[ridenrain]

I'll point out that the Manley report also said that for Canada to succeed, the Libs and CPC need to work togeather yet we see none of that and who is to blame for that?

We've seen Harper come out in support of the Manley report.
Has Dion?

[ryan29]

ridenrain ridenrain:

I'll point out that the Manley report also said that for Canada to succeed, the Libs and CPC need to work togeather yet we see none of that and who is to blame for that?

We've seen Harper come out in support of the Manley report.
Has Dion?

thats a good question after the report he has continued to use his line on the 2009 deadline the liberals have set for no particular military reason but keep quoting everyday .

has he actualy endorsed or argeed to the manley report i'm not sure .

[DerbyX]

ridenrain ridenrain:

I'll point out that the Manley report also said that for Canada to succeed, the Libs and CPC need to work togeather yet we see none of that and who is to blame for that?

We've seen Harper come out in support of the Manley report.
Has Dion?

Of course Harper endorsed the report, he cherry picked the people for just that purpose. He had no intention of picking people who would vote to leave.

Regardless, despite all the BS about Dion waffling the Liberals have continually stated that an end to primary combat roles to end in 2009 with our efforts shifted into a training and support role with emphasis on reconstruction. Combat as a secondary and as need basis. In addition they want a time table set up something the manley report doesn't support.

This is where cooperation and compromise needs to happen.

Not "give the manley report your full endorsement or else". Has Harper extended an olive branch or has he just played partisan politics. We both know its the latter.

The Liberals are the only other party that at least wants to remain with both the NDP and Bloc favouring full withdrawl yet knowing this Harper still won't make anything but a disingenuine attempt at "working together".

Harper is the PM and he is the one who is tasked with implementing plans of actions. He does not have the full support of the people and as such his minority gov't is responsible for getting support from another party not demanding it. Its his job to offer a solution that will appeal to another party (as both the Libs and CPC did with regards to NDP concessions) and if the Liberals are the only supporting party willing to keep boots on the ground then its up to Harper to get that support.

Thats what a leader does and so far the old standby of neither party making any effort to work togeather has shown through. You guys blamed Martin when he was leader of a minority gov't so now the same rule applies.

It is Harpers responsibility, not the Liberals to present a possible solution. He knows where the support that he needs lies and he should at least have an idea on how to get it. He will simply have to make a deal with the Liberals as he previously did with the NDP on budget & spending issues.

His gov't and his responsibility. If he is unwilling to accept that responsibility then he should step aside an perhaps another CPC MP can get the job done.

[ridenrain]

Talk about spin and wanting it both ways.
Harper appoints a Liberal and you still bitch about it.
If you don't like what he says, maybe you Liberals should have told you're leader what he was suposed to say, rather than letting the monkey king ramble off on another tangent.

Face it. You're party is deeply divided on this topic and the only reason they are against the mission is to hedge votes from the NDP. The Liberal platform is so weak that all you had was Kyoto, banning guns and raising the GST.

[DerbyX]

Talk about your D3S con attack again, Dodge, Deflect, Deny, and Spin.

Harper cherry picked his panel and had no choice but to choose a Liberal and he choose one who views he knew.

The Party isn't "deeply divided" anymore then your party is, its just that Harper won't let any MP who opinion differs from his own even surface for air.

Yet again you show why your party is unable to lead or govern because you can't even see past your own partisan BS to even make the attempt and somehow you think Canada should be teaching the Afghanis how to govern.

[ridenrain]

Bullshit.
This is just another example of you guys eating you're own for the sake of a couple votes. Are you telling us he isn't qualified or isn't a Liberal?

$1:

The Honourable John Manley has held several senior portfolios in the Canadian federal government. He was first elected to Parliament as a liberal in 1988 and has since held various positions including Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2000. Following 9/11, he became Chairman of a new Cabinet Committee on Public Security and Anti-terrorism. For this role, he was named TIME Canada magazine's "Newsmaker of the Year".

In January 2002, Mr. Manley was appointed Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, Political Minister for Ontario, Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations, and Chairman of the principal Cabinet committees. He added the role of Finance Minister in June 2002 and presented the Government’s federal budget in February 2003.

After leaving the federal Cabinet, Mr. Manley advised the Ontario Minister of Energy on the future of the provincially owned electrical power generation company. He also co-chaired an independent Task Force on the future of North America for the Council on Foreign Relations.

During the vote for the mission extension, some 30 liberals supported the mission in a free vote, including Iggy. How can you possibly say that you're party is unified on this when the leader and second disagree over this matter?

Video

Here's the video and the Libs start standing up for what's right at about 5:50

[dino_bobba_renno]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Talk about your D3S con attack again, Dodge, Deflect, Deny, and Spin.

Harper cherry picked his panel and had no choice but to choose a Liberal and he choose one who views he knew.

The Party isn't "deeply divided" anymore then your party is, its just that Harper won't let any MP who opinion differs from his own even surface for air.

Yet again you show why your party is unable to lead or govern because you can't even see past your own partisan BS to even make the attempt and somehow you think Canada should be teaching the Afghanis how to govern.

So are you saying Manley was a bad choice?

[DerbyX]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Bullshit.
This is just another example of you guys eating you're own for the sake of a couple votes. Are you telling us he isn't qualified or isn't a Liberal?

$1:

The Honourable John Manley has held several senior portfolios in the Canadian federal government. He was first elected to Parliament as a liberal in 1988 and has since held various positions including Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2000. Following 9/11, he became Chairman of a new Cabinet Committee on Public Security and Anti-terrorism. For this role, he was named TIME Canada magazine's "Newsmaker of the Year".

