Martin vs. Harper - Good vs. Evil

[jacqueline944]

Let me see - Paul Martin wiped out our deficit, put in economic policies that have given us the lowest unemployment and mortgage rates ever, and created three million jobs. He has turned us into one of the greatest developed countries in the world. And now he wants to make us even greater by putting billions into our social foundations that are recognized the world over as amongst the greatest of any nation. By contrast, Stephen Harper wants to put us $50 billion in the hole with unrealistic tax cuts and spending promises that don't even work (not to mention buying more freakin' military crap) AND he wants to build walls around his home province, work with the separatist Bloc, put all the power into the hands of the provinces (we all know what great track records they have!), and open up the door to banning abortion and instilling homophobic attitudes about our country's gay population.

Gosh, what a choice. Paul Martin or Stephen Harper Yes, I'm just as peeved about this whole sponsorship scandal as anyone, but I'm not about to throw my entire country down the toilet because of it. Paul Martin still has time to make it right in my eyes.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Wow, it really shows that the Liberal's don't care about our men and women serving are country when they don't see the need to put them in better equipment. As for abortion and gay rights, if you want to live in a judicial dictatorship so be it, but about 50% of Canadian's support the traditional definition of marriage, I guess in your view 50% of Canadian's are bigots.

This country was flushed down the toilet when all of the hippies who dodged the draft came to this country instead of fighting for theirs. Did'nt your hero Pierre Trudeau say he wanted to turn this country into Mao's china.

[Stoker]

I heard Harper eats cute (only the cute ones) little puppies and kills baby seals for fun

[BQSupporter]

What is going on here. Why does jacqueline944 sound like liberalpaulmartin. Funny how they both sign up to the website of the same day eh.

liberalpaulmartin

New Member

Group: Members

Posts: 1

Member No.: 570

Joined: 17-June 04

liberalpaulmartin said:

As the federal election nears - 11 days left!!!!! - the choice for prime minister is clear: NOT Conservative leader Stephen Harper. Here are about a dozen reasons why:

http://www.primeministergeorgebush.org/harpervids/

Prime Minister Paul Martin is really THE only voice that can lead this country. He tackled the deficit. He's paying down the debt, freeing up billions a year in interest payments. The Liberals have tabled SEVEN consecutive budgets. We are the only G-7 nation in surplus. Child poverty is down. Quality of life for seniors is improved. The Liberals are obviously doing something right! Let's keep up the momentum by voting Liberal June 28. 

Funny eh? liberalpaulmartin and jacqueline944 sound pretty much the same to me. Funny how they both sign up on the same day saying just about the same thing.

What do the liberal think they are doing? Do they really think we are stupid?

Wow. If this doesn't say they are really desperate and don't know what does.

[Remus]

Issues like debt and deficit reduction were brought to the fore front by the Reform party in the early and mid 90s while in opposition. One should remember that Harper was very active in policy creation when he was with the Reform party. Harper also worked on some policy with regards to the legality of quebec separation. Much of this work made it's way into the Clarity bill of Jean Cretien.

Does It make the Liberals Evil since they have put into law Harper's policies.

Instead of repeating Martin from the debates about the 50 billion black hole I would suggest some research into the conservative platform comparing it to that of the liberals and realize that money for health and tax cuts is better than giving money for expanding bureaucracy.

[Black Dog]

This thread should be called: "Martin vs. Harper: Evil vs. Eviler".

I would suggest some research into the conservative platform comparing it to that of the liberals and realize that money for health and tax cuts is better than giving money for expanding bureaucracy.

Has any national government ever succeded in cutting revenues and improving services?

[noelandmero]

Let me see: Paul Martin and crew stole my money and it's

hard to govern from jail. You can try and convice everyone that Harper is a homophobic pet killing savage dictator all you want. None of this will ever change the fact that if I did to my company what PM did to this country I would be sharing a cell with bubba. Fraud is Fraud he shoud not be elected he should be prosecuted.

[daniel]

That $50billion sounds familiar. Oh yes, that's almost $1billion a week just like what George Bush is doing. Tuning Bill Clinton's surpluses into a big massive deficit.

So anything George does, Harper wants to copy cat.

[Sully]

Let me see - Paul Martin wiped out our deficit, put in economic policies that have given us the lowest unemployment and mortgage rates ever, and created three million jobs. He has turned us into one of the greatest developed countries in the world. And now he wants to make us even greater by putting billions into our social foundations that are recognized the world over as amongst the greatest of any nation.

Paul Martin wiped out the governments operational deficit by slashing transfer payments to the provinces, not a hard thing to do. You can thank old Pauly for contributing big time to our ever increasingly poor health care system. A slash here and there saves a lot of bucks, so all these social program promises are only going to be topped up to the levels they were before old Pauly brought out the ax and made the chops, sad you cannot see that.

Haha you would love Pauly to take credit for low unemployment and low mortgage rates eh, if only that were true. You should be thanking the Bank of Canada and first and foremost the U.S. Treasury Board for the low interest rates, not Paul Martin. B of C adopts the decision for the most part of the U.S. treasury board to cut interest rates to the current levels because they have to. Its called perfect capital mobility, the interest rates of our coutries have to be in line with each other, because capital will flow to the other country where people would seek greater returns, but borrowing would be somewhat curtailed. Ahh thats too much information for you.

Yes based on GDP and productivity we are falling drastically behind the Americans. Wow must have been some great initiatives that Pauly implemented.

Hahahahaha, Could you rifle of some of the world reknown social foundations that we have that the world envies us for? hahahahah

By contrast, Stephen Harper wants to put us $50 billion in the hole with unrealistic tax cuts and spending promises that don't even work (not to mention buying more freakin' military crap) AND he wants to build walls around his home province, work with the separatist Bloc, put all the power into the hands of the provinces (we all know what great track records they have!), and open up the door to banning abortion and instilling homophobic attitudes about our country's gay population.

Wow you and Paul Martin must have went over the numbers together to discover this 50 Billion Dollar Black Hole, since Pauly won't tell us how he figured that out, maybe you could shed some light on the situation for us?

Yes that military crap, some of which Paul Martin is also supporting, yes what a bad idea to better equip our military. What would you like them to use, cap guns, make their own clothing and use their own personal mini vans to get to the battle field. Secondly there is no buying an aircraft carrier, its a hybrid carrier for carrying personnel and helicopters, far cheaper and smaller than an aircraft carrier, hahahahah you buy into Pauls lies too much. Funny how Paul Martin screwed up on the debate on this issue, what a twit.

Yes Harper bought the remains of the Berlin Wall and as soon as he becomes PM he will re-erect the wall round Alberta, you are bang on there.

Yes you could see during the debate that the Cons and BQ will be best of buds, and the Fedral Libs WOW-E-WOW they have an amazing record of managing our money, bang on again.

Beat the fear mongering drum, yes women and gays better look out as Harper has said time and time again that the first thing he will do is pass legislation, most likely under a minority govt. (not sure how this would be accomplished) to outlaw abortion and make homosexuality illegal, wow you found the hidden agenda!!!!

Can I ask you a question?

Are you Paul Martin? Are you disguising yourself under another name? You better come clean now while you have the chance!!!!

[noelandmero]

NEW LIBERAL PARTY OF CANADA AD

Removing the GST: 0$

Promising Day Care Twice: 0$

The look on youre face when we break all our campaigne promises and steal from you again: Pricless

[Alliance Fanatic]

Better re-equiping are military the bastard American lovers!!!!

Paul Martin is a hack, how is it that Liberal's can't realize that Harper's plan is to slow bureacratic growth, and with the saved money re-invest in health care, the military, and tax cuts.

If Paul Martin does get elected again, then it will probably be the end of Canada as we know it, he is going on an attitude that its the "good" Canadian's versus the evil "Albertan's". I think that we could possibly see alot of pissed off people in Alberta, and a seperatist party could possibly win seats in the provincial election.

When you go on the attitude the only real Canadian's are the one's for gay marriage, high taxes, socially liberal values, anti-Americanism, and high immigration, your bound to piss off a certain region of the country.

The new Liberal motto should be "elect a bureacrat not a democrat"

[Black Dog]

Paul Martin wiped out the governments operational deficit by slashing transfer payments to the provinces, not a hard thing to do. You can thank old Pauly for contributing big time to our ever increasingly poor health care system. A slash here and there saves a lot of bucks, so all these social program promises are only going to be topped up to the levels they were before old Pauly brought out the ax and made the chops, sad you cannot see that.

May I direct you to this:

Issues like debt and deficit reduction were brought to the fore front by the Reform party in the early and mid 90s while in opposition. One should remember that Harper was very active in policy creation when he was with the Reform party. Harper also worked on some policy with regards to the legality of quebec separation. Much of this work made it's way into the Clarity bill of Jean Cretien.

Does It make the Liberals Evil since they have put into law Harper's policies.

In other words, Martin followed the Reform/Alliance playbook on economic policy. If you expect Harper to fix Canada's social programs, you're dreaming. Harper will fix 'em the same way vets fix horses with broken legs: with a bullet to the head.

Yes that military crap, some of which Paul Martin is also supporting, yes what a bad idea to better equip our military. What would you like them to use, cap guns, make their own clothing and use their own personal mini vans to get to the battle field. Secondly there is no buying an aircraft carrier, its a hybrid carrier for carrying personnel and helicopters, far cheaper and smaller than an aircraft carrier, hahahahah you buy into Pauls lies too much.

What would the hybrid carriers be used for? How much would they cost?

None of this will ever change the fact that if I did to my company what PM did to this country I would be sharing a cell with bubba

Honestly: why do people expect the Cons to be any better? Because they say so?

[Alliance Fanatic]

and I expect the NDP to do so much better for the country. If the NDP had elected Nystrom or Blaikie for one of their leaders they would probably be a major player, and get 50 seats, but they chose the radical alternative and voted in Jack Layton. Black Dog no offense but you views are the same as those of a Pinko.

[Bionic Antboy]

Let me see: Paul Martin and crew stole my money and it's

hard to govern from jail. You can try and convice everyone that Harper is a homophobic pet killing savage dictator all you want. None of this will ever change the fact that if I did to my company what PM did to this country I would be sharing a cell with bubba. Fraud is Fraud he shoud not be elected he should be prosecuted.

No doubt about that, but I don't think that should give Harper a free pass.

[Bionic Antboy]

and I expect the NDP to do so much better for the country. If the NDP had elected Nystrom or Blaikie for one of their leaders they would probably be a major player, and get 50 seats, but they chose the radical alternative and voted in Jack Layton. Black Dog no offense but you views are the same as those of a Pinko.

HA!

I can't believe you used the word "Pinko". How very, uhm, "fascist" of you. That's SO old school.

Let's see how many MORE extremist labels we can slap on each other. It's so much better than intelligent discussion.

Sheeshhh....

As for Layton, the NDP are doing almost twice as well in the polls than they have with the LAST two NDP leaders. In fact, if the polls are any indication, they're looking to get possibly the highest popular vote in their history... just to put Layton's performance in historical context...

Of course, there's still over a week to go.

[Sully]

Issues like debt and deficit reduction were brought to the fore front by the Reform party in the early and mid 90s while in opposition. One should remember that Harper was very active in policy creation when he was with the Reform party.

In other words, Martin followed the Reform/Alliance playbook on economic policy. If you expect Harper to fix Canada's social programs, you're dreaming. Harper will fix 'em the same way vets fix horses with broken legs: with a bullet to the head.

You can draw that comparison all you want. Doesn't mean the outcome would have been the same, as most certainly the directions of the spending cuts would have been different. There are many programs from which to cut from and there would have been a decade to do it in. Debt and deficit reduction are good things, they need to be done, unless you want to unload the burden to future generations BD. Harper is the only guy I believe that is not afraid of reform. NDP and Liberals, like things the way they are, they just want to tax us more for the exact same service levels we are getting now and thats the scariest thing to me.

What would the hybrid carriers be used for? How much would they cost?

Hybrid carriers , carry personel and helicopters, we will not have to rent boats to get us to the battlefield. Used for transportation purposes. Costs not too sure, but no where near the multi-billion dollar cost of a significantly larger nuclear powered aircraft carrier as PM PM likes to say the Cons will purchase, I mean we would have to get new jets then too.

Honestly: why do people expect the Cons to be any better? Because they say so?

Cause they share most of the same values with me and to me are more believable. Liberals are liars, NDP couldn't run a tour of a telephone booth without raising taxes, Cons are the only possible choice for me.

Honestly: why do people expect the NDP to be any better? Because they say so?

[Argus]

Let me see - Paul Martin wiped out our deficit,

Actually, a booming American economy dragged us along with it, unemployment dropped, taxes rolled in, the GST the Liberals had promised to eliminate pumped up the treasury, so he wa able to balance the books - with the aid of cutting health care funding, education funding, and funding for welfare.

put in economic policies that have given us the lowest unemployment and mortgage rates ever, and created three million jobs.

