Stadium news-again

[gbill2004]

What an absurd thread.. We have MBB political pundits who literally have no credibility OR insight to this topic speaking on it as if they have done hard hitting investigative journalism..

man off-season around here gets lame.

What makes your opinions more credible than anyone else's?

Don't really agree with the way Spuds worded that there but... reading the last few comments on page 1 here, He is pretty much bang on. I mean there is tons of speculation and made up stuff there for sure from one guy atleast and with no real facts to back up what he is saying. I mean, honestly, if you are accusing people of doing back room deals over land or whatever else really, you better have some damn good facts to back it up and quite frankly, there are no facts. Just a bunch of speculation and really guessing big time, i wanna call it blowing smoke up peoples asses cuz that's actually what a few of those posts are pretty much doing. I like the one comment too that ends page 1, something about living in fantasy worlds... guess that person does too cuz what they have written about this topic is nothing but fantasy.

That's just what it is - speculation. No one was purporting to know exactly what is happening at city hall. There's no need for people to attack others for stating their opinions as to what's going on at city hall.

Yeah but theres a different between speculation and basically accusations like Gbills posts are doing. He's pretty much accusing chipman of buying bowman, I think that's a pretty bold statement to make with no real facts to back it up.

It's not a bold statement at all. That's how politics and business interact, especially when you have a pro-business politician in power.

[Goalie]

 

 

 

 

 

What an absurd thread.. We have MBB political pundits who literally have no credibility OR insight to this topic speaking on it as if they have done hard hitting investigative journalism..

man off-season around here gets lame.

What makes your opinions more credible than anyone else's?

Don't really agree with the way Spuds worded that there but... reading the last few comments on page 1 here, He is pretty much bang on. I mean there is tons of speculation and made up stuff there for sure from one guy atleast and with no real facts to back up what he is saying. I mean, honestly, if you are accusing people of doing back room deals over land or whatever else really, you better have some damn good facts to back it up and quite frankly, there are no facts. Just a bunch of speculation and really guessing big time, i wanna call it blowing smoke up peoples asses cuz that's actually what a few of those posts are pretty much doing. I like the one comment too that ends page 1, something about living in fantasy worlds... guess that person does too cuz what they have written about this topic is nothing but fantasy.

That's just what it is - speculation. No one was purporting to know exactly what is happening at city hall. There's no need for people to attack others for stating their opinions as to what's going on at city hall.

Yeah but theres a different between speculation and basically accusations like Gbills posts are doing. He's pretty much accusing chipman of buying bowman, I think that's a pretty bold statement to make with no real facts to back it up.

It's not a bold statement at all. That's how politics and business interact, especially when you have a pro-business politician in power.

 

It is bold because even though that may be the case, you have no facts to back it up this time at all. You can't saying Chipman bought Bowman or whatever without having any real facts. Can't just say that's how politics works, because yeah even though i agree with you there a bit, saying someone bought someone is crazy and honestly, if this was a court of law, it's not but if we pretend it is, you'd get laughed out of the room in like 5 minutes with your "but that's how politics" works argument. Like i said, it might be but Bowman has somewhat shown in his brief time in office that, you know what... he's not exactly the same as those other guys. I see nothing so far that even remotely suggest Bowman is similar to Katz or guys from the past and what you are saying with no real facts is he is the same. When all he has done since getting in to office is pretty much the exact opposite of what you are speculating about. 

[gbill2004]

What an absurd thread.. We have MBB political pundits who literally have no credibility OR insight to this topic speaking on it as if they have done hard hitting investigative journalism..

man off-season around here gets lame.

What makes your opinions more credible than anyone else's?

Don't really agree with the way Spuds worded that there but... reading the last few comments on page 1 here, He is pretty much bang on. I mean there is tons of speculation and made up stuff there for sure from one guy atleast and with no real facts to back up what he is saying. I mean, honestly, if you are accusing people of doing back room deals over land or whatever else really, you better have some damn good facts to back it up and quite frankly, there are no facts. Just a bunch of speculation and really guessing big time, i wanna call it blowing smoke up peoples asses cuz that's actually what a few of those posts are pretty much doing. I like the one comment too that ends page 1, something about living in fantasy worlds... guess that person does too cuz what they have written about this topic is nothing but fantasy.

That's just what it is - speculation. No one was purporting to know exactly what is happening at city hall. There's no need for people to attack others for stating their opinions as to what's going on at city hall.

Yeah but theres a different between speculation and basically accusations like Gbills posts are doing. He's pretty much accusing chipman of buying bowman, I think that's a pretty bold statement to make with no real facts to back it up.

It's not a bold statement at all. That's how politics and business interact, especially when you have a pro-business politician in power.

It is bold because even though that may be the case, you have no facts to back it up this time at all. You can't saying Chipman bought Bowman or whatever without having any real facts. Can't just say that's how politics works, because yeah even though i agree with you there a bit, saying someone bought someone is crazy and honestly, if this was a court of law, it's not but if we pretend it is, you'd get laughed out of the room in like 5 minutes with your "but that's how politics" works argument. Like i said, it might be but Bowman has somewhat shown in his brief time in office that, you know what... he's not exactly the same as those other guys. I see nothing so far that even remotely suggest Bowman is similar to Katz or guys from the past and what you are saying with no real facts is he is the same. When all he has done since getting in to office is pretty much the exact opposite of what you are speculating about.

Re-read all my posts on this. I don't know enough yet about Bowman to form an opinion on him, but we may find out this week whether he can in fact be bought, and whether he plays the same game as Sammy. It'll be refreshing if he does the right thing here.

[SPuDS]

What an absurd thread.. We have MBB political pundits who literally have no credibility OR insight to this topic speaking on it as if they have done hard hitting investigative journalism..

man off-season around here gets lame.

What makes your opinions more credible than anyone else's?

The fact my opinion is that- an opinion.. Not thinly veiled accusations and assumptions that there is nefarious dealings going on yet again..

Not to mention this thread has also leapfrogged from a discussion about the stadium (bomber related) to city hall (general discussions)

But dats none muh business..

[DR. CFL]

Sadly it seems that Katz and his dealings with getting his money making stadium built has seemed to tarnish the political landscape and make people very cynical.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

 

related note: the contractor (Stuart Olson Dominion), is also in a dust-up over the convention centre project. The convention centre part is fine, but as part of getting that contract they also had to build a top-tier hotel to service the expanded building. This seems to be mired by backroom deals that I'm no so sure SOD had much involment in, but the facts are still coming out.

It seems that CenterVenture kept throwing wrenches in the works of their hotel building so they could get the contract in the hands of TrueNorth. In exchange for doing the dirty, the 16 million dollar penalty for not building the hotel was slashed to under 4 million. One of the reasons that centerventure uses to try to convince the city councillers to accept the deal is that if they try to get the full penalty out of SOD, the whole thing will be tied up in courts for years. Part of me thinks they are using the reputation of the legal battle over the stadium construction as leverage to add more umpf to this BS argument.

The good news for taxpayers is that it seems mayor Bowman smells something shifty and is demanding a public RFP for the hotel build now. Here's hoping this issue can be fixed up, and SOD gets a fair chance to get a hotel built, or pays the appropriate penalty, not something discounted by over 10 million bucks.

Only problem is that Mark Chipman publicly endorsed Brian Bowman for mayor. My instincts tell me that Chipman expected something in return for that endorsement and that mayor Bowman will cave and allow TNSE to develop the land. I suspect Mr Bowman and Mr Chipman have spoken several times over the past couple weeks on this matter.

We will see what kind of backbone our mayor has this week. RFP and he's got a backbone (although TNSE could still win the bid through the RFP), or council decides to give the contract directly to TNSE means Bowman is paying back a favour to Chipman. Will be interesting...

Absolutely nonsense. This is the "dirty" aspect of politics. Someone endorses a politician and must be expecting a favour? Give me a break. There is absolutely nothing to indicate Chipman traded his endorsement for a favour.

