# Throne Speech - Oct 16, 2007



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

The Throne Speech is happening right now.

Let all flaming, "Harpo is a Nazi", here comes an election rants commence in...

3...2...1...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Guy: What happened to the 125,000 child care spaces Spec can't live without?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

They bragged about choice....ignored it.

••

So far sounds like Martin speech. All warm and fuzzy,

••

Kyoto the poison pill. Might take some time to play out.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> The Throne Speech is happening right now.
> 
> Let all flaming, "Harpo is a Nazi", here comes an election rants commence in...
> 
> 3...2...1...


I did notice the presence of Hillier and 2 female cdn. soldiers standing next to and behind Harpo

very nice optic for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

and now I listen to Iggy's musings
wow, Iggy called Dion "the leader" instead of "our leader"

how do you spell arrogant? I-G-G-Y


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Well Iggy came out with some strong comments. It would seem hard for the Liberals to backtrack from there. Maybe Iggy wants to see an election now for his own benefit.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Vandave said:


> Well Iggy came out with some strong comments. It would seem hard for the Liberals to backtrack from there. Maybe Iggy wants to see an election now for his own benefit.


You don't think he wants to see Dion fail do you?


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> You don't think he wants to see Dion fail do you?


No, that would be shocking. The Liberals are a very unified party and Iggy no longer has any leadership aspirations. 

To be a fly on the wall of the Liberal Party tonight.... :lmao:


----------



## absolutetotalgeek (Sep 18, 2005)

So ya, all is perfect. We are the perfect country, have the best jobs, have the most money, live in the best homes, have the best of everything and it's just going to get better and better because anything that is wrong, heaven forbid, is gonna get fixed pronto! .....Wwwwheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

All I see is a bunch a sorry, sad sack Liberals mulling their impending doom.

C'mon boys, pull the trigger. Let's have it out in an election and see where it puts the Liberals. Bring it on Dion.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

SINC said:


> All I see is a bunch a sorry, sad sack Liberals mulling their impending doom.
> 
> C'mon boys, pull the trigger. Let's have it out in an election and see where it puts the Liberals. Bring it on Dion.


Harper desperately wants an election but doesn't have the stones to call it himself..


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

rgray said:


> Harper desperately wants an election but doesn't have the stones to call it himself..


Maybe not, but he does have the smarts to make the sad sacks force it to almost guarantee a majority this time around.


----------



## absolutetotalgeek (Sep 18, 2005)

> ..mulling their impending doom


Oh there's doom comin' alright.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

....


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

rgray said:


> Harper desperately wants an election but doesn't have the stones to call it himself..


Easier to blame others....


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> Maybe not, but he does have the smarts to make the sad sacks force it to almost guarantee a majority this time around.


do I hear the popping of champagne corks already?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> do I hear the popping of champagne corks already?


You must have incredibly bad hearing.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> do I hear the popping of champagne corks already?


No, your tinfoil hat is making crunching noises in your ear.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> You must have incredibly bad hearing.





> Maybe not, but he does have the smarts to make the sad sacks force it to almost guarantee a majority this time around.


No, I just recall another election when Harpo popped champagne corks in anticipation of a victory, only to be reminded by the Canadian electorate that the only poll that matters is on election day.

Be careful what you wish for. You might just get it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> Be careful what you wish for. You might just get it.


I wish for the Liberal party to be eliminated, and a new Libertarian party that really believes in freedom to take its place.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Hey MF instead of spouting some more nonsense should you not try to answer this:
http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...ondrous-kwanzaa-card-harper-5.html#post593179


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ArtistSeries said:


> Hey MF instead of spouting some more nonsense should you not try to answer this:
> Wonder if I will get a wondrous Kwanzaa card from Harper?


Sure I'll answer it. No you will not get one.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Yup MF, lots of talking very little substance. The equivalent of troll diarrhoea...


----------



## Greenlion (Nov 19, 2002)

SINC said:


> Maybe not, but he does have the smarts to make the sad sacks force it to almost guarantee a majority this time around.


Majority?! 

What polls are you reading?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Greenlion said:


> Majority?!
> 
> What polls are you reading?


Call it a hunch that Canadians are so fed up with elections in general and opposition posturing in particular that they would elect a majority to shut them the hell up.

Oh, and polls like this one:

http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=c0183b6a-65fd-4896-aa39-ce227bbec1c3


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

*Speech No Hill To Die On*

First this:

“If there is a single issue that animates the opposition parties, especially the NDP and Bloc Quebecois, it's Canada's mission in Afghanistan. To its credit, the government is refusing to back down on our solemn commitment. Indeed, it signalled a desire to remain in the troubled country beyond February 2009, when the current mission is scheduled to expire, gradually moving from combat status to training and policing.
Surely, given the ultimate sacrifices made to date, arbitrary timelines shouldn't interfere with Job One -- buoying the Afghan government in its noble endeavour to resist the Taliban and begin building a civil society.”

And then this:

“It will be astonishing to most Albertans that the Conservatives felt the need to formally remind us that meeting Kyoto targets is impossible. Even Green Party Leader Elizabeth May recognizes that sorry fact. As she understated Tuesday, it's all about doing the best we can and then pledging further action.”

