Sunday, April 25, 2010

NDP Feeling Heat Over Gun Registry?

As Imp notices, Jack Layton is no longer "ruling out" whipping the New Democrat caucus over the final vote on Bill C-391. Hardly definitive language, but encouraging. Now that the NDP no longer has dissident Liberal MPs to hide behind, the hot potato lands in their lap, and I think they will look awful (at least to the progressive voters they share with the Libs.) if they allow Harper and Co. to pass this measure.

Which is why I think Iggy's laying the discipline on his own gang is good politics, even if the registry is repealed in the end. And even if you're a gun registry opponent that otherwise supports the LPoC: I mean, personal feelings aside, why would you not want somebody else to take the blame for its demise?


Skinny Dipper said...

One problem the NDP has is its distribution of seats. The party has quite a few seats in northern Ontario. Lots of hunters live there and voted NDP in the last election.

Kyle H. said...

I have a feeling the NDP will cave and whip the vote. Whether or not Layton will actually succeed in doing so, is another issue altogether.

But what if Layton does fail to get all members to vote against? That's a pretty damning note against his leadership, and I get the feeling that deep down, Layton's position is probably more vulnerable than Ignatieff's ever is.

I mean, think about it; he's gone through three elections, with relatively modest success, yet despite the lowest Liberal vote share ever in the history of NDP-contested elections, Layton still wasn't seen as a viable enough alternative to replace Dion. And he still wasn't able to seal the deal with the Coalition after. I'd be getting pretty tired, and if his caucus rebels on him on such a crucial vote, well...

Robert said...

Nope. No whipped vote. Private members bills are the NDPs bread and butter and if votes are whipped on them, the NDP will never pass anything again. They wont let the Liberals talk them into killing the party. No matter how much the Liberals want it.

Jim said...

Robert hit the nail on the head...the NDP cannot afford to marginalize private member votes.

With any luck, the Liberals will soon have to face that dilema.

The death of the long gun registry is one of the best things that could happen yto the LPC...they just don't want to wear it.

CanadianSense said...

No more Senate gutting or blocking.

Wonder if the LPOC wished they pulled the plug in May 2009 when they were ahead in the Polls?

Will those 8 Liberals show up, K. Martin has already caved.

The NFLD MP's may have some fog issues again and miss their vote.

C4SR said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
C4SR said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
C4SR said...

All of the NDP posing about protecting private members businees is bunk (or a longer word that also starts with bu.)

This is a government initiative.

the Bill comes complete with a Throne Speech endorsement and Conservative party paid advertising.

This bill has a much in common with private members business as hymen reconstruction surgery has to do with virginity.

In either case, you've been... well, you know.

Ignatieff and the Liberal caucus figured that out.

You'd think the NDP would be able to do that too.

Gene Rayburn said...

Cue Sir Gallahad to instigate a Jim spazz out in 3,2,1....

Gene Rayburn said...

Good to see you're contributing your usual speculation CS. Guess you have nothing to say as per usual.

49 Steps said...

Hey CS,

How are you enjoying your ban from 308?

Eric finally had enough of your shenanigans, personal attacks, and incoherent posting at gave you the BOOT, BOOT, BOOT.

How many BANS have you racked up now?

The number of places you can post must be getting smaller by the day.

Why do you think so many sites ban you?

Since you always have so much drivel to spew, perhaps you can share your thoughts on that.

Fred from BC said...

49 Steps said...

Hey CS,

How are you enjoying your ban from 308?

Eric finally had enough of your shenanigans, personal attacks, and incoherent posting at gave you the BOOT, BOOT, BOOT.

How many BANS have you racked up now?

So your response to the 4 points CS made above is...a personal attack?

Too funny... :)

Tof KW said...

What's funny is when one troll defends the other.

CS as usual chimes in here with useless speculation that is totally off topic to the thread - which to remind you is about the NDP possibly wiping their vote on the registry as well (as the Cons & Libs).

CanadianSense said...

Skinny Dipper is correct the NDP gained several rural seats at the expense of the Liberals.

