CdnFox

Name 5. There is NO segment that refuses to watch a woman superhero movie. Since the 70's there have been any number of very successful tv and movie shows with not only female leads but female characters. Wonder woman. Bionic woman, Avengers (original), Dr Quinn. etc etc etc. Tonnes of leads and co stars etc. Anybody under the age of about 65 grew up with this as being normal. But again - please, post where these hordes of conservatives were utterly furious that they might have to watch a movie with a sexy female lead, especially one wearing spandex or other skin tight outfit. Everyone knows males hate that.

ROFLMAO - NO THEY WERE NOT! They would have been mad if she HADN'T been a woman. Captain marvel was a woman Why don't you post where all these "conservatives" are "upset" about the female character Captian Marvel being played by a female. LOL - well you really screwed that up didn't you - just when i think you can't make yourself look worse...

Well..... maybe not superman But spidey, thor, iron man, black widow, black panther, hawkeye etc etc etc

Ummm - from your link: "But the main difference is one of perspective. Price is generally used to refer to the amount of money that a seller is asking for something, and cost generally refers to the amount of money that buyer will spend rather than the price that a seller is asking for." I can't affect the price of gas. That's what the seller charges per litre. Now - while i apprecaite you taking the time to post something that proves i'm right doing so KINDA makes you look extra dumb in two or three ways No, they don't. if they did - they'd be the same number wouldn't they. If i tell you that i put gas in my car and paid 1.75 per litre.... what was the cost of my purchase? You MUST be able to tell me, they're the same thing after all!!! If they're the same thing then if you know the price, then you also know the cost! That's what "the same" means. But you don't Because they're not the same. Anyone who's successfully mastered grade 1 mathimatics can see that they are two very different numbers. THe price can remain the same and the cost will differ depending on how much i purchased. Soooooo - i probably shoulnd't be making fun of the mentally disadvantaged like this Didja get it yet? Ya done being this dumb?

So NO BOOKS HAVE BEEN BANNED AT ALL!!!!! So you lied. As suspected. And in fact there's no actual threat of banning a book - they're just worried that the schools HE"S IN CHARGE OF may not find their textbooks suitable and may not buy them, . Maybe. Well - there's going to be a lot of textbooks the school doesn't find suitable because they're only going to pick one for that grade and subject and so a bunch will wind up disappointed. Not buying a book is not the same as banning it. Further - the books can mention her race just fine. What they can't say is that white people are bad and black people are good. But they can mention her name and that she was black all they want. So another lie. He's more honest than you apperently You just lied your ass off and tried to pawn it off as trump's fault? Nice try. And considering trump isn't president or even the nominee, he doesn't speak for conservatives. Conservatives care about the truth - ALL the left does is lie these days. Anyone who doesn't support that lie is considered right wing (even if they've been on the left of center all their lives). IT's pathetic.

There isn't. THere's been hugely popular female super heros for ever. Wonder Woman. Storm. Kitty from the xmen. Rogue ,Black cat, Jubliee, the list is endless. What there is a backlash about is forcing women into a story when it makes no sense or adds nothing JUST for the sake of it being a woman. IF it makes the story worse instead of better then it's just bad writing period, and often that's exactly what happens when you try to shoe-horn a woke agenda into a story. That's why disney started to lose a craptonne of money - and learned not to do that. Female characters are great, and in a lot of cases the character being female is the same as a male or better. THat's fine, everyone loves that. BUt we can all tell when a good story got crappy because a bunch of sexist freaks demanded that a character be overwritten to meet a gender ideology.

What the hell are you talking about - Captain Marvel was ALWAYS a woman. And then her powers got stolen - BY A WOMAN. Rogue specifically. I read these comics as a kid - Captain marvel has been a woman for about 40 years now. So why exactly would 'conservatives' care if she's played as a woman? It's like saying they're mad that wonder woman was played by a woman. Captain Marvel is Monica Rambeau. Created by Roger Stern and John Romita Jr., the character first appeared in The Amazing Spider-Man Annual#16 (October 1982) 1982 - but they were FURIOUS when the movie came out FORTY YEARS LATER were they? Bit of a delayed reaction wouldn't you say? And here we see the left lying again to try to make a point.

We actually had universal health care in the 60's. Every province had it. What happened in the 70's wasn't the addition of universal health care but rather universal health care funding. The provinces agreed to reduce their taxes and the feds would up theirs and pay 50 percent of the costs of health care. The idea being it would make it easier for poorer provinces to afford it (which was a LITTLE silly - that's what the equalization program is supposed to do). Of course - since then they dropped that considerably, and under trudeau it's about half of that - 25 percent of the costs. They kept the tax money tho

No, that's just misinformation from the left. It's a lie. Post any information showing that they are proposing an actual ban on the book. And there's the real difference between the right and left - the left HAS to lie to try to make it's point where the truth serves the right just fine.

First - That's dumb. Clearly they rely on people being sympathetic to their situation on both sides. That creates what's called 'political capital'. IF people have no sympathy for one side then they're not going to ask their gov'ts to speak out, are they. So yeah. It matters. And secondly - screw them then. If that's YOUR attitude and THEIR attitude then i don't really care - if that's how you feel it is then let them sort it out. IF they don't need me to care then let the isrealies wipe them out for all it matters to me. Both sides say justice is on their side so if you're going to get pissed because i dared to show an interest then no problem - i'm no longer interested, let them get wiped out, no skin off my nose is it. Well done.

It is politically weaponizing identifiable groups based on things like race, sex, gender identity, sometimes regional identity or other 'marginalized' groups and often involves pitting those groups against an 'opressive' force which needs to be beaten and crushed so they can get ahead, usually boiling down to white males This is what the 'intersectional' coalitions are about, the idea that there's a heirchy, if you're black then you're oppressed and deserve more than others, if you're a black female, you're REALLY oppressed and you deserve more than just regular blacks, and if you're a black female lesbian then you REAAAAALLY deserve to be heard more and get more than any of the others, etc etc. There's a whole hierarchy of oppression that says how deserving you are based on where you are on that list and how many 'boxes' you tick off. It's not organizing people with common beliefs. That's just regular politics. this is grouping people by type - you're a white male, you go stand over there, you're a black lesbian, you go with that group over there at the front of the line. THat kind of thing.

That is absolutely NOT what identity politics are in the slightest. FFS man - read a little before saying stuff like that.

I think it would be fair to say that identity politics might be considered it's own 'sect' of the religion And there are those on the right who practice it. But if we're being honest the right is not generally interested in that and it's defintely not emotionally invested the same way. Most of the 'right's' examples are reactions to the left, rather than stand alone beliefs or activities. It's not the same 'religious ferver' for the most part.

I think cerb was a dry run and i think that the vast majority would say it was not an experiment that went well for the UBI supporters. People are happy to give when their own needs are met. Right now - things aren't going so well in that department. And at some point things will tend to nosedive more. Justin is still dumping tonnes of unearned dollars into the economy and that's creating inflation pressures the bank has to fight with interest rates. I think if anything it'll go the other way and people will be less likely to want to give up their cash for someone else to "live free". I mean, we cam't even get people worked up over the fentanyl deaths any more. Too many people don't have enough for themselves to give freebies to others.

There is certainly a noticeable similarity. The part that is concerning is the blind adherence to the dogma without regard for fact or reason. The 'faith" is all, questioning the faith is punishable. While that might be one thing for an actual religion, it's very bad for a political movement. there's a reason histories don't smile on theocracies and why most civilized countries recognize the need to have seperations between church and state. I would tend to classify the left these days as more of a cult than a religion, but there can be no doubt that its nearly the same thing,

Sorry kiddo - if you're looking to "the Rolling Stone" for accurate reporting on woke issues, you're begging for disappointment https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/get-woke-go-broke-companies-are-laying-off-useless-dei-workers https://archive.ph/aCuG5 https://www.dailywire.com/news/get-woke-go-broke-old-navy-takes-massive-loss-angers-customers-after-going-all-in-on-inclusivity-sizing https://tomluongo.me/2021/04/12/woke-coke-goes-for-broke-destroying-its-brand/ https://nypost.com/2022/12/01/after-disneys-strange-world-bombs-film-critic-says-go-woke-go-broke/ Soooo yeah. Get woke go broke is definitely a thing OF course - most of the big companies don't actually go broke - they take a serious loss and then learn their lesson and turn things around Disney for example started taking serous losses and was in danger of its entire star wars empire collapsing - then they fired the woke and got back to storytelling and applogized to the fans and things went back to profit. But LOL - yeah kid, billions of dollars have been lost to 'wokeness', and companies are shedding the 'woke' pretty fast. Oh - and don't get your financial news from "rolling stones", ok? Just like you shouldn't get your entertainment news from the financial post?

Not to butt in on your discussion overly much - but i felt this particuar point should be addressed. Everything comes back to how many houses we build. That is the only thing that affects actual cost of home ownership or rent for most people. If there's enough homes, the cost is lower. if there is not the cost is higher. Most of what you mentioned is either wrong or is only right because of housing supply. Lets look: -Interest rates: Doesn't actually mean anything for the average buyer. If interest rates go up then purchase price goes down but payments remain the same. Ohter than those who have cash it doesn't change the actual realized cost, people will still pay the max per month they're allowed to. -Taxation policy: Not really. Again, in a market where there's not enough homes people will spend the max their disposable income allows after tax regardless. -Rental policies: Again, not really. IF there's not enough homes, then if policies restrict rentals then home prices go up as more try to buy and rental rates go up due to fewer rentals. If rental rules are relaxed and there's not enough homes then people hold on to investment properties but more people are trying to rent so - same thing. -Foreign investment rules: Makes no difference whatsoever. Foreign investors only care about buynig a lot of homes if the values are shooting up, which doesnt' happen if you're building enough homes. Canada doesn't so we're targeted, but if we did it would not be an issue. And as most investors rent the properties out it actually doesn't change our real housing situation at ll. In short - the only reason it's a problem is we're not building enough homes. -Immigration policy: You're closer to the mark here - but not really. Again - if we were building enough homes immigration would have zero impact. -Environmental and land use policy: Only in as much as it makes it hard to build enough homes. -Demographics: That doesn't mean anything. there are no demograhpic issues that aren't addressed by supply. -Market factors - supply and demand for housing: The ONLY thing that matters. If there were enough homes, they would be affordable and rents would be as well. ALLof our housing issues are due to not enough homes being built to satisfy the demands of our population. Solve that problem and the rest go away.

The economy doesn't, no. Its' not really possible per se. The value of work doesn't really change. Techology can change and make life better - people have far better medical options to day than they would have 40 years ago. People have more access to entertainment and information due to tech increases. But that's not an 'economic' issue. Generally the standard of living improves with technological and other innovations but not really economic ones. The economy can't really improve the lives of people per se. If it does it can only do so by providing more money to people - which inflation will simply wipe out very quickly. About the only change the economy can make that makes life 'better' is stability. If the economy is more stable over time it makes people's lives better. They can plan for more, they don't have their savings wiped out by economic uncertainty just as they're retiring, they can build better lives. But that's about it.

They're nazi's, then they're fascists.... it must be hard to decide what bigotry and hatred to stick with for you. It's easier for us because we just stick with facts and truths, we don't have to try to remember what lies we told yesterday like you do. Ohhhh it's nazis' AND facists THis from the girl who hates jews and males and whites who disagree with her and stands firmly behind cancel culture and repressing those who's opinion is different! LOLOL - yeah kiddo Sure thing I sense you readying a picture....

Nope, didn't really have time when it was out and haven't bothered since. But i'm glad your mommie had time to take you to see it, was it your birthday or .....

The rest winds up being 'blah blah blah' when the pictures come out It's like your defense mechanism because you know you look stupid and WISHED you looked sexy It's pretty funny to watch actually - i'm getting to the point where i can almost always guess when the pictures are going to come out Here - i made this one for you - you "sexy" thing

So the best you can do is lie about what i said? So yiou're admitting i'm right and your only defense is to lie Well there you go. I was right. I acknowledge the Palistinians discriminate more - they literally have said as an official position that the jews should be wiped out. Something you didnt' mention for some strange reason. Wow - it's as if you were completely brainwashed and think that the palistinians do NOTHING wrong at all. Considering that they haven't actually cleansed anything and htey could if they wanted to - i'm gonna go with 'no'. Doesn't matter does it. If you try to kill me and fail, and i kill you instead before you can try again, i've done more killing but was ABSOLUTELY RIGHT to do so. So here's my question - you've clearly lied and been dishonest in your above reply - we both know palestinias have used human shield tactics and have been the instigators much of the time, yet you claim otherwise and sealion about it and of course there's your many lies by omission as you suggest the Palestinians have done nothing in this conflict and are simply innocent victims which we also know is not true. That's common knowledge. So given that - if you really actually felt the Palestinians were in the right here.... why did you feel the need to lie? If it's clear cut as you suggest then why not tell the truth? Your own words prove you think they are guilty, you just prefer them to isrealies. I condemn the bad actions of BOTH sides - you've taken a side and will lie to protect it. Disgusting. You should be ashamed.

No, sorry. but if it helps what you're doing is called tribalism filtering. Why - doesn't sound like you're much interested in the truth. What will you do if i DO provide that evidence? Will you say i'm right or insist it's not 'real' evidence or just change the channel? Sure. No, isreal kills a lot of helpless civillians. The palistinians make sure of that. so don't fire rockets at isreal maybe. Of course they're used to it - their parents shoot rockets at isreal near their schools and isreal retaliates and blows the hell out of the school and everything near by. So maybe don't shoot rockets or send firebombs or anything like that into isreal. THey've got better gear and they will squash you.

No - the price i pay for gas remains the same It's measured in dollars per liter - says so right on the sign The cost of fuel depends on how much i buy. Those are not the same thing. The price right now might be 1.74 per litre - the cost to fill my tank might be 75 dollars - the amount i spend per month is actually independant of those two variables. ROFLMAO - what is it with you? You're not the dumbest person here, why is it when you say something so obviously wrong you just feel the need to double down like that! No, you're still paying the 1.74 per litre. What you MEAN to say is you can go farther for teh same amount of 1.74 worth of fuel. But - that's only relevant if you have control over how far you have to drive. AND - one would have to factor in the cost of a newer vehicle into that as well. Lets say you've got a 10 year old vehcile that gets 90 mpg that's worth 10 grand - and you'll have to pay 24 to get a vehicle that gets 100 k. Well - 14 thousand dollars buys a lot of gas - how long till your 'control' results in you actually saving anything? Sorry kid - you're wrong on several levels here. Which is precisely what was discovered with carbon tax. Remember when i said fuel consumption isn't 'elastic' enough to make it work? That right there is why. Nope. They drive just as much and buy less of other things. Less food for their families, less going out for fun etc. It hurts the economy where it has any effect at all. And that's it. Studies in bc showed that at BEST it resulted in about a 5 percent SLOWER INCREASE in carbon production. It didn't reduce it at all. And that's across the board, not just fuel. THis isn't theory - this is the results. This is also why we won't be hitting our federal targets for climate change. Again. Nope. Turns out that's not possible. You have to go to work every day. The kids need to be picked up. If you manage to reduce anything you'll probably only manage to cut down your shopping a tiny amount and it makes virtually no difference for the vast majority of people. This is already proven fact. People cut back elsewhere. And when they can't cut elsewhere anymore then they really start to suffer because they can't cut their energy consumption. SO what the carbon tax does is punish the hell out of the poorest people. And the only people it benefits are the liberals due to the extra tax revenues. And they already have lots of cash. Rob the poor to feed the rich. I'm sure history will look on that as a pretty noble idea, right?

You know that every time you post a picture like that we know you feel you lost the debate right? It's like it's your 'tell' Very amusing