Harper to prorogue parliament AGAIN?

[nicky10013]

I really don't care what you personally believe.

The fact is you have slandered an entire caucus with no proof, until you can substantiate your claims against the whole caucus you have lost the argument. But we both know you can't provide that list of each Mp sourced with multiple examples of them lying.

I really could if I wanted to. I'm just lazy. I think most people would agree with me, even if they don't sympathize with me over the laziness.

[nicky10013]

Real conservatism used to be about conservation of wealth and maintaining a stable society..now it seems that neo-conservatism is about conserving wealth and making sure no one touches your hoarded heap.

Yep. I would vote PC, unfortunately, the party has been co-opted by Karl Rove loving Bushites.

[nicky10013]

I really don't care what you personally believe.

The fact is you have slandered an entire caucus with no proof, until you can substantiate your claims against the whole caucus you have lost the argument. But we both know you can't provide that list of each Mp sourced with multiple examples of them lying.

Ahahahaha only a Conservative automatically declare the argument over and the opponent lost. Are you proroguing this thread?

[Alta4ever]

I really could if I wanted to. I'm just lazy. I think most people would agree with me, even if they don't sympathize with me over the laziness.

Then do it. Otherwise you have nothing.

[Alta4ever]

Ahahahaha only a Conservative automatically declare the argument over and the opponent lost. Are you proroguing this thread?

The argument is over until you can prove your statement.

[William Ashley]

I really don't care what you personally believe.

The fact is you have slandered an entire caucus with no proof, until you can substantiate your claims against the whole caucus you have lost the argument. But we both know you can't provide that list of each Mp sourced with multiple examples of them lying.

How much proof do you need, look at the platform they ran on, and what they have delivered. Easy enough to see, no?

1. Elected Senators NO

2. Killing the Gun registry NO (they killed parliament)

3. Lowest Unemployment rate LIES

4. Lower tax burdens LIES

5. Economic Development LIES reality DEFICIT SPENDING

6. National Sovreignty LIES (North America Deals sells out Canadian Sovereignty) Cons can't create a defence policy that is adequettely funded to stop Russian overflights of Canadian Territory, or turn back boats in our coastal waters.

7. The North - what collapse of Northern Ontario's Industry? The slow progression to ghost towning the north? Making Native Living methods imposible due to climate change, and destruction of the natural environment by infrastructure programs that destroy survivability of native living.

8. Environmental Protection - what by cutting down a 1600 KM x 1km tract of land?

The list goes ON LIES LIES AND MORE LIES... that is your CONSERVATIVE CAUCAUS.. CONS CONS CONS. CON MEN AND THE ODD CON WOMAN ARE DOING.

Is it clear now that you can see who the lyers are.. the CONSERVATIVE CRAUCUS.

The public however are the layers for this one, taking it on their back while they are gang raped by these crooks, taken for everything while these maleficents live the high life on tax payer dollars on the dupe.

Edited January 7, 2010 by William Ashley

[Alta4ever]

How much proof do you need, look at the platform they ran on, and what they have delivered. Easy enough to see, no?

They have delivered on much of there platform.

[nicky10013]

Then do it. Otherwise you have nothing.

Meh, I suppose so. I guess I'll just have to slander you next. Considering your sig at the bottom of each of your post, you're a liar and a hypocrite, too. Coalitions are pefectly legal and by trying to mislead people about the legality of said coalitions. I'm assuming you bought a button from the party. Where'd the idea come from? I'm betting the PMO. That goes back to the entire point. He runs the entire show. That's what my point rests on.

So, it seems the entire crux of yours lays on you trying to prove that Harper is actually far weaker, and not the strong glorious leader Conservatives try to make him out to be. Right?

[nicky10013]

They have delivered on much of there platform.

They cut the GST which has ruined the finances of Canada and thrown the rest under the bus. Try again.

[nicky10013]

The argument is over until you can prove your statement.

I supplied three examples over a litany of others and you just dismissed them as weak. So, ignoring things is just the norm then, eh?

[Alta4ever]

Meh, I suppose so. I guess I'll just have to slander you next. Considering your sig at the bottom of each of your post, you're a liar and a hypocrite, too. Coalitions are pefectly legal and by trying to mislead people about the legality of said coalitions. I'm assuming you bought a button from the party. Where'd the idea come from? I'm betting the PMO. That goes back to the entire point. He runs the entire show. That's what my point rests on.

So, it seems the entire crux of yours lays on you trying to prove that Harper is actually far weaker, and not the strong glorious leader Conservatives try to make him out to be. Right?

Those are Jack Layton's own words taken from the transcript of the November teleconference.

[nicky10013]

Those are Jack Layton's own words taken from the transcript of the November teleconference.

