Greg

Pellaken, did you lose your dictionary? Let's start proof-reading our comments before posting. I'm tired of reading ill-prepared remarks.

Agreed, that's just downright annoying. After reading your post, I'm abit sceptical about the whole thing. What's the point of this post? I will warn you snakeyes, your whole "evolution"/"animal" comments are not welcome here if you're eluding (and I think you are) to different ethnicities/races.

Quit generalizing Craig. We get your point - you hate the social welfare state and its liberal roots are the cause of all evil in Canada. Now lets move on and discuss some relavent points and facts about BSE.

This doesn't surprise me - in fact, I'm surprised it took this long to happen. In my opinion, rule number one when producing a campaign website is to minimize your critics ability to use your domain name against you. So in this case, the Martin campaign should have registered all the different domain name combinations that include his name. For example, paulmartintime.com paulmartintime.net paulmartintime.org paulmartintime.info or even, paulmartinsucks.com (which appears to be owned by Paul martin supporters?) There a many many many more variations that could be registered and used. A classic example of a overlooked domain was gwbush.com, during the last Presidential campaign. Georgewbush.com was the official website of Presidential candidate George W Bush. Gwbush.com was the parody site of a raving anti-bush activist/profiteer. The site become a huge thorn in the side of the George W Bush and the Republican party during the campaign. After repeated attempts were made to shut the site down, Bush's people realized that attempting to fight this out in court did nothing by increase the overall exposure of the site and the person behind it. I doubt this will be the last time we see this type of action in Canada.

What did I just tell you people yesterday? Cut this patronizing and otherwise useless banter out.

Let's try to avoid these types of polls in the future as they don't really contribute much to the forums. They seem to degrade into idle chit-chat/popularity contents. Cheers, Greg Admin

This statement is plain stupid. Cut it out.

For those interested, we have M. v. H. summarized.

Lets discuss Larry Spencer's statement that he would support any initiative to put support any initiative to put homosexuality back in the Criminal Code of Canada. This incident brings up some interesting questions. Including, how does this affect the merger process? How does Harper counter these types of statements? Should Spencer's have the right to say such things?

Blacksheep said it right, These forums are not the place to post rumours or conjecture. In the future, let's provide evidence for statements like these and remember that all posts must contain some aspect of an argument or attempt to stimulate discussion.

Crusader's original post was simply an opinion that wasn't grounded with any evidence (this is not to say that there isn't evidence to support his position, rather he just failed to mention it). From my perspective righturnonred was simply challenging Crusader and Mr Farrius to provide evidence and justification for the thread. Regardless of whether this issues have been debated throughout the media, you can't simply defer the responsibility of backing up your opinions by saying that they've been resolved elsewhere. I've never heard of anyone's argument being hurt by providing credible evidence to support it. But no, I don't expect you to provide evidence supporting Crusaders and Mr Farrius's opinion, I expected Crusaders and Mr Farrius to do that. I closed the post because there was already a debate occurring about the justifications of the war in Iraq, not because it was already dealt with. To often new members fail to use the search feature or look past the first couple of postings to ensure the topic they are posting isn't already being discussed. Also, the statement "dealt with" implies that the issue has been resolved and we can take for granted our positions relative to this issue. The issue of a just war has not been resolved, therefore it is still open for discussion. I admit, I should have deleted the thread altogether, however I wanted to provide Crusader and Mr Farrium the opportunity to defend their "war for oil" position.

Daniel, I don't think questioning whether righturnonred reads the newspaper or watches the nightly news is the issue here. He's addressing the valid issue of providing evidence for what we say. He has every right to ask you to prove what you're saying. No one is attacking your beliefs, they're attacking your inablity to defend them. So I encourage you to elaborate your original position.

Let's not reduce this thread to an "NDP Sucks" rant. If you want to discuss the merits of the New Democratic Party in Canada, then start another thread and base your posts on credible evidence. Thanks Greg Admin

Keep your arrogance to yourself Crusader, I doubt you'll get much respect around here behaving like this. Go read the rules and guidelines of these forums and make sure to direct your attention to this section, I dare you not to follow the rules, Greg Admin

Alliance Fanatic's post was deleted due to the fact that he cross-posted copyrighted material without providing appropriate sources. If someone would like to begun another thread be my guess. In the future, please report incidences like this one directly to me. Thanks Greg Admin

What evidence can you provide for these statements?

Daniel, your last post (and some before it) are borderline troll behaviour. If you're going to make a statement like, then you'd better back it up with some evidence. Start contributing to the discussion or I'll be forced to deleted your otherwise distracting posts. Greg Admin

This has already been covered throughout the forums. Please use the search feature and post in the appropriate thread.

Financial incentives? I thought it was access to non-union labour combined with lower production costs (due to a low dollar) alongside vast tracks of usable unpopulated scenery that attracked American movie production? In what way? Gov't grants?

Sorry folks, my fault. I merged a new thread with an old thread and ended up with the wrong thread title. Everything should be fine now, as I've renamed the thread to something alittle more descriptive. Sorry for any confusion. If there are any problems, just send them my way. Thanks Greg

You might want to check out the Election Predication Project. They have predict the following: Liberal Party: 69 Progressive Conservative: 26 New Democratic Party: 8 Lots of great commentary on individual ridings.

Does this thread have a point? If so, I'd appreciate someone getting to it as quickly as possible. If there isn't something of value here by morning, I'll be deleted it permanently.

Locke, you're speaking the truth. Sometimes many of us need to be reminded that we must not to take politics personally. I say we move on and get back to talking about politics. Everyone in agreement? Thanks p.s. Welcome to the forum,

I agree with many of the comments in this thread. Islam isn't a failure Criag, and many of your recent anti-Islam posts haven't a shred of evidence to support your position. Let's avoid making these types of value judgements.

You guys are wasting bandwidth and my time. Either get this thread back on topic or I'll close it. Thanks