What American's Ought to Know About Canada, But Don't

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


And I agree with you. I don't vote for rubber stamps. Neither should anybody else. But I don't want to tell people that they can't.

The issue is the leader saying she is outcast, not the people.

[KrazyHorse]

I'm against much of the hate speech legislation we have, BTW. For the same reason...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


It's important, sure. But individual freedoms are inviolable except in extreme situations.

And Parrish's freedoms would be some of those, wouldn't they?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


The issue is the leader saying she is outcast, not the people.

The people voted for the MPs. The MPs voted for the leader. The people knew what the rules of the Liberal club were.

Game, Set, Match

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
You can say it. It is up to others whether they beleive you or not.

Jon Miller

Try it on a job application. You'll be committing fraud.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


And Parrish's freedoms would be some of those, wouldn't they?

Parrish's freedom to have other people continue to let her use their name?



Must be in a part of the Charter I skipped...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


The people voted for the MPs. The MPs voted for the leader. The people knew what the rules of the Liberal club were.

Game, Set, Match

Bull****. The party voted for the leader. The leader became PM. The PM then subverts the MPs to his or her own program.

The people's choices matter very little in that equation, and that's the problem.

[KrazyHorse]

The party voted for the leader. The leader became PM.

You skipped a step...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Parrish's freedom to have other people continue to let her use their name?



Must be in a part of the Charter I skipped...

Maybe the part you skipped was not worshipping at the feet of a dictator?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

The party voted for the leader. The leader became PM.

You skipped a step...

No, I didn't. As was the case for several PMs of Canada.

[KrazyHorse]

Nice hyperbole. An astonishing lack of substance, though...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


No, I didn't. As was the case for several PMs of Canada.

Yes you did. 2000 and 2004. The PM isn't PM if his caucus doesn't support him. The caucus isn't in Commons unless the people vote for them.

[KrazyHorse]

In other words, you vote for your MP and you're stuck with what choices he makes. Including who he supports for the office of PM.

[Tingkai]

Excellent work gentlemen!

We don't want the Americans to learn too much about Canada and your discussion about Canadian politics will definitely glaze over their eyes.

[notyoueither]

The MP's don't get to run under the party banner if the leader does not sign their nomination papers.

And so, we are right back at the basis of the problem.

Your move.