I miss Reagan

LMAO

Done. Although I do think you are "denigrating" conservatives and thought you were defending the Liberals.

I honestly don't think I've been attacking you personally rather than your opinions. If I have been too harsh it's been response to the sweeping generalizations you have put forward which falsly claim my party has some hidden agenda of bigotry among other absurd claims. Point out any personal insults that offend you and I'll remove them.

What a load of dung. I feel like I'm being trolled, oh well. (edited) I don't know, maybe somebody should ask Mandella why he denegrated my hero by calling him a racist. (hint, my heros have always been cowboys ) The kind of party that supports free speech and the right to express one's opinion. The kind of party that wants to change this elected dictatorship. ...

Yes I know. It's my fault. I guess I was bored, sometimes it's just too hard to ignore the buffoonery .

I find this quite funny coming from one who decides to name himself after one of the biggest hypocrites in Canadian politics today . TURNCOAT How's that bumper sticker go.... "Definition of a Bigot: anyone winning an argument with a liberal.

Honest Abe didn't oppose slavery? "from his own mouth": "We have in this nation the element of domestic slavery. The Republican Party think it wrong - we think it is a moral, a social, and a political wrong. We think it is wrong not confining itself merely to the persons of the States where it exists, but that it is a wrong which in its tendency, to say the least, affects the existence of the whole nation. Because we think it wrong, we propose a course of policy that shall deal with it as a wrong. We deal with it as with any other wrong, insofar as we can prevent it growing any larger, and so deal with it that in the run of time there may be some promise of an end to it." Anyway I had no intention of debating the complexities of the US civil war but I think we can all agree that the issue of slavery played a major role in the conflict. I would like to know where you are getting this from and who you are comparing us to? Ah, so diversity only includes those who are not from conservative cultures. Hmmm So I guess we can exclude Africans, Asians... Sounds pretty typical of the liberal mentality of: tolerance only if we agree them. Is this an admission that perhaps we can trust the good nature of people rather than have a government nanny state? Honestly I have never been to a beach where I've had to pay to get in. I never have really heard of them. If you say they are there I can understand why. Violent crime is so rampant you need security everywhere you go. My good friend who lives in Cape Town had his ass kicked and his arm broken by some criminal on the beach. The beaches I went to I had to pay someone to watch my car. I was threatened with violence at one beach though. Elsewhere I was robbed and another time some guy tried to car jack me. We should start another thread on the state of South Africa. How extreme affirmative action is chasing all the money makers out of the country. How Mandella's ANC refuses to punish violent crime. How the victims of violent crime have no rights. How the borders are basically open to violent criminals streaming down from places like Nigeria. I could post the emails I get from another S. African friend about violent baby rapes and murders that happen daily.

I know I'm responding to your appeals to common liberal stereotypes and your contrary to fact hypothesis. It'd be good for you to at least try to back up your nonsensical rantings with some sort of facts. I'm not sure what you are saying. Is it that you decide who can be called a Christian and who can not. That's pretty phairisaical if you ask me. And what do the Mormons have to do with the price of rice in Seattle? Now we're affirming the consequent are we? If the Cons are down at the GOP convention, and the GOP have a lot of Christians in the party who arguably want to limit separation of church and state... then the Cons are down there because they want to limit the separation of church and state in Canada. WTF? So where do you draw the line? Are you going to take the word 'God' out of the National Anthem? Are you going to make Siehks take off their turbans as RCMP officers because they are employed by the state? I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to but should churches have the same rights as everyone else? That's pretty arrogant of you. Do also tell Budhists that they're not following Budda and tell them that they ought to be reincarnated as slugs? You know I hate to nit-pick at the fallacies because political discussions usually inadvertently involve this sort of thing. But I can't help it when someone seems to be purposely engaging in overtly eristic argumentation. You make such vague and provincial generalizations that are impossible to prove. And the petty arguments like "conservatives don't where seatbelts, there for they are hypocritical about law and order". Here's some advice. Take a look a Kimmy's most recent post on Rob Anders. She makes a clear and consise argument and backs it up with specific information. Try following her lead.

