shoop

There is nothing *mythical* to the record of the NDs under Rae in Ontario or the BC NDs prior to Gordon Campbell. Why avoid the issue or try and divert it elsewhere. Those are two very clearcut examples of ND governments behaving irresponsibly with taxpayer money.

As it turns out we were both wrong in the spelling of hypocrisy. Obstinancy is not an attractive trait. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy What exactly is a Xmas tree ringed with thorn bushes? Is this a slight on religion? I have never seen one before or seen it used.

Relative to population and GNP I actually wouldn't doubt if Honduras was more able than we are. (Oh, sorry to drop in actual knowledge of the situation Normie.)

Nice try pal. Simply replying to your false statements. There is a big difference between that and what you accused me of. If you don't see the difference, oh well such is life.

Brilliant, completely agreed.

Hmmm, Harris/Eves ran smaller deficits than Rae. Gordon Campbell (who is a "Liberal" in name only) has corrected the fiscal misfortunes in BC, despite years of mismanagment under the NDs. Any questions?

First off hypocracy is an adjective, not a noun. The expenditures the CPC have proposed are far less than those proposed by the Liberals. Third, what the f*ck does your last statement mean?

He is pretty pathetic. So beholden to the left-wing of the Liberal party that he can't even say Christmas. What sort of Catholic is he....

Great point wellandboy. Generally speaking this has been a very good election for the CPC in terms of media coverage. If Harper and Layton pressure Martin well in the debates tonight we will likely see a CPC lead early next week.

Here is an example of how much Martin has flip flopped on Iraq. Funny how CBC never mentions it. (all credited again) "I really think Canada should get over to Iraq as quickly as possible," (North Bay Nugget, April 30, 2003) "Once the war in Iraq began, Canada was far from neutral. The only satisfactory outcome was a defeat of Saddam Hussein and his removal from power." (Speech in Toronto, April 30, 2003) "Canada's strongest desire was for a swift and just victory by coalition forces. Thankfully, that occurred." (Paul Martin Times, May 1, 2003) "I don't think there is any doubt, if there ever was . . . that he does have weapons of mass destruction. Biological weapons that they discovered were very clear evidence of not only the fact that he had them, but that he had lied and that he is continuing to lie." (Calgary Herald, March 7 2003) "Canada's position was Saddam Hussein should be disarmed. Now, to be quite honest, I had a lot of difficulty understanding how he was going to be disarmed without being replaced." (Ottawa Citizen, April 28, 2003) "The fact that now we know well that there is proliferation of nuclear weapons and that many of the weapons that Saddam Hussein had, for example, we do not know where they are, so that means the terrorists have access to all that." (Globe and Mail, May 11, 2004) "Canada should be there." (Halifax Daily News, January 15, 2003)

Uhhh, Yeah Daniel. That myth is a myth line is pretty weak. Some evidence. And no I won't bother refuting your evidence till I see some.

Bullsh*t Layton doesn't try and portray himself as an average family. I like the addition at the end. The CPC message is resonating with average Canadians. Let go the anger son or it will eat you up over the next four years.

Actually it was on the National last night. Maybe you just chose to ignore it. I am not going to pay to buy you the transcript biotch... Care to point out any of my *fictional* CPC arguments. Accusing posters of lying without support is against the rules of the board.

Wow, what a random way to explain the generally poorer track record for ND governments. Thanks for the hijack err, much expected...

Yet another example of Paul Martin saying one thing, yet doing another when push comes to shove. Here are a number of, credited, quotes when he wasn't *fundamentally opposed* to BMD. Somebody save us from *another* term or Martin's flip flopping... "What possible benefit is it for us to stay away from the table?" (Toronto Star, April 29, 2003). "If there is going to be an American missile going off somewhere over Canadian airspace, I think Canada should be at the table making the decisions." (CBC, May 1, 2003). "We have to be at the table to essentially make sure that whatever decisions that are going to be taking place are taking place in Canada’s interests." (Ottawa Sun, January 9, 2004). "In response to a question about why the PM is in talks with U.S. President George Bush regarding the missile defence system, he said Canada can't walk away because it would lose control of its own air space. The PM said that 'nobody should trifle with Canadian air space unless Canadians say it's okay,' he said, making clear that 'I will not sign any agreement that involves the weaponization of space.' (Liberal Party Press Release, June 23, 2004).

Agreed, but two wrongs don't make a right. So the Washington Times, Fox News, anything related to Ezra Levant or Mark Steyn, CanadaFreePress.com are all equally is vile....

Here's another example from today's star. In an article talking about Harper's changing direction. Yet no 'expert' is quoted or referred to. Is it generally accepted journalistic practice to refer to 'expert' opinion without actually quoting any...

Today's Globe and Mail CTV Poll Globe poll, December 14, 2005 National Liberals - 33% CPC - 31% ND - 17% Quebec BQ - 54% Liberals - 24% Ontario Liberals - 44% CPC - 32% All three national parties are "hovering around 30% in BC". The CPC is at 59% in the Prairies. These results would give the CPC a slim minority government. Now if only Ontario would turn...

Actually he said Canada wouldn't send troops because the Liberal-decimated military lacked the ability to undertake such a massive operation.

Actually err, there would be a hell of a lot of Torontonians or Vancouverites that would agree with Harper. $200k means you are doing well, but you still ain't living high on the hog with that money. kimmy is right. I would also guess that Layton, as a tenured professor, was making more in private life than was Harper.

This would be the same GST the Liberals fought an election against yet never changed. This would be the same GST the Liberals were defending just last week. What exactly makes a law *obscure*?

Seems sorta like a guy who will do *anything* to stay in power. I like him when he is unscripted as well. But I wouldn't vote for him because he would never act on that...

I find both Steyn and Coulter to be incredibly annoying and childish. I have no problem with humour if it makes sense, and is truly *funny*. Your sad attempt was neither... ps, take a look at my history of posts here. Pretty obvious that I support neither the NDs nor the Liberals.

So you are opposed to the government providing incentives that encourage children to become more physically active? Perhaps if you relied a little less on the sarcasm your posts wouldn't be so difficult to understand...

So Martin now favours an elected Senate? CTV link What about Alberta's four senators in waiting? They were elected in November, yet they still sit on the sidelines. While in the interim Martin nominated three other senators in March. Why the change of heart all of a sudden?