|
bunnyofdoom posted:My platform for Ottawa Centre. You're already a city councilman, aren't you?
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
flakeloaf posted:You're already a city councilman, aren't you? I could charge people to enter Ottawa Centre and Old Ottawa South! I'll bottle the water from the Rideau, and sell it to raise money for the city! ...These are actual ideas from Councillor Clive Doucette
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Danny LaFever posted:I think the current economic action plan will achieve the goal of complete desolation better then yours. Just watch me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
They're seriously called the "red blacks"? I haven't been keeping up with local Ottawa news, but drat, that's so 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Entropic posted:They're seriously called the "red blacks"? I haven't been keeping up with local Ottawa news, but drat, that's so So is their commercial It never gets old posting that
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:I could charge people to enter Ottawa Centre and Old Ottawa South! I'll bottle the water from the Rideau, and sell it to raise money for the city! Wow. How does Jan Harder not have to consume fatal amounts of alcohol to handle sitting in a room with these people every day?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
They're the RedBlacks for the single lowest effort branding effort ever. Every other Ottawa sports team has red and black in their colour scheme. The Sens, the 67's, the Rough Riders, the Renegades, even the Lynx and the Fat Cats. They literally went "yeah, this is an Ottawa team. They're red and black, like all the rest. Red...black. RedBlack!  "
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Entropic posted:They're seriously called the "red blacks"? I haven't been keeping up with local Ottawa news, but drat, that's so I was pushing for the Ottawa Department of Football. Maybe the Ottawa Bureaucrats. The Ottawa Harper's Government of Sport? How about the Ottawa Maple Leafs? They could draw a crowd from the GTA with some confusion at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
The Ottawa Red Tapirs
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:They're the RedBlacks for the single lowest effort branding effort ever. Every other Ottawa sports team has red and black in their colour scheme. The Sens, the 67's, the Rough Riders, the Renegades, even the Lynx and the Fat Cats. Actually it's even more embarrassing than that. The guy held a huge competition encouraging people to design logos, pick names et al. Then he goes on live TV and Radio and says something along the lines of "Well the name we chose my friend and I made up one might when we were drinking". To paraphrase 'gently caress you guys for trying the name is mine'. Edit: though I heard that on 580 CFRA so whether it is true or not is debatable at best. A tertiary Internet search brought up no such story. Team THEOLOGY fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Probably because most of the names submitted were variations on "Rough Riders" or "Horn Chen is a huge doodyhead".Entropic posted:The Ottawa Red Tapirs This is unironically a good name.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
I want to run in Aylmer on a campaign of Harper-esque lies and misinformation. We'll call it the Aylmer F.U.D.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
Team THEOLOGY posted:Actually it's even more embarrassing than that. The guy held a huge competition encouraging people to design logos, pick names et al. Then he goes on live TV and Radio and says something along the lines of "Well the name we chose my friend and I made up one might when we were drinking". To paraphrase 'gently caress you guys for trying the name is mine'. Man, I wish that was true. Also, I am Going to unironically sing this if I go to a game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
JoelJoel posted:I was pushing for the Ottawa Department of Football. Maybe the Ottawa Bureaucrats. The Ottawa Harper's Government of Sport? How about the Ottawa Maple Leafs? They could draw a crowd from the GTA with some confusion at the very least. See, my idea was to call them the Ottawa M.P.'s since we've already got the upper chamber covered by the NHL. We can have the commons covered by the CFL, and the soccer team could have been called the Ottawa Justice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
Leofish posted:See, my idea was to call them the Ottawa M.P.'s since we've already got the upper chamber covered by the NHL. We can have the commons covered by the CFL, and the soccer team could have been called the Ottawa Justice. The Baseball team would then be the...ummm...the pages?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:The Baseball team would then be the...ummm...the pages? The Ottawa Governors General. Or, wait, that's uOttawa, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
I heard Ottawa Raftsmen being thrown around and I don't see any reason why someone would choose "RedBlacks" over that 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:The Baseball team would then be the...ummm...the pages? The Ottawa Infrastructure because nobody wants to pay for it and it's only operational for two years every six.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
Entropic posted:The Ottawa Red Tapirs flakeloaf posted:This is unironically a good name. Baird's Tapirs  We can have the cute little baby for the Mascot, and everybody will associate with Baird's rabid shouting! Win-Win! The Ottawa Baird's Tapirs
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Leofish posted:The Ottawa Governors General. What the gently caress's a GeeGee? JoelJoel posted:I've got Ottawa-Vanier covered. All I need to do is get the homeless to rock the vote and I'm a lock. Then I can get to business of moving the homeless in my riding to Aylmer. (Yes, Ottawa has a street literally called "White Fathers", but in French so nobody notices) JohnnyCanuck fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
