Conquer Club

notyou2 wrote:Did you change the entire first post?

Yup. I think it's criminal that he switched from boobs to Ruth Ellen Brasseau. How ever if he combined the two I might consider sending money.

notyou2 wrote:Did you change the entire first post?

Yes, that is the update. At the bottom is a spoiler that has the old post in it though. I intend this to be a running commentary.

Is this some sort of phatscotty tribute?

notyou2 wrote:Is this some sort of phatscotty tribute?

Not at all. I don't believe in polarized government. I hate on all parties equally. It just blows my mind how there aren't riots about this stuff. Yet people are willing to spend time bashing the NHL lockout.

Now home of the Twinkie

So in one part of the post you are upset that a provincial party used some shady dealings(redraw boundaries to exclude democratic choice) to build a ski resort.

The next part you complain about the constituents of a ridding choosing their representative. Yeah she's never stepped foot in the ridding, don't you think the people who live there would know that? If they don't who's fault is that? What right do you have to be outraged at their choice of representative?

DoomYoshi wrote:

notyou2 wrote:Is this some sort of phatscotty tribute?

Not at all. I don't believe in polarized government. I hate on all parties equally. It just blows my mind how there aren't riots about this stuff. Yet people are willing to spend time bashing the NHL lockout.

I was not referring to you making anti-government threads, the comparison was concerning you changing the original post. Scotty does that, as well as changing the title of the thread...it's FUCKING ANNOYING when he does it and I think it is dishonest. It takes all the posts out of context.

Baron Von PWN wrote:So in one part of the post you are upset that a provincial party used some shady dealings(redraw boundaries to exclude democratic choice) to build a ski resort.

The next part you complain about the constituents of a ridding choosing their representative. Yeah she's never stepped foot in the ridding, don't you think the people who live there would know that? If they don't who's fault is that? What right do you have to be outraged at their choice of representative?

Good question.

I have a few problems:

1)most arguments in Canada against proportional representation start with the fact that local constituencies need to be represented by locals. This clearly proves that concept wrong and yet we don't have proportional rep. yet. In Ontario, we went so far as to have a failed referendum on this concept. I spoke to one person who voted against it, and he was told it would end up screwing the North. The big parties are all conspiring to misinform the public so that small parties haven't a chance in Canada, at both the provincial and National levels.

2) If she had a successful campaign by spending $0, then no politician should be allowed to spend any more than that. The money wasted on campaigns and those stupid lawn signs is too high.

3)Clearly, in Canada right now there is a movement towards celebrity status of our higher level politicians. The NDP won so many seats in that election just because Jack Layton was hip. At my school, orange was everywhere, as an anecdote. CBC reported that polls show that if Justin Trudeau is leader of the Liberal, he has enough support for a majority government. This is one single person, in a party of 5 000 000. One person who really hasn't done anything to justify this support. We are about to enter a phase in which politics are truly meaningless at a National Level. We have already borrowed the extreme polarization from the US, now we are about to borrow the celebrity status of politicians. I don't appreciate this trend.

@notyou2: you can still see the old posts. It's not dishonest, because I put in the title that there was a change.

If you have something to add to your therrad, put it in a new post.

Generally, people don't reread the opening post of a thread.

For example, when I click to read a therrad that I've already read, I start at the first unread post. When you alter the OP, I'm not going to read it, especially when there's already more than a full page of replies.

Quick, Ruth Ellen pictures to appease the mob.

She's pretty cute actually. I'd vote for her.

You may have to move.

NEW updates on Fracking:

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/11/23/ottawa-sued-over-quebec-fracking-ban-u-s-firm-says-loss-of-permit-illegal/

I hope Ruth Ellen runs in my riding in my province and never sets foot here and wins in the next election. I'd vote for that.

notyou2 wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

notyou2 wrote:Is this some sort of phatscotty tribute?

Not at all. I don't believe in polarized government. I hate on all parties equally. It just blows my mind how there aren't riots about this stuff. Yet people are willing to spend time bashing the NHL lockout.

I was not referring to you making anti-government threads, the comparison was concerning you changing the original post. Scotty does that, as well as changing the title of the thread...it's FUCKING ANNOYING when he does it and I think it is dishonest. It takes all the posts out of context.

Sorry Doom, I didn't mean to be so obnoxious, but I do feel that changing the subject line of a post is dishonest. Not even sure you did that, but changing the first post is just weird unless Saxi did it to get people to respond and then change the original post to make it appear they were talking about something else entirely....now that could be funny.

Millard and Smich both found guilty of first degree murder.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/smich-millard-get-life-in-prison-for-bosma-murder-1.2949708

Hope they get repeatedly raped in prison.