blue_gold_84

Speaking of annoying individuals: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/danielle-smith-cbc-1.6799473 Insufferable stupidity.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/artemisii-astronauts-moon-canadian-1.6796246

"I misremembered." What's laughable is presenting no data while crying "defund CBC" and expected to be taken seriously. Public polls conducted online don't count, BTW. So much for using critical thinking. Explains why this country has so many ignorant, uninformed whiners.

Narrator: he did not show his work. Mostly because there is none to demonstrate CBC having the worst bias in Canadian media. The cognitive dissonance in this thread would be funny if it weren't so rampant. There are around 28M taxpayers in this country (https://www.statista.com/statistics/478908/number-of-taxfilers-in-canada-by-province/). CBC received $1.4B in 2021 from the federal gov't (https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/impact-and-accountability/finances/annual-reports/ar-2021-2022/financial-sustainability/year-in-review-our-results-government-funding). I'm no mathemagician but that's about $50 per taxpayer over the course of a fiscal year - less than $1 a week. Whining about CBC's public funding seems pretty misguided when you consider what it provides for Canadians. Never fails with a select few.

Congrats, Brad!

That's simply incorrect: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/267?view=part See the above link. More voted against than for Cooper's assclown motion. I mean, read the premise: Many reports? Nope. Is there even one? A vague statement based on hearsay doesn't count - or at least shouldn't. Also: his name David Johnston. And he isn't doing anything privately. He'll be doing it within the framework of the applicable legislation and reporting his findings to the PMO. Just because some braindead CSIS employee broke their oath, violated protocol, and presented nothing doesn't mean anyone else should. It's pretty unsettling how little some actually understand about how our democracy actually operates, while then trying to claim everything is a partisan issue and that a "public inquiry" is necessary based on the conjecture of an unhinged public servant and not so much as a shred of evidence. What exactly does he have to lose? It isn't like he currently holds office, and I doubt he'd even care about anyone who'd **** on his reputation for taking on the responsibilities of rapporteur.

Canada is an oligarchy that pretends to be a democracy.

Love it. Eat ****, Putin!

In order to function properly or optimally, democracy requires an engaged (and informed) populace. Apathetic voters who choose not to show up and cast a ballot result in the kind of election results we saw in Ontario last June. I worry for similar outcomes in other jurisdictions.

Voter apathy is the enemy of democracy. We've seen that play out at various levels here in Canada in recent years. How that affects our nation's political landscape in the near future remains to be seen but I think it's fair to say it's not a positive outlook.

Singh has a bit of arrogance at times but he has no clout, IMO. Poilievre pretends to be an everyman but the ones he fools are useful idiots who foam at the mouth when he blows his dog whistles. I'd argue 99% of politicians are smug and out of touch. The difference here is the LPC has been in power for nearly a decade, so theirs is magnified with them being in the spotlight (and often weaponized by their opponents).

Give Niederreiter a full TC and he'll be a top 6 mainstay in no time. He has the size and grit to his credit and can get in those dirty areas to create scoring chances. He's far more seasoned, IMO. Perfetti has an upside but what that is remains to be seen. His lack of size doesn't help his case, though.

The general haughtiness of the LPC does them absolutely no favours. That's evidenced in the polls, even if they don't mean much right now.

I didn't know the PM holds all the power and could veto whatever he wants. Oh, wait... That's not a thing in Canada. Another swing and a miss.

Case in point: Imagine thinking this dipshit has the upper hand on anyone in Ottawa.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/candace-bergen-manitoba-pc-election-campaign-1.6796138

What a mess.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-canada-water-agency-winnipeg-1.6795047

It's not my responsibility to negate another's unsubstantiated claim. That's not how burden of proof works. The fact of the matter is the individual who made the initial claim ran to the media and presented no evidence - none. And then that individual followed up by stating outright that she does "not believe that foreign interference dictated the present composition of our federal government." Where's the justification for an inquiry? Maybes and ifs don't count. I'll share this again because you seemed to miss or ignore it the first time: https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/independent-special-rapporteur.html

And that same jackass wrote an opinion piece for G&M, ostensibly to justify her reckless and misguided decision: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-whistleblower-china-canada-election-interference/ No evidence. HAN DONG IS A TRAITOR WHO SHOULD BE IN PRISON! Did I do it right?

Present the evidence. Until you do, it's conjecture. Same as with that jackass CSIS employee who went to the media while presenting not an iota of proof. Transparency is obviously important. But so is evidence of a pretty serious claim.

I'd say he's done. He's running Wilder Sports Academy down in Florida now.

How that gum doesn't fly out of his mouth when he goes off like that is something else.