CdnFox
-
Posts
27,105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
283
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by CdnFox
-
-
5 minutes ago, Aristides said:
The are elected to speak for their constituents, period.
Don't be silly. They frequently speak in the house on matters other than those which affect their constituents, and they vote on everything regardless of whether or not it affects their constituents.
5 minutes ago, Aristides said:An MP from St. John’s does not speak for the people of Whitehorse.
Of course he does, and frequently. We see it all the time. The guy from st johns can be a cabinet minister speaking for all of canada on finances - or be a shadow cabinet minister doing the same. Or may serve on committees to make decisions for all of canada. Etc etc etc. Did the guy in whitehorse elect Freeland? She's talking on his behalf - what's that about?
The house of commons is a chorus. Each region elects a voice to go and discuss the matters of the state on behalf of ALL canadians. Those people will vote, act on, decide etc issues for all Canadians. They will speak on behalf of canadians. Watch question period some time, MOST of the speakers are speaking for all canadians not just their constituents (tho that does come up once in a while due to familiarity).
THey ALSO speak for future voters who may not even be born yet, not just those who voted for them right now.
Sorry - you're wrong on this. The fact that a riding elects someone does NOT mean that person ONLY speaks for that riding.
-
6 hours ago, Moonbox said:
I'm the one who's angry...
I know. Thats what i said. Try and calm down a little.
6 hours ago, Moonbox said:There are better and more productive ways to cope with what's so obviously lacking in your life.
Liiiike what? Jumping into conversations to pick a fight and crybaby about how the person is picking a fight?
Getting angry and worked up because people on the internet can think and type faster than you? Those kinds of really productive activities that you do you mean?
Yeah - thanks. I don't think you've got a lot to be teaching anyone about leading a productive life
Say hi to your mom when she comes down to check on you kiddo
-
1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:
There were lots of reasons for the fall of the empire, but when it comes to the inability to fund itself, that had more to do with the country being too big. e.
Absolutely untrue. The size of the empire played almost no role in it's demise. The byzantine or eastern roman empire was considerably larger and lasted for 1000 years.
-
5 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:
Nope. Even in Ancient Rome, they used taxes for infrastructure and public services. The taxes actually increased along with the size of the empire because the Romans understood that maintaining such a large territory requires more government.
Yep, the didn't use 'taxes' for infrastructure, at least not by and large. Soooowwweeeee. They had SOME 'public funds' they spent on infrastructure but it wasn't from taxes. It was from tribute (business license basically), land fees, bribes, fees and licenses for the most part (and occasionally just killing a rival rich person and stealing everything in ceaser's day). So not taxes. The average person didn't pay a tax. There was no payroll deduction slip for the average person.
And a LOT of the roads didn't even come from that. It just came from the pockets of rich people.
So sorry kiddo wrong again.
-
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:
Of course. But the Right wants no sex ed at all.
Well that's a blatant lie. They believe in age appropriate sex ed that's focused on how pregnancy works, dispelling myths (like you can't get preggers if you have sex standing up, one of my faves), STD's, and some basics about health and biology.
They just don't want to teach 4 year olds how to do anal. Which seems to upset your kind terribly for some reason.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:They also want homeschooling, because most child abuse takes place in the home.
Well that's pretty stupid - first you're a disgusting person if you think right wing people support child abuse and want to create situations where it happens more, as you just said. What a pile of human trash you are to say that.
And second - if that WAS they're goal they just have to wait till the kids come home and abuse them then. It's not like kids are in school for 24 hours. So i would be a dense reason even IF it wasn't a disgusting thing to say.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:And of course, they don't want teachers finding out that a child is being molested or otherwise abused, since they'd call CPS.
Teachers don't give a crap. They're more likely to be abusing the kid anyway.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:I'm not a liberal, but that's just not true. Liberals want to raise the minimum wage, build infrastructure in rural areas, and expand medicare while conservatives want to cut medicare, medicaid, social security.
And give people more money. Soooo yeah.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:Why do you think the right-wing establishment started obsessing over queer people and "wokeness" like three years ago? It's because Republicans have no issues that are popular with average Americans. They need to obsess over culture war nonsense because they don't want to talk about economic policy.
