Topaz Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Why are the backbenchers of the A/T party coming out after the fact of what some ministers in their party are doing as far as spending money and not saying anything about when the House is seating? Is the backbenchers from Edmonton-st Alberta, who is the latest MP to come out and say something against certain memebers trying to save his own skin in the next election? It sure seems so. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/conservative-mp-brent-rathgeber-slams-ottawa-opulence-203949860.html Quote
eyeball Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Why are the backbenchers of the A/T party coming out after the fact of what some ministers in their party are doing as far as spending money and not saying anything about when the House is seating? They're just pretending to be high falutin' democrats for the rubes. Last month B.C. MP James Lunney's condemned the government over the Canadian Coast Guard cuts on the West Coast. He still voted for them. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Shady Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Why are the backbenchers of the A/T party There is no such thing as an A/T party. You've been told that many times. Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 There is no such thing as an A/T party. You've been told that many times. I think he's referring to the merger of the two parties: Alliance and Tory. Sometimes people invent pet names for parties. I don't believe there's a "dipper" party, but those of us who don't take everything too seriously just let it slide. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
bleeding heart Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 I think he's referring to the merger of the two parties: Alliance and Tory. Sometimes people invent pet names for parties. I don't believe there's a "dipper" party, but those of us who don't take everything too seriously just let it slide. Just so. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Shady Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 I think he's referring to the merger of the two parties: Alliance and Tory. Sometimes people invent pet names for parties. I don't believe there's a "dipper" party, but those of us who don't take everything too seriously just let it slide. Sweet. The Socialist/NDP party it is then. Quote
Topaz Posted June 28, 2012 Author Report Posted June 28, 2012 There is no such thing as an A/T party. You've been told that many times. Again I will explain the name. How Harper is governing is not the way the Conservatives of the past would govern. One, they would never NOT respect the House and the rules of Parliament, therefore, Harper is ruling like an Alliance/Reformer would, even though the party name is Conservative, its only a name, not what it stands for. Since the party does have former PC members, so the name A/T, short for Alliance/Tories party. I do have another name for it, but the monitor said I couldn't use the word to describe the party but the word is aloud any other ways. Quote
bleeding heart Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Sweet. The Socialist/NDP party it is then. Already got "dippers." Don't be greedy. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Wild Bill Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Again I will explain the name. How Harper is governing is not the way the Conservatives of the past would govern. One, they would never NOT respect the House and the rules of Parliament, therefore, Harper is ruling like an Alliance/Reformer would, even though the party name is Conservative, its only a name, not what it stands for. Since the party does have former PC members, so the name A/T, short for Alliance/Tories party. I do have another name for it, but the monitor said I couldn't use the word to describe the party but the word is aloud any other ways. Topaz, sometimes I seriously wonder if you live on a different planet! Harper is governing EXACTLY like the old time PC party of Mulroney's day! Precisely the opposite of what you claim! If anything, it would have been a Reform government that would have been far more transparent. One of its basic principles was for MPs to vote for their constituents and NOT just the way their Whip or the PM told them to! You just don't ever seem to fit the actual facts with your arguments. Instead, you go with what you like! You liked the old PC party so if Harper does something and you don't like it, then he must not be the same as the old PC party, EVEN WHEN HE DOES THE SAME THINGS! I'm sorry, but I just can't follow your reasoning at all, in any way. Since the parties merged I have seen virtually NOTHING of the old Reform/Alliance in the ACTIONs of the present CPC! I have seen ALL KINDS of things done exactly like Mulroney or even Clark would have done and DID do, on many an occasion! I suggest you open your eyes more often and look at the world as it really is and see people for what they actually DO! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Guest Peeves Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Sweet. The Socialist/NDP party it is then. Nah,if we're so inclined to lable, it's The CCF, Socialist, (mostly Quebec reps) NDP party. Quote
Guest Peeves Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) I like it when back benchers become *lose canons and call the party to task. That's what should happen as a control. Of course,there's not much of that anymore. Party leaders don't like to be second guessed. I think Cretien set that example. Never trusted dat dere guy from Shawinigan. I was there when it was called Shawinigan Falls. That was before the language police of course.... *Loose as win some lose sum. Edited June 28, 2012 by Peeves Quote
bleeding heart Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 I like it when back benchers become *lose canons and call the party to task. That's what should happen as a control. Of course,there's not much of that anymore. Party leaders don't like to be second guessed. I think Cretien set that example. Never trusted dat dere guy from Shawinigan. I was there when it was called Shawinigan Falls. That was before the language police of course.... *Loose as win some lose sum. Some people "credit" Trudeau for this. Either way...... Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
eyeball Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 I'm sorry, but I just can't follow your reasoning at all, in any way. I feel the same way when I see you waxing eloquently about principles, Harper's lack thereof and then what your famous nose tells you to do. I suggest you open your eyes more often and look at the world as it really is and see people for what they actually DO! Tell me about it. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Wild Bill Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 I feel the same way when I see you waxing eloquently about principles, Harper's lack thereof and then what your famous nose tells you to do. Tell me about it. I can't argue with a blind partisan, eyeball. You remind me a lot of my Orangeman grandfather... Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Shady Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Already got "dippers." Don't be greedy. I don't use that term though. Quote
Shady Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Again I will explain the name. How Harper is governing is not the way the Conservatives of the past would govern. One, they would never NOT respect the House and the rules of Parliament, therefore, Harper is ruling like an Alliance/Reformer would, even though the party name is Conservative, its only a name, not what it stands for. Since the party does have former PC members, so the name A/T, short for Alliance/Tories party. I do have another name for it, but the monitor said I couldn't use the word to describe the party but the word is aloud any other ways. Why don't you just refer to their actual party name? Do you refer to Republicans as the Republican/Whig Party? Quote
Topaz Posted June 29, 2012 Author Report Posted June 29, 2012 Topaz, sometimes I seriously wonder if you live on a different planet! Harper is governing EXACTLY like the old time PC party of Mulroney's day! Precisely the opposite of what you claim! If anything, it would have been a Reform government that would have been far more transparent. One of its basic principles was for MPs to vote for their constituents and NOT just the way their Whip or the PM told them to! You just don't ever seem to fit the actual facts with your arguments. Instead, you go with what you like! You liked the old PC party so if Harper does something and you don't like it, then he must not be the same as the old PC party, EVEN WHEN HE DOES THE SAME THINGS! I'm sorry, but I just can't follow your reasoning at all, in any way. Since the parties merged I have seen virtually NOTHING of the old Reform/Alliance in the ACTIONs of the present CPC! I have seen ALL KINDS of things done exactly like Mulroney or even Clark would have done and DID do, on many an occasion! I suggest you open your eyes more often and look at the world as it really is and see people for what they actually DO! So you are saying that Mulroney would have a huge debt like these Tories and they would NOT care about the environment over the oil industry? These Tories have the old Tories criticizing them on the size of the budget and the environment and I don't think you find any PC say these guys are just like us!! Quote
eyeball Posted June 29, 2012 Report Posted June 29, 2012 (edited) I can't argue with a blind partisan, eyeball. Partisan? Which party? You remind me a lot of my Orangeman grandfather... Because I'm orange? I'm just as pink as you probably. Edited June 29, 2012 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
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.