260

Leaders’ debate liveblog

Join Andrew Coyne, Rick Mercer, Scott Feschuk and the rest of Maclean’s election team


 

Check in with Andrew Coyne, Rick Mercer, Scott Feschuk, Aaron Wherry, Colby Cosh, Philippe Gohier and the rest of the Macleans.ca team for an evening of analysis, commentary and, well, probably a bit of mockery. The fun starts at 6:45 p.m.


 
Filed under:

Leaders’ debate liveblog

  1. So glad you're doing this since I cant' watch it on television.

  2. So glad you're doing this since I cant' watch it on television.

    • Should be live on the CPAC website

  3. GO STEVE!!!! Send the Russian back the USA!!!!

  4. GO STEVE!!!! Send the Russian back the USA!!!!

    • Don't forget to wipe, Jimmy

      • Don't forget to flush, dumby.

        • Do you have to leave so soon? I was just about to poison the tea.

          • By all means, start without me

  5. Don't forget to wipe, Jimmy

  6. Should be live on the CPAC website

  7. Michael Ignatieff wrote in one of his sleazy books: ‘Your breasts are perfect,' he said drily. When she looked down at them, at the little elipses with their raspberry nipples awaiting the touch of his hands, she began to laugh. He kissed them, making a ceremony of it, first one, then the other, and she wached him, feeling the echoes of a silent laughter rippling through her…”

    Check it out! http://www.torontosun.com/news/decision2011/2011/

  8. Michael Ignatieff wrote in one of his sleazy books: ‘Your breasts are perfect,%E2%80%99 he said drily. When she looked down at them, at the little elipses with their raspberry nipples awaiting the touch of his hands, she began to laugh. He kissed them, making a ceremony of it, first one, then the other, and she wached him, feeling the echoes of a silent laughter rippling through her…”

    Check it out! http://www.torontosun.com/news/decision2011/2011/

  9. Michael Ignatieff wrote in one of his sleazy books: ‘Your breasts are perfect,' he said drily. When she looked down at them, at the little elipses with their raspberry nipples awaiting the touch of his hands, she began to laugh. He kissed them, making a ceremony of it, first one, then the other, and she wached him, feeling the echoes of a silent laughter rippling through her…”

    Check it out! http://www.torontosun.com/news/decision2011/2011/

    • So….you're scandalized by reading fiction are you?

      • I'm just amazed he can read….

        • I'm not sure he can, given what he said in his first post.

      • No; just jealous. He's been doing the same Garfield and Odie strips for years…

    • Uh oh…. he's a heterosexual!

  10. So….you're scandalized by reading fiction are you?

  11. I'm just amazed he can read….

  12. I'm not sure he can, given what he said in his first post.

  13. Don't forget to flush, dumby.

  14. Do you have to leave so soon? I was just about to poison the tea.

  15. If the fun is supposed to start at 6:45, I'm sure not in on it because nothing's showing up in that window thingy at the top.

  16. If the fun is supposed to start at 6:45, I'm sure not in on it because nothing's showing up in that window thingy at the top.

    • Oh, Feschuck just stumbled on, for one….

  17. Uh oh…. he's a heterosexual!

  18. Oh, Feschuck just stumbled on, for one….

  19. Ignorant. He's Canadian. Does his Russian ethnicity really bother you?

  20. Ignorant. He's Canadian. Does his Russian ethnicity really bother you?

  21. Good thing no one wore their red suits. What a clash with the set that would have been!

  22. Good thing no one wore their red suits. What a clash with the set that would have been!

  23. Drink! Already!!

  24. Drink! Already!!

    • Okay, Harper's getting me drunk.

  25. Okay, Harper's getting me drunk.

  26. Aaannd Duceppe gives Mr. Harper a running head-start.. cute intro, but doesn't touch the question at all.

  27. Aaannd Duceppe gives Mr. Harper a running head-start.. cute intro, but doesn't touch the question at all.

  28. Iggy:

    "You're a liar"

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Very un-Prime Ministerial.

  29. Iggy:

    "You're a liar"

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Very un-Prime Ministerial.

  30. And the camera man must be from the CBC,

    because he's continually showing Harper's back while Harper's speaking.

  31. And the camera man must be from the CBC,

    because he's continually showing Harper's back while Harper's speaking.

    • They're trying to establish the presence of a tail and cloven hoofs.

      • Or trying for his best side…

  32. And are the opposition actively trying to look like a coalition against Harper, because if they are, they're doing a heck of a job.

  33. And are the opposition actively trying to look like a coalition against Harper, because if they are, they're doing a heck of a job.

  34. Iggy:

    "You're a liar" "You can't tell the truth"

    Iggy's got the angry, looking-down-his nose, sneer down pat.

    I'm no public relations expert, but angry sneering?

    I guess one has to be from an American Ivy League school, to call someone a "liar". Takes a special kind of skill.

  35. Iggy:

    "You're a liar" "You can't tell the truth"

    Iggy's got the angry, looking-down-his nose, sneer down pat.

    I'm no public relations expert, but angry sneering?

    I guess one has to be from an American Ivy League school, to call someone a "liar". Takes a special kind of skill.

    • Yeah, the willingness to point out an ugly truth about our current PM

      • I'm so glad chet's here to give us his expert advice. Gives those 18 year olds on the chat rooms a break from the creepy old guy vibe.

    • Actually he's from University of Toronto. So far that is still in Canada.

  36. Yeah, the willingness to point out an ugly truth about our current PM

  37. Iggy is now yelling at Harper:

    "you're a liar"

    over and over and over again.

    Very Harvardesque.

  38. Iggy is now yelling at Harper:

    "you're a liar"

    over and over and over again.

    Very Harvardesque.

    • Yalie.

  39. Emperor Harper showing his sleaziness…………….lying ,not answering the questions asked and looking sooooooooooooo smooth I hope Canadians wake up to see through the smoke screen and exercise their right to vote so we can restore some kind of democracy to the canadian people.

  40. Emperor Harper showing his sleaziness…………….lying ,not answering the questions asked and looking sooooooooooooo smooth I hope Canadians wake up to see through the smoke screen and exercise their right to vote so we can restore some kind of democracy to the canadian people.

    • Earth to Gisele… the Canadian people have been voting for years. And they're voting for Conservative candidates. That *is* democracy

  41. Serious question:

    Has there been a single statement by Iggy towards Harper that wasn't an angry personal attack?

    One?

    Harper: gives policy statement

    Iggy: You're a liar

    Harper: gives another policy point

    Iggy: "You haven't even earned a minority!"

    (Really? Not even a minority? That's funny cuz, I thought he had)

  42. Serious question:

    Has there been a single statement by Iggy towards Harper that wasn't an angry personal attack?

    One?

    Harper: gives policy statement

    Iggy: You're a liar

    Harper: gives another policy point

    Iggy: "You haven't even earned a minority!"

    (Really? Not even a minority? That's funny cuz, I thought he had)

    • Looks like (other than me) nobody's paying attention to you, Chet….

      • Other than you, ya mean?

        • That IS what I said :-)

          • As Clinton once said, that all depends on what your definition of "Is" is.

    • Hint: It's not a personal attack to point out falsehoods.

      • Hint: Canadians want to hear what Iggy will do for our country.

        Proving he can call Harper a "liar!!!!" doesn't really do that.

        • You really don't understand what a debate is, do you? I understand that your idol probably would have just preferred a stump speech without anybody there, but that's not a debate, that's dictating.

          But if you really want to know, you can try here: http://www.liberal.ca/platform/

  43. Looks like (other than me) nobody's paying attention to you, Chet….

  44. Yalie.

  45. Hint: It's not a personal attack to point out falsehoods.

  46. Hint: Canadians want to hear what Iggy will do for our country.

    Proving he can call Harper a "liar!!!!" doesn't really do that.

  47. Other than you, ya mean?

  48. That IS what I said :-)

  49. You really don't understand what a debate is, do you? I understand that your idol probably would have just preferred a stump speech without anybody there, but that's not a debate, that's dictating.

    But if you really want to know, you can try here: http://www.liberal.ca/platform/

  50. Harper is grinning on the hope that 40% of Canadians will believe his pap.

  51. Harper is grinning on the hope that 40% of Canadians will believe his pap.

  52. "The right to defend themselves without being charged" is simply a bad idea. There needs to be a charge, an investigation, and, if appropriate, an acquittal based on self-defense. Otherwise we give everybody the liscence to hurt whoever they want and simply claim self-defense.

  53. "The right to defend themselves without being charged" is simply a bad idea. There needs to be a charge, an investigation, and, if appropriate, an acquittal based on self-defense. Otherwise we give everybody the liscence to hurt whoever they want and simply claim self-defense.

  54. Layton's not having a good night, and Ignatieff is coming across as shrill, condescending, and somewhat manufactured.

    But what in God's name was that blatant lie Harper was trying to pass regarding how a government is supposed to form? "Our system is that the party winning the most seats forms government?" I have no doubt that 90% of the population just nodded and assumed it was the truth, but WTF.

  55. This liveblog sucks.

    You think this stuff is funny? The direction of our political leadership and the allocation of our tax dollars worthy of ridicule?

    G'bye.

  56. Layton's not having a good night, and Ignatieff is coming across as shrill, condescending, and somewhat manufactured.

    But what in God's name was that blatant lie Harper was trying to pass regarding how a government is supposed to form? "Our system is that the party winning the most seats forms government?" I have no doubt that 90% of the population just nodded and assumed it was the truth, but WTF.

    • This is all very nuanced. First of all, most of the rules are conventions. Secondly, one of those conventions is that when the current government is dissolved, the GG asks the party with the most seats to form a government. Of course it's not an all around rule, there are circumstances in which that might not happen (for instance in the King–Byng Affair when King refused to resign his post), but that's the convention.

      • There are historical precedents where the party winning the most seats did not form the next government; it's all about getting the confidence of the house. Harper didn't say "normal convention suggests", he said "the way our system works". There was no nuance in that statement.

        • There's not a whole lot of difference between "convention suggests" and the "way our system works". The conventions decide how the system works. So what's the difference? What he said is not a false statement.

          For instance, it's not a lie to say a soccer team wins a game by scoring the most goals. But that's not the only way to win, a soccer team can win by default if the opposing team does not field at least 8 players, and in fact there are other exceptions to the rule as well.

          • I'm sure Arthur Meighen would have loved our system to have worked the way Harper told Canadians is does.

          • That's true, but the parallel is not quite right, considering Harper is the incumbent and Meighen was not.

            Therefore:
            -Harper is saying he should remain PM if his party wins the most seats
            -King remained PM even when his party did not win the most seats

            Harper is not exactly going out on a limb here. Harper has also spent a lot of time in the campaign telling people there will be a coalition even if he does win the most seats, if he does not win enough seats for a majority.

          • I'll give Harper the benefit of the doubt and assume I misheard him, but I distinctly remember hearing that "the party winning the most seats gets to form government", and not a direct reference to either his party or the upcoming election.

            I suppose I'll have to undergo the distasteful exercise of reviewing that exchange. Or I could just forget about it, as I assume almost every other Canadian already is.

          • The party with the most seats does not automatically get to form the govt. It gets the first crack at winning the confidence of the house, that's all. The other parties can vote down the throne speech if they don't like it. Then it's up to the GG.[It's the very thing Harper fears.] He may except that the next party in line is stable enough.Or he may order an election. Harper was stretching the truth as usual.Harper's assertion was completely non sensical. How can the opposition seize power if the party with the most seats is an automatic given? Someone should pull up what he said in 04 or 97, where he contradicts this version of SH.
            I just can't believe Ignatieff in particular didn't jump all over that.

      • I think you might want to return to high school on that one.

  57. This liveblog sucks.

    You think this stuff is funny? The direction of our political leadership and the allocation of our tax dollars worthy of ridicule?

    G'bye.

    • It's called gallows humour. Most people here are sick to death of all of these talking points and are poking fun at the sheer silliness of the exchange.

  58. They're trying to establish the presence of a tail and cloven hoofs.

  59. It's called gallows humour. Most people here are sick to death of all of these talking points and are poking fun at the sheer silliness of the exchange.

  60. I lean towards the Tories, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think Ignatieff sh*t the bed tonight. He didn't go at a lot of the low-hanging fruit in the Tory platform (eg. things that won't be implemented in 5 years and Harper's budgets) and barely talked about the economy. He also failed to properly tackle G-8 spending as an accountability issue – Instead he talked about his democracy thing, which I just don't see moving votes. He was good on the international relations question, however.

    Harper was fairly solid. I think he strode the balance between being angry Harper and being prozac Harper. Whether or not his claims were correct, he did a good job of focusing on the issues and listing specific things that he would do.

    Jack Layton was rambunctious, and looked more like an alternative to Harper than Ignatieff did.

    Duceppe was not at his best. He sounded drunk.

    So my guess as to the "who won" polls is (which is not necessarily who I personally thought won): Harper > Layton > Ignatieff > Duceppe

  61. This is all very nuanced. First of all, most of the rules are conventions. Secondly, one of those conventions is that when the current government is dissolved, the GG asks the party with the most seats to form a government. Of course it's not an all around rule, there are circumstances in which that might not happen (for instance in the King–Byng Affair when King refused to resign his post), but that's the convention.

  62. I lean towards the Tories, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think Ignatieff sh*t the bed tonight. He didn't go at a lot of the low-hanging fruit in the Tory platform (eg. things that won't be implemented in 5 years and Harper's budgets) and barely talked about the economy. He also failed to properly tackle G-8 spending as an accountability issue – Instead he talked about his democracy thing, which I just don't see moving votes. He was good on the international relations question, however.

    Harper was fairly solid. I think he strode the balance between being angry Harper and being prozac Harper. Whether or not his claims were correct, he did a good job of focusing on the issues and listing specific things that he would do.

    Jack Layton was rambunctious, and looked more like an alternative to Harper than Ignatieff did.

    Duceppe was not at his best. He sounded drunk.

    So my guess as to the "who won" polls is (which is not necessarily who I personally thought won): Harper > Layton > Ignatieff > Duceppe

    • I agree, based on impressions alone, Harper won.

      The problem for him will come with the analysis immediately after where the lies will be pointed out.

      • Best way to inject some fun in the debates? Wire them all up and let Paikin shock them whenever they lie. Harper would have done the most dancing, by far… but none would have escaped without a jig or two.

    • I agree that Ignatieff seemed to be coached by his handlers primarily to go after Harper on the sleaze, corruption, lies, etc. thing. And as a result, he didn't spend as much time as he arguably should telling Canadians what he actually wants to do as PM.

    • While I don't know if I would go so far as to say he sh*t the bed, Harper definitely had the edge over Ignatieff tonight.

      But Layton sounded terrible to me; apparently I'm the only one in Canada who thought Layton's performance was not very good at all.

      • I would give him a big hug and kiss on both cheeks for dissing Iggy about his attendace in the HoC – that was priceless!!!!!

        • He held Ignatieff's feet to the fire more than once, no question, but both Harper and Ignatieff seemed much smoother and quicker on their feet. Harper more than Ignatieff, tonight.

          • I like Jack, and I normally believe him. It's when he's being either terribly sincere (looking directly at the camera and giving his sort of pleading pledges) or when he's being witty (the one-liners with that back-handed flip kind of delivery) that an old-fashioned sign flashes in my head that says "BAD ACTOR," in red lights, oddly enogh.

            The flashing gives me a headache if I see too many of his commercials.

      • I thought Layton's performance was erratic. As is usual, he often comes across as a used car salesman. However, also as is usual, he got off the best one-liners, although the one about criminals in the Senate during a serious discussion on crime was pretty much a juvenile cheap shot.

        I think Harper did exactly what he wanted. Stayed cool and above the fray. To me, Iggy's body language and tone were often not prime ministerial. His inexperience in these settings showed, in my opinion.

        • There did not appear to be any real 'gotcha' moments from any leader tonight, so I'm not of the opinion that this will be a real poll-moving performance. Maybe tomorrow night.

          I'll agree that Ignatieff was coached to go for the emotional appeal, which really didn't look very good at all. However, I'm sure the Liberals had focus-grouped that approach before they went with it, so perhaps they might deem it a success. Who knows.

          With a few weeks left to go in the campaign, this debate will undoubtedly be forgotten when people head to the polls.

    • "low hanging fruit" comment is dead on.
      A missed opportunity.

      I will add that the opposition leaders did come off as very rational at times and this might plant the seed that cooperative minority governments might not be so bad after all.

      • "cooperative minority governments might not be so bad after all."

        Did we watch the same debate? If tonight is what a coalition government would look like, we're all screwed.

  63. I agree, based on impressions alone, Harper won.

    The problem for him will come with the analysis immediately after where the lies will be pointed out.

  64. I cannot believe our PM just spent 10 minutes endorsing Laffer curves.

  65. I cannot believe our PM just spent 10 minutes endorsing Laffer curves.

    • I'm not generally a fan of that argument, but between 2000 and 2008 corporate taxes were cut by over a third. Revenues rose from 23 billion to 40 billion (look it up in the public accounts). They have since fallen (to about 30 billion), but are still well above their 2000 levels. As taxes go, the corporate tax seems to be a bit better than revenue neutral.

      • What were revenues doing before that though?

      • Any other economic activity going on from 2000 to 2008? Maybe economic activity that had something to do with inflating credit bubbles? If you pump more money into an economy, your tax revenues will raise. That much is a given. But I don't see any causation here between cutting corporate taxes and increasing revenue from productivity gains as Laffer and Harper suggest.

        • Well there's certainly causation or even correlation suggesting that cutting corporate income taxes did any damage to government revenue either. Besides, the "credit bubble" burst in 2008, and they're still bringing in $8B more than in 2000. And to be fair, 2000 was the peak of the .com bubble also, so really comparing 2000 to 2008 is fairly accurate.

      • That's silly. There is a point at which taxes are too high, which they probably were. Comparatively, anyway. But there comes a time when lowering it further does nothing. And we were probably there two years ago. Those that have any idea of what a Laffer curve is might call it 'diminishing returns' or something.

        • The problem is most people don't understand that the Laffer curve has two sides, and most of those who do don't look at the evidence that's available to tell us which side we're on.

          What we do know is that even the tax rates of the United States aren't all the way over the top of the curve yet, as Bush's tax cuts did result in lower revenues for the government.. not higher. Admitted, the reduction wasn't as much as the simple tax cut would suggest, which means there probably was some additional business activity that developed, but it wasn't very much.

    • Why can't you believe it Mike? Unlike the NDP's socialism and the Liberal's socialism-light, which have always proven to be failures, the Laffer curve theory of economics has always, I repeat – always, been proven to work. Regardless of how many times the left chooses to lie about it, the undeniable FACT is that lowering tax rates increased government tax revenue for John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Mike Harris and every other politician who ever had the courage and the economic smarts to do it. Every time, without fail.

      • Flat out lie. Bush cut taxes, Bush's revenue decreased.

  66. There are historical precedents where the party winning the most seats did not form the next government; it's all about getting the confidence of the house. Harper didn't say "normal convention suggests", he said "the way our system works". There was no nuance in that statement.

