# Hudaks Sins (Ontario)



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I thought it might be time to start this thread,
Although, Still in the early stages of the Ontario election,
This guy has many people standing up and looking at him.

His platform so far is workfare for prisoners,
An extension if you will on the Mike Harris platform,
Except now he wants prisoners to be accountable for their day to day lives.

Never mind what "WorkFare" did to Ontario's poor when it was introduced by "Mike Harris,
The poor took a pay cut and were forced to work for a can of tuna that they couldn't afford.

The mentally ill were forced out into the streets and the disabled weren't allowed to save for their retirement.

But that was the Mike Harris years, Fortunately McGuinty abolished all that nonsense,
Now however, Another Dark Horse has appeared in the forefront and threatens to bring
you whatever you little people desire, Whether it is less taxes or less services or even more pay per use.

What say ye?

Is this the kind of government you want in Ontario this fall?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I'll take it if it stops McGunity's green energy initiative. However, I'm very disappointed in the lack of spending cuts presented. Hudak is simply no Mike Harris.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

How can he have any sins when he has no power or policies that have been implemented?


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

don't forget his campaign promise for cheaper beer!

all he needs is a snappy slogan. "change book" ain't going to cut it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> How can he have any sins when he has no power or policies that have been implemented?


He's sinful because he represents a conservative party--the Original Sin of leftists. Kind of pitiful, huh?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Well Hudak hasn't had the chance to sin in government yet.

Though so far he may have handed McGuinty a nice big club with that whole make the prisoners work stupidity. Ideas like that, he'll crash and burn. He should stick to lying about tax breaks for the regular folk like his federal bros.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I do believe that given how little people like McGuinty, that all the Conservatives need to do to win is run someone who seems superficially reasonable on a platform of "I'm not McGuinty." 

If I were them, I wouldn't mess it up by throwing actual policy into it to be debated.... particularly not this early when people have lots of time to hear lots of spin about it.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Sonal said:


> I do believe that given how little people like McGuinty, that all the Conservatives need to do to win is run someone who seems superficially reasonable on a platform of "I'm not McGuinty."
> 
> If I were them, I wouldn't mess it up by throwing actual policy into it to be debated.... particularly not this early when people have lots of time to hear lots of spin about it.


I don't think you're too far on that. Hudak's cross is the Harris years, if he were smart he'd stfu up about things like worfare etc.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

There's no question that Dalt "the Dud" McGuinty has to go, but Hudak, if elected, will inherit a bigger deficit and a bigger hole in the budget than Mikey Harris inherited from Bobby Rae. Should be interesting how all that pans out given Hudak's so called "change book". It all sounds a lot like "the common sense revolution" and that could spell disaster, except that Hudak actually promises to increase the health care and education budgets.

The trend favours Hudak and the Tories, but October is a ways off. We shall see.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

groovetube said:


> I don't think you're too far on that. Hudak's cross is the Harris years, if he were smart he'd stfu up about things like worfare etc.


Yeah, so long as he stays away from the phrase "common sense revolution," he would likely be fine.

Change that campaign to "I'm not McGuinty" with a dash of "Harris? Never heard of the man."


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Going to be a short list compared to McGuilty, maybe the sea of orange will prevail in the Provincial election too...

Is making criminals work instead of learning tricks of the trade that will put them back in that very same spot the best you got??? Yikes!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

JumboJones said:


> Going to be a short list compared to McGuilty, maybe the sea of orange will prevail in the Provincial election too...
> 
> Is making criminals work instead of learning tricks of the trade that will put them back in that very same spot the best you got??? Yikes!


Hey, buck a beer and criminals picking up the empties...he's got my vote.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

It's not an exciting platform, but I want to see it slap McGuinty off the stage. Stick a fork in him--he's done.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> Hey, buck a beer and criminals picking up the empties...he's got my vote.


I just today gave all my empty beer cans to a homeless guy that claimed he's been living in a tent since Mike Harris was the premier of Ontario, Guess things haven't changed enough yet, Or maybe he's been off the grid for too long.

I can't imagine a change in the government would make any difference,
Once the mentally ill have been dumped on the street, It's difficult to get them back to an institution.

Typical of the P.C.'s, Save a buck from the poor and give it back to the non mentally ill.
I'm sickened by the way they have handled the sick, The Poor and the disabled in the past.

I hope they all come back as cockroaches in their next lives.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Anyone who is mentally ill should seek treatment for mental illness. Anyone who is ill should go to the hospital. Anyone who has been out of work and "homeless" for 16 years for any other reason has simply made a decision to remain in that state.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Anyone who is mentally ill should seek treatment for mental illness.


It would be nice if it was that easy.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> It would be nice if it was that easy.


Right. If they don't want treatment, then neither Harris nor McGuinty is to blame.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Right. If they don't want treatment, then neither Harris nor McGuinty is to blame.


They are if they cut funding for people who can ensure that they get treatment and care that they need in order to live in a way that does not harm themselves or others.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> They are if they cut funding for people who can ensure that they get treatment and care that they need in order to live in a way that does not harm themselves or others.


The Ontario Human Rights Commission puts a limit on what can be done to treat someone against their will. You my not like this, but there you have it.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> The Ontario Human Rights Commission puts a limit on what can be done to treat someone against their will. You my not like this, but there you have it.


Yes, but there are still those in need of treatment and care who are not capable to making that decision for themselves who are not getting it. You may not like this, but there you have it.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Right. If they don't want treatment, then neither Harris nor McGuinty is to blame.


That's a nice and tidy way of putting it,
So, Whatever happens to them, Happens.

How will they ever know, Since they are off the grid.

Reminds me a bit of Charles Dickens, But this isn't a book.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> The Ontario Human Rights Commission puts a limit on what can be done to treat someone against their will. You my not like this, but there you have it.


True, But if these people were ousted based on a case to case basis on what they thought was sane enough for society
Don't you think that an overseer committee should have had the final say?

Seems to me that a lot of these people should never have been allowed to live in a tent or on a hot air building exhaust grill in downtown Toronto.

Kind of makes me wonder where the fairy tale of the troll that lives under the bridge comes from.

In other words, This seems to be an attitude that needs to be stopped.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Lawrence said:


> True, But if these people were ousted based on a case to case basis on what they thought was sane enough for society
> Don't you think that an overseer committee should have had the final say?
> 
> Seems to me that a lot of these people should never have been allowed to live in a tent or on a hot air building exhaust grill in downtown Toronto.
> ...


What's your plan to solve this situation regarding the mentally ill in Ontario?


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

screature said:


> What's your plan to solve this situation regarding the mentally ill?


It's hard to repair the damage that has already been done by the Harris government,
The current government could provide incentives to get them in to get treatment.

But I doubt that would work for the hardcore people that live on the street,
The Policing system could bring them in a bit at a time,
But that would be tedious and probably cause a panic.

I'm really not sure what would be the cure...
Probably a lot more money than what they saved to create the problem in the first place.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Lawrence said:


> It's hard to repair the damage that has already been done by the Harris government,
> The current government could provide incentives to get them in to get treatment.
> 
> But I doubt that would work for the hardcore people that live on the street,
> ...


Truth be told I think the situation exists because even the policy makers don't have the answers and this was not a problem created by the Harris Conservatives, it has existed since time immemorial... 

What do we do with the mentally ill who refuse treatment or are not subject to it willingly and of their own volition without compromising their basic human rights?

Many of the mentally ill do not want treatment and it is only when they become a danger to themselves or others that they become wards of the state, i.e. when they commit a crime of some form or another. Until then they are free individuals like the rest of us.... replete with their own daemons and baggage. 

I would hate to live in a society where beyond being a danger to themselves or others their behaviour would require government/police intervention on the lives of individuals... it is far too slippery a slope.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Yes, but there are still those in need of treatment and care who are not capable to making that decision for themselves who are not getting it. You may not like this, but there you have it.


I may not like it, and the government can do nothing about it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I love the way that this guy's problems are "Hudak's Sins" though. Talk about misplaced anger.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Here's something sinful:

Cohn: Hudak Tories take a page from Harris era to dupe us on debt - thestar.com



> Here’s a hot issue that Tim Hudak thinks will bring down the Ontario government: Higher hydro bills.
> 
> And here’s the Tory leader’s bizarre pitch to bring those bills down: Stop collecting for our hydro debt, by brazenly declaring it paid in full — even though it’s still there.
> 
> ...


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I may not like it, and the government can do nothing about it.


Sure they can. They can make treatment and care available to those who need it. Not push them out into the street only to end up being a HUGE drain on policing resources and incarceration.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> I would hate to live in a society where beyond being a danger to themselves or others their behaviour would require government/police intervention on the lives of individuals... it is far too slippery a slope.





Macfury said:


> I may not like it, and the government can do nothing about it.


screature, I agree with you, but at the same time the way things appear to be now, a person has to create a very urgent crisis situation before there is any necessary intervention. I have seen a number of tenants who are mentally ill and living entirely on their own who clearly should not be--it is not that they are necessarily require institutionalization, but they at minimum need someone checking in on them regularly to avert problems before they reach a crisis situation. 

As a landlord, there is extremely little I can do but watch and wait for the situation to get sufficiently bad that I can intervene by attempting to evict the tenant and then hope for their sake that the crisis created by facing an eviction is enough to get them some help. And even at that, the help they receive is often only temporary and short-term.

And MacFury, this is where I do think the government CAN do something about this, because one of the reasons that some of these tenants live on their own (rent paid by ODSP), one of the reasons that we have to wait until a crisis situation is created, is that there are not enough spaces in assisted care, there are not enough spaces in halfway houses and group homes, there are not enough careworkers who can check in on people and the result is that people are not getting care sufficient to their needs. People who need full-time assisted care fill up the group homes because there are not enough spaces, people who need a group home situation get someone checking in on them part of the time, and people who need someone checking in on them get nothing at all. 

(You'll have to excuse me. I am dealing with a situation that touches on this very issue. It is truly ridiculous how bad it has to get before there's any slim hope of someone getting some help that they have clearly needed for a long time.)


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

JumboJones said:


> Is making criminals work instead of learning tricks of the trade that will put them back in that very same spot the best you got??? Yikes!


how about having criminals working on a farm and creating food for other prisoners as well as food banks, all the while rehabilitating themselves and learning valuable skills to reintegrate with society??

oh wait, we were doing that, but Haper killed that program.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

really? more info on this? That's pretty embarrassing for cons if true...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> screature, I agree with you, but at the same time the way things appear to be now, a person has to create a very urgent crisis situation before there is any necessary intervention. I have seen a number of tenants who are mentally ill and living entirely on their own who clearly should not be--it is not that they are necessarily require institutionalization, but they at minimum need someone checking in on them regularly to avert problems before they reach a crisis situation.


These people are not homeless.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

i-rui said:


> how about having criminals working on a farm and creating food for other prisoners as well as food banks, all the while rehabilitating themselves and learning valuable skills to reintegrate with society??
> 
> oh wait, we were doing that, but Haper killed that program.


I liked the whole idea of them making license plates, but the unions killed that one.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

No biggie Groove, it was a prison that ran a small farm which cost huge amounts of dollars to operate for what it produced. We all know that small scale farming is a losing proposition. That's why most of our food continues to be imported even during season. Very few if any full time farmers left, especially in southern Ontario.

...and I doubt that they supplied any food banks. Most food banks do not accept perishables.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> These people are not homeless.


guess you've never been downtown much.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> These people are not homeless.


No, but without some outside intervention, a lot of them will be.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

groovetube said:


> really? more info on this? That's pretty embarrassing for cons if true...


Canada to shut down six prison farms — City Farmer News



kps said:


> No biggie Groove, it was a prison that ran a small farm which cost huge amounts of dollars to operate for what it produced.


it was actually SIX prison farms across the entire country.

And the numbers that the Harper government claimed it was costing to operate didn't account for the actual FOOD that was being generated by the farms....and then the government went on to sign a contract for millions to replace the milk that will no longer be coming from the prison farms. *facepalm*



kps said:


> ...and I doubt that they supplied any food banks. Most food banks do not accept perishables.


stop doubting :



> The prison farms make important local donations that enhance regional food security, such as thousands of dozens of eggs per year to the Partners in Mission Food Bank in Kingston, Ontario.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

i-rui said:


> Canada to shut down six prison farms — City Farmer News
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Farming skills might have been useful 70 years ago, not today. The cost of the programme exceeded any benefit derived from it. That is for certain.

How would you or the media really know the numbers? It was not a for profit enterprise with proper books, it was a prison make work programme and a cost centre. Any actual food produced by these operations probably cost 10x as much as in a real farming operation considering the scale and the other logistics involved. They'll be better off in a vocational programme where they can learn real world skills.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm not buying that. 10x the cost? I'd be interested in more information on that.

and if the argument is that the cost of having prisoners doing workfare, security etc etc, then perhaps that's why Hadak should STFU on this one?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> guess you've never been downtown much.


Read the posts instead of spouting off. I said that the people living in Sonal's buildings were not homeless--they're living in apartments. Pay more attention.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh yeah that was like so obvious. And so unlike something you'd say macfury.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

kps said:


> How would you or the media really know the numbers?.


one way would have been if the Harper government actually SHOWED all the costs involved and be transparent, instead of just supplying a vague number and telling the public "that's it".

They have proven to be untrustworthy on every cost estimate they have provided us.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

i-rui said:


> They have proven to be untrustworthy on* every* cost estimate they have provided us.


That's going a little far. Almost all government programs over-promise and underbudget.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

groovetube said:


> I'm not buying that. 10x the cost? I'd be interested in more information on that.


It was an off the cuff number for driving my point. All I could find out in Googleland (aside from all the outrage) was that the revenues were 7.5 mil and expenditures were 11.6. So the cost of the programme was 4mil per year. Pretty cheap I suppose, but there is a conspiracy theory out there which you'll love...and that is that the Harper government wants the land to build it's super prisons on and hence closed the farms. Run with it.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

kps said:


> It was an off the cuff number for driving my point. All I could find out in Googleland (aside from all the outrage) was that the revenues were 7.5 mil and expenditures were 11.6. So the cost of the programme was 4mil per year. Pretty cheap I suppose, but there is a conspiracy theory out there which you'll love...and that is that the Harper government wants the land to build it's super prisons on and hence closed the farms. Run with it.


i'm too busy these days. I'll the resident libertarian run off with all the government spending on this latest social experiment.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> i'm too busy these days. I'll the resident libertarian run off with all the government spending on this latest social experiment.


You were the one who challenged the numbers. Don't be a lazy-ass.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Noticed the pollution index was a lot lower today, Thank you McQuinty for stopping all
those coal fired generators, Can't imagine the cheapy Cons caring too much about trivial things like that.

It'll be a shame to see him go, He's done so much for asthma sufferers in Toronto,
Guess we'll just have to bite the bullet and hope the PC's don't bring back suffering.

Whether that be breathing or cutbacks in social spending to the poor and the disabled.

I often wonder how many new disabled schools have been built per capita to abled bodied schools,
You can bet there is a lot more busing going on to disabled schools than there is to able bodied schools.

I blame all governments for that.
__________________


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I guess all that excess green energy (wind & solar) McGuilty is paying ¢80/Kw for isn't enough.

Site of the new gas fired plant:
Plant Location

...but don't worry Dave, it's far enough away from you so you _probably _won't get any of that lovely fog affecting you.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> I guess all that excess green energy (wind & solar) McGuilty is paying ¢80/Kw for isn't enough.
> 
> Site of the new gas fired plant:
> Plant Location
> ...


The plant location is just so funny, All those rich Cons that built their luxury homes in the area are about to be blown to kingdom come when and if that plant ever explodes.

I can't believe they got approval in a such a high density residential area.

Just imagine Sunrise propane as being an ant fart compared to this place.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

LOL...trust me there are no rich Cons there...just a hospital, Sherway Gardens and Iggy's old riding.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

kps said:


> LOL...trust me there are no rich Cons there...just a hospital, Sherway Gardens and Iggy's old riding.


That is really funny. The vastly wealthy Etobicoke. There are a few crumbling mansions along Lakeshore Boulevard, but they were built 100 years ago in those dreadful days of a vibrant industrial economy. 

McGuinty was a complete idiot for knocking down that coal plant when we had no substitute for the power generated. He was in such a hurry to push his philosophical agenda he didn't even consider the likelihood that it could be used for gas generation. 

The only reason we currently have enough electricity in the province is that McGuinty policies have depressed the economy to the point where we no longer require it.

Thank you McGuinty--for the few months you have left in office, at least.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Lawrence said:


> Noticed the pollution index was a lot lower today, Thank you McQuinty for stopping all
> those coal fired generators, Can't imagine the cheapy Cons caring too much about trivial things like that.


Amazing how perception can be politically motivated. The pollution index in June 2011 is considerably worse overall than June 2010. Yesterday's thunderstorm seemed to clear out much of the pollution--or are we thanking McGuinty for the thunderstorm as well?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> That is really funny. The vastly wealthy Etobicoke. There are a few crumbling mansions along Lakeshore Boulevard, but they were built 100 years ago in those dreadful days of a vibrant industrial economy.
> 
> McGuinty was a complete idiot for knocking down that coal plant when we had no substitute for the power generated. He was in such a hurry to push his philosophical agenda he didn't even consider the likelihood that it could be used for gas generation.
> 
> ...


I know a lot of a rich people in Etobicoke.

And now you're blaming McGuinty for the big financial meltdown? I guess Harper really goofed then eh cause the whole country went to pot? ('cept Alberta...)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> I know a lot of a rich people in Etobicoke.
> 
> And now you're blaming McGuinty for the big financial meltdown? I guess Harper really goofed then eh cause the whole country went to pot? ('cept Alberta...)


Yes. It hit Ontario particularly hard thanks to McGuinty who decided it was great time to jack up provincial debt, taxes and energy costs. After 8 years in power, he's made Ontario's declining economy his very own.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yeah McGuinty was the only one to jack up debt.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> yeah McGuinty was the only one to jack up debt.


Take a look at this debt accumulation numbers and tell me who has outstripped him.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

look at the Harper's debt and tell me which prime minister outdid him.

Look at Bush's orgy of spending (followed by Obama) and who outdid them?

Oh. You should apply to have the chain gangs in YOUR neighbourhood. And celebrate all the security costs that'll entail while yer at it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> look at the Harper's debt and tell me which prime minister outdid him.


Adjusted for inflation and as a percentage of GDP, that would be Chretien, followed by Mulroney and then Martin.



groovetube said:


> Look at Bush's orgy of spending (followed by Obama) and who outdid them?


Bush is a piker in this department. Obama has accumulated more debt than every other president before him combined--including Bush.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

spin spin spin.

wen you gotta spin, you're standing on no ground at all. 

Don't even try to pass this off as some kind of defence for the absolute raping of our money by your other parties. I'm not stupid enough to excuse one over the other in this regard. But some will just bend over if they wear the conservative label.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> spin spin spin.
> 
> wen you gotta spin, you're standing on no ground at all.
> 
> Don't even try to pass this off as some kind of defence for the absolute raping of our money by your other parties. I'm not stupid enough to excuse one over the other in this regard. But some will just bend over if they wear the conservative label.


I'm standing on statistical ground while you're standing on some sort of bog.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

hmm. seems to me those red areas were turned around and sent downwards after taking over a runaway train.

The blue ones, a real nice and steady up. No sign of turning it around that I can see. Enjoy your "statistical ground", I'll stand on the real one thanks.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> hmm. seems to me those red areas were turned around and sent downwards after taking over a runaway train.
> 
> The blue ones, a real nice and steady up. No sign of turning it around that I can see. Enjoy your "statistical ground", I'll stand on the real one thanks.


You asked me who were worse and you got your answer. Suck it up.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

you know, when in any conversation this is the level you need to relate to things, you just stand back, and laugh.

And laugh. It seems there's more than one simpleton around.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

Debt is different than deficit, but also connected to it. When the federal government started running a balanced budget or one with a surplus, then that debt could be payed down instead of growing.

If you're running a deficit, then you're borrowing more and the debt increases.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> you know, when in any conversation this is the level you need to relate to things, you just stand back, and laugh.


I know. Resorting to facts is often cruel, but you'll thank me later.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

someone resorted to facts?

How rare.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> someone resorted to facts?
> 
> How rare.


I know, groove--in groove-world there are no facts, just links of "google stuff" that don't mean anything to you.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh you genius, I love how you posted graphs showing the other party halting a runaway train and turning it around. Though even I know it's simplistic to make such simple waves of the hands, but you seem to crave it! And I'm the one who uses "mouthy simpleton" for a title. ha ha. Well...

Enjoy your, facts. Or your, statistical reality. Whatever, you're calling it these days.

Your holy war of, "the other guy is apparently much much worse!". Hold your drink up high, and toast yourself. You and your, facts. Smash them atoms!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> I'm the one who uses "mouthy simpleton" for a title. ha ha.


ha, ha! Yes, you do!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm guessing it's lost on you.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> LOL...trust me there are no rich Cons there...just a hospital, Sherway Gardens and Iggy's old riding.


That makes it even funnier...Iggy gets his last laugh after all,
For all those people that voted for Harper in the last election...
Here's your reward...A gas fired plant that is smack dab in the middle of a residential area.

Just like Sunrise Propane, Only a 100 or is that a 1000 times bigger,
Now, Why? Didn't they pick the Hearn Generating Station out on the lake?

They spent all that money taking the asbestos out of it,
I know because I was one of those poor sods that took down the scaffolds for that project.

Oh...Wait...The Harris Government leased it to a consortium and the lease is still active.

Oh but wait yet again...A demolition permit has been issued for the Hearn Generating Station.

What a waste.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Lawrence said:


> That makes it even funnier...Iggy gets his last laugh after all,
> For all those people that voted for Harper in the last election...
> Here's your reward...A gas fired plant that is smack dab in the middle of a residential area.
> 
> .


What's this got to do with Harper? It's McGuinty who's building this gem. Instead of building it on the site of the coal fired plant he shut down, he's building it on the Mississauga side of the Etobicoke creek as per the map I posted earlier.

All the rich Conservatives, you spoke of earlier, live in Oakville...and they managed to stop it there. LOL.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

This is getting silly. There are plenty of rich people in mississauga & etobicoke (ever heard of Kingsway, or Mississauga Road?), many of which i'm sure voted conservative.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

i-rui said:


> This is getting silly. There are plenty of rich people in mississauga & etobicoke (ever heard of Kingsway, or Mississauga Road?), many of which i'm sure voted conservative.


I guess the sarcasm was lost on you....


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Aaaaaaaand the sterling level of debate hums onward, folks.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

you expected better?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I dunno. I guess I can always hold out for better. And people think I'm cynical!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> I dunno. I guess I can always hold out for better. And people think I'm cynical!


Does "holding out for better" entail coming in, making pronouncements, then leaving without doing better yourself?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

once the thread peaks at "I know you are but what amI", you gotta chuckle.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> What's this got to do with Harper? It's McGuinty who's building this gem. Instead of building it on the site of the coal fired plant he shut down, he's building it on the Mississauga side of the Etobicoke creek as per the map I posted earlier.
> 
> All the rich Conservatives, you spoke of earlier, live in Oakville...and they managed to stop it there. LOL.


Had Iggy not lost his seat and people voted for him, Then perhaps the gas fired plant may
have not been approved to be built in Iggy's backyard, But since they voted for Harper...
They get a Provincial Liberal gas fired plant in their backyard.

Too funny.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well good on them, for, taking one for the team!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Lawrence said:


> Had Iggy not lost his seat and people voted for him, Then perhaps the gas fired plant may
> have not been approved to be built in Iggy's backyard, But since they voted for Harper...
> They get a Provincial Liberal gas fired plant in their backyard.
> 
> Too funny.


Dave, I've known you online for well over 15 years...if I respond to your post the way I would really like, I'd get at least a week off from the Mayor. But I'll leave it to your imagination, just pretend we're in the Adults forum on MagicBBS.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

(goes there to go see)


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

No Groove...the original old First Class BBS defunct many years now. You'll have to use your imagination too.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> No Groove...the original old First Class BBS defunct many years now. You'll have to use your imagination too.


St, Chuck...Is that you?

Lol...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

kps said:


> No Groove...the original old First Class BBS defunct many years now. You'll have to use your imagination too.


well the current would do 

or again in person at yet another crap hole?


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

groovetube said:


> well the current would do
> 
> or again in person at yet another crap hole?


Option two Groove...no Google bots to cache the post. 

It's patio time, baby!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

sure. hail the mose and lets do it. Max?


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I'm in! Any weekend this month.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Let me know where it's all up so I can kicks some ass and leave.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Let me know where it's all up so I can kicks some ass and leave.


You can kick all the ass you want as long as you buy....and keep on buy'n.

We'll even make it convenient for you and seek a crap hole in the east end.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

absolutely come kick some arse, it's highly encouraged.

I recall a couple good drinking holes in the east end when I used to live there.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

You can even invite Tim Whodat?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

not sure he'd be the sort people want to "have a beer with".


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Guys, I'd love to but I'm fried from work lately. Been putting in long hours and the weekend reprieves are sweet but very short. Barely time to recharge my batteries before going back into the fray. So it goes. No relaxed patio visits with y'all _pour_ moi until late August. Y'all meet up without me and discuss the news and blather of the day over luscious libations; I'll catch the next one. Cheers.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

ohhh party pooper. Surely you can drink beer in july.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Guys, I'd love to but I'm fried from work lately. Been putting in long hours and the weekend reprieves are sweet but very short. Barely time to recharge my batteries before going back into the fray. So it goes. No relaxed patio visits with y'all _pour_ moi until late August. Y'all meet up without me and discuss the news and blather of the day over luscious libations; I'll catch the next one. Cheers.


Not good until August??? That's a bogus excuse!


What's all this talk about the east end? I don't live there.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh, so on my end then.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I don't know Macfurious...just figured you'd be on the *right *side of the map. Lower right to be precise, in a mansion in Da Beach.

Pick a spot.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Is this going to be a same ol', same ol' bunch old guys slagging each other event, or will it actually be fun?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Is this going to be a same ol', same ol' bunch old guys slagging each other event, or will it actually be fun?


I think physical violence is part of this one.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Sonal said:


> Is this going to be a same ol', same ol' bunch old guys slagging each other event, or will it actually be fun?


Safety shoes and safety glasses are a requirement...body armour optional.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I think physical violence is part of this one.


I think I'll pass, Beer is cheaper at home anyways.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> Safety shoes and safety glasses are a requirement...body armour optional.


Oh, I have all those things, Especially the body armour,
Can't ride on the 401 without body armour.

Shame I can't make it.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Why not? Scooter in the shop?


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> Why not? Scooter in the shop?


Needs an oil change,
But it can wait until next weekend,

I have a lot of gardening to do this weekend, The backyard is getting weedy.
Front yard looks nice though.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> I don't know Macfurious...just figured you'd be on the *right *side of the map. Lower right to be precise, in a mansion in Da Beach.
> 
> Pick a spot.


South of Queen, In the old Greenwood Racetrack grounds?
I have a doctor friend that owns a house in there, Worth over a million dollars now.

I lived south of Queen street for 20 years on Scarboro Beach Blvd,
Not exactly a mansion, But it had a lake view, It was a second floor 2 bedroom duplex.
Rent was just $600. month when I moved out and up.

Owning a house is so much better than renting, Glad I moved when I did 12 years ago,
No way could we afford our house nowadays, It was just $140,000. back when we bought it.


Funny thing though...
We have air conditioners now, Never needed one living south of Queen in the Beaches.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

physical violence? Sounds like a regular gig to me.

My first house was in the east end, 12 years ago too when prices were way down there. Quite a surprise when we sold it, then all of a sudden prices dropped literally overnight and we got a place in the west end for a reasonable number. Relatively speaking I guess. Just had a real estate friend let me know what a handful of solds on my street went for lately, made me wonder where the ones predicting further housing downturns went to...


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

groovetube said:


> physical violence? Sounds like a regular gig to me.
> 
> My first house was in the east end, 12 years ago too when prices were way down there. Quite a surprise when we sold it, then all of a sudden prices dropped literally overnight and we got a place in the west end for a reasonable number. Relatively speaking I guess. Just had a real estate friend let me know what a handful of solds on my street went for lately, made me wonder where the ones predicting further housing downturns went to...


Physical violence, It's a regular occurrence in my neighbourhood,
I try to stay indoors after dark, But if you like that kind of thing...
Try "The Ark" at Dawes and Danforth and then drift west from there to the bars along Danforth to Main street.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

So not commenting on the previous back and forth I decided to weigh in on this one...

I am predicting that Hudak (baring some kitten eating scandal) will get in this fall. I think the Ontario PC party could run a toaster and win.

When they do win, I expect to see Wisconsin style politics and management which will decimate the public service... starting with Nurses and Teachers.

While I think they will get in I expect them to not be very smart about governing, for example whose brain child was to have the PC convention at the same time and same venue as the Anime North expo. Nothing like mixing Politics and Cosplay... well done PC party planning committee, or didn't you see stuff like this coming?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

da_jonesy said:


> While I think they will get in I expect them to not be very smart about governing, for example whose brain child was to have the PC convention at the same time and same venue as the Anime North expo. Nothing like mixing Politics and Cosplay... well done PC party planning committee, or didn't you see stuff like this coming?



The conflict is all in your head. As user Midli on the Cosplay website notes:



> General consensus is they will keep out of hair if we want em to, and are aware of how much a quirky happy bunch we are and take that into consideration. I've told them to pass the word around as well, they've happily obliged.. They aren't big bad scary evil people we think they are, they won't be really trying to push their politics on us, In reality they will either ignore/avoid us or look at us with some form of curiosity. As long as we show some civility and don't go HURR DURR YOUR A CONSERVATIVE FACIST NAZI HEIL HARPER SEIG whatever..everything will be OK.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Just so Google can find this thread, I'm giving it a bump.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Look out Timmy, there's a white boat comin' up the river...

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ls-inch-ahead-of-tories-in-two-new-polls?bn=1


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yeah well, after watching a pathological liar in toronto screw us, there isn't much appetite for yet another nen con jackboot telling us he's gonna find some "inefficiencies".

once again instead of good government, we may have 'the devil you know'.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Look out Timmy, there's a white boat comin' up the river...
> 
> Canada News: Liberals inch ahead of Tories in two new polls - thestar.com


Statistically, this should be frightening for McGuinty.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

this early in the campaign?

Well I suppose the rainbows are bigger over there then.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

groovetube said:


> this early in the campaign?
> 
> Well I suppose the rainbows are bigger over there then.


I'm waiting for the minority report


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Did anyone else hear Hudak being interviewed by Rita Celli on CBC Radio One?

Unbelievable example of dodge the question. Basically a parody of an indirect politician. Every caller (most were undecided) asked him direct questions which he consistently spoke around. Using catchphrases over and over like 'working families' and 'HST grab'. 

So obvious and so insulting. For this performance I give him an E.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Poor Hudak lost mrjimmy's lefty vote.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Poor Hudak lost mrjimmy's lefty vote.


Oh I'm sure he lost more than that.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Oh I'm sure he lost more than that.


The other votes of committed NDP voters?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

you're a bright boy. You can figure this out.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> The other votes of committed NDP voters?


Am I a committed NDP voter MacFury?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Am I a committed NDP voter MacFury?


Jeepers, I don't care which brand of poison you're drinking.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Jeepers, I don't care which brand of poison you're drinking.


That's good. Just the way I like it.

Back to my original point, did anyone else hear that interview?

Here it is just in case you missed it:

CBC.ca | Ontario Today | Open lines with PC Leader Tim Hudak


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I think the bandwidth must be strained on that site with all of the people flocking to it.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I think the bandwidth must be strained on that site with all of the people flocking to it.


I love it that you can't help yourself.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

The latest on Hudak is apparently his party is distributing flyers about "Sex Education" in the schools,
There is even a homophobic blurb about a "Kissing Booth"

It's got to be the funniest if not dumbest thing he has done so close to the finish line of this campaign.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Clearly he's counting on more ontarians being just as backwards and disgustingly brainless as himself. I saw on one of the news sites (national post no less) some conservative shrieking that mcguinty is forcing 4 year olds to learn about how to have gay sex.

