# Canadian Tories



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Any of our Canadian readers following the latest stories of Harper's hypocrisy and lies?



------------------


----------



## AMVanquish (May 24, 2005)

Aren't you supposed to wait 100 days before lobbing grenades at a new government? Or is it so bad this time they don't deserve a honeymoon?

By the way, I know you guys have been discussing fixed election dates. I actually prefer your system to ours. I like the fact that a government can fall at anytime. It keeps the politicians more responsive to the people.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

These guys managed to blow it on day 1. After running a campaign based on how they were going to clean up Canadian politics and get rid of the cronyism they immediately indulged in both.

Harper,_ on the day his government was sworn in_, brought into his cabinet an MP who had been elected as a Liberal two weeks earlier. This MP has refused to resign his seat and refight it as a Tory. Additionally, Harper, who's platform says the Senate should be elected rather than the current system of appointment, _appoints _a high ranking Tory official so that he can bring this guy into his cabinet.

And now he refusing to accept any review of his conduct by the independent ethics commissioner.

I don't like the guy anyway but I would have given them a chance as the duly elected government. But the hypocrisy and arrogance is astounding and I hope this government falls as soon as possible.

------------------


----------



## AMVanquish (May 24, 2005)

Do parliamentary rules permit someone from an opposition party to sit on the cabinet? I'm just wondering whether it was absolutely necessary for Emerson to switch parties in order to keep the post, or if he could, in theory, sit as a Liberal. If so, would the situation be more acceptable? Harper's reasoning was that there was no representation in the cabinet from the three major metropolitan areas. Didn't he also appoint a non-MP to represent Montreal?


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

I think Emerson could have sat as a Liberal for a very short while - he would have had the whip withdrawn immediately and been booted out of th eparty shortly thereafter. Such arrangemenents are satisfactory in times of coalition government but I think would be most unusual in a single party government such as Harper formed.

Would that have been a more acceptable solution? Probably not - the voters of Vancouver Kingsway overwhelmingly rejected the Tories and Harper. What Emerson did in crossing the house is within the rules, strictly speaking, but to do so only a matter of weeks after standing for another party simply in order to maintain your cabinet position is repugnant. He should resign and run again in a by election as a Tory - and get hammered.

Harper appointed Michael Fournier, the Tory party treasurer I think, to the Senate to enable him to take up a cabinet post, an utter contradiction to the position Harper had taken in opposition and the elction campaign where he complained long and loud about Liberal cronyism (with some good reason too). Fournier has also stated that he won't run in the next by election, the traditional thing to do under the circumstances - after refusing to run in the last election also.

The reason Harper has no-one from Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver in his cabinet is that those three areas rejected his platform completely. I fail to see how gerrymandering his cabinet to represent those areas makes any sense when neither Emerson or Fournier do actually represent those areas.

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

Has the new government made any commitments to rebuilding the Canadian military? 

Karl


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

There have been certain commitments made to funding increases - remains to be seen as to whether those will be honoured.

But be aware that you are unlikely to see US style military build up (proportioned to Canada's size of course). Canada has made huge contibutions in the major military conflicts over the last century or so but has no tradition of maintaining a large standing military and is unlikely to go that route. You will see increased spending on transport capability and equipment upgrades but not many new troops.

And don't expect Canada to join any ill thought out American adventures abroad - passing on Vietnam and Iraq was not only the right thing to do, it was extremely popular.

I'm sure you will be able to find a few articles with Canadian military leaders complaining about resources - but it is a soldiers job to complain...

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

No need to take a jab at the US. Its not as if I mentioned the tens of thousands of Canadians who chose not to fight the Axis or the strong support for Vichy among the Quebecois.

I would rather see a Canada that has the ability to protect herself than a Canada that lacks sufficient military capability. Most Americans wish Canada well even if the feelings is not mutual.

Karl


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> GMAC,
> 
> ...


But neither do you mention the hundreds of thousands who did fight the Axis before the USA got involved.......

The point I was making was not an attempt to take a shot at the USA, merely pointing out that Canada has a pretty good record of choosing the right wars to fight, and maintains a proud record of performance in all of them.

Canada can look after itself quite well but thanks for the concern.

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

And what does Canada think we should do about Iran - especially after the regime murdered a Canadian citizen not so long ago. Tehran must tremble at the thought of Canadian military power brought to bear or another terse diplomatic note from Ottawa.........ok that was sarcastic. But really what do you guys think about Iran?

Karl


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

And now the Right Honourable Steven Herpes is being sued by his cook.

