Bryan

I wonder that as well. I spent a few months in rural Quebec, and never met a single person whose english was not substantially better than my french. I've lived almost all of my life in St. Boniface, and the only people that I've encountered who didn't speak english were recent immigrants from Africa.

Maybe the answer is to remove any language requirements at all. Let the locals speak what they want. Let local govts conduct business is whatever language is appropriate for them. Don't require any specific language on any packaging (let the importer put a sticker on it so his customers know what it is).

Me too.

Depends on your definition of "overseas". North Americans travel to plenty of tropical countries. They're just most likely to be in the same hemisphere. But, yeah, the distance makes a huge difference. I can go for thousands of miles and still be fully inside of Canada.

Sounds drifty to me... maybe time for a new thread?

All futures eventually become the present. Present people have no control over what people in the past did. They were already there when we got here, none of us are responsible for how they came to be.

We are those people "in the future". We had no control over what happened in the past, and we are in no way responsible for it. Not. At. All.

I've said it here before, but It's always surprised me that Libertarian doesn't get more traction in the US. It's pretty much the very definition of the "American Way". This election in particular, where even their own parties mostly hate their own candidates for the big two, it's quite odd that Johnson hasn't already gotten AT LEAST 15%. If there was even an election custom tailored for a third party to make some waves, this is it. Presidents have been elected without majorities before. Not really an issue.

When it comes to terrorism, by the time it looks like you have enough grounds for a warrant, that probably means it's time to kick that door down right this second.

Definitely not. You can't control what someone did before you were born, and you have no control over when or where you are born. With regards to TSS's point about immigration -- those people were born in the UK as it exists now, not when it was an Empire. They can be independently for or against immigration without respect to the UK's previous imperial actions because they had nothing to do what that. And nothing in their lives today has anything to do with it either.

I hope he does get to debate, but I highly doubt that he will. The RNC and DNC put the 15% threshold in for a reason -- they do not like their two party system challenged.

Are you advocating for no social programs of any kind?

Again, the people who provide those funds do substantially more than just give out money. It's a tiny fraction of their jobs.

Who exactly would that be? Even in the welfare offices, actually paying that welfare cheque is a very small part of the job, Most of their days are spent dealing with much bigger problems.

Please. Nobody is responsible for the actions of their ancestors.

Virtually everyone is. I've never met anyone who would not be offended by such an inflammatory accusation.

If you know what you are doing, the authorities will not know what you're posting or where you're doing it. There are more than enough public wifi spots, more than enough anonymous services, and more than enough ways to access devices that can be used for video and data. Hiding is EASY. The guy screwed up (thankfully).

You can schedule something to be automatically posted at a later time.

Why?

It's not my views, it's their views. They wrote them down, easy to read for yourself. Would you take it at face value if someone told you they were a moderate Nazi?

That's not an "out", that is Islam. If you're not a radical, you're an infidel.

They are "full gospel" Muslims. Islam, by the book.

It's an ideology issue. Islam is a terrorist school of thought. Your skin colour or the country you come from is not relevant.

Governments absolutely can disregard the constitution and the charter if they choose to. They can even choose to set aside any court decision regarding such a law (renewable at five year intervals). That's not a level of controversy that most governments are willing to take on, so it's rarely done.

If that's what you're getting from this discussion, I wonder if maybe you're doing too much skimming and not actually reading of this thread.