<?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/697961</link>
		<description>Comments by NoNameCS</description>
<item>
<title>Macleans.ca : What Harper has planned for Ottawa</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/what-harper-has-planned-for-ottawa/#IDComment144867901</link>
<description>Hear hear, Be_rad !! </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/20/what-harper-has-planned-for-ottawa/#IDComment144867901</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Sun News Network: Hard News. Straight Talk. Short Skirts.</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/sun-news-network-hard-news-straight-talk-short-skirts#IDComment144505897</link>
<description>&amp;quot;Oh yea, Fox has proven you can get good looking girls with a brain and you don&amp;#039;t have to go with the PC grey-haired hags or ethnic quotas to pretend you are professional.&amp;quot;   Yet another example of the fine arguments we can expect from the self-appointed defenders of CBC-oppressed &amp;quot;real Canadians&amp;quot;.   &amp;quot;Judge Roiy Bean&amp;quot;, whoever you are, I say long live your right to be an ignorant, offensive blowhard on the public stage; not only is it a symbol of our collective freedom, it also greatly decreases your odds of finding a mate and reproducing. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/sun-news-network-hard-news-straight-talk-short-skirts#IDComment144505897</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Strategic voting</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/strategic-voting/#IDComment144290111</link>
<description>So you are of the opinion that a worker&amp;#039;s association&amp;#039;s democratic rights should be suspended because their management was too incompetent to keep the business healthy and the government was silly enough to bail them out?  That&amp;#039;s interesting. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/strategic-voting/#IDComment144290111</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Sun News Network: Hard News. Straight Talk. Short Skirts.</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/sun-news-network-hard-news-straight-talk-short-skirts#IDComment144251871</link>
<description>You&amp;#039;re letting the facts get  in the way of an uninformed, xenophobic and borderline racist rant.  We will have none of that here or on SunTV News, for that matter. Because the uninformed ranter is a folk hero and his egregious, ignorant opinions are symbols of our freedom.   The fact that they are clearly a symbol of the utter failure of our public school system to produce individuals capable of discerning fact from propaganda, make-believe and prejudice should not worry you at all. If it does, it clearly means that you are part of the &amp;quot;elite&amp;quot;, latte-drinking, CBC-loving non-citizens who oppress the true and good citizens of Canada. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/19/sun-news-network-hard-news-straight-talk-short-skirts#IDComment144251871</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The post-party era</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136564945</link>
<description>Ok, I&amp;#039;ll play and re-read your initial comment with this intervention in mind.    Doesn&amp;#039;t work.    Wherry is reporting a statement by Savoie on the decline of the basic functions of the political party. This is non-partisan. It applies to everyone, every stripe. And it&amp;#039;s nothing new: I remember writing a paper about it in the early 1990s in a political science class.     For some reason, you took it as a criticism of the Harper Government and saw an opportunity to air your grievances about the media. Grievances that I continue to believe are unfounded, but hey, you&amp;#039;ll continue to believe what you believe and so will I.    My only point here is that you must have a pretty huge chip on your shoulder if you think a Donald Savoie quote on the decline of the political party is an attack on Stephen Harper&amp;#039;s government or a Liberal plot. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136564945</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The post-party era</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136539172</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m sorry, but I don&amp;#039;t buy your right-wing victimization theory. It not only sounds hollow, it is patently false and misleading. Works great for whipping up donations to the Party, I&amp;#039;m sure.  The surly teenager, &amp;quot;oh we&amp;#039;re outcasts and mistreated by the establishment&amp;quot; shtick is getting old, in my view. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:12:12 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136539172</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The post-party era</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136515954</link>
<description>Enough with the whining, Dennis.   Remember the endless stack of articles written when Chr&amp;eacute;tien was in power about the &amp;quot;democratic deficit&amp;quot;, the irrelevance of Parliament, and so on and so forth? All of them were written in your imaginary &amp;quot;liberal-loving&amp;quot; media. Jeffrey Simpson even wrote a book called &amp;quot;The Friendly Dictatorship&amp;quot;. Remember that ?  Your argument does not hold water, Dennis. Sorry.  I think the real issue is that Harper promised to deliver a better kind of government and he has failed. Instead, he has reinforced and institutionalized the worse instincts of every one of his predecessors. It&amp;#039;s only fair that he gets called out for it. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:26:29 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/21/the-post-party-era/#IDComment136515954</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment136450154</link>
<description>Yeah. Oh, and that&amp;#039;s a lovely gazebo in Tony Clement&amp;#039;s riding, by the way. Just sayin&amp;#039;.   &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxomwSUfQHQ&amp;amp;feature=player_embedded&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxomwSUfQHQ&amp;amp;fe...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment136450154</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment136448668</link>