Can you name these economic policies? Because I can't think of one. Or are you going to credit Martin for the surging American economy in the nineties?

What I do know is that Martin is an arrogant, lying thief with no integrity and no honour leading a party full of corruption and incompetence. Good riddance to him and them.

[noelandmero]

As for Layton, the NDP are doing almost twice as well in the polls than they have with the LAST two NDP leaders. In fact, if the polls are any indication, they're looking to get possibly the highest popular vote in their history... just to put Layton's performance in historical context

I can respect a vote for the NDP I do not personally agree with anything they stand for but at least they stand for something other than grand larceny wich is what the liberals stand for.

I believe Macarther had it right with out knowing when he said" better dead than red".

[Black Dog]

Debt and deficit reduction are good things, they need to be done, unless you want to unload the burden to future generations BD.

Debt, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. People go into debt all the time to finance major purchases (mortgages, car payments, home improvements and repairs, etc.) Similarily governements can manage debt to maintain quality programs and services or upgrade infrastructure.

However, debt and defecit reduction has been the main objective of public policy at most levels of government over the past 20 years. This has come at the expense of the countries social programs and infrastructure. Future generations will be forced to pick up the tab for athe vital programs and services that were cutback, eliminated or reduced in the name of deficit elimination.

Harper is the only guy I believe that is not afraid of reform. NDP and Liberals, like things the way they are, they just want to tax us more for the exact same service levels we are getting now and thats the scariest thing to me.

It's not as if Harper's ideas are new. They're the same policies that right of centre governments have been pushing for many years across the western world and have consistently failed to deliver the promised returns.

Harper is a slash and spend idealogue in the same vein as Mike Harris and Gotrdon Campbell. Social services and taxes (especially for well-to-do) will be slashed, while spending will be amped up for pet projects like the military.

Hybrid carriers , carry personel and helicopters, we will not have to rent boats to get us to the battlefield. Used for transportation purposes. Costs not too sure, but no where near the multi-billion dollar cost of a significantly larger nuclear powered aircraft carrier as PM PM likes to say the Cons will purchase, I mean we would have to get new jets then too.

Transporation where? What wars are we going to be fighting that will require such services?

As for costs, well, the Italian navy paid $2.3 billion in November 2003 for the Nuova Unità Maggiore, a hybrid helicopter carrier like the kind the Conservatives propose. That's $4.6 billion for a pair which would break the bank of the Tories' proposed $5.5. billion defence plan.

What about the tanks Harper's talking about? The going rate on a Abram these days is about $4 million a pop. Jets? The U.S.'s proposed Joint Strike Fighter has a sticker price of $35 million, while th elarger, upgraded FA-18 Super Hornet is around $5 million wach. Those, of course are estimates. Military expenditures, more than any otehr, are prone to cost overruns.

The pouint is that that's a lot of money for a bunch of new equipment that we don't necessarily need. No one would argue that the Forces need upgrading: however, is there a concrete reason we need a 52 per cent increase in the size of our military?

Cause they share most of the same values with me and to me are more believable. Liberals are liars, NDP couldn't run a tour of a telephone booth without raising taxes, Cons are the only possible choice for me.

Honestly: why do people expect the NDP to be any better? Because they say so?

Because the NDP is realistic in its prohjections, unlike the Conservatories, who expect to pull giant surpluses and "cost savings" out of thin air (without cutting services: yeah right). Hell, the NDP platform is proposing a conservative platform at a net cost of $61 billion, versus the Tories' $89 billion platform.

and I expect the NDP to do so much better for the country. If the NDP had elected Nystrom or Blaikie for one of their leaders they would probably be a major player, and get 50 seats, but they chose the radical alternative and voted in Jack Layton. Black Dog no offense but you views are the same as those of a Pinko.

No offense, AF, but you have no clue about NDP policy or social democratic ideals whatsoever.

[noelandmero]

You should really do some looking before you start running off at the mouth.

As for costs, well, the Italian navy paid $2.3 billion in November 2003 for the Nuova Unità Maggiore, a hybrid helicopter carrier like the kind the Conservatives propose. That's $4.6 billion for a pair which would break the bank of the Tories' proposed $5.5. billion defence plan.

