Harper's election to lose? He's trying hard...

[Mr.Canada]

I think everyone's opinion is welcome here at MLW regardless of their place of origin or current living locale. I don't remember reading anything stating that you must be a Canadian in order to comment or have opinion on Canadian politics. Just as we're free to have opinion on the politics of the US, which you yourself have done many times William. So why wouldn't the opposite be true?

Can jbg vote here in Canada? Most likely not but that doesn't mean he cannot have opinion and voice concern over our plight. With so few Americans knowing whats going on in Canada I welcome Americans that follow the issues in Canada and voice their opinion on them. Whether I agree with them or not isn't of concern.

[jbg]

Its actually none of the above. It was me saying that since you are American your opinion doesn't count in a Canadian Politics forum - and you are a little alien in this milleau? What is an American Lawyer doing in a Canadian Politics forum anyway? Not welcome on the American ones or something, wouldn't it be more constructive to talk with your own kind rather than meddling in Canadians lives?

Or is that just another sign of the USA butting their words where they don't belong.

Because I want to be and the Charter gives speech rights to "everyone", whereas it gives "democratic rights" only to Canadians. So I'm within my rights.

I've personally been deeply offended by Americans and I find it disturbing to see one post in here thinking they have a slightest clue about Canada when they wern't born here, and don't live here.

How have I "deeply offended" you?

If it is seen as hostile that is because Americans have been hostile toward me. I havn't recieved an apology so for the most part your ilk come off as persistently rude, stupid and annoying.

I would assume that many Canadians would be as hostile since your posts are often ungrammatical, mis-spelled and make little sense. See my signature.

Of course I do interact with Americans in Canada. You havn't earned a say worth being valued and you are blabbing on like you know what you talk about, see the above.

By giving Canada an undefended border, being a pretty good neighbor, and thus basically allowing your living standard to reflect lack of a need for a defense? Imagine living like Israel?

There are Americans I get along with, so far you don't appear to be one, you havn't earned that respect so you start at the subhuman level where Americans I don't know belong.

Your kind is not human enough to deserve it, start changing your own country when you have decent people from that why not come back here, rather than bringing your pollution here and leaving the cesspool of american morality in your home country.

Are you saying I'm not a human being? Am I typing with paws?

[bush_cheney2004]

...If it is seen as hostile that is because Americans have been hostile toward me. I havn't recieved an apology so for the most part your ilk come off as persistently rude, stupid and annoying.

No doubt true at some level, but your arrest and deportation experience would only invite an acute exposure to this kind of American behaviour. I'm sure that Maher Arar feels the same way!

[bloodyminded]

Its actually none of the above. It was me saying that since you are American your opinion doesn't count in a Canadian Politics forum - and you are a little alien in this milleau? What is an American Lawyer doing in a Canadian Politics forum anyway? Not welcome on the American ones or something, wouldn't it be more constructive to talk with your own kind rather than meddling in Canadians lives?

Or is that just another sign of the USA butting their words where they don't belong.

I've personally been deeply offended by Americans and I find it disturbing to see one post in here thinking they have a slightest clue about Canada when they wern't born here, and don't live here.

If it is seen as hostile that is because Americans have been hostile toward me. I havn't recieved an apology so for the most part your ilk come off as persistently rude, stupid and annoying.

Of course I do interact with Americans in Canada. You havn't earned a say worth being valued and you are blabbing on like you know what you talk about, see the above.

There are Americans I get along with, so far you don't appear to be one, you havn't earned that respect so you start at the subhuman level where Americans I don't know belong.

Your kind is not human enough to deserve it, start changing your own country when you have decent people from that why not come back here, rather than bringing your pollution here and leaving the cesspool of american morality in your home country.

This is ridiculous from beginning to end.

[CANADIEN]

Its actually none of the above. It was me saying that since you are American your opinion doesn't count in a Canadian Politics forum - and you are a little alien in this milleau? What is an American Lawyer doing in a Canadian Politics forum anyway? Not welcome on the American ones or something, wouldn't it be more constructive to talk with your own kind rather than meddling in Canadians lives?

Or is that just another sign of the USA butting their words where they don't belong.

I've personally been deeply offended by Americans and I find it disturbing to see one post in here thinking they have a slightest clue about Canada when they wern't born here, and don't live here.

If it is seen as hostile that is because Americans have been hostile toward me. I havn't recieved an apology so for the most part your ilk come off as persistently rude, stupid and annoying.

Of course I do interact with Americans in Canada. You havn't earned a say worth being valued and you are blabbing on like you know what you talk about, see the above.

There are Americans I get along with, so far you don't appear to be one, you havn't earned that respect so you start at the subhuman level where Americans I don't know belong.

Your kind is not human enough to deserve it, start changing your own country when you have decent people from that why not come back here, rather than bringing your pollution here and leaving the cesspool of american morality in your home country.

Let us know when you have something intelligent to offer, instead of this pile of garbage which would properly be called racist if we were talking about a person's skin colour. Long live the ignore button.

[Molly]

I don't much agree with the way it was said, but have thought much the same.

"So, who asked you?" is a fair enough question.

[Scotty]

In politics there are no "unimportant" things, only varying degrees of "importance"...

Harper has established quite the PATTERN when it comes to that...

I would say the opposition has established a pattern for grasping at trivial matters and trying to apply enough oil and fire to catch someone's passing attention - and failing. Maybe they ought to try substance presuming, of course, there's any among them which have any.

[capricorn]

I would say the opposition has established a pattern for grasping at trivial matters and trying to apply enough oil and fire to catch someone's passing attention - and failing. Maybe they ought to try substance presuming, of course, there's any among them which have any.

I will never understand why Liberal brass recruited Ignatieff to lead the party. Ignatieff himself doesn't appear to know whether he is a Liberal, a Conservative or an NDPer. We do know he voiced views rather Conservative in nature in his pre-political life and now he appears to be tilting toward NDP ideology. With a weather vane as leader, it's no wonder today's Liberals lack vision and substance. The result is an organization that is reactive rather than proactive. This is not lost on the electorate and explains their standing in the polls.

[Sir Bandelot]

I don't much agree with the way it was said, but have thought much the same.

"So, who asked you?" is a fair enough question.

Yes some of them are antagonists, (as are many Canadian members here) but it would only be fair if we did not frequently attack US politics too. Which we love to do

[Sir Bandelot]

With a weather vane as leader, it's no wonder today's Liberals lack vision and substance. The result is an organization that is reactive rather than proactive. This is not lost on the electorate and explains their standing in the polls.

But it is also much to the detriment of Canadian politics, in my view. By not offering a viable alternative, starting with Dion and now Ignatieff, Liberals have failed the country. It would probably be best if the party completely imploded (as with the progressive conservatives) and a new party created from the ashes. The NeoLiberal party.

Oh god, forbid it!

The real problem with the Liberals I suspect, is internal conflict between various factions who want to hold power. Bob Rae, whose name should always be followed by large expectorations of mucous.

[capricorn]

But it is also much to the detriment of Canadian politics, in my view. By not offering a viable alternative, starting with Dion and now Ignatieff, Liberals have failed the country. It would probably be best if the party completely imploded (as with the progressive conservatives) and a new party created from the ashes. The NeoLiberal party.

Oh god, forbid it!

I agree.

The real problem with the Liberals I suspect, is internal conflict between various factions who want to hold power. Bob Rae, whose name should always be followed by large expectorations of mucous.

This further reflects Ignatieff's lack of political acumen in that he can't rally his team toward a common path and he can't assert his leadership. Contrast this to Harper setting goals his team can get behind, albeit a minority gets on board reluctantly.

[Sir Bandelot]

This further reflects Ignatieff's lack of political acumen in that he can't rally his team toward a common path and he can't assert his leadership. Contrast this to Harper setting goals his team can get behind, albeit a minority gets on board reluctantly.

Yes it does and I suspect the choice of Ignatieff himself as leader, and Dion previously also lies in that same problem. And as in the game of hockey, the ones that play together as a well integrated team instead of individuals cherry-picking for a goal, will be the most successful.

[betsy]

Its actually none of the above. It was me saying that since you are American your opinion doesn't count in a Canadian Politics forum - and you are a little alien in this milleau? What is an American Lawyer doing in a Canadian Politics forum anyway? Not welcome on the American ones or something, wouldn't it be more constructive to talk with your own kind rather than meddling in Canadians lives?

Or is that just another sign of the USA butting their words where they don't belong.

I've personally been deeply offended by Americans and I find it disturbing to see one post in here thinking they have a slightest clue about Canada when they wern't born here, and don't live here.

If it is seen as hostile that is because Americans have been hostile toward me. I havn't recieved an apology so for the most part your ilk come off as persistently rude, stupid and annoying.

Of course I do interact with Americans in Canada. You havn't earned a say worth being valued and you are blabbing on like you know what you talk about, see the above.

There are Americans I get along with, so far you don't appear to be one, you havn't earned that respect so you start at the subhuman level where Americans I don't know belong.

Your kind is not human enough to deserve it, start changing your own country when you have decent people from that why not come back here, rather than bringing your pollution here and leaving the cesspool of american morality in your home country.

This is still a free country, as far as I know. There should be no one to censor....or "filter"....what we can read or post. If someone's opinion or style offends you, kindly exercise your freedom to ignore.

Besides, I've openly and proudly supported George W. Bush, and I'm a Canadian.

Edited March 6, 2011 by betsy

[Saipan]

Your vote doesn't count, ur americung.

So why is CBC inviting americungs, like Michael Moore, Bill Clinton etc., to tell us who to vote for - just before federal elections? Isn't that against the law?????

Then why not Charlton Heston or G.W. Bush??

[bloodyminded]

So why is CBC inviting americungs, like Michael Moore, Bill Clinton etc., to tell us who to vote for - just before federal elections? Isn't that against the law?????

Then why not Charlton Heston or G.W. Bush??

They're not inviting them to tell us who to vote for.

They invite them...and then the blowhards sound off, believing their opinions matter because they've been so well-paid to offer opinions on everything else.

[Saipan]

They're not inviting them to tell us who to vote for.

Yes, they were. Very specifically before federal elections. It's all they were talking about, how and why not to vote CPC.

Edited March 6, 2011 by Saipan

[bloodyminded]

Yes, they were. Very specifically before federal elections. It's all they were talking about, how and why not to vote CPC.

You're paranoid.

No one needs to "invite" the opinions of Michael Moore and Bill Clinton. Like all narcissists--from Donald Trump to Kevin O'Leary to Caligula--they are only too happy to offer their opinions on everything.

Edited March 6, 2011 by bloodyminded

[jbg]

Am I an "Americung"?

[Scotty]

So why is CBC inviting americungs, l

That word is silly. You should stop using it.

[bloodyminded]

Am I an "Americung"?

It's a good question. Does it apply to all Americans? Democrats? Only the two blowhards in question?

No one knows but Saipan.

[jbg]

It's a good question. Does it apply to all Americans? Democrats? Only the two blowhards in question?

Which two "blowhards"?

[bloodyminded]

Which two "blowhards"?

Michael Moore and Bill Clinton, as per Saipan's remarks about them.

[youshouldknowbetter]

Harper has only managed to lose a majority, not an election (not since 2004, at least) Two things are most surprising:

1) No matter what the scandal, the Liberals can't make it stick. Even when there are multiple scandals.

2) There is still no heir apparent to Harper. Who will succeed him? Isn't it fascinating to see a leader with 3 elections (2 minorities, 1 loss) under his belt and a third on the way which looks to produce the same results and still, the attention is on the Liberal leader's possible successor?

Dave

www.youshouldknowbetter.com

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Harper has only managed to lose a majority, not an election (not since 2004, at least) Two things are most surprising:

1) No matter what the scandal, the Liberals can't make it stick. Even when there are multiple scandals.

2) There is still no heir apparent to Harper. Who will succeed him? Isn't it fascinating to see a leader with 3 elections (2 minorities, 1 loss) under his belt and a third on the way which looks to produce the same results and still, the attention is on the Liberal leader's possible successor?

Dave

www.youshouldknowbetter.com

Interesting viewpoint. This is Iggy's last kick at the cat, last chance.

[PIK]

Coffee shops across Canada, people are talking about the Bev Oda problem, the Government of Canada vs the government of Harper, the deficit, the high unemployment, the F35,the lies, the cheating, the arrogance on and on. Perhaps these pollsters should visit coffee shops and then take a poll and they will probably find difference views. Harper would probably be down were the Bloc are!

People don't care about oda, they care about the economy. The high unemployment?? are you living in america, because canada is not doing to bad considering. The F-35, canadians do not want a repeat of the hele mess.People see a goverment that has it's faults but stealing is not one of them and that is the one thing that liberals right now are known for, you screwed up big time and the people have not forgotten, majority on the way.