The LGR vote is a non issue for 95%of the voters.

It is an issue for what special interest groups?

Will the NDP risk activating those those farmers, "duck" hunters vs the Toronto elite dictating more usless regulation?

Lib incumbent defeated query. (Pundits Guide)

Sudbury NDP had smallest gap 5% in 2008 switch.
ThunderBay Rainy River was 8%.

The other NDP swings were much larger.

This is a win-win for the CPC of demostrating the rural vs urban class, culture war, special interest group influence in political parties.

Party discipline is key. The LPOC have been lacking in this area. This is not a Ignatieff issue. It goes farther back.

1)NFLD MP's vs Budget Accord
2)Maternal health-abortion
3)Mission extenion Afghan mission (Dion)

Gene Rayburn said...

Ugh, Fred From BC contributing his usual non-comment and CS using the duck hunter argument. Really, how many duck hunters are there in this country?

jesus, please find another animal you like to shoot to claim another type of gun user or just use Jim (short tempered, prone to spazzing) as your example.

Gallahad said...

Well, I was actually going to say something really biting, and then I saw Fred from BC, and his usual bullshit.

OK Fred,

Maybe this is now redundant, but you are also a ban monkey. Steve form Far and Wide gave you the heave ho. Didn't he?

I was on there a few days ago, and even after you got the boot, you were still posting.

Just so you know your shit has now been deleted.

Maybe you con morons should start asking yourselves why nobody responds to your posts.

Some serious introspection, is sure needed.

It takes a special kind of wad to keep posting to a site they have been banned from.

Gene Rayburn said...

Fred From BC proving himself, ha. That's like Canadiansense not trying to change the subject..

Gallahad said...

It's nice to see that CS, could spare a few moments away from his bum buddies Patrick Ross, and Mahmmod, to come and share his illuminating thoughts.

That picture of levant, is how CS looks, in the middle of a bout of romantic foreplay with Patrick.

That must be one hairy menage a trois when the three of them get together.

CS, suffers from erectile dysfunction, which makes him a very cranky, and scatter brained individual. He is always preoccupied with the thought that Patrick will find a new male love toy, which makes it hard for him to articulate anything even sembling common sense.

We should all feel sympathy for CS, and start a fund to buy him a whole shit load of Viagra.

That will keep him busy with Patrick, and off the internet.

Tof KW said...

CS Wrote:
”The LGR vote is a non issue for 95%of the voters.”

Source please? Your “opinion” is not a real statistic.

CS Wrote:
”It is an issue for what special interest groups?”

Umm, I dunno, maybe the boys in blue who face the possibility of getting shot on the job?

Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
Canadian Police Association
Coalition for Gun Control
+ most other police associations representing front-line police officers
WFP: Canadian police want to keep gun registry going

But they are all of course just a cult under the financial influence of the Liberal Party of Canada, right CS?

By the way if you read the article in the link, it answers your question above:

” A 2001 Gallup poll found that 61 per cent want stricter laws governing the sale of firearms and 63 per cent believe gun ownership should be made illegal for ordinary citizens.”

About your comments on duck hunting, something I and my old trusty 20-guage (I know it’s more for quail – deceptive birds – but I liked the accuracy and feel) did quite a bit in the past. Your comments are bizarre. So CS you believe that the majority of Canadians (80% are urban dwellers according to StatsCan 2006) should be told what to do by a special interest group of the minority? In my youth when I was an active hunter, I considered it a privilege that could be taken away from me should I act irresponsibly (kinda like having a drivers licence). And more ‘rural’ folk should stop with this sectarian us-vs-them bullshit, I’ve been both and there is no real rural/urban divide. Only firebrand populist politicians who exploit these sectarian feelings for political gain.

CS wrote:

” Sudbury NDP had smallest gap 5% in 2008 switch. ThunderBay Rainy River was 8%.”

In the 2008 election, Kitchener-Waterloo riding was won by CPC candidate Peter Braid by 50 votes over the incumbent Lib MP. CPC candidate Steven Woodworth won Kitchener Centre by something like 150 votes over Lib Karen Redman. If you want to engage in this speculation, there are plenty more urban ridings in southern Ontario that the CPC won by a 1-5% margin, and only due to vote splitting. Ignatieff wouldn’t be wiping this vote if he didn’t see a political angle to it, and the support of our nation’s police forces.

CS wrote:
”This is a win-win for the CPC of demostrating the rural vs urban class, culture war, special interest group influence in political parties.”

This isn’t the win-win issue that the CPC wishes it to be. That 80% Urban to 20% Rural ratio should show how foolish you sound trying to say urban and women voters (who are a majority over men) are a “special interest”. And it is you who and your ilk who flame this urban/rural sectarian war who are trying to envoke a “culture war” CS. And it is the gun lobbyists who are the special interest here CS; not the police, not those groups working to end violence against women and families, not the majority of Canadians who want tougher guns laws versus a scrapped registry.

Vancouver Sun: Scrapping long-gun registry is pandering to vocal minority

There CanadianSense, a detailed point-by-point rebuttal using facts instead of opinion and conjecture as you do. This is called “debating”.

I eagerly await your usual response - the kind that involves a shitzkrieg of irrelevant, off-topic speculation that argues all that is evil in the world is the fault of the Liberal Party of Canada.

BTW –as I’ve written before here and elsewhere, I’m not even a proponent of the registry. I just find the arguments of the gun-nuts so bizarre that I can’t help but enjoy filling your bullshit full of buckshot.

CanadianSense said...

I am thankful the host allows the "intolerance of the left" on display.

Angry posters, thank you for the rational adult debate on:

LGR, party discipline.

Gallahad said...


That was a very well reasoned, and thought out post. You also provided links to back up ypur position.

I just have one question.

Why are you wasting your time trying to have a rational discussion with CS?

Tof KW said...

Sir Gallahad said...
Why are you wasting your time trying to have a rational discussion with CS?

I dunno, sometimes I see such stupidity in the world that I feel the urge to bang my head against a cinderblock wall every once in a while.

CanadianSense said...

Tof KW,

My opinion about LGR as a campaign issue (door to door) I am not referring to a specific Poll.

It's the economy stupid meme!

Just like the scandals of the week, I can cite a Poll and show it has traction at a specific time.

In the next campaign the political parties in the left are FREE to campaign on keeping the LGR. (CPC win-win).

or the importance of Supreme Court Judges being fluent in French-English. ( I suggest these issues being debated are political games distractions at best)

The MP's that broke from urban NDP, Lib ranks on the scrapping have their reasons please feel free to review their comments.

The Police "Chiefs" are political appointees? Are the software vendors responsible for the registry donating to this association?

Reminds me about the Taser debate, Taser companies donating to the association. Do you think that is a percieved potential conflict of interest?

I have NEVER owned a gun, hunted, lived on a farm. City dweller residing in Oakvillle have ZERO conflicts for personal conflict for LGR regulation.

Nutshell why I don't support LGR.

LGR Policy does NOT work.

We already have regulation F.A.C.

Auditor General Report Sheila Fraser. The database is not accurate and compliance is below 50%.

So what is the cost to correct the flawed database? How do you enforce the regulations with on those not interested in doing the paper work?
Political Will: On reserve land? See illegal smokes.

Real problems vs political will to fix it.

Thanks for taking the time to debate the LGR, I don't agree with your classification of "gun-nuts" or anti LPOC bias re LGR.

The urban vote does not belong to the parties in the Liberals.

NDP have recovered, vote splitting is over, a geographic map illustrates very few urban cities are sending Liberals to Ottawa.

that is NOT an anti-Liberal bias. Those are called electoral facts.

Gene Rayburn said...

Why am I not surprised that CS is back to the public masturbation again. Part of Patrick's Hairy Palms gang I guess

Gayle said...

Not that I want to give CS any more attention, but this comment was interesting:

"This is a win-win for the CPC of demostrating the rural vs urban class, culture war, special interest group influence in political parties.'

Funny, because over on Stephen Taylor's blog Senator Finley posted complaining about how the LPC are pitting urban voters against rural voters by whipping the vote.

