CdnFox

Only the ones who lie. And usually only when they lie. If it seems like I say it a lot, that tells you more about the left-wing posters here then it does me be honest and you can disagree with me just fine and I won't call you a liar. But we both know you lie quite a bit. You even go so far as to misquote people and then pretend you're arguing with what they didn't say. At the end of the day if you're going to be a dishonest person you can't be that upset when somebody says hey you're a dishonest person

And still lying about it. What's funny is you will then cry like a baby about people calling you a liar. When you very clearly just lied. The quote he referenced did not say that you agreed with the person at all and it says that nowhere in there. But as a far lefty dishonesty seems to be your stock and trade you can't even admit your dishonesty

LOLOL i don't care who you are that's some funny right there, admittedly i DID feel like having a bowl of borscht afterwards and checked the fridge for perogies. Gads i'm tainted! I shall now take 18 hours to re evaluate my life and cleanse myself of the communism with some online day trading. Whew! Having dealt with that..... I don't see the word 'democrat' anywhere in there. Sounds like he was NOT calling for a purge of the democrats at all, but rather commenting generally about the state of the nation and his own struggles. I suspected that he may have been less than factually accurate with his comment Turns out that's the case. I'm shocked. Are you shocked? I was shocked.

He hides from everybody who kicks his ass. The only reason he listens to nationalist is because if he didn't then he'd have literally NO friends

I love that the hypersensitive information that he transferred supposedly was pulling results Like, don't these weenies realize literally anybody from any country can go to a polling company or as many polling companies as they like and have the same polls done anytime they want How in the universe is something that literallyl anyone can get if they want "Sensitive'? It's like saying "he turned over the public phone book for the area.... nobody should have that information!!!"

So in other words this has nothing to do with experience, you just don't like him and because you don't like him you're choosing to create a fake issue to justify why you don't like him. I'd mention that to your Mental health professional when you see them next. He's done a great deal to help people. But at the end of the day the simple fact of the matter is somebody that's experienced in politics is experienced in politics. You might argue that you don't like his policies. You could probably make a fair argument there based on your personal beliefs. Or you could argue that his vision of reducing red tape and such is problematic because of one reason or another. Or perhaps even that you feel that his entire focus is going to be on reducing government and not dealing with important social issues that you consider to be relevant, whatever they are. But trying to claim that he has no experience just shows that you are both desperate and dishonest about the issue. Of course he has experience. Few people have as much as he does. So whatever his policies are, whether you like them or not, he probably knows how to make them happen. He understands how the system works and how to get things done. So you would look less ridiculous focusing on concerns you have about what he's going to get done rather than his ability to do them. It just makes you look seriously weak if that's your complaint. Like everything else about him is perfect and that's the best you could come up with or something

Yes we do know why. And the why is because the liberals chose to import identity politics and culture wars from the united states in an effort to create the same sort of divisions and coalitions that more effective for Obama during his time Shocking That's not what's pissing you off. The reality is they did talk about our very real problems. Housing is a very real problem. Money and investment leaving Canada for other places is a very real problem. Everything else they discussed was a real problem as well. And you know perfectly well that trump will be in on January 20th and there is absolutely no chance of an election happening before then so the tariff issue will already have played out long before Poilievre gets a chance at the helm. Like it or not that's going to be a liberal issue. So he can't comment on what will happen after that until he sees how they handle it. So I have a difficult time believing that's really what's upsetting you as you watch this. I would venture that what's upsetting you is you know that if he does what he says and is able to address issues in the manner he is suggesting that it will probably be the death now of the left wing political apparatus in Canada for quite some time. And I understand why that would concern you. But let's not pretend that the issues he raised weren't serious issues. People not being able to afford housing or food is a serious issue. Our declining quality of life based on GDP per capita is a brutally serious issue. Our unsustainable deficits are massive issues.

Down playing it is pretty much the same as denial. If you say something was 100, and someone else says no no, 100 never happened it was maybe 25 at best, then they are denying that the worst of the thing you are talking about occurred. It is denial in that they are denying that anything as bad as 100 ever happened. So yes, it is denial

Yes. Provided they stop lying. People disagree with me all the time and I don't call them liars. But when you knowingly present false information then what you are doing is lying and I have every right to point that out. Maybe you should be asking why you feel the need to lie so often. I'm able to criticize people I disagree with using the truth. If you are not able to do the same then it calls into question whether or not you should be disagreeing with them at all. We know you have an affection for slave raised zucchini. So there's that!

Well seriously if you were Satan would you want to be seen on stage with Hillary? Yeah this particular round really kind of severely devalued the freedom medal. Which is a shame because michael J fox probably actually deserved it and I'm sure there are others who did as well but when you start including people like hillary Clinton and the like you just make it a useless piece of metal for everybody.

I suspect they will be reducing dramatically in about one election from now

No need. Trudeau passed those laws protecting trans so everything's solved now. That definitely didn't increase the divisions and violence.

Just going to gloss over the fact that you lied about what I said are you? No wonder nobody respects you on this board. Or more accurately the people that do are the ones that are the least respectable on this board

Is the hilarity a result of the fact that you are lying about the other things that Soros has done for example? Your comment smacks of the same rhetoric that I remember reading to the effect that Al Capone should never have been charged because all he did was contribute to soup kitchens and other charities.

That is the socialist or left wing way. "equality" means everyone is equally at the bottom.

