CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›2341 »

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

Hey guys apparently Mike de Jong doesn't use email

so there's nothing to FOI

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2024 09:20

DariusLikewise: Oct 4, 2008; You wore that on Halloween?

jm20 posted:

Content

Activist pours urine onto Rebel reporter's head

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSsk_k7MBpw&t=609s

lmao rebel reporter, gamer gate activist, SJW-hater, feminazi-fighter, libertarian super canidate lauren southern

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:04

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad!

Even then, and I oppose her from every standpoint, I think dumping piss on her is kinda a bad precedent. Don't dump disgusting things on people in general. I'd be ok with a glitterbomb.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:07

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Kafka Esq. posted:

Maybe it's time for a tabula rasa new thread, I can't even find the time to post the morning brief.

I can do it, I figured you weren't posting it because there wasn't anything interesting.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:08

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad!

I'd argue we wait til the end of session for this Parliament or at least until the budget drops. It's barely been 100 days.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:11

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

bunnyofdoom posted:

Even then, and I oppose her from every standpoint, I think dumping piss on her is kinda a bad precedent. Don't dump disgusting things on people in general. I'd be ok with a glitterbomb.

This. That's really gross.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:12

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

Protesting an event that didn't even take place and dumping piss on someone's head is exactly the kind of empty, self serving street theatre that keeps the left from accomplishing anything.

We're hosed.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:15

DariusLikewise: Oct 4, 2008; You wore that on Halloween?

bunnyofdoom posted:

Even then, and I oppose her from every standpoint, I think dumping piss on her is kinda a bad precedent. Don't dump disgusting things on people in general. I'd be ok with a glitterbomb.

It's an awful thing to do to someone, but if it's going to happen it couldn't have happened to a better(worse) person.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:17

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

I don't think anyone should have piss dumped on them. It is bad, and I really hope this is not a controversial opinion, but judging by this thread, it will be.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:17

Franks Happy Place: Mar 15, 2011; It is by weed alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the dank of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by weed alone I set my mind in motion.

Helsing posted:

Protesting an event that didn't even take place and dumping piss on someone's head is exactly the kind of empty, self serving street theatre that keeps the left from accomplishing anything.

We're hosed.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:20

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

DariusLikewise posted:

It's an awful thing to do to someone, but if it's going to happen it couldn't have happened to a better(worse) person.

Some idiots will think this was the greatest thing ever and they'll talk about it enthusiastically and encourage other people they know to dedicate energy and attention to this kind of idiocy, which may actually distract people from doing something more useful with their time. Meanwhile a bunch of other people will be turned off activism by this frathouse stunt or even pay more attention to the message of the person getting piss dumped on them. That person and her followers meanwhile will congratulate themselves on clearly having made waves and will likely be motivated to take further action.

Insofar as this will have any impact (fortunately it won't) it will be a negative one.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:22

Brannock: Feb 9, 2006; by exmarx; Fallen Rib

Helsing posted:

Protesting an event that didn't even take place and dumping piss on someone's head is exactly the kind of empty, self serving street theatre that keeps the left from accomplishing anything.

We're hosed.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:22

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

Helsing posted:

Protesting an event that didn't even take place and dumping piss on someone's head is exactly the kind of empty, self serving street theatre that keeps the left from accomplishing anything.

We're hosed.

Hey it's just like when that old man yelled at commies during the election and everyone in this thread agreed that the actions of one deranged individual don't reflect the entire righ... Oh. Yeah.

Seriously though as much as I'd like to agree, I think most people can recognise this as the act of a nutjob rather than representative of a broad political group.

The left has enough problems without claiming somebody pouring piss on someone else is one of them.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:30

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

Helsing posted:

Some idiots will think this was the greatest thing ever and they'll talk about it enthusiastically and encourage other people they know to dedicate energy and attention to this kind of idiocy, which may actually distract people from doing something more useful with their time. Meanwhile a bunch of other people will be turned off activism by this frathouse stunt or even pay more attention to the message of the person getting piss dumped on them. That person and her followers meanwhile will congratulate themselves on clearly having made waves and will likely be motivated to take further action.

Insofar as this will have any impact (fortunately it won't) it will be a negative one.

This is good because these people are idiots and shouldn't be involved in promoting the left's message anyway. They can out themselves as idiots and we can all safely ignore them.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:38

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

Helsing posted:

Protesting an event that didn't even take place and dumping piss on someone's head is exactly the kind of empty, self serving street theatre that keeps the left from accomplishing anything.

We're hosed.

You should tell your friends at Leftist HQ that their piss-throwing strategy is a non-starter.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:41

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

Jordan7hm posted:

Hey it's just like when that old man yelled at commies during the election and everyone in this thread agreed that the actions of one deranged individual don't reflect the entire righ... Oh. Yeah.

Seriously though as much as I'd like to agree, I think most people can recognise this as the act of a nutjob rather than representative of a broad political group.

The left has enough problems without claiming somebody pouring piss on someone else is one of them.

The CPC let that guy into their highly secured and strictly access-controlled indoor rally, so there's a slight distinction you're not observing

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:44

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad!

THC posted:

The CPC let that guy into their highly secured and strictly access-controlled indoor rally, so there's a slight distinction you're not observing

They let me into LPC rallies, so what does that tell you?

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:59

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/wage-gap-oxfam-1.3478938

quote:

Women's wage gap getting wider in Canada, new report indicates

Women in Canada still earn much less than men for the same work, and also bear far more of the burden of extra unpaid work, according to a report released today.

That's just one of the findings of the wide-ranging report from Oxfam Canada and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

The report, titled Making Women Count, looked at income inequality since the global recession that began in 2008, with a specific focus on how women are faring in Canada and around the world.

Wage gap now at 72%

While there are pockets of progress, on the whole, the report does not paint an encouraging picture. In 2009, women in Canada earned on average 74.4 per cent of what men earned. In 2010, it was 73.6 per cent, and in 2011, it was 72 per cent, roughly where it remains today.

Doubters of the gender wage gap often argue that women earn less than men mainly because they work fewer hours, as a group, than men do. But Monday's report says the data doesn't back that up.

Unpaid interns are predominantly female, new report finds
"The gap in men's and women's incomes is not simply the result of women working fewer hours," the report said. "Nor is it the result of different levels of education and experience. Even when all of these factors are considered, the result remains the same: a wage gap."

The most up to date data from Statistics Canada on the issue is from 2011. Even after stripping out the impact of part-time or temporary work people may choose to do, Statistics Canada data shows that women earn 72 cents for every dollar a man makes doing the same type of work: full-time, and full-year.

Part of the problem is that for whatever reason, women find themselves disproportionately represented in lower-paying industries. The report cites the example of truck drivers (the majority are men) who are paid an average of $45,417 per year, while Early Childhood Educators (the majority are women) are paid $25,252 per year.

That's just one example of a systemic imbalance.

Women, on the whole, also perform much more unpaid work than men do. That doesn't mean internships and the like; rather, it refers to the hours in the day that are dedicated to primarily household tasks.

Household chores

In low- and middle-income countries, the report says, women spend three times as many hours as men on unpaid care work each day. The situation in Canada is only slightly better, with women performing nearly twice as many hours of unpaid work each day as do men.

Globally, women spend between three and six hours every day on domestic and care giving work. Men spend markedly less time on such activities � between 30 minutes and two hours a day.

All those hours doing unpaid work eats into the earning potential of women during the remaining hours they have available for paid work. And there again, women on the whole are drawing the short end of the stick, the report says.

Levels of women who are employed in Canada have climbed steadily through the 1980s and '90s, but still have yet to match those of men, despite a demographic impetus against that: there are currently more women of working age in Canada than men, and on the whole, they are more likely to have higher education.

Currently, 59 per cent of minimum wage workers in Canada are women. Yet, women in Canada's labour force are more likely to have a university degree than men, but are paid less, on average, across all types of work.

"Education alone is not sufficient to overcome discrimination in wages and employment," the report says. "Clearly other forces are at play."

The wage gap is even greater for some groups of women in Canada, such as aboriginal women, women of different races, and immigrant women.

Global problem

Indeed, it's even worse in other countries, where the report suggests the global manufacturing supply chain is disadvantaging women more than men.

"The fact that women are good for economic growth does not necessarily mean that economic growth is always good for women," the report says. "In a global economy that depends on ever cheaper labour to produce profits for the global elite, paying women in low-income countries desperately low wages has become a means to drive profitability."

While a university-educated career woman in Canada may have little in common with an uneducated low-skilled worker in Bangladesh, they likely have one area in common: child rearing.

Despite modest progress on this front in recent decades, women still perform the lion's share of child-care related duties in the world. In a survey of 31 developing countries, 39 per cent of working women with children under six years old said they care for their children themselves during the work day � "literally doing two jobs at once," the report says.

Impact of child care

It in the area of child rearing that the report says policymakers have the easiest and most effective tools at their disposal to close the wage gap, by advancing subsidized daycare programs which statistics indicate are more than worth their cost in terms of returns to the economy.

"The lack of child-care spaces keeps mothers out of the workforce long after they want and need to return," the report says. "The high cost of child care means that a working parent often spends as much as a third of their income on child care."

The report gives the example of Quebec, where subsidized full-day daycare was implemented in 1997. Since then, the employment rate for Quebec women has doubled, and their poverty rates have dropped from 36 per cent to 22 per cent. According to a recent estimate from a G20 report, the impact of that surge of workers and taxpayers due to people no longer having to leave work to care for children resulted in a 1.7 per cent increase in Quebec's GDP, and an increase in provincial and federal tax revenues that exceed the program's cost.

In other words, subsidized daycare in Quebec has paid for itself and then some.

Researcher Kate McInturff of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives worked on the report, and said in a release that's part of why fixing the wage gap is good for everyone, not just women.

"In a world where so many women are still left behind, addressing the unequal economics of women's work will have a transformative impact on our economy," McInturff said.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:01

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

Every political movement has a need of idiots so it's no reason to celebrate when the idiots get redirected into bad behaviour that will just raise the idiot-not idiot ratio without accomplishing anything.

While this event itself obviously won't make much difference its symptomatic of deeper problems with the left that go all the way back to the 1960s. I'll quote Christopher Lasch at length here rather than rephrase his ideas in my own words and people can draw their own conclusions but I found the following passage pretty accurate in terms of diagnosing what is wrong with a lot of radical politics:

Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism, pp. 81-83 posted:

Radicalism as Street Theater

The degeneration of politics into spectacle has not only transformed policy making into publicity, debased political discourse, and turned elections into sporting events in which each side claims the advantage of "momentum," it has also made it more difficult than ever to organize a political opposition. When the images of power overshadow the reality, those without power find themselves fighting phantoms. Particularly in a society where power likes to present itself in the guise of benevolence--where government seldom resorts to the naked use of force--it is hard to identify the oppressor, let alone to personify him, or to sustain a burning sense of grievance in the masses. In teh sixties, the new left attempted to overcome this insubstantialtiy of the establishment by resorting to politics of confrontation. By deliberately provoking violent repression, it hoped to forestall the co-optation of dissent. The attempt to dramatize official repression, however, imprisoned the left in a politics of theater, of dramatic gestures, of style without substance--a mirror-image of the politics of unreality which it should have been the purpose of the left to unmask.

Theoreticians of the cold war saw the tactics of "escalation" as a means of impressing "relevant audiences" with the nation's strength of purpose, the strategists of the left, equally obsessed with appearances, believed that gestures of escalating opposition would eventually bring the establishment to its knees. In both cases, politics appeared as a game the object of which was to communicate to the opponent the escalating cost of his own policies. When he was sufficiently impressed with the cost, on this assumption, he would abandon intransigence in favor of conciliation. Thus opponents of the war in Vietnam announced in 1967, with great fanfate, that they intended to move "from dissent to resistance," expecting that resistance would have to be countered by repressive measures intolerable to liberal opinion. "It will be bloody," said one radical in defence of a particularly futile protest, "but blood makes the liberals mad." Far from provoking a liberal reaction, however, the politics of street theater solidified opposition to the left and created a mounting demand for law and order. The escalation of militant tactics fragmented the left and drew the more "revolutionary" elements into suicidal confrontations with the police and the National Guard. "We are working to build a guerilla force in an urban environment," the national secretary of SDS announced in 1967. In fact, SDS was laying the groundwork for its own collapse two years later.

The delusion that street theater represented the newest form of guerilla warfare helped to ward off an uneasy realization that it represented no more than a form of self-promotion, by means of which the media stars of the left brought themselves to national attention with its concomitant rewards. One exponent of "guerilla theater," after exhorting his followers to live by their wits, quickly explained that "to live by your wits is not to imitate the hustler who is a low-class capitalist, but rather the Latin American guerrilla who is a low-class socialist." Such talk served not only to reassure the faithful but to play up to the "relevant audience" of black and third-world militants, to which the white left had become unduly sensitive and which it desperately wanted to impress with its revolutionary machismo. The rhetoric of black power corrupted the white left and the black left alike, substituting a politics of the media for the civil rights struggles earlier waged in deadly earnest in the South. As the black power rhetoricians co-opted the civil rights movement, they also captivated white liberals who sought to appease the guilt associated with "white skin privilege" by adopting the gestures and language of black militancy. Both whites and blacks embraced radical style in place of radical substance.

By 1968, when the new left gathered for its "festival of life" outside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, the prominence of the Youth International led by Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman made it clear that a theatrical conception of politics had driven more rational conceptions from the field. "Yippie is gestalt theater of the streets," Rubin has claimed, "compelling people by example to change their awareness. Entering a Congressional hearing room in a Paul Revere costume or wearing judicial robes to a court proceeding is a way of acting out fantasies and ending repressions." Acting out fantasies does not end repressions, however; it merely dramatizes the permissible limits of antisocial behavior. In the sixties and early seventies, radicals who transgressed these limits, under the illusion that they were fomenting insurrection or "doing gestalt therapy on the nation," in Rubin's words, often paid a heavy price: clubbing, imprisonment, police harassment, or death itself, in the case of the terrorists--the Weathermen and the recruits to the Symbionese Liberation Army--who followed the logic of guerrilla theater to its inevitable ending. Yet these radicals had so few practical results to show for their sacrifices that we are driven to conclude that they embraced radical politics in the first place not because it promised practical results but because it served as a new mode of self-dramatization.

The only parts of this analysis that don't quite fit any more is that at least the people being described by Lasch were 1) willing to take real physical risks and 2) actually had some kind of theory of social change, however misguided, informing their street theatrics, and 3) actually warranted national attention in any kind of consistent manner.

One could debate Lasch's assertion about the extent to which the black power movement was crippled by deliberate police repression rather than undermined by its own theatricality, but as far as diagnosing this growing tendency on the left (though far from unique to the left) to treat politics more as a means of self expression than a method for achieving actual change I think Lasch's basic criticisms -- penned back in 1979 -- do capture some real issues with a lot of what passes for campus radicalism.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:01

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

THC posted:

You should tell your friends at Leftist HQ that their piss-throwing strategy is a non-starter.

Based on some of the pissing and moaning in this thread as of late I was under the impression that we're posting in Leftist HQ right now.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:03

Risky Bisquick: Jan 18, 2008; PLEASE LET ME WRITE YOUR VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT SO I CAN FURTHER DEMONSTRATE THE CALAMITY THAT IS OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM.; Buglord

bunnyofdoom posted:

They let me into LPC rallies, so what does that tell you?

A staffer gets into a rally by their own party. Is this really the argument you are making?

Dreylad posted:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/wage-gap-oxfam-1.3478938

Cue union haters from pooping on nurses and teachers for being overpaid.

Risky Bisquick fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Mar 7, 2016

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:03

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

I think he meant it as a self deprecating joke.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:06

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad!

^^^^he gets it

jm20 posted:

A staffer gets into a rally by their own party. Is this really the argument you are making?

No I was making a self deprecating joke about myself

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:06

Risky Bisquick: Jan 18, 2008; PLEASE LET ME WRITE YOUR VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT SO I CAN FURTHER DEMONSTRATE THE CALAMITY THAT IS OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM.; Buglord

THC posted:

I think he meant it as a self deprecating joke.

bunnyofdoom posted:

No I was making a self deprecating joke about myself

Don't be a PT6A now

ed: bod I want to dm you and laugh at something you posted elsewhere but sigh :10bux:

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:08

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Helsing posted:

One could debate Lasch's assertion about the extent to which the black power movement was crippled by deliberate police repression rather than undermined by its own theatricality, but as far as diagnosing this growing tendency on the left (though far from unique to the left) to treat politics more as a means of self expression than a method for achieving actual change I think Lasch's basic criticisms -- penned back in 1979 -- do capture some real issues with a lot of what passes for campus radicalism.

I would definitely take issue with that assertion given the legislative backlash to the Black Panthers and other black power groups, but that's beside the point.

Blame Foucault maybe? It seems like the greatest accomplishment in activism these days is change the conversation, and that is often considered to be one of the great accomplishments of Occupy Wall Street, which seems to be the apex of theatrical self-promotion in radical politics in North America. We change the conversation about income inequality, systemic racism, climate change, and things will happen. Somehow, in some way. The intense anti-institutionalism of the New Left I think has always meant that any kind of proposal for change fails - regardless of the success of the advocacy - as soon as it makes contact with the realities of existing institutions and the ways policies are crafted by government and the civil service.

Which might explain a lot of older leftists flight to neoliberalism - the government can't solve problems on its own, shackled as it is to institutional inertia and certain processes, so bring on the private sector that lacks both those restrictions and any meaningful accountability.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:19

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad!

jm20 posted:

Don't be a PT6A now

ed: bod I want to dm you and laugh at something you posted elsewhere but sigh

Oh dear.

Try email.

removed.

Also, technically, I didn't post that, the party did.

edit:

Also
So we decided not to let this shithead in

bunnyofdoom fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Mar 7, 2016

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:20

Wistful of Dollars: Aug 25, 2009

Drinking an animal's blood is the least offensive thing.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:30

Booourns: Jan 20, 2004; Please send a report when you see me complain about other posters and threads outside of QCS

~thanks!

PT6A posted:

I don't think anyone should have piss dumped on them. It is bad, and I really hope this is not a controversial opinion, but judging by this thread, it will be.

Shooting people in the face on the other hand, that's A OK

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:33

JawKnee: Mar 24, 2007; You'll take the ride to leave this town along that yellow line

bunnyofdoom posted:

Also
So we decided not to let this shithead in

Not that I'm exactly torn up over him being interrogated and turned away, but besides representing a Neo-Nazi in court, what ties does he have to them?

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:34

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

JawKnee posted:

Not that I'm exactly torn up over him being interrogated and turned away, but besides representing a Neo-Nazi in court, what ties does he have to them?

Duh, obviously criminals and people with bad, lovely opinions don't deserve legal representation. Any attempt to provide a legal defence for them should therefore be considered tantamount to agreeing with all of their thoughts and deeds.

Note: I'm not actually being serious here.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:39

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

Skinheads, Nazis, white nationalists and KKK guys show up to his gigs all the time and he never tells them to gently caress off. So there's that I guess. Also he legally changed his name to Augustus Sol Invictus so he's clearly a massive twat.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:41

Tsyni: Sep 1, 2004; Lipstick Apathy

just move this thread to gbs already

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:43

Reince Penis: Nov 15, 2007; by R. Guyovich

What a load of nonsense

quote:

The head of Canada's spy agency told a Senate committee today that his agency has used its extraordinary powers to disrupt extremist plots close to two dozen times since the fall of 2015.

Michel Coulombe, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, made the admission to the national security and defence committee, revealing for the first time how frequently this power was used.

Canada's spy agency was granted the power to disrupt suspected plots rather than just relay information about those plots to the federal government and the RCMP when Bill C-51 became law this past summer.

Two dozen extremist plots in the last 4 months. Truly we must be in grave danger all the time!!!

e: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/csis-power-disrupt-refugees-1.3479844

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:48

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

THC posted:

Skinheads, Nazis, white nationalists and KKK guys show up to his gigs all the time and he never tells them to gently caress off. So there's that I guess. Also he legally changed his name to Augustus Sol Invictus so he's clearly a massive twat.

Should people be excluded from Canada if/when they are assessed to be a massive twat?

I think screening people for ideological purity is not a thing the CBSA should be doing. It's as ridiculous as the US excluding people for admitting to experimenting with LSD in the 70s.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:50

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

I wonder how many of these extremist plots were of CSIS's own making. We'll probably never get to find out "because national security", so I'm just going to assume they all are.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:51

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

The nice thing about being a country and having borders is you don't need to exhaustively justify your reasons for keeping out right wing poo poo-disturbers who pal around with skinheads.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 23:53

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

THC posted:

The nice thing about being a country and having borders is you don't need to exhaustively justify your reasons for keeping out right wing poo poo-disturbers who pal around with skinheads.

Would you say maybe we should build a wall to help keep that sort out?

It could have a beautiful door, even.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:05

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

you have bad, lovely opinions yet here we are

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:11

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

I wouldn't go that far. This terrifying ditch seems to keep people out well enough already. It's full of man-eating raccoons and aggressive geese and God only knows what else.

Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 00:20 on Mar 8, 2016

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2024 09:20

MikeSevigny: Aug 6, 2002; Habs 2006: Cristobal Persuasion

Cultural Imperial posted:

Hey guys apparently Mike de Jong doesn't use email

so there's nothing to FOI

Good news, it turns out Christy Clark is illiterate, so she couldn't have written or read anything incriminating. Another brilliant political move by the BC Liberals.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:26

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›2341 »