CdnFox

It is the ENTIRE point. While a small percent of the population will ever be the 1 percent (approximately 1 percent of them to be more specific) The fact that more of them are from low and middle class shows there's no particular advantage coming from a 'wealthy' family. And yet true What a world eh? The comic didn't "show" - the comic imagined. However - at the end of the day the results show that isn't the determining factor for success. Yeah - it helps to know people but it's also a lot easier to get to know people than you might think. And connections get you 'good jobs' less effectively than you might think. A poor person starting out and working their way up through middle management into mangement is going to meet all kinds of people who will help them advance. But to be honest - its' their hard work and reputation that will jump out and propel them. Cream tends to rise to the top. The rich person doesn't give you a job because he knows you. HE gives jobs to people who will make him MOAR rich. Which means that a person's track record and performance is as good or better at creating advancement. Yeaahhhhhh - is that true tho? No one? That's not the point of most of these programs and such? That's not the point of saying poor people can't get ahead? I'm not so sure about that. Well they're wrong. Like i said - drop me into an economically disadvantaged situation with what i know and area and i'll be upper middle class quick enough. And i mean as a 20 year old or the like, not with my current track record and resume to fall back on. The difference if any isnt' the poverty or fewer opportunities. It's the ability and desire to maximize those opportunities. And that's the MAIN difference between kids raised poor and ones raised rich. No there isn't - who's hiring in north Korea? Don't be silly. Less so than you'd think. In america you might argue that access to university would be harder for poor people but even there there are paths. The data doesn't really show that. Sorry. And again - i would argue that the poor kid in the rich neighbourhood is going to be exposed to knowledge on how to take advantage of their opportunity more, and that's the main difference. Thats not the education problem here. None of it is relevant to who will or will not succeed. The paths are there for the most part, EVERYONE rich or poor has serious obstacles to overcome. But anyone with a little knowledge and a decent work ethic can achieve middle class no problem. Even upper middle class. If the poor people need anything its a shift in culture and learning how to maximize and recognize opportunity. Don't get pregnant out of wedlock. get a job (any job) and establish your rep, don't get involved in crime, chart a path. The statisics show that the vast vast vast majority of people rich or poor who do that will achieve at least middle class or better.

So don't. who cares.

No, i just agree that it makes sense to have some specific gun control for a variety of reasons. YOu're the one trying to spin it to mass murder and i don't even know how you got that from the line you quoted. Not really. It depends on what you mean by 'poison'. I'm against narcotics that are addictive for example because one quickly loses the ability to make rational decisions about them. And poisioning yourself would RARELY affect only you. Not terribly good for business either But - we have safety regulations. We don't generrally require a chef to have a 'chef license' - just a business license. SO the equivilant there would be regulation regarding the use and handling of firearms and depending on where you're talking about there is that already. It is the democratic and left wing position though. And that's the problem. It anchors the conversation in the wrong place. There really aren't any meaningful 'loopholes' but for sure "red flag" laws (or at least law or policy along the same lines) is a much better place to start. Sure there is. It would be more fair to say there's no reason the dems couldn't abandon their unreasonable attack on guns and focus on red flag/other laws. As long as they don't the republicans are going to have to dig in and not move an inch. Even on things like red flag laws which they tend to support in principle they'll have to be carefull as hell. This became politiicized and the dems have REALLY racheted up the rhetoric, and now there's no unsticking that without them taking a very very different approach.

No - that was clinton who was bawling about voter fraud. Pls try to keep up

Yep. Or that if anyone on trump's team ever talked to a russian, it's "COOOOLLLLUUUUUUUUSSSIION!!!! (Shakes fist vigorously at monitor) the fact is that the fbi report was VERY clear - no evidence at all of collusion.

Really? Because the Romanists all say it's YOUR fault. Sigh. perfectly good thread gone to waste again because of your imaginary friend.

That's not collusion and that's not trump. Collusion isn't just sharing data. There's nothing illegal about that. Nothing wrong with that either - that is not collusion or illegal. I've read the report - it does NOT say he colluded with the russians anywhere. THERES' no NEED to believe ^^THIS OPINION^^ without PROOOOOOOOOFFFF!!!!!!!!! (ARGRAGRGAGRGAGGRG!)

