Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by CdnFox

  1. 17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

    Not sure why anyone should be surprised at the liberals actions any more, do anyone really think that the liberal run commission is going to uncover any evidence or make that evidence available to the the opposition let alone the public...that would implicate the liberals in any way....all these commissions should be run by those that are not implicated in the actual event... in this case the Conservatives, and bloc...and we wonder why we have no faith in the government...

    Well i don't know that i'd say i'm "surprised", that's for sure ;)   But it is still very disappointing - you'd think after their first 'sweep it under the rug' attempt they'd just get it done and not drag it out but that's exactly what will happen now when the opposition points out they were denied

  2. 6 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

    Israel created this mess.

    The blockades, and constricting the Palestinians, have crippled their abilities to earn a living.

    Gaza could easily have negotiated those problems away close to 2 decades ago.  They decided that they would rather go with hate and violence and never make peace.

    Either they will get their heads out of their asses and build a life for themselves or they will continue to live in filth and violence until someday someone has enough and decides to end them entirely. They're going to have to make that choice.

    • Like 1
  3. 3 minutes ago, eyeball said:


    Aww muffin.  I'd be ashamed of it right now too if i were you.


    Except the state of our fisheries is still what it is despite conservatives having been in the driver's seat often enough to have acted on their awareness of how mismanaged, incompetent and corrupt things are. 

    When was that?  In the last 30 years the conservatives have had ONE majority gov't that lasted 4 years. Where are these decades of conservative rule you refer to?




    I call bullshit because like everything else you simply default the issue of accountability and transparency to the same old left vs right paradigm.

    You call bullshit because you can't make an intelligent argument and stomping your feet is your only alternative,

    This is a party issue.  The liberals are corrupt as the day is long - the voters allow that so they keep doing it.  Conservatives have pointed this out for generations now.  And when conservatives get in they tend to do better.  And if they don't their supporters destroy the party with no mercy.  not just 'vote them out' - reduce them to ash.

    That is all demonstrably and verified true.  So you can' "call bullshit" all you like but the fact is the only one spouting bullshit here is YOU. Don't blame the right for the failings of the liberal party.

  4. 1 minute ago, eyeball said:

    Oh shut up.....

    I've been pointing out mismanagement, incompetence, corruption and the uselessness of the Dept of Fisheries and Oceans for decades and you know it. I've even pointed out why economists look at the state of fisheries and communities that depend on them the way miners look at canaries.


    And yet you vote liberal.  Soooo ... yeah.


    Why is the right only now getting woke to this? 

    The right has pointed out liberal mismanagement, incompetence and corruption for more decades than you. 

    The right warned the country that the first trudeau would drive inflation through the roof and that he would be corrupt and that he would rape the west in favour of the east.

    Liberal voters like you didn't care.

    They utterly destroyed the PC party and wiped it off the map when it became corrupt, Liberals like you have never done that.  Ever.

    They warned that Chretien was corrupt, shawinigate for example And blew the whistle on the adscam things.  Again - left wing voters gave him 2 terms and a minority to his successor and co-conspirator martin.

    Harper predicted EVERYTHING that TRUDEAU has done - the lies about balancing the budget, the impact of the 'tax on everything' carbon tax, the fact he would raise it which trudeau denied, the china involvement etc etc, and justin has been as corrupt as hell  - being cited for corruption violations in the first 6 months of his rule.

    But liberals like you keep voting for him.


    Meanwhile harper fired a minster for buying expensive orange juice.

    Don't whine at the right wing about corruption - it woudl'nt exist if it weren't for you leftie freaks supporting the hell out of it

  5. 53 minutes ago, Rebound said:

    No, the issue is that the GOP wants to take his deposition in PRIVATE, meaning the record will be private.

    But can be brought out if someone makes a false statement easily.  The dems can request it and say 'that republican is lying, at no time in the transcripts does he admit to eating a live baby".   You can't just lie about it, so that excuse just doesn't hold water.


    And the concern with that is the Republicans will release snippets of the deposition to selected media outlets, who will put their spin on it.  

    Which the dems can point out as being lies. And if there's pressure the full transcript can be released if necessary, so republicans aren't going to win that one.  It's not a legitimate concern.


    So Hunter Biden has said No, he will agree to testify in public, in front of cameras, for all the world to see. No Spin Zone.  

