more vote of confidence drama

[octothorp]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...ence050614.html

Pat O'Brien claims that he and another unnamed Liberal MP will vote against the government unless they delay the same sex marriage bill. The thing that strikes me as strange is the unnamed MP... doesn't have the courage to stand up and say where he stands now, but will apparently stand up and say where he stands when it comes to a vote? Or is this all a big bluff by O'Brien? And it's so last minute that it has apparently caught the Tories off-guard, as they won't have all of their MPs there. Cadman won't be there, either. If O'Brien and the anonymous MP do vote against the government, they would still need Kilgour to vote against the government, or one of the three absent Conservative MPs to show up, otherwise it'll be back to the speaker's tie-breaker.

[Frank the Tank]

O'Brien is a bigot and I am ashamed to live in the city he represents in parlaiment.

[octothorp]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank@Jun 14 2005, 12:49 PM
O'Brien is a bigot and I am ashamed to live in the city he represents in parlaiment.

I'm curious to know what the general attitude toward him is in London. Did he get elected simply because he was the liberal candidate, or does he have a strong personal following?

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by octothorp+Jun 14 2005, 02:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (octothorp @ Jun 14 2005, 02:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Jun 14 2005, 12:49 PM
O'Brien is a bigot and I am ashamed to live in the city he represents in parlaiment.

I'm curious to know what the general attitude toward him is in London. Did he get elected simply because he was the liberal candidate, or does he have a strong personal following? [/b][/quote]
Well, its pretty much because he was a liberal and was the incumbent. Londoners are infamous for voting for the same person over and over and over.

Years ago our then-mayor (Diane Haskett) came out and quit just after the local elections started and we STILL voted her to another term. I yelled at everybody that voted for her. Man I was mad.

She is a born-again type and proceeded to deny the gay pride parade, but fully endorsed this crazy Christian bible-thumping parade. I just had to shake my head.

[V]

I can only imagine how out-of-hand that parade must've gotten. Those bible-thumpers are crazy!!

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Dominicwasalreadytaken@Jun 14 2005, 03:05 PM
I can only imagine how out-of-hand that parade must've gotten. Those bible-thumpers are crazy!!

Ummm, you're kind of missing my point Mr. Sensative.

[V]

Hmmm, never been called that before, I must have mis-projected myself.

As for your original point, I'm not surprised. London is in Ontario after all.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Dominicwasalreadytaken@Jun 14 2005, 03:10 PM
Hmmm, never been called that before, I must have mis-projected myself.

As for your original point, I'm not surprised. London is in Ontario after all.

Well the smileys help.

It is absurd how Ontario votes. I try my best to sway as many people as possible, yet every election, all I see is red. Very irritating.

[Hakan]

I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 03:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

HA! Oh thats priceless. I love it!

[V]

Originally posted by Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 01:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

I'd rather see neither, thank you very much. It's a case of boring versus all-out freakiness. And I'm not big on that kind of freakiness. Probably because I'm such an intolerant fanatical bible thumper.

[JohnnyTitan]

Originally posted by Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 08:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

Haha! I agree as well. Good call.

Voting with your pocketbook = OK. I can handle it, although there are social issues that matter.

Voting with your bible = Boo! That book should not be making political decisions.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by JohnnyTitan+Jun 14 2005, 02:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JohnnyTitan @ Jun 14 2005, 02:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 08:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

Haha! I agree as well. Good call.

Voting with your pocketbook = OK. I can handle it, although there are social issues that matter.

Voting with your bible = Boo! That book should not be making political decisions. [/b][/quote]
Why not?
You say it's okay to vote with your pocket book and then go on to say that there are social issues that must be considered. But then you condem people for voting their conscience, which is it? Should they consider the social issues or ignore their conscience (which can come from the bible among other places)?

Edit: Had to use question marks?

[Bingo]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank@Jun 14 2005, 12:49 PM
O'Brien is a bigot and I am ashamed to live in the city he represents in parlaiment.

Just curious ...

is he a bigot on other matters, or are you assuming that based on his non support of same sex marriage?

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally posted by JohnnyTitan+Jun 14 2005, 01:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JohnnyTitan @ Jun 14 2005, 01:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 08:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

Haha! I agree as well. Good call.

Voting with your pocketbook = OK. I can handle it, although there are social issues that matter.

Voting with your bible = Boo! That book should not be making political decisions. [/b][/quote]
I've never quite figured out why positions based on religion are frowned on so much. For individuals that is.

Everyone has their own set of beliefs, why are some peoples 'worse' because they're codified into a religious book?

Zealots come in all different stripes, but ones with a bible attached get a whole other level of contempt it seems.

I'm not the least bit religious, but I've always found it odd.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Bingo+Jun 14 2005, 03:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bingo @ Jun 14 2005, 03:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Jun 14 2005, 12:49 PM
O'Brien is a bigot and I am ashamed to live in the city he represents in parlaiment.

Just curious ...

is he a bigot on other matters, or are you assuming that based on his non support of same sex marriage? [/b][/quote]
A bigot is defined as follows: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.


Mainly his stance on same sex marriages. The fact that he bailed on his party plays a lot into it as well. Kind of the old "I'm taking my net and going home" crap because he doesn't agree with everything his party does.

[Natt]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank+Jun 14 2005, 08:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Frank the Tank @ Jun 14 2005, 08:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Dominicwasalreadytaken@Jun 14 2005, 03:10 PM
Hmmm, never been called that before, I must have mis-projected myself.

As for your original point, I'm not surprised.# London is in Ontario after all.

Well the smileys help.

It is absurd how Ontario votes. I try my best to sway as many people as possible, yet every election, all I see is red. Very irritating. [/b][/quote]
Yeah they tend to always vote for the same party and people no matter what or who they are.

Kinda like Alberta.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Bend it like Bourgeois+Jun 14 2005, 03:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bend it like Bourgeois @ Jun 14 2005, 03:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Haha! I agree as well. Good call.

Voting with your pocketbook = OK. I can handle it, although there are social issues that matter.

Voting with your bible = Boo! That book should not be making political decisions.

I've never quite figured out why positions based on religion are frowned on so much. For individuals that is.

Everyone has their own set of beliefs, why are some peoples 'worse' because they're codified into a religious book?

Zealots come in all different stripes, but ones with a bible attached get a whole other level of contempt it seems.

I'm not the least bit religious, but I've always found it odd. [/b][/quote]
Well, I look at it as you should vote for whomever (male/female/whatever party/sexual orientation) is going to go to bat for you on the issues that directly affect your life. If the world's biggest bible-thumping, queer midget transexual wrestler could do all I wanted to do in parlaiment, I'd vote for her/it.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Natt+Jun 14 2005, 03:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Natt @ Jun 14 2005, 03:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Well the smileys help.

It is absurd how Ontario votes. I try my best to sway as many people as possible, yet every election, all I see is red. Very irritating.

Yeah they tend to always vote for the same party and people no matter what or who they are.

Kinda like Alberta. [/b][/quote]
I'd argue that Ontarians are worse than Albertans for that.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Dominicwasalreadytaken+Jun 14 2005, 08:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dominicwasalreadytaken @ Jun 14 2005, 08:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Jun 14 2005, 01:13 PM
I'd rather see assless chaps in a parade then a bunch of pro-life signs and unmarried 20something virgins.

I'd rather see neither, thank you very much. It's a case of boring versus all-out freakiness. And I'm not big on that kind of freakiness. Probably because I'm such an intolerant fanatical bible thumper. [/b][/quote]
You prefer boring to freaky?