PDA

View Full Version : Here we go again...Canadian Elections


Pages : [1] 2

alexusjonesfan
Apr 15th, 2005, 01:53 PM
Martin, you've really made a mess of things...you had an assured majority and managed to fuck up barely holding on to power and of course now people are even more disillusioned with the libs. We're likely going to the polls by late May/early June it seems. The NDP support in Ontario is growing which'll probably mean more seats for the Conservatives here and more seats for the Bloc in Quebec. The Conservatives will come to power, overturn same-sex marriage legislation, align our foreign policy with Bush's (jump into Star Wars even) and try to privatise Health Care...yay. Though I'm pretty sure it'll be a Conservative minority with us heading into the polls yet again in a year :rolleyes:

Cassius
Apr 15th, 2005, 02:01 PM
Canadian elections?
Pffft.........no-one cares.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 15th, 2005, 02:02 PM
:crying2:

Cassius
Apr 15th, 2005, 02:02 PM
Before I get any angry replies from any Canadians, that was a joke:p

Ted of Teds Tennis
Apr 15th, 2005, 02:44 PM
There are NDP supporters in Quebec? I never knew that. ;-)

Wiggly
Apr 15th, 2005, 02:47 PM
Because of an :bolt: scandal :o

alexusjonesfan
Apr 15th, 2005, 03:24 PM
There are NDP supporters in Quebec? I never knew that. ;-)

sorry that came off all wrong...ndp support increase in Ontario = more tory seats, less lib support in Quebec = more bloc seats ;)

Darop.
Apr 15th, 2005, 05:24 PM
Hurray for canadian elections :banana:



The outcome of these elecetions will be decisive on how the next few years in the world will be.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 05:33 PM
There are NDP supporters in Quebec? I never knew that. ;-)About as many NDP supoorters in Quebec as there are Bloc supporters in Ontario! :haha:

~CANUCK~
Apr 15th, 2005, 05:41 PM
About as many NDP supoorters in Quebec as there are Bloc supporters in Ontario! :haha:

ya thats about right :lol:
this is gonna be awful. i can't beleive that steven harper might be running our counrty :sad:

~CANUCK~
Apr 15th, 2005, 05:43 PM
Martin, you've really made a mess of things...you had an assured majority and managed to fuck up barely holding on to power and of course now people are even more disillusioned with the libs. We're likely going to the polls by late May/early June it seems. The NDP support in Ontario is growing which'll probably mean more seats for the Conservatives here and more seats for the Bloc in Quebec. The Conservatives will come to power, overturn same-sex marriage legislation, align our foreign policy with Bush's (jump into Star Wars even) and try to privatise Health Care...yay. Though I'm pretty sure it'll be a Conservative minority with us heading into the polls yet again in a year :rolleyes:

there is no way that the overturning of the same sex marriage will go through. they tried to do it last week and the libs, ndp and bloq all voted no. There is no way the bloq would agree to that.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 05:47 PM
:smash: :banghead: :shout: :armed: Don't say that! That will be going from evil to eviler!


ya thats about right :lol:
this is gonna be awful. i can't beleive that steven harper might be running our counrty :sad:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:28 PM
But don't you like Bush Barrie. :o

I don't have a problem with a partly private health care system, I actually support that. At the moment, the health care is CRAP for all of us - the only positive aspect of it is that it's free. If some people have the money and want to go to a private hospital, I don't see why they couldn't. People talk about a 2 speed health care or whatever, but at the moment, there's only one - a very slow speed. :tape:

The aspect I don't like about Harper is that he supports the foreign and military policies of Bush. That, and he probably doesn't care much about environment. But for the rest, I'm not overly worried or anything. If the USA can survive with Bush, we'll survive with Harper.Actually, I do tend to favour the Republicans in the States, however, this is not a blind endorsement of eveything that Bush stands for or his policies, Plus, I seperate the States from Canada, What is good for the States does not work so well in Canada and, Stephen Harper just plain scares the hell out of me. I fear what he will do is basically what Mike Harris did in Ontario and Mike Harris just screwed things up.

badunka
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:40 PM
But I really think CDN's are afriad of Harper. This is really relfected in the fact the Liberals still have 27% support even through this huge scandal. I really feel like we are in deja vu all over again with last year and I hope again the Liberals will pull through.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:44 PM
But I really think CDN's are afriad of Harper. This is really relfected in the fact the Liberals still have 27% support even through this huge scandal. I really feel like we are in deja vu all over again with last year and I hope again the Liberals will pull through.But if they pull through that is like saying "We know that you are evil, crooked bastards and we don't care! Stel from us! Screw us! We don't care!"

badunka
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:48 PM
But if they pull through that is like saying "We know that you are evil, crooked bastards and we don't care! Stel from us! Screw us! We don't care!"


haha I know I'm just so conflicted ya know? haha but I really despise Harper and the Conservatives. I really would vote for them if Stronach was the leader though because I like her and she has strong connections across the globe.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:51 PM
haha I know I'm just so conflicted ya know? haha but I really despise Harper and the Conservatives. I really would vote for them if Stronach was the leader though because I like her and she has strong connections across the globe.Belinda Stronach I like! So we are agreed on that point!

badunka
Apr 15th, 2005, 06:59 PM
Belinda Stronach I like! So we are agreed on that point!

I really honestly think if they lose this election she will be the next Conservative leader. She's awesome.

~CANUCK~
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:00 PM
Belinda Stronach I like! So we are agreed on that point!
if belinda was leading that party i would even vote for them and im hard core lib

Lord Nelson
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:05 PM
But don't you like Bush Barrie. :o
The aspect I don't like about Harper is that he supports the foreign and military policies of Bush. That, and he probably doesn't care much about environment. But for the rest, I'm not overly worried or anything. If the USA can survive with Bush, we'll survive with Harper.
Western leaders now have kissed and made up with Bush. In Canada, the present leader (forgot his name) is not anti-Bush unlike Jean Chretien. I'm not really interested in Canadian elections except in Quebec since I'm francophone. :)

Martian Willow
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:17 PM
If this thread ends up with more posts than the UK election thread I will be very annoyed. We're far more important.

creep
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:21 PM
If this thread ends up with more posts than the UK election thread I will be very annoyed. We're far more important.

Then why didn't you bump up the 'UK thread', instead of this one! :)

~CANUCK~
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:23 PM
Allez le Bloc! :tape:
If you vote for the bloc i will have to kick your ass bagel ;)

~CANUCK~
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:25 PM
You want me to vote conservative. :silly:
bleh, vote for the lesser of the 3 evils, the libs :tape:

alexusjonesfan
Apr 15th, 2005, 07:46 PM
Western leaders now have kissed and made up with Bush. In Canada, the present leader (forgot his name) is not anti-Bush unlike Jean Chretien. I'm not really interested in Canadian elections except in Quebec since I'm francophone. :)

scusi, what are you doing trying to explain Canadian politics to a Canadian? From Bushie's perspective, PM isn't a great improvement over Chretien, he firmly got behind same-sex marriage and took Canada out of missile defence (after lots of waffling of course :tape: )

the libs dug their own grave so I don't feel sorry for them. It's just annoying that we'll probably have two elections in the next two years with the Conservatives spending most of their time undoing what the libs did and if they lose the next one the libs spend their time and money undoing what the Conservatives did...it's all such a waste :rolleyes:

Conchi Party
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:08 PM
I'm voting NDP, the lesser of the three evils is them. And to be honest, I actually like what they stand for. Their not corrupt like the liberals, or evil like the conservatives.

I don't understand why people don't vote for the best alternative, rather than the one who has the best chance of winning.

The CBC poll had the CPC at 33%, the libs at 27%, and the NDP at 24%. I've voted Liberal and NDP before, I usually boune between the two...

how about everyone else?

CanadianBoy21
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:13 PM
I voted liberal last summer. Will vote for them again.
Conservatives scare me quite frankly. Besides, I want our government to be liberal because the Americans are republic. Therefore the less we have to do with them, the better. Although the liberal have screwed up, just imagine what it would be with the conservatives. The bloc is not exactly any better in my opinion.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:18 PM
I'm voting NDP, the lesser of the three evils is them. And to be honest, I actually like what they stand for. Their not corrupt like the liberals, or evil like the conservatives.


grreeat..our choices are between evil, corrupt and will-never-win :lol:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:36 PM
I really honestly think if they lose this election she will be the next Conservative leader. She's awesome.I hope you are correct

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:37 PM
if belinda was leading that party i would even vote for them and im hard core libI wish there were more people like u!

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:38 PM
If you vote for the bloc i will have to kick your ass bagel ;)Voting for the bloc is just :crazy:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:39 PM
You want me to vote conservative. :silly:Better Stephen Harper than the bloc and Stephen Harper is evil!

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:40 PM
bleh, vote for the lesser of the 3 evils, the libs :tape:The lesser of evils is the NDP

Barrie_Dude
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:41 PM
I'm voting NDP, the lesser of the three evils is them. And to be honest, I actually like what they stand for. Their not corrupt like the liberals, or evil like the conservatives.

I don't understand why people don't vote for the best alternative, rather than the one who has the best chance of winning.

The CBC poll had the CPC at 33%, the libs at 27%, and the NDP at 24%. I've voted Liberal and NDP before, I usually boune between the two...

how about everyone else?I will likely vote for NDP myself, but not because I like Jacl Layton, it is just the party I am least afraid of

Andy Mac
Apr 15th, 2005, 08:57 PM
canadians are awesome!

hablo
Apr 15th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Martin, you've really made a mess of things...you had an assured majority and managed to fuck up barely holding on to power and of course now people are even more disillusioned with the libs. We're likely going to the polls by late May/early June it seems. The NDP support in Ontario is growing which'll probably mean more seats for the Conservatives here and more seats for the Bloc in Quebec. The Conservatives will come to power, overturn same-sex marriage legislation, align our foreign policy with Bush's (jump into Star Wars even) and try to privatise Health Care...yay. Though I'm pretty sure it'll be a Conservative minority with us heading into the polls yet again in a year :rolleyes:

:o If the Conservatives come into power that would just be terrible!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes: You also forgot the language issue: the conservatives would do away with bilinguilism laws !!!!!!!

hablo
Apr 15th, 2005, 09:56 PM
bleh, vote for the lesser of the 3 evils, the libs :tape:

That's what I did last election!!! lol :o

I'm sure the conservatives aren't above pulling what the liberals did!!!! They are a sham anyway!!!!!!!!!!! Harper (and Stockwell Day) scare the crap out of me!!!!!!!!!! :(

badunka
Apr 15th, 2005, 11:57 PM
:o If the Conservatives come into power that would just be terrible!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes: You also forgot the language issue: the conservatives would do away with bilinguilism laws !!!!!!!

but ultimately their stance on the language law is one of the main reasons they will be elected. Also there is a huge Chinese population growing within Urban areas and many refuse to or don't speak english. That is also another issue that will need to be addressed.

Lord Nelson
Apr 16th, 2005, 12:00 AM
Is Stephen Harper the conservative leader? If that's the case than I hope that he wins. According to the Economist he has a good chance of winning it :)

Scotso
Apr 16th, 2005, 01:50 AM
Vote NDP :worship:

Ted of Teds Tennis
Apr 16th, 2005, 02:19 AM
I will likely vote for NDP myself, but not because I like Jacl Layton, it is just the party I am least afraid of
Aren't the NDP just as populist as the CPC's predecessors Reform/Deform were? The only difference is that while Deform made immigrants and Quebeckers out to be the bogeymen, the NDP make business above some arbitrary size out to be the bogeyman.

I don't know if I would vote for any of the main parties if I were a Canadian. The amount of reflexive (even when it's pointless) anti-Americanism would be silly if it weren't so noxious. I listen to rebroadcasts of the CBC's morning shows on shortwave thanks to Radio Canada International, and one shining example I remember is of a roundtable discussion of whether fixed election dates, like in British Columbia, would be a good idea. One of the panellists actually had the gall to suggest she feared this would make Canadian elections more like American elections.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 16th, 2005, 02:19 AM
But I really think CDN's are afriad of Harper. This is really relfected in the fact the Liberals still have 27% support even through this huge scandal. I really feel like we are in deja vu all over again with last year and I hope again the Liberals will pull through.

It really wouldn't be that hard for the Conservatives to find a leader who wasn't a frightening, extreme right-wing overzealous bigot. Yet for some reason, they chose Harper. And they'll continue to pay for that, I hope.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 16th, 2005, 02:20 AM
But if they pull through that is like saying "We know that you are evil, crooked bastards and we don't care! Stel from us! Screw us! We don't care!"

Frankly, I think that politicians in all parties have the potential to be crooked bastards who may steal from us. Frankly, that's the last thing on my mind as we head into the next elections :)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 16th, 2005, 02:22 AM
Allez le Bloc! :tape:

I wish that Ontario would make their own special party. Then I could vote for them :(

Oh, wait. They do. They call themselves liberals :cool:

Crazy Canuck
Apr 16th, 2005, 02:26 AM
I think that Ted of Ted's Tennis enters every thread about Canada that has ever been made in order to whine about Anti-Americanism in Canada. Which is like, fine and all, but it kind of makes you wonder who's anti-what ;)

alexusjonesfan
Apr 16th, 2005, 03:22 AM
Oh, wait. They do. They call themselves liberals :cool:

yeah they're the official party of the GTA :o

and Ted, the Cons like American policies, they weally weally do. Harper wrote in the Wall St. Journal about how Canada had betrayed its dearest ally by not supporting the war in Iraq and Ralph Klien would declare Alberta a part of the States if he could. And being a libertarian, don't you already find it hard to vote for a major American party? ;)

adss
Apr 16th, 2005, 03:53 AM
I'm going to still keep on voting liberal. The conservatives are far too right-winged for a federal government, imo (also steven harper is creepy), but i would vote for them in a provincial election. and I would never vote for the NDP

CanadianBoy21
Apr 16th, 2005, 05:14 AM
Yeah, Chretian was good I think.
Paul Martin messed things up.
However I would vote for him again just because the other ones are even worse.

Hulet
Apr 16th, 2005, 09:07 AM
Do you guys think Carolyn Parrish is happy now that she was booted out of the party? :)

All those poll numbers showing the support for the Liberals shifting to NDP means nothing come election day; the Liberals will still crank up their scare-tactics (someone from the conservatives is bound to help them out - Ralph Klein?) and, before you know it, all those who claimed that they would vote for the NDP are once again voting for the Liberals.

Lord Nelson
Apr 16th, 2005, 12:48 PM
I think that Ted of Ted's Tennis enters every thread about Canada that has ever been made in order to whine about Anti-Americanism in Canada. Which is like, fine and all, but it kind of makes you wonder who's anti-what ;)
Well Ted has the right to make his comment. If U.S. policies are criticized than so should be the case with other nations. Why should it just be the U.S.?

Conchi Party
Apr 16th, 2005, 05:36 PM
Nope, I firmly in the NDP Camp now. I can't beleive people would vote liberal after all the shit that they have done. I don't think any party will win a majority, so like I care if it is a tory minority or liberal minority. Both of them will need the NDP or the Bloc to prop them up, and considering the NDP and the Bloc have the same fiscal and social policies (except for the seperatism thing!) the tories will be handcuffed on every issue. As a smart friend pointed out to me, the Conservatives will never win more than 1 or 2 seats in Quebec, and if you can't win in Quebec it is nearly impossible to win a majority.

My big issues are post-secondary (I'm paying $7500 in a user fee called tuition!) the environment, and a good health care system that is public. the liberals are were okay on these issues, but tuition continues to go up because the federal gov't cut funding to the provinces, Paul Martin doesn't stop people like asshole Ralph Klein from privatizing our system so that american companies can make money off of the sick, and they suck when it comes to reducing greenhouse gases. Oh and their corrupt:)

I actually have more respect for people who vote conservative (cuz they beleive in them), than in being scared and voting liberal, that's dumb IMO.

later

~CANUCK~
Apr 16th, 2005, 05:47 PM
I actually have more respect for people who vote conservative (cuz they beleive in them), than in being scared and voting liberal, that's dumb IMO.

later

I don't find that the liberals are that bad. I pay like 1100$ in tution a semester, i agree with most of there polices. The NDP are tree huggers and i can see them spending all there money in trying to cut green house gases. The conservitives scare me, well harper ie bush jr scares me. If he gets into power canada will become the mini me of the US. The libs have there probs but overall i believe they are doing a decent job.

Paldias
Apr 16th, 2005, 05:59 PM
I really hope that the Conversatives DO NOT become the Government. Their ideas are so scary, and they're all biggots. I mean they're just horrible. I feel that the NDP are too slimy and they are all so phony. I mean for god sakes Jack Layton thinks he the man of the people - then again he can say whatever the hell he wants since he'll never hold Governmental power.

I'll be voting for the Liberals this time around, however, I do hope that Pat O'Brien loses...what nerve he has to call that woman dumb blond bimbo.

And to all those voting for NDP I hope you realize that they'll never become the Government and by voting NDP you're giving the Conservatives the advantage to become a government (since your taking away votes from the Liberals who have similar ideals that you) and follow through with the exact ideas that contradict yours.

Paldias
Apr 16th, 2005, 06:03 PM
If the USA can survive with Bush, we'll survive with Harper.

I don't think you seem to realize that people aren't surviving with Bush. They have so many problems - it's just that Bush is able to cover it up better than any other politician in the world.

As for being able to deal with Harper...I'm not so sure...Canada's been Liberal-Left for over a decade, if all of a sudden we become Extreme Right who knows what the hell will happen...I mean look what Mike Harris did to Ontario...:scared:

Conchi Party
Apr 16th, 2005, 06:22 PM
Other than on a couple issues, the Liberals and Conservatives are virtually the same, especially with Paul Martin. The NDP are not slimy, the tories and liberals are. I dunno, I live in Alberta, but it seems to me that the Liberals are the ones who stole millions of taxpayer dollars, and the tories in Alberta funnel all of taxpayer dollars to their buddies through tax cuts.

The liberals will not form government either, it will be a fractioned parliament. So you might as well vote for who u believe in, not who is going to win in your area.

Plus statistically I saw a poll that put all 3 parties in a dead heat (within 10% of each other)

I voted Liberal in 1997 and 2000, and NDP in 2004.

adss
Apr 16th, 2005, 09:12 PM
The NDP will drive our economy down with all their government spending and raise our debt, I wouldn't trust the NDP to hold so much power just look at what Bob Rae did to Ontario.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 16th, 2005, 09:17 PM
I dunno if Ontario's a good example to go by. The NDP ruined us by overspending, the Tories ruined us by overcutting and the Liberals just lied about a bunch of stuff that they ended up having to go back on :lol:

adss
Apr 16th, 2005, 09:23 PM
It's the only example i can think of in which the NDP held so much power :angel:

Conchi Party
Apr 17th, 2005, 01:37 AM
How about Saskatchewan, Manitoba, or BC?? I don't believe any government can have that much impact on the economy, it is dictated more by corporations and the global economy, as well as the American economy.

Listen I'm not saying the NDP is the best in economics, but in a minority government, which looks inevitable, who do you want as the balance of power, the bloc or the ndp? Do the tories values match up with your own ( I heard that they nearly voted at their policy convention, their grassroots, to put the abortion debate back on the table), does the liberal corruption match up with your own values, or do you go with someone who has not been tried or tested. I go with the latter. If I was living in Quebec, I might vote Bloc, although I'm not a seperatist so....maybe not.

I haven't heard a concrete arguement from "liberal minded" people about why they are voting liberal. If you are comfortable voting conservative, I understand, but I am no fundamentalist christian who wishes to impose my values on others, nor do I think the economy is everything.

As a liberal voter under Chretien, I felt their was some balance, and I could justify voting lib, but not under Paul Martin.

Conchi Party
Apr 17th, 2005, 01:39 AM
Oh and another point, I live in Alberta where despite oil being through the roof this past decade, the gov't has some of the highest tuition, poorest environmental standards, a significantly crappy health care system, and the greatest income disparity in the country. I'd say our economy sucks as bad as Ontario for the vast majority of Albertans, just not the conservative buddies in the oilfield...

Scotso
Apr 17th, 2005, 01:57 AM
At least if the Conservatives win and screw everything up, people won't vote for them until they forget about it again.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:12 AM
At least if the Conservatives win and screw everything up, people won't vote for them until they forget about it again.

no that won't work. We already tried that in the US remember? :p

Still I don't blame the people not wanting to vote lib again...they really need to be held accountable for corruption..it's just that I'm not sure whether the alternative is any better :unsure: The NDP votes likely won't translate into more seats for them...they'll just finish closer to the other two parties in most seats (there were very few ridings last time around where a couple thousand votes for them would've won it). I'm peeved because we're on the cusp of a whole bunch of things right now, Kyoto's going to get implemented, gay marriage is about to become law and we just opted out of missile defence. It's annoying to think an election would slow all these things down or even get them to be drastically changed depending on how strong the next gov. is. This gov. really hasn't had a chance to implement its policies.

Scotso
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:21 AM
no that won't work. We already tried that in the US remember?

You've said a lot of really intelligent things on this board, but honeslty, that wasn't one of them :p

There is no comparing the U.S. to Canada in terms of politics. In most areas, yes, but Canadians actually seem to be somewhat reasonable when it comes to elections.

In the United States, men can lead us in hopeless wars (Nixon), be always asleep at the job which is the most important in the world (Reagan), and be a complete and utter moron (W), and still be practically worshiped.

Ryan
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:27 AM
Honestly, I wont ever vote for NDP because in Nova Scotia they're goal is to make the poor richer, and the rich poorer.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:06 AM
Well Ted has the right to make his comment. If U.S. policies are criticized than so should be the case with other nations. Why should it just be the U.S.?


Where did I say that he doesn't have the right to comment? I didn't even say that his comments lacked validity.

Seeing as I don't go off about US policies and defend every other nation on earth, you can save this for somebody that it's actually applicable to.

THANKS.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:13 AM
Honestly, I wont ever vote for NDP because in Nova Scotia they're goal is to make the poor richer, and the rich poorer.
There are rich people in Nova Scotia? People LIVE in Nova Scotia?

Oh, I kid.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:21 AM
You've said a lot of really intelligent things on this board, but honeslty, that wasn't one of them :p



my bad ;) Thankfully our 'blue states' have more votes than the rest of the country combined.

God knows we elected Mike Harris with a majority twice...though I blame that on Dalton McGuinty looking like a doofus prettyboy in the debates...and lo and behold he actually turned out to be one :o

I'm not worried about abortion, the government'll get taken down if they even so much as try and fuck with it. Most of the Con's policies are as centrist as the Libs, it's just their annoying right-wing grass roots supporters that make frightening appearances sometimes which makes me want to hold my nose and stay with the Liberals.

And Conchi Party, I'm shocked that Alberta isn't an economic haven with zero PST and oodles of money flowing out of every hole in the ground and infrastructure that makes the rest of the country look silly...that's what Klein says anyway :p

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:34 AM
Great thread.....I have laods to say now ;)

First, please stop all the hating on the Bloc (esp you SNAIL :p ) I would jsut elt you all know that quebec voting majorly for Bloc Québécois prevented a majoritary liberal government, and that with all the stupid scandals that are coming out, the liberal government would still be in place, with no chance of new elections.

As for the gay marraige thing, the Bloc Québécois is actually for it, well Gilles D always was, the fact they voted no was only to discredit the liberals ( wh oare actually doing a great job themsleves on that ;) ).

NDP, esp Layton, are great people with great values. On the other hand, i don't think the are ready or efficient enough to get a huge part of the power.

Steven Harper should jsut be killed already ;) This guy is very dangerous for Canada's statue around the world, we are known as a country being cool and with advanced ideas, and he is just going to do like Cher, turn back time ;)

Well, there is actually a chance i will vote in those elections. Ill be 18 on June 18th, though i feel they wil lbe before that. And all those things happening made me switch my view on those elections. If I vote, i will actually vote for the guy of the county where i live who might be the best for our county, and the guy in there who will actually have the biggest part in the upcoming government. And right now, that guy is Richard Marceau, he already did incredible things for legislation in canada, he is a great man, who is a real politician, who wants to make everyone's life better, and that would be the reason he would deserve my vote. And yes, he is from the Bloc Québécois. But comparing him as a person to everyopne who will go against him, there is no doubt in my mind to who i vote for.

To summarize, i won't vote Bloc Québécois, I won't vote for Duceppe, i'll vote for Marceau.

CanadianBoy21
Apr 17th, 2005, 04:08 AM
Conservatives, yuck.
They better not get to power.
I would hate that.

Paldias
Apr 17th, 2005, 05:27 AM
Great thread.....I have laods to say now ;)

First, please stop all the hating on the Bloc (esp you SNAIL :p ) I would jsut elt you all know that quebec voting majorly for Bloc Québécois prevented a majoritary liberal government, and that with all the stupid scandals that are coming out, the liberal government would still be in place, with no chance of new elections.

As for the gay marraige thing, the Bloc Québécois is actually for it, well Gilles D always was, the fact they voted no was only to discredit the liberals ( wh oare actually doing a great job themsleves on that ;) ).

NDP, esp Layton, are great people with great values. On the other hand, i don't think the are ready or efficient enough to get a huge part of the power.

Steven Harper should jsut be killed already ;) This guy is very dangerous for Canada's statue around the world, we are known as a country being cool and with advanced ideas, and he is just going to do like Cher, turn back time ;)

Well, there is actually a chance i will vote in those elections. Ill be 18 on June 18th, though i feel they wil lbe before that. And all those things happening made me switch my view on those elections. If I vote, i will actually vote for the guy of the county where i live who might be the best for our county, and the guy in there who will actually have the biggest part in the upcoming government. And right now, that guy is Richard Marceau, he already did incredible things for legislation in canada, he is a great man, who is a real politician, who wants to make everyone's life better, and that would be the reason he would deserve my vote. And yes, he is from the Bloc Québécois. But comparing him as a person to everyopne who will go against him, there is no doubt in my mind to who i vote for.

To summarize, i won't vote Bloc Québécois, I won't vote for Duceppe, i'll vote for Marceau.

You've told me you're a seperatist before, so why make up such an elaborate excuse to cover that up?

alexusjonesfan
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:26 PM
Steven Harper should jsut be killed already ;) This guy is very dangerous for Canada's statue around the world, we are known as a country being cool and with advanced ideas, and he is just going to do like Cher, turn back time ;)


Hey, it's not his fault he looks like a serial killer :tape:

He's nowhere near as cool as Martin who's close friends with rockstars like Bono :haha:

Paldias
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:38 PM
How does being a separatist contradicts his post? Try harder Sherry.

He says he's not voting for the Bloc Quebecois, or Duceppe but for Marceau because he's a great man. What bullshit is that? He clearly wants Canada seperated as he has told me so many times before.

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:40 PM
The cooler is the party Animal, Jack Llayton ;)

And Chubin, your post jsut provves a great misconception about the separatist of Quebec. We aren't all extremists, jsut like all conservatives don't want canada to go in war and ban abortion. And the Bloc Québécois always stated that sepatatism and their party shouldn,t always come together, which is true. There is a huge difference between them and the PQ of Quebec.

All i good tell you is that if Marceau was from Liberal, i'd vote for him. Personally for me he did numerous great things and i prefer knowing the guy i vote for as a place at the government and isn't only there to be behind some other forces.

cellophane
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:40 PM
Hey, it's not his fault he looks like a serial killer :tape:

I think he looks like a vampire.

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 17th, 2005, 02:41 PM
And the so many times is incredibly wrong, i told you like one time lol

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:22 PM
I think a lot of people on the board wish it also ;)

Scotso
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:53 PM
Honestly, I wont ever vote for NDP because in Nova Scotia they're goal is to make the poor richer, and the rich poorer.

Yes, they are socialist. But I fail to see why that makes them unattractive :p

Scotso
Apr 17th, 2005, 03:54 PM
And I fail to see also what is wrong with wanting Quebecois to be separate. Certainly people are allowed to have differing opinions?

alexusjonesfan
Apr 17th, 2005, 04:59 PM
And I fail to see also what is wrong with wanting Quebecois to be separate. Certainly people are allowed to have differing opinions?

maybe in some NDP run socialist paradise. Otherwise the Conservatives just wish Quebec didn't exist and the Libs will steal all the tax money they can to keep it in Canada :p

cellophane
Apr 17th, 2005, 05:10 PM
Yes, they are socialist. But I fail to see why that makes them unattractive :p

Never let being a socialist stand in the way of making money. ;)

Circe
Apr 17th, 2005, 05:14 PM
good old canadian politics. wonder what my 'best option' will be across the line in BC. must be some way to keep the tories out of power!

~CANUCK~
Apr 17th, 2005, 05:22 PM
So because someone supports Quebec separation, that MUST mean he's going to vote for the Bloc, and that MUST mean that's the only or first reason he's going to vote for the Bloc. :retard:
I wish I could have your logic Sherry. :wavey:

there are still a few hard core seperatist, that care about nothing else except seperation, although they are a dieing breed.

badunka
Apr 17th, 2005, 06:22 PM
there are still a few hard core seperatist, that care about nothing else except seperation, although they are a dieing breed.

Separation is not in the best interest for the province of Quebec. On basic statistics alone for every dollar of tax that Quebecers pay they get a ROI of 1.33 which is absolutely ludicrous. Compare this to Ontario which as it has been stated this week is the "engine" of Canada they only get 0.64 I believe. Oviosuly there's a problem.

Also with immigration Ontario gets less than $1000 per immigrant but Quebec gets over $ 3000. (as a note this was done by the conservatives not the Libs). It doesn't make sense.

Obviously on two major economic things like, it would be economic suicide for them to separate.

Paldias
Apr 17th, 2005, 06:38 PM
there are still a few hard core seperatist, that care about nothing else except seperation, although they are a dieing breed.

A dying breed? Tell me then why I just saw on CBC Newsworld that 47% of Quebecers want to seperate and want Jean Charest out.

~CANUCK~
Apr 17th, 2005, 07:15 PM
A dying breed? Tell me then why I just saw on CBC Newsworld that 47% of Quebecers want to seperate and want Jean Charest out.
becoz they are pissed off at the awful job he is doing. I don't even like what he is doing here. and the 47% is a direct coralation to the fact that we are all pissed off about what is going on in this country.

~CANUCK~
Apr 17th, 2005, 07:17 PM
A dying breed? Tell me then why I just saw on CBC Newsworld that 47% of Quebecers want to seperate and want Jean Charest out.

also there is a big difference between the hard core quebec is a counrty people and the random im pissed off so i want quebec to leave. There are fewer and fewer people these days in quebec that are seperation fanatics.

416_Man
Apr 17th, 2005, 08:26 PM
Stephen Harper really makes me nervous. He'll turn Toronto into Edmonton East. :(

Barrie_Dude
Apr 17th, 2005, 08:33 PM
A dying breed? Tell me then why I just saw on CBC Newsworld that 47% of Quebecers want to seperate and want Jean Charest out.And about 80% of the rest of Canada wishes that Quebec would just go away!

Barrie_Dude
Apr 17th, 2005, 08:47 PM
Then why do they bitch about seperatists if they want Quebec to go away. :scratch:They are tired of listening to Quebecors whine and cry about how tough they have it!

Barrie_Dude
Apr 17th, 2005, 08:53 PM
And that justify wishing Quebec would go away. K.If it gets them to shut the hell up, than yes!

badunka
Apr 17th, 2005, 09:15 PM
But Quebec seperation is obviously not about economy. It's about the philosophic notion that one nation = one country. Even if Quebec seperation implies some economical problems for Quebec (which is your opinion, that might not even be the case), that doesn't bother seperatists.

haha EVERYTHING is about the economy! Money keeps your social and physical infrastructure running. It is not my opinion it is everywhere. The thing is that most Canadians really could care less about Quebec. You're a drain on the rest of Canada's economy and a rather large burden to bear. Separatists also don't like to point out the fact they basically killed the city of Montreal during the last two referendums. Private companies picked up shopped to good ol' Toronto and Vancouver never to look back. THis is why many Government agencies are now located in Montreal such as Via and AC as they need to be there to not see the economy collapse.

I understand the philosophic notion but you must also understand the current state of Canada. We are a hugely multicultural nation and it is not longer just about English and French. We must adapt and continue to change to allow the country to prosper.

badunka
Apr 17th, 2005, 10:00 PM
Everything is about economy, but that doesn't mean all our choices have to be solely about economy.

Quebec seperation is not about economy... That's all I'm saying. If Quebec seperation means an economic suicide, then it's gonna be a problem Quebec will have to get through, that's all. As an anology, if you leave your parents' house, it might mean you'll have to eat a lot of peanut butter at first until you get a decent job and bought all your furniture and stuff, but that doesn't stop you from moving from your parents house because economy is not everything when you make choices.

I know about Canada being a multicultural nation, and...? It's still mostly about English and French anyway.

but ultimately your choices are economic because you need banks to loan you capital to build your "new" nation. I wouldn't count on too much help from the rest of Canada if Quebec separated as their already is huge amounts of ill will towards Quebec already. It's funny because I view myself as an incredibly tolerant person but I view Quebec as using one too many chances already and I think most Canadians do as well. I feel like your evading relevant points and makign analogies that really mean nothing. Quebec as an independent nation has none or very little chance to become a prosperous place.

badunka
Apr 17th, 2005, 10:15 PM
What chances? I don't understand what you're referring to.

Ok, I won't repeat 3 times the same thing, so I'll just let it go, but I don't see the relevant points that I've ignored.
your chances as a sovereign state. They are almost nil.

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 17th, 2005, 11:24 PM
People jsut need to understand that there are two different view on the subjects...You can't really get the idea of separatism if you aren't living in Quebec. On both sides in the apst year, there were some false facts and stats that were given to both sides to create ideas that are tough to get rid of.

And watching Chubin's posts, it jsut seems that the idea of separatists hating the entire country and all of its inhabitants is still very popular in english canada. It is so untrue.

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 12:01 AM
People jsut need to understand that there are two different view on the subjects...You can't really get the idea of separatism if you aren't living in Quebec. On both sides in the apst year, there were some false facts and stats that were given to both sides to create ideas that are tough to get rid of.

And watching Chubin's posts, it jsut seems that the idea of separatists hating the entire country and all of its inhabitants is still very popular in english canada. It is so untrue.

well thats the thing that most people don't understand, where as the rest of canada hates on the seperatists, the seperatists don't hate canada, they just think they will be better off on there own making there own choices. Personally i think it would be an economic disaster. My dad has lost his last 3 jobs which is directly related to the referendums. The companies closed down and all moved to Toronto. And quebec didn't even leave, so if it did a lot more companies would leave.

badunka
Apr 18th, 2005, 12:34 AM
People jsut need to understand that there are two different view on the subjects...You can't really get the idea of separatism if you aren't living in Quebec. On both sides in the apst year, there were some false facts and stats that were given to both sides to create ideas that are tough to get rid of.

And watching Chubin's posts, it jsut seems that the idea of separatists hating the entire country and all of its inhabitants is still very popular in english canada. It is so untrue.
I definately think you can get the idea of separatism outside of Quebec. Look at Western Canada for instance. I think most people in Canada are jsut very sick of the special and in most cases very unfair treatment that Quebec receives.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 18th, 2005, 01:19 AM
yay, here we go again discussing what won't be an election issue :p

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:46 AM
There are 2 sides like cd said... A lot of us think that we are treated unfairly. But it's a matter of opinion.

As for Quebec seperation itself, it only concerns Quebecers and what non-Quebecers think of that is pretty much irrelevant (as medias are so ridiculously biased about this anyway). I'm not saying this in a arrogant way, if there's another province which wants to seperate, I won't put my nose on their business and tell them what they should do.
I don't really understand how you can say the Quebec's separation is a nonissue for the rest of the country - that is, something we shouldn't be commenting on and "poking out noses" in. Seeing as many provinces share a border with Quebec and it could possibly have a huge impact on the ecomony, it's more than just a little "Quebec-centered" to say "it's nobody elses business". Yes, it is our business. If separatists don't like, then tough shit.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:47 AM
well thats the thing that most people don't understand, where as the rest of canada hates on the seperatists, the seperatists don't hate canada, they just think they will be better off on there own making there own choices. Personally i think it would be an economic disaster. My dad has lost his last 3 jobs which is directly related to the referendums. The companies closed down and all moved to Toronto. And quebec didn't even leave, so if it did a lot more companies would leave.
Horseshit. There are Canada-hating separatists. And not all of Canada hates separatists. A lot of people are sick of their pissing and moaning, and some people do hate them. But it's not as black and white as you'd like to paint it.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:49 AM
And I fail to see also what is wrong with wanting Quebecois to be separate. Certainly people are allowed to have differing opinions?
For the record, I don't think there is anything wrong with them wanting to separate. Nor would I think there would be anything wrong with PEI wanting their own country. I'd still laugh at them and get sick of the pissing and moaning though. Especially if they were totally fucking ungrateful :)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:51 AM
becoz they are pissed off at the awful job he is doing. I don't even like what he is doing here. and the 47% is a direct coralation to the fact that we are all pissed off about what is going on in this country.

Lot's of us are pissed off an what is going on this country. Let's all quit! Yeah! Awesome :banana:

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:53 AM
But Quebec seperation is obviously not about economy. It's about the philosophic notion that one nation = one country. Even if Quebec seperation implies some economical problems for Quebec (which is your opinion, that might not even be the case), that doesn't bother seperatists.

Frankly, I'd be scared as shit if I was a separatist and the people "in charge" of the matter didn't give at twat about the economical impacts.

But hey, don't listen to me. I'm just logical.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 02:54 AM
And about 80% of the rest of Canada wishes that Quebec would just go away!
And 100% of the rest of Canada would like Southern Ontario to go away. Maybe Ontario should make it's own country.

Seriously, some people whine about prejudice against people from Quebec (I don't think BD was being serious, but it is said). Try travelling the country and telling people you are from TORONTO. Get back to me and tell me which is a better experience.

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 03:00 AM
Horseshit. There are Canada-hating separatists. And not all of Canada hates separatists. A lot of people are sick of their pissing and moaning, and some people do hate them. But it's not as black and white as you'd like to paint it.

sorry that came out totally wrong. I should really re read what i post :rolleyes: . I was just trying to say that not every canadian hates separatists and not all separatists hate the rest of canada. Obviously there are going to be people who hate the separtists and there are going to be separtists that hate canada, but not everyone is like that like chubin was making it seem.

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 03:02 AM
Lot's of us are pissed off an what is going on this country. Let's all quit! Yeah! Awesome :banana:
sorry once again my bad, i was talking about quebec people being pissed off at charest and his wonderful job he is doing here. there are going to be your hard core separtists and then there are going to be a big chunk of swing voters that change there view of separation depending on how things are going in the province. Pretty much all quebecers are pissed off with the way charest is running things, which is why i believe that separation polls are up.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 03:51 AM
I said that non-Quebecer opinion is irrelevant for us, I didn't say seperation was only Quebec business, obviously it's not.

I meant that in the context of an election thread - because it's what the thread is about. I mean if the PEI wants to seperate, I wouldn't tell people they shouldn't vote for a X party because they have no chance to seperate. I don't live there, so what do I know? But hey that's my opinion.
Oh. My bad. That I do agree with ;)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 03:51 AM
sorry once again my bad, i was talking about quebec people being pissed off at charest and his wonderful job he is doing here. there are going to be your hard core separtists and then there are going to be a big chunk of swing voters that change there view of separation depending on how things are going in the province. Pretty much all quebecers are pissed off with the way charest is running things, which is why i believe that separation polls are up.
My bad again :p

Paldias
Apr 18th, 2005, 04:17 AM
Frankly I think we should stop talking about Quebec seperatism and start talking about the main issues of the campaign. Obviously Harper will bring up the inquiry, but is Martin going to make the Same-Sex Issue his main issue to run with? I mean what other issues can he run with besides the same-old I was a good finance minister.

From what I've read Harper is going to make Defend Marriage his main issue...it'll be interesting to see how it all pans out.

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 04:53 AM
Frankly I think we should stop talking about Quebec seperatism and start talking about the main issues of the campaign. Obviously Harper will bring up the inquiry, but is Martin going to make the Same-Sex Issue his main issue to run with? I mean what other issues can he run with besides the same-old I was a good finance minister.

From what I've read Harper is going to make Defend Marriage his main issue...it'll be interesting to see how it all pans out.

if harper decides to make marriage an issue he will lose the 1000 votes he was gonna get in quebec. Martin will bring up the pretty nice budget he just handed out that even the con thought was decent.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:13 AM
I kind of hope that Harper does go for the bigot vote. It's unfortunate, since it reinforces negative stereotypes about conservatives that are largly untrue, but it would humour me because he'd lose votes. Why the conservatives insist of pushing this garbage is beyond me. I could at least take them seriously if they didn't. Let it go, guys. Gay people have sex. And sometimes marry. Could we now focus on issues that are actually of importance to those of us who aren't 1) gay or 2) bigots? Thanks.

This might be the first time that I don't vote liberal, btw. I was really planning on it, but the lib candidate (who won last year)in this region is a conservative in red, IMO.

Captain.Canada
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:18 AM
OKAY, so is there really going to be an election soon? Or is it just speculation?

Captain.Canada
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:22 AM
I don't see Quebec having that much economic problems if they manage to work something out with the States.

They will lose out on equalization payments, not sure if that's a significant chunk of money though...

Captain.Canada
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:27 AM
I don't remember who I voted for last.. either NDP or Liberal. I used to be hardcore NDP but I'm not sure anymore. When they were in power in the provinces, it seems that they had to submit to economic pressures. It seems like they had a staunch position on the preservation of the environment, yet in Clayoquot Sound, BC, the NDP government allowed the mass deforestation of Canada's [only?] rainforest. The Rae government in Ontario seemed to have submitted to economic pressures too. I think that although the NDP might have to give in to economic pressures, I agree with them on their social stance so I might vote for them.

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:33 AM
I don't remember who I voted for last.. either NDP or Liberal. I used to be hardcore NDP but I'm not sure anymore. When they were in power in the provinces, it seems that they had to submit to economic pressures. It seems like they had a staunch position on the preservation of the environment, yet in Clayoquot Sound, BC, the NDP government allowed the mass deforestation of Canada's [only?] rainforest. The Rae government in Ontario seemed to have submitted to economic pressures too. I think that although the NDP might have to give in to economic pressures, I agree with them on their social stance so I might vote for them.

the only thing with this is voting for the ndp is like saying ok i want a conservative to win. Effectivly what you are doing is taking away a vote from the libs and giving it to a party that has as much of a chance at running this country as i do. I wouldn't mind an ndp gov't but they won't win

Captain.Canada
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:35 AM
the only thing with this is voting for the ndp is like saying ok i want a conservative to win. Effectivly what you are doing is taking away a vote from the libs and giving it to a party that has as much of a chance at running this country as i do. I wouldn't mind an ndp gov't but they won't win

If you convince everyone to think that way then they definitely won't win. If people start saying, hey, you know, they have a chance, then maybe we'll get somewhere.

adss
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:36 AM
IMO same-sex marriages when brought to parliament should be a free vote, so I find it completely pointless for the issue to be a main focus of the conservative party's campaign.

NAT
Apr 18th, 2005, 06:06 AM
With all due respect, I hear a lot of people saying "the Conservatives are scary" without any legitimate reason. That was the entire Liberal strategy last election, and it worked. Not every person who votes conservative is a red neck bigot. A lot of us are westerners who are sick of being screwed. The consevatives are scary, scary, scary. What's scary?? A government who lost a BILLION DOLLARS!! Who are corrupt beyond belief, who gave more patronage appointments than Mulroney, on and on and on.. Flip flop on Gst and everything else. They have proven themselves unworthy to govern. At least give the conservatives a chance. If they are so brutal, vote them out, but why vote for somebody you KNOW is corrupt? It makes no sense.
I do live in Alberta, I am educated, well travelled and racially mixed. Not your stereotyped Alberta redneck. I lived in B.C where the NDP ran the province into the ground. I have had relatives fly here to get an MRI from Vancouver because the wait there was too long, and private clinics were too expensive. I have news for you people, private clinics have existed a long time and the health care system hasn't imploded. Alberta makes huge transfer payments to the have nots, has the lowest taxes in the country, no PST, the lowest unemployment, most growth, etc. Of course much of this has to do with oils prices, but Conservative have been in power here a long time, and Armageddon has not arrived. If you disagree with their policies, fine. But please no blind scare mongering, without knowing the facts. The conservatives are not perfect, but at least they have said they will allow free votes on parliament, that is how the system is supposed to work. I work hard for my money, and I am sick of the Liberals stealing it.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 06:16 AM
the only thing with this is voting for the ndp is like saying ok i want a conservative to win. Effectivly what you are doing is taking away a vote from the libs and giving it to a party that has as much of a chance at running this country as i do. I wouldn't mind an ndp gov't but they won't win

Or, if you live in my riding, voting for the conservative or liberal candidate doesn't make a flipping difference, because they are both preaching "family values" and other such crap that I don't have time for.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 18th, 2005, 06:20 AM
We get it. Alberta is better than everybody else. The rest of us suck. Rah!

Btw, who was saying that all Conservatives are bigots? Maybe I missed those posts. I know that I myself explicitly said that those stereotypes are "largly untrue". However, I believe that Stephen Harper is one, and that it's ridiculous they can't find a better candidate to lead their party.

It's kind of hard to take provincial conservatives all that seriously after they destroyed the health care and education systems in Ontario, btw. I"m thrilled they worked in Alberta. They sure as fuck didn't work in Ontairo. Not that the libs are doing anything either. Not that they can. It will take several decades to undo what has been done :p

So forgive me for not giving a party that destroyed this province and has a bigot as a leader a chance. No dice.

NAT
Apr 18th, 2005, 05:16 PM
Where in my post did I say Alberta is better than eveybody else in Canada? Btw, I am originally from B.C. Nowhere did I say that YOU said all Albertans are bigots, but if you read the entire thread (yes, I did) there are some posts along those lines.
I agree that Harper is not a great leader, but again, that's what free votes in parliament are for. The point was many westerners feel why should we vote for a party who has continually screwed us, and is now doing it to the rest of the country. The Liberals have nothing to offer but scare tactics. So forgive me for not giving another chance to a party that is BLATANTLY corrupt.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 18th, 2005, 07:14 PM
:fiery: :fiery: I heard Mike Harris on the radio this morning and he was saying that he thinks it is time to dismantle Canada's Health Plan! :fiery: :fiery: :fiery:


Also, I gather that Jack Layton/NDP has offered to prop up the Paul Martin/Liberal goverment in exchange for more money for Ontario

alexusjonesfan
Apr 18th, 2005, 07:17 PM
:fiery: :fiery: I heard Mike Harris on the radio this morning and he was saying that he thinks it is time to dismantle Canada's Health Plan! :fiery: :fiery: :fiery:


Also, I gather that Jack Layton/NDP has offered to prop up the Paul Martin/Liberal goverment in exchange for more money for Ontario

good ol' mikey.. the NDP can't prop up the libs, they're one seat too short, they'll need to coerce a bloc MP or kidnap Belinda Stronach or something :haha:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 18th, 2005, 07:30 PM
good ol' mikey.. the NDP can't prop up the libs, they're one seat too short, they'll need to coerce a bloc MP or kidnap Belinda Stronach or something :haha:They would be lucky to have Belinda! She is the sharpest cookie on the hill!

~CANUCK~
Apr 18th, 2005, 07:58 PM
They would be lucky to have Belinda! She is the sharpest cookie on the hill!
Now there is an idea, make belinda head of the liberal party :eek:

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 18th, 2005, 09:01 PM
Fact: Bernard Landry, chief of PQ, owns multiple degrees in economy.

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 18th, 2005, 09:03 PM
And he was great at Tout le monde en parle yesterday night, hell get mnay more votes ;)

Barrie_Dude
Apr 19th, 2005, 01:04 AM
Now there is an idea, make belinda head of the liberal party :eek:She'd straighten things out!;)

Barrie_Dude
Apr 19th, 2005, 01:06 AM
Fact: Bernard Landry, chief of PQ, owns multiple degrees in economy.But he is still an EVIL PQ! :mad:

Scotso
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:13 AM
I don't see why it's so hard to convince one of the Bloc to vote with the Libs. I mean, it's not like they would prefer to have the conservatives in power, is it?

~CANUCK~
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:26 AM
I don't see why it's so hard to convince one of the Bloc to vote with the Libs. I mean, it's not like they would prefer to have the conservatives in power, is it?
Well look at it this way, they have the power to do what ever the hell they want in the end, they won't make up the gov't but they will be the party that decides who is gonna be in power. They can either go with the cons and make the minority or join the libs and ndp and make the minority again. Also there is no way in hell you are going to get all the bloc voting with the cons and one voting with the libs, that one person will be shot :p

alexusjonesfan
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:32 AM
I don't see why it's so hard to convince one of the Bloc to vote with the Libs. I mean, it's not like they would prefer to have the conservatives in power, is it?

Quebec is the most pissed at the libs. If an election is called, the Bloc is sure to pick up a bunch of seats and even if the Conservatives win, it'll still likely be a minority with the Bloc having a good chance at holding the balance of power. Only good things from their perspective.

I like what the NDP is doing (mainly because if it works, it'll lower some of my costs :o). They want Ontario to get more money and want the new corporate tax cut reduced. At first I thought it was pointless because the Libs + NDP < Bloc + Conservatives but apparently the tories have hinted that they won't try a no confidence motion if they don't have the support of the NDP (something about the libs then being able to scapegoat them as extremists and siding with 'separatists' to bring down the government)

Paldias
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:32 AM
:tape: Did you see what the Liberals did?
Every week (Wed. or Thurs.) the Opposition parties are allowed to bring forward their own motions (this month's case non-confidence), anyway, the Liberals control the dates in which they can bring in their own motions. Anyway they changed them all the way until the end of June :tape: meaning that the only way the Conservatives/BQ/NDP can take down the government is by voting against the Budget (THAT INCLUDES HEALTH CARE, INCREASED SPENDING FOR MILITARY, CHILD CARE - all things that they bitched about the Liberals doing and they did). :tape: This has to be one of the smartest things that the Liberals have done in a while....:tape:

alexusjonesfan
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:38 AM
looks like they're setting up to paint the opposition as fickle and extreme...this crying wolf has to backfire at some point though :tape:

~CANUCK~
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:47 AM
:tape: Did you see what the Liberals did?
Every week (Wed. or Thurs.) the Opposition parties are allowed to bring forward their own motions (this month's case non-confidence), anyway, the Liberals control the dates in which they can bring in their own motions. Anyway they changed them all the way until the end of June :tape: meaning that the only way the Conservatives/BQ/NDP can take down the government is by voting against the Budget (THAT INCLUDES HEALTH CARE, INCREASED SPENDING FOR MILITARY, CHILD CARE - all things that they bitched about the Liberals doing and they did). :tape: This has to be one of the smartest things that the Liberals have done in a while....:tape:
i thought they already voted on the budget. :shrug:

cellophane
Apr 19th, 2005, 03:55 AM
I'm SO out of politics. :tape: Belinda and Peter McKay are an item, I know that much though. :lol: So I guess that means Belinda in the liberal party is a no-no. ;)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 19th, 2005, 05:22 AM
Where in my post did I say Alberta is better than eveybody else in Canada? Btw, I am originally from B.C. Nowhere did I say that YOU said all Albertans are bigots, but if you read the entire thread (yes, I did) there are some posts along those lines.
I agree that Harper is not a great leader, but again, that's what free votes in parliament are for. The point was many westerners feel why should we vote for a party who has continually screwed us, and is now doing it to the rest of the country. The Liberals have nothing to offer but scare tactics. So forgive me for not giving another chance to a party that is BLATANTLY corrupt.

And forgive me for thinking that I'm going to take it up the ass from whatever party is in power, whether they be liberals or somebody else. So the libs have actually be exposed. So what? I expect my government to be corrupt as shit. My vote isn't going to change that.

Anyways, my sincerest apologies that Ontario can't be as brilliant as Alberta. I guess we're all sharing a brain over here.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 19th, 2005, 05:23 AM
Fact: Bernard Landry, chief of PQ, owns multiple degrees in economy.

Your point?

cellophane
Apr 19th, 2005, 05:29 AM
I have to say I really don't understand the whole deal with punishing the liberals. I agree that a government that cheats is sort of normal, no? :lol: Maybe I just have expectations that are too low. :lol: But, like, what's new? Is it realistic that the conservatives won't cheat? I can't see the logic behind that at all. :shrug: I guess I can understand some people have had enough, but I don't know...

Crazy Canuck
Apr 19th, 2005, 06:06 AM
It's a matter of dealing with the devil you know... :devil:

I already said that i probably won't vote for them, but my reasons for that have nothing to do with them being corrupt.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 19th, 2005, 12:56 PM
I have to say I really don't understand the whole deal with punishing the liberals. I agree that a government that cheats is sort of normal, no? :lol: Maybe I just have expectations that are too low. :lol: But, like, what's new? Is it realistic that the conservatives won't cheat? I can't see the logic behind that at all. :shrug: I guess I can understand some people have had enough, but I don't know...

yes we must 'demand better' :haha:

I still have no idea how they ran an entire campaign on that...I don't even know what it means :shrug:

Paldias
Apr 19th, 2005, 09:33 PM
yes we must 'demand better' :haha:

I still have no idea how they ran an entire campaign on that...I don't even know what it means :shrug:

Apparently demanding better brings in biggotry and the death penalty :tape:

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 19th, 2005, 10:00 PM
My Point Queen Rebecca was that with everyone saying that Quebec's separation would be a devastation economy wise, i just think that people from the Parti Québécois are intelligent to check their facts correctly. And Quebec for them is so important, i actually am sure that they prefer a solid Quebec in canada than a sucky Quebec being alone. So i'm sure they managed everything so that it wouldn,t end out that way.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 19th, 2005, 11:46 PM
My Point Queen Rebecca was that with everyone saying that Quebec's separation would be a devastation economy wise, i just think that people from the Parti Québécois are intelligent to check their facts correctly. And Quebec for them is so important, i actually am sure that they prefer a solid Quebec in canada than a sucky Quebec being alone. So i'm sure they managed everything so that it wouldn,t end out that way.Actually, it is mote the Ontario economy that drives the nation. If anything, we might get to keep some of our monry here which would be nice!

alexusjonesfan
Apr 19th, 2005, 11:53 PM
My Point Queen Rebecca was that with everyone saying that Quebec's separation would be a devastation economy wise, i just think that people from the Parti Québécois are intelligent to check their facts correctly. And Quebec for them is so important, i actually am sure that they prefer a solid Quebec in canada than a sucky Quebec being alone. So i'm sure they managed everything so that it wouldn,t end out that way.

look man, Bob Rae has a law degree, a doctorate from Oxford, was a Rhodes Scholar bla bla bla but that still didn't help him from making some pretty stupid decisions about running Ontario. All politicians have great training/education, if they actually applied some of it instead of fighting with each other, being petty and generally acting like 13 year old schoolgirls, we wouldn't be in half the shit we're in today.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 20th, 2005, 03:27 AM
My Point Queen Rebecca was that with everyone saying that Quebec's separation would be a devastation economy wise, i just think that people from the Parti Québécois are intelligent to check their facts correctly. And Quebec for them is so important, i actually am sure that they prefer a solid Quebec in canada than a sucky Quebec being alone. So i'm sure they managed everything so that it wouldn,t end out that way.
I did not mean to sound as if I was questioning the intelligence or academic ability of key seperatists.

Paldias
Apr 20th, 2005, 04:54 AM
Well I'm excited for the upcoming election! I've been working hard with my ridings Federal Riding Association, and we've come up with a lot of cool ideas that allow the people to hear our ideas and possibly want to vote for us. Should be an interesting election, hopefully all goes well! :)

NAT
Apr 20th, 2005, 05:19 AM
And forgive me for thinking that I'm going to take it up the ass from whatever party is in power



I guess some people are just more accustomed to taking it in the ass than others. :)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 20th, 2005, 05:43 AM
Seeing as I'm not into anal sex, I'm thinking that I'm not one of those people. It's called being a realist. I prefer this to thinking "yay! new party in power! NO MORE CORRUPTION :banana:"

But hey... whatever let's you sleep at night :yeah:

alexusjonesfan
Apr 20th, 2005, 07:51 AM
June 27th

seems like the libs' last stunt with the moving of 'opposition day' in the house and postponing the vote on the Conservative budget amendment turned out to be the last straw.

by that time none of the important laws will have been passed (pot, gays, missiles, kyoto) much less any implementation of the proposed budget. Yay for democracies that keep tripping over themselves :banana:

Lord Nelson
Apr 20th, 2005, 12:53 PM
That is why I'm proud to be a conservative. :D

alexusjonesfan
Apr 20th, 2005, 01:00 PM
That is why I'm proud to be a conservative. :D

because they call elections?

Lord Nelson
Apr 20th, 2005, 01:18 PM
No, because they deal with the real issues such as the economy, culture, crime & terrorism.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 20th, 2005, 01:22 PM
oh dear :o

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 21st, 2005, 12:31 AM
You sure you aren't american?

Barrie_Dude
Apr 21st, 2005, 03:16 PM
Seeing as I'm not into anal sex, I'm thinking that I'm not one of those people. It's called being a realist. I prefer this to thinking "yay! new party in power! NO MORE CORRUPTION :banana:"

But hey... whatever let's you sleep at night :yeah:I'd like to think that a new party brings no more crruption but I know better. I would be happy to see a new party shake things up in Ottawa!

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 12:04 AM
Anyone watching the jackass spew his BS tonite? I won't as I will just get angry!

Paldias
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:37 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/ram-newsworld/martin_paul050421.ram

Good evening.

I want to talk to you directly tonight – about the problems in the sponsorship program; about how I’ve responded to them as your prime minister; and about the timing of the next general election.

Let me speak plainly: what happened with the sponsorship file occurred on the watch of a Liberal government. Those who were in power are to be held responsible. And that includes me.

I was the Minister of Finance. Knowing what I've learned this past year, I am sorry that we weren’t more vigilant - that I wasn't more vigilant. Public money was misdirected and misused. That’s unacceptable. And that is why I apologized to the Canadian people a year ago.

But taking responsibility is about more than words. I want to tell you what I’ve done as Prime Minister to deal with the sponsorship scandal – to make sure it does not happen again, to make sure that those who violated the public trust will be identified and will pay the consequences.

On December 12, 2003, I cancelled the sponsorship program. It was my very first act on my very first day in office.

When the Auditor-General’s report was publicly tabled, I acted immediately by ordering a fully independent commission of inquiry, under Mr. Justice John Gomery. Its mandate is to get to the bottom of what happened, and to do it in full view of Canadians. It will report before the end of the year.

And I think you’ll agree – Judge Gomery is leaving no stone unturned.

In addition, I fired Alfonso Gagliano, the minister responsible for the sponsorship program, from his appointment as Ambassador to Denmark.

I put in strict new controls on spending within every single government department.

My government brought forward whistleblower legislation to ensure that when public servants and others come forward with evidence of wrongdoing, they are protected, not punished.

To recover taxpayers’ money – money that went to those who did not earn it -- I ordered my government to sue 19 people and companies for more than $40-million.

I committed to acting on the recommendations of Judge Gomery when he brings forth his final report. And I myself testified before his commission, answering any and all questions.

Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books - and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

Let me emphasize that point: if so much as a dollar is found to have made its way into the Liberal party from ill-gotten gains, it will be repaid to the people of Canada. I want no part of that money.

As Prime Minister, I will never hesitate to describe what happened on the sponsorship file for what is was: an unjustifiable mess. It’s up to me to clean it up. That’s my job. I am cleaning it up. And I am willing to be judged on my record of action.

In recent weeks, fallout from the sponsorship inquiry has led to speculation about an election – which in turn is consuming virtually all political discussion, at least here on Parliament Hill. Initiatives to improve health care, strengthen our economy and ensure for Canada a role of pride and influence in the world are being obscured by partisan jousting.

In short, the Parliament you sent to Ottawa less than a year ago is preoccupied with election talk and with political strategy – not with the job you sent us here to do.

As people focus their attention on the commission’s hearings, let’s remember that the inquiry is being held in front of a judge for good reason.

There is conflicting testimony; only the judge is in a position to determine the truth. Only he can cut through the partisan politics. Only he can tell us what happened and who was responsible.

We’ve all heard that the opposition may defeat the government and take the country to the polls for the second time in a year.

I am prepared to face Canadians and have them judge my response to this serious test of leadership. I will be politically accountable. But I believe that before there is an election, you are entitled to answers – to the answers that Judge Gomery is working toward. I believe that Canadians deserve a full and frank accounting of all the facts. Fairness and due process require nothing less.

For that reason, I commit to you tonight that I will call a general election within 30 days of the publication of the commission’s final report and recommendations. Let Judge Gomery do his work. Let the facts come out. And then the people of Canada will have their say.

If the Opposition forces an election before then, that is their choice. But I believe we can do better. I believe we can – and we should – use the coming months to pursue the public’s business. To act on the issues that matter most to you and make a difference in your life.

If we are to have an election, one that will be at least in part about the work of Judge Gomery, surely that election should occur only when we have the work of Judge Gomery.

In closing, let me say this: there are people who think I was wrong to call this inquiry, wrong to expose my government to the political cost of the scrutiny that has ensued. They warn we will pay a price in the next election. And perhaps we will.

But I trust your judgment. And I will not dishonour this office by trying to conceal or diminish such offensive wrongdoing. I have too much respect for this place.

