babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
That sounds very reasonable, which starts to ring alarm bells for me... given the Cons track record, I have deep suspicions that a refusal to be reasonable - lest they look "weak" - will guide their decision.
Don't worry. The Cons will have the $41 billion covered after they finish raising the OAS age, reducing federal contributions to medicare, science programs, Katimavik, the Canadian Revenue Agency auditors, the Coast Guard etc. Cutting 1000 people from the Coast Guard shows they have their priorities right (in at least one sense of the word). After all what's more important: having a military that can quickly do search and rescue or that can bomb the hell out of people in countries that have no capacity to launch air attacks on Canada?
Harper is getting fed up with the whining over the F-35s - so Ottawa is set to shut down the hearings on the F-35 jet purchase.