blackbird

There have been claims for months by some democrats that there was collusion between the Russians and Trump team during the election campaign. As a result of such claims, there is an ongoing investigation by authorities such as FBI, but they are investigating because they are required to investigate any allegations. It doesn't mean or prove there is anything in it. Democrats know that if they can keep investigations going, they get some propaganda value out of it. That's the nature of the system. I doubt it will find that the Trump team was working with the Russians to defeat Hillary and the Democrats. This is not an investigation for treason. There is such allegation except maybe by some extremists.

Trump is not being investigated for treason. That's fake. If you read the 64 Ways, you will see that the tactics which are being organized by the activists are undemocratic and anarchist. Taken from manuals of anarchists. Planting radicals in what are supposed to be grass roots meetings of constituents for the purpose of creating chaos and disruption of meetings.

" Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/64-ways-obama-is-sabotaging-trump/#vopt5I4dS7SHEo8p.99" This is unprecedented. Setting up a Operations centre to oppose a democratically elected president, not for the democratic purpose of preparing for the next election, but for the purpose of using every strategy possible to bring the government down by questionable means. Whether any of this is legal or not, I am not a lawyer and couldn't answer that question. It certainly sounds sinister. In taking the view Trump is an illegitimate president they are disrespecting the democratic system and the outcome of the election. The democratic system is supposed to operate in the elected Congress and Senate. "28) The manual advised protesters to spread out in pairs to make it seem like the whole room opposed the Republican host’s positions. It said, “This will help reinforce the impression of broad consensus.” It also urged them to ask “hostile” questions – while keeping “a firm hold on the mic” – and loudly boo the GOP politician. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/64-ways-obama-is-sabotaging-trump/#SrS5K5DzyDHZkGjk.99"

Because if you read the 64 Ways .. it shows there is an organized and professional effort by certain key operatives underway to attack the government and eventually bring down Trump. MSM doesn't report this.

Canada recently said they are giving 360,000 dollars to the third world (Africa) for family planning, which is a euphemism for abortion. Appalling that we have a federal government that would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of our tax money to fund aborting unborn babies in Africa. At the same time, Trudeau and the Liberals are running up a 30 billion dollars debt here at home. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't we have to pay interest on any federal debt? This interest will be an added burden on taxpayers. Trudeau is increasing taxes with his carbon pricing scheme, giving billions to the third world, and driving us deep into debt, which our children and grandchildren will have to pay back. Guess he is trying to make a name for himself on the U.N. Maybe he's eyeing a future job as secretary general, or some position on an international body. I'm sure the U.N. will love him for his generosity with our money and his blindly following along with their climate change agenda. Incidentally he took over 300 people to the Paris climate change conference at taxpayer's expense. How could Canadians have elected them?

Hasn't the travel ban 2.0 made a lot of exceptions?

NAFTA is a good deal for both countries with more than one billion dollars a day in trade crossing the border and thousands of jobs in both countries depending on it. I don't think it will be changed much. Maybe some minor updating. In the past the NDP was the most vocal opponent of free trade and their key supporters, the union leaders. I'm not sure they are still opposed to it. Maybe they have seen the light.

37) Talk-show host Rush Limbaugh said he was certain the former president and elements of the Democratic Party were behind the protests because they have been too organized and too professional to be random eruptions of grass-roots discontent. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/64-ways-obama-is-sabotaging-trump/#1DOHqivqgw7ASeJJ.99 It's true as this article on WND says. I think it should be obvious the protests were NOT just random grass-roots protests. They were well organized. Your claim that WND is not a credible source doesn't stand up. The 64 Ways do make sense. If you want to believe everything the CBC tells you (or doesn't report) or the CNN slant go ahead. But I don't.

If what you say is true, that taxpayers are paying for denomination schools, it is unacceptable. We have freedom of religion. Anybody can go to any church they wish and believe what they wish. I just think taxpayers should not be funding any religious schools.

Leitch is a good choice. Me too. I read the Bernier was supporting the separtists back in the 1990s and early 2000s.

I thought you were a "defender of the right", as your info says. You can't be a defender of the right and be a leftist at the same. You know what happens if you try to walk with one leg on each side of the fence. This link you gave with the critique of WND has the sound of being written by a leftist, probably a liberal democrat and maybe even more radically left. It's funny that these anti right people always find time to throw in a bit of anti-christian jibes. Regardless of what you believe spiritually, the article 64 Ways seems to be reasonable. I have read part of the 64 Ways down to about #32 and it makes complete sense. It is nothing outlandish which some might think from the title. It actually makes a whole lot of sense. It simply is pointing out how the anti-Trump people are part of a professional protest organization of activists and activist trainers, and it is run by Obama in the background for now. It describes how they are going about their plan to oppose Trump's agenda and possible bring Trump down. Haven't finished reading it.

