kelownabomberfan

I am looking at buying a new car this year. I usually drive my vehicles for at least 10 years. I am hoping this is the last gas-powered vehicle I ever buy. There are a few electric options now but none really appeal to me. I am hopeful that there will be a lot more options when I go to buy a car again in 2027.

One of the biggest scams pulled by the AGT crowd is getting 97% lie to be accepted as truth. This comment just isn't true. But besides the point about whether man-made climate change is real, there is a whole other argument here as to what should be done about it. Obama may have "lead the charge" but according to the alarmists, all of that money spent has done absolutely nothing. So what should be done? What money should be spent? I suggest those here interested in reading about this subject should read Bjorn Lomborg's stuff. He actually crunched the numbers, and is "leading the charge" in terms of questioning the costs and showing how all of that spending is doing no good. I don't even want to get into the discussion of who is "reputable" etc as it just detracts from the discussion as we argue over what is considered "reputable" and who is not considered "reputable" because they GASP don't parrot the accepted narratives.

Laine should have scored on that play in OT last night where he deked three Predators out of their jock straps. Because he didn't score, Matthews has my vote.

Barbecue is definitely better in Nashville.

basically the world would not be any different right now in terms of climate whether Obama had blown all of that money and made those punitive regulatory changes that cost the American economy trillions of dollars. That's my view.

I am not happy if the EPA is rolled back to stop protecting rivers and eco-systems as that is important stuff, however, I am happy to see the EPA's over-reach on regulating CO2 etc pulled back. The EPA was allowed under Obama to become far too strong for an unelected body. Just getting their power relaxed on various regulations could provide a $1.8 trillion boost to the US economy. https://cei.org/content/federal-regulation-cost-reaches-1885-trillion To me the argument about whether man-made climate change is real is moot and irrelevant. Obama handicapped the US economy and spent mega-billions over 8 years "fighting" it, and apparently didn't really make a dent. Is spending trillions on this "problem" the answer? I don't think so. There have to be better and cheaper ways to deal with this issue, other than funneling billions of dollars into Al Gore and George Soros' pocket.

Mark Cuban was all I needed as proof.

and yet it wasn't just the "white seniors and blue collar" that came out for Trump. It was a broad spectrum of the US electorate. They may "pay" in the end, but they had enough of the status quo. And that's what the DNC needs to accept and figure out how to change about themselves. Or just keep losing.

You are correct. I will support most who are in opposition to the odious regressive left. That I can't deny. And thank you for allowing me that right. I watched the NDP leadership speeches this weekend, and I had to disagree vehemently with pretty much everything the candidates had to say, in spades. If what they believe is "progressive", then count me out. They don't live in the real world.

On this we will agree completely!

LOL - then you must be having amnesia and totally forget the Bill Clinton administration...

Well that's the question now isn't it? I don't think that you can just dismiss this report by the New York Times that easily, though I know a lot of people wish that it could be that easy. My issue with the NYT is that they seem to be jumping on whatever story they can that they can spin to the negative, much like CNN and MSNBC, and in this case, in my view, they got burned. If they knew Trump was being wire-tapped, and reported it, then who was doing it? They must have some proof. I don't think it was Obama, and I think it was really stupid of Trump to say that it was, especially on Twitter. But that being said, NYT should have been more careful in this instance in my opinion, and/or should tell us just who was wire-tapping Trump and his team, and why they were doing it. As the NY Post article states:

Was it illegal when the New York Times reported on January 20th that Trump was being wire-tapped? http://nypost.com/2017/03/08/did-the-new-york-times-already-tell-us-trump-was-wiretapped/

Big difference for me is the carbon tax. I just hate that tax with a giant passion. Mostly because we already are getting totally shafted by it here in BC already. Guess why we are the only province that is running surpluses. And it's not because of spending cut-backs.

Yes it is muddy. It was introduced by a Liberal senator in 2013, and took until March 9th, 2017 to get to a vote. It was supported by all of the Conservatives and the NDP, and only passed because 100 Liberals voted for it too, as Trudeau allowed them to free vote on the issue. But it appears that Trudeau and his cabinet are opposed to this bill, for reasons unknown.

yet he's working to over-turn legislation that Harper's government brought in, so your statement above would not appear to be accurate.

I think it would surprise many here to learn that Justin Trudeau is working actively to over-turn the Genetic Protection law here in Canada, that was brought in by a Liberal senator, and supported by Harper and the Conservatives. So essentially, from what I am reading, Justin Trudeau is on the same side as the Republicans in the USA. Let that blow your minds for awhile. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/canada-s-new-genetic-privacy-law-causing-huge-headaches-justin-trudeau

ok you have the benefit of the Winnipeg media. I am not sure what you are talking about?

If we let Helle go he'll end up being Devan Dubnyk 2.0 on some other team. I give you the KBF guarantee on that.

This guy has us picking: https://www.nhl.com/news/mike-morreale-2017-nhl-mock-draft/c-285904720 This seems more Chevy's way - taking young guys out of the USA.

Apologies if one of these threads has already been started, but I didn't see it so I thought I would start one. After watching last night's 3-0 debacle, it's painfully obvious that another season will end with no playoff games to watch. I am thinking that I am going to have to endure my friends who are Calgary Flames fans this year laying it on thick as Calgary advances to at least the third round. We will see as they will have to get through San Jose who plays a similar style. Anyway, I am starting to research mock NHL drafts and I found one online, who is projecting the Jets to pick at #9, and pick the following player: Does this not sound like a Finnish Toby Enstrom? Is this really who we want to take in the first round? I notice they have Cal Foote going at 18. I would be mad if the Jets passed an opportunity to grab him, if he's still available at #9. He's just like his dad, and would be a horse for us on D for a long time.

Watching Calgary last night I am thinking that's a sleeper team that could go far in the play-offs, especially with a hot goalie. Talk about players buying into a system. They were out-hustled the Jets all over the ice, even up 3-0. Never any quit.

Bring up Poolman and Green next year, and let our grizzled vets like Morrissey and Laine mentor them.

and what's going on with Schiefele. He looks like he's playing hurt or something.

Jets just look completely deflated. They need to get out on the road, too long at home has led to complacency.