when the penny drops
in our local paper this week, i read a brief article discussing whether canada should eliminate the penny. be that as it may, what caught my attention was what one of our esteemed members of parliament had to say on the topic:
"i can't, for the life of me, think of any reason why flaherty wouldn't act on this immediately. [...] these little things add up and it's like an anchor dragging behind the boat. the minister should take the low-hanging fruit. it all adds up, and this is an obvious savings to the economy. in these times, flaherty should have no stone left unturned."
which is more worrying? a) that a paper will print this sort of drivel and call it news reporting; or b) that at least one of our members of parliament expresses political thoughts almost entirely in cliches.
although, you must admit it's an impressive piece of work to cram so many cliches into so few words, and so casually.