Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving). The ninth now
paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important! They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the
most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas,
where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Author Unknown
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Monday, April 11, 2011
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Our Economy is Fine!
A quick lunch-break post. Mr. Dion and Mr. Layton continue their fear-mongering about the economy. Yes, the stock market is down. But that's just artificial money! First off, the Canadian markets are only 50% economy based. The other half is driven by changing commodity prices. It is no coincidence that our markets fell when all of the commodity prices bottomed out last week, NOT perfectly in step with the US markets.
Regardless, don't take my word for it. Listen to the IMF.
Full article here.
Regardless, don't take my word for it. Listen to the IMF.
Canada will skirt recession:The International Monetary Fund, meanwhile, projected that Canada next year
will have the fastest growing economy of the G7 major industrial countries, at
1.2 per cent, despite virtually no growth of just 0.1 per cent in the U.S.,
Canada's main export market.
Full article here.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Hell hath frozen over
The Toronto Star just published a story that.... Aghast!.... doesn't take a single cheap shot at the Prime Minister. Ok, one small one about election timing, but I'll make a post about that tomorrow.
Please refer to Capital One tv ad.
Golly. Ok, I realize I took the "math" part out. It basically says that the Left is split, which is going to result in a stronger minority (most likely). Maybe the Left should coalesce. With Layton as PM.... right.... hell hath indeed frozen over.Oct 02, 2008 11:26 PM
James Travers
OTTAWA – Two nights of debate and another day of market turmoil are turning an election about the economy and Stéphane Dion into one that's still about the economy but also about Stephen Harper. For the first time since he prematurely killed the last Parliament, partly to avoid campaigning in hard times, the Prime Minister and his fiscal policies are emerging as ballot questions.
Four-against-one debates with the economy as the focus are driving that change. So, too, is the Liberal leader's belated shift from the environmental "e", his personal passion, to the economic "e", the national preoccupation.
...While watched across the country, the first debate was primarily a battle for Quebec with Harper and Gilles Duceppe the principal combatants. The second was loaded with broader implications and higher stakes – a possible Conservative majority and the determined NDP run at the Liberals for second place.
Tonight those two struggles centred on the economy and Harper's claim that Canada's fundamentals are so strong that the safe course is to stay the Conservative course. As he has done since the campaign began, Layton chipped at that proposition, effectively recasting extraordinary economic events as kitchen table concerns. Dion's attacks are more abstract but effective enough to force Harper to pre-emptively distance his policies from the laissez-faire U.S. mess blamed, a little unfairly, on George W. Bush. [Note from Glen: Emphasis added. And don't take this to mean that I don't blame Bush]
...Ganging four against one is good way to win a debate...Harper knows this, just as he knows that being pounded in the debates won't crack his core support.
What's less certain is how undecided voters will react to the cumulative opposition criticism and their own rising financial fears. However they ultimately cast their ballots, the Prime Minister and his policies are now an election issue and that is as it should be.
Please refer to Capital One tv ad.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Wasting Political Efforts
First Jack Layton said he wanted to be Prime Minister of a coalition government.
Now Lizzy May wants voters to vote strategically.
WHAT IS THE POINT OF RUNNING A CAMPAIGN?
This really perplexes me. These leaders are really taking the wind out of their own sails! I anticipated the Green Party receiving around 10% of the popular vote. But what her recent statement does is cheapen the efforts of her supporters on the ground. As a campaign volunteer for my local Conservative candidate, Bob Dechert, I know how much the leader's visits and messages have an impact on my own efforts. Her grassroots volunteers probably woke up today, looked at that headline, and asked themselves: Why am I doing this then? What is the point of all of that door-knocking, phone-calling, sign-posting? This goes against what was said last year, claiming that a Green vote isn't a wasted vote.
Even the former president of the Liberal Party of Canada says that the Liberals are going to "take a drubbing." This can't be a good feeling for the Liberal volunteers on the ground. They are wearing out their shoes and told their efforts will be for nought.
As for the prospects of a left-wing coalition government.... wow. Canada would be in serious trouble. It would be a spend-first tax-next government. I can't afford that right now. Neither can our economy, which they all claim to be worried about.
UPDATE: Even Warren Kinsella can see the upcoming troubles for the Liberals.
Now Lizzy May wants voters to vote strategically.
WHAT IS THE POINT OF RUNNING A CAMPAIGN?
This really perplexes me. These leaders are really taking the wind out of their own sails! I anticipated the Green Party receiving around 10% of the popular vote. But what her recent statement does is cheapen the efforts of her supporters on the ground. As a campaign volunteer for my local Conservative candidate, Bob Dechert, I know how much the leader's visits and messages have an impact on my own efforts. Her grassroots volunteers probably woke up today, looked at that headline, and asked themselves: Why am I doing this then? What is the point of all of that door-knocking, phone-calling, sign-posting? This goes against what was said last year, claiming that a Green vote isn't a wasted vote.
Even the former president of the Liberal Party of Canada says that the Liberals are going to "take a drubbing." This can't be a good feeling for the Liberal volunteers on the ground. They are wearing out their shoes and told their efforts will be for nought.
As for the prospects of a left-wing coalition government.... wow. Canada would be in serious trouble. It would be a spend-first tax-next government. I can't afford that right now. Neither can our economy, which they all claim to be worried about.
UPDATE: Even Warren Kinsella can see the upcoming troubles for the Liberals.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Polls CAN tell the truth: Breaking stereotypes
Yesterday I had a conversation with a few other Conservative supporters in my riding. We got to talking about the image problem that the Conservative Party has historically had, and how we all broke the stereotypical mould.
A black conservative? Shock and awe!
An immigrant conservative? Bewilderment!
A professional woman conservative? Unheardof!
A gay conservative? Unfathomable!
A lower-income conservative? Unbelievable!
From today's Daily Tracking numbers from EKOS:
A black conservative? Shock and awe!
An immigrant conservative? Bewilderment!
A professional woman conservative? Unheardof!
A gay conservative? Unfathomable!
A lower-income conservative? Unbelievable!
From today's Daily Tracking numbers from EKOS:
1. [The] front-running Conservatives ... appeal now cuts across economic classes.I am glad to finally see people accepting the message from the Conservative Party at face value, instead of believing what the mainstream media would have you believe about their ideals.
Contrary to the conventional picture of the Conservatives as the party of the better-off, they are almost completely uniform across income groups in terms of their support. In other words, whether you are making less than $40,000 a year or more than $80,000, your likelihood of voting Conservative is almost exactly the same.
2. In contrast, the Liberals ... now skew clearly towards wealthier voters.
3. The Conservatives are winning every age category, from youngest to oldest.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Green Shift no more?
Dion: The Green Shift is not a major part of the Liberals election platform.
WHHHAAAATTTTTT?!?
TO Star
I've always found the joke about Liberals flip-flopping to be funny, but this.... beyond the pale.
Mr. Dion has been touring the country since WINTER! trying to convince people that the Green Shift is a good idea. Now you are campaigning with nothing, nada, bupkis. The plan was unpopular at best, yes, but at least stick to your mores, and go down with the sinking ship. I think it is he, Dion, with the not-so-hidden hidden agenda.
So I guess that it is now upto Elizabeth May of the Green Party to continue stumping for the Green Shift. She claims that it's her idea anyways.
Update: Oh! That was the sound of the flop-back. The Shift is back on... but not as an important part of their campaign.
WHHHAAAATTTTTT?!?
TO Star
I've always found the joke about Liberals flip-flopping to be funny, but this.... beyond the pale.
Mr. Dion has been touring the country since WINTER! trying to convince people that the Green Shift is a good idea. Now you are campaigning with nothing, nada, bupkis. The plan was unpopular at best, yes, but at least stick to your mores, and go down with the sinking ship. I think it is he, Dion, with the not-so-hidden hidden agenda.
So I guess that it is now upto Elizabeth May of the Green Party to continue stumping for the Green Shift. She claims that it's her idea anyways.
Update: Oh! That was the sound of the flop-back. The Shift is back on... but not as an important part of their campaign.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
wtf Political Correctness
Many disturbing stories from this past weekend. I really hate this culture of political correctness that is being imposed. It is destroying free speech. It is also now destroying careers, thanks to the Human Rights Tribunal. Staying abreast of current political correctness is now a full time occupation.
