Are Tory MPs being muzzled?

[ReeferMadness]

Hey liquid is liquid right?

Oh, yeah. Think about that the next time to grab a coffee at a Conservative rally.

[Scotty]

There is obviously only one "I" in Harper's team. Can you guess ho?

And the NDP is now a capitalist loving centrist party opposed to tax increases on the rich or deficit spending and in favour of more military spending. Because of one man. And nobody in the NDP is complaining. Because they don't dare.

[Scotty]

What is the point of access if you write your question on a piece of paper, and if it actually gets asked before the meeting is over, I have to hear what the Marxist-Leninist and two independents, none of which will get fifty votes between them, think about the subject.

I agree. It's a waste of time. It's like a national leaders debate with eight people up there, most of them amateurs from nothing parties nobody cares about. And even the party candidates who matter have everything rehearsed, and won't step out of their talking points. And yes, that goes for the NDP and LIberals, too.

[SpankyMcFarland]

This seems an odd reason to evict Harper. Most of the election victories in the last century have failed to command a plurality of the votes.

It's not odd when they are running for a fourth term which is very unusual. Harper is the most divisive PM in recent history. His campaign is aimed at 40% max of the population and the rest he rejects as not worth talking to. Such a person is peculiarly unsuited for a fourth term.

With Mansbridge, he made a big deal of not continuing on if he didn't get a plurality of seats. A person as negative as he is should not be allowed continue on unless he has a majority of the seats. The other parties should vote him down and any leader who refuses to do so should be replaced.

[SpankyMcFarland]

And the NDP is now a capitalist loving centrist party opposed to tax increases on the rich or deficit spending and in favour of more military spending. Because of one man. And nobody in the NDP is complaining. Because they don't dare.

The level of control exerted by Harper on his MPs is greater than any other PM in recent history. That's not even up for debate beyond the Conservative bubble. He has no Deputy PM and no serious rivals in the party after ten years in office. Just compare that to the previous administration or the current govt in Britain.

[BubberMiley]

He had rivals. They've just been eliminated.

[ToadBrother]

By all means, you should never have to hear what anyone you disagree with thinks. Only an echo chamber of your own views. That's the Harper way!

It's not a matter of whether I agree or disagree, it's a matter of finding out what the people who have a chance of being my MP have to say, and not diluting with a bunch of malcontents who managed to scrape together enough money to get on the ballot.

[BC_chick]

.

Edited September 9, 2015 by BC_chick

[BC_chick]

Here's a CPC candidate who deserves to be muzzled. #jerrybance

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jerry-bance-marketplace-1.3217797

Where do they find these guys?

From a trades point of view, is there any reason why someone would choose to pee in a cup? For example, could he possibly have thought it's unprofessional to use their bathroom so he decided it's better to hide it?

Or is he just a sick fetishist who may enjoy the thought of people drinking out of a cup he peed in?

I really don't get this and I've asked a few friends who work in trades and none of them understand why he'd do that.

[ReeferMadness]

From a trades point of view, is there any reason why someone would choose to pee in a cup? For example, could he possibly have thought it's unprofessional to use their bathroom so he decided it's better to hide it?

Or is he just a sick fetishist who may enjoy the thought of people drinking out of a cup he peed in?

I really don't get this and I've asked a few friends who work in trades and none of them understand why he'd do that.

Yeah - who can know? Maybe he was in a hurry and wanted to save the couple of minutes it would have taken to run to the bathroom (and wash his hands). Sometimes people just have urges to do things they know are wrong just to get away with something.

Honestly, I think I'd rather not know.

[scribblet]

It's not a matter of whether I agree or disagree, it's a matter of finding out what the people who have a chance of being my MP have to say, and not diluting with a bunch of malcontents who managed to scrape together enough money to get on the ballot.

Right, no point in attending a debate run by enviro whackos for instance. The would stack the hall and not let the CPC speak... typical actually of a other groups too.

Edited for spelling

Edited September 9, 2015 by scribblet

[BubberMiley]

Right, no point in attending a debate run by enviro whackos for instance. The would stack the hall and not let the CPC speak... typical actually of a other groups to.

Yes, no CPCer has any use for environmentalists. They are first on Harper's enemy list.

BTW, "typical actually of a other groups to" is very insightful. Did you copy and paste that from Ezra like the debunked 75% figure?

[SpankyMcFarland]

Did you see poor old Rob Nicholson hiding from reporters today? Our Foreign Affairs minister. Sad.

[On Guard for Thee]

Did you see poor old Rob Nicholson hiding from reporters today? Our Foreign Affairs minister. Sad.

