Over 58969
politifake

Mob Politics


the judicial system -




OCHLOCRACY - According to Nancy Pelosi, this is what we have now with the Tea Party in power.




Billionaire Russian Mobster to Hold Fundraiser for Hillary -




WHO AM I? -


TAGS: exxonmobil corporate personhood
Rating: 2.45/5

More politifakes by crankyhead

Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 8:47 pm

Obviously I haven't considered every angle, but why not?...we sponsor kids that are good enough to play in our league, but it's the exposure that draws them, not the money.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 8:45 pm
I dunno, say he wanted to come for the exposure.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 8:36 pm

I guess so, But why would a 15 year old come here to play junior hockey? Remember (in my imaginary hockey utopia) the money isn't worth coming here for. I guess we could sponsor kids from other countries.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 8:27 pm
Subsidy: a financial aid supplied by a government, as to industry, for reasons of public welfare, the balance of payments, etc. So obviously, only those tax remittances that go back to the company in the form of a**istance, are called subsidies, Groucho.
GrouchoMarxist - October 8, 2012, 7:19 pm
This a cranky "Punked Alert" Expect more strawmen, non answers and loads of "What ifs"
GrouchoMarxist - October 8, 2012, 7:17 pm
So any tax for doing business is a subsidy if you're an oil company... s****** the koolaide
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 7:16 pm
So a 15 year old Finnish kid, say, would have to apply for dual citizenship, before he could play in your league?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 7:14 pm
Your mom said; "As soon as you start finishing your vegetables." =)
GrouchoMarxist - October 8, 2012, 6:55 pm
I wonder when I'll get my subsidy?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:35 pm

As long as you're a citizen.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 6:32 pm
So, are there no foreign born players in your league, or did I read that wrong?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:32 pm

Hockey should be about hockey and playing with the Americans has made hockey about money.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:28 pm

I could have worded that better. I want out of the NHL, I want big Canadian cities to have teams and one western and one eastern junior leagues to feed the CHL (Canadian hockey league) players.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 6:23 pm
OHL, WHL, QMJHL...
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:18 pm

I want Provincial teams with $150,000 a year salary caps......That would be promoting Canadian culture.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 6:16 pm
Yes. The NHL is a mess. 3 lockouts in 17 years. Ugh. The fans need a union. =)
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:14 pm

Don't get me wrong. I love the sport, just not the mess that the NHL has become. I still cheer for team Canada.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:10 pm

Kind of of like what Toronto does to Northern Ontario.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:09 pm

I do hate hockey, And I'm not a big fan of Winnipeg. They make decisions that affect the entire province, but they've forgotten that there are people outside the perimeter highway.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 6:05 pm
LOL! As if you didn't want the WPGJets back. I know you don't like hockey, but come on man.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 6:04 pm
On this issue, I'm confident with the word 'never'.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:03 pm

I also didn't want the WPG Jets back. (:
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:02 pm

That was in response to the jets. I'd have to read up about the crime bill. But I know we could use a few new prisons in Manitoba.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 6:00 pm

Never say never, But you're probably right. Of course it's a waste of money.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:59 pm
Or the Omnibus crime bill expenses? Building jails we don't need to house criminals that don't exist, wouldn't we be saving more money there?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:57 pm
What's your position on that new fleet of F-35's that Harper wants to buy? Isn't that a bit more frivolous a pricetag than the CBC, considering we'll never have to use them?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:56 pm

You know I don't back a party. I refuse to chose between 2 groups of morons. I take every issue as a solitary entity and make my decision.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:49 pm
That last sentence was sarcasm. =)
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:49 pm
I know, right? Remember back when the Liberal party of Canada posted 10 straight years (1998-2008) of budget surpluses under Chretien and Martin? Those were the days, huh? Good thing we've gone back in the red with the Conservative Harper. =)
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:39 pm

Or it's a billion dollars a year off the top of a $591,344,594,012.45 debt (as of Sept 21st) It all depends on what you see as more important. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:32 pm
That's a 9 cent a day per capita investment, to not have our culture a**imilated. I'm fine with it.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:31 pm

Like I said, Try watching CBC TV.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:31 pm

I don't think that the CBC provides $1,000,000,000 a year worth of culture.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:27 pm
This brings us back to the 'Kardashian' argument. The CBC promotes Canadian culture. That's a service, as a Canadian, that I enjoy.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:26 pm

I said it was OK to hold them to different standards because one is a necessary evil the other is just evil. I'm just being practical.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:25 pm

we don't need the CBC.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:24 pm

And I already told you I don't agree with subsidizing oil companies...In fact, they should be paying us for the privilege. But the CBC does nothing for us, and oil companies are used to getting handouts. The difference is that we need oil companies.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:22 pm
...and another way for those guys.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:22 pm
Otherwise, we're making these judgements based on favoring one product or service over another. Either companies can sustain themselves, or they can't. We either pick socialism, or we pick free market capitalism. It can't be one way for these guys...
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:22 pm

