[DerbyX]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm not seeing the problem. Harper, a Conservative, appointed Conservatives as Senators.

Excuse me, but sfw?

The problem is that he is doing it against he previous statements not to appoint senators and he is doing it at a time when parliment is suspended.

Aside from that its more about us calling him and his supporters out for being hypocrites.

I fully expect Harper to appoint conservative senators when he is PM. Fairs fair but just don't complain when the Liberals do it if you support your guy doing it.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm not seeing the problem. Harper, a Conservative, appointed Conservatives as Senators.

Excuse me, but sfw?

It's no big deal, unless you forget that a key plank in the Reform/Alliance/Conservative platform was senate reform. To date, he has appointed only two senators, Marc Fortier (so he could sit in Cabinet) and Bert Brown, who was 'elected' in a vote in Alberta.

Suddenly, he's just apppointing them like those dictators Chretien and Martin?

Where's the right-wing scorn and condemnation for flaunting this? Nowhere, because it's 'good' for their party.

Hence, the term hypocrite.

[HyperionTheEvil]

bootlegga bootlegga:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

Or we can talk about you.

You've already godwin'ed several threads and thrown out the 'facist' line becuase you, like all Liberals are simply bankrupt of anything better to say. You're incensed that Primie Minsiter had steered the country along the mdoerate road of fiscal responsibility.

You call conservatives 'Hacks'. You do that because because you do't like the reality is that the Left have manouvered themslevs into being a Party which continously destroys itself. Pick leaders of questionable intelligence, credibility and ideas. So the only thing you have left is to call people 'facists'

Time to grow up son

Actually, you're wrong, but that doesn't surprise me, as you usually are. I've only called one person a facist in one thread, and that was you. Like I said, if you live in a glass house, don't throw stones...

What no comment on any of Harper's flip flops? Of course, not you're a hypocrite! I also notice you've conveniently avoided repsonding to any of his flip flops in the Michael Ignatieff, in his own words thread (which you started. Typical ploy, post and run away. But then again, you're a hypocrite. You have no problem pointing out the other side's flaws, but refuse to see the warts on your own leaders face.

I think you're the one who needs to grow up, face facts, and accept reality as it is, not as it is presented by the blue propaganda machine.

That you did was enough , like i said at the time it merely higlights that you dont have any other ideas than "Haper is bad". And Harper didnt make any flip flops, but i also not that you didnt answer any of the qutes of Iggy in that threAD. . You spoort a leader that agreed with the Iraq invasion, agrees with torture and has disregard for Jews

Considering you're accsusing me of posting and running. Let's see you answer some of the facts ive presented about the Liberals time in power here. Let's see if your principles , which you claim to be so elevated that you can not do what you laim i did and answer the question about why the Liberal party puts itself before the country.

But i imagine you won't you'll come up with some excuse , say "Harper bad , Chretien, Martin, Dion, Iggy good" and move on. That's cool, every time to skedaddle off and back-peddle it just shows that you and the liberal party dont like to be caught in the cold light of day whree you have to explaing anyhting

Consdering that the Supreme court today found thar the Liberal government illegally collected money from tax-payers to pay down the national debt i wouldnt be surprised if you simply ran off to a dark corner and waited for the latest bad news to blow over. But i you would like to talk about how the liberals brought in a hidden tax on Canaidans and now have been cuaght red handed, i'm happy to hear you apologize to Canadians for taking thier money illegally

[commanderkai]

DerbyX DerbyX:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm not seeing the problem. Harper, a Conservative, appointed Conservatives as Senators.

Excuse me, but sfw?

The problem is that he is doing it against he previous statements not to appoint senators and he is doing it at a time when parliment is suspended.

Aside from that its more about us calling him and his supporters out for being hypocrites.

I fully expect Harper to appoint conservative senators when he is PM. Fairs fair but just don't complain when the Liberals do it if you support your guy doing it.

