Quake3World

...and six counts of child molestation.

last time I filed some papers to earn the right to vote once again, the gvt threatened to cut my welfare by 50%..so no more voting for the man.

GONNAFISTYA wrote:...and six counts of child molestation.

..they never told me they were 12 years old cunts..how could I guess??

I only realized there was something really wrong when the blood began to pour from every hole..

lol

well it wasn't my fault though...I apologized to her during the ambulance ride to the hospital..

Duhard wrote:I only realized there was something really wrong when the blood began to pour from every hole..

She didn't tell me she was 3!

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:i think quebec should stay in canada but they should annex alberta. That would solve all of our problems.

The extremes would cancel out and form a normal canadian province. Queberta.

R00k wrote:She didn't tell me she was 3!

No shit..for a second I thought I was fucking her in the ear..but by the way she was moaning there was NO FUCKING WAY I was fucking her ear hahaha!

LOL

so anyway the leader of the conservatives wants to repeal gay marriage even though the supreme court declared the old laws unconstitutional. what a scuzzbucket and for so many reasons

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:so anyway the leader of the conservatives wants to repeal gay marriage even though the supreme court declared the old laws unconstitutional. what a scuzzbucket and for so many reasons

Yet they have 31% support, tied with the Liberals. It boggles the mind.

Fucking idiots, this may have been an argument before it was passed but now it's settled imo. Imagine these wingnuts revoking the marriage licenses of all those Canadians. Good platform to run on... if you're looking for a Liberal majority.

Tormentius wrote: Yet they have 31% support, tied with the Liberals. It boggles the mind.

Disturbing.

Massive Quasars wrote:Fucking idiots, this may have been an argument before it was passed but now it's settled imo. Imagine these wingnuts revoking the marriage licenses of all those Canadians. Good platform to run on... if you're looking for a Liberal majority.

Yep, I seriously doubt there are enough liberal/ndp/bloc leaning christians out there to try and appeal to with the anti gay marriage angle, and its not like your going to win conservative votes with this since you already have them.

Last election one of the ppl running was asked what he thought of gay marriage, he said that in 5 years it wont even be an issue anymore, nodody will care, and he was right. Shit, isnt the provincial leader of the Bloc in quebec openly gay? Was front page news in one of the national papers a week or so ago.

The more the conservatives tie themselves down with the christian right, the less likely they are to be anything more then second best.

jester, this country is full of lefties. Three of the four national parties are left leaning, the conservatives (no surprise) are the only conservatives. Then you have people like Puff and the rest who will vote Green.

The christians who voted for the "liberal/ndp/bloc" likely won't stomach the conservatives.

that's enough inflamed rhetoric for one night

/fin

Massive Quasars wrote:jester, this country is full of lefties. Three of the four national parties are left leaning, the conservatives (no surprise) are the only conservatives. Then you have people like Puff and the rest who will vote Green.

The christians who voted for the "liberal/ndp/bloc" likely won't stomach the conservatives.

No argument on it being a left leaning country, my only thoughts on the conservatives taking a stance against the gay marriage resolution, is that they think they can sway the christian moderates more to their side by being the group that is trying to 'save the sanctity of marriage.' sarcasm.

Dont think it will work, but thats the only justification I can see if they want to try and appeal to more people then they already do.

Massive Quasars wrote:

Tormentius wrote: Yet they have 31% support, tied with the Liberals. It boggles the mind.

Disturbing.

America Lite?

R00k wrote:

Massive Quasars wrote:

Tormentius wrote: Yet they have 31% support, tied with the Liberals. It boggles the mind.

Disturbing.

America Lite?

If the extreme right-wing quacks have their way...yes :icon8:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/39th_Canad ... l_election

Follow this page, it's updated quite regularly. Notice the Greens are at 5%, not that I care either way but some do and I thought I would point it out.

Wikipedia owns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_po ... on%2C_2006

Thanks for the link MQ.

Was browsing the various party sites, and spent some time reading the green party philosophies.

It seems that the people involved with the green party have actually dedicated some quality thought to what seems to be an enlightened approach to governance, if not the environment.

You mentioned earlier in this thread that it would destroy the canadian economy (or words to that effect).

In what sense do you mean this?

Jules, I was under the impression that the Greens would advocate socialist economic policy along with environmental protection.

From Wikipedia's page on the Greens:

The direction of the 2004 platform, while retaining similar ecological themes, shifted in other aspects from a radical-left to a centrist or even right-of-centre stance. An emphasis on a green tax shift which favoured reducing income and corporate taxes while increasing taxes on polluters and energy consumers created questions as to whether the Green Party was still on the left of the political spectrum, or was taking a more eco-capitalist approach.

Having read this, it turns out my belief may be dated. I'm quite pleased that they're turning to a sustainable approach of environmental protection, rather than straining the economy (or worse) to meet their environmental goals. Though the discussion on their policies is brief in the Wikipedia page, and my support of their reversal in position is not necessarily tacit support for the policies laid out on that webpage.

I'd also add that I have a tendency to speak in hyperbole in political threads, making sometimes specious intentionally inflammatory statements. I think it's apparent, but some may not pick up on it.

Since you're inquiring sincerely, I thought I'd qualify my posts in this thread and others.