I Miss Trudeau

Rather, I think the problem is your inability for self critical thought. You've yet to provide a basis for why all humans ought to have liberty, and furthermore, why the liberty of other individuals is any of my concern. Of course, you won't do this because you can't. The majority moral philosophers have long since abandoned the project that you're undertaking because it is entirely fruitless. Its not logically indefensible in the least. Repugnant, perhaps, but not inconsistent. At any rate, the easiest way around this is to reject the entire premise from the get go. Whoa...wait a minute. You're the one making these assertions. YOU construct an argument to support them. This claim has been so thoroughly refuted that it literally pains me to see it yet again. More to the point, I've merely attacked your conception of morality. Of course I do. I also reject your nonsensical claim that human behavior can be known a priori, but thats neither here nor there. Nonsense.

So, in other words, the caveat itself is precisely the sort of thing that it intends to prevent.

Oh jeez. You want an actual example, perhaps even evidence, of the sell out? My, if only we could extend the same courtesy to all MP's in his situation.

No, I think he is on about an article that appeared in the National comPost the other day claiming that environmentalists were responsible for more deaths than Nazis and Stalinists. Of course, the article was nonsense, as it promotes that all too typical right wing mindset... "this extreme or this extreme. there is nothing in between."

The problem isn't the existence of christian people within either paty. The problem is that christian faith is the platform and vision for Canada of one of the parties. Regardless of whether or not you want to live "Christian ethics," one party is intent on making you do just that.

He has sold out to the radical christian right in the hope of winning again next election. To fatten the purse, he's also recieved a personal guarantee from Focus on the Family that he won't burn in hell. The man clearly has no principles.

True enough. Just look at Harper's attempted bribe to Cadman... "Vote with us and we won't force you to embarass another CPC candidate next election."

Whore! Opportunist! Prostitute!

No. Audio experts say the tapes were altered, Grewal says not. Try to be at least a little honest with yourself. Thats because some idiot altered the tapes and gave Murphy and Dosanjh a free ride. When is Harper going to quit burning his own barn and build something... anything? Glitches have a habit of deleting the most embarassing phrases of one participant to the conversation, I'm sure. Of course, not even just a bit of the phrase, but the whole damn thing. Or, in other words, Grewal was trying to sell his vote and was turned down. For Grewal, the most incriminating evidence are the gaps themselves, regardless of what was in them. What on earth are you talking about? You just can't resist the urge to throw in some completely irrelevant comment to score cheap political points, can you? Or maybe they've looked at the events of the last weeks and decided, with some justification, that the Liberals, all things considered, aren't much, if any, worse than the Conservatives. But of course, the Conservatives are just fine, and any opposition to the Cons stems from the fact that everyone east of Winnipeg is an imbecile. Err, except for the enlightened voters of Quebec.

The Conservatives would fair worse under MacKay than under Harper.

Unbelievable.. proof that the CPC will do anything to get into power, and not a single CPC supporter on MLW to condemn their actions. So much for the high ground.

I disagree. The frequency of sudden stops and changes in background ambience (sometimes mid sentence!) combined with the ridiculously long time before they were released make this whole situation very suspect. Just how long does it take to release 4 hours of tapes?

Do they all spontaneously stop and/or edit those recordings mid conversation, too?

If they are indeed using auto-dialers in an attempt to shut down the servers and fax lines, I would hope that they'll be subjected to the same sort of criminal prosecution as those idiots that perpetrate denial of service attacks on web sites. If it is in fact just a bunch of moralising morons having a tantrum...hell, I'll donate some bandwidth to their "Stop the Conservatives from being elected!" campaign.

No, they are just informed enough to know that it was BS. So Mr. Burns, unintentionally, demonstrates that PIPA was right.

Christians are already overwhelmingly represented in our parliament. I think what you meant to say is "Why should fringe 'christians' be left on the fringe?"

Them homooohsexuals are taking over! Better git yer gun!

This fundamental problem with your position was raised in another thread, and you were unable to answer it there, either. To the thief, you keeping things that he/she needs to survive locked away in your house is an act of force. He is merely using force as a response to your force.

The serperatists and federalist conservatives are using misrepresentations and outright lies as a means to gain political advanatage. Thats what is "systemic." The people of Quebec are having the wool pulled over their eyes, and you, August, seem to revel in it.

Troll: see here

Both of whom are dedicated to removing a restriction placed on members of our society. A restriction that the CPC is fighting vehemently to maintain. Can you supply even one example of the NDP trying to control your life? Can you supply anything to substantiate this claim? So I suppose preventing you from physically abusing another person violates your rights too, right? When contrasted with your earnest desire to be permitted to vehemently abuse other people, my alleged desire seems downright benevolent. And thanks for pointing out just how absurd your views really are.

I'm not a big fan of FPTP, but I don't really see how dooming every future Canadian parliament to the type of unproductive nonsense we've just witnessed is any better.

Got anything to back up your claim, or should I just dismiss it as the usual anti-Liberal rant?

Do you honestly believe this crap? Or did you just get it from Gutterford or Liefield and figure, "Hey, this sounds clever!" I mean, you make it sound like homosexuals are trying to tell you that you can't have heterosexual marriages, rather than the other way around.

You can't seriously be expecting consistency on the part of the right, can you? Let me clarify for you: If the Liberals are acused of making deals for votes, they are dishonest crooks. If the Conservatives are accused of making deals for votes, they are doing God's work.