Made with Love

Doug Ford being sued by brother's widow

As for your Ford vs NDP argument, I also disagree on one part that you said. Barring refugees from entering into Canada will NOT allow homeless people, veterans, orphans, people living under poverty, etc. to be treated better. For one thing Ford does not give two shits about anybody living under the poverty line, he only wants his rich upper class buddies to profit.

Instead of the "it's better to put your own oxygen mask first before other people" analogy this is assuming that oxygen masks already exist on the plane. Ford will be the equivalent of cutting out all oxygen masks and removing every safety feature and instead spend money on fancy extravagant rocket wings or missiles on planes. Whether you are a refugee, a homeless person, a veteran, or anybody living in poverty Ford will never be your friend.

I don't know what Ford will do for those mentioned. He probably won't do much. But what I feel he will do, is strengthen the economy enough that maybe the next party will have enough in the bank to actually address these issues.

Instead of an NDP government that will actually make our financial situation worse and will make it harder to get out of based on the over use of an already crumbling system.

There are enough advocates and social media pressures to keep him from doing serious harm, in my humble opinion. While NDP will do more and Liberals have done enough.
 
So why don't I tell D to stop??? Because there is no point. D will go at you as hard as you go at him. That is how he is. If you don't like it, you don't engage him. He is an asshole. He knows he is, I know he is and treat him accordingly. And if you think he hasn't gone after me just as hard, you haven't read all his posts. We disagree and he attacks me when we do. I just don't both voicing my disagreement with him anymore. I am secure enough in my opinions, I am secure enough in knowing when and where to use my energy and where to not bother. I made this choice with D a long time ago. That is how I choose to deal with him based in my personal opinion of him. But even going toe-to-toe with D is not going to do him or me harm. We can call each the most foul of names in one there and laugh and joke in another. We are separated emotionally from our posts.


I've always known that deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep deep down you really do love me. It's deep, but clearly, it's there. :wink2:
 
CA

I am going to try my best here but you are still not going to like what I have to say.

First. I know all about gaslighting. All about it. I am not gaslighting you. Not at all. Just because someone brings up mental illness ( which you openly admit to) doesn't mean I am gaslighting you. I am not trying to make you feel crazy, I am not trying to insert one idea, then flip to another, taking Yu along for the ride then switching it all up, claiming you to have thought of it all and blaming you in some way. I am not sowing seeds of doubt or anything else related to gaslighting.

It is my opinion, based on your posting, based on my experience (which you don't know about me either) - that you are suffering in your mental illness and lashing out. It is in my opinion, that you have unresolved issues that cause you to rage so hard on these boards. It is my opinion that you read into things that are not there because you automatically feel insult first. I would be a million dollars you have a hard time taking a compliment and don't believe when someone truly likes you for you.

I don't think this board is healthy for you. Not with the generally shared opinions of some based on your difference of those opinions. I believe that you truly believe you are advocating but I feel it takes a toll on you here. Also I don't agree, I guess, with your style of advocating if that style is to do a "tit for tat" style. If someone calls you an "it", I feel it is better to educate or hold places like this board accountable. I don't think name calling back is the way to go. I also think when you post those raged filled posts, that you are walking into the baited trap they set and you fall for it hook, line and sinker. Which I feel is unhealthy. That is again just my opinion. You can see the difference between my style of addressing him on the "it" issue and your way.

Now people will say "but Jess - you are such a cunt in some of your post" and it is true. But I don't have the same rage and anger. I post off the cuff comments and one liners (but just a bunch of them in one post). This is what I am good at but they are not emotional based posts. When I am being serious, you can tell because I actually take the time to respectfully share my serious opinion. For you, you can see the upset caused. You can see the hurt, the offended feelings, and then the following rage and anger. There is a difference but again, in my opinion.

I never said you were a sick dog. Again you didn't read properly and took insult where it was not directed at you. The dogs who are taken, forced into the ring, treated poorly and abused are the victims. The sick fucks are the ones who net and watch and take joy out of it. Those who bait you here, knowing that you suffer from a mental illness, knowing that you are not cis-gendered, knowing all your triggers and buttons, are in my
opinion, wrong for doing so. The analogy I made was not to insult you. But that is how you took it. It is not something I will apologize for. I didn't not insult you.

