Leader Circle

Over the years, I have heard this rumour many times. I have heard anecdotal evidence about white males who considered themselves the best candidate losing out to a visible minority or a woman. Is there any basis to this? I have my own anecdote to add. I recently applied for a position at Canada Post. During the hiring procedure about 40 people were called in to write a Canada Post test - a kind of postal aptitude test. This room full of 40 people had maybe 10 caucasian men, 1 caucasian woman, maybe 5 black men, and about 15 asian/south asian men (these numbers are approximate). Before writing the test we all had to fill out a form that says if we are a recognized minority or not. This test was somewhat difficult - not due to the caliber of the question, but simply due to the amount of time given versus the number of questions. Many people with English as a first language would have some difficulty with this test, those with English as a second language would have great difficulty. Eleven (11) people, including myself, passed this test. Approximately 4 caucasian men, 1 caucasian woman, 1 black man, and 5 asian/south asian (East Indian) men passed. Only those that passed the test were called to interview. I, for one, got the job. So despite the minority survey that we filled out, it seems to me that Canada Post's hiring practices are pretty fair... they are based on the outcome of the written test and doesn't take into account your race or sex. Do you know of any white males that have applied for the RCMP or at least tried to go to cop school in Regina? Ask them how many of those white males got turned away...it may shock you! I have had friends told not to bother applying, because they were not a recognized minority. I have another friend who married a girl from Denmark and you would think she would automatically become a Canadian citizen, but WRONG... she was denied for her social insurance number, because she is considered an refugee???????? Not sure about that, but she is not allowed to get a social insurance number, therefore she can't work in Canada legally? She was told, though, if she was a lesbian, they could help her out...WTF??

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...nationworld-hed I'd be interested to hear from those who have expressed such strong opinion to the contrary, such as Armyguy. In my opinion this is a perfect example of something that warrents discussion. It's a view contrary to many who count themselves as enlightened and able to face hard truths about terrorists that others can't face. Perhaps Frist is presenting another hard truth that needs facing. Wait, wait, hold the phone, this post has nothing nasty to say in reference to Stephen Harper...WTF? Someone must have hijacked his login name..omg!

Hey Chicken Little, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling". This glacier melt would happen even if we weren't living here. Climates change, we can't stop it, but in the meantime if people make money off of oil, God forbid. Yeah it polutes to extract oil from the ground, but your VW diesel polutes like crazy too.(and it requires us to extract oil from the ground!) Toronto has a haze hanging over it because you all drive your cars to work. Being the most environmentally friendly people that you are, why not take public transit? The reason they don't do their part in the big TO is the good old reasoning "NIMBY". NOT IN MY BACKYARD" Where is all of the garbage going that you generate in Toronto? So scream and holler about the bad things that oil does, but we are not alone in the oil craze, the whole world is doing it. So Margrace, you may be right, we are all fat cats. Apparently, the ideal way is to be poor, make your own clothes, use solar power, and go back to the stone age, but you'll be doing it all by yourself, with a few Amish folks! Good luck! Tell me how happy you are 10 years from now. Just had a thought mar, what are you doing with a computer? Shouldn't you be out there roughing it? Do you drive?

I remember being at a Bluejays game in the Skydome in 1992, when Rae was Premier, and Rae was at the game. They put him up on the big screen at the dome and the boos were deafening. That is 50,000 people not liking their Premier, not good! That was 14 years ago, surely many people have not forgotten him and their total dislike of him. He will be a tough sell to the people of Ontario. I think he will be the best thing that happened to the CPC, if he were to get in, since Mulroney retired!

My god...that is a lot of people.... Your sarcasm tells me you're not familiar with the science behind polling. It's quite accurate, within the margins. Well, if you are right, what do you think of these stats? Your post does not dispute what I said. Well it does not support your dim belief in the crashing support for the CPC. it seems if they are on the climb....enlightened?? Have they saw the light or is Volpe just another example of idiots in politics?

