CdnFox

Sorry @Black Dog but he is 100 percent correct and you've got zero room to argue here. You are attempting completely to distort what the word censorship means. This isn't even in the ballpark, it's not even a stretch. If I choose not to go spend my money to see a movie I'm not censoring the director or the actors. If I choose not to pay a company to come assess my home I'm not muzzling or censoring them. If it is censorship and evil to not let the work be done then why aren't these people doing it for free? If this isn't a commercial product why are they demanding to be paid for their time? Why aren't you funding it? Why aren't you putting up your hard-earned cash so that they can go do this research? How dare you censor these people!! You see how stupid it sounds. There's just no defense here in the slightest this isn't remotely close to censorship. There is a limited amount of resources, a certain number of proposals will be turned down every year, in fact the majority of them, and it has always been the case. The government is prioritizing where it's spending its money and that's just the way it is. You can argue that they should be researching different things or prioritizing differently but you can't for a moment pretend this is censorship

There's no analogy here. It is a product. People are selling their time and energy in exchange for the knowledge and information they will collect. The customer has to find that a desirable exchange or there's no funding. If you believe what you said then why aren't they doing the research for free? Why aren't they donating their time and their money to do it? How dare they put limits on the advancement of knowledge!! They want to be paid. That makes this a job like any other. Which means they have to convince the purchaser that it is worth their time to hire them and that the work they are doing is valid and something that the purchaser wants. And rolling stones gather no moss, and neither a borrower nor A lender be, etc etc. Sounds great. But here's the bottom line, just because you think a specific subject is worth researching doesn't mean other people do or should. There is a limited amount of money to pay for research, there is a limited amount of research personnel, there is absolutely no reason in the universe at all for a government to fund research that it does not believe will have a benefit that applies to its mandate. If you want money to do work whether it's research, or building someone a deck, or doing someone's taxes, or taking out their gallbladder, you have to convince them that the results will be worth the money. It doesn't get any more simple than that, And if you believe otherwise then you should be funding these people out of your own pocket because how dare you not?

Funded. Not published. They can be published without being funded by the government. And you just proved the point that this is not censorship. Despite your further claims to the contrary they can still publish their works they can still discuss any works they publish they are still free to conduct their own research. This is funding, and funding is not censorship. If the government passed a law saying nobody else was allowed to fund them that would be censorship but in this case the government simply choosing not to fund them is not censorship in any possible stretch of the word

True. Honestly I think it's probably most likely still going to be a landslide but now it could definitely take all kinds of twists and turns and interesting elections are always interesting

I'm hardly seeing them at all anywhere. This is officially the quietest leadership race in the history of man. If a leadership race was held in a library with the lights turned off, this is what it would be like. The debates are coming up but they're both in quebec for some reason and one night apart, which is really just one debate then. They're not doing any really big rallys, a few here and there with are attended by dozens as near as i can tell. I haven't even heard much of any kind of future plan from any of them.

Right right. So... go over the very detailed plan the liberals have put out then. I mean justin must have had one, he knew an election was coming so he must have released HIS plan right? Or the detailed plan of any of the current candidates for leadership other than "Will randomly declare emergency act". Go ahead. Or Jagmeet's plan. Lets hear the details of that. Truth is PP's given more details and talked about his plan more than any of the others. You're a liar and a hypocrite, but at least you're consistent.

We have no knowledge that would suggest your eyes or your ears are faulty in any way. But we are familiar with your brain which is what your eyes and ears report to. The cameras can be 4K but if the processor is a commodore 64 then the output is still going to be extremely fuzzy and choppy

I'm not sure I see the contradiction there. Trump says he's going to negotiate with them and hopefully find a path to peace and vance says if you don't make peace with us imma kick you butt. That seems to be consistent, make peace or prepare for war

LOL you're killing me! Oh! well i guess that counts. That didn't take long at all.

I don't think anyone disputes that. That doesn't make it censorship. We can have a discussion about whether or not the research in question is valuable but at the end of the day and if the consumer doesn't want to buy something then you have to accept that and see if anyone else wants to buy it. Saying that you don't want someone's product does not make it censorship

There's absolutely no comparison. The not withstanding clause was always intended to be used to deal with legislation where the government determines the charter created an unintended consequence, that's why it was put in there. HE'll be using it precisely as it was intended to be. It's been used many many times. That's the reason it's there. It's used in very specific cases which must be spelled out in detail, and it goes along with a bill through the usual process of scruitiny in both the house and the senate. The emergency powers act and the other emergency powers granted to the gov't are entirely different and we've already seen this gov't use them once unlawfully. You can't challenge them in court before they're used as you could a bill passing through parlaiment. You can't get an injunction to suspend their implementation pending a court challenge. So basically you're fine with the gov't setting aside the rights of Canadians at large for political gain as long as its the liberals because the notwithstanding clause exists. That's just pathetic.