In January 2002, Mr. Manley was appointed Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, Political Minister for Ontario, Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations, and Chairman of the principal Cabinet committees. He added the role of Finance Minister in June 2002 and presented the Government’s federal budget in February 2003.

After leaving the federal Cabinet, Mr. Manley advised the Ontario Minister of Energy on the future of the provincially owned electrical power generation company. He also co-chaired an independent Task Force on the future of North America for the Council on Foreign Relations.

During the vote for the mission extension, some 30 liberals supported the mission in a free vote, including Iggy. How can you possibly say that you're party is unified on this when the leader and second disagree over this matter?

Video

Here's the video and the Libs start standing up for what's right at about 5:50

Learn to read!

DerbyX DerbyX:

The Party isn't "deeply divided" anymore then your party is, its just that Harper won't let any MP who opinion differs from his own even surface for air.

Get it? Of course there is dissention for a volatile issue.

Now you are launching a spin campaign to say I think Manley was A) Unqualified or B) Not a Liberal.

AGAIN: Learn to read!

I said:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Of course Harper endorsed the report, he cherry picked the people for just that purpose. He had no intention of picking people who would vote to leave.

Yes Manley is a Liberal and as qualified as anybody is as this is a pure opinion and Harper choose him because he knew what his opinion would be.

Now since you dodged all the othe rpoints I made in favour of yet another tiresome crybaby tantrum against he Liberals I'll spell it out for you.

The onus is on Harper to present a plan that the Liberals will endorse. His.

[DerbyX]

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Talk about your D3S con attack again, Dodge, Deflect, Deny, and Spin.

Harper cherry picked his panel and had no choice but to choose a Liberal and he choose one who views he knew.

The Party isn't "deeply divided" anymore then your party is, its just that Harper won't let any MP who opinion differs from his own even surface for air.

Yet again you show why your party is unable to lead or govern because you can't even see past your own partisan BS to even make the attempt and somehow you think Canada should be teaching the Afghanis how to govern.

So are you saying Manley was a bad choice?

No, thats not what I said. I said that Harper choose him and the panel because he knew how they felt and figured they would almost certainly present a recommnedation he agreed with and would endorse.

Opinions about the issue have long been known and it would be very easy (and is very common) to pick a panel designed to respond a certain way. If he wanted a panel that recomended withdrawl he could have choosen Layton and six of his friends.

A better panel would have been for each party leader to choose a proportional number of appointees.

[ridenrain]

So Manley IS qualified and IS a liberal.
.. but somehow his judgement was false or maybe he was forced to report what Harper wanted?

It would appear that Harper HAS presented a plan through this report.
You bitch about the lack of cooperation yet you refuse to accept an independant report.

Harper appointed a Liberal and you bitch. If he appointed a Tory, you'd bitch. Who did you want, Jack Layton? I'm assuming that because the report didn't say what you liked, it was fixed?

Do you read that before you post it or do you just write what the voices in you're head tell you?

Harper is now pressuring the NATO allies to come up with the requirements for this extension, including threats to Bush and the rest. If this was fixed, you'd have bet he'd have the bar lowered quite a bit. Why can't you simply believe that, for once, the report might be genuine and honest. Have you become so toxic and cynical that it is impossible for any government, save you're own to do the right thing?

You're dodging the fact that Dion voted against the extension and Ignatieff voted for it. That's a huge rift and I can't believe Iggy is going to suffer fools well for long.

Based on that, Harper should have picked the vice-Liberal leader to do the report.
Would you still bitch about that?

[EyeBrock]

DerbyX DerbyX:

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Talk about your D3S con attack again, Dodge, Deflect, Deny, and Spin.

Harper cherry picked his panel and had no choice but to choose a Liberal and he choose one who views he knew.

The Party isn't "deeply divided" anymore then your party is, its just that Harper won't let any MP who opinion differs from his own even surface for air.

Yet again you show why your party is unable to lead or govern because you can't even see past your own partisan BS to even make the attempt and somehow you think Canada should be teaching the Afghanis how to govern.

So are you saying Manley was a bad choice?

No, thats not what I said. I said that Harper choose him and the panel because he knew how they felt and figured they would almost certainly present a recommnedation he agreed with and would endorse.

Opinions about the issue have long been known and it would be very easy (and is very common) to pick a panel designed to respond a certain way. If he wanted a panel that recomended withdrawl he could have choosen Layton and six of his friends.

A better panel would have been for each party leader to choose a proportional number of appointees.

Come on Derby. Manley told it, warts and all. He's no CPC lackey and he's done his time. I've seen him at question time, he takes no shit. The PM could not ensure his view on anything. One thing though, he's respected by all sides and his opinion hold weight on all sides of the house.

Layton is just a left wing anti-war socialist who's only retort is for us to pull out. Why would anybody appoint him to anything?
He's a waste of nice suits and rations.

[dino_bobba_renno]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Layton is just a left wing anti-war socialist who's only retort is for us to pull out. Why would anybody appoint him to anything?
He's a waste of nice suits and rations.

My god I could imagine the grand standing if layton was on the panel.
Manley was a good choice in my opinion. Don't forget Derb that he delt as many blows to the Conservatives as he did to the Lib's position on the war.

[ridenrain]

I actually typed in NDP-MP Dawn Black but felt that Jack would have more of an impact. The point was that if you wanted a predictable result, pick a ringer.
I would have liked someone who had more military experience but that's pretty rare in Canada.

.. although I do wonder what Iggy would have said..

[EyeBrock]

Maybe Green loony Elizabeth May shoulda been on it too. Her and Jack are known for their non partisan approaches to national issues.

[dino_bobba_renno]

Ya she probably would have come back advocating that we replace the opium crops with tropical rain forests in and effort to curb green house gases.