dickleyjones

And again, he is not special. This happens often, the gov lets the colleges regulate themselves and thats the way most drs want it because otherwise the gov WOULD be involved. They almost never step in unless criminality is involved. This is not government censorship, it is peer censorship ie "someone complained and he's making us look bad". And although i don't agree with their stance, all it really amounts to is a performative action. Nothing that actually matters much besides perhaps being forced to take a day off to attend a course. This is something drs/dentists sign up for when they are licensed. The college gets to appear like they are doing something. You really think anyone is gonna take a course for 8 hours on ethics and come out the other side any different ie brainwashed? Lol if anything my experience tells me it does the opposite and just causes someone to harden their stance. I have seen it first hand many times (the dental college). If you think drs shouldn't regulate themselves then that is reasonable. But you have a major fight on your hands to remove self regulation.

Nah, it's not the canadian gov, it's his college. The gov decided they want nothing to do with it and that the college gets to decide which is the norm. I have seen a lot of this (some firsthand). You can argue with the college all you like but honestly they are mostly toothless. So you take a course in something you don't care about, pass, and be done. I just went through this, all it was was an ethics course and an essay like a kid in detention. No one's mdnd was changed, no one is in the gulag, very very few ever have their license revoked. This is doctors managing doctors wanting to appear to be doing things in the public interest but really it's almost always just lip service and performative measures. I won't say it is good, i think it is usually just a stupid waste of time and money. Without the college involved it would be the gov, the courts, etc, so i guess if you are a doc you take the good with the bad and be satisfied that at least you are self regulating.

Lol i'm sure this ban will have the desired effect and totally not backfire. Sincerely, Barbara Streisand

It's kinda funny but it comes off as mockery more than anything ie you are deranged if you don't agree with me. I suppose its meat for the base. The voiceover is terrible though, text to voice tiktok style?

Cool! So this means either way, Jesus is coming back in November.

pop into the chatbox, "game over" usually shows up before the end of the 1st quarter.

you know, i thought Vance was the right pick for Trump. Trump has such a great sense of humour and Vance seemed like the kind of guy who gets that. but Vance himself just cannot land a joke well, it may have been better to pick someone more serious to play the straight man.

I want to like manningcast, i really do, but the audio is so atrocious i can't bear more than a minute or two. Do better, rich dudes!

Yes, exactly what I mean.

It would have been more reliable and just as acceptable to say "we can't confirm Trump wrote it, but there are people saying he had a hand in its creation."

Sounds reasonable. Except, how can they defy their communist masters?

I understand why they would lie 1000s of times - to fulfill their communist agenda. What part of the communist agenda includes defending Trump?

How could the communist news do this?

"communist" being a label is what i suspect. Been that way a long time, here we go again. But i am not above discourse on the topic. It appears those that throw out that word ARE above discours. Ah well, i seek to understand, it eludes me for now no thanks to the posters who really can't have proper discourse for some reason. On price control, sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't. Imo it's kind of a do nothing promise as it does not solve anything. But it might make someone feel good so it's an ok strategy.

The list is a work of fiction as i already pointed out. It says so right in your post. And even if it were really written by actual american communists, you fail to acknowledge that this list is mostly a guide to power for any political entity. One that is followed by entities i think you support. One that has been followed by multiple entities throughout history. I won't bother showing you how, for example, "control education" is a pursuit followed by nearly every political entity in existence. Do i agree that dems will pull all sorts of ***** like the list? Of course! That's what political parties do. The r's are doing the exact same thing in their own way. You could check most of the boxes for them on that list. Does that make R's communists too? I can only imagine that you avoid roosevelt discussion because it does not fit your narrative at all. And because it's a jumping off point for further discussion of how many many (many!) so called anti communists do so called communist things.

It is an interesting list. and let me say i do appreciate you conversing with me honestly about your position. i really do seek to understand. i wish we could find the actual list or minutes from the communist party from back then to see how it aligns. in their own words. as it stands this is the work of an author who may very well have been in the know. he probably has some bias because of his strong faith. one thing that strikes me is the many ways the list is unlike the current Chinese gov: eliminating oaths, eliminating censorship, promoting pornography and LGBT, promoting riots, defunding police, discrediting family. the list mostly reads as a guide for any political force to take power. plenty of this list applies to both Rs and Ds and govs across the world: permit free trade, foreign aid, control schools, promote protests, control media, control unions, control big business. none of this is unique to communism. the pro LGBT and pro social religion stuff just the other side of promoting religion which are all forms of controlling others (especially children, in schools, in media...). i mean, sure, atheism and communism go together, but atheism is not prevalent. i suppose you can add non-religious which IS increasing. but non religious is not necessarily communist. the original author of this piece was a very religious person, his views come through in the list. communist China agrees with him on the LGBT issues. ok, i had better stop or @B-Man is gonna shoot more beavers at me. i really would like to hear your thoughts on Roosevelt being a communist (or not).

open borders like communist China? afaik their immigration is locked down quite hard. doesnt seem very communist to me. trans cult in communist china? they dont even allow gay people to marry. being trans appears to be even worse. lawfare in communist china now thats valid. from what i see you guys have been doing that to each other (rs and ds) for some time. although I absolutely grant you that the president was mostly off limits until recently. and thank you @B-Man i love me some beavers.

fair enough. i assume the same applies for the myriads of other politicians over the years, from both sides, who do "commie things"? it doesn't seem that way. instead it seems like the current enemy is the dems and that yelling commie is a tactic which may get the right out to vote. either that or there must be a threshold that is crossed where one moves from "doing commie things but not a communist" to "actual communist"

but nixon gets a pass for reasons. let's do roosevelt next? it seems he was more extreme commie than nixon.

how are they allowed to disagree under this communist rule?

I live just outside of hamilton, just on the fringe of a rural area. I live in a 4bd house with a lovely 1 acre yard. I feel blessed to live where i do at low cost. I have been living here for 20 years now, so i'm a rather extreme example of rent control. Thankfully my landlords would rather have good people taking care of their house than go through the difficult and legally dubious process of kicking us out and replacing us.

Communist is as communist does. Unless?

Yeah, i feel abused. I guess i should prefer my rent to double at the whim of my landlord? I currently pay $1700 (4 bd) my rent would easily be $3500 - $4000 if i moved to a similar place. That said i totally agree that gov has dropped the ball on housing. It has been that way since the 90s. But it's not only because of price control (rent control), that's a drop in the bucket. It's many things. Foreign owners are a problem. Not building enough, especially right now. I think the worst is corporate ownership. To quote Irv, it's a mess.

Huh til Nixon was a communist too!

I mean the higher earning middle are the ones who used the first time home buyers the most. Lower middle and less still can't afford and now the cost is up even more. So, it benefits a few if you are one of the lucky ones that's nice. At the same time, some must now climb even higher than before. I will certainly take advantage when it is my turn to buy. Cell phone plans. We are notoriously expensive. In 2019 a mid tier plan was ~$75. Everyone knew we were being screwed. Now the same tier (slightly upgraded because tech) is ~$35. in addition, cell companies can no longer charge cancellation fees after 2 years, must unlock your phone upon request, and there is now a cap on roaming and data overage charges. in my case, living in a rural area and using cell data, my bill was around $300 per month for two plans (high even by canadian standards). Now it's about $40 with the occasional overage charges of another $50. My current plan is $20. Add to all numbers 13% tax.