cybercoma

Harper is part of that system, but I'm sure you feel that he doesn't share any blame for the present situation. The hoopla and nonsense he has helped create on parliament hill are also irrelavent to the apathy of voters, I'm sure. The reality is that many Canadians equate our parliament with sandbox antics, an attitutde which is, sadly, accurate. Harper hasn't really raised the level of discourse up there, has he? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This has nothing to do with parties, the collective apathy of voters is a growing problem. No matter who is leading the country, only a fraction of voters will have voted for them. The hoopola on Parliament Hill may be taxing (no pun intended) to some voters patience; however -- this is my personal opinion, I'd much rather have someone harping (no pun intended again) on the Liberals for the Gomery problems than an opposition that kicks back and just let's all this illegal activity slide.

And she continues her quest to never becoming a party leader ever, in her entire career. It's a good move for the Liberals, but they're simply going to use her and throw her to the curb when they're done with her. All's fair in politics and it makes for good ratings.

What exactly do I not get? I didn't read the entire conversation, I just saw your pompous post and thought I'd point out that I get a chuckle at your gimmick.

60.5% of voters turned out for the last election, of them 37% voted for the Liberals. If I'm not mistaken that works out to around 23% of Canadians actually voting for the Liberal Party. My point? This is hardly a reflection on what Canadians really want and more a reflection of the apathy Canadians have towards the entire system.

How many posts can you make, claiming you're the bearer of arcane knowledge? Oh, excuse me...not arcane knowledge -- simplistic views that everyone else is too stupid to grasp. I don't know whether your "I'm smarter than you" gimmick is funny or sad.

What this country needs right now, more than ever, is a Pierre Trudeau.

Stronach switching parties makes this question even more difficult. How fair is it to the voters that voted for the party they wanted in power (in this case the Conservatives for Newmarket) only to have their candidate switch to the other team?

I have the vague notion that money was not a motivating factor for her. It seems she realized that she would never be leader of the Conservative Party and hence, she would never be PM, as a Conservative. Thursday's vote seems to have concentrated her mind.OTOH, I kind of prefer the National Enquirer version that she's taking public revenge on Mackay for some indiscretion. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, she's a billionaire, I was being facetious. It's quite simply the fact that Stephen Harper told her she'd never be Party leader...as you said. She decided to jump to the Liberals because she probably figures she can be a more prestigious public figure that way. It's simply a grab at attention for her. She wants to be in the limelight and this is the only way she can.

I wonder how much in taxpayer's money she stands to make from this transition... I mean, to align yourself with a party wrapped up in a criminal matter such as this...you certainly implicate yourself as a supporter of such activities.

Took the words right off my keyboard. I like this guy's assessment.

Why is this a problem? Your favourite candidate just proved to you the NDP is a viable option. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I simply don't agree with the idea of spending us into bankruptcy.

The whims of Ontario, that's rich. If anything we're probably the most crapped on province, paying more into the system than we get back. Thanks for the laugh.

Hey! I resemble that comment! Resent....I mean resent.....

Honestly, I've got nothing better to do than vote. I'd much rather pretend I have a say than be told who our leader is going to be for the next 3 decades.

You know what's tiresome? Your tirades about how parliament is being toyed with or even held hostage by THE MAJORITY of representatives that were democratically elected to defend their positions, which they are doing. I know it's awfully difficult for you to come to terms with having the MINORITY of votes in the house right now, but it's a reality of the situation. The majority of elected representatives want this government to pack its bags, but you...just like the liberal party...are clinging to the idea that a single party makes the rules. If anyone is being crass here, it is you and the Liberal Party for completely ignoring the wishes of the majority.

I'm willing to bet Saddam's ties to al-Qaeda are on a lower level to the United States' ties.

There is as libertarian party (as someone had corrected me when I first started posting here), I've just never seen a candidate for it.

If the shoe were on the other foot, I'm certain you would find it an absolutely wonderful prospect. If it meant getting the Conservatives out of power ASAP, because they were unlawfully using YOUR money that you made from working your butt off, I can't see you having a problem with it. Maybe I'm wrong.

Actually, sorry Sweal...this was uncalled for.

I hate to say this but I hope there's mass protests in Ottawa if the Liberals win another minority government. I hope people from all over the country arrive, holding candlelight vigils for the death of our country.

The only thing I like about Jack Layton is that out of everyone in Parliament right now, he's the only one that has specific goals to accomplish and is getting things done in an unwavering manner. He has stood for his party's beliefs and whether I like it or not put them into action. What's even better is that he has made no qualms about voting against the liberal government once the budget is passed. If Stephen Harper would've just settled down and continued pointing out the damning evidence from the Gomery inquiry, he could've had the NDP on his side after the budget passed. As much as I disagree with the NDP and as funny as it is to picture Jack Layton as the leader of the kids table during thanksgiving dinner, he really does have all the other party leaders on a leash. While they sit back and fight he's actually getting things accomplished.

We all want a better country, we just have vastly different opinions on how to achieve that.

5 to 10 litres...GET IT? GET IT!? Gas is expensive! BAHAHAHAHAHA!

I'm just wondering what everyone here would do when posed with the following problem. In my riding there is a particular candidate that has done tremendous things for this city, has sat on city council and has been very vocal in demanding the things we need here most. Of all the candidates he's probably the only one who has his head squarely on his shoulders and actually knows what's going on around here. Here's my problem....the NDP picked him up as their candidate. So during a federal election, do you vote for the party you want in power, regardless of the particular candidate that is running for them...or do you vote for the person whom you think will be the most beneficial for your corner of the country?

YAWN! Someday maybe you right wingers will learn that vapid dismissals do not amount to valid rebutals. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why bother with a valid rebuttal against a mental invalid?