Poilevre lobs nuclear bomb across the house of commons

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

What’s so clever about insinuating something like that? I could do that.

Any body can - after they watch someone else do it.

11 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Is it even true?

No way to be sure. There's some facts that support it but there appears to have been a oayout and nobody will talk about it, including the PM. And his silence isn't proof in and of itself either way.  So ... it might be, or it might not.

Which is what makes the reply so well done. PP definitely didn't say it was. Or even directly imply it was.  Actually making  an accusation would be wrong unless you had a specific reason to. Even implying it directly would be questionable.  But when you vaguely allude to it like that you're managing to say "maybe you don't want to dig into work history as much as you think you do big guy" without actually stepping over a line.

And to do that on the fly incorporating Justin's own language into the reply is actually very clever. The ability to do that is pretty rare, and it's mostly valuable during an election. Well see how the next election goes for the libs.

 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I don’t think I’d equate American interference with what the Chinese are up to - they aim to overthrow our system not do a few tweaks. As for the Russians, they don’t have the money to be a major problem. The CSIS leaks have been disquieting but I think they’re evidence of serious threats being ignored. 

There is also the matter of indirect vs direct.

The russians tend to go on social media and post information or misinformation looking to sway voters. They either really 'sell' things that are true but negative about who they don't like or they'll spread rumors or mistrusts.  For example a lot of what they spread about hillary during the us election was quite true and isn't disputed, but they made sure as many people saw it as they could with their limited budgets.

That's very different than Actually threatening someone's family or targeting them  outside an election. Or illegally funneling large amounts of money into campaigns. Or getting people loyal to your foreign gov't working as direct advisors to an MP without disclosing your direct paid connection the foriegn gov't.

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Any body can - after they watch someone else do it.

Ah, come on, it was neither subtle nor Shakespearean. Anybody could do it if they chose to. A future PM needs to look the part. Leave the dirty stuff to the attack dogs. 

Edited June 5, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Ah, come on, it was neither subtle nor Shakespearean.

it was nicely subtle and Shakespeare would have loved it (actually he really would have.)

In and of itself it was a moderately ok zinger but in reply to the PM's comment specifically it was pretty good. They can't accuse him of making an inappropriate accusation yet he kinda did.

5 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Anybody could do it if they chose to. A future PM needs to look the part. Leave the dirty stuff to the attack dogs. 

Have you met justin?

He's accused the opposition leaders of being everything from white supremisists to neo nazi's to planning to ban all abortions to  host of other things. He's literally called opposition mp's a "piece of shit" in the house and told people to fack off etc.  He called a jewish mp a nazi.  And he's been elected 3 times.

A pm has to look strong. If people attack him then he has to show he's got the 'elbows' to smak 'em back.

[SpankyMcFarland]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

it was nicely subtle and Shakespeare would have loved it (actually he really would have.)

In and of itself it was a moderately ok zinger but in reply to the PM's comment specifically it was pretty good. They can't accuse him of making an inappropriate accusation yet he kinda did.

He did make an accusation that we all understand. Your notion of subtle is not mine.

Edited June 5, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[ExFlyer]

18 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

...

...

....

He's accused the opposition leaders of being everything from white supremisists to neo nazi's to planning to ban all abortions to  host of other things. He's literally called opposition mp's a "piece of shit" in the house and told people to fack off etc.  He called a jewish mp a nazi.  And he's been elected 3 times.

...

And you have the nerve to call other people liars LOL

BS on you. Prove every one of your statements or accept that you are a liar. LOL.

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

He did make an accusation that we all understand.

No,  he didn't. At best he could be said to have implied that there was some inappropriate reason for trudeau's departure. 

That's what makes it subtle.  And yes, people will hear that and recall the rumours about why justin had to leave, but that is not the same as an accusation at all.

13 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Your notion of subtle is not mine.

Mine is fairly dictionary.

subtle

adjective

1. So slight as to be difficult to detect or describe; elusive.
2. Difficult to understand; abstruse.
3. Able to make fine distinctions.
4. Operating in a hidden, usually injurious way; insidious.
5. Characterized by skill or ingenuity; clever.
6. Crafty or sly; devious.

Of the 6 possible definitions it looks like it pretty solidly hits 4.

13 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Are you willing to back it up with evidence?

Evidence of what? What precisely did Pierre accuse him of? I can't quite remember

13 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Fake news is about to become an epidemic. Serious leaders of any party shouldn’t be adding to it. 

Again - Justin does the fake news thing ALL the time. Constanty.  And he has been re-elected 3 times after scandal after scandal.

So...  can you explain how ONLY conservative leaders MUST take the high ground?  Why the rules apply only to them? Why the public keeps rewarding the guy who doesn't play by those rules - the same guy who was the butt of the joke here?

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

And you have the nerve to call other people liars LOL

Only the ones who lie So yeah - you get called it a lot.

5 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

BS on you. Prove every one of your statements or accept that you are a liar. LOL.

Why? If i do you'll pretend i didn't anyway.

I tell you what - are you claiming NONE OF THOSE ARE TRUE?  Lets see who the liar here really is

[ExFlyer]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Only the ones who lie So yeah - you get called it a lot.

Why? If i do you'll pretend i didn't anyway.

I tell you what - are you claiming NONE OF THOSE ARE TRUE?  Lets see who the liar here really is

There ya go.

I don't need to pretend because you cannot prove it LOL

Cannot back up your BS lies and are trying to deflect. Typical. 

The liar is clearly you.

Yup OK  ?

Edited June 5, 2023 by ExFlyer

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

And this local mp that calls you every time you email (which i don't believe in the slightest) is with which party? I"j going to guess that it just HAPPENS MAGICALLY to be liberal?

My location is Saskatoon. That should be your first clue. ? Tell me, how many grits were elected is all of Saskatchewan in the last election? I can give you a little hint: 0. NDP won ...0 seats. CPC won ALL the seats in Saskatchewan.

If Mr. O'Toole or Charest were leading the party, we would not be having this discussion. I am afraid Mr. Poilievre is going to be harmful to the CPC. The promises he has made he can't keep or shouldn't. He wants to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Stupid. Get rid of the CBC? Mulroney merely pre-empted 20 minutes of one episode of Coronation Street and brought holy hell down on himself. 

The most critical file we are facing in the greenhouse effect. Mr. Polilevre should be creating a path to drastically reduce emissions while bringing more prosperity to the west, Ontario and Quebec. Presenting a vision of a better future is what could give him his record majority. By remaining silent on what he plans to do gives the electorate a picture of a man with no vision. A viable visionary plan would leave Trudeau's policies in the dust.

[CdnFox]

24 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

There ya go.

I don't need to pretend because you cannot prove it LOL

Cannot back up your BS lies and are trying to deflect. Typical. 

The liar is clearly you.

LOL - well lets see about that shall we

So i said he called an mp a piece of shit.

You claim that's not true

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/justin-trudeau-allegedly-calls-peter-kent-a-piece-of-s-in-commons

LOL - YOU LIED LIBERAL Big shock

I said trudeau claimed the CPC leader was a white supremisist

https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/conservative-politics-1.5099222

YOU LIED AGAIN LIBERAL - HE DID

I said he used "f*ck' in the house -

YOU Claim that was a lie - but he did

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-fuddle-duddle-1.6441824

YOU LIED AGAIN 

As to him saying a Jewish mp stood with the nazis:

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-accusing-jewish-mp-of-standing-with-swastika-new-low-for-pm

Yup =  you lied again  

24 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Yup OK  ?

You owe me 9 more biatch

 I notice you gave up early the other time.

So as we can see - you lied. And what's worse you lied many times.  And you're SHOCKED that people call you a liar

Gotcha  - now 9 more pls  

[Queenmandy85]

47 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So...  can you explain how ONLY conservative leaders MUST take the high ground?  Why the rules apply only to them? Why the public keeps rewarding the guy who doesn't play by those rules - the same guy who was the butt of the joke here?

Like any sport, you have to set an example. The rule is the same now as when you were in kindergarten: It is not whether you win or lose, it is how you play the game.

The Prime Minister keeps winning because the CPC chooses losers to lead. When they eventually get a good leader like Mr. O'Toole, they drop him. We had the chance to have Jean Charest, but instead we picked Poilievre. He will win the next election and be a one -hit wonder. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

My location is Saskatoon. That should be your first clue. ? Tell me, how many grits were elected is all of Saskatchewan in the last election? I can give you a little hint: 0. NDP won ...0 seats. CPC won ALL the seats in Saskatchewan.

Your profile says that but you're comments suggested otherwise.  Kinda hard to say  

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

If Mr. O'Toole or Charest were leading the party, we would not be having this discussion.

Yes - you lean more to the liberals and wish we had a liberal light leader.  We get it

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I am afraid Mr. Poilievre is going to be harmful to the CPC. The promises he has made he can't keep or shouldn't. He wants to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Stupid.