Couple of interesting headlines to start
Doctor deemed racist for 'liking visible minorities', $4000 fine
UN Calls Canada Racist for 'visible minorities' tag.
I really hate labels to begin with. But seriously... Can you please tell me: What is the politically correct way to describe me these days?
I've also come to hate blogs... am I a hypocrite for keeping one, even though no one reads it? I'll hopefully have some time to pen my reactions to Chris Reid's resignation as Conservative candidate, simply for believing in personal liberty.
Couple of interesting headlines to start
Doctor deemed racist for 'liking visible minorities', $4000 fine
UN Calls Canada Racist for 'visible minorities' tag.
I really hate labels to begin with. But seriously... Can you please tell me: What is the politically correct way to describe me these days?
I've also come to hate blogs... am I a hypocrite for keeping one, even though no one reads it? I'll hopefully have some time to pen my reactions to Chris Reid's resignation as Conservative candidate, simply for believing in personal liberty.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Politics and the General Public: Policy, Promises and the Unintelligible
Wow, am I about to make a non-partisan post? We'll see...
After watching CBCs "Your Turn 2008" campaign programme today, I think I understand the problem with government (Note: I said government, NOT politics) in North America, and especially in Canada. This may be an oversimplification of the sources of the problem, but bear with me.
It all starts with Voter Apathy.
Voters stop caring because they see all of the politics. That's all of the posturing, the partisan hackery and mockery. They see all of the broken promises made.
New voters dont start caring because they see the above. But more importantly, they do not understand the underlying principals behind the promises made (then broken).
Why are the promises made in the first place?
Because the political parties do not have policy that is easily interpreted by the general public. The possible reasons are many: the policy is too difficult to understand, the policy is deliberately convoluted, it might even be that the general public is too stupid to understand the policy. But the bottom line is this, that the political parties cannot let their policy documents stand on their own as living, breathing documents.
So the political parties make "policy decisions" which are expressed as (mostly) spending promises and tax cuts (or increases). The details of these expressions are based on the current realities, or the anticipated reality of the (hopefully) foreseeable future. But it's all fiction and conjecture really. And once you get into power (or opposition), the reality is usually different. So your policy gets expressed in terms of a different revenue stream or expenditure.
Ok... all that to just say this: Party policy is just too friggin complicated to understand. That's it.
After watching CBCs "Your Turn 2008" campaign programme today, I think I understand the problem with government (Note: I said government, NOT politics) in North America, and especially in Canada. This may be an oversimplification of the sources of the problem, but bear with me.
It all starts with Voter Apathy.
Voters stop caring because they see all of the politics. That's all of the posturing, the partisan hackery and mockery. They see all of the broken promises made.
New voters dont start caring because they see the above. But more importantly, they do not understand the underlying principals behind the promises made (then broken).
Why are the promises made in the first place?
Because the political parties do not have policy that is easily interpreted by the general public. The possible reasons are many: the policy is too difficult to understand, the policy is deliberately convoluted, it might even be that the general public is too stupid to understand the policy. But the bottom line is this, that the political parties cannot let their policy documents stand on their own as living, breathing documents.
So the political parties make "policy decisions" which are expressed as (mostly) spending promises and tax cuts (or increases). The details of these expressions are based on the current realities, or the anticipated reality of the (hopefully) foreseeable future. But it's all fiction and conjecture really. And once you get into power (or opposition), the reality is usually different. So your policy gets expressed in terms of a different revenue stream or expenditure.
Ok... all that to just say this: Party policy is just too friggin complicated to understand. That's it.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Trading Votes
Would you really trade your vote to someone across the country to keep a certain party from getting a majority? This has popped up in the last day or so here in Canada. And I find it very troubling, but I will need to spend a couple of days doing some more research and thinking to really put my finger on it.
Yes, it shows dissatisfaction with the current system. I'll be the first to say that our system sucks. But please do note that the Conservatives are the only party that has supported electoral reform.
I'll be reading the Canada Elections Act, along with decisions made by the courts in the UK and US on similar practises.
A quick quote from the US decision:
"they amounted to efforts by politically engaged people to support their preferred candidates and to avoid election results that they feared would contravene the preferences of a majority of voters in closely contested states" [emphasis added]
This does not apply to the Canadian political arena because you are no longer voting for your preferred candidate, but for the party. Which, theoretically, you aren't voting for. As for the majority of voters part, that too does not apply, because there has never been an instance in Canada where the party with the most votes hasn't formed government. Yet.