What about the tanks Harper's talking about? The going rate on a Abram these days is about $4 million a pop. Jets? The U.S.'s proposed Joint Strike Fighter has a sticker price of $35 million, while th elarger, upgraded FA-18 Super Hornet is around $5 million wach. Those, of course are estimates. Military expenditures, more than any otehr, are prone to cost overruns.

The Italian Carrier is not a helicopter carrier it is a jump jet carrier designed for the harrier II aircraft and would cost alot. Harper wants ships like the HMS Ocean a helicopter carrier at the cost of 312 million a piece.

The Hornet is a completly outdated piece of shit as we never spent a dime on them since the day we bought them. There is no such thing as an enlarged updated F-18a/b. There is an all new larger F-18G/F superhornet at 60 million a copy. The F-35 is a deal. Don't you dare think of putting our pilots in a fight with those Hornets unless you want to lead the pack.

It's not as if Harper's ideas are new. They're the same policies that right of centre governments have been pushing for many years across the western world and have consistently failed to deliver the promised returns.

Please try reading something like this weeks economist or whashington post the US economy i growing at it's fastest rate in twenty years bush's tax cuts are exactly what the doctor ordered. In fact with bush's tax cuts he collected more in taxes last year than clinton ever did.

Please if you are going to make statements make factual statements spouting bullshit numbers about defence programs and economic policys that you obviously no zero about makes you look like and idiot and destroys any credibility youre arguments have. A monkey with internet access can see that most of what you argued in the above is made up in 5 minutes

[Sully]

However, debt and defecit reduction has been the main objective of public policy at most levels of government over the past 20 years. This has come at the expense of the countries social programs and infrastructure. Future generations will be forced to pick up the tab for athe vital programs and services that were cutback, eliminated or reduced in the name of deficit elimination.

I do not believe there is an easy answer to address this problem of reducing debt and maintaining programs. Some programs can have their budgets cut, some programs can be cut altogether and others should be maintained and that depends on what programs each one of us cherishes, so there is no way to make everyone happy. But either way future generations will have to pay, its just a question of how much they will have to pay?

It's not as if Harper's ideas are new. They're the same policies that right of centre governments have been pushing for many years across the western world and have consistently failed to deliver the promised returns.

Harper is a slash and spend idealogue in the same vein as Mike Harris and Gotrdon Campbell. Social services and taxes (especially for well-to-do) will be slashed, while spending will be amped up for pet projects like the military.

Yes and those socialist policies of the western world are becoming too expensive and programs are having to be slashed.

Well Harper's tax cuts are different from Campbells, no where has he said the tax cuts will pay for themselves like Campbell did. Nor was Campbell sitting on surpluses. There is a similarity tho, both would come into office with a bloated bureaucracy, leaving room for significant cuts in those areas.

I don't know why you believe the military to be a pet project, its an important program for Canada.

I mean all your answers lie with the NDP, let the military die, significantly increase taxes, implement new social programs we do not need, etc etc. Vote NDP if thats what you want.

Transporation where? What wars are we going to be fighting that will require such services?

Here let me look into my crystal ball and tell you!!!!!

Who knows, we do peace keeping round the globe and who knows what conflicts will arise, but having OUR OWN equipment to move OUR TROOPS to those areas, is that a bad thing.

As for costs, well, the Italian navy paid $2.3 billion in November 2003 for the Nuova Unità Maggiore, a hybrid helicopter carrier like the kind the Conservatives propose. That's $4.6 billion for a pair which would break the bank of the Tories' proposed $5.5. billion defence plan.

Well good for the Italians, who knows where they would be made and who would make them. And the timeline over which they would be paid. And the final price tag.

What about the tanks Harper's talking about? The going rate on a Abram these days is about $4 million a pop. Jets? The U.S.'s proposed Joint Strike Fighter has a sticker price of $35 million, while th elarger, upgraded FA-18 Super Hornet is around $5 million wach. Those, of course are estimates. Military expenditures, more than any otehr, are prone to cost overruns.

Tanks like the ones you propose are not the on the table, they are looking towards APCs (ARMORED PERSONEL CARRIERS). Jets we definitely need upgrade on our CF-18s. Why are you mentioning Joint Strike Fighter, why don't you throw in some B-2 Bombers, F-117 Stealth Fighters, some Aircraft Carriers and Nuclear subs too.

The pouint is that that's a lot of money for a bunch of new equipment that we don't necessarily need. No one would argue that the Forces need upgrading: however, is there a concrete reason we need a 52 per cent increase in the size of our military?

The point is the stuff proposed is what we need. As for an increas of 52 percent I do not know what the perfect number is. But definitely an increase.

Because the NDP is realistic in its prohjections, unlike the Conservatories, who expect to pull giant surpluses and "cost savings" out of thin air (without cutting services: yeah right). Hell, the NDP platform is proposing a conservative platform at a net cost of $61 billion, versus the Tories' $89 billion platform.

Says You!!!!

[Stoker]

As for costs, well, the Italian navy paid $2.3 billion in November 2003 for the Nuova Unità Maggiore, a hybrid helicopter carrier like the kind the Conservatives propose. That's $4.6 billion for a pair which would break the bank of the Tories' proposed $5.5. billion defence plan.

Thats on the "extreme" edge of the scale.......The Spanish and British built or are building a "hybrid carrier" for half a billion euros, which is still under a billion per.....

What about the tanks Harper's talking about? The going rate on a Abram these days is about $4 million a pop. Jets? The U.S.'s proposed Joint Strike Fighter has a sticker price of $35 million, while th elarger, upgraded FA-18 Super Hornet is around $5 million wach. Those, of course are estimates. Military expenditures, more than any otehr, are prone to cost overruns.

The Australians just bought about 60 rebuilt Abrams tanks, three years ammo, spares, tanker trucks, transporter trucks, simulators etc for 500 million......The Liberals plan on buying the same amount of the untested, lighter armed, lighter armoured Mobile Gun System for over 600 million........what type of pork is that? Who's riding is GM deisel in?

The pouint is that that's a lot of money for a bunch of new equipment that we don't necessarily need. No one would argue that the Forces need upgrading: however, is there a concrete reason we need a 52 per cent increase in the size of our military?

Yes, because the government for almost 40 years have neglected the forces, and because of that, it's going to cost an arm and a leg to rebuild it.....if we had of been reponsible, we wouldn't be in this state......

The Hornet is a completly outdated piece of shit as we never spent a dime on them since the day we bought them. There is no such thing as an enlarged updated F-18a/b. There is an all new larger F-18G/F superhornet at 60 million a copy. The F-35 is a deal. Don't you dare think of putting our pilots in a fight with those Hornets unless you want to lead the pack.

In fairness to BD, the F-35, when you factor in dev costs, spares, simulators etc, will cost more then the Super Hornet......IIRC, the Brits figure on paying about 7 billion pounds for a 150.....you do the math.

With that said, when 2015 comes around, we will have to bite the bullet and pay that to replace the (buy then) close to 40 year old Hornets

Tanks like the ones you propose are not the on the table, they are looking towards APCs (ARMORED PERSONEL CARRIERS). Jets we definitely need upgrade on our CF-18s. Why are you mentioning Joint Strike Fighter, why don't you throw in some B-2 Bombers, F-117 Stealth Fighters, some Aircraft Carriers and Nuclear subs too.

No we do need tanks, and that is what the Cons are talking about......as for the JSF.....we all ready put a quarter of a billion dollars into the program so we can bid on contracts (support Quebec aerospace industry perhaps?)......I'm sure that will be the direction we will be going in in about 10-12 years from now.

The point I'm making is that we are going to have to tighten our belts and suck it up and start paying to defend ourselves.......and all the NDP lovers should put this into persepective, because if we pulled out of NATO and Norad, we would have to pay a hell of alot more to defend ourselves........

[playfullfellow]

Wow you and Paul Martin must have went over the numbers together to discover this 50 Billion Dollar Black Hole, since Pauly won't tell us how he figured that out, maybe you could shed some light on the situation for us?

You know, this 50 billion is probably another patronage scandal in the waiting and since Martin wont be PM, it will be someone elses blackhole, most likely Harpers.Yeah, I can see the Liberals blowing 50 billion and then blaming someone else for it, even before an election is complete.

If Martin winds another term, then are in for another 4 years of broken promises. It will be another 4 years of voting on the fab of the week. Sheesh, at this rate, even Duceppe would be more favorable and he wants to split the country.

[takeanumber]

Klein is screwing things up for Harper.

(haha).

Klein is running around saying that he's going to privatize healthcare once Harper wins.

Lovely.

Martin refused to do anything when Klein first started doing it.

Meh.

If you love Klein. You'll love Harper.

[Stoker]

Didn't Pettigrew also have a bit of a faux pas?