CdnFox

the vast majority of antifa support those fringe cases just by being in antifa. Antifa never denounces the violence - if you're a part of an org that supports and allows that violence it's not the 'fringe'. Its the entire org

If you DON"T want to own a gun you're a nutbar! Seriously they're so chock full of awesome explody goodness! Well - first off, "Far too lethal"? Honestly - tell me you know nothing of guns without telling me. The idea that one gun is substantially 'more lethal' than another, or that there's some type of gun you'd PREFER to be shot with is silly. Secondly it's actually become more difficult over time, it USED to be easier. So neither of those are terribly logical on the face of it. Actually there's hard evidence that this is not true. Gary Mauser, professor at SFU some time back, did a tonne of research on this and so did others. The availability of guns plays no role in the murder rate for countries. Countries with more guns had high rates and countries with no guns had high rates. Suicide rates were also examined. You can still dig up his works online if you look. THis is why the left had to make a deliberate switch to discussing "Gun Crimes". Because if you look at just the murder or violent crime rates then it's obvious guns dont' play much of a role. BUt if you look at Gun Crimes - then banning all guns slows down Gun Crimes (even if people still kill using other tools). The problem isn't the tool. Of course not - but the fact is there ARE safety rules in place for guns. Background checks. etc. Honestly beefing them up woudln't make much difference. Take an example - we can look at it. How about we look at the recent nashville one - shooter bought guns legally with background check and had no criminal records that would have stopped such a purchase. Wasn't known to police. So - the 'loophole' laws etc were useless. Shooter used an ar, a 9 mm keltec carbine (small rifle that shoots pistol ammo) and a handgun . Used all three killing different people. The type of gun made no difference. ANd we can see that with other shootins - some of the highest kill numbers were done wiht pistols, others rifles, etc. What they did could EASILY have been done with a pump action shotgun or lever action rifle. So it's not the 'semi auto' issue. Soooooo - what "gun law" would you have passed that would have prevented the deaths? The only thing that prevented more deaths was the cops getting on the shooter so quick. Other laws that AREN't gun laws might have helped tho.

REminds me of an old joke - still works today tho for his kid ? Pierre trudeau decided to walk to work at the parliament one day. On his way he saw the rising sun, and said "Sun - am i a good leader?" The sun replied "You are an amazing leader who cares for and represents his people and the country is lucky to have you" Cheered by this he continued to work and put in a full day. On his way home he saw the setting sun and looking for a little extra praise he once again asked "Sun, am i a good leader?" "You are a tyrant and a traitor" said the sun. You have betrayed your people and worked against their will, you care for nothing but your own corrupt power". "Woah!" Said trudeau- "This morning you had nothing but compliments for me! Now you hate me! What happened!?!?" "Ahhh" said the Sun, "this morning i was in the east. This evening I'm in the west."

A lack of any evidence proves it wrong. Sorry sparky but that's how law works So that would make YOU the !diot.

And didn't collude. So - not only are you not talking about trump, you're talking about someone who was not guilty of collusion. Which means you're a failure TWO times

Her 'FANTASY OPINIONS' sure sound like she's a loser Sure i do - her words are RIGHT THERE. Do you need a link to them? LOLOLOL Exactly. SHe believes trump is illegitimate AND she impinged the entire election process. She thinks she won - she thinks trump unlawfully 'stole' the election. Gee.. where have we seen that kind of thinking recently everyone here knows who the liar is sparky. And it ain't me.

That was your claim - so you'd be the one putting words in other people's mouths. And sadly, not a first for you at all

SO in actuality i have noted i have plenty- you're just not worth the effort. And - i gave you a very specific example so you'd have somewhere to start. So what you're admitting is you CHOOSE to remain ignorant about this and KNOW that the facts are out there but don't want to take the 10 seconds necessary to start looking on your own because then you'd have to admit you were wrong. And you expect ANYONE to take you seriously about anything after this little exercise in self -delusion? Pathetic

Why you said it yourself - here you go: It was in the same thread where everyone in this forum chimed in and said they didn't know what i was going to say next. Don't you remember saying it? It's right there Ahh but there's the rub. Everyone knows what i'm talking about. And that you're a dishonest person who is so petty they post fake quotes from other people and then erase them when it's pointed out. And it's pretty clear you're not well thought of for that and similar reasons, sounds like you've been a loser for quite a while.

