Jump to content


Photo

Really? Trust this guy??


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#36 sherri

sherri

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,413 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:00 PM




1. you have to remember where a large amount of that "information" in that video is coming from. biased, left leaning media who couldn't be more opposed to a Conservative government.



exactly the point i was trying to make
which is why i dont bother with that crap


But there is truth to every story, right? Maybe not in it's entirety, or maybe it doesn't play out exactly like they would have you believe, but there is truth. It's not plucked out of the sky!



some are completely un-true like the Lib's attack ad on Harper where they "quoted" Harper as saying he wanted to scrap the Canada Health Act, which they had to go back and correct because he had never said that.

funny how the Conservatives use actual footage of Iggy putting his foot in his mouth whereas the Fib's...i mean Lib's use ficticious "quotes" LOL


exactly

#37 It'sMe

It'sMe

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 717 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:04 PM





1. you have to remember where a large amount of that "information" in that video is coming from. biased, left leaning media who couldn't be more opposed to a Conservative government.



exactly the point i was trying to make
which is why i dont bother with that crap


But there is truth to every story, right? Maybe not in it's entirety, or maybe it doesn't play out exactly like they would have you believe, but there is truth. It's not plucked out of the sky!



some are completely un-true like the Lib's attack ad on Harper where they "quoted" Harper as saying he wanted to scrap the Canada Health Act, which they had to go back and correct because he had never said that.

funny how the Conservatives use actual footage of Iggy putting his foot in his mouth whereas the Fib's...i mean Lib's use ficticious "quotes" LOL


Yes, because the Conservatives have never posted false or misleading political ads. They are the last bastions of integrity, class, and truth. Thank you for showing me the light and for making me realize that I need to vote for a party whose social policies I find deplorable, simply because their political ads have always been squeaky clean!


you're quite welcome :)

#38 sherri

sherri

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,413 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:06 PM






1. you have to remember where a large amount of that "information" in that video is coming from. biased, left leaning media who couldn't be more opposed to a Conservative government.



exactly the point i was trying to make
which is why i dont bother with that crap


But there is truth to every story, right? Maybe not in it's entirety, or maybe it doesn't play out exactly like they would have you believe, but there is truth. It's not plucked out of the sky!



some are completely un-true like the Lib's attack ad on Harper where they "quoted" Harper as saying he wanted to scrap the Canada Health Act, which they had to go back and correct because he had never said that.

funny how the Conservatives use actual footage of Iggy putting his foot in his mouth whereas the Fib's...i mean Lib's use ficticious "quotes" LOL


Yes, because the Conservatives have never posted false or misleading political ads. They are the last bastions of integrity, class, and truth. Thank you for showing me the light and for making me realize that I need to vote for a party whose social policies I find deplorable, simply because their political ads have always been squeaky clean!


you're quite welcome :)



hahaha thats quite funny
if anyone is voting based on the ads then thats a problem itself

#39 one_vice

one_vice

    New Kid on the Block

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 150 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:13 PM







1. you have to remember where a large amount of that "information" in that video is coming from. biased, left leaning media who couldn't be more opposed to a Conservative government.



exactly the point i was trying to make
which is why i dont bother with that crap


But there is truth to every story, right? Maybe not in it's entirety, or maybe it doesn't play out exactly like they would have you believe, but there is truth. It's not plucked out of the sky!



some are completely un-true like the Lib's attack ad on Harper where they "quoted" Harper as saying he wanted to scrap the Canada Health Act, which they had to go back and correct because he had never said that.

funny how the Conservatives use actual footage of Iggy putting his foot in his mouth whereas the Fib's...i mean Lib's use ficticious "quotes" LOL


Yes, because the Conservatives have never posted false or misleading political ads. They are the last bastions of integrity, class, and truth. Thank you for showing me the light and for making me realize that I need to vote for a party whose social policies I find deplorable, simply because their political ads have always been squeaky clean!


you're quite welcome :)



hahaha thats quite funny
if anyone is voting based on the ads then thats a problem itself


Exactly. That's why I take them out of the equation altogether when trying to decide how to vote. Sadly, not everyone does that. If they did, the ads would not be successul and we wouldn't have to be subjected to them anymore.

#40 vals

vals

    Proud member since September 2008

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,169 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 03:16 PM

I like Harper! He's done a lot of good for the country, especially where the economy is concerned. With Harper we weathered the recession better than any other G7 nations and we recovered better than any other G7 nations. This in itself speaks volumes IMO!

#41 JeepMom

JeepMom

    aka JeepFreak

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 03:30 PM

I like Harper! He's done a lot of good for the country, especially where the economy is concerned. With Harper we weathered the recession better than any other G7 nations and we recovered better than any other G7 nations. This in itself speaks volumes IMO!


I do have some food for thought on that note.... DID we weather the economic storm better then most other countries because of

A) the Conservative minority government..one that has had a hard time the past 4 years getting anything done b/c they are a minority...

or

B)did we do OK because of the work and policies that has been done over the many many years by past governments.

Just food for thought, not meant to start a debate on who to vote for.

#42 vals

vals

    Proud member since September 2008

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,169 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 04:27 PM

It is 100% Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party who are to thank for maintaining a secure and stable economy!

Just do a little back reading to the start and you will see how Canada has benefitted from the conservative party.

In the early 90's this country had a massive amount of debt due to out of control government spending.

Chretien was sinking us, borrowing out the ying yang and digging us deeper and deeper into a recession. After him things didn't get much better and even though some still claim that Martin was at the forefront of the great dig out, in reality if you do your research you will see that the time that both Chretien and Martin where in charge where the lowest economic times this country had seen since the 1930's (great depression).

In comes Harper in 2006, quickly implementing changes that thrust our counties saving in the right direction and has ultimately enabled us to quickly move towards recovery from the global recession. Its hard to argue with all the facts when you see all the positive changes that came with the Harper government.

#43 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 04:33 PM

My phone is going wonky and decided to not cooperate in quoting a post, so I will just address it here.

It was brought up that Harper spends too. Of course he spends, you can't run a country without capital. The thing to look for is RESPONSIBLE spending. Spending money like its going out of style on most things doesn't make any fiscal sense. There are areas that are so far out of date (due to Liberal negligence in governments past) that they are being updated now, so the increased funding is not for long term, just to replenish the reserves; example military funding. Then there are the areas that can use funding for what is needed, which he does put money into. He is not trying to do away with health care, but it can run better with less profit loss on asinine programs. There was a study released this year about the positions established under McGuinty in our system, that are unneccessary and drawing funding from Dr's, nurses, patient care, research, etc. I'm sure across the other provinces there are issues the same. Large quantities of money being mismanaged, auditing and reconfiguring the budget is not a bad thing. Why would one oppose making sure the money is going where it is needed?

I know for me it isn't that I don't care about human rights, but I see them different the left leaning supporters. I don't even agree that everyone should be able to claim protection of human rights. Those that commit atrocious crimes (the major ones: cold blooded murder, rape, pedophilia, terrorists, etc) in my mind gave up the right to fair treatment when they ignored the human rights of their victims.

I want a government that respects privacy, isn't looking to socialize every possible aspect of its citizens lives eliminating freedom of choice, that encourages healthy economic growth by not stifling corporations and their growth here. That encourages people to push themselves into a better life instead of fostering conditions that lead to too many people dependant on social programs and assistance. I don't want my children and their children being held liable for an irresponsible governments idealistic pipe dreams.

I find it hilarious that everything Harper has done federally to help McGuinty has countered provinvially. Most of the complaints we in Ontario have really aren't even under federal territory! Know thy enemy. High cost of living? Yes that will happen when taxes are through the roof because our provincial government and its branch off party both support tax hikes. Not enough money spent on healthcare? No, its just being spent without prudence on areas that aren't priority, leaving crucial services short on funds. Education not receiving enough? It isn't, but you'll find the conservatives support education and want to see the average citizen better educated to add more to our workforce, instead of raise the citizens to become reliant on social services.

Harper has done a good job while in power. Even while dealing with all the antics of the opposition, and the smoke screens they've attempted to create. I don't want a Prime Minister who wants to hold my hand. Government should not act as our parents dictating our lives.

#44 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 05:39 PM

But they should CARE about the social welfare of their people!!!!

I would HATE to be a homosexual person living in Harper's world. If it were up to him I'm scared where they'd be!! I also absolutely cannot fathom what his damn problem is with equality and equal wages, etc.