What it seems like is CV has a deal for a hotel project there. SOD claims they have a deal too. Let them both submit bids and let council pick one. Done and done.

Supposedly SOD was having trouble finding a hotel partner and let CV know that. If CV turned around and did their own search and made a deal with TN and then SOD said hey wait we think we have a partner now, I can understand if CV was reluctant to throw away their work. Especially if SOd's partner isn't local like TN

Not that I am defending CV at all. They got way too far away from their original mandate.

Bowman will clean it up. If anything bowman will be tougher on Chipman to dissuade anyone from accusing him of a conflict. I see nothing that indicates bowman is Sammy.

You are being very naive here. Election support from business in exchange for political favors happens ALL the time.

But I sure hope you're right about Bowman treating Chipman tougher.

 

No it doesnt happen ALL the time.  We saw with Sammy that it DOES happen.  But because Sammy was corrupt doesnt mean Bowman is.  Because Shinidco made back room deals doesnt mean Mark Chipman will.

Really this is sad and ludicrous.  Argued with some moron on Twitter about this too with them claiming Bowman should have to recuse himself from all dealing with Chipman because they know each other.  hey I voted for Bowman too so I guess I cant do business with the city.  Its silly.

 

Wait until they actually do something untoward before you tar and feather them.  As it is, Bowman is likely to demand an RFP be issues for the site in question so he certainly isnt doing Chipman any favours if they think they made a deal with CV already.

[The Unknown Poster]

If Bowman sides with True North, it means hes been bought off.  hahahaha if so, I'd hate to be True North. 

 

Im perplexed by the growing anti-Chipman feelings in this city.  I guess when you have a large population of have-nots and wannabe socialists its going to happen that they begin to resent the successful people, as ludicrous as it is.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What an absurd thread.. We have MBB political pundits who literally have no credibility OR insight to this topic speaking on it as if they have done hard hitting investigative journalism..

man off-season around here gets lame.

What makes your opinions more credible than anyone else's?

Don't really agree with the way Spuds worded that there but... reading the last few comments on page 1 here, He is pretty much bang on. I mean there is tons of speculation and made up stuff there for sure from one guy atleast and with no real facts to back up what he is saying. I mean, honestly, if you are accusing people of doing back room deals over land or whatever else really, you better have some damn good facts to back it up and quite frankly, there are no facts. Just a bunch of speculation and really guessing big time, i wanna call it blowing smoke up peoples asses cuz that's actually what a few of those posts are pretty much doing. I like the one comment too that ends page 1, something about living in fantasy worlds... guess that person does too cuz what they have written about this topic is nothing but fantasy.

That's just what it is - speculation. No one was purporting to know exactly what is happening at city hall. There's no need for people to attack others for stating their opinions as to what's going on at city hall.

Yeah but theres a different between speculation and basically accusations like Gbills posts are doing. He's pretty much accusing chipman of buying bowman, I think that's a pretty bold statement to make with no real facts to back it up.

It's not a bold statement at all. That's how politics and business interact, especially when you have a pro-business politician in power.

It is bold because even though that may be the case, you have no facts to back it up this time at all. You can't saying Chipman bought Bowman or whatever without having any real facts. Can't just say that's how politics works, because yeah even though i agree with you there a bit, saying someone bought someone is crazy and honestly, if this was a court of law, it's not but if we pretend it is, you'd get laughed out of the room in like 5 minutes with your "but that's how politics" works argument. Like i said, it might be but Bowman has somewhat shown in his brief time in office that, you know what... he's not exactly the same as those other guys. I see nothing so far that even remotely suggest Bowman is similar to Katz or guys from the past and what you are saying with no real facts is he is the same. When all he has done since getting in to office is pretty much the exact opposite of what you are speculating about.

Re-read all my posts on this. I don't know enough yet about Bowman to form an opinion on him, but we may find out this week whether he can in fact be bought, and whether he plays the same game as Sammy. It'll be refreshing if he does the right thing here.

