[Numure]

Knoss Knoss:

$1:

That's going to put the Libs at a financial disadvantage for the foreseeable future. I don't see Harper moving to change those rules now that they're in place. Especially when the system favours the CPC.

Actully he is, ever hear of the Federal Accountability Act? It would ban union and corperate donations and limit private donations to $1000.00 . And i think the bloc will support this so It will make things very hard financialy.

Its a good thing. Its been like this in Québec for 30 years now. I'm quite happy they are finaly doing it in Ottawa.

[Knoss]

$1:

If Harper tries to kill Kyoto, a plan that has popular support in every province except Alberta, he will find himself in political trouble.

The general population in Saskatchewan is primarily opposed to Kyoto. Many farmers are concerned that a Carbon credits program will result in overgrowing to grass and hamper the cattle industry, while not rewoarding those who began seeding farmland to grass 10 years ago.

[Rev_Blair]

$1:

Will you stop with the Kyoto crap, this is bad for everybody except the people of Power Corp and the Liberal life suckers. For someone that’s a so-called clear thinker maybe you should do some reading on the subject.

I've done plenty of reading on the subject, Tallywhacker. I read the science though...not the conspiracy theories and Exxon-backed junk-science.

$1:

That’s not a free vote now is it?

The point is that Harper does not have the authority to force the other parties to hold a free vote. Since they've all stated that this is a matter of human rights and the courts are in agreement with them, and because all parties made their platform clear on the subject, it would be expected that the Liberals and Bloc would whip their vote.

Harper can let his party vote every which way. He does not have the authority to force the other parties to do the same.

[2Cdo]

Rev, I agree with you that Harper cannot force the other parties to vote his way, but then that is the beauty of a free vote. SSM will pass, as the other parties do have a majority (and can force their members to vote a certain way) and nothing will change. The big point is that Stephen Harper said he would have a free vote and honour whatever the outcome is. The issue then becomes a non-issue and we move on to other things.

I know for some people here a politician doing what he promised is something new and unheard of! I think that PM Harper is going to be one of those that does what he promised to do, whether people like it or not.
I agree that he might have a hard time with some issues passing in parliament, but at the end of the day he can say that at the very least he tried!

[hwacker]

Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:

The point is that Harper does not have the authority to force the other parties to hold a free vote. Since they've all stated that this is a matter of human rights and the courts are in agreement with them, and because all parties made their platform clear on the subject, it would be expected that the Liberals and Bloc would whip their vote.

Harper can let his party vote every which way. He does not have the authority to force the other parties to do the same.

Thats fine al least we will know what parties are in bed with Castro. Have a free vote day Rev.

[2Cdo]

Us "losers" just redefine what success means to us, because your shallow "win or lose" world just isn't very appealing.

So says the man who has nothing but time on his hands!

[bootlegga]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

I know for some people here a politician doing what he promised is something new and unheard of!

Actually, no it's happened before. Chretien said he would cancel the EH-101 contract and he did (much to my dislike). Mulroney said he would sign the FTA and he did. Of course Chretien didn't keep all his promises and I don't expect Harper will either. Such is life...especially when dealing with politicians.

[gideon]

IceOwl IceOwl:

No, I subscribe to the "no one is born a thug" policy.

Great, then you should support stronger punishments to reduce the allure of the thug lifestyle.

$1:

That won't stop crime, because at that point the crime has already been committed.

Wrong, it would keep the criminals from reoffending.

$1:

Let's just say I have a friend who's seen a number of important-looking documents with Department of National Defense letterheads, and leave it at that.

Already living in a dumpster, eh po boy?

[2Cdo]

"Important looking documents" and actual important documents are two different things! Also the "I have a friend" comment reeks of bullshit!

[Big_Roy]

I think the big thing is that if the Conservatives can work with the bloc or the Liberals for legislation it will pass. If they don't it won't but the bloc and Liberals have to agree to pass a non confidence vote. The NDP dosen't matter, they can not give the Liberals majority, so they can not pass legistaltion or hold a non confidence vote. The Conservatives and NDP would never work togeth and in the current cirumstances can't. The Conservatives and Liberals can work together on federalist legislation.

The NDP's position of power is compramised and I hope LAyton won't be so cockey next election.

[gideon]

IceOwl IceOwl:

Prison isn't a deterrant for would-be criminals.

Are you REALLY this stupid?

Tell me, why do they run from the police if they don't mind going to prison? Perhaps you could share your keen insight into the mind of a criminal

$1:

If I had it that bad, I'd sooner sleep out in the wind and cold than live next to garbage like you.

Good, if a piece of trash like yourself showed up in my neighborhood it would be disposed of promptly

PS. Find a job yet?