gerryhatrick

Ah...the sound of two right hands clapping. Strangly empty sound! Now...what was that about the National Energy Program?

What a pathetic response. This news is a lot newer than the sponsorship scandal. I supose you were out chastising the Cons and the NDP for dredging up really old news? But you need to get real here. I am not "the left" and I'm certainly not "desperate". I am overjoyed with the election outcome, thankyou v.much. I brought this up just for betsy to stand in contrast to her post about EGALE. I thought she needed to have a look in a mirror in the form of Larry Spencer. Sure it's an oldie (2 WHOLE YEARS!) but a goodie. Now, which one of you rightwingers was talking about the National Energy Program just the other day......you remember which one? I gotta find him so you can tell him your line about "old news".

Why are the conservatives allowing this? CORRUPTION! Come on Harper, I thought you were going to deal with this?

If you don't know the ages of people at a LGBT youth group, then how are you able to make assumptions about them? Obviously your ignorance extends so far as to think an 80 year old might be at a youth group, so that provides some hint of your logical analysis here. Your cited portion does not indicate that EGALE wants 14 and 15 year olds to be able to have sex with adults, btw. When you have a real basis for your assumptions try again.

So the answer is yes then. And you bristle at being called anti-gay? Look in the mirror betsy, you have an anti-gay agenda.

The ironly your first paragraph against that next sentence almost made me fall down. Or is that hypocrisy? Ahem... Uhhhh...could you please enlighten us with an example from your experience in Canada? Or are you just going to use these fictitious *experiences* of yours derail the conversation. Like the CBC having an *agenda* CBC has an agenda. What tin-foil hat nonsense.

I agree with the US congressman Murtha. He comes off as an honest straight-shooting old soldier to me. He says it's time for the US to get out because they've become the target...they're the reason the violence continues. He points out that the vast majority of the US enemy in Iraq are Iraqis and that a majority of Iraqis say attacks against US forces are legitimate. Yes, it would be nice if the US could leave it better than it was when they marched in. I hope the fact that Saddam is gone will be enough to fulfill that argument and save face and allow them to get the hell out before it gets any worse. BTW, reconstruction is all but over due to the lack of security. Contractors have fled the country. What reconstruction should Canada participate in? Training Iraqi forces? We're already doing that. If the US wants to help that nation now they'll leave.

Oh, he's probably gay betsy. Why else would someone defend them from bias and ignorance unless they were one of them, right?

Let me ask you a question. Do you think homosexuals want to have sex with children?

Where in thier statement does it say they want 14 and 15 year olds to be able to have sex with adults, exactly?

Oh for heavens sake. Go here: http://www.cbc.ca/programguide/program/pro...levision&genre= See that? "Nerve" is one of hundreds of shows. And some of what you're complaining about appears to be videos sent in by viewers. What should we do, withold thier tax rebates? Your outrage is shrill and baseless. GOD BLESS YOU CBC, WE LOVE YOU!!! The last bastion of unbiased commercial free radio. Always stand on guard Canada, to rightwingers the lack of rightwing bias = leftwing bias. Don't let the fascists steal the quality from the world!

What gay rights groups are encouraging sex between adults and 14-15 year olds? I would gladly debate if the subject was honesty put forth. So far it has not. Betsy has done nothing but deal in innuendo and negative suspicion. An I supposed to debate that? She is trying to paint homosexuals as pedophiles. I'm I required to debate that? No thanks, I'll just point out anti-gay bias and move on.

You get what you give I guess. Can't you think of homosexuals as anything other than sneaky pedophiles trying to make it easier for them to have sex with minors?

Haven't you noticed? We're way past the "introduction" line, Gerryhatrick! Kindly read. It's like jumping into the fray kicking and swinging away without knowing what the fray is all about. Not really betsy, since my post was a direct response to you talking about the introduction line and how it seems so similar to something you found at the NAMBLA website. Please debate in good faith, thanks.

Family issues, not affairs. Quite right. This fragment makes no sense. I can understand you think I have "hatred" for the CPC. It's usually the same pattern with a rightwinger...accuse critisism as being "hatred". Pretty moot point. Is being an MP not being part of government? It matters little, he was in Harpers caucus and in Parliament. That better? I think what was really wrong with it is how all the self-loathing Canadians like yourself decided to scream and cry over it and boohoo the end of the world because the US would certainly react to an improv comedy sketch by closing the border. The rightwing will never stand up for Canada becuse they've always been afraid of US reaction to every burp and sneeze up here. Case in point. If you choose to believe such a thing is "anti-Americanism" then it makes it easier for the Bill O'Rielly's and Ann Coulters and Tucker Carlsons to repeat that we're guilty of anti-Americanism. If you choose instead to see it for what it is...a silly improv comedy bit playing upon the earlier news of her being caught making offhand remarks.....then you've got some sensible perspective. George Bush is the common denominator in MANY international relationships that have soured with the US. Why do people like you blame Canada first always?

It's good to remember that Wikipedia is not always fair and accurate. It is the result often of small numbers of people making submissions. In this case, it gives the impression that he chose not to join the new party, but of course he was not permitted.