Well that's the english translation but yes, its what it says in german. Interestingly one of the discussions that was held about this on this forum a quote from Hitler was put forward where he was asked about this specifically. He said that they weren't the socialists as in the socialist party which already existed and they didn't believe in that particular Marxist agenda, and they could have called themselves liberals but he felt that that really didn't capture who they were. And his mind they were socialists because they believed that industry and society had a duty to promote a common social agenda and contribute towards that. And to that end he controlled industry fairly tightly to make sure that they provided for that agenda. I mean that's pretty much textbook socialism. He controlled the means of production through excessive regulation and taxation so that it benefited the perceived needs of the state rather than individuals primarily. The left doesn't like the comparison because they feel it makes them look like somehow socialism is the same thing as Nazis which is not true. But it's yet another example where A socialist model went horribly wrong, and it joins russia, china, Venezuela, Cuba, and a number of other socialist models states in that regard

Where are you seeing that? I haven't seen that reported at all

What kind of retarded dolt thinks that working in an industry for 25 years is the same as having no experience in that industry? And considering your last bright idea was "A drama teacher with no experience in politics? Yes please!" I think we can safely rule you out as somebody worth listening to when it comes to picking a competent person for the job Prime minister is not an entry level position. This guy has never done a day working in politics or running a government or the like. He is a banker. Being a banker is not the same as being a politician in the same way that being a banker is not the same as being a doctor. You would have thought you would learn from your last pick not to choose someone with zero experience. Poilievre has decades. So if experience matters to you then you know who to pick

And was that 2014? In fact was it 2010? 2000? 1980? 1950? No? Earlier than that? So it sure wasn't a problem in canada when trudeau took over Because 2015 is when Trudeau took over and things have certainly got a hell of a lot worse since then. Now jews are being attacked in the streets, their schools shot up, massive protests calling for their death, there are union groups and teachers advocating for the destruction of israel.... so if we have to go back 100 years to find something similar then you're kind of proving the point they were making. We didn't have a big anti semite problem in canada. Now we do. THe culture wars and race hatred we see today came up from the states and was spread by the liberals

Who claimed that you said she was right? You dishonestly characterized the statement she made and I pointed that out but I don't recall saying that you believe she was right. Did someone else say that? I hope you're not being dishonest again No it didn't Mike. Lying again I see. Point out where it said that you believed she was right. Seriously, if you didn't have dishonesty you'd have no honesty

She's dumb as a stump. She agreed with everything he said and then literally everything else after she agreed was wrong. I have no doubt that other people that have no education in these matters and are equally of low intellect believe that somehow she's making right-wingers look stupid. But to anyone with a brain or a smidgen of knowledge she's a complete adult. Imagine arguing that GDP per capita isn't relevant or is it indicative of quality of life. Or imagine suggesting that if we lower the prices of real estate that it wouldn't matter because the developers will just pocket the money as if there's no such thing as competition or a market. Like that is seriously "I believe in Santa Claus" level stupid. Oh well. There will always be those in society who think that McDonald's is healthy and fine dining.

Of the total population of canada, 1 percent is a significant portion. There were about 17,000 in bc alone at the turn of the 19th century at a time when bc's population was only about 100,000 people. That's a pretty significant hunk. And that's from one country. Soooo - thanks for admitting i was right i guess?

oh look at you trying to backpedal your way out of it You said that only whites were allowed. Yeah the Chinese were not only allowed but arrived in huge numbers. You can point to very brief periods in history where they unfairly had to pay a tax but the tax is not a restriction on entry. And lots of the periods of time there were no 'restrictions' as you call them. So now that you've been proven to be a complete liar and a fraud you're going to try and backpedal it and say "oh, but by 'not allowed' i meant there were some financial disincentives" Pathetic. Chinese arrived in large amounts. Black people arrived in fairly respectable numbers considering they were coming from the US. Japanese and other asians were also arriving in substantial numbers through most of our history. So once again you're a lying sack of shit who can't man up when he's wrong. LOTS AND LOTS of people who weren't white were allowed into canada and ALWAYS have been. Well that's not possible - no non whites were ever allowed in Canada according to you until recently!!!!! LOL thanks for taking the time to confirm you're full of shit.

Nope. They absolutely did not. No they don't. And when conservative governments do it and the electorate finds out about it conservatives punish the shit out of them. The problem is that those on the left are constantly prepared to reward that behavior. And yet you want to excuse it by pretending somehow it's acceptable to other people. Like your own lack of morals and decency is somehow ok if you can pretend everyone else feels the same way. They don't. We're not talking about a slip up or a misunderstanding or somebody being incompetent and doing something they shouldn't have, we're talking about constant and regular deliberate breaches of ethics and the law that began almost immediately after he took office and has not stopped. Not to mention allowing foreign interference in the form of Chinese money pouring into liberal candidates and taking no action to prevent us because it was beneficial to him. Sorry, you don't get to pass that off as everybody does it. You are supporting a corrupt government because you are a corrupt and moralist individual as are many on the left. Fortunately the ones who are not as a moral and repugnant as yourself have finally realized that they cannot support the scumbag liberals the way they used to and are now turning to Poilievre and are set to give him the largest majority in history. The liberals will have a long walk back from this one and they may even be wiped out, which is what they desperately need. The party has become inherently corrupt and so has its base. They need to be shaken up and think about their actions.

You make hypocrisy sound like a bad thing. For liberals it's practically a prerequisite