bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 I apologize for the Canadians in this forum. They're just not very good at this stuff. No, it is our fault...we are just bullies and trolls. How dare we compare this circumstance to political discourse in Canada. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted July 16, 2012 Author Report Posted July 16, 2012 No, it is our fault...we are just bullies and trolls. How dare we compare this circumstance to political discourse in Canada. They certainly got a serious case of the vapors, didn't they? Quote
BubberMiley Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Romney Derangement Syndrome. Please!...Discuss!... Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Guest Manny Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 I apologize for the Canadians in this forum. They're just not very good at this stuff. No need to apologize for everyone else. Maybe they don't really care enough to argue at great length about it. Besides, no matter what the argument we know we're pretty much not going to change each others attitudes around here! Quote
cybercoma Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Yes...anything that fractures you world view is "trolling"....now you can tell me to "shut up" in the usual tantrum. Did I hit a nerve or something? You continue to claim hypocritically that you're not a troll when it's patently obvious with ridiculous remarks like an 18 year old could master being a PM. Quote
cybercoma Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 I know....and it is grand fun. They just couldn't leave well enough alone..... But that's your intent, isn't it? To get people to comment on your off-topic remarks that clearly aren't meant to further the discussion. You're winning. You can pat yourself on the back now. Quote
cybercoma Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Evidently it's trolling to point out the requirements for becoming PM. If it was trolling to point out the requirements then I would have made comment about the requirement. It's trolling to say an 18 year old could MASTER it. It's also trolling for you to pretend like you're too stupid to see how that's trolling. Quote
Guest Manny Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 The other element that differs between the birther debate and dual citizenship is the notion or concept that there is some kind of ongoing conspiracy. IE Obama is a liar, and his supporters are helping him conceal the truth. Saying that the leader of a federal party "shouldn't" be allowed to have dual citizenship, as Layton did, is only stating his personal opinion. As he said, "I would prefer ... " No raging conspiracy implied. And it's that element that takes the conversation out of normal discourse. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Did I hit a nerve or something? You continue to claim hypocritically that you're not a troll when it's patently obvious with ridiculous remarks like an 18 year old could master being a PM. Dude...the youngest monarchs (head of state} in your "system" were far younger than 18 years, let alone a lesser prime minister. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 But that's your intent, isn't it? To get people to comment on your off-topic remarks that clearly aren't meant to further the discussion. You're winning. You can pat yourself on the back now. Always do..I never have to throw tantrums and tell people to "shut up". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest American Woman Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 The other element that differs between the birther debate and dual citizenship is the notion or concept that there is some kind of ongoing conspiracy. IE Obama is a liar, and his supporters are helping him conceal the truth. Saying that the leader of a federal party "shouldn't" be allowed to have dual citizenship, as Layton did, is only stating his personal opinion. As he said, "I would prefer ... " No raging conspiracy implied. And it's that element that takes the conversation out of normal discourse. What's implied is a lower sense of loyalty to Canada - as some came right out and said it. If it were simply the law that they wanted changed, they could have/should have worked towards changing it; but instead of doing that, they just implied - or outright said - that candidates with dual citizenship are not as loyal Canadians as they are. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 What's implied is a lower sense of loyalty to Canada - as some came right out and said it. Yes...here is an example: Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Signals.Cpl Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 What's implied is a lower sense of loyalty to Canada - as some came right out and said it. If it were simply the law that they wanted changed, they could have/should have worked towards changing it; but instead of doing that, they just implied - or outright said - that candidates with dual citizenship are not as loyal Canadians as they are. But you yourself said that you only want natural born citizens as POTUS which would imply that there is a lower sense of loyalty to the US from those who hold dual citizenship at least in your eyes. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 But you yourself said that you only want natural born citizens as POTUS which would imply that there is a lower sense of loyalty to the US from those who hold dual citizenship at least in your eyes. This is unclear, as a natural born US citizen could have dual citizenship. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
cybercoma Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Dude...the youngest monarchs (head of state} in your "system" were far younger than 18 years, let alone a lesser prime minister. Name me one Canadian monarch that took the throne "far younger than 18 years [old]." Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) Name me one Canadian monarch that took the throne "far younger than 18 years [old]." So you agree that 18 years of age is seasoned enough to be crowned as head of state...amazing! Do your own monarch research...America has given you the means and tools to do so. Edited July 16, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shakeyhands Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 I guess I should have said that there's no need to look south - one need only look in their own backyard. But then I suppose it would matter which way your backyard faced??? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
cybercoma Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 So you agree that 18 years of age is seasoned enough to be crowned as head of state...amazing! Do your own monarch research...America has given you the means and tools to do so. You can't name a single Canadian monarch under the age of 18 because there hasn't been one. Care to try again? Quote
GostHacked Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I think you should stick to the anti-Christian topics. It's your specialty. What do you mean 'obtuse'... Typical Shady drivel. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 You can't name a single Canadian monarch under the age of 18 because there hasn't been one. Care to try again? You've made another logical error...your "system" doesn't only apply to Canada. Furthermore, that you would be satisfied with even an 18 year-old as head of state is astounding. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted July 16, 2012 Author Report Posted July 16, 2012 You've made another logical error...your "system" doesn't only apply to Canada. Furthermore, that you would be satisfied with even an 18 year-old as head of state is astounding. Ease up BC. You're gonna give'em another case of the vapors. Quote
waldo Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 how deranged is it for the Mitt to refuse to release his tax returns? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 how deranged is it for the Mitt to refuse to release his tax returns? Not deranged at all, as US tax returns are confidential with severe penalties for unauthorized disclosure. 26 USC § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Black Dog Posted July 16, 2012 Report Posted July 16, 2012 Dude...the youngest monarchs (head of state} in your "system" were far younger than 18 years, let alone a lesser prime minister. This is not true, of course. Quote
bleeding heart Posted July 21, 2012 Report Posted July 21, 2012 You've made another logical error...your "system" doesn't only apply to Canada. Yes. It does. Whatever the English monarchs have or have not done is irrelevant, except as it directly relates to Canada. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.