Oh nos! Poor Canada emasculated by that oh-so-oppressive figurehead monarchy! If only they could follow the Pure Gold of Democratic Fundament over the border just south.
Except possibly those who actually do kneel out of recognizing injustices to minorities, which tells me this isn’t your idea of a “free people”. And why capitalize national anthem?
Yikes! Hopefully you’ll soon recover from your vapours over a centuries-old practice that has not only sustained families and communities, but will continue to so do.
So you’re trying to equate a Canadian winter (which is apparently too harsh for your soft ass) to Canadians’ fear of firearms? :dubious: Yeah kinda wimpy of them to not droolingly embrace guns in their culture as much US citizens seem to do, for some reason, in theirs.
And the Stanley Cup shit - WTF does ANY of this have to do w- oh…wait a sec…I take it wolfpup is Canadian, so you had to come up with some kind of irrelevant weaksauce-as-fuck refutation, sorta like grasping at straws kinda thing.
Perish the thought of the current US gov’t qualifying for both of those attributes.
And before that we had the JP Morgan robber barons, the economic panics of 1873 and 1893, along with other shit, but you’re too young a buck to remember that.
And yeah thank jeebus we no longer have open square lynchings - the progress we’ve made! Wow!
I was starting to use ellipses to indicate truncated quotes, like I normally do, but here felt like taking a shower for doing so, and decided otherwise.
Careful OP, at this rate if there’s another economic implosion you might end up as a full blown comrade. If that happens you might regret believing corporate media lies about Occupy, castigating the left as “SJWs,” or how you heaped so much blame on the common people who spend most of their energy struggling to survive while being bombarded by plutocrat propaganda 24/7, but no biggie, lots of people go through a lib phase.
You’re right to be outraged by America’s role in Yemen, but Trump is continuing Obama’s policy. Citations Needed had a good episode about it.
Thanks for the link, hadn’t heard of Citations Needed before but the name sounds right up my alley, I’ll give that a listen at work tomorrow.
Most of the Yemeni coverage I’ve seen so far has been from Redacted Tonight and Democracy Now, with a smattering on The Young Turks and people who affiliate with them.
I’m well aware the Saudi support has been ongoing throughout the Obama and Trump administrations (and during the Bush years, for that matter) - which is why I didn’t mention Trump or a timeframe. The Yemeni crisis has been building since 2015 when Saudi began its military intervention, it’s really coming to a head now and if something isn’t done soon the thousands of deaths are going to swell into hundreds of thousands and then millions.
I’m utterly appalled that they are able to intentionally starve a country and you’re far more likely to see media coverage about Saudi Arabia lifting the ban on women driving than you are about them trying to ethnically cleanse their neighbors.
Hahahaha. Where did I suggest/say that posters could not call U.S. Senators? What I am saying is that U.S. Senators are responsible to their own constituents. If you wish to annoy 100 U.S. Senators with your opinions, I say, “Go for it”. Everyone needs a hobby. Unfortunately for you, only your two U.S. Senators are obligated to listen to you. The other 98 have enough constituents of their own. Better luck next time.
Oh my, you’re an angry elf, aren’t you. Is reality a second language for you? It doesn’t matter what YOU believe your Senator SHOULD do. If you have two Senators, their responsibilities are already well established. You probably have a zip code, a personal phone number, an IP address, a criminal record, etc. which established your identity. Senators are NOT going to take calls from 300+ million people.
Hahahaha. Where in the Constitution is it defined who Senators are “obligated to listen to”? Whatever the answer, most posters will rightfully disregard the opinions of poster doorhinge on who they should or should not call, not surprisingly. Better luck next time.
As long as senators can take money from people out of state, then there is nothing wrong with talking to a senator from out of your state.
Do you not think that if I call up your state senator, and offer him a big juicy contribution to his super pac, that he will give me far more attention than he would if you, his actual constituent, wanted to address your feelings on governing with him?
You’re right. But here’s the thing. That bill was so bad that I shouldn’t HAVE to call them on it. This wasn’t an issue of, “let’s hear how you feel, so we can decide how to vote”. No sir. The `Pubs didn’t give a flying fuck how any of us felt.
ETA… I accept your pitting as I curl into a ball and weep for my countrymen.
Does the form require that the commenter enter his own ZIP code? Does the site software have any way of verifying whether the commenter really entered his own ZIP code?
Heck, even I’d listen to you if you paid me to, but that’s not what is being discussed. Call every, and any, U.S. Senator you wish. But everyone should know that they have three representative in the U.S. Congress. Two Senators, and one Congressman. Three representative who are there to represent you. If the voters don’t believe that their Representatives are representing them, or that there is someone else who will represent them better, your three representatives will be looking for honest work.
It doesn’t matter how much money legislators receive from out-of-state donors who can’t vote for them if the voters who can vote don’t like the SOB who’s taking the out-of-state donations.
Voters are easily swayed, especially if the campaign coffers are full
I’d like that were true, but as money does come into the coffers and pacs from out of the states and jurisdictions of the congresscritters in question, it seems that people with much more money and influence than you and I disagree with your assessment.
I, and the majority of Americans, did NOT vote for Trump. He LOST the popular vote, which is a count of the actual votes. He won by a fluke in the rules – the Electoral College, which ironically was intended to keep demagogue so-called “populist” scumbags like himself from seizing power.
As far as ideals, and the left wing ideals, we are NOT the ones now supporting a serial child rapist from fucking Alabama. Values my fucking ass.
I wanted Bernie, but voted for Hillary. And judging from the popular vote, I’m not the only one
Thank you, Visiting Professor doorhinge, for the civics lesson. Perspicacious as always.
I’m sure you probably don’t remember me, but I also attended your brilliant lecture on the role of the mass media in modern society, in which you just kept repeating “the media should do a better job reporting the news” over and over. I’m a huge fan of your work!
Weren’t we discussing the simple notification of U.S. Senators regarding pending legislation? You know, who in the U.S. Senate should concerned citizens/constituents notify if they want to make their own, personal, legislative concerns known?
If you donate $100 to every Senator, they will listen to you. They might even take your views into consideration, if it already concurs with their own. If you donate $1000 to every Senator, you’ll become even more popular. But you need to understand that you only represent one vote. In, I assume, one state. If it comes down to a choice between your out-of-state $1000 donation vs 1000 like-minded, eligible voters who disagree with your position, the Senator from another state will thank you for your donation, and will vote in favor of reelection.
FYI, the majority of Americans did not vote for Hillary, either. Hillary won the race that no candidate was running for. Congratulations Hillary.
What is this “fluke in the rules” that you are referring to? Did you just become aware of what the Electoral College is? Or what it does? Did you graduate from a high school in the U.S.? Do you remember taking a Constitution Test as part of your H.S. graduation requirements?
