Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, herbie said:

The MSM hasn't covered PP's plans as he doesn't have any real plans. Just slogans and misinformed opinions of Liberal ones.
They can't cover what's not there.

Right right. 

So... go over the very detailed plan the liberals have put out then.  I mean justin must have had one, he knew an election was coming so he must have released HIS plan right? Or the detailed plan of any of the current candidates for leadership other than "Will randomly declare emergency act".  Go ahead. 

Or Jagmeet's plan. Lets hear the details of that. 

Truth is PP's given more details and talked about his plan more than any of the others. 

You're a liar and a hypocrite, but at least you're consistent. 

Posted

Look dude, we signed onto the Paris Agreement in 2016 and the Tories have YET to produce a climate plan. They continue with Harper Era crime law BS, and promote shit that will dramatically cut their revenue and act like cutting the CBC will cover everything.
How gullible can you be? Dumb slogans and no meat, a repeat of the Trumo campaign.

Posted
19 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well the books have been opened a great deal. We know about the snc scams, we know about all the single sourced contracts and work for nothing like the company that got hundreds of millions for arrivecan,  we know about the "Green slush fund", we know about a lot of this crap. 

Unfortunately a lot of canadians dont' care about corruption. (eyeball..... Staaaaaaaaare...)  and vote the gov't in anyway. 

All PP can do is shut a  bunch of it down for now, but it gets revived the next time the libs are in power. 

With respect if you want more detail go dig it up yourself you lazy treesloth. This is a discussion forum, it's not an educational facility. 

The lefty liberals here seem to enjoy the corruption and incompetence that they support coming out of Ottawa. Eyeball is just another prime example of another dumbass lefty liberal 🤡 who prefers lies and bull chit over truth. Eyeball has to be a lefty liberal troll here alright and is trying to deflect what the phkn liberals have been doing to Canada for decades now. 

Eyeballs lefty liberal imbeciles in America are getting their asses kicked big time by Trump. Hopefully soon, PP will do the same to the lefty liberals here also. Canada needs an house cleaning also. We need an Elon Musk to clean the liberal corruption and incompetence Canadian house and get back to common sense. Something eyeball lacks big time. 😁

 

Posted

Emergency Powers = Emergency Act, I assume, as far as the OP is concerned?  

Is anyone else aware that there's an entire branch of parliamentary emergency powers under the principles of POGG?  

Doubtful.  

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
1 hour ago, herbie said:

Look dude, we signed onto the Paris Agreement in 2016 and the Tories have YET to produce a climate plan.

They completely ignored the paris agreement and we're not going to meet the targets or even come close

So you're saying that you feel better about a party that lies about what it's going to do so that you can feel better and virtue signal compared to a party that hasn't lied about what it's going to do and has said it will come up with something later

You couldn't be a bigger hypocrite if you tried. If all you need is someone to lie to you so that you can vote for them then no problem, the conservatives have developed a magic word disc that will eliminate all climate change. They will deploy it shortly after they are elected. Prove me wrong.

There you go, see you at the polls

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, herbie said:

The MSM hasn't covered PP's plans as he doesn't have any real plans.

He has lots of plans. 

He said he will change the justice system and stop this insane catch and release system.  One reason we need to dump the Liberals and NDP is because of the catch and release of criminals.  A man was attacked and stabbed by a criminal the other day, which happens frequently.  The suspect was arrested and released the same day even before the victim was released from the hospital.  This is the new normal and happens regularly.  Nobody is safe.

The Liberal soft-on-crime approach with their repeated catch and release is devastating to many innocent Canadians.  Anybody who votes for Liberals or NDP is voting to allow criminals to continue attacking Canadians.  Rocks in their head.

Edited by blackbird
Posted
1 minute ago, Moonbox said:

Emergency Powers = Emergency Act, I assume, as far as the OP is concerned?  