  67. I agree that Ignatieff seemed to be coached by his handlers primarily to go after Harper on the sleaze, corruption, lies, etc. thing. And as a result, he didn't spend as much time as he arguably should telling Canadians what he actually wants to do as PM.

  68. By all means, start without me

  69. Wonderful, Ignatieff played right into Harper's hand….

  70. Wonderful, Ignatieff played right into Harper's hand….

    • Please tell me you're not trying to revive the Chessmaster meme…

      • I think he's going for more for a gin meme.

        Harper the gin-meister..

        • I definitely could have meistered some gin last night.

  71. There's not a whole lot of difference between "convention suggests" and the "way our system works". The conventions decide how the system works. So what's the difference? What he said is not a false statement.

    For instance, it's not a lie to say a soccer team wins a game by scoring the most goals. But that's not the only way to win, a soccer team can win by default if the opposing team does not field at least 8 players, and in fact there are other exceptions to the rule as well.

  72. I'm so glad chet's here to give us his expert advice. Gives those 18 year olds on the chat rooms a break from the creepy old guy vibe.

  73. I'm sure Arthur Meighen would have loved our system to have worked the way Harper told Canadians is does.

  74. Please tell me you're not trying to revive the Chessmaster meme…

  75. One of the CTV guys:

    Cool hand Harper, Angry Iggy, Happy Jack and Duceppe the Provoquer – nuff said!!!

  76. While I don't know if I would go so far as to say he sh*t the bed, Harper definitely had the edge over Ignatieff tonight.

    But Layton sounded terrible to me; apparently I'm the only one in Canada who thought Layton's performance was not very good at all.

  77. One of the CTV guys:

    Cool hand Harper, Angry Iggy, Happy Jack and Duceppe the Provoquer – nuff said!!!

    • While I'll certainly give that performance to Harper, there wasn't enough in there to interrupt the current news-flow. And since the current news-flow is focused on Fraser's report, that's unfortunate for Harper.

  78. I would give him a big hug and kiss on both cheeks for dissing Iggy about his attendace in the HoC – that was priceless!!!!!

  79. That's true, but the parallel is not quite right, considering Harper is the incumbent and Meighen was not.

    Therefore:
    -Harper is saying he should remain PM if his party wins the most seats
    -King remained PM even when his party did not win the most seats

    Harper is not exactly going out on a limb here. Harper has also spent a lot of time in the campaign telling people there will be a coalition even if he does win the most seats, if he does not win enough seats for a majority.

  80. I'm not generally a fan of that argument, but between 2000 and 2008 corporate taxes were cut by over a third. Revenues rose from 23 billion to 40 billion (look it up in the public accounts). They have since fallen (to about 30 billion), but are still well above their 2000 levels. As taxes go, the corporate tax seems to be a bit better than revenue neutral.

  81. I think you might want to return to high school on that one.

  82. Harper seemed ill in the press scrum after

  83. Harper seemed ill in the press scrum after

    • He was probably just nauseated at having to deal with people who don't fawn over him.

      • The anger just under the surface was palpable. "You rejected my beautiful right wing vision, and now everyone in the country is going to pay!"

    • I thought Jack was rather yellow & jaundiced-looking; didn't think he looked healthy at all. Hope the campaign isn't taking too much out of him.

      • I saw that, but I honestly blamed the makeup person. I figured they had put him up on his podium earlier in the day and light-tested his makeup to find the perfect shade of orange that would look best on HD against the primary camera angle.

        But he did look a little too fake-tanned for my liking.

  84. So! Prime Minister Harper was the only one to wear a Canadian flag on his lapel. Duceppe may be forgiven because he is a really skewed Canadian. But the other two contenders have no excuse.

  85. So! Prime Minister Harper was the only one to wear a Canadian flag on his lapel. Duceppe may be forgiven because he is a really skewed Canadian. But the other two contenders have no excuse.

    • That is by a long-shot THE dumbest statement I have ever read on this board. Even chet in his angriest moments doesn't need to scrape the barrel that badly.

      That's it? That's the BEST you have to offer? He wore a flag on his lapel? Sweet jesus, mary, and joseph as my dear, late mother used to say.

      My god, even CATS has never written anything so utterly obtuse, so utterly lacking in any logic, reason, so so Fox News Republican in it's inanity (and trust me brother, I recognize it- I'm living it every day here in the US)

      If I may be so bold (and frankly so utterly rude) as to speak on behalf of this board, on behalf of Liberal, Conservative, NDPer, Green Party, Bloquist (of both the Quebec and Alberta varieties), libertarian, authoritarian, I would say, "Please go away. Now"

      • So, Dave, how do you really feel about the Agha Khan`s comment ?

      • You don't suppose maybe he was being sarcastic?

        • Oh I hope so. I don't like letting emotion take over like that.

  86. I thought Layton's performance was erratic. As is usual, he often comes across as a used car salesman. However, also as is usual, he got off the best one-liners, although the one about criminals in the Senate during a serious discussion on crime was pretty much a juvenile cheap shot.

    I think Harper did exactly what he wanted. Stayed cool and above the fray. To me, Iggy's body language and tone were often not prime ministerial. His inexperience in these settings showed, in my opinion.

  87. They're all Canadian and we all know it.

  88. He held Ignatieff's feet to the fire more than once, no question, but both Harper and Ignatieff seemed much smoother and quicker on their feet. Harper more than Ignatieff, tonight.

  89. "low hanging fruit" comment is dead on.
    A missed opportunity.

    I will add that the opposition leaders did come off as very rational at times and this might plant the seed that cooperative minority governments might not be so bad after all.

  90. There did not appear to be any real 'gotcha' moments from any leader tonight, so I'm not of the opinion that this will be a real poll-moving performance. Maybe tomorrow night.

    I'll agree that Ignatieff was coached to go for the emotional appeal, which really didn't look very good at all. However, I'm sure the Liberals had focus-grouped that approach before they went with it, so perhaps they might deem it a success. Who knows.

    With a few weeks left to go in the campaign, this debate will undoubtedly be forgotten when people head to the polls.

  91. There were a lot of attacks that seemed almost ready to work and then got blown. Duceppe in the first scrum with Harper seemed like he really really had an idea to nail Harper with if he could only figure out how to say it. Ignatieff got on a good roll on the G8 and other lying to Parliament accusations but he didn't follow up properly. Same with Layton's good line about criminals in the senate.
    To me, the only attack that might stick was Layton on Ignatieff's House attendance, and Ignatieff handled it very poorly with his How dare you sir! schtick, instead of actually explaining himself.
    Even there, Layton could have done better by following up with how Ignatieff's absence, and the Parliamentary flu of his caucus allowed Harper to rule with a de facto majority.