You couldn't have read it in 30 seconds.

So you have read the long article in 10 seconds? Amazing!

How do I move it to United States Politics? Just sent a request to the Administrator to ask it to be moved.

It might seem outrageous and unprecedented that a newly departed president would devote himself to overthrowing his successor, but that is exactly what a mountain of growing evidence appears to indicate. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/64-ways-obama-is-sabotaging-trump/#W2APqBS2eyLASAui.99 http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/64-ways-obama-is-sabotaging-trump/

I think the doctor was annoyed with the patient because he refused to quit smoking. I'm not sure what happened finally. I doubt if most doctors are like that.

I agree. Don't know why someone would give you a thumbs down. I gave you a thumbs up to cancel it out.

Private religious schools are only partially funded by government. The reason is because people pay tax dollars for education. If they send their kids to private schools, the government provides some funding and the parents must still pay a monthly tuition for each child. In one school I know of, I think it was $400 per child per month. That is a lot of money. Some provinces might be different where the Catholic church has some kind of historic agreement with the government to provide catholic schools funded by the provincial government. But this is an exception and there is no such agreement for other religions. I'm not sure why you don't agree with eliminating religion from government. Not sure what you mean by government. Government cannot favour one religion over another. Can you see the unfairness of government favouring one religion over another? The best way they can be seen to be fair is not allow any religion in public schools or public universities. If people want religion in schools, they are still free to send their kids to a private school which has their religion. They can also go to their church after school. They shouldn't ask the school to provide a place for worship. Taxpayers are not paying for that.

Yes, I agree that is exactly the situation. But, we must stop dwelling on the past and the blame game. If native leaders are going to focus on the past and looking for someone or something to blame, they will never be able to help their people. It is easy to say these things, but people have to change the present paradigm, which is dependency. I read a book a few years ago called "Dances with Dependency" out of poverty through self-reliance --- by Calvin Helin. He is a native, who finished school and went to university, became a lawyer, an author, and public speaker. He is a kind of motivational speaker who understand the problem of dependency. His books and messages are widely acclaimed. Try Googling him. I believe he has the answer. But the will has to be there.

If people started being denied medical care because they are overweight, drink liquor, don't exercise enough, or because of a whole string of other sins, there would be very few people who would qualify for medical care. I don't think the medical system can discriminate against anybody based on anythiing. Everybody has a right to receive medical care. The problem is the long waiting list for some things, the high cost of certain drugs, and the overcrowded emergency rooms, and overcrowded hospitals. As far as quality of medicare care, Canada is way down the list of countries providing good medical care. Costs are escalating and care is declining in some ways. Governments are failing to act to rectify the problems with the health care system. All they can come up with is a 20% tax on sugar, while the health care system deteriorates. Patient blaming by the elites. One of the weaknesses of democracy. Nobody is accountable because there are so many issues at election time.

There are some doctors who will not give you heart surgery if you are a smoker. I overheard a doctor tell a smoking patient that on the heart ward. That saves a lot of money too.

An organization is demanding the federal government put a 20% tax on drinks with sugar in them. This would include all beverages such as pop, juices, cold drinks, coffee, and teas. Would you be in favour of such a tax? The idea is to force Canadians to reduce consumption of drinks with sugar in them and thereby reduce obesity and health problems. Some opponents say this will not reduce consumption. Is this a misguided attempt at social engineering? Is it an assault on personal freedom? They can calculate it will bring in over 10 billion dollars of tax revenue for the government. What do you think? Good idea or bad?

The problem is if Trudeau brings in a law, a judge can sentence anyone to a jail term and/or fine. Unless you have a lot of money to appeal and challenge it, there is not much you can do except go to jail. Also, there is no telling which way an appeal court will rule these days and you can't count on the Supreme Court to stand up for freedom of speech. When there is a law forbidding any speech against Islam and their side has lawyers arguing it is "Islamophobia" and against the law, you might have a hard time proving you have the right to freedom of speech. Doesn't matter that much what the Charter says if the law says something different and the judges give more weight to the law because of political correctness and powerful lobbies and lawyers on Trudeau's side.

Heard that Trudeau is bringing M103 back to Parliament March 21 for second reading instead of waiting until April. Trying to rush it through?

So how do you explain the videos that were taken of the planes flying into the twin towers? How do you explain all the evidence that the planes were hijacked and passengers reported on their cell phones that they were hijacked? How do you explain the plane that flew into the pentagon? How do you explain the plane that crashed into the ground after some passengers fought the hijackers and a woman passenger phoned a relative on her cell phone and told what was happening? How do you explain the authorities have identified who each hijacker was and traced their lives up to the day of the attack? How do you explain the fact some took pilot training to learn how to fly the passenger jets in a basic way?