I will not aplogize for "gaslighting" and if I am being really honest, I am offended you would play that card. If you don't truly know what gaslighting is, you should not be using the term. Also, I am not trying to silence you. I will report your rage filled insult throwing posts just like I will Robertson when he refers to you as "it". Both are wrong. Saying that is "gaslighting" you, sharing my opinion about your mental illness and what I feel is symptomatic behaviours is not gaslighting. To be honest, you screaming that in every post is almost, READ ALMOST akin to false rape accusations. And as someone who has experience, heavy experience in the mental health field, it could be highly offensive to be falsely accused of gaslighting when it is the furthest thing from the truth. However, again I feel it is a lashing out due to uncontrollable rage due to unresolved issues and lack of proper mental health care and maintenance so I don't take it personally. Just like I don't take it personally when any other patient lashes out. I know it is not me, it is the illness. Again - my opinion.

So you can agree to disagree. These are simply my opinions. I do not and will not add to what I think is someone suffering from mental health issues. I will also not support an asian based review board, nor half the asian agencies I see. I won't see men who review asian agencies (thankfully most stick to what they love) but why you may ask, because I personally feel way to much sex slavery and human trafficking happen in asian markets. I don't deny they happen else where as well, I fully admit I could be wrong about few places but that is my opinion and I will do everything in my power to avoid enabling places like them. All based on my personal opinion.

My personal opinion is that these boards are not healthy for you. You say that you need to have the oxgyen mask in the plane first, well sweetie - you need a have place that will actually hear what you say. I would say a black person, who has admitted mental health issues, who rages In posts, who gets baited in posts, posting on a known KKK site, is also someone who should be removed from the site. Because it is not healthy for them either. They will NEVER make a change on a board like that. They will drive themselves further into suffering for trying.

If you are so passionate about advocting, then maybe put your energy into an area where actual change may be possible. You have already said over and over this board is "this", "that" and the other regarding some of the things you feel strongly about. For someone to make change here, they need to be one step removed from
the personal heartache these posts cause. I personally don't believe you are strong enough emotionally at this point to handle these types of posts, threads, etc.

And let's talk privilege - you seem to think you are the only one marginalized. That what? Because I am white, heterosexual and have money I have not suffered or that I am not marginalized. Thanks for the assumption about me but Hello? I am a woman. That in itself marginalizes me. Privilege is intersectional. It actually has many components. Race, gender, sexual orientation, wealth, religion, age, health/disability, etc. There are more like where you live country wise, education etc but the main list is there. So yes, my race does and has brought me privilege, my cis-gender as well but you don't know my wealth, when I got it, how I got or even if I truly have it. You don't know my faith, you don't know my health, you don't even know my sexual orientation. You assume. However, I have had to suffer in the face of others privilege. Certainly not as much as a black gay woman in a poor country who is of the Muslim faith but I know about priviledge and I fight very hard for equality. To insert otherwise is again, an attempt by you to insult me because you dislike my opinions of you personally. Instead of being able to step back emotionally and address the issue in the debate directly. That is why I feel you are not emotionally or mental fit for this board at this time.

I could go on and on but this post is long enough. My opinion has not changed. It appears you just like that opinion when it is directed to someone else. However my opinions are the same for everyone. No privildged treatment on my part.

So why don't I tell D to stop??? Because there is no point. D will go at you as hard as you go at him. That is how he is. If you don't like it, you don't engage him. He is an asshole. He knows he is, I know he is and treat him accordingly. And if you think he hasn't gone after me just as hard, you haven't read all his posts. We disagree and he attacks me when we do. I just don't both voicing my disagreement with him anymore. I am secure enough in my opinions, I am secure enough in knowing when and where to use my energy and where to not bother. I made this choice with D a long time ago. That is how I choose to deal with him based in my personal opinion of him. But even going toe-to-toe with D is not going to do him or me harm. We can call each the most foul of names in one there and laugh and joke in another. We are separated emotionally from our posts. In my opinion, you are not and that is why these boards are harmful to you and why, if you can't leave on your own taking your own self care into account and seeing the importance of your and your emotional safety and well being, then I will continue to encourage others to ignore you, to not bait you, and will encourage the bird to take the rights steps, be accountable and responsible for itself membership and give you the time away you need.

Again - all just my opinion. I know you will not like it, I accept that. I do however hope you can see it is with care and willingness to support and help that I write these things. Not to insult, shame, or silence. I say speak up but only when it will not cause you personal harm which right now I do not believe is possible. I am actually looking out for you even though you don't believe it.

And I tried to find the spelling and grammer mistakes but I am on my phone and can only do so much with no real time to have even spent posting all this but I felt it was important enough to try and explain again. Because I felt you - CA - are important, your feelings are important and I wanted to ensure I addressed it again in as nice of a way as possible. So while I spent the time, I hope you will excuse the spelling.

I honestly stopped reading after I glanced over your wall of text and your statement that me claiming that you gaslighted me is akin to me "falsely accusing you of rape" stared out to me. Thanks, now I know not to take you seriously whenever you do voice about false accusations of rape.

Holy shit you are persistent, writing a big colossal wall of text over somebody you don't even know on the internet. I don't know whether to be flattered or creeped out.

I take back my apologies then. I won't truce to you because you're stubbornly resistant to logic and you never listen. You still go on and on about my mental health like it's some kind of sick twisted obsession of yours.

EDIT: On second thought I'll bite. I'll... wade through all the muck.

Jessica Rain said:
I would say a black person, who has admitted mental health issues, who rages In posts, who gets baited in posts, posting on a known KKK site, is also someone who should be removed from the site.

No just no. I have no words. This quote right here summarizes everything about you very well.
 
Last edited:
So help me out here people, a member can use the "I have mental issues" card, when defending their initiating personal insulting posting ?

But a member can't reply in kind, using the "sane" card, because those aren't allowed in the ever changing rules of its game, sounds like a double standard to me, but I guess it would be plausible in a psych ward.

Its really very simple, DO NOT initiate PERSONAL insulting, unless you are prepared to be responded to in kind.

If a member insults a political party, a religion, a hockey team, or community that has some meaning to you, that does NOT give you the right to personally insult, and not expect a relation.

If I initiate personally insulting in a thread, I fully expect to be attacked in kind.

OK, I'm done with my rant.
 
I honestly stopped reading after I glanced over your wall of text and your statement that me claiming that you gaslighted me is akin to me "falsely accusing you of rape" stared out to me. Thanks, now I know not to take you seriously whenever you do voice about false accusations of rape.

Holy shit you are persistent, writing a big colossal wall of text over somebody you don't even know on the internet. I don't know whether to be flattered or creeped out.

I take back my apologies then. I won't truce to you because you're stubbornly resistant to logic. You still go on and on about my mental health like it's some kind of sick twisted obsession of yours.

I am sorry you refuse to read the whole thing with the care and supportive natural it was intended. It does not surprise me. I knew you would not. You are not in a healthy enough place to so it is ok.

I understand and accept your position even if you equally can not do the same in respect to me.

I do with to you all the best and I will at least still stick up for you in the way I feel is most beneficial to your emotional mental health.


PS - I even capitalized ALMOST akin to false accusations. Almost. Meaning close. Means has some similarities. Again you choose to skim and find ways to feel insulted. Someone who was secure within themselves would not find insult in everything.

Just because I am drinking coffee out of a white cup doesn't mean I don't like black people. That is what you seem to do though. See the word white and automatically assume a negative against black. I hope you can see that some day. It will trying help you in your activism.
 
I honestly stopped reading after I glanced over your wall of text and your statement that me claiming that you gaslighted me is akin to me "falsely accusing you of rape" stared out to me. Thanks, now I know not to take you seriously whenever you do voice about false accusations of rape.

Holy shit you are persistent, writing a big colossal wall of text over somebody you don't even know on the internet. I don't know whether to be flattered or creeped out.

I take back my apologies then. I won't truce to you because you're stubbornly resistant to logic and you never listen. You still go on and on about my mental health like it's some kind of sick twisted obsession of yours.

EDIT: On second thought I'll bite. I'll... wade through all the muck.



No just no. I have no words.

CA - if you choose not read that is your choice. My post was supportive and caring and honest.

You choose to read insult that is not there. I capitalized the words READ ALMSOT akin. Meaning close, meaning somewhat similar. Which it is. It is falsely accusing for one. That is the same. And because you don't know my mainstream life, you can not say that it is not similar in others ways based on my private life.

But it again I said almost and you choose to read that as finite.

