Ricki Bobbi

Gerry you have demonstrated your hatred for the PM over and over again on this forum. You have broken the rules repeatedly. I have no problem supporting like-minded posters who take offence with your rule-breaking and hatred for the Prime Minister. If you can't find a rule I am breaking please don't accusing me of breaking the rules.

Say what you will, but the change in public opinion is good news for the Conservatives and their re-election chances. There will definitely be another election before the current tour of duty is over. But with the public warming up to the mission it appears that much more likely the Conservatives will win the next election.

Youd could just provide the link. That is if you had one.

You won't waste your time because I haven't done what you falsely accused me of doing. Want to prove me wrong? Spend the time. You are insulted because I accused you of hating Harper? You just bumped a month old thread calling him a wimp. You have called his actions dishonest over Afghanistan. You have said he is government is wasting money in supporting the rights of people with strong religious beliefs. That is just today. Play the victim all you want Gerry. Your actions on this board need to be dealt with by somebody.

Could you provide a little support to actually prove the govermnet acted dishonestly?

Do point out that rule about baiting? There is nothing obvious about you Gerry. Other than your hatred for the PM. How am I baiting you? By not doing what you tell me to do? By point out your logical inconsistencies and your never-ending streab of breaking the rules of the board? I ignored your insults for two weeks, yet you came back to attack again and again and again.

You go ahead and stand by those choices. It is rare to see a PhD exhibit above average mental ability? Are you freaking kidding?

Name one other poster I have complained about Gerry. You can't because I haven't. My definition of the rules? Hmmm, look at the top left corner of the page. Just under "Invision Power Board" you will see Forum Rules and Guidelines. You can follow the rules like everybody else. Ignore when I point them out to you. But I'm not going to do whatever you tell me. I understand you are a powerless individual. A PM you hate in Ottawa. But you can't expect to treat people the way you do and have them respect your imagined authority.

Hmmm, 49% of Canadians *don't* think we should exit in 2009. But support for the mission will crumble?

Name one other poster I have complained about Gerry. You can't because I haven't. Here is the forum rule you broke with the *wimp* line.

Which rule did I break Gerry? I'm not baiting anybody. If you feel that i have broken a rule point it out. For two weeks I ignored your baiting and there was no *pollution* of the board. Your choice. Walk away or keep insulting me and I will respond.

Gerry, if you really feel it is so obvious why the legislation is useless then prove so. For you to throw out an *obvious* truth then ask other people to prove otherwise is pretty shoddy debating. The cost of this legislation would be pretty minimal in the grand scheme of things. Please enlighten us why this legislation would *useless*.

Your definition of intellectual appears to be quite pliable. Preston just finished undergrad, Harper did an MA and worked in a think tank so I guess that is considered an intellectual. Broadbent and Layton both have earned PhDs and have worked as professors in the past. Granted Chretien was no intellectual.

I'll debate the issues when you do. I have provided examples time and again when you have broken the rules. Your behaviour has changed becaouse of a warning or new meds, but something has caused the changed for the better. Don't break the rules and I have no foot to stand on. Break the rules and I'll point it out every time.

Well said. That is why Harper will go through with this legislation.

Yeah, Gerry. Name one other poster I have *complained* about for rule brekaing? Seriously, provide one other example. You can't, because it is just you. You are the only one allowed to break the rules with impugnity. Warning? Hmmm, all of a sudden you quit calling the PM a wimp, and insulting the behaviour of his supporters as idiotic. You have quit using disprespctful language for some reason. Maybe you have changed your meds. I don't know but the difference in your behaviour is appreciated. At least you are being respectful in this one, if not still condescending and belittling. Who would see Bush as being considerate and cooperative for this act? The hard core right would see it as an exmple of weakness in the war on terror.

Because you feel the legislation would be useless, you have the right to tell Canadians with strong religious beliefs they need to *get educated*? Wow. Are there any other minorities out there you want to talk down to and dictate their need to get *edcuated* to?

Do you have a better choice for elections? Is there a test one would have to pass in order to be able to vote? Your choice of *intellectuals* would lead to a never ending succession of Liberal and NDP governments. Maybe not the ideal choice...

Then why the big concern about the legislation? If it helps Canadians with religious beliefs feel more secure about their place in our society and doesn't hurt anybody else what is the big deal?

Up until the Representative Mark Foley scandal broke last week it wasn't *obvious* the Republicans were poised to lose the House. Do explain how *throwing Harper his bone* would help Republican electoral chances. Gerry I said midterms the first time around. Take a look at my posts. It's tough to debate with somebody who ignores your posts. Did you really not notice I said that the first time around? I don't *always* make the posts about the poster. Only people who call the PM a wimp, his acitons *idiotic*, etc.... They don't hurt me Gerry. They make me laugh. While you are on the board, and respecting the rules of the board we will be cool and the gang. When you attack people and break the rules of the board with impugnity I will call you on it.

It is much more than a symbolic gesture. Harper and Bush have developed a relationship where a phone call gets things done. What more could Canada do about the Arar situation? Use military might? Actually Gerry. I pointed out the political costs to GW. But I'll make it very clear, just because you obviously didn't catch it. The *mid-term* elections in the U.S. are the elections for the House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate which take place in non-Presidential election years. As a Republican President GW Bush is considered leader of the Republican Party. So if the Republicans lose the house and/or senate that would be an example of the electorate resenting his actions. I take your lack of belligerence since your warning meaning that you have taken it to heart. The ongoing obtuseness is clearly a matter of lack of ability so I'll provide little explanations for you any time you require it.

Twisted logic? Again with the typical NDP hyperbole... There is a difference between the Conservative and Liberal strategy in dealing with the NDP for very logical reasons. The Liberals see the NDP as a natural enemy on their left flank. That is why Layton tried that dumbass "lend us your vote" in the last election. To Liberals that was just plain dumb, not really crazy. Conservatives see Layton as an annoyance and a typical hypocrite, as are many silver-spoon socialists. Like when he and Olicia were making $120K between them and living in a co-op in downtown Toronto. Paying $800 a month for a 3 BDRM. Originally claimed he was paying market value. wtf? Then he fessed up and moved. Good work jack!

What? Canada is becoming anti-Canadian? It's a legitimate complaint and a matter of style. Martin would have issued a press release and done interviews without speaking directly to GW.

Really? How do you know what was in the mind of most respondents to the poll? I take your silence on the other issues means you support Harper on all non-Afghanistan issues.

You keep telling yourself that. Remember to use actual names if the person you are referring to with a pronoun is unclear. Yeah, I think you are over-estimating your boy Iggy. He will probably hold his own in a debate. But won't *chew* anybody up. At least not in the eyes of the swing Liberal-Conservative votes who will decide whether or not Harper wins a majority. The only people Iggy appeals to in a debate are the snotty, intellectual elite Toronto types. Far more good, honest working Canadians out there. Much better for the CPC to appeal to them.