What is your view on proroguing.. TWICE?

#45 Jen.Uh.Fur

Jen.Uh.Fur

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,012 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 05:47 PM

But they should CARE about the social welfare of their people!!!!

I would HATE to be a homosexual person living in Harper's world. If it were up to him I'm scared where they'd be!! I also absolutely cannot fathom what his damn problem is with equality and equal wages, etc.

What is your view on proroguing.. TWICE?


But yet isn't gay marriage legal in Canada? (not trying to argue, just trying to fully get your point)

#46 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 06:06 PM

But they should CARE about the social welfare of their people!!!!

I would HATE to be a homosexual person living in Harper's world. If it were up to him I'm scared where they'd be!! I also absolutely cannot fathom what his damn problem is with equality and equal wages, etc.

What is your view on proroguing.. TWICE?


Its not that they don't care. But being concerned is different than having to assume full responsibility. People owe it to themselves and our country to be self-sufficient in more areas.

Where is homosexuals coming into it? You've thrown me for a loop here, what are the concerns here? If he's ever said they will be outlawed I've missed it. There isn't much he could do against it even if he wanted to.

Where are the wage problems you are speaking of? You will have to enlighten me.

As far as proroguing, twice, no I don't have much of an issue there. Was it shady? Could be seen that way. But notice it was only in response to shady tactics being put forth by the opposition.

#47 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 07:38 PM

He has been clear about his distaste for homosexuality, saying legalizing marrying was a mistake, etc, etc. I'd have to find the actual stuff I was looking at, but being a conservative in values as well, that isn't at all surprising!

Proroguing IS shady!! Every bill that was on the table (including ones he was very against) were thrown out. It was basically a dictators move in what is supposed to be a democracy. There is a reason every single one of those people have seats, because of our votes. By propoguing they are basically saying screw that, we will do this OUR way. It's not right, and I don't think it should be allowed at all. There were bills waiting to be decided and they were wipped right out.. of course they were ones he was fighting against! It's a weak move, IMO, showing a big lack of character.

About wages, that was more things I have heard in passing. He does not believe in wage equality between men and women, for what I understand and has dramatically cut funding to women's right and advocacy groups. I'd have to look more into it before I could really discuss details.

#48 It'sMe

It'sMe

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 717 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 07:43 PM


But they should CARE about the social welfare of their people!!!!

I would HATE to be a homosexual person living in Harper's world. If it were up to him I'm scared where they'd be!! I also absolutely cannot fathom what his damn problem is with equality and equal wages, etc.

What is your view on proroguing.. TWICE?


Its not that they don't care. But being concerned is different than having to assume full responsibility. People owe it to themselves and our country to be self-sufficient in more areas.

Where is homosexuals coming into it? You've thrown me for a loop here, what are the concerns here? If he's ever said they will be outlawed I've missed it. There isn't much he could do against it even if he wanted to.

Where are the wage problems you are speaking of? You will have to enlighten me.

As far as proroguing, twice, no I don't have much of an issue there. Was it shady? Could be seen that way. But notice it was only in response to shady tactics being put forth by the opposition.


i think you are my political kindred spirit, Michelle LOL!

i'm thinking the "equality and equal wages" thing is based on the fact that Harper hates women and homosexuals. this is evident in the fact that he's going to get rid of abortion and gay marriage if he gets his majority :rolleyes

proroguing? no issue with it in the least. the coalition of losers attempting to form their own government, i have a big problem with. the second time he did it, i didn't have a problem with it either.

apparently Canadians have either selective or short term memories. Harper is certainly not the first and won't be the last PM to ever do this.

#49 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 07:48 PM

I realize others have done it, but I am not concerned with that as I am in the current time, dealing with my current choices.

I also didn't say any of those things, so you can role your eyes if you want, but those issues are a big deal for me, and I would never support someone who would go on record being so totally opposite of my values.

#50 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 07:54 PM

He has been clear about his distaste for homosexuality, saying legalizing marrying was a mistake, etc, etc. I'd have to find the actual stuff I was looking at, but being a conservative in values as well, that isn't at all surprising!

