|
It has reached parity with Toronto drivers.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
Nice to see a public sector union doing something useful with their dues for a change.quote:Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne and two of her senior ministers are alleged to have committed “misfeasance in public office” when they sold off Hydro One shares and used the public sale to enrich the Liberal Party, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
If self driving cars ever become a thing it's going to make getting around by bike so much more enjoyable. Until one confuses me for a cloud and kills me. Still probably safer than biking around entitled dickhead car commuters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
 "If the Youth Minister refuses to do his job, we think he should fire himself" Young New Democrats to PM: fire the youth minister
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Do you guys remember the insanity of the young liberals, young Socreds in bc
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
klockwerk posted:
quote:This past week alone, the Prime Minister doubled-down on handing out criminal records to young people for marijuana possession, he backtracked on fixing our electoral system, and he failed to put forward a plan to address precarious work. This is actually a pretty reasonable complaint Trudeau has admitted to smoking weed after becoming an MP. quote:“We had a few good friends over for a dinner party, our kids were at their grandmother’s for the night, and one of our friends lit a joint and passed it around. I had a puff,” Trudeau said. This is another one of those Trudeauisms -- a lot like when he released a statement about being in "deep mourning" over Castro's death but then skipped the funeral -- that doesn't have a lot of political significance but which really reflects poorly on the man's character. I can easily understand somebody who smoked weed in college deciding later in life that it's bad and changing their position on it. It's a dumb reversal but these things happen. But the idea that somebody who in the recent past while already an elected official was happy to get high while continuing to advocate that the police "enforce the law" is loving atrocious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
But does every party have such a pathetic, chinless excuse for a man running for its leadership? Oh look he called for the incarceration of his party's interim leader as well: https://twitter.com/BradTrostCPC/status/806247094398976000
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
quote:
Posting a photo of an emoji on your crotch = you are a horrible misogynist and you don't care about missing and murdered indigenous women, who is entirely unfit for any public office. Um, okay?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Helsing posted:This is another one of those Trudeauisms -- a lot like when he released a statement about being in "deep mourning" over Castro's death but then skipped the funeral -- that doesn't have a lot of political significance but which really reflects poorly on the man's character. I can easily understand somebody who smoked weed in college deciding later in life that it's bad and changing their position on it. It's a dumb reversal but these things happen. But the idea that somebody who in the recent past while already an elected official was happy to get high while continuing to advocate that the police "enforce the law" is loving atrocious. This exactly. The proper move would be to actually pass some legalization legalisation. Instead, we are going to have more empty "consultations" while big business lines up for lobbying. I voted for Trudeau, mostly as part of the "anybody but Harper" move, and to say I have been unimpressed with his administration has been an understatement. His ministers especially have been an embarrassment. Maryam Monsef's "math is hard" stunt sums it up for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Posting a photo of an emoji on your crotch = you are a horrible misogynist and you don't care about missing and murdered indigenous women, who is entirely unfit for any public office. Emojis can't consent. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Emojis can't consent. Is this seriously all the picture was. I heard his apology on the radio and it does not match what this picture is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:But does every party have such a pathetic, chinless excuse for a man running for its leadership? That's not how hashtags work. He's replying to Ambrose and tagging the #lockherup conversation not implying she should be locked up. I understand the confusion though, social media is awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Is this peak outrage? Can we finally stop being so loving thin skinned and humorless as a society?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
We named a loving building after Jim flaherty That fat worthless gently caress
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
May that building get sold off to a private entity at a loss and then collapse into a smoldering heap a few months later. It's the only worthy fate of a building named after Flaherty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Risky Bisquick posted:That's not how hashtags work. He's replying to Ambrose and tagging the #lockherup conversation not implying she should be locked up. I understand the confusion though, social media is awful. Seems ambiguous to me, I'll wait for Brad to explain precisely which women he intends to imprison in his dungeon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:loving lol at the Alberta Party who apparently wants to unite with the PCs though. Why did you even want to exist at all, and now your plan is to tie yourself down on a sinking ship? I remember reading a breakdown of the various party platforms, in the lead up to the last provincial election, and AB Party was pretty much halfway between the NDP and the PCs positions on most things. Like, the writing's on the wall that the PC party is going the way of the dodo, it's just a matter of whether we end up in a two-party system in Alberta. Trying to cobble together some sort of cohesive centrist 3rd party isn't the worst thing that could happen, IMHO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Laminar posted:Is this seriously all the picture was. I heard his apology on the radio and it does not match what this picture is. Yeah according to CBC. What did you think it was?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Do they get snow like Winnipeg? Had to shovel a road in and out of a parking lot for my car last night twice, I'm just staying in tonight, gg winter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Yeah according to CBC. What did you think it was? Something worth the time and effort to get mad over I guess?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Remember when half this thread had a fit over that poll showing a large majority of Canadians think that "political correctness has gone too far" and that people are "overly sensitive"? This is like exhibit A in how for once the average Canadian has a way better handle on things than a large segment of the posters here apparently do. If you're wondering why he resigned, it's because the reaction to this photo genuinely seems to have compromised his ability to work that file. People in positions of real influence over his work were outraged: quote:AFN chief facing resignation calls over ‘sick’ naked legs photo with emoji by crotch Seriously, what the gently caress? Any playful allusion to sex coming from a man now means that they only think of women as sexual objects to be used for their selfish pleasure? I get that there are real reasons to be outraged over patriarchal and hetero-normative cultural practices but this drifts well over the line into outright anti-sex prudery. And don't kid yourself into thinking this doesn't have real consquences by driving people away from left-wing or progressive causes when we become puritanical scolds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Risky Bisquick posted:That's not how hashtags work. He's replying to Ambrose and tagging the #lockherup conversation not implying she should be locked up. I understand the confusion though, social media is awful. Helsing posted:I get that there are real reasons to be outraged over patriarchal and hetero-normative cultural practices but this drifts well over the line into outright anti-sex prudery. And don't kid yourself into thinking this doesn't have real consquences by driving people away from left-wing or progressive causes when we become puritanical scolds. But the cat's out of the bag. Things like this will keep happening and people will keep denying there's a problem because the claim that it's blown out of proportion and inconsequential fits the "march of progress" narrative much more nicely. Or, they just don't see censorship and shaming like this as a problem. I don't know which is worse. unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Dec 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Have you seen some of the poo poo I've been probated for? You're surprised a bunch of delicate snowflakes get triggered so easily?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/fabulavancouver/status/806526035365924867 Haha I loving love this idea. Anything to wage a war on homeowners
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Speaking of easily triggered, I have a panic attack every time I see the phrase "tweet storm"
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Helsing posted:trivialized Indigenous women I seriously do not understand how that photo is doing that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Yeah according to CBC. What did you think it was? It sounded to me like it was a full naked picture with like the emoji covering his junk with like an face implying oral with a gross message on it or something. This was obviously stupid as heck to send out, but I"m not sure all this drama and the teary apology is justified.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I seriously do not understand how that photo is doing that. This man implied that a woman might put her lips close to his genitals. Entertaining such deviant thoughts makes it clear he thinks of women as nothing but objects and he's clearly a high-risk potential sex offender.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I seriously do not understand how that photo is doing that. It is because you don't have a weird combination of prudishness, shrill contempt for normal human sexual interaction and what appears to be a incongruous belief in anti-miscegenation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Helsing posted:This man implied that a woman might put her lips close to his genitals. Entertaining such deviant thoughts makes it clear he thinks of women as nothing but objects and he's clearly a high-risk potential sex offender. But the MMIW inquiry isn't about finding the women or anything like that. It's about root causes and one of those root causes could potentially be men pushing the sexual boundaries of what's acceptable in social media space and/or physical space. There's nothing illegal about the picture but certainly not something you want to see from a MAN who's working in an official capacity to discover the root causes of sexual abuse against indigenous women. This is what I imagine rattles around inside the mind of the UofT students who are probably at the heart of this outrage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
People have a right to their own line of whatever's considered offensive and most definitely there should be some mostly held common lines that can cost people their employment when crossed. In the cases where it's more vague I think it should err on the side of whoever is potentially victimized, but this particular case seems pretty extreme to me. I think the main problem is societal perceptions haven't quite caught up to the internet age yet, and until it has people will lose their jobs quickly and easily over poo poo that, in some cases they maybe should not? TheKingofSprings fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Dec 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
It's a tasteless photo from someone in a privileged position. Yeah, your average SA user doesn't give a poo poo nor would most random people on the street. It doesn't make it right. Any lower and you have this dudes bulge with the emoticon to kiss it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:People have a right to their own line of whatever's considered offensive and most definitely there should be some mostly held common lines that can cost people their employment when crossed. I agree. Outrage is so instantaneous now, that the institutional urge to quash any outrage before it can groundswell means you get precipitous reactions before people even really think about what an appropriate response should be. Sometimes it may be appropriate for somebody to lose their job, sometimes other consequences are appropriate as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:It's a tasteless photo from someone in a privileged position. Yeah, your average SA user doesn't give a poo poo nor would most random people on the street. It doesn't make it right. Any lower and you have this dudes bulge with the emoticon to kiss it. Why is an allusions to oral sex from a married man on his private instagram account tasteless?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:It's a tasteless photo from someone in a privileged position. Yeah, your average SA user doesn't give a poo poo nor would most random people on the street. It doesn't make it right. Any lower and you have this dudes bulge with the emoticon to kiss it. Considering the portfolio he held it could be argued it undermines his position and he probably should, at the very least not be in charge of that file any longer. Outright losing his position over it is a different matter to me. E: I guess the question I have right now is, if he was that careless to post such a tasteless photo without consideration of the consequences, can his competency for his job be put into reasonable doubt?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Why is an allusions to oral sex from a married man on his private instagram account tasteless? Why does that matter? It's a tasteless act to put online to an audience. You want to see your buddies implying their wives are coming to suck some cock?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
I don't know if other people are following this, but the Nova Scotia Liberals pulled back after closing schools for a single day as party of the ongoing spat between them and the teachers union. The rumours are that there was a mini party revolt about it. Enough so that they actually made a statement on it: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/stephen-mcneil-teacher-union-contract-dissent-1.3883676 So now the Liberal's big ploy to put pressure on the teachers has failed, and I think they are scrambling for a Plan B. Considering the teacher's union negotiators have been pretty terrible as well, I think this is heading into trainwreck territory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Why does that matter? It's a tasteless act to put online to an audience. You want to see your buddies implying their wives are coming to suck some cock? What actually makes this tasteless? It's the 21st century. Our woke feminist prime minister once did a strip tease for charity. Are we supposed to pretend that our politicians don't have sex? Literally everyone else in society seems to be oversharing information about their sexuality these days, sex oozes from every outlet of pop culture, the sex lives of famous people are openly discussed and celebrated. Why is it wrong for somebody in a position of public influence to dare imply that he's engaged in the most vanilla sex act conceivable? And to answer your question directly no, it would not bother me in the slightest if someone I knew made a reference or even a joke to their sex lives, and I'm quite glad I live in a cultural context where those things can be discussed openly. The only thing that might bother me would be if I got the impression that one partner was sharing more information than the other partner was comfortable with, but literally no one appears to have raised this objection and there's no evidence his wife gave a poo poo. This outrage seems to stem entirely from the fact that he dared to make an allusion to an extremely unremarkable expression of intimacy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Considering the portfolio he held it could be argued it undermines his position and he probably should, at the very least not be in charge of that file any longer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
Helsing posted:What actually makes this tasteless? It's the 21st century. Our woke feminist prime minister once did a strip tease for charity. Are we supposed to pretend that our politicians don't have sex? Literally everyone else in society seems to be oversharing information about their sexuality these days, sex oozes from every outlet of pop culture, the sex lives of famous people are openly discussed and celebrated. Why is it wrong for somebody in a position of public influence to dare imply that he's engaged in the most vanilla sex act conceivable? There's a time and place for things. And in the public eye is not one of those places. Maybe you're someone who doesn't care. You make out with your partner wherever you want, you squeeze their tits or dick - it's all good, it's the 21st century. You post a picture of your dick standing up in your underwear on Facebook, "it's time for sucking!". Hell yah, just a basic thing, right guys? No, it's tasteless. Public displays of overaffection are tacky.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 19:27
|
|