Tuesday, October 25, 2005

NEW BRUNSWICK IS ON FIRE???????

fire

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is Bernard Lord's response? Play politics to entice away NDP MLA and then call a snap by-election. It is all about him. Saint Johners and NBers in general can go to hell. He thinks he can win by-election through his candidate flaunting shapely legs, blond hair and toothy smile. It shows shallowness and it shows how much Bernard Lord cares for New Brunswick and Saint Johners in particular.

Boo Hoo Hooten said...

Well the effects must be reaching them because here in Saint John I just had lunch at Market Square and Mayor McFarlen was sitting ALONE under the stairs having lunch while his Liberal adviser Anthony was having lunch in Brunswick Square among the people which I must admit is nice to see.

Also I was told Mayor Mcfarlan was BOO'D and heckled at The Lord BeaverBrook Arena the other night so I think the beast is awakening.

Mr.Lord,Mr.McFarlan,Mrs.Hooten the truth shall set you free (FROM OFFICE THAT IS!!)

Anonymous said...

Hey you should of put shawn in the picture with a pitchfork with Mckenna looking over him now that would have been a good picture. How come you never blast opposition on there stance of issues Charles? or a good story about what government has done?? never ever do you do that always a biggot to the Lord gov.

Anonymous said...

Margaret-Ann Blaney complains that there were racial slurs thrown at Councillor Chang. I suppose it is only Lord Government's prerogative to be racist. Lord and gange are the leaders in that.

Boo,Hoo,Hooten said...

How come Mrs. Blaney didn't say anything when the Telegraph Journal put her face on the front page of the Paper with T J burkes saying here is the prettiest couple in politics. Does that mean the Telegraph Journal was saying T J Burke was a sissy? Because they used the word pretty?
I don't think so.
And how did she think the people of New Brunswick would accept this sort of absolute nonsense, as it had nothing whatsoever to do with politics.

Please Mrs. Blaney if your going to come out and make a rare comment at least make it about something you might have done for the people of New Brunswick instead of taking shots in empty air to try and deflect the just due negative attention your party buddies rightfully deserve as your party can only fling it out for so long before it starts coming back to the source it all started from to begin with.

I don't think political name calling that by the way has been happening for at least 100 years or more can be titled racial slurs at your party's convenience and if so then your Leader owes one hell of a lot of apologies

Eartotheground said...

Charles i had to start this blog to let people know about all spots of government, I will discuss advertising with you tonight is this okay?


http://eartothegroundinfredericton.blogspot.com/

Charles LeBlanc said...

quote - I will discuss advertising with you tonight is this okay????

You are too funny but I'll play along....bring your wallet!!!!!....lol

Anonymous said...

New Brunswick is a great place to live. It is too bad that we have a racist government which is givining New Brunswick a bad name. Sooner we get rid of this plague better it is. It is about time that a cure is found for the plague called Lord government.

Anonymous said...

Taking money for advertising.
Dont forget that your a welfare bum. That is welfare fraud

That's what I said,Didn't you hear?? said...

I see the comedy team is still here!
Don't worry chuck the rest of us caught the joke but you know M.T.H.G and his whitty humor ha,ha.

jwmcq said...

That's not nice using terms like welfare bum because corporations like the Irving's, Molson, numerous call centres, are the largest welfare bums of all in this province, and they just might be offended. Call it subsidies, call it whatever you want, but it is still just corporate welfare.

The big difference is that genuine welfare recipient's have no choice, they need assistancxe in order to survive, but the corporate welfare bums can afford to pay their own way, they just don't feel they should have to. Especially when they have politicians who are busy feathering their corporate nests, so that when the taxpayer's finally catch on and kick their asses to the curb, they will have a nice soft place to land.

Anonymous said...

jwmcq, very good analysis. Then we have welfare bums like Bernard Lord. Why are we spending hundreds of thousands of dollars annually on this bum? What has he done other than creating problems for the people of this province and looking after himself. The current Lord government is bunch of harmful bums.

Spinks said...

9:13pm - since you asked the question, I'll take a stab at answering it. We're spending it because the people of NB voted him in. As I've said many times, like it or not that's democracy. June 2007, give or take a year, he can be turfed. You don't have to like it but short of a non-confidance vote in the legislature or a socialist revolution that's not going to change.

Anonymous said...

In other words we are paying for our own foolishness for voting him in. That is the failing of democracy. There should be a way to turf out incompetents like Lord.

Spinks said...

I guess you could look at it that way. Winston Churchill said it best "Democracy is the worst form of government in the wrold...except all the others." I'll take what we have with civil voting procedures but that's me.

Anonymous said...

Don't wait two more years; let him know we are not going to take his arogance and he does not need another MLA. Give Hooten the Lord Booten.

Anonymous said...

