QSLS Politics

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Censure and Censorship on the David W Campbell blog

In comments on the David W. Campbell blog:
Back in black… so to speak
April 21st, 2009
---
In response to Anonymous:
“be polite and respectful, or you get the hell out.”

How quaint, and how 1960’s. The musings of someone who has been vilified the most, for his biased unfounded weird views, would want censorship. We know that.

You neglect to mention what started this? Besides the ongoing simmering of posters who post with inaccurate information and who get set straight by my ability with google aided by the number of books I have read. Well believe me, when someone accuses you,out of the blue, for what I already mention several times slipping in one ear and out the other like the numb sensitive bunch you always been, you won’t like it too good. But I knew what this guy was like when I first hit this blog. Someone so without it that even mckenna left him behind.

Well the die been cast, by specious innuendos, by someone to cowardly to retract so I will step up my insults to anyone who tries to post bull, when the correct information is easily accessible.
Again, your opinion, or vote has no value, when there can be no action to take. Again its because your knowledge of computers and internet is as limited as any other subject you venture into. I am just thankful that I am not in that category.

---
Dan Fitzgerald wrote:
Sounds like a lot of nothing about nothing.

I enjoy commenting on Charles' blog because he's got about a dozen topics per day and a fairly active readership.

Mr. Campbell's obvious yet seemingly unconscious corporate lackey spin makes commenting on his posts pretty tempting... Had his policy on comments been more lenient back in the day (see links), I might have been commenting more here, the above rhetoric by the anonymous coward is way less cogent and much more degrading than what I was saying here:

http://davidwcampbell.com/?p=1979
http://censurergeneral.blogspot.com/2008/09/nau-pharmaceutical-benefits-management.html

When did you stop censoring?

Monday, April 20, 2009

On the anniversary of the NB Kleptocrat Pension Swindle

In response to Charles Leblanc: "PISSED OFF FORMER LIBERAL MINISTER VAUGHN IS LOOKING EVERYWHERE FOR SUPPORT TO SAVE THE FERRY AT GAGETOWN!!"

In comments, Dan F said:
I believe this is the only tangible copy of Kleptocrats discussing their pay / pension boost (combined discussion of bills 53 and 54 at around 53 minutes into this recording): http://myginch.com/QSLS/media/qpupload/NB-legislature-300408latenight.mp3

More from my liveblog of that day: http://qslspolitics.blogspot.com/2008/04/nb-tenancy-securities-act.html.

Recall, according to the CBC, the video equipment was 'taken out' by floodwaters the day before - what a bunch of hogwash - the cameras were out that day for the same reason Charles is banned from the building: Kleptocrats can't handle scrutiny of their devious actions.
---

Bill 53 - An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly Act
http://www.gnb.ca/legis/bill/pdf/56/2/Bill-53.pdf

(a) by repealing subsection (1) and substituting the
following:

25(1) Commencing April 1, 2008, each member of the Legislative Assembly shall be paid an indemnity at the rate of $85,000 per year.

Since they were on camera for this other bill - they barely mentioned what this law was doing, more salary / pension raises apparently:

Bill 54 - An Act to Amend the Executive Council Act
http://www.gnb.ca/legis/bill/pdf/56/2/Bill-54.pdf

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, enacts as follows:

1 Section 5 of the Executive Council Act, chapter E-12 of the Revised Statutes, 1973, is amended
(a) in subsection (1) by striking out “twenty thousand dollars” and substituting “$52,614”;
(b) in subsection (2) by striking out “thirty thousand dollars” and substituting “$79,000".

2 Section 6 of the Act is amended by striking out “fifteen thousand dollars” and substituting “$39,500”.

3 Subsection 6.1(2) of the Act is amended in the portion preceding paragraph (a) by striking out “January 1,

4 This Act shall be deemed to have come into force on April 1, 2008.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Amerika, Drugs and Fake Christians

In general response to:
"Worse than that, the general public might become aware that a nondescript apartment building was also a drug den where underage drinking, dope smoking and other unmentionables were happening on a regular basis."
on the Burton Front - April 15th, 2009 (1)
---
Dan F said:
How's your love-affair going with the US these days Anselm?

http://cryptogon.com/?p=8061

Guess that's what you get when you have several druggies as presidents in a row, eh?

Too bad their puppeteers can't do us all a favour and go get high on grass.

Just about anything would be better than their constant self-enrichment in generating Armageddon and endless wars at everyone else's expense.

Do you think Jesus would take money from arms dealers before he'd smoke a joint?
(Comment Source)