How is it hypocritical? He wants an elected Senate, but there can never be an elected Senate since the Liberal Party will not support it, and as such, the Liberal Senate members will not support Senate reform. What do you want him to do? Make provinces hold elections that have absolutely no actual legitimacy in the Canadian Parliamentary system?

Do you want him to leave those seats vacant? I fully support Senate reform, but since the Liberal party is against such a thing, we might as well try to shift the Senate into our favor, no?

[uwish]

well, we all know how well the new crime bills 'sped' threw the upper house. The liberal dominated senate did everything in their power to stop it. I do find it hard to buy that a liberal senate would pass law restricting or eliminating the senate.

Perhaps he is trying to sway the balance of power in the upper chamber to push his reforms without further delay or distraction.

[Zipperfish]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

bootlegga bootlegga:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

Or we can talk about you.

You've already godwin'ed several threads and thrown out the 'facist' line becuase you, like all Liberals are simply bankrupt of anything better to say. You're incensed that Primie Minsiter had steered the country along the mdoerate road of fiscal responsibility.

You call conservatives 'Hacks'. You do that because because you do't like the reality is that the Left have manouvered themslevs into being a Party which continously destroys itself. Pick leaders of questionable intelligence, credibility and ideas. So the only thing you have left is to call people 'facists'

Time to grow up son

Actually, you're wrong, but that doesn't surprise me, as you usually are. I've only called one person a facist in one thread, and that was you. Like I said, if you live in a glass house, don't throw stones...

What no comment on any of Harper's flip flops? Of course, not you're a hypocrite! I also notice you've conveniently avoided repsonding to any of his flip flops in the Michael Ignatieff, in his own words thread (which you started. Typical ploy, post and run away. But then again, you're a hypocrite. You have no problem pointing out the other side's flaws, but refuse to see the warts on your own leaders face.

I think you're the one who needs to grow up, face facts, and accept reality as it is, not as it is presented by the blue propaganda machine.

That you did was enough , like i said at the time it merely higlights that you dont have any other ideas than "Haper is bad". And Harper didnt make any flip flops, but i also not that you didnt answer any of the qutes of Iggy in that threAD. . You spoort a leader that agreed with the Iraq invasion, agrees with torture and has disregard for Jews

Considering you're accsusing me of posting and running. Let's see you answer some of the facts ive presented about the Liberals time in power here. Let's see if your principles , which you claim to be so elevated that you can not do what you laim i did and answer the question about why the Liberal party puts itself before the country.

But i imagine you won't you'll come up with some excuse , say "Harper bad , Chretien, Martin, Dion, Iggy good" and move on. That's cool, every time to skedaddle off and back-peddle it just shows that you and the liberal party dont like to be caught in the cold light of day whree you have to explaing anyhting

Consdering that the Supreme court today found thar the Liberal government illegally collected money from tax-payers to pay down the national debt i wouldnt be surprised if you simply ran off to a dark corner and waited for the latest bad news to blow over. But i you would like to talk about how the liberals brought in a hidden tax on Canaidans and now have been cuaght red handed, i'm happy to hear you apologize to Canadians for taking thier money illegally

Insofar as stacking the Senate goes, how about a compromise position of "Chretien, bad, Martin bad, Harper bad."

[Scape]

Exactly. There is this a huge amount of noise being made over senate reform and that's fine. There is also a lot of lamenting over the past appointments and how they were also marred. However, it completely undermines the position of a reform orientated agenda to then revert to exactly the same tactics when pressed by the very people who have been beating the drum on reform all along. It's one thing to talk the talk but it's entirely another thing to walk the walk and Harper's actions here speak much louder then his words.

[uwish]

see above post...

[ridenrain]

mtbr mtbr:

let's not skip over the last paragraph..

"Still, it appears Harper hasn't completely backed away from his previous policy. An insider said Harper would ask anyone he appoints to agree to step down and run in a Senate election if new legislation is ever implemented."

It looks like everyone missed that paragraph. That leaves room for changes and I'm sure these honorable Liberal senators wouldn't stand in the way of modernizing the senate.

[hurley_108]

Bah, at least he's finally doing his job. I don't see the hypocrisy in continuing to perform a function that is your present duty even as you try to delegate that duty. This way, even if his senate reforms fail, we will have had these Conservative governments represented in the upper chamber.

The first guy appointed, and still sitting, is Willie Adams, appointed in '77. Since '77, we've had about 19 years of Liberal rule, and 13 of PC/C rule, or 1.46 years of Liberal rule to every year of PC/C. If Harper fills the 18 vacancies with Conservtives, the standings will be 58 Liberal to 41 PC/C, or 1.41 Liberal senators per PC/C Senator. That's a 3% difference - pretty damn close. I can't argue with that.

I've been saying all along that Harper's not been doing his job allowing these senate vacancies to go unfilled. I'm glad he finally is.

[uwish]

yeah, perhaps some spin doctoring on that one.

crooked face had the best spin doctors in the house

[uwish]

HEADLINE NEWS


"Hurley supports the right, pleased to see Harper acting"

more @ 11!

[Scape]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Bah, at least he's finally doing his job. I don't see the hypocrisy in continuing to perform a function that is your present duty even as you try to delegate that duty. This way, even if his senate reforms fail, we will have had these Conservative governments represented in the upper chamber.

The first guy appointed, and still sitting, is Willie Adams, appointed in '77. Since '77, we've had about 19 years of Liberal rule, and 13 of PC/C rule, or 1.46 years of Liberal rule to every year of PC/C. If Harper fills the 18 vacancies with Conservtives, the standings will be 58 Liberal to 41 PC/C, or 1.41 Liberal senators per PC/C Senator. That's a 3% difference - pretty damn close. I can't argue with that.

I've been saying all along that Harper's not been doing his job allowing these senate vacancies to go unfilled. I'm glad he finally is.

I'm fine with the appointments and this man made crisis has forced Harper to do his job as you point out. However, his foot dragging was for two years during which he held to a platform of elected senate reform. He can't have it both ways. He either needs to throw himself on the gears of the senate and grind it to a halt like he promised to or commit to making the senate work by not placing gag/sabotage orders on committees. Since he is locked in perpetual minority status he won't have brute force as an option.

[jason700]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Hypocrisy..oh yeah, you and RR have lots of it.

As far as I've seen, a lot of the truly partisan (hard core) right wing people on here are major hypocrites. They bash the Liberals for accepting Belinda Stronach, yet revel in accepting David Emerson. They bash the Liberals for not getting rid of the GST, but ignore Harper's election promise not to tax income trusts. They bash the Liberals for cutting defence spending, but give Harper a pass on cancelling critical projects like the JSS, SAR planes, and heavy icebreakers. They hate the Liberals for proposing to work with the Bloc, yet ignore the Conservatives work with them for hte past two years, and even Harper's proposed coalition with the Bloc (that never worked out because Layton told them to fuck off). The list goes on and on and on and on.

Then when confronted with the facts, the worst any of them will say is, "I don't much care for it, but you know the Liberals ...". Their tone of course changes to to a "frothing at the mouth mad like a rabid dog" when discussing Liberal politics.

There are of course exceptions (Thanos and Poquas for example), but many Conservative hacks here just get swept up in rhetoric and refuse to even look at the problem rationally. Truth and logic are irrelevant to their argument/attitude. Instead terms like coup, traitor, socialist are liberally (pun intended) tossed around like hand grenades and the whole thing just bogs down into a game of name calling. Check any of the threads on the coalition last week and you'll see it to be true.

The truly hilarious thing is that NOT one of you even has the balls to admit Harper is breaking yet another of his party's promises, to reform the Senate.

Whatever, it's par for the course with you hacks...

And then Hyperion responds with... "I don't much care for it, but you know the Liberals ...". Haha.

Hey Hyperion, how about you speak to these points first, then we'll talk about the Liberals if you'd like.

[uwish]

which is it? do you want the government to focus on the economy, if he ground the senate to a halt everyone will be complaining he is 'playing politics' which is it?