No, I was talking about your own words after. "Jack Layton on his coup against the people of Canada." Where do you get off calling it a coup and where do you get off speaking for the people of Canada.

[Alta4ever]

I supplied three examples over a litany of others and you just dismissed them as weak. So, ignoring things is just the norm then, eh?

3 examples one for 3 people of a caucus of 145 members, yep that is a real strong argument. For you argument to have merit you must have multiple examples for each member, to show a behavioral pattern.

[Oleg Bach]

Send them to the dungeon....wait - seriously this is what just happened in Parliment and now it's happening here...someone is taking the ball and going home....that is pro - rougish...

[nicky10013]

3 examples one for 3 people of a caucus of 145 members, yep that is a real strong argument. For you argument to have merit you must have multiple examples for each member, to show a behavioral pattern.

Well when the 3 differnt examples all come from the top, the man who controls the caucus, I'm sorry, it is a behavioural pattern. Attempting to make people prove things with multiple sources 145 times over is a hollow diversionary tactic that everyone sees through by people who just can't see through their own partisan blinders.

[William Ashley]

Nicky is a strawwoman or is lying about her degree.

[Alta4ever]

Well when the 3 differnt examples all come from the top, the man who controls the caucus, I'm sorry, it is a behavioural pattern. Attempting to make people prove things with multiple sources 145 times over is a hollow diversionary tactic that everyone sees through by people who just can't see through their own partisan blinders.

So you admit you can't do it?

The fact is that you can't prove your statement, and now your just making excuses.

[nicky10013]

Nicky is a strawwoman or is lying about her degree.

I'm all man.

Edited January 7, 2010 by nicky10013

[Keepitsimple]

Where do you get off calling it a coup and where do you get off speaking for the people of Canada.

The People of Canada spoke loudly and clearly - only 27% were in favour of the coalition....Canadians were so upset that the Conservatives shot up to 45% in the polls:

Results of the poll, conducted exclusively for Canwest News Service and Global National, showed 65% of those surveyed said they believe Mr. Ignatieff should try to find a compromise with Mr. Harper, compared with 27% who said he should "stick with the Liberal-NDP coalition." Eight per cent said they didn't know how Mr. Ignatieff should proceed.

The only place the coalition had majority support was in Quebec, were 62% gave the idea approval. Opposition was strongest in Alberta where 80% were opposed.

Poll results also suggest Canadians are so uncomfortable at the prospect of a Liberal-NDP coalition government, backed by the Bloc, that a majority -- 56% -- would prefer going to the polls again early in 2009 if Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean is forced to choose between the two options. That number is unchanged from a similar poll conducted last week, prior to Mr. Ignatieff's promotion to the Liberal leadership.

The poll also said the Conservative party would garner 45% of the vote and score a majority victory if an election were held today.

Link: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1069365

[William Ashley]

I'm all man.

Edited January 7, 2010 by William Ashley

[nicky10013]

how do you mean?

[nicky10013]

Nicky is a strawwoman or is lying about her degree.

Since I didn't understand the term, I looked it up.

#

A person who is set up as a cover or front for a questionable enterprise.

#

An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.

No, I'm not and I do have my degree. The great thing about education is you get to see all sorts. This Alta4eva person is clearly never going to be wooed by the info I could look up and provide. The minute it's posted the minute it's going to be dismissed. Why would I spend 3 hours going through all the news articles to try and impress someone who's unimpressible? It's a stupid endeavour. Some people, no matter how obvious the evidence will always dismiss it because it doesn't fit with their dogma however outdated it may be.

I half realised it when I was called a teenager but I got pissed off and got into it. That was my mistake. Getting into it with these types of people is like taking a bite on a turd sandwich. Never turns out well and haunts you for hours.

Edited January 7, 2010 by nicky10013

[Alta4ever]

Since I didn't understand the term, I looked it up.

#

A person who is set up as a cover or front for a questionable enterprise.

#

An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.

No, I'm not and I do have my degree. The great thing about education is you get to see all sorts. This Alta4eva person is clearly never going to be wooed by the info I could look up and provide. The minute it's posted the minute it's going to be dismissed. Why would I spend 3 hours going through all the news articles to try and impress someone who's unimpressible? It's a stupid endeavour. Some people, no matter how obvious the evidence will always dismiss it because it doesn't fit with their dogma however outdated it may be.

I half realised it when I was called a teenager but I got pissed off and got into it. That was my mistake. Getting into it with these types of people is like taking a bite on a turd sandwich. Never turns out well and haunts you for hours.

Maybe you shouldn't make such statements with out proof.

[nicky10013]

Maybe you shouldn't make such statements with out proof.

Maybe Harper shouldn't be such a liar and a hypocrite.

[Alta4ever]

Maybe Harper shouldn't be such a liar and a hypocrite.

So your changing now from all of the conservative caucus to just the prime minister?