Old Guy

Sorry I didn't get her name but If it helps she was wearing a cowboy hat with an American flag motif and was missing a couple of teeth.

Sorry made a mess of the copy and paste but my point remains that the period of investigation was 2002 - 2014. In 2015 the commissioner some recommendation and in 2017 she ask for the governments response these come after the findings. But since you only read the first two and not the last four I doubt you went any further than your ha ha moment. Sloppy debate skills. Here is one article linking religion to Harpers government and another although I'm not sure why since you aren't much for reading new information.

Let me try again, the policies were not the reason that the scientists who complained about their research not being released which would allow for wider collaboration with other scientists. Which, by the way, is how science works. It was the administration of those policies that was the problem. You apparently only read the first 2 and either ignored or lost interest in 3 - 6. Here they are: In practice, the Communications Policy and the departmental media relations policies were not being applied by the subject institutions during the period under investigation in keeping with the stated objective of responding to the information needs of the public. As applied during the period under investigation, the Communication Policy and the departmental media relations policies are impacting upon the federal access to information regime. The fear observed by the OIC on the part of public servant investigation participants is consistent with the “chill” documented in the survey of over 4,000 federal government scientists conducted by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada and reviewed by the OIC as part of this investigation. The application of the Communications Policy and the departmental media relations policies during the period under investigation is not consistent with the Government of Canada’s formal commitments to foster and promote Open Government.

Because I think Harper was anti science and choose some crazy ash religious garbage over science does not mean I'm pro Trudeau. The only thing he has managed to do well is to apologize. In fact when he gets turfed in the next election he might hire himself out like a singing telegram except that he could show up at someone's house and apologise on behalf of his client.

Well I've heard MAGA people claim that since Trump never lost the election he is in control and just chooses to to live at Mara Lago.

Duh that's typically how politics work. There is an election and the winner forms a government. Parties don't give up power they lose it in an election. And BTW do you know what a Marxism is or what a marxist government would look like or perhaps you've just heard it down at your local. According to this list Canada ranks 23rd out of fifty of the richest countries in the world. Read the short descriptor on the side to give some context to why, for example Luxemburg is ranked as number 1. Premier Lougheed of Alberta visited Norway to study how the Norwegian's set up their sovereign wealth fund. He tried something similar but successive Conservative governments squandered it away. Here is a video on how Norway handled it's natural resources. Norway's sovereign wealth fund stands at 1.7 Trillion dollars. Government can use no more than 3% of the funds earnings for social programs which is currently estimated at 33 billion dollars annually. These means that politicians can't buy votes. Oh and their government is a parliamentary democracy and the state owns a share of the natural resources.

I hope your right. Given a majority the PP (professional politician) Pierre Poilievre is liable to go off the rails and turn us into a crypto nation where the rich can steal more easily. What an Elitist wonk he is. Yeah but Trudeau must go.

This has more to do with multigenerational families where older people remain in the family and do what they can to contribute to the family by helping prepare meals and looking after children. The nuclear family changed all that some would say for the worse.

Here are some comparisons relative to your assertion that China has a higher standard of living than Canada. In some areas they are ahead and some we are better. Of course larger populations tend to benefit from economies of scale so comparing Canada and China is a questionable exercise.

Leave aside the notion of political systems and countries what you are in essence comparing are two competing economic systems. One where the state owns the means of production and where decision making naturally becomes more centralized. The other where the means of production are held privately whether by individuals or corporations and where decision making is more competitive and more polarized. Keep in mind that neither of these systems are pure. Communist countries have some private ownership and in capitalist countries some assets are owned by the state. The question then becomes which system is more efficient at creating and distributing wealth? Prior to the economic reforms in China which led to easing up own state control wealth equality was higher but innovation and production suffered. By 1998 when the reforms allow more free enterprise and market forces production increased and the wealth gap increased. This gap is measured by the GINI Index The latest figures I found were in this article. The larger the number the wider the gap. Canada 31.7, China 37.1, USA 39.8, Mexico 43. I included the US and Mexico because they are both along with Canada North American with an economic treaty. At least on this measure Canada is doing better than its neighbors and China.

News Flash: Biden dropped out of the race. Why do you think Trump loves Rocket Man in North Korea - He sent Trump a love letter. If you are so weak minded that you can be manipulated that easily... It could be, "please please mr. dictator tell me again how great I am and I'll give you Alaska" 🤣 Thanks for the heads up I didn't know that.

