Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Partisan ideology will of course determine that Liberals will always believe the worst, and spin any story to fit their own needs as most of these comments show.

There were NO corporate 'donations', some observers may have used corporate cards to pay the fees, not a donation.

The CPC were in fact trying to save the taxpayers money, when, on professional advice that the actions where legal, they proceeded to let 3 members over donate by a few hundred $. All money has been returned, and accounting corrected. The Liberals still owe 40-million bucks to the Canadian taxpayer. Not a cent has been paid.

Elections Canada has in fact, revealed even under the new interpretation of convention fees as donations, a mere three delegates at the Tory policy convention had to be refunded for over-donating. And guess what, only three people were at or near the maximum donation amount and also attended the convention that year. One of whom was Stephen Harper,r likely becauswe he had allready made the maximum donation prior to the convention fee issue. The Conservatives had not considered the fees to be donations in part because of their position that political conventions should not be subsidized by the Canadian taxpayer.

The PMO has expressed that while they do not agree with Elections Canada's decision, they will comply with it. They also underscore that it has always been their position that whatever the decision rendered by Elections Canada, they would comply with it.

Spin it anyway you like, it is a far cry from the exaggerations on here.

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Partisan ideology will of course determine that Conservatives will always believe the best scenario, and spin any story to fit their own needs as most of these comments show.

But that doesn't apply to the Liberals/NDP and their comments on this thread?

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted

Partisan ideology will of course determine that Conservatives will always believe the best scenario, and spin any story to fit their own needs as most of these comments show.

But that doesn't apply to the Liberals/NDP and their comments on this thread?

It surely applies to everyone that is loyal to a Party or leader Ricki Bobbi.

Posted
It surely applies to everyone that is loyal to a Party or leader Ricki Bobbi.

Then why not state that explicitly. If you want to take the high road better to do it before somebody calls you on taking the low road...

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
Partisan ideology will of course determine that Liberals will always believe the worst, and spin any story to fit their own needs as most of these comments show.

There were NO corporate 'donations', some observers may have used corporate cards to pay the fees, not a donation.

Corporate money was used to pay for something that is considered a donation. How is that NOT a corporate donation?

The CPC were in fact trying to save the taxpayers money, when, on professional advice that the actions where legal, they proceeded to let 3 members over donate by a few hundred $. All money has been returned, and accounting corrected. The Liberals still owe 40-million bucks to the Canadian taxpayer. Not a cent has been paid.
Here we go with the "b-b-but we're not as bad as the liberals" BS. Well the Liberals didn't run a campaign on accountability and ethics either.

As for saving the taxpayers money, I find that is a convienient excuse for trying to hide party funds.

Elections Canada has in fact, revealed even under the new interpretation of convention fees as donations, a mere three delegates at the Tory policy convention had to be refunded for over-donating. And guess what, only three people were at or near the maximum donation amount and also attended the convention that year. One of whom was Stephen Harper,r likely becauswe he had allready made the maximum donation prior to the convention fee issue. The Conservatives had not considered the fees to be donations in part because of their position that political conventions should not be subsidized by the Canadian taxpayer.

So only 3 people actually "over donated". Even if it were 500 people, I don't find that anywhere near as concerning as a political party trying to hide millions in funding.

The PMO has expressed that while they do not agree with Elections Canada's decision, they will comply with it. They also underscore that it has always been their position that whatever the decision rendered by Elections Canada, they would comply with it.

Ofcourse they will comply. What else are they going to do? Come right out and tell Canadians that the CPC thinks it is above the law?

Spin it anyway you like, it is a far cry from the exaggerations on here.

The CPC did not report funds that came into the party. They then denied this fact. What is there to spin?

The spinning is coming from the CPC supporters who are trying to make this out as an unintentional error. This wasn't a misplaced comma or decimal point. Nor is it a case of entering the data on the wrong line.

Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html

"You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)

Posted
The CPC did not report funds that came into the party. They then denied this fact. What is there to spin?

At this point you aren't spinning. You are out and out lying.

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
It surely applies to everyone that is loyal to a Party or leader Ricki Bobbi.

Then why not state that explicitly. If you want to take the high road better to do it before somebody calls you on taking the low road...

Because scriblett already covered the Liberals in post 175 :)

Posted
The CPC did not report funds that came into the party. They then denied this fact. What is there to spin?

At this point you aren't spinning. You are out and out lying.

RB, Can you back up your assertion that WDW is lying? From what we all know, thats exactly what happened, they took in revenues that werent counted and reported, how can you call him a liar?

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted
And stil,l no one is talking about the million in corporate donations, just the individual ones! :unsure:

What millions, please explain and provide sources.

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

Posted
The CPC did not report funds that came into the party. They then denied this fact. What is there to spin?

At this point you aren't spinning. You are out and out lying.

I have already shown you twice that this is a fact the party now admits to. Just what the hell is your problem in understanding this concept?

Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html

"You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)

Posted
I have already shown you twice that this is a fact the party now admits to. Just what the hell is your problem in understanding this concept?

You're lying and you haven't proven anything...

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
I have already shown you twice that this is a fact the party now admits to. Just what the hell is your problem in understanding this concept?

You're lying and you haven't proven anything...

I have already posted twice, from the original article no less, where the CPC did not report donations. does the phrase "disclosing an additional $539,915 in previously unreported donations" ring a bell.

Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html

"You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)

Posted
I have already shown you twice that this is a fact the party now admits to. Just what the hell is your problem in understanding this concept?

You're lying and you haven't proven anything...

I'm trying to give the benefit here, I've read through this multiple times and don't see where he is lying, please provide your proof.

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted

What part of - the party proceeded on legal advice, re recent change of rules and what they did was not a deliberate act of evasion but a simple act of interpretation of new rules - don't you understand. All of which has amounted to 3 people being over donated due to the change of rules. Any transfers from ridings under the same process has been rectified.

If I remember some of what went on before the Tory convention, there was a difference of opinion as to what the new guidelines from Elections Canada where to be interpreted and after consultation with lawyers, accountants and whoever, the decision was made to proceed as they did. Obviously they made the wrong decision. The only reason the media got a hold of this is because the CPC willingly told about it - and again has willingly rectified all of it.

Interesting how a little spin deflects questions about why nobody is in jail yet over Adscam that deliberate and wilful theft of public funds, which has yet to be rectified.

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

Posted
I'm trying to give the benefit here, I've read through this multiple times and don't see where he is lying, please provide your proof.

Here's a deal Shakey. (Which based on your post history you'll ignore and start in with the insults.) In the very post WDW quotes the term "undisclosed" if you look at the context of the original sentence they 're-classified' the donations.

Skillful editing aside re-classification implies that the funds were reported just not disclosed as donations.

All semantics.

Again WDW quit lying and provide some proof that you don't have to manipulate to fit your theory.

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
Interesting how a little spin deflects questions about why nobody is in jail yet over Adscam that deliberate and wilful theft of public funds, which has yet to be rectified.

I wonder the same thing myself, but thats not the topic of this thread nor the issue being discussed.

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted
I'm trying to give the benefit here, I've read through this multiple times and don't see where he is lying, please provide your proof.

Here's a deal Shakey. (Which based on your post history you'll ignore and start in with the insults.) In the very post WDW quotes the term "undisclosed" if you look at the context of the original sentence they 're-classified' the donations.

Skillful editing aside re-classification implies that the funds were reported just not disclosed as donations.

All semantics.

Again WDW quit lying and provide some proof that you don't have to manipulate to fit your theory.

Then why try to change Accountability Act retroactively? I get what you are saying but it flies in the face, clearly it was against the rules?

I'll ignore your attack.

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted
Then why try to change Accountability Act retroactively? I get what you are saying but it flies in the face, clearly it was against the rules?

I'll ignore your attack.

Good on you keeping it at a higher level. I'll do the same. B)

Do you have a specific example of the Conservatives trying to change the Accountability Act as it applies to this case or are you referring to the changes forced on them by the unelected and unaccountable Senate?

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
Do you have a specific example of the Conservatives trying to change the Accountability Act as it applies to this case or are you referring to the changes forced on them by the unelected and unaccountable Senate?

I'm not sure what it has to do with changes to the AA by anyone, clearly the amounts claimed were incorrect and not in line with Elections Canada rules, I am talking about disagreeing with an interpretation and then trying to change the bill retroactively to cover their rearends.

In a government order paper posted Friday without fanfare, the Conservatives appear to tacitly concede they were wrong when they claimed there was no need to declare the fees more than a year ago.

They now want to change the accountability act to add that "payment . . . of a fee to participate in a registered party's convention is not a contribution" as long as the fees don't exceed the cost of running the convention

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/061117/..._accountability

As far as I understand the changes from the senate, none had anything to do with this, again though, thats probably a different thread for another time.

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted
I'm trying to give the benefit here, I've read through this multiple times and don't see where he is lying, please provide your proof.

Here's a deal Shakey. (Which based on your post history you'll ignore and start in with the insults.) In the very post WDW quotes the term "undisclosed" if you look at the context of the original sentence they 're-classified' the donations.

Skillful editing aside re-classification implies that the funds were reported just not disclosed as donations.

All semantics.

Again WDW quit lying and provide some proof that you don't have to manipulate to fit your theory.

You seriously can't understand what has happened can you?

Yes they reclassified their funds to fit with Elections Canada guidelines. IN THAT RECLASSIFICATION THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY UNREPORTED DONATIONS.

Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html

"You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)

Posted

This is all quite hilarious, there is so little to find fault with the CPC that it is a hoot watching all this and reading the spin on it no one else seems to be that worried LOL

When the Lib's started haranguing about the Conservatives hiding donations the MP's are able to reply that the Liberals actually get help for their convention fees from taxpayers by using their Convention fees as a political donation. Guess they (Libs) think the only way to do things is to fleece the taxpayer as much as you can.

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

Posted
Yes they reclassified their funds to fit with Elections Canada guidelines. IN THAT RECLASSIFICATION THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY UNREPORTED DONATIONS.

USING ALL CAPS DOESN'T GIVE MORE CREDENCE TO YOUR FABRICATIONS. LOOK AT THE SENTENCE AGAIN, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!!!!

Dion is a verbose, mild-mannered academic with a shaky grasp of English who seems unfit to chair a university department, much less lead a country.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen

Posted
Yes they reclassified their funds to fit with Elections Canada guidelines. IN THAT RECLASSIFICATION THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY UNREPORTED DONATIONS.

USING ALL CAPS DOESN'T GIVE MORE CREDENCE TO YOUR FABRICATIONS. LOOK AT THE SENTENCE AGAIN, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!!!!

Here is the whole sentence:

In the revised report, the Conservatives have "reclassified revenue related to the 2005 convention," disclosing an additional $539,915 in previously unreported donations, an extra $913,710 in "other revenue," and an additional $1.45 million in "other expenses." The report does not explain what constitutes other revenue or other expenses.

Just where is it you are getting lost?

Yes they reclassified some revenue. Including "disclosing an additional $539,915 in previously unreported donations"

"Previously unreported donations". Previously unreported. Unreported.

Are you following along yet? :rolleyes:

Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html

"You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,899
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Shemul Ray
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Akalupenn earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...