GWiz

Not necessarily... You could welcome them to your side with their guns, like the Republicans in the US are accepting the gun totting more radical "tea partiers" into their fold... Then it becomes easier to enslave those that are left out... Which is in fact what all those "heros" of yours you mention, both on the left and on the right, actually did...

Supper TIME, catch you later (tomorrow maybe if I have TIME)... Have a look back in this thread, there's a real "scary" scenario that Harper may be unleashing on the Canadian public there... Start here > http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18464&view=findpost&p=648249

Nothing "softer" than air, eh...

pssst, in case you haven't heard, it's a CANADIAN thing going on... What's a "snooki" from "jersey shore"? Some sort of fish?

WOW! Both barrels at once, that's gotta hit and hurt something soft...

No worries, I'm SURE Harper will kick her in the shin or chin before the debate so she'll have a limp or can't speak clearly...

Pretty much what I said > http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18464&view=findpost&p=648249 This election is very far from a decided issue... What if the NDP get really squeezed and loose the "deciding factor" option and the Liberals or CONS and the BLOC gain enough seats for those 2 oppostion parties to have enough seats to "bring down" a CON or a Liberal minority (a really bad outcome that the "Harper Coalition Ploy" could easily generate)?

Hey you striped, yellow, pussy cat lover, still wasting your TIME trying to teach a democratic symphony to the tone deaf? Missed one > http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18464&view=findpost&p=648249

I nominate Tina Keeper to moderate the debates, she meets ALL the criteria mentioned... Besides the questions are all pre-submitted by Canadians from across Canada, but I do wish they'd have a little better format than in past debates...

One only has to listen to Harper to see that at least he already KNOWS that Ignatieff and the Liberals will have the support of the NDP and BLOC should EITHER the CONS or the Liberals win with a minority... Harper himself has taken any other outcome off the table with his statements that Ignatieff has the support of the NDP and BLOC regardless of outcome... More importantly, with a representation that reflects what some 60% (certainly more than 50%) of voters voted for, how in actuality is that so bad? I'm ready and waiting for Ignatieff's "right cross" to follow up his working well "left jab" come the debates to be then followed by a devestating "upper cut" to knock Harper out... What's more I'm actually starting to like Ignatieff more and more each TIME I hear him speak, as I did Wednesday night in Winnipeg, so I'm actually "upping" my support for the Liberals in meaningful "real TIME" effort...

And all that to get some of the LOWEST paying, and most hectic, jobs available anywhere in the civilized world...

My take? Who cares, no one will ever see it since it would only apply, maybe, once a "balanced budget" is achieved... Certainly not if a Harper led CPC take budgets for an astounding $30,000,000,000.00 ($30 BILLION) DEFICIT which ends up as a record $56,000,000,000.00 ($56 BILLION) a "mere" budget DEFICIT "error" of $26,000,000,000.00 ($26 BILLION)... If Harper were to get the chance to implement his proposed $30,000,000,000.00 ($30 BILLION) deficit budget this time I wonder how big an "error" we'd be subject to this time around?

Here you go >- Brian Mulroney had come to power by forging a coalitional of traditional Conservatives, disillusioned Liberals, Quebec Nationalists and right wing social conservatives. He managed to accommodate most of these views during his first mandate. By the time his second mandate was underway and he was looking to solidify his role in Canadian political legend by succeeding where he felt others had failed, by creating a consensus and national deal with Quebec over a renegotiated constitution, the coalition was starting to fragment. Many of the Quebec nationalist had joined the Conservatives in Ottawa in order to manipulate the Government to benefit not just Quebec but a Quebec separation agenda. In 1990 the Conservatives produced a report that addressed changes that should be made to the Meech Lake Accord. Lucien Bouchard who had been one of Mulroney's main Quebec Lieutenants objected to the changes and refused to support them. Bouchard was fired by Mulroney when his nationalism was fully recognised and Bouchard lost no time in leaving the Conservative Party to form the Bloc which would be completely committed to Quebec separation. He was quickly followed by Nic Leblanc, Louis Plamondon, Benoit Trembley, Gilbert Chartrand and Francois Gerin from the Conservatives and two Liberal members of Parliament. - - The existence of the Bloc has served as a constant reminder of the question of separatism in Quebec and has created a deadlock in Canadian politics by preventing either the Liberals or the regenerated Conservatives, from gaining a majority in the last 3 elections. This may serve as their most effective legacy in attempting to destabilize Canadian confederation. - http://www.canadahistory.com/sections/eras/moderncanada/bloc.htm Lest anyone forget what Stephan Harper's mentor (BM) and most staunch supporter did... Harper of course furthered that same "agenda" by making Quebec a seperate "nation" within Canada at the first opportunity... - As one who experienced western alienation in his bones, Harper sympathizes with the evident alienation of the Québécois. He has gone to extraordinary lengths to court Quebec despite all the warnings that it was a lost cause. He won't give up and starts every speech in French, even when abroad, to recognize French as the founding language of Canada. He recognized the Québécois as a nation within a united Canada and, while he would certainly not condone a separatist government violating the Constitution, he would also never act counter to Quebec's vital interests. - Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/afraid+Tory+majority/4540006/story.html#ixzz1IHzd9WST

CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS No need to thank me, you're welcome...

Yet?

No, the Canadian Parliament is the sole freely elected voice of Canadians in a Parliamentary Democracy The only other "check" to prevent a roque Government in Canada is the Governor General as the Queens representative... The Canadian Parliament is thus the "voice of the people" and held as "supreme" in the Canadian Parliamentary system... "Contempt of Parliament" is indeed Contempt of Canadians, which is why it's never happened before anywhere with a British based Parliamentary System... Inspite of many, many scandals, and the like in all those Parliaments no Political Party has ever before questioned the rights of Parliament like the Harper Regime did...

Lévesque, René You're welcome...

My answer to you is that you do not have much of an understanding of the whole process, of which the committee is only one part, of what it takes to be found in Contempt of Parliament (aka Contempt of Canadians)...

Well my friend it's very simple to not have "weasels" in Parliament, and if you consider Canada's Parliament a "snake-pit" you haven't any understanding of what a snake-pit is... The simple solution is don't elect snakes and weasels to Parliament... IMHO Parliament is but a reflection of Canada as a whole, that's why it is called a Democracy, every person in Parliament is elected by the Canadian public... If you prefer another system, feel free to live in one, there are many available to you... Speaking of "snakes and weasels", it's as I said, "to hold the Harper Regime in Contempt of Parliament is in fact saying that the Harper Regime has contempt for Canadians... Now if the "media" had portrayed that fact I think it may make the Harper Regime downfall the main story and a little more interesting to most Canadians..."

I like Canadians so unlike Harper I've never had contempt for them.. Thought some Canadians as pretty stupid, but never contempt... Hell I've never even had contempt for Americans regardless of political leanings... You on the other hand?

Yup... Pretty much what I said... The reason for Parliament being supreme is that Parliament is us, all of us Canadians, it's our voice in our Government... We're not the US where they have three supposedly equal parts of a Government, Executive, Legislative and Legal... We have one, Parliament, it's our only freely elected institution and therefore, we, ALL Canadians, must be equal in Parliament as the supreme institution of Canadian Democracy... The Harper Regime tried to usurp my (and your) rights as a Canadian... There is no bigger story than that for me... To hold the Harper Regime in Contempt of Parliament is in fact saying that the Harper Regime has contempt for Canadians... Now if the "media" had portrayed that fact I think it may make the Harper Regime downfall the main story and a little more interesting to most Canadians... So my question is, why didn't the media do that? Some political bias perhaps?

Complex systems, like Canada's Parliamentary System, require very complex changes in order to change the whole system... There are no easy ways to change our Canadian Parliamentary system without a very, very complex process which no single party can or should become involved in... If you want what you suggest send your suggestions to your MP (any party) and make sure you clearly state what's on your mind and your methodology about how you would go about making those changes...

Which is what I've been saying all along... Regardless of the outcome of an election, in a Democracy like Canada's, Canadians will ALWAYS get exactly the Government they deserve... As Forrest Gump said, "stupid is as stupid does"...

All well and good, but this is Canada, where a "coalition", in FACT, would represent how a 2/3 MAJORITY of Canadians voted... Why anyone thinks that any Government that only represents 1/3 of Canadians is "better" than a Government that represents 2/3 of Canadians is a very strange concept in many thinking people's minds... I'm very much in favour of minority Governments that realize the need to work with other parties rather than a dictatorial style rule by a certain party anyday...

Nope, all I'm saying is that "the media" in general know which side their bread is buttered on... Ergo their willingness to mostly ignore certain things, like the Historic event of a Government being found in Contempt of Parliament (aka Contempt of Canadians), in favour of other things "put out there" by a specific party like the red herring of a non-existant coalition, which directly SHOWS very clearly the "medias'" general leanings and direction...