punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Two word answer: Rahim Jaffer.He has brown skin. He is Muslim. He is young and handsome. He won four elections as a Tory. He is from Alberta. Sucks to have him violate all your stereotypes, eh? He is the one who lost to the NDP in ALBERTA? Yah he is gone forever. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 It was rather shocking wasn't it! Quote
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) It was rather shocking wasn't it! It was amazing is what it was. Next time they will nominate a white guy Edited January 4, 2009 by punked Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 It was amazing is what it was.Next time they will nominate a white guy I don't think that had much to do with it actually. Nor do I think that is a good solution for them. The problem was the man, and now he is gone. Quote
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 I don't think that had much to do with it actually. Nor do I think that is a good solution for them. The problem was the man, and now he is gone. It was Alberta. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 The Tories have more visable minorities and women MP's than any other party in Ottawa. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 It was Alberta. We are a little different here, that I will admit. In the case we speak of, turfing a Conservative for a New Democratic Party representative is fairly extreme here. Quote
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) The Tories have more visable minorities and women MP's than any other party in Ottawa. Percentage wise? Becuase the Tories have more seats then any other party in Ottawa. Wait 15% of the conservative caucus are women but 32% of the NDP are women. Edited January 4, 2009 by punked Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 Percentage wise? Becuase the Tories have more seats then any other party in Ottawa. Facts are facts. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Facts are facts. Only when you twist them. The Cons ran less women then any other party. Facts are facts. Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Facts are facts. Statistically, the NDP is far more representative than the Tories. That's the facts. Trying to compare absolutes is really quite retarded. Quote
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Did you know the Cons have more white males as MPs then any other party? Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 Did you know the Cons have more white males as MPs then any other party? I'm sure they do. Canada is 80% white in case you didn't know. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
gordiecanuk Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 He did no such thing, he assembled the council which is different from defining it. Christianity was decided upon by the Bishops and Priests present. I assume you know this but just enjoy being a twit. If you're too lazy to read about what you criticize I'm not going to condone your own sloth.Here you go. A short form for you to read and learn about what it is you want to hate. Christianity Catholicism and The Holy Catholic Church in particular. So a pagan emperor of Rome assembles a group...a group of Bishops and Priests of his choosing. And Peter agreed to being 1st Bishop of this abomination? Oooops, sorry...he was already dead and decomposed when all this happened. Quote You're welcome to visit my blog: Canadian Soapbox
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) I'm sure they do. Canada is 80% white in case you didn't know. And half of Canada is female but only 15% of the Cons caucus is what is up with that? Facts are facts they have more white males thus they are not representative of women or minorities. You said it facts are facts. Edited January 4, 2009 by punked Quote
gordiecanuk Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 And half of Canada is female but only 15% of the Cons caucus is what is up with that?Facts are facts they have more white males thus they are not representative of women or minorities. You said it facts are facts. There are very few (any?) Cons who represent Canada's 3 largest cities...Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver. They are however very well represented in rural areas where immigrants are tokens at best. Quote You're welcome to visit my blog: Canadian Soapbox
ToadBrother Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 I'm not a Jew therefore I don't rule myself by the first 5 books of the Bible. How very convenient. HEre we go, with the selective "These laws don't apply to me" nonsense. The Bible is sacrosanct, except for those bits that would land you in a prison cell, or a rubber room. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 How very convenient. HEre we go, with the selective "These laws don't apply to me" nonsense. The Bible is sacrosanct, except for those bits that would land you in a prison cell, or a rubber room. Not at all Mr. Toad. I'm merely pointing out that Jews use the first 5 books as a set of Laws whereas Catholics use the entire, complete Bible. Protestants use a shorter Bible as Martian Luther tore 7 books of the Bible out cause he disagreed with them. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
WIP Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) He did no such thing, he assembled the council which is different from defining it. Christianity was decided upon by the Bishops and Priests present. I assume you know this but just enjoy being a twit. If you're too lazy to read about what you criticize I'm not going to condone your own sloth.Here you go. A short form for you to read and learn about what it is you want to hate. Christianity Catholicism and The Holy Catholic Church in particular. Did you happen to notice that the Wiki articles on the history of Christianity and Catholicism leap from the time of the Apostles right to the 4th Century when Constantine makes it the official religion of the Empire? The reason is that the period of time that Christianity was forming and the period it went underground during the persecutions is almost a void, with no clear facts and contradictory claims of church leaders in various parts of the Empire. There seems to be evidence of an attempt to establish orthodox doctrines and collections of scriptures, since during the 1st and 2nd Centuries, every church had different collections of scrolls that they were calling scripture. It Started with Marcion, who was later branded a heretic - who produced the first collection that was being called the Bible. What you don't find is evidence for the doctrine of Apostolic Succession or making the Church of Rome pre-eminent. The establishing of a Catholic Church have more to do with Emperor Constantine's desire to try to keep his empire united, and since the traditional Roman gods were losing favour to Isis, Mithraism and other new religions, Christianity was his default choice, likely for nothing more than secular reasons that it was practiced throughout the Empire and was popular among the underclasses who he was trying to get back on good terms with. Edited January 4, 2009 by WIP Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Not at all Mr. Toad. I'm merely pointing out that Jews use the first 5 books as a set of Laws whereas Catholics use the entire, complete Bible. Protestants use a shorter Bible as Martian Luther tore 7 books of the Bible out cause he disagreed with them. You are wrong the Jews use the whole old testament they call it the tanhak. They also have the Talmud, and three or four other books. Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Not at all Mr. Toad. I'm merely pointing out that Jews use the first 5 books as a set of Laws whereas Catholics use the entire, complete Bible. Protestants use a shorter Bible as Martian Luther tore 7 books of the Bible out cause he disagreed with them. The Jews use a number of different sources. Judaism is another in a long list of things you know nothing about. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) The Jews use a number of different sources. Judaism is another in a long list of things you know nothing about. Yes, very good. You still see me as a threat as many here do or they simply would ignore me until I fell into obscurity. Your and those like you who give me constant attention and airtime give me legitimacy. If I really don't matter then let me spout on about whatever I like without you responding to me. Edited January 4, 2009 by Mr.Canada Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
punked Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 What I just point out when someone says something I don't agree with. I think all peoples should do this. Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 4, 2009 Report Posted January 4, 2009 Yes, very good. You still see me as a threat as many here do or they simply would ignore me until I fell into obscurity. Your and those like you who give me constant attention and airtime give me legitimacy. We're here to debate. You continually demonstrate ignorance on a number of subjects, so others feel compelled to show just how ignorant you actually are. Saying "Jews don't use just the first five books of the Bible" isn't giving legitimacy, it's demonstrating how stupid you are. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Posted January 4, 2009 We're here to debate. You continually demonstrate ignorance on a number of subjects, so others feel compelled to show just how ignorant you actually are. Saying "Jews don't use just the first five books of the Bible" isn't giving legitimacy, it's demonstrating how stupid you are. IS what I said false? Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.