Spinks, we can have democracy and still get rid of this incompetent Lord. It is called recall legislation. They have it in B.C and they have it in U.S. To avoid future disasters like Lord we should get legislation in place.

Spinks said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Spinks said...

Kind of true, but at this point we don't have recall legislation so that can't happen for now.

Anonymous said...

At least think of future. We cannot afford another Bernard Lord. There is a need for recall legislation or impeachment.

Spinks said...

I don't have a big problem with recall as long as the criteria is strong. There was talk a few years ago of 3% of the population being able to trigger a recall. If that were the case theoretically you could be into endless elections as special interest groups seek to impose their will by generating chaos. I appreciate that some don't like Lord, heck you'll never get any politician supported by probably any more than 60% of the voters and even that would be extremely high, but he hasn't done anything that truly can't wait until the next election. Recall, in my mind, would be used if for example, they promised during an election a 10% tax cut and raised taxes instead by 10% or high ranking officials get nailed for criminal charges. I wouldn't want to see it used because those who affiliate with other parties disagree with a government's policies. That's what an election is for. IMHO.

Anonymous said...

What about below 30% ratings? A moron like Lord do manage to get into office and it is important to remove him/her from office. Nixon had to resign because of pressure and impeachment hearings. If American did not have that recourse then they would have had to put up with Nixon full term. Nixon at least was a leader who had some vision. What has Lord got? Nothing.

Spinks said...

As I said I can appreciate there are folks like yourself who can't stand Lord and can't wait to get him out. But to compare Lord to the Watergate Scandal is a grasp at best. I wouldn't mind having some recall legislation with restrictions in place but even if it were in place, as I said Lord has done nothing to necessitate such an event anyway. An election a la democracy will ensure the will of the people. If the power were there for the Left to remove Lord given this current environment then the same powere would exist for the Right to remove Graham because they don't like him. That quickly gets into insanity and pretty darn costly I might add. Recall with strict criteria would be okay though.

Anonymous said...

Watergate is nothing compared to $3 billion gone through Orimulsion fiasco. He was sleeping. "I did not know" is no defence. He should know as he is a lawyer. But then he knows nothing anyway. To expect him to know law will be a stretch.

Yes, recall legislation is needed. If Shawn Graham screws it he deserves recall too.

Spinks said...

I'll agree with you that Watergate is nothing like Orimulsion. It was much worse. Not of course to New Brunswick but in the big picture it certainly was. There is no comparison. There are some great books if you're interested about Watergate. Now THAT's a good example where recall could and should be used.

Anyway, just because people don't like Lord isn't enough to have him recalled. The same would go for Graham. There needs to be a compelling reason. Orimulsion is a screw-up but an election will best decide that. The point is moot anyway because an election is only another 18 months or so away. It would take at least that long if not longer to get recall legislation in place so we're dealing in hypotheticals at best. I'm afraid you'll have to let the democratic processes which are in place play out and work to boot out Lord at the next election if he's even still around.

Anonymous said...

Orimulsion is of course worse than Watergate. NB cannot afford to lose $3 billion because we have dum dum for a premier. Enough is enough. He is screwed. What is his most recent approval rating -below 10%.? Recall legislation is needed so that we do not have to put up with the likes of Lord ever again.

Anonymous said...

If these leaders are employees of the people , shouldnt we as employers make demands of them as in civil life ? Maybe a non political panel should be made up to create 10 or 20 demands that these employees must answer to , and at the half way mark of thier term , be given a mark of fulfullness and based on this mark a recall be allowed . examples
1. lower unemployment
2. lower corporate handouts
3. lower poverty
4. strengthen medium home grown business
5. lower bankrupcy rate for small business

These are a few ideas that could be better worded , but I for one , am tired of listening to leaders give promises that were never meant to be kept . Seems funny to me that we as employers , should be told what we want and need .
On another note , it seems to me that a company with so much to win or lose on politics , should have a monopoly on our main source of media , newspaper . In Saint John they talk bout ( sink the blue canoe ) , this wont happen . If you want change in media to happen , how about , boycott any company that advertises in his papers , forcing them to spend thier advertiseing money at other outlets and giveing a financial burden on the paper owners . and instead of buying a newpaper a day , everyone cut thier buying habits in half . Face it guys , change is needed and talkin on blogs is good for the soul , but accomplishing nothing . The rich dont want anything to change , so its up to the everyday people , who would be sent to defend this country , to make war on politics that work for large corporations , and not the people who pay thier most generous wage .

Anonymous said...

http://eartothegroundinfredericton.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

Of course the rich don't want anything to change. They don't care either and yes it is up the average people to speak up. Some people are so down they can't help themselves. Please vote and give a little taste what will come for Lord in 2 years; don't wait. He has been around a lot lately but we won't see him until he needs us later. Moncton seems to be his priority.