:clap: 

http://www.canada.com/edmontonjourn....html?id=e951d0d6-d199-46c2-8d85-472436a9a979


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

" buoying the Afghan government in its noble endeavour to resist the Taliban and begin building a civil society.”"
Too bad the mayor of Kabul is negotiating with them... Did he not invite them back into the gov?
Not that it makes a big diff with the death penalty back in force... what was it for? One execution was for adultery... 
No big diff between Karzai and the Taliban..


> In the meantime, however, Afghan officials have given no indication that the government is about to suspend capital punishment: Executions would be a good lesson "for those who are committing crimes as murder, kidnapping, *adultery* and rape," said Humayun Hamidzada, Karzai's spokesman.


http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/c19327f41cbfb7f2600fa90f8f4a582d.htm


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> it's all about doing the best we can and then pledging further action.”


except we're not even close to doing the best we can - no legislation for the oil sands to clean up - not even a mention of hard reduction targets in the speech.

And if you think his 20% and 50% figures = hard reduction.....the problem is he didn't say from WHEN.

If from 1990 which is the world standard - it's to be applauded.

It is a poison pill for Dion and a strategy he should not fall for if he wants to continue.

Wait until Bush is gone and his party settled. Let the others be ideologues.

Politics is the art of the possible. Dion must think of The Art of War and choose HIS time and place of conflict, not let Harper choose.

Dion is caught between his consensus nature and the need for a leader.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> It is a poison pill for Dion and a strategy he should not fall for if he wants to continue.


Yes, the Kyoto statement is a strike right at Dion. If he backs it up, he will really undermine himself in the future. If he goes to the polls now, he faces a loss of leadership due to the lack of party unity and funds. It looks like he is going to lose either way.

You have to hand it to Harper. He is making some very shrewd political moves.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> Yes, the *Kyoto statement *is a strike right at Dion.


And an insult to most Canadians.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> You have to hand it to Harper. He is making some very shrewd political moves.


Rhetoric is now insight. XX) :yawn:


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

ArtistSeries said:


> Rhetoric is now insight. XX) :yawn:


He reminds me of another "decider."


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Good riddance to Kyoto. Stick a fork in it--it's done. Now let's get on with it.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Good riddance to Kyoto. Stick a fork in it--it's done. *Now let's get on with it*.


And what "it" would that be?
Doing nothing, it seems.....
All talk, no solutions.
Kyoto is still the will of most - except the oil barons it seems...


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

ArtistSeries said:


> And what "it" would that be?
> Doing nothing, it seems.....
> All talk, no solutions.
> Kyoto is still the will of most - except the oil barons it seems...


"getting on" refers to Afghanistan, cutting social programs, and an election


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Of course I'll be looking to SINC telling us how crime is out of control... those frigth-wingers never tire of telling us how the world is going to hell...


> *Homicide rate drops in 2006*


globeandmail.com: Homicide rate drops in 2006


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I'm sure the Harpcrites will cite Harpo for lowering the homicide rate, but for some reason don't want to admit that Harpo also oversaw the 5 fold increase in death toll of Canadians in Afghanistan.

"Don't mind that man behind the curtain."


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

You guys should toss in some "high-five" and "thumbs-up" icons while you complete your mutual love tango of Conservative hatred.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> those frigth-wingers never tire of telling us how the world is going to hell...





ArtistSeries said:


> And what "it" would that be?
> Doing nothing, it seems.....
> All talk, no solutions.
> Kyoto is still the will of most


*
Pot:* Kettle you're black.
*Kettle:* No Pot, you're black.

:lmao:


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> You guys should toss in some "high-five" and "thumbs-up" icons while you complete your mutual love tango of Conservative hatred.


Is that it?
You really don't have any substance....
Taking lessons for Paris Hilton I see..


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

AS: This usually when you throw in some sort of obscure reference to a "dry humping dog."


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

No diarrhea troll - 
and thanks for showing once again that you have nothing to add except for little snips of no value.

Care to tell us what getting on with "it" means?
How is doing nothing on GHG doing something?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I've made a Hai-ku of the previous posts:

Talk, not solutions
Kyoto the will of most
Fright-wingers won’t tire


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Congrats MF, derailed another one.
Are you on the Harper payroll?
Please go back to your handlers and request your money.
I'd note that you did not smear Dion enough, so they may remove some of the monies there.
I'm sure you'll be back and make it up.
Canada's "the Government is clean" will thank you.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> How is doing nothing on GHG doing something?


The Conservatives have been doing more than nothing, which beats the record of the prior Liberal governments.

And now, Dion will be too chicken to take the government down for stating the obvious (i.e. that we can't meet the Kyoto).


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Exactly Dave. Shall we return to the Martin days of bowing down to the altar of Kyoto while doing nothing. Granted, it made a great press relase, but...


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> The Conservatives have been doing more than nothing, which beats the record of the prior Liberal governments.
> 
> And now, Dion will be too chicken to take the government down for stating the obvious (i.e. that we can't meet the Kyoto).


Already posted the little linky where GHG had stabilised under the Libs and emissions down 15%+... try another one VD.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Throne speech response - Liberals WILL not vote it down by the sounds of it.

Decent speech.
He wants to see the details.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc: Sounds like. Apparently Dion will suggest an amendent that the NDP will not be able to support in full so--no election.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yep - he played it correctly and will abstain.

We'll see how far Harper will get in his agenda. 
It's actually not a bad probation period.

