Wild Bill

Well then, are you agreeing that the West was OUT? Are you implying that the fact that the Liberals for some time had only one or two MP's like "Landslide Annie" McLellan counts as representing the whole West and makes the Liberals a national party? Somehow it seems like you are trying to have it both ways for the Liberals and no way at all for the Tories. As for Harper's speech, do you truly believe that the majority of Westerners have felt like the Liberals cared for their interests for the past few decades, if ever? Don't try to give me nitpicking historical details. I don't live in the West. You'd have to convince the Western half of Canada. Why don't you imply they are stupid for eschewing the Liberals a bit more. That oughta do it!

Perhaps now at least Carolyn Bennett is one Liberal who now appreciates law and order issues! We don't know yet who committed these acts of attempted murder, but we do know that if caught the legal system will not consider it such. It will be treated as merely public mischief, at least as far as sentencing goes. And which party is most responsible for that?

LOL! You beat me to it!

Give him a break, jdobbin! It likely took him at least 30 days to eat all those kittens Bush gave him with the boots!

I did! Who did you think I was talking about?

Ah, the perils of peaking too early! Still, we have 9 days to go. Lots of time for folks to waver back and forth. Meanwhile, I'm surprised that no one is talking about this Tuesday, when the CPC intend to reveal their economic platform! This could make a huge difference, either way! Dion's plan is so vague. If the Tories have something definite that appeals to the voters' gut then Harper could peak perfectly in a week at the polls. However, if it also seems vague and wishy-washy...

<sigh>, thus it has always been, BCc! It just seems to be the way many of our fellow citizens think. Politics is about perception far more than reality. You point out that there is a particular perception out there on the west coast. Some others will immediately claim "Well, they are WRONG because of..." This is absolutely irrelevant! It's going to do squat about changing everyone's minds! At the same time, many of these same people will try to demonize their political "enemy" by fostering a bad perception about his character. So they DO understand about perception and politics but just can't see it when it affects their own beliefs! I guess we all colour reality through our self-chosen sunglasses. Mine are Ray-Bans, like those of Jake and Elwood Blue.

LOL! No, they never would make such mistakes! They simply would have headed out to a restaurant like Bourbon Street in Pointe Claire, sat down and started handing out envelopes full of cash... Harper may not totally understand Quebec, but at least he's not a crook! Anything crooked he may have done pales in comparison to Adscam, like a kid stealing candy to a Charles Manson. If you're right, then how soon Quebecois forget! Kinda puts the lie to "Je me souviens"

I think you've confused the Commonwealth with NATO...

I wonder how many appeals for a strategic vote in another riding are phony? I mean, how can you tell if it's not really someone just trying to split the vote in a particular riding to allow someone else, even a Tory, to come up the middle? It seems to be totally an honour system and in politics that's an oxymoron.

Made a run yesterday from Stoney Creek to Port Dover, to make a pickup from a customer. I drove through Glanbrook into Haldiman-Norfolk along HWY 3, which is right through McHale's riding. I was struck by the sign count. Not that many, over all. The majority seemed to be Dianne Finley signs. A very few for her Liberal opponent. Not a single NDP that I noticed! The significant thing was that there was a surprising number for McHale! Of course, signs have only a loose connection to actual support but still, it's interesting...

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the UK to come and help us, unless it was a NATO thing. She is the Queen of Canada and the Queen of the UK but Canada and the UK have nothing else legally in common. As a figurehead, she couldn't force the UK to come and help, no more than she could force Canada to help the other way. We share a figurehead. That's it.

And under his sweater, beneath his platform, are his sleeves rolled up like Obama?

I would have appreciated being able to hear most of Harper's answers! Seems every time an opponent posed a question he and the rest of them jumped all over Harper so I couldn't hear the answer. Now I wake up to read my morning paper and see lefty critics savage Harper for not answering! Unbelievable! Dion and Duceppe weren't too bad but Layton and May sounded like refugees from "babble.com". No manners at all.

Lemme see here, we gave you innumerable actors, comedians and Apollo rocket scientists to help put a man on the moon. You gave us a few draft dodgers and Elizabeth May. Thanks a lot for nothing!