It is good to see CS sees that it is actually the CPC who is pitting region against region, urban against rural.

Tof KW said...

Thanks CS, I see you don’t disappoint. So let’s see, how many irrelevant issues did you dredge up here…

- Bilingual supreme court justices

- The RCMP’s taser transgressions

- Auditor Generals reports (wasted money is another issue - that money is gone - start-up is over and the annual registry costs are minimal)

- First Nations Reserves & illegal tobacco importation and sales

- Vote splitting over? (really – that’s been around since the CCF first formed – when did it end?)

Yup, if you can’t dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with your bullshit.

And I stand behind my original points, none of yours address them. Oh, and opinion poll after opinion poll shows that the majority of Canadians want tougher gun laws. Please feel free to find one that opposes this. Even the CPC have openly mused about adding more self-loading gun models to the restricted list, so the ‘law and order party’ even gets that.

Also, yes the economy is usually the #1 issue in surveys, along with (in no particular order) health care, crime and security, the environment, and the national debt rounding up the top-5. The economy does not negate the importance of the other issues. Also please stop trying to tell voters what issues are important or not – they do not require, nor desire your “opinions” on how they should think. How arrogant of you to think your opinion is all that voters care about.

CanadianSense said...


It was nice to see to revert to personal attacks again.

You may not like those comments, and continue to believe the Liberals are a national party.

Some of us believe the Bloc will become the next official opposition.

In 2008 NDP (18.2%), Green (6.8%)total 25% popular vote, in 2010 it will hit 27% at the expense of the Liberals.

Gallahad said...


Huh nice try TK.

You din't anserw anything.

The LPC is to blame for stuff. How many nfld mps have fog issues?

How many rural mps not show up?

LPc vs rural, you know facts, guns way of life tradition, all to do with rural.

Supreme court judges need French?
What about West, they can't be judge as well?

Economy not hugh factor?

CPC leads on this, as well as on all issues.

LPC can't show up for work talk real issues.

Everyone know police chiefs are evil cult. conflict of interest with software maker.

Huh? you can't understand this.

punish law gun owners for nothing but wedge issue. try to score votes.

Why hard for you people to understand facts?

For record I am gay not do not masturbate, do not play with boys.

Is that what you guys do?

There I have just given CS response.

I have saved him a lot of time and effort, and time away from Patrick.

Tof KW said...

Thanks CS for yet again trying to change the channel.

Others are telling you to f-off, yet by actually having a debate with you (a pointless endeavor) I'm the one with the personal attacks?

I'm simply hi-lighting how pathetic your style is. This is why you get banned - and should be here too.

You did not refute a single point I made earlier, you simple spread bullshit around to see what sticks to the wall.

You also seem to forget I'm not a Liberal, never have been.

I simply enjoy showing the CPC is a misnomer - there is nothing conservative left in that party (except to pander to social conservatives). They are nothing but neo-liberal economics, wrapped around firebrand populist politics who's only goal is to destroy all things they deem as 'liberal'.

The day Canada gets a real Tory/Conservative party is the day my tepid support for the Liberal Party ends.

Did I make myself clear to you CS?

Tof KW said...

Well done Sir Gallahad!!!
Your imitation is downright frightening!

CanadianSense said...


The post was about LGR, political party discipline. (NDP feeling heat)

In my posts I have raised issues specifically regarding LGR, party discipline.

I was not reduced to making personal attacks to defend my views on LGR or the NDP needing to whip their MP's.

You can disagree with my analysis without making disparaging remarks.

You chose to encourage the personal attacks and shut down debate. This says much more about your character than mine.

You can ignore the political landscape and the difficulty of getting LGR fixed to justify the claims made by those in favour of keeping it.

You can pretend the Liberal policy was NOT a mistake.

Why the need for changes than if the policy is not flawed?

This Liberal policy was enacted on a tragedy that had nothing to do with long guns. The registry would have not been able to stop the Marc Lepine's of the world. More regulation is not the answer.

Feel free to encourage more hateful personal insults regading the debate on LGR and political party discipline.

CanadianSense said...


this is a win-win for the CPC because

1) They can afford to run TV, radio spots explaining why the Liberals in Toronto are forcing their rural MP's to keep regulations that don't work.

2) The CPC platform promises to scap the LGR is being acted upon.

Gayle some see "evil" everywhere.

I see Liberals playing games, making cosmetic changes to a bad policy. Not evil just wrong.

sharonapple88 said...

CS, yes because all issues should be boiled down to regionalism... root, root, root for the hometeam and all that jazz.

As for running the gun registry as a Toronto issue... you've also forgot about Quebec where just 37% support doing away with the long-gun registry. Don't forget to demonize Quebecers too.

2) The CPC platform promises to scap the LGR is being acted upon.

And... sigh... I thought this was a private member's bill. I wish the government had the balls to make it a government bill if they're going to claim credit for it.

Tof KW said...

CS, engaging in a debate with you is like playing whack-a-mole at a carnival. I could continue to refute each point you make, but you just bring up 10 news one without actually addressing the facts I've presented.

I refuse to continue banging my head against a wall.

I've presented a solid reason why the long gun registry should be kept. The police need it. Now I know you know more than they do CanadianSense, but can you see why maybe Ignatieff is siding with the police chiefs on this issue?

CanadianSense said...


Thank you for not engaging with a personal attack.

No one asked if the CPC are playing political games: LGR as a private members Bill or framing it to their benefit against "Toronto strategists in the left.

If you can find a blanket statement against Toronto citizens from the CPC please let me know.

I posted months ago on this blog the CPC benefit strategically by using Toronto elites, strategists from the left.

Every political party engages and play games with motions and Bills.

If LGR is a National Policy, why use a blanket statement regarding the province of Quebec?

Perception vs Reality (Political Issues)
In November 2009 Quebec had two contests, a Bloc seat held for 16 years was lost to the incumbent government. Does this mean the entire province has gone CPC? No

How did the Liberals fare in Quebec did their vote share go up or down? Are you suggesting the Liberals failure to block LGR was responsible for them in finishing behind everyone except the Greens?

CanadianSense said...


You made several posts why you feel your opinion is more important than mine.

You included several opinions and links from stakeholders that are partisan, may have a vested interest.

You engaged in personal insults and attacks.

Again we have been around this before.

You have no difficulty is repeating disparaging remarks when someone disagrees with your opinion or encouraging personal attacks.

I chose not to follow your debating style in using the "arrogant, stupid" narrative.

Fortunately in Canada we are allowed to agree to disagree. The "Big Tent" is apparently a myth.

Gallahad said...


Why are the police chiefs a cult?

Why do the police chiefs, and law enforcement officers want the registry?

You haven't answered one damn question posed to you by TofKW.

Did you even read his posts?

You haven't posed an intelligent or articulate response to anything.

You are rude and ignorant, and you think your point of view is the only one that matters.

When you are asked a question, you do not even have the courtesy to answer it, but rather you post more incoherent bullshit.

You wonder why you get mocked, and insulted?

You wonder why no one takes you seriously?

Take a look in the mirror buddy, you are one delusional piece of work.

Tof KW said...

Why do you not support our cops?
Why do you think you know more than they do?

Also, note the newest thread here showing the majority of Canadians want the registry kept.

Our police want it, the public wants it. I think we need some sort of registry, and I've actually hunted (dropped it long ago, I don't even fish much). Why do you (who doesn't even hunt) support a bunch of gun-toting rednecks and think they rate more than the police and public safety?

Also, why is Harper wiping his own party over a private members bill? Blame Harper as much as you do the Libs (and maybe NDP) on this matter.

I don't expect logical answers, just hi-lighting your hypocrisy. Think with your brain instead of spreading Harper's talking points.

BTW - Harper voted for the registry in 1993. He actually did the Reform Party thing and voted the way his constituency wished.

Tof KW said...

Sorry looked it up and the vote was in 1995, he was the only Reform MP to vote in support of this bill.

Jim said...

