poochy
-
Posts
1,278 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by poochy
-
-
4 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:
Trudeau secretly vacationing on a bahamas island owned by a registered lobbyist is a conflict of interest. Not impressed. Trudeau's life of incredible privilege makes him clueless to these types of things. He's so spoiled and naive, coupled with the typical Liberal Party arrogance, it will be his downfall. He's not going to last near as long as his father if he keeps this up, and we're only just over a year in.
See, i dont think he's clueless, i think they know the voters are. The liberals will get the benefit of the doubt and be re elected unless they get convicted or at least charged with something, that's just Canada. Conservatives barely got one majority and nothing really changed, and they were evil, that's also Canada. This guy lobbies for us for 10's of millions and the PM holidays with him, Harper covered up 90k that they paid back to us that turned out to not be fraudulent, got roasted for it, one is a pretty liberal, the other was a conservative, scary stuff right there. The Chretien liberals won 3 majorities, and a minority with Paul Martin even with the sponsorship scandal looming, and that was after really deep cuts to balance the budget, there's no reason these liberals wont see the same success no matter what they do.
-
According to that he has reimbursed us for 9 personal trips, some of them are an extra days stay after official business, like when they celebrated their anniversary in Japan and stayed another day, whatever, it's pretty clear he has spent plenty of time elsewhere, dont care a ton about that, but is it also ok to do it as a guest of a billionaire who lobbies us for our money? Does the hair, the smile, and the stammer out count any attempt at keeping an ethical distance from someone like that?
Harper got roasted for 90k, we've given this guy's foundations millions, shrug i guess, shrug. It is after all, the first time he's been in this sort of conflict, right?
-
59 minutes ago, blueblood said:
As if the Harper burnt his toast threads weren't bad enough, we don't need trudeau burnt his toast threads. Trudeau can spend his pm salary and trust fund money on whatever he wants.
Trudeau I mean Gerald Butts are already driving the economy into the ditch with a carbon tax, excessive government spending, and now taking a page from the clintons with pay to play. Tories take vacation, the ndp takes vacation. There are bigger fish to fry than splitting hairs over which is a vacation and which isn't.
Did you hear that? That was the sound of you completely missing, not understanding, or not reading the point.
-
Including this one
Now, this Aga Khan seems like a decent guy, but his foundations also lobby the government for many, many millions of our dollars.
Perhaps we need a new Topic titled, What would the local propagandist, possibly paid poster left have said if Harper had done this? Im sure it would be moderated though, we're back, it's ok to tell overt lies again.
-
3 hours ago, The_Squid said:
This was a Conservative boondoggle. Thankfully, it has been put to rest... move on.
You mean for the project they originally didn't get us involved in, or the one the delayed for political reasons because of a pacifist opposition who would prefer we bought nothing at all, but will settle for second or third or fourth or fifth best just to keep up appearances? What a stupid comment, conservative boondoggle, by what measure exactly?
-
For those that keep repeating that Mulroney had lower interest rates while ignoring he had a huge debt piled on to him by PET, you are in effect lying about the reality. A lower rate applied to a huge number rang up by the pervious guy still amounts to big payments, and btw, why did the previous guy borrow so much when rates were so high? Like most liberals, probably because it's what's good for them now that matters, let the next guy clean up the mess. Not to worry, this government is shattering all records, and if the conservatives win again and have to make cuts the will be vilified far more for it than Chretien was, because they are evil, Chretien was a good guy, a nice liberal, besides, the debt was Mulroney's fault.
-
http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/canada-deficit/index.html
Trudeau Snr took us from a 667 million deficit to 10 billion in his first go round, and from 14.5 to 34.2 Billion the second time, his record is by far the worse, it's not even close. Interest rates were at their peak and just coming off peak when Mulroney took over, of course that government had to deal with the interest payments on the massive accumulated debt of Trudeau Snr. They did so while increasing the deficit significantly less than Trudeau did, Chretien did the same until they made DEEP cuts to get back to balance. It's clear from the graph where the trouble began, it's also clear that the spike in the Harper conservative spending is directly related to the most recent recession, most of which as the result of short term stimulus spending, it's also clear they got back to balance relatively quickly in spite of the deep drop in revenues. If this graph included this past year Trudeau Jnr would easily break his fathers record for the largest increase in deficit spending. Now of course someone will come along to lie, or obfuscate about this chart, it's what they do, just like this current government demanded stimulus spending, then complained about the deficit, then promised to produce a deficit, and then went on to about triple it.
We are still paying for his fathers mistakes, and we will pay for his for the rest of my life, that is certain, but before that happens another liberal will come along to complain about the, next, last conservative government, saddled with another Trudeau's debt, the liberal will claim we must have cuts, because the conservative rang up the debt, of course ignoring the Trudeaus in the equation, and the cycle will start again. Who knows, maybe after another conservative government takes over, yet again gets decried as evil monsters for not cutting nearly as deep or borrowing nearly as much as the liberals, and loses, perhaps yet another Trudeau, Jnr's jnr, will be awaiting his coronation by the baying mob, it will for ever be so as long as there are liberal's whose appetite for graft is only surpassed by the numbers of those desperate to have honey poured into their ears. It's good for all of them.
It doesn't matter what the conservatives do, they are always cast as the greater villain by an incompetent rabble. They just aren't nice liberals.
-
1 minute ago, Omni said:
Nice picture. What the hell is it supposed to tell us?
Im sorry, but it's self explanatory, you said there is no ice, there is ice, do you the hell understand it better now? Do you have the ability to be honest in any discussion?
-
Also, no doubt some have heard that it's 30 degrees warmer than normal in the arctic, well, that's partly bs, yes, a small area has been warm, however today, as it was yesterday, our high arctic has been quite seasonable.
CWEU 240100Z 08003KT 15SM SKC M34/M38 A2977Minus 34 in Eureka
CYRB 240300Z 32007KT 15SM FEW004 M26/M30Minus 26 in Resolute Bay
CYEV 240100Z 11004KT 030V160 15SM SCT140 BKN240 M21/M24 A2999Minus 21 in InuvikCYCB 240300Z 26007KT 10SM -SN SCT003 OVC008 M24/M27 A3010MInus 24 in Cambridge Bay. -
9 hours ago, Omni said:
I guess that's why the arctic has been around 15 degrees warmer than usual and there's no ice, and the antarctic ice sheet melt has been deemed to be irreversible.
There's no ice...well, it has been warm, and there is less ice, but you don't have to habitually lie about everything.
-
4 hours ago, Bryan said:
The post you responded to was my account of the difference between private and public delivery in Canada.
That, new member.., never actually answers a question that was asked, they invent another argument for you, then answer it,..never seen that before.
-
4 hours ago, carepov said:
First of all, hyperbole hinders your argument: "hundreds of thousands of people every year whose religious values are completely and violently incompatible with both secularism and tolerance"
http://canadaimmigrants.com/canada-immigration-by-source-country-2015/
Second, odds are that most people leaving their "intolerant and theocratic" home countries (eg: a combined 32,000 from Iran, Syria and Pakistan in 2015) are those that would rather live in a more tolerant and secular country like Canada.
Finally, the greatest eroders of Canadian tolerance are not immigrants it is those that are intolerant of immigrants.
Yea, I mean, clearly the only reason to come here is to be more tolerant, it's never to exist in a more tolerant society while disagreeing for other, say, monetary considerations.
Yes clearly intolerance can only be the fault of people who don't like the intolerant. With circular arguments like that everyone else should clearly just accept you as the winner...wow.
-
1 hour ago, Omni said:
Of course, Harper's bagmen ended up in court.
-
1 hour ago, The_Squid said:
Harper had his party bagmen and women in the Senate doing it for him. Duffy... Wallin.... etc, etc.
Same thing, except not as honest.
O of course, expect it's completely not the same thing.
Anywho, here's the latest, in addition to not being lobbied at fundraisers to then actually, yes, being lobbied at fundraisers, it seems liberals were also maybe soliciting donations above the limit. But hey, aren't they nice those liberals? Look at how much they care about all the things, and look at all those good people who will vote for them again no matter what they do or how unethical or illegal it might have been, just like last time they were in power. But of course this has nothing to do with our pert little PM, it just couldn't have.
-
Im still waiting for someone to point out to me where the last government destroyed the environment.
-
5 hours ago, Omni said:
I'll be happy to explain basic math to you some time, but for now just try to understand that when you cut an increase in half, that is a decrease.
I have to ask, what's it like living your life without honor or any sort of ethical code?
-
16 hours ago, Omni said:
The previous conservative government simply chose to cut back on transfers to healthcare. That's tough on an ageing population. At least the current federal government doesn't mind to sit down with the premiers, unlike Harper. It may take more meetings than one.
O look, an outright lie, from that poster? Nah, couldn't be, there should be some moderation effort to remove posts that easily verifiable as false.
-
1 hour ago, Smallc said:
It's a troubling development to be sure.
actually, probably not really, sure it could be a serious fleet wide issue, but usually not, they are just overly and rightfully cautious.
-
11 hours ago, drummindiver said:
.. as he avoids the question with a nice deflection...
It's all these people are capable of, anyway, today the government house leader said that parliament is no place to be discussing liberal fundraisers. You have to wonder if they, like those that so desperately support them, are really that stupid.
-
On 12/17/2016 at 5:10 PM, Canadianjim said:
Me ? nope.. facts are stubborn..yawn
You dont really know what you're talking about do you? Must be tough. Anyway, your PM has admitted to being lobbied at party fundraisers, something he previously said didnt happen, so he's a liar, not that you would care about such things.
-
1 hour ago, Canadianjim said:
Birthers have all kinds of conspiracy theories. Interesting that while they have sold out to Russia, they still keep the nut job conspiracies going.
That's what you came up with? Yawn.
-
Hell of a guy that Trudeau, Canada was back because he was PM now, and he was going to do things differently, yea, worse. Thanks libs.
-
4 hours ago, ?Impact said:
Yet they cheered when Harper got rid of the per-vote financing, and brought in his Corrupt Elections Act on way less than that.
It's not corrupt if you follow the rules, it's not really the conservatives fault that liberals are generally so weak in character that they cannot follow the rules even after they make a big show of expecting to be better than the conservatives while doing so. But you go ahead and keep spinning liberal, btw, is this the new official line of attack from the think tank or lobby group? I see you've been spreading it around.
-
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-sordid-encounters-of-the-liberal-kind
Of course none of this compares to paying back 90k of our money and covering it up, a hand maiden to Chinese billionaires though, that's the kind of world citizen Pm the young voter needs to assure themselves that democracy is well cared for.
How many Vacations?
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
Thanks for stopping by and spreading around the usual manure.
How is it not a conflict of interest to accept this gift from someone who lobbies our government and gets 10's of millions of our dollars? Answer that one, honestly, as if you could.