In truth we can't be a million percent sure. He just said he'd use emergency powers. Certainly that would include things like the emergency act but there are other emergency powers technically that might be considered to be federal. I can't think of what he might be referring to other than the emergency powers act off the top of my head but they're probably are one or two things that would also fit that description. For example although I can't recall it off the top of my head I believe there is a provision that allows under certain circumstances the setting aside of the constitutional election date during times of war or other severe circumstances and I'm not sure that's in the emergency act. I'd have to look it up

Quote

Is anyone else aware that there's an entire branch of parliamentary emergency powers under the principles of POGG?  

Sure but in this context that would be more about stepping on provincial rights rather than people's rights. That's more commonly used to allow the federal government to intervene in areas that would be provincial jurisdiction.

Which is also seriously bad but should be blunt federal government tends to do that anyway. And they already control the border so when it comes to tariffs there's not much it would matter. An example of where it might be used would be to ram a pipeline through a province that didn't want it, or to seize control of companies in a province or the like. 

I'm not an expert on that law but I don't think it would really be applicable to personal rights in this case

Posted
2 hours ago, taxme said:

The lefty liberals here seem to enjoy the corruption and incompetence that they support coming out of Ottawa. Eyeball is just another prime example of another dumbass lefty liberal 🤡 who prefers lies and bull chit over truth. Eyeball has to be a lefty liberal troll here alright and is trying to deflect what the phkn liberals have been doing to Canada for decades now. 

Eyeballs lefty liberal imbeciles in America are getting their asses kicked big time by Trump. Hopefully soon, PP will do the same to the lefty liberals here also. Canada needs an house cleaning also. We need an Elon Musk to clean the liberal corruption and incompetence Canadian house and get back to common sense. Something eyeball lacks big time. 😁

 

I wouldn't count on Poilievre being quite as ruthless or thorough as trump :)  But I imagine he'll do some good

Posted
33 minutes ago, blackbird said:

A "climate plan" is the biggest scam in history.  Get off it.  Nobody can control the climate.

Is that what you think PP believes too, that AGW isn't even real?

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
11 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Is that what you think PP believes too, that AGW isn't even real?

That's not what he said. @blackbird Did not say he didn't believe that global warming isn't real. He said the climate plans are the biggest scam in history.

And they are. I paid my carbon tax for 10 years or more and it hasn't helped a bit. The whole climate crisis call to spend money and tax the middle class out of existence is a scam.

You have 10 years to get the plan right and you failed utterly. So it really doesn't matter whether or not anthropomorphic global warming is real, what is a parent is that the so-called plans to fix it are a scam

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You have 10 years to get the plan right and you failed utterly. So it really doesn't matter whether or not anthropomorphic global warming is real, what is a parent is that the so-called plans to fix it are a scam

And PP says he has a real scam that actually will control the climate.

C'mon, aren't you even the least bit curious to see how blackbird manages to rationalize all this away and vote for higher costs, subsidies instead of rebates and utter failure in any case?

Come to think of it how do you do it?

 

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

And PP says he has a real scam that actually will control the climate.

 

He has never said that. But of course lying about it is what we expect from you

Quote

C'mon, aren't you even the least bit curious to see how blackbird manages to rationalize all this away and vote for higher costs, subsidies instead of rebates and utter failure in any case?

I'm having more fun watching you rise like a slug that's had salt put on it. You had 10 years. 10 years where the government could have gotten away with anything and the public appetite for working on climate change was huge.

You blew it. You wasted it. And the science is pretty clear that nothing we do is going to make any significant change at all. Until some of the big boys make some decisions to reign things in or until technology advances to a point where it's more desirable to use products that are safer for the environment without subsidy Things are going to get worse and it really doesn't matter where Canada does

Quote

Come to think of it how do you do it?

It would be nice if he first three words were true. 

Edited by CdnFox
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You have 10 years to get the plan right and you failed utterly. So it really doesn't matter whether or not anthropomorphic global warming is real, what is a parent is that the so-called plans to fix it are a scam

And, since fat people have a 20% higher carbon footprint than those who are fit, they could have accomplished more by losing weight and driving the speed limit. 