To be fair, Harper voted Yea at the first reading only.

Gene Rayburn said...

Ever the apologist eh Jim?

Gallahad said...


Jim is back.

Jim weren't you acting like the big man on Far and Wide?

You challenged Steve, to delete your post.

Guess what big boy, he did.

I guess you are now banned there.

We now have the pleasure of the company of three Far and Wide rejects.

Jim, Fred from BC, and Canadian Sense.

Wow, you guys are sure one impressive list.

Gene Rayburn said...

Im just wondering how much longer Jim can hold it together before he has one of his famous spazzouts

Gallahad said...

I guess I will leave Jim alone.

He only has made one comment, even if it was bullshit.

I don't want Jim, to have a spazzout.

Canadian Sense took a beating today, and I feel it fair to only pound the shit out of one of them a day.

Anything more would seem like greed.

Fred from BC said...

T of KW said...

CS Wrote:
”It is an issue for what special interest groups?”

Umm, I dunno, maybe the boys in blue who face the possibility of getting shot on the job?

Wrong. The registry does nothing to make the police any safer on the job. When a police officer approaches a potentially dangerous situation they ALWAYS assume that there could be a firearm present. They know full well that criminals don't register their guns (which are usually handguns anyway, thus not even subject to this registry) and they never would dare relax and let their guard down because the computer told them it was safe to do so.

(that's hardly rocket science, just common sense..)

Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police

Political appointees all, doing as they are told by their bosses.

Canadian Police Association

Did they poll their membership?

Coalition for Gun Control

Oh, please. Kooky Wendy MAKES HER LIVING at this.

+ most other police associations representing front-line police officers

BUT NOT ALL. See Saskatchewan, Calgary...

(and hey, you left out the old "police access the registry 11,000 times PER DAY!" misdirection. Tsk, tsk...)

WFP: Canadian police want to keep gun registry going

I wonder what else they want?

A complete ban on civilian firearms ownership? An end to the requirements for search warrants? The power to search anyone's person, vehicle or computer? Hey, why not? What have you got to hide?

(oh, I know: the return of Capital Punishment. Especially for cop-killers. Right?..)

The vested interests of the police are not the issue here. The uselessness of the long-gun registry is the real issue, and the foolishness of the Liberals who are trying to score some political points with it. It's a lose-lose situation for Ignatieff...he just doesn't know it yet...

Gene Rayburn said...

Once again Fred from BC confuses opinion with fact.

Why don't you ever provide proof for your statements Fred? All you do is obfuscate and attempt to change the subject.

Do you pull your facts from the clouds or your ass? Please tell.

Scotian said...

There is a difference between a cop having to assume a firearm is present versus knowing not only that the resident(s) have a firearm's licence (which is the registration argument) and actually knowing that there are firearm(S) (as in knowing multiple firearms are present which is a part of the difference between FAC information and the registry's information) present, what kind of firearms and how many that may need to be accounted for and removed (if for example it is a domestic dispute situation where it is needed to make sure all firearms are removed from the environment to prevent violence from occurring once the police leave) which the registry does provide.

Is the registry perfect, fool proof and always going to have all the proper information entered? No, but it is still providing significantly more than just whether a person is allowed to have a firearm, and the more information the better.

Also registration allows for investigators to backtrack where a firearm originates and that is important in an investigation, even if it was stolen by the time it was used in a crime, anyone that fails to understand how that works clearly knows nothing about basic investigative practices and therefore has no business commenting on such aspects let alone acting as if they have any knowledge of such and how a registry aids in such.

Something too many opponents of the registry fail to understand (intentionally or not) is that registration is not confiscation. It is not gun limitation, it is good basic gun safety and control in terms of tracking and sourcing what legal guns are out there as well as where a stolen gun comes from which in turn may help identify the suspect that used it in a crime by giving an investigator a place to start from.