    In short: what a bunch of doofuses!

  92. There were a lot of attacks that seemed almost ready to work and then got blown. Duceppe in the first scrum with Harper seemed like he really really had an idea to nail Harper with if he could only figure out how to say it. Ignatieff got on a good roll on the G8 and other lying to Parliament accusations but he didn't follow up properly. Same with Layton's good line about criminals in the senate.
    To me, the only attack that might stick was Layton on Ignatieff's House attendance, and Ignatieff handled it very poorly with his How dare you sir! schtick, instead of actually explaining himself.
    Even there, Layton could have done better by following up with how Ignatieff's absence, and the Parliamentary flu of his caucus allowed Harper to rule with a de facto majority.

    In short: what a bunch of doofuses!

  93. A corporate tax cut may play a role in the economy, especially a 1/3 tax cut like you claim. the return to the tax level of a year ago is extremely unlikely to place Canada in economic jeopardy.

  94. Also, I understand Saturday Night Live's Joe Piscopo is trying to call Ignatieff. He wants the voice for Mr. Whiner back.
    Zing!

  95. Also, I understand Saturday Night Live's Joe Piscopo is trying to call Ignatieff. He wants the voice for Mr. Whiner back.
    Zing!

  96. I'll give Harper the benefit of the doubt and assume I misheard him, but I distinctly remember hearing that "the party winning the most seats gets to form government", and not a direct reference to either his party or the upcoming election.

    I suppose I'll have to undergo the distasteful exercise of reviewing that exchange. Or I could just forget about it, as I assume almost every other Canadian already is.

  97. Actually he's from University of Toronto. So far that is still in Canada.

  98. While I'll certainly give that performance to Harper, there wasn't enough in there to interrupt the current news-flow. And since the current news-flow is focused on Fraser's report, that's unfortunate for Harper.

  99. The party with the most seats does not automatically get to form the govt. It gets the first crack at winning the confidence of the house, that's all. The other parties can vote down the throne speech if they don't like it. Then it's up to the GG.[It's the very thing Harper fears.] He may except that the next party in line is stable enough.Or he may order an election. Harper was stretching the truth as usual.Harper's assertion was completely non sensical. How can the opposition seize power if the party with the most seats is an automatic given? Someone should pull up what he said in 04 or 97, where he contradicts this version of SH.
    I just can't believe Ignatieff in particular didn't jump all over that.

  100. What were revenues doing before that though?

  101. He was probably just nauseated at having to deal with people who don't fawn over him.

  102. Honestly. Watching re-runs in the west here. Jack Layton just suggested that the Temporary Foreign Worker Program work pretty much the way it already does. Goof.

  103. Honestly. Watching re-runs in the west here. Jack Layton just suggested that the Temporary Foreign Worker Program work pretty much the way it already does. Goof.

    • I'll take that over Harper's magic "an immigrant is a small loan away from economic prosperity in the field they practiced in their homeland" bit.

  104. No; just jealous. He's been doing the same Garfield and Odie strips for years…

  105. Or trying for his best side…

  106. The anger just under the surface was palpable. "You rejected my beautiful right wing vision, and now everyone in the country is going to pay!"

  107. I'll take that over Harper's magic "an immigrant is a small loan away from economic prosperity in the field they practiced in their homeland" bit.

  108. Best way to inject some fun in the debates? Wire them all up and let Paikin shock them whenever they lie. Harper would have done the most dancing, by far… but none would have escaped without a jig or two.

  109. That is by a long-shot THE dumbest statement I have ever read on this board. Even chet in his angriest moments doesn't need to scrape the barrel that badly.

    That's it? That's the BEST you have to offer? He wore a flag on his lapel? Sweet jesus, mary, and joseph as my dear, late mother used to say.

    My god, even CATS has never written anything so utterly obtuse, so utterly lacking in any logic, reason, so so Fox News Republican in it's inanity (and trust me brother, I recognize it- I'm living it every day here in the US)

    If I may be so bold (and frankly so utterly rude) as to speak on behalf of this board, on behalf of Liberal, Conservative, NDPer, Green Party, Bloquist (of both the Quebec and Alberta varieties), libertarian, authoritarian, I would say, "Please go away. Now"

  110. Any other economic activity going on from 2000 to 2008? Maybe economic activity that had something to do with inflating credit bubbles? If you pump more money into an economy, your tax revenues will raise. That much is a given. But I don't see any causation here between cutting corporate taxes and increasing revenue from productivity gains as Laffer and Harper suggest.

  111. Intersting takes here. My admittedly partisan impressions.

    Harper stayed on message but came off so robotically no one who ever doubted he is one need wonder again – suggest he break out the piano immediately. His dismissals of how parliament actually functions were breath taking.

    Ignatieff had his moments. The you stiffed parliament and bickering retorts were effective. Otherwise he looked nervous, a bit over the top and missed some glorious opportunities to out Harper. Did not presnt himself effectively as an alternative. Jack stole his limelight.Does anyone else think ruling out a coalition with the NDP as well as the bloc might turn out to be a disasterous mistake?

    Jack was on the whole magnificent. Ok just good. I had no idea he could speak so well. Usually he's like the annoying everyready bunny to me. On occasion skewered Harper and particularly Ignatiff. Definitely effective.

    Duceppe did look a little drunk. Not his best. But oddly no one seems to think he gave Harper his most uncomfortable moment one the 04 question. I thought he was very effective there intandem with Layton…although i might be projecting.

  112. Intersting takes here. My admittedly partisan impressions.

    Harper stayed on message but came off so robotically no one who ever doubted he is one need wonder again – suggest he break out the piano immediately. His dismissals of how parliament actually functions were breath taking.

    Ignatieff had his moments. The you stiffed parliament and bickering retorts were effective. Otherwise he looked nervous, a bit over the top and missed some glorious opportunities to out Harper. Did not presnt himself effectively as an alternative. Jack stole his limelight.Does anyone else think ruling out a coalition with the NDP as well as the bloc might turn out to be a disasterous mistake?

    Jack was on the whole magnificent. Ok just good. I had no idea he could speak so well. Usually he's like the annoying everyready bunny to me. On occasion skewered Harper and particularly Ignatiff. Definitely effective.

