CanPol - You won't hear Tories on the news

[snoopy369]

That's okay, Wezil, I'd vote for you. Six or seven times at least. Living in Chicago has its advantages

[Wezil]

As a Rhino I think I could accept your six or seven votes. See? It all works out.

[Wezil]

I can't afford gas station ads so I will use this thread for some shameless campaigning.

http://rhinoparty.com/

[RedFred]

I am no fan of Dion, but what is the big fuss about carbon taxes? BC already has one. It will inevitably follow in other jurisdictions.

[Wezil]

The big fuss is that Dion, a Liberal, appears ready to head to the polls with a new tax as his major plank in the platform. Do none of his advisers think this may just be tad insane?

[Ben Kenobi]

I am no fan of Dion, but what is the big fuss about carbon taxes? BC already has one. It will inevitably follow in other jurisdictions.

Which is why all the folks up here are asking if they can pay taxes to Edmonton instead?

Carbon taxes is a tax on the interior and a north to fund more social programs and busses down in Vancouver. We pay all the tax and receive none of the benefits.

I wouldn't give a dime to Campbell until the policy reverses.

[Wezil]

I guess I wasn't the only one bothered by gas station political ads...

In this week's tour of the federal funny farm, we find piles of taxpayers' money being fed to a talking grease spot.

The babbling blob, of course, is the infamous animated star of the Conservatives' latest attack ads aimed at Stephane Dion's as yet unannounced plan for a national carbon tax.

The Tory propaganda claims the Liberal leader wants to tax "everything," and implores Canadians not to be "tricked."

Clearly, Dion is not proposing to tax anything close to "everything" -- the last time that happened was the GST imposed by Brian Mulroney's government -- and the Liberals have pledged it would not apply to gasoline at the pumps.

Nonetheless, the talking grease spot apparently bit the Liberals where it hurts, and their plans to unveil their carbon tax last week were shelved.

At this writing, Liberal MPs and party strategists remain deeply divided over whether Dion's tax plan will be seen as a bold move by a committed leader, or the act of someone who should be committed.

In the meantime, the Conservatives were the ones who got tricked by their own attack ads.

Last week, they had to kill their plan to run the obnoxious grease spot and its annoying messages on video screens atop gas pumps, presumably after the owners of said screens remembered that most cars come with a tire iron.

Undeterred, the Conservative party now plans to air the attack ads on radio at a cost of many hundreds of thousands of dollars, most of it siphoned from the pockets of ordinary taxpayers.

(continued)

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Weston_Greg/2008/06/15/5880536.php

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Carbon taxes is a tax on the interior and a north to fund more social programs and busses down in Vancouver. We pay all the tax and receive none of the benefits.

Do you mean that Northern BC is somehow trapped in its own physical reality and exempt from the climate change engulfing the rest of the planet.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Wezil
The big fuss is that Dion, a Liberal, appears ready to head to the polls with a new tax as his major plank in the platform. Do none of his advisers think this may just be tad insane?

You know, sooner or later it might be prudent to increase taxes. Every Tom, Dick and Harry promises to cut the damn things and won't cut social services, so oddly enough, putting taxes back up might not be a bad idea.

Once upon a time politicians could campaign on tax increases on their own merits. Nowadays, any mention of a tax increase brings the slavering tory monkeys to have a fit and throw poo everywhere.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
I guess I wasn't the only one bothered by gas station political ads...

That's a **** article, because the policy of FuelCast (even before this) was not to air political ads. The article makes it sounds like it was outrage from idiots that caused the change.

It's also **** because it says the taxpayers will be funding the ads, when they are funded 100% by private contributors to the conservative party.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon


You know, sooner or later it might be prudent to increase taxes. Every Tom, Dick and Harry promises to cut the damn things and won't cut social services, so oddly enough, putting taxes back up might not be a bad idea.

Taxes have been going up and up and up forever. "At some point" seems to be "whenever possible" for the Canadian government. And then they mismanage all the revenues they get perpetually. No thanks.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles

That's a **** article, because the policy of FuelCast (even before this) was not to air political ads. The article makes it sounds like it was outrage from idiots that caused the change.

You're just upset you won't be hearing the Tory message.

It's also **** because it says the taxpayers will be funding the ads, when they are funded 100% by private contributors to the conservative party.

Not exactly. You do know some party funds come from the public purse now?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil


You're just upset you won't be hearing the Tory message.



Not exactly. You do know some party funds come from the public purse now?

Since when did this make up the "majority" of the funds spent, and if they are spent are they not intended for party use as they see fit?

You're starting to remind me of the writers for The Star, which every week put up a new front-page desperate hit-job attempt. Today's hitjob is a front-page scandal of how Conservative politicians go on fundraising expeditions when they are out of town. It's funny that I didn't see them complaining when the Liberals did this when they were in charge.

The article is also awesome for the not-so-subtle inferences. Eg, "Each trip would at least cost thousands of dollars of taxpayer money, though we cannot know the exact amount!" (MAYBE THEY SPENT BILLIONS!).

[Wezil]

I haven't seen the break down of party funding to know if public funds are now a "majority".

Apparently you have so I await your link.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
I haven't seen the break down of party funding to know if public funds are now a "majority".

Apparently you have so I await your link.

I'm not the one who made the claim, the article you posted did.

Either you can support the claim or you can stop linking to the Sun...