2009 will be very different with Bush gone and a weak NA economy.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Not badly played if Dion goes for it--making the NDP his fall guy. Let's see if Layton wants to play.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Dion marked Harpers paper and gave him a 51.

I don't think that joke will spin very well for Harper.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> He wants to see the details.


No he doesn't.

He would support Genghis Khan at this point.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Spare us the champagne bubbles.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Spare us the champagne bubbles.


Wanna sip? The Liberals seem to support the agenda moving forward so you must be quite happy as well.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I think that too much has been made of Harper wanting an election. He was prepared for one, but I suspect he's just as happy to move forward with the legislative package.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Macfury said:


> I think that too much has been made of Harper wanting an election. He was prepared for one, but I suspect he's just as happy to move forward with the legislative package.


And showing the country that Dion lacks a package. :lmao:


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Vandave said:


> And showing the country that Dion lacks a package. :lmao:


Dion is a medical anomaly, how he able to stand upright without a spine, we'll never know.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> Dion is a medical anomaly, how he able to stand upright without a spine, we'll never know.


And this one needs a back brace..... Too many timmies?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Oh no... are we back to this nonsense again? Enough of this judging crap about people's appearances. Reminds me of the unkind remarks made about Chretien and the set of his face, thanks to a childhood bout of polio.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Yes you are correct Max.

No more jokes about the fat cats in Ottawa...


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Yeah, I expect that particular moratorium to last for all of 30 seconds. We have such curious memory lapses, we humin beans.


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

Boy Harper sure is tubby in those pics.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Considering the throne speech and the lack of the Kyoto accord involvement in it...
Does this mean that I can finally buy a larger 2 stroke vehicle in Canada?

Dave


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Dave, I hope so for you. 
I was also looking for a turbo lawnmower...

In the meanwhile, get prepared for:


> myCampaign is your 24/7 virtual campaign office. Sign up today and get full access to your online action centre!
> 
> The myCampaign action centre helps you spread the Conservative message, raise money, and recruit volunteers. To get started, simply select one of the action items below.
> 
> ...


https://mycampaign.conservative.ca/


http://www.thestar.com/News/article/267194


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper, then the opposition leader, condemned the practice at the time.
> 
> "What I can say is that it doesn't surprise me the Liberals are doing that," he said on Dec. 8, 2005. "I suspect for most of the Liberal campaign if it isn't groups that are linked to the government or linked to the party, I think they'll have a lot of trouble finding anybody to support some of their policies."
> 
> ...


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

So _that's_ how they propagate.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> And this one needs a back brace..... Too many timmies?


Get a grip, what next four eyes jokes?


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> Get a grip, what next four eyes jokes?


Here, this stuff writes itself: http://www.cpcenergy.ca/?section_id=511&section_copy_id=44021&language_id=0

The "spoke person" for the youth wing looks like a real stoner (that's someone who smokes the pot for you older CPC activist)...

BTW, submit an ad and you can win an iPod or Wii...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Clearly AS is worried--it's nothing but jabs at people's appearance now. Thanks for raising the level of discourse, "diarrhea troll."


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

diarrhea troll - that would be your new nickname.

As for the CPC ad, it's amusing.
CPC Energy and a rather dopey looking dude - surely you are not that bereaved of humour.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

You're free to make fun of anyone's appearance--just noting that this has become the evening's theme of your posts.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

ArtistSeries said:


> surely you are not that bereaved of humour.


I think you mean 'bereft'...

but WRT the topic at hand, it seems that both Harper and Dion have played their hands well. Harper was in a no-loose situation, but could've been much more clumsy in his execution, and Dion did the best he could with a very weak position, and managed (I think) to deflect the worst of the blow onto the NDP.

This does, however, give Harper time to build more political capital, increasing the likelihood that the Conservatives will have a shot at a majority next election (assuming they don't make too many egregious mistakes, and assuming that the Liberals continue to shoot their feet off, both of which seem likely).

As much as I'd like to see the Conservatives implode, they're good politicians, and they're making all the right moves to consolidate their power. I don't think the Liberals can afford to wait for them to make a mistake... they're going to have to get their act together if they want to have a fighting chance in the next election.

Cheers


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

"this is your brain on conservative kool aid"


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> Here, this stuff writes itself: CPC Energy is challenging you to show us what you got!
> 
> The "spoke person" for the youth wing looks like a real stoner (that's someone who smokes the pot for you older CPC activist)...


You might want to read the tag line, looks like the Conservative might have a Bloc roomy. BTW the Liberal equivalent is just as bad.

Young Liberals of Canada :: Welcome


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/media.canada.com/canwest/90/liberal_thong.jpg


MACSPECTRUM said:


> "this is your brain on conservative kool aid"


Guy kinda reminds me of Napoleon Dynamite. I wonder if he's wearing the latest young liberal fashions? :lmao: 

http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/media.canada.com/canwest/90/liberal_thong.jpg

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

JumboJones said:


> You might want to read the tag line, looks like the Conservative might have a Bloc roomy. BTW the Liberal equivalent is just as bad.
> 
> Young Liberals of Canada :: Welcome


That's the one with the "jazzy" maple leaf logo that looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

bryanc said:


> I think you mean 'bereft'...
> 
> but WRT the topic at hand, it seems that both Harper and Dion have played their hands well. Harper was in a no-loose situation, but could've been much more clumsy in his execution, and Dion did the best he could with a very weak position, and managed (I think) to deflect the worst of the blow onto the NDP.
> 
> ...


