Thursday, April 26, 2007

(video) Liberals on Environment: Lots of Tricks, No Action

Watch how David McQuinty uses a bag full of tricks to dodge the following question:

Peter van Dusen:
Is it fair to hold the Conservative government to a set of targets that the previous Liberal government didn't try to reach for ten years?

Enjoy!



6 comments:

Peter Rempel said...

Hey Erik, why did you shut down comments on that other thread?

Erik Abbink said...

Because I get tired of Blogging Tories trolling my site.

Peter Rempel said...

Not sure how I was trolling. You were the one using the words "stupid" and "crap."

You usually this sensitive?

Erik Abbink said...

Hey, you started it by saying my analogy stinks where I've proven the analogy goes;

Small improvements can lead to far bigger pollutions.

Then you say the same thing I say in different wording ("Companies can't expand unless they devise a way to limit the total emissions.), , calling it a contradiction.

For once go with your own wisdom: "I realize that I'm wasting my time here but oh well."

Move on (or be deleted).

Peter Rempel said...

Be deleted? Why? Is commenting on this blog reserved only for people that agree with you? What are you afraid of?

We didn't write the same things. I take it English is not your first language.

Have you ever met Werner Patels? You know seem to have popped out of the same pea pod.

Erik Abbink said...

Peter, I have no problem with visitors who have a different opinion, but this blog has no place for people who:

- ignoring facts
- distort what I say to make a cheap political point
- refuse to apologize for doing so.

You're probably too ignorant too see this, but with the few posts you've made on my blog, you've already qualified for all three.

There are enough blogs out there that will argue with the twisted way of neo-con reasoning, just not me.

Good for Werner Patels to have come to the same conclusion.

NB: We did talk about the same things. They are a different way of explaining intensity targets, only yours has left out "the fact" that major expansion of an industry will result in more pollution; hence twisted reasoning. GFY, PR.