    Duceppe did look a little drunk. Not his best. But oddly no one seems to think he gave Harper his most uncomfortable moment one the 04 question. I thought he was very effective there intandem with Layton…although i might be projecting.

    • I thought Iggy's comments re: bickering might have held some water if they hadn't been preceded and followed by 2 hours of bickering.

  113. I thought Jack was rather yellow & jaundiced-looking; didn't think he looked healthy at all. Hope the campaign isn't taking too much out of him.

  114. Well, maybe Steve needed to remind himself

  115. Well, maybe Steve needed to remind himself

  116. This debate should get Harper his majority. The other leaders came off as whiners who wasted most of their valuable minutes taking pot shots at Harper instead of selling themselves as potential PMs. Iggy and Jack sounded lame and somewhat grasping in comparison to Harper who appeared relatively calm and collected. It made up my mind…and, as an aside, although I empathize with people who want to move to Canada and can understand why they would like to have their parents and grandparents come here, too, our health care system would crash if we get too many elderly people emigrating all at once. It going to be hard enough for existing Canadian baby boomers to get adequate health care…So, for the time being patience is required. As the economy improves those parents and grandparents should see the welcome door open wider.

  117. This debate should get Harper his majority. The other leaders came off as whiners who wasted most of their valuable minutes taking pot shots at Harper instead of selling themselves as potential PMs. Iggy and Jack sounded lame and somewhat grasping in comparison to Harper who appeared relatively calm and collected. It made up my mind…and, as an aside, although I empathize with people who want to move to Canada and can understand why they would like to have their parents and grandparents come here, too, our health care system would crash if we get too many elderly people emigrating all at once. It going to be hard enough for existing Canadian baby boomers to get adequate health care…So, for the time being patience is required. As the economy improves those parents and grandparents should see the welcome door open wider.

    • Harper won this debate, but it was not nearly a strong enough win to guarantee a majority. I doubt it was a strong enough win to displace the coverage of Sheila Fraser's report for more than a day or two.

      • If the leaked draft of the report is accurate, at least the money went toward improvements in a riding where Canadians living there have benefited from their town’s beautification…instead of the money going into some politician’s pocket. By the way, here, in NS we elected an NDP government with great hopes…they promptly raised our taxes and used tax payers money to buy themselves a lot of personal goodies…like laptops for family members. I don’t think any of us expected them to blow the chance we gave them…and so quickly…they barely had the seats warm! Harper may not be perfect, but after watching the leaders in action tonight, I think he is by far the best of the lot; he has been doing a good job so far. I don’t vote for a particular party election after election. I vote for the leader I think will do the best job, even though in this case it will mean passing up a good local Liberal…that’s one thing that bugs me about our system of election.

        • Oh please tell me you're not serious.

          You're seriously not going to pass up a good local candidate to support a candidate in a different riding who'll never know that you exist?

          You want to know why we have government that sucks? Because people like you pass over better candidates for stupid party politics. And I don't care if that better candidate was Conservative, Liberal, Marxist, or National Socialist. If we want a representative democracy that works, the only way we're *ever* going to get that is if we start remembering the "representative" part.

          Remember, the leader doesn't make all the decisions. That falls to the various representatives, often in committee.. and if you send less than the best local candidate you have available, you're not only hurting yourself, you're hurting all of us too.

          Christ.. we really do get the government we deserve, don't we?

          No wonder it sucks.

          • Agreed.But… you're telling me ihave to vote for the conservative candidate in my riding if she's good? Luckily i have a choice of good liberal and NDP candidates.

          • If they're the best candidate? In my opinion, you'd be stupid to do otherwise.

            But that doesn't mean you can't let them know that their status as best candidate, and thus getting your vote, is contingent upon them being willing to stand for you even against the party.

            Unfortunately for CPC candidates, that tends to be a handicap.

          • I'm sure your recipe is the best one to get our politics out of its rut. Luckily for me i don't have to make a difficult choice. After this debate i'm more concerned about Harper then ever. I read his whole performance as the economy trumps democracy. His remark about: "you guys found me in contempt"said it all really. Not parliament, but "you guys." I'm convinced now that Harper's first instincts are that of the authoritarian. And i seriously doubt he can be stopped.

            It's really depressing, the state of our politics. In the mother parliament there have been fairly recent episodes of a hundred or more MPs getting up and crossing the floor to vote with the opposition. Can anyone seriously conceive of that happening here, now or at any time?

          • I’m serious. The local Liberal candidate is slightly better, but not a lot better. Whereas, the Federal Conservative leader is a lot better than what’s being offered by the other parties. I want to give Harper the opportunity to implement some of the ideas he has put on the table. What I’m seeing from the other parties amounts to obstructionism. If the Liberals and NDP were more cooperative with the Conservative government and not so hell bent on getting the Conservatives out at all costs~ even when what is being proposed by the Conservatives is good for the country~ I wouldn’t be as concerned with seeing another minority government.

          • The difficulty is, you can't trust him to implement anything he says he will.

            He said he'd implement a policy of not appointing unelected senators or unelected people into cabinet. He turned around on *both* of those promises on the first day.

            He said that if he were Prime Minister, he would demand that the USA live up to their NAFTA obligations for softwood lumber, and that you don't negotiate when you've won. Once elected, he turned around and not only let the US off the hook, but fatally injured several logging companies in British Columbia by giving away a billion dollars of their money to our US competitors.

            He said that if he were Prime Minister, he wouldn't tax income trusts. He got elected and applied a tax to income trusts.

            He said that if he were Prime Minister, he would protect whistleblowers. He appointed a person who not only did not protect whistleblowers, but for whom there's increasing evidence that she actually went after them.

            He claimed that a Prime MInister needed to respect the demands of the House of Commons while he was facing Martin. When he became Prime Minister, he flat out refused to give information to the House that it needed to be able to properly assess and vote on the bills he was proposing. He wanted our representatives to just "trust him" on blind faith, despite all of the evidence to the contrary…

            ..and here I see you doing what seems to be exactly that, and I just can't understand why.

            Do you really think he'll implement anything he says he will? Why do you believe that? Why, when there are so many examples of what he said he was going to do and he did the exact opposite?

  118. So, Dave, how do you really feel about the Agha Khan`s comment ?

  119. I only noticed this tonight, but can someone tell me what genius at Liberal HQ decided that despite Iggy's obvious imagine problem, the slogan for his signature promise should be Learning PASSPORT??

  120. I only noticed this tonight, but can someone tell me what genius at Liberal HQ decided that despite Iggy's obvious imagine problem, the slogan for his signature promise should be Learning PASSPORT??

