Don't be surprised if there are only a couple of others here who agree with you.
Printable View
Don't be surprised if there are only a couple of others here who agree with you.
this thinking will eventually do them in.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
100% agree with you but it will probably continue with the same posters,banging the drums on the same topics.Very sad.
for a guy who dislikes this place here you are again slandering an ex PM who really isn't part of this thread's topic and you accuse us of politicizing threads? Too funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Like I said , strictly for entertainment purposes, if I want real information I will go to experts, not people who only know how to cut and paste.
Just a rebuttal to GW's post # 11 about under the table payments. He brought it up , but of course you would overlook that.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Will just say this much.
As a gun owner, a registry doesn't bother me too much, to each their own. I see it as an inconvenience. That said, I also see it as a colossal waste of resources that was utterly ineffective . That was during good economic times when we didn't have to be very careful about where we allocate funds and resources. These days....What a joke if they bring it in in some form or other...We have far, far, far, far more pressing needs...
Like vets that are homeless, suicide rates that make gun deaths look ridiculous. Healthcare is a joke and many more pressing issues (unemployment in ONT and ALTA) and on and on and on....
However.
As we know in Ontario and previous administrations be they Provincial or Federal. Restraint, priorities that are sound are never high on their list. They do love to spend and they do love to pander to their friends. Thats hardly speculation, its cold hard fact that all Liberal admins spend a ton of money on their strongholds....Quebec Federally and GTA provincially.
So "supporting" could mean many things. Some weeks ago there was a lot of speculation about their platform and just how GC JT might be..
While their definition of support remains to be seen. Today, hard to argue that those with concerns have more basis to think theres an agenda, than those who argued it was nothing but fear/chicken little.
A statement from the Feds a long the lines of Que can do what they want, but we won't be involved. Would have put it to bed, or been a step in the direction of "See, nothing to be worried about"
As for the rest.
Perhaps, but to date those who are very critical of the Libs have been right far more often than wrong. And those who believed in McGuinty, and then Ms Wynne argued against the spending, economy, scandals, ineptitude, pandering to Unions, etc...
So is there are decided right bias here..absolutely and sometimes it goes to far. However, at least provincially, Ms Wynne and friends have trashed the province and more....Proof is in the pudding.
Can hardly blame people.
personally I take the "Fudd" term as a compliment. Redneck also fits.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Cons, NDP, or Libs I just don't trust any of them not to bring back the LGR if it is perceived to buy votes. Parties do not set policy as to benefit the common good or common sense but rather to what will get them re-elected.
Truer words were never spoken.Quote:
Originally Posted by bardern
Not sure how you see the Feds laundering money to Quebec the same as Mulroney screwing over the German guy for cash payment for lobbying services the week he left office. Mulroney may have been a sleeze there but he was a private citizen and attempts to slander him got him one of the largest ever court settlements in Canadian history. Nothing Political on Mulroneys part there just personal greed.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann