a) Well, I don't want you to do anything, but that would make your post make more sense.
b) Fair enough.

That's not really complaining in the first place though, it just stating an opinion.
Also, Roosevelt said that after his terms as president, so it wasn't technically the government saying it.

They can come up here if they want. Churchill would be lot bigger if people actually wanted to live on a tundra.

Its not like Canada has any particular desire not to build up there, its just too desolate to bother. We also have our share of climate skeptics, we're really not all that different from the States in that regard.

No, you are being disingenuous. I refuse to believe you have this flawed of an understanding of how language works.

It getting hard to assume you aren't being disingenuous. Are you actually trying to invalidate the idea of a connotation?
I don't "have a feeling", I'm aware that the word "pronoun" has an LGBT connotation, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of it too.
Just because its not in the dictionary definition doesn't mean it somehow an invalid observation. That's the entire reason to call something a connotation.

You may not understand what a connotation is.

The existence of happy poor people suggests that money is not necessary to obtain happiness.
The existence of miserable poor people doesn't weaken this suggestion.

Hunk is correct.

Not relevant.

Well enough in and of itself. A shame the Conservatives refuse to actually use the opportunity for the reasons people voted for it.