CdnFox

You think land is harder to cross than an OCEAN!?!? Do you know where the celts lived? You figure they were just really good swimmers or something? The celts never bothered the romans AT ALL on the continent since the very begining of the founding of rome! Certainly not 700 years later. No, they were not. That's dumb. The celts were no where near rome. Hadrian's wall was in ENGLAND!!!! It had NOTHING TO DO with bararians attacking rome!!! Oh my god... He didn't have people as clueless as those on the left today are. Imagine not even knowing what CONTINENT he built the wall on.

Ummm - it literally says what i said. Pretty much word for word. No taxes - public funds which don't come from workers and private funds from rich people. ROFLMAO - you didn't read it did you!!!! You read the headline and THOUGHT it proved your point and didn't read it!!!! HAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHA - Holy shite kid Du bist sehr dumm. Bist du nicht! LOL

Well you're certainly proof that you can lie if you want. Lets look at your 'sources'. first - they don't want to ban it at all, they want to make it require a parents ok. BZZZT - you lied. Second - a SMALL group of republicans suggested banning sex ed in schools and NO ELECTED REPUBLICANS were interested or bound to it. - BZZZZT! Third - about a GOP nominee who FAILED TO GET NOMINATED!! - so the gop didn't agree with him. BZZZT Forth is a repeat of an earier one. i guess you realiy do believe if you repeat a lie it'll become true - BZZZT So - compelete bullshit across the board, and pretty much referring to only one small area of the country and not the national campaign. If that's what you've got - you've proven it's not a popular opinion amongst the GOP. Sure they do. Well - i suppose they might wait till they're more like 8 But yes. They do. And that's a problem. No there isn't. Show me the stats that prove home schooled kids are abused more. Yep = teachers and coaches add a new layer of risk. Any home abuse will happen anyway but now teachers and coaches also get a crack at it. Well not true of course. And they called regan a radical. Or were you suggesting we go back to lincon? The guy they're trying to cancel. They haven't. THey picked trump over hillary - and now that htey've got biden they're showing a hell of a lot of buyer's remorse. Well that's a lie of course. They wanted their neighbourhoods fixed up they wanted high paying jobs, and all that was being offered. They also wanted the tax revenues. But - Cortez told them that they would be giving BILLIONS IN SUBSIDIES that could be BETTER SPENT ELSEHWERE to amazon. Except - it was tax credits. So they'd pay less tax but employ 25,000 people. Now that they're not going to be there, there is NO tax. Cortez THOUGHT that the money was being paid TO them and screwed up big time. So - now new york is broke. Less services, they can't keep it clean, they can't keep it safe, and people are fleeing it. Awww muffin - do you get confused if two people talk at once???? I guess it must get hard to keep your lies straight when there's more than one person

Is that you talking into the mirror AGAIN! wow - well, i suppose most parrots love a good mirror

There really wasn't. It boils down to a deterioration in leadership due to a selection process and public that favored strength over intelligence or skill. Ascension by murder was common. Initially when the first emperors rules they were wise and generally benificent. Julius looked at several slave and social reforms. Augustus was VERY intelligent and ended civil war. The next 5 were also good. Then it took a turn and by the end the roman leaders had completely run the place into the ground and left it fertile for the hoardes. They absolutely did not. I wouldn't call a large ocean a 'border'. And the celts were entirely pacified. And the germans weren't the issue, the migration period wouldn't happen till right at the end of the empire. There was constant fighting. Not a fan of history are you.

Same one you gave when you insisted that the romans taxed people like we do and used it for infrastructure. oh... wait.... Typical lying leftie - and always screams 'soucre' when they realize their wrong. I appreciate the admission tho It's not hard to look up. I've actually read quite a bit about ancient rome, it's a fascinating topic. Not hard to look up the fact they didn't collect taxes from workers either as i said. Pretty common knowledge. So - seeing as you obviously DON'T have a source for any of YOUR comments (because they were wrong) - it's fair to say you were lying and making it up as you went, wouldn't you say? Tsk Tsk.... poor little leftie, hoisted by her own petard.

Not really. One is a learning institution with children and it's not appropriate to push a religion on them. The other is a gov't workplace serving a country that by it's own documents was founded on Christianity, So not hypocrisy. But - i do think they should send a more clear message and remove the religious symbols from the leg as well.

