Leaderboard

Trump is playing the media for a fool. While you people get excited about things that hardly matter, he's busy signing executive orders like they're going out of style. Protestors can bitch and whine about how rude he is, but that changes absolutely nothing. He;s done nothing worthy of impeachment at this point. Trump was elected in part for those very personality traits you abhor. BECAUSE he is rude. Nothing he's done is self-inflicted. But rest assured, being POTUS means he can readily inflict pain onto others. With a mere word, even...

Please delete my profile.

Headscarves were common female apparel among Catholics even in my time in Europe. As long as you can see the face there is no problem. Ditto burkinis. Women should be perfectly entitled to cover up as much as they want on the beach. Men, too.

I thought maybe I was the only one catching on to this. Trump wakes up and spins a shiny top for the media and then gets on with his day.

Probably a good idea to silence the ones who are telling lies, and encouraging/ inciting violence against the state.

I don't think so.... here's why... Women are treated much, much, much better here than they are in the Muslim world, in general. That is so obvious that I don't think I need to provide a cite, but I will if you like. You don't have to be a perfect society to criticize a place, or culture/religion, that is so much worse. We will never be perfect. So, according to your theory, we can never criticize anyone for the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation because of the wage gap in Canada. That's complete nonsense.

Taken away, at least. By ambulance isn't necessary, and multi-year assignments on work farms is a pretty expensive punishment for what is essentially property damage.

President Trump has done nothing yet that would constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors". U.S. presidents are not impeached because some people don't like their policies, including foreign nationals.

President Trump cannot be impeached from his presidency. He must be impeached, and then found guilty for the articles of impeachment (U.S. House) by trial in the U.S. Senate. President Bill Clinton was impeached, but still served two full terms as president.

Give the system a chance to work. The courts can and should strike down unconstitutional orders.

I noticed in the old software that the top posters for the day was actually calculated over 24 hours and not a calendar day, perhaps it is the same thing with the reputation points (ie. if you gave them yesterday afternoon then they will be cleared this afternoon and not this morning at midnight).

Do you think that every person with moral objections to abortion votes for an anti-abortion candidate? If they do will you denigrate them as hypocrites? Voting requires prioritization and it is unreasonable for you to expect that everyone else shares your priorities. When it comes Trump's "racist policies" a voter could reasonably gamble that the courts would prevent him from acting which would make Trump a safer vote than Hillary who promised to enact policies that many people find unacceptable. IOW, Trump was a reasonable choice for people who had fundamental objections to Clinton's policies. The fact that he is a despicable individual does not make it an irrational choice - especially if one believes that the checks and balances built into the US system actually work.

I think you have that backwards. Trans people have been discretely using opposite public restrooms for decades with extremely minimal impact on anyone. But in 2016, in response to nothing at all, the North Carolina Republicans decided to make a law against it anyway. Their law is utterly unenforceable, and doesn't even prescribe penalties in the unlikely event that somebody somehow figures out how to enforce it. All it did was manage to create a bunch of hype and hysteria over a menace that didn't even exist. It doesn't make any cis-gendered person safer... the hysteria the law created did manage to make at least one cis-gendered person less safe, as a genetically female woman got attacked in a restroom because some redneck chicks thought she might be a dude. And while the law became infamously known as "the bathroom bill", it actually contained a lot of stuff that didn't relate to bathrooms at all. It contained provisions banning municipalities from implementing other anti-discrimination measures. It prevents municipalities from implementing minimum wage laws. It prevented people from suing for discrimination-- later overturned. It prevented municipalities from not hiring contractors with discriminatory practices. There was a considerable amount of stuff aimed at making sure that municipalities couldn't set employment standards that exceeded the state employment standards, whether it be in wages, hours, sick leave, or anti-discrimination protection. It's somewhat Orwellian that this generalized attack on worker protections became known as "the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act". The freedom of speech? When was that in jeopardy? The freedom of speech is doing fine. The rights of gay people or trans people aren't on quite as stable of ground as the right to free speech. Especially in some parts of the US, where lawmakers are constantly on the attack. That's why the protests. You can ask "well it only affects a small portion of the population so why is it a big deal?" but to me the idea that it's ok to attack people if you pick a vulnerable enough target doesn't sit well. -k

Do you mean the Environics survey? I also noted that it said that more Muslims had respect for other people compared to respect for Canadian culture than non-Muslims. Non-Muslims seem to cherish Canadian culture over respect for other people.

Key point - that so many foreigners (and even many Americans) don't understand. ===== As a foreigner (non-American), it took me some time to understand that many Americans voted for Trump because of immigration. It took me far more time to understand that Trump (like many Europeans but unlike most Americans) is shameless. Donald Trump is like an elderly German nudist in a spa: The American coastal, cool Hollywood PC "Liberal" left cannot shame him.

Equating the hijab with the niqab is silly. It's just a head scarf.

I have no one on ignore.

I vow never to give anyone a thumbs down.

No downvote please. Just an upvote.

It is not a policy. It is a character flaw... Yes, it is a character flaw... I labeled it a 'policy' because being a racist can impact policy (plus we were comparing it to things like the environment before, which is a policy issue.) You see, that's where I strongly disagree. I've already pointed out why being a bigot should be considered more than just a 'minor flaw'. I guess in the grand scheme of things, if you were a Trump supporter I'd have to label you as being "OK with racism". Yes, that should also have gotten him disqualified too. But the fact that he has one character flaw doesn't mean that the other character flaw (bigotry) isn't also enough to disqualify him. But I've already addressed that issue. Yes, in theory its possible that a Trump supporter didn't hear about Trump's racism, or they heard (from sources like Infowars) about supposed evil things hillary has done. But that wouldn't justify their support of Trump to me. If I were hiring someone and they said they voted for Trump because "Hillary was involved in Pizzagate" I would also find that a reason to be hesitant to hire them. Why? Because as a business owner, I'd want to know that any employees that I hired were able to engage in enough rational/skeptical thought to analyze sources of data and accept or reject those sources based on their accuracy/trustworthiness. Otherwise, I'd be hiring someone who is more gullible and more prone to scams and bad data than they should be. I never claimed that the mainstream media was perfect. Yes, occasionally they get facts wrong. Yes, sources can have biases. Yes they can sometimes be prone to sensationalism. But, the vast majority of times when a source like the New York Times or CNN posts some bit of information, that information will almost always be true. Yes, I'm sure if you hunted down every article ever published by the Times or CNN you can probably find many things that they've gotten wrong. But if they are correct 99% of the time, that should be considered enough to say "these people are pretty darn accurate". The accusations that the Media is "wrong" often comes from sources like Infowars (and from Trump himself)... sources that are much more flawed than the mainstream media that they are condemning. Trump: "Hey, I lied about supporting the Iraq war... but trust me when I say that the Main Stream Media is wrong!". I recognize that The Toronto Star has a left-wing editorial slant. I recognize that Sun News generally has a right-wing editorial slant. However, I would not hesitate to refer to information published in either of these sources (regardless of their bias) because I know that the facts that they themselves published are likely correct (even if they put some sort of spin on the information.) The New York Times, CNN, NBC, etc.... usually correct in the information that it prints (even if it may have an editorial bias). Sources like Brietbart, Infowars and Trump himself... source of such alternative facts such as pizzagate and 9/11 inside-job conspiracy nonsense. It would be nice if all Trump supporters were able to recognize that "A source which is sometimes wrong is still better than a source that is almost always wrong".

Just the ones where you slag canada and canadians.

Yeah, that was ugly. He was almost threatening any black who would perform at the inauguration. And the MSM was, of course, pretty much fine with this and the other factors I mentioned.

Another aspect of this was the artists that were to perform at the inauguration events. An actual witch hunt ensued, with the fury of a woman scorned. Jackie Evancho, Jennifer Holiday, Toby Keith to name a few, but most wouldn't go near Trump for fear of Facebook hate pages and death threats, which these artists received. Then there was the black witch hunt. Any African American who dared to be seen at the Trump tower was attacked and mocked relentlessly. Steve Harvey was called a mediocre negro being dragged in front of TV as a photo-op. This on that wonderful bastion of open minded discussion, CNN. Democrats preach tolerance, but I guess it comes with strings attached.

Let's be honest here. The conservative party is not a real conservative party. It is a liberal party dressed in conservative clothing. Why? Because they all think and act and pretty much carry on with the same programs and agendas as does the other. Whether it will be JT or some new conservative party leader they will all adhere to political correctness and multiculturalism, and will keep flooding this country with the third world, and refugees. Canada means nothing to them. All they are interested and concerned in is money, power, and trying to keep up with the Aga Khans of the world. The conservative party is smart enough to know that in order to gain power one must speak political correctness and suck up to every minority in the country. So, don't worry about the conservative party if they ever did come to power. All Canadians will be doing when they foolishly vote is to replace one JT liberal party with another JT liberal party. In Canada it will always be the same old, same old because the majority of PC Canadians like it that way.

I do not have a problem with the two dollar toll but this is just the very start. 2 bucks today will grow very rapidly to cover inflation,administration, upkeep,HST, cause they need a raise,want to build a monument to some woman,cause it rained last Tuesday, etc,etc This is just the start of the tolls coming. There is already talk in other big cities of starting them up as well.

Considering Greg, that you feel it necessary to insult someone with every single post you grave us with (it just happened to be me in this case) it's quite clear that we wouldn't have an adult to run to anyway. I'll again show myself the door.

You shouldn't shoot your mouth off about things you know nothing about. You absolutely do not own anyone's content here. There is nothing that you can put in the terms of service or the rules of the forum that can change that. Legally is it NOT yours. I don't have a reason to want to remove my content, but some people might have very good reasons for it. I guarantee you if anyone decided to get a lawyer involved, you would lose. Again, even Facebook and Twitter cannot assert that right, even though it's in the terms of service. You can edit and delete any and all of your content there, because they have smart lawyers that are protecting their owners from themselves.

Since I started getting involved with investments I have discovered the vast, vast ignorance most people have in Canada about investing. They know nothing, and they have a level of discomfort with it all that leads to an aversion to learning. The losses to banks are long term, and people have a hard time wrapping their minds around them. Banks take advantage of that. And not all fees are quite so obvious. For example, the mutual fund my friend was put in holds, not stocks, not bonds, but a collection of other bank mutual funds which contain stocks and bonds. All of those funds also have fees. So is my friend paying twice over? I'm not sure, never having owned these instruments, but it wouldn't surprise me. There is generally a lot of fine print in buying instruments like this and people don't understand the implications of what's written, nor have a comparison readily available. The Canadian financial industry has been preying on and ripping off the middle class for decades. So we have no business criticizing US financial disclosure records or rules of behavior for US financial institutions.

I presume you mean the scale of it in Canada because around the world spousal abuse happens a lot whether the country is Islamic or not. For example, in Russia domestic abuse is not considered much of a crime and they don't keep statistics, but it's estimated that 14,000 women a year die. If you are concerned about the scale of specifically spousal violence by Muslim men against women in Canada, then consider this Stats Can study, which found that Aboriginal women were at highest risk of spousal abuse, non-immigrant women were #2, and immigrant women were the least likely to be victims of spousal abuse. One could make the point on this study that it's based on self-reported crimes, as well as police data and so immigrant women may be less likely to report, but another Stats Can study says that about the same percentage of immigrant, non-immigrant and aboriginal women report spousal abuse. Stats Can doesn't seem to separate the various immigrant communities, so we don't know if Muslim men are more likely to abuse their spouse than other immigrants, but it does seem that they're less likely to do so than non-immigrant men. I am certain it is a problem around the world, among Islam and among non-Islam countries. In Uganda, for example, there is no law against domestic violence and over 60% of women report being abused by their intimate partner. As noted above, Russia doesn't even keep statistics but in-country organizations claim 10s of thousands of victims per year. To me, it's the country or even region that can be blamed for the problem, not a particular religion. So, for some reason Canadian men groping and propositioning women is to be expected, but Muslim men groping and propositioning women is terrible? I do not understand that double standard. Tarrabush Game'ai literally means 'group harassment' in Arabic. It's not a term for a 'rape game', as some media outlets would have you believe. Yes, gang rape is an ugly feature of life in Arabic countries, and in Western countries. Even prior to the refugees coming into Germany police would set up 'sanctuaries' for women during Oktoberfest, to offer them protection from drunken German men. It's possible you've missed all news reports of women in Canada, Britain and the States in which a woman has been gang raped at a party, whilst other party goers took pics, or simply didn't notice. Here's just a small sampling: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gang-raped-front-hundreds-clubbers-magaluf-2096376 - 17-year-old raped by 6 British men in Majorca. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a8557036/taylor-hirth-gang-rape-independence-missouri/ - a particularly horrific story of a woman who was gang-raped while her two-year-old daughter was in the room. https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/court-documents-reveal-horrific-allegations-in-toronto-police-gang-rape-case - in Canada, a case where three cops raped a woman. I don't point these stories out to you because I want to defend rapists or think Islam is some paragon of virtue among the religions of the world, but because I think blaming Islam for these things is misguided. As long as those things can be found around the world, among all different cultures and beliefs, then the refrain of "It must be something about Islam" is clearly wrong. We can't solve a problem by looking at the wrong cause.

Kimmy, does Canada's Bank Act have such a regulation? Heck, who exactly regulates Canada's "financial institutions"? Indeed, is there any regulation at all? Reserve requirement

Are you going to give up your little blue Viagra pill because Pfizer is part of that coalition?

Interlopers hiding among protestors does not make the protestors guilty of the interlopers acts. If you want that logic, then you are personally responsible for every terrorist act that ever happened in Canada.

I only caught a few minutes of the speeches last night, and the stupid CBC didn't put the names of the nameless on screen while they were talking but it was the nameless that seemed the most reasonable of the bunch.

Interesting how you connect the interlopers to the protestors as if they were the same group. You might be happier in communist China with its work camps.

Also an Algerian national that Canada had an outstanding arrest warrant for.

It's definitely a warning.