Engrish prease. I don't recall what video you are referring to.
"I know you are but what am I" is your response?
Tough Justin
- Thread starter Insidious Von
- Start date
Memory problems as well
You do when you post a reply to me saying I'm justifying Justin being an ok PM though.
It's also interesting that all I hear from PP is the blame game though and that's the very thing you're upset about. Well, that and how he's going to overstep the authority of the PMO.
Can you name something you don't like about PP? Are you going to show the objectivity others can't?
"I don't consider someone's campaign at all when I vote for them because they're not in power yet and therefore nothing matters" is not critical thinking. It's either inane or an outright lie. So you'd vote for Elizabeth Rowley, leader of the Communist Party or Canada? She's never been in office, ergo there's no reason not to using your version of "critical thinking". Of course you wouldn't. You're making up excuses to either avoid being objective, or to avoid showing you're incapable of it.
Project much? Aren’t you full of yourself that you can claim to somehow know what others are or aren’t thinking.
Nor, am I not sure where you get off demanding others “justify” their reasons for voting A or B. Who made you god.
Secondly, you seem stuck on the idea that critical thinking is somehow tied being capable of listing what other people don’t like about PP. What you call “objectivity”. You might want to look up the definition of critical thinking Einstein. Just because someone doesn’t want to play by your rules, self proclaimed god that you are. Doesn’t mean they haven’t analyzed available information, and then come to the conclusion that change is better then watching the house burn down.
Such a fool. Someone pretending to be smart, intellectual, throwing around big words without even knowing what they mean
Nor, am I not sure where you get off demanding others “justify” their reasons for voting A or B. Who made you god.
Secondly, you seem stuck on the idea that critical thinking is somehow tied being capable of listing what other people don’t like about PP. What you call “objectivity”. You might want to look up the definition of critical thinking Einstein. Just because someone doesn’t want to play by your rules, self proclaimed god that you are. Doesn’t mean they haven’t analyzed available information, and then come to the conclusion that change is better then watching the house burn down.
Such a fool. Someone pretending to be smart, intellectual, throwing around big words without even knowing what they mean
Read those two words in bold mental midget. Your not as intelligent as you think you are, nor are you god.
Last edited:
I don't. I use their own words and actions to evaluate.
I'm not demanding anything. I asked if you could prove you're being objective. You haven't yet.
No, I tie critical thinking to being able to evaluate and be objective. You bring up Einstein, he notoriously rejected his own conclusion because he believed it contradicted good religious views. That's decidedly not thinking critically. Luckily he came to his senses eventually and accepted it eventually.
Lol You literally said you didn't analyze it. Backpedalling now?
More ad hominem. After pages of saying you don't analyze anyone's behavior until they get in power and now saying you did analyze but just don't want to play "by my rules"?
I certainly don't think I'm God. I just asked if you could demonstrate your objectivity, and you've refused at every turn by saying you aren't objective into after someone comes to power, only to start backpedalling now.
Are you saying you never ask people questions on this forum and then point out when they keep telling to you but never answer it? Doesn't mean you think you God or that you're "making rules", it simply means you're trying to engage them in a good faith discussion, but that requires both parties act in good faith. You constantly refuse to do so.
But since you've gone full ad hominem and have started backpedalling, you've proven to be noting but a troll. So you can join the other trolls on the ignore list. Adios!
I guess you did read the first line in my post? They all lie! And I never said that you were ok with JT being PM but really that’s what you are trying to do hear when you attach every post that has any degree of difference to yours.
its clear that your blind to anything other than JT because as I said 8 years in office and JT and you are blaming the previous government. If JT really wanted “Sunny Days” he is PM then make it happen instead he’s too busy pointing to 8 years in the past, shutting down oil and gas, banning gins from law biding citizens, scandals in office… 2 that found him personally guilty of breaking ethics then major scandal like SC Lavalin scandal,We charity scandal, then I believe the last count of 6 liberal ministers who also with ethics violation, this all before we talk about black face, him getting put in his place at the UN council by a few members while only of a handful of UN representatives actullay showed up when he was speaking, then the truckers & emergency act. And more… and more and more
At this point he needs to be formally charged ( especially for the interference in sc lavalin ) and put away for life with the keys thrown away. The amount of money he is spending, the lies he’s told the benefits that his friends and family are getting or have gotten.
He needs to go and put someone else in that office at this point I could go there and run it better than him at least I understand how monetary policy affects Canadians.
The definition of an idiot really apply here because we know what he’s going to do if voted in again and you expect him to be better the next time. That is an idiot because your doing the same thing over again expecting different results. JT will deliver the same divisive leadership, causing inflation to jump even more due to excessive spending and a blind ideology which we can all see is causing massive harm to Canadian families.
don’t be an idiot it’s time to change, I don’t need to point out the faults of PP because JT has done enough that he needs to go and go now.
Ummm....
Pretty sure I'm not repeatedly hallucinating that. I mean, that's a link to a post you actually made in reply to me, right?
I'd love to find some objective PP supporters to have a reasonable discussion with. I find him grating and annoying, so I only check in when he talks about issues I feel are important. I may be missing a lot of what he says, and I'd love to hear from reasonable, objective people who support him so strongly to find out why they support him in light of his remarks. Hence why when people praise him, I ask if they're objective to see if they're worth my time. But if their only qualification for liking him is "He's not Trudeau," that doesn't really work for me. I'm looking for substantial reasons why I should vote FOR Pierre, not just reasons why I should vote AGAINST Trudeau. I already have lots of reasons to vote against Trudeau; I don't need more.
Plenty of people have posted they hate Justin. I don't generally reply to them because I hate him too, unless they've mentioned PP in which case I ask about their objectivity. I think maybe you're confusing me with another poster. Or perhaps everyone that doesn't like PP has blended together into one hive mind in your opinion. I dunno. But I don't think your assessment of me is accurate. I don't think I attack every post that has a different opinion. I've actually pretty much only replied to people who reply to me directly on this thread for several days now. Besides, you seem to think "different opinion from mine" is "hates Trudeau", given how you keep listing all these terrible things he's done not realizing I pretty much included all of them already in my list of why I hate the guy. It's like you're trying to convince me to hold an opinion I already said I have, and then to support that you just give me the same reasons I gave when I explained why I had that opinion.
We're in complete agreement about Justin Trudeau being terrible and needing to go. You're just wasting your own time repeating his failures over again to try and convince me.
You're confusing me with someone else. I never blamed the previous government. And since you're confusing me with someone else, I'm not sure your analysis of me is very accurate.
Which indictable offenses in the criminal code would you charge him with? As much as he's a disaster, I don't think he's actually done anything criminal, but maybe I've missed something. I'm open to hearing your case.
I think you're still confusing me with someone else. I literally said I'm not voting for him next time, and I certainly don't think things would be different if he won again. I merely said if my only two choices were him and PP, I'd vote for him. I think PP will do much worse. But we have more than 2 choices so I don't have to vote for either one.
No one has to do anything. I merely asked people to show they're objective. If they don't want to they don't have to. But anyone that is unable to say anything bad about PP is in a cult, just like the Trump supporters that say he could murder someone in broad daylight on video and he'd still be their guy because he would obviously have a reason. And I for one am not going to waste my time getting involved in discussions with cult members because that's not going to go anywhere. I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask questions of posters in order to assess how much effort to put into my replies. Some people seem to think it is. That's their opinion and they're entitled to it. But just as they have no obligation to do anything I ask, I have no obligation to engage in meaningful discussion with them if they choose not to answer. If that's unreasonable, then I don't know what reasonable is.
Not at all surprised. Word of warning. Know what you’re talking about when you throw big words around. Especially when trying to use it as some kind of insult, and inflating your own ego.Tried to warn you, your too slow to pick up on the not so subtle clues…backed yourself into a corner quite nicely…You know what they say about fools and rope…
“Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action”
“Critical thinking has been described as an ability to question; to acknowledge and test previously held assumptions; to recognize ambiguity; to examine, interpret, evaluate, reason, and reflect; to make informed judgments and decisions.”
In short, come to a conclusion and act…You know, before the house burns down…….
No-body owes you Jack. Would seem to me, your bothered stuck in your mental paralysis, that no-body wants to help you arrive at a decision..And because quite obviously you have a real problem comprehending, that concerning oneself with today. ….Let me break that down into something you can hopefully grasp.
You’re wasting a ton of energy, worrying about something that could, possibly, not happen (aka he may not win). Are you god?
“cross that bridge when we get there”
Does not mean, a person ( everyone responding to you) is not aware of his shortcomings. And if you were actually as smart as you think you are. You might recall a “discussion” from less than a week ago. When I said I had hopes for him prior to him becoming leader….You are not god, you don’t get to dictate anything. You do not have the ability to know what anyone is thinking..let alone what they have filed for future reference.
Nor would I hire you for any position that required the ability to think critically, make critical decisions in timely manners.
/can predict now, how your going dance around a trap of your own making.
/edit
Decided to add one last piece of wisdom. People that are actually intelligent, they don’t “tell” people what to think.
And as far as “ad hominem” attacks go. What’s the matter Snowflake. Don’t like it when someone fires back?
“Critical thinking is a kind of thinking in which you question, analyse, interpret, evaluate and make a judgement about what you read, hear, say, or write”
“Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action”
“Critical thinking has been described as an ability to question; to acknowledge and test previously held assumptions; to recognize ambiguity; to examine, interpret, evaluate, reason, and reflect; to make informed judgments and decisions.”
In short, come to a conclusion and act…You know, before the house burns down…….
No-body owes you Jack. Would seem to me, your bothered stuck in your mental paralysis, that no-body wants to help you arrive at a decision..And because quite obviously you have a real problem comprehending, that concerning oneself with today. ….Let me break that down into something you can hopefully grasp.
You’re wasting a ton of energy, worrying about something that could, possibly, not happen (aka he may not win). Are you god?
“cross that bridge when we get there”
Does not mean, a person ( everyone responding to you) is not aware of his shortcomings. And if you were actually as smart as you think you are. You might recall a “discussion” from less than a week ago. When I said I had hopes for him prior to him becoming leader….You are not god, you don’t get to dictate anything. You do not have the ability to know what anyone is thinking..let alone what they have filed for future reference.
Nor would I hire you for any position that required the ability to think critically, make critical decisions in timely manners.
/can predict now, how your going dance around a trap of your own making.
/edit
Decided to add one last piece of wisdom. People that are actually intelligent, they don’t “tell” people what to think.
And as far as “ad hominem” attacks go. What’s the matter Snowflake. Don’t like it when someone fires back?
Last edited:
Just trying to read their gobblygook gives one a dizzy spell. It's as if someone is typing while foaming at the mouth and their fingers can't keep up with their thought process. LMAO
PeePee is going for the angry white males but its not a big enough demographic.
The kind of people who don't care that PeePee has no real world experience, has never done anything in office and has already shown he'll lie and cheat to gain power.
They didn't learn from the Ford brothers or trump, they just can't learn.
I'm surprised Pee Pee hasn't tried to bring Chris Sky into the party.
For me, Trudeau's biggist fuck up was overstepping his bounds as PM and interfering in with the independent Solicitor General, who happened to be a Member of Parliament in the party he's in charge of and a member of his own Cabinet. His connections do not give him the right to interfere in the independence of our justice system. It's the same shit we all should criticize Danelle Smith for. It's a big deal.
But PP had already said he's going to go after a the chairman of an independent agency that has no ties to his party or his government. Plus PP has been working in government finances for long enough up know that's a massive scandal. He's literally saying he's going to play mini-dictator on a level that exceeds what Trudeau did (edit: not by a lot. Also note the wording; I am indeed saying Trudeau also played mini-dictator, so save your "so PP would be a dictator but JT wouldn't???" comments). The way people pretend he didn't, or that just because he said he'd be a dictator doesn't matter until he actually does it, is mind-blowing.
Last edited:
To be a politican you have to have thick skin. Politicians are Narcissists By Nature, they don't give any fucks about anything or anyone but themselves, look at what Obama went through considering he's "black" (the white supremacists lost their minds when he was President, even though he's half black really).
Last edited:
I still don't see SNC as a major scandal, it was smallish potatoes that wasn't overtly corrupt the way DoFo's greenbelt and healthcare moves are.
He's had some policy failures but for the most part has done pretty well, with a few successes, including leading us through covid.
PP would have invested Canada into bitcoin, ignored covid and cut services had he been in power.
Not really, no. You said they're all narcissists, and then said "Look what Obama went through considering he's black." I take that as you saying that because he's black he went through something unique that proved he's a narcissist, but I didn't know what that was. Now I just don't see how dealing with white supremacists made him a narcissist, so I don't think I understood your point. Or are you saying the other politicians treated him a certain way because they were narcissists? Is that it?
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to fight with you; I couldn't even if I wanted to because I just honestly don't know what you're saying. According to some here I'm not very bright, so perhaps that's the issue.
90% of the posts in this Section could be filed in 2 folders: Accusation /admission and The only standards are double standards. Gets tedious after a while...