Don't be silly. They frequently speak in the house on matters other than those which affect their constituents, and they vote on everything regardless of whether or not it affects their constituents. Of course he does, and frequently. We see it all the time. The guy from st johns can be a cabinet minister speaking for all of canada on finances - or be a shadow cabinet minister doing the same. Or may serve on committees to make decisions for all of canada. Etc etc etc. Did the guy in whitehorse elect Freeland? She's talking on his behalf - what's that about? The house of commons is a chorus. Each region elects a voice to go and discuss the matters of the state on behalf of ALL canadians. Those people will vote, act on, decide etc issues for all Canadians. They will speak on behalf of canadians. Watch question period some time, MOST of the speakers are speaking for all canadians not just their constituents (tho that does come up once in a while due to familiarity). THey ALSO speak for future voters who may not even be born yet, not just those who voted for them right now. Sorry - you're wrong on this. The fact that a riding elects someone does NOT mean that person ONLY speaks for that riding.

I know. Thats what i said. Try and calm down a little. Liiiike what? Jumping into conversations to pick a fight and crybaby about how the person is picking a fight? Getting angry and worked up because people on the internet can think and type faster than you? Those kinds of really productive activities that you do you mean? Yeah - thanks. I don't think you've got a lot to be teaching anyone about leading a productive life Say hi to your mom when she comes down to check on you kiddo

Absolutely untrue. The size of the empire played almost no role in it's demise. The byzantine or eastern roman empire was considerably larger and lasted for 1000 years.

Yep, the didn't use 'taxes' for infrastructure, at least not by and large. Soooowwweeeee. They had SOME 'public funds' they spent on infrastructure but it wasn't from taxes. It was from tribute (business license basically), land fees, bribes, fees and licenses for the most part (and occasionally just killing a rival rich person and stealing everything in ceaser's day). So not taxes. The average person didn't pay a tax. There was no payroll deduction slip for the average person. And a LOT of the roads didn't even come from that. It just came from the pockets of rich people. So sorry kiddo wrong again.

Well that's a blatant lie. They believe in age appropriate sex ed that's focused on how pregnancy works, dispelling myths (like you can't get preggers if you have sex standing up, one of my faves), STD's, and some basics about health and biology. They just don't want to teach 4 year olds how to do anal. Which seems to upset your kind terribly for some reason. Well that's pretty stupid - first you're a disgusting person if you think right wing people support child abuse and want to create situations where it happens more, as you just said. What a pile of human trash you are to say that. And second - if that WAS they're goal they just have to wait till the kids come home and abuse them then. It's not like kids are in school for 24 hours. So i would be a dense reason even IF it wasn't a disgusting thing to say. Teachers don't give a crap. They're more likely to be abusing the kid anyway. And give people more money. Soooo yeah. Riiiightt - no republicans were ever elected before that, i forgot. Nope. IN fact AOC threw over 4000 great paying jobs in the can in new york with her leftie bullcrap and lack of understanding. And busiesses and wealthy people are fleeing left-run states like new york and cali. In droves. Those workers are either going to move to a non leftie state or suffer. Actually campained for it. With my gay conservative candidate. At a convention. Where it was decided that the CPC should drop that because it was bull. And to keep his earlier promises when the CPC got in they had one vote in the house saying 'should we drop this or keep fighting about it" and it was 'drop it', and for 10 years it never came up again, Sooooo yeah. Again - you lie because it is the only way you can try to make a point. I tell the truth because the truth makes my point.

You're moving goalposts. First off they absolutely do represent the us - she's literally called a representative. Sorry - that's the way it is. Second off - you've switched from canada's people to "canada" or the "US". Nice try. AOC is as representative of the people of the US, May is a representative of canadians. That is absolutely how it is. They speak in the house and they speak in public and they're not speaking JUST about things that affect their riding. They're elected to represent the people. The riding is the people who chose them to speak on behalf of the people but they still get to speak on behalf of the people. When they vote - they vote for all canadians. When they speak, they speak for all canadians. Which is why they're SUPPOSED to watch what they say a bit. And not call canadians bigots or mysoginists or wastes of space just because they disagree.

