Damn, you Hosers!. Pour le Québec: Condamnez-vous les Canadiens! Source: SNL La source. : SNV. TED CRUZ WAS BORN IN CAI! J' -ID! -1. so, WHILE WE WERE WORRIED A
Click to expand


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#10 - djchurro (10/08/2013) [-]
stickied by mudkipfucker
User avatar #7 - roflstorm (10/08/2013) [-]
#128 to #7 - DonPatchy has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #86 to #7 - tehbanana (10/09/2013) [-]
User avatar #160 to #86 - doctadoc (10/09/2013) [-]
found the canadian
#24 - bokkos ONLINE (10/08/2013) [-]
You thought we forgot about 1812?
Oh Canada, bitch.
We're sorry.
User avatar #79 to #24 - idkwhatthatmeans (10/09/2013) [-]
Does nobody on this site read a goddamn textbook? It was ******* british troops fighting for BRITAIN.

Also DC at that point was a rustic ******* ******** so congrats on burning down that slum. Not to mention that war ended in an armistice..
#31 to #24 - macabrealucard ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#39 to #31 - fedegon (10/09/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #37 to #31 - douchenugget (10/09/2013) [-]
Look at that *********** grin
#77 to #37 - sonofthedeepsouth (10/09/2013) [-]
How about I slash and cut your **** !
User avatar #125 to #31 - flambenobunaga (10/09/2013) [-]
His boss theme is my ringtone...
#65 to #24 - sircool (10/09/2013) [-]
you do realize that canada didn't exist at that time as it was still a part of british rule, so it had the backing of what remained of the british empire at the time, and despite burning down washington, you still lost.
User avatar #82 to #65 - alexthecanadian (10/09/2013) [-]
Technically, you America lost because the Invasion of Upper Canada failed. However, in both country's we are taught that it was tie. This is because the counter-invasion by the British was also a failure.
#183 to #82 - anon (10/13/2013) [-]
Actually we only didn't invade and keep it because we were at the time bitching to the Russians about not carving up Austria, so we couldn't be seen to be doing the same thing (in the interest of Austrian allies)
User avatar #184 to #183 - alexthecanadian (10/13/2013) [-]
Indeed. I realise.
#67 to #65 - bokkos ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #127 to #67 - nitsuan (10/09/2013) [-]
You say it is a joke, but you would not believe how many Canadians I have talked to that really believe they flat out burned down the white house. That is why I always react to it.
User avatar #72 to #67 - sircool (10/09/2013) [-]
But It's WRONG!!!
User avatar #69 to #65 - ishallsmiteyou (10/09/2013) [-]
That and we killed over 300 American soldiers with a makeshift band of about 150 Native warriors and a small militia led by James Fitzgibbons.
#71 to #69 - sircool (10/09/2013) [-]
congratulations, you did the same as america did but against a smaller foe.
congratulations, you did the same as america did but against a smaller foe.
User avatar #68 to #65 - ishallsmiteyou (10/09/2013) [-]
Technically we won. The objective of East and West Canada (as the colonies were called then) was to defend our land. We accomplished our objective. The American objective was to take control of the Canadas, which they failed to do.
User avatar #103 to #68 - mrblueftw ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
Your one riled up canadian arn't you?
#18 - include (10/08/2013) [-]
#159 to #18 - thalfak (10/09/2013) [-]
USA fw
USA fw
#16 - mehmachine (10/08/2013) [-]
Oh **** we've been found out
#56 - Nihatclodra (10/09/2013) [-]
They're onto us! Quick, deploy the Stone-Golums!
User avatar #66 to #56 - ishallsmiteyou (10/09/2013) [-]
...or just push 'em down the hill when they attack
#113 to #56 - anon (10/09/2013) [-]
Dip **** That is a Inukshuk,
User avatar #117 to #113 - Nihatclodra (10/09/2013) [-]
I know, it's a joke...
User avatar #151 to #56 - twofreegerbils (10/09/2013) [-]
Isn't that an Alaskan thing..?
User avatar #180 to #151 - Nihatclodra (10/09/2013) [-]
It's an Inukshuk, a human-shaped stone landmark that can be found primarily in Canada, and Alaska.
#40 - evilredmuffin (10/09/2013) [-]
#35 - jackknapp (10/09/2013) [-]

#45 - leetboy (10/09/2013) [-]
On behalf of Canada, we're ACTUALLY SORRY for Ted Cruz, Justin Bieber and Nickelback.
User avatar #48 to #45 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
Actually we like the first one
#95 to #48 - Katzie (10/09/2013) [-]
> implying everyone in Canada likes Ted Cruz
User avatar #97 to #95 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
>implying Texans don't

I never said I was Canadian
#107 to #97 - Katzie (10/09/2013) [-]
> implying everyone in Texas* likes Ted Cruz
User avatar #135 to #107 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
>implying I meant everyone.
User avatar #63 to #48 - ivoryhammer (10/09/2013) [-]
No we don't.
User avatar #76 to #63 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
Shut the **** ivory. Seriously you red thumb byposted on the political board all the time and never even post a ******* thing. Shut your whore mouth.
User avatar #122 to #76 - teoberry (10/09/2013) [-]
He was, is, and always will be a little bitch. Just ignore him.
User avatar #134 to #122 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
He's a nonpolitical board faggot.
User avatar #105 to #76 - ivoryhammer (10/09/2013) [-]
Is someone a bit mad?
User avatar #136 to #105 - undeadwill (10/09/2013) [-]
Y u gotta be a bitch ***** hippie
#73 to #45 - RedManWins (10/09/2013) [-]
America just came in 7th for ''most free country" in the WORLD. I'm glad to be Canadian, where at least I know I'm most free then a person in the United States.

