CdnFox
-
Posts
27,010 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
283
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by CdnFox
-
-
34 minutes ago, eyeball said:
It was out of commission because it was under maintenance at the time.
But it wasn't supposed to be. It wasn't even a problem with the resivoir just the cover. It had been down since february and was supposed to be operational. @Nationalist was right
Now the governor is launching an 'investigation' to look into the failure.
SO that's not much of an 'excuse'. "down for repairs" for forever is a failure of the gov't.
12 minutes ago, Aristides said:He is too lazy to read the news link I posted, he would rather believe Trump's bullshit about Newsom and smelt.
The newspaper says he's right and you're wrong. Who were you talking about being too lazy and smelling like bullshit ?
LOLOL
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Moonbox said:
I'm afraid of talking to him, he says, as I bait him into another thin-skinned response. 🤡
Sure kid
Having had your cowardice pointed out you try to defend it
QuoteYou won the no-life medal for having absolutely nothing else going on in your life. Congratulations!
People preferred me as a poster. Sorry you're butthurt
QuoteMike never had a chance, really.
Nope. He's awful. Dishonest, he contributes nothing of substance, almost never starts a thread or begins a conversation and half of the time he's just posting "why are we talking abou this' replies.
He's almost as useless as you, but slightly less bitter or emotionally damaged
What's 100-50 again?
-
1 hour ago, DUI_Offender said:
Smith accomplished nothing. The tariffs remain. Her mission failed.
Smith accomplished quite a bit, which is why you're so butt hurt
19 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:What a coincidence. Everyone is laughing at you on the other forum you are at, sluggo.
Everyone laughs at you here. So does that make you even?
-
Just now, eyeball said:
While you try to blame every single glitch in the Matrix on the left?
I don't of course but i'm sure lying about it helps you sleep with your fragile ego at night
QuoteSure kid.
-
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:
Hey what's up loser haven't seen you reply since you embarrassed yourself about Canada not restricting foreign immigration for a good chunk of its history and the whole deal with the cybertruck guy's mainfestos, and now you are gonna talk about respectable arguments? lol gtfo.
You've been the one hiding out since then
And it was you who wound up looking like an !diot when it turned out your 'restriction was a tax which is no restriction at all and the only actual restrictions only lasted about 20 years out of a 150 year history Which isn't exactly "most'
To be honest i'd forgotten about it. You lose so many discussions with me that i can't even keep track any more.
I see it's still bothering you tho obvious;ly
LOLOLOL sorry to hear about your butthurt !
And you got absolutely creamed in the cybertruck one - that's where you refused to provide a cite till after someone else did and then it turned out the guy didn't say anything like what you said at all.
That one wasn't even a fight, you were just wrong and wanted your error to be my fault somehow as usual.
Anyway, the fact you were wrong in those cases has nothing to do with 'respect' and everything to do with you being dumb.
This however was beyond that
Do better for heaven's sake. Nobody respects you as it is but this is just a new low.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, myata said:
Only three rules:
1. One (everyone) has the right to physical safety (no violence)
Not true. If you threaten or conduct act of violence yourself or support such activities then you have no right to safety. That rate comes with responsibility. Break into my home and you were right to safety goes out the window
Quote2. Everyone the right to emotional and psychological safety (no harassment, threats, coercion)
Not even a little bit. There is no right not to be offended. Which is why we let a piece of crap like you post here
Quote3. Everyone can have an expectation of reasonable convenience (accommodation) as long as it doesn't significantly and unduly inconvenience others
No. That is something that we generally agree on as a society because it is generally beneficial but that is not a right. It's like if my neighbor comes and asks to borrow a cup of sugar 99.9 times out of 100 if I have sugar I'm going to lend them some. But they don't have a right to it.
QuoteSimple?
Simple minded. But that's not surprising coming from you. And you're just going to declare what you think everybody's rights are without even discussing it with anyone else, this is just how it is because myata is the only voice that matters
Yeesh. The one time you post something that's actually legible to a degree and it turns out to be garbage.
People do not have the right to be unoffended. People do not have the right or should not have the right to demand that others accommodate their particular interests. We may choose to be polite. We may choose to be non offensive. We may accuse to accommodate others to the point of hardship. But those are choices
-
4 hours ago, Hodad said:
That's easy. A reporter. An impartial third party who is actually looking at the budget documents. Which are public, btw.
The fire chief is likely not looking at the budget and is heavily incentivized to blame someone else--doubly so if it gets the department more money I'm the next budget.
Did you just say reporter and impartial in the same sentence?
