Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/20/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    One thing that I have found about Lefties: When they yell at you and then you yell back they say 'Don't yell at me'.
  2. 3 points
    Those under threat from communist influences (as you put it) should shoulder their share of the load.....it's been a long time coming. IMO, we have enough to worry about right here with the rise of socialism and it's time to look inward. Canada and the US won't be destroyed by a foreign enemy, we will do it to ourselves.
  3. 2 points
    Fans outraged after CTV's Jess Allen calls hockey fans, “white boys”, “not very nice” and “bullies” And yet Grapes is the one who gets fired!? Talk about a double standard! https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/fans-outraged-after-ctv-s-jess-allen-calls-hockey-fans-white-boys-not-very-nice-and-bullies?ref=trevor
  4. 2 points
  5. 2 points
    Releasing dangerous criminals with a slap on the wrist or a few months in jail doesn't work either. Personally, since neither works I'd take the throw-them-in-jail-for-a-long-time option over just releasing them back to their former life and associates.
  6. 2 points
    Where is this going now?... The notion that MCAS was intended as "stall prevention" in rare corners of operation is showing up and now being discussed. The implications are significant. Stall prevention systems are not permitted single-points-of-failure, https://www.satcom.guru/2019/10/flawed-assumptions-pave-path-to-disaster.html For ease of reference, here is the link to the JATR, https://www.faa.gov/news/media/attachments/Final_JATR_Submittal_to_FAA_Oct_2019.pdf
  7. 2 points
    you missed the part where the conservatives also fail to balance the budget and actually spend more than the liberals except in the election year where they claw back allocation to make the books look good for the short memoried Canadian Voter
  8. 2 points
    Everyone keeps blaming Scheer but I think he's probably a fine person and well suited for the job. Unfortunately, it's the boys in the backroom giving advice and planning the strategy that are the problem. He's got an answer to those questions they keep asking about abortion, LGBTQ issues, citizenship but has clearly been advised to try to softly deflect and avoid stating anything solid that can be twisted and repeated ad-nauseum by the media. He tried to answer the questions like Trudeau answers - by not answering, hoping that the focus would change. Instead the focus became; why didn't he answer the questions. Anyway, IMO, this was a failure of the Conservative Party more than a failure of Scheer himself.
  9. 2 points
    IMHO, we’re getting very close to willful negligence, which is much, much worse.
  10. 1 point
    Hi Seeker. I appreciate your warm tone, thanks. You say, "we need the resource revenue from oil and gas production", but that's just not so. That's using the old, out-dated, un-sustainable line of thought. What we need is the trees that stand on the "oil sands" to stay right where they are, and the bitumen to stay in the ground. It's time Billionaires started to pay out a few more pounds of their ridiculous hordes. There is absolutely no shortage of available wealth for all sorts of good-for-the-planet ideas if we add some serious tax to those with endless truck-loads of money. The gap in wealth between the working poor and the yacht riding rich is insanely large and needs serious correction. Looking simply for "returns for investors" has been the goal for too long and has, in part, caused this whole problem. Priorities need to change, and as I see it, they are.
  11. 1 point
    As this progresses, people will be forced to confront the question of what they are willing to give up to go from 1.7% of global emissions down to 1%. It's a huge cost, emissions are currently rising (not lowering) and as yet, no one has said where the 79 megatons of current accord deficits are to come from. Until those discussions start taking place, good intentions amount to nothing more than fluff in a belly button. Shutting down the entire agricultural sector (in its entirety) is currently not enough to do the job and with each passing day we are losing ground. Liberal platitudes about filthy oil are less than meaningless without huge sacrifices that liberals themselves will balk at. If you are a carbon tax fan (and I'm not) it needs to be at about $300.00 per ton. I will believe this is an emergency when those screaming emergency begin to act like it's an emergency. If you want to get my attention and support, you need to say where you want those 79 Mts to come from..... when you are willing to pay the price, I'm ready to listen. Until then, strident screams into a pillow is about all ya got.
  12. 1 point
    sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should. That thing does not deserve the Mustang name.
  13. 1 point
    Alberta contributes more to Canada than any other province. Canada's economic success over the past decade has largely been thanks to Alberta's success.Jul 13, 2017 https://www.660citynews.com › albe...
  14. 1 point
    Without a government subsidy impossible.
  15. 1 point
    The problem we have with getting away from fossil fuels is the reluctance from those who are against it to lead the way by example. 1. getting rid of all fossil fueled vehicles, lawn mowers, emergency generators etc. 2. going off the electrical grid so as to reduce / eliminate any need to use electricity produced by using fossil fuels. 3. never using any public transportation (including airplanes) if they run on fossil fuels. and the list goes on. Re raping forests, now sure how you link that to Alberta, ( https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/annual-status-of-reforestation-in-alberta-report).
  16. 1 point
    by Joe Durocher “ I have been disappointed in the recent divide of Canadians. We have been conditioned to accept polarized politics...left vs right...liberal vs conservaties...how about we act responsibly and stop wasting money and time arguing, and actually come to conmon solutions to social and natural problems? History shows us the best way to control a people is to "Divide and Conquer ", which is being successfully done in most countries in the world and also in a global way. If we all agreed to certain common principles, we could begin to move forward. There is a small number of individuals and families who seek control and power over the masses. They control the highest seats of governments, central banking institutions, media corporations, social media and search engine companies, etc. We need to be wise enough to see beyond the constant pumping of certain stories and narratives that are filtered towards our minds consistently, day in and day out, to keep us divided. Our goal needs to be to have free minds, that seek solutions to problems instead of bowing to the daily conditioning we receive, to constantly battle one another. We should be battling things together like political correctness etc., getting offended over everything, and other things that are dividing us and destroying our society. You have more inside you then you realize and have solutions to the world problems. Make your voice heard, but do it above the chaos of battling each other or arguing about silly issues. Work on solutionary thinking! Look to the year 2020 as a year where we begin to see through the smoke screens and begin to see with 20/20 vision. “
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
    All major companies and public organizations in Canada and the US have a "whistleblower" system in place. These were put in place, primarily for financial issues following the Enron scandal, but are used for many other purposes.... non-financial criminal or immoral acts or breaking company rules being the secondary use. In many cases, they use a firewalled system so that the "company" can't see the reporter and doesn't know their identity but even simpler systems are in place allowing people to report to an email address using a temporary email. The point is that the reporter provides initial facts and the designated person is responsible for investigating and determining the validity of the report. It doesn't proceed solely on the basis of the whistleblower's complaint. The principle of the system is to protect those who know of illegal or immoral acts carried out by company personnel so that they can initiate investigations without concern about being fired or otherwise sidelined. In the case of Trump, the life of this unknown person would be at risk if exposed. If the reporters information leads to no illegal or immoral acts, then the investigator simply drops the case. In the case of Trump, if there was nothing to follow up, then the case would not have proceeded. There has been much confirmation (and more to come) of the contents of the whistleblower accusations and, since his accusations are, at least partly, hearsay, his/her direct testimony would add nothing to the proceedings. The whistleblower's report can't be entered into testimony and, if you are watching carefully, while he is referred to in the proceedings, none of the details of his report is mentioned. Trying to "out" this individual is simply an effort to dissuade other potential reporters in the future from coming forward with what they know. It would be a true shame if they undermine the reporting system as it would mean that those in power would be even more prone to break the law. This is exactly the way that the CrimeStoppers system works. That is a great way to get people to report crimes and identify perpetrators without having to risk personal harm. The perpetrator has no right to see his "accuser", nor should Trump. It doesn't really matter whether the Dems know or don't know the whistleblowers identity any more than it matters if the Police know who a CrimeStoppers reporter is. The only thing that matters is where the information leads. Regarding second hand information, the listener of the damning public phone call that Sondland had with Trump will be testifying tomorrow. So the GOP won't be able to call the phone call information "second hand" anymore. Really quite stupid of them. They pick a new rebuttal almost every day and it gets disgorged almost immediately. We'll see how compelling the witness' testimony. It may even result in Sondland's resignation... having a phone call with the president in public, which can be easily overheard while discussing a foreign government in a restaurant IN THE FOREIGN STATE. There is no decay of western society in this issue except that those in power seem to think that they are above the law. The U.S. President and his men may have broken the laws and the meaning of the Constitution which they vowed to protect and there is enough evidence to at least see what is there. The fact that they will not participate, which in itself may be impeachable, just means that they don't get to tell their side, which will probably at least keep them out of jail for perjury. If they have nothing to hide, why wouldn't they simply testify? To paraphrase a great exchange from yesterday: GOP: I think that the instigator of this investigation should be made to face this inquiry. DEMs: Absolutely. We await the President's attendance.
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    Oh Hilary, please say yes - the country needs you! “Well, you know, I’d never say never to anything,”
  22. 1 point
    So when will Trudeau and Singh be asked tasteless questions about their religion? Rex Murphy I think it’s clear to any moderately neutral mind that Andrew Scheer has taken more than his fair share of a mauling since election night. Former party big shots have dumped on him, there have been endless complaints in a compliant press from nameless “sources high in the party” about his performance, and the same press on its own has been very busy on the “can Scheer survive?” meme. The question has been plant-food for the political panels and fertilizer for mischievous politicos. For what it’s worth (very little) I think his campaign was weak, unaggressive to a fault, gave the Liberals a pass on some very serious issues, was not nearly hard enough on the Trudeau blackface theatricals, and, most significantly, did not make what it needed to make: a national case for Canada’s oil and gas industry. Nonetheless, with all that said, the novice leader increased Conservative seats (by 26 — a wholesome gain); took the Liberals down from their majority (20 lost, a notable loss); post-vote owns a whole block of the country; and has a very powerful presence in the House of Commons. No A++ for the leader, but certainly not the string of Ds and Es he’s getting from the Ottawa sages and some of his anonymous “friends.” Jagmeet Singh by contrast is being toasted, not roasted, for his campaign. Objectively this is strange. Under his leadership the NDP were obliterated in Quebec, lost a massive chunk of seats (went from 39 to 24), and were seen at one point in the campaign as threatened by the Greens. The latter should be seen as a shameful blot on any leader’s record — the Green party really being a toy car, a Tesla-tot, rather than a genuine eight-cylinder political vehicle. Mr. Singh impressed mainly because his performance in the year and a half before the election was almost brilliantly dismal. Any change was necessarily for the better. Then, there’s Justin Trudeau. He took a sledgehammer to his “woke is me,” “I am the guardian angel of Canada’s diversity and tolerance” image via a triplet of revelations that in his pre-PM days he danced and yodelled in blackface. The prior expulsions of Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott left his male-feminist banner limp on the flag post, and his refusal to allow any accounting of the SNC-Lavalin interference — his resistance to accountability — put paid to any idea that his was a “new” politics. In the matter of shutting down inconvenient questions, he out-Chrétiened Chrétien. Who lost the most? A fair argument can be made that it was the Trudeau Liberals. From government to minority, from fresh new leader to just another pol — and let us not neglect that the Bloc is back in force and half of Western Canada is dangerously angry with how it is being treated. So the question is, why all the drear post-mortems on Scheer, and so few on the leader who birthed the phrase “sunny days.” The Scheer autopsies reached something of a peak moment this week, when after his first post-election caucus, one reporter thought it necessary to inquire into his theological beliefs. She asked if he thought homosexuality was a “sin.” (Scheer is a Catholic, though he does not posit that as an essential element of his candidacy.) A very odd, and even artful question. I half-expected a followup along the lines of Name the 12 Gifts of the Holy Ghost? What are your views on the Transubstantiation? Now were Mr. Scheer a candidate for Pope (unlikely), or leaving politics for the priesthood (dubious), such questions might even have a point. The point the sin question did have was to continue the line egregiously put out by his Liberal opponents that Scheer was going to “smuggle” his religious views on same-sex marriage and abortion into law should he win the election. It was oppo-politics chaff, and a really cheap brand of that reliably cheap stuff. He rebutted the inane suggestions multiple times on the campaign trail but various supine reporters kept tossing it up, and this post-election catechism was just the most tasteless and ostentatious version of the same sly charge. To be clear, even the dogs in the street, the very mutts of the alleyways, knew and know that Andrew Scheer was not running for PM to establish a new Catholic Dominion, that he was not some version of a Christian ayatollah plotting to bring Margaret Atwood’s grim fantasy upon Canadian politics. So why bait him with that faux-concerned question? For good or ill we have for a long time now left the religion of our politicians out of their public performance. We question them on their ethics and integrity without reference to their moments in the Confessional or their private meditations and prayers. When Justin Trudeau