Somehow when it comes to emissions 1% is a life threatening number but when applied to known fentanyl deaths it's a drop in the bucket. 

 

Edited by Venandi
  • Like 1
Posted
14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I'm not an expert on that law but I don't think it would really be applicable to personal rights in this case

The last time the emergency branch of POGG powers was used was to fight inflation in 1976.  A destructive trade-war declared by our (supposed) closest ally would probably constitute a bigger crisis. 

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
15 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

The last time the emergency branch of POGG powers was used was to fight inflation in 1976.  A destructive trade-war declared by our (supposed) closest ally would probably constitute a bigger crisis. 

The "anti inflation act" which limted bigger business and gov't from having pay rises over a certain amount. I do recall reading about that. 

For those following along, trudeau's spending (the first one ) and the red hot world economy led to very high inflation and to put the breaks on that rather than reduce spending trudeau passed a law which said big businesses over a certain size and gov't agencies could not give wage increases more than like 6 percent or something. The idea is that this would reduce inflation by putting a cap on the amount of money available out in the economy. 

So i get your point. But even tho that's a pretty serious gov't overreach into the private sector and we may well see the like moving forward it's still  not the kind of suspesion of democratic or personal rights that we can see under the real emergency powers carney seems to be talking about. 

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So i get your point. But even tho that's a pretty serious gov't overreach into the private sector and we may well see the like moving forward it's still  not the kind of suspesion of democratic or personal rights that we can see under the real emergency powers carney seems to be talking about. 

My point is that it would make no sense for him to be talking about the Emergencies Act, for multiple reasons. 

First, a trade-war would be a nonsense justification for its use, and it would be shut down by legal challenge. 

Second, the Liberals would be pretty gunshy on this considering how much blowback they received last time.  

In the context of the Orange Blob, the Emergencies Act could be enacted if Trump made actual attempts to annex Canada by force, otherwise folks are blowing a lot of smoke around this.  

Edited by Moonbox

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
14 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

My point is that it would make no sense for him to be talking about the Emergencies Act, for multiple reasons. 

First, a trade-war would be a nonsense justification for its use, and it would be shut down by legal challenge. 

Second, the Liberals would be pretty gunshy on this considering how much blowback they received last time.  

In the context of the Orange Blob, the Emergencies Act could be enacted if Trump made actual attempts to annex Canada by force, otherwise folks are blowing a lot of smoke around this.  

It made no sense for him to claim that putting more taxes on steel doesn't hurt consumers because consumers don't go out and buy steel. But he said that exactly.

Honestly, nobody calls legislation passed under the principle of pogg "emergency legislation" , they didn't even use that term in the 70's. 

And carney has been here quite long enough to know what happened with the emergency act. I can't believe that he would use the term emergency powers lightly.

Because he has chosen not to explain what he means we are left to guess and I suppose your guess is as valid as anyone else's but  The use of that specific term in that specific way very strongly suggests that more serious emergency powers may be on the table. You absolutely certainly cannot discount that

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

He has never said that.

He said he's for carbon capture. He may not have an official plan but there most certainly will be one of he's elected.

Climate action may not be a priority for Poilievre, Dachis says in an interview; however, the party will need a “comprehensive and credible climate policy” as part of its election platform.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.corporateknights.com/category-climate/pierre-poilievre-is-loud-on-carbon-pricing-but-silent-on-climate-policy/

So-called green conservatives such as Clean Prosperity mentioned in the article are who PP will lean on for policy direction.

Will PP follow Trump and pull Canada out of the Paris Agreement? I'm sure that will be a tricky question for someone who'll be trying to differentiate and distance himself from Trump.

Whatever it is PP comes up with it will likely be a minimal effort to virtue-signal how much Conservatives care.

I guess die-hard deniers and hard-boiled conservatives in general will just have to hold their noses and pretend not to notice. When they're not busy defending and promoting it that is.