Good points perhaps but still, the West will never forget how the Liberals took them for granted for decades. Either they ignored them completely, like with British Columbia, or they actually bled them for brownie points in the East, with the National Energy Policy. Those old enough to remember the NEP saw people losing their jobs in droves! Commercial real estate in Calgary went from being scarce to a 30% vacancy rate almost overnight. Many folks couldn't carry their mortgage and lost their homes. Generations are going to have to grow old and die before negative feelings fade away towards the Liberal party in the West. Can't blame them, either.

You are simply not being fair! It may be true that every citizen has a duty to be aware of what's gong on in his society. Where is it written that YOU get to pick what he's supposed to investigate? If we spent our days investigating EVERY issue that someone like you pointed out we'd have time for nothing else, including eating, sleeping and getting rid of what we had eaten! When one man starts to claim that he has the right to set MY priorities then I demand the right to set HIS! I, like many are aware of what you point out. I simply don't consider your points valid enough to justify my time.

Invited? Wasn't this the lady who was threatening to sue if her party wasn't allowed in the debates? And what was so special about the Greens? Reform got far more votes than that in their first election and were flatly refused entry to the debates. Tell me again there's no bias in this country. As for Cuba, it's not a democracy. What relevance does that have for Canada?

And these links prove...what? The first two show that agencies like some banks and Merril Lynch agree with you. You must have heard the old story about "4 out of 5 doctors prefer Aspirin"? You might have to go through thousands of doctors to get those 4 but then you only need to take one of those who didn't prefer Aspirin to legitimately make your claim. ML and those banks might appreciate bail out money. Or do you believe ML and banks are too honest and saintly? Lots of folks might share your opinion. Lots of folks would have a different opinion. That's why they're called opinions and not facts. On to Montebello! Who sent those cops? The local police chief? The local RCMP chief? Charest? Harper? The head of a private security agency? Wouldn't it make a difference which specific individual gave the order? Would it make sense to blame Harper for something Charest had done, or either of them if it had been a local decision? Could the unionists have staged it themselves, for the publicity? DON'T try to tell us no such group would ever do such a thing! There are no saints in these matters, on either side. *shrug

"Claims" is exactly what they are! Not facts, but opinions. You listed your premises and elevated them to facts because YOU believe them! Now you expect everyone else to spend their time and effort in disproving them. While you are busy criticizing others for their debating skills, have you never understood that the onus of proof is on YOU? I suggest you try posting on "babble.com" where you will find most folks are perfectly willing to agree with each other on premises just like yours. You can join them in calling everyone who doesn't accept their arguments very, very bad names. This is known as "progressive" thought. For the most part, on this board we try to use reason. Some of us are better at it than others but almost everyone tries a bit harder than you have so far.

You might try reading what the Liberals themselves are saying about their tax. It will be on fuel, because fuel burned produces carbon. It will be on electricity, if it came from coal, oil or gas turbines. (This lets Quebec off the hook - hydro electricity is their main source. Go figure.) It will be on anything manufactured, if something was burned in the manufacturing process. Tractors that burn diesel while farming to provide our food. It will be on literally everything that you can construe an argument that it has burning and thus carbon emitting somewhere in the process of getting it to you. Just the increased shipping costs for planes, trains and transport trucks will add a hefty increase to the price. Dion claims that all this will be offset by income tax cuts. Just the thought of all the research and math that would be involved is pretty scary. Somehow, any errors will surely not be in our favour. Have you forgotten how when the GST came in we were told it would not be on necessities? Have you forgotten the uproar when we saw GST being charged on salt, sugar, flour and even feminine hygiene products? Or do you have total faith that a Dion government will be far more intelligent and honest than all previous governernments and make none of these mistakes?

Well, you started it! All these criticisms are just logical extensions of your own flawed premise. You really should try to be a bit more objective. Your arguments are like a scientist who already made up his mind and now is frantically looking for an experiment to prove his premise, merrily ignoring all the many experiments he does that disprove it. Just because you don't like Harper doesn't change the fact that two comes after one.

Because when you read their party literature it's really thin on workable economics and really long on the environment. Often their candidates economic views and/or history seem leftist. They obviously are trying to present themselves as more of a broad perspective party but they're young. They have a LONG way to go!

Of course not! He'd be an idiot to do that! He's the target! He'll get all the blame and no credit at all for appearing. I mean, really! Are you serious or just praying for a slipup?

"Sure I was a Tory! Honest! For years and years! Since I was a baby!" Firesign Theater said it best years ago: "You can believe me, because I never lie!"