shoop

Thanks for that. You do realize that it was probly Prentice who *took* Ablonczy's spot.

Who knows about Emerson. What exactly is the sell-out? Are you really that angry about *anything* necessary to govern the country effectively? How exactly are you *involved*? You clearly have issues with the three big Canadian cities. They didn't vote the way you wanted them to. But telling them to piss off and *vote the right way next time* is childish and won't work. I hope you don't approach your personal and professional relationships in such an aggressive Ayn Rand-esque way...

Call it selling out if you want. Honestly, there are certain things that have to be done in order to run a successful government. Look at Joe Clark. He stood by his principles and lasted nine months. Had he been a little shrewder Trudeau wouldn't have screwed the west with the N.E.P. or imposed Constitution Act 1982 on the country. Seems to me like you just want to sit and bitch no matter who is in power...

Wow, what a great recipe for a short-termed minority government followed by a long return to the opposition benches. Harper is laying the groundwork for a majority win in the fall of 2008. He is showing the long-range thinking that has been lacking for far too long in Canadian right of centre parties, and from certain posters on this board.

Hmmm .... Why call the thread a *massive* dissapointment then? Yeah, the floor-crossing is a strange one. Especially if you look at his riding. I think he will have a very tough time winning re-election there as a Conservative. That sorta hick, red-neck talk will *never* get the Conservatives into majority territory. Creating a cabinet is a balancing act. If you truly feel you were *conned* then you don't understand the trade-offs of governing...

It was a poorly called game, don't get me wrong. However, quote random seahawks fans, or angry commentators, all you want. The refs didn't *win* the game for the Steelers. The refs didn't force Seattle to give up a 37-yard pass when the Steelers were at third and 28. You really couldn't tell if that Roethlisberger TD was good or not. Too bad they didn't have a better camera angles. The refs didn't make the Seattle kicker to miss two field goal tries. The refs didn't make the Seahawks to bite on the gadget play with Randle El throwing that great TD pass. The refs didn't make Hasselbeck force that bad pass for the interception in the 4th that essentially ended the game.

Well geoffrey, your post history is of somebody who is very obstinate in their positions and will not change. Regardless, I will offer some rationale for the choices the Prime Minister made. Fortier (at least spell the guys name right) is there for the need to represent Montreal. A by-election isn't feasible as there probly won't be a seat in Montreal opening up short term. Yes, he will go into the senate. A condition of that is he will only sit as an appointed senator until a senate election can be held. Ablonczy was symbolic of the tough choices Harper had to make. Did she *deserve* to be in? Probably. Did a lot of others who *deserved* to be in get shut out? Calgary couldn't have three ministers (Harper, Prentice and Ablonczy). Harper's choice of Prentice was shrewd as Prentice knows the Indian Affairs file extremely well and it keeps the PC wing of the party happy. Environment is a good portfolio for Ambrose. What would have been the *more* she deserved? As for not playing into her *strengths*, Intergovernmental Affairs and Social Development (both presumably playing to her strengths) were melded into other areas of responsibility. I think you are downplaying Ambrose's competency and the importance of the Environment portfolio. Bernier and Cannon both got *good* ministries. Boy, what a great insult about Stockwell Day. Glad to see you put a lot of time and consideration into that one. Childish, ignorant, tsk, tsk task. Another choice aimed at maintaining internal harmony in the party. Foreign Affairs is a great posting for anybody to get. Toews is a little out there, if he doesn't rein himself in he won't bet there long.

Yeah, you ain't Harper. They needed representation from the three big cities that they got *shut out of*. That was the rationale for Emerson. If Harper were going to tell him that he wouldn't have brought him over in the first place.

The game was pretty poorly called, but it didn't cost the Seahawks the game.

True enough geoffrey. They both still have the right to exist ... *without* government funding.

Don't argue. Just show what they where they would have had to invest over the past 30 years to get your 10% compounded monthly return. btw, nice trick with compounding it monthly. What would the return have to be if it were only compounded annually. Clearly you are a Finance major, but if you are going to argue a ridiculously high rate of return that back it up. The 12.5% the Fund got from loans to other provinces in this climate, and probably wouldn't have been able to do so at any point in the past 15 years. But please if you honestly believe this is true point the way to those easy money stocks...

Sad, sad how much the left is brainwashed. Nobody said that economist's were rich .... at least nobody who had any facts to support their claim.

Very interesting how the Liberals withheld the information of the payout in the dying days of the election. Random CTV link.

I hear you ft. Somehow geoffrey just isn't getting that point. When was the last time a 10% rate of return would have been relatively low risk? Early 90s?

Ahhh Gerry, you weak-minded fool. First it would be *censor* not *censure*. Do you understand there is a difference? No lobbying for equal payments. No payments treats everybody fairly. I have said before that I don't really listen to any radio, so no I don't listen to CBC radio. Riots??? Kinda like the riots when CBC went on strike last year? Oh yeah, *nobody cared*!

Well geoffrey, you also have to take a look at the risk profile involved. There is *no way* you would get guaranteed returns at that rate of return. Talk about simply average makes me think you are basing this more on textbook learnin' than any actual experience with investments.

Easy big fellow. Nobody is talking about censoring the CBC. Just give it the same amount of money that CTV, The Globe and Mail, Global, etc. get from the government.

Is there something I am missing with this one? Why would a defeated candidate, from a province with tons of cabinet worthy MPs, get a posting?

Good article Stan. Quite interesting that even the Star is willing to give Harper a chance and look at him with an open mind. Now that he will become Prime Minister tomorrow...

Nobody seems to be complaining but you. So sorry, I can see how bringing up quotes from MPs who got kicked out of caucus years ago is valid. But refuting your sad assertions is a *waste of time*. Maybe if you actually made defensible points you wouldn't have to try and divert the conversation when you get shot down. Nah, you would actually have to be able to formulate a coherent argument to do that.

So Dingwall getting paid off is a failure on the part of the Conservatives? Wow, glad to see you are happy the Conservatives won Gerry! btw What exactly should they do? This appears to be the most cost-effective decision they could make. It is about staying within a budget ... isn't it?

Uhhh, don't recall anybody starting a thread about the NEP here. Care to point that one out? Didn't think so... Good luck digging up the Diefenbaker quotes.

Anybody else got an opinion? Tomorrow being the big day and all....

No real qualms with your math. (You probably aren't the only one who took intro Finance). Do show me where you would have gotten those returns though. Very tough to assume you would have outgained the market over a prolonged period of time.

Every since Enron, etc. companies are having a tough time recruiting board members. Sure the money is nice but not if you are going to get your ass sued it isn't. Besides most companies don't *really* care what their shareholders think of their board members.