Thursday 17 March 2016

Comparing the difference from 1988 to today.

Sorry folks, I know Donald Trump is running for the Republicans but I can't support him. He's too much of an extreme.

Okay. So we know all about Trudeau and the State Dinner he and the President had. Looks like they (and the media ) all enjoyed it. But let's look at the facts. When Mulroney went to Washington for a summit meeting which included a State Dinner with Ronald Reagan he was criticized on all ends.

 None of the favorable media attention that Trudeau got over this past week was with Mulroney when he went to Washington in 1988.  Harper never got it either when he went to visit Bush in June or July of 2006. What he got was a reference from Bush who called him his good friend "Steve" and what did CTV say to that? Huh. He called him Steve. Even his wife doesn't call him that. Also, Look at the way he shakes hands with his son Benjamin? How's that for coverage? Remember this when someone like Rona Ambrose visits Washington.
 Anyways, let's remember in 1988 this is when we were dealing with things like free trade with the U.S. Some headlines which we read "Free trade deal will destroy us Kaplan warns." That was Robert Kaplan a liberal MP at the time speaking in Toronto and of course was exploited by the Star. The first paragraph reads--"Everything Canada holds dear will be destroyed under a free trade deal with the United States, the country's former solicitor-general warns." Written in 1988, which of course today, that's ridiculous because it never happened. We still have everything we hold dear to us like a free healthcare system, as well as business, and it thriving today because of free trade. But hey, as long as I can get a few people to believe it, why not say it. Scaring people into voting liberal is a good idea. (Get power at all costs and keep power at all costs).
 Further in the written column he says this--"under free trade, Canadian governments give up the right to subsidize industry, but subsidies are what built our country."
 "It would never have held together without government subsidized railroads, airlines, communication networks and pipelines he said."
 In other words it was necessary to fund Air Canada which almost went bankrupt. The railroad all around this Country, Subsidized actually means Government money so businesses can survive and thrive eventually like Air Canada. It's possible early on that we would have been broken up as a nation without subsidizing. But to say we can't continue to be a free sovereign nation is not smart.
 He continues to say--"The Americans believe they are No. 1...They think what has to change is other countries," Kaplan said.
 Yes they think they are number 1, but Canada never gave up an ounce of freedom in the Free Trade Agreement.
 What to remember about this is politicians will say anything to get elected, to keep power, and tell you that a free trade agreement that was signed close to 30 years ago and is still in effect did not take away our sovereignty. We're still a sovereign Country, and we're still able to subsidize our own business, and business is good, There's nothing to worry about. Some other headlines in the Star read this,
"Mulroney slammed by U.S. environmentalists for Acid Rain." Some points to make about this line is that Richard Agers of the "National Clean Air Coalition" who criticized the PM was actually Canadian. So how did a Canadian become a spokesperson of a U.S. Environmental group. Maybe they made this up. Also remember, Mulroney received an award for his work on acid rain. For cleaning it up in conjunction with the United States government. Was it mentioned anywhere in the left wing newspaper, I doubt it.
 Also, in it's Editorial that week, the Star slams Mulroney for getting nothing on acid rain. Didn't he get an award? In it the Editorial Board of the Toronto Star says his chummy relationship with Reagan accomplished nothing. Near the beginning of the clip, they try to scare us by saying--"Meanwhile, the deadly combination of pollutants continues to endanger or forests, lakes, wildlife, homes and even our health." So acid rain is bad for us and we're going to die from it. Who do you know has died from a disease in the environment. But also in the same sentence the Board says we've seen political theatre and nothing more than picture opportunities for two consummate actors. (that's mulroney and reagan).

So question. What was that picture thing with Trudeau and Obama all about?

To continue, "they say that Mulroney must accept the blame." That may be fine by me and their obvious liberal slant because Mulroney did clean up on Acid Rain in the Great Lakes region and he got an award for it. As PM, he has an excellent record on the environment because cared about it, just like every voter like myself who voted Conservative.

I will dare say he cares a lot more, and did a lot more for what's around us then David Suzuki  and the Star Editorial Board did. Let me ask them a question.

Who cuts the lawn and prunes the flowers at One Yonge Street?

Here's some other headlines:
 "Maple trees and the maple syrup industry could be extinct within the next 10 years." Toronto Star. April 27, 1988. That's not to smart because trees live a lot longer then any of us and when one tree dies or is cut down, you plant another one.
Another thing David Kaplan said is--"Americans are so proud to defeat attempts to legislate equal rights to women." I think his idea was that Canada was doing much more for the rights of women to pursue opportunity. He may be right, but again it's a line he's feeding. Look at Hilary Clinton running for president for the second time. Also Barak Obama is the first black President and has done an excellent job too.  He and former Prime Minister Stephen Harper got along well, and nobody mentions that. These two can get along even today, like drink coffee and tea at a Tim Hortons or Starbucks. Anyways, I think the Americans are doing fine when it comes to opportunity for women. They're not proud to destroy it. Example/ Hilary Clinton.
But they will say anything to get power.

Pipelines are subsidized by Government.

More headlines:over man "Metro Officer convicted after accident in Whitby," "Peel policeman faces tribunal locked up by mistake" Some things do not change, like the continual bashing by the star of the Police. And you may already know they do this because of the liberals' soft on crime approach. Since when do criminals deserve rights? Ask some questions. Who here questions the integrity of the Police? further, Do the Police discriminate against any person of ethnic origin? Can anyone join the Police Force or do they discriminate against a certain group? The answer is No. When was a time when you heard the Toronto Star refer to the Police as being "Toronto's finest" the best, Never. But wait for the day when they consider the criminal as being something better. That will take the cake. Quickly, If someone broke into your house, who would you call? Police, Ghostbusters, A Toronto Star Reporter.
  One thing's for sure, anyone who works at One Yonge Street is no expert on Police matters so don't call them. 
Let's be real about what's going on. I'm not calling the Star because they're not going to protect me. Continue to support the Police.

Take care, Have a good day.


 

No comments:

Post a Comment