid off for not doing your job... sweet Jaysus. I'll bet the fucker sleeps really well at night, too.

04 Feb 06 - 05:59 PM (#1661690)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Dammit. I woulda screwed up for half what he was paid and settled for have what he was awarded. Coulda saved the taxpayer lotsa bucks there. FYI.

06 Feb 06 - 03:48 PM (#1663029)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Somminey beech! Emerson just abandoned the Libs for a Cabinet post with Conservatives. I don't imagine there are too many happy campers in Vancouver Kingsway right now..... the voters definitely did not want a Conservative in that riding, they ran 3rd in the election to the Liberals and the NDP.

Of course I've never believed there was much difference between the Libs and Cons, so the voters definitely got what was paid for.

Too bad too. Wadell of the NDP, being bilingual and a strong voice for the arts and the environment would have been a better choice. But then the voters of that riding took their chance in strategic voting trying to keep the Conservatives out.

06 Feb 06 - 06:13 PM (#1663176)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Bardford

Here's the CBC Talking about Emerson's big switcheroo:

In changing parties, he followed the example of former Conservative MP Belinda Stronach, who crossed the floor last year to become a Liberal cabinet minister.

At that time, Harper said:

"We don't go out of our way to romance MPs to get them to cross the floor. Liberals will do anything to win.

"We are trying to create a principled party where people act in a principled way, and obviously we're fairly cautious about encouraging party jumping, because that's the kind of thing that generates cynicism.

"And frankly, when someone jumps, once you're not sure you can trust them the next time, so I would always handle that with an extraordinary degree of caution."

At least Belinda waited a couple of Mississippi's before she crossed the floor - looks like yer man in Vancouver probably had his cellphone out before his election office coffee maker was packed up.

06 Feb 06 - 06:21 PM (#1663181)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

There is no point discussing morals in a whorehouse.

06 Feb 06 - 06:30 PM (#1663191)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Stevie Boy also said, re Belinda, there should be a recall clause and anyone wanting to cross should have to be re-elected in a by-election. And, appointing someone to the senate so he can be parashitted into cabinet as a reward? Some of the other cabinet appointments frighten the crap out of me. Jaysus... that was in the first couple of hours.

Hang on tight.

06 Feb 06 - 08:58 PM (#1663344)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

Harper just got sworn in and things are starting to stink already.

06 Feb 06 - 09:28 PM (#1663378)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

I'm one who voted for Ian Waddel. My riding is Vancouver-Kingsway. I feel quite sickened by this. Emerson won but I thought, oh well, at least its not a Conservative. This is not a Conservative riding! The Conservatives came in third! I'm outraged. The system has to change. Our votes counted for nothing!

Yes, I know, Belinda did it too. The Conservatives and Liberals are dirty politicians. Thats why I voted for Wadell. You're right, Metchosin, those who voted 'strategically' should shoot themselves. Emerson is a dog. Talk about having no respect for his constituency. I doubt if Emerson will show his face around here in the future. There are plenty of people who would like to tear him apart. He's a traitor.

06 Feb 06 - 09:43 PM (#1663388)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

There are those who think it doesn't matter what party your local MP is in if he gets a Cabinet position... it MUST be good for his riding.

I don't hold that belief and I would feel betrayed if I was in Emerson's riding. It souldn't be allowed. Belinda Stronach shouldn't have been allowed to do it either.

Unless we do away with the party system altogether and MPs would have to be true to their local constituents. Would need a major overhaul of the system to make that work, but hey, sounds like a job for the REFORM party, doesn't it?

And I thought the Reform guys wanted to do away with the appointed Senate, make the members have to RUN for a seat there like the US? Now Harper APPOINTS his campaign crony to the Senate so he can give him a juicy Cabinet position without his having to achieve any kind of elected mandate by running for a seat. Okay, so SH didn't break any rules, but what a bunch of fucking hypocrites!

Would Preston Manning have pulled this kind of trick? I was at least developing a bit of respect for him when his party stabbed him in the back and replaced him with that wing-nut Stockwell Day.

Just goes to show you... they're all the same when they get in.

Dianavan, I am beginning to see you are probably right.

07 Feb 06 - 12:39 AM (#1663502)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

he-he - I just found out which cabinet position Emerson was given. Looks like Minister of the Olympic Games or something........

Maybe thats not such a bad idea. Emerson knows the territory and has a background in economics.

Even though I feel betrayed by the system, I actually think it might be a good appointment.