User avatar #89 to #73 - ronyx (10/09/2013) [-]
What exactly is this "freedom" that is taken into consideration?
#154 to #45 - carcon (10/09/2013) [-]
I like Nickelback.
#57 - beyondnonsense (10/09/2013) [-]
mfw I'm Canadian
mfw I'm Canadian
#75 to #59 - reican (10/09/2013) [-]
That's my fault really... No regrets.
User avatar #91 - teoberry (10/09/2013) [-]
Calgary pride, faggots. I'm proud to say Cruz was born in my city.
#118 to #91 - retepraamrod (10/09/2013) [-]
Hell or high water!
User avatar #119 to #118 - teoberry (10/09/2013) [-]
I was gone for most of stampede, it ******* sucked.
User avatar #120 to #119 - teoberry (10/09/2013) [-]
I thought we were gonna have a repeat of the flood today tho.
User avatar #142 to #91 - Onemanretardpack (10/09/2013) [-]
Moving to Alberta as soon as I can get a written job offer for my work visa. I almost hate to say it, but it's gonna be the decade of Canada
User avatar #181 to #142 - teoberry (10/10/2013) [-]
Awwww yeah brutha. You're gonna love it here.
#88 - epicprivate (10/09/2013) [-]
Its... Its Not like I like you, or anything...
#23 - pussypunchpiss (10/08/2013) [-]
oh 			****		 guys, they're onto us
oh **** guys, they're onto us
User avatar #2 - spookyghostparty (10/08/2013) [-]
GG, Canada. No RE.
User avatar #70 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
Actually it was the Koch Brothers, setting down blueprints to shut down Obamacare, along with some other insanely rich Conservatives, using their excessive power with money ever since Obama was re-elected to make this stuff happen gradually and seem like it was sudden

Conservative Plot To Defund Obamacare Exposed
User avatar #121 to #115 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
Do you not believe that rich sons o' bitches have power and connections?
User avatar #123 to #121 - durkadurka ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
It's retarded to think that a handful of wealthy people can exert perfect control over such complex systems.

Of course wealthy people spend money to try and influence things in their favor; this is so common that it goes without saying. Every side does this, it happens on the left just as much as it does on the right.
User avatar #124 to #123 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
I'd like to go ahead and ask if you watched the video
User avatar #165 to #124 - durkadurka ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
"If it goes into effect everyone will realize how much they like it."
^ loled at this bit. If anything, the reverse is happening.

It shouldn't come as a shock that people of similar political ideologies get together and discuss what issues they're going to support, etc.

I don't find this guy credible: He has such a warped perspective of the healthcare legislation (he repeatedly states that most people like it, and says that it will keep people from dying in the streets). He's assuming that providing funding to activist organizations somehow gives them direct control over said groups. There's hardly any basis in facts, it's mostly just a string of assumptions driven by political bias.

Again, this is nothing unique to the right. That's why I included the youtube video. I'd encourage you to watch it, because it's essentially a mirror of what you posted.
In the interest of trying to be objective as possible, I'm taking the same stance on Soros as I am the Koch Brothers; They don't do much controlling, they simply fund groups which support their ideals.
George Soros exposed!
User avatar #171 to #165 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
Fox news is your source?
Warped perspective?
Not credible?
Since when did most people not like the healthcare?

Way too much instability here. You make your own perspective sound warped.
User avatar #172 to #171 - durkadurka ONLINE (10/09/2013) [-]
Did you read what I said?
"Again, this is nothing unique to the right. That's why I included the youtube video. I'd encourage you to watch it, because it's essentially a mirror of what you posted."

If you really don't understand the point I'm trying to make then yeah, I guess you are stupid enough to think the Koch brothers control everything.

But yeah, I wouldn't call the young turks credible by any stretch of the imagination. Fox News has its biases, but they're at least a news organization. They're not saying things up like "now people won't die in the streets".

Do you seriously think most people agree with the AFA? What world do you live on?
Belief that most Americans approve of the AFA is delusional - on par with the belief that a handful of men can do exactly what they want to the economy and politics.
User avatar #174 to #172 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
To the original subject, the Fox news video showed no substance behind what they were saying. On the other hand TYT did.
User avatar #173 to #172 - ihatem (10/09/2013) [-]
I never said they controlled the whole situation, that doesn't mean zero influence. And you're arguing at anecdotal things.

A lot of those people wouldn't have the same opinion when they're explained what the law will actually do. A lot of oppositions are based on very little. "Approval of ACA" is two different things in one question, "Approval of what I think the ACA is" and "Approval of the actual contents of the ACA"
#104 - maryjaneinmabrain (10/09/2013) [-]
>Still happening
>Still happening
User avatar #96 - greenstrongworld (10/09/2013) [-]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)