Chretien on The Hour

[Michael Bluth]

They might also be uncomfortable that he has not learned anything from his error and find no reassurance that he wouldn't make the same mistake again.

I hope that Canada is not presently in Iraq only because the CPC is waiting on a majority. That would truly be *scary*.

Please try that line in the next election.

The more your put out the *scary* *scary* *scary* on what the CPC would do with a majority the more voters will roll their eyes like this --->

[jdobbin]

I hope that Canada is not presently in Iraq only because the CPC is waiting on a majority. That would truly be *scary*.

If he did, the view of some of some on the board would be: "Brilliant, simply brilliant! The man is a genius!"

Harper keeps angling for another two years in Afghanistan.

Here is what the very latest poll says Canadians think about that prospect:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/290195

An online survey of 1,052 Canadians by Angus Reid Strategies, conducted Dec. 19 and 20, shows 53 per cent of those polled believe Canada's troops should be withdrawn before the February 2009 deadline. Sixty-one per cent reject any suggestions of extending the mission beyond the deadline.

While Prime Minister Stephen Harper has mused about extending the mission if the House of Commons is agreeable, the poll shows 60 per cent of those surveyed don't believe Harper has done a good job of explaining Canada's role in Kandahar.

"The federal government continues to face a challenge in courting Canadians," concludes the survey, which is considered accurate plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Seventy-one per cent – up dramatically from 58 per cent in July – believe Canada is shouldering too much of the burden of the NATO Afghan mission, which involves nearly 40 countries and a total force of about 41,700 troops.

[BubberMiley]

Please try that line in the next election.

The more your put out the *scary* *scary* *scary* on what the CPC would do with a majority the more voters will roll their eyes like this --->

Really? But MDancer just said a few posts ago that he thought it was extremely effective and the only reason why Harper is failing to make it above the low 30s in the polls. Why didn't you challenge him on that?

[Michael Bluth]

Really? But MDancer just said a few posts ago that he thought it was extremely effective and the only reason why Harper is failing to make it above the low 30s in the polls. Why didn't you challenge him on that?

Didn't see him use the term 'extremely effective' or give a number in the polls. If he had given such an inaccurate and unsupported number I would have challenged him on that.

Even our resident poll misrepresenter wouldn't say the Conservatives have failed to make it above the low 30s in the polls.

tsk tsk tsk, is you argument so weak you have to make things up now?

[BubberMiley]

Didn't see him use the term 'extremely effective' or give a number in the polls. If he had given such an inaccurate and unsupported number I would have challenged him on that.

Weren't they at 29 in the last poll? Nevertheless, he said that Harper's inability to gain was due mostly to the "expertise of the liberal fear-smiths." Why do you avoid my question about your clear disagreement with Dancer about the effectiveness of their alleged strategy?

[jdobbin]

Weren't they at 29 in the last poll? Nevertheless, he said that Harper's inability to gain was due mostly to the "expertise of the liberal fear-smiths." Why do you avoid my question about your clear disagreement with Dancer about the effectiveness of their alleged strategy?

Just a shade over. They are are 30 with the Liberals at 32.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40th_Canadian_federal_election

[Michael Bluth]

Why do you avoid my question about your clear disagreement with Dancer about the effectiveness of their alleged strategy?

I dealt with it directly. If you had asked an honest question, or at least admitted your mistake in your question I will deal with your new one .

Is your anger and inability to focus based on depression at the thought that the Liberals are likely to be deprived of their G*d-given right to rule the country for the rest of the decade at least.

Oh yeah, here is the question you ignored.

tsk tsk tsk, is you argument so weak you have to make things up now?

[BubberMiley]

I dealt with it directly. If you had asked an honest question, or at least admitted your mistake in your question I will deal with your new one .

Is your anger and inability to focus based on depression at the thought that the Liberals are likely to be deprived of their G*d-given right to rule the country for the rest of the decade at least.

Do I come across as angry? Internetspeak can sometimes be misinterpreted, but rest assured I'm happy as a clam.

But yes, looking at dobbins link to the polls, I guess they have made it into the higher 30s and even touched 40. I didn't realize they've been tanking so severely in the past few months. Why do you suppose that is? I would have thought maybe the expert Liberal fear-smiths caused it, but you indicate that's impossible.

[Michael Bluth]

Do I come across as angry?

Most assuredly you do.

As evidence, this question you have been habitually ignoring. Quid pro quo Clarice..

tsk tsk tsk, is you argument so weak you have to make things up now?

The latest thing you made up? Claiming I said anything was impossible. Never did. No proof. Hence you made it up....

[margrace]

Please try that line in the next election.

The more your put out the *scary* *scary* *scary* on what the CPC would do with a majority the more voters will roll their eyes like this --->

Yes well I am hopeful that people aren't that stupid, the only reason I read these posts is to find out just how determined the right is to gain control and what they would do it the get it. It is scary.

[BubberMiley]

Most assuredly you do.

I obviously have to make more use of the smiley faces to debate with you to make sure my true emotions come across.

I suppose I also have to avoid paraphrasing and always quote directly so there are no little semantic cracks for you to hide in.

[Michael Bluth]

I obviously have to make more use of the smiley faces to debate with you to make sure my true emotions come across.

Glad you are taking it in good humour.

I suppose I also have to avoid paraphrasing and always quote directly so there are no little semantic cracks for you to hide in.

It's called honesty and the truth. Try it, you will sense the feelings of self-loathing ebb away when you do.

