Hal 9000

There is zero chance that she takes any accountability at all for her response, either in her actions or her words

Clearly you don't know squat about sociopaths.

I think Trump is much smarter than people give him credit for.

Trump will bring out certain economists, military leaders, medical professionals and other respected people who will serve to sort out his ideas in ways that laymen can understand and other republicans can get behind. This will provide an easy transition for politicians who were against Trump to suddenly get on board.

Hillary is clearly guilty in the email scandal, but it's like the Tonya Harding deal - "we know you're guilty, but you have a chance at winning for us, so we'll just wait it out".

I think emoticons should be banned, they're used for noting more than trolling or flaming.

Well, the blue collar workers for one. Trump (and Sanders) have been pretty successful as showing Hillary as an elitist, pandering to the wall street crowd. Trump has gone directly to the people and promised jobs (for both Black and white...whoever). That will resonate with a lot of people. Obama got like what 100% of the black vote (more than 100% in some areas - somehow), If Trump can pull down 25% of the black vote, it should offset any losses in the hispanic demographic. Besides, If he can convince enough people, white or black in major hispanic areas, then the hispanic vote becomes marginalized. Eg., would you trade off the hispanic vote for the border security vote? - Maybe! Trump is the most socially liberal of any republican candidate in years, maybe ever. His issue is convincing the evangelicals to side with him, and given the option of him and Hillary, I gotta believe they'll come to his way of thinking. The fact is; for all the retoric, Trump may be the one candidate that brings the republican party (kicking and screaming) closer to the left socially. And; given the difference socially, I think Trump can actually sway some Bernie people to his side - or at the least, many of them will stay home on voting day - this also bodes well for Trump. Foreign Policy, With what Hillary and Obama has been a part of in Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Syria etc etc, I think people will realize that the democrat's foreign policy is not all milk and honey, that they've been as big a problem, maybe bigger than the GW Bush decisions. I think that we'll see voting based on things other than race, gender or age, maybe not a lot, but maybe enough for Trump to succeed.

I think Trump is actually trying to change the way demographics vote. Hillary is poised to get the majority of the women's vote, Black vote, latino vote, gay vote and any other minorities she can pander too. The only real hope for Republicans is to convince people that regardless of your race, jobs and the economy are more important than better welfare (or whatever Hillary is stumping). Many of these offended women and hispanics were never gonna vote for Trump (or any republican), so may as well try to appeal to the ones that understand jobs, security and economy. Right now, US always seems to be about 50% for each party, Trump has to bring people from the left over to his side and by all accounts, it seems to be working

I've always been a fan of Condie. I'm surprised she didn't run for president, actually. Having her on the ticket would be a game changer for sure, but she said in an interview that after GW, she wanted to distance herself from politics. Has enough time passed that she might get back into the ring? Hopefully.

Hmmm, I guess white people strangle at about the same rate regardless of country.

We'll (or americans, I suppose) never know how to deal with gun violence unless the stats can be broken down to gender, race, age, location, gang shooting, domestics etc etc. Until then, it's nothing but hysteria directed at every gun owner.

I don't know if Billary (or any democrats) want to bring ethics into the equation. And, as for war and Viet Nam, I think all this shows that Trump is not the warmonger many people want to label him as. Suer, He wants the 'Big Dog" in the front yard, but everything he's said and done, indicates that (other than the annihilation of ISIS) he has no interest in policing the world.

Eyeball is quoting an old socialist adage about "all I really need to know, i learned in kindergarten". It's printed on a bunch of elementary posters (like the "hang in there" cat) and i think it's even a book...because that's just how important kindergarten teachers are. Now he's trying to defend the position - I'll give him a mulligan on it. Personnally, I think you're supposed to be civilized before the age of 5, if not, then what kind of parents do you have? And, I think you civility changes and keeps growing - even after kindergarten (unless you're a millennial).

I'm sure it would matter if it was Trump people attacking.

So, why are these democrats attacking innocent people?

I think he made it quite clear, he blames every US president since Reagan. Fair analysis, I say!