This is the sort of mentality we're dealing with here. Just disgusting the lengths these wastes of skin will go to.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Here's the flyer that the P.C. party is circulating


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If that stuff is true, I agree with Hudak--that has no place in elementary school.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well that's a surprise.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

It's cherry-picked and often misleading.

Election Blog: Fact-checking Hudak’s “Homophobic” Flyer | Toronto Standard | News, Media, Art, Business, Technology, Fashion, Events


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Sonal said:


> It's cherry-picked and often misleading.


Not just cherry picked and misleading, it's downright and obviously deceitful. Using spliced-quotes, and out-of-context/partial quotes to make your opponent appear to stand for things that they clearly and unequivocally do not is just plain dishonest. The fact that Hudak is 'standing by' this egregious lapse of judgement is pretty damning evidence that he has no integrity at all.


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

bryanc said:


> not just cherry picked and misleading, it's downright and obviously deceitful. Using spliced-quotes, and out-of-context/partial quotes to make your opponent appear to stand for things that they clearly and unequivocally do not is just plain dishonest. The fact that hudak is 'standing by' this egregious lapse of judgement is pretty damning evidence that he has no integrity at all.


+1


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bryanc said:


> Not just cherry picked and misleading, it's downright and obviously deceitful. Using spliced-quotes, and out-of-context/partial quotes to make your opponent appear to stand for things that they clearly and unequivocally do not is just plain dishonest. The fact that Hudak is 'standing by' this egregious lapse of judgement is pretty damning evidence that he has no integrity at all.


Which dovetails perfectly with this partial definition of a politician, pulled from the dictionary that is part of the Tiger OS:



> ...• a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, ....


Don't matter if it's a white stripes on a black body or black stripes on white. They's all skunks. 

Sadly that remark is somewhat derogatory of the skunks in our midst. They at least serve a very useful purpose as they devour large numbers of rats, mice and other rodents.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Well that's it--I can never vote for McGuinty now!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well vote hard, because apparently the libs have skyrocketed in the polls and good ol Hudak slipping.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Well that's it--I can never vote for McGuinty now!


Vote for Hudaks homophobic kissing booth, lol, I can't believe he did that.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Lawrence said:


> Vote for Hudaks homophobic kissing booth, lol, I can't believe he did that.


I won's kiss a man on the mouth. Even a Conservative.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I love this, It's like watching "The Price is Right"
Do you go with the audience (Your own P.C. Party)
Or do you go with your own gut feelings and beliefs?

Guess he should have gone with his own gut feelings,
The audience secretly wants you to fail.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I won's kiss a man on the mouth. Even a Conservative.


Yet his own flyers imply doing just that,
Had he not dug up this kind of dirt, Perhaps things might have been different,
It's just like what John Tory did to make him fail in the last leg of his campaign as well.

He listened to the wrong people within his own party.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

McGuinty was a flippin sitting duck in this election, and I'm sure he knew it. It's like watching a car crash in slo mo seeing Hudak and crew in action.

The ironic thing is, If John Tory was leading the PCs, I bet he would have crushed McGuinty without breaking a sweat.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

groovetube said:


> The ironic thing is, If John Tory was leading the PCs, I bet he would have crushed McGuinty without breaking a sweat.


Well, as long as he let go of the religious schools thing that killed him last time. 

But I agree with you.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Well, as long as he let go of the religious schools thing that killed him last time.
> 
> But I agree with you.


Tory_ is_ McGuinty... what a sad sack.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Tory_ is_ McGuinty... what a sad sack.


But a sad sack who might have won it all.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> But a sad sack who might have won it all.


Who cares. He's the same as McGuinty. I don't care which party gets in if the leaders are indistinguishable from each other.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

It's astounding how people think Hudak is better.

Hudak is just another McGuinty, but just a way bigger arse opening. Just not everyone is smart enough to see it is all. Or people just like lining behind bigger, er, arse openings I donno.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Thank you Hudak, You've done it,
You've proved to us that smear campaigns work well against yourself.

:lmao: :clap:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Lawrence said:


> Thank you Hudak, You've done it,
> You've proved to us that smear campaigns work well against yourself.
> 
> :lmao: :clap:



By increasing the number of PCs elected?


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Macfury said:


> By increasing the number of PCs elected?


By not get a Majority


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> By increasing the number of PCs elected?


Some people live under a rock.

No. By going from being a shoo in for premier to letting mcguinty kick you in the nads.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

McGuinty didn't really win. He only got 37% of the popular vote. That means 63% voted against him.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

groovetube said:


> Some people live under a rock.
> 
> No. By going from being a shoo in for premier to letting mcguinty kick you in the nads.


I'm surprised Hudak did as well as he did. Being a McQuinty clone with a blue tie was a mistake. I think Ontarians were ready for a lean to the right, non-centrist to kick McQuinty's ass, but the Cons failed on all fronts.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

kps said:


> I'm surprised Hudak did as well as he did. Being a McQuinty clone with a blue tie was a mistake. I think Ontarians were ready for a lean to the right, non-centrist to kick McQuinty's ass, but the Cons failed on all fronts.


I agree. By waffling on budget balancing and cost cutting he failed to energize the voters who would have propelled him to victory. Although I'm not a member of the PC party, I spent considerable effort explaining to candidates, the party itself and anyone who phoned me that the cost-cutting I expected was virtually absent from the roster of promises,


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

adagio said:


> McGuinty didn't really win. He only got 37% of the popular vote. That means 63% voted against him.


We're not hearing much of that one when the Liberals win, eh adagio? That chestnut is saved up only for Harper--or Hudak, had he won.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

kps said:


> I'm surprised Hudak did as well as he did. Being a McQuinty clone with a blue tie was a mistake. I think Ontarians were ready for a lean to the right, non-centrist to kick McQuinty's ass, but the Cons failed on all fronts.


I don't think Hudak is a McGuinty clone at all. He merely portrayed himself as the little yappy dog biting McGuinty's heels and growling like a little fool. Or, the cat on a leash. Take your pick.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

groovetube said:


> *I don't think Hudak is a McGuinty clone *at all. He merely portrayed himself as the little yappy dog biting McGuinty's heels and growling like a little fool. Or, the cat on a leash. Take your pick.


If he's not, he sure portrayed himself as one, although the yappy dog is not a bad analogy. That's why the voters went to the "devil they know".

Terrible campaign the Cons ran, just pathetic.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Macfury said:


> We're not hearing much of that one when the Liberals win, eh adagio? That chestnut is saved up only for Harper--or Hudak, had he won.


I'm glad Hudak lost, and I still feel this shows why FPTP doesn't express democracy well.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

kps said:


> Terrible campaign the Cons ran, just pathetic.


It was theirs to lose and lose they did. Hudak either has to get better strategists for next time - or Hudak himself will be given the bum's rush.

But what's more dramatic is the fallout and how the provincial map is jigged - NDP in the north, conservatives in rural, and the liberals take the cities. Pretty extreme regionalism. You can almost cut the lines of demarcation with a knife.

And yeah, the percentage of voters who actually bothered to vote - for a populous province of one of the greatest countries in the world, it's disgraceful.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Ottawaman said:


> I'm glad Hudak lost, and I still feel this shows why FPTP doesn't express democracy well.


yup. Agreed. Changing this would have resulted in more conservative seats, but if that's what voters wanted according to popular vote, that what they should have gotten.

If this was changed, I bet you'd see a real rise in voter turnout. Perhaps then, your vote would truly matter.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Max said:


> It was theirs to lose and lose they did. Hudak either has to get better strategists for next time - or Hudak himself will be given the bum's rush.
> 
> But what's more dramatic is the fallout and how the provincial map is jigged - DDP in the north, conservatives in rural, and the liberals take the cities. Pretty extreme regionalism. You can almost cut the lines of demarcation with a knife.
> 
> And yeah, the percentage of voters who actually bothered to vote - for a populous province of one of the greatest countries in the world, it's disgraceful.


he should start with firing whoever cobbled that horrendous commercial with the ominous bass tone that throughout it all, even when they displayed Hudak and his message. Worst campaign ad I've seen in a long time.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I think it's a theme borrowed from American-style attack ads - ominous bass tones to underscore the negative vibe. I'm surprised more people don't catch on to how manipulative the ruse is. But evidently it's still highly effective - to a point.

I think Hudak was taking bad advice... I really don't know the man but I'd like to think he was driven by an over-eager crew of handlers.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Max said:


> It was theirs to lose and lose they did. Hudak either has to get better strategists for next time - or Hudak himself will be given the bum's rush.
> 
> But what's more dramatic is the fallout and how the provincial map is jigged - NDP in the north, conservatives in rural, and the liberals take the cities. Pretty extreme regionalism. You can almost cut the lines of demarcation with a knife.
> 
> And yeah, the percentage of voters who actually bothered to vote - for a populous province of one of the greatest countries in the world, it's disgraceful.


Noted the same thing about the regionalism Max. It's becoming clear that if you can grab urban voters, you have a good shot at taking the whole thing.... much like Federally, if you own Ontario, you can almost take the election.

The 416 is painted of red until you hit the central lakefront where it goes orange--but for my lone riding. 

Hudak ran a lousy campaign. He's not charismatic, which isn't a dealbreaker in these things if your messaging is on-point. But his messaging sucked... running "Dalton is the Taxman! Don't vote for the taxman!" just didn't resonate. Exit polls show that taxes were NOT the most important issue for most voters. He read the public wrong.

On the other hand, I am glad to see that the negative attack-style ads seem to be losing some of their effectiveness. Maybe one day we'll see politicians standing FOR things again.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Wasn't Hudak's wife a top adviser to Mike Harris? I wonder what role she played in formulating his strategy.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Ottawaman said:


> Wasn't Hudak's wife a top adviser to Mike Harris? I wonder what role she played in formulating his strategy.



Not enough!


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

For my two cents, I think the Tories had a flawed campaign.... where was the " it's the economy stupid" catch line....or any catch line for that matter .... remember the famous "Corporate Welfare Bums"... nothing like that was issued to cause some form of reasonance....this is particularily important when there appears to be little in defining issues....for the most part all three parties had the same issues.

I think Hudak will be given a short leash..... while he did have some gains the opinion is that he squandered his poll lead ( if indeed it ever existed ). The Libs, on the other hand, risen from the dead live on for another 4 years with a technical majority if there are no reversals on recounts ( that is as the Speaker historically comes from the Opposition and historically supports the Government in times of a tie, the Libs have access to 54 votes....) so this should be interesting. I would look to see the NDP side with the Cons, since they seem closer together than the Libs.... but it should be more of the same in my opinion.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Canada News: Liberal-dominated Toronto ?not healthy?: Hudak - thestar.com

Poor little Timmy and his great big bunch of sour grapes. I wonder if he was frowning and stomping his feet when he said it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Canada News: Liberal-dominated Toronto ?not healthy?: Hudak - thestar.com
> 
> Poor little Timmy and his great big bunch of sour grapes. I wonder if he was frowning and stomping his feet when he said it.


Happy to see he kept McGuinty to a minority.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

> “I am going to work hard in the weeks and the months ahead to earn the trust of more Toronto families, and to the City of Toronto I want you to know that the Ontario PC Party is there to fight for you,” he said.


Well good luck Hudak. Unfortunately Toronto has heard this BS before. 

He's going to have to come up with a different song and dance to dupe Torontonians into that crap.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> Well good luck Hudak. Unfortunately Toronto has heard this BS before.
> 
> He's going to have to come up with a different song and dance to dupe Torontonians into that crap.


Conservatives used their one 'Get Out Of Jail Free' card with Ford. 

As The Who said, 'We don't get fooled again'.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Happy to see he kept McGuinty to a minority.


Looking forward to see who crosses the floor to correct that.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

With a speaker from the opposition, mcguinty has a virtual majority.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> With a speaker from the opposition, mcguinty has a virtual majority.


GT, let the CONS dream a little dream wouldja?


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Ha, Ha Ha, Ontarians fell for it again....the McGuinty Lieberals at it non stop.



> Major work is continuing on a controversial Mississauga gas-fired power plant one month after Premier Dalton McGuinty’s campaign pledge to stop it.
> 
> Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak unveiled photographs taken Monday showing a huge generator en route to the site near Sherway Gardens.
> 
> ...


Canada News: Full steam ahead at ?cancelled? Mississauga gas plant - thestar.com

I think most of us knew all along that he could not cancel the project unless he paid who knows how much in contractual penalties.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Had Hudak got in, would things have been any different? Trying to get out of these things can be hellishly expensive.

It was bad politics on both sides.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

No Max, it wasn't Hudak who made the decision to build it there (instead of Lakeshore), and it wasn't Hudak who falsely promised to stop it. 

I don't care how much one may hate the Cons and Hudak, but really, for how long are some of you going to allow this piece of sh*t to get away with it?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

probably long enough til we let the other 'piece of sh* get away with plenty more.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Hey 'toobage, when you fatten up one pig at the trough, you slaughter it and make kolbasa out of it...then you lead the next one to the trough.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

the trick is to try and prevent the wart hogs from getting a chance.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

kps said:


> No Max, it wasn't Hudak who made the decision to build it there (instead of Lakeshore), and it wasn't Hudak who falsely promised to stop it.
> 
> I don't care how much one may hate the Cons and Hudak, but really, for how long are some of you going to allow this piece of sh*t to get away with it?


Kps, it's all about perspective. I might just as well ask you just how long you're willing to give Hudak a free pass for idiotic behaviour - and his very own brand of political excrement.

Evidently you don't see it that way - and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm simply amazed that friends could view the same things through such different lens and remain friends. Must mean that politics is not the be all and end all, regardless of the ever-strenuous efforts of policy wonks and pundits who would have us believe otherwise.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yes I do recall ales being consumed with the lot of us with no serious barbs tossed.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Kps, it's all about perspective. I might just as well ask you just how long you're willing to give Hudak a free pass for idiotic behaviour - and his very own brand of political excrement.
> 
> Evidently you don't see it that way - and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm simply amazed that friends could view the same things through such different lens and remain friends. Must mean that politics is not the be all and end all, regardless of the ever-strenuous efforts of policy wonks and pundits who would have us believe otherwise.


Max, how can I give Hudak anything when the man was never elected. I on the other hand don't understand your hatred of everything "Hudak Conservative" and your and Grovetube's assumption that they'd be worse than the current scheitmeister. 

Boys, I'd hope that our friendships are based on a lot more than our individual opinion of a bunch of dickhead politicians.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Hatred is a strong term, kps - your term, not mine.

There's lots about the conservative political inclination that I understand, even admire. You wouldn't have heard me expressing such sentiments a couple of decades ago, but there it is. I also get the fact that, more than ever in this world, playing politics is about playing to the media with simplified messages and on-point slogans full of great intentions but zero room for sophisticated discernment. That's something both left and right plunge into and exploit, often to the detriment of both. It's like a carnival barker, eager to part you from your wallet. The signal gets amped but so does the noise; the distortion levels soar too.

Groove will have to speak for himself on the matter. Personally, I don't know if things would be worse than the present 'regime,' if you will, but I sensed Hudak would have brought us back to a Mike Harris slash-and-burn kind of mentality; while some folks on this board would dearly love to see that happen, I'm not one of them. In the zeal to destroy all that's supposedly awful, collateral damage ensues practically inevitably.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I just don't see Hudak as a deep thinker. While simple slogans win campaigns, it takes deeper thinking to run government. Rob Ford, likewise, is not a deep thinker, and the combination of two shallow thinkers municipally and provincially wasn't something I could get down with.

Does that mean I think McGuinty is a deep thinker? Not sure, to be honest. He's a better campaigner than Hudak. His government has achieved some successes and some losses. Overall, I give him a meh.

Honestly, though, sometimes I think people look for excuses to spew vitriol at the politicians they don't like. I mean, if "most of us knew all along he could not cancel the project unless he paid who knows how much in contractual penalties", then is it any surprise that he didn't cancel the project?


