UN authorizes `all necessary measures' in Libya

[Wezil]

Before he was leader of the Opposition Asher. Back when he was with NCC and talking about "firewalls" around Alberta...

[Wezil]

Harper was long and loud against deficit spending.

[Asher]

The NCC is essentially being in the position of being the opposition. Whatever the opposition says, whatever advocacy groups say, they're always bull****. Never, ever pay attention to them.

The important thing is what they do when they actually have input.

[Hauldren Collider]

Politics dictate what the opposition says. You know very well Harper couldn't stand up as leader of the opposition and say "I think the prime minister is doing the right thing!"

That's funny, because there have been several times when for instance Speaker Boehner or Senator McConnell have said that they agree with President Obama on a particular policy. Maybe that's a Westminster thing?

[Wezil]

You DanS'd me.

The NCC is essentially being in the position of being the opposition. Whatever the opposition says, whatever advocacy groups say, they're always bull****. Never, ever pay attention to them.

That's pretty lame.

The important thing is what they do when they actually have input.

What? Like the opposite of what you said was the best thing to do (backed up with an Economics degree)?


It's good that you are single issue as this is something the Conservatives are more likely than others to go your way on. Aside from when Harper puts on his populist hat the Conservatives should have very few things for you to agree with.

[Asher]

What? like the opposite of what you said was the best thing to do (backed up with an Economics degree)?

As I said, it is beyond me why you would pay any attention at all to what opposition blowhards ever say.

It's good that you are single issue as this is something the Conservatives are more likely than others to go your way on. Aside from when Harper puts on his populist hat the Conservatives should have very few things for you to agree with.

Like what? Most of the things the Tories do I don't give a crap about. Keep my taxes low, don't interfere with the Alberta economy, don't take away my rights, and I'm a happy camper.

[Wezil]

That's funny, because there have been several times when for instance Speaker Boehner or Senator McConnell have said that they agree with President Obama on a particular policy. Maybe that's a Westminster thing?

Meh. Asher exaggerates.

Obviously there is agreement on occasion but for the most part they try to distinguish themselves. Sometimes you look stupid doing it (as with the LIberals recently re - arena funding).

[Asher]

Meh. Asher exaggerates.

Obviously there is agreement on occasion but for the most part they try to distinguish themselves. Sometimes you look stupid doing it (as with the LIberals recently re - arena funding).

I don't exaggerate. In CanPol, the opposition parties simply don't show up for a vote if they would have voted with the ruling party. It looks bad in the next election, "You voted X % of the time with the evil Conservatives!!!! YOU ARE ALSO EVIL"

It's an exception, not the rule, for the opposition and ruling party to agree formally. Can you think of one instance where Ignatieff said the Tories were doing the right thing, Wezil?

[Wezil]

As I said, it is beyond me why you would pay any attention at all to what opposition blowhards ever say.

Once again, NCC is not "opposition" and to continue saying it is disingenuous at best.

It's not a matter of me paying attention, it is a question of their credibility. You pointed to the man's Degree as a qualification for the job and I demonstrated that his degree is worthless as he doesn't believe in the policies he himself espoused. Colossal fail on the credibility measure.

Like what? Most of the things the Tories do I don't give a crap about. Keep my taxes low, don't interfere with the Alberta economy, don't take away my rights, and I'm a happy camper.

You've already conceded you don't follow these issues so why should I entertain a discussion with you on them? Get back to me on it.

[Wezil]

I don't exaggerate. In CanPol, the opposition parties simply don't show up for a vote if they would have voted with the ruling party. It looks bad in the next election, "You voted X % of the time with the evil Conservatives!!!! YOU ARE ALSO EVIL"

It's an exception, not the rule, for the opposition and ruling party to agree formally. Can you think of one instance where Ignatieff said the Tories were doing the right thing, Wezil?

Oh Christ Asher. I was being generous to you and you paint yourself back into the corner. :sad:

Afghanistan.

[Asher]

Once again, NCC is not "opposition" and to continue saying it is disingenuous at best.

It's an advocacy group of very right-wing people, and Harper was the leader of it during a time of Liberal rule. They are not THE "Opposition" formally, but they are quite obviously a group in opposition to a Liberal government.

It's not a matter of me paying attention, it is a question of their credibility. You pointed to the man's Degree as a qualification for the job and I demonstrated that his degree is worthless as he doesn't believe in the policies he himself espoused. Colossal fail on the credibility measure.

I'm not going to say this again because it's getting boring. What talking heads and politicians say as members of an opposition group, when it is in their interest to get the ruling party out of power, is always directed at trying to discredit the party rather than say what they actually think the right thing to do is.

When Harper became PM, he did what he actually thought the right thing to do was, rather than make knee-jerk political hay out of it like he had done prior. I don't understand why you are even bothering arguing about his comments before he became PM...what he did as PM is important.

You've already conceded you don't follow these issues so why should I entertain a discussion with you on them? Get back to me on it.

I don't follow because there's nothing to follow.

[Asher]

Oh Christ Asher. I was being generous to you and you paint yourself back into the corner. :sad:

Afghanistan.

You mean the topic of endless months of vitriolic parliamentary debate? Interesting way of saying they agree...

If you're referring to the simple fact of pulling out of Afghanistan, considering both parties committed to that BEFORE the government was even elected, it doesn't really count. Again, that's an obvious exception. Even then, didn't they disagree on timeline?

For everything else to do with Afghanistan, the Liberals most certainly did not agree with the Tories. The whole Khadr thing, for example.

[Wezil]

You should be man enough to concede the point. This issue is one in which the Liberal Opposition supported the Government in the House. This disproves your statement that they "never" agree (which I said was an exaggeration).

Man up.

[Asher]

Another example is the JSF program. The Liberals initiated it, committed Canada to it, then now that the Tory government pulled the trigger on the purchase they're up in arms over it...

[Asher]

You should be man enough to concede the point. This issue is one in which the Liberal Opposition supported the Government in the House. This disproves your statement that they "never" agree (which I said was an exaggeration).

Man up.

I was speaking in general terms, and further went on to say the couple of examples this has happened are exceptions, not the rule. All of which have extenuating circumstances -- like for Afghanistan, both committed to it pre-election and they STILL managed to bicker about it extensively as they argued about HOW it should be done.