I agree with you to a point. Dion's hand was played for him before he even got the table. Harper could still force an election in the next few weeks.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> You might want to read the tag line, looks like the Conservative might have a Bloc roomy. BTW the Liberal equivalent is just as bad.
> 
> Young Liberals of Canada :: Welcome


Where is the dope head on the Young Liberals site?
BTW, if you look at the Young Liberals ads that parody the mac ones, they are pathetic.

It's funny how Connies see nothing wrong with using the most unflattering pictures of Dion (I just received a Conservative Postcard with one) (look at the Conservative site), yet get pissed when Harper is shown in a similar light...


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> That's the one with the "jazzy" maple leaf logo that looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!


The "reverse" checkmark is rather stupid...


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

--


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> The "reverse" checkmark is rather stupid...


http://www.impawards.com/2000/posters/loser.jpg


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> Are they pointing out his flaws as you were? I just think picking on someones weight is uncreative, tasteless and extremely juvenile.


Explain your avatar, then:









As you are no doubt aware, the Progressive Conservatives, in part, lost an election by using that picture in their advertising.

Do you mean to be offensive to Chretien by posting the unflattering "uncreative, tasteless and extremely juvenile" picture, or are you commemorating the Progressive Conservatives' major loss?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

HowEver said:


> Explain your avatar, then:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You got me before I could change my post, damn you!

You caught me. :lmao:


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> You got me before I could change my post, damn you!
> 
> You caught me. :lmao:


A case as do as I say, not as I do....


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

*Is this a triple dog dare?*



> A Conservative source said that one portion, on tougher sentences for gun crimes, will reflect NDP amendments the Tories had accepted in the last session, but other portions of the new bill will undo opposition amendments - daring them to back down.


globeandmail.com: Harper reloads with crime ultimatum

Harper would like an election. End of story.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> A case as do as I say, not as I do....


Hey I'm man enough to admit when I'm being a hypocrite.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> Hey I'm man enough to admit when I'm being a hypocrite.


Sorry JJ. I was not trying to be insulting. There is no icon for "I think it was funny given your avatar, but you seem to have some humour about it".


If I had used Harpocrite, the I was being insulting.


----------



## Paul O'Keefe (Jun 3, 2005)

The probem with gun crime is not with the penalty it's about enforcement and prosecution. We can increase penalties all we want, but if we don't investigate, arrest, and prosecute the offenders, it doesn't help.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Sorry JJ. I was not trying to be insulting. There is no icon for "I think it was funny given your avatar, but you seem to have some humour about it".
> 
> 
> If I had used Harpocrite, the I was being insulting.


Now we can ask about that picture of Harper you use for your avatar...


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> The probem with gun crime is not with the penalty it's about enforcement and prosecution. We can increase penalties all we want, but if we don't investigate, arrest, and prosecute the offenders, it doesn't help.


The problem with gun crime is that it is way to easy to get a gun. Eliminate that problem, and you eliminate gun crime.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

HowEver said:


> Now we can ask about that picture of Harper you use for your avatar...


It's a respectible undercover SQ office posing as an Anarchist...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

guytoronto said:


> The problem with gun crime is that it is way to easy to get a gun. Eliminate that problem, and you eliminate gun crime.


The problem with simplistic ideas is that it is way to easy to formulate them.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> It's a respectible undercover SQ office posing as an Anarchist...


Thanks, I didn't know.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> The problem with gun crime is that it is way to easy to get a gun. Eliminate that problem, and you eliminate gun crime.


Sorry, but anyone who even remotely believes guns can be eliminated simply does not understand the love affair mankind has with guns. They will never be eliminated, by Canadians or anyone else.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

hmm. I suppose that's why it makes so much sense to bust kids with some pot.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

SINC said:


> Call it a hunch that Canadians are so fed up with elections in general and opposition posturing in particular that they would elect a majority to shut them the hell up.
> 
> Oh, and polls like this one:
> 
> Harper Mr. Popularity compared to Dion - poll


That poll means nothing. This is the important poll Tories lunge toward majority turf, poll says and while it says they're in sight of a majority, they don't have it yet, and may not get it, if they ask the public to vote now. The public knows who is trying to force a vote, and they'll penalize the Conservatives with a minority government, if they keep on trying to force a vote. The public doesn't want a vote, and I'd bet anything they like the minority the Conservatives have.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> hmm. I suppose that's why it makes so much sense to bust kids with some pot.


Absolutely. Keeps 'em clear headed.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Absolutely. Keeps 'em clear headed.


when they shoot. I see. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

SINC said:


> Absolutely. Keeps 'em clear headed.


I'll be sure to let you know when I meet a clear headed teenager... or anyone under thirty for that matter.

And, given your current sig (regarding having another beer), this is among your most ironic posts to date.

Cheers


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I wonder if the Cons read the stats.
Rural Canada shrinking by 8% per year,
Cities growing.



> *PM's blatant snub of Canada's cities*
> 
> Oct 18, 2007 04:30 AM
> 
> ...


TheStar.com | comment | PM's blatant snub of Canada's cities

I find it interesting the growing discontent in Alberta about Con complacency and mismanagement of resource funds, infrastructure and royalties.

As the dinosaurs get diluted by urban and eastern influences bloc Alberta may be no longer.
'Bout time.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

It's time for Ontario to just up the PST by one per cent to replace the next reduction in GST--if they have the stones. That will be more than enough to slick the greasy troughs of Ontario's cities. I hope they don't jump on it, but this ball is in the province's court now.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> I wonder if the Cons read the stats.
> Rural Canada shrinking by 8% per year,
> Cities growing.
> As the dinosaurs get diluted by urban and eastern influences bloc Alberta may be no longer.
> 'Bout time.


Cry me a river when there is no bread for your table. If our farmlands disappear, the cities will hurt first and most. We in rural areas will at least have room to grow our own food. Not much grows on concrete and pavement.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> I'll be sure to let you know when I meet a clear headed teenager... or anyone under thirty for that matter.
> 
> And, given your current sig (regarding having another beer), this is among your most ironic posts to date.
> 
> Cheers


Difference being, the beer is legal.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

SINC said:


> Difference being, the beer is legal.


Yep... but it's important to recognize that legality is about the only significant difference.

Cheers


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC said:


> Difference being, the beer is legal.


So why to you keep on Harping that you don't need the courts, legal system and laws to tell you what is right or wrong?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ArtistSeries said:


> So why to you keep on Harping that you don't need the courts, legal system and laws to tell you what is right or wrong?


SINC doesn't need them--only the ne'er-do-wells need that kind of prodding.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> Yep... but it's important to recognize that legality is about the only significant difference.
> 
> Cheers


That and the fact that I can't have a beer and go to work undetected to play at being a pothead. I'd be fired on the spot for the legal infraction due to the obvious smell. 

Trouble is today's employers don't know who is stoned and who is not. That is until they check productivity and therein lies the answer.

Ah yes, pot, the miracle illegal drug that only 15% of Canadians find any real need to use. And that's another thing. Users are losers. But you've heard that all before. Haven't you?


----------



## zlinger (Aug 28, 2007)

I hear that Harper has plans to drill for oil on the front lawn of the Parliament buildings


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC said:


> That and the fact that I can't have a beer and go to work undetected to play at being a pothead. I'd be fired on the spot for the legal infraction due to the obvious smell.
> 
> Trouble is today's employers don't know who is stoned and who is not. That is until they check productivity and therein lies the answer.
> 
> Ah yes, pot, the miracle illegal drug that only 15% of Canadians find any real need to use. And that's another thing. Users are losers. But you've heard that all before. Haven't you?


I'm glad a Canadian icon seemed okay with pot
YouTube - Late great Canadian Pierre Berton on how to roll a joint!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

so which is it??....Ministry of Truth anyone???/



> *Canada won't actually quit Kyoto, Baird says*
> 
> The Canadian Press
> 
> ...












I can tell Con hearts are REALLLY in this.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Seems to me when even the leader of the Green Party of Canada admits that Kyoto targets are impossible, you're blowin' smoke MD.

The Conservatives are making the best of a bad situation caused by 13 years of Liberal inaction on climate control. Do the words Environment Minister Dion ring a bell?

Nuff said.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC said:


> Seems to me when even the leader of the Green Party of Canada admits that Kyoto targets are impossible, you're blowin' smoke MD.
> 
> The Conservatives are making the best of a bad situation caused by 13 years of Liberal inaction on climate control. Do the words Environment Minister Dion ring a bell?
> 
> Nuff said.


Smoke?
Well given the illusory statements SINC, I'm wondering what you have been smoking.
For how many years was Dion environment minister?
What treaties did they put in place? Meanwhile Harper and fiends did everything they could to delay.
And while you are it, care to have a look at the stats for the GHG emission? I did post them in they had flat-lined, the intensity had been reduce by 17%... oh and the economy was doing fine.

Now SINC, with an ineffectual opposition don't you find it odd that the Connies can't even manage a majority? What does that tell you about Canadians wanting them?

For a so-called journalist, one would thing that SINC, you'd be doing some fact-checking... Or are you as bad as the media that you so often decry.... :lmao:


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

the cons, neo and otherwise, think they smell a majority gov't in the near future and it interferes with their senses and sensibilities

I find it interesting that none of the cons took the Alberta oil barons to task for threatening to cut jobs if the AB gov't had the audacity to increase oil royalties, even though it was recommended to the AB gov't years ago, but uncle Ralph kept it secret, whilst the very same oil barons are making huge profits


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Fears of Harper majority waning, poll shows
Norma Greenaway, CanWest News Service
Published: Friday, October 19, 2007

OTTAWA - Most Canadians say the best outcome of the next federal election would be a majority government, according to a new national Ipsos-Reid poll.

Moreover, the poll conducted exclusively this week for CanWest News Service and Global National reveals that of those Canadians who prefer a majority most think it ought to be led by Stephen Harper.

Fears of Harper majority waning, poll shows

The good news polls keep rolling in. :clap:


----------



## zlinger (Aug 28, 2007)

May God bless Canada...


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Vandave said:


> Fears of Harper majority waning, poll shows
> Norma Greenaway, CanWest News Service
> Published: Friday, October 19, 2007
> 
> ...


and the chances of even more Canadians dying needlessly and past 2009 in Afghanistan rises

promises of child care seats go unfulfilled, in fact, un-promised while military hardware spending rises dramatically

all for 1% less GST

cons that used to wail about huge surpluses under previous Liberals gov't now do their best cheshire cat imitations

and as part of their 1st piece of legislation, in fact, RAISED the income tax rate on those Canadians that were paying the least and barely making ends meet

yeah, an Harpo majority would be great for military hardware makers, oil barons, military commanders that aren't in theatre, but bad for the vast majority of Canadians that aren't making huge dollars - oh wait, isn't that George W. Bush?

oh well, i guess the silver lining is with the above parity of the Cdn vs. U.S. greenback, it might make buying a Mexican getaway less expensive


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> oh well, i guess the silver lining is with the above parity of the Cdn vs. U.S. greenback, it might make buying a Mexican getaway less expensive


What about Ecuador?


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> and as part of their 1st piece of legislation, in fact, RAISED the income tax rate on those Canadians that were paying the least and barely making ends meet


They never raised taxes on the lowest bracket because they already don't pay income tax. They also raised the basic tax exemption.

As far as raising taxes on the next lowest income tax paying Canadians... they didn't. The Liberals only proposed lowering the bracket but the Conservatives didn't follow through with it. Instead they lowered other taxes.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Here is a good analogy on tax cuts.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men -- the poorest -- would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $18,and the tenth man -- the richest -- would pay $59.

That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement-- until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost $80.00.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six -- the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, Then the fifth man and The sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.

But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man, but he, pointing to the tenth. "But he got $7!". "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar, too, ........It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!".

That's true!" shouted the seventh man, why should he get $7 back when I got only $2?" The wealthy get all the breaks!". Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill!

Imagine that!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Good one VanDave!

But I'l expect Spec to belch up another order of sour gas (GST, childcare) once again after he works hard to forget his lesson.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Vandave said:


> They never raised taxes on the lowest bracket because they already don't pay income tax. They also raised the basic tax exemption.
> 
> As far as raising taxes on the next lowest income tax paying Canadians... they didn't. The Liberals only proposed lowering the bracket but the Conservatives didn't follow through with it. Instead they lowered other taxes.


don't you think the poorest income tax paying canadians deserver the most tax breaks?

why did harpo et al raise the lowest income rate by 1/2 % and lower it for other (higher) brackets?

because poor people don't vote conservative

that 1/2% showed the true intentions of the con gov't vis a vis poor Canadians - they just don't care about them


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> don't you think the poorest income tax paying canadians deserver the most tax breaks?


Define 'most'. Is most a percentage or is most an absolute value?

Either way, my answer is probably no. See the analogy above. High income people pay the vast majority of income tax in our country, well above the amount of government services they consume. 

In contrast, the poorest Canadians already don't pay any income tax. Are you suggesting that we should start giving them money in addition to all the free government services that they get? 

Reducing consumption taxes (e.g. GST) is a help to people who don't pay tax.



MACSPECTRUM said:


> why did harpo et al raise the lowest income rate by 1/2 % and lower it for other (higher) brackets?
> 
> because poor people don't vote conservative


They didn't raise the lowest tax bracket. I already debunked this above.


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

These arguments are disingenuous. Why? Because Harper's policies DO NOT HELP POOR CANADIANS NO MATTER HOW MUCH SPIN YOU PLACE ON THEM! Want proof? Here it is:
TheStar.com | columnists | Why poverty threatens us all


> THE PROSPERITY GAP
> 
> The gap between rich in poor in this country has reached Third World levels. Will it take widespread unrest to convince people they have a stake in this?
> Oct 20, 2007 04:30 AM
> ...



In short: Trickle Down is complete BS used by the rich to justify their HUGE cash grab at the expense of the poor and middle class.



(Bold added by me)


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

QUOTE: "More than a decade of tax cuts at the federal level and in certain provinces has not put a dent in the rising number of people in poverty, despite being among the advertised benefits of tax reduction."

Do the words "More than a decade of tax cuts at the federal level", mean anything to you?

Last I checked, the Conservatives have only been in power 20 months or so.

Mind explaining how this is the fault of the Harper government?

Seems to me the Liberals did the damage long before they ever came to power.


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

I'd have to agree with you that the Liberals have done most of this but Harper has only made the situation worse. Harper has not significantly changed any related policies except to accelerate the process put in place by the Liberals. Harper doesn't get a pass for continuing bad policy and after this and the previous throne speech he now owns this policy.

I'd add that since Mulroney (and likely before) this has been Conservative policy.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

martman said:


> In short: Trickle Down is complete BS used by the rich to justify their HUGE cash grab at the expense of the poor and middle class.


The economy is not a zero sum game. Cash grab? Are you kidding me?

The poor and middle class are not worse off today than they were 10 years ago. The employment rate is higher and more people are making it on their own without government assistance. Deflationary effects in many consumer goods has been very good for lower income people. You can chalk this up to global trade and off-shore manufacturing. 

Everybody is better off today than 10 years ago. But... the wealthy have done even better because they have the skills to partake in the new economy. 

Increasing taxes on corporations and high income tax earners will only hurt the poor in the long run. A dynamic and booming economy are preferable to some poorly thought out socialist or communist ideology.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Here is reality Martman:

- The top 10% of income earners pay 52% of taxes in Canada. 
- The bottom 50% of income earners pay 4.6% of taxes.

Ya, the rich are sure milking the poor.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Vandave said:


> Here is reality Martman:
> 
> - The top 10% of income earners pay 52% of taxes in Canada.
> - The bottom 50% of income earners pay 4.6% of taxes.
> ...


it begs the question why Harpo INCREASED income taxes on the lowest bracket

not like it was going to help pay down the deficit, but it was a great signal to his "base" (rich and corporations) that those "without skills" (as described above) would be paying more taxes

how many of those top 10% use much of their corporation's (who pay little if no tax) assets for personal use?
corporate junkets for "meetings"
tax write off for vehicle?
putting relatives on payroll
writing off portions of residences as "offices"
and so many more that their accountants can figure out that my bookkeeper hasn't even head of

and for those 10% how much of the wealth do they own ?
your figures show the very disproportionate distribution of wealth in Canada

let's hear an "Amen" for the downtrodden rich class
perhaps time for a telethon for the Eaton, Weston or Black families?


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

Vandave said:


> Here is reality Martman:
> 
> - The top 10% of income earners pay 52% of taxes in Canada.
> - The bottom 50% of income earners pay 4.6% of taxes.
> ...


The top 10% make 82 times the amount that the lowest 10% make yet only pay 52% of the taxes. Seems to me they are getting an extremely good deal and not a poor one like the picture you are painting. 

<sarcasm>my heart goes out to our poor rich community. They have it so hard making money hand over fist while sh*tting on the poor. That ever increasing wage gap between the rich and the poor just isn't increasing fast enough for me!</sarcasm>


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

Vandave said:


> The economy is not a zero sum game. Cash grab? Are you kidding me?
> 
> The poor and middle class are not worse off today than they were 10 years ago.
> 
> ...




This is blatantly not true. Quoted below is a commentary on the state of welfare recipients finances. If the ideology behind it is too much for you to consider than just read the parts in bold as this is what is relevant to my point here.


> In rich Canada, welfare worsens
> Recipients get less than 20 years ago
> Public is turning a blind eye to issue
> 
> ...


Canadians on disability and on welfare are NOT better off than they were 10 years ago. Even in Ontario McGuinty's 2% raise falls behind the rate of inflation for 1 year. Meaning: Welfare and disability recipients are worse off than they were a year ago.



StatsCan said:


> At the same time, the number of individuals making less than $20,000 a year accounted for four out of every 10 people with employment income in Canada. This is essentially the same proportion as in 1990.


Looks like the working poor aren't better off either...


the comentary above (Why poverty threatens us all) refutes your assertion that lower taxes = more money to the poor.

Here is more from the globe and mail.



> After two decades of overall economic expansion, the top 5 per cent of earners saw average incomes leap from $133,000 to $178,000. During the same period, earners in the middle of the pack saw average incomes frozen at $25,000, with family incomes nudging up slightly from $42,000 and $43,000.
> 
> “People in the middle have genuine reason to be puzzled about where these benefits from economic growth are,” McGill University economist Christopher Ragan said.
> 
> ...



Looks like the middle class aren't any better off either.


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

Vandave said:


> . A dynamic and booming economy are preferable to some poorly thought out socialist or communist ideology.


This part of the argument is a fallacy, more specifically a red herring, with red baiting attached to it. No one mentioned Communism or Socialism except you.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> *The poor and middle class are not worse off today than they were 10 years ago.* The employment rate is higher and more people are making it on their own without government assistance. Deflationary effects in many consumer goods has been very good for lower income people. You can chalk this up to global trade and off-shore manufacturing.
> 
> Everybody is better off today than 10 years ago. *But... the wealthy have done even better because they have the skills to partake in the new economy. *
> 
> Increasing taxes on corporations and high income tax earners will only hurt the poor in the long run. A dynamic and booming economy are preferable to some poorly thought out socialist or communist ideology.


If you are ready to write such fallacious sentences, there really is no point to continue.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

martman said:


> This part of the argument is a fallacy, more specifically a red herring, with red baiting attached to it. No one mentioned Communism or Socialism except you.


VD sounds like a reject from the Reagan years, no?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

VanDave: This is just jealousy on the part of people who wish they were rich as well. The gap between rich and poor is only a relative measure--of jealousy.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> VanDave: This is just jealousy on the part of people who wish they were rich as well. The gap between rich and poor is only a relative measure--of jealousy.


Uhmmm.... no. 

VD seems to imply that the gap is due to skills only once again forgetting the human aspect and what is called "circumstances".


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> VD seems to imply that the gap is due to skills only once again forgetting the human aspect and what is called "circumstances".


I'm not saying that at all. 

I happen to believe that a fully capitalist or economic free society would leave many people behind. For that reason, I do believe in a progressive tax system and I believe in social support programs. 

The only question is how 'progressive' a tax system should be. When the top 10% are paying more than half the tax, I think we have gone far enough. When the bottom half pay less than 5%, they are doing quite well (from a progressive tax standpoint).

FYI... to get into the upper 10%, one only needs to earn about $65,000. That doesn't really fit with the stereotype some are trying to portray.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Macfury said:


> VanDave: This is just jealousy on the part of people who wish they were rich as well. *The gap between rich and poor is only a relative measure--of jealousy.*


that's a keeper

pure neo con think

you should be embarrassed to be Canadian and think so selfishly


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Vandave said:


> I'm not saying that at all.
> 
> I happen to believe that a fully capitalist or economic free society would leave many people behind. For that reason, I do believe in a progressive tax system and I believe in social support programs.
> 
> ...


if those figures are true, there are a lot of poor people
$65K before income tax doesn't add up to a lot of take home pay, and heaven forbid if you have a mortgage and/or children


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> if those figures are true, there are a lot of poor people
> $65K before income tax doesn't add up to a lot of take home pay, and heaven forbid if you have a mortgage and/or children


No, it doesn't. 

And it doesn't help when government takes more than half of that in taxes. If anything is holding people back, it is overtaxation.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vandave said:


> No, it doesn't.
> 
> And it doesn't help when government takes more than half of that in taxes. * If anything is holding people back, it is overtaxation.*


I would say that it's corporate welfare, a sense of entitlement from the rich, and gouging your fellow human being... 
While overtaxation is a problem, your Reaganomic view of it is not a solution. I see you are trying to sound "centrist" but it's really coming off as selfish.

I hate corporate welfare, maybe you should start there, no?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

martman said:


> In short: Trickle Down is complete BS used by the rich to justify their HUGE cash grab at the expense of the poor and middle class.
> 
> 
> 
> (Bold added by me)


I guess it all depends on who you believe. The stats seem to point in just the opposite direction:

*Talk Of Income Gap Is A Political Ploy:*

"Much of the battle against poverty in this country is driven by resentment of the "rich" rather than compassion for the poor.

The past decade has seen tremendous successes in poverty reduction. As recently as 1996, nearly 16 per cent of Canadians lived with low income. Now, under 11 per cent do. That's a drop of nearly a third. (As a point of reference, in the 1950s, nearly 40 per cent were poor.)

In May, in its annual assessment of income in Canada, Statistics Canada reported that only 7.4 per cent of families were living below the low-income cut-off (LICO). But the cut-off itself is not a measure of poverty.
It does not gauge how many Canadians are unable to provide themselves and their families with the basics of food, clothing and housing.

Rather, it calculates how many must spend a greater percentage of their income on necessities than the statistical average for their family type and location. The percentage of Canadians who truly struggle just to keep food on the table, clothes on their backs and a roof over their heads is probably half the official numbers.

But let's use the LICO numbers for now. Even under their loose and relative definition of poverty, just 11.7 per cent of children under the age of 18 are living in need, "far below the 18.6 per cent in 1996," according to StatsCan.
The income of seniors has seen a real increase of 15 per cent since 1996, so now just 6.1 per cent of seniors are low-income.

And while poverty among single moms remains stubbornly persistent, there is plenty of good news for "female lone-parent families," as well. Their incomes, after inflation, have risen from an average of $21,900 in 1996, to $30,400.

*As a result, where a decade ago 52.7 per cent lived in relative poverty, now just 29.1 per cent do."*

Talk of income gap is a political ploy

Bold face mine.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Wow SINC, quoting from that ideologue Lorne Gunter.... 
Lorne Gunter - bold faced liar...

Facts Sinc, facts - start being a journalist instead of a propaganda agent....


"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."
Stephen Colbert


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

some other "gems" from the author, Lorne Gunter, of the above piece


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

So let me guess. The point has now become StatsCan figures aren't facts?


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC said:


> So let me guess. The point has now become StatsCan figures aren't facts?


Yes they are - did you read the ones about the purchasing power of the dollar and the GHG emissions under the Liberals?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ArtistSeries said:


> Yes they are - did you read the ones about the purchasing power of the dollar and the GHG emissions under the Liberals?


SINC: These are the actions of a "diarrhea troll" or "dry humping dog." You were discussing poverty and he wants to talk about failed Liberal GHG policies. How very "Rovian" of him.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> SINC: These are the actions of a "diarrhea troll" or "dry humping dog." You were discussing poverty and he wants to talk about failed Liberal GHG policies. How very "Rovian" of him.


Short memory?
SINC is quite prepared to ignore, lie and mislead even if StatCans show that he is wrong.

Now, all of a sudden he's ready to quote lying fright-wing ideologue Gunter because he's basing an article on StatCans data:yawn: ? 

Still trying to smear MF? How about answering:
Can you back up your slanderous statements? Or are you just a liar and complete idiot?


Now, if you want to debate the interpretation of Gunter's diatribe, by all means...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Why debate Gunter at all--you've already declared him irrelevant. And why would you want to debate me about it, since you've identified me as "either a liar or a complete idiot"--a statement, by the way, that is in violation of your terms of membership on EhMac.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> And why would you want to debate me about it, since you've identified me as "either a liar or a complete idiot"--a statement, by the way, that is in violation of your terms of membership on EhMac.


Important clarification MF:
Okay MF, either back it up or STFU. 
Can you back up your slanderous statements? Or are you just a liar and complete idiot?


Again, nice smear attempt on your part. Cherry-picking quotes and trying to make it seem like you are the moderate one after stating what I can only qualify as a lie.
Keep on indulging MF....


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I can hear Con teeth grinding all over the nation 



> *PM's shrug reminiscent of Trudeau*
> 
> 
> Oct 22, 2007 04:30 AM
> ...


gotta love Hebert for getting to the heart of things........:clap:

TheStar.com | comment | PM's shrug reminiscent of Trudeau


----------