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Hatred is a strong term, kps - your term, not mine.
> 
> There's lots about the conservative political inclination that I understand, even admire. You wouldn't have heard me expressing such sentiments a couple of decades ago, but there it is. I also get the fact that, more than ever in this world, playing politics is about playing to the media with simplified messages and on-point slogans full of great intentions but zero room for sophisticated discernment. That's something both left and right plunge into and exploit, often to the detriment of both. It's like a carnival barker, eager to part you from your wallet. The signal gets amped but so does the noise; the distortion levels soar too.
> 
> Groove will have to speak for himself on the matter. Personally, I don't know if things would be worse than the present 'regime,' if you will, but I sensed Hudak would have brought us back to a Mike Harris slash-and-burn kind of mentality; while some folks on this board would dearly love to see that happen, I'm not one of them. In the zeal to destroy all that's supposedly awful, collateral damage ensues practically inevitably.


I'm no fan of Hudak's either, but I don't buy into the 'Mike Harris' mentality either. I mentioned this before, he's more like McGuinty and that's why he lost and in a way it's a good thing, let McGuinty do the slashing and burning as he must in order to put reduce the debt.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Agreed on your point about deep thinkers, Sonal - big time. Perhaps Hudak has some people on his team to do that for him. In any case, I'd rather the leader be able to act in that capacity.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Sonal said:


> Honestly, though, sometimes I think people look for excuses to spew vitriol at the politicians they don't like. I mean, if "most of us knew all along he could not cancel the project unless he paid who knows how much in contractual penalties", then is it any surprise that he didn't cancel the project?


To some of us it's no surprise, but to those wearing the proverbial rose coloured glasses, it just might be. 

It's no secret that I dislike this particular politician far more than some others, but I think I have a good reason. Saying "meh" just doesn't do it for me. Perhaps It boggles me that the people of this province continue to reelect a habitual lier, a premier who took the richest province and made it a have not province by mismanaging the economy, energy policy and wasted billions of dollars on questionable projects and programmes.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Kps:when the alternative is decidedly negative, simplistic and shallow, I'll take 'meh' any day.

________

Perhaps you're right about Hudak not being like Harris - maybe the doesn't have the stones Harris demonstrated with his slash and burn program. But if Hudak is more like McGuinty than Harris, that still doesn't explain why Ontario didn't give him the top job. Perhaps the people knew better?


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Kps:when the alternative is decidedly negative, simplistic and shallow, I'll take 'meh' any day.
> 
> ________
> 
> Perhaps you're right about Hudak not being like Harris - maybe the doesn't have the stones Harris demonstrated with his slash and burn program. But if Hudak is more like McGuinty than Harris, that still doesn't explain why Ontario didn't give him the top job. Perhaps the people knew better?


I think a lot bought into the negative union ads and the mike harris syndrome...those that went "meh" gave McGuinty a minority. LOL


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

kps said:


> I think a lot bought into the negative union ads and the mike harris syndrome...those that went "meh" gave McGuinty a minority. LOL


I think that's true. I don't know anyone who positively adores Dalton McGuinty and stands by his government's every move - far from it, actually.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Well the guy -was- a Harris guy during those years. It doesn't take much to make that connection. 

That and being hoodwinked by 'tommy boy' mayor rob ford.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Well, we all know about Ford by now... low mayoral ratings included. But you bring up a good point. Beware pols who promise too much. They are bound to disappoint.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

But isn't this the holy grail? Anyone who has run a business has surely learned this over and over? No?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Never underestimate the public's capacity to forget, I suppose. And the corollary, too: never underestimate the public's capacity to hold a grudge.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I'll take "meh" over "blech." 

Hudak ran a very bad campaign. Considering that no one really *likes* McGuinty, losing to him is pretty bad. But from what I can see, Hudak's main message was "McGuinty is the taxman! Beware the taxman!" and exit polls showed that taxes were not the primary issue for voters--evidently, he misread the public. 

The disintegration of Ford Nation didn't help. There was too much similarity in the messaging, and Ford's lows carried over to Hudak.

People keep accusing McGuinty of being a liar. But shoot, how many politicians keep all their promises while in office? Saying "Well, he promised one thing and reneged so I'm not voting for him" is pretty much a reason to not re-elect any politician. Sure, you hope they keep the promises they make, but realistically, that will never happen.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Sonal said:


> I'll take "meh" over "blech."
> 
> People keep accusing McGuinty of being a liar. But shoot, how many politicians keep all their promises while in office? Saying "Well, he promised one thing and reneged so I'm not voting for him" is pretty much a reason to not re-elect any politician. Sure, you hope they keep the promises they make, but realistically, that will never happen.


Accusing? LOL, McGuinty has a proven track record of lies and broken promises. Don't deflect by insinuating Hudak would have been the same. How about Horwath, would she have broken all her promises...after all she's just another politician?

Well at least Harper kept his word today....:clap:


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Good thing Horwath won't be tested on her promises anyway.

I don't think Sonal was trying to deflect, kps. Just looks like you can't stand the notion of anyone being happier with Dalton than with Hudak.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Good thing Horwath won't be tested on her promises anyway.
> 
> I don't think Sonal was trying to deflect, kps. Just looks like you can't stand the notion of anyone being happier with Dalton than with Hudak.


Let me fix that for you:

*" Just looks like you can't stand the notion of anyone being happy with Dalton."*

That's more like it.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Whatevz! Like, same diff man.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I'm pretty positive Horwath wouldn't be able to keep all of her promises either. 

Most politicians campaign with hundreds of promises, and except (possibly) for the incumbent, none of them have much ability to vet the feasibility of any of them. It's just not realistic to expect every promise to be kept. Now you can argue that a particular politician might be completely disingenuous about it, or that another genuinely meant to do something but it didn't work, but neither of us are telepathic and so it's hard to know for sure. 

But yeah, kind of silly to get pissed off about not keeping promises when you knew from the outset that it wasn't going to happen. It's the political equivalent of "I'll call you."


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

kps said:


> Let me fix that for you:
> 
> *" Just looks like you can't stand the notion of anyone being happy with Dalton."*
> 
> That's more like it.


I don't too many are really happy with Dalton. Unfortunately, in the last election, there wasn't a better option.

Same has happened federally.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Okay, y'all are in agreement that* none of them* keep their promises, they're all liars, cheats and thieves when it comes to our tax dollars, but what the heck, we'll just give McGuinty some good ol' positive reinforcement to do more of the same by continuing to vote him in ...is that the idea?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Nope... more like Hudak was not the man to replace him and Horwath? Ixnay too.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Max said:


> Nope... more like Hudak was not the man to replace him and Horwath? Ixnay too.


Yep, pretty much.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Nope... more like Hudak was not the man to replace him and Horwath? Ixnay too.


...and so we're stuck with Norman Bates...in a minority at least.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Be happy with what little there is... we're in an era of reduced expectations!


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

kps said:


> in a minority at least.


Possibly not...

Canada News: Klees to run for speaker, throws Tories into disarray - thestar.com


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Here's where the real "meh" comes in...more like an era of zero expectations. I mentioned that I have changed my outlook on a lot of things. One is, I no longer subscribe to what I've always been told are or should be reasonable compromises.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> Possibly not...
> 
> Canada News: Klees to run for speaker, throws Tories into disarray - thestar.com


With a leader like Hudak, I'm not surprised.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Kps, I was only joking about reduced expectations. I did it because it poured fuel on the fire and I figured it would prompt you to post away and vent your indignation.

Put it another way: better the devil you know. In your world, the devil has to be put down, period - I get it. I don't subscribe to it but I do get it.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Kps, I was only joking about reduced expectations. I did it because it poured fuel on the fire and I figured it would prompt you to post away and vent your indignation.
> 
> Put it another way: better the devil you know. In your world, the devil has to be put down, period - I get it. I don't subscribe to it but I do get it.


Well jeez Max, that makes all the difference....but actually I think you're right. LOL

EDIT: Oh, and I just joined the Federal Conservatives with a 3 year membership. A reward for bill C19. Figured I'd better put my money where my mouth is...LOL


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Good for you. I'm glad they're sinking that registry. It was a waste of time and money.