was rightly being tested by the press on his conduct during the SNC-Lavalin affair, did any in the press gallery ask: Mr. Trudeau, as a Catholic do you think your interference with the Justice Department is a sin? As a Catholic do you think your treatment of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman violates the commandment about “bearing false witness?” Even more to the point — As a Catholic how do you justify barring all MPs who oppose abortion (which in your faith really is a sin) from your caucus? Well, if we’re going to have religious questions put to one leader, let’s put them to them all. What are Mr. Singhs’ private religious views on homosexuality and abortion? This latter is highly unlikely though. For as unspeakable as it may be to mention the obvious here, to question the religion of a person who is not Christian is, under the current progressive ethos, beyond the courage or depravity (take your pick) of any journalist who wishes to remain a journalist. And further, when any leader gives a vague non-religious reply, let those who trill from the highest branches of the blasted Twitter tree, as they have with Mr. Scheer, “retweet” (that is the deplorable verb) their evasive replies. So yes, Scheer is bearing more than his fair share of post-mortem scrutiny. This is not to say — I repeat — he performed well. It is just to ask that if the press wants him to have a stay in the grinder, should it then be preparing for Trudeau’s turn, and Singh’s as well? https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-so-when-will-trudeau-and-singh-be-asked-tasteless-questions-about-their-religion
  23. 1 point
    Some of the voting statistics are in now and should be a source of concern..... but aren't. This is my interpretation based on the numbers I read this morning: It sounds like some 30% of voters will support the base and the attendant narrative no matter what. They vote how they vote and their only argument is conservatives (or Liberals) BAD and only we have the answers. Issues are irrelevant. 21% vote tactically, in other words AGAINST what they don't like. That doesn't mean they like what they are voting for and once again, issues are irrelevant. Only 12% of people actually follow the issues and vote accordingly..... political agnostics if you will, they are only interested in good ideas and will support the candidates who have them. This was likely a tough election cycle for them but keep in mind that they don't matter much because they are a dying breed. This years election was conducted the way it was for a reason.... issues didn't matter, answers weren't demanded and so weren't given. IMO, the 12% figure is worrisome to me (and should be to everyone else too). It means that political discussion and debate is pretty much worthless now; what we see (even on this forum) is the defence of narratives and that defence now masquerades as discussion. In old school CRM circles this was called "strength of an idea." A dangerous characteristic in aviation and also in democracy and law making because it follows the existing narrative regardless of changing circumstances that have rendered the narrative wrong (or dangerous). Consider the story above (veteran pensions), every year (and I mean every single bloody year) something like this is released 3 or 4 days before Remembrance Day and in order to have impact, it always has old guys with medals so the sponser can scream "LOOK WHAT YOU DID". The context is never (and I mean never) about how to fix it, it is always (and I mean always) about who's fault it is. Now, do you think any of this is lost on veterans? Here's a hint, the answer is no; I guess I can only speak for myself here, but I don't care what colour your poppy is either; so stop naming highways the "Highway of Heroes" or some such nonsense..... I don't care; give that deaf WW2 WAG (gunner) some hearing aids.
  24. 1 point
    Jaydee. Don't be blind to it. There are conservatives in this country (and the US in greater numbers) that would have women and girls wearing burkas if they could. Look at all the cases where girls are being told "you cannot wear this or cannot wear that because the boys can't control themselves". there IS a North American Taliban. It's called the religious Right
  25. 1 point
    So it started under a LIBERAL government, went unnoticed until a CONSERVATIVE government discovered the error and has STILL gone Uncorrected for the last FOUR years under the Turd...and will take TWO more years under the incompetence of theTurd to rectify...yep...sounds about right....blame it on Harper.
  26. 1 point
    It always seems (to me) that the backlash is worse than doing it right in the first place and that change is demanded by the very voters who insisted on creating the problem. The Second Law of Liberal Dynamics states: The volume of screaming (racist, xenophobe, etc) is inversely proportional to cost borne by the screamer.
