Sponsorship Scandal - Confidence Vote
karra @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 2:24 pm
In the likely event of a non-confidence vote re the sponsorship scandal which party will support the Liberals in getting to the bottom (as if) of this?
It could be interesting nest paws?
What do you think?
QBC @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 2:32 pm
Oh Karra, poor Karra,
Bitter about the election, so here we go again. The block won't support a non-confidence vote, nor will the NDP. Looks like you and the radical right are all alone............again.
karra @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 3:07 pm
$1:
Oh Karra, poor Karra,
Bitter about the election, so here we go again. The block won't support a non-confidence vote, nor will the NDP. Looks like you and the radical right are all alone............again.
Bitter about the election, so here we go again. The block won't support a non-confidence vote, nor will the NDP. Looks like you and the radical right are all alone............again.
Jeez, what tard compost pile did you slither out from under? Can't a girl ask a proper question without being subjected to ad hominum attacks? Where do you see bitterness? Is it because you want to see it or are your eyes simply covered in mould? Give yourself a shake lad - you may find it useful. . . .
Sheesh already. . . .
figfarmer @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 3:34 pm
I dunno. I think that after the recounts, after the NDP have forced the Liberals to dance to their "Positive and Progressive" tune for a while, winning back a bit of ground we have lost on social issues, and after the Fib..er...Liberals have lost a couple or three dozen of their MPs to the sponsership scandal there probably will be a no confidence vote. Don't hold your breath though. It's going to take better than a year; probably longer than the average eighteen months too.
Milton @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 3:37 pm
None of the parties will call for a non confidence vote at this time. They will wait for the budget .
Rev_Blair @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 3:50 pm
Any party who forces anoher election too soon wil be punished at the polls. A party like the Conservatives that did worse in the popular vote than last time and was rejected outright by 70% of the Canadaian people would be insane to do such a thing.
QBC @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 5:38 pm
Karra, the election was less than a week ago and your talking about non-confidence already. Shows just how bitter you are about it love. As Rev said, 70% of Canadians said no to the radical right. So, live with it, you and all the other right wing sudo-christian fundamentalists will just have to wait till next time. Who knows, maybe this minority Liberal government just might do well by Canada. Lets wait and see till we try and get rid of them.
karra @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 6:00 pm
Good lord lad, what's the matter with you? Cold last night? Got hoar on the brain? The election was last week you say, mmm. An observant chap you are shirley. Do you consider yourself another hard left nutter who sings praises and hollers hossanas to hollow man? Isn't it just a little uncomfortable with his hand up your backside?
Still waiting for an explanation re bitter, if you have one. 'Course if you're simply another simple sock puppet of the copyright crackpot we'll understand if you choose not to substantiate your allegation.
Sheesh, encore again. . . .
My projection re a non-confidence is - if it occurs within the first 16 - 18 months the Conservatives will win with a huge majority. After that, the Liberals will continue to the end of their mandate.
Rev_Blair @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 6:21 pm
You predicted a Conservative majority last time, Karra. You were wrong.
karra @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 7:07 pm
$1:
You predicted a Conservative majority last time, Karra. You were wrong.
err, good one dude - I did indeed and I must admit my prediction was flavored with a large smattering of wishful thinking hence I was wrong - unlike others who wish and even frequently choose to keep their heads in frosty heaps of composts and other assorted rotting substances - 'tis time to move on - there are scandals and interesting times ahead with this minority government - why some fools would even suggest the knee dippers hold the balance of power. . .
QBC @ Sun Jul 04, 2004 9:13 pm
My lord Karra, everything you say tells us how much you hate what happened with the election, your the one that tells us about bitterness. The funny thing is dear, that everyone, well except maybe Bush and Sharon, are left of you. That dousn't make us left wing, just not way out in "Right" field. By the way, what is your fascination with compost? You've used it twice in this thread, Freudian slip maybe?
Gonzo @ Tue Jul 06, 2004 5:38 pm
I cant believe some right wing nutters. Fills there post with nonsense ramblings that go on and on. "What tard compost pile", "frosty heaps of composts", someone has a compost fixation.
Rev_Blair @ Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:18 pm
Some would even suggest that focusing on scandal to exclusion of policy was the road to follow, Karra. A few, about 30% of eligible voters, would say that accusing people of supporting child pornography was a reasonable thing to do. That same thirty percent seems to feel that it is okay to enforce your (generic your) peculiar (anti-gay, anti-women's choice) religiously-based views on others.
