Discussion:
Joe Clark favours Martin over Harper for PM
(too old to reply)
Don Dickson
2004-04-25 21:23:54 UTC
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming election
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.

Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.

Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be counted on
to come up with something new.
--
Don Dickson
Claude Brogg
2004-04-25 21:34:01 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming election
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be counted on
to come up with something new.
--
Don Dickson
Mr. Harper knows that hindsight is 20/20. What real politician doesn't?

I'd rather have a person in charge who can adapt to change and by doing so
can admit to being in error than a stubborn fuck-head who stands by what he
said and is inflexible in the face of a mistake, thinking he's infallible.
We've seen enough of that.
Justa Guy
2004-04-26 02:46:20 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice
of
Post by Don Dickson
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to
represent
Post by Don Dickson
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming
election
Post by Don Dickson
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for
not
Post by Don Dickson
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he
would not
Post by Don Dickson
send troops to Iraq.
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be
counted on
Post by Don Dickson
to come up with something new.
--
Don Dickson
Mr. Harper knows that hindsight is 20/20. What real politician doesn't?
I'd rather have a person in charge who can adapt to change and by doing so
can admit to being in error than a stubborn fuck-head who stands by what he
said and is inflexible in the face of a mistake, thinking he's infallible.
We've seen enough of that.
I don't care who is in charge AS LONG AS he is not from Quebec.
We need a leader from outside Quebec that thinks of Canada as
something a little larger than Quebec.
Harper will get my vote for that reason alone.
Hopefully he will retain some of his tenacity and not sell us out if
he wins.
I had hopes for Martin, but can we *really* ever trust a Liberal?
tsarkon
2004-04-25 22:28:13 UTC
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
Claude Brogg
2004-04-25 22:27:36 UTC
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
All I want to know is "is his daughter single?" She was a cutie.
The Doctor
2004-04-26 01:00:19 UTC
Post by Claude Brogg
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
All I want to know is "is his daughter single?" She was a cutie.
Catherine got married.
--
Member - Liberal International
This is ***@nl2k.ab.ca Ici ***@nl2k.ab.ca
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Patriots - This is the time to wave your sword and declare your alligence!!
The Doctor
2004-04-26 01:00:04 UTC
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
Mulroney supporting Harper is a BIG liability!!
--
Member - Liberal International
This is ***@nl2k.ab.ca Ici ***@nl2k.ab.ca
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Patriots - This is the time to wave your sword and declare your alligence!!
Un Patriote
2004-04-26 03:56:52 UTC
Post by The Doctor
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
Mulroney supporting Harper is a BIG liability!!
Yes, to English Canada as a whole.

English Canada's chronic inability to generate the new set of national
political figures to overtake the older one and to move away from
Negro Kings from Quebec IS what is sinking the colonial imposture as
Indirect Rule did to the British Empire...

The nation of Quebec dumps its political garbage on your doorsteps and
you convert the worst of it as your Saviors and your Messiahs...
The Doctor
2004-04-26 13:49:37 UTC
Post by Un Patriote
Post by The Doctor
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
Mulroney supporting Harper is a BIG liability!!
Yes, to English Canada as a whole.
English Canada's chronic inability to generate the new set of national
political figures to overtake the older one and to move away from
Negro Kings from Quebec IS what is sinking the colonial imposture as
Indirect Rule did to the British Empire...
The nation of Quebec dumps its political garbage on your doorsteps and
you convert the worst of it as your Saviors and your Messiahs...
Mulroney on his own is a disaster. Even Quebec despises him.
--
Member - Liberal International
This is ***@nl2k.ab.ca Ici ***@nl2k.ab.ca
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Patriots - This is the time to wave your sword and declare your alligence!!
Claude Brogg
2004-04-26 14:12:59 UTC
"The Doctor" <***@netknow.ca> wrote in message news:c6j41h$j39$***@gallifrey.nk.ca...


...
Post by The Doctor
Mulroney on his own is a disaster. Even Quebec despises him.
--
Wow! That's as low as you can get, and even they despise him!
Un Patriote
2004-04-26 08:53:38 UTC
Post by The Doctor
Post by tsarkon
Support from Joe Clark is a liability, I'm glad he's supporting Martin.
Way to go Joe.
Mulroney supporting Harper is a BIG liability!!
Yes, to English Canada as a whole.