  27. 1 point
    Them good, them bad. The debate will go on and on and on. Check in 30 years from now and we will see what history shows. In the mean time, why waste our, yours and my time debating?????? None of which which change a damn thing?/////
  28. 1 point
    Cmon Jaydee...it’s obviously a fake....not a bilingual sign
  29. 1 point
    Many jurisdictions in the US are eliminating the mandatory minimum sentence. Any criminal case requires a trial by a Jury of your peers the Judge does not make the final decision. Sentencing is done by the judge based on the merits of the case. Yes there is interpretation of the law and precedent to take into account. This is why we appoint judges and it takes a long time to get there.
  30. 1 point
  31. 1 point
    Oh No.....not a needle in sight !! Ford must be Bad !!
  32. 1 point
    This has the look and feel of a staged event to me. Show me results.... no talk, results. Same deal for the Toronto gang situation; stop talking. What's needed now is someone to say "WATCH THIS." We have a constitution for a reason, it's a tool that should be used and activist judges can choke on the not withstanding clause as far as I'm concerned. The time for California style rhetoric like "So even when he's doing what you want, you aren't happy?" is like so like over like. It's like uninspiring like and like meaningless like. Like show me some like action like. Grab these situations by the throat and shake them.... then talk. Maybe after that the talk will be worth listening to.
  33. 1 point
    If Airbus has any interest in developing the mythical A220-500 to attack the low end of the MAX market, this might be the time.
  34. 1 point
  35. 1 point
    Surely it is uncontrolled and unqualified drone operation that is a problem for airports and controlled airspace. If it is properly run and integrated with the operation of the airport and airspace it could work OK. Moving time sensitive and priority goods etc. comes to mind.
  36. 1 point
    IMO, radical elements of the left and right don’t represent main stream thinking (yet)…. I fear it’s coming, but we aren’t quite there. Scheer simply could not stand tall and answer a single question about his personal beliefs.... and that's just "as a for instance" BTW. He thought, just like the US Democrats do, that bad mouthing your opponent was good enough to earn the win and he got knocked out in the opining minute of round one. He showed up on fight day armed with trash talk then gassed out because he didn’t do the road work. Trudeau bad me good or Trump bad me good, comes from a place of mental, moral and physical weakness and from a dark land where the absence of good ideas prevails. Be a good candidate, do the bloody work, earn the win; ya got a target for carbon emissions, stand tall and lets discuss what needs to be cut. Otherwise ya got nothing but fluff. There is a Chinese proverb that says “big winds come from empty caves.” Never has it been more true.
  37. 1 point
    http://www.breakingburgh.com/frito-lay-changes-color-of-cheetos-to-avoid-association-with-trump/ Frito-Lay Changes Color Of Cheetos To Avoid Association With Trump The popular snack Cheetos will look different starting tomorrow after Frito-Lay decided to change the color from its traditional bright orange. “Cheetos are now fluorescent green, though with the same great cheesy taste you know and love.” The move is being made in response to consumers associating the product with President Trump. “People who love cheetos suddenly reported feeling sick after eating them, and we finally realized it’s because they reminded them who the leader of the country was.” Echo Dot (3rd Gen) - Smart speaker with Alexa - Charcoal By Amazon $49.99 Rated 4.5 out of 5 by 62773 reviewers on Amazon.com Buy Now Focus testing suggested the new look was a vast improvement, with the product now being associated with aliens, radioactivity, and the Grinch instead of the current White House incumbent. Orange growers will be closely watching Frito-Lay’s balance sheet, as they decide whether to genetically modify their product to be more purple. Sadly, one victim of the Trump era appears to be the mushroom business, where sales have been steadily falling over the past year. “People just can’t bring themselves to put a mushroom in their mouth anymore for some reason.”
  38. 1 point
  39. 1 point
    I think you are starting to see how ridiculous all of this is. Not much different than efforts to brand Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian agent IMO. The quickest easiest solution to your Trump allergy is for Democrats to "do the work, earn the win." Their current efforts and machinations must be exhausting and stressful, there simply has never been a time when earning the win was more simple. Were we to apply the same standard to Canadian Cabinet Ministers over the last 50 years, CBC shows like This Hour and This is That would have an unlimited supply of material. Again, I'm left with the notion that "do the work, earn the win" is easier than blaming space aliens for the rise of DJT.... on our current course, that will be the next headline.
  40. 1 point
    Wow...starting to think and say what I feel and say.... IMO...there is no requirement for Canadian fighter aircraft...... Make our NATO commitments Heavy Airlift only We should maintain. operationally, our Rescue Squadrons and Normal Transport Squadrons (to assist in non armed-conflict areas in the world) While it is "fun" to fly the supersonic toys it is very difficult to rationalize why we have to bear the expense of training pilots and maintaining non required "whiz-bangs" Perhaps, in time the Brass Hats at Disneyland North will realize the futility of attempting to rationalize the need for Canadian Fighter Squadrons.... Bruised egos be damned....time to be realistic.
  41. 1 point
  42. 1 point
    IMHO, this is being generous. If I was King for a day they would be swinging from a palm tree somewhere in the desert.
  43. 1 point
    I know it’s difficult, we all fall into the trap every now and then but try not to let the troll get to you. It just makes his day Just let him live in his fairy tale la-la-land where he seems happy.
  44. 1 point
    perhaps because unlike you , he read the document and I quote from the bottom of the page.
  45. 1 point
    Great idea but as long as Quebec has their Get out free card, that will never happen. The other Provinces would like to have the same.
  46. 1 point
    There is starting to be push back ..... first Jordan Peterson and now Piers Morgan: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwiHr57S6rTlAhXRVN8KHe4CAnkQyCkwAHoECAwQBA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DvDT-Yj5n6zE&usg=AOvVaw1UlwVScdtSWyCZWEoOgSXn
  47. 1 point
    When every Province and Territory has their own party looking out for only their own objectives, which seems likely given what has transpired in Quebec, is it anything more than anarchy? How could any party win a majority government and how have we allowed the BQ to even exist?
  48. 1 point
    This is largely self inflicted. Just like voters, politicians will refuse to discuss substantive issues…. they just won’t. Prove it to yourself, find an acquaintance who wants action on climate change and ask them where the 79 megatons of carbon should come from to meet the Paris Accord target. They won’t tell you and neither will politicians. They will rail against other issues too, say the US withdrawal from Syria but they have no idea about Canada’s role there and can’t (or won’t) offer an opinion on what should be done. They won't tell you and neither will politicians. Just like Paint Bros, these folks see every complicated issue as simple yet they can’t get through Christmas dinner with their in-laws. Most discussion forums serve as a microcosm of this…. members partake in a war of links and memes, my guy good, your guy bad sentiments, and they will (usually) refuse to defend their position or offer an alternative course of action to that which they oppose. Expecting politicians do anything different has predictable results and we are seeing it for ourselves right now. They are a reflection of the society who elects them. IMO, we are getting exactly what we deserve and I bet I will be thinking the same thing Tuesday morning. Good Lord, CBC has a call in show on (right now) soliciting opinions about the campaign. I had to turn it off.... proof positive we really will get exactly what we deserve.
  49. 1 point
  50. 0 points
    Maybe we can trade some of our judges and the liberal voters who support them for insulin.... export certificates for California are now available. It's worth noting this paragraph in the article; I simply hadn't heard about this. If true, I think it sets a dangerous precedent that borders on insanity. Without another election and a different result, I have no idea how to solve the gang problem plaguing Toronto..... it's almost as if they want it to continue and would like to see its effects increased. When you can own, carry, transport and discharge an an illegal handgun legally AND without consequences, it means you have finally arrived at Crazy Island. This is self inflicted madness, if you are soliciting good ideas to help solve the problem, I got nothing for ya. "A Canadian Press story in Wednesday’s Toronto Sun highlighted “a teenager, who shot and killed one of five men who attacked him in the lobby of his apartment building, had his manslaughter and aggravated assault convictions overturned on Tuesday” because the judge ruled he was merely trying to protect himself after being hit with a bat by a gang of five assailants. In essence, the court set a precedent that there are instances where an illegal handgun can be legally used. Here's the link: https://torontosun.com/news/provincial/warmington-fords-throw-away-the-key-talk-the-right-approach-on-gun-crime