Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Exactly! :)   And you kept zooming in till it didn't look like there was so much blue :) 

Exactly!  and then Treebeard showed us much red there was in Alberta, because you're apparently so dumb that someone had to explain that the amount of paint on the map isn't important, but rather the number of seats won.  

When this level of stupidity :) is how you convince yourself that you're right:), it's no wonder you think you're batting 100.00%:)

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

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Moonbox said:

At any moment you can put me on ignore.  I'd be happy not hear from you.  👍

Posters like you are basically free comedy on this board. Why would anyone throw that away? We can all use a laugh

Edited by CdnFox

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

What, so you're just out and out lying now?

2006 Canadian federal budget - Wikipedia

The budget was presented ON MAY 2nd. 

The election was on JANUARY 23rd. 

So at MOST you could say he presented it THREE months after he was elected. .And only ONE month after when it's traditional to do so. 

You're such a lying sack of shit. 

 

Calm down, I just made a mistake. You made one too btw, it was almost 3.5 months before Harper presented his budget and another month before it passed so....meanwhile the sun still rose in the east and set in the west as always.

You're such a drama queen.

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

Posted
2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Exactly!  and then Treebeard showed us much red there was in Alberta, because you're apparently so dumb that someone had to explain that the amount of paint on the map isn't important, but rather the number of seats won.  

 

Exactly!  Except nobody ever said that :)   That was YOUR claim not mine :) 

I just laughed at you for posting a visual representation that showed almost all blue and a little red and claiming "look! This proves the liberals are doing great!!!!"  LOLOLOL

So here's the difference, you're refering to something that YOU made up and are trying desperately to attribute to me. Whereas you really actually did screw up trying to figure out what a variable is in math, you really did insist for pages that 100 - 50 is not 50  and here you really did agree with Eyeball (should have been your first clue you were on the wrong track) and tried to claim that harper took 8 months to produce a budget when he took 3.  :) 

You are wrong virtually every single time, and you're so pathetic and desperate that you're looking for spelling mistakes and dictionary definitions of words to try to deflect ;) 

How's those math lesson's going? LOL

 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Calm down, I just made a mistake.

I doubt that very much.  And you were pretty arrogant for a guy who was 'just making a mistake'.  

How do you make a 'mistake' like that? What, you tripped and accidentally added 5 months? You must have looked it up and at no point anywhere does any document say that harper took 8 months to deliver a budget 

Quote

You made one too btw, it was almost 3.5 months before Harper presented his budget and another month before it passed so

And right there you prove your dishonesty.  You said "come up with" originally and now you want to change it to 'passed'. Mean while you want people to believe you're not a dishonest liar :) 

and I wasn't wrong, i just rounded down to the nearest month because i know you have trouble with numbers that get into the double digits :) (oh and fun fact, the budget must be shown and presented to the opposition in committee before it's tabled so it really was more like 3 months for him to 'come up' with it.  Even when you're wrong, you're still more wrong than you thought you were :) )

But you're trying to pass that off as being the same as your lie that it was 8 months before harper "came up" with a budget. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
19 hours ago, Barquentine said:

A budget takes months to prepare in normal times.

When's the last time we saw a normal budget? Budgets used to be hand-typed by the Finance Minister themselves. This secrecy was apparently to prevent insiders from profiting on knowledge they had of changes or things governments might be investing in.

They're all massive omnibus budget bills nowadays that also pass a bunch of legislation on things unrelated to any normal budget. There's no way any normal Finance Minister is the only one privy to these. If the issue here is accountability and transparency in government spending that went out the door a long long time ago.

It's almost like we could use a Federal Accountability Act or something.

 

 

 

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

Posted
1 minute ago, eyeball said:

When's the last time we saw a normal budget?

2024. Might be the last one if you and the libs have your way.  You spent a lot of time fighting AGAINST transparancy for a guy who claims to believe in it. 

The rest of your ramblings is distraction to hide the fact you support the liberal's lack of accountability. 

Quote

Budgets used to be hand-typed by the Finance Minister themselves. This secrecy was apparently to prevent insiders from profiting on knowledge they had of changes or things governments might be investing in.

No, That happened under one PM briefly, and was quickly abandoned. It was not necessary nor widely accepted.

Secrecy was considered important in the past but In modern times (since the 90's) budgets have always been discussed in committee before presented to the house and when presented to the house everyone gets a copy in advance. You're saying in the old days the finance minister hand typed all the copies for everyone and the committees discussing it weren't allowed to see it? :) 

 

Quote

They're all massive omnibus budget bills nowadays that also pass a bunch of legislation on things unrelated to any normal budget.

No, that's only since 2018. Prior to that Omnibus bills COULD NOT include anything that was not directly related to the primary bill. The omnibus was there so that if a change to one bill made it necessary to change other supporting bills as well to reflect the changes it was all done in one process. 

But  your beloved liberals changed that law and removed that. 

Since then an omnibus could have anything. 

 

So here we have proof. An entire post in a long line of posts of you explaining why we shouldn't have accountability. You believe firmly that the liberals should not have to produce a budget which would hold them accountable. You've defended it because a hundred years ago one guy typed a budget one time so budgets aren't real or something

You hate accountability. Every single time something comes up to hold the liberals accountable you go on forever about how they shouldn't be held accountable as you are doing here.

 

The liberals should have to produce a budget, they are deliberately avoiding being accountable, they should be punished by the voters for this kind of thing. But you will of course vote again for them next time because you don't mind a lack of accountability as long as it's liberals

 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You hate accountability.

LMAO!

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

Posted
10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

LMAO!

Ahhh your usual admission you're wrong without saying it ;) 

There has never been a single time when the gov't should have been held accountable that you haven't argued that they shouldn't.  Including this one. 

If you cared about accountability at all you'd be mad they're not releasing a budget. Instead you started off lying in their defense and then went on to spout gibberish about how there is no such thing as a 'real' budget anymore which is childish. 

Nobody spends more time arguing that the liberals should NEVER be accountable more than you.

Besides, it's all harper's fault. You've been saying that for decades :) 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

There has never been a single time when the gov't should have been held accountable that you haven't argued that they shouldn't.  Including this one. 

LMAO!

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

If you cared about accountability at all you'd be mad they're not releasing a budget. Instead you started off lying in their defense

You simply can't get your head around the idea that when someone mocks the quality of your overtly partisan criticism it doesn't means they support who or what you're criticizing can you?

 

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

Posted
15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

LMAO!

You simply can't get your head around the idea that when someone mocks the quality of your overtly partisan criticism it doesn't means they support who or what you're criticizing can you?

 

Kid, anyone over the age of seven can see through your lies. You're not mocking anything. You're desperately standing up for the liberals and you always do and not just with me but with others as well. Every single time someone says the liberals should be held accountable you immediately launch into lengthy diatribes as to why they shouldn't and never should.

It's become a running joke, others have commented on it. You absolutely are against any accountability towards the liberals, you believe that accountability should only apply to conservatives and frankly you haven't even stood up for that too much other than to say the lack of accountability is all harper's fault 

You have to remember that very few people are as stupid as you are. I'm sure you think you are fooling everyone, but that just simply is not the case

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Every single time someone says the liberals should be held accountable you immediately launch into lengthy diatribes as to why they shouldn't and never should.

No, I simply ask how when there exists no meaningful mechanism by which this can be done.

Of course this always makes you pipe up and peddle the notion that Conservatives like Stephen Harper fixed Canada's accountability problem years ago or that an x on a ballot every 4-5 years is plenty enough accountability. But only if it's for a Conservative, otherwise you're a Liberal by default.

Rinse and repeat, and it's pretty much the same treatment for anyone around here that doesn't demonstrate the same  obsequious adoration your do for your beloved Conservatives.

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

Posted
3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No, I simply ask how when there exists no meaningful mechanism by which this can be done.

 

Which as we all know is a blatant lie. All the provinces turned out budgets, federal governments have turned out budgets since the beginning of confederation, there's absolutely a complete meaningful mechanism by which they can be produced. Pretending that there's no way to produce a budget is not even going to trick your fellow grade two students

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Rinse and repeat, and it's pretty much the same treatment for anyone around here that doesn't demonstrate the same  obsequious adoration your do for your beloved Conservatives.

Kid as I have told you a trillion times your stupidity is not my fault. When you say something that is childish pureile and retarded I point it out. The fact that that's most of what you say is not my fault

And if someone else says something that is equally childish puerile and retarded I generally call them out

But you are literally arguing that there's no meaningful mechanism to turn out a budget. Budgets are one of the primary ways that we hold governments to account and you're arguing your ass off that it's not possible for him to have one where there's no meaningful mechanism or that there's no point in having one etc

This has nothing to do with me. This is you demanding that we don't hold the liberals to account

If you gave one tiny itty bitty little bit of A crap about accountability you would be all over the liberals for not turning out a budget. And you can't blame that on me

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But you are literally arguing that there's no meaningful mechanism to turn out a budget.

Nice try Captain Strawman.

38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Budgets are one of the primary ways that we hold governments to account

Oh, I thought an x every 4-5 years sufficed.

38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

This has nothing to do with me. This is you demanding that we don't hold the liberals to account

LMAO!

38 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

If you gave one tiny itty bitty little bit of A crap about accountability you would be all over the liberals for not turning out a budget. And you can't blame that on me

As I said...

Sure they have that responsibility.

Read much? 

Apparently not.

 

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

Posted
18 hours ago, Moonbox said:

At any moment you can put me on ignore.  I'd be happy not hear from you.  👍

No you wouldn't , if it is not me then it's some other on this forum that you'll attack for endless pages of nonsense...

  • Haha 1

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted
4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Nice try Captain Strawman.

 

Those were literally your words. It's not a strong man argument when I'm referencing what you specifically said. I don't think you understand what straw man actually means

Quote

Oh, I thought an x every 4-5 years sufficed.

No you thought that we should do away with elections because they're pointless and don't hold anyone to account

Quote

 

As I said...

Sure they have that responsibility.

Read much? 

 

 

No, that's not what you said. And I know because I read much more than you just quoted :) 

You said they have that responsibility but it doesn't matter.   You also suggested there's no way to actually have a budget. You suggested that there's no mechanism for that these days.

So basically you said they have a responsibility but there's no way or reason that they should possibly be expected to fulfill it.

That is what you said.

Lie much?  No point in answering everyone can see already. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Those were literally your words.

No they were not.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I don't think you understand what straw man actually means

It means you're a lying sack of shit.

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No you thought that we should do away with elections because they're pointless and don't hold anyone to account

Our first past the post system certainly sucks and your contention it's all we need to hold anyone to account is laughable.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No, that's not what you said. And I know because I read much more than you just quoted

Sure they have that responsibility is definitely what I said. What you read into what I say is what you use as the basis for the strawmen you spin.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You said they have that responsibility but it doesn't matter.   

Making it matter is a big part of that responsibility. It's what I'd do if I wanted people to have confidence in it.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You also suggested there's no way to actually have a budget

No I didn't, you're making that up too.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You suggested that there's no mechanism for that these days.

I said we can't properly hold our governments and politicians accountable. If we could they would have little reason not to produce a normal decent timely budget.

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So basically you said they have a responsibility but there's no way or reason that they should possibly be expected to fulfill it.

That is what you said.

Of course they could fulfill it. Under the present standards we have for accountability however I wouldn't expect much.

You OTOH have ridiculous expectations.

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Lie much?  No point in answering everyone can see already. 

See what?

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

Posted
28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No they were not.

Oh look who's embarrassed by what he said yet again and is desperately trying to deny it :) 

They were your precise words

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It means you're a lying sack of shit.

LOLOL  so you really didn't know and had to look it up and now you've realized i was right and you want it to be my fault :)

30 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Our first past the post system certainly sucks and your contention it's all we need to hold anyone to account is laughable.

I've never said it was all we need. In fact i'm arguing on this very thread that we need things like budgets. 

but it is the one most certain way the voters can punish those who are corrupt and drive corruption outside of the political Arena.

I'm using weight you say that elections are meaningless and at the same time you're arguing that budgets aren't necessary as part of holding governments to account. Basically absolutely everything that can be used against the liberals you shoot down

31 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I said we can't properly hold our governments and politicians accountable.

No you didn't. You argued that there's no such thing as a real budget. Everybody in the universe argues that a budget is a way to hold the government accountable and you just basically said no it doesn't really mean anything but we both know it does.

So you're not arguing that there isn't a way, you're arguing that we shouldn't. Budgets are a way and you argue the liberals should be allowed not to produce one without comment

If you believed in holding governments to account you would be demanding that they put out a budget but you're not

33 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Of course they could fulfill it. Under the present standards we have for accountability however I wouldn't expect much.

Do you mean your standards? Were you voted for these people and continue to excuse their behavior?

I agree that your standards allow for the liberals to not be held to account. You said it a million times. You probably been saying it for decades now :)  

34 minutes ago, eyeball said:

See what?

You lying. As always. You claim you didn't say what you said, you pretend that you care about accountability when you argue night and day against it for the liberals at least. 

Honestly it's gotten to the point where newfoundlanders make jokes about how stupid you are  :)  

You don't give a crap about accountability. You never have. You care about arguing to protect your beloved liberals and that's all you do

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

They were your precise words

No, they were yours. Post a link to them or fùck off.

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

Posted
2 hours ago, eyeball said:

No, they were yours. Post a link to them or fùck off.

They're right there above. they're even on the same page as your request there. This literally is the link and everyone can read the thread.  your words " there exists no meaningful mechanism by which this can be done."

as i said, literally your words

I get why you're ashamed of what you've said.  That happens to you a lot. You say things and then have to spend pages trying desperately to rewrite them. Or pretend you were talking about something else when it's obvious you weren't. Or pretend you never said it in the first place. 

 

Your dishonesty Always catches up with you.

 

Hey. Here's the facts. Producing a budget is a huge part of being accountable. This is a minority gov't, the voters can easily hold the gov't to account with an election if the public turns against the liberals. 

And you're arguing that budgets dont' matter and elections don't matter so we should just let the liberals off the hook. 

If you cared about accountability you'd be furious with the liberals for what they're doing. It's pretty obvious you don't. And trying desperately to rewrite what you've said is just childish. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
30 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Yep, the guy lies his ass off and caves when the public gets mad.  They sepcifically refused a budget in the fall to 'take the time to get things right' and it was just not possible and nobody can budget in this environment etc etc.... then  when people start pointing out what a lying sack of crap he is suddenly it's entirely possible and of course they were always going to do that (which they said they weren't). 

If the "fall' means september that might get him off the hook but i suspect he'll delay as long as he can. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
31 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yep, the guy lies his ass off and caves when the public gets mad.  They sepcifically refused a budget in the fall to 'take the time to get things right' and it was just not possible and nobody can budget in this environment etc etc.... then  when people start pointing out what a lying sack of crap he is suddenly it's entirely possible and of course they were always going to do that (which they said they weren't). 

If the "fall' means september that might get him off the hook but i suspect he'll delay as long as he can. 

oh calm down you little angry old man lol.

Posted
27 minutes ago, Politics1990 said:

oh calm down you little angry old man lol.

LOL oh look the leftist are pulling their favourite "Why are we even talking about this/why do you care"  argument :) 

Mike hardner will be along shortly to give you a gold star :)  well done little guy! 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

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
      10,911
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    AlembicoEMR
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

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