I agree that Harper is a hypocrite. I heard that when he talked to Belinda, just before she crossed the floor, he actually kicked a chair.

07 Feb 06 - 02:03 AM (#1663523)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

I can't believe how stupid Harper would be to dismantle the Liberal childcare spaces that were on the brink of becoming a reality. $1200.00 a year is hardly a substitute for the creation of a comprehensive, national childcare policy that was supported by three other parties. It has taken years of research and planning.

Do not let Harper dismantle the Liberal, childcare policy. Change the name to the Canadian, childcare policy if you must but don't trash the program. Its a good program that will give hope to the struggling, urban working mom and dad.

Give the $1200.00 a year to the stay at home, caregiver but give the working people the desperately needed spaces by going forward with the plan. The new spaces are desperately needed. Keep them.

It would be a huge waste of time and energy to do otherwise.

If Harper trashes that program, he will never be re-elected.

07 Feb 06 - 09:47 AM (#1663788)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Charmion

"he-he - I just found out which cabinet position Emerson was given. Looks like Minister of the Olympic Games or something........"

Um, no: the (not very) Honourable Mr. Emerson has just taken the oath as Minister of International Trade, a really important portfolio, especially in BC. He's our man in charge of getting that huge trading partner to the south of us to comply with court rulings on the softwood lumber tariff, among other things.

I hear that International Trade and Foreign Affairs are again in the process of merging (having been integrated in 1993, under Kim Campbell, and split around 2000 [I think], under Chrétien), so Mr. Emerson may lose his seat on the front bench to a departmental reorganization.

07 Feb 06 - 10:54 AM (#1663849)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

Cabinet.

07 Feb 06 - 01:11 PM (#1663939)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Check out the new Minister of Public Safety. But who will keep us safe from the Minister?

07 Feb 06 - 01:56 PM (#1663955)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"I want to know how many women in Alberta are physically battered and not just insulted by their husbands... If we talk insulted by their husbands, then I'm afraid that I'm guilty from time to time of abusing my wife."

- Stockwell Day, 1987, disputing a poll indicating one million women had been abused physically, emotionally, sexually or economically.

07 Feb 06 - 01:57 PM (#1663957)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"Women who become pregnant through rape or incest should not qualify for government-funded abortions unless their pregnancy is life-threatening."

- Stockwell Day, 1995, at an Alberta Conservative party convention.

07 Feb 06 - 02:01 PM (#1663960)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

"I paraded [protested] with Day and his people in front of a school in Red Deer against sex education."

- Jim Green, supporter of anti-Semitic teacher Jim Keegstra, quoted in Briarpatch Magazine, July/August 2000.

07 Feb 06 - 07:29 PM (#1664064)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Leadfingers

200 ??

07 Feb 06 - 07:34 PM (#1664065)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

Day points to AIDS story to explain Arafat snub
The Toronto Star, Monday, November 22, 2004

Stockwell Day is pointing to a published report that includes the suggestion that Yasser Arafat had AIDS in explaining why he didn't send condolences on the death of the PLO leader.

"Some of you have asked why I have not released a statement of condolence or sympathy," the Conservative party's foreign affairs critic wrote in a Nov. 16 e-mail to party colleagues obtained by The Canadian Press.

"As you know, there are two sides to the Arafat story. You pick."

08 Feb 06 - 05:52 PM (#1664590)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

"Mr. Flaherty, best known for his work in a variety of portfolios in the Mike Harris governments in Ontario, grabbed plenty of headlines for taking on squeegee kids and the homeless. But one of Mr. Flaherty's lesser-known moves during his years in the Ontario cabinet goes further in revealing the new federal Finance Minister's political philosophy.

It was 2000 and Mr. Flaherty, then Ontario's Attorney-General, jumped on board a private member's bill designed to deal with the perception that dangerous criminals were getting off easy. His support for the bill, to create a registry comparing the sentencing habits of judges, earned Mr. Flaherty sharp criticism from legal circles and among some elites. "

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060207.RFLAHERTY07/TPStory/Business

08 Feb 06 - 06:47 PM (#1664674)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

The Honourable David Emerson

The Honourable Stockwell Day


There's a couple of oxymorons.

08 Feb 06 - 07:42 PM (#1664717)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

You can say that again without the oxy.

08 Feb 06 - 09:09 PM (#1664803)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

Emerson has been placed so that he can promote oil and gas exploration on B.C.'s fragile coast. He is another politician supported by the energy moguls.

Think about it. Bush, Harper and Emerson. All supported by the oil barons. With Gordon Campbell (a neo-con who calls himself Liberal) as Premier of B.C., it doesn't look good. Talk about consolidating your power!

Scary!

09 Feb 06 - 03:46 AM (#1665029)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

agreed guest.....and this is the party leader who says he intends to reverse Canadian cynicism regarding politicians. Sounds like more of the same old shit to me.

Regarding retired Brigadier-General O'Connor as Minister of Defence:

"He has since worked as a consultant and in a variety of business operations"

More appropriately and to the point, he has since worked as a government lobbyist for the international armament industry.

And Harper defended his choice of O'Connor despite his previous call for a 5 year ban regarding Liberal lobbyists. It's supposedly different if you're a lobbyist prior to election......and I gather, a Conservative. This is the same fellow that will now hand out defence contracts. Wonder with whom O'Connor plays golf?

You want to know who really pulls the strings? Follow the bucks......

09 Feb 06 - 11:41 AM (#1665277)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Emerson's newly appointed assistant is the same Conservative MP who introduced the private member's bill that would have required a by-election to be held in ridings where members cross the Floor. LOL

I wonder if this new government will go after Mulroney for lying under oath regarding his relationship with Schreiber, now that the Airbus scandle has resurfaced?

One thing for certain about politics in Canada, we can always be certain that some lying, self-serving bastard will always be elected.

09 Feb 06 - 04:38 PM (#1665450)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

When you're full of gas, the shit always floats to the top.

10 Feb 06 - 08:44 AM (#1665950)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Raptor

How bout the Francophone secratary from Alberta that can't speak french?

It wasn't time for that kind of change.

Raptor

10 Feb 06 - 12:47 PM (#1666185)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

My hero George, Geoge Strombouloupolis, that is, fried dear Pia Shondell last night when she tried to defend Emerson's move. Poor Pia had a quaver in her voice and its probably the only time the privilidged cow has quavered in her life.

10 Feb 06 - 01:48 PM (#1666224)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

My country, tis of your people you are dying.

10 Feb 06 - 01:59 PM (#1666234)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

"How bout the Francophone secratary from Alberta that can't speak french?"

Seriously? Unfuckingreal. No wonder the PQ want out. If someone treated me that way, I'd want out, too.

One more step to breaking up the country. Tete-merde.

10 Feb 06 - 06:22 PM (#1666420)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Their plan seems to further Balkanize it by destroying federalism, Gnu. Makes it way easier way to pick off. There is a large element in Alberta that has always seemed to admire Texas, much more than what makes up the rest of Canada.

10 Feb 06 - 08:40 PM (#1666510)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Yikes! The people of Vancouver center/Kingsway are up in fucking arms about this. They are furious, saying their rights have been trampled on. A petition is being circulated demanding a bi-election. Ian Waddell is saying that Emerson's crossing violated ethical standards because Harper inticed (bribed) him to cross the floor. If so, Harper may have to step down.

Wow. I love it. I'd be so proud if our little riding caused Harper to eat dirt.

10 Feb 06 - 10:10 PM (#1666545)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

I need drugs.

11 Feb 06 - 04:06 AM (#1666661)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST

MP Peter Julian, "Therefore, in our opinion, Mr. Harper may be in breach of Section 8 of the Conflict of Interest Code and I would ask that you investigate this matter."

14 Feb 06 - 03:20 AM (#1667930)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

So 82% of us in the Vancouver-Kingsway riding did not vote Conservative but we now have a Conservative representing our riding? I thought there was no taxation without representation. I thought my vote counted. I thought this was a democracy.

Worst of all. What does it tell our children?

I didn't protest, yesterday, but I did go to the meeting. All ethic backgrounds, all ages, all outraged. I did sign a petition.

I don't know what else to do. If you did not get to vote for the party of your choice, what would you do? We are the only people in Canada without a vote. How would you feel?

14 Feb 06 - 10:29 AM (#1668154)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Same way I feel here in Alberta. Fooked!

14 Feb 06 - 10:37 AM (#1668164)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

But, you don't even have any snow... yet. Mwwaaahahahahaha.

14 Feb 06 - 10:38 AM (#1668165)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

What's snow?

14 Feb 06 - 10:48 AM (#1668174)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I was calling this area the "Banana Belt" until I woke up yesterday. We got belted alright. It's only a matter of time, Peace. And, Old Man Winter still has lots of time to lay a whoopin' on ya.

14 Feb 06 - 07:43 PM (#1668651)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

We just got nailed, BTW. About 2 mm. Predictions are that it won't last. In fact, most of it's already blown away.

14 Feb 06 - 07:44 PM (#1668652)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Which means that somewhere, some lucky kid can construct a snowball.

14 Feb 06 - 07:54 PM (#1668665)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Little Hawk

Meanwhile, we are half buried in the stuff in Orillia. I got a ladder today and crawled up on top of the big canvas and wood frame quonset hut at the back of the property. Was worried it might collapse under all that snow. Spent about an hour pushing snow off from the top, then discovered that I could slide right down the side, bringing a ton of snow with me to the ground! Kind of fun, but I would have liked it better when I was a kid. I finally got about 95% of the snow off, and had a hot bath afterward.

08 Mar 06 - 12:45 PM (#1688360)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

Dianavan, IMO what this does demonstrate is that Harper has about as much understanding of Canadian parliamentary democracy as my dog has of calculus.

He was quoted today as saying that, as Prime Minister (perhaps he was thinking king or president), he has the authority to select and appoint anyone he wishes to a Cabinet post. Obviously being a democratically elected candidate by the Canadian voter is not a prerequisite in his mind. I guess we could be thankful that he didn't publically appoint the whole of the Fraser Institute as cabinet ministers and thereby further circumvent the electoral process.

Aside from his Americanized outlook regarding the power of the office of the Prime Minister, what strikes me also, is his contempt for his fellow Conservatives. His appointments seem to indicate, that of all his duly elected fellow Conservatives, from which he could select, none of them were competent enough to hold a Cabinet post. Perhaps he's right. LOL

08 Mar 06 - 01:57 PM (#1688406)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

Jaysus, don't give him the idea.

08 Mar 06 - 02:47 PM (#1688451)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Cluin

He's really afraid of his party, the bunch of backstabbing bastards they are. There'll soon be cries of "Kill Piggy!"

08 Mar 06 - 04:09 PM (#1688516)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: GUEST,dianavan

Well, we haven't given up protesting like they were hoping.

In fact, the ethics commissioner is now investigating both Harper and Emerson for breach of ethics. Whats really interesting is that Harper is now threatening to fire the ethics comissioner. What a joke. He has to go through the House of Commons for that and I doubt if he would have the support he needs. I think Cluin may be right but I also think that Harper is hanging himself by being so pig-headed.

Unfortunately, I think they are investigating the wrong thing. They should be arresting Emerson for fraud. He said he would be Harper's worst nightmare and it took Liberal money from our riding to run his election campaign.

Emerson exemplifies what is happening to democracy everywhere. Doesn't matter anymore what party you vote for, its the CEO's that are really in power and they will do whatever is necessary to hold on to it.

Here's one of the best articles (published in the Georgia Straight) that I have read on the subject.

http://www.rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?x=47400

08 Mar 06 - 04:12 PM (#1688519)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

But he really may turn out to be Harper's worst nightmare, Dianava, although perhaps not in the way first envisioned. LOL

08 Mar 06 - 04:57 PM (#1688567)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

"Harper is hanging himself by being so pig-headed."

Joe Clark did the same when he headed a minority government causing it to fall.

"Oh when will they ever learn..?"

09 Mar 06 - 10:51 AM (#1689229)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Metchosin

On a lighter note, has anyone besides me noted how much Peter MacKay looks like one of the goons from the old Popeye cartoons?

09 Mar 06 - 11:51 AM (#1689285)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

Now that you mention it

23 Mar 06 - 09:18 PM (#1701444)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

Ashley MacIsaac announces his intention to run for the Liberal leadership. http://www.cbc.ca/ns/story/ns-macisaac20060323.html

It's about time we had a professional fiddler in Ottawa.

23 Mar 06 - 09:29 PM (#1701453)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

If he gets in, how long will it be before we invade the USA?

23 Mar 06 - 09:35 PM (#1701459)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: bobad

The army's already in training.

23 Mar 06 - 09:37 PM (#1701464)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: Peace

And if it's upto Ashley, they will NOT be wearing FOTLs.

24 Mar 06 - 06:15 AM (#1701574)
Subject: RE: BS: OH NO! Libs loosing in Canuckistan
From: gnu

I can hear him now.... Hey fuckin Speaker, piss on the hounourable member.