waldo

talk about "not understanding what YOU read"! I didn't ask you for any 'stat numbers' relative to your ASSUMPTION (sic)... I only laughed/mocked you over your "silent Hispanic Trump supporters'. You know, because you dropped that little gem instead of providing a response to what I actually questioned/challenged you on. These following posts clearly outline the timing of you being questioned/challenged well before your silly reach to what you call, "your assumption... your musing", over "the silent ones"! .

you keep beating on this point; again, what do private citizens representing private companies pursuing, "mining and or oil services contracts in the Middle East, proper", have to do with whatever Canadian military decision/deployment the Canadian government chooses to enact/sanction within Iraq... you know, what this thread is about, hey? .

so you keep saying... in spite of being corrected on your purposeful repeated want to declare Cruz a Canadian; again, as stated previously... several times now: no - as you've already been apprised: Ted Cruz's Canadectomy was complete on May 15th, 2014, the date after the issuance by Canada, per his request to renounce his Canadian citizenship, of a Certificate of the Renunciation of Canadian Citizenship: "Subsection 9(3) of the Canadian Citizenship Act provides that the applicant ceases to be a citizen after the expiration of the day on which the certificate was issued, or such later date as the certificate may specify." what's the word for someone who continues to state something knowingly false... simply seeking a reaction for no useful/contributory purpose? .

anyways! . . . . . . . I accept your capitulation and unconditional surrender! .

let the infighting begin! Rona Ambrose made 'solemn vow' not to run for Tory leadership, Tony Clement says .

again: "The full sample size of voters captured by the polls was 1,573. That means Trump's claim that he is "No. 1 with Hispanics" is based on about 125 registered Republicans." That's huuuuuuuge! and, again, you fail to provide any numbers that speak to the National Hispanic support (or lack thereof) for Trump. Clearly you don't like the recent polling numbers I brought forward that highlight the abysmal Hispanic support Trump has... in spite of his lies/fabrications... that you perpetuate. Here, have another: a WAPO/Univision poll showed 8 out of 10 Hispanics hold an unfavourable view of Trump. . yes - it's the kind of "logical analysis" brought forward by those who can't accept Trump has little Hispanic support... from those who can't seem to provide any real numbers that speak to their presumed National Hispanic support for Trump! Do you think polling companies take the names of those surveyed and provide the names of those with negative views toward Trump, of those who plan not to vote for Trump... to the "cartel... to Mexican-run gangs in the U.S.? Oh my! . it's very relevant... read accounts of the Republican National Committee's postmortem review of the 2012 election defeat. again: "I related the Hispanic vote percentage for GWBush and for Romney. I emphasized the importance of the Hispanic vote in the U.S. general election, speaking directly to the 2012 results analysis of the Romney election defeat the Republican National Committee performed... highlighting that the only way they could expect a Republican to get elected U.S. President in 2016 is if Hispanic support was significantly increased beyond the level Romney realized. As I said, enter Trump and the abysmal support he has with U.S. Hispanics." .

posting here rather than extend further upon the moderator called thread drift in another thread. In that declared/titled Conservative party related thread, the presumed thread drifting call started with a Conservative versus Liberal party comparative reference. If one can't address the Liberal party reference without "thread drift" being declared... #stiflingDiscussion .

again, you were the one that emphasized (bold highlighted) the Hispanic population percentage of the rally city - and you followed that up with a demographics related link. There's a reason you presumed to highlight/identify Hispanics - yes? Why you actually created another thread, "Do Latinos Really Hate Trump"... and you also flogged the Nevada state results there just as you're doing here. so yes, I challenged you to step-up and speak to the Hispanic support you claim/imply Trump holds... and as I did that I put forward for your edification the latest representative U.S. National poll of Hispanic voters that clearly shows you're fabricating just as well as Trump is! So what do you come back with? Why you drop this lil' nugget about "Silent Trump supporters"! again, you weren't misquoted; your exact words were quoted. . no - let me say it again... perhaps it just might register with you - finally! I related the Hispanic vote percentage for GWBush and for Romney. I emphasized the importance of the Hispanic vote in the U.S. general election, speaking directly to the 2012 results analysis of the Romney election defeat the Republican National Committee performed... highlighting that the only way they could expect a Republican to get elected U.S. President in 2016 is if Hispanic support was significantly increased beyond the level Romney realized. As I said, enter Trump and the abysmal support he has with U.S. Hispanics. . ya, Trump stated! And low-information types got suckered by it. That whole Trump bluster over the Nevada Hispanic vote has been so busted many times over! Although it's in your own provided link, it's not stated directly so you obviously had difficulty deciphering what was actually stated in your linked article. Here, try mine - enjoy: .

no self-respecting proud Canadian would ever consider Canada becoming a part of that sorry-state country... those Americans desperate for Canadian water/resources will need to wait for another illegal U.S. invasion and regime change! .