I spent the time writing you that long wall of text to be supportive to you. My last paragraph speaks about how I feel you are important enough for me to miss a coffee with a neighbour to write to you. But you want to chalk that up to me wasting my time.

I have tried. I have shown my care, my support even if it's in a way you need but don't like. I have shown respect. I have done enough and then some more.

You choose what you choose. And that is fine. That is your right

I do wish you all the best even if you don't feel the same for me. I can accept and understand your position even if Yu can't equally do the same with me. I understand that in your position you are just not capable. I don't hold you at fault. I understand where it comes from and therefore I don't take it personally.

I do hope you take take care of you. Self care is the most important care. You are worth that and I hope one day you are open enough to see that.
 
I know what care and support is thank you. I don't need no stranger on the internet who think she's entitled to use my mental health status to silence or control me dictate to me what I think should be "care and support".

This is the problem I have with your posts. No you are NOT helping me if you refuse to listen to me or try to silence everything I say by virtue of my "mental health status" that you have NO clue about. If you truly wanted to help me you would have joined alongside with me to tackle all the homophobia, transphobia, ablism, sexism, and racism that's ever so prevalent on this site instead of thinking of the most creative ways to silence me.

Just because I am drinking coffee out of a white cup doesn't mean I don't like black people.

Oh that's new. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH oh Jessie you are HILARIOUS. Actually no I'm just kidding you're not. Probably the only thing out of everything you said worth reading just for the sheer hilarity... and cringeworthy-ness.
 
Last edited:
I thought I lost that one post about the white cup. Good I didn't.

CA - all the best to you. I hope you get the help, love, care, and support you deserve and need. You are worth it. I hope one day you see it.
 
I have gotten love, care, and support in the past from people whom I trusted.

Good thing they were not from you.
 
So help me out here people, a member can use the "I have mental issues" card, when defending their initiating personal insulting posting ?

But a member can't reply in kind, using the "sane" card, because those aren't allowed in the ever changing rules of its game, sounds like a double standard to me, but I guess it would be plausible in a psych ward.

Its really very simple, DO NOT initiate PERSONAL insulting, unless you are prepared to be responded to in kind.

If a member insults a political party, a religion, a hockey team, or community that has some meaning to you, that does NOT give you the right to personally insult, and not expect a relation.

If I initiate personally insulting in a thread, I fully expect to be attacked in kind.

OK, I'm done with my rant.

No, I don't think using the mental illness card is right or an excuse for insulting behaviour. I agree it should be addressed.

I just think some post insults because they can help it while others post because they can't.

The board, in my opinion, has the responsibility to address both ways equally and if they fail in that, I would hope that those who are currently mentally and emotionally sound, would not engage with those they know are not emotional and mentally sound.

That again is just my opinion.

I also have the opinion that anyone who knowingly has a mental illness has a responsibility to themselves and to society to ensure they get help and maintain a healthy mental and emotional state. Again, just my opinion. To which I am happily able to agree to disagree.
 
So help me out here people, a member can use the "I have mental issues" card, when defending their initiating personal insulting posting ?

But a member can't reply in kind, using the "sane" card, because those aren't allowed in the ever changing rules of its game, sounds like a double standard to me, but I guess it would be plausible in a psych ward.

Its really very simple, DO NOT initiate PERSONAL insulting, unless you are prepared to be responded to in kind.

If a member insults a political party, a religion, a hockey team, or community that has some meaning to you, that does NOT give you the right to personally insult, and not expect a relation.

If I initiate personally insulting in a thread, I fully expect to be attacked in kind.

OK, I'm done with my rant.

That's because people with mental health issues have consistently in the past been marginalized by "sane" people. Again, systemic oppression, which you obviously have no clue about.

I believe in empowering any individual who is marginalized because at the moment the society is an uneven playing field for disabled people or people with mental health issues. We always hear stories of able bodied doctors or loved ones speaking on behalf of mental health patients but very rarely mental health patients speaking about their OWN experiences. You hear of plenty of stories of mental health people being abused by doctors or other "sane" people in power solely because they are viewed as lesser human beings. Or how often mental health is being used as a scapegoat to silence individuals who make a strong opinion just like the asylum doctors in the 1880s who labelled any women who dared to speak up against the patriarchy as sick or diseased.

For more information look at the way Jessica has been consistently silencing me for thinking I "have a mental health illness" or viewing me as a "sick dog" because she treats people with mental health issues like animals but you'll obviously take her side so you two can join in the circlejerk together.
 
Last edited:
That's because people with mental health issues have consistently in the past been marginalized by "sane" people.

That's just 'crazy' talk, and you're clearly completely 'nuts' for continuing to insists it's the truth!

:blush2:
 
Back to Doug Ford. The rest of you must organize an orgy to give that adrenaline a short fuse.
 
It was just a matter of time


Newly-elected Progressive-Conservative Premier Doug Ford has begun chipping away at the previous Liberal government’s legacy after only a few days in office, freezing new measures on police oversight, ticket scalping and vaping, as well as firing Ontario’s new chief scientist.
The new Premier has moved quickly to put his stamp on the public service and halt a number of incoming initiatives since he and his cabinet were sworn in on Friday. The Liberals had held office for nearly 15 years before the party suffered a catastrophic election loss in June. Now, the Tories say they want to consult widely on a number of new rules introduced by former premier Kathleen Wynne in her government’s final year in office.
Even before entering the Premier’s office, Mr. Ford moved to shake up Queen’s Park. His incoming administration implemented a hiring stop in the public service, froze salaries for managers and began to dismantle Ontario’s cap-and-trade carbon-emissions system before officially taking power.


Among the latest moves from Mr. Ford was the firing of Ontario’s chief scientist, Molly Shoichet. An award-winning professor at the University of Toronto, she was appointed as Ontario’s first, and, to this point, only, chief scientist last November in what Ms. Wynne’s Liberals said was an effort to create a voice for science at the top level of government. Ms. Shoichet was told on Tuesday, after the Canada Day long weekend, that she had been let go.
“I was dismissed. I don’t think it was about me or even about the chief scientist position, but rather an out-with-the-old and in-with-the-new, even though, for me, I had just been there for six months,” Ms. Shoichet told The Globe and Mail in an e-mail.

The government will maintain the role and find someone new to fill it, said Simon Jefferies, a spokesman for Mr. Ford. The chief scientist is expected to brief decision-makers, promote Ontario’s scientific research both domestically and internationally and craft a research agenda for the government.
“The chief scientist was removed from her position. We will undergo a process of finding a suitable and qualified replacement,” Mr. Jefferies said.
Mr. Ford also dismissed Ontario’s chief investment officer, Allan O’Dette, and removed former TD Bank chief executive Ed Clark from his role as the premier’s business adviser.
Over the Canada Day long weekend, Mr. Ford’s cabinet halted an overhaul of Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit before it came into effect. The unit, which looks into all cases of death, serious injury and sexual assault involving police, was set to get broader powers.
While campaigning, the Tories dismissed a wide-ranging police bill introduced by the Liberals, known as Bill 175, as burdensome and disrespectful of police.


In a letter delivered to three police organizations only hours after he was sworn in, Mr. Ford promised more changes would be coming to policing legislation. “We believe that the previous government’s Bill 175 hurts policing efforts in the province and undermines confidence in the police. Law-abiding people in this province should never feel unsafe when dealing with the people who protect us,” Mr. Ford wrote.
New ticket-scalping rules that would have capped the price of resales at 50-per-cent above face value, which were introduced as part of an omnibus consumer protection act at the end of last year, have also been put on hold. According to Mr. Jefferies, the Ontario government has no way of enforcing that cap. The government has said it will review the provisions, which were introduced after public anger with a widely scalped Tragically Hip tour following frontman Gord Downie’s diagnosis of terminal brain cancer.
A set of new rules that would have regulated vaping in the same way as smoking, ending the practice of in-store testing and requiring retailers to keep the product hidden from the public, were also paused. The government has said it wants to re-examine evidence of vaping’s use as a smoking-cessation tool.
The New Democrats, who are now Ontario’s Official Opposition, charged that the moves by Mr. Ford’s cabinet to undo legislation without the legislature were “backroom” deals.
“No one voted for business to be conducted in secret, behind closed doors,” Leader Andrea Horwath said in a statement. “And I’m sure no one voted to have a premier that would listen to influencers and lobbyists while shutting out everyday people affected by the laws.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will be meeting with Mr. Ford for the first time on Thursday at the Premier’s Queen’s Park office.
 
