In no order,sleeper;1856040 wrote:What's your top 5?
Like_that
O-trap
Heretic
Ironman 92
Ironman 02
In no order,sleeper;1856040 wrote:What's your top 5?
Gosh a ruddies.CenterBHSFan;1856050 wrote:Several things wrong with your assertions.
1.) I have absolutely condemned and mocked Trump. Those posts are there for everybody to see. As far as I know, none of them have been deleted by any moderator or admin.
2.) Trudeau is not Canada, just a temporary visual front. But praising Castro gives a glimpse of what he thinks is praiseworthy, indeed. It wasn't an opinion, it was outright praise.
Secondly, have you paid any attention, whatsoever, to what direction Canada is taking concerning freedom of speech, personal liberty? The laws of Canada are starting to be ate up by progressivism.
Thirdly, Canada as a whole is becoming a meme of "tolerant of everyone who thinks as a collective".
You're just spewing nonsense because you cannot back up your claims pertaining to Canada being tolerant.
Good. The left can quit melting down and acting like pulling out of this has any impact on curbing "climate change". Also, Obama didn't even go through the treaty process before entering into it. And India has proposed 300+ more coal plants, how does that curb climate change?sleeper;1856041 wrote:Trump officially drops out of the Paris Climate deal.
Shit.Heretic;1856039 wrote:I think it's the same problem I have when it comes to pizza and my weight. I KNOW I should be watching what I eat and I KNOW there are plenty of better things for me that I'd enjoy at least as much, but there I am with a plate loaded down with it. Impulse control: Lacking.
What's frightening is that the Democrats gave us such a horrible choice solely because they were completely obsessed with having our first woman POTUS.isadore;1856043 wrote:What is frightening is your inability to condemn a leader who you helped elect by not voting for Hillary Clinton.
The left is the entire world. But you are right, the right wing party and its followers with their religion and backwards 1500 mentality know more than the entire world on issues of science.iclfan2;1856072 wrote:Good. The left can quit melting down and acting like pulling out of this has any impact on curbing "climate change". Also, Obama didn't even go through the treaty process before entering into it. And India has proposed 300+ more coal plants, how does that curb climate change?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Gosh a ruddies the Democrats provided a qualified candidate, all the non-Hillary voters did not take that very viable choice, and gave us the ***** grabber. After 8 years of George H. Bush the country was ready to elect a charismatic African American moderate liberal. After 4 years of Trump the electorate maybe ready for our first gay Hispanic transgender POTUS.gut;1856079 wrote:What's frightening is that the Democrats gave us such a horrible choice solely because they were completely obsessed with having our first woman POTUS.
And that really set us back - now we're going to have to wait that much longer for our first gay Hispanic transgender POTUS.
Not a treaty, it was an agreement that nearly the whole world largely agreed. The U.S. pulled India and China to agree to the terms of the agreement.iclfan2;1856084 wrote:How does getting out of the "treaty" affect how the US tackles "climate change"? Also, when did the Senate ratify the "treaty"?
I'm not arguing for or against the "science" of climate change here, only about being in a stupid group that lets other countries weigh in on how we should run our own country.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've even been disappointed with the US courts in terms of what they constitute "inciting" violence or panic.CenterBHSFan;1856090 wrote:Canadian "free speech" has been under controversy for some time now. Here are varied sources describing what has been going on:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9296/canada-parliament-condemns-free-speech
http://www.dailywire.com/news/12957/war-against-free-speech-canada-close-passing-michael-qazvini#
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/tom-kott/freedom-of-speech-canada_b_2324999.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/03/07/canadas-parliament-wants-to-fight-islamophobia-by-killing-free-speech/
Free speech should be a fundamental tenet of liberalism. Everyone realizes that people don't like to be offended. But they should have the right to be offended.
As long as speech doesn't incite violence (calling for the deaths of police or people of religion) or panic (yelling fire in a theater), the freedom of expression should be allowed to exist in a free society. Canada has been treading in these murky waters for years now, and it's time for them to grow up.
China, India, EU, Africa, South America, and a whole lot of fortune 500 companies support the agreement. There is a reason every other country except Syria and Nicaragua supported it.Con_Alma;1856102 wrote:...so staying in the agreement is so China and India trust us??? How about China and India have the same carbon emission reduction requirements as the U.S.???
It created a UN slush fund that we pour $$$into and doesn't require congressional approval for the cash with harsher requirements on the US to cut carbon emissions than others ....while the end result in impact on climate change according to MIT is negligible.
Yeah, the entire scheme is designed to be a global wealth transfer. It's an excuse to tax and regulate, on a global scale, and little more.Con_Alma;1856102 wrote: It created a UN slush fund that we pour $$$into and doesn't require congressional approval for the cash with harsher requirements on the US to cut carbon emissions than others ....while the end result in impact on climate change according to MIT is negligible.
...because it would be mutually beneficial for them. If it wouldn't they shouldn't enter into a trade deal. This "accord" was a ridiculous, feel good for climate change, ridiculously expensive ego show.ptown_trojans_1;1856119 wrote:...
Why should any country enter into any trade or economic deal with the U.S.?
If Trump likes it one day, he may shit on it the next and end it.
You forgot to switch screen names slerper.Dr Winston O'Boogie;1856127 wrote:Trump is causing our country to take on his personality - selfish, narcissistic, greedy and untrustworthy. He is a bully and a charlatan. He doesn't give a flying **** for the common man. He's in it for his own ends and the interests of the little New York cabal he's got around him. This is a sad day for our great country. We have elected the enemy.
Wrong. I've been known to give Sleeper crap. He and I don't see eye to eye on plenty. We do on Trump though.superman;1856128 wrote:You forgot to switch screen names slerper.
Which the White House said Iran is complying and said they support...for now.Con_Alma;1856118 wrote:The Paris Climate Accord was about as brilliant as the "non-treaty" Iran deal.
Why should another country trust what Trump says in a trade deal? He clearly does not honor any agreements and changes his mind on a whim.Con_Alma;1856125 wrote:...because it would be mutually beneficial for them. If it wouldn't they shouldn't enter into a trade deal. This "accord" was a ridiculous, feel good for climate change, ridiculously expensive ego show.
Nothing stops the U.S. from being environmentally conscious. Meanwhile other nations belch into the atmosphere at crazy levels and claim they are part of the Paris Accord. ...and according to MIT has little to no impact.
If it was so bad, why did every country on earth, except 2 sign up for it? Seriously, most other agreements do not get nearly as many countries on board. So I just guess Syria and Trump knew more than the rest of the world? Riiiight.Con_Alma;1856132 wrote:The Paris Accord was nothing more than sentiment over substance.
The only thing they're going to cry about is the US not being around to kick in the lionshare of the funding. But the big kicker are the carbon taxes, and that's where the US is the proverbial whale. It's unclear how that will shake out since we aren't part of Paris, and it's a valid point that maybe we should have had a seat at the table in setting those terms....but there's more than one way to skin a cat.ptown_trojans_1;1856140 wrote: Again, to the larger point, why should other countries trust our leadership now? We don't believe in anything but ourselves. Screw the rest of the world. Why would I trust the U.S. now if I am another country?
By every definition it is a treaty. A treaty today is now just referred to by any one of its synonyms in order to subvert the Constitution. John Kerry sums it up pretty good.ptown_trojans_1;1856089 wrote:Not a treaty, it was an agreement that nearly the whole world largely agreed.