liberal leadership race.......

[JMH]

I never thought that I would witness such a pathetic state of affairs as this.

After watching question period today, I was shocked to see the same crud as usual. The NDP has no realistic concept of NATO (they apparently dont know what it is) and the Liberals played Politics with a tragic event.

Jeepers, we are in serious trouble. Liberal leadership candidates? NONE. These idiots can't get over their EGO'S let alone run a country. There are so many of them that it's anoying. Hedi Fry, Volpe, Kennedy, and on and on . All LOOSERS, with no chance whatsoever.

These, as most of them, are people that barely made their own ridings! The public genuinely despise' these people!? Hedi Fry, was narrowly re-elected against.......... a gay thief. Are these people on DOPE? Well I hope so, because there is no other reason for them to be wasting our time..........and Liberal Money!?

The Liberal Party is in shambles.

[gerryhatrick]

I never thought that I would witness such a pathetic state of affairs as this.

After watching question period today, I was shocked to see the same crud as usual. The NDP has no realistic concept of NATO (they apparently dont know what it is) and the Liberals played Politics with a tragic event.

Jeepers, we are in serious trouble. Liberal leadership candidates? NONE. These idiots can't get over their EGO'S let alone run a country. There are so many of them that it's anoying. Hedi Fry, Volpe, Kennedy, and on and on . All LOOSERS, with no chance whatsoever.

These, as most of them, are people that barely made their own ridings! The public genuinely despise' these people!? Hedi Fry, was narrowly re-elected against.......... a gay thief. Are these people on DOPE? Well I hope so, because there is no other reason for them to be wasting our time..........and Liberal Money!?

The Liberal Party is in shambles.

What nonsense. If you want to critisize the Liberal leadership candidates then do so with a little intelligence. Calling them all "LOOSERS" simply exposes your irrational partisanship.

There is a very good chance that the candidate elected will be the next PM, given the fact that Harper cannot increase his lead over a leaderless party while he has the pulpit of government.

[JMH]

I never thought that I would witness such a pathetic state of affairs as this.

After watching question period today, I was shocked to see the same crud as usual. The NDP has no realistic concept of NATO (they apparently dont know what it is) and the Liberals played Politics with a tragic event.

Jeepers, we are in serious trouble. Liberal leadership candidates? NONE. These idiots can't get over their EGO'S let alone run a country. There are so many of them that it's anoying. Hedi Fry, Volpe, Kennedy, and on and on . All LOOSERS, with no chance whatsoever.

These, as most of them, are people that barely made their own ridings! The public genuinely despise' these people!? Hedi Fry, was narrowly re-elected against.......... a gay thief. Are these people on DOPE? Well I hope so, because there is no other reason for them to be wasting our time..........and Liberal Money!?

The Liberal Party is in shambles.

What nonsense. If you want to critisize the Liberal leadership candidates then do so with a little intelligence. Calling them all "LOOSERS" simply exposes your irrational partisanship.

There is a very good chance that the candidate elected will be the next PM, given the fact that Harper cannot increase his lead over a leaderless party while he has the pulpit of government.

My goodness, I suppose I'm left to you (the intelligent one) that listens to their rhetorical re-cap of yesterday. Thank god for us "dummies" for there is some hope. I'll give you this..........A freind of mine just had to put out a burning cross in his front yard...........in Prince George........disgusting.

[geoffrey]

There is a very good chance that the candidate elected will be the next PM, given the fact that Harper cannot increase his lead over a leaderless party while he has the pulpit of government.

I won't be part of a Canada led by either of the two frontrunners in the leadership campaign. Hopefully we can drum up some sepertist movement out here, because I'd sure hate to move. Rae is a strong armed economic interventionist, socialist to the core... and Ignatieff has already launched his Trudeau-esk screw the west, we'll take the rest campaign based on NEP II. I'll pass, I don't need to be part of that.

Hopefully Canadians are smart enough not to elect a Liberal government until they can find a leader that returns liberal economics to the party that once was the pro-business party of Canada.

[gc1765]

I won't be part of a Canada led by either of the two frontrunners in the leadership campaign. Hopefully we can drum up some sepertist movement out here, because I'd sure hate to move. Rae is a strong armed economic interventionist, socialist to the core... and Ignatieff has already launched his Trudeau-esk screw the west, we'll take the rest campaign based on NEP II. I'll pass, I don't need to be part of that.

Hopefully Canadians are smart enough not to elect a Liberal government until they can find a leader that returns liberal economics to the party that once was the pro-business party of Canada.

What's your opinion of Dion? He has a pretty good chance of winning too.

[geoffrey]

What's your opinion of Dion? He has a pretty good chance of winning too.

Probably my favourite of the 3, though favourite is merely relative. Another academic, so I really doubt his ability to deal with business as well as Martin or Mulroney, but he does promise to be an economic liberator. I like this. His views on education, well, I know he wants to make more people educated, but how? Cheaper tution? I hope not. I'm a university student and the one thing that angers me is when students complain that their tution is too much. Do they not realise the value they are getting long-term? It's not like the student loans program picks up anyone that can't quite pay the bill... I fear Dion is going down the path of free university or subsidized university. All this will do is increase the number of people that really shouldn't be there, more people in the same number of seats doesn't do anyone any good.

He's very pro-environment and I fear NEP II from him as well. Carbon taxes are enormously popular in Quebec (of course they are, Quebec would love to take more Alberta money) and I can see Dion following that thought.

Another point on Dion, could there be any one candidate more detached from the West?

[geoffrey]

I regret posting that Dion is detached from Alberta... he's got a freakin' Alberta specific campaign site. What a champ... I'll post more after I get some work done, I might be more favourable to Mr. Dion.

Just don't go down that NEP road.

[jdobbin]

I won't be part of a Canada led by either of the two frontrunners in the leadership campaign. Hopefully we can drum up some sepertist movement out here, because I'd sure hate to move. Rae is a strong armed economic interventionist, socialist to the core... and Ignatieff has already launched his Trudeau-esk screw the west, we'll take the rest campaign based on NEP II. I'll pass, I don't need to be part of that.

Hopefully Canadians are smart enough not to elect a Liberal government until they can find a leader that returns liberal economics to the party that once was the pro-business party of Canada.

You would leave Canada?

[Ricki Bobbi]

What nonsense. If you want to critisize the Liberal leadership candidates then do so with a little intelligence. Calling them all "LOOSERS" simply exposes your irrational partisanship.

There is a very good chance that the candidate elected will be the next PM, given the fact that Harper cannot increase his lead over a leaderless party while he has the pulpit of government.

Ahh the irony in chastising others for the terms they use in describing Canadian politicians.

But sticking to form by turning *any* thread into a chance to attack Harper. Consistency is an admirable trait.

[Michael Hardner]

Ricki, you must admit that the first post in this thread is a classic drive-by...

[gc1765]

Ricki, you must admit that the first post in this thread is a classic drive-by...

Yep, replace "liberals" with "conservatives", and some people on this board would immediately label the poster as a conservative/Harper basher...but when the shoe is on the other foot, no comment. Those same people don't blame others for being liberal bashers. Interesting.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Yep, replace "liberals" with "conservatives", and some people on this board would immediately label the poster as a conservative/Harper basher...but when the shoe is on the other foot, no comment. Those same people don't blame others for being liberal bashers. Interesting.

MH, agreed it was a classic drive-by.

gc, are the supporters of any other party that fair minded here? Is it wrong if everybody plays by the same rules?

I'm not really aware of any poster here with a history of standing up for the Liberals and the Conservatives.

But feel free to enlighen me if I'm wrong. And feel free to address the substance of my post. It would only be fair for you to take umbrage with a post by a poster with a history of attacking Harper as it would with somebody with a history of supporting him. Wouldn't it?

[gc1765]

Probably my favourite of the 3, though favourite is merely relative. Another academic, so I really doubt his ability to deal with business as well as Martin or Mulroney, but he does promise to be an economic liberator. I like this. His views on education, well, I know he wants to make more people educated, but how? Cheaper tution? I hope not. I'm a university student and the one thing that angers me is when students complain that their tution is too much. Do they not realise the value they are getting long-term? It's not like the student loans program picks up anyone that can't quite pay the bill... I fear Dion is going down the path of free university or subsidized university. All this will do is increase the number of people that really shouldn't be there, more people in the same number of seats doesn't do anyone any good.

He's very pro-environment and I fear NEP II from him as well. Carbon taxes are enormously popular in Quebec (of course they are, Quebec would love to take more Alberta money) and I can see Dion following that thought.

Another point on Dion, could there be any one candidate more detached from the West?

