CdnFox

Well i'll admit that bumps it up to highschool level. But that's not much better!

Already provided the 'evidence' for others - all they have to do to see you lied is check the time stamp. And a bunch of them saw the original text too You've been exposed bud. that's all you are as a person, and you'll have to live with the fact everyone else knows it now. What a pathetic thing to do

Yeah - its pretty funny Its basically forcing russia to sell at a discount.

Well i think you'll find a lot of people get excited watching sports as well And there's some reason - correctly evaluating the outcome is always a rewarding experience (or figuring out why you got it wrong as the case may be). And it does change things - whether it's an ndp or UCP gov't will impact things federally quite a bit and might also have a serious and interesting imapct on the federal NDP who will be in an awkward position. Politics does matter in the end, so there's a certain excitement to it

A what? Are you serious? I guess maybe if the election is being held on an elementary school playground. These people are in it to win it. it's not a game for them. Same one - and it's the same answer. Limit that crap. Tonnes of politicians do that including left of center ones. It's a way of killing stories that the media loves to harp on but there's just nothing more to answer on. The issue will be gone and the press won't have as much time for false accusations. Side note - Notley is really making this easy for her as well. Compared to her first winning campaign she's being seriously pathetic right now. Ford won because his opponents were so lackluster that if he didn't say a thing he still looked better and notley is giving Smith that kind of freedom right now. It's a close race - notley should be all guns blazing and she's barely noticeable, which gives smith the freedom to sit back and talk less. I doubt they will, especially in alberta.

Their stock should have gone UP since the announcement. That's the point of announcements. So even when it gets back to where it was it STILL is below where it should be. There's a huge opportunity cost with this and sure, absolutely sometimes you learn valuable lessons for the future and it costs a few bucks to do so and that's just life, nothing ventured nothing gained. But - i think the lesson they're learning is 'get woke go broke', and that's probably not what the trans community was hoping for.

So here's a short little skit called "The Privilege Game" that AA reminded me about. This in my opinion is a VERY accurate and Funny (or frightening) look at the whole culture war and it's affect on people and how they react. They even nail the personalities. Please watch it and tell me - Accurate portrayal or unfair representation? DId they miss anything?

yeah, i didn't get that either.

So? Do you watch sports? Even tho you dont' get to play? Hmmmmm It's fun to watch and look at the strategies and what happens and even 'root' for your fave team once in a while (whether they deserve it or not in some cases ) Obviously more than most provinces what happens in Alberta affects bc so we have some small stake in it and with a large percent of the population being from alberta we do have a certain empathy. But mostly it's just fun to watch. Relax.

Nobody tried to cancel bud But it's very typical of you to try to blame others for your own crimes They just don't buy the product anymore. And in fact that DOES cause change QUITE a bit. We saw that with gillette. Disney fired a BUNCH of Hard Left losers over their woke debacle. There are plenty of other examples. The fact you felt the need to lie about what the reaction was and then lie about the result of that action proves that the left is pretty concerned about stuff like this. And you should be. Good luck trying to get trans people hired by companies as spokespeople moving forward. And honestly it totally didn't have to be that way.

Of Smith? No - i'm interested as a political junkie but i think alberta is mildly screwed either way this election But i do stand by what i said - the cbc came out of nowhere with completely unsupported allegations regarding documents they admit they never even saw, causing the gov't to hire a third party to investigate and even after they found that there WAS no such documents the CBC continued. That's just one example. The media really does bring this kind of thing on themselves more often than not. So now they're going to have to pick their quesitons carefully or they won't have anything to report on. Frankly - i would feel the same if an MSM publication did the same with a left of center gov't. Strangely, it hasn't come up yet. But if it does i'll say the same.

Oh they're not going belly up or the like But you can bet there'll be some people who just missed a rung on the corporate ladder and there will be a warning to others about such things both in that company and others. Meanwhile they can't fire the person or they'll have yet ANOTHER social backlash on their hands. So that person will be 'kept on' but will very quickly fade to nothing.

Maybe if they limit questions the media will be forced to stop asking the same ones over and over and over again if they want to have something to write about You linked to the cbc - thats the same cbc that insisted there absolutely was emails between her and the justice people and an independent search that went through both sides found nothing. And the cbc still kept on with that story. Sorry - the press brought this on themselves.

I guarantee that losing money bothers them period. You don't get that big by not caring about cash.

And it's a lie. It's a lie you use to call people nazis' when you're not wanting to say it out right. Sorry - it's still just alie. Sure - it's a typical lie for you. You obviously do think ted cruz is a nazi but nobody's going to buy that. So you say he's a nazi 'indirectly' There's nothing remotely 'nazi' about his theory - it's just your way of calling people nazi's that's slightly easier to defend than actually calling them one. It's dishonest and yet another example of you being a terrible person. Everyone's a nazi in your world, and if you can't say it outright then you can say that they THINK nazi.

No, that is not supported by the story. that is a severe twist on it. Ahhh your favorite battlecry when you run into a fact you don't like Predictable. There's no goalpost moving there - the fact is their data set included a subset that isn't appropriate for comparison. Sorry. Nope. For that to be true the variable would have to be the co-op - but if ALL multi owner businesses are more successful on average then it says NOTHING about coops - it just says multi owners are more successful. Sorry but clearly you don't understand how data works. Often they can't afford to start co-ops either. So there's no difference there. No. First off the use of gov't isn't exclusive to democracies. In the old feudal system the gov't used the law to prevent warlords. Second, we don't live in a democracy, we live in a constitutional democracy. We use the CONSTITUTION to prevent warlords. The gov't is simply the mechanism by which the people vest power, but it is constrained by the constitution which grants people their rights and limits the power of government. You don't really know much about how governance or countries or any of this works do you. Of COURSE they would buy and sell politicians. I would point you to the soviet union, or china, or cuba, or any of the socliastic countries. At the end of the day, someone somewhere still controls the assets. Socialism just pretends that such abuses are 'on behalf of the people' without giving anything back. It's limited. Its' more true in the US, it's far less true in Canada. Yet we have lots of billionares - elon musk is half canadian. Everyone who goes bankrupt gets bailed out. That's how bankruptcy works. What HE proved is he has the skills and ability to rebuild after failure. That's how you learn - you fail, you get better, you rebuild. Do you think tiger woods never lost a game of golf? You don't get to the top without failure. If it was as you say and he was protected by privledge, he would never have gone bankrupt in the first place. Trump lies. I LOVE that you're taking him as an authority now Does that mean i can start quoting him and you'll just accept it? Or are you only using the quotes you favor? But you said he lost it all - and rebuilt from nothing. So.. swing and a miss. Nope - he wasn't that rich. Sorry. Owning a mine doesn't make you a multi millionare. And in fact - he sold his first video game at the age of 12 and started to amass his money then. So. Swing and a miss again on your part kiddo. We'll you'd be wrong but lets say that's true - that would mean that HALF came from a NON rich family - literally proving that you have a similar chance to become one of the most wealthy as a person who was born into wealth. If what YOU claimed was true, ALL of them would be from wealthy families You lose again kiddo. You really aren't very good at this. Gates wasn't born into wealth, his family was upper middle class at best. His dad was a lawyer and his mom was a director on a few boards. That is HARDLY rich. And he did it all himself. Started the business, raised the money and investors - didn't use any 'family fortune' or the like , Sorry kiddo - middle class. How about jeff bezos - he was born into poverty. HIs parents were teenagers when he was born and still struggling to get through school. I suppose you'll claim he was rich? Epic fail. Or if your honest about it. Which rules you out. Nope - it is ONLY able to repress people. That's how it works. it cannot 'give' anything, it must TAKE first and redistribute, which represses growth horribly. Nice story - you know 'paula' is jeff bezos right? Here's a short little skit about socialism and far left thinking:

well you'd THINK with his background Justin would at least be able to ACT like he does.....

Which is untrue. He's dead right - there's nothing 'nazi' about calling someone who's marxist a marxist. Honestly @WestCanMan, she just calls everyone a nazi that disagrees with her, and then pretends she didn't REALLY call them a nazi. She's just a lying leftie and a hate filled racist, bigot and fierce anti-Semite. Why are you even worrying about her calling you a nazi, eveyrone's a nazi in her world. (oh except it's not REALLY that you're a nazi, it's that your ideas or your gov't or your actions or whatever are nazi when you push her on it).

Well that company is ABSOLUTELY engaging in the culture wars if they hired the person BECAUSE they are trans. Here's how that works. If they just hired who they thought was best and that person HAPPENED to turn out to have a penis, then they're just trying to sell beer and their best choice happens to have a penis. If they hired someone BECAUSE they were trans with the idea that this would make them look more 'woke' or intersectional then it's identity politics and culture war. You're forcing a moral issue on people instead of selling beer. That does not appear to be the case here. They appear to be reacting to the company deliberately putting the person forward because they are trans. If you happen to have a mixed race couple then fine -if you choose them BECAUSE you want to normalize mix raced couples then that's a different situation. Your politicizing your product and people don't like that. Whether they do or not others will see the loss they're taking and think twice before doing the same thing. And they should. This company deserves it's losses. If you make beer - sell beer. If you want to sell politics then start an acitvists group. People don't want to have to deal with this shit in every single area of their life and if they are forced to then it wont' make trans people more accepted, it will lead to a backlash where they are far LESS accepted.

Neither are preferable. When you 'borrow" at high interest for an "investment" - you risk the investment not paying off. It is a BAD idea to put home renovations on a credit card and HOPE that the home sells for more money. Imagine you did that and some underwear-streak of a prime minister drove inflation up and interest rates with it and your home was suddenly worth less before you could finish the renos and sell it. Then what? YOu're still stuck with the high interest rate loan on the credit card. Sounds like you're a pretty serious liar. There is no renovation you could do to a home in this market to triple it's value, never mind one that would fit on a credit card. and no sane person would put it on a credit card, they'd take out a loan. So - bullshit. You're a liar. As to buying parts to sell that's not an investment that's just work. The parts don't increase in value, you just add value by charging for your time. Not the same thing at all. He told you not to do that That is easily the stupidest comment on the internet And as you can imagine, it was up against some pretty stiff competition.

It is crystal clear. His language is consistent from beginning to end. You have to WANT it to mean something different for it not to be clear. I get it - you like the guy and you don't like to see him saying stupid things. But unfortunately that's something he does now and again and this is an example. and that's about where you should have stopped. There's no exaggeration here. This is just how he thinks.

I have to admit - i haven't' followed this case closely (nobody in canada drinks bud light, or at least if they do they're not willing to admit it) but usually in cases like this the undergarment clumpage is due to feeling like this was foisted on them for the purpose of demanding they agree with it. In other words, it stops just being an ad about the beer they like and is now weaponizing a product they like to try to force them to agree to something they may or may not want to. Nobody likes that.

That's dumb. If we're going to go that route then why not to back to god - it's all his fault for creating mammals in the first place! What a bastard. You are literally sitting on your high throne making up facts. There's no science behind it, sorry. And a dictionay definition that doesn't actually demonstrate your point doesn't help much. Again - the fact you have to lie to make your point shows you don' t have a point. Sigh. No, stupid, roe was overturned because it IS about the constitution AND they decided roe vs wade incorrectly indicated abortion was covered by the constitution. As we will see The very first line of your quote says it all. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such rightis implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. All you had to do was read the first line. It spells it out crystal clear. This is about the constitution and whether or not abortion falls under its' protection. Roe claimed that it did under the 14th amendment to the constitution. It has now been decided it does not. That's it. That's what the whole thing was about. And if it's not part of teh constitution then it's not a federal issue -the issue belongs to the states. I'm sorry. You just don't have enough education in these matters to speak intelligently on them. The rest of your drivel was equally uneducated. Maybe consider doing some reading and educating yourself a little before speaking further. Honestly you look pretty stupid right now. You can fix that by obtaining a little knowledge.

You know - joking aside this really is a complex question. How do we define winning the war? Achieving the objectives? or does winning have differnet levels, like sort of won, won, really won, and so on? Russia clearly intended to take control of ukraine. And they intended the war to be short. There is much evidence fort his. So from an 'objectives' point of view they lost. But - if they still walk away with more land and the donbas area etc - is that a win? Or not? Ukraine wanted to avoid being taken over by russia as their goal and has added taking back crimea. I doubt they will achieve that, there's a pretty good chance they'll lose a little land and won't get crimea back. But - if they end the war and drive off the russians and have 90 percent of their land back is that a victory? Given what it's done to their country? Really the only clear winners appear to be nato and the west, which is fine with me. But kind of crappy for russia and the ukraine

WHY do you THINK that CAPS make A LIE you TELL more TRUE somehow? IT'S really WEIRD. And no. Logic and reason don't require facts. There's entire branches of that world that exist without it in fact - like Philosophy. I see your education still needs some work. In any case we do have facts and evidence to work with here. We have the fact of the lawsuit and the fact of Fox's current leadership position in viewership which i mentioned and their income and their behavior with the lawsuit and a bunch of other things. Soooo .... Ya done being wrong?