We both have equal evidence. Why is your speculation on stronger ground? How about this. You show me the evidnence that they weren't already involved and I will believe you. Until then I will stick with saying I don't know, as I always have. Like it or not, liberals don't get to sit on an untouchable pedestal.
Innocent until proven guilty. Can't work any other way.
Example: There have been a couple unsolved homicides in Calgary. I blame you. I have no proof, but I blame you. You're going to prison until you can prove you're innocent. See how that sucks?
Innocent until proven guilty. Can't work any other way.
Example: There have been a couple unsolved homicides in Calgary. I blame you. I have no proof, but I blame you. You're going to prison until you can prove you're innocent. See how that sucks?
1) there is evidence that there is a possibility.
2) sending someone to prison is not the same as saying you don't know what happened. It's saying you do, whether there is evidence or not.
The evidence is quite clear in implicating the NDP and Bloc. Anything else is speculation. I guess only the conservatives get to be on an untouchable pedestal.
To be fair, the Conservatives aren't the ones trying to overthrow the government a month after an election. And don't kid yourself, that's what this is.
The evidence is quite clear in implicating the NDP and Bloc. Anything else is speculation. I guess only the conservatives get to be on an untouchable pedestal.
How is saying you can't state something as a fact without knowing putting another party on a pedestal. What does anything I've said about your supposed facts have to do with the conservatives in any way. Find something to support your facts, or don't call them facts. That has been my entire point.
I can't even look at Dion or Layton without wanting to punch them in the face. Those smug little expressions. Jackasses is what they are.
...then you look at Duceppe. He's just sitting there looking around the room like he's playing golf or something. Not a care in the world, since he knows he's going to get everything he asks for... and since he honestly doesn't give a rat's ass what happens to this country.
IMO, there should be some proof beyond a reasonable doubt before it should even enter into the conversation.
It was just an example. Sure the degree of repercussion is different but the point still stands.
I don't see what's wrong with speculating the possiblity as an opinion on a message board given some circumstantial evidence. It's me stating an opinion. It's completly different from convicting someone and saying it's an absolute fact based on that same circumstatial evidence.
Flarety constantly referring to the Mp's posing the same redudant "why haven't you done anything (read: thrown money away yet)" both from the NDP, Liberals, as "to the honoroable member of the seperatist coaltion party".
The Duceppe gets up there and tosses a glib word in here and there, but stays out of it.
Harper with a couple responses, then Layton gets up with that typical smirk and repeats himself about 5 times...speaking in French (pretty transparent if you ask me) for the first couple questions. Harper fires him down pretty quick and of course Layton trots out then his supposed trump card about the agreement signed back when. Of course, that agreement ws consultation if Parliment gets dissolved, not a "put us in power" but when has the facts stopped Layton from stretching truths and get in the way of a good rant.
Dion steps up and trys...and Harper saves his best for him, questioning his love of the Canada vs Quebec. Dion was getting noticeably worked up, mouth quivering, and reall, starting to make no sense. Harper saying that Dion doesn't have to hide behind parlimentry niceities and backroom deals, let the people decide. Loud cheering and applauding from the Conservatives.
Dion had a few stand up and clap for him, but with each answer or reponse, those numbers dwindled.
Harper continues, passionately but not out of control, that he's not going to hand over the keys of power to a group that Liberal, NDP and Bloc Voters didn't vote for 6 weeks ago, and disresepct their vote in a deomcratic country by letting some backroom deals happen that he's going to let the Canadian people decide. After another weak and disjointed Dion response, Harper continued, trotting out the "seperatist coaltion" term, that if he signs this document, he's making the worst decision in the history of the Liberal party. Finally, that no coaltion government ever has, or will his government start, cut backroom deals with a party that doesn't believe in this country.
Got very loud, very heated...but in addition to the passion that Harper shows in fighting and making his common sence stance clear as day, over the same tired argument hiding behind parlimentry rules that the other leaders are making, he comes out clearly as the strongest personality and firecest leader to run the country, based on his tone and presentation, if nothing else.
Layton was nagging on the same little things he always does and repeated himself, Harper only answered one of his and let the Fianance minister quiet down Layton (good, as I was about to put my fist through the TV) and with Dion, Haprer had him worked up and confused within seconds...it was like shooting fish in a barrell with Harper and I think everyone in the Commons knew it....to make Dion Prime Minister would be the largest mistake (after the Libs cutting a deal with the Bloc) and biggest farce of it all.
Funny enough, Duceppe, Layton and Dion all had on the same greenish brown striped ties...I guess that's what happens when you mix those 3 colors together?
Last edited by browna; 12-02-2008 at 01:21 PM.
The Following 22 Users Say Thank You to browna For This Useful Post:
How is saying you can't state something as a fact without knowing putting another party on a pedestal. What does anything I've said about your supposed facts have to do with the conservatives in any way. Find something to support your facts, or don't call them facts. That has been my entire point.
Ok I see your point.
I would speculate that the Liberals were in fact aware of this attempted coalition before the mini-budget and initially refused to join. When Harper decided to cut their lifeblood, they went ballistic and said screw it, we're not dealing with this anymore and joined this (inherently problematic) coalition. We can all blame whomever we want, but ultimately the cause and effect relationship is pretty clear. As well, it doesn't matter anymore to the Liberals that the provision is gone as they've shown their cards and the hands have been dealt. It's pretty much all in from here on out.
I don't have to read that to know that whatever option 10 is, it has to do with either getting rid of Harper or allowing the Coalition to plow through with without an election, or some form of bending over for a separatist/socialist agenda.
In other words, clicking that isn't worth my time or effort.
You've pretty much put yourself in Grain of Salt mode in this thread. (as I'm sure I have, as well)