I actually agree with your post for the most part. Out of those three, I would also pick Dion. As for Rae, if I could put aside my skepticism and be naive enough to believe that he has actually moved to the center (economically) then he wouldn't be as bad of a choice....but I doubt that's the case. I don't want to see Canada getting back into deficits. Same goes for Ignatieff. I don't think ignatieff is as smart as he's cracked up to be, I don't know why people put so much hope in him. He also appears to be a bit arrogant, but that's just my opinion.

As for education, this is where I disagree with you. Subsidizing tuition isn't such a bad idea. First of all, a course costs what like 3 to 4 hundred dollars? Times that by 250 students...that's $100,000 per course (not including the amount that an international student pays). Does it really take that much money to run a course? I'll bet a lot of that money goes to paying the professor's salary, when professor's spend most of their time doing research not teaching. The research that they do is meant to benefit everyone (for example health-related research), why should only students have to pay for it? Of course, I'm pretty sure that education is already heavily subsidized, but still....

The other reason why it's not such a bad idea is that, as someone else on this board has already put forth a very convincing argument for, putting money into education is an investment. If someone goes to school, whether university, college or trade school, they are likely to get a better job, make more money and pay more back to the government in taxes. So, in theory the government should get some of that money back, kind of like with Reagan's supply side economics (if I understand supply side economics, which I don't ).

By the way...imagine being a graduate student and paying tuition but NOT taking any classes, now there's a ripoff. Luckily it's only masters students and not PhD students that have to pay tuition.

[gc1765]

gc, are the supporters of any other party that fair minded here? Is it wrong if everybody plays by the same rules?

Probably not. There's a lot of liberals here who are blinded by partisanship as well. But I haven't heard of any of those partisan liberals condemn others on this board for being partisan. To imply that it's a bad thing to be partisan when you are clearly partisan yourself sounds like hypocrisy to me.

I also try to look at an issue from both sides and come up with a fair opinion of the situation. I'd say most of the time I'm non-partisan, but I'm sure I'm guilty of it from time to time (though not as bad as some others on this board, on both sides of the political spectrum).

But feel free to enlighen me if I'm wrong. And feel free to address the substance of my post. It would only be fair for you to take umbrage with a post by a poster with a history of attacking Harper as it would with somebody with a history of supporting him. Wouldn't it?

I'm not condemning you for not speaking out against the liberal bashing, if that's what you are thinking. I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of it. I'll tell you what, if I see a liberal that I think is being a hypocrite, I'll be sure to point it out.

[geoffrey]

The other reason why it's not such a bad idea is that, as someone else on this board has already put forth a very convincing argument for, putting money into education is an investment. If someone goes to school, whether university, college or trade school, they are likely to get a better job, make more money and pay more back to the government in taxes. So, in theory the government should get some of that money back, kind of like with Reagan's supply side economics (if I understand supply side economics, which I don't ).

That's a big stretch to compare to supply side economics, but I see your point. How I see it though is different. Your going to make alot more money over your career going to school than not. It's a positive investment for people to go, why not spend the money?

[Ricki Bobbi]

I'm not condemning you for not speaking out against the liberal bashing, if that's what you are thinking. I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of it. I'll tell you what, if I see a liberal that I think is being a hypocrite, I'll be sure to point it out.

Take a look at my original post. It was a response to a poster who always takes the time to post the Prime Minister in the worst possible light. Yet you don't say anything about his post?

Here is the quote I took issue with.

What nonsense. If you want to critisize the Liberal leadership candidates then do so with a little intelligence. Calling them all "LOOSERS" simply exposes your irrational partisanship.

How is starting a thread calling the Prime Minister a wimp not being *irrationally partisan*?

Do you not think he was being hypocritical?

[August1991]

Ricki, you must admit that the first post in this thread is a classic drive-by...

Drive by? I dunno. But it is reason to restrict which posters can create a new thread and waste other people's time.

A true drive-by of the Liberal Party would have hinted to a possible leader, weak against Harper.

So given yet another thread about the Liberal leadership race, let me make lemonade with lemons and turn this thread into a question: which Liberal candidate would do best against Harper?

Better yet. Let me start another thread specifically with that question. I'll link both ways.

Thread continued here.

[gc1765]

Take a look at my original post. It was a response to a poster who always takes the time to post the Prime Minister in the worst possible light. Yet you don't say anything about his post?

