and……?

Well, most of that policing policy was established before Fantino entered the scene. And, if you're so critical of Conservative Fantino regarding Caledonia, what about his boss, Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty, who's completely responsible for the entire affair from start to finish?

If you were being completely consistent, wouldn't you conclude that McGuinty is even more unqualified for political office than Fantino?

But my guess is you won't even come close to being completely consistent, as per usual.

Yes, you are confused, since I haven't made any comments regarding my support for either. Instead, I simply defended Fantino's political pedigree, since he clearly engaged in a political policing strategy under the supervision of a Liberal premier. This track record undermines the notion that he's not ready for politics. I think he clearly is — regardless of what you think of his actual positions or political leanings, or the fact that he was a cop. In fact, a regular accusation made against him when he was a cop, usually by critics on the left, was that he was a political cop at that. Hard to square that characterization with the new one, also apparently from leftists here, that he's now not political enough. Got it?

Query: Are you serious?

I agree with Dennis to the extent that the tone and nature of attacks against Fantino have certainly not been consistent or coherent. Some people who attack him for the Caledonia thing are attacking from the "right", in the sense that they're claiming that he was "soft on the aboriginals" and essentially carried out or participated in a "politically correct" fiasco which amounted effectively to discrimination against non-aboriginal people. Yet I've heard lots of others take almost an opposite tack against Fantino, complaining that he's a populist, redneckesque, law-and-order type, a sort of Canadian Mayor Daley waiting to happen. So to that I think it is reasonable to say to his critics: pick a narrative and stick with it, will ya?

So, instead of responding to the numerous points I made, you'd rather question me about my "tone"? This is why I asked if you were serious. You don't seem to be.

Where in the world have I been nasty? You can't respond to one point I've made on here, so you have to go on the attack. Then you have the gall to suggest that I'm the one being nasty. This is unbelievable.

You have yet to cite one instance of my being "nasty". You're more than welcome to engage in debate. It seems that you can't. Instead, would prefer to attack me personally in a knee-jerk fashion. Is that being "nasty" too, or am I not allowed to tell the truth? Am I not allowed to dare disagree with you?

Is politics a religion to you? Is this why you get so angry at people like this? Is this why you can't engage people intelligently?

This is exactly why I asked if you're being serious. You're not. Oh, sorry, too "nasty" for you? lol

I find it amusing how some people are far more fascinated with me than with refuting one thing I have to say on here.

Wow, you spend a lot of time picking my posts, don't you? Now, how about posting the context in which all those comments were made, and the tone used to make them? There are a lot of nasty posters on here. You seem to completely ignore them, and expect me to yield when challenged. I won't do that. I don't think that's a nasty tone. But you're clearly far more interested in trying to discredit my voice than in actually responding to what I have to say. In other words, you're terrified of the threat I pose to your agenda, apparently. Must be hard to sleep at night, eh? Oh yeah, not allowed to say that. I have to sit down and take your personal attacks with a smile. Sorry.

You are threatened, since you'd rather spend a lot of time copying and posting one-line comments out of context rather than confront my ideas.

Why did you leave out what my opponents were saying?

You're not interested in serious dialogue. You are in fact terrified of it. Terrified of me, apparently.

You went out of your way to post dozens of my sentences completely editing out the context. This is serious debating to you, is it? In fact, you have refused to debate me. Instead, you have wasted a lot of time accomplishing absolutely nothing. Congrats. You're a winner, I tell ya. lol

What does anything I do in my private or professional life have to do with what I do on here? Like I said, it was always a stupid line of questioning, but apparently it's all you have. Thanks for showing up.

In other words, your entire intent was to personally smear me. Thank you for proving me right all along.

Newsflash: Subscribers automatically get one thumbs up after every submitted post. And you can't vote for yourself. But so glad to see you being on top of things and all.

I guess IntenseDebate wants to reward people who post as subcribers. I don't know. Ask them. But check it out. Every time a subscriber posts, they automatically have one thumbs up.

If they're always posting thumbs down, then I'd never have a positive rating, right? But keep up your personal campaign against me. You're just proving I was right about you from the beginning, and that you need these tactics. Thanks.

Most of my posts don't have negative ratings. Just the ones where the left-wing gets furious. Bye.

Glad to see you're so obsessed with me. But if all the feedback was negative, so, too, would be my rating. And these boards are dominated by leftists. it's why you get furious with me, and my positive rating. Thanks.

You troll a lot, do ya? Thanks again.

No, some of you can't confront my ideas, so you have to engage in these personalized attacks. I'm sorry, but, where I come from, standing up for yourself is not being nasty. It's not illegal to challenge other people's political agenda.

Okay, done. I can[t even begin to debate. You win…

Precisely. Thank you.

Why even ask it?

You can't vote for yourself, but thanks for showing up.

Ask IntenseDebate.

Even if it were established before Fantino entered the scene, enforcement of the law was in his hands, and he chose a certain path.

McGuinty also bears responsibility for Caledonia, but then again, so does any Prime Minister who's been in power since the whole shebang got started. Native treaties, as well as criminal law, are both considered federal "powers" (though left mostly up to the provinces to enforce.)

McGuinty's mandate is not directly in policing; Fantino's was. That he couldn't police the area for the greatest good to the greatest number demonstrates, to me, a failure to live up to one's mandate that I cannot forgive.

There are far better areas in which to criticize McGuinty in terms of his failure to live up to his mandate (eHealth, OLG, Health Premium, Smart Meters, coal-fired generation anyone?)

Thanks for the attack, though. Nice to know my abs can still take a needless gut punch from time to time.

Coming from a guy who regularly absolves the current 'so-called leader' Harper of any responsibility in his governing and its results makes this thread an ironic satire. Any chance you could type your opinions up faster and fed-ex them to Desperate Housewives? Seems they're in need of some new fictional ideas…

As practiced and applied by your own fearless leader, yes. I guess its live by the sword, fizzle by the sword…

I think there's plenty of blame to go around in the Caledonia situation, and I really wish you'd taken my post in the spirit intended. But you know what, you're right. I'm just a dumb loser hypocrite who doesn't deserve to sweep the ground you walk on and can't possibly defend her opinions and therefore has no right to hold any. I suppose I'll take my shoes off, find myself a smart, rich husband, mate, and then stay barefoot in the kitchen raisin' the young'ins where I belong.

I suppose I should probably get off the internet, if that's what I'm gonna do.