  121. Harper won this debate, but it was not nearly a strong enough win to guarantee a majority. I doubt it was a strong enough win to displace the coverage of Sheila Fraser's report for more than a day or two.

  122. Earth to Gisele… the Canadian people have been voting for years. And they're voting for Conservative candidates. That *is* democracy

  123. I like Jack, and I normally believe him. It's when he's being either terribly sincere (looking directly at the camera and giving his sort of pleading pledges) or when he's being witty (the one-liners with that back-handed flip kind of delivery) that an old-fashioned sign flashes in my head that says "BAD ACTOR," in red lights, oddly enogh.

    The flashing gives me a headache if I see too many of his commercials.

  124. That's silly. There is a point at which taxes are too high, which they probably were. Comparatively, anyway. But there comes a time when lowering it further does nothing. And we were probably there two years ago. Those that have any idea of what a Laffer curve is might call it 'diminishing returns' or something.

  125. "cooperative minority governments might not be so bad after all."

    Did we watch the same debate? If tonight is what a coalition government would look like, we're all screwed.

  126. You don't suppose maybe he was being sarcastic?

  127. Is that the Liberal Party taxation policy now? Never cut taxes until the high rate is demonstratively damaging the country?

  128. Is that the Liberal Party taxation policy now? Never cut taxes until the high rate is demonstratively damaging the country?

    • Even if it isn't, it's probably not a bad idea. After all, that'd get us out of deficit, out of debt, and allow us to build a surplus so that the next time the economy hits the skids, we can afford to keep things humming without having to pay off the bankers.

      Does it suck that it means people like me will end up paying for the largesse and selfishness of folks like my parents, as well as supporting the kids of other people (as I'm not having any of my own). Is it unfair? Damn right.. unfortunately, growing up means doing the right thing even when it isn't fair, even when it does suck.

      • Tax the rich.
        Blame them for capital flight.

        • Learn moderation. A 3% increase in one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world isn't going to drive capital to riskier countries.

  129. I saw that, but I honestly blamed the makeup person. I figured they had put him up on his podium earlier in the day and light-tested his makeup to find the perfect shade of orange that would look best on HD against the primary camera angle.

    But he did look a little too fake-tanned for my liking.

  130. If the leaked draft of the report is accurate, at least the money went toward improvements in a riding where Canadians living there have benefited from their town’s beautification…instead of the money going into some politician’s pocket. By the way, here, in NS we elected an NDP government with great hopes…they promptly raised our taxes and used tax payers money to buy themselves a lot of personal goodies…like laptops for family members. I don’t think any of us expected them to blow the chance we gave them…and so quickly…they barely had the seats warm! Harper may not be perfect, but after watching the leaders in action tonight, I think he is by far the best of the lot; he has been doing a good job so far. I don’t vote for a particular party election after election. I vote for the leader I think will do the best job, even though in this case it will mean passing up a good local Liberal…that’s one thing that bugs me about our system of election.

  131. Well there's certainly causation or even correlation suggesting that cutting corporate income taxes did any damage to government revenue either. Besides, the "credit bubble" burst in 2008, and they're still bringing in $8B more than in 2000. And to be fair, 2000 was the peak of the .com bubble also, so really comparing 2000 to 2008 is fairly accurate.

  132. Duceppe made it pretty clear that he doesn't view himself as a Canadian. He even used the phrase "When I go to Canada…", inferring that when he's in Quebec, he's not in Canada.

  133. Duceppe made it pretty clear that he doesn't view himself as a Canadian. He even used the phrase "When I go to Canada…", inferring that when he's in Quebec, he's not in Canada.

    • Yeah, isn’t it great to live in a country where our tax dollars go in part to funding a party of seditionists? Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

  134. I thought Iggy's comments re: bickering might have held some water if they hadn't been preceded and followed by 2 hours of bickering.

  135. Yeah, isn’t it great to live in a country where our tax dollars go in part to funding a party of seditionists? Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

  136. Symbols are important.

  137. Symbols are important.

    • Substance is more important.

  138. I think he's going for more for a gin meme.

    Harper the gin-meister..

  139. Substance is more important.

  140. Oh please tell me you're not serious.

    You're seriously not going to pass up a good local candidate to support a candidate in a different riding who'll never know that you exist?

    You want to know why we have government that sucks? Because people like you pass over better candidates for stupid party politics. And I don't care if that better candidate was Conservative, Liberal, Marxist, or National Socialist. If we want a representative democracy that works, the only way we're *ever* going to get that is if we start remembering the "representative" part.

    Remember, the leader doesn't make all the decisions. That falls to the various representatives, often in committee.. and if you send less than the best local candidate you have available, you're not only hurting yourself, you're hurting all of us too.

    Christ.. we really do get the government we deserve, don't we?

    No wonder it sucks.

  141. Even if it isn't, it's probably not a bad idea. After all, that'd get us out of deficit, out of debt, and allow us to build a surplus so that the next time the economy hits the skids, we can afford to keep things humming without having to pay off the bankers.

    Does it suck that it means people like me will end up paying for the largesse and selfishness of folks like my parents, as well as supporting the kids of other people (as I'm not having any of my own). Is it unfair? Damn right.. unfortunately, growing up means doing the right thing even when it isn't fair, even when it does suck.

  142. The problem is most people don't understand that the Laffer curve has two sides, and most of those who do don't look at the evidence that's available to tell us which side we're on.

    What we do know is that even the tax rates of the United States aren't all the way over the top of the curve yet, as Bush's tax cuts did result in lower revenues for the government.. not higher. Admitted, the reduction wasn't as much as the simple tax cut would suggest, which means there probably was some additional business activity that developed, but it wasn't very much.

  143. Agreed.But… you're telling me ihave to vote for the conservative candidate in my riding if she's good? Luckily i have a choice of good liberal and NDP candidates.

  144. If they're the best candidate? In my opinion, you'd be stupid to do otherwise.

    But that doesn't mean you can't let them know that their status as best candidate, and thus getting your vote, is contingent upon them being willing to stand for you even against the party.

    Unfortunately for CPC candidates, that tends to be a handicap.

  145. As Clinton once said, that all depends on what your definition of "Is" is.

  146. Tax the rich.
    Blame them for capital flight.

  147. Learn moderation. A 3% increase in one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world isn't going to drive capital to riskier countries.

