Keepitsimple

In case it went over your head - Unions are a "faction or a cause".......if you disagree with the definition, there's nothing further I can say to educate you.

Not quite as simple as it might sound because you run up against a concept called Free Speech.

Ah - I see your problem. You don't seem to understand that if the economy "goes south", Provinces are still guaranteed a minimum of 3%. So it's math and comprehension that you have trouble with.

There'll be plenty of polls. Be patient.

If your math was any good, you'd figure it out.

No - for being incompetent by telling your Boss that a three percent raise (or higher) is a pay cut.....especially when he promises it for the rest of your life! Incompetent because you've been told over and over that your math needs a lot of work - and yet you still don't get it. Fired, fired, fired!

Will the media put pressure on Engage Canada to shut down? Don't hold your breath.

Definition of Partisan: a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance. You don't have to support a specific party to be partisan. Clearly, the financial impetus behind Engage Canada is the Unions. Their mission? To make the Conservative Party unelectable. That's where the partisanship lies. Clear enough for you? Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/unions-centre-left-interests-to-begin-ad-campaign-attacking-harpers-tories/article24924913/

He'd say "You're Fired!".

First of all - it's a minimum of 3% - it actually could be 6% - or even more. That said......if you got used to 6% raises every year and then you only got 3 or 4 or 5% - what do you think your boss would say if you questioned why he "cut" your salary? I'll tell you.....he would either laugh at your sense of humour, demand that you receive some sort of counselling - or kindly show you the door.

....AND funded largely by Unions and other Left Wing organizations with the sole purpose of making the Conservative Party unelectable. Yup.....indeed it is partisan - unless you completely ignore what partisan means.

You're pretty funny On Guard - talk about flogging a dead horse! So you feel the Liberals should have guaranteed a 6% increase in perpetuity...is that right? Why didn't they? The answer is that even Martin wasn't that stupid! Have you heard the LIberals or NDP saying they would restore all these supposed "cuts"? Reality is not your strong suit.

You've shown your stripes consistently - you don't like Harper - I get that......but it's not about "my guy" or "your guy"..... I took issue with your saying that they were using propaganda images that even the networks did not use. Hogwash. Here's what I said.....

This was all before HarperPAC of course........and Engage Canada" claims they are "non-partisan"....is it any wonder that someone felt obliged to counter this Left Wing attempt to thwart democracy? The Conservatives may indeed spend their own money on so-called "attack ads" but the public knows where they come from. Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/unions-centre-left-interests-to-begin-ad-campaign-attacking-harpers-tories/article24924913/

Are you now trying to say that Engage Canada is not led by former LIberals and NDP hacks?

No it doesn't - and it's ludicrous and childish to suggest otherwise. It's a political ad to oppose a party that would break from the military alliance to fight ISIS and to vote for a government that will stay the course. It delineates a clear difference in policy.

You must have missed my reply to Big Guy in Post #129:

Ah - you're very sharp. Very clever. You are indeed right. The government did not shut it down - because they had nothing to do with it - other get very irate and get the originator, Stephen Taylor, to voluntarily shut it down.

Your point is an inch short of a complete lie. You made it seem like the Conservative ad was replaying the disgusting ISIS videos. They are not. They use single frame pictures that do not show the actual violence - it's the commentary that provides the emotional context. As for your claim that the networks don't show these images - here's a link to a CBC news report - I'm sure there are plenty more out there. How about starting a topic that denounces the CBC for pandering to the ISIS propaganda? As for Mr. Trudeau? The vast majority of Canadians don't agree with him - and this is a pretty effective way to point that out. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/ID/2651275778/

Hamas welcomes Christians and Jews.......I didn't know that.

Also saw her on P & P a while back - rude and comes across as a spoiled brat. That's the new Liberal Cabinet material?

Another "truth" ad.......and there are no graphic videos - the commentary paints the picture. And facts are facts - once again, Trudeau's own words - his own "policy" is highlighted. Perhaps some people might like that policy - but an overwhelming majority of Canadians support our limited military action to join with our allies. As Mileski says..."if you're not going to use military action against ISIS - when will you use it?". Like his father, he appears to have no use for the military.

HarperPAC was "up" for three days before the government shut it down - citing the rules that they themselves put in place. Good for them. Yet the Union-backed Engage Canada PAC lives on - headed by former Liberal and NDP hacks with the stated goal of making the Conservatives "unelectable". Go figure.

Did you not even READ the article? Of course, once again you are completely wrong. I mean c'mon Topaz - give yourself a shake. It's about the recruitment process itself - head-hunters - recruiters - not doing their job! Your Link didn't work for me so here it is again: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/air-force-memo-warns-of-risk-to-operations-due-to-poor-recruiting-1.3104873

The one-month sentence is too light. It's pretty clear that the guy lied and cheated but the worst part is that he has shown no admission - no remorse. He's an embarrassment. All that said, at least he DID get some jail time - which should be a deterrent for those who would intentionally break the election laws. I'd have rather seen 6 months - after all, he'd be out in two months or less. It's the non-admission, no remorse that burns me most.