cybercoma Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Posted October 3, 2014 You are correct! Although the only thing I see from other conservative MP's lately in QP is chest thumping about the Franklin expedition or some other thing that they think the PM has done well. Most likely questions handed to them by the PMO. I doubt any of them, save for independent conservatives would dare pressure the PM or his cabinet on something they are doing wrong. Granted, I just want to make it perfectly clear that Question Period is for the government to respond to questions from MPs on behalf of their constituents. I find the blurring of government and the governing party to be an affront to the Westminster system and shows a complete disregard for Responsible Government. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Could you forward that to the PMO? I could try but I'd probably just get some purposeless response about my thoughts on Israel. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
On Guard for Thee Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 John A Macdonald would have shook his head in shame and opened a bottle of gin I suspect. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Scratch that last post, it would probably be some purposeless response about a friend of a friend of a friends of mines thoughts on Israel. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
cybercoma Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Posted October 3, 2014 John A Macdonald would have shook his head in shame and opened a bottle of gin I suspect. Yeah right. Like the bottle wouldn't already be open. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Yeah right. Like the bottle wouldn't already be open. Correct. What I should have said was "the next bottle" Quote
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 What you guys don't seem to understand, is that what's relevant to one person, may not be relevant to another. Who's going to judge that? And how? This is all absurd, but not surprising. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 (edited) Relevance is universal, enforcing it is common sense. If I'm having a conversation with a group of people about the price of tea in China and you chime in and start talking about what your dog did last night, you're not being Relevant. The same should apply to QP. If the opposition asks the Cabinet what they are going to do about the situation in Iraq and they start talking about The oppositions position on Israel, that is not relevant. The questions will always be Relevant so the answers should be to. They may be repeated 25 times but every time the answer should be relevant even if it changes every time as long as its relevant. Edited October 3, 2014 by PrimeNumber Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Relevance is universal, enforcing it is common sense. If I'm having a conversation with a group of people about the price of tea in China and you chime in and start talking about what your dog did last night, you're not being Relevant. The same should apply to QP. If the opposition asks the Cabinet what they are going to do about the situation in Iraq and they start talking about The oppositions position on Israel, that is not relevant. The questions will always be Relevant so the answers should be to. They may be repeated 25 times but every time the answer should be relevant even if it changes every time as long as its relevant. Relevance is subjective. Always has, always will. Quote
BubberMiley Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Relevance is subjective. Always has, always will.Can you provide an example of what you mean? Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Can you provide an example of what you mean? Sure. Some people think that what a rape victim was wearing or her previous conduct is relevant to a case. Some people don't. Quote
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Some people think that tax rates are relevant to economic growth. Some say they're not. Quote
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Some people think that the unemployment rate is relevant to immigration levels. Some people don't. Quote
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Some people think that the oils sands are relevant to our standard of living. Some people don't. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 (edited) What your talking about is still relevant to the topic though. Some might say what a rape victim was wearing might be relevant to the case but if the defense lawyer starts talking about what the rape victims sisters opinion is on the Israel-Palestine conflict he no longer becomes relevant and the judge will use their power to enforce that the defense lawyer stays on topic. Its pretty simple I don't see what is so confusing here. Edited October 3, 2014 by PrimeNumber Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 What your talking about is still relevant to the topic though. Some might say what a rape victim was wearing might be relevant to the case but if the defense lawyer starts talking about what the rape victims sisters opinion is on the Israel-Palestine conflict he no longer becomes relevant and the judge will use their power to enforce that the defense lawyer stays on topic. Its pretty simple I don't see what is so confusing here. It's not confusing at all. It's subjective. Quote
hitops Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 What your talking about is still relevant to the topic though. Some might say what a rape victim was wearing might be relevant to the case but if the defense lawyer starts talking about what the rape victims sisters opinion is on the Israel-Palestine conflict he no longer becomes relevant and the judge will use their power to enforce that the defense lawyer stays on topic. Its pretty simple I don't see what is so confusing here. No Shady's right, it's all a matter of degree. Maybe a the sister's opinion on Israel made somebody so mad they decided to rape her sister as punishment, or to get the infidel, or something etc. It's a long shot, but there are also 7 billion opinions in the world, guaranteed you'll find it in there somewhere. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 If Relevance can be enforced in a court it can be enforced in Parliament. Doesn't matter if the sisters opinions led to her being raped if the lawyer doesn't tie it into the matter at hand, it becomes irrelevant. That's where the difference is, if he talks about the sisters opinions but doesn't make it relevant to the rape like you just said he has no case. Pretty cut and dry guys. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
PrimeNumber Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 It's not confusing at all. It's subjective. I'm glad you agree with me then, it really isnt confusing is it? Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
The_Squid Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 (edited) What you guys don't seem to understand, is that what's relevant to one person, may not be relevant to another. Who's going to judge that? And how? This is all absurd, but not surprising. Walruses in Alaska are beaching themselves in Israel due to terrorism. Israel has a right to defend itself from Alaskan walruses. -------------------- Edited October 3, 2014 by The_Squid Quote
The_Squid Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 It's not confusing at all. It's subjective. You're right though... relevance is relative... there are no absurd answers, only absurd expectations that questions should be answered. Never mind the blubbering apology... his answer was still relevant to ... someone? Quote
cybercoma Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Posted October 3, 2014 (edited) What you guys don't seem to understand, is that what's relevant to one person, may not be relevant to another. Who's going to judge that? And how? This is all absurd, but not surprising.Walruses in Alaska are beaching themselves in Israel due to terrorism. Israel has a right to defend itself from Alaskan walruses.Class dismissed. Excuse me while I clean up the coffee I just spit on my monitor laughing so hard. Edited October 3, 2014 by cybercoma Quote
cybercoma Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Posted October 3, 2014 It's not confusing at all. It's subjective.Why did Calandra apologize with tears in his eyes? Quote
cybercoma Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Posted October 3, 2014 While we're at it, Shady, why did 3 Tories vote to support the motion? Quote
Shady Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 Why did Calandra apologize with tears in his eyes? I couldn't care less about him. I'm talking about the bigger picture, and the absurdity of policing language that's usually subjective. It's assinine. Quote
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.