Leaderboard

Hawley is such a sniveling worm. This is pure partisan hackery and a gross publicity stunt. Such legislation is long overdue. It's been proposed over and over again in both the house and the senate without success. Someday it will happen. The concept is great, but if Hawley actually cared about doing good instead of getting his name in the papers he wouldn't have given his version this silly name, which is a poison pill. You can't build bipartisan consensus (as others have genuinely tried to do) while being a partisan a-hole.

Also important to point out that without Al Gore all this climate hysteria doesn't happen. If you want to pretend what's happening as far as the effects of climate on society is only about the science go for it but observance of the obvious tells us most of it is political.

All I have are facts. Fact: Trump lost the election. Fact: Trump knew he lost Fact: Trump lied and said the election was stolen Fact: Trump hosted a “stop the steal” rally which resulted in the storming of the US Congress and six deaths. Donald Trump belongs in a prison cell for that.

Well... a poster says "I know that sea level rising, because I look at it with my eyes" and I produce NOAA data done with measurement tools. Would you expect the first poster to say "oh, right... thanks, my error" ? I kind of would because that's what I would do.

Reference - Sea Level Rise in Florida (references from NOAA data) https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida/#:~:text=When the ocean rises high,352% across Florida since 2000.

The cult-like ideas...such as? When you're reading and looking for things to confirm what you already feel and believe, it's very easy to find lots of information on it. What I find really odd is how a forum (which means "place to talk") for world leaders that's been attended by world leaders for decades has now been conjured into a nefarious CABAL/CULT simply by virtue of angry repetition. Here's a great quote: “Thank you Professor Schwab for that kind introduction, I also want to thank you particularly for the invitation to speak here that you extended to me earlier this year. But more than that, Professor, you have made the World Economic Forum an indispensable part of the global conversation among leaders in politics, business, and civil society. And in the face of continuing global economic instability, the opportunity this gathering provides is now more valuable than ever. So I know everyone here joins me in thanking you for, in service of the common good, your vision and your leadership." -Stephen Harper, Davos 2012 I don't think it's any surprise that you weren't fussing and whining about this 10 years ago, nor do I find it surprising that our mouthpiece opposition leader had nothing to say about it back then when he was part of the Harper government. The only reason he has anything to say about it now is because the conspiracy circus has been talking about it non-stop for the last 2+ years and he can harness that befuddled rage by echoing it back to you and pointing it at someone.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/josh-hawley-introduces-pelosi-act-bar-lawmakers-trading-stocks-profiting-office Josh Hawley introduces PELOSI Act to bar lawmakers from trading stocks and profiting while in office A Republican in the U.S. Senate is looking to prevent lawmakers and their spouses from trading stocks on which the officials would have privileged information and used the bill's title to make a not-so-subtle dig at former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. On Tuesday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., introduced the PELOSI Act, officially the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act, requiring members and their spouses to divest any holdings or put them in a blind trust within six months of entering office. "Members of Congress and their spouses shouldn’t be using their position to get rich on the stock market - today l’m introducing legislation to BAN stock trading & ownership by members of Congress. I call it the PELOSI Act," he wrote on Twitter Tuesday. The bill comes after revelations last year that Nancy’s husband, Paul Pelosi, traded between $1 million and $5 million of stocks for semiconductors just days before Congress allocated $52 million to the industry. The stocks were later sold at a loss to remove the appearance of impropriety. Only a couple of talking points. (Liberals here will stupidly try to change the subject and make this about climate change. You watch.) 1. ANYONE ELSE trying this kind of insider trading would have been arrested. Insider trading is a FELONY. https://kretzerfirm.com/insider-trading-penalties-punishment-jail-time-for-illegal-insider-trading/ 2. If LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP were still in office and a Democrat had proposed a law against such Congressional insider trading, EVERY LIBERAL HERE would be celebrating and even beating off. 3. The country needs MORE bills like this, where Congress is held to the same standards as the taxpayers who pay their salaries.

And this is from a major corporation that the Democrats probably IGNORE when it comes to tax laws. https://www.foxnews.com/media/davos-speaker-one-billion-people-stop-eating-meat-innovation-environment Davos speaker calls for one billion people to 'stop eating meat' for 'innovation' and the environment Siemens AG chairman said the future will bring proteins that are zero carbon, healthier and tastier than meat A speaker at the World Economic Forum (WEF) called on one billion people to "stop eating meat" to combat climate change. "If a billion people stop eating meat, I tell you, it has a big impact. Not only does it have a big impact on the current food system, but it will also inspire innovation of food systems," Siemens AG Chairman Jim Hagemann told the WEF crowd in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday. He was "inspired" by his 24-year-old daughter who asked him how he could advocate for "zero carbon value chains" and still eat meat products. To bring you up to speed on this ignorant hack, here are the talking points: 1. There is no climate change. (For climate change, there has to be MAJOR changes in local weather conditions, which is the very definition of climate change) 2. Termites produce more C02 in the atmosphere than all human activity combined. 3. The largest concentration of greenhouse gasses (which keeps the surface of the earth from resembling the surface of the moon) is WATER VAPOR, which is 97 percent of all greenhouse gasses. (Makes sense, since THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH IS WATER). Only 29 percent of the ENTIRE surface of the earth is land. (including continents and islands) https://bettermeetsreality.com/how-much-land-is-there-on-earth-what-is-it-used-for/ 4. Out of that 29 percent, HALF of that is used for ALL agriculture. (Growing food.) That means 14.5 percent of the earth's land surface produces ALL agriculture, FEEDING EVERYONE. https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture Out of that 14.5 percent, 77 percent of that is dedicated to cattle production. That means ELEVEN PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE EARTH'S SURFACE IS DEDICATED TO RAISING MEAT. The numbers don't lie. But that retard from Siemens (who I guarantee you has a succulent T-bone steak every night for dinner) somehow thinks 11 percent of the earth's surface is somehow outpacing the 97 percent of all greenhouse gasses and somehow changing the climate.

I have posted a couple of web sites both being from the WEF , you either think that those comments are normal and acceptable, or you did not look at the sites... read them and tell me those are thought from a organization with nothing to gain form all this talk.... Those ideas that the liberal government has been flashing around all have originated in the WEF...Carbon tax, build back better, just transition... which supports my claim that this organization has great influence over our government. we shit a large tuna every time China has influence over our nation, a large organization with the backing of billions of dollars and now people are say nothing to see here move along... One has to ask themselves why Soros said during an interview that his organization had penetrated the Liberal government, and then went on to name names... maybe i misinterpreted that... or maybe you brushed it under the table... to me if it smells like shit it normal is... And if all that is normal to you then carry on...for me i think there is something else there, what, i do not no, but any organization this powerful normally has an agenda, again i do not know what it is...But it does interest me... You seem to think becasue Harper was a member, that there is nothing there, PP was also a member what does that prove exactly...And what did you expect Mr Harper to say, he was a guest that attended that convention on his own accord...again it proves nothing except Harper is polite, and respective to his host... To be honest it was not on my radar 10 years ago, i was still in the military and really did not have the time or effort to look in to it...which again means nothing really...I was assuming PP was a member according to a few sources i have read, again he was now he is not, means nothing to me. As for PP, what ever he is doing is does seems to be working, he is getting support from some where, where do you think his support coming from... can't be that many rednecks out there, so i think the center is starting to cave, and see PP has the only vote left worth voting for...

You know what! There are a number of law schools in B.C. such as the U.B.C. in Vancouver, the University of Victoria Faculty of Law, Thompson Rivers University, People's Law school, and Peter A. Allard School of Law. So it ridiciulous to say a private Christian University such as the TWU is harming LGBTQ people. There is no reason in the world why they would want to go to a Christian university or complain about it unless it is politically motivated like you. Your claims are a plain lie about harming LGBTQ. Every private religious institution has a perfect right to have their own admission requirements. This is not China.

It actually makes a lot of sense, knowing that the FBI was spying on him and his guests.

I think that during elections all the candidate must attend local All Candidates Meetings wearing huge fake tits. Then you'll laugh so hard you won't remember the promises they made in their speeches that they had no intention of keeping

Hypothetically: Let’s say climate change was real. Based upon the logic you lived by, it would be impossible to prove it to you. Because you have convinced yourself that you absolutely do not want to believe it no matter what.

Indecent acts are permitted if you're a protected class in Canada. At least, child porn is still an offense and not just a sexual orientation.

Or marriage, or a contract, or when ordering at McDonalds ? You agree to something and you get something. If you don't agree to it, then that's fine too.

The collusion nonsense started during the campaign little one. Hillary went around with her drunk rants about the Russians and how she lost because of the Russians. Should be locked in a psych ward

The woke mob giveth and taketh away. No rational reason

NASA has been measuring this with satellites for more than 30 years. 0.13 inches per year means 1.3 inches every ten years at the present rate, which is 30% faster than 20 years ago. If it keeps accelerating at that rate it in 20 years it will be .17 inches a year and in 200 years it will be increasing at a rate of almost 4 inches a year, but we know now that the rate of acceleration is not linear, it is increasing, If the rate is increasing at a rate of 1 inch every 10 years, that will mean 4 inches in the next 30 years and 5.2 inches in the next 30 years. In 200 years that would mean a total rise of 19 inches but we know the rate isn't linear. The recent study of glacial melt in Greenland found the undermining of the large glaciers by warm sea water is causing them to melt at a much faster rate than was thought.

^The MSNBC is strong in this one. His mind is weak. He could watch Joy Reid for an hour and not spot a smidgeon of lying, racism, hypocrisy or stupidity.

1. No, but it nullifies your reasoning - which is why I pointed it out. 2. The name is indeed used to identify witches, as witch hunts tend to do. 3. I opined that the policy makers within the organizations would likely align their policies to avoid legal challenges. I think that stands to reason. 4. I'm just trying to see if we can come up with ways to discuss this on level ground. What are the considerations ? What does agreement, vs. agreement-to-disagree look like ? We're not going to convince everyone, nor are we going to solve the disagreements but this would make it easier for me to understand the various viewpoints. 5. I would say your problem is with the policies themselves. Which is fine.

Absolutely. Two centuries on, a blind and mindless ride continues. All the mental effort so far went into conservation and preservation of the status quo, as of Day 1, intact and unchanged. Take the Constitution that just cannot be updated, simply no way (if anything, that seems to be the consensus). Think of the God that couldn't lift the rock They themselves created, yes, done and accomplished! Could it be because, as was pointed out eloquently, the request was for a "good" government, which isn't synonymous (especially if it's the governments itself that gets to judge its goodness) with accountable, responsible or even responsive? Unlike these qualities that are objective, clear and measurable, "goodness" can be in the eye of the beholder.

1. They do it plenty of other places and it gets lots of coverage. 2. No - PEOPLE started doing this first. The government FOLLOWS the people. When gay marriage was passed pretty much 1/2 the country was already ok with it, and numbers were on the rise. Why do you think the Liberals frame themselves as the ones leading the charge ? And why do you buy in to Liberal public promotion? 3. My doctor ? What ?

Inland poster here. Not afraid, but I am just trying to get straight what people who post disinfo then refuse to retract it are afraid of.

I'm saying what we need is more voter power, not just how we count votes. We need more democracy, take some of the decision making away from the government which has grown into an elite separate class that threatens to dictate its terms to us, no matter how incompetent they are. We are in a nanny-state. Because we are coddled by government, we are ignorant of the issues and carry on happy-go-lucky, not needing to burden ourselves with the knowledge needed for good governance. Then we complain bitterly when they screw everything up. For comparison look to the US model, they have far more voter's rights to decide who will be in government, right down to the lowest levels. The right move is to put limit s on government size and power, and Canada needs this drastically.

If you added up the ratings of the so-called “liberal media” news, they would crush Fox News

Absolutely true, according to the rules that you made up. But what you don’t understand is that America is a nation of LAW. And Biden and Pence did not violate the LAW. Trump did. What’s the difference? The difference is two-fold: First, the LAW says that removal of classified documents is only a crime if the material was KNOWINGLY removed with the INTENT to keep it. Both conditions must be met. Second: The suspected charges listed against Trump involve obstruction of justice and lying to investigators. Pence and Biden were 100% cooperative; Trump was not. Trump insisted on keeping the documents after not only repeated requests, but even after court orders. Trump himself said he was “negotiating” the return of the documents. There is nothing to negotiate! If I steal your car, am I allowed to “negotiate” for its return? Of course not! Biden and Pence did not negotiate; they proactively looked for the documents and voluntarily returned them. And in Trump’s case, the charges listed so far do not pertain to whether the documents were classified or not. The issue is stolen government property.

