Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Spring Salmon said: It would be political suicide for him to touch abortion. He knows that. We know that. Pierre is smart enough not to lose this election over this issue He will do it. The plan is to bring in adjacent laws like the failed attempt at "protecting" pregnant women. PP won't prevent his backbenchers from introducing bills, and you know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 5 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Wo are THEY though? The courts. And the lower courts are politicized exactly the same as the Supreme Court. Everyone knows the Supreme Court always votes in Trump's favour, he literally put all of his buddies on the court. He did it on purpose to reverse Roe v Wade, did he not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said: I wasn't referring to illegal actions. I was referring to putting your political opponent in the slammer 5 months before an election. It's not a good look. They were able to push all the other trials until after the election. They could have easily done the same with this one. What was the rush? They had 7 years. Regardless of Trump's illegal actions, the perception that is being played is that he is being jailed by his political opponent. That's the narrative the Republicans are running with and IMO it's not a good look... IMO you are witch hunting. We are not going to agree on this one. Let's get back to Canadian Politics. If JT jails someone I'm sure you'll let me know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Ricky Ravioli said: "My boy Skippy" hasn't done anything. I'd elect a Zamboni driver if it meant Trudeau was gone And thats the problem. We actually both agree that Trudeau should go. I've said that for 2 years now. But that doesn't make Skippy a good choice. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 6 minutes ago, Bob Long said: you're arguing that its OK to politicize the courts to take rights away from women, but its not OK to politicize the courts if a leader is a criminal? Not sure I am following. When did I argue to take women's rights away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, Bob Long said: He will do it. The plan is to bring in adjacent laws like the failed attempt at "protecting" pregnant women. PP won't prevent his backbenchers from introducing bills, and you know it. To say he will do this as a matter of fact, sounds like fear mongering. The very thing you accuse Pierre of doing. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: He will do it. The plan is to bring in adjacent laws like the failed attempt at "protecting" pregnant women. PP won't prevent his backbenchers from introducing bills, and you know it. Almost 10 years of a majority under Harper and it was left untouched. You don't even know you're being gaslight because of the Liberal party is nose-diving in the polls. They are so desperate to change the narrative. Edited May 31 by bolt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Satchmo said: IMO you are witch hunting. We are not going to agree on this one. Let's get back to Canadian Politics. If JT jails someone I'm sure you'll let me know. I'm sure you'll find out before me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, Master Mind said: To say he will do this as a matter of fact, sounds like fear mongering. The very thing you accuse Pierre of doing. It's based in fact MM. He has already allowed his backbenchers to do it, I'm not making things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 4 minutes ago, Spring Salmon said: It would be political suicide for him to touch abortion. He knows that. We know that. Pierre is smart enough not to lose this election over this issue It's incredible when other posters post literal quotes, you have to take them as fact but when it's PP it's completely different tune... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, bolt said: 10 years of a majority under Harper is was left untouched. You don't even know you're being gaslight because of the Liberal party is falling in the polls. We are not worried about Harper. BTW - If your argument is strong enough why the typical addendum about polls? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: And thats the problem. We actually both agree that Trudeau should go. I've said that for 2 years now. But that doesn't make Skippy a good choice. Give me better choices then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said: Not sure I am following. When did I argue to take women's rights away? I'm trying to clarify your stand on politicization of the courts. You're arguing to wait on Trump, but based on what? if its OK to politicize the courts for a preferred agenda like getting rid of Roe which effects every potential parent in the US, how can you justify not politicizing going after Trump committing a crime? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: He will do it. The plan is to bring in adjacent laws like the failed attempt at "protecting" pregnant women. PP won't prevent his backbenchers from introducing bills, and you know it. Harper didn't do it and neither will PP. He's not THAT dumb. It's been settled and will not be brought up again other than maybe a few loud MLA's on the far right... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 9 minutes ago, Satchmo said: I think you are really talking about points of view and confusing it with age. I think there is some overlap of those though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, Elias Pettersson said: Harper didn't do it and neither will PP. He's not THAT dumb. It's been settled and will not be brought up again other than maybe a few loud MLA's on the far right... so why is he allowing his backbenchers to try? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Give me better choices then this is what people have been asking the CPC for 10 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, Ricky Ravioli said: I think there is some overlap of those though. Coincidences are everywhere. Especially if you look for them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Salmon Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: He will do it. The plan is to bring in adjacent laws like the failed attempt at "protecting" pregnant women. PP won't prevent his backbenchers from introducing bills, and you know it. If that's what you believe then maybe it's time for JT to enshrine it into law. Actually maybe it was time to do that 9 years ago when he had a majority. Why didn't he I wonder? Because then he couldn't use it as an election issue and whip up fear. And that is more important to Justin than women's rights 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 6 minutes ago, bolt said: The conservatives aren't going to ban abortion and have already stated it's a non issue. We had almost 10 years of Harper and it was left untouched so why the concern now? It's the Liberals bringing this up because they are extremely concerned with their weak poll numbers. Gaslight, Divide and distract so we don't talk of actual issues affecting Canadians. On one hand: All you guys can do is look back and say Harper Harper Harper; he has no bearing on what Pierre will do. On the other hand: Harper was in power for years and he never So....which is it? Is the former government fair game or not? Also, the Liberals are not bringing this up. Those links are ALL CONSERVATIVES making statements about it. Why is that hard to comprehend? They won't do it, except they literally are. Talking about Gaslighting I literally showed you video of an MP bringing a motion not 3 weeks ago, Pierre saying he won't stop MPs, Conservative brass refusing to allow MPs to comment on the Roe V Wade decision and no less than 14 MPs with statements about wanting to restrict abortion access in canada to "protect the kids" with you saying it isn't happening. So who is gaslighting whom? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 26 minutes ago, Bob Long said: he's towing the line nicely tho isn't he? "the democrats" didn't bring the charges, nor stack the jury. The guy committed fraud to cover up a payment. Petey is fine with it because he likes Trump. Con's don't care about the law anymore, they care about their side. C'mon Jimmy, you know this isn't true... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, Spring Salmon said: If that's what you believe then maybe it's time for JT to enshrine it into law. Actually maybe it was time to do that 9 years ago when he had a majority. Why didn't he I wonder? Because then he couldn't use it as an election issue and whip up fear. And that is more important to Justin than women's rights nice try. But thanks for actually revealing your true position. There's no need to enshrine a right women already have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Satchmo said: We are not worried about Harper. BTW - If your argument is strong enough why the typical addendum about polls? If Harper didn't do it neither will Pierre. Did you know you need a majority of MPs to vote and also need the senate approval. Also it would be political suicide. You're just feeding into the Liberal gaslighting to change the subject of everything else. Fear and divide isn't a winning strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, Bob Long said: so why is he allowing his backbenchers to try? Backbenchers aren't even MLA's. They are as the name implies, sitting in the back. They can chirp all they want, but nobody is going to listen... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said: Backbenchers aren't even MLA's. They are as the name implies, sitting in the back. They can chirp all they want, but nobody is going to listen... nope thats not good enough and you know it. It's the method he's allowed, and it's the one he will use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.