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.

Well, you vote Liberal. Ah, I see, lets just kill everyone who opposes us. Well that makes me feel much better. Cuz I'd sure rather go in to a private hospital and put my life in to the hands of a system who's only accountability is to shareholders. And I mean seriously who cares if poor people couldn't afford health care or police or firefighters? They shouldn't be so damned poor. I was referring more to Iraq, North Korea, etc. Afghanistan I will agree is a whole other kettle of fish. Would you say you were going to do these things before you were given the power to do them? Of course not, because then they'd never get voted in.

Ok, I guess you misunderstood (or maybe I didn't explain it the way I intended)What I meant was federally the spirit is to help each other. I know Alberta or Quebec don't give two s**ts about any other Province else in this country. (And I'm talking about the governments not the people) What I'm saying is the federal policy is to take from our strengths to address our weaknesses. The difference between us and the U.S. being in the U.S. states are much more autonomous, I would say to a detriment of the country as a whole, than the Provinces are here in Canada.

I see what you're saying Ricki, but you keep saying "Cost" and what I'm saying is: What the Hell difference would dollars make if the Earth becomes uninhabitable? I'd much rather have a massive debt (which we already have anyway thanks to Mulroney and his boys) and be alive than have no debt and be dead.

Do you honestly feel that we would be running budget surpluses now if there had never been small-c conservatives in the House during the Chretien era? Do you believe that the Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA have been bad things for Canada? Do you realize that the accords with the US on acid rain were passed by a Conservative Prime Minsiter? btw, have you really taken a look at the Green Party platform? LOL. It there anything good Conservatives haven't done? Seriously though Conservatives have done some good things in spite of themselves, but what I was saying was to me their overall philosophy is flawed. Tax cuts > debt reduction. Looking to pick a fight > Peacekeepers Private Systems > Public Systems Missle Defence > Actually freakin talking to rouge states. Protecting Religion > Gay Rights (This one should be =) etc. The old Progressive Conservatives, all I felt about them is that they were misguided. But at least I felt like they had Canada's best interests at heart. And when they screwed up as was inevitable we Liberals could comein and fix the mess. This new group however I don't get that feeling. They want to do things to Canada that would damage it so much it would be unfixable. That's why I and a lot of other Liberals are so disturbed by the thought of them gaining a majority. As for Martin I wasn't a big fan of him either, Chretien was of course one of the best PMs ever and to shove him out the door was unforgivable. I still supported him because the alternative was unthinkable, but it was more a party thing than a leader thing.

He hasn't submitted a plan yet. So he gets a pass for now. But as long as he says he plans to meet the Kyoto targets then qutoes like the following are misleading and totally unrealistic. We don't have time for emissions to be reduced fairly under Kyoto. I'd argue that we don't have time to wait. Did you ever see An Inconvient Truth? I mean it starring Al Gore aside it is an informative movie.

Yeah, I'm a bastid.

Please don't try to make this board a Harper-hatefest. Well tell Harper to stop doing things that are so hateful! Seriously though, lets actually get back to the topic. The point I was trying to make before I skewed off in to my tangent is that I feel Dion is going after the Conservative base by showing them that they can have their cake (Prevent Climate change and certain death) and eat it too (Make money while they're doing it.)

Explain your original question? You ask if there are any Liberals I would like to see win. Ignorant question and I respond by giving MPs I want to see win. You respond by saying you can't think of one Conservative you want to see win??? There isn't one Conservative who is a credit to the House of Commons and serves his constituents well??? Ok, first I'd like to apologize for the question, it was ignorant and I realize that.However, I do think this conversation can continue without animosity and I'm anxious to do so. In answer to your question I was being honest. I don't think Conservative MPs are good because I don't think that any aspect of Conservatism is good. This is just a personal feeling here. The only aspect of Conservatism I can sort of get behind is the desire to have a strong military. But while I agree with that I think that my reasons for wanting it are different than manta Conservatism. My reason is I think that Canada should be a beacon of light and peace in the world, and our soldiers should be used in peacekeeping roles and the like. I get the feeling that hard core Conservatives want a strong military because they feel preemptive strikes are the only solution. i.e. Iraq.

Ok, I'd just like to publically apologize to my good friend Ricki.

Well if it isn't paid back it's not a loan.