<description>I guess you missed the part where Lavigne is not a member of the Liberal caucus.  Call me stupid all you want, but people working in the PMO are at the heart of the government. Nothing happens without their ok. They have as much, if not more influence than your average MP because their are handpicked by the PM or by his most trusted advisors.   But you know this, Bluescot. You&amp;#039;re flailing here. And I don&amp;#039;t blame you: the sound of chickens coming home to roost must be pretty scary for the Harper bunch...   </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment136448668</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135879729</link>
<description>There you go, seeing a &amp;quot;Liberal&amp;quot; again.   I think getting the &amp;quot;Right Honourable&amp;quot; before your name and getting to rename the government after yourself qualify as being &amp;quot;in power&amp;quot;, don&amp;#039;t you ? </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:20:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135879729</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135879488</link>
<description>Hmm. Let&amp;#039;s see. Go ask Chr&amp;eacute;tien, who called in the RCMP on the Adscam nonsense, if that move bought him one half second of consideration from Harper or from the media.  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:18:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135879488</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135874394</link>
<description>Right, he only directed conservative policy in opposition and worked as a senior advisor in the PMO. No role at all. Like a paperboy, really.  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135874394</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135873761</link>
<description>I guess you missed the Harper Government taking full credit for it with a full day of photo ops and a $26 million ad campaign. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:48:50 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135873761</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135872295</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m all for calling out people when they step out of line, but Lavigne was thrown out of the Liberal caucus way back in 2006, when the allegations came out. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:40:58 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135872295</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135844304</link>
<description>Reading the comments of the pro-Harper crew is getting really tiresome these days.  The Harper Government&amp;#039;s chickens are starting to come home to roost. Deal with it. Blaming the media, seeing Liberals and &amp;quot;lefties&amp;quot; everywhere just reveal a persecution complex that makes you sound like angry teenagers.  After being in power for five years, it&amp;#039;s high time you grow up. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135844304</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Carson show</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135812516</link>
<description>My God, could you be more lame ? </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/17/the-carson-show/#IDComment135812516</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The constantly evolving nature of democracy</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/14/the-constantly-evolving-nature-of-democracy#IDComment134838092</link>
<description>A paranoid stance that has been debunked by historians and political scientists alike, who have pointed out how the Conservatives&amp;#039; mistrust of the civil service (and the civil service&amp;#039;s eventual backlash) has been their undoing every time they have won power during the 20th century.  Keep repeating past mistakes is the motto, I guess... </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/14/the-constantly-evolving-nature-of-democracy#IDComment134838092</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Great moments in communications</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/08/great-moments-in-communications#IDComment133380718</link>
<description>Note to my kids: if you ever try and convince me you did not commit an act despite the fact that I and a stadium full of people will have seen you commit said act, I will disown you. On the upside, you&amp;#039;ll be ripe for a communications job with the PCO. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/08/great-moments-in-communications#IDComment133380718</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Meanwhile, at the Federal Court of Appeal</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/01/meanwhile-at-the-federal-court-of-appeal/#IDComment131703675</link>
<description>Well, they tried the &amp;quot;administrative issue&amp;quot;, the &amp;quot; nothing to see here&amp;quot;, the &amp;quot;Elections Canada are Liberal shills&amp;quot;, the &amp;quot;But everyone else has been doing it&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;Elections Canada is pursuing this despite the fact that the courts have cleared the Conservative Party&amp;quot;... What&amp;#039;s next ?  I&amp;#039;m betting the courts will be liberal appointees and elections spending laws will be deemed anti-democratic. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/01/meanwhile-at-the-federal-court-of-appeal/#IDComment131703675</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Commons: &#039;Let her speak&#039;</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/02/28/the-commons-a-five-year-old-accounting-dispute/#IDComment131611955</link>
<description>&amp;quot;If anyone thinks Elections Canada is impartial.......then you probably think Muamar Quadaffi is correct when he states his people love him.&amp;quot;  Wow, HamesHalifax. That is a full-blown stinker of a line. Go back to the lab, my demagogic friend, and change the formula for your magic mushrooms.   </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/02/28/the-commons-a-five-year-old-accounting-dispute/#IDComment131611955</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>