M.Dancer Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 In a sworn affidavit, Liberal Party strategist Warren Kinsella says the party's president, Alfred Apps, told him in May about "high level" discussions with NDP officials about the "creation of a new party."Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/06/09/liberals-ndp-merger-kinsella.html#ixzz0qOl6nVKy Cuing 3rd suicide attempt in three, two...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Cuing 3rd suicide attempt in three, two...... Dancer, on CTV Power Play, Clark got an email from Apps saying that it was Warren who came to HIM and he also said he told Warren it wasn't going to happen. Apparently, Warren was asked to leave by the Liberal party and there on bad feelings on Warren part, naturally. In cases like this, who knows who is lying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Dancer, on CTV Power Play, Clark got an email from Apps saying that it was Warren who came to HIM and he also said he told Warren it wasn't going to happen. Apparently, Warren was asked to leave by the Liberal party and there on bad feelings on Warren part, naturally. In cases like this, who knows who is lying. Kinsella has lost his mind, so far as I can tell. This appears to be largely a manufactured news item, and I think it's pretty clear here that Kinsella was behind it. Edited June 9, 2010 by ToadBrother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Look if the Liberals want to be a part of the NDP it is pretty easy. They just need to get rid of their Liberal membership and take out a NDP I don't see the problem. They don't need to have talks in backrooms, they don't need to pretend they are "talking with the NDP" or anything like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Cuing 3rd suicide attempt in three, two...... At this rate there may be enough former aids and executives from the liberal party to start something up. Talk about self fullfilling prophesy.. come one come all to the Social Party. Edited June 9, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 At this rate there may be enough former aids and executives from the liberal party to start something up. Talk about self fullfilling prophesy.. come one come all to the Social Party. Oh the other posibility is that someone or multiple people were duped. PS it is posible to fall prey to a false flag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Look if the Liberals want to be a part of the NDP it is pretty easy. They just need to get rid of their Liberal membership and take out a NDP I don't see the problem. They don't need to have talks in backrooms, they don't need to pretend they are "talking with the NDP" or anything like that. It's fairly obvious it was a joke. When it first came on the news last night, it was announced that this secret cabal of negotiators were planning on calling it the "Liberal Democrats". Either Kinsella has suffered some sort of severe brain injury, or this was a deliriously funny joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Oh the other posibility is that someone or multiple people were duped. PS it is posible to fall prey to a false flag. This is INTERNATIONAL STAGE / NATIONAL STAGE politics. Technology etc.. exists for a qualified organization to provide misinformation or covert operations to create the appearance to cause chaos in an order. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 The Funny line of this story is the Liberal precondition that the NDP renounce socialism... It would be simpler to ask the palestinians to renounce terrorism or asking layton to have his balls resewn on so that they could be cut off again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 The Funny line of this story is the Liberal precondition that the NDP renounce socialism... It would be simpler to ask the palestinians to renounce terrorism or asking layton to have his balls resewn on so that they could be cut off again... So far as I can tell, it's as if someone wrote an Onion faux-news story, and somehow Kinsella took it seriously. The more you look at it, the more absurd it becomes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) All in all though this wouldn't be a bad thing. Perhaps they just need to understand GOVERNMENT IS SOCIALISM OR CORRUPTION (serving self interest rather than public (society's) interest. And society can be served by providing individuals with individual freedoms and access to self employment and trade. Edited June 9, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) The Funny line of this story is the Liberal precondition that the NDP renounce socialism... It would be simpler to ask the palestinians to renounce terrorism or asking layton to have his balls resewn on so that they could be cut off again... Ummmmm you might not know this but the NDP got rid of the socialism platform and embraced a mixed economy when they were the CCF in 1956. So maybe you should catch up on your politics a little or just keep showing you are an uneducated voter. Maybe you can go read the Winnipeg Declaration and you know catch up on 50 odd years of Canadian politics. You can keep attacking like we live in 1950. Edited June 9, 2010 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Ummmmm you might not know this but the NDP got rid of the socialism platform and embraced a mixed economy when they were the CCF in 1956. So maybe you should catch up on your politics a little or just keep showing you are an uneducated voter. You should direct that to the Liberal who made the demand...and to the NDP's socialist Caucus... http://204.225.123.146/ Seems like you are an uneducated NDPer...which is par for the course with the NDP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 You should direct that to the Liberal who made the demand...and to the NDP's socialist Caucus... http://204.225.123.146/ Seems like you are an uneducated NDPer...which is par for the course with the NDP 5 bucks to get into their next meeting...Think I'll pass... Dancer,this is the fringe nutbar types... Kinda like the fringe nutbar "Myron Thompson" types that hang around the edges of the CCRAPers...er,sorry...The Conservative Party of Canada... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Dancer,this is the fringe nutbar types... Yes that's the way I would describe the NDP....I mean...you have seen babble.com? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) You should direct that to the Liberal who made the demand...and to the NDP's socialist Caucus... http://204.225.123.146/ Seems like you are an uneducated NDPer...which is par for the course with the NDP Just because the NDP believes in Democracy and does not crack the whip on its members does not mean they are Socialist. I have been to convention, I have been in the NDP we stopped arguing about this 40 years ago. There are those who believe in Socialism that is their right as party though we do not. That is the official stance we have already denounced it AGAIN GO BACK 55 YEARS TO WHEN DID IT AND READ THE PARTIES DECLARATION ON IT. Yes their is Socialist Caucus, and yes they believe in Socialism, just as their is a moderate wing and so on. We had the waffle, and many other groups who are welcome in the party. However the party itself and the majority of its members passed a resolution 55 years ago. So catch up a little bit ok? Edited June 9, 2010 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Yes that's the way I would describe the NDP....I mean...you have seen babble.com? I have(I call it "Bedwetter Central")... But,I notice most of the Marxist twits there can't stand the direction of the NDP and feel it should take a decidedly Trotskyite direction.I would'nt put alot of stock in the inhabitants of Bedwetter Central as it relates to the current NDP. The Bedwetters are a strange and deluded lot,though... Edited June 9, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Just because the NDP believes in Democracy and does not crack the whip on its members does not mean they are Socialist. I have been to convention, I have been in the NDP we stopped arguing about this 40 years ago. There are those who believe in Socialism that is their right as party though we do not. That is the official stance we have already denounced it AGAIN GO BACK 55 YEARS TO WHEN DID IT AND READ THE PARTIES DECLARATION ON IT. Yes their is Social Caucus, and yes they believe in Socialism, just as their is a moderate wing and so on. We had the waffle, and many other groups who are welcome in the party. However the party itself and the majority of its members passed a resolution 55 years ago. So catch up a little bit ok? So when did the renounce the possibility of nationalizing banks and certain industries... citations please... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Just because the NDP believes in Democracy and does not crack the whip on its members does not mean they are Socialist. I have been to convention, I have been in the NDP we stopped arguing about this 40 years ago. There are those who believe in Socialism that is their right as party though we do not. That is the official stance we have already denounced it AGAIN GO BACK 55 YEARS TO WHEN DID IT AND READ THE PARTIES DECLARATION ON IT. Yes their is Social Caucus, and yes they believe in Socialism, just as their is a moderate wing and so on. We had the waffle, and many other groups who are welcome in the party. However the party itself and the majority of its members passed a resolution 55 years ago. So catch up a little bit ok? They don't crack the whip? Did'nt they crack the whip on that memeber from Manitoba(her name escapes me) who voted against the party wishes on the same sex marriage issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yesterday Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Ummmmm you might not know this but the NDP got rid of the socialism platform and embraced a mixed economy when they were the CCF in 1956. So maybe you should catch up on your politics a little or just keep showing you are an uneducated voter. Maybe you can go read the Winnipeg Declaration and you know catch up on 50 odd years of Canadian politics. You can keep attacking like we live in 1950. OK I am going to ask a simple question because I am slightly confused. I read the MichealJounals regarding the Social Credit Theory and thought it was Liberal. What is Liberal if not Socialist. Teach me please... Edited June 9, 2010 by Yesterday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 They don't crack the whip? Did'nt they crack the whip on that memeber from Manitoba(her name escapes me) who voted against the party wishes on the same sex marriage issue? That is different, that is a leadership matter not a party one. They whip their votes yes, however all members are allowed in the party. They can caucus how they want. We also kicked out the One NDP Martin named to the Senate again a leadership matter. We don't support the Senate and as such our members should not be sitting in it. However again that is a matter of governance which stands with the leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Or rather, it's an example of NDP hypocrisy. You can do as you like...as long as we like it to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 OK I am going to ask a simple question because I am slightly confused. I read the MichealJounals regarding the Social Credit Theory and thought it was Liberal. What is Liberal if not Socialist. Teach me please... Liberal (not the party but the actual belief) is a pretty simple one. I think John Rawl's defined it as a society or belief where the worse off are still better off in that country or under that political ideal then anywhere else. Which can mean a lot of things. It does not have to be socialist, I would say I am a Liberal but I am very far way from Socialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Or rather, it's an example of NDP hypocrisy. You can do as you like...as long as we like it to. Pretty much... They let their member vote according to conscience on the Long Gun Registry issue,but on same sex marriage(a personal moral issue if I've ever seen one)...No way! Edited June 9, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2010 Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Or rather, it's an example of NDP hypocrisy. You can do as you like...as long as we like it to. No you can do as you like in the party and bring change from with in the party however if you step outside the what the party has set as its agenda in governance and not follow the tenants the party has put you there to follow you can expect to leave. You are not making clear distinctions between those the party has funded to be in governments for forward what they believe in and those who go to meetings and put their money forward to have a right to vote to make those tenants. We are not the Conservatives or Liberals, the Leaders don't set the agendas they are their to enforce the parties beliefs as set out at conventions. I know it is a tough concept we don't elect people to make the rules, we make the rules and expect the elected officials to follow them. It is call democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.