Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Liberals only need Ontario and Quebec to win. Redneck WASP Alberta is irrelevant

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Auld Bob

unread,
Jun 30, 2009, 11:49:04 AM6/30/09
to

kekpar

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:49:30 AM7/1/09
to

Canuck57

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:53:33 AM7/1/09
to

"kekpar" <kek...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9f267afc-0f43-460e...@h30g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...

> On 30 juin, 11:49, Auld Bob <fraeoldbobpeffers...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T380E.pdf
>
> don't need bloc either

Actually, one thing I admire about the Bloc is that they represent Quebec
and don't piss on thei constituants like Liberals and Cons do.

Wish we had such a party in Western Canada.


Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

10x

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 2:02:20 PM7/1/09
to
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:45:24 -0700 (PDT), Voyager
<think...@dlcwest.com> wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes
>
>On Jul 1, 9:53�am, E. Barry Bruyea <lobbyi...@goaway.com> wrote:

>> Yeah, that's all we need is more 'one-trick-ponies'.
>
>We've already got "three one-trick ponie" parties that govern at the
>behest of, and to the benefit of, Central Canada.


You are wrong. The Liberal party governs to the behest of the folks
that control the Liberal party and for the benefit of the Liberal
party and the folks that control it. They just happen to own much of
central Canada.

Message has been deleted

x

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 6:08:36 PM7/1/09
to
E. Barry Bruyea wrote

> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:45:24 -0700 (PDT), Voyager
> <think...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>
> >x-no-archive: yes
> >
> >On Jul 1, 9:53�am, E. Barry Bruyea <lobbyi...@goaway.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 07:53:33 -0600, "Canuck57" <f...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yeah, that's all we need is more 'one-trick-ponies'.
> >
> >We've already got "three one-trick ponie" parties that govern at the
> >behest of, and to the benefit of, Central Canada.
>
> Well, they sure as hell aren't doing 'Central Canada' much good these
> days, given the job losses in Ontario, which has gone from a have (and
> helping support much of the west & the east for decades) to a have not
> province.
>

Well said.

Message has been deleted

10x

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:10:36 PM7/1/09
to
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 16:20:21 -0700 (PDT), Voyager
<think...@dlcwest.com> wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes


>
>On Jul 1, 4:09�pm, E. Barry Bruyea <lobbyi...@goaway.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:45:24 -0700 (PDT), Voyager
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <think.un...@dlcwest.com> wrote:
>> >x-no-archive: yes
>>
>> >On Jul 1, 9:53 am, E. Barry Bruyea <lobbyi...@goaway.com> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 07:53:33 -0600, "Canuck57" <f...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>

>> >> Yeah, that's all we need is more 'one-trick-ponies'.
>>
>> >We've already got "three one-trick ponie" parties that govern at the
>> >behest of, and to the benefit of, Central Canada.
>>
>> Well, they sure as hell aren't doing 'Central Canada' much good these
>> days, given the job losses in Ontario, which has gone from a have (and
>> helping support much of the west & the east for decades) to a have not

>> province.-
>
>Central Canada is still doing much better, viz the ROC, than they
>should be. And they have never supported the west.
>Raped it - yes. Stolen from it - yes. Cheated it - yes.
>Supported it - no.

Why are you using past tense?
The situation has not changed since they hung L. Riel...

Canuck57

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:21:33 PM7/1/09
to

"10x" <10x@telu�s.net> wrote in message
news:hkun45l17vudhqsm6...@4ax.com...

Quite true. Kind of proves the point that history was written by the
victors and colonial guard. For if L. Reil was successful we might have
called him the founder of Western Canada, or whatever they would have called
us.

Instead we are stuck with a Sir John A. MacDonald, drunkard joe boy of the
British empire bending over for anything alocolic, even poor french cognac.
Parliament has to be about the worst form of psuedo democracy going.


x

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:28:12 PM7/1/09
to
Canuck57 wrote

> Quite true. Kind of proves the point that history was written by the
> victors and colonial guard. For if L. Reil was successful we might have
> called him the founder of Western Canada, or whatever they would have called
> us.
>
> Instead we are stuck with a Sir John A. MacDonald, drunkard joe boy of the
> British empire bending over for anything alocolic, even poor french cognac.
> Parliament has to be about the worst form of psuedo democracy going.
>
>

You must admit that MacDonald was pretty interesting.

He was bilingual, Celtic and English (Celt being his mother tongue)

And when he went to London to petition the British Parliament for our
independence, he got a wee bit tipsey and spilled a lamp in his London hotel
room, causing it to burn to the ground.

Not a bad start for our country, I say!


He was a real drinker. The story about how he puked during a session of
Parliament is right up there with how Churchill made that remark "My Lady, I
may be drunk, but tomorrow I will be sobre, and you will still be ugly".

Canuck57

unread,
Jul 1, 2009, 9:51:40 PM7/1/09
to

"x" <x...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.24b5d73a2...@news.x-privat.org...

LMAO.... did the drunk really burn a London hotel? Funny....


Message has been deleted

petem

unread,
Jul 2, 2009, 8:49:04 AM7/2/09
to

"E. Barry Bruyea" <lobb...@goaway.com> a �crit dans le message de groupe
de discussion : ei1n45l73b85od28j...@4ax.com...

> Yeah, that's all we need is more 'one-trick-ponies'.
>
>

Its allways better to have a 'one-trick-ponie' then just a old beaten
horse...

Message has been deleted

nadagami

unread,
Jul 2, 2009, 1:47:07 PM7/2/09
to
Pourquoi alors l'Europe ne veut pas acheter les produits tir�s de la chasse
au phoque pratiqu�e par les Francoqu�b�cois autochotones de la C�te-Nord et
des �les-de-la-Madeleine?

Merci en passant, et � la tr�s fran�aise Brigitte et au tr�s britannique
Paul de nous rappeler tout l'amour qu'ont pour nous la France et
l'Angleterre.

nadagami... eee... allez donc chier peut-�tre aussi en m�me temps?

nadagami

unread,
Jul 2, 2009, 1:48:53 PM7/2/09
to

"nadagami" <nada...@adresseinvalide.net> a �crit dans le message de news:
vo63m.33046$Db2.32507@edtnps83...


S'cusez! Mais en m�me temps, chus bin content de m'�tre tromp� en envoyant
par erreur mon message ici.

nadagami


Message has been deleted

Scotius

unread,
Jul 3, 2009, 6:08:44 PM7/3/09
to
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:49:04 -0700 (PDT), Auld Bob
<fraeoldbob...@gmail.com> wrote:

>http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T380E.pdf

You keep up that crap and they'll separate, and then they
won't care WHAT you think of them.

0 new messages