Yes, it shows dissatisfaction with the current system. I'll be the first to say that our system sucks. But please do note that the Conservatives are the only party that has supported electoral reform.
I'll be reading the Canada Elections Act, along with decisions made by the courts in the UK and US on similar practises.
A quick quote from the US decision:
"they amounted to efforts by politically engaged people to support their preferred candidates and to avoid election results that they feared would contravene the preferences of a majority of voters in closely contested states" [emphasis added]
This does not apply to the Canadian political arena because you are no longer voting for your preferred candidate, but for the party. Which, theoretically, you aren't voting for. As for the majority of voters part, that too does not apply, because there has never been an instance in Canada where the party with the most votes hasn't formed government. Yet.
Green Party Leader Liz May: Canadians Are Stupid
Why the Green Party will not elect a single member to the Parliament this election
Reason:
Question: "Why are Canadians scared of a Carbon Tax?"
Liz May: "I think Canadians are stupid."
Sorry Lizzy, you just lost everything that you had built up over the last 2 years.
Reason:
Question: "Why are Canadians scared of a Carbon Tax?"
Liz May: "I think Canadians are stupid."
Sorry Lizzy, you just lost everything that you had built up over the last 2 years.
The Changing Face of the Ontario Economy
In Response to Toronto Star Article: Harper won't guarantee Ontario jobs
This simply goes beyond politics. No amount of political posturing is going to change our economy's present troubles.
Face the facts. Our economy is changing. We can no longer rely on the manufacturing industry, for one simply reason: the cost of labour. We can no longer use the cheap dollar as a crutch in helping our exporters; we had an opportunity to improve efficiencies in the late 90s, slept on that, and now we are paying the consequences.
The bottom line: You aren't going to keep your jobs CAWs. Because you get paid $70/hr in an unskilled position.
The Future: Ontario must start to reshape itself as a place for skilled workers, especially in the areas of innovation. I may be on the other side of the political spectrum as McGuinty, but I will give him due in this area. Premier McGuinty has himself realized the importance of innovation in securing Ontario's place in the emerging global markets. Check out the work that he has done as Minister of Innovation, and the work being done by the newly reorganized Ontario Centres of Excellence. (www.oce-ontario.org/) This group is working to build connections between industry, research and academia, to find the next RIM or Imax.
You simply cannot guarantee jobs, as the NDP or the private unions would have you believe. You cannot bully private companies into keeping jobs in Canada. What you have to do is reshape your industries, keep your workforce current, up to the times, and WELL EDUCATED! As such, the decision to reopen a Windsor plant over the one in Oshawa was simple: The Ford facility is an engine plant, and the money is earmarked for investment in fuel-efficient technologies. That's the future.
This simply goes beyond politics. No amount of political posturing is going to change our economy's present troubles.
Face the facts. Our economy is changing. We can no longer rely on the manufacturing industry, for one simply reason: the cost of labour. We can no longer use the cheap dollar as a crutch in helping our exporters; we had an opportunity to improve efficiencies in the late 90s, slept on that, and now we are paying the consequences.
The bottom line: You aren't going to keep your jobs CAWs. Because you get paid $70/hr in an unskilled position.
The Future: Ontario must start to reshape itself as a place for skilled workers, especially in the areas of innovation. I may be on the other side of the political spectrum as McGuinty, but I will give him due in this area. Premier McGuinty has himself realized the importance of innovation in securing Ontario's place in the emerging global markets. Check out the work that he has done as Minister of Innovation, and the work being done by the newly reorganized Ontario Centres of Excellence. (www.oce-ontario.org/) This group is working to build connections between industry, research and academia, to find the next RIM or Imax.
You simply cannot guarantee jobs, as the NDP or the private unions would have you believe. You cannot bully private companies into keeping jobs in Canada. What you have to do is reshape your industries, keep your workforce current, up to the times, and WELL EDUCATED! As such, the decision to reopen a Windsor plant over the one in Oshawa was simple: The Ford facility is an engine plant, and the money is earmarked for investment in fuel-efficient technologies. That's the future.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Days of our Lives
So in the past 24 or so hours (ok, the past 29 hours), I've been all over place. Mostly around downtown Toronto. But thanks to my role at TIFF, I've had quite the day.
Yesterday I went to the Terence Blanchard concert at Yonge & Dundas Square. For any of you jazz heads out there, you know the man. Quite the cool cat, and he put on an amazing show, even in the rain. But before then, I ran into several old friends, including Geoff D. from SMC '03, Jamie M. from Queen's '07, and Danny R from SMC '03 and Queens.
Tonight I had the opportunity to stand on the stage behind the Prime Minister at a campaign stop in Mississauga. He even shook my hand on camera! This was at his announcement on Veterens Affairs, which will provide Allied soldiers with the same tax benefits as Canadian soldiers. Very big step.
I just, JUST, got back from a private concert by Metric. OMG, Emily Haines and those legs. It was quite the intimate affair, and we got some sweet photos from our spot right at the side of the stage. Awesome double set by this Canadian band. I'll try to get the photos posted on Facebook within the next couple of days.
Yesterday I went to the Terence Blanchard concert at Yonge & Dundas Square. For any of you jazz heads out there, you know the man. Quite the cool cat, and he put on an amazing show, even in the rain. But before then, I ran into several old friends, including Geoff D. from SMC '03, Jamie M. from Queen's '07, and Danny R from SMC '03 and Queens.
Tonight I had the opportunity to stand on the stage behind the Prime Minister at a campaign stop in Mississauga. He even shook my hand on camera! This was at his announcement on Veterens Affairs, which will provide Allied soldiers with the same tax benefits as Canadian soldiers. Very big step.
I just, JUST, got back from a private concert by Metric. OMG, Emily Haines and those legs. It was quite the intimate affair, and we got some sweet photos from our spot right at the side of the stage. Awesome double set by this Canadian band. I'll try to get the photos posted on Facebook within the next couple of days.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Toronto Star continues to suck b@!!s
An update on the Toronto Star calling the past government productive. TODAY they decided that the Conservatives record is somehow flawed.
Harper is running on flawed record
"...Canadians have seen what kind of government he runs over the past 32 months. Of course, it was a minority government, held in check by the opposition parties."
Held in check? All that Mr. Dion did was run and hide every time the Conservatives wanted to pass a bill.
Every time something came up, all the Liberals decided that they needed to take a piss.
Every time something came up, they needed to run home and check their toasters.
Every time something came up, they needed to take their dog for a walk, instead of actually voting, as they were elected to do. At least Jack Layton and the NDP had the balls to stay in the House.
Harper is running on flawed record
"...Canadians have seen what kind of government he runs over the past 32 months. Of course, it was a minority government, held in check by the opposition parties."
Held in check? All that Mr. Dion did was run and hide every time the Conservatives wanted to pass a bill.
Every time something came up, all the Liberals decided that they needed to take a piss.
Every time something came up, they needed to run home and check their toasters.
Every time something came up, they needed to take their dog for a walk, instead of actually voting, as they were elected to do. At least Jack Layton and the NDP had the balls to stay in the House.
The Liberal Press Machine: The Toronto Star
This from the Toronto Star editorial, entitled: War of Words on Green Shift.
"The Conservatives are seeing red over the Green Shift.
My Opinion:
The bottom line is this: The Toronto Star's editors and "analysts" are simply a privately funded corporation acting as part of the broke Liberal election machine.
How do the announced changes (read: flip-flops) constitute a "legitimate political response"? This is simply the Liberal party pandering to whomever can shout the loudest.
What it also does is make an ill-conceived plan even more complicated. OUR TAXATION SYSTEM IS COMPLICATED ENOUGH AS IT IS! If you are going to do something, make it easier for me to hand over my hard earned dollars for you to spend in ways that do not benefit me, or the country.
Every new tax system, every new tax credit or taxation exemption makes it harder and harder for an individual to do their own taxes. Why should I have to SPEND money having someone do my tax reporting? This reduces the collective disposable income, which hurts the economy. Imagine the effect on corporations. They won't have the time or money to invest in new innovations; they'll be hiring more tax lawyers to figure out what the hell they owe to whom.
"The Conservatives are seeing red over the Green Shift.
