[Newsbot]

Title: The May 2 Election Improper, Illegitimate, Null and Void.
Topic: Canadian Politics
Written By: Robin Mathews
Date: Wednesday, May 04 at 15:53
The act of naming Stephen Harper and the Conservative Members of Parliament in Contempt of Parliament ruled out Mr. Harper's legitimacy as a candidate for the May 2, 2011 Election... and probably did the same for all Conservative members.  The Election as conducted, therefore, was illegitimate.  The evidence follows. Canadians must demand Elections Canada request a full review of the Elections Act by the Supreme Court of Canada in order to end any false claims of legitimacy by the Stephen Harper group.
read more

[Individualist]

"The May 2 Election Improper, Illegitimate. Null and Void. YOU READ IT HERE."

It's amazing British Columbia can contain your massive ego.

You have eliminated all doubt about your deserving the nickname I gave you so long ago. You are a gasbag!

The election showed how irrelevant you and the rest of the far-left crowd are. Even Jack Layton's NDP is more Roy Romanow than Svend Robinson.

You don't have a captive audience anymore, and nobody gives a crap about your useless anti-American ranting posing as poetry. You're nothing.

[RickW]

Grow up, Indie. Harper bent and broke so many rules and laws, he should be in jail for 20 years. But the good folks of Ontario chose to ignore the very things Harper rants and raves about and wants to build jails for, they no longer warrant a place in Canada.

[Individualist]

RickW wrote:

Grow up, Indie. Harper bent and broke so many rules and laws, he should be in jail for 20 years. But the good folks of Ontario chose to ignore the very things Harper rants and raves about and wants to build jails for, they no longer warrant a place in Canada.

Another sore loser heard from. See you in four years.

[MALLIUS62]

Individualist
It seems to me the rule of law holds little sway in your political discourse. I just hope your vitriol against Mr Layton was not too nasty during the smear campaign the day before the election. Harper is an ego without equal and this country will pay dearly. Not just because of his policies but because of his disdain for the rule of law. And yours too apparently.

[Brent Swain]

Perhaps yank loving Indi has no business being north of the Canada US border. All would be invaders have their Vichy quislings, promoting apathy.

[Individualist]

Brent Swain wrote:

Perhaps yank loving Indi has no business being north of the Canada US border. All would be invaders have their Vichy quislings, promoting apathy.

So you can correctly comprehend the rest of my response, please consult the following:

http://dictionary.canadaspace.com/definition/american/

I will be using definitions #1 and #3 of this term, which are broadly accepted both within and outside of North America.

I know that rabid anti-Americans such as yourself live in a binary world where anyone who doesn't hate the US as you do are labelled "Yank-lovers" and similar epithets. Mel Hurtig, who seems about as fond of the US as you are, tends to use more pretentious words like "comprador" (or the one you used, "quisling"), but the idea is the same - that someone who isn't anti-American can't be a loyal Canadian. That is a judgement that is as faulty as it is insulting. It is in fact an instance of the "bifurcation fallacy" or "false dilemma" logical fallacy. Some more education...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Note that this is a fallacy you share with George Bush. Bet that stings.

Simply admiring or even wishing to emulate certain aspects about the US or opposing blanket condemnations of the US or its citizens by Canadian nationalists does not make one a "quisling" or fifth columnist acting of behalf of a foreign power.

You don't hear me ranting against Sweden or Norway. I do oppose the doctrine of "Janteloven", which underlies much of Scandinavian social democracy (and by extension NDP ideology), because it is profoundly anti-individual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janteloven

But I don't go onto Internet forums bashing Swedes or Norwegians. I don't want their system imported into Canada, but I have nothing against them or the choices they have made for themselves.

So allow me to forward on to you advice that was offered to me earlier in this thread. Grow up.

[RickW]

Individualist wrote:

RickW wrote:

Grow up, Indie. Harper bent and broke so many rules and laws, he should be in jail for 20 years. But the good folks of Ontario chose to ignore the very things Harper rants and raves about and wants to build jails for, they no longer warrant a place in Canada.

