Reply #144: that was an acknowledgement that your statement was false?

[iverglas]

The NDP voted to retain the long gun registry. Right?

I have no clue how party discipline would work in your country. What it might get you, though, is a functioning Congress where votes were based on policy rather than horse trading, and a whole lot fewer barrels of pork, of course. The term "earmarks" is not in a Canadian dictionary. Legislation is about what it's about, not about a bridge to nowhere in a riding nobody's ever heard of.


Party before constituents and country, that sounds like a shitty deal.

Actually, you have your horses and carts seriously confused.

Party must have policy and be trusted to act on that policy, and then constituents get a genuine opportunity to vote for policy of their choice and expect party, if successful, to carry it out.

Strange concept for you to grasp, I do understand.

If the people in your riding thinks Harper is a lunatic but also think the registry is expensive theater benefiting Honeywell stock holders instead of public safety, they are screwed?
Not being Canadian and only started following Canadian politics for my own reasons, that is what my research come across.

Your research came across people who based their position on the registry on something having to do with Honeywell share values? I don't think you found those people in LUFA, who don't have enough brain cells amongst them to understand the sentence. Amazing, the things some of you people manage to "know" that none of us people who actually live here, vote for/against and even belong to / run as candidates for the parties in question manage never to have heard of.

Find someone who thinks Harper is an evil piece of shit and opposes the firearms registry and I will show you someone who has not yet managed to separate fact from propaganda.