• batb

    35 of 98 comments are terry1's. That's a lot of hot air.

  • Beer and Popcorn

    The conservative ads are facts as well – I guess that's why they hurt so much and you and the MSM are fighting them so hard eh Terri?!

  • Liz J

    What the hell are you ragging on about ?

    Judging by the frenzied retorts you keep your little fingers busy clicking out you have it right with the word hysterical, that's exactly what you are.

  • terry1

    batb….it simply takes that may posts to deflate the tory egos here. My ego says Harper must go and so do about 80% of other Canadians and 90% of Quebeckers.
    .

  • terry1

    Liz J Hysterical..take a valium and relax. Good liberal governance is coming your way.

    I think you should explore what is “Ragging” here. Hysteria is a form of ragging. LOL

  • terry1

    Here is the best fact for today:

    Harper had risen to the post of justice-of-the-peace by the time a judicial enquiry found him guilty of, as one historian put it, “violent and oppressive measures” – vindictive to a point beyond all reason.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/this-country/

  • Beer and Popcorn

    Terri – are you also a Canadian of convienience? You seem to be taking this pretty seriously?!

  • terry1

    Who is Terri? I see terry1 here and that's all

  • Omanator

    I need some help here. Did I see an interview of Iggy by an American TV station in which he made some rather disparaging remarks about Canada.? Does any one have a copy of that ?

  • Omanator

    Gayle, that is still less than the Liberals stole from the Canadian people.

  • Omanator

    Terry What did Judge Gomery have to say about your boy Warren? Questionable activities?

  • terry1

    More important is what the current inquiry will say about a tory PM taking cash in hotel rooms.

  • Joe Smith

    Anyone who admits they don’t vote is a fucking idiot. Go away.

  • Gabby in QC

    “Brian Mulroney became Prime Minister without ever sitting as an MP first, did he not?”

    No, actually Brian Mulroney was first elected in a 1983 by-election in Elmer Mackay's riding, vacated in his favour. However, he had been very active both in federal and provincial politics beginning in his university days. He gained a great deal of experience organizing campaigns and so on, so he indeed paid his dues.

    We'll have to continue disagreeing on whether Ignatieff is a suitable candidate, though. I’m afraid his having a big enough ego is not a sufficiently convincing argument for me.

  • Gayle

    I am sorry, but I beg to differ (from Wiki):

    “Mulroney was elected party leader on June 11, 1983, beating Clark on the fourth ballot. He attracted broad support from the many factions of the party and especially from representatives of his native Quebec. Two months later, Mulroney entered Parliament as the MP for Central Nova in Nova Scotia, winning a by-election in what was then considered a safe Tory seat after Elmer MacKay stood down in his favour.”

    I notice that you are, yet again, (deliberately?) mischaracterizing my arguments. Of course I never said that having a big ego qualifies Ignatieff – rather I pointed out that ALL people who have been Prime Minister have had huge egos, and thus the fact Ignatieff is egotistical hardly disqualifies him for the job.

    I do like it when we are polite, but perhaps you could do me the courtesy of responding to what I actually said.

    Thanks

  • Phil

    The Conservatives ran an operating surplus; the deficit you are talking about was interest on Pierre Trudeau’s debts, calculated at the usurious interest rates he left behind him.

    Chretien did the right thing. Like his hotel deal, Adscam, APEC summit, the billion-dollar boondoggle, the firearms registry (why is the cost benefit analysis a cabinet secret?), government contracts for no work, I could go on and on.

    But don’t let the truth get in the way of your spin.

  • Gabby in QC

    Sorry for the repetition, but it's necessary.
    You said: “Brian Mulroney became Prime Minister without ever sitting as an MP first, did he not?”

    And I said not quite. Let's review the chronology.
    1. Brian Mulroney became leader of the PCs in June 1983, as you rightly pointed out.
    2. Two months later, i.e. sometime in August 1983, Mulroney won the Central Nova by-election, thus becoming an MP.
    3. The next federal election was held on September 4, 1984. That is when Brian Mulroney became PM. So he sat as an MP for some 13 months prior to becoming PM.

    I.e, Brian Mulroney did not become “Prime Minister without ever sitting as an MP first” as you stated.

    And Gayle, please get over your complex that people – in this case, me – are trying to twist your words. You said something which was inaccurate, and I corrected your inaccuracy, that's all.

    As for the ego thing, it would help if you could discern a little mild sarcasm now and then. I know you did not state “Ignatieff has a big ego therefore he’s good PM potential.”
    I simply responded to your general premise that ALL PMs have had big egos, reducing it from the general (all PMs) to the particular (Ignatieff). IMO, big ego or not, he’s still not prime ministerial material because of what I’ve already stated in previous comments.