considering the global-wide U.S. laughing/fretting stock Trump has caused, that's quite a "definitional reach" you have, hey! Jeezaz, the way O'Leary has pumped his own tires over that U.S. "Shark Tank" copy of the Canadian teevee show Dragon's Den, it's hard to fathom you've never heard of the guy... well, whatever floats your agendaBoat! .

tag not recognized on 3 pdf readers I tried, including Acrobat. Presumes you have a browser plug-in to read pdf files and/or a native built-in pdf viewer (that is enabled)... notwithstanding the page number isn't the number within the pdf file proper. Make that presumes you have a working browser plug-in as they must be updated in line with Adobe revisions... notwithstanding Adobe-to-plugin (browser) conflicts... Chrome has a history! .

"will be supportive"... now you're into your crystal ballin'! you thought you had something with your last post on that private 'somewhat minuscule' company venture. Sorry to have burst your bubble there... why the way you perpetually flogged that pic of Paul Martin in the desert tent through MLW thread after MLW thread, one would have thought you could update on that and actually present something on Harper providing direct Canadian support in regards your reference to Kurdistan oil. oh wait... didn't your efforts to highlight Canadian interests in Iraq somewhat back-fire on ya - should we resurrect a thread, hey! It's always humourous to realize just how far you've reached to try to deflect away the shyte-storm results U.S. Iraq "regime change" has wrought, hey! .

please clarify the 'Canada support' for a private company 'bit player' in an initiative principally fronted by New Age (African Global Energy) Limited as supported by the (KRG) Kurdistan Regional Government's Ministry of Natural Resources... .

why so touchy/defensive? Which one of those 2 individuals touts/touted himself as a business/financial wizard? Surely you can try to make your case for O'Leary based on his own initiatives and successes/failures therein - yes? .

isn't questioning the business acumen of O'Leary... fair game? If the guy presumes to run as a candidate for CPC leader... to become Prime Minister of Canada, why would you take a somewhat defensive posture with your reply? Does O'Leary having more money than you (as you acknowledge), meet your personal criteria/qualification for CPC leader/Prime Minister? .

"pull a Trump"!... you mean wildly inflate his "business acumen", as Trump has done? What is one to believe in the face of such a questioning/critical rebuke, as follows: The real (and shocking) story of Kevin O'Leary's business career .

interesting you never source/cite your little anecdotes - go figure! Annual cost for Harper’s RCMP security detail has doubled to $19.6 million since he became PM in 2006 .

yabut... what if you have "text-with-complete-sentences" interspersed with tabular text... with graphs. You know - a composite makeup! in the following example copy from a .pdf file, I didn't include the graph, only 2 related lead-in text passages to the graph. Is this where your suggestion to do it the "old fashioned way" comes in... to "type it all out"... or take the time/effort to try to edit this into something presentable? As opposed to just including the 2 text paragraphs as a part of the "snapshot snip" to capture the graph? • Annual CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production were 8.3 [7.6 to 9.0] GtC 12 yr –1 averaged over 2002–2011 ( high confidence ) and were 9.5 [8.7 to 10.3] GtC yr –1 in 2011, 54% above the 1990 level. Annual net CO 2 emissions from anthropogenic land use change were 0.9 [0.1 to 1.7] GtC yr –1 on average during 2002 to 2011 ( medium confidence ). {6.3} • From 1750 to 2011, CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production have released 375 [345 to 405] GtC to the atmosphere, while deforestation and other land use change are estimated to have released 180 [100 to 260] GtC. This results in cumulative anthropogenic emissions of 555 [470 to 640] GtC. {6.3

yes - I selected part of a quote that I wanted to respond to. If you have concerns... "ignore and report"! As for your off-topic reference, you've been personally schooled on that in the past. Please stay on topic. .

I didn't change a word of what you stated; you were quoted verbatim. There is no MLW rule, as I'm aware, that states a complete post must be quoted; I do believe focusing on a pertinent point is... less clutter and that seems to be the 'order of the day' around here! in this particular case, you were requested/challenged to put forward numbers that spoke to your reference to 'Hispanic Trump supporters'. Again, I note you replied without providing any such numbers to align with your implication. I do believe the sure sign of, as you say, "losing the discussion"... is resorting to a heightened presence of large font bolded Red/Green coloured text, interspersed with animated emoticons... you know, your posting pattern. .

you've just contradicted the other MLW moderator who advised the textual image was ok, subject to a "clutter evaluation". Could we have consensus please! This is most important given your hangin' judge propensity - please advise. as I said, just looking at the textual image... how would you even know it's an image? Your "good old fashioned way"... typing it all out... how "fashion forward" of you! .

so you have no numbers then for your stated, "Trump Hispanic supporters" - noted: .

is the GOP "base" (whatever that actually is anymore) ready for... even the perpetual long-standing rumours of? Just sayin! .