  148. I'm sure your recipe is the best one to get our politics out of its rut. Luckily for me i don't have to make a difficult choice. After this debate i'm more concerned about Harper then ever. I read his whole performance as the economy trumps democracy. His remark about: "you guys found me in contempt"said it all really. Not parliament, but "you guys." I'm convinced now that Harper's first instincts are that of the authoritarian. And i seriously doubt he can be stopped.

    It's really depressing, the state of our politics. In the mother parliament there have been fairly recent episodes of a hundred or more MPs getting up and crossing the floor to vote with the opposition. Can anyone seriously conceive of that happening here, now or at any time?

  149. Did that Separatist dips##t say his Mother was a "Rolaid'? or a Raelian?

  150. Did that Separatist dips##t say his Mother was a "Rolaid'? or a Raelian?

  151. Why can't you believe it Mike? Unlike the NDP's socialism and the Liberal's socialism-light, which have always proven to be failures, the Laffer curve theory of economics has always, I repeat – always, been proven to work. Regardless of how many times the left chooses to lie about it, the undeniable FACT is that lowering tax rates increased government tax revenue for John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Mike Harris and every other politician who ever had the courage and the economic smarts to do it. Every time, without fail.

  152. I definitely could have meistered some gin last night.

  153. Oh I hope so. I don't like letting emotion take over like that.

  154. Mr, Harper is nothing more than a DICTATOR , he should be the first to try out the new super prisons. Has hitler come back from the dead. They always say hte world keeps revolving.

  155. Mr, Harper is nothing more than a DICTATOR , he should be the first to try out the new super prisons. Has hitler come back from the dead. They always say hte world keeps revolving.

    • Are Conservatives so overconfident at this point that they have time to post nonsense like this on blogs to try and make Liberals look bad?

      • I’m not affiliated with any party…since the sponsorship scandal and the in-fighting among the Liberals in recent years…having them “look bad” doesn’t take any effort at all…

  156. Are Conservatives so overconfident at this point that they have time to post nonsense like this on blogs to try and make Liberals look bad?

  157. I’m serious. The local Liberal candidate is slightly better, but not a lot better. Whereas, the Federal Conservative leader is a lot better than what’s being offered by the other parties. I want to give Harper the opportunity to implement some of the ideas he has put on the table. What I’m seeing from the other parties amounts to obstructionism. If the Liberals and NDP were more cooperative with the Conservative government and not so hell bent on getting the Conservatives out at all costs~ even when what is being proposed by the Conservatives is good for the country~ I wouldn’t be as concerned with seeing another minority government.

  158. I’m not affiliated with any party…since the sponsorship scandal and the in-fighting among the Liberals in recent years…having them “look bad” doesn’t take any effort at all…

  159. Jack won the debates for me, no other leader can touch Jack as an average Joe Canadian you can TRUST.

    I was considering voting Liberal, but when Jack mentioned the Liberal leaders lack of attendance it really hit a nerve for me, as I've always thought to myself that I just cant picture Iggy sitting their in opposition after he looses the leadership?, I think he'll be long gone back to his American home.

  160. The difficulty is, you can't trust him to implement anything he says he will.

    He said he'd implement a policy of not appointing unelected senators or unelected people into cabinet. He turned around on *both* of those promises on the first day.

    He said that if he were Prime Minister, he would demand that the USA live up to their NAFTA obligations for softwood lumber, and that you don't negotiate when you've won. Once elected, he turned around and not only let the US off the hook, but fatally injured several logging companies in British Columbia by giving away a billion dollars of their money to our US competitors.

    He said that if he were Prime Minister, he wouldn't tax income trusts. He got elected and applied a tax to income trusts.

    He said that if he were Prime Minister, he would protect whistleblowers. He appointed a person who not only did not protect whistleblowers, but for whom there's increasing evidence that she actually went after them.

    He claimed that a Prime MInister needed to respect the demands of the House of Commons while he was facing Martin. When he became Prime Minister, he flat out refused to give information to the House that it needed to be able to properly assess and vote on the bills he was proposing. He wanted our representatives to just "trust him" on blind faith, despite all of the evidence to the contrary…

    ..and here I see you doing what seems to be exactly that, and I just can't understand why.

    Do you really think he'll implement anything he says he will? Why do you believe that? Why, when there are so many examples of what he said he was going to do and he did the exact opposite?

  161. Basic info….our system is fatally flawed. Until we elect a government with 50.1% of the vote the system is an embarasment and corrupt. Yes harper might get 42% to form a minority, or god forbid majority, but remember 58% voted against him. Why does this issue not get more press? oh and did anyone notice the calm boyish Harper voice? Ever heard this during question period. Can you say dictatory?

  162. It was like watching a rerun. You pretty much knew what was going to happen, however, the back drop and set are another story. I didn't see that one coming!
    Corrigated roofing and plexi glass. Are you kidding me!!!
    Couldn't they have held it in the parliment buildings? In the midst of the marble floors and columns, soaring cathedral ceilings and breath taking stone carvings? At least that stuff is paid for.
    Billions for the G8, and a few hundred for the set.
    I wonder if the President of the USA would stand in front of a sheet metal podium?
    I felt ashamed to see our Prime Minister, and the Leaders of the other parties in such surroundings.

  163. @ Scott Feschuk, thanks for nothing. I had one interesting dream about Harper and Ignatieff last night. This is how horror movies start. This is how porno starts. LOL!

  164. @ Scott Feschuk, thanks for nothing. I had one interesting dream about Harper and Ignatieff last night. This is how horror movies start. This is how porno starts. LOL!

    • You think that’s scary? I dreamed the four of them were dressed in drag as “The Golden Girls”…okay, so I googled each of their ages yesterday…Gilles was the caustic Sophia, Jack the sweet and flakey Rose, Michael was Dorothy ~ hell, he looks like her! And Harper was sexy and senual Blanche ~ Talk about the power of suggestion; Scott Feschuk’s twitters did it!

      • Harper as Blanche sounds about right :-)! Do you think we can sell it as CanCon?

  165. You think that’s scary? I dreamed the four of them were dressed in drag as “The Golden Girls”…okay, so I googled each of their ages yesterday…Gilles was the caustic Sophia, Jack the sweet and flakey Rose, Michael was Dorothy ~ hell, he looks like her! And Harper was sexy and senual Blanche ~ Talk about the power of suggestion; Scott Feschuk’s twitters did it!

  166. Harper as Blanche sounds about right :-)! Do you think we can sell it as CanCon?

  167. Flat out lie. Bush cut taxes, Bush's revenue decreased.

Sign in to comment.