Ok, slight misunderstanding i think. I'm sorry i meant that i thought it was clever to say Tesla, an electric car, is 'in the tank", like a gas tank because ice sales are doing better. It would have been an amusing and clever play on words, the car with no tank is in the tank. I thought you'd used the words intentionally with that in mind and was just acknowledging your clever reply. Sorry, looks like i gave you way too much credit there.

Or unless the house votes against his gov't. They HAVE to call the house back, and the other parties have already said they'd bring him down. So ONE use of the powers is to stop confidents votes to deal with the 'crisis'. And the law allows for them to change the next election date till fall of 2026 if they wish. Those are simple facts. Bottom line if he's already talking about using the emergency powers available then every single canadian should be afraid.

With a video of him actually saying it. You going to try and claim that they think the video? Is there any part of it that you disagree with or believe is not accurate? No? Just once it would be nice to have an honest conversation with you instead of you trying to bullshit your way out of a position you just don't like I have never said anything like that in my entire life. I have posted many CBC articles here for discussion. I do not trust the CBC and I try and verify all of their stories but I have never suggested that nothing they say can be believed. Once again, lying about what I've said in order to try and boost your narrative because the truth simply doesn't. That's nice. It was the video that was the important thing. The video is quite clear. And all I talked about was his use of emergency powers. I never mentioned a single word about green anything Actually it entirely is. That is how it works now in the day of sea lioning But You didn't ask me to prove my claims, you said there wasn't enough information. So it is 100% your job to go out and find more information if you want to know more. That is literally how it works. I'm not here to educate your dumb ass. He is already planning to use emergency powers. Those are the powers we use to suspend law and human rights. Trudeau already illegally used the emergency powers act once, and these are the same liberals who voted for that. I don't care if you're on the right or the left that should be VERY concerning for you yet here you are defending it

If it were you you'd use it to eliminate elections and make justin ruler for life

How. What liberties will he suspend in order to achieve this? How will he use it so that it will defeat the enemy? You obviously know his intentions, please enlighten us

They haven't been silenced. They're just not being funded by A specific group, they are free to raise their own money from other groups and do the research and publish the results. They're saying we as a customer do not want to buy products that are like this. There is a ton of research they probably aren't interested in funding and never have been This would be like saying you are censoring Disney plus because you don't pay for a Disney Plus Membership. It's not censorship

And if he does say that then he'll have still done more to actually solve the problem than Trudeau had. Trudeau did less than nothing and you losers had 10 years to course correct and make a difference and you failed, and you destroyed the economy while you were pretending to do something. So if Poilievre gets in and does nothing he will still have hurt us less than you

I never said he did. But he did say he intends to use emergency powers to fight trump. THere's only a few places he can use that. Extending the election date is one. I never mentioned 'Green" anything yet you just claimed i did. so much for you "listening" So you're stupid AND a hypocrite.... quite the package! Well seeing as you know which emergency powers he's talking about go ahead and put those fears to rest and tell us what he's intending

Well the books have been opened a great deal. We know about the snc scams, we know about all the single sourced contracts and work for nothing like the company that got hundreds of millions for arrivecan, we know about the "Green slush fund", we know about a lot of this crap. Unfortunately a lot of canadians dont' care about corruption. (eyeball..... Staaaaaaaaare...) and vote the gov't in anyway. All PP can do is shut a bunch of it down for now, but it gets revived the next time the libs are in power. With respect if you want more detail go dig it up yourself you lazy treesloth. This is a discussion forum, it's not an educational facility.

if people think polievre is going to be able to do a deal with trump that gets canada a fair deal he wins. And if trump is saying he doesn't hate him then that goes a long way towards that.

Makes me wonder why you're always on the left then And the only substance this would have is in your imagination. You had 10 years to prove that you and your fellow lefties were serious about climate change and you utterly completely failed despite having absolutely free reign. So it's pretty obvious you don't actually give a crap

Will slip a message under your bed when it's safe to come out.

Yeah, nobody wanted to get rid of the liberals until trump piped up 🙄🙄 Honestly I've lost track of how many different kinds of stupid you are

There's no need to reply if you're actually out on a date.......