When I was young, I practically lived here in the Parliament Buildings. My father was a cabinet minister in four Liberal governments. He taught me that those who serve in public office have a duty to protect the integrity of government.

My pledge to you tonight is that I will live up to that ideal. I went into public life because I believe in the good that government can do. And I will do my all as Prime Minister to make sure that your government is worthy of your respect.

The final judgment on whether I have done that will be yours.

Thank you. And good night.

Crazy Canuck
Apr 22nd, 2005, 02:39 AM
You sure you aren't american?
Conservatism isn't limited to the USA, ya know.

Mind you, I do laugh out loud at the thought of the conservative government dealing with those things any better than the liberals, but whatever. If I thought they conservatives in this country would do anything more than take me back to 1950, I'd be happy to consider them. New leadership would help ;)

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:21 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/ram-newsworld/martin_paul050421.ram

Good evening.

I want to talk to you directly tonight – about the problems in the sponsorship program; about how I’ve responded to them as your prime minister; and about the timing of the next general election.

Let me speak plainly: what happened with the sponsorship file occurred on the watch of a Liberal government. Those who were in power are to be held responsible. And that includes me.

I was the Minister of Finance. Knowing what I've learned this past year, I am sorry that we weren’t more vigilant - that I wasn't more vigilant. Public money was misdirected and misused. That’s unacceptable. And that is why I apologized to the Canadian people a year ago.

But taking responsibility is about more than words. I want to tell you what I’ve done as Prime Minister to deal with the sponsorship scandal – to make sure it does not happen again, to make sure that those who violated the public trust will be identified and will pay the consequences.

On December 12, 2003, I cancelled the sponsorship program. It was my very first act on my very first day in office.

When the Auditor-General’s report was publicly tabled, I acted immediately by ordering a fully independent commission of inquiry, under Mr. Justice John Gomery. Its mandate is to get to the bottom of what happened, and to do it in full view of Canadians. It will report before the end of the year.

And I think you’ll agree – Judge Gomery is leaving no stone unturned.

In addition, I fired Alfonso Gagliano, the minister responsible for the sponsorship program, from his appointment as Ambassador to Denmark.

I put in strict new controls on spending within every single government department.

My government brought forward whistleblower legislation to ensure that when public servants and others come forward with evidence of wrongdoing, they are protected, not punished.

To recover taxpayers’ money – money that went to those who did not earn it -- I ordered my government to sue 19 people and companies for more than $40-million.

I committed to acting on the recommendations of Judge Gomery when he brings forth his final report. And I myself testified before his commission, answering any and all questions.

Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books - and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

Let me emphasize that point: if so much as a dollar is found to have made its way into the Liberal party from ill-gotten gains, it will be repaid to the people of Canada. I want no part of that money.

As Prime Minister, I will never hesitate to describe what happened on the sponsorship file for what is was: an unjustifiable mess. It’s up to me to clean it up. That’s my job. I am cleaning it up. And I am willing to be judged on my record of action.

In recent weeks, fallout from the sponsorship inquiry has led to speculation about an election – which in turn is consuming virtually all political discussion, at least here on Parliament Hill. Initiatives to improve health care, strengthen our economy and ensure for Canada a role of pride and influence in the world are being obscured by partisan jousting.

In short, the Parliament you sent to Ottawa less than a year ago is preoccupied with election talk and with political strategy – not with the job you sent us here to do.

As people focus their attention on the commission’s hearings, let’s remember that the inquiry is being held in front of a judge for good reason.

There is conflicting testimony; only the judge is in a position to determine the truth. Only he can cut through the partisan politics. Only he can tell us what happened and who was responsible.

We’ve all heard that the opposition may defeat the government and take the country to the polls for the second time in a year.

I am prepared to face Canadians and have them judge my response to this serious test of leadership. I will be politically accountable. But I believe that before there is an election, you are entitled to answers – to the answers that Judge Gomery is working toward. I believe that Canadians deserve a full and frank accounting of all the facts. Fairness and due process require nothing less.

For that reason, I commit to you tonight that I will call a general election within 30 days of the publication of the commission’s final report and recommendations. Let Judge Gomery do his work. Let the facts come out. And then the people of Canada will have their say.

If the Opposition forces an election before then, that is their choice. But I believe we can do better. I believe we can – and we should – use the coming months to pursue the public’s business. To act on the issues that matter most to you and make a difference in your life.

If we are to have an election, one that will be at least in part about the work of Judge Gomery, surely that election should occur only when we have the work of Judge Gomery.

In closing, let me say this: there are people who think I was wrong to call this inquiry, wrong to expose my government to the political cost of the scrutiny that has ensued. They warn we will pay a price in the next election. And perhaps we will.

But I trust your judgment. And I will not dishonour this office by trying to conceal or diminish such offensive wrongdoing. I have too much respect for this place.

When I was young, I practically lived here in the Parliament Buildings. My father was a cabinet minister in four Liberal governments. He taught me that those who serve in public office have a duty to protect the integrity of government.

My pledge to you tonight is that I will live up to that ideal. I went into public life because I believe in the good that government can do. And I will do my all as Prime Minister to make sure that your government is worthy of your respect.

The final judgment on whether I have done that will be yours.

Thank you. And good night. :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs:

alexusjonesfan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:45 PM
wow, he'll be lucky if the government lasts all the way 'till the publishing of the report

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:47 PM
wow, he'll be lucky if the government lasts all the way 'till the publishing of the reportWe Need Belinda to save the day!

alexusjonesfan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:52 PM
We Need Belinda to save the day!

what, come out of the closet as a liberal? :p

The report comes out when? September or something...yeah right, the conservative's will want to finish them off before the summer break.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:53 PM
actually, bring Stockwell Day back, the libs will never lose then :bounce:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:55 PM
actually, bring Stockwell Day back, the libs will never lose then :bounce::scared: He frightens me more than Stephen Harper! :scared:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 04:57 PM
what, come out of the closet as a liberal? :p

The report comes out when? September or something...yeah right, the conservative's will want to finish them off before the summer break. That is IF the Martin goverment does not quash the report prior to that!

alexusjonesfan
Apr 22nd, 2005, 05:05 PM
That is IF the Martin goverment does not quash the report prior to that!

they won't be able to, I don't think...they're in too much shit as it is. They're probably hoping it'll blow over by then and they'll have more time to paint swastikas on Stephen Harper in the meantime. The one thing I honestly find disturbing about Harper is the new ads he's been taking out in 'ethnic' newspapers and magazines etc. trying to scare minorities into thinking that passing same-sex marriage legislation will somehow be racist and trample over the rights of these communities. It's like "today it's marriage, tomorrow they could take away your freedom". I know all's fair in politicking and what not but that's seriously dastardly and completely malicious towards minority queer youth who have enough issues to deal with as it is.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 22nd, 2005, 07:05 PM
Well, the conservatives scare me after what Mike Harris did in Ontario. I do not want the same thing to happen Canada wide, though, in all honesty, neither the provincial liberals (Dalton The Jerk!) or the Feds (Martin the Ass) are any better!

Paldias
Apr 22nd, 2005, 08:35 PM
Well, the conservatives scare me after what Mike Harris did in Ontario. I do not want the same thing to happen Canada wide, though, in all honesty, neither the provincial liberals (Dalton The Jerk!) or the Feds (Martin the Ass) are any better!

Seeing as your name is Barrie Dude, I'm guessing that you're not a friend of the Liberals and you won't be voting for Aileen Carrol?

Barrie_Dude
Apr 23rd, 2005, 10:53 PM
Seeing as your name is Barrie Dude, I'm guessing that you're not a friend of the Liberals and you won't be voting for Aileen Carrol?Aileen Carroll? I live in Toronto! But I was born in Barrie! Isn't she the MP for Barrie?

Cosmopolitan
Apr 24th, 2005, 02:52 AM
they won't be able to, I don't think...they're in too much shit as it is. They're probably hoping it'll blow over by then and they'll have more time to paint swastikas on Stephen Harper in the meantime. The one thing I honestly find disturbing about Harper is the new ads he's been taking out in 'ethnic' newspapers and magazines etc. trying to scare minorities into thinking that passing same-sex marriage legislation will somehow be racist and trample over the rights of these communities. It's like "today it's marriage, tomorrow they could take away your freedom". I know all's fair in politicking and what not but that's seriously dastardly and completely malicious towards minority queer youth who have enough issues to deal with as it is.

Where are these ads?

Paldias
Apr 24th, 2005, 02:52 AM
Aileen Carroll? I live in Toronto! But I was born in Barrie! Isn't she the MP for Barrie?

Yes she's the MP for Barrie. I thought you lived in Barrie, nevermind (your name confused me). Who is your MP though? And will you be voting for him/her? If not, who then?

(This is a question for everyone it's interesting to see how the votes divde accross Canada)

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:02 AM
You already know my answer :D

Crazy Canuck
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:28 AM
Where are these ads?
he new ads he's been taking out in 'ethnic' newspapers and magazines etc.

Although I suppose that you're actually asking him to be more specific. I'd be surprised if you could find any of that stuff online.

alexusjonesfan
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:28 PM
here's what I was talking about:
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/images/advocacy/draw_line_lg.jpg

not to mention the 'chats' his party members have been having with ethnic media orgs painting same-sex marriage as a threat to the rights of those communities (someone was on TV just last night with that bs). On the whole though, it's not working, many community leaders are actually saying that they're annoyed that the cons are assuming what their whole community thinks and believes based on their own stereotypes.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:30 PM
Yes she's the MP for Barrie. I thought you lived in Barrie, nevermind (your name confused me). Who is your MP though? And will you be voting for him/her? If not, who then?

(This is a question for everyone it's interesting to see how the votes divde accross Canada)I was born in Barrie and I have lived in Barrie from time to time

¤CharlDa¤
Apr 24th, 2005, 03:32 PM
I actually received one of those Conservative things, not for same sex marriage, but for the scandal. And believe me, i never felt more joy than when i teared the sheet in mini-pieces and saw harper disappear!

Circe
Apr 24th, 2005, 05:26 PM
I actually received one of those Conservative things, not for same sex marriage, but for the scandal. And believe me, i never felt more joy than when i teared the sheet in mini-pieces and saw harper disappear!
i understand your joy ;) was in BC on friday, some relatives are actually planning to vote for the cons this time around.

~CANUCK~
Apr 24th, 2005, 07:36 PM
Yes she's the MP for Barrie. I thought you lived in Barrie, nevermind (your name confused me). Who is your MP though? And will you be voting for him/her? If not, who then?

(This is a question for everyone it's interesting to see how the votes divde accross Canada)
Paul martin is in my riding, so i vote for him :lol:

alexusjonesfan
Apr 24th, 2005, 11:58 PM
Bill Graham is in my riding...he no can lose :p

Paldias
Apr 27th, 2005, 12:56 AM
Bump ;)

alexusjonesfan
Apr 27th, 2005, 04:09 PM
Layton and PM kiss and make up while Harper throws a hissy fit.

Harper, stop harping on that bullshit about throwing taxpayer's money around, it'll actually go back to the taxpayer this time, instead of adding to a corporate tax cut, yes yes I know, I'm just a crazy unemployed Ontarian who wants more gov. support :p

more likely, these 'agreements' (read: crappy political manoeuvers) will prove futile and never see the light of day, the gov. will fall, we'll have an election anyway and be more apathetic than ever.

Barrie_Dude
Apr 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM
Yeah, Harper is throwing a hissy and Martin is a lying bastard!

alexusjonesfan
Apr 27th, 2005, 05:21 PM
Harper are Layton are in my neck of the woods this week...maybe I can get some meringue on short order :hearts:

Barrie_Dude
Apr 27th, 2005, 05:28 PM
Harper, Layton and Martin were in my neck of the woods over the weekend and I couldn't find a rotten tomato anywhere! :sad:

Hulet
Apr 27th, 2005, 09:02 PM
What's the problem with Harper? What's so evil about allocating some money to lower student tuition and loans? You know, that also helps the economy, don't know how, but I am sure it does (Well, atleast it helps me out). :) Anyways, the more the chaos at ottawa evolves, the more Harper appears incapable of making good use of this opportunity.

cellophane
Apr 29th, 2005, 03:06 PM
Liberals are back in the polls:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050429.wxelection29front/BNStory/National/

Barrie_Dude
Apr 29th, 2005, 04:05 PM
What's the problem with Harper? What's so evil about allocating some money to lower student tuition and loans? You know, that also helps the economy, don't know how, but I am sure it does (Well, atleast it helps me out). :) Anyways, the more the chaos at ottawa evolves, the more Harper appears incapable of making good use of this opportunity.My experience with the Evil Mike Harris makes me think he is evil too

Barrie_Dude
May 1st, 2005, 12:49 AM
I think elections will be in June

Conchi Party
May 1st, 2005, 06:13 AM
As a student in post-secondary, it pisses me off that harper calls the deal, a deal with devil. We shouldn't be giving a 5 billion dollar tax cut to corporations. Trickle down is a bunk theory in a globalized economy.

That being Paul Martin is an ass for now being forced by a party with 20 seats into doing the right thing on the environment, tuition, and social housing by the NDP, who are looking better and better.

If you are remotely progressive, I hope you won't vote for Martin this time. If your a conservative go ahead and vote conservative. I personally will vote NDP, and I'm going to even help out in some way....I have no idea how but I'm so pissed off....

Barrie_Dude
May 1st, 2005, 07:13 PM
I have to go NDP on this one

alexusjonesfan
May 1st, 2005, 07:41 PM
lol, anyone watch cbc sunday with the two spokepeople from the NDP and Tories? It was hilarious. The Tories are a broken record at this point: 'they're corrupt, they're corrupt! who cares what a judge has to say, they're corrupt!' and the NDP guy mentioned how they were actually just making the liberals stick to their promises. It was funny when he mentioned that there was no lib spokesperson at the show because the NDP's become the official spokesperson for lefty parties.

alexusjonesfan
May 1st, 2005, 07:46 PM
As a student in post-secondary, it pisses me off that harper calls the deal, a deal with devil. We shouldn't be giving a 5 billion dollar tax cut to corporations. Trickle down is a bunk theory in a globalized economy.

That being Paul Martin is an ass for now being forced by a party with 20 seats into doing the right thing on the environment, tuition, and social housing by the NDP, who are looking better and better.

If you are remotely progressive, I hope you won't vote for Martin this time. If your a conservative go ahead and vote conservative. I personally will vote NDP, and I'm going to even help out in some way....I have no idea how but I'm so pissed off....

I dunno, the NDP might end up picking a whole bunch of GTA seats this time around. People know that the Tories have no chance in hell of getting a majority govt (especially now, which makes them look even sillier trying to push for an election) and so won't not be scared into voting liberal this time. If they pick up extra seats, they'll probably be lib seats so that could mean another early election :o

Barrie_Dude
May 1st, 2005, 08:05 PM
Yeah and the Conservatives are still trying to distance themselves from the Mike Harris years. The libs here are also dealing with Dalton "Lying Bastard" McGuinty as well. Plus, Jack Layton is well known in the GTA having been on the city council for years and his wife is still there!

murphy_wmm
May 2nd, 2005, 08:30 AM
Ever since becoming a voter myself, I don't see anything changing no matter who is elected. :-P

alexusjonesfan
May 2nd, 2005, 04:37 PM
yay for voter apathy :banana:

actually there are some differences between the parties this time around...one side effect of the PC's dissolving is that no longer is everyone trying to crowd the centre.

alexusjonesfan
May 13th, 2005, 06:15 PM
:yawn: :smash:

nothing's getting done because none of she sides can stop braying like idiots. To top it all off each side is just waiting for the ill members of the opposite party to die and get out of the way:retard:

I was listening to a show on CBC radio 1 yesterday and they had RH Thompson and some playright talk about the election in Shakespearean terms...Thompson thought we were in act V (thank god) but wasn't so sure if anybody was going to pay the ticket to watch this disaster.

cellophane
May 17th, 2005, 07:46 PM
Belinda joins the liberals. :eek: :eek: :eek:

alexusjonesfan
May 17th, 2005, 08:06 PM
:eek:

~CANUCK~
May 17th, 2005, 09:04 PM
Belinda joins the liberals. :eek: :eek: :eek:
Are you kidding?

~CANUCK~
May 17th, 2005, 09:07 PM
Oh my, you were not only not kidding, but paul made her a minister :lol:
best news ive heard in a long time :D

CanadianBoy21
May 17th, 2005, 09:53 PM
lol, :lol:
This is great, hopefully the conservatives will get flushed down the drain now.

Paldias
May 17th, 2005, 11:34 PM
:eek:

Stronach: The Liberal Saviour? :o
Never thought I'd live to hear that one :tape:

alexusjonesfan
May 18th, 2005, 02:53 AM
bwahahahahaha the National Post is up in arms :lol: One guy on cbc compared it to Judas giving up Christ :eek: :lol:
It's cool how her bf MacKay was responsible for this mess being started by going back on his word and Stronach might finish it all by going back on hers ;)

cellophane
May 19th, 2005, 01:03 AM
:haha:


Belittling Belinda

http://www.thetyee.ca/Views/2005/05/18/belindastronach.jpg
How could she?!
We’re told she’s a ‘blonde bombshell heartbreaking attractive dipstick whore.’ Nothing gender specific, of course.

By Shannon Rupp (http://www.thetyee.ca/Bios/Shannon_Rupp)
Published: May 18, 2005
http://www.thetyee.ca/images/emailButton.png (http://www.thetyee.ca/scripts/emailfriend.php?pageaddress=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thety ee.ca%2FViews%2F2005%2F05%2F18%2FBelittlingBelinda&pagetitle=Belittling+Belinda) http://www.thetyee.ca/images/printButton.png (http://www.thetyee.ca/Views/2005/05/18/BelittlingBelinda/print.html)

TheTyee.ca

The joke about Hollywood is that it’s high school with money, and the same could be said about politics.

Take Belinda Stronach’s leap to the Liberals. It’s being discussed in terms usually reserved for gossip about the popular high school girl who ditches her not-quite-as-appealing boyfriend and his loser pals.

A headline search on the day she dumped the Conservatives yielded this gem from the Toronto Star: "Stronach leaves boyfriend as well as Tories."

Yeah, that’s the news: she ditched her erstwhile boyfriend, Peter MacKay. The story came from Canadian Press, the wire service noted for its accurate reporting and deadly dull copy. True-to-form, they got the facts right and missed the truth. Subsequent news stories noted that she and the Conservative deputy leader were "on a break," which is code-speak among women for "I’m ditching you but I want you to go quietly and not make a scene." I’m guessing Stronach had figured out weeks ago what the rest of us already knew: she wasn’t just in the wrong clique, she was slumming.

Wives and hussies

Some media seem to think this story is just the lure for capturing the People-reading riff-raff normally preoccupied with the Brad-and-Jen break-up. The Star’s follow-up story was headlined: Break with party breaks a heart? Parliament Hill romance on rocks/Peter MacKay goes into hiding. Over at the National Post, Stronach is dubbed "Blonde Bombshell." Now, I’m betting on "Blonde Ambition" showing up somewhere -- has anyone spotted it yet? If so, please send the clip: I have a pricey lunch riding on it.

As astounding as the tone of the news coverage has been, it’s got nothing on the adolescent woman-hating quotes coming from Harper and the boys -- and you’ll note it was all boys belittling Belinda.

A pissed off Harper told a news conference: "I told my wife only a few days ago that I thought it had become obvious to Belinda that her leadership ambitions would not be reached in this party regardless of whether or not we won the next election."

Translation: Harper’s (nameless) wife is a good little helpmate standing behind her man and supporting his career not like that driven hussy Stronach.

"There’s no grand principle involved in this decision, just ambition," Harper said.

Imagine that: an ambitious politician -- who’d a thunk it? Is Harper saying he isn’t ambitious? Or is he saying it’s okay for men to be ambitious but not women?

I’m guessing it’s the latter because Stronach’s femininity is clearly on trial here.

The basic points

The commentary hit some classic woman-hating points.

1. Belinda is not deferential. She’s being taken to task for having the audacity to make a career decision without consulting her boyfriend. Not her husband, you’ll note, or even her life-partner. No, she’s being pilloried for not consulting the guy she used to date. This after she had the nerve to run for leader.

2. Belinda is not standing by her man. (See number 1.) Although it’s curious that the Conservatives would bring up the issue of loyalty given that they seem to have misunderstood their role as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. I would think that loyalty automatically dictates that they not get into bed with Gilles Duceppe’s Bloc Quebecois. That way lies social diseases, like separation. And I think it’s fair to say that it’s wrong to pimp out Canada just so Harper can have an early shot at power.

3. Belinda is a slut. "I said that she whored herself out for power, that's what she did," said Tony Abbott, a Christian fundamentalist minister and Alberta MP. Saskatchewan Tory Maurice Vellacott told the Regina Leader-Post that "Some people prostitute themselves for different costs or different prices."

"Whoring oneself out for power" -- that’s practically the definition of a politician. And it appears to be a fair description of Harper’s Conservatives, given their canoodling with the Bloc. I’m not quite sure why the Tory boys feel a need to sling this mud, except for the opportunity to label a woman promiscuous. Maybe it’s that fundamentalist Christian influence? I’ll bet someone somewhere in Toryland used the term Jezebel too.

4. She’s a dimwitted slut.

“I think she sort of defined herself as something of a dipstick,” said Ontario MP Bob Runciman. “An attractive one, but still a dipstick.”

"I've never really noticed complexity to be Belinda's strong point," Harper said. Really Stephen? She out-maneuvered you: what does that suggest about your grasp of complex issues?

5. She’s a heartless, manipulative slut. "My heart's a little banged up but that will heal," MacKay confessed to CBC. "I had no idea. I knew she was unhappy."

You were on a break? You knew she was unhappy? But still, you had no idea? Uh-huh. And these clowns have the audacity to claim Belinda’s not too bright?

Her last name is Stronach

And while we’re on the subject, why does everyone and his dog -- from reporters to voters -- feel entitled to call Stronach "Belinda?" Harper is Harper, Martin is Martin, and Duceppe is That Separatist Bastard -- but female politicians are often referred to by their first names. Generally, that’s how one addresses children, servants, and other inferiors while figures of authority are entitled to be called by their surnames -- or would that be sir-names?

It’s obvious that Stronach saw that rare, perfect opportunity in which her career ambitions matched her political obligations and she seized it -- arguably the sign of a good politician. She could serve her constituents by supporting a budget that’s in their best interests, serve her country by blocking the Bloc’s opportunity to separate, serve good Canadian liberal democratic values by defending the rights of women and minorities, and serve herself a cabinet position -- albeit in a government on the verge of going down.

To an outsider her move looks both savvy and responsible -- which, frankly, is a rare sight among Stephen’s Conservatives.

There’s no getting around the sexism in Belindagate which, ironically, reinforces exactly what Stronach says about the Conservative party. They’re not inclusive. They’re indifferent to women’s issues, which explains their failure with women voters. They don’t understand the complexities of Canada -- or complexities of any sort, judging by their comments.

Too young to govern

To this I would add that their reaction to Stronach’s defection reveals again that Stephen’s Conservatives are unfit to govern: they’re incompetent as politicians, and just plain, ordinary, garden-variety stupid as people.

Exposed as power-hungry hypocrites, all the Conservatives can do is raise the spectre of sexist stereotypes as their defence?

Oh yeah, that’s just what we need: a bunch of guys with the mindset of socially and intellectually retarded teenagers running the country.

Politics may be just another case of high school with money, but if Stephen’s Conservatives want to get their hands on our dough we should require that they at least pretend to be intelligent adults. That would start with putting a ban on the sexist cracks.

cellophane
May 19th, 2005, 01:09 AM
All those Belinda articles. :lol:

Barrie_Dude
May 19th, 2005, 01:16 AM
lol, :lol:
This is great, hopefully the conservatives will get flushed down the drain now.Lets see, first the alliance with the evil bloc, now Belindas defection! There is not a chance for them in Ontario now!

Barrie_Dude
May 19th, 2005, 01:18 AM
Actually, it is great that Belinda did this!

alexusjonesfan
May 19th, 2005, 01:49 AM
The vitriol being spewed against her by the national post/cfrb and other right wing mouthpieces was hilarious. It's lovely how the conservatives are the ones wagging the moral finger. How dare she corrupt the pure art of politicking with her ambition :lol: I'd be bitter too after seeing how in one fell swoop she leap frogged the entire opposition to become a ruling cabinet minister. I'd love to see how Macleans deals with this...a month or so ago, they had a huge multiple page special on her. About how she's glamorous, witty and charming and everone loves her and how she'll prove that Conservatives deserve seats in Ontario...how will they fit in all the Belinda bashing now? :lol:

as an aside, it's scary how much of a conservative bent Macleans has taken. Last time around, they had headlines like "going, going, gone" with a picture of the liberals and "the new prime minister?" with a picture of Harper and their last issue was an expose on Harper showing how he's a kind, affectionate man, who just wants the best for Canada but those morally bankrupt liberals keep trying to paint him as a nazi :lol:

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 02:52 AM
Actually, it is great that Belinda did this!

bottom line is, the people who voted her voted for the conservative party, not for the liberals.

In any case, she is only dad's little girl, she was succesful with Magna because Magna is one of the best organized companies in the world, my cat (if I had one) could have run Magna and made a profit.

Just wait until the spoiled daddy's little girl gets bored, it won't be long.

One thing I did learn from this, I was leaning towards the conservative but didn't like Stephen Harper, but I didn't mind Martin.

After all the pathetic moves that Martin has done to keep a grip in power, basically using 4.5 billion dollars of our tax money to buy the NDP then I am done with the liberals, for good.

I would never ever vote a party that has Paul Martin in its ranks, and btw, I used to think that Jack Layton was an honest man, I just didn't agree with his ideas but I thought he was honests, it turned out he is a whore like all the rest.

Again, I don't like Harper but the others are even worse.

And if I hear Martin say again that we have to go his way because that's what Canadians want I will vomit. That's the favourite liberal's phrase of the moment, when McGuinty broke his electoral promises in the first budget "that's what Ontarians want", when they broke them once again this year "that's what Ontarians want us to do"

what the fuck do they know what Canadians want? And if Martin thinks I will believe that he was the finance minster and didn't know about the sponsorhip scandal, then he really lives in La La Land.

Actually I think if there are elections I will drop my own paper with the legend "fuck off, all of you".

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 04:25 AM
... I used to think that Jack Layton was an honest man, I just didn't agree with his ideas but I thought he was honests, it turned out he is a whore like all the rest.

.

In all due respect, aren't you a trifle old to be so naive as to think of any politician as "honest"? :shrug:

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 04:28 AM
Again, I don't like Harper but the others are even worse.

I think I'll stick with the government that doesn't want to control my ovaries. That said, there are sociall conservative liberals too... which is why I probably won't vote for the one in my region.

I suppose if I was a male who wasn't offended by complete bigots I could stomache Harper. Sadly, I'm not. It disgusts me that this is the man that they think best represents the conservative party. I mean, surely this ain't all they got? :shrug:

~CANUCK~
May 19th, 2005, 04:37 AM
I think I'll stick with the government that doesn't want to control my ovaries. That said, there are sociall conservative liberals too... which is why I probably won't vote for the one in my region.

I suppose if I was a male who wasn't offended by complete bigots I could stomache Harper. Sadly, I'm not. It disgusts me that this is the man that they think best represents the conservative party. I mean, surely this ain't all they got? :shrug:

Belinda was the best thing they had, but they just lost her to the libs. :lol: Personally i think that party would be better off with peter mckay running them.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 05:09 AM
In all due respect, aren't you a trifle old to be so naive as to think of any politician as "honest"? :shrug:

take is this way, as honest as you can get.

maybe I had the idea he was more honest than the others because he didn't have a chance in hell to run this country.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 05:13 AM
take is this way, as honest as you can get.

maybe I had the idea he was more honest than the others because he didn't have a chance in hell to run this country.
Maybe the NDP can afford to be honest. Although judging by your take on recent events, apparently not ;)

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 05:16 AM
I think I'll stick with the government that doesn't want to control my ovaries. That said, there are sociall conservative liberals too... which is why I probably won't vote for the one in my region.

I suppose if I was a male who wasn't offended by complete bigots I could stomache Harper. Sadly, I'm not. It disgusts me that this is the man that they think best represents the conservative party. I mean, surely this ain't all they got? :shrug:

well, I don't have ovaries.

I don't like Stephen Harper, and I do think he is hurting the liberal party.

The conservatives were winning support, but he made the wrong moves, making an alliance with the bloc would not set well in Ontario, anybody but Harper could see that.

He just needed to wait, and make things difficult for Martin.

I used to think Martin would be a good PM because he was a good finance minister, but he clearly isn't up to the job, he doesn't have leadership skills like Chretien does. When he was just giving advise and someone else was making the decisions and showing the face, he was fine, but he can't be the boss.

I think that with the Gomery inquiry, the problem with Ontario's gap and Martin's own lack of direction, Harper could have won it if he was patient enough to wait, but he isn't.

Honestly, I don't see anybody in any party capable of doing the job. Maybe it will end up with Belinda as prime minister, that maybe wouldn't be so bad because daddy Frank would really making the decisions, and he hasn't done bad at all at Magna, but maybe he is not interested.

Wait for Belinda to defeat to the NDP at any time, or maybe to the bloc.

The National Post (a liberal newspaper) today posted Belinda's opinions in several matters, some of day said just days apart, pretty amazing. Martin may end up regretting welcoming her to the liberal party.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 05:17 AM
Maybe the NDP can afford to be honest. Although judging by your take on recent events, apparently not ;)

oh yes, you can afford to be honest when there isn't anything at stake.

but, which movie was that? "show me the money", it's amazing how it's always down to that

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 05:31 AM
and you know one thing that really amazes me?

how stupid Harper and co can be.

there is one thing worse than being dishonest, and it's being stupid.

Point is, one stupid conservative attacked Belinda personally, that gave the liberals ammunition because they accused him of sexist and shifted the attention to a trivial issue. Not that it's trivial to respect women, but it is trivial to focus on that when there is so much at stake.

If Harper and co had one brain cell, they could have exploited this in their own benefit, with some ability this could have been the last nail in Martin's coffin, but they would have had to wait until he sofocates, instead Harper took the nails off to try to kill him with his own hands.

well, with that stupid analogy what I am trying to say is that Martin is making error after error but Harper, instead of letting him do just that, and help a little, prefers to try to rush things, then Martin can come with trash like "Canadian want this" (sure Canadian love to be robbed asshole).

And with the perfect opportunity to discredit Belinda, as opportunistic, daddy's girl, cheater, blah blah they resort to personal insults that allow the liberals to defend Belinda, it's like somebody steals your car, and you take the thief's shoes, then you are focusing in the shoes and not the car (another stupid analogy).

Funny things, Belinda is incredibly easy to attack, first, she has no experience, she is rich, daddy's girl, has never finished anything, is good looking (I don't think she is but the media seems to think so) which is never good, instead, they made her a victim.

Idiot's guide on how not to win an election, by Stephen Harper.

alexusjonesfan
May 19th, 2005, 06:12 AM
Funny things, Belinda is incredibly easy to attack, first, she has no experience, she is rich, daddy's girl, has never finished anything, is good looking (I don't think she is but the media seems to think so) which is never good, instead, they made her a victim.

Idiot's guide on how not to win an election, by Stephen Harper.

actually she's really hard to attack without getting stupid about it. The daddy's girl bullshit is really dumb. She's no different than someone like Ted Rogers or Galen Weston who all inherited companies from their well off families. Because she's a woman she's somehow less deserving:rolleyes:. Another thing is that she was one of the most wishy washy conservatives ever. There's red toryism and then there's her. She didn't really articulate strong positions on anything and had been hinting for a long time about the merits of some parts of the liberal budget. That itself got her a private dressing down by Harper which some think motivated this whole thing (apparently he said he'd hold her personally responsible if they lost the budget vote because she wasn't taking carrying the party line). It's hard for them to find much at all to show she's going back on her words, just some soundbites about pies and shareholders which is nothing compared to the scads of crap other high profile tories have generated on the subject of the problems with the liberal budget. They're pretty stupid, they should've left her alone because she's not an easy target unless you want to start calling her a bimbo and look like a kindergartener which they proceeded to do. Same thing happened in parliament last week, they could've just waited for the budget vote which was set for Thursday for a long time back but they had to throw hissy fits each and every day and act like children (especially Rahim Jaffer...god like he has some right to talk about honesty). But seriously, this isn't an inclusive, pragmatic party, it's a divisive negative thinking one, that's the only trick in their bag. The Tory campaigns of late have been like the Liberals' governance...it starts out with lots of potential but by the end you're wondering what the fuck they were thinking in the first place.

oh and please, the National Post is not a liberal newspaper, they're slightly less biased than the Sun :o

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 07:29 AM
actually she's really hard to attack without getting stupid about it.

I disagree, pretty blond rich girls are an easy target.

The daddy's girl bullshit is really dumb. She's no different than someone like Ted Rogers or Galen Weston who all inherited companies from their well off families.

you obviously have no clue what you are talking about, you can't seriously compare Belinda with Ted Rogers or Galen Weston, can you?

They inherited companies, and they made them grow, by their own merits.

Magna is under the complete control of Frank Stronach, it's always been, and it will always be while he is alive. When Belinda was elected CEO it raised eyebrows in Bay Street, not because she is a woman (there are many succesful business women, but because she had no experience whatsoever and knew nothing about manufacturing processes or car designs. She did well because she didn't have to do much, she was the face of the company. Her own father admitted she was going to do well only because she was surrounded by the right people. Magna was making record profits without Belinda, continue with Belinda, and now it's doing it without Belinda. Conclusion, Belinda is irrelevant.

Because she's a woman she's somehow less deserving:rolleyes:.


that has to be the stupid comment of the day, when did I say she is less deserving for being a woman? the fact is that she was put in charge of Magna by Daddy, she got bored and went into politics and the only reason she could do it is because she is a billionaire, and nobody wants to upset daddy, and now she jumps ships, contradicts herself, and she does it just before a crucial vote, I am sorry but I can't respect someone that acts like that, man, woman or elephant.

Another thing is that she was one of the most wishy washy conservatives ever. There's red toryism and then there's her. She didn't really articulate strong positions on anything and had been hinting for a long time about the merits of some parts of the liberal budget.


that's bullshit, during the campaign it was obvious that the media was told not to be too harsh on her, she would only answer the script, prepared by Mulroney, Harris and company.


That itself got her a private dressing down by Harper which some think motivated this whole thing (apparently he said he'd hold her personally responsible if they lost the budget vote because she wasn't taking carrying the party line).


that's bullshit, Harper is an idiot but the only reason why Belinda left is ambition, if there is an election now she could lose her ride, she only won by 700 votes, now she has a cabinet position. If she was that worried about the alliance between the tories and the bloc, why didn't she speak before things got too far? she was happy criticizing Martin, the budget and everything she was told to criticize.

It's hard for them to find much at all to show she's going back on her words, just some soundbites about pies and shareholders which is nothing compared to the scads of crap other high profile tories have generated on the subject of the problems with the liberal budget.


that's irrelevant, the fact that others are bad means she can be bad and it's ok?

She went from attacking Martin to praise him, in a week. Among other things.

They're pretty stupid, they should've left her alone because she's not an easy target unless you want to start calling her a bimbo and look like a kindergartener which they proceeded to do.


she is an easy target, I remember during her campaign how she messed up concepts related to the military (I can't remember exactly what she said) and other matters. You couldn't get her to give you some concrete answers, they were all in a limbo, generics.

Same thing happened in parliament last week, they could've just waited for the budget vote which was set for Thursday for a long time back but they had to throw hissy fits each and every day and act like children (especially Rahim Jaffer...god like he has some right to talk about honesty).


there are two tories MP that are under cancer treatment, the more they delayed the vote, the more is the risk they can't attend. I do agree they should have waited, it does look the Gomery inquiry is damning for the liberals.

But seriously, this isn't an inclusive, pragmatic party, it's a divisive negative thinking one, that's the only trick in their bag. The Tory campaigns of late have been like the Liberals' governance...it starts out with lots of potential but by the end you're wondering what the fuck they were thinking in the first place.

we agree on that.


oh and please, the National Post is not a liberal newspaper, they're slightly less biased than the Sun :o

the National Post is owned by Canwest, which is in turn controlled by the Asper family, long time liberal supporters

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 07:33 AM
Because she's a woman she's somehow less deserving:rolleyes:.

sorry, but I have to get back at that, because it really irritates me.

That's the typical liberal strategy, if somebody attacks a liberal woman, they play the sexist card. Of course it's easy to say "oh, you hate her because she is a woman, you are a sexist pig" than actually answer the concerns :rolleyes:

true, she shouldn't be considered less deserving because she is a woman, but also, she shouldn't be treated with a different standard because she is a woman. The "don't attack her or you are sexist" doesn't work, it's like she can get away with anything because she is a woman

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 07:46 AM
I disagree, pretty blond rich girls are an easy target.

In all due respect... your post ended here to me, because it pretty much sums up your problem with Stronach... and a certain cast of women in general.

Thanks kindly for making your prejudices very clear from the outset ;)

Oh, and thanks for posting this:

if somebody attacks a liberal woman, they play the sexist card.

Right after posting the first line that I quoted.

Hilarious :lol:

Nooo, you're not remotely sexist :haha:

cellophane
May 19th, 2005, 03:39 PM
Now Parrish might have appendicitis? "She is going to vote, even if she has to crawl" :lol:

cellophane
May 19th, 2005, 04:27 PM
...But Parrish dismissed fears that she might miss the showdown, thus endangering the survival of Prime Minister Paul Martin's government. She said Liberal MP Bernard Patry, a physician by profession, had visited her Thursday morning and diagnosed the condition as either an ovarian cyst or a kidney stone.

"Come hell or high water, there's no frigging way I'm going to let one ovary bring the government down," she said....


:haha:

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 04:33 PM
In all due respect... your post ended here to me, because it pretty much sums up your problem with Stronach... and a certain cast of women in general.

Thanks kindly for making your prejudices very clear from the outset ;)


sorry but where did I say that's what I think? I said she is attackable, I didn't say I agree or that is fair, it's reality.

And the way she looks has nothing to do with my distatste for her, using her father's power to get her way has a lot to do with that.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 04:36 PM
Right after posting the first line that I quoted.

Hilarious :lol:

Nooo, you're not remotely sexist :haha:

sorry, I thought you were smart enough to know the difference between describing a reality and having an opinion. It's obvious I don't like Stronach but it's also clear it has nothing to do with her hair colour.

Which doesn't mean that others won't use it against her, and that's what I mean.

This is not the first time that you confuse me describing what's happening with my opinions, you are the first one that complains about taking phrases out of context and that's exactly what you are doing here.

And no, I am not remotely sexist, believe it or not, do you think I care?

(this post has made me lost the respect I had for you at a high rate), and I don't know if you are blond or not.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 04:38 PM
finally, it's really hillarious that you said that.


I like Sharapova, that last time I checked is blonde, but I do understand that she is attacked for that reason.

Does it mean for example that if you recognize that gays have a tough life in today's society you are homophobic?

you should really get a clue.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 05:11 PM
Fingon chill... Your post ( 239 (http://www.wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=5469254&postcount=239) ) was sort of aggressive and insulting ("look you have no clue!", "stupid comment of the day!", "bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!"), surely you can express your opinion without insulting the person you're interacting with...

And yeah it's a long thread, sometimes people missinterpret what other people say, that happens. *Let's take a deep breath*.

you are right, but the post I answered to was aggressive as well, that sets the tone.

And one think is misinterpret and another accusing you of something you know you are not, especially when the same person makes the same mistake twice, gets a little tiring you know. Why do you think I bothered to explain my analogies were analogies? because people don't read, or don't understand what they read.

Maybe it's me that don't express myself well.

alexusjonesfan
May 19th, 2005, 05:22 PM
[I disagree, pretty blond rich girls are an easy target.

yes if you want to go after their prettyness which is petty


you obviously have no clue what you are talking about, you can't seriously compare Belinda with Ted Rogers or Galen Weston, can you?

They inherited companies, and they made them grow, by their own merits.

Magna is under the complete control of Frank Stronach, it's always been, and it will always be while he is alive. When Belinda was elected CEO it raised eyebrows in Bay Street, not because she is a woman (there are many succesful business women, but because she had no experience whatsoever and knew nothing about manufacturing processes or car designs. She did well because she didn't have to do much, she was the face of the company. Her own father admitted she was going to do well only because she was surrounded by the right people. Magna was making record profits without Belinda, continue with Belinda, and now it's doing it without Belinda. Conclusion, Belinda is irrelevant.


Yes, about as irrelevant as Galen Weston or Leonard Asper who's families and company infrastructure do most of the work. They aren't visionaries either, Lenny's even driving Canwest down with his failures in convergence.

that has to be the stupid comment of the day, when did I say she is less deserving for being a woman? the fact is that she was put in charge of Magna by Daddy, she got bored and went into politics and the only reason she could do it is because she is a billionaire, and nobody wants to upset daddy, and now she jumps ships, contradicts herself, and she does it just before a crucial vote, I am sorry but I can't respect someone that acts like that, man, woman or elephant.

She paid her dues as much as any billionaire child does. My woman comment had to with the scrunity she has to undergo vs. some of her peers.


that's bullshit, during the campaign it was obvious that the media was told not to be too harsh on her, she would only answer the script, prepared by Mulroney, Harris and company.


It's true. Look at even her Conservative leadership campaign quotes. They're so sterile and scripted that it's impossible to find any real strong opinions or assertions to now prove that she's going back on her ideas. Like I said, wishy-washy to the max.



that's bullshit, Harper is an idiot but the only reason why Belinda left is ambition, if there is an election now she could lose her ride, she only won by 700 votes, now she has a cabinet position. If she was that worried about the alliance between the tories and the bloc, why didn't she speak before things got too far? she was happy criticizing Martin, the budget and everything she was told to criticize.


No, it's true. The hardliners (i.e. the real powerbrokers) didn't like her stances on marriage and abortion. There'd been murmurs floating around the press for ages. Harper's personal attack session with her last Thursday was in yesterday's Star. It's what prompted the whole shebang. She knew she had no future in the party so she looked elsewhere. I'll find the quotes when I have time.


that's irrelevant, the fact that others are bad means she can be bad and it's ok?


don't know what you mean here. I meant she never had any strong agendas unlike her cohorts, which to now go back on.


She went from attacking Martin to praise him, in a week. Among other things.


yes that's what happens when you switch parties.


she is an easy target, I remember during her campaign how she messed up concepts related to the military (I can't remember exactly what she said) and other matters. You couldn't get her to give you some concrete answers, they were all in a limbo, generics.

exactly.


there are two tories MP that are under cancer treatment, the more they delayed the vote, the more is the risk they can't attend. I do agree they should have waited, it does look the Gomery inquiry is damning for the liberals.


No, I meant they knew last week already that a budget vote was going to be held this Thursday, still they adjourned parliament needlessly ad acted silly throughout the proceedings. Waiting a week quietly would've greatly helped their cause.


the National Post is owned by Canwest, which is in turn controlled by the Asper family, long time liberal supporters

The Asper connection is weird. Yeah, Izzy Asper was a big liberal supporter and personal friend of Jean Chretien but the paper has always been right wing (it was Conrad Black's baby remember) and has gotten moreso after the passing of Izzy Asper in 03. It was the only one of the major dailies to endorse Harper last time around and most of their editorials are about as anti-liberal as you can get without sounding like a tabloid. Canwest in general has a huge conservative bias in reporting, I can tell even from the articles in my local Southam newspaper group which all come preapproved from Winnipeg.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 06:36 PM
lol... now I've "misinterpretted" because I read exactly what you said and took it at face value. Yes, I'm clearly the wrong one here.

btw, having respect for a female politician or not does not compare to your fandom of Sharapova.

I don't know or care if you have a problem with blondes in general. I know that you made two comments about how Stronach looks. Seeing as you said them in posts that were chalk full of YOUR opinions, there was absolutely nothing wrong with my assuming this was also your opinion - taking context into consideration! Nothing was removed.

I couldn't give a flying fuck if you've lost respect for me :lol:

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 06:53 PM
[
yes if you want to go after their prettyness which is petty


I never said she was attackable by me, I said she is attackable, period, petty or not petty is reality. I don't like her but for different reasons and I would use other weapons against her.

Yes, about as irrelevant as Galen Weston or Leonard Asper who's families and company infrastructure do most of the work. They aren't visionaries either, Lenny's even driving Canwest down with his failures in convergence.


No, they are not visionaires, but there is a big difference, as I said, Galen Weston was prepared to run the company for a long time, Belinda was not, she tried different things and it was her father who put her there.

The fact is, when Belinda left Magna, the company continued doing just as well. Maybe Galen Weston, or Leonard Asper are not also great leaders of this times, not everyone is Jack Welch or John Chambers.

She paid her dues as much as any billionaire child does. My woman comment had to with the scrunity she has to undergo vs. some of her peers.

oh give me a break, I wish I had to pay those dues as well. Being a woman in that environment has good and bad things, yes, she is subject to a greater scrutiny, which in politics is good, not bad, what you need is exposure.
And she gets away with many things just because she is a woman, it's like you can't attack her without being called a sexist. She even gets support just because she is a woman. Janet Ecker recently said the only reason she supported her is because she is a woman. Do you think she would get as much attention is she wasn't? if Ted Rogers wanted to be a candidate he wouldn't get that kind of attention.


It's true. Look at even her Conservative leadership campaign quotes. They're so sterile and scripted that it's impossible to find any real strong opinions or assertions to now prove that she's going back on her ideas. Like I said, wishy-washy to the max.


As I said Stephen Harper is an idiot, and he is probably the smarter of the group which is worrying.

I don't think Belinda is stupid, not at all, but I think she doesn't really have a plan, or understands the problems of governing a nation and she just wants a new toy, that's of course only my opinion.


No, it's true. The hardliners (i.e. the real powerbrokers) didn't like her stances on marriage and abortion. There'd been murmurs floating around the press for ages. Harper's personal attack session with her last Thursday was in yesterday's Star. It's what prompted the whole shebang. She knew she had no future in the party so she looked elsewhere. I'll find the quotes when I have time.

of course she didn't have a future, but not because of abortion or same sex marriage. The same way that nobody would have a real chance at the liberal party while Martin is still around (unless he suffers and big defeat).


don't know what you mean here. I meant she never had any strong agendas unlike her cohorts, which to now go back on.


what I said is that pointing to other's errors doesn't make her own acts good, we should stop electing the least evil and start electing the best.


yes that's what happens when you switch parties.
[/quote

Well, the problem is that she switched ideology, if she ever had one.

Thing is, before I wouldn't have voted her (not that it matters since I don't live in Aurora) but I would give her a chance in the future, when she was more experienced, now, that I see she doesn't have any ideology except her own personal ambitions I will never vote for her, not in a million years.

This whole chain of success has actually put a few off my list for good, including Martin and Layton.

[quote]

No, I meant they knew last week already that a budget vote was going to be held this Thursday, still they adjourned parliament needlessly ad acted silly throughout the proceedings. Waiting a week quietly would've greatly helped their cause.


I think his whole strategy is flawed, Martin was vulnerable and every move by Harper has only strenghten him.


The Asper connection is weird. Yeah, Izzy Asper was a big liberal supporter and personal friend of Jean Chretien but the paper has always been right wing (it was Conrad Black's baby remember) and has gotten moreso after the passing of Izzy Asper in 03. It was the only one of the major dailies to endorse Harper last time around and most of their editorials are about as anti-liberal as you can get without sounding like a tabloid. Canwest in general has a huge conservative bias in reporting, I can tell even from the articles in my local Southam newspaper group which all come preapproved from Winnipeg.

you might be right on that, I read more the Globe and Mail but I was quite surprised on how bitter they were towards the liberals, but I thought it was more because the Aspers were supporter of Chretien, not Martin.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 06:56 PM
lol... now I've "misinterpretted" because I read exactly what you said and took it at face value. Yes, I'm clearly the wrong one here.

btw, having respect for a female politician or not does not compare to your fandom of Sharapova.

I don't know or care if you have a problem with blondes in general. I know that you made two comments about how Stronach looks. Seeing as you said them in posts that were chalk full of YOUR opinions, there was absolutely nothing wrong with my assuming this was also your opinion - taking context into consideration! Nothing was removed.

I couldn't give a flying fuck if you've lost respect for me :lol:

as I said, this is the second time, you read a description of something and assume that's my opinion.

I think it's dangerous to walk in certain neighbourhoods, doesn't mean that I will be shooting people there.

end of story here, I don't enjoy talking to children, grow up and come back.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 06:59 PM
btw, having respect for a female politician or not does not compare to your fandom of Sharapova.


why not? there are both blonde, they are both succesful, they are both hated because of their looks.

I really don't consider a politician above a tennis player, actually it's probably the opposite, so the comparisson is pretty valid.

oh I know you don't like Maria, of course you woldn't.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 07:51 PM
why not? there are both blonde, they are both succesful, they are both hated because of their looks.

Maria is marketted because of her looks, and you're quite fond of them if I'm not mistaken. Maria is also an athlete, not a politician. She doesn't make her money using her brains. That isn't to imply that she doesn't have any, merely that they haven't gotten her where she is now. Stronach is a politician. Surely you can rub together a couple of brain cells and see how they are totally different? :shrug: Respecting a female athlete who is marketted as a sex symbol does not demonstrate that in general, you can respect successful women. Not to suggest that you can't - merely to spell out as clearly as possible why these two are so different that drawing a comparison was hilarious. Hilarious!

I really don't consider a politician above a tennis player, actually it's probably the opposite, so the comparisson is pretty valid.

The comparison was so totally invalid that I'm STILL laughing at you.

oh I know you don't like Maria, of course you woldn't.

Of course not! I can't STAND attractive women. I only root for uggers! Like Golovin and Kirilenko (the latter of whom I only started rooting for because I thought she was pretty!), and formerly Kournikova, Hingis, and Krasnoroutskaya.

Way to make yourself look even stupider :lol:

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 07:52 PM
as I said, this is the second time, you read a description of something and assume that's my opinion.

I think it's dangerous to walk in certain neighbourhoods, doesn't mean that I will be shooting people there.

end of story here, I don't enjoy talking to children, grow up and come back.
How hilarious that you followed this up with another response for me, that was even more childish and inane :lol:

Barrie_Dude
May 19th, 2005, 07:53 PM
:scratch: I can't figure out what peoples problem is with Belinda Stronach! Frankly, I think that she is a breath of fresh air. She is certainly smart and capable. She was the best thing going as far as the conservatives were concerned and she was the only reason I took them seriously. Now that she is with the Liberals I can completly dismiss the conservatives as just plain evil. Stephen Harper has zero leadership ability and his deal with the bloc shows that he has no concept of how to win an election. If he feels that he can make a deal with them and pick nup seats in Ontario he is way, way wrong. He will likely lose seats here because of that fact alone. Then, losing Belinda will cost him dearly as well. Plus, the reations as far as calling her a whore and a bimbo, well, that just goes to show me that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are not ready to lead. I am no big fan of the Liberals either, but this Belinda thing as well as the mis-steps by the Conservatives will likely save their butts in the long run.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 07:56 PM
I can't figure out what peoples problem is with Belinda Stronach!

You mean aside from the fact that she's a woman? Who is being opportunistic and dared to make an important decision in her life without first consulting her "man" to see what he thought about the matter?

She DID just switch parties at a pretty vital time. I can see why some people might get their panties into a twist over that.

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 07:58 PM
Maria is marketted because of her looks, and you're quite fond of them if I'm not mistaken. Maria is also an athlete, not a politician. She doesn't make her money using her brains. That isn't to imply that she doesn't have any, merely that they haven't gotten her where she is now. Stronach is a politician. Surely you can rub together a couple of brain cells and see how they are totally different? :shrug: Respecting a female athlete who is marketted as a sex symbol does not demonstrate that in general, you can respect successful women. Not to suggest that you can't - merely to spell out as clearly as possible why these two are so different that drawing a comparison was hilarious. Hilarious!


Stronach doesn't need to use her brains or looks to make money, she already has money, more than you or me could even dream of, or was it her decision to be Frank Stronach's daughter? At least Maria got there by her own merit, physical or not, while Belinda was just born like that.

I have no intentions on demonstrating anything, Sharapova was the first blonde that came to my mind, there are many others, example Carly Fiorina, ex HP's CEO, she messed up big time but she is a really intelligent woman and very capable, she was able to pull out a huge deal and be the head of one of the biggest companies in the world, all by herself. She did fail but probaly anyone would have failed in that position. and oh, I forgot, she is blonde and quite atractive for her age.

The comparison was so totally invalid that I'm STILL laughing at you.


of course, you wouldn't get you, are you blonde? (jk).


Of course not! I can't STAND attractive women. I only root for uggers! Like Golovin and Kirilenko (the latter of whom I only started rooting for because I thought she was pretty!), and formerly Kournikova, Hingis, and Krasnoroutskaya.

Way to make yourself look even stupider :lol:

when did I say you hate pretty women? please quote me and I'll apologize.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 08:01 PM
when did I say you hate pretty women? please quote me and I'll apologize.

You said that people don't like Maria because of how she looks (which is largly rubbish, imo)

You then said that I don't like Maria, naturally.

The implication was obvious.

If you meant something besides the obvoius, please correct me.

Crazy Canuck
May 19th, 2005, 08:03 PM
of course, you wouldn't get you, are you blonde? (jk).

This is the second time you "jokingly" wondered what my hair colour was. It's irrelevant, so I don't need to tell you :)

Anyways, I think the comparison was laughable. Being born into money doesn't guarentee success. Regardless, we're not going to see eye to eye on the comparison so I'm happy to let it drop now, so that other people can talk about other things ;)

Fingon
May 19th, 2005, 08:08 PM
:scratch: I can't figure out what peoples problem is with Belinda Stronach!


her lack of ideology, she just thinks what's convenient for her at the moment, don't tell me other politicians are the same because I know that, that doesn't make her better.

Frankly, I think that she is a breath of fresh air. She is certainly smart and capable. She was the best thing going as far as the conservatives were concerned and she was the only reason I took them seriously.


well, she was high-profile, which doesn't mean she was brilliant, in a party where all the candidates are rather dull she would shine, especially with her story and daddy's money.
I can't for my life respect someone that switches parties like that, it revelas a complete lack of ideology and if they don't have one, it doesn't matter how charming, intelligent or hard-working they are, what am I supporting? I support ideas, not people. Belinda doesn't have any, that's actually Martin's problem as well, at least Harper does have an ideology, you might support it or not but you know what you are getting. How many people voted Belinda because she was a conservative (an ideology) and found out she is now a liberal and changed all her ideas or most of them?

What she did is betrayal, not of her fellow party members but of the people who voted for her, if she wanted to switch she should have resign her position in Parliament and then switch, I would have respected that, and I know other have done the same, again, many people shoot others, it doesn't mean it's ok to do it.

Now that she is with the Liberals I can completly dismiss the conservatives as just plain evil. Stephen Harper has zero leadership ability and his deal with the bloc shows that he has no concept of how to win an election.

agreed, 100%

If he feels that he can make a deal with them and pick nup seats in Ontario he is way, way wrong. He will likely lose seats here because of that fact alone.

right again.
Then, losing Belinda will cost him dearly as well. Plus, the reations as far as calling her a whore and a bimbo, well, that just goes to show me that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are not ready to lead. I am no big fan of the Liberals either, but this Belinda thing as well as the mis-steps by the Conservatives will likely save their butts in the long run.[/QUOTE]

that takes me to my favourite topic, the liberals are not good, the conservatives are not good, the NDP isn't good, nevermind the bloc, that left what?

exactly, I used to live in another country and blame the politicians for everything, they were corrupted, liars, lacked an ideology, I used to think the developed world was different, it's not.

You know what the difference is? that in Canada, the US or Europe the politicians have less power, they can do less damage, the private sector is too strong for that to happen.

This countries are succesful despite their politicians, not thanks to them, which leads me to believe the best alternative is that that gives the government as little power as possible.

It's like when you give something to a little kid to play, they are going to break it so you won't give them too much or anything too valuable, it's called damage control.

Paldias
May 19th, 2005, 10:50 PM
:) Liberals survived....no election :D

Barrie_Dude
May 19th, 2005, 11:27 PM
Well, Fing, perhaps my expectations of leadership skills is low, but given what I have seen in Ottawa (and here in Toronto) I feel that Belindas leadership skills exceed what I have seen by a wide margin. But, give Mssrs. Martin and Harper, I expect somesone to come along that is far better b4 I can halfway expect to respect them. The current state of federal politics is, at best, dismal and I find Belinda to be the one bright spot.

canuckfan
May 20th, 2005, 12:36 AM
What a soap opera the last few days were! I even watched the vote live and I was on the edge of my seat!:rolleyes:

I have mixed feelings about Belinda Stronach. I do think that one night she got bored with her day job and sudenly thought: «Well, wouldn't it be fun if I was prime minister?». And that was it. All her moves are towards that. The proof is that the first thing she did when she became a politician is tu run for the leadership of the Conservative Party. It didn't work out well and it became clear that even with the sponsorship scandal, the liberals would still win an election. So she joins the liberals and becomes minister of human ressources, only 18 months into her political career. This has to be a record. The next thing you know is that she'll be running for the leadership of liberals. If her plan works out good, she'll be prime minister before 45 yeard old. And perhaps all of that because she's well know and massively rich, and yeah, good to look at too, wich is very rare in politic ;). Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against her and I'm sure she is a very intelligent person, but could Joe Bloe from Medicine Hat have done that? No way!

On the other hand, I do think that she's a breath of fresh air and most of all I do think that she really cares about Canada. If not, she wouldn't have left her job at Magna and she would not put her integrity at risk like she does...

And most of all, she's totally fascinating! I remember 18 months ago I never heard of her and then I saw her on the news and I immediatly went to see her website. I mean, she's quite young, she's beautiful, she's richer than 99.999% of the canadians, she's best buddy with Bill Clinton, she was once married to one of the best and most respected olympic athlete ever, she was C.E.O. of one of the biggest canadian companies (even if daddy put her there) and she has this chic about her. She's the best and most glamourous thing to come to Ottawa since Pierre-Elliot Trudeau for the medias. And she happened to be dating Peter Mackay when she defected, breaking his earth in the process. The journalists covering politic must be salivating right now. It's the West Wing meets The O.C.

Barrie_Dude
May 20th, 2005, 12:41 AM
Agreed

Ted of Teds Tennis
May 20th, 2005, 02:39 AM
This is the second time you "jokingly" wondered what my hair colour was. It's irrelevant, so I don't need to tell you :)
It's OK to admit that you're bald. :p

Crazy Canuck
May 20th, 2005, 02:50 AM
It's OK to admit that you're bald. :p
It was that obvious, eh?

Fingon
May 20th, 2005, 04:10 AM
You said that people don't like Maria because of how she looks (which is largly rubbish, imo)

You then said that I don't like Maria, naturally.

The implication was obvious.

If you meant something besides the obvoius, please correct me.

you imply too many things, if you actually read what I said instead of imagining it then you could make some sense.

Fingon
May 20th, 2005, 04:16 AM
Now I remember one of Belinda's answers during the leadership campaign, it was that answer what actually put me off her.

She was asked a very difficult question, if she would send Canadian troops to Iraq.

Her answer was really :eek: , she said she would ask the expersts, the military.

I was like wtf? the military had to decide in operational issues, how to deploy troops, when and how to attack, how to defend, logistic, etc. but the decision is a political decision.

She could have answered either way or even she could have said she didn't know, and I would have been ok with that, but her answered showed a total divorce from reality, she didn't know something as basic as that, that sending troops to Iraq was a political decision, that you couldn't leave to the military.

that answer showed me that everything was staged, she used the classic "I am not an expert but I will be advised by experts" as a way to avoid a direct answer, only that she showed she had no clue on how to run a country.

pretty much like Martin, you will never get a direct answer, maybe they are great for each other, they can be talking for hours without saying anything.

Fingon
May 20th, 2005, 04:21 AM
Well, Fing, perhaps my expectations of leadership skills is low, but given what I have seen in Ottawa (and here in Toronto) I feel that Belindas leadership skills exceed what I have seen by a wide margin. But, give Mssrs. Martin and Harper, I expect somesone to come along that is far better b4 I can halfway expect to respect them. The current state of federal politics is, at best, dismal and I find Belinda to be the one bright spot.

well, that's the problem

if you give 1 million dollars to politician A, he/she will steal the money.

if you give 1 million dollars to politician B, he/she will steal the money.

in an ideal world, you could hope that you have to elect a politician C that will not steal the money, but that's not going to happen, even if politician C wants to be honest, the system will suck him up.

Solution, don't give them the million dollars, they still will want to steal it, but they won't.

Listening to Martin, Harper and Belinda is making me an anarchist.

Fingon
May 20th, 2005, 04:24 AM
This is the second time you "jokingly" wondered what my hair colour was. It's irrelevant, so I don't need to tell you :)

Anyways, I think the comparison was laughable. Being born into money doesn't guarentee success. Regardless, we're not going to see eye to eye on the comparison so I'm happy to let it drop now, so that other people can talk about other things ;)

doesn't guarantee success, but makes is much more likely.

Anyway, this silly discussion would have never taken place if you have concentrated on the topic and not bringing silly accusations and focusing on stupid supposed sexists comments and not in the real matter.

You think you are too smart, but your inability to focus in what's important is a clear sign of the contrary, but if thinking that makes you happy...