The fellow used to work for him at Stornoway, the official residence of the Leader of the Opposition. Steve-O promised to employ him at 24 Sussex, but instead fired him on election day. The cook is demanding restitution for that, plus money owed for work washing Steve's car and caring for his cat!

DocD


----------



## EL72 (May 25, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Canada can look after itself quite well but thanks for the concern.
> 
> ------------------


That's the funniest thing I have read today. We couldn't defend this country against the Salvation Army. With what? The couple of thousand guys in Afghanistan wearing jungle camo, driving non-armored pick-up trucks. Our three rusty old helicopters crash all the time and we buy bargain-basement used submarines from the brits that leak and catch fire.

The term "Canadian Military" has been an oxymoron for the past 25 years at least. That said, we can afford to not have a real army given that we free ride on the world's most powerful military power who happens to live next door. We do not even have to blindly follow them to Iraq or elsewhere as we do maintain an independent foreign policy. Let's not however, make it our national pastime to bash the Americans and their elected head of state.


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> And don't expect Canada to join any ill thought out American adventures abroad - passing on Vietnam and Iraq was not only the right thing to do, it was extremely popular.


Sounds like you are just regurgitating the same old leftist propaganda here unfortunately. For most of the 20th Century Canada packed a whallop of military strength. You will recall that Canada was a massive part of the D-day landings, and that we played a large role in WW1 and Korea as well. It was only in the 70's that our military began a decline, heightened by the election of the Liberals in the ealry 90's.

It ay also surprise you to know that Canada played a support role in the 1st gulf war, and that a Canadian General was responsible for much of the ground attack role in the current Iraq war. In fact, many Canadians have been killed and injured in Iraq, soldiers who are in the Canadian military, but on troop exchange programs wih the US forces.

Just because the Liberal government said something wasn't so, doesn't mean that was the case.

As far as the Emmerson thing goes, the Liberals did the same thing many times in their government, they only complain when it works against them.

Sour grapes is all it is.

Respectfully,

Jeansguy

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by EL72_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is funny you should refer to Canadians as "free riders". One of examples of a free rider I used for my Econ class was Canada. Canada has been able to maintain a ridiculously low spending level for defense, simply due to the presence of the US. Every time I hear Canadians harp about the US, I cringe. Those numerous critics live in la-la land when it comes to acknowledging the contributions the US makes to the peace, overall way of life, and prosperity Canada experiences.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> 
> As far as the Emmerson thing goes, the Liberals did the same thing many times in their government, they only complain when it works against them.
> 
> Sour grapes is all it is.


Kind of missing the point a little bit aren't you?

It was the Tories who said they _weren't_ going to do that sort of thing and that they were above all the Liberal shennaningans.

How long did that last? Oh, less than a day......

The stench of hypocrisy hangs over Harper's lame duck government and they will soon be gone, and he'll be the new Joe Clark.

------------------


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wow, quite the little right-wing cabal I seem to have attracted today!

How long before someone rolls out the old Soviet Canuckistan line? Or we get a few quotes from Mark Steyn?

I would have thought the Canadian Tories might have toned down their anti-Canadian rhetoric now that their boy is in charge. Its seem that the self-loathing America worshipping is a hard habit to break. You boys aren't from Alberta are you?

As for our friends to the south, cringe away old chap, just remember that when the real wars break out Canada tends to be there fighting a couple of years before the US decides to take the plunge.

------------------


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Wow, quite the little right-wing cabal I seem to have attracted today!
> 
> ...


This is hardly fair or productive. I understand many people from the east of Canada have a real vendetta against the USA and Western Canada, but I hardly think this is called for.

The fact is Canada is a parliamentary democracy, and the electorate votes not for the party, but for the individual, and that individual is free to switch parties as often as they may like without having to face an election. This cannot change without completely reconsituting the government.

I was upset about the Senatorial appointment as well, however it was said that he will be made to face an election soon. Time will tell on that one.

In the World Wars Canada would never have been involved as early as we were if it had not been for Britian getting invovled. Recall that even in WWII Canada was still basically an extension of the British Empire and did what we were told.

Lastly, you can bash on America all you want, but remmber that one of the reasons we are able to have such low defense spending is because the USA spends so much. In addition, it's very small minded. Remember that Canadians and Americans are basically the same people. Many of their citizens started out on one side of the border and moved across only becuase of jobs or land, and we really share the same culture and history.

It's just too bad that there are attitudes like this in Canada. Much of our economy is based on our exports to the US, and much of the US economy is based on the importation of goods and especially raw materials from Canada.

It's also very disrepectful to say that many of the conflicts the US gets involved in are not real 'wars'. Especially to those who fought and died in the service of their country.

I'll just finish off by saying that America is unique in the world in it's regard for freedom and Liberty. Remember that the statue of Liberty is not standing, she is walking away from America, to spread freedom throughout the world. It's symbolic of an attitude that many in Canada and elsewhere in the world have forgotten. Too often people see the justification for war in oil or money, without realizing that, while oil is important, many other things are too.

Respectfully,
Jeansguy.

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> 
> This is hardly fair or productive. I understand many people from the east of Canada have a real vendetta against the USA and Western Canada, but I hardly think this is called for.


Possibly - but since I live in BC I couldn't possibly comment.



> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> The fact is Canada is a parliamentary democracy, and the electorate votes not for the party, but for the individual, and that individual is free to switch parties as often as they may like without having to face an election. This cannot change without completely reconsituting the government.
> 
> I was upset about the Senatorial appointment as well, however it was said that he will be made to face an election soon. Time will tell on that one.


The point is not Canada's status as a Parliamentary democracy - the question is about the total and utter hypocrisy of Harper and the Tories.

They called Belinda Stronach a whore and a bimbo for crossing the floor. But when they do it, it's all is fair in love and war. I mean, at least Stronach had fallen out with Harper, Emerson had just finished saying he would make the Tory's life hell when he switched teams.

You are flat out wrong about the senatorial appointment. Fournier has made it clear he will not run until the next general election even if a local seat becomes vacant, breaching all convention in such situations. And Harper promised an elected senate - right, once he has appointed his cronies obviously.....

------------------


----------



## EL72 (May 25, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> The stench of hypocrisy hangs over Harper's lame duck government and they will soon be gone, and he'll be the new Joe Clark.
> 
> ------------------


Wishful thinking gmac. By the time the election rolls around, Emerson et al will be ancient history. Who do you think will be elected: Jack Layton? Or perhaps Belinda Stronach?

btw I am from Montreal and now live in Toronto - not Alberta.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by EL72_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Tories had one attraction - and one attraction only - that they weren't the Liberals. And they blew that on the first day.

The last time there was such an open field in a Liberal leadership race Trudeau emerged to become the greatest Canadian PM of the 20th century.

Canadians have already realised that the Tories are just as crooked as the Liberals, except they don't have Paul Martin to run the economy. Jim Flaherty? Ha!

------------------


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by EL72_
> 
> btw I am from Montreal and now live in Toronto - not Alberta.


You must be one lonely Tory in TO.......

------------------


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

Gmac sorry for calling you an easterner, lol

I actually harbour no resentment towards he big T.O., but its an easy mark.

FWIW, I'm from Saskatchewan, not Alberta. And of course, this is NDP land.

In truth I'm much more a libertarian than a conservative, however I find conservatism much closer to libertarian than liberalism.

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## daltx (Jan 19, 2006)

Jeansguy and EL72,

Thanks for showing us the other side of Canadians. I think gmac has been giving Canadians a bad name on this board. I am glad you are able to show that their are still those who appreciate the unique relationship that our two countries have and appreciate the United States' essential protection of Canada.

gmac, as for your declaration that Canada only gets involved in the "right wars," what makes you the authority on wars that are right and wars that are wrong? I am not sure if the war in Iraq will end up as a war that was worth the time and lives or a war that was not. I am sure that you are in no position to make that decision either.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> 
> Gmac sorry for calling you an easterner, lol
> 
> ...


No worries buddy, I get what you are saying. My disdain for T.O. is, I am sure, the equal of yours.

My position is that I was willing to give Harper a shot - no one denies the Liberals were corrupt - but he blew it in such short order that I find it very hard to give the man or his minority government any credit at all.

I may be proven wrong but nothing I have seen so far makes me think so,,,,,,,

------------------


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by daltx_
> 
> J
> gmac, as for your declaration that Canada only gets involved in the "right wars," what makes you the authority on wars that are right and wars that are wrong? I am not sure if the war in Iraq will end up as a war that was worth the time and lives or a war that was not. I am sure that you are in no position to make that decision either.


History - or at least the winners - will make that decision, not anonymous guys on a web board. I'm only stating my own position.

But I think most historians will agree that Canada was right to be involved in the fight against the Nazis from the start and was also right to not get involved in the Vietnam conflict.

The Great War was such a disastrous muddle that it would be hard to attribute credit to any nation for its part. But the Canadian forces won one of the most important victories of that war at Vimy Ridge, so credit where it is due.

We'll see how Iraq finishes but I believe I have made my position clear on that in other threads.

As for "the United States' essential protection of Canada", you'll have to define that a little more clearly.

------------------


----------



## daltx (Jan 19, 2006)

gmac,

I agree that it will be historians who decide, not you and I. Even historians will probably disagree.

As for my comment regarding the USA essentially protecting Canada, I was simply restating what your fellow Canadians had already said on the thread. That is that Canada is able to spend very little money on defense funding because of the fact that the United States spends so much. No nation would ever consider entering into a war with Canada because they realize that the it would be equivalent of entering into a war with the USA.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by daltx_
> 
> As for my comment regarding the USA essentially protecting Canada, I was simply restating what your fellow Canadians had already said on the thread. That is that Canada is able to spend very little money on defense funding because of the fact that the United States spends so much. No nation would ever consider entering into a war with Canada because they realize that the it would be equivalent of entering into a war with the USA.


Restating what they said doesn't make it right.

Your comments make it sound like there are a long line of nations just itching to invade Canada and would do so in a heartbeat if it weren't for the pesky USA protecting us.

I'm assuming you get how ludicrous that is.

Of course, the last nation to actually attempt an invasion of Canada was the USA.

------------------


----------



## daltx (Jan 19, 2006)

I am not trying to suggest there is a long line of nations ready to invade Canada, although maybe there should be, as Canada is a beautiful country that anyone would be proud to own.

Of course a restatement is not automatically a fact, however the idea that Canada is able to maintain such a small military as a result of its location is indeed a fact. It is very easy for Canadian politicians to sit back and criticize decisions made by US for British goverments about war, as they have no real fear that they will ever truly suffer from their involvement. Canadian troop contributions to wars these days are minimal at best. When people refer to "NATO forces" or "UN Peacekeepers," they are essentially referring to the American military.

My point is that it is all too easy for Canadanian politicians to criticize American or international decisions, as they know that Canadians will rarely have to lose their lives in conflict. Those losses will be mainly suffered by Americans, for the sake of the rest of the world.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> The last time there was such an open field in a Liberal leadership race Trudeau emerged to become the greatest Canadian PM of the 20th century.


This is a most telling statement. Our greatest PM, according to gmac, was a socialist that expanded the power of the Federal government at the cost of Provincial powers, fostered bi-lingualism (a most fractious policy), and founded Cite Libre, a party that felt the nation-state was outdated and government should be run at the international level i.e. one world. This is _NOT_ my opinion, but rather historical fact and can be found quite easily on the 'Net I'm sure.

Best regards.


----------



## AMVanquish (May 24, 2005)

I thought you guys were going to give us Alberta in exchange for Oregon, Minnesota and New England.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Wayfarer_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Greatest PM of the 20th century is what I said. John A was obviously the greatest ever.

I'm not sure of the reasons for your disdain for Trudeau, your post is a bit unclear. But he did bring home the constitution and get Canada out from under the BNA Act.

As for his socialism, sure..... Nothing wrong with some well enacted socialism.

What was your point?

------------------


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Greatest PM of the 20th century is what I said. John A was obviously the greatest ever.
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with socialism that a few well-placed rifles can't fix.

Trudeau wrecked Canada. We will pay for decades to come for his errors and arrogance.

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you can read my post and find me unclear, you're either being obdurate for the rhetoric value or simply find a one world socialist government acceptable. If the former, there's no points to be scored as you've not disagreed with me. If, as your post indicates, you have no problems with socialism, that would tend to be incongruent with someone, who one can assume, indulges in expensive clothing. Under one world socialism, we'll have the same sack clothe so the Party leaders can wear bespoke.

I do stand corrected however, you did specify 20th century and I missed that.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> 
> Nothing wrong with socialism that a few well-placed rifles can't fix.
> 
> Trudeau wrecked Canada. We will pay for decades to come for his errors and arrogance.


Trudeau wrecked Canada?

How so?

As for your rifles, exactly who are you placing them against? The electorate? The representatives of the people? Parliament? The Crown?

All sounds like fascism to me.

------------------


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Wayfarer_
> 
> If, as your post indicates, you have no problems with socialism, that would tend to be incongruent with someone, who one can assume, indulges in expensive clothing. Under one world socialism, we'll have the same sack clothe so the Party leaders can wear bespoke.


It does not appear that we have the same ideas about socialism. I find my political ideas perfectly congruent with my taste in clothing, and that does not include "sack clothe", whatever that may be.

------------------


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by daltx_
> When people refer to "NATO forces" or "UN Peacekeepers," they are essentially referring to the American military.


That is blatantly untrue. UN Peacekeeping, at least since the 50's, has mainly been done by poorer nations (the financial incentives are worth much more to them). You will get all the figures on the UN website (). Just a summary : as of January 2006, the US are contributing 370 troops to UN peacekeeping, France is contributing 586 and Bangladesh is contributing... 10,154 (total figure: 71,811); the second biggest contributor is Pakistan.