Riiiightt - no republicans were ever elected before that, i forgot.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:Let's say that's true. Let's say that behind the scenes, Democrats look down on blue-collar people. They would still be the better choice because their policies benefit the workers. Whereas Republicans only make policy that benefits the rich.
Nope. IN fact AOC threw over 4000 great paying jobs in the can in new york with her leftie bullcrap and lack of understanding.
And busiesses and wealthy people are fleeing left-run states like new york and cali. In droves. Those workers are either going to move to a non leftie state or suffer.
11 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:And when you say "family values," you mean you're against gay marriage.
Actually campained for it. With my gay conservative candidate. At a convention. Where it was decided that the CPC should drop that because it was bull. And to keep his earlier promises when the CPC got in they had one vote in the house saying 'should we drop this or keep fighting about it" and it was 'drop it', and for 10 years it never came up again,
Sooooo yeah. Again - you lie because it is the only way you can try to make a point. I tell the truth because the truth makes my point.
-
1 hour ago, Aristides said:
AOC, MGT and Boebert do not represent the United States. May does not represent Canada. They do represent enough people to win their respective constituencies.
You're moving goalposts.
First off they absolutely do represent the us - she's literally called a representative. Sorry - that's the way it is.
Second off - you've switched from canada's people to "canada" or the "US". Nice try.
AOC is as representative of the people of the US, May is a representative of canadians. That is absolutely how it is. They speak in the house and they speak in public and they're not speaking JUST about things that affect their riding. They're elected to represent the people. The riding is the people who chose them to speak on behalf of the people but they still get to speak on behalf of the people. When they vote - they vote for all canadians. When they speak, they speak for all canadians. Which is why they're SUPPOSED to watch what they say a bit. And not call canadians bigots or mysoginists or wastes of space just because they disagree.
-
47 minutes ago, Aristides said:
She is not parliament, she is not the people, she is one member. Saying she represents Canada is like saying MGT, Boebert or AOC represents the US.
No one person is the parliament or the people. Are you saying NO one represents the people?
I don't think you get how this works. And people like AOC are indeed representatives of the people. A fact that's caused some trouble.
47 minutes ago, Aristides said:Government is the Cabinet.
Don't be silly. The gov't has nothing in the slightest to do with the cabinet. The cabinet doesn't even really exist as part of the governing structure - if Justin didn't want to have a cabinet he doesn't have to. thats' why they change size with each gov't. It's simply an internal structural tradition that works well for organizational purposes. The Cabinet isn't The Gov't. How many votes does "the cabinet" get? zero. The only people who get votes are the individual MP's regardless of whether they are cabinet or not.
The Parilament is the governing body, with one party forming the official government, one party forming the loyal opposition, and the rest forming the remainder of parliament.
Pretty much all matters of import need to be voted on. Any new laws, any spending, etc. THAT - and not the cabinet - is how the people are represented.
Do you know how many votes justin trudeau has? 1 Do you know how many lizzie has? 1. They are actually no different in the slightest when it comes to representing the people.
As leader of the party that currently forms gov't, Justin is the voice of the canaidan GOVERNMENT - but not the voice of canadians. No more than lizzie etc.
I know this seems counter intuitive. but it is in fact how it works. Justin isn't even the head of state in canada. And the representative of the head of state could decide tomorrow that justin isn't prime minister any more.
Lizzie is in fact a representative of the people as part of the governing body.
While this might not be comfortable for you (god knows i need a shower after saying it) it is the way it is.
-
33 minutes ago, eyeball said:
To be sure there is and always has been a very good indicator of totalitarian leanings in our governance which is the amount of secrecy baked into it.
Sure. You almost can't have gov't without it. But - this bypasses some of the most important checks and balances that are in place to keep that from going too far.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:
Your above quote is a concept that TreeBeard, eyeball, and others have no grasp of. The Emergency Act was abused by an inept government and its weakling leader. If not reined in, that weakling leader will use it again . . . and who knows for what.
Sadly true. And worse, each time it's abused it makes it easier to take the abuse an inch further. They'll take this example and stretch it just a bit the next time, and then do the same the next time.