Proroguing IS shady!! Every bill that was on the table (including ones he was very against) were thrown out. It was basically a dictators move in what is supposed to be a democracy. There is a reason every single one of those people have seats, because of our votes. By propoguing they are basically saying screw that, we will do this OUR way. It's not right, and I don't think it should be allowed at all. There were bills waiting to be decided and they were wipped right out.. of course they were ones he was fighting against! It's a weak move, IMO, showing a big lack of character.

About wages, that was more things I have heard in passing. He does not believe in wage equality between men and women, for what I understand and has dramatically cut funding to women's right and advocacy groups. I'd have to look more into it before I could really discuss details.


If he finds homosexuality distasteful that's his personal problem. He can't overturn the gay marriage law without huge reprocussions, and even though I support the tories I wouldn't back them on that issue.

You know what else is shady? When 3 losing parties try to overturn the votes that brought a leader into power. Layton has to aim for a coalition, as I don't think he's at the point where he could be a serious contender for PM. Damn right I was happy that move was stopped cold.

I've never seen anything that supports wage differences.

And I don't think the government should be funding personal interest groups. Womans rights or no, there are other ways to increase their budget. Like allowing citizens to keep more money through lower taxes, and letting them make personal donations to the organization of their choice. Why is government money supporting these groups?

#51 vals

vals

    Proud member since September 2008

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,169 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 08:27 PM

~Jill~, on 27 April 2011 - 07:38 PM, said:

He has been clear about his distaste for homosexuality, saying legalizing marrying was a mistake, etc, etc. I'd have to find the actual stuff I was looking at, but being a conservative in values as well, that isn't at all surprising!

Proroguing IS shady!! Every bill that was on the table (including ones he was very against) were thrown out. It was basically a dictators move in what is supposed to be a democracy. There is a reason every single one of those people have seats, because of our votes. By propoguing they are basically saying screw that, we will do this OUR way. It's not right, and I don't think it should be allowed at all. There were bills waiting to be decided and they were wipped right out.. of course they were ones he was fighting against! It's a weak move, IMO, showing a big lack of character.

About wages, that was more things I have heard in passing. He does not believe in wage equality between men and women, for what I understand and has dramatically cut funding to women's right and advocacy groups. I'd have to look more into it before I could really discuss details.


This is all sensationalized crap found on personal blogs. I've read it all too and its a good laugh, but has no really proof to back it. The homosexual this is just ridiculous. Does no one remember that Harper promised a free vote on same sex marriages and even told the presses that he fully supported civil unions between same sex couples??? Odd that this little piece of info is hidden behind the much more seedy story of the ant-gay comments someone claimed Harper said on a social network.

The anti-womans right, pro-abortion, hidden agenda thing is also laughable. Little tidbits of information twisted and changed to create an interesting story.

I go based on the facts. Based on the improvements I see, what I read on t he government websites and in small doses what I read in the papers.

People should really steer clear of political personal blogs during election time and form decisions based on fact and not fiction!

#52 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 09:50 PM

For the record, I haven't visited a single blog, and I didn't say a thing about abortion.

I try not to vote based on my values, but it's really hard not to. I have to remember that when I tell my mom not to vote based on her conservatives values because it's really so much more than that. And no one is going to make a lick of different where she wants to see the changes.

I should send my sister Nath here and let her hash it out with you guys. That's one person you'd have your work cut out with!! She's of course, anti-Harper, and she wont even stutter while she gives you her laundry list of why! heh

Edited by ~Jill~, 27 April 2011 - 09:51 PM.


#53 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 09:51 PM

What governement sites are you going to read on? Not just their platforms, right? The ones written for them, with all the crap they spew to get your vote?

#54 vals

vals

    Proud member since September 2008

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,169 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 10:35 PM

The platform sites have good info, so long as you stick to the basics and the bio and avoid getting sucked in by the he said she said mumbo jumbo. I try to stay away from the extreme info sites, those are the ones that are just so ill informed. My spouse is a political madman ( I swear people think he is crazy when they see our library) so I'm constantly hearing up to date info that he reads. He's insane when it comes to following all this and staying abreast of the now. I too follow, but not to his extreme. I stay away from the fight sites and stick to the more relative ones. I like to hear both sides of the story, get all the facts and form an unbiased opinion. I too am guilty of a google from time to time though :) Too each their own, thats what makes politics so interesting and exciting, but I like to see people really do the research before choosing what to believe, especially when it gets really personal and a persons character is called to play.

#55 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 11:07 PM



But they should CARE about the social welfare of their people!!!!

I would HATE to be a homosexual person living in Harper's world. If it were up to him I'm scared where they'd be!! I also absolutely cannot fathom what his damn problem is with equality and equal wages, etc.

What is your view on proroguing.. TWICE?


Its not that they don't care. But being concerned is different than having to assume full responsibility. People owe it to themselves and our country to be self-sufficient in more areas.

Where is homosexuals coming into it? You've thrown me for a loop here, what are the concerns here? If he's ever said they will be outlawed I've missed it. There isn't much he could do against it even if he wanted to.

Where are the wage problems you are speaking of? You will have to enlighten me.

As far as proroguing, twice, no I don't have much of an issue there. Was it shady? Could be seen that way. But notice it was only in response to shady tactics being put forth by the opposition.


i think you are my political kindred spirit, Michelle LOL!

i'm thinking the "equality and equal wages" thing is based on the fact that Harper hates women and homosexuals. this is evident in the fact that he's going to get rid of abortion and gay marriage if he gets his majority :rolleyes

proroguing? no issue with it in the least. the coalition of losers attempting to form their own government, i have a big problem with. the second time he did it, i didn't have a problem with it either.

apparently Canadians have either selective or short term memories. Harper is certainly not the first and won't be the last PM to ever do this.


Indeed.

#56 joeyjoey

joeyjoey

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 717 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 11:40 PM

I think the point is that he is pretending to look through the flash, not the viewfinder.



Oh !!!!! Well, Duh on my part !!!

It was a joke, if you guys don't see the humor of not being able to even aim a camera properly but RUN a whole country, it's funny!!


LOL.. Well, i guess no one should be asking me to run the country, because I didn't see anything wrong with the pic, LOL.

Yup, it is funny. No, I don't have a stick up my butt. Just a little unobservant, lol.

But I'll still be voting for him. :)

#57 Jen.Uh.Fur

Jen.Uh.Fur

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,012 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 01:41 PM

If that's a reason not to trust someone to run the country, then no one should be fit to run the country. While you may not have made that exact mistake, I'm sure there was a silly mistake or two that you have made in your lifetime.

#58 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 01:48 PM

Oh my.. I wasn't being SERIOUS about it being a reason not to. I was just pointing out that it's funny that he can run a country but he can't point a camera. It was meant to be a joke, hence the "LOL" is the title and the laughing in the OP. I really don't understand how that was so hard to catch?!

Boy am I sorry I posted this! lol

#59 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 01:51 PM

Jill what are your feelings on current gas prices? Would you welcome a ten cent/litre increase, while we hover around $1.30/litre?

#60 Sam

Sam

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:14 PM

$1.50 in windsor, DH just texted me from work.

#61 cbarker78

cbarker78

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,587 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:16 PM

But one of your local NDP MPs voted against the bail out AND the DRIC. That's concerning to me!!! These both directly affect our area.



this "smear" campaign recently unveiled by the Windsor west conservative candidate is such smoke and mirrors it's really ridiculous!!

From what I've found so far... and it's not nearly scratching the surface... all three of this candidate's "key points" were in reality, NDP votes against the BUDGET tabled in 2008, 2009, and 2010!!

All three "key points" had their own debates in parliament.....

It's quite disheartening that a CPC Candidate, and by extension, the CPC party would try to BLATANTLY twist public record like that!!! It's such BS!!

#62 DivineMrsM

DivineMrsM

    Member since October 2005

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,592 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:26 PM

Oh my.. I wasn't being SERIOUS about it being a reason not to. I was just pointing out that it's funny that he can run a country but he can't point a camera. It was meant to be a joke, hence the "LOL" is the title and the laughing in the OP. I really don't understand how that was so hard to catch?!

Boy am I sorry I posted this! lol



Isn't it annoying when things go SO far from what you originally wanted it to be?! I'm sorry people just didn't quite grasp the meaning of this post!

But to out myself as an idiot, I didn't even notice that he wasn't looking thru it properly! LOL Great photog *I* am eh! lol

#63 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:27 PM

$1.50 in windsor, DH just texted me from work.


:o

#64 Kris

Kris

    Plotting a takeover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,533 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:34 PM

so did not get that pic right away, duh!

Either way doesn't matter to me wont vote for for him anyways, geez politics talk gives me a headache lol

#65 JavaBean

JavaBean

    Thoroughly addicted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,134 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 03:51 PM


But one of your local NDP MPs voted against the bail out AND the DRIC. That's concerning to me!!! These both directly affect our area.



this "smear" campaign recently unveiled by the Windsor west conservative candidate is such smoke and mirrors it's really ridiculous!!

From what I've found so far... and it's not nearly scratching the surface... all three of this candidate's "key points" were in reality, NDP votes against the BUDGET tabled in 2008, 2009, and 2010!!

All three "key points" had their own debates in parliament.....

It's quite disheartening that a CPC Candidate, and by extension, the CPC party would try to BLATANTLY twist public record like that!!! It's such BS!!



Which INCLUDED the DRIC and bailout. What's the smear? Where's the BS? He fully acknowledges these points, you know that, right?

#66 JavaBean

JavaBean

    Thoroughly addicted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,134 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 03:52 PM

And Jill, I personally appreciate some discussion on this topic. I think that it gets people researching the parties, looking into what is really behind this election and that's a GREAT thing! :)

#67 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 05:35 PM

I agree, but I thought I'd help give people a giggle, and for the most part I was SOO far off the mark with that one! lol

When I left for work everything around me was still 1.28$ that was at 4:30

#68 It'sMe

It'sMe

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 717 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 05:45 PM

gas in T.O is $1.38-$1.39....been around this price for awhile :(

#69 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 07:35 PM

Jill what are your feelings on current gas prices? Would you welcome a ten cent/litre increase, while we hover around $1.30/litre?


Of course I wouldn't, but are you implying that if the Conservatives are re-elected they actually plan to DO something about decreasing the price? I'm actually curious. Cause it would really help their reputation if they did something NOW!!

#70 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:18 PM


Jill what are your feelings on current gas prices? Would you welcome a ten cent/litre increase, while we hover around $1.30/litre?


Of course I wouldn't, but are you implying that if the Conservatives are re-elected they actually plan to DO something about decreasing the price? I'm actually curious. Cause it would really help their reputation if they did something NOW!!


No, my questions weren't spawned by the conservatives and their impact on gas. We would benefit from having a Canadian oil refinery, but no one has tackled that this round.

I can't link in pages from my phone, but if you wind up interested I can tell you where I've found it.

Information from the article:
Harper has brought up that Layton willl be responsible for a ten cent/litre increase for gas with his 20 billion dollar "hidden carbon tax" plan. That may sound like a "Hail Mary" sound bite borne of desperation, but there is some third party validation for the claim. Jack Mintz, chair of the School of Policy Studies at the University of Calgary, estimates that an NDP cap and trade plan with a price of $40/carbon tonne would indeed see gas prices rise by 10 cents/litre. "Ultimately people bear the brunt" Dr. Mintz

See, that's what kills me. The left see themselves as for the people, but everything they do screws us a bit more. The trickle down effects everyone financially. Old taxes will be raised, lord knows what they are going to want to tax next. How many items that we buy are already higher than 13% tax, and we will see more of an increase ("green taxes" being the main example, tagging on already expensive items such as televisions and appliances)? Not only are they taking money from us here, but by raising corporate taxes they (companies) will be forced to raise their prices costing us more there as well. They brainwash about these "evil corporations that don't care about people" instead of considering what we get from having them, and keeping their costs low. The country cannot run off mom 'n pop stores.

Yes, Harper has spent. But there is a HUGE difference between one time costs and starting programs based off unproven theories that are a yearly expense that are supposed to become permanent fixtures. Really, stop and think where all this money is coming from!

Inspite of all the minorly important reasons that people have given for disliking Harper he is the only person who as PM can lower our household costs. Liberals flat out refuse to consider tax reduction because they like their padded pockets too much. With the NDP's platform it is flat out impossible to give the people a break on their expenses, because if they do there is no way to fund these programs they are touting. They benefit from having people rely on their system.