    It is the ultimate spin zone. Like i said - the questions from the dems will be "are the republicans doing this out of hatred or incompetence" and the answer will be "two things can be true",  while republican questions get stonewalled and basicaly ignored.

    Which is why he wants to do it in public. I would too if i were him,  but it's not out of concern for what the republicans might do.


    So far, as you well know, Republicans have brought witness after witness without finding any crime at all. Deluge found a “crime” of Joe Biden embellishing his resume at U Penn. Not exactly impeachable, but that’s the level of detail. 

    Welll then there should be no problem with him testifying in public OR private.

  6. 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

    There were very few non-white immigrants to Canada until after WW2.  Yes they have made many contributions. 

    Individually.  And of course moreso in even more modern times.  Like there was the black mayor on vancouver island in the 1800's who was well known for being a strong leader who played a big role in moving the community forward, but i wouldn't say "black people' by and large played a large role in the development of the island communities. I would say that guy did but that's not the same as the Chinese contribution to the province for example.

  7. 17 minutes ago, Hodad said:

    I'm aware that it was likely caused by a rocket misfire. Not sure how that is relevant to the casualty count.


    Pretty simple  - they insised it wasn't a rocket misfire.  They insisted that it was deaths at the hands of the israeils.  Until it was known that it was caught on film.

    So if they lied about that and blamed the israelis for deaths that were higher than what happened and were not caused by israelis - what other casualties did they lie about?

  8. 38 minutes ago, Aristides said:

    So why not do it in public?

    Ahhh - so you had no reason to ask me which democrats were on the committee. Just being a sealion. See if you can waste my time digging up and posting information you don't care about.   You're a dink.

    And i answered that previously very clearly. So more sealioning. Public allows him to grandstand and his dem friends to ask him loaded and leading questions like 'clearly this is an unwarranted attack on you by the evil republicans, do you think that's because they're jealous of your greatness or because they're scum?"

    At any rate - as i've demonstrated there's no way for the republicans to lie about what he's said in private, so might as well do it there.

  9. 19 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

    For those that lived through Mr. Chretien years of cuts... I would think no one would be stupid enough to go through that again....and yet here we are, looking into the abyss,

    Here's the thing. Services were cut back then because of spending cuts.  But this time - there have been massive spending increases.  Massive.  And despite INCREASED spending service levels crashed.

    How the hell do you circle THAT square?

  10. 1 hour ago, Jack9000 said:

    gonna anger alot of his own mps/staffers if they got to stay for christmas but hilarious in a way considering politicians never work Christmas and will be crying  while lots of normal people sucked it up and have had to work a few.

    I"m sure. But - harper pulled the same thing back in the day when Martin had the minority.  So he can just blow it off as a conservative holiday tradition :)  

  11. 5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

    I wasn't aware of any large populations of ethnic Russians, but Ukrainian communities are everywhere on the prairies. 

    of course.  You can't throw a brick without hitting a perogie.


    I just did a quick google search and was surprised to find out that about 4% of Manitobans and Saskatcha(folks?lol) are Russian. 

    Da - ve haf yoo surrounded comrade!!!


    There are only 3x as many Ukrainians but it seems like more than that. Mabe during the cold war a lot of Russians started pretending that they are Ukrainian?

    Well given the histories there's a bit of confusion. My family was referred to as "russian" because Ukraine was under russian control when they fled.  But they would likely call themselves Ukrainian today.  And a lot of those ukranians actually had german blood - they had come to ukraine during the time of katherine the great which SHE was looking desperately for farmers. 

    So it gets a little messed up.   Being a 'Russian Mennonite' basically means your forefathers were kicked out of every respectable country in Europe at one time or another, and most of them were really Ukrainian. 

    • Like 1
  12. 1 hour ago, Aristides said:

    So who are the Democrat committee members?



    Why do you ask? Are you suggesting they'd lie about biden or something?

    1 hour ago, Aristides said:

    Hunter would be testifying on his own but since when do you think he should be denied legal advice, do you think these committees should be some sort of star chamber?

    There are representatives on both sides present and asking questions.  It's hardly a star chamber.

  13. 1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

    Of course. My own family to Canada as “Germans from Russia” ethnic Germans who lived in what is now the Ukraine for about 100 yrs before coming to the prairies in the late 1800s. . Many non-white immigrants have been in Canada a long time also. Chinese workers built the railroads, Blacks from USA and Caribbean came also, even some Turks, Syrian and Lebanese came early. Russians built Canada to the same degree as these non-white immigrants did. They don’t get special credit for building Canada simply for having the same skin colour as British and French. 

    Sometimes you're just really weird.  You knew about the great migration but pretended that russians and ukraines didn't play a major role? Kinda feels like you were being dishonest on one end of that  or the other.

    And no  - not 'all kinds.  British, (and scott, irish), french, chinese, russian/ ukrainian. Those are the peoples that came here in large numbers and made a massive impact on building canada.  Not blacks - there were some and some did great things but no, they did not contribute in a substantial way as a  group like the othes. not  the turks not the syrians etc etc.

    The british et al gave us the exploration and massive expansion through the hudson's bay company,, The french gave us exploration and expansion through the voyageurs, the chinese built the railroads and settled much of british columbia, the russian/ukraine people made the breadbasket happen.

    Those are the major groups. Take any one of those groups out and canada would not be what it is today.  take the syrians out and we're pretty much the same.

  14. 1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

    Huh?  That makes no sense. Newspapers don’t buy ads, they sell them. Unfortunately google is a monopoly that controls online advertising and all the infrastructure so they’re like a middleman broker who keeps the advertisers money for themselves and leaves the newspapers with very little.

    Any monopoly can be broken and papers have always found their own advertisers. There's nothing stopping them from selling their own adspace. If they choose to use google as a service that's their option but it's not the only option.

    And regadless - thy make money at it.

    Obviously they want people to visit their site directly and benefit from them doing so,   so again - if they get a benefit from a google search should htey not have to pay?  You're dancing around the question but it's a straight forward question.

  15. 11 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

    They were helped al lot more by Indigenous, Black and Chinese people than they were by Russians. Russians get no special credit over those other groups for “making” Canada simply by being White. 

    You may be unaware but in the 20's there was a MASSIVE influx of Ukrainians and russais who were extremely vital to the development of prairie farmland. My own family on one side was part of that. There's even a name for that period but it eludes me at the moment.

    But for sure the russian/ukranians who were specifically recruited by the gov't and brought here for agriculture played a very large role in the development of Canada as a country.

  16. Just now, BeaverFever said:

    Most people do not get their news by doing web searches first of all. They browse news headlines that Google, Facebook et al scrape from the internet.

    And? For the ones who do or the ones who look up stories - shouldn't the papers be compensated?

    MOST people who frequent forums use google to search for articles.  At some point they want to share something  or they want to research something and the search pulls up news articles that they will go read at that paper's site. The number of people being driven by google to those news papers is NOT zero.


    Second of all as I mentioned Google does make an exceptional amount of money from ads on the news outlets site no matter how the reader ended up there. Thisnis because Google has a near monopoly on online advertising.   Your very own conservative newspaper National Post  describes it as follows:

    I love that I own the national post now :)

    Sure - google sells ads and the newspaper chooses to buy them. But they don't need to, that's a choice. And it's a bit of a different subject although i can see how you're relating them.  But - a paper buying ads from google because it's easier than going and finding their own ad dollars is not a contract to drive business to the website. Google itself does do that though, so why wouldn't the paper who derrives a benefit have to pay for that?



  17. 35 minutes ago, Jack9000 said:

    lol trying to bully   to get what he wants done. he looks like a spoiled child not getting his way more then a man whos trying to prove he would be a competent  Prime minister. however mps sit far to few days.. so i won't cry to see them have to work thru christmas for once 123 days   is a joke 

    Well it's always interesting when the left calls it 'bullying' when the right does it, but "standing up for people" when their own people do it :) Was Jagmeet "bullying" when he did the deal with the libs, or bullying when he told them he'd pull it apart if they didn't do what he said?

    This is a valid enough tactic and given the lib-ndp coalition which is in effect a majority it's the only real way he can push for things.
    But was this what he should be pushing for? It just doesn't feel like a hill to die on.

    14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

    I don't care if they sit over Christmas, I was away from home for more than a few. However, PP better be there with the rest of them.

    That's a guarantee.  The photo ops alone make it worth it.

  18. 1 hour ago, Rebound said:

    Cause there’s a hell of a difference! It is FACT that House Republicans release doctored evidence! They said so!  So Hunter will testify PUBLICLY, where his answers can’t be doctored.

    Such meetings are duly recorded and the dems will be there too - so that's not a valid excuse.  If it was just republicans that would be different but that's not the case.

    He'd have to do better than that.

  • Create New...