No one person is the parliament or the people. Are you saying NO one represents the people? I don't think you get how this works. And people like AOC are indeed representatives of the people. A fact that's caused some trouble. Don't be silly. The gov't has nothing in the slightest to do with the cabinet. The cabinet doesn't even really exist as part of the governing structure - if Justin didn't want to have a cabinet he doesn't have to. thats' why they change size with each gov't. It's simply an internal structural tradition that works well for organizational purposes. The Cabinet isn't The Gov't. How many votes does "the cabinet" get? zero. The only people who get votes are the individual MP's regardless of whether they are cabinet or not. The Parilament is the governing body, with one party forming the official government, one party forming the loyal opposition, and the rest forming the remainder of parliament. Pretty much all matters of import need to be voted on. Any new laws, any spending, etc. THAT - and not the cabinet - is how the people are represented. Do you know how many votes justin trudeau has? 1 Do you know how many lizzie has? 1. They are actually no different in the slightest when it comes to representing the people. As leader of the party that currently forms gov't, Justin is the voice of the canaidan GOVERNMENT - but not the voice of canadians. No more than lizzie etc. I know this seems counter intuitive. but it is in fact how it works. Justin isn't even the head of state in canada. And the representative of the head of state could decide tomorrow that justin isn't prime minister any more. Lizzie is in fact a representative of the people as part of the governing body. While this might not be comfortable for you (god knows i need a shower after saying it) it is the way it is.

Sure. You almost can't have gov't without it. But - this bypasses some of the most important checks and balances that are in place to keep that from going too far.

Sadly true. And worse, each time it's abused it makes it easier to take the abuse an inch further. They'll take this example and stretch it just a bit the next time, and then do the same the next time. Fortunately SOME people on the left, in this case the civil liberties groups, have figured it out and we'll see if they can have some success in court. I hope so - this is not a good thing.

The totalitarian rhetoric was yours. I didn't mention hitler or the like. Nor did i say a future leader would be liberal or mention a political leaning. I swear sometimes you're like a magic 8 ball - you just rattle your head and say whatever floats to the top. If it becomes established that It's ok to enact the emergency act to suppress protests the gov't doesn't like, then a totalitarian, authoritarian, or just plain egomaniac gov't of the future can abuse it to essentially crush all protests in Canada by attacking people's assets even if they're only supportive. That has a wide range of applications So that's bad. If you don't think that's bad - well then you're helping earn that repuation of being a little more like hitler that you talked about, aitcha

The Parliament is literally the voice of the people. Parl -iament. A speaking. The gov't is the gov't and is charged with the administration of the people but the entire parliament is the voice of the people. That's even what the word means - here's from the dictionary: A representative body having supreme legislative powers within a state or multinational organization. So - while Lizzie cannot speak for the GOVERNMENT per se, she absolutely CAN and DOES speak for the people. She is not the only voice that speaks for the people, but then there's no ONE voice that speaks for the gov't either. Even the leader doesn't do that. Things still need to be voted on So yes - Lizzie does represent the people of canada. When she speaks she speaks for Canadians. She's not the only voice that does, but she definitely is A voice that does. What else did you think a representative democracy was?

Well it's always wise to keep one's powder dry till all the cards are on the table. But honestly - i'd rather see you vote ndp or green than justin That guy has GOT to go But - election's a long time off (theoretically). So who knows - perhaps the elderly will get their act together and come around to pp a bit more

Well the ones who respond to numerous polls do In fact that's one of the weirdest things politically in the last while - traditionally the older people are pro conservative and younger people are pro lib/ndp. For about the last year it's flopped, and younger people are flocking to the CPC banner while older people are going liberal. I wonder if it has to do with PP's presence on social media, whcih is more likely to be seen by younger people. But yeah - you hit 65 and his approvals go down.

yes. You're asking if i'd like to dial back what YOU said?

Sure she does. She's a gov't representative. She can't enter agreements but yeah, when she talks she's representing canadians. That's what it means to be an mp and leader of a party in the house of commons. Did you not know this was a democracy? She might not represent ALL of canada but as we noted neither does justin. In fact - justin got about the same number of votes as she did. Sorry - if you didn't know that an mp is speaking on behalf of the people when they speak then i'm afraid your education is severely lacking. Swing and a miss kiddo.

That's true, but i'm not sure that's the issue here tho is it? It's more of an increase in the cost of living. or are you suggesting the bureaucracy and such expansion is what the cost of living increase results from?

Actually he's most popular amongst boomers, and my comment would have been blaming the millenials for him.

Actually i pointed out more. Thanks for paying attention tho, you've been great ? Well... it's a little concerning that you've given the voices in your head a name, but.. sure. Sure kiddo. that's the problem. ????? - sssuuuuuurrreee....