My god...that is a lot of people.... Your sarcasm tells me you're not familiar with the science behind polling. It's quite accurate, within the margins. Well, if you are right, what do you think of these stats? Date CPC Lib NDP Bloc Green Ekos 18/09/2006 39 29 17 8 7 Strategic 17/09/2006 35 26 19 12 8 Decima 04/09/2006 34 30 14 11 10 Decima 28/08/2006 33 28 19 10 Ipsos-Reid 24/08/2006 38 29 17 10 5 SES 23/08/2006 36 30 18 11 5 Decima 13/08/2006 36 29 15 10 Decima 31/07/2006 32 31 16 11 8 Decima 24/07/2006 36 30 17 10 5 Environics 23/07/2006 36 30 18 11 5 Decima 18/06/2006 38 28 19 10 Strategic 08/06/2006 36 27 19 9 9 Linky Dinky

I think Stompin' Tom Connors would have been more qualified and he is someone who " truly loves Canada"!! She is just another symbol of the way the world is changing and not for the good!

You people are pathetic! Every chance you get, you scream racism, well, get over it. Not everything that white people say can constitute as racism. That thing "tsi" is not more intelligent, it simply spews a bunch of garbage and ruined a perfectly good thread that was intended to show respect for innocent people who died for no reason. Although your kind of tree-hugging people would rather talk to the terrorists, rather than destroy them, which is what they deserve! Please enlighten me on the people who died for US (imposed???WTF?) corporations? Can you wow me with a for instance? Directly speaking of course! It is sad how you lefties feel for the "huddled masses" and the impoverished, yet you are never willing to dole it out yourself, you just want the "big business" to look after it for you and you will still tell of their evils! YOUR sort can be brainwashed easily - a little free healthcare, some medicinal weed, a gay pride parade and a union wage!

I don't know how old you are Argus, but in my day manners, tact and respect counted for something. And what does your rant have to do with respecting the victims of 911? I find it hard to fault Argus for how this thread played out, blame that "thing" whose name I cannot pronounce.(Not that I would want to anyway). I think that "thing" needs to be shot with a ball of it's own shit. It started as a thread reminding us of the horrible things of 5 years ago, but as always, the ignorant left, changed it to blame it on the capitalists among us! Whoever brainwashed these idiots has been effective, because there seems to be support for such stupidity as I have seen in this thread. Hey Newb, You have issues with people who prefer to tell the truth? Ah right, you vote Liberal, forget I asked. I like what Argus said & do not find it racist, but truthful. Some people need to be told the truth, maybe they would become more useful in society if they weren't protected by the brainwashed lefties!! It is truly humbling to read those names and see all the families affected by an act of terrorism. It makes me support what our troops are doing in the middle east so much more. If more people here took the time to see how families were ripped apart, maybe they would have more respect for what our armed forces are trying to do over there?

He was invited the day he become prime minister. Who here has heard the song by Guns & Roses "Dead Horse"? Well you guys are beating the shit out of a useless topic. He was damned either way, if he showed he'd be hassled by the press, if he didn't show, he'd still be hassled by the press!! By missing it, he got to get away from the same old song & dance of U2's Bonehead, I mean Bono, about 0.7 GDP support for aids & Africa and all the other hand out junkies! As far as the Canadian public, if they can't see what the media does to make Harper look bad, they are idiots anyway. As far as votes from urban centers like TO, he never got any in the last election and he is still against ssm, so he'll never get their support, no great loss there! Besides, they have a used car salesman and a couple of Islam's finest to represent them in the HOC.

Poor Toronto, another kick in the pants for the centre of the universe. You guys are so sad. Holy inadequacy! This anti Toronto thing that some of you have going is hilarious, no matter how angry and jealous you may be, remember that Toronto loves you. Problem is many of us outside of Toronto don't favor the gay love that TO provides!!! Yeah you do... we see the websites you've been visiting... not that there's anything wrong with that. Negatory pigpen, not in this life.

Poor Toronto, another kick in the pants for the centre of the universe. You guys are so sad. Holy inadequacy! This anti Toronto thing that some of you have going is hilarious, no matter how angry and jealous you may be, remember that Toronto loves you. Problem is many of us outside of Toronto don't favor the gay love that TO provides!!!

How many more useless threads are you going to put on here about the same topic? You just want to bash Harper for the same BS reasons, give it up! Your time was back in the sixties... go get in your VW bus and head for Woodstock, we are tired of your same pathetic rants.

