SpankyMcFarland

Nationalism doomed it and the war finished the job. I'd say the nearest thing to it is the EU.

If such a choice existed I would choose safe drinking water.

All pols tell lies. That's kind of compulsory. Small 'c' conservatives split on geographic lines and FPTP did the rest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1993 So the 'destroyed' party got 16% of the vote and 2 seats while the other right-wing party got 18.7% and 52 seats. The Official Opposition got 13.5% of the vote, less than either but all in one province, and 54 seats.

Who proposes that? That will never happen. Israel will take as much of the West Bank as it can WITHOUT the Arab population. In fact there is a proposal to swap a piece of Israel proper with its Israeli Arab population for parts of the WB proper. Both sides think tribally as in South Africa.

The non-Israeli land in question has been under Israeli control for fifty years so it is very like Israeli territory now. The Israelis may choose to prolong this legal limbo indefinitely as they continue to expand settlements and segregate the population.

Mulroney was a success overall. The GST and free trade are still with us as well as a concern about deficit spending. He also had the right approach on apartheid and capital punishment. The figures look bad for him on the deficit front but both he and Michael Wilson were worried about it and were trying to get it under control. I like the way he spoke in fully formed sentences, even on the phone. He did badly blot his copybook over the Airbus affair - that's a small matter in the big picture, something he will have to live with that does not really affect the rest of us. It remains to be seen whether Trudeau will radically change the fiscal consensus that has persisted since Mulroney's time. I doubt it.

Our own internal motivations are impossible to divine, let alone anybody else's. I judge Chrétien on his results. He brought the deficit down and stabilized our national debt and for that he deserves great praise. As regards the vision thing, he was, again, the anti-Trudeau, an arch-pragmatist. He kept things that worked like the GST and free trade. Both Liberals and Conservatives have benefited from a split opposition and the magic of FPTP but the Conservatives need it more because they are a minority in this country.

We can debate what should have been cut but I hope you agree that SOMETHING had to be cut? Only the most fanatical leftist would argue otherwise. Chretien turned the ship of state around. On fiscal matters, he was Trudeau's opposite.

Cost cutting is painful. Surely, Conservatives understand that much? Chrétien, not Harper, led the way on fighting deficits and he got the job done.

Inches or even pounds only help if you can actually box and take a punch. It was a huge risk for Trudeau in multiple ways but it showed a toughness to him which served him well in the campaign and since. The race angle is nothing special. We are all facing that problem. I don't hold JT to any higher standard there, just as Holy Joe Tories who turn out to be gay don't shock me either. Hypocrisy is a vital political virtue.

Apartheid South Africa was less of an outlier than we like to think. Its mistake was to rigidly codify and legislate the ethnic segregation that existed in many other countries at the time, and still does. PJ O'Rourke had great fun with this selective outrage in his hilarious book 'Holidays in Hell'.

The situation in the WB does have some similarities to RSA. The lives of people, where they can live and work, are determined by their ethnic origin and security is a common theme as well. One supporter of the status quo preferred to call it segregation, unaware of the connotations of that word. Whatever you call it, you have tribal separation. I don't think the Israelis set out with the same intent as Hendrik Verwoerd and his friends but the current product is not that far off. Quality of life-wise, fair to middling: a long way from either Congo at the bottom or the likes of Norway at the top. Clearly, the world is full of tribal conflict far worse than Israel/Palestine; one thing the Israelis get is access and approval at the highest level in the US. Even the Saudis don't get this treatment: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/24/obama-binyamin-netanyahu-congress-speech-boehner-leaks One of the people in the audience for that speech was Arnon Milchan who spied on the US and is still allowed unrestricted access there, a very unusual situation: http://www.timesofisrael.com/film-mogul-power-broker-ex-spy-arnon-milchan-is-central-to-netanyahu-graft-probe/ http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2017/05/10/how-to-smuggle-us-nuclear-triggers-to-israel/ http://www.israellobby.org/krytons/05032017_Heli_Release.pdf

You don't prefer people like you, even slightly?

'Stretcher' does sound Third World but I suspect she was in a hospital bed in the ER and was being monitored.

Here's a good citizen: http://www.obj.ca/article/ottawa-real-estate-veteran-paul-hindo-wins-22m-lotto-649

Actually, from the little I understand of it, I think CRA's general definition of residency for tax liability, based on 'strength of ties', is a model for other countries to follow although I haven't found a single accountant in this country who agrees with me. In the U.K. and Ireland, where 'number of days' and other tests are used, many of the richest locals claim to reside abroad in low tax jurisdictions when they are clearly not exiles at all. Using some legal loophole, one Irish billionaire who claims to 'reside' in Malta has a Dublin mansion with no kitchen. You should reside for tax purposes where you live, and you live where your family lives. If you want to be considered to have left Canada, sever all ties with the country first.

These problems are present in both jurisdictions but we seem to doing even worse in Canada is what I am saying.

I'm afraid it needs to be made legal. We can't carry on with the same failed policies. The conditions in some locations are unacceptable for Canadian kids. I can see there are competing rights here and I feel we need to bring the issue of child welfare more to the fore.

I think an aboriginal person would be preferable in that they could be much tougher. There are native bands that have run things well and the people responsible should be encouraged to take leadership positions nationally.

The current arrangements do not work well for aboriginal kids. The bands should be resettled in larger, more viable communities and far more accountability must be required regarding how money is spent.

Typical Nordic modesty. Here are some reasons for staying under current management which I presume haven't changed too radically in the last five years: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/greenlands-success-shows-canadas-child-mortality-disgrace/article1211264/?arc404=true

Who is leaving, Britain or the EU? They not exactly comparable in size. The UK is finally waking up to the monstrous amount of paperwork and uncertainty that Brexit will bring.

I wouldn't believe any accusation in a divorce and any driver is seconds away from killing a pedestrian.

No, the WAY of selecting the GG is wrong, not Johnston who has been very good at his job, including helping a frail old English lady down the steps of Canada House.