REVscene Automotive Forum
Page 69 of 429 « First 1959606162636465666768 69 70717273747576777879119169 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)
-   Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)
-   -   Canadian politics thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/715648-canadian-politics-thread.html)

Manic! 07-11-2020 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitev70r (Post 8992419)
I knew it was just a matter of time before Manic! would post an assinine reply about some Conservative with some link to WE.

So was Peter McKay in the room when the government decided to award them the contract?

OK, I'm going to explain it once and I hope you get it through your thick skull. A critique of JT is NOT a vote for the Cons. It is possible to like some of the things that the Libs are doing and critique JT and prefer a different leader of the Libs. Nice that he was handed that job because of his privilege but he is proving over and over again that he is a lightweight with no substance.

You are so predictable ... cancel yourself please.
It's just another issue McKay can't complain about. Just like he can't complain about the government not shutting down the boarders earlier because he had sent his wife and kids to Mexico. There is a reason why McKay deleted this tweet. I wonder if his wife for paid?

whitev70r 07-11-2020 10:39 AM
Are you that dull? Yes, McKay can critique it. Again, nothing against the work of WE, they do some positive things ... not a perfect organization but this isn't a slam on WE. Nothing wrong with being paid as a speaker either ... the issue is with the ethics of awarding a contract to a group without bidding or other options. That's a no no in government awarding contracts. JT and Morneau should have reclused themselves in the decision making process ... get it .... ??? If they had other organizations bid or considered, and JT and Morneau stepped out or reclused themselves and WE got the contract ... it's all good. Do you get it now ??!!

Manic! 07-11-2020 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitev70r (Post 8992430)
Are you that dull? Yes, McKay can critique it. Again, nothing against the work of WE, they do some positive things ... not a perfect organization but this isn't a slam on WE. Nothing wrong with being paid as a speaker either ... the issue is with the ethics of awarding a contract to a group without bidding or other options. That's a no no in government awarding contracts. JT and Morneau should have reclused themselves in the decision making process ... get it .... ??? If they had other organizations bid or considered, and JT and Morneau stepped out or reclused themselves and WE got the contract ... it's all good. Do you get it now ??!!
Some cons are slamming the We charity as a whole. mckay deleted his tweet for a reason. I will let guess the reason.

CivicBlues 07-12-2020 04:20 PM
My god, Canada has the dullest and most asinine political scandals.

SkinnyPupp 07-12-2020 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CivicBlues (Post 8992539)
My god, Canada has the dullest and most asinine political scandals.
GOOD!

GLOW 07-13-2020 07:20 AM
in local gov't they jump through hoops to publicly and fairly bid 5 figure projects, normal and common knowledge in govt & public sector...

direct award almost a billion? damn JT
https://media1.giphy.com/media/iurIH...ized-large.gif

Infiniti 07-13-2020 08:24 AM
FYI, the Federal gov't awards sole source contracts on a fairly regular basis, and for contract sums below and in excess of the amount equivalent to WE. Not taking a side on this debate, just wanted to let people know as there seemed to be this misconception that all contracts the government sign go through some type of competition for contract award.

Jmac 07-13-2020 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLOW (Post 8992598)
in local gov't they jump through hoops to publicly and fairly bid 5 figure projects, normal and common knowledge in govt & public sector...

direct award almost a billion? damn JT
https://media1.giphy.com/media/iurIH...ized-large.gif
The health authority I work for is $25k for selective bid and $75k for open bid.

https://www.islandhealth.ca/sites/de...r-business.pdf
Quote:
Direct Award Î Direct award is permitted for smaller expenditures where the total value of
the equipment, supplies and services is less than $25,000. A direct award will result in a
contractual relationship that meets VIHA business needs, demonstrates cost effectiveness,
and quality that reflects market value. No competitive bid process is required.
Ü Select Bid Î A Select Bid process may be used where the value of equipment, supplies and
services is greater than $25,000, and less than $75,000. Construction contracts are permitted
to use a Select Bid process in excess of $25,000 and less than $200,000. A minimum of
three qualified potential vendors will be requested to submit proposals. The entire process is
documented in an approved format and all decisions/results clearly justified.
Ü Open Bid Î An Open Bid must be used where the value of equipment, supplies and services
is equal to or exceeds $75,000 and construction contracts that are equal to or exceed
$200,000. This highly structured process ensures the opportunity for all interested vendors
to submit proposals.

RRxtar 07-13-2020 09:23 AM
Its okay everyone. JT said sorry.

welfare 07-13-2020 09:32 AM

JDął 07-13-2020 10:20 AM
Anyone who remains supporting Justin Trudeau is a partisan hack. Even if you're a Liberal party supporter due to policy you can't stand behind this guy. Amongst everything else, this is his third breach of ethics investigation and he'll almost certainly go 3/3 guilty verdicts. Worst PM in Canadian history. Some Liberal MP's must really be looking themselves in the mirror and wondering how long they can continue to tow the party line while it's become the most corrupt and destructive political party the country has seen.

Hondaracer 07-13-2020 10:24 AM
Have never seen a leader who thinks it’s acceptable to use the “I didn’t know” defence as often and as blatantly as turd, pretty gross tbh.

Manic! 07-13-2020 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDął (Post 8992621)
Anyone who remains supporting Justin Trudeau is a partisan hack. Even if you're a Liberal party supporter due to policy you can't stand behind this guy. Amongst everything else, this is his third breach of ethics investigation and he'll almost certainly go 3/3 guilty verdicts. Worst PM in Canadian history. Some Liberal MP's must really be looking themselves in the mirror and wondering how long they can continue to tow the party line while it's become the most corrupt and destructive political party the country has seen.
And who did you vote for last year? scheer? the guy who lied about his citizenship, work history, and a whole bunch of other things. The majority of Canadians are left-leaning and will vote to keep the left in power.

Manic! 07-13-2020 04:17 PM
The fact this guy is still running for the con leadership is everything you need to know about the con party.

https://north99.org/2020/07/13/conse...tory-vaccines/

Quote:
Conservative leadership candidate proposes mandatory ultrasound before abortion, while also opposing mandatory vaccines

Derek Sloan, a candidate to replace Andrew Scheer in the Conservative party’s upcoming leadership election, has proposed a mandatory ultrasound for women who want an abortion.

Sloan’s “12 Point Pro-life Plan” would force women to have an “ultrasound prior to abortion”, included as the eighth point, on the grounds that “many women complain that information is withheld” before they undergo the procedure.

Currently MP for Hastings-Lennox & Addington, Sloan identifies as a social conservative without apology. In comparison, Peter Mackay and Erin O’Toole, also eyeing the UPC Leadership, are less conservative on the issue of abortion.

Mackay says he supports abortion rights, and O’Toole said he’s pro-choice. However neither of them will bar MPs from presenting bills on the issue.


Sloan’s socially conservative stand on the abortion issue places him well outside the mainstream of Canadian opinion. According to a February 2020 Dart and Maru poll, 75% of Canadians surveyed are satisfied with Canada’s current policies on abortion, and seven in 10 people believe that abortion is acceptable.

The candidate has staked out extreme positions on other issues as well. He has said he will “never support mandatory vaccinations for Canadians”. When asked whether he would support banning conversion therapy, Sloan said that it can be “broadly defined” and “nobody should be forced to do anything they don’t want to do”. He previously gained attention for racially charged comments against Canada’s Chief Medical Office, Dr Theresa Tam, claiming she was working with China.

whitev70r 07-13-2020 05:27 PM
Justin, I'm sorry I got caught, Trudeau strikes again.

Cue the moronic Manic! reply ... yah but the cons are worst.

Manic! 07-13-2020 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitev70r (Post 8992655)
Justin, I'm sorry I got caught, Trudeau strikes again.

Cue the moronic Manic! reply ... yah but the cons are worst.
With all the scandals you would think the cons would have an easy win but JT will win again and will probably have more seats this time.

JDął 07-15-2020 03:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitev70r (Post 8992655)
Justin, I'm sorry I got caught, Trudeau strikes again.

Cue the moronic Manic! reply ... yah but the cons are worst.

I can only imagine the autistic screeching that's coming from Manic with the multiple posts in response, 100% trying to deflect on to something else than the blatant corruption of the PM and Liberal party that no longer have the moral authority to govern.