The problem wasn't in the law but how the law was practiced. Here are is the summary from the Information Commissioners report on the issue. Check out the findings. For more detail on what the complaint was about you can read this article, but given the source I doubt you'll bother. Funny that you don't hear people complaining about information requests being refused at anything like the same level. Again it maters how laws are applied.

Have a look at his speech from 2016 and now there is a loss of coherence that is hard to miss. He rarely speaks in complete sentences even at his own rallies. Leaving that aside do you really want a president that easily manipulated.

I watch fox but realize its the right wing equivalent to MSNBC. For that reason I don't watch either very long. Fiscally I'm a conservative but socially I'm a lefty. So for example I voted for Stanfield and for Joe Clark. Harper on the other hand, in my opinion, was a control freak who did his best to limit science, especially around things that went against his belief system, climate change springs to mind. Trudeau is great at apologies but I expect that is because more often than not he has pissed someone off. I would imagine it is a relief to him to apologize on behalf of a country rather than himself. Well there was that black face incident. I suspect Poilievre will win hopefully a minority government and so we will be back to trickle down economics. I just hope he doesn't try to swing our monetary system towards crypto. Mostly I listen to podcasts and because I don't think Trump was a good president the first time and will be worse now I listen to pods you would consider left wing. The Bulwark, Forbes, Meidas Touch, and David Pakman. I also occasionally listen to the Bridge, The House and Cross Country Check-up. The Bridge is hosted by Peter Mansbridge and is slanted to neo liberalism but the House is interviews and discussion about current affairs and check-up as you know is a call in show. For international news I watch BBC, Aljazeera and Euro News and CGTN. These are just t help me stay informed.

And Trump isn't demented? You must not of watched the debate. It was like he had a rant button and Kamala kept pushing it.

It sounded as though transgender surgeries were a common occurrence. I included a link to a Harvard study. Your second video was completely devoid of meaningful content. I am not a Trudeau fan =never voted for him never will. Nor am I impressed by protesters using bullhorns to drown out any possibility of discussion. That's more, a conservative thing.

I don't listen or watch CNN and could care less what their take is on anything. But tell where do you get your news? I am honestly curious for your recommendation.

Like the tariff Trump imposed when he was in power and he promises to do it again? I don't see a big difference between the two parties on this issue. It's just that Trump will go about in his most bellicose way. His motto should be, "let the spittle fly".😁

Congrats you got all the way to the third sentence without resorting to name calling. And of course no link.

How about all the country's that share a border with Russia and especially those that were former vassal states.

These are all good points. I would point out that Hamas has been cited for war crimes as they should. My point is the comparison between 1200 dead Israelis versus 41,000 dead Palestinians. That is where proportionality comes in. 1. I have no special insight into Hamas. But if you read the history of Israel you will see that early on there was a strong movement to reach beyond the borders agreed to and to occupy all of the land. Ben Gurion Israel first Prime Minister lead this movement which was criticized by more moderate Jews. He used this as his rationalization for forcing the Palestinians out of Palestine: "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?" Hamas might have seen itself as striking a blow against a people who have pushed them into smaller and smaller enclaves. Like I said I'm not sure why a small force would attack a stronger enemy. Any resendable person would expect Israel to respond by attacking. Yes we can agree that any country including Israel has a right to defend itself. Do the Palestinian's in the Westbank and Gaza have the same right? Apparently not. I don't agree that freeing the hostages and over throwing the government of Gaza are the only two objectives. A third objective is to forcing Palestinians to leave Palestine.

Can you post a link to support you assertions or do I just add them to the BS pile.

Unevidenced assertion. And Alex Jones and Steve Bannon doesn't count. They lie more than Trump - Oh what am I saying no-one lies more than Trump.

How do you tell a post is from a right wing extremist? Because they start off by name calling, stupid seems to be a favorite of theirs. I acknowledged in my post that the guy who called Trump a buffoon was a democrat. In your haste to to call me stupid you didn't fully read or perhaps comprehend my post. Sorry if you took my question as an insult but let me ask again, when did truth matter to Trumps MAGA World?

Any credible evidence for your statement that "two people that were driven by left wing rhetoric have attempted to murder a former president." Or is that just some BS you heard on news max or truth social or perhaps Alex Jones? Whose predictions were they? All you have are unevidenced assertions.