CdnFox

Well we will never know for sure if he would or wouldn't have.... and i'm perfectly happy about that

Nonsense. Lets not play games. You've been trying to TELL ME what i claim is happening. You're not trying to nail down anything. I've been clear. Teaching children about more than the basics necessary to help prevent pregnancies and std's at a young age is inappropriate and if you teach them about things such as positions and how to have sex then you'll be encouraging it. Sex ed with graphic details about techniques and such have been taught in schools to very young kids, and that that's inappropriate. Simple enough This is where you really come across as a liar. Why do i need to underscore that considering i never used those words - and it's about the 3rd time when you have lied suggesting i did. It's easy enough to show that homosexual sex was taught in schools. Did you want to ahve a real conversation about this or did you just want to keep lying about what i said? Can you post where i agreed with you?

PPC’s Maxime Bernier fails in quest to win byelection seat in Manitoba https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2023/06/19/pierre-poilievres-conservatives-look-for-gains-as-results-are-tallied-in-four-canadian-by-elections.html And he didn't just "lose" - he lost big. The riding had some support for him in 2021 when they felt betrayed by o'toole, but with PP at the helm that has evaporated and their support is very low. ANd that's one of their best ridings. So now what. I think it's time for bernier to fold his tent and go home. I doubt he will, i think he'll hang on hoping for enough donations to keep his job going, but he should On the other hand it's nice to have a place for all the SERIOUSLY right wing nutjobs - and as a warning shot for the party about drifting too far to the left.

Yup thats about it. Also they want to spread the idea that 'even republicans realize that the republicans are unreasonable some times". It's like "LOOK - even republicans can do the right thing once in a while!" Republicans have always realized the market isnt' entirely free and some regulation is necessary.

Also - number 4 applies to almost everyone on the left. Soooo - we can write the left off as mentally defective now based on the definition proposed by a leftie? I mean - there's a certain symmetry to it ...

Sure you are - you're claiming it didn't happen. And no - what i said is If you teach a kid how to do something, you're promoting it. That's what i said. Can you post an example of me saying i claim the material says; 'Hey kids gay sex is fun you should try it, here's how it's done'.? No? Hmmm - looks like you'd be the liar then I'm happy to post a bunch of stuff to show sexually explicit content and topics far beyond basic sex ed where taught in schools - if you are arguing that never happened then say so and we'll see who's right

The average person's criteria is "anyone who believes in NYleftie's criteria being a real thing unironically". I'll put you down for a 'yes'

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rahim-mohamed-multiculturalists-confused-as-muslim-modesty-clashes-with-pride Multiculturalists confused as Muslim modesty clashes with Pride Looks like its happening in vancouver as well.

I've read the law kid. Did he know that? Did he even know that he still had those documents? You have to be able to prove that. So what i said was correct. He didn't mean THOSE boxes - the aide misunderstood. Also he thought those ones only had momentos left in them and no classified documents. Also he never looked inside them so how did he know they were labeled classified? Also someone else obivously reorganized his boxes on him at some point. Also.... You see how that works? Well i just addressed that of course. "I was sure all those boxes were still there, the aide moved the wrong ones", etc etc etc. Pretty simple. Not really. Whats' said in court matters. It sounds like what he MEANT was that he didn't think there were any classified docs in those ones. It's super easy to create doubt. And that's all he needs. Hillary had tonnes of classified documents and LIED about having them, and then tried to destroy them to hide that she'd had them. Swore up and down she didn't mean to have the records destroyed but it was ok because none were classified - but we now know that tonnes were. And if anthony weiner had them - who else did. She's 100 percent every bit as guilty as trump. Lets not pretend otherwise.

Nah. Republicans have always considered special cases and looked at doing things like that where it makes sense. Nobody on the republican side has ever argued for a TRULY 'free market'. It generally doesn't work - you need some regulations and occasionally some stimulous to achieve proper function of the market. The main difference is that republicans see the need for very little and let the market correct problems itself while the dems feel that the market should be heavily controlled and milked for as much money as possible to fund their social spending.

Yeah - unfortunately the truth rarely has a lot of surprises to it. It's no shock you're not a fan.

I've mentioned this before - if you have to start by using a phrase like "so what you're really saying is... " and then rewrite what the person ACTUALLY said to something that you feel you can argue better you're basically admitting you knew you were wrong. It s a cheap and cheezy tactic. Providing basic sex ed to age appropriate kids as they're entering puberty has some value because it can help prevent pregnancy and prevent STD's. BUT - there is no reason to teach "gay" and "straight" sex or 'techniques'. Gays aren't getting pregnant form sex and STD prevention is the same regardless of straight or gay. Teaching very young children about sex or teaching sexual technique or position or the like in schools is inappropriate - and yes both of those things have been happening. You're being dishonest if you claim doing that ISN'T promoting sex

It has EXACTLY as much to do with people in America being the victims of violence as casualties in a war on another continent 40 years ago does. Absolutely nothing. And fun fact - more us soldiers died from friendly fire and booby traps than getting shot by the enemy. If NO soldiers had died in vietnam - the number of people murdered would be the same As to the gays - how do you know they weren't "Shotgun" weddings? LOL It was a ridiculous and childish appeal to emotion that tried to tie two things together that have nothing to do with each other. You should feel mildly embarrassed you even tried it.

But it is. And that's about to get a lot worse over time. That's why this has always been forbidden. It is true, and it will work in teh court of public opinion, and when trump gets in and uses the DOJ to go after whomever the next Dem Candidate is you're going to be crying the blues about how unfair it is - but remember it was the dems who started it. If they wanted to go after trump, they should have gone after hillary first. Then it's established that ALL sides face the law. But when you only go after your opponents who break the law..... Can you name one democrat who claims hunter biden was about to run for president? No? Not one? Hmmmmm. Don't pretend you don't know what the issue is.

If you teach a kid how to do something, you're promoting it. That's just how humans work. You can't say "here's how to do this thing now never do it". Adults might be able to understand a message like that somehow But kids never will. Hell - 90 percent of the time if you tell kids NOT to do something, their first instinct is to do it. So pretending that sex ed at young ages isn't 'promotion' would be dishonest, And when you teach gay sexual technique then you are in fact promoting that as well. If a parent thinks their kid should be learning gay sex techniques and they're at 'that age' - they can make sure they learn it. There's all kinds of resources. But to put it schools is grossly inappropriate when you know many parents are not ok with it.

Ok well they DO do that and lying about it isn't appropriate NOR will it solve the problem.

Doesn't need to. He just has to prove that he thought he did. Hillary's case changed the burden of proof to requiring mens rea - a guilty mind. So if he genuinely thought the documents were NOT classified then he didn't intentionally keep classified documents. You're trying to CSI Jr this thing and it's far more simple than you think. He's not going to go to jail over having the documents. Period. He will go to jail for either a) distributing the documents to people he shouldn't have, b) KEEPING the documents knowingly and with intent specifically to do so after being told to give them back, and/or c) colluding to keep the evidence from the authorities, which is obstruction of justice. The rest is just political porn you're exciting yourself with Seriously.

Uhhh - that is a FREQUENTLY stated left wing position. "if you wouldn't date a trans you're transphobic". MANY prominent people on the left have expressed that exact view. https://medium.com/@QSE/when-you-say-i-would-never-date-a-trans-person-its-transphobic-here-s-why-aa6fdcf59aca https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42652947 https://www.yourtango.com/2020336987/are-you-transphobic-arent-attracted-trans-person I can post a few trillion more if it will help? As is typical - the left comes up with a brainless idea and then claims it's a right wing idea when it doesn't sell.

That is not the rule. It's got nothing to do with his wealth. And i know you know this - why are you doing that? Was the democrat running for president? This is soooooo simple. The president largely controls the department of justice. So if the department of Justice goes after THE PRESIDENT'S POLITICAL OPPONENT then it LOOKS like the president is using the courts to "take out the opposition". And very quickly that's precisely what the DOJ will be used to do. So there's a very long standing tradition that presidential contenders are NOT prosecuted unless the crime is very very serious (like murder or the like) unless it's by their own party after the fact. Othewise if that was acceptable then everyone would have their opponents investigated and would have 'fake dossiers' and harass the hell out of their opponents family etc etc etc. That is not in the interests of democracy. personally - i'd rather see an independent body that has the power to chase presidential candidates or former presidents that's completely independent of the president's power and that went after both sides equally . But what you CANNOT have is "anything goes' for one side and "the law!" for the other. And they'll have all those lovely weapons he gave them to fight back and kill Americans.

Ahhh yes - the old leftie lie - "I know everyone thinks i'm wrong - but they just don't understand! Only I have the true knowledge!" LOLOL The truth is is that americans understand the difference between gender and sex just fine. Your problem is that the only thing "fluid" about "gender" is the left's definition of it. Even in discussions here your version of 'gender' frequently changes and twists to try to fit your argument. So sure - people accept that trans people aren't evil or the like, that they have an illness. But - at the same time they're not buying this idea that there's 147 different genders out there. There are two genders and everybody is a mix and blend of those two genders. And they're getting sick of this idea of multiple genders and that's starting to translate into getting sick of 'over-indulging' trans people's mental health issues. And i note your "recent article" is 2021 - while @Zeitgeist 's article is from 2023. You're behind the times girl - and you're losing.

Honestly - do you even listen to what you say? "I know it's a terrible thing and ruins the country but i'm sure glad it's happening". Do you understand that the moment people like me give up on trying to convince people like you their politiicans figure it out and they realize they can get away with doing it - and they do. You're literally begging for pollitics to come into our judiciary MORE than it already is - and i'm getting fed up trying to explain why that's bad. And that means that if the Conservative leader gets in and starts playing political games with them, i'm not going to care. I mean - you don't for YOUR guys so why should i? This is why Canada is spiraling to the bottom. The left won't hold it's politicians to account and the right is getting sick of being the only ones who try. Nope. It's mostly corruption. And the public is aware of a lot of it and turns a blind eye, especially in the east. Westerners have a long tradition of freaking out about corruption but it's far more tolerated in quebec and ontario and the atlantics. I honestly dont' know why that is but it's always been that way. Maybe just because of the larger population in the two bigger provinces.

Not even a little. Or are you ACTUALLY suggesting putting a stop to gay marriage will control gun crime I would fire that question right back at you because you don't seem to have a limit on an acceptable number of deaths. I You would fire it back because you have no answer. You have no answer because it was an !diotic comparison that has no value in the discussion other than to try to falsely appeal to emotion. It's a joke of a thing to say and indicates you dont' care about the problem as much as you care about virtue signalling about it. THAT is why you can't answer it. I also wouldn't have an answer because it's stupid. There is no relationship between what happened in viet nam 40 years ago in a combat zone and the violence we're seeing now - almost half of which is apperently accident or suicide. Sure it does. But there's no chance to do anything about it while people like you suck all the oxygen out of the conversation And yes - only an !diot would make those kinds of comparisons - SO STOP.

this is fact, and i have dozens of reports to prove it. Sorry - you're not "sort of" wrong here - you're DEAD wrong, plain and simple. Before there can be any chance of everyone having a charging port the vast majority of facilities will need extensive upgrades AND the power grid itself will as well AND our ability to generate power will have to go up one way or another.

There's really no way to do that. The purpose of RRO is to ensure that all people get a chance to speak and that meetings are conducted in an orderly fashion and that minutes are available so that there's no dispute later about what the turn out of votes were and what was voted on. It doesn't really apply to lobbying meetings. I mean - you could sort of do it but there's never any 'decisions' made per se. So you could only minute the general topics. Further most lobbying is done informally, by email or by phone or over drinks. So there's no opportunity to say it was a 'meeting' and 'minute' it. And - if they want to do 'clandestine' things then they would just meet and not tell anyone or leave it off the minutes and just minute the rest of the meeting. About the best you could reasonably do is to have a requirement that every time a lobbyist approaches an mp that they must record what they've spoken to them about which i think they already do. They can always be accounted for. "i decided to do this". Easy enough to say you met to talk about 'baked beans' and then talk about whatever you want - and good luck proving they discussed it. It's just not practical. The MP has to be able to explain his decision and what we really need is more effective opposition challenging that. Question period is not an effective method of holding the gov'ts feet to the fire. If it was it wouldn't be called 'question' period it would be called answer period. Frequently the gov't just doesn't.

Cool story. So - name one person our nuclear secrets have killed. Yes. Absolutely and without question. Well - as much as the us "needed" to be there at all.