No, that one is smart. it might be that he can't (although it is possible) but he definitely should.

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Get rid of the CBC? Mulroney merely pre-empted 20 minutes of one episode of Coronation Street and brought holy hell down on himself. 

There's wide support for that. The CBC has become corrupt and a mouthpeice for the liberal party. Why should i pay for that? If you like coronation street then i'm sure some other channel will pick it up.

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The most critical file we are facing in the greenhouse effect. Mr. Polilevre should be creating a path to drastically reduce emissions while bringing more prosperity to the west, Ontario and Quebec.

That is not even remotely the most critical file.  There is NOTHING we can do as a country about that.  Even if we eliminated ALL emissions and just committed suicide, China is increasing it's emmissions by more than our entire amount currently every 2 years. We are utterly meaningless.

If there was anything we could be doing it would be looking for harm reduction by making more cleaner fuels available in the short term and investing money in developing the next generation of tech that can actually solve problems like battery storage or nuclular/plasma power.

It's important - it's not the most important.

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Presenting a vision of a better future is what could give him his record majority.

That much is true. Leaders win big  by presenting a cohesive easy to understand vision of the future that can be quckly articulated and has some sort of path.

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

By remaining silent on what he plans to do gives the electorate a picture of a man with no vision. A viable visionary plan would leave Trudeau's policies in the dust.

releasing his plans now would prove he was an incompetent !diotvwith no right to lead. It's beyond a rookie mistake.

The time to release his plans is during an election. Right now he can give the '10,000 ft view' of his plans but you'd have to be a political retard to actually give details.  Even his 'jail not bail' stuff is premature.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Like any sport, you have to set an example. The rule is the same now as when you were in kindergarten: It is not whether you win or lose, it is how you play the game.

No, the goal is to win. This isn't a 'game'.  We're talking about people's lives, our freedoms, our future. Thats' not "For sport". That's something our people have fought and died to have.

And which sport exactly can you name where only one team follows the rules?

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The Prime Minister keeps winning because the CPC chooses losers to lead.

And now we've got a winner who is going to focus on winning, not "playing the game" or "being nice".

And guess what's going to happen. Justin will be gone.

Sounds like the losers are the ones who follow your rules.

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Again - Justin does the fake news thing ALL the time. Constanty.  And he has been re-elected 3 times after scandal after scandal.

How can you compare what you refer to as Trudeau's "scandals" with the real scandals like the customs scandal or the hald dozen separate incidents of bribery, especially from the mafia, under Mike Pearson. Now those were real scandals, not a visit to one of the worlds leading religious leaders or a clumsy attempt to save 1500 engineering jobs by asking if a deferred prosecution was possible. (Pearson was also re-elected after all the revelations came out.)

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

How can you compare what you refer to as Trudeau's "scandals" with the real scandals like the customs scandal or the hald dozen separate incidents of bribery, especially from the mafia, under Mike Pearson.

Nobody has done so. Not to mention that party doesn't exist any more.

Asking me about something i've never done is pretty clear indications that you know i'm right and can't argue the point without introducing a new topic. Specificaly a topic that happened six decades ago with a dead guy.

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Now those were real scandals, not a visit to one of the worlds leading religious leaders or a clumsy attempt to save 1500 engineering jobs by asking if a deferred prosecution was possible. (Pearson was also re-elected after all the revelations came out.)

You mean interfering with our justice system to get donors off scott free for money?

THat's actually pretty bad. So's taking bribes from the aga khan. So's giving single source contracts to people who pay his family money.  I could go on of course - there's so many.

Now - we can argue  if all of that is worse than OTHER scandals if you like - i mean, is that as bad as taking envelopes of cash in brown envelopes under the table in payment for awarding contracts like Chretien's liberals did? You tell me.

 Or if you really do feel like going back in time - is it as bad as Laurier burying the report on residental schools to avoid costs and knowingly allowing abuses to continue? I suppose that's a fair question.

Did you want to continue? Or are we ready to go back to discussing this century?

[Queenmandy85]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sounds like the losers are the ones who follow your rules.

I campaigned for the only Conservative to defeat a Trudeau. I campaigned for him in the leadership campaign and then in the federal election that followed.

Once in office, he set about privatizing Metro-Canada, strengthing ties with Israel and getting rid of the deficit Trudeau left him. 

[ExFlyer]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

LOL - well lets see about that shall we

So i said he called an mp a piece of shit.

