HoratioCaine

Yeah! git rid of all dem furriners! And who needs rights and freedoms anyway? Why not just let the strong prey on the weak. Your post represents a complete lack of understanding of the point Leafless was trying to make. I love how Conservatives like to make themselves out to be smarter than everyone else whenever someone says something they don't agree with. No, I understood what was said completely I just chose to respond in the mocking way the original thought deserved.

Yeah! git rid of all dem furriners! And who needs rights and freedoms anyway? Why not just let the strong prey on the weak.

Ah, you like highlighting the Conservatives weaknesses.

Heh, not a chance in Hell. You think we in the center right/center/center left/left are stupid enough to believe that just because Harper hasn't tried anything he'd really like to try yet doesn't mean he wouldn't in a second if he got a majority?Talk about :lol: :lol: That's like me telling you this criminal over here hasn't tried to shoot anyone since I gave him a water gun so lets go ahead and give him a real gun and turn him loose. The Conservatives know they can't reshape Canada in their perverted image without a majority, but they also know they can't show their real hand before they get it or else they never will. Now I understand they've already fooled you and that's fine, but don't come at me with weak crap like that argument. Dude, Ricki's right. You really need to put *scary* *scary* *scary* to bed. Harper has performed admirably as PM and I am SO VERY HAPPY the Liberals are out of office and we actually have democracy in this country. I get giddy just thinking of a strong Harper majority for five or more years. We might have a transparent government and a stronger military and a greater voice on the world stage. You Conservatives need to give us Liberals a break when we argue with each other, we Liberals are at a disadvantage. At our very core we have this drive, this desire, this downright need to make sense that you Conservatives just don't have. And as a result we constantly get frustrated continuing an argument in vain.

Heh, not a chance in Hell. You think we in the center right/center/center left/left are stupid enough to believe that just because Harper hasn't tried anything he'd really like to try yet doesn't mean he wouldn't in a second if he got a majority?Talk about :lol: :lol: That's like me telling you this criminal over here hasn't tried to shoot anyone since I gave him a water gun so lets go ahead and give him a real gun and turn him loose. The Conservatives know they can't reshape Canada in their perverted image without a majority, but they also know they can't show their real hand before they get it or else they never will. Now I understand they've already fooled you and that's fine, but don't come at me with weak crap like that argument.

Hello?

I hear what you're saying, but at least he's pretending to care now, so maybe he won't do as much damage as I thought in the short time between now and when we get another majority.

Ricki my oldest and dearest friend, who was the last Liberal leader not to become Prime Minister? Lord how I can't wait to see Dion debate Harper, I might actually feel sorry for Harper when it's over. Well, maybe not. Speaking of being baked...

One long agonizing year, but still at least we can thank our lucky stars it wasn't a majority.

The NDP have to stick with the Reformers, Layton knows there is no chance in Hell he even maintains what he has now, let alone gains.

Yeah, they're already playing the Boob card. (The latest commercial features a gratutious shot of the daughter's rack and then the pop saying "Have you're bosoms gotten bigger?") That's usually a death knell for a show such as this, grasping at straws.

Nah, he'll never be PM. I mean for God's sake someone from Quebec can't win seats in Ontario, just ask Jean Chretien! Oh wait....

People like you are the reason we have global warming deniers. Exaggeration just ruins all credibility. We'll never have 60-70 degree heat. Yeah, cuz the whole world is depending on me for their info.

Well, that was well thought out analysis. Ricki? You got on me for attacking a group of voters. SICK EM! SICK EM! Really? You don't listen? But you seemed so informed. I hope you enjoy drowning, or perhaps baking to death in 60-70 degree heat.

Exactly and calling a contribution a "loan" doesn't make it a loan if there is no intention by either party to have it paid back. Are there any mechanisms to ensure that these "loans" are in fact repaid and by who? The cynic in me says that no matter what rules are made or who makes them, parties and politicians will start looking for ways to circumvent those rules because money is too important to success. Yes, but what I'm saying is we wouldn't call it a "loan" unless we intended to pay it back.Like I say I have no problem with parties leveling the playing field while the campaign finance laws are so lopsided toward one party. Campaign Finance laws should be geared so that no one party benefits more than another. This whole banning donations from one source thing is the problem. What I'd suggest is something like a cap, that says parties can spend so much money per year. (more in an election year of course) But they can get it from any source, Individuals, Companies, Unions whatever.