Armchairprophet

So, he bought an un-built pipeline for $4.5 billion of our tax dollars and THEN signed onto the West Coast tanker moratorium, a bill that will effectively kill the expansion and Canada's oil exports altogether. So how does that "keep things rolling", as you put it?

Nonsense. I think a lot of Canadians conflate US and Canadian history when it comes to the First Nations. The residential schools were arguably the only attempt at genocide in Canada and even that doesn't fit the definition you posted. In fact, some of the Native groups were important to the Europeans. The fur trade wouldn't have been what it was without the Wyandot. Outside of death by disease from incidental contact, most of the Natives killed in Canada were killed during the English-French War as a result of choosing sides and not as an actual policy of extermination..

Uh huh. Tell us, was that before or after he signed onto the West Coast tanker ban?

I have no problem with transgender people. I knew one before and after and the after part literally changed his, or rather her life. I won't get into the details about it but to say this. If you had meet him when he was 13-14, the first thought that would have likely entered you head is, "That poor bugger should have been born a girl". Keep in mind that he came from a family that wasn't too thrilled about it either so he didn't get much support except from his parents. It's the rest of the "gender fluidity" nonsense that ticks me off. I'm sorry but I'm NOT going to entertain somebody's delusions. Look folks, the mammalian world comes in two flavours, male and female, there is no "other". I've also seen where this goes. Idiots who want to be a different age. Idiots who want to be animals. Like the twit in the US. He first went through gender re-assignment surgery because he felt like a woman. Okay that's fine. Then, she went and got tattooed and plastic surgery to giver her a dragon look because she "identified" as a dragon. This brings up a MAJOR problem. If she is mentally ill, then entertaining her delusion is only harming her more. If she isn't mentally ill and truly thinks she's a dragon and identifies as such and not a human, then she is not protected by basic human and civil rights. Those are for humans. She's not even protected by animal rights since they only include real animals and not mythical creatures. So the question is, if leftists claim it is indeed not a mental illness, then should she be protected by human or animal rights?

Giving me the money back I spent on carbon taxes is not going to alter my spending habits. In fact it's been proven over and over again that taxes in general do NOT alter people's spending habits. Unless the goal is to tax them into the poor house.

Climate change is real. The planet doesn't have a static environment. However what the leftists actually mean is AGW and l'm not buying it. Do our activities contribute in any way? Most likely, we affect every other part of the environment. Are we the primary driver? THAT is the question that is still debatable. There is no consensus about it either, the 97% consensus is a myth. 97% is a result of fun with numbers. But this ain't the thread to get into that. Ugh. Nothing more annoying than a bunch of emotional and moral relativists. There's just no talking to them. It's like trying to convince religious idiots that their religion is just a bunch of made up bullshit.

Climate change is real. The planet doesn't have a static environment. However what the leftists actually mean is AGW and l'm not buying it. Do our activities contribute in any way? Most likely, we affect every other part of the environment. Are we the primary driver? THAT is the question that is still debatable. There is no consensus about it either, the 97% consensus is a myth. 97% is a result of fun with numbers. But this ain't the thread to get into that.

As opposed to idiots using over blown hyperbole and rhetoric because they don't like the fact the stats don't bear out the "Blame Whitey" bullshit narrative? Tell us oh great adjective spewer, how exactly does male Natives murdering female Natives constitute "genocide"? Why is a 17% unsolved rate for non-Native women not even newsworthy but a 19% unsolved rate for Native women is an abomination? The simple fact is, there have been studies on this very subject before and they all came to the same conclusion. There was even an independent study on murdered and missing women in general in Canada and across all racial groups, the vast majority of women are murdered by men from the same racial group. This latest MMIW crap is just another example of leftists (and various elements in the Native community who can't resist playing the identity politics game) refusing to accept reality. But then what can you expect from a group of worthless troglodytes who scream "NAZI!!!!!!" every time someone rejects their morally and emotionally relativistic ideology while believing the Natives were caretakers of the Earth and lived in some Kum By Yah fantasy world.

Actually, the fact that many of the immigrants who settled in Quebec can at least speak French isn't surprising considering many of them came from France's former colonies in North Africa and Asia. Hell, years ago I met a Vietnamese dude who was quite fluent in French and he'd only been here for just over a year. And that wasn't even in Quebec. But then there's this. "In other words, 6.8% of immigrants reported being unable to conduct a conversation in either official language." So if over 93% can conduct a conversation in either official language, then why the constant need for all the people in govt who can speak other languages? And more importantly, if one of the selection criteria is knowledge of one or the other official language, then there should be 0% of economic migrants who can't speak either official language. I also know from my experience working for Census Canada as quality control personnel that a lot of people don't like to fill out their census forms, immigrants and natural-born Canadians alike. So it's quite possible that the reported numbers could be off as well.

I take it you missed the irony of a Jewish person espousing the benefits of National Socialism?

Let's start off with the original "97% consensus". That "consensus" is another example of leftists using magic math. A bunch of scientists were surveyed about the topic of AGW, as it was being called at the time. The problem is only 33% responded to the survey. Of the 33% who responded, 97% agreed that AGW was the cause. Of the other 67% who didn't respond, several stated their reason was because the survey questions were designed to lead to a preconceived conclusion. That's not science. Since then, a number of scientists who were part of the "consensus" have since distanced themselves from it, questioning if we really are the primary cause. A former head of the IPCC and a former chair of one the European environmental agencies have both stated that the AGW push is simply a massive transfer of wealth scam. The climate doom and gloom has been going on since at least the 1950's. What's interesting is the oddly large number of 12 year predictions. Some of the more memorable ones were; 1950's America had 12 years before it became mostly desert. In the early 70's we were about 12 years from an ice age. In 1998 it was predicted the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2000. In 2001 it was predicted the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013. The Greenland ice sheet and receding glaciers: The shrinking Greenland ice sheet is a non-starter. It didn't even exist 1000 years ago except at the very north of the island. That ice loss would put sea levels at about where they were 1000 years ago. Scientists are " shocked" at the pace it's receding and yet it only took 400 years to cover the interior of Greenland in the first place. This leads us to the receding glaciers. Again, we really don't know how fast they grew so to be "shocked" at the rate of loss would suggest one knows the previous rate of growth. Then there's the seriously flawed science and some of it I believe is intentional. One of the worst cases involved measuring the output from volcanic venting. Not the actual eruptions, just the normal venting they do. When all was said and done, they calculated that volcanic venting generates about 0.2Gt of emissions per year and compared that to humanity's 30Gt/yr. Problem is they only measured the ones they could reach and failed to extrapolate the data for ones on the sea floor, which conservatives estimates put at around 1000X as many as there are above sea level. That would put volcanic output from venting at about 200Gt/yr, almost 7X higher than human activity. Finally, there's the damn impressive footage I saw from Wood's Hole. For decades it was believed the Mid-Atlantic Ridge was fairly quiet. That is until Wood's Hole took a much better look at it. It was awe inspiring and terrifying at the same time. Mile after mile after mile after mile of active vents, volcanoes, stacks and smokers. Now having said all that, I'm not saying our activities have no effect on the climate. After all, we affect every other part of our environment so it would be silly to suggest that's the one part we don't. And I don't think you'll find a single scientist who would suggest so either. The only argument is just how much are we actually responsible for. And shouldn't we actually find out for sure before we start knee-jerking solutions to problems that aren't going to go away anyway? Climate change happens whether we're here or not. If it's happening and all we're doing is merely contributing to it, then all this knee-jerking is only going to temporarily put off the inevitable while leaving our kids and grand kids so deep in debt it won't matter if the world is still here and doing fine, they won't be able to afford to enjoy it.

Oh wait, let me guess. You think I'm a Conservative because you stupidly assume I'm a conservative, right? For the record, I support sex-ed. What I don't support is a bunch of whiny leftists who constantly play the guilt by association game acting like there's nothing wrong with a pedophile drafting up a sex-ed curriculum. Do you get it yet or should I just bust out the crayons and draw you a nice simple picture? Are you a liberal or a leftist? I gotta know so I know whether or not I need to dumb things down for you.

Which ironic considering how many of them were willing to elect a Jewish person who espouses the benefits of what is effectively National Socialism.

Are you saying you're stupid and don't understand context? What part of "drafted by a now convicted pedophile" are you having trouble comprehending?

Yeah, unlike the outraged closet pedo's all upset over the scrapping of a sex-ed curriculum that was drafted by a now convicted pedophile. I guess the concept of guilt by association only applies to the right. You know, like how Scheer is a White nationalist because he didn't get all self-flagellating and self-aggrandizing about White nationalists.

No place has EVER seen a reduction in emissions as a result of a carbon tax. Of course you hear the old argument that they reduce net emissions but they're just using the same fancy math tricks that corporations use to declare a profit as a loss. It's all based on projections, not actual amounts. Speaking of the oil sands, I get a HUGE laugh out of the most recent McDonalds commercial going on about how their Canadian beef suppliers have reduced their emissions by 15% over the last 30 years. Meanwhile, the oil sands have managed to reduce their emissions/bbl of oil produced by 23% in just over 20 years. Which is pretty borked considering the agriculture-fast food industrial chain is arguably the most destructive industrial chain on the planet and unquestionably the most wasteful. Yet ironically, the same mind-set that cheers the loss of good paying oil sector jobs, whines about how those poor kids at McDonalds don't get paid enough.

Huh, and my post was deleted because of "inflammatory speech" towards a political party, not an entire race of people? Love the double standard I'm experiencing here already. Apparently, "inflammatory speech" is verboten towards hate-filled, homophobic, religious extremist political parties, but overt racism gets a free pass.

I don't see them as blaming immigrants so much as criticizing the current immigration system. There are some harsh realities that have zero to do with bigotry. It's not exactly a secret that Canada is suffering from an affordable housing crisis. So what's this govt's solution? Increase immigration numbers. Yeah, that'll help bring housing costs down. As well, any immigration or economics expert who understands the economics of mass immigration to a welfare state will tell you that Canada's immigration program is disastrous. Even the Europeans have said as much. The problem is the 1% factor. The closer you get to an annual intake of 1% of your total population, the less the benefits of immigration outweigh the costs. Once you're over the 1% threshold, the costs (not just financial by the way) outweigh the benefits. Nothing bigoted about it. It's also well known that since the days of mass immigration began, landed immigrants as a whole take more from Canada than they contribute. It's not until the 2nd or 3rd generation that they start "paying their own way" so to speak. The other issue is the number of unskilled, completely unemployable migrants we let in, many of whom are illiterate in their own language. If you have no discernible work skills, and have no working knowledge of either official language so you can at least be trained for something, then you shouldn't be permitted to emigrate to Canada and leech off the system. As well, to not have immigration rates tied to some economic factor or another is short-sighted, stupid and downright dangerous to the over-all health of Canada.

Nah, it makes perfect sense to me. What with all the hot air these faux Liberals are spewing.