It was just a matter of time


Newly-elected Progressive-Conservative Premier Doug Ford has begun chipping away at the previous Liberal government’s legacy after only a few days in office, freezing new measures on police oversight, ticket scalping and vaping, as well as firing Ontario’s new chief scientist.
The new Premier has moved quickly to put his stamp on the public service and halt a number of incoming initiatives since he and his cabinet were sworn in on Friday. The Liberals had held office for nearly 15 years before the party suffered a catastrophic election loss in June. Now, the Tories say they want to consult widely on a number of new rules introduced by former premier Kathleen Wynne in her government’s final year in office.
Even before entering the Premier’s office, Mr. Ford moved to shake up Queen’s Park. His incoming administration implemented a hiring stop in the public service, froze salaries for managers and began to dismantle Ontario’s cap-and-trade carbon-emissions system before officially taking power.


Among the latest moves from Mr. Ford was the firing of Ontario’s chief scientist, Molly Shoichet. An award-winning professor at the University of Toronto, she was appointed as Ontario’s first, and, to this point, only, chief scientist last November in what Ms. Wynne’s Liberals said was an effort to create a voice for science at the top level of government. Ms. Shoichet was told on Tuesday, after the Canada Day long weekend, that she had been let go.
“I was dismissed. I don’t think it was about me or even about the chief scientist position, but rather an out-with-the-old and in-with-the-new, even though, for me, I had just been there for six months,” Ms. Shoichet told The Globe and Mail in an e-mail.

The government will maintain the role and find someone new to fill it, said Simon Jefferies, a spokesman for Mr. Ford. The chief scientist is expected to brief decision-makers, promote Ontario’s scientific research both domestically and internationally and craft a research agenda for the government.
“The chief scientist was removed from her position. We will undergo a process of finding a suitable and qualified replacement,” Mr. Jefferies said.
Mr. Ford also dismissed Ontario’s chief investment officer, Allan O’Dette, and removed former TD Bank chief executive Ed Clark from his role as the premier’s business adviser.
Over the Canada Day long weekend, Mr. Ford’s cabinet halted an overhaul of Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit before it came into effect. The unit, which looks into all cases of death, serious injury and sexual assault involving police, was set to get broader powers.
While campaigning, the Tories dismissed a wide-ranging police bill introduced by the Liberals, known as Bill 175, as burdensome and disrespectful of police.


In a letter delivered to three police organizations only hours after he was sworn in, Mr. Ford promised more changes would be coming to policing legislation. “We believe that the previous government’s Bill 175 hurts policing efforts in the province and undermines confidence in the police. Law-abiding people in this province should never feel unsafe when dealing with the people who protect us,” Mr. Ford wrote.
New ticket-scalping rules that would have capped the price of resales at 50-per-cent above face value, which were introduced as part of an omnibus consumer protection act at the end of last year, have also been put on hold. According to Mr. Jefferies, the Ontario government has no way of enforcing that cap. The government has said it will review the provisions, which were introduced after public anger with a widely scalped Tragically Hip tour following frontman Gord Downie’s diagnosis of terminal brain cancer.
A set of new rules that would have regulated vaping in the same way as smoking, ending the practice of in-store testing and requiring retailers to keep the product hidden from the public, were also paused. The government has said it wants to re-examine evidence of vaping’s use as a smoking-cessation tool.
The New Democrats, who are now Ontario’s Official Opposition, charged that the moves by Mr. Ford’s cabinet to undo legislation without the legislature were “backroom” deals.
“No one voted for business to be conducted in secret, behind closed doors,” Leader Andrea Horwath said in a statement. “And I’m sure no one voted to have a premier that would listen to influencers and lobbyists while shutting out everyday people affected by the laws.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will be meeting with Mr. Ford for the first time on Thursday at the Premier’s Queen’s Park office.


Good for Doug Ford. I'm so glad that Kathleen Wynne got trounced in the last election. :YMAPPLAUSE:
 
Good for Doug Ford. I'm so glad that Kathleen Wynne got trounced in the last election. :YMAPPLAUSE:
This is especially hilarious, coming from a party of socialists, typically "influenced and lobbied" by unions.

Leader Andrea Horwath said in a statement. “And I’m sure no one voted to have a premier that would listen to influencers and lobbyists while shutting out everyday people affected by the laws.”



Not forgetting back room deals made with teachers unions by the Fiberals.
 
Back
Top Bottom