I think it is worth noting that The Terrible Sweal proclaimed that these 10 points as "An incisive, insightful summary of the degeneracy of conservative 'thinking'. Devastating in its accuracy and humor both." Takeanumber: IMO It's a pretty gross generalization to say that all conservatives are Christian and that they all think along the same religious lines even within the Christianity. But feel free to show me where in the CPC policy declaration it says we want to impose tithing on the people of Canada. For some reason the secular humanist left seems to think religious bigotry and stereotyping is fair play. Can't totally disagree with this one. Our conservative cousins down South had to fight a war against the Dems to eliminate slavery. Gotta love ol' Abe. There are other traditions we want to end as well, like that Canadian Liberal tradition of excessive taxation. Hmmmm. Devastating indeed. No you're mistaking us with the NDP. I'm with Kimmy on this one "who is against seatbelts". And as my ol' Uncle Bob says to his wife, "Dianne what in the hell are you talking about??" See response to point 2. And I'm not sure how you can make this assertion when the Conservative Party of Canada is the most diverse. I'm quite sure that Rahim Jaffer, Gurmant and Nina Grewal, Bev Oda, and Inky Mark would strongly disagree with you. Once again I'd like to see where in the CPC handbook it outlines this policy. I also have to wonder why Calgary, the Canadian bastion of conservatism, provides more community volunteer hours at places like these than anywhere else in Canada. You could've just shortened this and just screamed: "YOU'RE ALL HOMOPHOBES!" Nevertheless this dead horse has been beaten enough, I suggest referring back to some of the previous same sex marriage threads to get into this again. What do you have against ol' George? Let me guess you're a tree hugger still pissed that he chopped down that cherry tree. eh? I think you should call Rob Anders and tell him that you have appointed him spoksman for the CPC. BTW have you been to South Africa lately to see what a lovely place Mandella and his party have turned it into. I have. You should go. I suggest talking a stroll through a park in Jo'burg after dark. Or you could just ask one of the many educated South Africans here in Canada (brain drain result of affirmative action in S.A.) how they feel about what's happened in S.A. the past decade. What the hell are you talking about Dianne!!!? I'm sorry for the tongue-in-cheek but it's just so hard to take you seriously. When I lost count of all the fallicies I kinda gave up....

Oh *gag* give me a flippin break, don't flatter yourself. I think the message was clear from the cons on the forum that your falacy ridden insults were hardly worth responding to. Nevertheless we can delve into your mudslinging if you like in another thread...

Don't wish for that.La politique des pires, c'est la pire des politiques. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why not Aug. I actually think it'd be good. Something needs to light a fire under the people of this country to get some real reform. I don't think a Conservative minority will do it. When Mr. Dithers gets re-elected there will be some real rage in Quebec and Alberta. He's perfect for pissing everyone off the way he's passing out goodies in different amounts to different provinces and people depending on how much it takes to buy them off. This is creating some real resentment. We need to hit rock bottom, as they say. Let the shite hit the fan I say.

I think you are right Argus. Some of these usual suspects would likely describe themselves as "slightly" left of center or actually centerist as Ceasar claimed to be lol. I'm not sure they realize the political spectrum is more circular rather than linear and that they are a lot closer to the intolerant bible thumping radicals than us Conservatives are.

So true!! this is what I've been saying all along. I'd like to hear about some of your travels Aug. I too have visited some of these dictatorships and communist countries which many leftists seem to defend as some sort of Utopia as opposed to the fascist USA .

Ya but it's not like Quebec is going to disappear off the face of the earth, they'll still be there. I'm sure there would be plenty of trade agreements with them. If they were independent I'm sure they'd have lot more incentive to become more productive. How about this. Ontario takes care of the Maritimes and Manitoba, and we'll take care of BC and Sask. Eh eh? In fact P.E. Trudeau had the same idea "Screw the West! We'll take the rest!!"

It should be pretty interesting. We'll likely see more Liberal arrogance on display tonight, refusing to accept their own demise.

So that's how it works eh? We take one MP's comments and project them as the party line. This should be fun...

Ok, now I know you're just full of $hit on this one. You're just being stubborn in an attempt to not lose a debate. You're over your head on this one. C'mon now, answer the question. Why should we remain united other than emotional reasons? There isn't any reason. It has nothing to do with whether I like Quebec or not in fact I really do like them. Individually they are some of the nicest people I've ever met. I have a lot more respect for them than Ontarians. I think it'd be a positive move to be separate from each other. I like Russians and Americans too but it doesn't mean I think our countries should be united. We have different cultures.

Ya a real gem. A series of false and bigoted insults that can only be refuted by taking the topic of this thread in 10 different directions.

No no no, that isn't proof. That is a regurgitation of anti-US talking points. Proof is where you give me a reference to some real evidence where Bush is shown to conspire to provide false evidence. NO!. He was providing the best evidence there was at the time, which the whole world agreed with. To say that he knowingly decieved is slander. For instance if in January I tell you there are 30 moons orbiting Saturn and then in February they discover another moon it doesn't mean I was lying. It means I was giving what seemed to be rock solid evidence at the time. I think you guys understand this, actually I know you guys do. The fact is you love to hate Bush so badly you want every rotten thing people say about him to be true. Be honest with yourself.

I'm sure you do know someone who only has to work 4 days a week. I'll tell you that it isn't the norm. As for complaining, who doesn't complain. It's human nature especially in Canada. As for Quebec separating, who cares if they do? What benefit does Quebec bring to Canada. All this keeping Canada together business has nothing to do with anything except emotional attachment. This country would be far better split up.

He looked you in the face and lied to you? I think you're thinking of Bill Clinton. He was the grey haired guy with the big nose. Anyway, I think you need to get off the Michael Moore. Lying generally means you intend to decieve. Conveying faulty intelligence doesn't constitute lying. Prove it! Prove that he intentionally misled the American people into the war. I want documentation showing me that it was all part of the plan to lie.

You're a little slow BD so I'll try to be a little more clear for you. See: "In fact it seems the British people overwhelmingly support Blair in his decision to stick to supporting the US, although the media spin would have has believe something different." Part of the premise was that the media is spinning Blair's third majority into something negative. For the past 2 years the media has been claiming that Blair would likely fall in the next election. Even the day before the election the papers were claiming that this election was a referendum on Blair and his support for George Bush. If you like, BD, I'm sure I can find a more right slanted article for you. You really should get a job at the Globe and Mail. Remember the Tories are pro-War. And, "significant"!?. You consider 2 seats significant? yikes, you don't set the bar very high do you. Anyway this is becoming pattern behavior for you. According to you Bush won 04' based soley on the votes of religious radicals. And the story evolved when it suited your arument whether it was fear mongering, Kerry bashing etc. etc. Now, you're not saying the NDP isn't a credible arternative are you?

I knew the excuses would come. Try third consecutive majority. I guess if the Liberal-Democrats only recieved 22% of the vote, that means around 80% of Britans support the war.

There's that defeatist attitude of the Maritimes.... JK I love you Maritimers, even though you guys seem to be genetically Liberal. I agree with most of what you say except for the anti-west comments. But I just attribute those "hill-billy" type comments to indoctrination by the leftist press out there.

Response: This is what gets me about you radical leftists, you have no objectivity whatsoever. If anyone has principles and stands by them it's George W. Bush. You may totally disagree with those principles, you may think he's totally stupid insane, a war monger or any other pejoritive you have for him. Trudeau was principled, I've said it before and I'll say it again even though I can't stand the man. August even admitted the same. Trudeau made decisions based on what he thought was right (even though he was totally wrong), and he stuck by those principles. Paul Martin is unprincipled, a ditherer who flip flops which ever way will keep him in power as clearly evidenced in his budget flip flops first flips right to the conservatives, then makes a radical swing left to appease the NDP. He doesn't stand for anything.