Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Goes along with our culture of celebrity worship.  Trump got elected on it and O'Leary tricked his believers on it.  Its not so much JT is shallow, but that our society is and he's using that.

Posted
2 hours ago, Argus said:

 In it, Trudeau is purportedly jogging - alone - in Vancouver, through a group of students.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/05/20/jogging-justin-trudeau-photobombs-vancouver-prom-students.html

Aw shucks, he wore a t-shirt. So we weren't treated to seeing his nipples or his biceps. :o

  • Like 2

"We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers

  • 1 month later...
Posted

What is with the socks?

Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
On 2/15/2017 at 0:16 PM, Omni said:

Perhaps because he is the Prime Minister and has a concern about global warming.

I think that our feminist PM thinks that having more women and minorities and less white men in his cabinet is great for his party and Canada, eh?  

Posted
On 15/02/2017 at 4:02 PM, Omni said:

Trudeau inherited a country who's international image had been hollowed out by nearly a decade of conservative rule under Harper. It will take some work to revive it but JT is getting there. In his year he has done tours to the G20 and Commonwealth summits, the Paris climate summit, hosted the 3 Amigos, greatly improved relations with the US, impressed the G7 members by his performance at that summit in Japan, and showed renewed interest and participation at the UN. How's Trump doing so far?

A totally demonstrateable, proveable confabulation. http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/canada-regains-title-of-most-reputable-nation-despite-harper-derangement-frenzy

Posted
On 15/02/2017 at 4:38 PM, ?Impact said:

Canada had a long history of balance in the support in the middle east, and Harper changed to to one of singular support for Israel. Yes, that did cause Canada a loss of standing with Muslim countries, and for the first time ever lost the rotating security council seat. 

Thanks to Paul Martin. If Harper had his way in the lead-up to the 2008 recession, he would have destroyed this country. He wanted to allow Canadian financial institutions to gamble with their depositors money.

Unlike Martin who stole 53 billion in ei reserves then his government was charged with making it impossible to get benefits. Actual Canadians who paid in and needed it at the worst time. Or the $153,000 he claimed in government contracts when it was over  $153,000,000, done when he was minister of finance.  Oops! Speaking of that, the drs, nurses, teachers, Healthcare in general....in fact everything that got slashed because of him.  

Martin has my vote, which is saying something as I truly despise JT.

Posted
On 06/04/2017 at 2:15 PM, SpankyMcFarland said:

In the post-PT era, there is no contest on deficit slaying. Chretien turned the tide and is the clear winner. Look at the figures. He may had some luck on his side but he deserves credit for what he achieved. Only partisan goggles can stop people seeing that.   

 

Ffs. His finance minister Martin decimated Healthcare, education, infrastructure.....everything that could be decimated and this is your gold standard?

Ridiculous.

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, drummindiver said:

Ffs. His finance minister Martin decimated Healthcare, education, infrastructure.....everything that could be decimated and this is your gold standard?

Ridiculous.

Cost cutting is painful. Surely, Conservatives understand that much? Chrétien, not Harper, led the way on fighting deficits and he got the job done. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Posted
12 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Cost cutting is painful. Surely, Conservatives understand that much? Chrétien, not Harper, led the way on fighting deficits and he got the job done. 

We all know Harper's record on deficits. Last time around he tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat by robbing the "rainy day fund" to finally show what was meant to look like a balance. 
 

Posted
11 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Cost cutting is painful. Surely, Conservatives understand that much? Chrétien, not Harper, led the way on fighting deficits and he got the job done. 

We are talking about decimating all social safety nets, including stealing ei reserves. Surely a liberal can see the problem in that?

Posted
11 hours ago, Omni said:

We all know Harper's record on deficits. Last time around he tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat by robbing the "rainy day fund" to finally show what was meant to look like a balance. 
 

We all know Chretein et al stealing ei....a rainy day fund if ever there was one...then making it impossible for people to get to ensure they kept the good times (for them) rolling.

How much did you say Harper "stole". 53 billion? Did the SCC say Harper broke the law? The liberals did.

Posted
1 hour ago, drummindiver said:

We all know Chretein et al stealing ei....a rainy day fund if ever there was one...then making it impossible for people to get to ensure they kept the good times (for them) rolling.

How much did you say Harper "stole". 53 billion? Did the SCC say Harper broke the law? The liberals did.

Sorry. Incoherent bafflegab again. Maybe regroup and try again.

Posted
1 hour ago, drummindiver said:

We are talking about decimating all social safety nets, including stealing ei reserves. Surely a liberal can see the problem in that?

We can debate what should have been cut but I hope you agree that SOMETHING had to be cut? Only the most fanatical leftist would argue otherwise. Chretien turned the ship of state around. On fiscal matters, he was Trudeau's opposite. 

  

Posted
5 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

We can debate what should have been cut but I hope you agree that SOMETHING had to be cut? Only the most fanatical leftist would argue otherwise. Chretien turned the ship of state around. On fiscal matters, he was Trudeau's opposite. 

  

Yes, cuts had to be made.

Do you agree with the use of ei funds to balance the budget and making it impossible for ppl to get benefits after putting so many ppl out of work. 

Stats show other countries curbed their debts during this period without such draconian measures.

Posted
13 hours ago, Omni said:

We all know Harper's record on deficits. Last time around he tried to pull a rabbit out of a hat by robbing the "rainy day fund" to finally show what was meant to look like a balance. 
 

Bafflegab at its finest because there isn't a iota of truth....just that HDS raising it's ugly head.

Posted
6 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

Bafflegab at its finest because there isn't a iota of truth....just that HDS raising it's ugly head.

So you fail at law, AND politics. How are you at trades?

Posted

I get the impression from this forum that Mulroney isn't very fondly remembered in Canada. If I am right then why is it so? He won two elections, the first with a landslide, so what turned him unpopular in the end?

Posted
On 22 May, 2017 at 10:29 AM, dialamah said:

Goes along with our culture of celebrity worship.  Trump got elected on it and O'Leary tricked his believers on it.  Its not so much JT is shallow, but that our society is and he's using that.

Nope he's a vapid moron and people just follow him because he's good looking. 

Posted
24 minutes ago, Omni said:

So you fail at law, AND politics. How are you at trades?

Everything I say has been linked to you numerous times. Your refusal to accept facts speaks volumes. I'm not sure if those volumes represent ignorance, obfuscation or just plain stupidity. 

How are you at understanding English? 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
14 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Cost cutting is painful. Surely, Conservatives understand that much? Chrétien, not Harper, led the way on fighting deficits and he got the job done. 

Chretien did not give a damn about the deficit or the budget. Chretien did not have any vision or ideas and there was nothing he particularly wanted to do as prime minister. Like Donald Trump, he simply wanted the title. He was a political weasel and all he cared about was politics and winning. He let Martin do what he wanted because there was no viable opposition, and even after the money started rolling in he just let it pile up because he saw it as ammunition that he could use at election time should the opposition get its act together. 

As for Martin, once he became PM and faced an actual united conservative party with a real threat against him he opened the taps wide and offered up everything in that election but a free toaster for every vote. His promises, had he won and had he actually lived up to them, would have returned us to deficits.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
6 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

How are you at understanding English?

Much better than you apparently. Especially the legalese portions. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,907
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    derek848
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Benz earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...