Last week, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion announced shifts to his Green Shift, some $900 million in concessions for sectors hit hard by the carbon tax plan.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper promptly lashed out at the changes as 11th hour improvisations that suggest Dion is rewriting his plan "on the back of envelopes."
...
My Opinion:
The bottom line is this: The Toronto Star's editors and "analysts" are simply a privately funded corporation acting as part of the broke Liberal election machine.
How do the announced changes (read: flip-flops) constitute a "legitimate political response"? This is simply the Liberal party pandering to whomever can shout the loudest.
What it also does is make an ill-conceived plan even more complicated. OUR TAXATION SYSTEM IS COMPLICATED ENOUGH AS IT IS! If you are going to do something, make it easier for me to hand over my hard earned dollars for you to spend in ways that do not benefit me, or the country.
Every new tax system, every new tax credit or taxation exemption makes it harder and harder for an individual to do their own taxes. Why should I have to SPEND money having someone do my tax reporting? This reduces the collective disposable income, which hurts the economy. Imagine the effect on corporations. They won't have the time or money to invest in new innovations; they'll be hiring more tax lawyers to figure out what the hell they owe to whom.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Politics and the Media
I really do hate the Toronto Star. For the entire time that the Tories have governed, they have criticized every single move that they have made. Now that it serves their purposes, they are claiming that this past parliament was "productive". This now allows them to say that the Conservatives are now calling the election for political gain. Why not "report" that this, and I quote, "has been one of the more productive and long-lasting minority governments in Canadian history"? The simple reason is thus: The Toronto Star is not interested in providing and reporting facts for the general public, they would rather force feed the masses their political spin.
Another great example is today's front page article. Click Here. I have never before seen such a blatantly partisan front page article from a major newspaper. What the Toronto Star did, in effect, was make an endorsement BEFORE the election had even been called.
My next complaint is of the CBC. Take a look at what they had to offer on the Palin baby story, a full two days after this story was debunked on the internet: Click Here. I'm not saying that they are biased (they are). I'm just saying that they're stupid. (And a slight waste of tax-payers dollars, although I love CBCSports.)
I'll definitely be posting some more thoughts as the campaigns start to ramp up, but do yourselves a favour: Read the National Post.
Another great example is today's front page article. Click Here. I have never before seen such a blatantly partisan front page article from a major newspaper. What the Toronto Star did, in effect, was make an endorsement BEFORE the election had even been called.
My next complaint is of the CBC. Take a look at what they had to offer on the Palin baby story, a full two days after this story was debunked on the internet: Click Here. I'm not saying that they are biased (they are). I'm just saying that they're stupid. (And a slight waste of tax-payers dollars, although I love CBCSports.)
I'll definitely be posting some more thoughts as the campaigns start to ramp up, but do yourselves a favour: Read the National Post.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Hilary to Bill: You cheating tard
Oh this is simply hilarious. Check the image of the Clinton snub.
Thanks to Peter for the heads up on this one.
Thanks to Peter for the heads up on this one.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Reasons Obama Can't Win
Paris Hilton for President?
Sure, it pokes more fun at McCain, but get serious. Obama has now been endorsed by Paris Hilton, Hamas, and a recently executed convicted murderer. Quite the impressive list. Being a celebrity rarely gets you elected. The only ones who it helped were Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan. But don't forget, they were both Republicans.
All jokes aside... her energy policy is actually the most sound. Who wrote her policy book? Someone hire that person. And when did we start using the term "energy policy" to describe how we are going to survive the "oil crisis". It's just as sneaky as saying "budget surplus" instead of over-taxation (it's a subtle difference with huge implications).
Thanks to Funny or Die
Sure, it pokes more fun at McCain, but get serious. Obama has now been endorsed by Paris Hilton, Hamas, and a recently executed convicted murderer. Quite the impressive list. Being a celebrity rarely gets you elected. The only ones who it helped were Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan. But don't forget, they were both Republicans.
All jokes aside... her energy policy is actually the most sound. Who wrote her policy book? Someone hire that person. And when did we start using the term "energy policy" to describe how we are going to survive the "oil crisis". It's just as sneaky as saying "budget surplus" instead of over-taxation (it's a subtle difference with huge implications).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)