Reduce spending to kill the deficit
DerbyX @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:18 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
DerbyX DerbyX:
mtbr mtbr:
wasn't it something about a global recession?
and I seem to remember the opposition wanting to bring the government down because they weren't spending it fast enough
and I seem to remember the opposition wanting to bring the government down because they weren't spending it fast enough
Nope. We wanted to bring him down because Harper was incompetent.
Actually most people think he's quite competent.
Not according to the latest polls.
mtbr @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:20 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
Not according to the latest polls.
really
http://www2.canada.com/news/national/ha ... id=1489965
http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=43532
RUEZ @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:20 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
Not according to the latest polls.
I don't think that actually measures his competence level. After all Martin lost to Harper.
DerbyX @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:21 pm
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/04/ ... rence.html
Sure thing sunshine. 
Scape @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:22 pm
So that 10 billion surplus Harper pissed away in 1 fucking term was a good idea?
Tman1 @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:23 pm
Then again Harper almost lost to the three stooges.
Lemmy @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:24 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
So why do you think Harper increased spending?
I know this question wasn't directed at me, Ruez, and I apologize for butting in, but why are Liberals and Conseratives arguing about this? You were BOTH part of it. Both of your parties are irresponsible governors of this nation. You're arguing against one another over an idiotic budget that you co-conspired.
So, the correct answer to Ruez' question: Because Stephen Harper isn't smart enough to get into a better school of economics than the University of Calgary.
DerbyX @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:24 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Not according to the latest polls.
I don't think that actually measures his competence level. After all Martin lost to Harper.
Thats right. Martin was far more competent then Harper.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
RUEZ @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:24 pm
Scape Scape:
So that 10 billion surplus Harper pissed away in 1 fucking term was a good idea?
I love it when you guys use that term pissed away. I guess giving people their money back is considered pissed away to a socialist.
RUEZ @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:25 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
Thats right. Martin was far more competent then Harper.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
No
NO
NO
Tman1 @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:26 pm
Scape Scape:
So that 10 billion surplus Harper pissed away in 1 fucking term was a good idea?
Depends what he pissed it away on. Can't improve Canada when you horde money and not spend. I'd say it is just bad timing.
RUEZ @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:28 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
I know this question wasn't directed at me, Ruez, and I apologize for butting in, but why are Liberals and Conseratives arguing about this? You were BOTH part of it. Both of your parties are irresponsible governors of this nation. You're arguing against one another over an idiotic budget that you co-conspired.
So, the correct answer to Ruez' question: Because Stephen Harper isn't smart enough to get into a better school of economics than the University of Calgary.
So, the correct answer to Ruez' question: Because Stephen Harper isn't smart enough to get into a better school of economics than the University of Calgary.
Here I thought you were going to engage in a mature debate, but your ending sucks.
DerbyX @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:28 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Thats right. Martin was far more competent then Harper.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
No
NO
NO
wow. Its not often you are wrong so often in a single post.
mtbr @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:28 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
RUEZ RUEZ:
So why do you think Harper increased spending?
I know this question wasn't directed at me, Ruez, and I apologize for butting in, but why are Liberals and Conseratives arguing about this? You were BOTH part of it. Both of your parties are irresponsible governors of this nation. You're arguing against one another over an idiotic budget that you co-conspired.
So, the correct answer to Ruez' question: Because Stephen Harper isn't smart enough to get into a better school of economics than the University of Calgary.
yes we know it's your old argument about him never being an economist
quote.png [ 12.93 KiB | Viewed 75 times ]
Tman1 @ Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:29 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
RUEZ RUEZ:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Not according to the latest polls.
I don't think that actually measures his competence level. After all Martin lost to Harper.
Thats right. Martin was far more competent then Harper.
lets face it. Harpers policies are shite and his leadership sucks.
Thats why he has failed to win a majority and now stands a distant second in the polls now.
When did Canada start choosing its leaders based on competence levels?