Ricki Bobbi

I got it all along. You have already judged the show, and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your opinion.

I thought you considered yourself to be a Libertarian?

So when people say an organization has been recently implicated in a *serious fundraising scandal* that is saying the organization is a good thing?

How defending MADD lead to "we're not as bad as the Liberals." in your warped world view?

But MADD is a bad thing. Gotta love the Harper-haters.

So you think overall MADD is a bad thing for society in Canada? What is wrong with the people who still support the organization? Go ahead, we know you can't do anything but attack, so turn it on...

It's much more than one thirty second clip. Here are three more gems to add to the case. But let me guess, you aren't going to judge the entire show on one 30-second clip, two more rednecked quotes and a blatantly politically-biased characterization of a political ideology. Here is the source of everything below. www.littlemosque.ca The Reverend is *tolerant*? but he is quoted as saying: "Christianity didn't survive 2,000 years by being charitable." Sounds like they are portraying him as intolerant... The same redneck (character name Fred Tupper) who utters the cleavage line also says: "If we don't stop them soon we will all be speaking Muslim." Oh the wit in that one... Here is part of how the character Fred Tupper is characterized on the show's Web site. Fred describes himself as a textbook libertarian: like most bigots. No political bias there. Unless you consider yourself a libertarian, then you are a bigot - by CBCs definition.

If it's such a certainty it should be very easy for you to provide links to SAR helicoters which would fit the bill....

As Senator Lebreton is the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of MADD I am guessing that there are many people who aren't especially partisan who respect her. Unless you consider people fighting against drunk driving are Tory hacks by definition. http://www.madd.ca/english/about/boardofdirectors.html

You aren't really adding anything to the thread. Sillier and more pedantic? Because you refuse to acknowledge the racism and government-funded stereotyping inherent in this 30 second clips?

And being the tenth poster on this thread to make the same obvious point, i.e. the show hasn't aired yet, is even sillier and quite pedanitc.

One issue with your argument is your claims of 'tradition' and 'normalcy'. The post of Secretary of State for Seniors has only ever been filled by an unelected Senator. Don't belive me, look it up.

Oops, double-post.

yes, thank you. I think you make a great argument for an elected Senate.

You said: There are as many Senator's in the Cabinet today as there were on Friday. Your statement was wrong.

She was already in Cabinet. So your claim is just plain false.There are just as many Senators in Cabinet today as there were yesterday. But instead of admitting your mistake you tried to split hairs about the difference between the role of Leader of the Government in the Senate and Secretary of State for Seniors. Is it that hard to own up to an error?

Uh wrong. But nice try. They have probably both changed their Web sites since my original post. The Internet is a fleeting creature...

Because I had been asked if I had ever said something bad (i.e. ever off any critcism) about the Government.

This conversation started when somebody asked if I had ever criticized the Conservatives. Which I have. The point was about blind partisanship. Somebody who has never criticized the Conservatives is just as blindely partisan as somebody who has never said anything positive. Are they perfect? No, they deserve some criticism. Are they absolutely terrible? No, they deserve some praise. Anybody whose *analysis* can't agree with that is blindly partisan. On either side of the aisle...

There is what you said in context, thats not criticsm. Just sayin' Criticism doesn't have to involve name calling and belittling people. The Government has to work on the environment file. They haven't done a great job on it to this point. Appointing Baird as the new Environment Minister is a step in the right direction. Have you said anything that positive about the Conservatives? Just askin'

You are working pretty hard to find something to attack the Government on with that one. As the first Secretary of State for Seniors *ever* I think it is probably a good thing it is a Senator in the position. Given that a lot more Senators are seniors than MPs. Onto the other moves. Seems like a shuffle aimed at building the base in Ontario. Giving Environment to Baird, as opposed to Prentice, seems like a commitment to the issue with a very promininet Ontario minister. Also moving Finley into Immigration was smart. I never really got why Solberg was in that job to begin with.

The Fraser Institute! :lol: Without alienating my brehern on the right, I hope people can see this as another example that there are differences amongst conservatives. I agree that the Fraser Institute is pretty hard core. They definitely don't represent my views, even though I am conservative. While some of the attack from the left types here will dismiss what I just said or belittle it, I hope that those of you who are truly here to debate will believe that I do have qualms about a lot of what the Fraser Institute does.

It will be a good test of Baird's negotiation skills without a doubt. As Government House Leader in the Senate Marjorie LeBreton was already in Cabinet. Pesky things those facts...

So Kenney got in from Alberta as a Secretary of State. Guess I got that one wrong. OMG I bet Ablonczy is fuming.

So you are just here to start a fight. Good for you sir.