Yes, it's in the bible. Do your own research. Those were a lot of examples i gave you. Shoulnd't be too hard but i'm not spending that much time looking up links i doubt you'll read. Of course it had to do with first nations protests and blocades. northern gateway was his attempt to appease them by saying we wanted two but we'll take one (the southern one). Seriously - its to fight climate change that he cancelled it and then he turned around and BOUGHT one to push through? Surely even you can see that doesn't fit a 'climate change' agenda. Sure but honestly you're not worth my time to look it up for you. But a small amount of research will show it did have an impact on gov't policy. It's all part and parcel. If you were to take any one protest in isolation it's effect is relatively minimal, but when you add them together over time it begins to have a serious impact on gov't policy and on private sector policy. And there is often a more direct result as well - Teck resources backed out of a massive new mine directly as a result of the blockades you're referring to.

LOL - sure kid THe only thing people question is what YOU say i said - seeing as you make it up and then delete it at will

Yeah. He obviously wanted to go now but that is clearly not a good move. Trump is going to get is second kick at the can and that's the way it goes. DeSantis would be wise to keep building his brand, keep achieving good results in florida, and set himself up for the next go around. I think if trump loses a second time that'll be it, and i don't think people will give him a third time. And if he wins then he's only got one term.

8 billion in stock value. Sales are into the billions on TOP of that but are still being calculated. but the stock stuff is very real and easy to verify, I take it you don't know how stocks work You're freaking out right now - and you're so desperate that this isn't happening that you're claiming stock market prices which can easily be read are 'mythical'. And yes - bud is freaking out. that's a hell of a loss to take. Nope. That's not what 'freedom fries' was. And while the word 'boycott' was tossed around nobody really got around to organizing anything. Funny story - products that SOUNDED french actually DID drop very significantly in sales during that time but often the products weren't french. Like grey poupon mustard and L’Oréal shampoo, neither of which are actually french. So if a real boycott had actually happened it actually would have probably had a noticeable effect, But - it didn't. Yep. but as noted - french fries don't actually come from france so your claim that somehow it was going to hurt them is silly. Never happened. Sorry. Well next time try to educate your imaginary protesters better

I'm going with 'pulls pin on grenade - throws pin and keeps grenade by mistake" .

so - kids you DIDN'T raise did well. Has the ring of truth to it Seriously - the responses write themselves It's a little too easy, i'll pass this time, we both know what i'd say anyway If that's the case - the left wing children who heard all about how their fellow canadians were all misogynists and bigots and were wastes of space we shoulnd't tolerate and who deserved to be killed (prevelant left wing position) if they don't agree with vaccines and who were all trying to kill grandma would be in far worse shape. Of course you're not - fear of speaking against the liberal gov't is bread and butter for your kind.

While theres truth to that, historically people need something to vote FOR - not just something to vote against. The last two elections show that. So to win the cpc will still have to put something attractive on the table to win over ontario.

No. First off america has a problem with mass murders, not guns. Second i have never said that gun control would reduce mass murders, you just keep repeating that despite my correcting you several times. This is why you're wrong SO often - you just don't listen. Oh sweetie - i'm so many levels above you intellectually that of COURSE you're going to have problems trying to fit me into one of your mental pigeon holes Sure kid. No, but it would require an iq higher than an overripe avocado to understand it so it may have gone over your head a little. It's quite simple. The Dems have been SO brutally unreasonable, illogical and destructive in their attacks on gun owners so far that the trust levels are so low that simply saying 'could we compromise over here' would be seen as a trap without a very strong demonstration that wasn't so. And frankly there's no reason to think it wouldn't be. Bring in red flag laws which say ' if proven to be a nutbar no guns', and it's only a matter of time till a dem changes it to "prove you're not a nutbar before you're allowed to buy a gun at all, and we'll define what 'proof' is". Prove me wrong. So. As i said i doubt that either side will be interested in any kind of rational or real discussion. There will be a killing, dems will demand gun bans and claim republicans just want to see people dead, republicans will resist any changes to gun laws and will dig in further - and then the cycle will repeat.

IT's not ok to expose children to complex sexual issues period. We dont' teach them it's ok to be masochists either. Or furries. You think if we don't teach them as children they'll automatically hate trans people? Did YOU learn about trans people in school when YOU were in grade 2? And do you hate them now? Hmmm.

So there's nothing you can actually point to as any kind of voter restriction at all then. Just 'republican bad". LOL - sounds like you're the one with the 'big lie' I agree her behavior is horrible. But - that's Hillary. Actually she has to this day denied that trump actually won. She says he's an 'illegitimate president' who won through voter fraud and hacking and a bunch of other things to change the outcome illegally. She spent the time between when she lost and when she conceded desperately looking for legal options. THat's why she didn't concede that night and her people waited to see her in vain. The fact that nobody cared enough about her to march is something that i'm sure bothers her to this day She STILL TO THIS DAY denies she lost Just like Trump. Sorry kiddo - you lose again

Have you MET our prime minister? You're free to live in ignorance They were forced to do new deals with many first nations to make that happen AND the project was delayed by ages AND they did force it's route to be changed a number of times and forced it to be massively overbudget Likewise the TMP in the south was ALSO delayed by many years, still isn't complete, is massively over budget and again first nations had to be give extremely larger compensation. And a third pipeline that was planned for the north was cancelled entirely. So - they got more money, delayed everythnig and drove costs up to discourage other projects, and got one cancelled. They also won court battles along the way which improved their barganing power for future projects. And - the two out of three being built were both announced well over a decade ago. Meanwhile, how many new projects have you heard announced? None? Hmmm. Even mines and such have been tremendously affected. You don't need to have complete victory across the board to still have won a lot. Sorry bud - the first nations have vastly improved their power with such activities.

LOL - not like you who always present such intelligent and thought provoking insights right? IF you're any indication i daresay we can guess who's kids came out more emotionally scarred, and it probably isn't Goddess's

Setting your projection aside, there's no evidence of 'election rigging' here that i can see. Is your sole evidence that republicans voted for it so it MUST be fraud? BTW - is clinton still demanding that 2016 was 'rigged' and trump is illegitimate? Oh - yeah i see she is. Yep it's all republicans I swear you've got your head stuck straight up your echo-chamber.

debt is always higher - things cost more and there's more people every year. Debt to gdp is a better way to look at things. And there - trump did better than most. In otherwords he increased productivity and profit faster than he increased spending: https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-states/total-debt--of-gdp Whereas under biden that obviously was NOT the case. Now - covid. Fair enough. But - it's still entirely out of whack. So trump did better than obama - MUCH better than biden and if covid hadn't come along the debt to gdp might very well have been at an all time low historically. So swing and a miss there.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/conservatives-wont-commit-to-legislating-end-to-strike 'Justin Trudeau has increased the public service budget by $21 billion ... and he still hasn't been able to solve this problem,' Conservative MP Stephanie Kusie said “The strike that we are witnessing here today is a complete result of the incompetence of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government,” Kusie, the party’s Treasury Board critic, told reporters. “Canada is broken, and this is just simply another example.” Public servants, Kusie said, are being squeezed by Canada’s affordability crisis, just like everyone else. “Justin Trudeau has increased the public service budget by $21 billion, in addition to adding and spending $22 billion on outside consultants, and he still hasn’t been able to solve this problem and to come to an agreement in this negotiation.” The ndp has already said they won't. The bloc isn't enough to get it done on their own. Justin has painted himself into a bit of a corner here and is in danger of pissing off not only the public but the largest union. And he's taking serious hits for the fact that yes - he's spent 50 billion more on the service and consultants, it's STILL not working right, and now they want a raise he can't afford. I guess just trying to buy your way to popularity wasn't a good idea after all.

I'm afraid its you who's out of touch there. In fact it's a very successful tactic and often results in a claim moving forward. If you want to say it SHOULDNT be - that's probably pretty defensible. If you're saying it should CHANGE - sure, right with you. But - as of now it absolutely is the case and the courts have done much to back that up. It is the way of things at the moment.