WoW, I never knew just how many people have total and unquestionable faith in our legal system. Personally, I don't believe that our legal system decides when a murderer becomes a non-murderer. And, Homalka was never charged with murder anyway, so is the argument that she never was a murderer - at all? I mean really this changes everything. It means that OJ Simpson is not a murderer, Ghomeshi is not abusive and there are no pedophiles or rapists out there, because hey, they're not in jail. This is a woman who lured 15 year old girls, drugged them, bound them, beat them, raped them, sodomized them, strangled them, chopped up their bodies (just one I suppose), and dumped their bodies...but she's better now - right BC chick? And Betsy, when you say that the parents lost their child, it sounds like it was some tragic accident - it wasn't! I can't even begin to imagine how, as a parent you go on with life knowing what you're baby daughter went through at the hands of these monsters. P.S - Any of you people that offer her even the slightest sympathy should be ashamed. She deserves a bullet in the head and an eternity in hell.

The difference is; one turned on the other. That's all! When it comes to murder, you've either murdered someone and are a murderer - or you've never murdered someone. There is a line that you cross and don't come back from. You're judging her newfound innocence on the back of a FF'd up, unconfident prosecutor who made a tremendous error in judgement. I'll assume that you don't actually know the details of the crimes or trial/settlement.

Ok, so we know these people are out there - in more ways than one. I don't want to just label them "clueless hippies", because the word clueless is implied. Anyway, what bothers me is the people around them who either supported their decisions or simply just did nothing. These "parents" obviously knew the risks and gambled (and lost) their toddler's life on their backward belief system, but what about the nurse friend, shouldn't she have made it clear that the parents see an actual doctor immediately? How about the naturopath, they obviously told her what they suspected and she gave them echinacea? Really? shouldn't this person be held accountable to some extent for her negligence?

Would you consider Paul Bernardo a rapist and a murderer? I mean, the only difference between the two of them is that she lied and turned on him to manipulate the crown into an easy deal - right?

Here's some reason for ya; If we, as eyeball has demonstrated, can't accept the fact that Karla Homalka is a homocidal pedophile rapist, then is there anything at all that can be accepted as fact - cite or not?

Good question. Now this is where we have to look at cultures. While we in the west are not concerned with a preservation of culture, the Chinese certainly are. We care nothing about the future beyond our own retirement - We don't really care about our past and history, in fact too many people are ashamed of any small culture we do have - maybe we care about our kids and also use cliches like "what will we leave for our grandchildren", but lets face it - we don't care how Canada will look after we're gone. We don't care if our kids or grandkids are asian, we don't care if they're black or muslim or atheists - we just don't care. Should we care? maybe, maybe not...and it doesn't really matter. The problem is; we also think all countries or cultures feel this way - well, they don't. The Chinese do care about their culture and the future of the Chinese people, not just for the next one or two generations, but for the long haul. They put Chinese first, they buy Chinese, sell to Chinese and support Chinese. They have obvious goals - goals that some of them know are generations away and Vancouver is a part of that bigger picture. Vancouver is their gateway to North America. Toronto is the financial nerve centre. You'd have to foolish to deny a long term goal for Vancouver. You see, we're hung up the wrong questions; Chinese nationals or Chinese Canadians doesn't matter, what matters is; who's paying the bills on these houses and properties? And, what is the long term plan? As an aside, I'll resent any indication that I hate or fear the Chinese - frankly, it's what I admire about them. If we had an ounce of their character, we'd be a better society.

I didn't say that they have control over our entire fishery, I said that they have control over many of our fisheries. I think that entire entire time I've been here, I've only mentioned the Chinese once or twice - and only in regards to fisheries. Don't try and paint something thats not there - it's disingenuous.

Ok, This isn't really about fishing, but as it add's to the big picture, I'll give my take. I've fished in many fisheries in different provinces across Canada, and in down time I drove a truck to deliver different fish to downtown Vancouver. While fishing and delivering fish, the same couple names always came up. These guys (all Chinese) had control of boats, quota, crew shares and the entire market - and I saw it not just one fishery, but many. When you actually see just how deep these few people are, you take notice. The Chinese are dictating nearly our entire commercial fishery. As for the americans, I'd be just as incensed if it were them doing this. I think our resources should belong to and be controlled by Canadians. The Americans have been known to arrange their fishery dates to make sure they get the fish before they hit Canadian waters - this is an issue too. In the Maritimes, it is much harder to get a fishing license if you are not local, I think that's the way it should be. To go even further, I'll add this; I get outraged when I see a log barge full of timber heading for Asia, our coal or minerals heading out of the country as well. I don't like our water or hydro leaving Canada either. Sorry, this has nothing to do with yellow people, it is about sitting back and being taken advantage of by outside countries.

No!