ScottBrison

Well, the reason I picked my party is because their ideaology supports my personal interests.

If I were faced with this situation I would vote for party over man, because you know the guy on most occasions is going to be whipped into voting with his party, and I mean he must support their ideals because that's a requirement to join the party. If you don't support their ideaology then really you'd be voting for something you don't want.

The only thing I'll say is this: I'm very happy that Ed Broadbent offered what he did, because now the Conservative Alliance won't have any excuses when they lose the Confidence vote on Thursday.

153-153, 152-152, 151-151, Makes no difference to me, the speaker still casts the deciding vote

I can't imagine much better than hearing the absolutle silence from all you right wingers when the government wins that vote.

I actually agree with you there, but the difference is I think she should be thrown out and a Liberal put in her place

Since you only joined this board, uh, two days ago, I find your opinion about the level of debate somewhat premature - unless you meant it as a threat. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well first of all, just because I joined two days ago doesn't mean I was born two days ago. Secondly I don't threaten people, so I'm sorry if you felt threatend, it wasn't intentional. And thirdly I'm pretty young so I'm just wondering what your name means? What happened in August of 1991?

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR You shall all pay! I will unleash the awesome fury that is the Canadian army against you!

Ok, let me try something else, because if humanly possible I want us to agree on something, so here goes: The surface of the sun is hot. ....discuss!

Can't we all just get along? I guess not. Well, I tried.

ROFL Nice one.

It came to my attention that the level of debate on this board is progressively getting worse the closer that we come to elections, and I am more than willing to accept my share of the blame for that. I feel passionatly for what I believe in and since I'm a sarcastic S.O.B. often times that leads to me proving my point using said sarcasm. So I'd like, if it's humanly possible, to see if we can build some bridges in this thread. So if you want to argue that's cool, but do it in PM or in another thread is all I ask. So I'll get started. - I believe that Canada is the greatest country in the world. Can we at least agree on that?

I can't help it if you're not sickened by Conservatives claiming Liberals would use a life threatening illness to further their agenda. That's a problem you need to deal with yourself.

I understand what you're saying but what I personally believe in my heart is that Harper and this new Ultra Right version of the party is just saying these things to gain power. Because they know that once they get in there will be nothing to stop them. I do apologize for lowering the level of debate here, but don't just single me and bd out. It's not just us.

If you believe that I've got some swamp land in Florida I can let you have for a song! But I'm not worried about the rights they have now. What I'm worried about is the rights they currently have now being trampled on or eliminated completely by Harper and his Nazi buddies. I'm not going to argue with you further on that one, because although I don't personally agree with your beliefs I do respect them. No, it's about a Liberal insulting a Conservative member's intelligence. Do I think this was uncalled for? Yes. Letting strippers jump the queue for immigration is a slap in the face to every immigrant that has strugged for enterance and citizenship in Canada, those that truly deserve it. This I will agree with you on, I'm not deluded into thinking that members of the Liberal party can't do any wrong, and I do think there should be a more independant way for these matters to be dealt with so that: a) We don't end up with a party policing themselves. We don't end up with a witch hunt, with a party not giving a damn about justice, only about gaining power. c) And most importantly we don't see people getting away with these transgressions. I believe this would be the only way to stem this tide. I'm proud to be part of a party that can change it's opinion in the face of overwhelming public support, that's not waffeling, that's hearing what the people want and doing it.

So lets see now, say you were in the Conservative party and it merged with say, the NDP and the NDP took over and put their agenda in. Would you stay in this new party and let your values be trampled on? Or would you switch to the party that more closely represented your values? Nah, why bother asking? I imagine you'll say you'd stay or make up some bullshit about the Progressive Conservatives not getting hijacked just so you don't have to be wrong.

well, um, not discriminating against people based on stuff they're born with such as, oh I don't know, sexual orientation ummmmmm allowing women to choose what to do with their own bodies, you know. Minor stuff.

In regards to the comments directed at Inky Mark. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, it's ridiculous to call the Conservatives human beings. And as for the gene pool comment anyone with half a brain can see he was referring to intelligence. Leave it to a Conservative to leap to a bigoted assumption like that. It's all they know.

Your the second person to talk to me like you think I really am Scott Brison. heh, I think he's got better things to do, he's not Josh Lyman after all And as for the Crooks reference there aren't any Conservatives who were ever crooks a....a...aah....aaaaah aaaaaaaaaaaah chMULRONEYoo *sniff* hmm, some pollen around here I think. The reason I chose Brison is because I admire him, In my opinion (And I know the Conservative Alliance has other ideas) he stood up for what he believed in, sure he's a blue Liberal, but i'm proud to have him in my party.

For the Conservative Alliance to say that the Liberals were hoping that their cancer would prevent them from voting is sickening. They didn't seem to care too much about Chuck Cadman who wasn't even able to make it, but oh that's probably because he's expected to vote for the government. Add the 2 ministers who were voluntarily not there and we've got a tie boys and girls. Then the speaker, who is to vote to keep the status quo, votes for the government and wow we've got a yes vote. And it was the Conservative Alliance who put this procedural motion forward to begin with! Hypocrites. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...ment050511.html

Oh I won't be going anywhere, except to my seat on the Right side of the house.

I think the number one issue for the Liberals is obviously The Sponsership file, and the #1 issue for the CONs whether they like it or not is are they genuinly interested in fixing the mess or just grabbing at power? How Canadians feel about those two issues will be key, everything else in my opinion, will get overshadowed.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Can anyone say push poll? I can see the question now: "Keeping in mind that the Gomery inquiry says that the Liberals are scum sucking maggots who have not only stolen gajillions of dollars from the public purse and used it to buy each and every one of them a kickass Ferrari, but have also tried on several occasions to steal your children from you and make them work as slaves to fund their coke habits, and also keeping in mind that the Conservative Alliance has a platform of free milk and cookies for all Canadians, tax cuts so deep it'll make your wallet actually smile at you, and Steven Harper finished second place in balloting for the new Pope, who are you most likely to vote for if an election were held today?" Seriously tho, if Harper gets in defecting to Iraq would look good.

Q:Will the government fall tonight?, Or will we have a constitutional crisis? No, and No.