JoelJoel posted:Canadian news reporting at it's finest. Terrence Corocran is the worst. He's Ezra Lavant with a shred of credibility left.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Kintarooooo posted:We need a kickstarter, 250 party members to form an eligible party, at least 1 candidate, 1000$ per candidate deposit, and (the hard part) 100 electors per riding to support your candidacy. Getting 100 electors is super easy. Pirate Party did it after all. edit: Ran into them in KW when they were canvassing. Literally went to university students to get them to sign up. It's a real easy place to get them for a comedy party as well. MatchaZed fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
lonelywurm posted:
This is amazing and definitely hasn't gotten enough love. Well done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Good news from the Red Chamber for once (or UNELECTED STOOGES SUBVERTING THE WILL OF PARLIAMENT  , your choice.):The Twitter Press Gallery is reporting that the Senate has amended the Tory union disclosure bill C-377 and sent it back to the House. Senator Segal, no friend of the bill, got enough of his fellow Tories to vote yes on his amendments to narrow the bill's requirements - the Globe has details here if you haven't hit your paywall limit this month yet. tl;dr posted:The bill from Conservative MP Russ Hiebert aimed to force unions to disclose all payments made by unions to outside groups or individuals worth $5,000 or more. The bill also sought to force unions to disclose the names and salaries of all employees who are paid more than $100,000. That second reporting threshhold may sound familiar to you! (it certainly will to Brent Rathgeber). Dallan Invictus fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:For those of you not mooting running in 2015, the Twitter Press Gallery is reporting that the Senate has amended the Tory union disclosure bill C-377 and sent it back to the House. Senator Segal, no friend of the bill, got enough of his fellow Tories to vote yes on his amendments to narrow the bill's requirements - the Globe has details here if you haven't hit your paywall limit this month yet. This is exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about when I said the Senate is still worth keeping, by the way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
From Senator Segal's comments:quote:As a Conservative, I am first a "decentralist" who respects provincial autonomy within Confederation. Bill C-377 would subject unions to federal authority, when their activities clearly fall under provincial jurisdiction. One of the frustrating things about Stephen Harper is the way he insists on passing legislation that he must know will be struck down the courts. Huge parts of his law and order agenda are blatantly unconstitutional and are slowly being dismantled by the courts. Passing and then annulling these laws is a massively expensive and wasteful process. Normally the government is not supposed to pass bills that it already anticipates will be struck down immediately. You'd think fiscal conservatives would be more concerned about this example of government waste but of course Harper is pushing these bills primarily because crime is a 'winning issue' for the Conservatives. Its interesting to see a Conservative Senator actually calling Harper out on the fact that his posturing about getting tough on the unions is actually just superficial grandstanding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Helsing posted:From Senator Segal's comments: Agree 100%. I think he's also playing the long term game of discrediting the Charter, as that's where most of these new laws will lose. It's a way of continuing to keep the anti-Trudeau base mobilized, even though the Charter is 30 YEARS OLD GIVE IT UP ALREADY YOU CUNTS 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
OK, my new plan for the Senate is to just have a public trial where we push them off of the cliff on Parliament Hill any time one of them is obviously corrupt and leaching of off taxpayers. That way we can keep the appointed senate, while still giving the people a voice via judicious use of mob justice. E: VVVVI guess we can also periodically burn it down every time they neuter an important bill too. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:This is exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about when I said the Senate is still worth keeping, by the way. If you're going to be making the utilitarian argument, you need to own the bad as well as the good. The Senate is also responsible for killing the climate change accountability act, which, by itself, is a Much Bigger Deal than union disclosure regulations, and probably than every single other thing the Senate has done in the last decade combined. Cordyceps Headache posted:OK, my new plan for the Senate is to just have a public trial where we push them off of the cliff on Parliament Hill any time one of them is obviously corrupt and leaching of off taxpayers. That way we can keep the appointed senate, while still giving the people a voice via judicious use of mob justice. I've run the idea of installing a guillotine in the Senate past Senior New Democrats, found no uptake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
PK loving SUBBAN posted:Agree 100%. I think he's also playing the long term game of discrediting the Charter, as that's where most of these new laws will lose. It's a way of continuing to keep the anti-Trudeau base mobilized, even though the Charter is 30 YEARS OLD GIVE IT UP ALREADY YOU CUNTS "Listen, only certain people are allowed rights and freedoms. We only have so many, so we can't just go giving them away willy nilly! Every time you give rights to someone, you have to take them away from someone else. That's how rights work! And really, since some people had fewer rights to begin with, wouldn't giving them rights and then taking them away be more cruel than never giving rights to them in the first place? If you give a child a candy and then take it from him, he will be more hurt than if you never gave him candy at all. Trudeau should have known this."
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Helsing posted:From Senator Segal's comments: What's worrying is how these habits get replicated in provincial legislators. Look at McGuinty proroguing in Ontario, or the passing of loi 78 in Quebec. It's possible that this is the first time I've noticed this trend, and there are plenty of other past examples, but it should be a concern.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:If you're going to be making the utilitarian argument, you need to own the bad as well as the good. The Senate is also responsible for killing the climate change accountability act, which, by itself, is a Much Bigger Deal than union disclosure regulations, and probably than every single other thing the Senate has done in the last decade combined. If your standard for "Should this legislative body be eliminated?" is because sometimes it does lovely things, we wouldn't have a Parliament at all. The Senate is still a political body and is currently controlled by Conservatives; of course they're going to play politics with the stuff they get. In fact, the Senate is a great place to kill bills you don't want to have pass, but also don't want to vote against in the House. The point here is simply that sometimes flawed bills leave the House, and that the Senate is a great place to clean them up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
My standard is "is this legislative body democratic and accountable?" You're the one who implied that the Senate should be kept around because it does good things sometimes, but the balance of the Senate's activity is very, very deep in the red column, and by that standard it should be abolished.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:My standard is "is this legislative body democratic and accountable?" You're the one who implied that the Senate should be kept around because it does good things sometimes, but the balance of the Senate's activity is very, very deep in the red column, and by that standard it should be abolished. Hey, maybe if you squint and concentrate really hard, you can see how the first sentence of this post completely, 100% contradicts the second? To clarify, you said, "The Senate is bad because it once killed a bill I like". I said, the House kills lots of bills all the loving time, so what? Now you're saying the standard is "democratic and accountable", which is great and something I would 100% endorse... except it has nothing at all to do with killing bills or doing a good job digesting legislation. Franks Happy Place fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
Helsing posted:From Senator Segal's comments: Aside from not having a knee-jerk distaste for unions, Segal also supports a Guaranteed Annual Income. It's strangely refreshing to see someone go against the dominant conservative political ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Helsing posted:One of the frustrating things about Stephen Harper is the way he insists on passing legislation that he must know will be struck down the courts. Huge parts of his law and order agenda are blatantly unconstitutional and are slowly being dismantled by the courts. Passing and then annulling these laws is a massively expensive and wasteful process.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:Hey, maybe if you squint and concentrate really hard, you can see how the first sentence of this post completely, 100% contradicts the second? No, you said, first, "This is exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about when I said the Senate is still worth keeping, by the way", advancing the utilitarian argument that the Senate is good because it sometimes does good things. I disagree that the Senate doing good things is enough to justify it, as an unelected and unaccountable chamber, but am positing that even if it were, the Senate is responsible for more bad things, of greater magnitude, than good things. I don't think that, in a democracy, the quality of the legislative output of a chamber is in any way related to its legitimacy. I was trying, perhaps clumsily, to say the Senate was bad even by the standard which you had advanced, without endorsing that standard. And, obviously, you don't endorse the "democratic and accountable" standard, because you like the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:Now you're saying the standard is "democratic and accountable", which is great and something I would 100% endorse... except it has nothing at all to do with killing bills or doing a good job digesting legislation. That's pretty much always been the standard of people who object to the Senate since day one don't pretend like it's is the first time you've heard the objection that submitting to rule by unelected patricians is ridiculous in the 21st century, it's just also worth bringing up that our Senate is massively corrupt and kills important, democratically mandated legislation like the climate change and transgender rights bills.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:And, obviously, you don't endorse the "democratic and accountable" standard, because you like the Senate. I like that we have two legislative bodies because one is full of gigantic manchildren baboons that don't know poo poo about poo poo and let PMO micromanage the nation to a terrifying degree, yes. However, pretending like that's an endorsement of the current Senate when I've been on the record multiple goddamned times in this very thread saying I'd prefer they were elected on a counter-cyclical basis and were subject to the same ethics rules as the House, though, is a wee bit of a straw man. A week ago or so, some people asked me to list off things the Senate did that were good, so I took the opportunity to say "This is what I was talking about", because today's events are basically the best-case scenario for demonstrating the practical use of a chamber of Sober Second Thought. That's pretty simple, no? DynamicSloth posted:That's pretty much always been the standard of people who object to the Senate since day one don't pretend like it's is the first time you've heard the objection that submitting to rule by unelected patricians is ridiculous in the 21st century, it's just also worth bringing up that our Senate is massively corrupt and kills important, democratically mandated legislation like the climate change and transgender rights bills. Well the Supreme Court is unelected too, and the House is just as corrupt as the Senate, so we'd better abolish those as well. All Praise Emperor Steve I, First of His Name, King of the Calgarians and the Northmen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
Fine-able Offense posted:Well the Supreme Court is unelected too, and the House is just as corrupt as the Senate, so we'd better abolish those as well. All Praise Emperor Steve I, First of His Name, King of the Calgarians and the Northmen. The Supreme Court doesn't legislate and only strikes down laws because they are superseded by other laws passed by democratically elected representatives. The conspicuously corrupt in the House like Bev Oda don't seek re-election. In the Senate if your caught out on massive corruption (or arrested for domestic violence) you just quit pretending you're doing any work, chill as an independent and hold onto that seat until they pry it from your cold dead hands. Fine-able Offense posted:However, pretending like that's an endorsement of the current Senate when I've been on the record multiple goddamned times in this very thread saying I'd prefer they were elected on a counter-cyclical basis and were subject to the same ethics rules as the House, though, is a wee bit of a straw man. Senatus delenda est. DynamicSloth fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:41
|
|