They definitely wouldn't get away with spending public money on p***ography.http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/02/cbc-doubles-down-on-p***ography
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:19 pm
I totally understand your point Moo. Yes, 5 is half of 10. What I'm driving at here is that if we're going to argue that one company should get 5, because it is half of 10, than this should apply to all companies, big oil included.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:19 pm

I'd be OK with keeping the Radio stations. But do me a favour, Go home tonight and watch CBC television. Come back tomorrow and tell me if we need that.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:18 pm
The CBC is a by product of the CRTC and the Canadian Broadcasting Act, is it not? SunMedia, as a private entity, aren't held to the same content criteria as the CBC, are they?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:17 pm

And 5 is still half of 10. I said I didn't agree with giving them anything. But I'm not even going to hope for that....too many bleeding hearts in our country.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:15 pm
Fair enough, but SunMedia is owned by a much larger corporate entity, and the protection of that corporate umbrella gives SunMedia access to capital that is being subsidized by other sectors. The CBC isn't in the wireless telephone market, for example.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:12 pm
You can call it whatever you want to, but a tax break, is a subsidy, is a handout.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:12 pm

But it's better than nothing.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:11 pm

Everyone needs entertainment that doesn't include the Kardashians, Privatize the CBC and give them the same breaks as Sunmedia. Bingo!, we just saved %500 million dollars a year. I don't even like that solution.....
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 5:09 pm

Yes, which is why I mentioned my distaste for them. and they have received help from the government, but not the 500 million that the CBC claimed. They got breaks, not handouts.I don't agree with that either.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:03 pm
The CBC provides Canadian content to the public airwaves. There needs to be at least a couple of stations up here that aren't addicted to the Kardashian sisters, no? =)
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 5:02 pm
Isn't SunMedia owned by Quebecor?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:43 pm

And yes, I understand that the sun network is disgusting and right wing. but at least we're not giving the a billion dollars for stale entertainment.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:42 pm

What is the CBC providing?...........This is an old article, but it's a good example of the cbc's entitled attitude.http://www.torontosun.com/2011/10/19/cbc-lashes-out-over-scrutiny-of-spending
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:41 pm

Correction, We just slashed %10 from their budget. Good job conservative government. (I'll never say good Job Steve)
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:38 pm
Cheers moo, I'd appreciate reading that.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:38 pm
Companies provide goods and services to the market place. That's the comparison. Just because they provide different goods and services, doesn't mean they should operate by a different set of rules. It's the same argument.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:37 pm

I'll find the Sun article about french vs english channel spending by the CBC....It doesn't seem to be on their website anymore.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:36 pm

Why do you have to make any comparison to oil companies? It's a simple question, Is the CBC worth a billion dollars in tax money every year?......NO. Is PBS worth 500 million to the Americans? ..No. Oil subsidies are a different argument.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:29 pm
...sets of rules for different sectors, than why are you angry about there being different sets of rules for different sectors? Is it that you just don't like the goods and services offered by french language television? Because that's not an excuse.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:28 pm
If you're saying that you can hold different sectors to different rules, but at the same time, you're complaining about a perceived 'french programming bias' on the CBC, I'm not sure I understand your argument. If you're not angry about different sets...
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:26 pm
So, it's your opinion, that public broadcasting is COMPLETELY irrelevant?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:25 pm
I listen to CBC radio more than I watch CBCTV, to be honest. Can you cite a source that shows the budgetary bias in the CBC towards french language programming? I'd be interested to see it.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:25 pm

No, I don't want my taxes subsidizing oil companies. and yes, you can hold different sectors to different rules. If one sector is COMPLETELY irrelevant.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:23 pm
Either every company gets to benefit from tax incentives/credits/subsidies, or none of them do. It's either socialism or it's free market enterprise. It can't be one way for some, and the other way for others. You see what I mean?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:23 pm

Do you watch the cbc?....We spend as much on french programming as we do on English, Is the country %50 French? Last year we paid for the french to buy softcore p*** from France and put it on a public network.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:21 pm
This is the disconnect I'm trying to illustrate. You can't hold one sector accountable to a different set of rules, simply because you don't like what goods and services that sector is offering.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:19 pm
Fine. You don't want your taces supporting the CBC. Great. How do you feel about your tax dollars supporting Petro Canada? Or worse, how do you feel about foreign oil companies getting tax subsidies in Canada?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 4:17 pm
A bias towards the french? What are you talking about?
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:16 pm

The only thing I hate more is Manitoba public insurance....Be glad you live in a province with private insurance. Because we're getting f***ed hard.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:14 pm

We spend more than a billion dollars a year to watch reruns of crap that were made in the 70's. Add a bias toward the french, and it's a God d*** national tragedy.
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 4:09 pm

Personally, I don't want my tax dollars supporting the CBC, and If I were American I think I'd feel the same about PBS. If these shows are so great, then they'd do just fine on a privately owned and funded network.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 3:46 pm
If both companies are receiving federal aid in order to survive, then both should be subject to the same criticism about receiving that aid, no? Or is big oil just simply too big to be criticized?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 3:44 pm
... excuse me, people.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 3:43 pm
Of course I support the CBC. I'm trying to illustrate the disconnect that exists in the conservative mindset, when they jump up and down and stamp their feet in anger over one company being subsidized, but remain eerily silent for other corporations,...
Mooooooooooooooooooo - October 8, 2012, 2:09 pm

So, Do you agree with the money our government spends on the CBC?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 12:42 pm
...is only what, 40 years old? Longer, maybe?
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 12:40 pm
A week ago, not one single one of you had an issue with PBS. Today, because Dr. Oz decreed it from the pulpit, every last one of you hates PBS. But you're right, it must be the left who's brainwashed. I mean, the whole 'end big oil subsidy' argument...
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 12:39 pm
...wilfully disconnect the oil companies from having to do the same thing. You're simply shilling for these companies to keep stealing your tax dollars, while b***** the war drum, looking for big bird's head. Respectfully, you remind me of a sheep.
crankyhead - October 8, 2012, 12:37 pm
Actually, your definition is based entirely on your own interpretation of fact. What is dishonest is that you're arguing that PBS should be able to compete in the free market against ABC, CBS, etc..., without recieving taxpayer subsidies, but then you...
WTFO - October 8, 2012, 3:00 am
BTW, I looked and found that PBS gets about $450M annually. Here's the difference tax breaks are not the same as handouts. The govt can't claim that not taking peoples money is the same as spending our taxes. It's a dishonest argument from the start.
WTFO - October 8, 2012, 2:54 am
more to the story. These tax breaks are not specifically for oil companies. They are the same tax breaks EVERY business gets. http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/about_those_oil_subsidies.html. Another liberal myth blown up with facts.
WTFO - October 8, 2012, 2:53 am
Being the only one to comment on your poster is sad. Here, let me help your misguided attacks on Exxon. I did some research. The 'subsidies' everyone is talking about are not tax dollars being sent to oil (or Exxon), they are tax breaks. However, there is
crankyhead - October 7, 2012, 10:59 pm
Like Exxon. They get way more money from the taxpayer than PBS does. Not only that, Exxon is a corporation. And 'Corporations are people, my friend.', aren't they? Where's the ire and outrage for Exxon the welfare queen?
crankyhead - September 19, 2012, 12:28 am
Seriously, I made this a year ago. What're the odds?
crankyhead - September 18, 2012, 10:17 pm
Hey Willard... is this the type of 47% you were talking about? Corporations are people, right?


TEAMSTERS UNION PRES. JAMES HOFFA,"TAKE THOSE SOB'S OUT!" - Ahhhh the civility and the tolerance of the left is breath-takingly refreshing isn't it?




Guardians Of The Republic -


TAGS: democracy republic congress voting mob
Rating: 4.75/5

More politifakes by Greybeard

posterman - August 6, 2014, 2:05 am
all your freeloaders are guilty, but I refer to the mass influx of illegals in addition to the millions on welfare, food stamps, section 8 housing draining our tax dollars. Due to our inability to reform leaders we can at least address the freebie mess
Greybeard - August 4, 2014, 10:43 pm
Yes sir :)
Zeitguy - August 4, 2014, 9:58 am
And by freeloaders you are referring to the congress, central bankers and corporate elite.
Greybeard - August 4, 2014, 6:15 am
and they are too busy working and paying the taxes that support the free-loaders in our society. Vicious circle...
Greybeard - August 4, 2014, 6:14 am
No, not socialism. Just voting the free-loader enablers out of office, Set maximum 1 term limits for congress and the presidency without lucrative retirement benefits. It would never work though unfortunately, because it would take the middle class vote
posterman - August 4, 2014, 5:46 am
And sadly the entitled , lazy leeches have usurped the rights of the working class and our current liberal culture of corruption supported by mass media, forces the middle class to fund this agenda. Your suggestion socialism?


AMERICANS STILL REMEMBER WHAT LIBERAL DEMOCRATS HAVE FORGOTTEN -




DEMOCRAT INDIVIDUALISM- A BRAINWASHED MOB -




UNIONS - Give us what we want....or else!!!!




" 50+ DIFFERENT ADDRESSES TIED TO OBAMA AND MICHELLE " - Obama's Social Security number reserved for Connecticut applicants also tied to an alias Harrison J Bounel.




GMOBAMA - protector of Monsanto




Liberal Stupidity -




PREV PAGE