What "anti-Americanism"? All this BS about anti-Americanism smacks of American rightwingers accusing democrats of supporting terrorists. What anti-Americanism are you talking about? Harper telling the US ambassador that he gets his mandate from the Canadian people, not the US ambassador? There is a lie that is repeated over and over by people of a particular political bent in Canada that Canadians are "anti-American". If a person opposes George Bush and his policies, they are not anti-American. A large majority of Americans don't approve of him at the moment, in fact. In fact, a person can INSULT George Bush and not be anti-American. Get off the divisive pot and start making sense.

Exactly what is "delusional"? You think the war was neccessary? "As a moderate conservative" you believe the US went to war for oil. Therefore it was neccessary? And since we're in the business of name-calling, are you too stupid to recognize this post - although truthful - is a response to the Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy? Why isn't Canada in Iraq?" Montgomery Burns post? What's your take on that? Do you think the US war was to "promote democracy" - as MBurns claims - or just for oil as you claim? You said something about "delusional"?

You're either lying, or mistaken. Are you truely not aware that the oft-repeated quote used to support that is so out of context that calling it support for the war is absolutely a lie? The CBC doesn't say that. Try to focus on the truth geoffrey. Iraq is a bloody disaster. There is no security. The professionals are fleeing the country. No reconstruction can move forward. Your claim that just becuse Saddam was opressive he needed to be removed is too narrow to take seriously I'll be interested to see you come back on the Paul Martin claim. It will give a great deal of insight into you.

"family affairs critic" then? I changed it. Either way, it's the same in my view. Is your point about the "Harper *government*" to say that he was never in government? What nonsense. The party leader should speak with a member about those issues that are part of the critics area of focus. If Stephen Harper had chosen a defense critic who believed Canada should get Nukes and fire one at Mexico, would you make the same excuse? Come on. Carolyn Parrish you mean? She didn't hate Americans. This is getting pretty sad now. And there was nothing wrong with what she did on that comedy show. Quite funny actually, too bad there's so many PC folks around.

Ha ha ha! He has a speach impediment! I love it! Good one!

November of 2003, JUST before the previous election. And it is now only Feb. 2006, just barely over 2 years since. And the news of the day indicates Harper only "suspended" him from caucus at first. Other news indicates it was done "temporarily", presumably so a review could take place. When I heard about it, it took me 2 minutes on the internet to confirm that the idiot was developing opinions against homosexuals based on a piece of obvious satire. Why wouldn't Harper have kicked him off caucus with permanence immediately? Well, perhaps you'd wish this was all just opinion, but the bulk of what I wrote is straight facts. Quotes, and the like. But please, indicate which of my opinions you disagree with, specifically. I think the fact that this man was made a "family values critic" in the Harper government is something worth considering. I'm not suggesting Harper shares Spencers views, but he surely must have talked to him about issues that might be considered "family values" to the (then) Canadian Alliance, don't you think? Strange his idea of a homosexual agenda/campaign as evidenced by some satire wouldn't come up!

Wasn't all that long ago....just over two years actually. Spencer said in an interview with the Vancouver Sun that a “well-orchestrated” campaign to “convert” young boys in school playgrounds and locker rooms to homosexuality was underway since the 60's It included plans to “deliberately infiltrate the North America’s judiciary, schools, religious community and the entertainment industry". He capped it all off with a call to re-criminalize homosexuality and lock up gays. “If somebody brought a bill in the House to do that I’d certainly vote for it. Yeah, I’d like to see that be the case,” he told the Sun. The idiot didn't even know the source of his fears. Some activists speech from the 60's he said...the name slipped his mind though. Spencer: “His quote went something like this ... ‘We will seduce your sons in the locker rooms, in the gymnasiums, in the hallways, in the playgrounds, and on and on, in this land.’ It was quite a long quote stating what was going to happen to the young boys of North America.” Anyone know the source of Spencers fear and ignorance? Well, his ignorance is his own doing...and perhaps we can partly blame his environment. The source of his fears in this case is not a speach by a gay activist in the 60's at all, but rather an obviously SATIRICAL essay that ran in 1987 in a Boston publication. Naturally, a piece of satire is fair game for the extreme rightwing to pick up and run with. And then poor ignorants like the Canadian Alliance's "family affairs" critic Larry Spencer lap it up without question.

And there it is folks! I knew it wouldn't take long for the obligatory allignment of homosexuals to a pedophile organization! Betsy has found some similarities in introductions! RUN!!! Try reacting without fear or bias to the entire article betsy, not just some "introduction", and don't go running over to NAMBLA to seek out similarities. It's a pointless exercise that only demonstrates your anti-gay stripes.

What was the name of that Conservative MP who was kicked out of caucus by Stephen Harper after claiming there was was proof of a secret gay agenda to target kids in school for conversion to homosexuality? The "proof" was a parody written back in the 60's. That kind of stupidity and ignorance is truely frightening. Good for Harper for kicking him out, but it makes you wonder how many others are just smart enough to keep thier mouths shut. Ah well, it doesn't matter anyway. Canadians will never let minority rights be trampled by that kind of ignorance. People like that should move to Kansas or Utah.