The Man that the Conservatives don't want you to know about
kerfuffled @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:49 pm
What webcam! 
FuBaR @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:12 pm
The Sponsorship Program wasnt the problem on its self. According to Government of Canada books, the program appeared to be clean, therefore, the PMO, whom had control over the funds to designate to the different companies was the only knowledge of where the money was going. The finance department provided the funds, the PMO decided who was gettign it. As a member of the Liberal Party Quebec wing, its clear that Paul would have known that they were getting some kickbacks. Were their actions justifiable, hell no. Were they the first to have a money scandal, hell no.
Editted so hwacker wouldnt pop a blood vessel.
hwacker @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:15 pm
GA-FuBaR GA-FuBaR:
The Sponsorship Program wasnt the problem on its self. According to Government of Canada books, the program appeared to be clean, therefore, the PMO, whom had control over the funds to designate to the different companies was the only knowledge of where the money was going. The finance department provided the funds, the PMO decided who was gettign it. As a member of the Liberal Part Quebec wing, its clear that Paul would have known that they were getting some kickbacks. Were their actions justifiable, hell no. Were they the first to have a little money scandal, hell no.
Please post another example.
How do you define Little? I guess you have that much in your piggy bank?
+ seeing how you are 15 you don't know anything but Liberals. kinda biased i'd say.
FuBaR @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:22 pm
There you go hwacker. I editted the post for you. Ive never seen an adjective receive such a response.
What does it matter what I've experienced. I agree with the policies of the Liberals federally, and our good old NDP here in Saskatchewan. I dont understand how people like you can be so blatantly rude and arrogant towards people who political ideals dont follow yours.
Everybody wants a little something different from those who run the country. Instead of sitting at your keyboard there, getting into mindless debates about this stuff, why dont you do something about it. Go out and run for government, then we'll see how many people truly agree with you. Or just go help out the conservatives or something, because all the junk you endorse for them, you could be pulling in at least 40,000 a year.
hwacker @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:30 pm
GA-FuBaR GA-FuBaR:
There you go hwacker. I editted the post for you. Ive never seen an adjective receive such a response.
What does it matter what I've experienced. I agree with the policies of the Liberals federally, and our good old NDP here in Saskatchewan. I dont understand how people like you can be so blatantly rude and arrogant towards people who political ideals dont follow yours.
Everybody wants a little something different from those who run the country. Instead of sitting at your keyboard there, getting into mindless debates about this stuff, why dont you do something about it. Go out and run for government, then we'll see how many people truly agree with you. Or just go help out the conservatives or something, because all the junk you endorse for them, you could be pulling in at least 40,000 a year.
What does it matter what I've experienced. I agree with the policies of the Liberals federally, and our good old NDP here in Saskatchewan. I dont understand how people like you can be so blatantly rude and arrogant towards people who political ideals dont follow yours.
Everybody wants a little something different from those who run the country. Instead of sitting at your keyboard there, getting into mindless debates about this stuff, why dont you do something about it. Go out and run for government, then we'll see how many people truly agree with you. Or just go help out the conservatives or something, because all the junk you endorse for them, you could be pulling in at least 40,000 a year.
lol
40K is tax now.
Now i know how you define little.
"blatantly rude and arrogant"
You are 15, in your lifetime the liberals have been in power, you have no idea what the other party's would be like in power.
If you think my questions are blatantly rude and arrogant, let me tell you something, it's going to get worst as you grow up. Better get some thicker skin.
There are no winners on both sides, each team does not get trophies, life sucks get use to it.
FuBaR @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:35 pm
Did I say that I was personally offended by your crap? Its the same junk you here anywhere. All that Im saying is that when you come to the site, and you see that hwacker has made a post, you know its going to be putting down somebody else in the thread to advance his position.
What would my concern be with what the other parties would be like in power of I dont believe in their ideals.
Ruserious @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:36 pm
hwacker hwacker:
You are 15, in your lifetime the liberals have been in power, you have no idea what the other party's would be like in power.
Well I sure as hell am not 15 and I do remember what it was like when there was another party in power.
And apparently so have the majority of Canadians for the past 12 years because the stench of the Conservatives screwing this country up with their fiscal mismanagement still lingers in the noses of the majority of Canadians when they go to the polls.