 

 

It will be refreshing if he does the right thing FOR THE CITY.  If that means giving a contract to True North instead of someone else than so be it.  It doesn't mean he was bought off, although some like yourself will suggest it does.

 

There are corrupt politicians.

 

Not every politician is corrupt.

[Atomic]

Im perplexed by the growing anti-Chipman feelings in this city.

 

Not me, I saw it coming a mile away.

 

Successful = evil.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

Im perplexed by the growing anti-Chipman feelings in this city.

 

Not me, I saw it coming a mile away.

 

Successful = evil.

 

haha true...to many in this province.  But we did elect the NDP for what seems like an eternity so I guess I shouldnt be surprised when successful, wealthy people are considered bad.  God forbid Chipman worked hard to be a success.  We should form a group, get some torches and pitchforks and storm MTSC and make Chipman give all his money to the have-nots.

[Mike]

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

 

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

[gbill2004]

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

[Jacquie]

Sadly it seems that Katz and his dealings with getting his money making stadium built has seemed to tarnish the political landscape and make people very cynical.

 

Shaw Park opened 6 years before Katz became mayor and the last expansion a  couple of years before he became mayor. What does the building of the stadium have to do with his dealings as mayor? His dealings with the Goldeyes and the parking lot while he was mayor is a different story.

 

And FYI - the City owns Shaw Park and Riverside Park operates it.

 

Im perplexed by the growing anti-Chipman feelings in this city.  I guess when you have a large population of have-nots and wannabe socialists its going to happen that they begin to resent the successful people, as ludicrous as it is.

 

What anti-Chipman feelings? If there are anti-Chipman feelings, you sure are making assumptions about the people who may feel that way.

[Jacquie]

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

 

And as usual, Mike is right.

[gbill2004]

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

And as usual, Mike is right.

lol are you two dating?

[Jacquie]

 

 

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

And as usual, Mike is right.

lol are you two dating?

 

Do you live in your parents' basement dreaming up conspiracy theories? lol

[Noeller]

Can we lock this or move to the General Discussion Forum......?

[Mike]

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

 

 

Then why are you making such a big deal out of me disagreeing with you?

[Mike]

Can we lock this or move to the General Discussion Forum......?

 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

 

backtrack alert.  Implying Bowman AND Chipman are corrupt people is not simply expressing an opinion to keep things interesting.  It's practically slanderous.  And ignorant.

[gbill2004]

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

backtrack alert. Implying Bowman AND Chipman are corrupt people is not simply expressing an opinion to keep things interesting. It's practically slanderous. And ignorant.

No it's called freedom of speech.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

backtrack alert. Implying Bowman AND Chipman are corrupt people is not simply expressing an opinion to keep things interesting. It's practically slanderous. And ignorant.

No it's called freedom of speech.

 

Its still ignorant.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

It's one thing to suggest people are being naïve if they don't admit some pro athletes use performance enhancing substances or if they're not willing to acknowledge some politicians are crooked to varying degrees.

It's another thing altogether to paint every athlete and politician with the same brush using zero evidence whatsoever and going off total gut feelings and then claim the people who dare to question you are naïve.

What a surprise...Mike disagrees with me! lol

I've presented my thoughts and opinions on issues and others are free to agree or disagree. Pretty sure that's the point of a message board. Keeps things interesting in my opinion.

backtrack alert. Implying Bowman AND Chipman are corrupt people is not simply expressing an opinion to keep things interesting. It's practically slanderous. And ignorant.

No it's called freedom of speech.

 

 

Freedom of speech doesn't imply freedom from criticism...

[The Unknown Poster]

And actually freedom of speech isnt an excuse for slander. 

[gbill2004]

And actually freedom of speech isnt an excuse for slander.

As a Canadian, it's all of our jobs to hold our politicians accountable, and to demand transparency of government. It's unfortunate some perceive that as slander. Have you ever watched question period in parliament? My comments would be considered softballs compared to what goes on there.