Edited by eyeball

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
1 minute ago, eyeball said:

He said he's for carbon capture. He may not have an official plan but there most certainly will be one of he's elected.

So what you're saying is that you lied about what he said, he never said anything like that at all, he said something entirely different.

Yeah. I know. That was my point.

And he absolutely can have a credible climate policy. They're ups that policy will be adaptation which makes more sense than trying to control the climate when you only produce 1% of the pollution. Perhaps his policy will be to try and develop technology that is Affordable and desirable for the rest of the world to adapt so that the big polluters actually have reasonable means and motive to reduce pollution.

But the key word there is credible. Will people will be looking for is something that actually delivers results and doesn't wipe out Canada doing it. Which is the exact opposite of what the liberals delivered

Posted
2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So what you're saying is that you lied about what he said, he never said anything like that at all, he said something entirely different.

This is what he said.

Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre responded to questions from reporters on Wednesday regarding the recently announced clean energy investments in Tuesday's federal budget. He said while he is for things like carbon capture and storage, he accused the Liberal government of being unable to get infrastructure projects built. He said the Conservatives would analyze the budget for clean energy-related tax credits, but he would focus on getting "gatekeepers out of the way to get things built."

https://globalnews.ca/video/9587349/poilievre-says-hes-for-carbon-capture-claims-liberals-cant-get-infrastructure-projects-built

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But the key word there is credible. Will people will be looking for is something that actually delivers results and doesn't wipe out Canada doing it.

According to people like @blackbird if not most the hard-boiled die-hard AGW deniers that comprise the bulk of PP's base of support, no plan is credible. It's all virtue signalling bullshit.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

This is what he said.

Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre responded to questions from reporters on Wednesday regarding the recently announced clean energy investments in Tuesday's federal budget. He said while he is for things like carbon capture and storage, he accused the Liberal government of being unable to get infrastructure projects built. He said the Conservatives would analyze the budget for clean energy-related tax credits, but he would focus on getting "gatekeepers out of the way to get things built."

https://globalnews.ca/video/9587349/poilievre-says-hes-for-carbon-capture-claims-liberals-cant-get-infrastructure-projects-built

And?

Where's the part where he said he was going to save the world? And he's not even talking about his own policy he was responding to a question about the federal budget.

This keeps getting more and more off track every time you try and make a point. You started off claiming that he had a super plan that would save the world that he would implement as prime minister, and now have sunk back to there's this thing that he said he kind of likes without giving specifics and he was talking about the federal budget put in by a completely different party and not his plan at all

I don't know what to tell you bud. It's hard to find anything that you say that's truthful.

Posted
1 minute ago, eyeball said:

According to people like @blackbird if not most the hard-boiled die-hard AGW deniers that comprise the bulk of PP's base of support, no plan is credible. It's all virtue signalling bullshit.

You're getting to that point where you get so angry about your own stupidity and failures that you begin to lose the ability of coherent speech.

And once again you misrepresent what other people have said in order to try and present your agenda. Blackbird is of the opinion that any plan that professes that it will significantly alter the climate by controlling Canadian emissions with today's technology is probably just virtue signaling. And that is certainly true. As we have discussed many times even if you wiped out all of Canada's emissions it would make no real difference.

That doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a valid climate plan. It may include adoption where we invest in things and infrastructure and technology that will allow us to maximize the benefit of climate change and minimize the harm. It may involve developing technologies that will allow the major polluters to cost-effectively and desirably reduce their emissions over time. Etc etc

You had 10 years and everything you did failed. You didn't take climate change seriously, at no point in time was there ever any effort made to reduce emissions seriously Or even track how effective various programs were.

So let's be blunt. Even if the plan is do nothing and wait until the technology improves, it would still be a better plan than yours was and far more honest.

  • Haha 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You started off claiming that he had a super plan....

LMAO!

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

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

    • Total Members
      10,889
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Lillian
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

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