Comment 20386

By Serious (anonymous) | Posted March 27, 2008 at 08:07:54

GQ, you consistently try to set up a straw man to defend Don's indefensible somersaults in logic. No where in my statement is there hatred for MacLean. There is a dislike of his style and his 'persona' and his policies and his utter disregard for the honest opinions of others (in this case Councillors) who disagree with him. I have never spoken to him but have watched him in action at a public forum I spoke of. I was behind him and that was uncomfortable because it was summer time and I think he had biked to the location in the east end. Not a pretty thing. In spite of that, I didn't know who he was til someone pointed him out and he was obnoxious to say the least.

But in this article, it is his illogical conclusions that gall. If someone votes for raising bus fares so services can be improved, they are according to him anti environment! If someone tries to keep the competitive edge on the airport, they are anti environment. If someone doesn't toll the Linc, they are anti environment. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe people were just voting on fares and airport lands and tolls? And don't tell me that people should see everything through the environmental lens. Although a motherhood attitude, it isn't always preached even by Don who goes on the computer, a clear anti environmental thing to do. Who probably has electricity, a clearly anti environmental thing to do. Who probably shops at a grocery store and buys food from far away, a clearly anti environmental thing to do. Who probably drives to the two universities he works in, a clearly anti environmental thing to do..etc etc. Do you see how silly this argument can get?

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds