The results are the results and crying over spilled milk won't change the facts here.
By the way; pretty tasteless suggestion...
Justin, Justin, Justin
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
The results are the results and crying over spilled milk won't change the facts here.
By the way; pretty tasteless suggestion...
...Says the guy telling us that Pierre Trudeau was worse than Clifford Olsen.
What is tasteless is comparing a former leader of this country who was respected all over the world to a murderous child
molester. During Olsen's heyday, I was dropping off and picking up my ten and twelve year old children to and from school.
We didn't know Olsen then but we knew kids were disappearing.
I reiterated what was published in the National Post.
Perhaps you can find a reputable media outlet that mirrors your questionable and tasteless suggestion. Methinks that you won't have any luck there... You'll just have to assume ownership of it all to yourself
More than just re-iterated. You made a special point of pointing out that Pierre Trudeau was worse than Clifford Olsen, which you said you found "interesting." The adjective you were looking for, I believe, is "ridiculous."
I was hoping my little example would perhaps demonstrate that such a comparison was, indeed, ridiculous, which you now seem willing to accept in hindsight, given that you are trying to foist the whole sorry comparison on to me. :lol:
In the future, maybe stick to facts, figures and considered opinion. When you compare Prime Ministers to serial killers you just make yourself look like an idiot.
Nope, the adjective I was specifically looking for was 'interesting' and quite frankly, it is... Personally, I would never have ranked PET as being worse than a serial killer but apparently, the polls indicated that they feel he is.
Your little example demonstrated quite clearly that your suggestions are questionable if not outright reprehensible.
But that's your problem, not mine
Funny... I notice that you have not addressed any of the realities that I applied to the pretty graph that clearly you know little about in terms of the big picture realities.... Nope, no answers or observations that would support a position - just a pretty little graph without any perspective.
Talk about looking like an idiot... Think twice before you decide to bring a knife to a gun fight
Pierre Trudeau is disliked by some because of his style of leadership and because he's become an easy target for the right to bash for political points. While he was PM the nation was in the process of defining itself in terms independent of the UK and the US.
It's because of Trudeau to a degree that we have an independent Canada for the conservatives to treat with contempt.
It's because of Trudeau to a degree that we have an independent Canada for the conservatives to treat with contempt.
Then the smart thing to do would have been to not even bring it up. It had nothing at all to do with the conversation at hand, concerning King Trudeau I and his putative contributions to Canada's current debt woes. As it is, you responded to my graph by comparing Pierre Trudeau negatively with a serial killer, and made yourself look like an idiot, an error you seem determined to multiply, as you continue to defend it.
Support my position? No, I readily admit to be being gobsmacked as to how to support my position after your little hand grenade.
Me: This graph seems to demonstrate that Trudeau is not wholly responsible for Canada's debt.
You: Trudeau was worse than Clifford Olsen.
Me: wtf?
That pretty much sums up the discussion to date from my perspective.
Last edited:
I hear that Harper already has some attack ads out.... It'll be interesting to see how jr handles the attention
I prefer Justine Trudeau as PM to living in the one-party-state the conservatives are busy erecting.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/03/31/peter-worthington-pierre-trudeaus-damaged-canada/
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2011/11/05/bob-plamondon-30-years-ago-the-damage-done-by-trudeau/
Both those links could be considered blogs, or editorials. They are one man's opinion and that opinion is from conservative writers. You could not consider either man as being non-partisan.
it was what was expected. The cons can't do anything else except throw mud. It's what they are best at.
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2011/11/05/bob-plamondon-30-years-ago-the-damage-done-by-trudeau/
Both those links could be considered blogs, or editorials. They are one man's opinion and that opinion is from conservative writers. You could not consider either man as being non-partisan.
it was what was expected. The cons can't do anything else except throw mud. It's what they are best at.
I imagine a lot of folks are getting blown during Harper's tenure....................DUCKS!!??8O.........Damn perverts.
And still two years to go...............They must be a tad worried.