Another sore loser heard from. See you in four years.

Seems that the rule of law is optional. With an attitude such as yours, why not just let the police forces take perps out into the alley and dispense some 9 mm "justice"?
Let me see now - we've had brown shirts and black shirts. Now it looks like the rise of the blue shirts......

[RickW]

[quote="Individualist]profoundly anti-individual[/quote]
The problem with you so-called "individualists" is that, in order for you to practice your "individualism" you must neceessarily embrace anarchism. All else is simply moving the goal posts in your favour, and without allowing that it impinges on the rights of others that you claim to want for yourself.

[Brent Swain]

I'm anything but "Anti American' I think "America" is two great continents, consisting of 21 great countries ( and one dud). It's that arrogant, no-name country between Canada and Mexico , who's inhabitants are so embarrassed that, when asked where they are from, will only give the name of the continents, which is the problem.

[Individualist]

Brent Swain wrote:

I'm anything but "Anti American' I think "America" is two great continents, consisting of 21 great countries ( and one dud). It's that arrogant, no-name country between Canada and Mexico , who's inhabitants are so embarrassed that, when asked where they are from, will only give the name of the continents, which is the problem.

See, I know how to use copy and paste too...

So you can correctly comprehend the rest of my response, please consult the following:

http://dictionary.canadaspace.com/definition/american/

I will be using definitions #1 and #3 of this term, which are broadly accepted both within and outside of North America, except for some hate-addled non-entity named Brent Swain, who seems to be vying with Ed Deak for the coveted title of "Most Repetitive Poster of Vive" for 2011. Good luck there, buddy.

[Individualist]

Brent Swain wrote:

I'm anything but "Anti American' I think "America" is two great continents, consisting of 21 great countries ( and one dud). It's that arrogant, no-name country between Canada and Mexico , who's inhabitants are so embarrassed that, when asked where they are from, will only give the name of the continents, which is the problem.

Oh, and do you suppose we should stop calling ourselves "Canadian" as well, given the claim from Quebec nationalists that we unjustly appropriated that name (along with the maple leaf) from their "nation"?

Although I'm sure the Iroquois would have a thing or two to say about the French appropriation of their word for "village", but hey, we're all Africans if you go back far enough.

[RickW]

Individualist wrote:

Oh, and do you suppose we should stop calling ourselves "Canadian" as well, given the claim from Quebec nationalists that we unjustly appropriated that name (along with the maple leaf) from their "nation"?

Although I'm sure the Iroquois would have a thing or two to say about the French appropriation of their word for "village", but hey, we're all Africans if you go back far enough.

Depends on whether or not you believe in the term "by right of conquest".

[Brent Swain]

Back to the topic. Why not post the address where we send our complaints to elections Canada ,HERE.
We couldn't get rid of the Tory majority, but getting rid of Harper would make things entertaining ,as they would quickly return to what Diefenbaker described as the Tory Tradition of "Circle the wagons and shoot inwards. "
Without Harper, the only Reform party member who voted FOR the gun registry, they would scrap a lot more loony gun restrictions than Harper would ever let them do.
Then, they will have served their one useful function , and we can then get rid of them for a long time.

[Individualist]

Brent Swain wrote:

Back to the topic. Why not post the address where we send our complaints to elections Canada ,HERE.
We couldn't get rid of the Tory majority, but getting rid of Harper would make things entertaining ,as they would quickly return to what Diefenbaker described as the Tory Tradition of "Circle the wagons and shoot inwards. "
Without Harper, the only Reform party member who voted FOR the gun registry, they would scrap a lot more loony gun restrictions than Harper would ever let them do.
Then, they will have served their one useful function , and we can then get rid of them for a long time.

Sorry to burst yet another of your bubbles, but the Liberals have taken over that whole "circle the wagons and shoot inwards" idea. Liberals like stealing bad ideas from Red Tories (think wage and price controls and anti-Americanism), which is awfully convenient, since that party is now the default home for Red Tories (think David Orchard). And good riddance to bad statist rubbish, as far as I'm concerned.