• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

Nice to see that johnunit has no respect for the judicial system. You know we have an appeals process, right? You don't get to choose which judgement you like based on your feelings of a person.

1. How many times do I have to say that it's done and on to the next issue?

2. You rant in here all the time about people you feel have been too lightly sentenced, yet when it's a politician you support, someone who disagrees with the judges has "no respect for the judicial system." I'm doing the EXACT same thing you do when you bemoan short sentences for offenders.
 
And how often do you support lenient, virtually pointless sentencing - yet oddly support the hammer being dropped to its full extent in this case?
 
774670_10152484015320026_1352268019_o.jpg

That's funny but I'm pleased that he won this appeal, because the clown cannot get his right wing agenda through the council. Smitherman would have got his right wing corruption through, as the Star lets any Liberals completely off the hook. It's funny given their coverage of the ORNGE scandal never mentions Smitherman at all.
 
He represents everything I detest about right wing politics. But I also feel sorry for him at times because he's just so ****ing stupid it's almost sad. Of course, that is quickly tempered by his nastiness and bitter politics of resentment.
 
And the guy you advocated for cost this province $1 billion over a health care scandal that he claimed no knowledge of despite being the Health Minister at the time.

.

Funny how the left can't see something as huge as McF*cks green energy program to hold up the sky and line up his buddies pockets. BILLIONS a year for twenty years.....for nothing. Did I mention BILLIONS a year? Money that could be spent on health care and schools by the rate payers? Nothing to see here.

But Fords grain of sand "illegality" to get money for a charity is the Hindenburg.

Idiocray class.
 
My dislike of him means that I'd have been happy if he had been removed for breaking the law, just like your positive feelings towards him makes you unhappy that he was almost removed.

Except he didn't. Except the endless lefty law warfare on him amounted to nothing but a waste of time.

If you don't like him, don't vote for him. I'm sure that will hurt his feelings. LOL!

Harper is taking a moment away from his secret agenda and waving a hello too. Hope you will vote for him or else his feelings will be hurt too.
 
After Rob Ford’s legal victory, Toronto’s humiliated left has a front-row seat to watch the mayor’s influence grow

COMMENT

What will they do, the massed forces of the Toronto Spring, the great swirling media-leftist agglomeration that had convinced itself that they had the city’s right-wing mayor, Rob Ford, on the ropes? They’ve been counting votes, announcing candidacies, speculating and musing about recapturing city hall from the evil clutches of a mayor who actually wanted to curb the growth of city spending and reverse decades of slide and deterioration.

The story was so big in the minds of the Toronto media that they had spun the possibility of overthrowing Rob Ford into a national event. Was it a symbol of a national reawakening of the left? Unfortunately, all the plans and fantasies—the late Jack Layton’s wife, Olivia Chow, was being trotted out as the left’s likely standard bearer — had been pinned on the outcome of a court case.

In a staggering blow on Friday to the great entrenched left-wing power base in Canada’s largest city — a base that has never accepted loss of control over their sprawling government enterprise — an Ontario Divisional Court threw their hopes out of court. The unanimous three-judge appeal decision concluded that the very foundation of the case was based on a series of manoeuvres by Mr. Ford’s enemies on city council — manoeuvres that were essentially illegal.

Anti-Ford activists on council, with a sympathetic Integrity Commissioner as accomplice, had essentially attempted to force Mr. Ford to repay $3,150 that had been contributed by others to a high school football team at the mayor’s request. Council had no legal authority under the city’s Code of Conduct to punish Mr. Ford in this way, said the court. The attempt was “objectionable” because “council did not have the jurisdiction to impose such a penalty.” It was “ultra vires” — beyond council’s power — and therefore “a nullity.”

Good word, that. Nullity is where the left is at right now.

The rest of the case falls apart as a result. Some are claiming Mr. Ford won on a “technicality,” including Clayton Ruby, the high-profile activist Toronto lawyer who brought the charges into court. Mr. Ruby says he will appeal Friday’s decision to the Supreme Court, but at least one expert in administrative law says such an appeal has little hope.

“The Divisional Court’s judgment is almost certainly the end of the legal saga,” says Paul Daly, adjunct professor of administrative law at the University of Montreal, in a commentary in today’s National Post. “The Supreme Court of Canada has a very limited power to entertain any appeal.”

So now Toronto’s mayor and the city can begin to get back to business. The mayor himself seemed somewhat contrite. He claimed to have found the process a “very, very humbling experience.” That lasted a few seconds before he moved on to say: “We are running this city better than any administration ever has” and that he planned to push ahead with his agenda “for the next six years.” That implies he will be running for another term in 2014.

Doesn’t sound too humiliated to me. And six years is a long time in politics, even longer if you’re on the political left and you have just spent the better part of a year on ill-fated and ultimately embarrassing trumped-up failed legal cases engineered by Mr. Ruby, a national hero of the Canadian left.

The other case run through Mr. Ruby’s legal shop attempted to pin a libel charge on Mr. Ford over comments allegedly related to a Toronto restaurant owner. There was much media and political hysteria over that case, too, but it was thrown out just before Christmas.

So now, across Toronto and at city hall, the gunslingers of the left will have to re-holster their empty political revolvers. They are said to be shocked at the outcome.

They should, in fact, be shocked at their own ignorance and deep ideological bias. The charges against Mr. Ford were weak and flabby from the start, and this loss was predictable. Many Torontonians see it that way too.

I kinda like the way I put it in a column last December: “They have no case and no just cause beyond their own ideological delirium — these fantasy rock throwers, the usual collection of leftists and waffly centrists, cringing sophisticates, downtown Liberals, Toronto Star columnists, CBC reporters, Ryerson academics and would-be mayoral candidates who would like to maintain the old quasi-corrupt ways that have long dominated Toronto city government.”

Good riddance to all of them, at least for a little while.

Mr. Ford remains the nearest Toronto — and maybe any city in Canada — has had in recent decades to what I have called a straight-shooting Saperlipopette-disturber. He’s no saint and he has his uncouth flaws, but he is also someone who tends not to play along with the ingrown culture of municipal governance that has dominated Toronto politics for decades.

Recently, with Mr. Ford calling most of the shots, the city passed a budget that was as close to good policy as is possible, especially during a period when the mayor was at the time under constant siege from the left and the media.

If there’s a Toronto Spring, Mr. Ford may be its torchbearer. Torontonians can now expect more good government — or at least better government — from city hall. The recent past under Mr. Ford includes a more disciplined budget, an abandoned plastic bag ban, privatized garbage collections, mostly quiet unions. There should be more to come, on transit reform, road repair and spending.

In the transit debate and future budgets, Mr. Ford’s influence and authority will be higher than they were before the left tried to engineer a coup via the courts rather than the ballot box.

Many have said — and continue to say — that Rob Ford may have learned a lesson from these cases. They had hoped — and still entertain the idea as a weak fallback position following the court decision — that Mr. Ford would be humiliated. It is hard to see it that way, in the wake of Mr. Ford’s two convincing court victories. It is the left that has been humiliated.


http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/25/....influence-grow/

SIX YEARS!

:smilielol5:
 
as of today it is basically illegal to unlock your cell phone in the US.

I think it's only if you are in a contract. Once the contract expires or you buy it out, you can unlock the phone. Still ridiculous though.
 
I think it's only if you are in a contract. Once the contract expires or you buy it out, you can unlock the phone. Still ridiculous though.

how is it ridiculous? When you buy an iPhone or Galaxy S III for 50 bucks from the carrier, the carrier has loaned you $650 for the phone in exchange for you signing a 2 year contract (3 years here). You don't want your phone locked then save up the money and buy it outright. Or accept the fact maybe you can't afford to have all the cool toys.

What they should do is that if you want out of the contract and after you pay the ETF they unlock the phone for you. They also need to change roaming charges.
 
I don't see the connection. Either you've purchased the phone or you haven't. If you've purchased the phone (at a discounted rate) on contract, then unless the contract states clearly that you're leasing the phone or some such, you own the device itself. The service contract is entirely separate. If you don't live up to the terms of your service contract, the carriers have potential redress for that, ie/ termination of service, collections, credit reporting. The device though, should not be locked, and it should not be illegal to unlock.

The device and the contract are two separate items imo.
 
Contracts are being written differently now. It's like a car payment. Sure you "own" the phone, but technically the carrier does until you fulfill your contract with them.
 
Think of it as financing maybe?

Other than if you're planning on leaving the country, then there is absolutely no reason why you would want the phone unlocked unless you're planning on switching carriers.
 
Think of it as financing maybe?

Other than if you're planning on leaving the country, then there is absolutely no reason why you would want the phone unlocked unless you're planning on switching carriers.

If I own it, then what my plans are for the device are none of the carriers concern aslong as I don't breach the contract. But if what Corks is saying is the new industry standards...that's different, because you don't actually own the phone until it's paid off. In effect, they're putting a lien on the phone until the contract is honoured in full.
 
I don't agree with the supposed recent changes (I am not 100% certain) just read something a few months back when I switched to the iphone.

With that said, my real opinion sits with the excessive costs for data and minutes. Why we don't have a truly unlimited plan for say, 99 bucks, is unbelievable.

All this my-5/10, incoming calls, ect, nonsense is insane.
 
Back
Top