1. Yeah but it's their job to be outrageous. 2. If you deny the existence of trans women, though... 3. How can you be so sure? Maybe they're trying to be accommodating? Maybe they actually polled their members? It would be like someone calling you a bigot without knowing your reasons. I'm trying to lay out some parameters for this problem without jumping ahead to character assessments. 4. I don't think that making negative generalizations that condemn a group of people has been ok, acceptable or logical for a long time. Even talking about racism in a white society is something that we have to tiptoe over, lest people get offended. Even if it's a fact it's not the "fault" of people living today. It's nobody's business to editorialize in their perceived issues with other groups. 5. How do you know that somebody's comments on black people are truth versus feelings? There may be some truth in what they say, but to put any group on a lower level than you is very much an exercise in feelings. 6. Well JK is wealthy, and able to speak her opinions without regard to her reputation I guess. Personally, I understand why people get prickly when somebody from another group puts them on a lower level. You just have to look at the immense white backlash against critical race theory on here to see a living example. What about your example above about black people? Doesn't that apply to trans people too? I do think there could be a time when, like the past, there was more comfort and talking about our differences. But there's not enough energy to do that today, just look around and see.

No it's not. Warming is not happening nearly as fast as the majority of climate modeling predictions. Kind of "glacial" in comparison if you like that word.

1. C16 ? Well it IS law. You can not accept it in your heart, but it is law. That's neither here nor there though. Pretty much all of us have to live under laws we don't agree with. 2. Ok, noted. I respect that you have an opinion but it's not actually interesting to me in terms of the discussion on this thread. I know lots of people don't care for the law. How do we as a country deal with a change like this is a better question to me. If your answer is 'resist' then ok to that too, but it's not applicable to this question at hand here. 3. Another good question. There's this traditional idea of 'reputation' that professional societies adhere to. Basically if somebody in the profession acts outside certain bounds then the association is concerned that it makes the entire group seem disreputable and ununified. If you want to erase the 'behaviour' clause exactly, or change it then maybe it has to be done. But it has to be legal and it has to fit the goals of having a professional association in the first place. So you WON'T be able to say "unprofessional comments do not include criticism of trans rights or their new status as women" because that won't stand up in court. And - yes - you can complain about that but in the context of this thread that's like admitting there's no way to change things IMO.

The worst part about it is that many of the people complaining are those very same poor, who rant about the "elites" who are trying to screw them while demanding policy action that actively makes their situation worse. ?‍♂️

The effects on the supply chain aren't multiplicative, and they are not 1:1 costs. Fuel costs are only one among COG factors. If you're seeing a carbon tax on fuel (pretend 5%), that's not being amplified up the supply chain. When you buy something, that 5% is watered down with a multitude of other unrelated costs to get you to the bottom line, so the price impact ends up being maybe 1-2% instead. That's why the 35-40% fuel price spike we experienced this last year didn't drive inflation up nearly that high. In the case of the carbon tax, if rebates etc are handled properly, this would have little/no impact on the poor. I don't usually like consumption taxes in general, but like alcohol or gambling this is more of a usage/vice tax, where the people "abusing" it are the ones who end up paying the lion's share (and not the poor, who often can't even afford to drive). Outside of heavily carbon-intense businesses, the economic impacts are grossly exaggerated. Where it may hurt the most is in Alberta, but considering Alberta still generates something like 50% of its electricity through coal, when they're producing and exporting a much cleaner (and cost-efficient) alternative, I have a lot less sympathy than I would otherwise.

the Abrams is not really harder to maintain than the Leopard 2 the Honeywell AT1500 engine is quite reliable, it's battle proven in the harshest conditions ( Arabian dessert ) it's also multi fuel, it can run on diesel, marine diesel, gasoline, or jet fuel Abrams is also stealthy, we used to call them "whispering death" because the engine is so quiet in case of both tanks, the advantage is the thermal sights with the Rheinmetall RH120/L44 gun both Arbams & Leopard can see and shoot Russian tanks beyond the range which the Russians can see & shoot also, don't underestimate the British Challenger 2 being sent as well the British L30 CHARM rifled gun is longest ranged in NATO Challenger 2 holds the world record longest ranged tank kill in Iraq, at 5,100 meters Challenger 2 also has the heaviest frontal armour of any NATO MBT

1. So it sounds like you want to radically remake how professional organizations work. You want no moral code, no restrictions on speech... what about if people face unrelated sanctions like fraud ? Is that ok ? You can answer, and then maybe explain how we are going to collectively experience what comes of this. 2. It didn't have anything to do with JK rowling. I don't know how many times I have to say that on this thread. I should count.

Here is the matter: "The college says the complaints against Hamm stem from her identifying herself as a registered nurse while making public posts supporting biological females and criticizing transgender women. This, says the college, underpins the forthcoming hearing. “Between approximately July 2018 and March 2021, you made discriminatory and derogatory statements regarding transgender people, while identifying yourself as a nurse or nurse educator. These statements were made across various online platforms, including but not limited to, podcasts, videos, published writings and social media,” states the citation."

I'm not even poor and the carbon tax was neutral for my family at the last time I checked.

It's not that simple. You can do things that make huge differences for relatively minor costs, while influencing and improving behavior and minimizing waste. Canada's overall impact is not large, but our per-capita impact is among the worst in the world along with petro states like Qatar or Saudi Arabia. Poorer nations than Canada are transitioning faster than we are, so the argument that there's no point in us doing anything is silly. While more pro-active countries than us expand their economies and substantially reduce CO2 levels at the same time, we're left on the wrong side of progress. I don't agree with a lot of climate policies around the world, and ranted for years against the Liberals' disastrous green energy grift in Ontario, but that doesn't mean that everything they did was bad. Phasing out coal is the sort of low hanging fruit that everyone in Canada should be able to achieve, especially when we're one of the world's biggest exporters of cleaner-burning natural gas.

Other countries are experiencing similar problems. For example, the UK: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/01/up-to-500-deaths-a-week-due-to-ae-delays-says-senior-medic And Europe generally: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/a-ticking-time-bomb-healthcare-under-threat-across-western-europe

That's not why she's in trouble. Read again.

That's what you took of that post? ?

If you let an EV run out of range, you have no choice but to call a tow truck. I did see a tiktok where a guy had a generator in the trunk of his Tesla. Even if you planned to use it. You'd need to spend 3 hours plus charging the car with the Generator. If you lack proper planning skills, an EV may not be for you yet.

Actually, Florida WAS underwater a while back. And that was BEFORE world governments started funding junk scientists to wag their fingers at us about climate change. But there is ZERO evidence that Florida will be under water in 99, 0r 900 years. Algore said Miami would be under water around the year 2001, and so far they're still partying at South Beach. Key West is still and overpriced tourist trap. The water levels all around the state haven't moved in the past 23 years. But what does that have to do with the subject of the thread? Are you too stupid to discuss the subject of the thread? It's about gun control. I thought you goose steppers beat off to gun control stories.

Those of us who make up most of America (Mainstream conservatism) believe in freedom of choice and freedom to make up our own minds (as well as the RESPONSIBILITY of having to live with our choices.) People can come up with these illogical, fact free conclusions and those of us who make America work have the right to LAUGH at these bozos.

This has nothing to do with professional behaviour. Unless they can show that she brings it to work and it affects the way she does her job, they should stay out of it. I'm getting more and more worried about professional organizations that are setting themselves up as arbiters of social issues. It is a really disturbing trend. It is not their mandate to tell people what to think about things that have nothing to do with providing health care, let alone penalize them for it. Her opinions on who should be allowed to use women's washrooms is no more their concern than it is to this man.

Oh, by the way, the LARGEST carbon bomb on the earth, the WORST polluter is CHINA. Think China has acres and acres of cattle ranches?

They are the best, and your biased left wing rags will not convince the country of the opposite.

FACT: Florida has the worst nursing schools in the United States.

They’re sick control freaks who think they deserve to micromanage populations. The WEF is an unelected mob of kleptomaniac disaster capitalists who use the cover of solving world crises to commodify every aspect of human existence in order to accumulate more power and money for themselves. Trudeau and Freeland are ardent supporters to the degree that they will foist policies on the public without a public mandate then give us a sell job. It’s gross but most people are simply too removed, gullible, exhausted, and/or disempowered to do anything about it. Make no mistake though, the fascist ESG alignment of big business with government is overriding national constitutions and sovereignty. People generally aren’t getting it and are toeing the party line by calling anyone who calls attention to the undermining of democracy a “conspiracy theorist”.

Naw, your screen is too small. LMAO

There's a world of difference between a President and a Vice-President having classified documents at his residence.

Maybe if it is found that Joe violated the LAW like Trump did. Trump has displayed both HIS KNOWLEDGE OF, and INTENT to RETAIN, the documents. Joe HAS NOT.