Fortunately for the rest of us, 70% of Canadians rejected Stephen Harper's viewpoint/lack of leadership and voted for somebody else. Canada is now in a position to move ahead.
karra @ Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:00 pm
$1:
Some would even suggest that focusing on scandal to exclusion of policy ....
An interesting statement of what I'm surely not sure. Whatever does it mean?
$1:
A few, about 30% of eligible voters, would say that accusing people of supporting child pornography was a reasonable thing to do.
They would? How do you know that?
$1:
That same thirty percent seems to feel that it is okay to enforce your (generic your) peculiar (anti-gay, anti-women's choice) religiously-based views on others.
They do? How do you know that?
$1:
70% of Canadians rejected Stephen Harper's viewpoint/lack of leadership and voted for somebody else.
Methinks your math requires some serious consideration. . . .
$1:
Canada is now in a position to move ahead.
A pleasant thought without a doubt, but somewhat naive.
karra @ Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:26 pm
Speaking of responsible opposition. . . .
$1:
Harper focuses on Liberals, not election results
Last Updated Wed, 07 Jul 2004 14:28:37
OTTAWA - The Conservatives are more interested in holding the Liberals to account than bringing down their minority government, leader Stephen Harper said on Wednesday.
Harper spoke to reporters after holding his party's first caucus meeting since the federal election.
"Canadians want this Parliament to work, and that's what we'll be aiming to do," said Harper.
"We will not be just defeating the government for the sake of doing it."
As they headed into the meeting, many of the Conservative members of Parliament told reporters they were happy with the 99 seats won by their party, 24 of them in Ontario, and 26 more than they had when the election was called.
Others said they were disappointed by the results, considering that halfway through the campaign, some thought they were headed for a majority win.
FROM JUNE 16, 2004: Harper says Conservatives approaching majority
The MPs broke into loud applause as Harper convened the meeting.
Afterwards, Harper demurred when asked by reporters what went wrong during the campaign.
"I'm not going to get into a post-mortem on the election today," he said.
"The general reaction of our party is that we made amazing progress, we won a lot of seats and the Liberals lost a lot of seats," he said. "We have more potential to win a lot more in the future."
Deputy leader Peter MacKay said before the meeting that caucus members would look at "the good, the bad and the ugly" of the election campaign.
Harper said the party would have to make changes before the next election, but for now his priority is to be an effective Opposition.
"It's up to the government to reassure the Canadian public of their accountability," he said.
Another priority might be to entice Chuck Cadman to join the caucus. The former Canadian Alliance MP lost the Conservative nomination, and won his riding as an Independent.
Should he return to the Conservatives, the Official Opposition would have 100 seats.
Last Updated Wed, 07 Jul 2004 14:28:37
OTTAWA - The Conservatives are more interested in holding the Liberals to account than bringing down their minority government, leader Stephen Harper said on Wednesday.
Harper spoke to reporters after holding his party's first caucus meeting since the federal election.
"Canadians want this Parliament to work, and that's what we'll be aiming to do," said Harper.
"We will not be just defeating the government for the sake of doing it."
As they headed into the meeting, many of the Conservative members of Parliament told reporters they were happy with the 99 seats won by their party, 24 of them in Ontario, and 26 more than they had when the election was called.
Others said they were disappointed by the results, considering that halfway through the campaign, some thought they were headed for a majority win.
FROM JUNE 16, 2004: Harper says Conservatives approaching majority
The MPs broke into loud applause as Harper convened the meeting.
Afterwards, Harper demurred when asked by reporters what went wrong during the campaign.
"I'm not going to get into a post-mortem on the election today," he said.
"The general reaction of our party is that we made amazing progress, we won a lot of seats and the Liberals lost a lot of seats," he said. "We have more potential to win a lot more in the future."
Deputy leader Peter MacKay said before the meeting that caucus members would look at "the good, the bad and the ugly" of the election campaign.
Harper said the party would have to make changes before the next election, but for now his priority is to be an effective Opposition.
"It's up to the government to reassure the Canadian public of their accountability," he said.
Another priority might be to entice Chuck Cadman to join the caucus. The former Canadian Alliance MP lost the Conservative nomination, and won his riding as an Independent.
Should he return to the Conservatives, the Official Opposition would have 100 seats.
If only, historically, the opposition had been like this - shirly we wouldn't find ourselves in the dire crookeds we find ourselves in these daze, oui?