Liberals Scandals

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,059
0
0
59
The Pacific Scandal is my choice. Consider the amounts of money Sir John A. Macdonald was demanding and think of what those sums would be today. At one point Macdonald wanted another $10,000. That was back in the 1870's, holy shit that might be well into the millions nowadays.

Number two would be Adscam. The idea of some party operatives creating a scam to have kickbacks filling Liberal party coffers is repugnant. Some in media have mentioned that Chuck Guite arranged similar things for the Tories during their reign of error. A party's dependence on the good graces of the business sector will only continue to lead to more shit like this.

And we are being set up again by the Tories. In 1984 Mulroney was far too excessive on denouncing John Turner for the patronage appointment deal he made with Pierre Trudeau. Yes the deal was terrible, however Mulroney made himself out he some kind of hero of honesty. When he began doling out patronage he was just as excessive, if not more, than the Liberals.

So with Harper's constant harping on corruption he is making himself out be another hero of honesty. It's a given that if the Tories were to form a government that sooner or later (likely sooner) there would be scandals. And Harper playing the role of holier than thou, even the slightest scandal will seem like a shocker.
 

Maury Beniowski

Blastocyst
Mar 31, 2004
1,869
1
0
In a nice wet pussy!
The "opportunity" to become scandalous, is one of the perks of power that is jealously guarded from those that fail to gain it, with the consequences being brandished against those who blindly proffer it to them in the first place.
 

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
5,215
1,222
113
Upstairs
Claiming politicians are liars is a given. They all are. But we KNOW the Liberals are lying - the Conservatives just want a chance.
 

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
dirtydan said:
Sir John A. Macdonald
Just a little tidbit of info for those who might want to know. Good ol Sir John A was a habitual drunkard. If that's what it takes to become Prime Minister in Canada, then I qualify :eek:
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,059
0
0
59
Discombobbled said:
Just a little tidbit of info for those who might want to know. Good ol Sir John A was a habitual drunkard. If that's what it takes to become Prime Minister in Canada, then I qualify :eek:
Indeed he was. During his speech defending himself and his goverment on the Pacific Scandal he downed quite a number of glasses of "water". The contents was really vodka. No wonder the Senate was intended to be the house of sober second thought! :eek:
 

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
dirtydan said:
The Pacific Scandal is my choice. Consider the amounts of money Sir John A. Macdonald was demanding and think of what those sums would be today. At one point Macdonald wanted another $10,000. That was back in the 1870's, holy shit that might be well into the millions nowadays.
I don't think it would translate into that much money. For instance, in the late 1700s the Chinese payed $1000.00 in 1700s money for one good sea otter pelt. I think $1000.00 back then was alot of money, but not what you are suggesting. :)
 

planetsmurf

papa smurf
Apr 13, 2005
1,109
2
0
Cock Throppled said:
Claiming politicians are liars is a given. They all are. But we KNOW the Liberals are lying - the Conservatives just want a chance.
i totally agree, the fact that the liberals lied to us and gave a millions away to there friends is just a given nowadays. and in this next election i will vote more against the consevatives then for the liberals because at least we have seen the worst from them, probably
 

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
planetsmurf said:
i will vote more against the consevatives then for the liberals
No disrespect intended there Smurf, but what are you saying exactly? I'm confused. :(
 

Sonny

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2004
3,731
220
63
Discombobbled said:
No disrespect intended there Smurf, but what are you saying exactly? I'm confused. :(
Let me jump in here, I think blue-boy is saying... I will vote against Mr. Harper and his evangelistic, hateful, neo-conservative authoritarian bunch of lard-for-brains and for the Liberal devils I know, and who actually seem to be cleaning up their act after that shameful heist by the now-gone Chretien & crew.
 

festealth

Resident Troll
Sep 8, 2005
276
0
0
dirtydan said:
Indeed he was. During his speech defending himself and his goverment on the Pacific Scandal he downed quite a number of glasses of "water". The contents was really vodka. No wonder the Senate was intended to be the house of sober second thought! :eek:
i always thought it was gin....oh well:D
 

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
Sonny said:
Let me jump in here, I think blue-boy is saying... I will vote against Mr. Harper and his evangelistic, hateful, neo-conservative authoritarian bunch of lard-for-brains and for the Liberal devils I know, and who actually seem to be cleaning up their act after that shameful heist by the now-gone Chretien & crew.
Ok, fair enough, thanks Sonny. :)
 
Vancouver Escorts