|
|
|
Bye Bye Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
- Thread starter Scuba Steve
- Start date
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
"If elected mayor, she said, she would increase bus service during rush hour by 10 percent — at a cost of $15 million. The expense, she explained, would be to pay the extra drivers."
"But Chow offered no specifics about where she planned to find the $15 million for her proposal."
Later on News at 11:30 said she will be raising taxes to pay for the 15 million
Now add more buses to rush hour and create a few more bike lanes and let's see how well Toronto traffic will do
And it starts!!!
People may question my morals for defending ford and might even think I am just someone with lack of intelligence, but I said it before, I prefer Bill Clinton in Power shoving Cigars up to Lewinsky's vagina and balancing the budget than having George Bush in power going to church every Sunday and ****ing not only the USA economy but the rest of the world's as well
"If elected mayor, she said, she would increase bus service during rush hour by 10 percent — at a cost of $15 million. The expense, she explained, would be to pay the extra drivers."
"But Chow offered no specifics about where she planned to find the $15 million for her proposal."
Later on News at 11:30 said she will be raising taxes to pay for the 15 million
Now add more buses to rush hour and create a few more bike lanes and let's see how well Toronto traffic will do
And it starts!!!
People may question my morals for defending ford and might even think I am just someone with lack of intelligence, but I said it before, I prefer Bill Clinton in Power shoving Cigars up to Lewinsky's vagina and balancing the budget than having George Bush in power going to church every Sunday and ****ing not only the USA economy but the rest of the world's as well
Last edited:
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Can someone confirm Olivia Chow has never had a driver's license? Only a person who's never driven can hate cars as much as her. She couldn't care less for people who drive, just cares about how much tax can be collected from them to fund her pet projects.
Can someone confirm Olivia Chow has never had a driver's license? Only a person who's never driven can hate cars as much as her. She couldn't care less for people who drive, just cares about how much tax can be collected from them to fund her pet projects.
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Clinton is not the buffoon that Ford is.. He's an embarrassment to himself, his family and Toronto....
Clinton is not the buffoon that Ford is.. He's an embarrassment to himself, his family and Toronto....
MarcosSantiago
Well-known member
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Do you really think Rob Ford balanced the budget?
That he saved $1B dollars?
Mmmh.... are you smoking the same stuff he is smoking?
Do you really think Rob Ford balanced the budget?
That he saved $1B dollars?
Mmmh.... are you smoking the same stuff he is smoking?
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Clinton, as with many men in lofty positions, was drunk with the power and took advantage of his position. He was otherwise a good President.
Ford..... Well that joke writes itself.
Clinton, as with many men in lofty positions, was drunk with the power and took advantage of his position. He was otherwise a good President.
Ford..... Well that joke writes itself.
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
He gives a perception that his focus is fiscal responsibility, true or not it is another debate.
Others don't sound or look like an idiot like he does but I do not trust them, they are probably as bad or worse than Ford but just hide it better.
Anyways, never mind. Continue on
Irrelevant to my point, It was an example of why people support FordDo you really think Rob Ford balanced the budget?
That he saved $1B dollars?
Mmmh.... are you smoking the same stuff he is smoking?
He gives a perception that his focus is fiscal responsibility, true or not it is another debate.
Others don't sound or look like an idiot like he does but I do not trust them, they are probably as bad or worse than Ford but just hide it better.
Anyways, never mind. Continue on
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
You are contradicting your first sentence with your second one
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
If that's the case then it was a bad example ... the problem is that you will not find a good example for your cause, or at least I'd like to hear of one.
The suggestion that Toronto voters must choose Ford because nobody else can do what he's done for the city (without the side show) is crazy in my opinion and that's exactly what he wants the voters to believe.
If that's the case then it was a bad example ... the problem is that you will not find a good example for your cause, or at least I'd like to hear of one.
The suggestion that Toronto voters must choose Ford because nobody else can do what he's done for the city (without the side show) is crazy in my opinion and that's exactly what he wants the voters to believe.
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Not really. In his case what he did had little bearing on anything other than his marriage. Kennedy is pretty universally considered to have been a great President, and yet he's also said to have had hot and cold running totty going through the White House. Such things used to be expected and the office was held in a high regard to the point that the failings of the man were overlooked, unless they impacted upon the office. Discretion was all that was required.
Not really. In his case what he did had little bearing on anything other than his marriage. Kennedy is pretty universally considered to have been a great President, and yet he's also said to have had hot and cold running totty going through the White House. Such things used to be expected and the office was held in a high regard to the point that the failings of the man were overlooked, unless they impacted upon the office. Discretion was all that was required.
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
Not you specifically, but most people here are crying because he is giving Toronto a bad name and jumping on a high horse about how immoral he is, but yet it is ok for others to do likewise things.
People! Ford does not fit with your preconceived idea of what a Mayor should be and you wouldn't like him irrelevant if the guy was an angel because he is fat and is not your white, tall slick politician ... Period
.. and that is ok but some of the arguments in here are weak sauce!
?? So it is morally ok to cheat on your wife and lie under oath and conduct yourself in a manner that is unbecoming of the President of the United States but not ok to consume illegal substances and lie about it because you are the mayor of Toronto?
Not you specifically, but most people here are crying because he is giving Toronto a bad name and jumping on a high horse about how immoral he is, but yet it is ok for others to do likewise things.
People! Ford does not fit with your preconceived idea of what a Mayor should be and you wouldn't like him irrelevant if the guy was an angel because he is fat and is not your white, tall slick politician ... Period
.. and that is ok but some of the arguments in here are weak sauce!
Last edited:
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
But relevant in that he exposed the city to the possibility of a compromised Chief Magistrate, by putting himself in the position of potentially being blackmailed. Doing the immoral is one thing and you're right, I'm not the sort of person who is likely to re-elect an immoral person. Doing something that is illegal is a different thing altogether. That's doing something that's typically immoral, while also having been determined to be counter to the public good. The person who does that sort of thing, while in office, is the sort of person I want out off office NOW.
*EDIT* I forgot to comment on the "lying under oath" thing. While this is a rather pointy-headed argument and ultimately the findings were counter to this, Clinton wasn't lying under oath by the rules set out by the court, itself. For purposes of those hearings the court defined having sex in the very narrow terms of actually engaging in sexual intercourse. As Clinton and Lewinsky never engaged in sexual intercourse, Clinton was actually not committing perjury. In order to find him to be committing perjury they actually had to alter the definitions, after the fact. This information is readily available, but ignored by his detractors.
But relevant in that he exposed the city to the possibility of a compromised Chief Magistrate, by putting himself in the position of potentially being blackmailed. Doing the immoral is one thing and you're right, I'm not the sort of person who is likely to re-elect an immoral person. Doing something that is illegal is a different thing altogether. That's doing something that's typically immoral, while also having been determined to be counter to the public good. The person who does that sort of thing, while in office, is the sort of person I want out off office NOW.
*EDIT* I forgot to comment on the "lying under oath" thing. While this is a rather pointy-headed argument and ultimately the findings were counter to this, Clinton wasn't lying under oath by the rules set out by the court, itself. For purposes of those hearings the court defined having sex in the very narrow terms of actually engaging in sexual intercourse. As Clinton and Lewinsky never engaged in sexual intercourse, Clinton was actually not committing perjury. In order to find him to be committing perjury they actually had to alter the definitions, after the fact. This information is readily available, but ignored by his detractors.
Last edited:
Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
If your criteria to have him removed from Office NOW is the fact that he did something Illegal then he has yet to be charged of anything. In front of the law -According to your criteria- he should still be in office as he is.
The city was not compromised, he didn't do anything that caused harm to the city in relevance to blackmail. Potentially doing something is not actually doing something, but I will confess, I haven't follow every single issue brought forward on his investigation so if in fact he was blackmailed and he did something that will damage the city in relevance to being blackmailed then i regress
Its funny how you are able to rationalize what Clinton did but yet you can not stand what Ford has done, I find that very interesting.
Saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" is the same as Ford saying "I might have done some crack cocaine during one of my drunken stupors, maybe around a year ago"
Ford implied he may or may have not while Clinton danced around a question and used a technicality to try and excuse a lie, they were both morally wrong when doing it and I personally don't care as long as they take care of the business of governing; In the other hand, you seem morally comfortable with that Clinton did, I think cheating on your wife shows less character than someone smoking crack cocaine but hey, we are all different.
Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, he lied under oath on the Paula Jones case, the fact that the charge failed in the house is of no consequence, he lied under oath, as a matter of fact, this was the real cause why the investigation started.
Just to clarify as i know my tone most times comes out as if i am upset, I am not, this is an enjoyable conversation.
If your criteria to have him removed from Office NOW is the fact that he did something Illegal then he has yet to be charged of anything. In front of the law -According to your criteria- he should still be in office as he is.
The city was not compromised, he didn't do anything that caused harm to the city in relevance to blackmail. Potentially doing something is not actually doing something, but I will confess, I haven't follow every single issue brought forward on his investigation so if in fact he was blackmailed and he did something that will damage the city in relevance to being blackmailed then i regress
Its funny how you are able to rationalize what Clinton did but yet you can not stand what Ford has done, I find that very interesting.
Saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" is the same as Ford saying "I might have done some crack cocaine during one of my drunken stupors, maybe around a year ago"
Ford implied he may or may have not while Clinton danced around a question and used a technicality to try and excuse a lie, they were both morally wrong when doing it and I personally don't care as long as they take care of the business of governing; In the other hand, you seem morally comfortable with that Clinton did, I think cheating on your wife shows less character than someone smoking crack cocaine but hey, we are all different.
Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, he lied under oath on the Paula Jones case, the fact that the charge failed in the house is of no consequence, he lied under oath, as a matter of fact, this was the real cause why the investigation started.
Just to clarify as i know my tone most times comes out as if i am upset, I am not, this is an enjoyable conversation.
Last edited:
|
|
|
|
|