meggo Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 globe article here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Evil_Mouse Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Apparently Ambrose and Clement are sticking to the party line, I see.That's just way too sad. Please call a spade a spade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_rawk Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Huzzah! The results of the first rounds of testing on your average Canadian citizen made some headlines back in Nov. 2005 (I said in a post titled "powder, blood & ethics" in that first blog that I ever started and abandoned that "this is just a point the size of a pin on the tip of the tip of a very large iceberg")Glad to see the testing re-emerge, and with prominent political figures as the test subjects this time.Apparently Ambrose and Clement are sticking to the party line, I see.I'm pretty chuffed about the Conservative's policies regarding chemicals. Gawd knows the Liberals were never anxious to do anything about it, and never made a single gesture to indicate that they ever would. IMO Ambrose and Co. can laud CPC policies as much as they like, so long as they keep the beneficial ones up. (Fuck, how upside down has the world gotten? I just came to the defense of Ambrose and Clement!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmoothedShredder Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 (edited) I'm pretty chuffed about the Conservative's policies regarding chemicals. Gawd knows the Liberals were never anxious to do anything about it, and never made a single gesture to indicate that they ever would. IMO Ambrose and Co. can laud CPC policies as much as they like, so long as they keep the beneficial ones up. (Fuck, how upside down has the world gotten? I just came to the defense of Ambrose and Clement!) Hehe, I was wondering what to think of this, and before I replied, I wanted to make sure I knew what chuffed meant. When I looked it up on dictionary.com, I must of found the most loaded term I've ever found!!! (That doesn't really say much) It means it's opposite... as far as I can tell. Check it out: Chuffed at Dictionary.com I reserve my response until this clarification is presented!!! Edit: After checking some other sources, the value neutral definition pertained to loud puffing noises... so... I'm still confused! Good puffs, or bad puffs? Edited January 4, 2007 by Guest To puff or not to puff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 cool, im gonna start using chuffed. i wonder what caused the complete reversal of meaning ... sounds gay if ya ask me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_rawk Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Heh. William, I meant the "delighted; pleased; satisfied." definition. That said, I did a number on my back recently, and reserve the right to chalk my satisfaction with the present direction of a Conservative party policy up to the use of alcohol as a muscle relaxer the moment an election rolls around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts