Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#229 - creosote (11/25/2012) [-]
If I were the prime minister and he showed up dressed like that, I would refuse to shake his hand...
#223 - PrescriptionMcCoy (11/25/2012) [-]
#191 - daroke (11/25/2012) [-]
is that semen?
#187 - jalthelas has deleted their comment [-]
#168 - anon (11/25/2012) [-]
How dare he present himself to the Hockey Tribe Master like that!
User avatar #162 - secretdestroyers (11/25/2012) [-]
Thoughts/Opinions on Steven Harper: discuss!

Yes, I'm starting an opinion thread, come at me!
User avatar #206 to #162 - MotorstormLegend (11/25/2012) [-]
...I don't really give a **** about him. As long as he doesn't do anything really ****** up, I'm happy.
#160 - trogdorthedragon (11/25/2012) [-]
**trogdorthedragon rolls 925**
maby he was TRYING to play sexy cowboy for his man
#150 - zipzapzoop has deleted their comment [-]
#142 - jvenegas (11/25/2012) [-]
do i even need to comment on this
User avatar #125 - littlenish (11/25/2012) [-]
I know alot of gays, some of them even have ball gags hanging in their living rooms. None of them dress like that.
User avatar #137 to #125 - certifiedidiot (11/25/2012) [-]
Sounds like some kinky bastards
#118 - thehiddenweasel (11/25/2012) [-]
what is wrong with kids these days?
User avatar #113 - rseliteforces (11/25/2012) [-]
#111 - samitron (11/25/2012) [-]
Hahaha, I instantly thought that.
#96 - onewithtrees (11/25/2012) [-]
**onewithtrees rolled a random image posted in comment #29 at Devil's music ** I roll,.... BLACK MAN!
#37 - anon (11/25/2012) [-]
op cant inb4 ******* faggot
User avatar #33 - jordoguy (11/25/2012) [-]
And once again he's proving my theory with every picture taken of JB he get's slightly more gayer or douchey
User avatar #23 - holeymoley (11/25/2012) [-]
#20 - CCSteel (11/25/2012) [-]
Sadly, I'm more upset that that man is my PM, terrible terrible
User avatar #10 - erihk (11/24/2012) [-]
sarah jessica parker died?
User avatar #64 - ericzxvc (11/25/2012) [-]
I hate Harper 10,000 times more than Bieber so I'm glad he wore ******* overalls, anything that makes Harper feel more the the ass-hat he is the better.
User avatar #94 to #64 - killerjumpstart (11/25/2012) [-]
why do you hate harper so much? Just another conservative Canadian asking.
User avatar #100 to #94 - ericzxvc (11/25/2012) [-]
Raised the debt to 600 billion, abolished decades of environmental regulations in which he lied to everybody saying that "he streamlined the processes" but actually just made him able to expand the oil sands and move the oil while completely destroying the environment in a completely unsustainable way. Created mandatory minimum jail sentences which cost more money, create more prisons, cause more unjust incarcerations all despite the fact that crime has been steadily going down so every single analyst has wondered why the **** there is this "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist. Abolished the long gun registry which was simply a list of people who owned long guns to attempt to prevent things like the Montreal Massacre from happening and had no negative effects whatsoever.

That enough for you?
User avatar #105 to #100 - killerjumpstart (11/25/2012) [-]
oh my sides
User avatar #112 to #105 - ericzxvc (11/25/2012) [-]
What was wrong with that statement? It's actually incredible how much environmental law he's been able get rid of, even not being someone who supports the environment (aka a stupid person) you have to appreciate how much he's managed to destroy. Plus Conservatives are just terrible with money, their deficit has historically always been worse than the Liberals, and household incomes have only ever increased during Liberals in office.
Sounds like you're one of the ignorant Canadians that enabled him to ruin this country.
#121 to #112 - tranminh (11/25/2012) [-]
where is your source for the crime rate going down, because in my knowledge it has been on the rise...
User avatar #132 to #121 - ericzxvc (11/25/2012) [-]

"Critics of the bill cite!! falling crime rates!! and say the cost of increased incarceration will be enormous, while rehabilitation and reintegration of convicts falls through the cracks."

Regardless of crime rates anyway, this guy under the new legislature would be forced to spend 3 YEARS in prison because he took a picture of himself holding a gun, does that not sound like cruel and unusual punishment to you?

You need to login to view this link

"The government provides no evidence that their get-tough-on-crime policies are responsible for lower rates of crime.
They can’t be criticized for making the “correlation does not mean causation” error because their statements are too vague to identify causes.
The available evidence from the United States and Canada says that mandatory minimums have not delivered their anticipated returns in public safety[1].
A review of the research for the government by the Department of Justice in 2002 shows that incarceration has little or no impact on recidivism[2].
A submission by the Canadian Psychological Association to the Senate Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs earlier this year presented research showing that mandatory minimum sentences are expensive, do not reduce crime, and are unjust.
Canada’s crime rate has been dropping since the early 1990s, irrespective of the government in power or their particular crime control policies
#152 to #132 - tranminh (11/25/2012) [-]
Well then, I guess my source was wrong. Don't worry though I was never going to vote for Harper anyway, however I think that expanding the oil sands is an economically sound approach. Although I think the environmental considerations should be taken into account, we're selling oil to china and buying it back at 3x the price. We should invest in our own refineries and begin to assert dominance over the great lakes and northern canada. Soon we're going to need that oil and water.
User avatar #155 to #152 - ericzxvc (11/25/2012) [-]
It's one thing to expand the oil sands, it's another to do it while completely disregarding the environment, they're environmentally damaging enough with the regulations in place. The other parties never said they would shut down the oil sands, they would just protect the environmental integrity of them, which is necessary because you don't want another BPesque fiasco. We may need it but it seems we're not going to get it, one of the reasons that Harper removed so many of these laws was so he could complete plow and destroy his way with an oil pipeline directly to the US.
#156 to #155 - tranminh (11/25/2012) [-]
Which apparently won't work eh, I've heard the US has found some crazy oil deposit on their own land and they're gonna be able to be self dependent for awhile. Sucks for Harper then lol
 Friends (0)