I didn't leave out anything -she said he knows several times. Also i didn't write the quote, that came from a 'fact checking website. BUT - that actually makes it MORE true. SHE BELIEVES - these are HER beliefs as well. So she is 100 percent trashing the electoral process Yeah - she believes that the electoral process was compromised and that trump is an illegitimate president. You literally just reinforced my point. Sorry sparking - trump didn't "collude" with the russians. Show me in the report where the term 'colluded' shows up. Liar. THERE'S no NEED to BELIEVE this OPINON without PROOOOFFF!!! Go ahead and post it. Show where it says trump colluded with the russians.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/sociologist-says-pandemic-may-have-made-canadian-youth-less-empathetic-meaner-1.6362442 TORONTO - Increased time online during the pandemic may have made young Canadians meaner, a researcher said Wednesday, warning that declining empathy which emerged during isolation was now fostering increased cruelty during in-person interactions, including at school. Kaitlynn Mendes, an associate professor at the University of Western Ontario, said during an Ontario Medical Association press conference that many parents may not be aware of their children's increased exposure to online harassment during the pandemic, which is now having damaging consequences. "Teachers really noted that, as young people were coming back into school, the way that young people were communicating with each other during lockdown had changed, and they found that their empathy had really decreased," Mendes, who is a sociologist, told reporters. It's interesting. It's worth examining the effect lockdowns had on kids and others just to better weigh the pros and cons next time. I"m not arguing for or against lockdowns but i think that they were done with no though to what the consequences long term might be - or even that there WOULDN'T"T be any. This research and others seems to indicate that there was a significant long term effect of the lockdowns.

Ahhh -no. I said they have had large claims, I said in SOME CASES we don't even know how large the claims were. That is not a contradiction. Lets say we have 3 claims. 2 of them are for 100 dollars. The third we don't know. We can say we've had claims of 100 dollars and some claims we don't even know how much it was. That is not a contradiction, that is true You STILL don't know how english works do you LOLOLOL

I said you couldn't refute MY points. I never claimed it was your post Still havent' figured out how english works i see

Fair enough - but regardless of whether they are yours or a repeat of someone else's I wasn't interested in suggesting i approve of it. And always will. Fox don't care. CNN don't care - they've lost some doozies as well. NBC don't care. What they care about is ratings and their ratings have gone way up. I'm sure they'll work harder in the future to hide the evidence better but they'll always be pushing the line and getting sued. sometimes successfully and sometimes not. They all will. Which i think is terrible - They do the deed, they get insurance to pay most of the fine and they move on to do it again, and the public has no honest sources of information. Mark twain said: "if you don't read the paper, you're uninformed. If you DO read the paper you're misinformed". Even more true 130 years later.

LOL - you're such a class act And no, there is no law in the states that you have to treat everyone the same. People have the same rights. That's not the same thing. DeSantis won't be affected one drop by 'trannies' or disney - if anything smaking disney around won him points. If it wasn't for trump he'd be the next candidate and if he was up against biden he'd have a very strong chance of winning. Back to the "tranny" issue, i think transgender people on average are pretty well accepted but the political movement of 'transgender' is a different beast altogether, and some of the more unreasonable demands and the constant need for attention of the political activists rubs nerves raw. As i've said from the get go - the evidence does not suggest this is really a 'tranny' backlash. This appears to be more of a backlash against constant identity politics and the culture wars. This isn't just the far right tranny haters, this is much larger than that.

For liberal voters it's practically a prerequisite. Well i think there's a bit of the 'sleeping dragon" (or perhaps in the case of canada the hibernating bear ) going on. People gloss over this stuff and don't really think about it or what it means - until you rub their faces in it a bit and they're forced to really look at it. Then they tend to get a little more involved. If it's just on the paper for a day or two then gone they just don't even notice. It's almost like they think "Meh - someone will make a big deal of it and tell me if it's REALLY important",

LOL - oh please The writer sets the tone. Or are you claiming that when you called fox viewers "shit" you meant it in the positive, friendly way and are just being misinterpreted Please. A man owns what he did and the tone there was pretty specific No offense - i just didn't agree with it. And that was hilarious But - that's why i didn't want to associate myself with the rest of the post, but wanted to acknowledge the very clever joke

I think the woke zelots is exactly what Trudeau thinks he gets out of Jaggers. They all think 'trudeau is better than the cpc - he's not woke enough but that's ok because the ndp keeps him in line so we're all happy'. That will hurt jaggers in the next election as the radicals will have less of a fear or hatred for Trudeau because they don't see him as a threat to their ideology - they think he'll be kept in check.

I more disagreed with your tone and this: he only total shit of the political spectrum is the trump and Fox followers. Get it, you losers LOL Fox lied and got caught. All the other media have lied and got caught and had to pay settlements too. I don't see any difference really and i'm not sure it's appropriate to suggest that somehow it's ONLY the people who watch the liars YOU disapprove of that are 'total shit" instead of the ones who watch the liars you do approve of. But the joke was hilarious

Of course she did She said: Trump "knows he’s an illegitimate president," " Well - it's not possible for him to know that unless it's true - so she believes it's true. Buddy - everyone is now watching you lie your ass of and it' ruins ANY credibility you might have for the future. She specifically said his presidency is illegitimate and he knows it. That's what those words mean. FURTHER _ she claimed there was Vote suppression , and voter purging. BOTH OF WHICH ARE PART OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS - She ABSOLUTELY impugned the integrity of the electoral process claiming it had been TAMPERED with. So now we know she's a liar - and so are you. No wonder you support her. You lose 2ce now kiddo. Next time try truth.

Yeah - truth is always a good play So you approve of torturing a BUNCH of 15 year old kids, ruining their future, ostracising them in their community and getting them tossed from school, having their lives and the lives of their families ruined just so you can fake a video for clicks? Buddy - your 'moral high ground' is sinking fast here Never happened. There was zero chance that the election would be overthrown by fox news. And they knew it. Same as cnn then. At least fox didn't EDIT A VIDEO TO FALSIFY WHAT HAPPENED like cnn did. Which is far worse than just repeating a lie, which cnn ALSO did. Innocent companies LOL. Sure a company is worth WAAAAY more than an innocent CHILD'S LIFE! I mean - most people if given a choice of saving a child or a company would let the child die, right? That's pretty normal. Those companies have the resources to fight (and did). THey have insurance, they have lawyers, they have resources. And their people are protected by a fair bit of anonymity, it's not easy to come up with the CEO's home address. Unlike the kids who were named and their community and school directly metnioned - took people 6 seconds to find them. Which riot did fox cause specifically? So you're saying the capital riot was fox - not trump. That's just stupid. Every election whomever wins accuses the other side of 'pointless recounts. Recounts are never pointless. And if they are the Dems are every bit as guilty - hanging chad anyone? or did you forget all the times that the dems contested an election? So fox news caused the impeachment. You're an !diot. Basically you've tried to claim that every single negative thing that happened during trump's time is fox news's fault. So does that mean cnn is guilty for the 5 billion dollars in riots that happened over the race stuff they reported on? Does that mean that theyr'e responsible for the current border crisis? How about the war in ukraine - they've talked about that. Sorry - we're comparing two specific incidents. one is the claim that dominion's machines were a problem, the other that a bunch of schoolkids racistly confronted a first nations veteran. Both of which were false. And of the two - DELIBERATELY FAKING A VIDEO AND RELEASING DETAILS OF WHERE THE KID LIVED AND PUTTING THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES AT DIRECT RISK IS WORSE. THat is a F***ING CHILD for christsake - and they FAKED evidence - not just lied but knowingly faked evidence - to do it. FAR worse than just repeating a lie you don't really believe about a company that has every ability to protect itself. God what mental gymnastics you people are prepared to do in order to justify your evil.

ROFLMAO I was the one who said ratings are a measure of popularity - and if they're a measure of popularity that literally does mean they have a meaning - they mean how popular a show is ROFL - you couldn't even go a complete sentence without contradicting yourself and looking dumb Honestly don't you think about what you write? And of course the fact something is popular doesn't in any way shape or form mean it's a 'popularity fallacy'. That's not what that word means. If i said "everything fox writes must be true because they're the most popular" - that would be a fallacy. Pointing out that they're the most popular itself isn't. I feel like i should be sending a bill to your parents for tutoring you,

It is a claim of fact. For him to know it would have to be true. So she's stating it's true. I get that english isn't your first language - but that's how it works. She called his presidency illegitimate. And it's hardly the only time. You asked for proof - you got proof - now don't throw a fit just because you were wrong. There is no such evidence - as the mueller report showed. None. not a drop of evdence. So how are you any better than trump is? You're both claiming that the election was rigged despite clear proof to the contrary. I mean what kind of person are you? Wait... Hillary? Is that YOU??!?!

Oh Nooooes - his word of the day calendar strikes again!!

Awww muffin - is that pesky truth bothering you again? Poor thing You know - whenever you post in CAPS like THAT we know you're upset and don't have an argument. LOL - sorry sparky but repeating a lie doesn't make it true. AND theres NO proof to that OPINION!!!! (reeeeeeeeeeee) What is that, about the 4th time this week you've used a "fallacy" term you don't understand? Do you just call anything you don't like some sort of random fallacy and hope people buy it? Anyway you're wrong because of the "maybe you should learn what words mean before using them" fallacy Back in the real world, Fox still is the highest rated by a landslide. So people do enjoy them and they're obviously raking in teh dough. That's just a truth.

Well she's not the only one either, there were many such comments.

No. I didn't. And putting things in bold and caps and italics doesn't change the fact that it is YOU who is lying about what i said. Lets look at what i said, THey don't need to do anything but monitor social media and see what spin their fans come up with and like best and go with that. My guess is: "THEY were FORCED to PRETEND they lied because the left wing appointed judge was going to rule against them no matter what if it went to court AND nancy pelosi had their children locked up in a puppy-chow factory basement surrounded by rabid poodles! So what i very clearly said is here's a guess at what their fans will come up with. And YOU HAD TO CUT OFF THE END OF THAT SENTANCE - because you KNEW it would be obvious that i wasn't being entirely serious. So when you say that i was making that statement - YOU LIED. What i stated is that fox viewers would come up with something, and this is my guess as to what. So you had to lie to try to make your point and pretend i said something i didn't say. You should consider a job with Fox, you'll fit right in.