    The hour is late here in QC, so we’ll have to argue another day.

    Maybe Stephen will one day see the light and change the format from these dreadful threaded conversations, where the space for replies keeps getting narrower and narrower!

  • terry1

    I love headlines like these:

    “Grits figure campaign will put Harper on pogey”

    Don Martin's column

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/fp/Grits+

  • Gabby in QC

    Once again, Terry1, it would be wise to read beyond headlines:
    Don Martin:
    “It's an insanely generous nanny-state concept. …
    Price tag for this benefits bonanza, if ever implemented: $1 billion, maybe more.
    But hard times and ease of understanding may turn this imprudent policy into shrewd election politics. …
    … crafting a one-size-fits-all benefits structure has a simplistic appeal.
    But just 360 hours to qualify? For a benefit payment period that's just shy of a year? Come on, that's a bit rich, even for Liberals.
    … there are many better ways to reform the system, starting with the Conservatives' re-announced $500-million to stretch benefits for long-term workers … “

  • Alex

    These statistics are arbitrary garbage. First off, the Tories are back up in the recent polls to 35%. Which means 65% (not 80!) of Canadians don't have the Conservatives as their first choice. But you know what that means? Even more Canadians don't have the Liberals, NDP, Bloc, or Greens as their first choice. Second, using Quebec seems pretty arbitrary too when you consider that the Conservatives are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out in front in the four western provinces while the Liberals are way behind.

    Not too sure what you're getting at other than proving you are completely full of it. There are a lot of notable Liberal supporters that I can at least respect in a debating forum… you are not one of them, especially as your “evidence” is so easily refuted.

  • terry1

    Alex, First of all percentages don't equate to actual numbers of people. They are modelled after ridings and population segments in the various regions of the country. The Quebec poll is very accurate because it polled 1003 people in Quebec only with a very small margin of error and there is more than one poll to concur with those results. The federal one has over a 6% margin of error in each province/region and several other polls still have the Libs ahead.

    Refuting evidence is one thing..talking out of your southern brain is another issue.

  • east of eden

    Nice channel change, Theresa.

  • Gayle

    Fair enough. I should have said he became leader of the party without having sat as an MP first – since he refused to run as an MP after he lost the leadership race to Joe Clark. My point is the same though.

    As for the word twisting, I was referring to the ego comment, not Mulroney.

  • Beer and Popcorn

    It must be a challenge Terri to try and put a positive spin on poll results that are basically unchanged from the disasterous showing that the Liberals had under Dion.

    It also must be tough when you see the mid 40's leadership numbers that Harper has (versus the same low 30's for Ignatieff) .

    You are right – the numbers don't lie, but Liberals usually do in my experience.

  • terry1

    Your welcome Eve

  • terry1

    whine and cheese……
    35% on average for the libs is higher than last last election but Harpercrites average of around 32% is much lower than October.

    Harpercite is not anywhere near the high 40's in popularity…how about low teens as a more exact number.

  • terry1

    Phil, you are another angry tory who likes to use the big lie. Check your statistics world wide in Trudeau's time…our debt and deficits were lower than almost all otyher western countries with high birth rates and baby boomers growing up. Trudeau put money into infrastructure to support the fast population growth and even found time to free us from the British crown among things he did.

    Mulroney's numbers were much worse than his peers in other countries…..so go peddle your lies to other ignorant believers. Many of us do know the facts and call your stuff BS.
    Mulroney finished off his kleptocracy by taking cash in a hotel room, from a known slug, while still in power.

    Chretien and Martin put the country's finances on a very solid footing only to see the latest tory kleptomaniac rip us all off again.

    Hows that for real facts.

  • Richard

    Here's your real fact of the day. Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty have turned a $19B surplus into a $50B deficit. That's a turnaround of $69 billion dollars.

    You Tory folks keep hashing your canards, it's great to see that you've got your priorities straight.

  • Bocanut

    What do you care?
    You claim not to be a supporter of the Liberals ,NDP or Bloc.
    But yet you troll around political sites desperately seeking attention.

  • Richard

    Here's your real fact of the day. Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty have turned a $19B surplus into a $50B deficit. That's a turnaround of $69 billion dollars.

    You Tory folks keep hashing your canards, it's great to see that you've got your priorities straight.

  • Bocanut

    What do you care?
    You claim not to be a supporter of the Liberals ,NDP or Bloc.
    But yet you troll around political sites desperately seeking attention.