The registry was intentionally sabotaged by the Reform/CA/CPC side of the political environment from the outset with campaigns on how to make it less reliable, and to advocate non-compliance making it more expensive to set up and administer, something its detractors tend to fail to remember to mention (if they know this at all). That it is seen as an important tool by virtually (if not actually) all the police representative organizations of this nation is something that speaks volumes for its actual importance as a tool for law enforcement, and that so many of the so called self described law and order Conservatives are failing to accept this shows this is about ideology and about culture war politics and not good government policy, but then little if anything this CPC government and party does considers good governing policy as even a consideration let alone a primary consideration unlike all prior governments both Liberal and PCPC in our history.

There is a reason part of our motto is good government, until the Harper CPC came along to power it was something practiced by all governments be they Liberal or PCPC conservative, this government is something unlike anything we have ever experienced before, it is inherently anti-government and against considering the premise that government is ever able to be good and helpful for society. this business with the LGR is only one in a looooong succession of examples of this reality.

CanadianSense said...


The 8 Liberal MP's already stated reasons why the LGR was bad.

12 NDP MP's also stood up and voted against the bad policy for similar reasons. They gave their promises to their constituents.

This issue illustrates how leadership has failed. This issue has been hijacked by special interest groups trying to link LGR with safety, anti-women issues.

The Liberals may have written off the eight rural seats, will the NDP do the same? (I don't see the NDP taking a hit in cities, their base vote is very loyal.

Could NDP pick up those eight rural seats from the Liberals? (Have not checked 2nd place in those ridings)

This will be framed as political strategists in Toronto/Ottawa vs rural residents. This has been used to raise funds successfully by the CPC for partisan gains for years.

Gene Rayburn said...

Yawn, wanking with both hands a bit early today eh Canadiansense? Or are you trying to get a point in before Sir Gallahad serves you your ass on a platter again?

Tof KW said...

"This will be framed as political strategists in Toronto/Ottawa vs rural residents. This has been used to raise funds successfully by the CPC for partisan gains for years."

Man, CanadianShitSense saying the Libs are playing partisan rural vs urban games ...and admitting the Cons have been doing exactly that to increase political donations. Oakville crackpot, do you have any sense of the hypocrisy in this? ...And your posts are full of many more examples.

Fred's using the classic Carl Rove tactic (which the CPC has received training in) of attacking the credibility of expert advise.

Well Fred, you and CS obviously know more that our national police associations and the chiefs. Bully for you!

BTW - I have two friends in the Wat Reg Police force - true blue politically as well. Both support the registry (and a number of their colleagues as well) and wish the CPofC would smarten up on this issue. This blows your whole "real cops don't support the LGR" theory for me. Maybe in SaskAlberta they want it scrapped, but not here.

CanadianSense said...


It is a pity what passes for adult conversation in debating differences of opinion on this subject. The hostility, fear is rampant of this latest stunt backfiring.

1. Personal Insults
2. Repeated sexual requests.

Let's hope the NDP leadership on free votes continues to allow their MP's to respect the constituents interests instead of special interests' politicial strategists from Toronto-Ottawa.

Tof KW said...

CanadianSense you don't even know the basics about engaging in an adult debate. Did you even bother to read my posts on how to do this?

Why even ask, of course not.

Two full more current threads now on the gun registry debate here, and you're still going on at this one.

Now go make like the birds and flock off.

Gene Rayburn said...

believe me Canadiansense noone wants to make sexual requests from the likes of you... I'm imagining Del Mastro in some biker shorts behind a beige Dell...

Why don't you and Fred get a room and bucket of KFC? It seems that your idea of intelligent debate seems that greasy.

Nice attempt at fake indignation. Might have worked if you didn't resort to it so consistently.

Gallahad said...

I imagine that Fred, and CS, have shared many tender kisses, and touching moments together already.

They are probably cuddling in each others arms, as I speak. Basking in the post orgasmic afterglow.

CS, trolls all the internet sites, in search of male lovers. Fred has no idea that he is not CS's one and only.

I guess that cat is now out of the bag Fred. CS, is just a slut.

Harrigansturf said...

Hi sir
I am a Landscaping Services Calgary near to your home town. i have faced some new problem relates to NDP..

Gene Rayburn said...

Uh oh looks like the NDP didnt pay their gardening bill.