There are currently 7 NATO operations going on (from Afghanistan to Darfur). As far as I know, none of them have any significant American involvement.

I am not saying of course that the US do not intervene abroad but they tend to shun doing so as UN Peacekeepers (as do most other developed countries) or even as part of a NATO-led force (they usually choose to have their own seperate force, as is the case in Afghanistan rather than having American troops under a non-American HQ).


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by daltx_
> 
> My point is that it is all too easy for Canadanian politicians to criticize American or international decisions, as they know that Canadians will rarely have to lose their lives in conflict. Those losses will be mainly suffered by Americans, for the sake of the rest of the world.


If recent wars are any indication, those losses will be mainly suffered by local civilian populations (who have no say in the American or international decisions).


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Rich,

I am surprised! Your last statement was disingenuous at best. The vast majority of Iraqi civilian casaulties are caused by the insurgent terrorists and not by the US military. And lets not drag the old canard out - that Iraq would be a peaceful, violence free place if the US had never liberated Iraq. Sadaam's security service murdered 5-10 thousand people a year and his prisons and dungeons were overflowing. And does anyone really think that when Sadaam left this mortal coil Iraq would suddenly become Switzerland? The ethnic and religious tensions (at the core of the current problems) would have just as likely come unbound and Iraq would likely have collapsed into a more brutal civil war and been at the mercy of Iran and Syria. Let us blame the Bush administration's naivety or incompetence (take your pick) for not forseeing this development. 

Ultimately the success of Iraq (and I think a stable, nascent Iraqi democracy would qualify as a success) depends on the Iraqi people. There is the theory that says people deserve the government they have because ultimately at some level they have to acquiese to how they are governed.

Let us blame the terrorists of the insurgency for Iraq's current violence.

Karl

P.S. Apologies to GMAC for straying so far off topic. A thousand pardons!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> It does not appear that we have the same ideas about socialism.
> ------------------


I cannot vouch for your ideas re: socialism, but mine are the rather standard ones to be found either in action (to greater or lesser extent) in various countries or as defined by the political science academia. I shan't quibble with how you define socialism. I find the old motto of "If a man isn't a socialist by 20, he has no heart. If a man is still a socialist by 40, he has no common sense" to be very on target. I also find one can usually substitute "personal fortune" or "lucrative career" for "common sense" in the adage.

Warmest regards.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Rich,
> 
> I am surprised! Your last statement was disingenuous at best. The vast majority of Iraqi civilian casaulties are caused by the insurgent terrorists and not by the US military.


I'm sure more Iraqi civilians have been killed by US forces in Iraq (both Gulf wars) than by insurgents, and that those civilian casualties greatly exceed US casualties. No reliable figures on civilian casualties are ever available of course.

I'm not making any judgement here on the expediency of US intervention, just stating one of its effects. Civilians caught up in war are its forgotten victims, and this is particularly striking in Iraq. They also die "for the sake of the rest of the world".

We can say it's Saddam's fault if you like.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

None of this has much to do with the Canadian Conservative party, although Steve-O originally was in favour of following the US into Iraq, but our (then) PM Johnny Crouton declined. Later Steve backtracked, saying maybe it wasn't such a good idea. Lord knows what he believes now that he's the man.

It appears (on heresay, so far) that possible future Grit leader Micheal Ignatieff is in favour of the Iraq adventure and will present his reasons soon. That will be the political equivalent of copping a feel on an underage girl in public, which strongly suggests he knows nothing about politics...

DocD


----------



## zegnamtl (Apr 19, 2005)

I find the new government's policy towards the media alarming.
It would appear if Harper had his wish, 
the media would only be allowed to print what his office has approved with no questions.

This will prove fatal if he keeps on the current path,
his handlers are doing far more harm than good.


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> No reliable figures on civilian casualties are ever available of course.


Two reliable estimates exist. One only takes into account verified casualties appeared in the international press and is, therefore, a gross understatement. The other is a mortality study featured in _The Lancet_ (one of the world's foremost medical journal), the problem being that it does not discriminate between violent death and death because of a degraded health infrastructure and such.

I will not go into details, since this is not the main subject of discussion here.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Zegnamtl,

You are in Montreal, what do you think of the Fourtier appointment?

My own view is that it is hypocrisy of the highest order to campaign on a clean-up-Ottawa ticket and then, on the first day of your new government, appoint a party hack to the Senate so he can then take up a Cabinet post.

Does Montreal need Cabinet representation that badly?

From our side of the country, Vancouver certainly does not need representation from the likes of Emerson.