English Canada's chronic inability to generate the new set of national
political figures to overtake those of the previous generation, and to
move away from Negro Kings from Quebec IS what is sinking the
colonial imposture as Indirect Rule did to the British Empire...

The nation of Quebec dumps its political garbage on your doorsteps and
you convert the worst of it as your Saviors and your Messiahs...

That the theme of National Unity originated around the Union Act of
1841 is still, 163 years later English Canada's main concern should
have triggered an alarm signal a long time ago... From generation to
generation found themselves at the switch, brain deads...
Invective
2004-04-25 22:54:26 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian.
Joe Clark was *never* a conservative of any kind. He was an ambitious young
lawyer largely lacking talent who knew that he'd never get elected as a
Liberal in Alberta. So he joined the PC party as a 'red' tory. He was an
unfortunately bad choice as a compromise during a convention when the party
was divided between two strong candidates, and his leadership was a disaster
from the very first day. Everything he touched turned to crap. Every
decision he made turned out to be wrong. He couldn't count, had no
judgement, and no political savvy. His second time around the party turned
to him as someone the people at least knew, someone who could stabilize the
almost dead PC party. He did that, stabilized it on the edge of death.
As before, he made all the wrong decisions, took all the wrong paths, made
all the wrong choices, alienated Canadians, and made a joke of himself. He
turned the PC party into the Liberal Party Light, but without the slick
political skills, and with no real alternatives or ideas to what the real
Liberals were doing. He was nothing more than a pompous windbag living off
his reputation as "Earnest, honest young Mr. Clark", but he was no longer
earnest, honest or young.

His choice of Martin over Harper shows both his sulky resentment at the
party abandoning him and ignoring his wishes, and his level of comfort with
liberalism - however corrupt or filled with graft - over anything resembling
conservative values.
No one with any brains would let Joe Clark make a political decision for
them except as an example pointing in the wrong direction. If Joe Clark says
Martin is the way to go it ought to be a blinding wake-up call to those
thinking of voting Liberal.
Post by Don Dickson
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.
I don't know his exact words, but Canada is not in a position to send troops
now. We have nothing to send.
Bradly Wiebe
2004-04-27 05:04:01 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice
of
Post by Don Dickson
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to
represent
Post by Don Dickson
the views of the average Canadian.
Joe Clark was *never* a conservative of any kind. He was an ambitious young
lawyer largely lacking talent who knew that he'd never get elected as a
Liberal in Alberta. So he joined the PC party as a 'red' tory. He was an
unfortunately bad choice as a compromise during a convention when the party
was divided between two strong candidates, and his leadership was a disaster
from the very first day. Everything he touched turned to crap. Every
decision he made turned out to be wrong. He couldn't count, had no
judgement, and no political savvy. His second time around the party turned
to him as someone the people at least knew, someone who could stabilize the
almost dead PC party. He did that, stabilized it on the edge of death.
As before, he made all the wrong decisions, took all the wrong paths, made
all the wrong choices, alienated Canadians, and made a joke of himself. He
turned the PC party into the Liberal Party Light, but without the slick
political skills, and with no real alternatives or ideas to what the real
Liberals were doing. He was nothing more than a pompous windbag living off
his reputation as "Earnest, honest young Mr. Clark", but he was no longer
earnest, honest or young.
His choice of Martin over Harper shows both his sulky resentment at the
party abandoning him and ignoring his wishes, and his level of comfort with
liberalism - however corrupt or filled with graft - over anything resembling
conservative values.
No one with any brains would let Joe Clark make a political decision for
them except as an example pointing in the wrong direction. If Joe Clark says
Martin is the way to go it ought to be a blinding wake-up call to those
thinking of voting Liberal.
Post by Don Dickson
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for
not
Post by Don Dickson
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he
would not
Post by Don Dickson
send troops to Iraq.
I don't know his exact words, but Canada is not in a position to send troops
now. We have nothing to send.
Kick ass reply. It couldn't have been said better.
Le Mod Pol
2004-04-27 10:11:56 UTC
Post by Bradly Wiebe
Post by Don Dickson
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice
of
Post by Don Dickson
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to
represent
Post by Don Dickson
the views of the average Canadian.
Joe Clark was *never* a conservative of any kind. He was an ambitious young
lawyer largely lacking talent who knew that he'd never get elected as a
Liberal in Alberta. So he joined the PC party as a 'red' tory. He was an
unfortunately bad choice as a compromise during a convention when the party
was divided between two strong candidates, and his leadership was a disaster
from the very first day. Everything he touched turned to crap. Every
decision he made turned out to be wrong. He couldn't count, had no
judgement, and no political savvy. His second time around the party turned
to him as someone the people at least knew, someone who could stabilize the
almost dead PC party. He did that, stabilized it on the edge of death.
As before, he made all the wrong decisions, took all the wrong paths, made
all the wrong choices, alienated Canadians, and made a joke of himself. He
turned the PC party into the Liberal Party Light, but without the slick
political skills, and with no real alternatives or ideas to what the real
Liberals were doing. He was nothing more than a pompous windbag living off
his reputation as "Earnest, honest young Mr. Clark", but he was no longer
earnest, honest or young.
His choice of Martin over Harper shows both his sulky resentment at the
party abandoning him and ignoring his wishes, and his level of comfort with
liberalism - however corrupt or filled with graft - over anything resembling
conservative values.
No one with any brains would let Joe Clark make a political decision for
them except as an example pointing in the wrong direction. If Joe Clark says
Martin is the way to go it ought to be a blinding wake-up call to those
thinking of voting Liberal.
Post by Don Dickson
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the
Liberals for not
Post by Don Dickson
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if
elected he would not send troops to Iraq.
I don't know his exact words, but Canada is not in a position to
send troops now. We have nothing to send.
Kick ass reply. It couldn't have been said better.
Think about this -- Clark's endorsement may well have
been the kiss of death for Martin.
--
LP
In politics, moderation is the best policy
Anonymous/Remailer
2004-04-25 23:41:02 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values (snipped)
By "traditional PC values" the idiot Clark and you, of course mean, politically correct values.
Not conservative, right wing or common sense values.