You claim that's not true

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/justin-trudeau-allegedly-calls-peter-kent-a-piece-of-s-in-commons

LOL - YOU LIED LIBERAL Big shock

I said trudeau claimed the CPC leader was a white supremisist

https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/conservative-politics-1.5099222

YOU LIED AGAIN LIBERAL - HE DID

I said he used "f*ck' in the house -

YOU Claim that was a lie - but he did

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-fuddle-duddle-1.6441824

YOU LIED AGAIN 

As to him saying a Jewish mp stood with the nazis:

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-accusing-jewish-mp-of-standing-with-swastika-new-low-for-pm

Yup =  you lied again  

You owe me 9 more biatch

 I notice you gave up early the other time.

 

 

"allegedly called Peter Kent 'a piece of s---' i"

Alleged...no proof.

You lied LOL

 

"Conservatives accuse Trudeau of dropping F-bomb during chaotic question period"   no proof, just an accusation LOL

You lied. LOL

"accused him of "dropping an F-bomb,"...."alleged profanity"... :"the Tories have not been clear about what they heard"

Accused. Once again...

You lied.

Support of swastika and confederate flag waving truckers debacle is OK with you?

So you see, the lies and accusations without proof explode out of you LOL

Yup OK  http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/word/bullshit-bs-smiley-emoticon.gif

 

 

[Queenmandy85]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Not to mention that party doesn't exist any more.

That will come as big news to the Liberals. Every major scandal has been under a liberal government except the Pacific Scandal. So the Liberal Party doesn't exist?

[Queenmandy85]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Or if you really do feel like going back in time - is it as bad as Laurier burying the report on residental schools to avoid costs and knowingly allowing abuses to continue? I suppose that's a fair question.

Just as an aside, but so did Tommy Douglas, but CCF are just grits in a hurry. 

[CdnFox]

Just now, Queenmandy85 said:

I campaigned for the only Conservative to defeat a Trudeau. I campaigned for him in the leadership campaign and then in the federal election that followed.

Clark? Joe clark won a minority gov't and then was defeated in an election forced by trudeau a few months later.  That was no victory.

Just now, Queenmandy85 said:

Once in office, he set about privatizing Metro-Canada, strengthing ties with Israel and getting rid of the deficit Trudeau left him. 

He failed horribly. Petro-canada became massive. AND - clarke didn't want to privatize it, he wanted it dismantled.  Fail. The guy wasn't even in power for a year as i recall.

That's why he's now known as 'Joe Who?'.

that's not a 'victory' we want to repeat.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

"allegedly called Peter Kent 'a piece of s---' i"

Alleged...no proof.

You lied LOL

Total proof, and never denied by trudeau

Sorry little guy - It was you who was the liar.  And about all the other ones too which i notice you couldn't dispute

And this is why everyone calls liberals liars. You whine and complain "Oh - why do you keep calling me a liar?"  

Its simple. You always lie ?

Try telling the truth.

And you still owe me nine.  Unless you've realized how stupid that made you look. C"mon - i'll promise to make fun of you each time agian - you know you love that  

6 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Just as an aside, but so did Tommy Douglas, but CCF are just grits in a hurry. 

Well in fairness to tommy tho (who was a notorious racists actually) he wasn't in power. It wasn't his job to address that, so while i disapprove of what he did he kind of gets a bit of a walk. If he'd been PM then different story.

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That will come as big news to the Liberals. Every major scandal has been under a liberal government except the Pacific Scandal. So the Liberal Party doesn't exist?

The liberal party still exist.  Does the PC party? Nope

 

16 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

"allegedly called Peter Kent 'a piece of s---' i"

Alleged...no proof.

You lied LOL

 

"Conservatives accuse Trudeau of dropping F-bomb during chaotic question period"   no proof, just an accusation LOL

You lied. LOL

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-apologizes-for-swearing-at-kent-1.995992

Nope -you're still the liar

And here's the thing - you liberals always double down on lies.  You lie, you get caught, you get proven wrong, and then you double down on it.

Like i said to start with - you'll just pretend i didn't

Libearls lie and you're a liberal   thanks for proving my point.

[Queenmandy85]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well in fairness to tommy tho (who was a notorious racists actually) he wasn't in power.

He was Premier for 17 years.

[CdnFox]

Just now, Queenmandy85 said:

He was Premier for 17 years.

But not prime minister. Who is responsible for residential schools.

18 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That will come as big news to the Liberals. Every major scandal has been under a liberal government except the Pacific Scandal. So the Liberal Party doesn't exist?

My bad - i had it in my head he was part of that liberal-conservative coalition that was going on for a while but you're right, he's just a straight up liberal.