Honestly every day I think you can't look more stupid and every day you outwit me
-
3 hours ago, Black Dog said:
I'd have a tiny bit more respect for MAGAtards if
Yeah, and winning YOUR respect is top of their priority list
When you start making respectable arguments and contributions then other people might care but you're the guy who cheers when people he doesn't like gets shot and thinks islamists don't vote. It's like saying "if you do this, you might really win favour with this dung beetle. "
-
3 hours ago, Black Dog said:
Islamists don't vote.
???????
What the hell dude, i wasn't going to jump into this as @WestCanMan was obviously having fun beating you up by himself but that is by far and away the STUPIDEST thing you've ever said.
They not only vote, they do so in organized groups and in large numbers. You couldn't have admitted to being a tard any more effectively if you'd produced dna evidence that your mother was a hamster and your father was a fly who couldn't figure out which half of the window was open.
How do you even manage to say something like that?
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Moonbox said:
Well nobody else wants to talk to him, so he's here...all day...every day...looking to fill that hole.
Awwww moonbox
Still randomly showing up to attack me when your self esteem is low is it Hell i won forum member of the year. Over mike i'd point out LOLOLOL
It's pathetic that you're now so afraid of me you have to talk "to" me by talking about me to someone else
-
4 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:
Traitor.
Anybody who makes their country ACTUALLY better while identifying as their birth gender is a traitor to you.
-
5 hours ago, Radiorum said:
No, what Smith has presented are irrefutable facts supported by evidence.
No, what smith has presented is a claim. Then you go to court and THEN both sides get a chance to refute it. AFTER that the judge (and jury in some cases) will decide what has been proven to be fact or not.
You're just out and out lying at this piont.
And posting exerpts every 5 minutes to disrupt the forum and the thread just proves even you don't believe it's true, or you'd just have posted a link and possibly some of the points you consider to be critical.
This is exactly the kind of dishonestly we've become used to seeing from the left and why nobody with a brain accepts what this guy said as 'true' on good faith. The republicans are going to own the dems for the next 12 years and the CPC in Canada will own the left probably for about as long.
-
8 hours ago, Scott75 said:
No, I'm not.
You absolutely are.
QuoteFor starters, societies are an amalgamation of the people that compose it.
You don't believe that, you discount and disregard anyone who doesn't agree with you. So you absolutely don't see society as an amalgam.
QuoteSecondly, I said nothing about it being an unalienable right.
You did. Trying to caveate it afterwards is meaningless. And you've been quite clear since.
Your type of oppressor always is the same. They insist on being repressive, THEN claim they don't really believe in repression, then go back to being repressive. Antifa was one of the most facists orgs out there for example.
QuoteBottom line, many of the rights we have depend on where we are.
No, that's not how rights work.
Quote
I'm not an American citizen
Ok, the canadian constitution then. Or for whatever country you live in.
Can't? Nope? not at all? So the rest of your drivel was just trying to distract from that?
And you still didnt' address a single point i made or anyone else has for that matter. What a scumbag.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:
They discussed nothing.
They discussed a great deal according to eyewitnesses and reporters who were there. In fact they had more than one private conversation with just him and her discussing oil and the shared energy resources between the two countries.
On top of that she met with and talked and discussed the issues with some of his key advisors. Those are relationships that will last for the entire term and are very important.
Meanwhile Justin hid in a cave and the left wing governments did nothing. Jag me came out and threatened trump and insulted him which as everyone who knows trump can tell you is a great idea because he responds very well to being threatened and insulted 🙄
It is a damn shame we have the left in power this critical time. It could have been avoided if we had decent governments in and now in the absence of a federal government willing to do something the premiers have to step in and get the job done. Never vote woke
-
6 hours ago, Nationalist said:
So...the threatened tariffs would take effect on January 20th IF Canada does not stop the flow of illegals and drugs to the US.
Here's the challenge. He never actually said he would forgo the tariffs if we secure the borders. He just said there was going to be tariffs and mentioned that our borders are one of the things that are unacceptable. He hasn't actually given us any indication whatsoever of what would be necessary in order to set aside the tariffs and frankly I'm not sure what he's going to before he takes power.
He may very well intend to put tariffs on just to show us he can. Leave them on for a month and then pull them or something. Or he may show up and say if you want to avoid tariffs here's my list have that done by tomorrow and we can remain tariff free.
The whole point of what he's been doing is to create confusion and doubt and uncertainty. At some point he will come forward with an actual list of demands, but until then we have no idea what it'll take to make this go away
-
13 hours ago, eyeball said:
You mean like the report I posted. It was ignored too by the same people.
That youd' never read till now? Sure.
QuoteSo why didn't it get done?
Too busy focusing time and money/resources on sheltering illegal mexicans and other woke policy, not enough focus on their core responsibilities.
Which is the same thing that happens whenever you lefties get into power. You could say the same of trudeau quite easily.
QuoteWhy not? They've had right wing governments before.
Not in the last 30 years or more. Arnie was technically a republican but ran very much on the left.
But i love that you're still trying to blame conservatives for what the woke left has broken
QuoteWell don't forget you got the Mel, Jeff and Arnold's of the world influencing impressionable minds. Politicians can't be too careful.
California is very left. And they are a mess, financially and business is fleeing the state and they are not focusing on core issues which means they get more disasters and on and on it goes.
Whenever the left gets into power this is what we see. It's just a matter of time
-
13 hours ago, eyeball said:
The electorate will be way way to cranky for that if they don't see promised changes within a couple of years.
They will see changes in improvements very quickly. As I've said Trudeau screwed things up so badly that basically if someone came in and just did nothing there would still be improvements.
By the time Trudeau actually leaves which will be sometime in may now, people will not be able to afford rents, they won't be able to afford food properly, we will be in a trade war that will be plunging us into a recession because he sat and did nothing, none of our government services will be working properly, jobs will be getting scarce and good jobs even scarcer, our quality of life will be nose diving thanks to our plunging gDP per capita. And that's probably the good news
Poilievre will get in and one way or another the trade war will end. It will probably end around that time whether he's in or not but he will get in and it will appear as though as he got in the trade war ended. He will cut immigration. It's already scheduled to be reduced, and he'll likely go a little farther than that. That will drastically impact rents in the short term, and also ease inflation and pricing for other areas.
He will kill the carbon tax and probably jigger other taxes to entice business investment back. That'll take a couple years to pay off but it will pay off and the recovery from trudeau's recession will be strong.
As long as things are moving in that direction even if they're not perfect people will be happy.
13 hours ago, eyeball said:That's alright Canada seems to sprout more parties.
On the left it does. On the right not so much. On the left there's the libs, the dips and the greens but on the right only the cpc has seats (although many consider the bloc to be a center or center right party, but they're a special case and really only hurt the libs).
So what will happen is the right will grow considerably stronger and the left will split the vote more and more and more.
-
13 hours ago, robosmith said:
I am for the quality of being fair and impartial.
As long as you're the one who gets to decide what's "fair", and "impartial' just means nobody's allowed to disagree with you
-
1 hour ago, robosmith said:
You know that NO ONE outside the MAGA CULT believes your BULLSHIT don't you.
IOW you're just wasting your time. And if you don't start making substantive posts, I'm going to add you to my ignore list.
Woo HOOOO @Deluge makes the list
I know you worked hard at that bud
So what has he got left, like 3 people he can still talk to?
-
9 minutes ago, eyeball said:
We all know it's coming.
No, these warnings are specific to a specific area and we're given to a specific group that has specific responsibilities for that area. I doubt very much you received or read any specific reports dealing with preparedness and recommended changes in Southern California for firefighting
QuoteI didn't say it was shouted down. I said that politicians knew it would be shouted down if woke concerns about climate change were the reason for s̶t̶e̶a̶l̶i̶n̶g̶ spending taxpayers hard earned money - they simply found it easier to do so on other stuff and took the path of least resistance.
Well that's not what you said and even if it was what you said I doubt very much the politicians in california especially Southern California believed that it wasn't worth bringing something up because it would get shouted down for any reason involving wokeism or climate change or the like.
QuoteSo is there any evidence of right wing protesters calling for money to be spent preparing for something that might not happen because of something they don't give a shit about?
There's no evidence that the right played a role at all in the decisions in Southern California. In fact it's an extremely left-wing area. The politicians tend to be left wing, it votes left-wing federally, it is seen as a hotbed of left-wing activity.
Which is why it's Highly Questionable but you would claim that they didn't move forward because of fears of people criticizing them for wokeism and left-wing thinking regarding climate change of all things
-
23 minutes ago, eyeball said:
No, that's not what I meant.
Too bad, you were that close to being right
QuoteYou get 5 years, if you're lucky. Good luck.
8 minimum and 12 would not surprise me. Then we'll see from there.
remember that every 6 years the west gets more and more seats.
-
LOL we've created a monster
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:
I've been arguing this for 20 years. We need to build relationships with Europe and Asia. Reliance on the Americans leaves us vulnerable if the US implodes, like what has happened in the past decade.
Unfortunately the left has blocked twinning that pipeline for quite some time. I'm afraid it's your fellow environmentalists that are the hang up here.
-
2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:
Danielle Smith, is probably the worst Premier in the history of Alberta.
She's doing great. She addressed fair compensaiton and resources for those who serve the public, she opened lines of communication with a potentially hostile group and was positively recieved, and one loser on the left mocked her for doing her job.
And the left is losing it's shite over it.
which is just a bonus
Danielle Smith and the UCP are treasonous pieces of garbage.
in Provincial Politics in Canada
Posted
If Trudeau wants to Call an election and let Canadians decide, until then if you won't do his job others are going to