Both Joe Clark and Paul Martin are limp-wristed socialists.

Good God! Of course, Clark would prefer Martin over Stephen Harper. How can you be so stupid?

As for Harper's saying he would not be in favor of sending Canadian troops to
Iraq now, that is not a reversal. It is a reassessment brought
about by changed situation there. I would agree with him.

Troops in Iraq now are bogged down in thankless and futile peacemaking, policing
and nation building, which can never be successful in this Muslim country. The situation is
not the same as it was during the invasion of Iraq over a year ago.

Further, with Canada's emaciated military being already stretched too thin, it would be physically
impossible to send well-trained and equipped Canadian troops to Iraq.
Peter White
2004-04-25 23:47:46 UTC
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values (snipped)
By "traditional PC values" the idiot Clark and you, of course mean, politically correct values.
Not conservative, right wing or common sense values.
Both Joe Clark and Paul Martin are limp-wristed socialists.
Good God! Of course, Clark would prefer Martin over Stephen Harper. How can you be so stupid?
As for Harper's saying he would not be in favor of sending Canadian troops to
Iraq now, that is not a reversal. It is a reassessment brought
about by changed situation there. I would agree with him.
Troops in Iraq now are bogged down in thankless and futile peacemaking, policing
and nation building, which can never be successful in this Muslim country. The situation is
not the same as it was during the invasion of Iraq over a year ago.
Further, with Canada's emaciated military being already stretched too thin, it would be physically
impossible to send well-trained and equipped Canadian troops to Iraq.
When did Harper learn to wink with both eyes?
He gets away with except at times like this when he tries to use both
eyes at the same time.
Don Dickson
2004-04-25 23:59:46 UTC
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
As for Harper's saying he would not be in favor of sending Canadian troops to
Iraq now, that is not a reversal. It is a reassessment brought
about by changed situation there. I would agree with him.
Oh I see. If you are a Harper supporter and he does an about face it's a
"reassessment". But if a politician of the NDP or Liberal parties makes a
"reassessment" it's okay for Harper to call them wishy-washy.
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Further, with Canada's emaciated military being already stretched too thin,
it would be physically impossible to send well-trained and equipped Canadian
troops to Iraq.
That situation has not changed since BEFORE the Iraq war started but Harper
wanted to send them when the US first went in.
--
Don Dickson
dave
2004-04-26 00:37:07 UTC
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values (snipped)
By "traditional PC values" the idiot Clark and you, of course mean, politically correct values.
Not conservative, right wing or common sense values.
Oh by that you mean the $33 billion dollar deficits per year
that ah, Brian Mulroney's Government was running,
( under Finance Minster Micheal Wilson )?

I think I understand you now, those *stupid values" that
got Canada in this present financial mess with find ourselves
in today?


Hmmm, no common sense there....
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Both Joe Clark and Paul Martin are limp-wristed socialists.
I'm sorry Don, the only one who does the "two-stroke" around
Parliment there is good'ol Steven Harper...
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Good God! Of course, Clark would prefer Martin over Stephen Harper. How can you be so stupid?
You obviously don't get it, do you shit for brains. Joe Clark
represented the more moderate Conservative majority within the
voting public.

If he says he's against Harper, and instead for Paul Martin,
well now, let's just say that all the advertising money in the
world won't win back those people that hear these comments,
those that know and remember the former Prime Minister.

Face it Don, in eubonics, the New Conservative are otherwise
in a state of "we be fucked",
before the national election even gets off the ground.
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
As for Harper's saying he would not be in favor of sending Canadian troops to
Iraq now, that is not a reversal. It is a reassessment brought
about by changed situation there. I would agree with him.
There's a far more accurate word for that, and it's called a
" complete political reversal", dumb ass, because Harper's
got his head so far up his ass he can't find nor smell
the truth...

Just over 85% of Canadians think CHREITIEN, yeah, that guy, did
the right thing with not supporting the US. Go figure...
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Troops in Iraq now are bogged down in thankless and futile peacemaking, policing
and nation building, which can never be successful in this Muslim country. The situation is
not the same as it was during the invasion of Iraq over a year ago.
Of course not. The Sihittes were against Saddam Hussien and the
ruling Sunni minority that Hussien represented. Now that the
US is in there, exploting the oil resources of this country
for it's own benefit, the US has merely managed to piss off
the Shittes as well with their criminal behaviour.

But then, with only 5% of the army around to resist the American
army, Iraq easily fell. Now, with over 20% of the population
pissed off with the Americans, the war of attrition has begun.

Nothing like this has been seen since Vietnam, and now you'll
see George Bush try to implement the draft in order to get enough
feet on the ground to keep the peace alive in Iraq.

I don't know, do you think 100+ American lives per month was
worth it, since the reasons for going to war with Iraq was
simply made up, and untrue?


Face it, even now Harper is giving Chreitien his due;
Chretien called the right play, and not even Harper can stand
up and debate that the former Prime Minister did not exercise
good, sound, and reasonable judgement to be against the
American unlawful invasion of Iraq.


Face it, if the Liberals passed a law against inbreeding, the
Conservative Party members and supporters would simply disappear
and would die off within a single generation...
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Further, with Canada's emaciated military being already stretched too thin, it would be physically
impossible to send well-trained and equipped Canadian troops to Iraq.
Why go to Iraq, when Afganistan is not yet finished with, hmmm?

Why is the war on terror stopped with a war on Iraq, a country
that had nothing to do with terrorism in the first place?

Why did Mulroney bleed the Army dry of funding during the mid
1980's to 1990's, and nothing was ever said until the Liberals
took over, and started reading the books?



God, some one must have cut off your gentialia, and used them
as a thumb-tack your brains on a washroom wall somewhere...

Fuck, Conservatives are so, so dumb.
Don Dickson
2004-04-26 11:02:20 UTC
Post by dave
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values (snipped)
By "traditional PC values" the idiot Clark and you, of course mean,
politically correct values.
Not conservative, right wing or common sense values.
Oh by that you mean the $33 billion dollar deficits per year
that ah, Brian Mulroney's Government was running,
( under Finance Minster Micheal Wilson )?
I think I understand you now, those *stupid values" that
got Canada in this present financial mess with find ourselves
in today?
Hmmm, no common sense there....
Post by Anonymous/Remailer
Both Joe Clark and Paul Martin are limp-wristed socialists.
I'm sorry Don, the only one who does the "two-stroke" around
Parliment there is good'ol Steven Harper...
Dave
I don't want the credit for brown stuff that Anonymous Remailer spreads.
--
Don Dickson
"The Right One"
2004-04-26 01:11:46 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming election
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be counted on
to come up with something new.
--
Don Dickson
Joe Clark is a bitter person. He has just discovered that He is a would be
leader who couldn't
lead a horse to water even if they watered the Oats.


--
Terry Pearson
http://www.rightpoint.org
The last ten years have been a decade
of diabolical decadence.
If You Support Paul Martin And The Liberals,
Then You Support Crime!
What example are you setting for your Children?
Peter White
2004-04-26 01:20:35 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice
of
Post by Don Dickson
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to
represent
Post by Don Dickson
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming
election
Post by Don Dickson
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for
not
Post by Don Dickson
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he
would not
Post by Don Dickson
send troops to Iraq.
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be
counted on
Post by Don Dickson
to come up with something new.
--
Don Dickson
Joe Clark is a bitter person. He has just discovered that He is a would be
leader who couldn't
lead a horse to water even if they watered the Oats.
What are deOats?
Post by Don Dickson
--
Terry Pearson
http://www.rightpoint.org
The last ten years have been a decade
of diabolical decadence.
If You Support Paul Martin And The Liberals,
Then You Support Crime!
What example are you setting for your Children?
E. Barry Bruyea
2004-04-26 10:39:31 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming election
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be counted on
to come up with something new.
Whether Harper would make a better P.M. or not is something that we
will or won't see; but the fact that a politician who is and has been
irrelevant for many years opens his mouth, touting one or the other,
goes public with his opinion, is a non-news story and could even swing
votes away from 'his' choice.
Valentine Michael Smith
2004-04-26 11:36:45 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
Just when you think you have heard everything our politicians can be counted on
to come up with something new.
It's just one more proof of how little choice there is in politics -
why are you suprised ?
........

N' keep it in yer mind and not fergit
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to.

Bob Dylan

...........

www.libertarian.on.ca

..............
Karen Gordon
2004-04-26 17:17:22 UTC
Post by Justa Guy
I don't care who is in charge AS LONG AS he is not from Quebec.
(K): Paul Martin "is not from Quebec".
Post by Justa Guy
We need a leader from outside Quebec that thinks of Canada as
something a little larger than Quebec.
Harper will get my vote for that reason alone.
Hopefully he will retain some of his tenacity and not sell us out if
he wins.
I had hopes for Martin, but can we *really* ever trust a Liberal?
(K): You should be able to "trust a Liberal" these days ..... they're
just about as rightwing as your Conservative Party - and just about as
trustworthy for that reason.

--
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Steal from one person, and you're a criminal.
Steal from everyone, and you're a government.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
E. Barry Bruyea
2004-04-26 18:58:08 UTC
Post by Karen Gordon
Post by Justa Guy
I don't care who is in charge AS LONG AS he is not from Quebec.
(K): Paul Martin "is not from Quebec".
Martin was born in Windsor, but has spent most of his adult life in
Quebec and represents a Quebec riding.
Valentine Michael Smith
2004-04-28 03:46:10 UTC
Post by Karen Gordon
Post by Justa Guy
I don't care who is in charge AS LONG AS he is not from Quebec.
(K): Paul Martin "is not from Quebec".
Post by Justa Guy
We need a leader from outside Quebec that thinks of Canada as
something a little larger than Quebec.
Harper will get my vote for that reason alone.
Hopefully he will retain some of his tenacity and not sell us out if
he wins.
I had hopes for Martin, but can we *really* ever trust a Liberal?
(K): You should be able to "trust a Liberal" these days ..... they're
just about as rightwing as your Conservative Party - and just about as
trustworthy for that reason.
You recently supported of a certain thief (long time major player with
the ndp) and claimed they were only stealing a ring to feed to poor -
and you talk about people not being trustworthy ? There was also the
matter of you being a closet bigot for years, denied it for years till
you could deny it no more, and now your trying to hide it against but
there again the truth is out with your own words.

Yes your an expert in "untrustworthy".
........

N' keep it in yer mind and not fergit
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to.

Bob Dylan

...........

www.libertarian.on.ca

..............
Valentine Michael Smith
2004-05-02 15:21:48 UTC
Post by Karen Gordon
Post by Justa Guy
I don't care who is in charge AS LONG AS he is not from Quebec.
(K): Paul Martin "is not from Quebec".
Post by Justa Guy
We need a leader from outside Quebec that thinks of Canada as
something a little larger than Quebec.
Harper will get my vote for that reason alone.
Hopefully he will retain some of his tenacity and not sell us out if
he wins.
I had hopes for Martin, but can we *really* ever trust a Liberal?
(K): You should be able to "trust a Liberal" these days ..... they're
just about as rightwing as your Conservative Party - and just about as
trustworthy for that reason.
You recently supported of a certain thief (long time major player with
the ndp) and claimed they were only stealing a ring to feed to poor -
and you talk about people not being trustworthy ? There was also the
matter of you being a closet bigot for years, denied it for years till
you could deny it no more, and now your trying to hide it against but
there again the truth is out with your own words.