I couldn't actually see him, I guess he was too well hidden. I did see Teneycke trying to fend off the press, and prior I heard the room groaning as a CBC reporter tried to pursue the refugee crisis. Your terse evaluation is quite accurate. Hopefully things will become less sad in October.

[Argus]

It's not odd when they are running for a fourth term which is very unusual. Harper is the most divisive PM in recent history.

Really? When Trudeau traveled across the country by train western farmers pelted his train with fruit and vegetables. When it got into northern Ontario, the people in Sudbury pelted it with rocks. He was loathed in much of the country.

And I clearly remember Trudeau's government deliberately pitting different parts of the country against each other.

[Topaz]

Really? When Trudeau traveled across the country by train western farmers pelted his train with fruit and vegetables. When it got into northern Ontario, the people in Sudbury pelted it with rocks. He was loathed in much of the country.

And I clearly remember Trudeau's government deliberately pitting different parts of the country against each other.

So does that mean someone could throw a pie in the PM face and not get arrest or be charged with terrorism? Not that I would do it but it would really peeve off Harper and he take it out on his body guards. As far pitting parts of the country ...Harperman has done a good job on that.

[SpankyMcFarland]

Really? When Trudeau traveled across the country by train western farmers pelted his train with fruit and vegetables. When it got into northern Ontario, the people in Sudbury pelted it with rocks. He was loathed in much of the country.And I clearly remember Trudeau's government deliberately pitting different parts of the country against each other.

Trudeau is a good example, actually. He is the last PM who divided the country as bitterly as Harper has done.

[Evening Star]

Really? When Trudeau traveled across the country by train western farmers pelted his train with fruit and vegetables. When it got into northern Ontario, the people in Sudbury pelted it with rocks. He was loathed in much of the country.

Maybe this would be a less unhinged way for 'the left' to express its disagreement with Harper's policies?

See, this is why I have a hard time with the whole 'Harper Derangement Syndrome' argument. As far as I can tell, he has faced rather little opposition compared to other leaders: he has not been pelted with things like PET or Lloyd Axworthy, he has not faced terrorists who have called him abusive names on national TV, a national humour magazine has not run a contest to deflower his daughter, I don't even remember any really huge protests against him. When the Liberals were Official Opposition, they rarely opposed; even the NDP has not exactly been the Rat Pack. Virtually every major English-language newspaper has endorsed his party in the last couple of elections. And yet, the persecution complex of his supporters is never abated.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Evening Star

[ToadBrother]

Trudeau is a good example, actually. He is the last PM who divided the country as bitterly as Harper has done.

And yet he managed to get nine of ten Premiers to agree to massive constitutional changes.

Is there anyone out there who could ever get that wide an agreement now?

[ToadBrother]

Maybe this would be a less unhinged way for 'the left' to express its disagreement with Harper's policies?

See, this is why I have a hard time with the whole 'Harper Derangement Syndrome' argument. As far as I can tell, he has faced rather little opposition compared to other leaders: he has not been pelted with things like PET or Lloyd Axworthy, he has not faced terrorists who have called him abusive names on national TV, a national humour magazine has not run a contest to deflower his daughter, I don't even remember any really huge protests against him. When the Liberals were Official Opposition, they rarely opposed; even the NDP has not exactly been the Rat Pack. Virtually every major English-language newspaper has endorsed his party in the last couple of elections. And yet, the persecution complex of his supporters is never abated.

It's hard for me to take it seriously because the Tories under Harper have become so obnoxiously partisan that they can hardly complain when elements of the opposition become as deranged as they do.

Besides, any party that releases a poster strongly suggesting that the leader of the third party in Parliament is effeminate and possibly homosexual has absolutely no right to complain about hyperbolic slurs being cast against them.

[PIK]

And if the one of the other 2 win ,you expect things to be different, I doubt it.

[SpankyMcFarland]

From a trades point of view, is there any reason why someone would choose to pee in a cup? For example, could he possibly have thought it's unprofessional to use their bathroom so he decided it's better to hide it?

Or is he just a sick fetishist who may enjoy the thought of people drinking out of a cup he peed in?

I really don't get this and I've asked a few friends who work in trades and none of them understand why he'd do that.

You could imagine a man of that age having an incontinence problem and being unable to get to the toilet in time. Peeing in a cup might be justified then - but not washing it afterwards and concealing the act. He didn't look like he was in any great distress before the event.

[Topaz]

Just wondering with all the problems the Tory Party are having with people within the party, could be some members want Harper to lose and get rid of him, so they can get a better leader for the party??

[Canada_First]

I vote for Ben Mulroney. A son vs son face off. That would be cool.

[ToadBrother]

And if the one of the other 2 win ,you expect things to be different, I doubt it.

Yes, I realize this is now the Tories' campaign slogan. "We suck, but so do they..."