Manic is the guy who goes off whenever he can about Conservative party candidates and abortion but I'm pretty sure he stated he voted NDP in the last election - for a party leader who's a practicing Sikh making him 100% pro-life. I'm glad everyone is putting him on ignore so he can echo-chamber his worthless opinions to no one but himself :lol

SkinnyPupp 07-15-2020 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDął (Post 8992862)
https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/...58619764940801

I can only imaging the autistic screeching that's coming from Manic with the multiple posts in response, 100% trying to deflect on to something else than the blatant corruption of the PM and Liberal party that no longer have the moral authority to govern.

Manic is the guy who goes off whenever he can about Conservative party candidates and abortion but I'm pretty sure he stated he voted NDP in the last election - for a party leader who's a practicing Sikh making him 100% pro-life. I'm glad everyone is putting him on ignore so he can echo-chamber his worthless opinions to no one but himself :lol
AFAIK Sikhs are pro life, but see abortion as a legal matter, not a religious one. Jagmeet Singh has fought for abortion clinics constantly, and is pro-choice (as we all should be)

Not everyone feels the need to force their own personal religious beliefs on the country. :rukidding:

JDął 07-15-2020 03:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp (Post 8992864)
Sikhs are pro life, but see abortion as a legal matter, not a religious one. Jagmeet Singh has fought for abortion clinics constantly, and is pro-choice (as we all should be)

Not everyone feels the need to force their own personal religious beliefs on the country. :rukidding:
Absolutely correct. The hypocrisy is that Manic likes to attack one party for the exact same policy over personal or religious belief, but not another.

SkinnyPupp 07-15-2020 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDął (Post 8992865)
Absolutely correct. The hypocrisy is that Manic likes to attack one party for the exact same policy over personal or religious belief, but not another.
The difference, I think, is he's attacking someone who has the wrong beliefs (that women aren't allowed to choose what to do with their body)

JDął 07-15-2020 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp (Post 8992866)
The difference, I think, is he's attacking someone who has the wrong beliefs (that women aren't allowed to choose what to do with their body)
Tell me the difference between a man deciding a woman's right to choose because of a religious belief whether they're Christian or Sikh, and I'll buy you a beer. Both party leaders have the exact same stance personally but do not follow through with it in policy because they know it's not the will of the people. I say leaders as Scheer was in the last election but will not be in the next, it'll be O'Toole, MacKay, or Lewis who are all pro-choice. The fourth guy is fringe with as much chance of winning as Elizabeth may does at being PM.

SkinnyPupp 07-15-2020 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDął (Post 8992868)
Tell me the difference between a man deciding a woman's right to choose because of a religious belief whether they're Christian or Sikh, and I'll buy you a beer. Both party leaders have the exact same stance personally but do not follow through with it in policy because they know it's not the will of the people. I say leaders as Scheer was in the last election but will not be in the next, it'll be O'Toole, MacKay, or Lewis who are all pro-choice. The fourth guy is fringe with as much chance of winning as Elizabeth may does at being PM.
I mean if he wants to criticize anyone for thinking a woman has no sovereignty over their own body, I don't think he cares what religion they are. Has Singh ever said he believes women shouldn't have the right to choose, but simply won't change the law? Honestly I don't know. I don't think Sikhism has a specific stance on abortion, only feticide.

Neither Singh nor Scheer have any right to tell someone what to do, even if they "believe" whatever they "believe". It's good that neither want to change Canadian abortion laws.

westopher 07-15-2020 04:22 PM
I believe leaders of every party have said they would not allow their members to table any bills that would challenge abortion rights except for Scheer and the cons, but I'm going off of memory so I could be wrong.

Hondaracer 07-15-2020 05:11 PM
The problem with the cons is they have to appeal to some rural farmer that doesn’t want abortions.

Hopefully under new leadership they can kind of sway that opinion

mikemhg 07-15-2020 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDął (Post 8992865)
Absolutely correct. The hypocrisy is that Manic likes to attack one party for the exact same policy over personal or religious belief, but not another.
How is that a hypocrisy? I've never heard Singh state that he was against abortion, or that he would enact any policy to ban such.

So you're saying his religion is a monolith, and that because he is Sikh he is automatically against abortion? That's absolutely ridiculous :lol


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:07 AM.
Page 69 of 429 « First 1959606162636465666768 69 70717273747576777879119169 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net