Yes your an expert in "untrustworthy".
........

N' keep it in yer mind and not fergit
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to.

Bob Dylan

...........

www.libertarian.on.ca

..............
Siobhan Medeiros
2004-05-07 05:26:13 UTC
Post by Valentine Michael Smith
You recently supported of a certain thief (long time major player with
the ndp) and claimed they were only stealing a ring to feed to poor -
and you talk about people not being trustworthy ?
Well, gee, let's compare Svend to your hero, Gordon Campbell, hmmmm?

Svend Gordon
Turned himself in. Had to be caught by police.

Did something that couldn't Could easily have killed somebody
possibly have physically hurt
anyone

Up front about how incident, no Tried soft-shoeing it, saying he
only
excuses offered had "two or three martinis" (in
fact
he was double the legal limit)

Did the right thing and resigned Still wants to be premier
to seek treatment

Most likely one-time only thing Yeah, right.
explained by well-known
psychological condition brought
on by stress.


I would be happy to forgive Svend, just like the auction house did,
once he can show me that he's overcome his problems. I would be
honored to vote for him again. At least he's not a lying redneck like
Gordon Campbell.
Post by Valentine Michael Smith
There was also the
matter of you being a closet bigot for years, denied it for years till
you could deny it no more, and now your trying to hide it against but
there again the truth is out with your own words.
That just goes to show you even a broken clock is right twice a day.
You are quite correct, sir. Karen Gordon is a racist bitch and I wish
she'd join your side and make a clean break of it.
Duncan Patton a Campbell is Dhu
2004-05-07 08:31:37 UTC
Sven was caught on the tapes and given the "revolver in the bedroom"
option.

Dhu
Post by Siobhan Medeiros
Post by Valentine Michael Smith
You recently supported of a certain thief (long time major player with
the ndp) and claimed they were only stealing a ring to feed to poor -
and you talk about people not being trustworthy ?
Well, gee, let's compare Svend to your hero, Gordon Campbell, hmmmm?
Svend Gordon
Turned himself in. Had to be caught by police.
Did something that couldn't Could easily have killed somebody
possibly have physically hurt
anyone
Up front about how incident, no Tried soft-shoeing it, saying he
only
excuses offered had "two or three martinis" (in
fact
he was double the legal limit)
Did the right thing and resigned Still wants to be premier
to seek treatment
Most likely one-time only thing Yeah, right.
explained by well-known
psychological condition brought
on by stress.
I would be happy to forgive Svend, just like the auction house did,
once he can show me that he's overcome his problems. I would be
honored to vote for him again. At least he's not a lying redneck like
Gordon Campbell.
Post by Valentine Michael Smith
There was also the
matter of you being a closet bigot for years, denied it for years till
you could deny it no more, and now your trying to hide it against but
there again the truth is out with your own words.
That just goes to show you even a broken clock is right twice a day.
You are quite correct, sir. Karen Gordon is a racist bitch and I wish
she'd join your side and make a clean break of it.
--
***********************************************

All persons named herein are purely fictional victims
of the Canidian Bagle Breeder's Association.

Save the Bagle!

I keep getting anonymous mail from my "Fans".

Don't be anonymous.

To send me a private message, goto:

https://www.neotext.ca/cgi-bin/pub.gtx.sh?&COLS=48&ROWS=8&PROC=message&SERVICE_ADDR=campbell


***********************************************
Valentine Michael Smith
2004-05-08 12:06:12 UTC
Post by Siobhan Medeiros
Post by Valentine Michael Smith
You recently supported of a certain thief (long time major player with
the ndp) and claimed they were only stealing a ring to feed to poor -
and you talk about people not being trustworthy ?
Well, gee, let's compare Svend to your hero, Gordon Campbell, hmmmm?
Where have I ever indicated I like Gordon Campbell - or even support
him let alone him being my "hero".
You should apologize for your error.

........

N' keep it in yer mind and not fergit
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to.

Bob Dylan

...........

www.libertarian.on.ca

..............

The Toad
2004-04-26 19:51:25 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper ...
HOPE AND DESPAIR OVER THE NEW CONSERVATIVE PARTY

What is a small "c" conservative supposed to think?

Hope for the new "Conservative" party grows with Red Tory Joe Clark's
rejection of it. Perhaps it will become a real conservative party
devoted to the interests of English Canada.

But then hope is dashed and replaced with despair at the news that
old Lying Brian, Red Tory par excellence and Liberal in all but name,
is quite happy with the new "Conservative" party.

How can Mulroney, a man who never met a giveaway program to Quebec or
the French that he didn't love, possibly support a party that might
protect the interests of English Canadians?

How can the creator of Ottawa's Employment Inequity Program, designed
to make sure white males are the last hired and the first laid-off in
the Federal government and as many other places as possible, support a
party that might treat white English males almost as well as Ottawa's
beloved minorities?

Could it be that Mulroney sees something that the politically
incompetent bungler Clark has overlooked?

Perhaps it was that in the voting for "Conservative" Party leader,
each Quebec vote was given twenty times as much weight as the vote of
a party member in Alberta.

Perhaps it was Harper's muzzling of his party's anti-bilingualism
critic who protested 71% of all new hirings and 68% of all promotions
in the civil service going to Francophones. If Harper doesn't even
want to talk about this blatant discrimination against the English,
what are the chances that he will take on the tough job of
eliminiating that discrimination if he is elected?

Perhaps it is the "Conservative" Party's determination to be a
"national" party at any price that attracted Mulroney's greedy eye.

That price of course is very high: abandonment of everything the old
Reform Party stood for.

Want votes in the Maritimes? Then you can't cut federal transfer
payments to the pogey addicted Maritime provinces and their voters.
Ontario and the West must continue to support these eastern deadbeats
and of course, the spoiled child of Confederation, Quebec.

Want a few votes in Quebec? Then Ottawa's bilingualism program can't
be touched. The majority of public service jobs and promotions must
continue to go to the French.

And Harper's OK with this! "I think we're looking at changes around
the edge -- not necessarily fundamental change," Harper said about
civil service bilingualism in March 2004. Wasn't opposition to
federal bilingualism a core-issue of the old Reform Party? I guess
"that was then" and "this is now."

Are you English and want a fair chance at a government job? Harper
and the "Conservatives" aren't going to help you. They've already
sold out to the French. Just politics as usual in French
Trashcanistan. Might as well emigrate to the USA while you can --
you've no future in this country unless your name is "Jean-Pierre."


Toad-Beneath-the-Harrow (a.k.a. DB)
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Fairness" French-Canadian style in our federal public service:
71% of all new hirings going to Francophones,
68% of all job promotions going to Francophones.
Francophones as proportion of Canada's population:
24% approximately.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Micheal Wilson
2004-04-28 19:55:50 UTC
Post by Don Dickson
In an interview on CTV Joe Clark says that people who believe that Harper
represents the traditional PC values are wrong. He said that in a choice of
evils he would pick Martin over Harper as the best person for PM to represent
the views of the average Canadian. He also says that in the upcoming election
individuals should disregard traditional party loyalties and vote for the
candidate who best represents their personal views.
Also interesting is that Harper who strongly condemned the Liberals for not
supporting the US and sending soldiers to Iraq now says if elected he would not
send troops to Iraq.
Actually, just a minor correction. Harper is not saying that "if elected he
wouldn't send troops" (well actually he may have said that too), but what he
said the other day was that he would not have sent troops to Iraq to fight
in the war, but would only have offered "moral" support. Just a minor
difference in tense.

Hansard, Jan 29, 2003
(Stephen Harper):"We have called for participation in the predeployment
exercises."
(Stephen Harper):"Make no mistake, Saddam's behaviour to date indicates that
he will not honour diplomatic solutions so long as they are not accompanied
by a threat of intervention. The least sign of weakness or hesitation on our
part will be interpreted as incitement.... We believe that Canada cannot
stand on the sidelines in such a moment.... Canada will be counted."

Sounds like he wanted to send troops.



Mike
--
--
http://michealwilson.blogspot.com/

Build a Man a Fire, and he will be Warm for a day.
Set a Man on Fire, and he will be Warm for the Rest of his Life.