Here is the quote I took issue with.

What nonsense. If you want to critisize the Liberal leadership candidates then do so with a little intelligence. Calling them all "LOOSERS" simply exposes your irrational partisanship.

How is starting a thread calling the Prime Minister a wimp not being *irrationally partisan*?

Do you not think he was being hypocritical?

Good point. I actually didn't notice that before, which is why I didn't post a response. I guess you're both hypocrites

At least the post about Harper being a wimp provided some argument as to why the poster thinks he is a wimp. In this thread, the liberals are called losers & idiots without really explaining why they are losers & idiots. I think in the first case, the thread was started to show how Harper tries to avoid the media, but calling him a wimp was excessively partisan. What was the purpose of this thread except to insult liberals?

[Ricki Bobbi]

At least the post about Harper being a wimp provided some argument as to why the poster thinks he is a wimp. In this thread, the liberals are called losers & idiots without really explaining why they are losers & idiots. I think in the first case, the thread was started to show how Harper tries to avoid the media, but calling him a wimp was excessively partisan. What was the purpose of this thread except to insult liberals?

Fair enough. but I didn't start this thread....

[gc1765]

At least the post about Harper being a wimp provided some argument as to why the poster thinks he is a wimp. In this thread, the liberals are called losers & idiots without really explaining why they are losers & idiots. I think in the first case, the thread was started to show how Harper tries to avoid the media, but calling him a wimp was excessively partisan. What was the purpose of this thread except to insult liberals?

Fair enough. but I didn't start this thread....

I know. That was more of a side-comment not related to anything you said.

[gerryhatrick]

But sticking to form by turning *any* thread into a chance to attack Harper. Consistency is an admirable trait.

These constant accusations of hating or attacking Harper are insane.

When I state a fact it is not an "attack". Harper has not increased his lead since the election. That is a factual statement, not an attack.

I realize you work for the CPC, but you need to allow the free flow of facts and opinions without blowing a gasket.

[Ricki Bobbi]

These constant accusations of hating or attacking Harper are insane.

When I state a fact it is not an "attack". Harper has not increased his lead since the election. That is a factual statement, not an attack.

I realize you work for the CPC, but you need to allow the free flow of facts and opinions without blowing a gasket.

Don't work for the CPC. Lying doesn't get you anywhere.

If you really want to respond to the freeflow of ideas. Address my repsonse to your *can't increase his lead against the leaderless Liberals* comment. Or you could brush it off as you have done repeatedly....

[scribblet]

But sticking to form by turning *any* thread into a chance to attack Harper. Consistency is an admirable trait.

These constant accusations of hating or attacking Harper are insane.

When I state a fact it is not an "attack". Harper has not increased his lead since the election. That is a factual statement, not an attack.

I realize you work for the CPC, but you need to allow the free flow of facts and opinions without blowing a gasket.

Just curious, but how do you know he works for the CPC, and do you work for the Liberal party?

[watching&waiting]

I can not see Jerryhatrick working for the Libs or any party for that matter. He just is way too belligerent in his ways and methods of communications. Most people here I believe learned to hate him for this, and now many tolerate him but many ,many have just chose to ignore him. The would make him pretty much a poison pill for anyone who would employ him. What ever he does to make his living goes, he probably has issues with thise around him, and would be quick to blame them for his problems. I can only guess and say he is a social outcast as it seems he is far too entrenched in his own view to consider or tolerate any arguments other then his own.

Now that is only my personal view of him, and I can only go by his behaviour here on this site. I can only hope that what he displays here is just an evil personality of a many personality disorder.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I can not see Jerryhatrick working for the Libs or any party for that matter. He just is way too belligerent in his ways and methods of communications. Most people here I believe learned to hate him for this, and now many tolerate him but many ,many have just chose to ignore him. The would make him pretty much a poison pill for anyone who would employ him. What ever he does to make his living goes, he probably has issues with thise around him, and would be quick to blame them for his problems. I can only guess and say he is a social outcast as it seems he is far too entrenched in his own view to consider or tolerate any arguments other then his own.

Now that is only my personal view of him, and I can only go by his behaviour here on this site. I can only hope that what he displays here is just an evil personality of a many personality disorder.

That is some funny and insightful stuff.

You'd be surprised at the wingnuts working in political offices for *all* parties.

It's pretty easy to be rude, belligerent and childish when hiding behing a computer screen.