![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
Yes, boys ‘n’ girls, in the world according to Iceman, there could only be one explanation for Speaker Milliken’s rulings. He’s a Liberal partisan!
I am not surprised by either ruling. At this point it was just about what I expected. Milliken said exactly what his party wanted him to say and he said it when they wanted him to say it. The Liberals needed him to speed up his “investigation” before the budget vote.
Yeah, it would have to be that, now would it? So what would have suited you, Iceman? If Speaker Milliken allowed Master Stevie continue to behave like a dictator? Oh yeah! I forgot, you and your ilk have wet dreams about that.
Icman doesn’t even pretend to respect democracy here.
Speakers are chosen by secret ballot in the House of Commons, but the Stephen Harper never made any major effort to elect a Tory to the post, which was clearly a mistake.
What? Even if Stevie voted against Milliken for speaker in 2004, it wouldn’t have made much difference given the vote in 2004 was unanimous.
Oh, I get it! How’s about we do away with that pesky secret ballot and just let Master Steve appoint one of his buddies as speaker? Perhaps Don Cherry would be ‘non-partisan’ enough for ya?
Someone send that boy a dictionary and bookmark the word unanimous
ck Reply:
March 10th, 2011 at 6:44 PM
And he’s supposedly an honours grad.
The IceMan is a joke. I always love his polls he holds, his option are always a partisan hackery. I just waiting for the poll where he ask which Party Leader’s Gimp he wants to be
answers
a – Leader of the CPC
b – Leader of the Harper Government
c – The Conservative Leader
d – The one from Alberta
ck Reply:
March 10th, 2011 at 10:19 PM
I’ll take…oooh….lessee now, all of the above!!! Oops, not an option. Never mind then.
Yeah, I’m sure Iceman is loads of fun at parties.
I get the impression he wears his name well; that he keeps the temperature in his home below 30 degrees.
Iceboy is: an effing idiot.
Waste of skin.
a neandercon.
all of the above
Don’t know how he manages to change his own diapers.
ck Reply:
March 11th, 2011 at 9:51 AM
All of the above!! Kaching!!
I don’t think he does change his own diapers.
Political Polls out themselves as worthless
OTTAWA – Canada’s notoriously competitive pollsters have some surprisingly uniform advice about the parade of confusing and conflicting numbers they’re about to toss at voters ahead of a possible spring election:
Take political horse race polls with a small boulder of salt.
“Pay attention if you want to but, frankly, they don’t really mean anything,” sums up Andre Turcotte, a pollster and communications professsor at Carleton University.
He has even more pointed advice for news organizations that breathlessly report minor fluctuations in polling numbers: “You should really consider what is the basis for your addiction and maybe enter a ten-step program.”
And for fellow pollsters who provide the almost daily fix for media junkies: “I think pollsters should reflect on what this does to our industry. It cheapens it.”
Turcotte’s blunt assessment is widely shared by fellow pollsters, including those who help feed the media addiction to political horse race numbers.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/pollsters-advise-voters-to-be-wary-of-polls-ahead-of-possible-spring-vote-116112554.html
Point 8:25 in the video:
Peter Mansbridge on CBC discusses story of the year: worthless polls
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/atissue/story/2011/02/17/thenational-atissue-170211.html
We invited Allan Gregg from Harris Decima (and the At Issue Panel on The National) and Paul Adams, assistant professor at the Carleton school of journalism. Adams covered Parliament Hill for the CBC and The Globe and Mail. He also worked for EKOS Research. Here’s that conversation:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2011/02/on-the-house-how-reliable-are-polls.html