------------------


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

Gmac is just talking tough because he carries a dagger in his sock. Any guy tough enough to wear a skirt in the Canadian winter while carrying a dagger is a guy I ain't messin with...

(modifying my "I shall not get involved on Interchange" policy with an exception for instances where I can make a wisecrack without pissing off myself or others)

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Call it a "skirt" again and we'll be messin' whether you like it or not.......

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

What????? You would take unilateral action? Surely you should consult with the UN first.

Karl


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> 
> Gmac is just talking tough because he carries a dagger in his sock. Any guy tough enough to wear a skirt in the Canadian winter while carrying a dagger is a guy I ain't messin with...


Gmac carries a sgian dubh? I guess he can't be all bad. If I hear he's a fan of, or heaven forbid, plays, piobaireachd, I'm not sure how I'll handle knowing he's a socialist!


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Karl, defending oneself against a direct attack does not require approval from anyone else. And calling a kilt a skirt is a full frontal assault.

If, however, there were only rumours about Carlo calling the kilt a skirt, spread by men of extremely dubious credibility and picked up by those spoiling to see me and Carlo "messin'", while Carlo himself denied it and teams of investigators were unable to find any evidence to back up these rumours, then it would be most impolitic of me to start the messin' without at least reviewing the facts of the case with some of the other posters here and reaching some concensus.

Otherwise it would probably be seen by other posters as a totally unjustified attack by me.

Geddit?

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

As Sgt. Hulka once said "Lighten up, Francis."


Karl


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Wayfarer_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't you believe it.

Great fan of pipe music but no expert and certainly not a player.

------------------


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Great fan of pipe music but no expert and certainly not a player.


I think you said you were in BC? I just purchased SFU's latest CD, "On Home Ground". If you like the music, a great CD.

Warmest regards.


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Call it a "skirt" again and we'll be messin' whether you like it or not.......


LOL, damn... I forgot how damned bloodthirsty those Canadians are. Please forgive me, amongst the gentle and peaceful citizens of Texas such a comment would be the cause of laughter rather than a call for Jihad.

So, when wearing a KILT, do you prefer pumps or slingbacks?

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> 
> So, when wearing a KILT, do you prefer pumps or slingbacks?


LOl.

Good thing we are al friends here 

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> 
> LOL, damn... I forgot how damned bloodthirsty those Canadians are. Please forgive me, amongst the gentle and peaceful citizens of Texas such a comment would be the cause of laughter rather than a call for Jihad.
> 
> So, when wearing a KILT, do you prefer pumps or slingbacks?


Either will do just fine for kicking your ass if there are any more comments of that nature.......

------------------


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

What'd I say? Gmac, you misunderstand me. I think it is great that you can unabashedly prance about town wearing Mommy's things and I for one am willing to stand up and fight for your right to express your lifestyle choice in any manner you choose.

Wow, some people... you stand up for them and try to be understanding and open and what do they do? Respond with violence and aggression.

So sad, no wonder we have wars in the world, it's those illegal immigrants from Canada giving the US a bad reputation... stealing our jobs, inciting violence... damned snowbacks.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> 
> What'd I say? Gmac, you misunderstand me. I think it is great that you can unabashedly prance about town wearing Mommy's things and I for one am willing to stand up and fight for your right to express your lifestyle choice in any manner you choose.
> 
> ...


Texan or kilt-wearer? You decide. [)]


----------



## Preston (Aug 8, 2003)

You must've missed the part of this thread that was fun. Why bring ugly accusations like BUSH LIED! to a light-hearted banter about kilts? In the first place, it isn't true. In the second place, it isn't funny.

And for the record, I think guys in kilts are studs. Wish I could get by with it, but I don't think I could pull it off. Then again, I don't guess anyone really can without clan affiliation of some sort.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

You constantly call Bush stupid and take incessant cheap shots at the US but to my knowledge no one has threatened to kick your ass. But somebody calls a kilt a skirt and you threaten violence. Don't be such a hoser. Again heed the words of Sgt. Hulka and "Ligthen up, Francis."

Karl


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Preston_
> 
> And for the record, I think guys in kilts are studs. Wish I could get by with it, but I don't think I could pull it off. Then again, I don't guess anyone really can without clan affiliation of some sort.


If you go to Scotland you'll see that no-one wears kilts. So wear the kilt; they should be grateful that someone wants to.

DocD


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by Doctor Damage_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


While I agree one will not see office clerks in kilts even in Scotland, I can assure you last year when I was in Glasgow for the 2005 World Pipe contests, there were indeed thousands of Scots wearing kilts. What can one draw from this? I would dare say that while not every day wear, they are still worn when fitting (and not just at piping events).

Warmest regards.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> GMAC,
> 
> ...


Karl, you take yourself _wayyyy _too seriously.

Carlo and I were exchanging emails last night chuckling about our next insults and wondering how anyone could ever take any of this kind of stuff seriously. I was the straight man to his flame-thrower.

For the record, nobody is geting their ass kicked.

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GMAC,

Maybe I should take Sgt. Hulka's advice then.

Karl


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

That's the spirit, I patronized him, he threatened me... we didn't have anything to eat but I thought it went pretty well...
(name that movie)

Nice to see we can be irreverent around here in a good natured way from time to time.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> 
> That's the spirit, I patronized him, he threatened me... we didn't have anything to eat but I thought it went pretty well...
> (name that movie)


OK, you got me - what movie is that from?

------------------


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

The American President

Many of the same creative people who did/do The West Wing.

Although it is a liberal democrat administration and Republicans are portrayed somewhat unflatteringly it is on my top 3 movies list. Like West Wing, every detail from the cinematography to the score is absolutely masterful.

Comes from the scene when Michael Douglas is explaining his oval office meeting with Annette Benning to his chief of staff (Martin Sheen). Rent it, buy it, steal it but watch it.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## AMVanquish (May 24, 2005)

Carlo,

Maybe you should finance a movie portraying a Republican President, and all his causes shown to be noble and just. It's about time we had some balance from the Martin Sheen/Jeff Bridges/John Travolta portrayals.


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

AMV... I swore I would not get sucked into politics because these days it is so hard to do so in a civil manner.

...and right now I could only spare a few grand and what kind of film would we get, something with Michael Moore's production quality? At least that movie was well made and didn't bang the drum so loudly as to distract.

I actually like the way West Wing handles it. I think they hire republicans and ask them what they would say. The good and bad and utter hypocrisy of all sides comes out.

Scene with Donna Moss and her Republican lawyer boyfriend 
"why are you a Republican?"
"Because I hate poor people... they are just so, so... poor! ...and then he actually goes on to explain what he believes and why.

Ditto the little blonde they brought in to advise from the 'dark side' ...she was the smartest one in the room usually and gave Sam a wedgie on national TV more or less.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

I enjoyed The American President - I like Michael Douglas and he has done some great movies over the years but doesn't seem to get that much credit.

I believe The American President was also the inspiration behind Spin City with the Michael J Fox character.

I never got into the West Wing and it seems a bit anachronistic now - its been a long time since Clinton was in the Whitehouse....

------------------


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

gmac - get season 1 on dvd and start watching, it has nothing to do with the Clinton administration. The president doesn't even f...

Ok, I promised not to get sucked into politic fights on this forum...

It could be anywhere, anytime. The dialogue is the best I've seen - ever. If you rent it and aren't hooked by the third episode you can send a skir... kilt and Jill will take pics and post them. Pumps too.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Wayfarer_
> 
> While I agree one will not see office clerks in kilts even in Scotland, I can assure you last year when I was in Glasgow for the 2005 World Pipe contests, there were indeed thousands of Scots wearing kilts. What can one draw from this? I would dare say that while not every day wear, they are still worn when fitting (and not just at piping events).


Yeah, sorry. I was just focused on the streets. Sometimes I think you've got a better chance of seeing a kilt on any given day in Toronto or NYC than in Scotland. At the Games there must a spectacular showing.

DocD


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

For those of us not of Scots background, is there a site somewhere that names and shows all the different bits and bobs of the full kilt outfit?

Cheers


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> For those of us not of Scots background, is there a site somewhere that names and shows all the different bits and bobs of the full kilt outfit?


Here's the registry of all tartans:


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> For those of us not of Scots background, is there a site somewhere that names and shows all the different bits and bobs of the full kilt outfit?
> 
> Cheers


Have a look here:

For a daytime wedding I would tend to go with the semi-formalwear which is the Argyll jacket. I wear a belt rather than a waistcoat and would tend toward a silver silk tie as opposed to the woollen tie they suggest.

However, at most weddings you will see all of those outfits plus many combinations of the different elements

------------------


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

OK, GMAC. You owe me one.

Here's *Charles Henry McFrank * in a kilt...

​
...and pumps, of course.


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

....and that's when I killed her, your honor.

www.carlofranco.com
Handmade Seven Fold Ties


----------



## Badrabbit (Nov 18, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by CarloFranco_
> Ditto the little blonde they brought in to advise from the 'dark side' ...she was the smartest one in the room usually and gave Sam a wedgie on national TV more or less.
> 
> www.carlofranco.com
> Handmade Seven Fold Ties


You talking about Emily Procter. I love that little hottie. You really can't beat a smart blonde with a sweet NC accent. Man I love southern women (which is a good thing since there aren't a whole lot of yankee chicks where I live).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women thrive on novelty and are easy meat for the commerce of fashion. Men prefer old pipes and torn jackets. 
Anthony Burgess


----------



## Badrabbit (Nov 18, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Jill_
> 
> OK, GMAC. You owe me one.
> 
> ...


They may take Chuck's skirt but they can never take his FREEDOMMMMM!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women thrive on novelty and are easy meat for the commerce of fashion. Men prefer old pipes and torn jackets. 
Anthony Burgess


----------



## ice (Sep 2, 2005)

Crossing the floor is an old Canadian parlimentary tradition. MPs are elected as individuals, not as parties - until a few elections ago the parties didn't even appear on the ballot. 

They are free to change parties whenever they want, and in the past used to do so frequently. Even Trudeau started with the NDP. MPs are supposed to represent their constituents, not a party.

Harper also was following Canadian tradition by adding regional representation for a major Canadian city that didn't elect any Conservatives. He had to bring in a senator for Montreal. 

Remember, under Canadian parlimentary rules cabinet members don't even have to be elected. Harper can appoint whomever he wants.

Partisan politics are more a US thing than Canadian, so this shouldn't be an issue to Canadians.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Yes, but...the parliamentary system is based as much around 'traditions' as it is 'rules', so in my view crossing the floor about 10 seconds after getting elected is a violation of the spirit of parliament, if not a violation of the rules.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Quite.

Nobody has said there was any breach of the rules. There was, however, a massive breach of trust by David Emerson of the voters of his riding, and by Stephen Harper of the voters of Canada.

His empty promises about cleaning up government and his paranoid delusions about the liberal press, liberal judges and the liberal civil service should combine to see him turfed out of office quickstyle.

------------------


----------



## EL72 (May 25, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> His empty promises about cleaning up government and his paranoid delusions about the liberal press, liberal judges and the liberal civil service should combine to see him turfed out of office quickstyle.


How does that Supertramp song go: Dreeeeamer....nothing but a dreamer...

Even in your own province of BC, Harper's approval ratings are way up according to the latest polls, proving you are among the minority of disgruntled leftists who cling to the Emerson affair to fuel their dreams of seeing Canada return to the tax and spend liberal days.

https://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=40bc8a42-eb4c-488d-bcec-c576a99eb49d

I know it's hard to admit but Harper is here to stay. The next government will be a majority with another 25 seats in Quebec


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

You may recall that it was the Liberals who fixed the fiscal disaster left by Mulroney and his band of incompetents.

Harper may have seen a slight honeymoon boost following his disastrous beginning but the combination of his hypocrisy, daft policies and horrible personality will see him spiralling back to the opposition benches shortly.

Spring 2007 election. Liberal landslide. He'll only get that long because nobody wants to force another election too soon.

How do you think Emerson will make out in Vancouver Kingsway? Maybe Harper will just appoint him to the Senate after his inevitable humiliation? Because he will run in that riding again, won't he? Cause he's all about representing his people, right?

Ha!

------------------


----------



## EL72 (May 25, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Spring 2007 election. Liberal landslide.


I won't burst your bubble gmac. I understand defense mechanisms are hard to break free from when our view of the world is so inconsistent with reality. Let's talk again next year. Hopefully, we'll be able to revive this thread and ease you gently into the real world.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by EL72_
> 
> ...the tax and spend Liberal days.


That's no less partisan than gmac's statements. The cold hard reality is that Canada was the only G8 nation in the black as recently as Martin's government. I don't know if that has changed since the election, but hopefully Harper will keep the tiller steady. It's too early to tell though, and his obsession with controlling communications is not a happy development (it's a bit early in his government for the massive paranoia to set in...).


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Doctor Damage_
> The cold hard reality is that Canada was the only G8 nation in the black as recently as Martin's government. I don't know if that has changed since the election, but hopefully Harper will keep the tiller steady.


Given the recent track record of conservatives on both sides of the US-Canadian border of slashing taxes and then spending like drunken sailors, I think we can safely assume that Canada will see a return to enormous Mulroney/Bush/Reagan style deficits if Harper is given long enough to do any real damage.



> quote:_Originally posted by Doctor Damage_
> It's too early to tell though, and his obsession with controlling communications is not a happy development (it's a bit early in his government for the massive paranoia to set in...).


Oh, he has been massively paranoid since well before his election. Go back and check his comments about ring fencing Alberta for evidence of that.

------------------


----------