You may not like McGuinty but your guys are in power federally - that should make you smile. Plus there's the fact that where you're moving, you're likely to be in good company. The Liberals don't enjoy much support outside of Ontario cities. Lots of people will share your disgust! Chin up, man.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> Good for you. I'm glad they're sinking that registry. It was a waste of time and money.
> 
> You may not like McGuinty but your guys are in power federally - that should make you smile. Plus there's the fact that where you're moving, you're likely to be in good company. The Liberals don't enjoy much support outside of Ontario cities. Lots of people will share your disgust! Chin up, man.


Yup....can't wait to spread my wings in _Blue_ Ontario. Mind you, everything further north of me will be orange.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Ahh, well. Can't have it all, eh. Stay within in the blue zone and you're golden.... golden blue.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> Yup....can't wait to spread my wings in _Blue_ Ontario. Mind you, everything further north of me will be orange.


Don't worry, There is always a blue gazebo in the bush...Somewhere up there,
Although, We are getting 15 more seats soon, That'll be interesting.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Meanwhile in Ontario.....

Canada News: MPP Elizabeth Witmer leaves Tories for WSIB post - thestar.com

So a prominent Tory steps down. McGinty needs just one seat to edge into a majority. Interesting how this may play out.

I do agree with the article that it was a bad move for Hudak to immediately refuse to work with the Liberals on the budget. They basically gave up and lost any opportunity to move things in a direction they wanted, and so they had to sit back and watch these go in the opposite direction.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

What purpose would "Working with McGuinty" on the budget have served if the NDP was already ready to back it?


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> What purpose would "Working with McGuinty" on the budget have served if the NDP was already ready to back it?


The NDP wasn't going to back it without changes, which the negotiated for and got.

Hudak never came up to bat on this one. Essentially, he gave up any semblance of power on this, and got nothing.... and for what? Spite? 

So the budget moves further left, which gets him no closer to his stated goals for Ontario.


EDIT TO ADD: If nothing else, his participation in the process could have been sold as "Look, we did everything possible to make McGuinty see reason, but he just wouldn't listen." Now, he's stuck with the optics of "well, we had an opportunity to make things go a little more our way, but instead we chose not to do anything at all."


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> The NDP wasn't going to back it without changes, which the negotiated for and got.
> 
> Hudak never came up to bat on this one. Essentially, he gave up any semblance of power on this, and got nothing.... and for what? Spite?
> 
> So the budget moves further left, which gets him no closer to his stated goals for Ontario.


Hudak's campaign wasn't run to the right of McGuinty so he has no real high ground here. Had he promoted McGuinty's current budget--which is a step in the right direction--as part of his election campaign, he would have won in a landslide.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Hudak's campaign wasn't run to the right of McGuinty so he has no real high ground here. Had he promoted McGuinty's current budget--which is a step in the right direction--as part of his election campaign, he would have won in a landslide.


You consider a step in the right direction as including a 2% tax on the super-rich? That doesn't seem like you.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> You consider a step in the right direction as including a 2% tax on the super-rich? That doesn't seem like you.


I don't support the 2% tax—I hate these infantile gestures of class warfare--but Hudak could not have changed that. The point I'm making is that McGuinty's budget was a better platform than Hudak ran on. He has no moral high ground at this point to attempt to force the budget toward fiscal conservatism. McGuinty has eclipsed him. Hudak is a spent force.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I don't support the 2% tax—I hate these infantile gestures of class warfare--but Hudak could not have changed that. The point I'm making is that McGuinty's budget was a better platform than Hudak ran on. He has no moral high ground at this point to attempt to force the budget toward fiscal conservatism. McGuinty has eclipsed him. Hudak is a spent force.


True. But I wasn't thinking so much about the actual budget as I was thinking that Hudak shot himself in the foot politically by not at least pretending to participate in the process. He can't take credit for anything, and he can't even claim to have been a victim of anything. He simply stepped to the side and let himself be rendered irrelevant.

He just doesn't seem very good at playing this game.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I think he already positioned himself left of McGuinty's current persona with his crappy election platform. He couldn't appear morally outraged over that budget.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I think he already positioned himself left of McGuinty's current persona with his crappy election platform. He couldn't appear morally outraged over that budget.


Nonetheless, he's trying to.
Hudak on Budget: Liberal, NDP Chiefs “Win” – Ontario Loses | Ontario PC Party


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

From this conservatives point of view, Hudak has been a total fail. I agree with Macfury, I think he ran on a Liberal platform. They need a leadership change if they hope to win. A conservative candidate would be nice.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Nonetheless, he's trying to.
> Hudak on Budget: Liberal, NDP Chiefs “Win” – Ontario Loses | Ontario PC Party





> Hudak said that the Ontario PC Caucus believes in a very different approach: “It’s one that requires urgent action on two parallel tracks,” Hudak said. “We need to reduce the size and cost of government and kick-start growth and job creation in the private sector.


Really? Why didn't you have a plan for that before the last election? He doesn't wear the outrage well.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

*Separated at Birth...*

.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

*Also Separated at birth...*

.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Hi Sonal and all. I think both you and Macfury are right on this one. I vote conservative I our provincial riding as we have, in my opinion, a good MPP, but I think the PCs need to look for a new leader. Not sure if it is just me, but Hudak can't seem to develop a complete thought. And while I agree with Macfury (somewhat) on his approach to the budget, I agree with you 100% that he has been relegated to an also ran in the process with his utter absence in the negotiations. 

Could be a ploy if all goes sour that he and his party had nothing to do with the budget but I don't think that is a good strategy.... Better to be viewed as a leader. His lack of action only communicate that he is not.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Breaking news.

Dalton McGuinty resigns. Watching on CBC right now.

Ummm.... what the what?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sonal said:


> Breaking news.
> 
> Dalton McGuinty resigns. Watching on CBC right now.
> 
> Ummm.... what the what?


Yes, we just heard about his resignation here in NL ............. where things happen 1/2 hour slower than in the rest of Canada.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

"In Powers" only resign for two reasons, family or scandal ....... should be fun to watch the next few weeks.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Rps said:


> "In Powers" only resign for two reasons, family or scandal ....... should be fun to watch the next few weeks.


Health .............. or the proverbial "writing on the wall" come to mind as well, Rps.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Dr.G. said:


> Health .............. or the proverbial "writing on the wall" come to mind as well, Rps.


Dr. G, I lump health in with the "family" category, as for writing on the wall, me thinks the writ might be on the way and Big D didn't think he would carry the win .... in that case go out a winner ( which he is, he's had an outstanding career whether you are a liberal supporter or not you have to give it to him ) but there is some steam when the newbie is crowned, so I would expect the opposition to force something soon.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Rps said:


> Dr. G, I lump health in with the "family" category, as for writing on the wall, me thinks the writ might be on the way and Big D didn't think he would carry the win .... in that case go out a winner ( which he is, he's had an outstanding career whether you are a liberal supporter or not you have to give it to him ) but there is some steam when the newbie is crowned, so I would expect the opposition to force something soon.


Well, I guess he shall have to wait and see if the NDP can cut expenses and the cost of the public service.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Might he consider a run as leader of the federal Liberal Party?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I doubt it.

As for Hudak, sure, let him get in. The federal tories will have the backlash in ontario against that lunatic to deal with. It may not be so pleasant in this province for anyone for a while though.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

groovetube said:


> I doubt it.
> 
> As for Hudak, sure, let him get in. The federal tories will have the backlash in ontario against that lunatic to deal with. It may not be so pleasant in this province for anyone for a while though.


Groove, I wouldn't speak too soon on Hudak or whether Big D runs for the Feds .... let's see how it plays out in the next few days ..... the real reasons will, as always, come out shortly.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Rps said:


> Groove, I wouldn't speak too soon on Hudak or whether Big D runs for the Feds .... let's see how it plays out in the next few days ..... the real reasons will, as always, come out shortly.


Agreed--this isn't just McGuinty leaving for the good of his health.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Rps said:


> Groove, I wouldn't speak too soon on Hudak or whether Big D runs for the Feds .... let's see how it plays out in the next few days ..... the real reasons will, as always, come out shortly.


I read he's staying on until a new leader is chosen. Isn't the federal leadership thing going to happen in 2013?


----------

