- Joined
- Nov 9, 2017
- Messages
- 9,813
- Reaction score
- 4,603
Pipelines? I'm assuming you're against them, but for what reason?
According to the NEB, these pipelines spilled an average of about 1,084 barrels per year between 2011 and 2014.
Pipelines? I'm assuming you're against them, but for what reason?
Do you think shipping fossil fuels from overseas is less harmful to the environment?According to the NEB, these pipelines spilled an average of about 1,084 barrels per year between 2011 and 2014.
Environmentalism, indigenous issues (UNDRIP), pipelines, healthcare, pharmacare, education.
Can't wait to walk into that voting station and put in a vote for the People's Party of Canada.
I've talked a bunch of undecided voters into voting PPC, too. Even a couple of Conservative voters.
WAR BERNIER and LONG LIVE THE PPC!
Do you think shipping fossil fuels from overseas is less harmful to the environment?
That's why we need viable, lasting refineries on the prairies. Yeah, fossil fuels are going to be phased out, and I'm for going renewable, but in the meanwhile the economy needs to keep going and we need the money to fund green research.I'll just add in here that Canada importing oil from places like KSA it is not really about what is more or less harmful to the environment. It is about economics.
Eastern refineries like Irving Oil in Saint John (proposed destination for Energy East) are geared to process light oil from the Mid East. They could get heavy Alberta oil by rail but they don't want it, they want the cheap stuff they were built to handle. If there was a pipeline east it is not even evident that they would want the oil as they've been very clear they will not sign binding contracts to take dilbit. They don't even want cheap Bakken shale oil, they want the cheap cheap cheap stuff from overseas. A pipeline east is only worth it if refiners spend billions to upgrade their facilities, which they won't do.
That's why we need viable, lasting refineries on the prairies. Yeah, fossil fuels are going to be phased out, and I'm for going renewable, but in the meanwhile the economy needs to keep going and we need the money to fund green research.
Trudeau's views change with whatever views are fashionable at the moment. The coward is only saying this because Scheer was getting dumped on for his views on abortion. Though, I doubt he was ever personally opposed to abortion. He just wanted to have a toe in the water of the Catholic vote.
Trudeau declares he’s no longer personally opposed to abortion
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau created a stir in the media last week when he declared he no longer personally opposes abortion — a view he presumably once held because of his Catholic faith.
“I don’t think it it is actually coherent or consistent for someone to say that they are pro-choice — particularly a man — to say that they are pro-choice but don’t like abortion,” he added.
“I evolved past that particular perspective. I continue to be and will always be fully pro-choice, but I no longer feel that I can or need to say that I’m against abortion. That’s not for me as a man to say. I will always be pro-choice,” said Trudeau.
Trudeau “seems to be dropping even the pretence of being ‘personally opposed’ to abortion and appears to be rejecting the idea that unborn human life itself is deserving of any protection at all,” observed [Dr. Edward] Peters, who teaches canon law at Detroit’s Sacred Heart Major Seminary.
As Liberal leader, Trudeau banned anyone who was vocally pro-life from running as a Liberal Party candidate, and as prime minister has made access to abortion the cornerstone of the his government’s foreign and domestic policy, including earmarking $7.1 billion by 2030 to fund and promote abortion as part of Canada’s international aid.
Pro-life politicians buckling under growing hostility
Trudeau’s latest assertion can reasonably be seen as his attempt to score political points in a bare-knuckles, neck-and-neck fight against his greatest threat, Conservative leader Andrew Scheer.
It also underscores a growing hostility in Canada’s media political elites, and the culture itself, toward politicians who dare to even think abortion is wrong.
That's why we need viable, lasting refineries on the prairies. Yeah, fossil fuels are going to be phased out, and I'm for going renewable, but in the meanwhile the economy needs to keep going and we need the money to fund green research.
Canada is a holdout of Brezhnevism. T———’s apparatchiks aren’t very different from their Soviet predecessors: frail old men in buffoonishly baggy suits from the 1990s, complete with black (Volga-like) sedans and dachas in the countryside. When they aren’t vacationing in said dachas, their main occupation is making sure that things are as stable as possible, which realistically means making sure nothing new ever happens.
Americans with left-leaning sympathies point to Canada as a model to emulate for a progressive and fair society. But Canada is, and has always been, an oligarchy where the ruling families—the Saputos, Demarais, Reichmans, etc.—have relied on their own Brezhnevites to preserve their wealth by shielding them not just from competition, but from any kind of change.
The key to acquiring wealth in this country is creating bottlenecks by saturating public and private institutions with members of this class. Thanks to their valiant efforts, the Canadian economic model is a madhouse where apparent opposites are simultaneously true. Anyone who’s worked in developing economies knows that the right sort of corruption is a blessing, at least in the short-term: for a few greenbacks more, you can shrink processes that take months down to a few days. In Canada, the same process seems to exist to slow down development. Both governmental and private sector projects are always severely over-budget and late by ridiculous timeframes. Internationally promoted as an open and transparent economy, anyone in the thick of it encounters a culture of eerily systematic structural barriers. Spend enough time in it, and your mind begins to wander off to very different comparisons.
Trudeau's views change with whatever views are fashionable at the moment. The coward is only saying this because Scheer was getting dumped on for his views on abortion. Though, I doubt he was ever personally opposed to abortion. He just wanted to have a toe in the water of the Catholic vote.
Trudeau declares he’s no longer personally opposed to abortion
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau created a stir in the media last week when he declared he no longer personally opposes abortion — a view he presumably once held because of his Catholic faith.