The old "T" card. That's all there is in the view-finder of neo-cons in Canada, USA, and Israel. Reality is not quite that simple though. The vast majority of this nation of 4 million that's being destroyed are not terrorists. As well, the amount of terrorism coming out of Hezbollah has been pretty scant for quite a while. It will be so great to see you after Harper wins his majority and you poor lefties have to crawl back into the hole you came form!

Like many Canadians, I gave Harper the benefit of the doubt ... which he quickly lost when he set himself up as a dictator ... the only one allowed to speak. Then he repeatedly showed hisw petulance and displayed that he has no idea how to GOVERN, but he only knows how to CAMPAIGN for election by pandering only to his financial supporters ... Harper would only be comfortable with sole and unquestioned power. He has NO IDEA how to provide good democratic governance!! ...so I call him His Harpiness ... ... and YES we could use some more trees to hug ... and to help us breathe ...!!! (duh) ... rampant corporate stripping of Canadas resources will meet the wall of Indigenous resistance!! So Basically you are saying you would prefer NO DEAL with the US on the lumber dispute? Typical.....

My name is Geoff and I am a Conservative. *to applause* I am often described as a conservative, mostly because I'm not libertarian enough to sit with them around the campfire. I am opposed to the neo-con agenda, the spend big, tax little complex. I am a very small government supporter, I think I earn my money and should be able to keep as much as possible. That is a primary objective of a competent government in my mind, treat my money as I would, spend it wisely, and don't take more than you need to. A polar opposite to the tax and spend Liberal, I would prefer the government spend controllably, and then we all pay an invoice they send at the end of the year (if it were to be practical). I am as fervently against surpluses as much as I am against deficets. I am a social conservative to some degree, though I take a pragmatic, non-religious stand. I don't believe my religious views should be imposed on anyone else. My opposition to abortion, for example, has been layed out in a completely logical argument in other threads. None the less, I don't support a full ban as it's not a pragmatic solution. I am against homosexual marriage, but not against equality rights for gays and lesbians. That is the summary of a conservative from my viewpoint. There are many other varieties though. One common thread is the belief in equality of right over equality of opportunity. If everyone is treated equally by the government, then we all can suceed or fail based on our own efforts in life. I sincerely believe this. I think most people would take the dignity of a meager paying job then over unemployment if the government hadn't made unemployment socially acceptable. Dignity of the common man (or woman) is the utmost concept, and dignity isn't found through social programs but personal accomplishment, which can only be truly allowed to all that want it in an undiscriminatory equality of right system. Welfare destroys human dignity and creates crime and further poverty through this. That is the summary of what I think is a conserative. Well said Geoff! Sounds like the Conservatives I know.

Would it not be tempting the oppostion to topple the government over an issue Harper & Emerson intends to sell to them & the rest of Canadians? Canadians do not want another election on this and I look at it as, Harper is not doing an about face on the lumber, he is saving us a lot of hassle by trying to negotiate with the opposition to find a smooth transition of this deal and get it DONE. I agree, the deal appears to be a good one for Canadians and even though there were losses, the US did lose more out of the deal. The opposition does not want to concede this, because THEIR way is the best way.(even if it has not been presented!) Where are the BETTER deals all these critics seem to think exist? From a Liberal government who had poor relations with the US? From the car salesman of an NDP leader who literally has zero chance of EVER being PM? The reality of all this is, if a better deal is out there, it has yet to present itself and while the lumber boys wait & litigate the current deal will effectively disappear and the lawyer bills will not. I am with you on the tax cuts!

I don't see it. The conservatives that post here do often express concern about the state of the nation, or the community so to give a blanket statement that they are equating self-interest with moral good needs more evidence. Self-interest AND biases. Either may be of influence and they are not necessarily identical. Consider social conservatives ... bias drives their position on homosexuality, not self-interest. Did you ever consider that maybe so-cons base their decision on morals and biblical beliefs versus bias? Morals are not always based on biases, sometimes it is just a matter of believing what is right or wrong and many so-cons believe that gay marriage and abortion is wrong.

And you don't find that a problem, given that the "deal" amounted to a complete sell-out of Canada's several trade tribunal victories? Sometimes the things you righties come up with are simply asstounding. Obviously you haven't spent much time at a negotiating table. Agreements are based on compromise, if you think the U.S. was going to cede to all our demands you are simply naive. We had to give a little to get a little. It was the best agreement we'll get. A negotiation is not appropriate where one side is right and the other wrong. Says who? NAFTA or the WTO? Canada is in the wrong clearly, just less so than the US. That's why the deal was weighted more favourably to our side. You don't regard the sacrifice of billions in illegal duties collected as a loss? You don't regard the ruination of the principles of NAFTA as a loss? Illegal says who? The WTO has said repeatedly that Canadian illegaly subsidizes it's lumber industry through ridiculously low stumpage fees... which it does. The duties were too harsh, but some duties are justified. The sad thing here is Geoffrey, even if Harper & Emerson had gotten MORE than the 5 billion and got our legal fees covered and a few billion to boot, these damn Harper haters would find a problem with the deal. They cannot be pleased. Shakey being left handed, has a position of power in his beliefs, if this deal fails to make it to a vote, because of the minority situation, it automatically becomes a matter of Harper not being accountable to Canadians. Regardless of whether it was a good or bad deal, everytime the opposition decides to cause havoc, they can stop many of Harper's initiatives by banding together. The ideal situation in a lefty's mind is, the lumber deal NEVER gets resolved. It just gives them more reason to hate Bush & Harper and that seems to be their main goal in life. The other thing is, if no deal for lumber companies comes through, then they get there other goal satisfied, to ruin big business and make them dependant on subsidies, like many of their own. They can pander to these same people and tell them(for votes) if that had have been our people brokering the deal, we would have gotten a better deal, when most probably prefer to see the big lumber boys get nothing and they save a few more trees that they all can hug!!! LOL

Not sure exactly the point you are trying to get across??? They tried to bring a deal to help Canadians and all it got was complaints and criticism. What is better, settle now or go back to the drawing board, spending oodles more money??? If they won't agree, the deal is dead, wtf is he supposed to do? You just can't please anybody these days???

I guess if his stuff bothers you, you should talk to gerryasshatrick too??? He spouts the left wing stuff, his just doesn't rhyme.

Riiiight. Moral compass. Like Bush, huh? I think I'll stick with the inexperience and ignorance thingy, it makes more sense. Stating that the violence will escalate is not a "moral compass", it's the ramblings of an imbecile. Does this mean you support the Hezbollahs? You think what they are doing in Lebanon is ok? You beelding hearts cannot be pleased ever. You always need something to whine about.

What about there gay rights people? They were pissed that under 18 anal was not removed, don't you think they'll be up in arms about it? Considering the stroke they have these days, could they not have an effect on this bill?

I'm not using the Bible for any cause. I'm just pointing out that it has been proven that the Bible was continuously changed by humans to suit their purposes for hundreds of years. Since it is simply a flawed human text it would be foolish to use as the grounds to condemn any other religion, gender, race or sexual orientation. This is true, but the King James version seems to be the undisputed version that most of the world follows. You are right that is has been changed to a certain extent, but the message seems to be the same. A few misspelled words or sentence structure is not enough to destroy a complete doctrine I am sure. If you are going by the "Da Vinci Code", Dan Brown's book, it has been picked apart quite effectively and though he brought up some good points, he was writing a fiction novel. It is a futile attempt to justify smearing the Bible to save some face, by saying the translation has changed over time. The true translation from Hebrew probably has some serious differences, but the message stays relatively the same. "Forever oh Lord, thy word is settled in Heaven" Psalm 119:89 KJV

So, you're obviously a believer in the Old Testament then. While you're condemning homosexuality, you might want to consider what else God had to say in Leviticus 20. Also consider Deuteronomy 21:21 about what to do with rebellious children. My point is one can cherry pick any Biblical passage to make an argument. And it amazes me some of us still insist on using a 2000 year old book to solve 21st century problems. So I guess you're not a believer in the Bible or it's relevance to today? You are right that people can take one verse of scripture and make whatever they want out of it. Many religions were spawned that way, even if they are based on just a few scriptures. I guess the task for someone seeking Christ is to find that religion that uses the whole Bible. As far as Leviticus 20, it basically tells the evils of forbidden carnal sins, most of what is covered in the 10 commandments. I'm not sure the point you are trying to prove?? So much of the Bible I don't understand and I know that stoning someone today is not the way to handle these sins, but in it's time it was acceptable. Many wouldn't mind doing some of that to child molestors and I would find it very hard to stop them from doing that, even though it is not acceptable today.