Hence, if it looks and still smells like shit, they're still shit.
Which is why Canadians keep saying "OH HELL NO" to the Conservatives and voting for the better party, the Liberals.
hwacker @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:50 pm
Ruserious Ruserious:
hwacker hwacker:
You are 15, in your lifetime the liberals have been in power, you have no idea what the other party's would be like in power.
Well I sure as hell am not 15 and I do remember what it was like when there was another party in power.And apparently so have the majority of Canadians for the past 12 years because the stench of the Conservatives screwing this country up with their fiscal mismanagement still lingers in the noses of the majority of Canadians when they go to the polls.
Hence, if it looks and still smells like shit, they're still shit.
Which is why Canadians keep saying "OH HELL NO" to the Conservatives and voting for the better party, the Liberals.
Too bad your party is sucking in southern Ontario, CPC +9 so much for the strong hold eh buddy.
ShepherdsDog @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:55 pm
$1:
voting for the better party, the Liberals.
The Conservatives restructured over the years since the Mulroney fiasco, but people are usually afraid of the unknown and that is what the Conservative Party of Canada is. So it's a case of better the devil you know rather than the one you don't, as opposed to voting for the 'better' party. Anyone who thinks the Liberal Party is a 'better' party is an anal ostrich and needs to come up for a breath of O2 and a a dose of reality.
hwacker @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:59 pm
Harper’s Conservatives have a campaign aimed at spreading bite sized and easily digested promises across the land. On the GST, child care, hospital waiting times, and small business taxes, the Conservatives are doing a much better job defining themselves to the electorate. With the exception of his early promise to hold a free vote on same-sex marriage, Harper has steered away from ideological rhetoric and appears intent on a campaign dedicated to easily comprehended, and measured, promises which, regardless of their policy correctness, define him as a far safer and measured candidate than was the case in the last election.
The Liberals are going to have to start countering this strategy pretty soon, or they could find their numbers slipping to the disastrous levels already reported by Darrell Bricker and his friends at Ipsos. This may turn out to be the campaign where victory came not through "showing the beef" á-la-Walter Mondale in the 1984 U.S. Democratic primaries, but instead through arranging a neat path of Timbits in the snow all the way to the Conservative box on the ballot. And Canadian voters may be so mesmerized by what lies along the path that they stop focusing on the demeanour of the guy placing them at their feet.
Angus Reid
FuBaR @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:00 pm
Still well within the margin of error. Just wait for Stephen to have another goof troop moment rambling on about an issue that is alraedy settled, like he did the first day of the campaign, that should bring them back a bit.
Ruserious @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:45 pm
hwacker hwacker:
Harper’s Conservatives have a campaign aimed at spreading bite sized and easily digested promises across the land. On the GST, child care, hospital waiting times, and small business taxes, the Conservatives are doing a much better job defining themselves to the electorate. With the exception of his early promise to hold a free vote on same-sex marriage, Harper has steered away from ideological rhetoric and appears intent on a campaign dedicated to easily comprehended, and measured, promises which, regardless of their policy correctness, define him as a far safer and measured candidate than was the case in the last election.
The Liberals are going to have to start countering this strategy pretty soon, or they could find their numbers slipping to the disastrous levels already reported by Darrell Bricker and his friends at Ipsos. This may turn out to be the campaign where victory came not through "showing the beef" á-la-Walter Mondale in the 1984 U.S. Democratic primaries, but instead through arranging a neat path of Timbits in the snow all the way to the Conservative box on the ballot. And Canadian voters may be so mesmerized by what lies along the path that they stop focusing on the demeanour of the guy placing them at their feet.
Angus Reid
Taken right from that link you provided there hwacker...The Liberals are going to have to start countering this strategy pretty soon, or they could find their numbers slipping to the disastrous levels already reported by Darrell Bricker and his friends at Ipsos. This may turn out to be the campaign where victory came not through "showing the beef" á-la-Walter Mondale in the 1984 U.S. Democratic primaries, but instead through arranging a neat path of Timbits in the snow all the way to the Conservative box on the ballot. And Canadian voters may be so mesmerized by what lies along the path that they stop focusing on the demeanour of the guy placing them at their feet.
Angus Reid
$1:
The Liberal Ontario Fortress seems impenetrable—in the last ten days or so, four out of five respected polling companies have put the Liberals at over 40 per cent in Ontario, with an overall lead ranging from twenty points (Nick Nanos’ SES) to ten points (Allan Gregg’s Strategic Counsel).
Ipsos missed the boat.
Numbers don't lie. Even the majority of polling companies are favouring the Liberals.
Ruserious @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:50 pm
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
$1:
voting for the better party, the Liberals.
The Conservatives restructured over the years since the Mulroney fiasco, but people are usually afraid of the unknown and that is what the Conservative Party of Canada is. So it's a case of better the devil you know rather than the one you don't, as opposed to voting for the 'better' party. Anyone who thinks the Liberal Party is a 'better' party is an anal ostrich and needs to come up for a breath of O2 and a a dose of reality.
A party controlled by the same idiots that Canadians rejected under their previous names, The Alliance, Reform Party.
A party that was formed based on a lie.
A party whose social views are comparible to those of the stone age and whose party motto is: We're religious homophobic bigots and we're proud of it.
Lay off that Blue flavoured kool-aid, it's distorting your sense of reality.
hwacker @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:52 pm
Ruserious Ruserious:
hwacker hwacker:
Harper’s Conservatives have a campaign aimed at spreading bite sized and easily digested promises across the land. On the GST, child care, hospital waiting times, and small business taxes, the Conservatives are doing a much better job defining themselves to the electorate. With the exception of his early promise to hold a free vote on same-sex marriage, Harper has steered away from ideological rhetoric and appears intent on a campaign dedicated to easily comprehended, and measured, promises which, regardless of their policy correctness, define him as a far safer and measured candidate than was the case in the last election.
The Liberals are going to have to start countering this strategy pretty soon, or they could find their numbers slipping to the disastrous levels already reported by Darrell Bricker and his friends at Ipsos. This may turn out to be the campaign where victory came not through "showing the beef" á-la-Walter Mondale in the 1984 U.S. Democratic primaries, but instead through arranging a neat path of Timbits in the snow all the way to the Conservative box on the ballot. And Canadian voters may be so mesmerized by what lies along the path that they stop focusing on the demeanour of the guy placing them at their feet.
Angus Reid
Taken right from that link you provided there hwacker...The Liberals are going to have to start countering this strategy pretty soon, or they could find their numbers slipping to the disastrous levels already reported by Darrell Bricker and his friends at Ipsos. This may turn out to be the campaign where victory came not through "showing the beef" á-la-Walter Mondale in the 1984 U.S. Democratic primaries, but instead through arranging a neat path of Timbits in the snow all the way to the Conservative box on the ballot. And Canadian voters may be so mesmerized by what lies along the path that they stop focusing on the demeanour of the guy placing them at their feet.
Angus Reid
$1:
The Liberal Ontario Fortress seems impenetrable—in the last ten days or so, four out of five respected polling companies have put the Liberals at over 40 per cent in Ontario, with an overall lead ranging from twenty points (Nick Nanos’ SES) to ten points (Allan Gregg’s Strategic Counsel).
Ipsos missed the boat.
Numbers don't lie. Even the majority of polling companies are favouring the Liberals.
ses is so far out there, Money can be the only reason. Stolen Liberal money.
RUEZ @ Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:55 pm
Ruserious Ruserious:
Wrong. People see them for who they really are.
A party controlled by the same idiots that Canadians rejected under their previous names, The Alliance, Reform Party.
A party that was formed based on a lie.
A party whose social views are comparible to those of the stone age and whose party motto is: We're religious homophobic bigots and we're proud of it.
Lay off that Blue flavoured kool-aid, it's distorting your sense of reality.
Ah, typical ignorant Liberal.
A party controlled by the same idiots that Canadians rejected under their previous names, The Alliance, Reform Party.
A party that was formed based on a lie.
A party whose social views are comparible to those of the stone age and whose party motto is: We're religious homophobic bigots and we're proud of it.
Lay off that Blue flavoured kool-aid, it's distorting your sense of reality.