“I don’t think it it is actually coherent or consistent for someone to say that they are pro-choice — particularly a man — to say that they are pro-choice but don’t like abortion,” he added.
“I evolved past that particular perspective. I continue to be and will always be fully pro-choice, but I no longer feel that I can or need to say that I’m against abortion. That’s not for me as a man to say. I will always be pro-choice,” said Trudeau.
Trudeau “seems to be dropping even the pretence of being ‘personally opposed’ to abortion and appears to be rejecting the idea that unborn human life itself is deserving of any protection at all,” observed [Dr. Edward] Peters, who teaches canon law at Detroit’s Sacred Heart Major Seminary.
As Liberal leader, Trudeau banned anyone who was vocally pro-life from running as a Liberal Party candidate, and as prime minister has made access to abortion the cornerstone of the his government’s foreign and domestic policy, including earmarking $7.1 billion by 2030 to fund and promote abortion as part of Canada’s international aid.
Pro-life politicians buckling under growing hostility
Trudeau’s latest assertion can reasonably be seen as his attempt to score political points in a bare-knuckles, neck-and-neck fight against his greatest threat, Conservative leader Andrew Scheer.
It also underscores a growing hostility in Canada’s media political elites, and the culture itself, toward politicians who dare to even think abortion is wrong.
Thank you for your vote - Liberals
Those two combined parties won’t even come close to the liberal vote, the only hope is the cons.Nothing to thank me for - us PPC voters aren't going to offset the huge chunk of voters the Blackface Boss is going to lose to the NDP and Green Party
Well, thank you for making me feel depressed on a Saturday.This is potentially worse than a liberal majority. The greens and the NDP have a number of policies that - if they’re workable at all - will cost billions of dollars, and their only answer on how to pay for those is “more taxes on the rich and corporations” (newsflash guys: people and corporations are actually free to leave Canada which they might do if you’re going to use them for funding your pie in the sky projects like national pharma and dental care). Then there’s the far left stance on social issues which are cornerstones of both platforms. If the Liberals form a minority and have to team up with the NDP or the Greens (or both), these utopian economic policies and far left social policies will work their way into legislation to some degree over the next few years. The liberals at least want to build a pipeline...the NDP wants to give each province veto powers over projects like pipelines, effectively ensuring that there will never be another pipeline built in Canada.
I’m worried the conservatives are done. Their platform is the most practical, but they’re doing a piss poor job of properly getting that message out to Canadians and Scheer has remained just as uninspiring a leader throughout this campaign as before.
What we’ll get is a government obsessed with solving climate change, reconciliation and further expanding our Medicare system which is already a massive burden on the budget. Seriously, if you count the Conservatives out (hopefully they’re not) you might be better off hoping for a Liberal majority than the SJW Frankenmonster that would be the alliance of the Canadian left.
Trudeau's views change with whatever views are fashionable at the moment. The coward is only saying this because Scheer was getting dumped on for his views on abortion. Though, I doubt he was ever personally opposed to abortion. He just wanted to have a toe in the water of the Catholic vote.
Trudeau declares he’s no longer personally opposed to abortion
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau created a stir in the media last week when he declared he no longer personally opposes abortion — a view he presumably once held because of his Catholic faith.
“I don’t think it it is actually coherent or consistent for someone to say that they are pro-choice — particularly a man — to say that they are pro-choice but don’t like abortion,” he added.
“I evolved past that particular perspective. I continue to be and will always be fully pro-choice, but I no longer feel that I can or need to say that I’m against abortion. That’s not for me as a man to say. I will always be pro-choice,” said Trudeau.
Trudeau “seems to be dropping even the pretence of being ‘personally opposed’ to abortion and appears to be rejecting the idea that unborn human life itself is deserving of any protection at all,” observed [Dr. Edward] Peters, who teaches canon law at Detroit’s Sacred Heart Major Seminary.
As Liberal leader, Trudeau banned anyone who was vocally pro-life from running as a Liberal Party candidate, and as prime minister has made access to abortion the cornerstone of the his government’s foreign and domestic policy, including earmarking $7.1 billion by 2030 to fund and promote abortion as part of Canada’s international aid.
Pro-life politicians buckling under growing hostility
Trudeau’s latest assertion can reasonably be seen as his attempt to score political points in a bare-knuckles, neck-and-neck fight against his greatest threat, Conservative leader Andrew Scheer.
It also underscores a growing hostility in Canada’s media political elites, and the culture itself, toward politicians who dare to even think abortion is wrong.
Perhaps not, but we need to make the effort to clean our act up. And I'll take evolution over revolution when it comes to making changes in order to meet our energy needs.I doubt this is true in the next century, unless there is a strong commitment to nuclear power.
Our tax dollars hard at work. I have the complete opposite opinion of someone ITT, let's get the CBC off the tit and let them live or die on the vine like any other news or media entity.The CBC writing a story about the CBC suing the conservative party.
CBC taking Conservative Party to court over online election ad
The CBC is taking the Conservative Party of Canada to court for using the broadcaster's footage in an online advertisement.
In a legal application to the Federal Court of Canada, the CBC served notice it wants the Conservative Party of Canada and its executive director, Dustin Van Vugt, to acknowledge the party "engaged in the unauthorized use of copyright-protected material."
CBC-Radio Canada named the journalists in the lawsuit, according to the statement, "because their images and journalism were misused for partisan purposes negatively impacting perceptions of their independence."