Previous  1  2  3

   

Waiting with bated breath for an answer will get you some time on an oxygen tank eventually.

   

I just started reading the thread and didn't even know where to start. It's like a clusterf*ck of WTF.

But i'll bet the response will be fun

   

He got it wrong, everybody knows it's Trudeau who came the closest.


Just sayin'...

   

My first time in this thread too.

   

Somewhere we went from the NQP having a card carrying separtist as their leader to Mulroney trying to destroy Canada to Harper something or other to ....somewhere else entirely.

   

Big deal, she's the interim leader. She's only there until Jack dies.

   

I see the Harper propaganda machine is back in operation. Time to once again start demonizing the opposition with half truths and blowing things out of proportion. Well, I suppose since it's worked so well in the past they might as well keep it up.

   

I don't think the media is reporting any half truths. Anything that's been said has been confirmed by Turmel herself.

She was a member of both the Bloc and and the Quebec Solidaire (membership is still valid).

She also donated money to the Bloc.

   

Political opportunists aren't restricted to the sovereignity movement. Many pol's have re-invented themselves over the years. I find it ironic though that putting the ambition to belong to any party that stands a chance of gaining status and power ahead of your acutal beliefs should be surprising to anyone unless of course their real agenda is to later hi-jack that party for their hidden agenda.

You don't change your beliefs you merely change your uniform!

Bob Rae and many others have done it before. I won't respect any of them; much less vote for them!

   

Then, what would the the point of posting on political forumns, unless you were trying to convince someone of the corectness of your position? Are they not allowed to change their views when presented with a good argument? Would you lose respect for them if you did convince them you were right?

   

That's an ideologue. Intelligent, educated individuals alter their political beliefs depending upon the information, context or persuasiveness of the argument. That's a good thing. Besides, ideology is ever-evolving or changing, so why would chastise those that stay dogmatic?

   

Mind pointing out what you think are the half truths of her belonging to two seperatist organizations?

Right now her argument is full of ..."but I didn't inhale."

   

or Clinton's it wasn't really sex.

   

I guess Jeffy isn't coming back to "defend" his rather problematic position. That's telling.

   

Previous  1  2  3