<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/555837</link>
		<description>Comments by Douglass</description>
<item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Commons: The daring Mr. Harper</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/26/the-commons-the-daring-mr-harper#IDComment146318829</link>
<description>Prison I think. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 22:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/26/the-commons-the-daring-mr-harper#IDComment146318829</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Stephen Harper&#039;s constitution</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/21/stephen-harpers-constitution/#IDComment144917292</link>
<description>I am shocked to learn that this is how our government works. Here I&amp;#039;ve been under the impression that we vote in an MP, not a government. Who knew? </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:21:40 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/21/stephen-harpers-constitution/#IDComment144917292</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Harper won’t reopen abortion debate</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/21/harper-won%e2%80%99t-reopen-abortion-debate#IDComment144915840</link>
<description>The debate has already been opened. By one of his MP&amp;#039;s in fact. I think the people have a right to know where all the leaders stand on this issue. Stephen Harper has not answered the question. The media should not allow him to slip out of this. Harper&amp;#039;s opinion on a woman&amp;#039;s right to choose has a direct affect on his policies on maternal health and need to be uncovered and exposed. Having our rights eroded quietly in the backrooms of parliament by a party unwilling to put their ideas before the electorate is a slap in the face to woman across the country! </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/21/harper-won%e2%80%99t-reopen-abortion-debate#IDComment144915840</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Back and forth</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/back-and-forth/#IDComment144632471</link>
<description>I agree with that. With the British election and the regular use of the word coalition during the recent coverage of Libya there has been a much more positive impression of coalitions.  That said I think this bullishness of Harper&amp;#039;s, declaring he won&amp;#039;t work with our elected representatives in a minority situation will backfire. People want their government to work. To work together. His stance smacks of self interest. I don&amp;#039;t think Canadians like that look on their politicians. It&amp;#039;s exactly why the cons tried to paint Ignatieff with that brush in their pre writ ad campaigns. It was a bad move on Harper&amp;#039;s part.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/back-and-forth/#IDComment144632471</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Two questions for Stephen Harper (III)</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/two-questions-for-stephen-harper-iii/#IDComment144566013</link>
<description>That&amp;#039;s a very clear and concise explanation of our system. I only wish our dear leader understood our parliamentary system so well. My worry is that he does, and yet still spouts gibberish like &amp;quot;only the first place party can form government.&amp;quot; for pure self interest and partisan gain. Make one yearn for a real leader. One who respects the people that send ALL of the MP&amp;#039;s to Ottawa! </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/two-questions-for-stephen-harper-iii/#IDComment144566013</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Two questions for Stephen Harper (III)</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/two-questions-for-stephen-harper-iii/#IDComment144564791</link>
<description>I hope that&amp;#039;s sarcasm John. I&amp;#039;d hate to think your that much of a tool. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/two-questions-for-stephen-harper-iii/#IDComment144564791</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Back and forth</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/back-and-forth/#IDComment144560070</link>
<description>Today&amp;#039;s headlines are that Harper would be unwilling to work with the other parties if he is given a minority government in this election. Doesn&amp;#039;t sound like he&amp;#039;s changed much to me. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:35:23 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/back-and-forth/#IDComment144560070</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : A statistically unrepresentative sample of Canadian concerns</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/18/a-statistically-unrepresentative-sample-of-canadian-concerns/#IDComment143972232</link>
<description>Nice! A man of the people.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/18/a-statistically-unrepresentative-sample-of-canadian-concerns/#IDComment143972232</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : A statistically unrepresentative sample of Canadian concerns</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/18/a-statistically-unrepresentative-sample-of-canadian-concerns/#IDComment143971517</link>
<description>Why don&amp;#039;t you go to one of his events, and ask him. The Liberal&amp;#039;s seem pretty willing to take all questions. Even absurd ones like yours. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/18/a-statistically-unrepresentative-sample-of-canadian-concerns/#IDComment143971517</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Muguette Paille&#039;s vote</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142938007</link>
<description>She was trending on twitter last night. Many people seem to care what she had to say. Those people vote.  To your other point, yes common sense is what the opposition has in this election. It seems in short supply with the Conservatives. You should look into that. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:47:47 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142938007</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Muguette Paille&#039;s vote</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142923213</link>
<description>No but it means more than one vote is paying attention to her opinion. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142923213</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Muguette Paille&#039;s vote</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142922816</link>
<description>Yes! How dare the individual care about issue relevant to the individual! Shame! Shame! </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:32:37 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/14/muguette-pailles-vote/#IDComment142922816</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : About that $11-billion</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/13/about-that-11-billion/#IDComment142591587</link>
<description>More than just Liberals see cuts on Health spending as a risk. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/13/about-that-11-billion/#IDComment142591587</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Debate night</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/12/debate-night/#IDComment142279145</link>
<description>Hello from BC! Many of us will NOT be voting conservative! </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/12/debate-night/#IDComment142279145</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : &#039;Clearly erroneous&#039;</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/clearly-erroneous/#IDComment142074511</link>
<description>Shorter GreatWallsofFire: It&amp;#039;s okay to lie and mis quote the AG as long as it&amp;#039;s just to people you don&amp;#039;t like. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 02:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/clearly-erroneous/#IDComment142074511</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : &#039;Clearly erroneous&#039;</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/clearly-erroneous/#IDComment142072756</link>
<description>when did the Mob take over? </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 02:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/clearly-erroneous/#IDComment142072756</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Harper government misled Parliament on G8 spending: AG</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/harper-government-misled-parliament-on-g8-spending-ag/#IDComment141962651</link>
<description>She can&amp;#039;t release it. It doesn&amp;#039;t matter if the Easter bunny asks her too, she has to release it to parliament, which is not currently sitting. Get it? </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:02:39 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/11/harper-government-misled-parliament-on-g8-spending-ag/#IDComment141962651</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Lady Gaga isn&#039;t PM&#039;s happy place</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/08/lady-gaga-isnt-pms-happy-place#IDComment141118028</link>
<description>His record, and broken fixed date election laws would beg to differ. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/08/lady-gaga-isnt-pms-happy-place#IDComment141118028</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : &#039;Our interest is in having as many people out to hear our message as we can&#039;</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/07/our-interest-is-in-having-as-many-people-out-to-hear-our-message-as-we-can/#IDComment140820918</link>
<description>Can you kindly point me to the rules of Blogging? You should really get on spreading the word on this list, most bloggers seem unaware and are instead practicing free speech. Bastards! </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 7 Apr 2011 20:34:35 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/07/our-interest-is-in-having-as-many-people-out-to-hear-our-message-as-we-can/#IDComment140820918</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : &#039;Our interest is in having as many people out to hear our message as we can&#039;</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/07/our-interest-is-in-having-as-many-people-out-to-hear-our-message-as-we-can/#IDComment140819881</link>
<description>I bet he&amp;#039;s facebook friends with Wherry too! Somebody PLEASE find the 50 foot pole! </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 7 Apr 2011 20:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/07/our-interest-is-in-having-as-many-people-out-to-hear-our-message-as-we-can/#IDComment140819881</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>