ばか！バカ！　馬鹿ー月！

onizuka-gto wrote:Good one Yanks, thanks for avenging the London Bombing, some what.

Do you say it for the Osama thing? And I wondered why 4chan was all with "america f*ck yeah!". I don't buy it, not being paranoid but this is just too much convenient. Osama was an excuse to invade another country, attacking others in the process and justifying defense costs. Now they kill him, without trial or whatsoever (they have so many arabs in guantanamo... why not take him there?) and without proofs, so they can retreat, people happy coming back home, gov happy because they can reduce costs, and Obama' image raising top.
To me its more credible the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and that Bin Laden was dead long before at some random bombing. They kept him live to justify the invasion, and now they are in crisis decided to kill him.

Well thats great and all... But that head of state appointed a CEO TO A HIGH GOVERNMENT POSITION.

Zell_ff8 wrote:

onizuka-gto wrote:Good one Yanks, thanks for avenging the London Bombing, some what.

Do you say it for the Osama thing? And I wondered why 4chan was all with "america f*ck yeah!". I don't buy it, not being paranoid but this is just too much convenient. Osama was an excuse to invade another country, attacking others in the process and justifying defense costs. Now they kill him, without trial or whatsoever (they have so many arabs in guantanamo... why not take him there?) and without proofs, so they can retreat, people happy coming back home, gov happy because they can reduce costs, and Obama' image raising top.
To me its more credible the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and that Bin Laden was dead long before at some random bombing. They kept him live to justify the invasion, and now they are in crisis decided to kill him.

Spoiler! :

A little cynical, are we not? That sounds more like a conspiracy theory than anything about 9/11. Anyhow, regardless of whether bin Laden is dead or not, the United States government needs to keep security on a high level. Ironically, the Israeli government has hiked up their security even further because they know that this will somehow get back to them, despite the fact that they had nothing to do with it.

ben1234 wrote:I'm very disappointed at seeing Harper get his majority. Now the country will go further into debt by investing useless warplanes and wars the country has no right to be in

And what makes it even worse is that our taxes are going up again so Harper can pass some more bills to give himself a raise

You must've seen Harper speak in French and make a mistake. "Les Canadiens n'ont pas besoin d'érections inutiles." Which means, 'The Canadians don't need needless erections.'

Well, my province is at 80% NDP. But I'll probably move to Windor in the following months.

Zell_ff8 wrote:Do you say it for the Osama thing? And I wondered why 4chan was all with "america f*ck yeah!". I don't buy it, not being paranoid but this is just too much convenient. Osama was an excuse to invade another country, attacking others in the process and justifying defense costs. Now they kill him, without trial or whatsoever (they have so many arabs in guantanamo... why not take him there?) and without proofs, so they can retreat, people happy coming back home, gov happy because they can reduce costs, and Obama' image raising top.
To me its more credible the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and that Bin Laden was dead long before at some random bombing. They kept him live to justify the invasion, and now they are in crisis decided to kill him.

As for the Bin Laden thing, well, you can't really expect him brought to the U.S. Ther would be an awful amount of bombs detonating.

I think what I hate the most is that Harper got his majority when 60% of the voters didn't even vote for him.

It's like back in 08 when Green got 6.8% of the votes but still had no representative in parliament

ben1234 wrote:It's like back in 08 when Green got 6.8% of the votes but still had no representative in parliament

Well, if it's this case, and we use the percentage, thann there wouldn't be stability in the Chambers.

About 13.8 million people voted in 2008. 6.8% of that is ~940 thousand voters

With the current system based on ridings, 940 thousand voters couldn't get a representative in parliament. Something is seriously wrong with that =/

ben1234 wrote:About 13.8 million people voted in 2008. 6.8% of that is ~940 thousand voters

With the current system based on ridings, 940 thousand voters couldn't get a representative in parliament. Something is seriously wrong with that =/

Well, that's Canada's politics. Imagine; if it's like this, then how are we going to form a government with the percentage? Heavy-mass coalition?

Something like this might work

What it really does is it makes most, if not all, votes count. So there'll be less chance of a majority and more minority governments. Because a party shouldn't get a majority with just 40% of the popular vote

But at the same time, many don't wish for a minority government. First, elections every two years. That's why the voting percentage is getting down. Second, you can NOT make a country go forward by trying to mix in other ideologies. A left-sided official opposition and a minority government right-sided isn't really a good mix. After all, from the very creation of Canada, the Canadians consider a minority government as a sign of instability and weak. That's why for long time, there are only two main parties; conservatives an liberals. In the past, it's almost like an automatic majority, since to win in the elections, you basically need 50% or more. The problem these days is the creation of two other main parties; the NDP and the Bloc (I think that they'll get more seats in the next elections).

Also, do not forget that there's a reason why the rep. by pop. wasn't liked by the UK; before 1852, there were more French Canadians than English Canadians. So they used basically the same system we're using right now to retrain the strength of the French Canadians. And it became the actual government now.