June 09, 2018

The “Ford Factor” comes to Ontario: Celebrating “The People’s Win”

David MenziesMission Specialist

 

Winning!

After 15 years of scandal-plagued rule, the Ontario Liberals were crushed on Thursday.

And boisterous members of Ford Nation couldn’t be happier.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2018-06-11 00:04:04 -0400
Liza Rosie 5hrs ago…..This Spring, Jason Clemens, the Executive Vice-President of the Fraser Institute , wrote a great article on Canada’s SUPPLY MANAGEMENT. I will only repeat this one important paragraph.

“The United States has repeatedly indicated that a key tension in NAFTA renegotiations is Canada’s continued protection of Dairy, Poultry, and Egg Producers. These protectionist policies, known as Supply Management, were also an irritant in the Trans-Pacific free trade negotiations. (Also in European Free Trade Agreement)
The question for Canadians is why broad trade agreements, which benefit almost all Canadians, are being jeopardized to continue to protect a small subset of farmers in Canada-estimated at 13,500 nationwide.”
I will add that Supply Management was started in WW1 as Canada was afraid that all their food would go to the US Soldiers, and our people would starve.
Talk about out of date.
commented 2018-06-11 00:02:13 -0400
Lee H…That is a fantastic idea!
commented 2018-06-10 22:11:57 -0400
Three things need to happen before Premier-Elect Ford’s Progressive-Conservative government can allow the Ontario Liberals official party status:
1.) Kathleen Wynne must resign as a MPP and get lost, forever.
2.) The Liberal candidate must win the by-election to replace Kathleen Wynne as a MPP.
3.) There needs to be another by-election in a riding not presently held by a Liberal, and the Liberal candidate needs to win that by-election.
In other words, if the Ontario Liberals want to regain official party status, the ONLY way they can be allowed to do that is if they earn it the old-fashioned way; by winning the MINIMUM number of seats in elections.
The people of Ontario have spoken, and Premier Ford would be making a significant mistake if he were to over-rule them.
commented 2018-06-10 21:43:58 -0400
Liza said in part, “Damn I just hate that we have to fund this crap”
My thoughts exactly!!
commented 2018-06-10 21:31:37 -0400
Regarding getting rid of sex ed, in schools. I wonder if Ford has any plans to object to this use of taxpayer money ? Damn I just hate that we have to fund this crap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IMKpe5bmaw
commented 2018-06-10 21:07:53 -0400
I saw that Robert,, it was from 2009 or there abouts. Liberals have been anti American for years.

‘Opposition leader Stephen Harper, who heads the pro-American Canadian Alliance, said the repetition by Liberals of such sentiments hurt bilateral relations.’

“I don’t see the point of those kinds of comments, but they constantly come from the Liberal Party,” he said.
commented 2018-06-10 20:20:08 -0400
Andrew is still apologizing for political Islam, a theocracy. M-103 is a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood via Iqra Khalid and the Liberal Party. Criticizing an ideology should not be illegal.

Andrew, I can’t be any clearer – we have laws in place which are not enforced on Al-Quds day.
commented 2018-06-10 19:15:15 -0400
“If you support this group being tossed away for hate speech, does that mean you support M103?”

Andrew, is taking exception to political Islam, the same as calling for death to Jews, in your mind? These Islamists we invited into our country, are enemies of the west. There is no reason they should be protected under any Canadian law. That’s why m103 is so insidious and evil. Political Islam has no place here and deserves no tolerance.
commented 2018-06-10 19:04:20 -0400
Andrew the fake PhD Stephenson, you deflect yet again. You made the claim that you hold a PhD. That was challenged, and you made the claim so prove it. I don’t care who you are, and it matters not what education level I have, you made the claim but refuse to back it up. As such, your claims in the future will all be questioned with that in mind. Further to that, your refusal to back up such a strong claim, and continual dancing around it with deflection, means you can not be believed, regardless if you have a GED or a PhD. It really is that simple. Dance on for all to see, your credibility is not what you say it is, it is what your track record in proving your claims, which is far from stellar.
commented 2018-06-10 19:01:24 -0400
http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/agriculture/world-dairy-producers-cry-foul-over-canadian-milk-products-deal
this is an article from 2016, but I don’t think we’ve changed much since then.

“Dairy producers in Australia, the European Union, Mexico, New Zealand and the United States have teamed up to threaten a trade war over a new deal between Canadian farmers and its dairy industry.

In a letter made public Monday, the dairy councils that represent the bulk of the world’s milk producers says the new deal will keep out foreign “dairy ingredients” and put subsidies in place that will help Canada “unfairly compete with our products in third country markets.”

Sounds like subsidies to me.
commented 2018-06-10 18:56:20 -0400
“Common Sense commented 1 min ago
Andrew the fake PhD Stephenson, yes it does matter 100% as it goes to your credibility. If you lie, you can not expect to be believed. You sound like a politician who lies and when caught says me may have mis-spoken. No, it is a lie. You make a claim, and you are challenged on that claim, you back it up with proof, otherwise it is a lie, puffery. You are pathetic and anything you claim comes into question. And as you say, it matters not the education level of the one party vs. the other. "

Common,

This board does not feature an edit function. What I wrote below is immutable. Does your perception of my credibility change something I wrote earlier from true, to false, or vice versa, even if the statement itself hasn’t changed?

Which is to say, does truth depend on who is articulating it? Or is it an independent, objective fact that is true regardless of its origin?
commented 2018-06-10 18:43:08 -0400
“liza rosie commented 15 mins ago
US milk and dairy is still cheaper than ours, so if we both subsidize why is milk so much cheaper in the US than Canada? Sounds like our government is pocketing the high tariffs charged, to subsidise the subsidies. Something works better in the US because they don’t hike their prices to the consumer as we do in Canada.”

We don’t subsidize. Supply management does many things, but among them is ensuring consumers pay the full cost of milk.

The practical aspects of the tariffs is that we import very little dairy from the US. Some specialty cheeses are imported, mostly from Europe, but that’s about it.

:Tammie Putinski-Zandbelt commented 19 mins ago
Andrew ever the contrarian…..Hate speech and inciting murder are illegal already"
I’m surprised you haven’t figured out where I’m going with this.

If you support this group being tossed away for hate speech, does that mean you support M103? Or are you going to just be very selective about your application of the law, depending on whether you agree with the comments being made or some other subjective measure?

“As for Trudeau’s performance for the press, it backfired on him. "

Which is of course why we’re now debating the incredibly pressing issue of his eyebrows.

“Why didn’t he give a joint statement with President Trump?! "

Because nothing worth a joint statement was achieved?

Has the thought ever crossed your mind that the problem might not be on Trudeau’s end?
commented 2018-06-10 18:42:23 -0400
Andrew the fake PhD Stephenson, yes it does matter 100% as it goes to your credibility. If you lie, you can not expect to be believed. You sound like a politician who lies and when caught says me may have mis-spoken. No, it is a lie. You make a claim, and you are challenged on that claim, you back it up with proof, otherwise it is a lie, puffery. You are pathetic and anything you claim comes into question. And as you say, it matters not the education level of the one party vs. the other.
commented 2018-06-10 18:33:46 -0400
I’m not going to, because it doesn’t matter if you think I have one or not. I do, but if you wish to be skeptical, that’s your prerogative. Your skepticism of my education does not affect whether my subsequent arguments are true or not.

I repeat, if a word-for-word identical statement is made by someone who holds a doctorate, and someone who does not, does the veracity of that statement change depending on who says it?

That’s what ti comes down to. The content of my posts does not change whether I have a PhD or not, the statement is written as written. Does my title, therefore, change a true statement into an untrue one or vice-versa, based on who I am, even if the statement hasn’t changed at all? Of course not, it’s either true or it isn’t, and who says it is irrelevant in seeking that truth.

Common, the veracity of a statement does not vary depending on who says it. Truth is objective. It is not an opinion. I originally revealed this because you somehow implied that Tim Ball was above criticism because he holds a PhD, when, again, the same position applies. If he says something wrong, holding a PhD does not make it less wrong. Or more wrong. Two independent phenomena. The onus is on you to determine the veracity of a statement and not get sidetracked by misplaced trust in authority.

Authority lies just as easily as anyone else, Sense. Take statements at face value. Be skeptical – but be impartial in applying that skepticism, and be able to defend your position empirically and objectively. And, always remember, skepticism is not the same thing as demonstrable falsehood.

So, knowing that, is anything I have said in this thread, actually, objectively untrue? Don’t deflect on this one. Actually address what’s being said.
commented 2018-06-10 18:21:48 -0400
You are right about that Andrew, both Scheer and Kenney stand with Justin on the dairy/steel and aluminum snub. We’ll see how smart a move that is, shortly.
commented 2018-06-10 18:20:18 -0400
Andrew ever the contrarian…..Hate speech and inciting murder are illegal already, Hezbollah and Hamas are terrorists groups- carrying these flags promote terrorism, again, illegal, use existing Canadian laws . Guest speakers are subject to Canadian laws are they not?!!

As for Trudeau’s performance for the press, it backfired on him. Anyone with diplomacy skills would have given the media a statement which confirmed it was a productive meeting, all sides were given the opportunity to share concerns, progress is being made, read the communique…confirm all 7 nations signed it. Trudeau likes the sound of his own voice and whenever possible he tries to portray himself as not being a beta male, doesn’t work.
Why didn’t he give a joint statement with President Trump?! I’ll tell you, he would have been called out right then and there…so, he waits for Trump’s plane to take off and gets in front of the press to spin a story. He’s a legend in his own mind.
commented 2018-06-10 18:20:10 -0400
US milk and dairy is still cheaper than ours, so if we both subsidize why is milk so much cheaper in the US than Canada? Sounds like our government is pocketing the high tariffs charged, to subsidise the subsidies. Something works better in the US because they don’t hike their prices to the consumer as we do in Canada.
It all sounds like the kind of government manipulated mess only a truly free market system between countries could fix. It seems to me Trump suggested such a thing at the summit.
commented 2018-06-10 18:12:59 -0400
You didn’t make an argument Andrew the fake PhD Stephenson, you made a claim that you held a PhD. Stop deflecting and prove it. You can’t dance around it, you made the claim you held a PhD. Prove it.
commented 2018-06-10 18:10:34 -0400
Common,

If am argument is made by a layperson, and the exact same argument is made, word for word, by a PhD scientist, whose argument is more reputable?
commented 2018-06-10 18:08:13 -0400
So Andrew the fake PhD Stephenson, what you are saying is that if make a claim, you do not have to back it up with anything, and everyone must accept it as truth. No, you make the claim, you back it up. You are a complete fool. There is no other way to see that.
commented 2018-06-10 18:02:07 -0400
“Speaking to reporters at Queen’s Park on Sunday, Ford offered his support to Trudeau.

“I can tell you on the trade deal south of the border, we stand shoulder to shoulder with the prime minister and our federal counterparts. My number one priority is to protect jobs in Ontario, especially protect the steel workers, aluminum workers."

http://www.680news.com/2018/06/10/trumps-tirade-sparks-calls-for-calm-promises-of-support-for-trudeau-2/
commented 2018-06-10 17:51:31 -0400
commented 2018-06-10 17:45:13 -0400
“Used your own words right back at you. You made the claim, so prove it. Take your own advice. You still have zero credibility as a result of your own actions. You can not deflect from that, liar. "

I don’t have to prove anything, because it holds no impact on my subsequent statements. If that subsequent comment is wrong, then you should be able to show that directly.

If I don’t, then I guess we can’t prove anything, can we? Therefore, this particular claim is unverifiable, and can’t be used to determine the reliability of subsequent claims. You can speculate its accuracy all you want, but speculation isn’t evidence of anything else. Guess you’ll have to evaluate their accuracy directly, if you can. I suspect not, since you keep muddling around in appeal-to-authority fallacies.

“Tammie Putinski-Zandbelt commented 36 mins ago
Andrew you dolt, Trudeau’s diplomacy failures are now legendary. This is the worst one yet. "

Like I said, the White House aka Trump views anything less than total sycophancy as “backstabbing”. I don’t dispute that the White House is saying such things.

I’m asking you, that if Trudeau has the choice of being friends with Trump, or standing up for Canada and being the target of these outbursts, which is the better choice. What would YOU do in this situation? Do you feel that Canada should just meekly take Trump’s attacks, or should we fight back in some way even if it pisses off the White House?

“Tammie Putinski-Zandbelt commented 34 mins ago
Arrest those carrying the Hezbollah flag, Hamas flag, signs calling for the murder of jews….pretty simple isn’t it! Charge them with promoting terrorism and in the case of signs calling for death…hate crime charge. "’

So, the government can arrest you for saying the wrong thing?

“Our quota system for eggs and dairy is only a good deal for a few select dairy farmers and the government. It is counter productive, ask New Zealand. "

The problem is that New Zealand exports milk (predominantly to China; we do as well but are at a geographical disadvantage). We’re talking about importing it. Part of the problem is that the US milk market isn’t free either – they’re subsidized very heavily, somewhere more than a dollar a gallon. Conversely, we don’t subsidize farmers- the supply managed price is high enough that we don’t have to, the consumer pays an inflated, but full, price. If we open the borders, we’ll be flooded with subsidized milk from the US, and have absolutely no hope of competing with their subsidized farmers. That’s why we haven’t done it. That’s the problem – opening the borders has no benefit to the Canadian dairy industry whatsoever. Free trade needs to be free, and that means that both sides have to play fairly – if Americans ended milk subsidies, then we could discuss liberalizing the market. But, that’s not going to happen, the dairy lobby is too powerful.

“The steel and aluminum smack grew from that attitude as a retaliation tactic, because we all know Trump hits back. Too bad Justin and his ‘team’ don’t want to play fair. All Canadians will suffer for it. "’
Trump struck first. Our tariffs were retaliatory
commented 2018-06-10 17:41:48 -0400
Tammie, agreed, there should be zero tolerance for Hamas and Hezbollah supporters in Canada. If you want to support terrorist groups, go back to the middle east. All this turmoil that has nothing to do with what Canada stands for, is concrete evidence that political Islam, from anywhere in the world, is not compatible with the west, should be kept out of western countries and be cause for stripped citizenship and deportation ( even if your birth place is Canada,if your parents birthplace is another country, you can go there).
Political Islam and Nazism are parallel on many levels. Canadians are not going to tolerate it. When Justin is gone, all bets are off for these implanted Islamics.
Allowing this in our country makes as much sense as having compassion for m13 gang members. Political Islam is toxic.
commented 2018-06-10 17:34:54 -0400
Mark, the eyebrows really aren’t a big deal, pretty much everything about Jr. is fake.
commented 2018-06-10 17:32:31 -0400
Tammie P Z…Liza Rosie..Those snap shots should be sent to the Toronto Police Chief and to the Toronto Mayor..with a question..Is this how you promote of being one of the safest City’s in North America?..