gerryhatrick

Indeed, polling them on your election issues shortly after you won the election does seem quite stupid. And partisan. Good call. Ok, back to the Liberal days.... It's interesting. When faced with any subject about CPC wrongdoing all their supporters can do is harken back to the Liberals. Quite funny, actually.

Oh no, she's a "terrorist sympathizer" engaging in a little "American bashing". B-Max said so. Very reasoned analysis, btw.

Oh, thank you so much. I don't bother with people who are seemingly intelligent but choose to weigh in on the denial side of the "debate". That's my choice...one made after much patient imparting of the available information. The simple fact is that some folks will never accept the reality. I think it's a mental weakness....they're unable to accept that such a situation could be occuring, so they latch onto any piece of deception or nonsense logic they can get their hands on. And then there's the partisan aspect as well. Some on the right see it as a political issue and truely believe that Global Warming is a plot by socialists to reign in capitalism. Or they have faith in God and have decided that God would not let it happen or it's part of Gods plan. Stuff like this: is typical. There is no real "debate" anymore, and well-meaning people who continue to debate the nonsense put forth by those who can't mentally compute the reality of Global Warming or are politically bent on denial are likely wasting their time.

Second that.

The legislator said "They continued the policy of the U.S. and our people don't agree with U.S. policy, and this is why there is no positive results right now." THAT is "America bashing" in your view? Saying that a US policy isn't working equals "America bashing"? You need to work on your objectivity a bit I'd say.

Indeed, polling them on your election issues shortly after you won the election does seem quite stupid. And partisan. Good call.

It's pretty significant that they've just voted to suspend the boycott for 30 days. It is hardly a "minutiae" point. And in 30 days if Harper hasn't met with them to work out a solution I'm quite sure the boycott will resume. The reason the press gallery decided to boycott the list is because Harper was stone-walling reporters who were working stories he didn't like. It would be like Martin not taking questions from reporters who were working the sponsorship beat. Would that have been OK by you?

But I don't concede that. I concede they were the government when they conducted the poll, but it was clearly a partisan poll. As is said in the Montreal Gazette: There is always a thin line between legitimate government polling to better-tailor public programs and polls that serve the political needs of the party in power. But polling right after a national election to gauge support for an election platform voters passed judgment on weeks earlier is clearly a political and partisan act. http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...70-09d5b0908d11 That's pretty much how it looks. RB wanted to make the point that the polling was done by the Government of Canada, which it was. That hardly means it's legitimate polling.

Guess truth and facts are "anti-Harper" now. 1984 has arrived. Where's RB? We need someone to quote you some rules, no?

A VERY nuanced difference, since just a few weeks earlier they were the five priorities for the CPC. But OK, since the CPC is the government at the time of polling then yes, the polling was on government policy. Why waste $85,000 on a poll about the five priorities that they were just elected on though? Tweaks? You mean like dropping the wait times guarantee? You think people polled weren't intersted in that one?

Said it once, but I'll repeat it for you. Your not debating in good faith RB. Should I be surprised? The question that you injected yourself into was brought up by geoffrey. He stated "Umm, Sheila Fraser alerted us to the Sponsorship Scandal." In fact, the story was first persued by the Globe and Mail. And according to my link, Chretien ordered Sheila Fraser to find out what she could. The point is that the media was a full participant in revealing the sponsorship scandal. The media. Hard to accept it, I know. That commie enemy of the free world - the media - actually seeks the truth. If you have a link contrary to what I've posted feel free to post it. If you just want to continue trolling, feel free to do that as well.

Well, the reality is that the boycott has been lifted for 30 days. What you claimed was that they'd agreed to Harpers demands. They haven't. If they'd agreed to Harpers demands they would have passed a resolution saying that press gallery reporters will now submit their names for the PM's list. The resolution simply suspends the boycott for 30 days. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. And frankly RB I don't care what you do. If you want to cry about me making "demands" of you or giving you "orders", go ahead. You and Harper, the two biggest victims in the world!

Au contraire, let's debate the issue. You're not interested in debate though....you're interested in baiting and trolling and accusing others of "hate". You go first. Say something in support of this government of Canada paid for $85,000 poll, if that's your position.

You said That wasn't the case and isn't the truth. I bother because you bother... What funny games you like to play RB. You've stated elsewhere that your goal is just to get me "off track", which is really nothing more than baiting. But I'll play. From the article: That sure appears to lay the credit at the door of the Globe and Mail for bringing the sponsorship scandal to light. Is the article wrong? Go ahead, answer with "no it doesn't"!

The two separate posts seem awfully similar to me as well. This would be the rule that *doesn't* apply in this case. Stop trolling RB. If you think this post is the same as another, report it. Your contant quoting of rules that aren't being broken is a little immature. But we both know it's just your little baiting routine. My critisism of Harper is "hate" to you, and it makes you very upset...that's obvious. You can take the opportunity to develop some more maturity, your choice.

Yet again the *proof* provided is misleading and irrelevant.... How is the link "irrelevant"? It supports exactly what I posted. Why do you bother?

Got it from Paul Wells' blog. He is a member of the press gallery. Read his post from yesterday. For at least 30 days the press gallery won't boycott the list. Given how split the gallery is on the boycott I doubt anything will change after the 30 day period ends. Still not quite right though. The press gallary has not "agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. " They voted to suspend the boycott and allow reporters to sign the list for the next 30 days. Slight difference. Next time post your source up front.

rest here --> http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/st...2c-7c5c27e12a56 Well that's interesting. ArmyGuy - our man in the Afghan - should have a comment on this. If it's true then it's obvious why more debate on the mission is required. "Stay the course" is not an intelligent mantra, as we've seen demonstrated in Iraq.

Like I said, you are smart and they aren't. Whatever. When you are able to get past a poster and answer a post let me know.

Seems awfully similar. What seems "awfully similar"? You're making no sense.

More ignorance used to bash the media. The Globe And Mail was responsible for bringing it to our attention. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/groupaction/ Start reading at "By the early spring of 2002...." Geoffrey, you catch this I presume?

Tell the truth, you work for Steve, right? There's no other explanation for your rabid anger over my critisism of him.

What nonsense. It is the first and only time it's been posted. Don't pollute the forum with your baseless complaints. I guess you're a bit sensitive. I said nothing directly about you. I used three-peat as a synonum for "hat-trick", not "hatrick". I guess you're a bit slow on the comprehension. I didn't indicate you said anything directly about me. Not even remotely. Don't post after drinking perhaps?

Good tip for you, no charge: speak for yourself. Don't pretend that you and the rest of the forum are on the same page. au contraire, I do. But "I" am not the issue here. You want to focus on me, apparently, but the issue is being raised by opposition parties and properly reported by the media. Don't complain that it's coming up, complain that Harper isn't responding. If he's disclosed all his donors, say so. If he will not disclose anymore, say so. Since he's isolated himself from the media he's developled a tendency to answer for nothing.

It has been claimed elsewhere that this topic is a "hat trick", which is a hockey term for three goals. In case anyone didn't know that, the poster called it a "three-peet" as well. In fact this is the first and only time this topic has been posted. It might appear like a duplicate since there are other topics about other partisan polling by the CPC paid for with taxpayer money. thx.