Yes well I am hopeful that people aren't that stupid, the only reason I read these posts is to find out just how determined the right is to gain control and what they would do it the get it. It is scary.

Already have power. Won't be a significant difference in the Government when we increase our standing to the House to majority status.

Stupid? tsk tsk tsk so symptomatic of the silver spoon Liberal set. "Stupid" masses how dare they deny us our G*d-given right as Canada's Natural Governing Party. Interesting how you don't hear that term very often these days.

[BubberMiley]

It's called honesty and the truth. Try it, you will sense the feelings of self-loathing ebb away when you do.

I guess you'd know.

[Michael Bluth]

I guess you'd know.

While various strains of the "I know you are but what am I" retort are common on the school ground I don't see it's applicability in this case. Could you be a bit more specific please?

[BubberMiley]

Could you be a bit more specific please?

Sorry. I check out of debates when they veer to the personal insults, like saying I must be "self-loathing." I was willing to ignore the sycophant remark because you couldn't spell it anyway, but keep it respectful and centred on the issues, not my character, and I will continue.

[Michael Bluth]

Sorry. I check out of debates when they veer to the personal insults, like saying I must be "self-loathing." I was willing to ignore the sycophant remark because you couldn't spell it anyway, but keep it respectful and centred on the issues, not my character, and I will continue.

If 'sychopant' was an insult why did you use it in your reply?

If you want to argue for respect how about not applying a double-standard?

Or is a Liberal supporter entitled to a higher level of respect than a Conservative supporter?

And the comment on spelling is respectful?

Two hypocritical statements in the same post. That's awesome!

[BubberMiley]

If 'sychopant' was an insult why did you use it in your reply?

Two hypocritical statements in the same post. That's awesome!

Oh dear, now you're calling me a hypocrite.

And I don't wear "sychopants." Just flat-front khakis for me.

[jdobbin]

And I don't wear "sychopants." Just flat-front khakis for me.

I think this is another case of a poster being "pantsed."

[Michael Bluth]

Oh dear, now you're calling me a hypocrite.

And I don't wear "sychopants." Just flat-front khakis for me.

If the pants fit. To be correct I 'proved' your hypocritical behaviour.

Please answer the question, given your admitted desire for respect.

If you want to argue for respect how about not applying a double-standard?

Or is a Liberal supporter entitled to a higher level of respect than a Conservative supporter?

And the comment on spelling is respectful?

Two hypocritical statements in the same post. That's awesome!

Edited January 3, 2008 by Michael Bluth

[guyser]

It's called honesty and the truth. Try it, you will sense the feelings of self-loathing ebb away when you do.

My oh my.

For one who burst a vein and had a conniption fit when told the same, it is suprising to see you dish it out. ...well not really.

[Charles Anthony]

Everybody,

Take this as a global warning: stop the personal attacks and just focus on discussing the topic.

I understand that tempers can easily flare and the debate can get heated but things are degrading into boring childish banter.

I do not care who started what. If the public nagging continues, there will be suspensions.

[Michael Bluth]

Everybody,

Take this as a global warning: stop the personal attacks and just focus on discussing the topic.

I understand that tempers can easily flare and the debate can get heated but things are degrading into boring childish banter.

I do not care who started what. If the public nagging continues, there will be suspensions.

You should care who started what.

This thread has degenerated into three posters attacking one.

You don't respond to reported posts despite stating you prefer them as a means of communication and these global warnings do nothing to stop the behaviour.

If guyser and jdobbin are going to feel free to jump in on the party and create a feeding frenzy against any conservative poster why should they stop if you are only going to issue a 'global warning'?

[jdobbin]

Just watching the interview again in the first link. You can see how Chretien's charisma comes through in an interview. Sad to say about the present leadership of the parties in Canada is that he probably could outwit them all and win again if he was so inclined. He would take apart the humourless Harper. Without a script, he would be left at sea in both languages against Chretien in debate.

[guyser]

Just watching the interview again in the first link. You can see how Chretien's charisma comes through in an interview. Sad to say about the present leadership of the parties in Canada is that he probably could outwit them all and win again if he was so inclined. He would take apart the humourless Harper. Without a script, he would be left at sea in both languages against Chretien in debate.

I dont see the charisma you do. Manipulative yes, shrewd , but charisma is something I save for poeple I like. Chretien doesnt do it for me.....then again, that other guy in office is completely devoid of all charisma, 'cept when he is wearing his black leather vest (too small) and his cowboy hat. Cuz, ya know everyone in Etobicoke wears one.

Both languages...?....yikes, he was bad in english, although understood.

[jdobbin]

I dont see the charisma you do. Manipulative yes, shrewd , but charisma is something I save for poeple I like. Chretien doesnt do it for me.....then again, that other guy in office is completely devoid of all charisma, 'cept when he is wearing his black leather vest (too small) and his cowboy hat. Cuz, ya know everyone in Etobicoke wears one.

Both languages...?....yikes, he was bad in english, although understood.

Charisma can be a characteristic in people you don't like as well. Mulroney had a lot of charisma. There's no doubt about that.

I certainly wouldn't want him to run again and thankfully, I don't think his wife would let him as well. I'm just saying that compared to the leaders we have now, he doesn't come off as wooden, humourless and not able to work without a script.

Harper has become better at making the prepared speech. That's one better than Dion. Layton's problem is that he can't keep from talking. Duceppe's problem is that he only has one issue.