Keepitsimple

Please don't let facts get in the way of a good anti-Harper narrative. Yep.....Sunny Ways!

Say it ain't so! Say it ain't so! Sunny Ways.......let's see where they end up on C51. Link: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/02/06/liberals-back-csis-in-torture-lawsuit.html

I think it's clear to anyone who watches politics unfold - that Trudeau himself is a lightweight, pretty well completely devoid of leadership. He's a figurehead. But so was Ronald Reagan - and yet his administration flourished and he was called "The Great Communicator". What's important is the wizard(s) behind the curtain......and they have not been fully "outed" at this stage. Gerald Butts is one of course and his McGuinty/Wynne heritage makes his influence truly scary. But there must be two or three others that will be counted on to pave the way forward. Until we understand who they are, their agendas and motivations - we won't know if the Trudeau figurehead will become the "great communicator" or just another Mr. Dithers. It all depends on how positive, clear and decisive the wizards can be. Sunny Ways aside, we're not off to the best start.

More accurately, they were hired by the Hiring Managers within the presumably non-partisan bureaucracy.

The quote was provided to you but you are too willfully blind to acknowledge it. This quote in Trudeau's own words - from January 22nd is clearly more supportive than your Liberal party position from the campaign: This one is optimistic - indeed, Sunny Ways This one from the campaign - we don't know - could happen but might not.....no Sunny Ways there....

No need for further comment now that you've agreed that unspent infrastructure funds are not returned to general revenues.

January 22nd, 2016 - seems pretty vocal, yes?: “I am solidly in one camp on this one,” he said. “I am very much in the camp of both premiers, [Ontario’s Kathleen] Wynne and Notley, who demonstrated that Canada can and should work together on economic issues for all of us.” Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/montreal-area-mayors-energy-east-criticisms-short-sighted-notley-says/article28339330/

You implied that Federal unspent Infrastructure money goes back into general revenues, yes? I asked for a cite. You made the contention - please prove it. I'll settle for a statement that you "mis-spoke" - without paragraphs of Waldo-babble clouding the issue.hey? but of course! That was the grand Harper charade... cut spending throughout with allocated funding not spent returned to the federal treasury as lapsed funding. All in order to be able to spring forward with a grand 2015 election campaign announcement of a 2014-15 budget surplus

Do you have a cite to support your contention that allocated, unspent Infrastructure money was returned to general revenues? That's what the topic is referring to.

Oh come on - we're talking about the Star here. They could have used the term "not yet spent" which would have been far more accurate. The money is allocated - it's there - all part of a huge but confusing infrastructure commitment over 10 years. You're being disingenous by suggesting a delay in infrastructure spending makes it easy to run a surplus.

Money to burn? Really? .

You're feeling pretty hip with your new-found "gold-rush" term. Pretty silly. What do you consider to be "sustainable" - that trendy, definition-elusive term? Canada's mining, logging, fishing and energy industries have built Canada into the best country in the world over two centuries - and you demean it as a "gold rush"? That's just naïve, teeny-bopper talk. Our policies should not be a pessimistic one that dictates we're not going to do resource projects until undefined this-and-that's are done. Policies should be optimistic in sending messages that it's critical that we do these projects - now how can we satisfy genuine stakeholders in a reasonably thorough - but perhaps not perfect manner.

What utter claptrap. You act as if each province should act like a country with it's own independent economy. What part of "country" do you not understand? To use your analogy, the fault lies with the rest of Canada fore not developing vibrant industries outside of resources to soften the blow. The obvious truth is that provinces bring different strengths to the table and Alberta - and lately, Saskatchewan ands Newfoundland have brought energy to the forefront. Like a sports team, the sum of the parts can be greater than the whole when we all pull together. We should be defending our resources - not alienating them. It should be less about the endless criticism coming from the squeaky wheels - and more about how we can all pull together and make this work. Your attitude is nothing short of disgusting....oh - and I'm from Quebec and have been in Ontario for years. I'm what they call - a Canadian.

What would you prefer - "slowed to a crawl"? OK then.......slowed to a crawl. I find it fascinating that in light of oil projects being cancelled or suspended, investment fleeing and 60,000 people being thrown out of work - that somehow - in the face of all that.....you call it hyperbole and imply that there is some vitality to the industry? Waldo, it's one thing to be a somewhat amusing, verbose contrarian, it's quite another to be completely blind to reality.

Unless you've changed your tune on just about everything, you seem to know absolutely nothing about how a refinery works. Petroleum Gas, regular gasoline, Naptha, Kerosene, Diesel, Lubricating Oil, Fuel Oil and a myriad of residual products are produced at refineries - and they all have to be delivered to the markets that they service - by pipeline, rail, truck or water. Here's a primer - let me know your thoughts on refineries after you read it: