[Newsbot]

Title: Three ministers won't run
Category: Political
Posted By: DerbyX
Date: 2008-09-04 15:00:27
Canadian

[DerbyX]

Gee RR. You seem to infer that every Liberal MP who decides to leave politics for any reasons is doing so under the "rats leaving the sinking ship" theory. Now we have 3 high profile CPC MPs, ministers at that leaving. Whats your take? Emerson knows he won't win re-election so that explains his leaving.

The others? I guess they feel they don't want to be part of a historic conservative collapse.

[kenmore]

Well Emerson knows he is fucked in Vancouver.. he wouldnt get re-elected anyway

[Arctic_Menace]

It's gonna be a very flammatory next couple of months...

[kenmore]

Yes.... and wont it be grand

[ridenrain]

Derby: Do you want to compare how may the libs lost to how many the CPC lost?
Do you want to do that in public?

besides.. I think we just borrowed Emerson anyways.

[newfette]

kenmore wrote:

Well Emerson knows he is fucked in Vancouver.. he wouldnt get re-elected anyway

same goes for Loyola Hearn... good ol Danny is in full force with his ABC campaign

[DerbyX]

ridenrain wrote:

Derby: Do you want to compare how may the libs lost to how many the CPC lost?
Do you want to do that in public?

besides.. I think we just borrowed Emerson anyways.

Compared to how many the PCs lost in 93?

Still, this is more about how you always state that any Liberal leaving for any reason is just a smoke screen yet never seem to see it in your own party.

A Liberal steps down due to a stroke and you question the timing and the accuracy. A Liberal decides not to run in order to spend more time with his family and you scoff at that too.

Suddenly not just 1 but 3 high profile CPC candidates and ministers at that decide not to run with little said as to why and the very eve of an election.

If they were Liberals you would be crowing nonstop about infighting and party abandonment.

Yet more examples of your partisan hackery. I guess you just didn't get enough being slapped around by Bootlegga.

[Reverend Blair]

What's up with Solberg? He's been there since before he had pubic hair and he quits now that his party forms government?

I've heard some bizarre conjecture on the subject...AIDS, criminal charges, a paternity suit...but nothing that sounds even close to right. Anybody know the real answer?

[ridenrain]

Are you still sore because I questioned why the Liberal party president was stepping down?
She left the party with a very brief medical excuse and I simply questioned why such big news was not in the news.
The party president knows every detail of the party, the finances and the people so her leaving was big news.


Considering that you folks employ Ouija boards to talk to our dead candidates, I don't see how you should be all so "righteously Indignant"

As for little boots, he wedged his boot in his mouth over that one.

[mtbr]

Reverend Blair wrote:

What's up with Solberg? He's been there since before he had pubic hair and he quits now that his party forms government?

I've heard some bizarre conjecture on the subject...AIDS, criminal charges, a paternity suit...but nothing that sounds even close to right. Anybody know the real answer?

why ? are you desperate for a scandal.

[Reverend Blair]

No, just curious. As I said, I've heard some pretty wild conjecture (if I was desperate for a scandal, I'd be wondering which of those was right instead of dismissing them all) and I never had Solberg pegged for being ready to give up politics.

[bootlegga]

DerbyX wrote:

ridenrain wrote:

Derby: Do you want to compare how may the libs lost to how many the CPC lost?
Do you want to do that in public?

besides.. I think we just borrowed Emerson anyways.

Compared to how many the PCs lost in 93?

Still, this is more about how you always state that any Liberal leaving for any reason is just a smoke screen yet never seem to see it in your own party.

A Liberal steps down due to a stroke and you question the timing and the accuracy. A Liberal decides not to run in order to spend more time with his family and you scoff at that too.

Suddenly not just 1 but 3 high profile CPC candidates and ministers at that decide not to run with little said as to why and the very eve of an election.

If they were Liberals you would be crowing nonstop about infighting and party abandonment.

Yet more examples of your partisan hackery. I guess you just didn't get enough being slapped around by Bootlegga.

Maybe he's a sadist and just likes getting smacked...

[robmik43]

bootlegga...you might want to Google the difference
between 'sadist' and 'masochist'...then post your
thought-provoking witticism....

[Tricks]

bootlegga wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

ridenrain wrote:

Derby: Do you want to compare how may the libs lost to how many the CPC lost?
Do you want to do that in public?

besides.. I think we just borrowed Emerson anyways.

Compared to how many the PCs lost in 93?

Still, this is more about how you always state that any Liberal leaving for any reason is just a smoke screen yet never seem to see it in your own party.

A Liberal steps down due to a stroke and you question the timing and the accuracy. A Liberal decides not to run in order to spend more time with his family and you scoff at that too.

Suddenly not just 1 but 3 high profile CPC candidates and ministers at that decide not to run with little said as to why and the very eve of an election.

If they were Liberals you would be crowing nonstop about infighting and party abandonment.

Yet more examples of your partisan hackery. I guess you just didn't get enough being slapped around by Bootlegga.

Maybe he's a sadist and just likes getting smacked...

I believe you mean masochist.