Signals.Cpl

I think most people want to know why... but this individual won't be able to hide for long I hope. I want to know what the message he was trying to send to the political parties and the Canadian People in general.

Well if he is caught doing that with his lack of understanding of finances we can excuse him...

There was a package going to the Liberal Party... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/police-identify-body-parts-suspect-severed-hand-bound-for-liberals/article2447319/

I think another party might have benefited more if it were a brain.

Honestly I think the most beneficial part of the UN would be to keep the peace if it was restructured properly. It would not be so much to make the living standards equal around the world.

I do think the Warsaw Pact had no desire to go to War with NATO and vice versa but the main deterrent to World War 3 was the massive nuclear arsenals both sides had. If the Nukes were not there then we would have most likely had WW3.

No it does not make the MP's irrelevant, there are lets say in one 4 year term 400 votes, on 380 of them the MP will use his or her best judgement as to what the constituents would want, but then there are those few things the 1%-10% of the issues that would require the MP's to look at the people's opinion rather then their own best judgement.

Not necessary on every issue, but as an MP when most of your constituents disagree with your vote maybe thats your hint to change your stance. And yes we vote for an MP that represents a party and thus we should expect most votes to end up along the party line but when your constituents say they don't like it, you don't like it. I support the conservatives, but there are issues where I would support the NDP/Liberal/Green and I am sure most people are not Conservative or NDP or Liberal on 100% of the issues so sometimes you won't vote based on your party but based on your constituents wishes. And as well, direct democracy is possible on a smaller scale like an MP and his or her constituents where you could meet people hold a town hall meeting and get the feel of the people. I want to know that I voted for the MP and have a say in his/her decision making over the next 2,3 or 4 years rather then vote for a Conservative/NDP/Liberals and a month after the election have them cross over to the NDP/Conservatives/Liberals and vote with them over the next 4 years. Do you want people involved in politics? Right now I voted last year and will vote in 3 years and during this time I have no say, I can go to the MP's office and might even get to meet him but he will hear my issue, smile and forget about it as soon as I leave. I would prefer to have a say in major decisions rather then see an MP vote for a policy while 70% or 80% of his constituents are against that policy, thats not democracy at least not to me, democracy should not be reduced to voting for a government every 4 years knowing that whoever you vote for will just ignore you until the next election.

I don't think he was sentenced to anything.

Nah, he is going to head UNICEF most likely...

We should have each MP vote according to his constituents views. The MP is elected to represent us and our views or at least the majority view and we should count on the MP voting how we want him/her to rather then how the party wants him to. This way even in a majority we would know that we as agnation have an input in our government and the government has to convince us to support them.

Great advice...you should probably take it yourself.

I don't know, whats the punishment for killing a person and then eating their eyes and heart?

There is never a guarantee about anything, but that doesn't mean we should let him go so he can potentially decide to go off his meds and kill another person or people. Tracking devices as you said are not fool proof and he might not want to go back to the hospital, but at the same time the reaction time between removing the device and the police kicking in the door gives him a nice head start and if he decides to get off of his meds and listen to "god" again more people lose their lives.

That we know of...

What I was saying was that the NDP has to be really careful when it deals with issues concerning Quebec because if for example an issue comes between Ontario and Quebec then decision to support Quebec might shut out Ontario a decision to back Ontario might lose Quebec with no guarantee of gaining anything in Ontario. I know voters in every province can change their minds, but if for example the F-35's are chosen and its time for the government to award contracts for maintenance and upgrades then it might become a race between Quebec companies and companies based in another province, NDP backs Quebec they run the risk of losing out potential seats, they back the other province they might lose Quebec seats...

Its from some nutcase who thinks he is making a point. All I have to say is that any criminal organization that decides to pick on a political party in Canada regardless of which party is declaring war on the country and will likely not survive for any significant length of time after such a stupid move. This cannot be a political party, or the mob, or any other organized crime organization. It is most likely a lone wolf type of thing and/or a very small group that will likely be tracked down and arrested. Again, if any criminal organization is too stupid and does this then they are likely not going to be around for much longer.

Are you serious?

True, but it also depends on events in Europe, if things go down hill for Greece, Ireland, Portugal and any of the larger economies then promises to improve on or introduce new programs might scare the swing vote.

Yeah, but what is the alternative? If the economy is doing well, the budget is balanced, and we are paying down the debt what can the NDP offer to the Canadian people? I mean yeah there is the robocall issue which could be brought up, and then the F-35's and probably a few things will pop up over the next few years but would the issues of today be still issues of tomorrow? Depending the conservatives to screw up the economy so that you can provide an alternative is not something to base your strategy on.

How does that make my comment wrong? At this moment the NDP depends on Quebec, 59/103 seats are from Quebec, 22/103 seats are from Ontario. The election of 1993 has nothing to do with this, NDP has Quebec, and thus they have to protect said stronghold therefore it might come in to conflict with trying to make inroads in other provinces if an issue were to pit Quebec against Ontario, the Maritimes or the RoC in general. What does what the Liberals did in 93 have to do with my comment?

Good, they can try but doesn't matter many will bite. If the government is doing its job properly then there would be no problem mainly because the NDP can spin the economy any which way they want but it will not help if the outlook is great. If global economy takes a dive and Canada still comes out of it better then most good luck painting the policy unsustainable. And the other thing is telling the people how you can and will do a different, better job. Now with Greece, Portugal, ireland and potentially some larger nations facing serious debt problems Canadians might be much more vigilant about the debt and not get too carried away with all the promises the parties have.

How do you know? Did I ever say we should make it brutal? I understand you might have problems understanding this but there is more then 2 ways to treat prisoners, it's not criminals get vacations or criminals get tortured on a daily basis, it could be somewhere in the middle but then again I wouldn't expect YOU to be able to comprehend such a complex issue. I guess you couldn't grasp the subject but here ill try to explain it again: the criminal should get punishment fitting their crime. Get it? Or do you need me to explain it to you in simpler terms? Yeah, because he is an average joe right? When you go from having it all to having nothing at all you might not like it either, and it will have nothing to do with the prison itself. Oh I have already been punished, and I haven't even committed a crime...reading your bullish*t post was cruel and unusual punishment enough.

Neither does someone who is high, or someone who commits a murder in the heat of the moment yet we still demand they serve their sentences.