Fortunately SOME people on the left, in this case the civil liberties groups, have figured it out and we'll see if they can have some success in court. I hope so - this is not a good thing.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, eyeball said:
No, I asked if you'd like to dial back your totalitarian rhetoric - in the context of suppressing dissent.
The totalitarian rhetoric was yours. I didn't mention hitler or the like. Nor did i say a future leader would be liberal or mention a political leaning.
I swear sometimes you're like a magic 8 ball - you just rattle your head and say whatever floats to the top.
If it becomes established that It's ok to enact the emergency act to suppress protests the gov't doesn't like, then a totalitarian, authoritarian, or just plain egomaniac gov't of the future can abuse it to essentially crush all protests in Canada by attacking people's assets even if they're only supportive. That has a wide range of applications
So that's bad. If you don't think that's bad - well then you're helping earn that repuation of being a little more like hitler that you talked about, aitcha
-
33 minutes ago, Aristides said:
She is a MP and leader of a party with 2 seats in Parliament, not a member of the government, that is the PM and Cabinet.
The Parliament is literally the voice of the people. Parl -iament. A speaking.
The gov't is the gov't and is charged with the administration of the people but the entire parliament is the voice of the people. That's even what the word means - here's from the dictionary:
A representative body having supreme legislative powers within a state or multinational organization.
So - while Lizzie cannot speak for the GOVERNMENT per se, she absolutely CAN and DOES speak for the people. She is not the only voice that speaks for the people, but then there's no ONE voice that speaks for the gov't either. Even the leader doesn't do that. Things still need to be voted on
So yes - Lizzie does represent the people of canada. When she speaks she speaks for Canadians. She's not the only voice that does, but she definitely is A voice that does. What else did you think a representative democracy was?
-
15 minutes ago, Aristides said:
I'm not on social media other than with friends and relatives, this is as close as I come. I just don't like Trudeau. Although I wasn't a big fan, I was OK with Scheer and O'Toole. I'm waiting for an election platform before I make up my mind about PP.
Well it's always wise to keep one's powder dry till all the cards are on the table. But honestly - i'd rather see you vote ndp or green than justin That guy has GOT to go
But - election's a long time off (theoretically). So who knows - perhaps the elderly will get their act together and come around to pp a bit more
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Aristides said:
Not the ones I know. Boomers weren't the big recipients of the 600+ billion in new debt JT has racked up. I blame Canadians for him, I don't pick and choose.
Well the ones who respond to numerous polls do
In fact that's one of the weirdest things politically in the last while - traditionally the older people are pro conservative and younger people are pro lib/ndp. For about the last year it's flopped, and younger people are flocking to the CPC banner while older people are going liberal.
I wonder if it has to do with PP's presence on social media, whcih is more likely to be seen by younger people. But yeah - you hit 65 and his approvals go down.
-
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:
In terms of suppressing dissent? ?
yes.
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:I said comparable to Stalin or Hitler or would you like to dial it back somewhat?
You're asking if i'd like to dial back what YOU said?
-
Just now, TreeBeard said:
No, she doesn’t speak for Canada. You’re either obtuse or dishonest.
Sure she does. She's a gov't representative. She can't enter agreements but yeah, when she talks she's representing canadians. That's what it means to be an mp and leader of a party in the house of commons.
Did you not know this was a democracy?
She might not represent ALL of canada but as we noted neither does justin. In fact - justin got about the same number of votes as she did.
Sorry - if you didn't know that an mp is speaking on behalf of the people when they speak then i'm afraid your education is severely lacking.
Swing and a miss kiddo.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, eyeball said:
Parkinson's Law is a fact of life.
Work expands so as to fill the time available for it's completion.
That's true, but i'm not sure that's the issue here tho is it? It's more of an increase in the cost of living. or are you suggesting the bureaucracy and such expansion is what the cost of living increase results from?
-
13 minutes ago, Aristides said:
Not sure why you blame Boomers for JT. Most I know don't like him.
Actually he's most popular amongst boomers, and my comment would have been blaming the millenials for him.
-
17 minutes ago, eyeball said:
A few frozen bank accounts? That's a pretty lame assed totalitarianship.
Actually i pointed out more. Thanks for paying attention tho, you've been great ?
17 minutes ago, eyeball said:No it's a broader spectrum than that really. Unconservatives is a better catch-all term.
Well... it's a little concerning that you've given the voices in your head a name, but.. sure.
17 minutes ago, eyeball said:Yes, most conservatives don't/can't/won't think straight.
Sure kiddo. that's the problem.
17 minutes ago, eyeball said:Why not, you assume anything else that comes to your knee.
????? - sssuuuuuurrreee....
-
1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:
True. If they’re not part of an actual ruling government, then how would they have the authority to speak FOR a country?
Does Elizabeth May speak for Canada when she says stuff? Heck no, she doesn’t. That’s nonsensical.
Sure she does. In fact that's come up before. If a member of parliament makes a statement about another country that is given weight.
Let me guess - if i say that a leader of a country said something, your next attempt to defend the libs will be "Well, TECHNICALLY that leader didn't get 100 percent of the vote so they don't speak for the WHOLE country"...
"well TECHNICALLY it's not the country"... Please. Their politicains slag us, their media slags us, polls slag us, it's the country.
"BUUUUUUUTTT NOT TEEECHNICALLY" Yeash. Tell me you know i'm right without telling me.
-
Quote
Rising costs of living deny the luxury of squirrelling funds away to serve a far-off future. I’ve felt that older generations take this “spend today, worry later” attitude as blithe ignorance. Instead, it’s a necessity to survive. As grocery bills increase, hunger pangs speak louder than the little voice echoing in our heads about the life-changing magic of compound interest.
Well then i guess you shouldn't have voted liberal should you.
This is a serious problem for kids today but there is NOTHING LEFT that can be done. With the debt that's piled up and the mismanagement of the gov't the damage is so deep that these kids will be well into their 50's by the time things get back to 'normal' and they have a chance, and it'll be a little late for them at that point.
People think elections dont' matter and who's in gov't doesn't matter - but it matters. We need to get back to fiscal responsibility.
Oh and PS kid - Justin promised you that he'd take action on housing - did you see that great plan in this recent budget to build a bunch more houses so homes can be affordable? Yeah, me neither. Sucker.
-
28 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:
meh, Canada schmanada
Canadian just means ; resident of Canada
To you it does dougie. To a Canadian it means more than that. But - you've made it clear you're not a real canadian and don't have much in the way of honour anyway, so you wouldn't understand.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:
Well you should list these means so we can go through them, the sort of other real means associated with real totalitarians.
I literally did list some.
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:I mean, we've been subjected for years now to associations with, Stalin, Hitler... the very worst that history has to offer.
"we"? You mean liberals?
Well gee - do you think maybe there's a REASON for that?
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:Mr Socks. ?
well.. in fairness i probably shouldn't assume his gender like that.....
-
11 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:
I remember wind-bag right-wingers and talking heads in some countries speaking out,
Ahhh. So this is going to be one of those times where you attempt to defend justin's actions by claiming that if politicans from a country speak out, even if they're part of the current gov't, they're not REALLY actually THE gov't so the 'country' didn't speak out.
Please. That's as weak as 'true communism has never been tried'.
Not ONLY did gov't members speak out from croatia, germany, austrailia, and a bunch of others but the media also spoke out and they're part of the voice of teh country as well. Papers noted that people were horrified to see that kind of thing happening in Canada of all places. France, England, etc all talked about it for weeks and it was all negative, nobody supported it.
Sorry -you can't win this one with some sort of lawyers technicality bullcrap. His totalitarian actions were condemned around the world.
So much for 'canada is back'.
-
7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:
Thus the exodus from California, Nee York and other left-wing states to Texas and Florida.
Yep - and they're feeling it now.
https://nypost.com/2022/04/09/millionaires-fleeing-south-from-new-york-tax-smack/
You can tax to a certain point, and then people and business has had enough and they flee. At some point it gets to be worth the money and hassle.
-
1
-
Quebec legislature moves to ban prayer in schools
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
Not really. One is a learning institution with children and it's not appropriate to push a religion on them. The other is a gov't workplace serving a country that by it's own documents was founded on Christianity,
So not hypocrisy. But - i do think they should send a more clear message and remove the religious symbols from the leg as well.