Boges

I personally think Canada is woefully unprepared for a Zombie Apocalypse. Since we're not big fans of guns up here there should be a run on crossbows and axes.

I thought this was kind of Funny. http://www.torontosun.com/2013/02/26/toronto-city-hall-hath-no-fury-like-a-lefty-scorned

When a Canadian Liberal compares a Canadian Conservative to the Tea Party Right of the US they lose some serious credibility in my eyes. It's the same type of fear-mongering Conservatives in the US partake in when they label President Obama a Socialist.

So every law being passed becomes a national referendum. Yeeeeeaaaahhhh Good Luck with that.

It's the advocates fault people didn't understand. What makes you think said people will understand now? Was the Ontario MMP proposal rushed? It was the McGuinty Liberals that proposed it. BTW the McGuinty Liberals came one seat from a majority with an only 2% lead over the PCs.

But the Lower House is based on regional representation. It's just cut up equally amongst separate ridings. If you want to have a proper regional representation then do as the US. Have 2 seats for each province for each and territory. PEI and the Yukon get 2 seats and so does Ontario. The current system seems inconsistent regarding how the seats are assigned. But ultimately it's irrelevant because all the senators are appointed and have no real power to overturn a bill passed in the House of Commons, if you allow an elected Upper House then they should be able to.

I read today that Chief Teresa "I'M STARVING!!!!" Spence is now appealing to the UN. http://whitewraithe.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/facepalm.jpg?w=482

And I disagree with all of them. I'm not familiar with how the House of Lords works in the UK but I know in the US it just allows more complication to trying to find agreement in the legislative branch. The will of the Senate is useless if the House disagrees; you still see a stalemate. The Senate makes itself even more irrelevant because ultimately you need 60 seats to avoid a potential fillibuster. You have Senators in New York and California that represent a huge number of people having no more say than someone from Alaska, it seems anti-democratic. I understand the idea initially when the US was essentially a bunch of different countries. But now it seems unneeded.

Electing them. The Senate in both countries are redundant.

It can be done, it just would be stupid.

I bet you also completely read the terms and conditions of your auto insurance or cell phone contract. It's not like I think Ben Affleck should be charged with a crime. I just think it's a douchie move. I like historical movies but I don't want to watch this one. Argo was the subject of the Editorial in today's Sun. http://www.torontosun.com/2013/02/25/canada-snubbed-in-hollywood-ending-2

An elected Senate would be a mess in Canada. You can't have someone who gets elected by the 12 million people in Ontario have and equal vote as someone from 150,000 PEI. An Ontario Senator would have the largest official mandate of anyone in Canadian history. They do it in the US, but they have 50 States, we only have 13 Provinces and Territories. The Senate should be scrapped it's a sinkhole of money and is only useful for patronage.

That would be ever worse. You fight a campaign against someone, beat them but they still get a seat because they're on a list. Similar as to why the ranking model would never fly. You lose the election but you end up winning because more people select you their second choice than the winner. BTW The only reason Harper appointed Fortier was because he was completely shut out in Montreal. He wanted a Montreal based cabinet minister. I don't think he's doing that anymore.

One other thing about MMP. Using the 2011 federal election as a case study, since people object to a party winning a healthy majority with 40% of the vote. It wouldn't really change the balance of power. The CPC still won't the popular vote, therefore they would have the most List MPs to add to their majority of of representative MPs.

List MPs have no real constituency and no real mandate since they are just put on a list, likely based on service to the party. A party may stuff the list with party hacks that are horrible at campaigning. I see this as patronage. Would a "List MP" be allowed in cabinet? Where would their office be? If you like that, fine, but as a democracy the only way to change the system we've seen since confederation would be to take it to the people via a referendum or at the very least have a party put changing the system in their platform. None of these things have been done yet.

I'm sure the CBC is applying for a government grant to make one.

I love that response, people don't understand this system so we shouldn't ask them their opinion on the change and just do it. Nice defense of democracy. If there's a will for electoral change then perhaps the NDP will put it in their platform. Oh wait they became the top opposition party by basically dominating one province. So perhaps they aren't to eager to change the system either.

Yeah I'm sure after seeing Argo many people actually googled the truth about the event. The movie was marketed as a top secret event that just recently became public. I remember seeing Bryan Cranston promoting the video during an episode of Breaking Bad promoting the movie that way.

Team Paul Martin did a pretty good job elbowing Chretien and his loyalists out.

I suspect that could be attributed to the popularity the Bush administration received due to his response to 9/11. Did Laura Bush get to announce the Best Picture Winner?

Well that's the thing. Many Liberals have more in common with the Conservatives so a merger isn't a simple solution to remove the 35-40% of people that vote Conservative out of power.

You're being represented by someone locally. In our system we only vote for our local representative. A system of popular votes would take local representation completely out of the equation. You're just giving people seats based on a national vote count. The only solution is a Mix-Member system where some representatives are local and others are popular. This system has been defeated twice in votes in Ontario and BC. In Ontario, the province that pretty much decides federal elections, it was defeated soundly in 2007 Going to keep trying? I think a popular vote model works in smaller countries but voters in different parts of this country need their own representatives because Ontarians are very different from Quebecers, Easter Coaster, Westerners and people in BC. It's a big country and the House of Commons is a good representation of the will of a nation on the whole.

You mean Hitler didn't die that way? I think there's a difference between a stylized movie like that and a movie that's supposed to be telling the story of a secret mission. I think the comparison to the submarine movie is an apt one. U571 I think. Americans weren't even involved in capturing the enigma machine. The movie was almost completely made up.

Apparently they aren't getting a special prosecutor to go after him. Is there anything else people want to go after him on?

I actually wanted to see Argo, until I heard it kind of ignored or at least minimized the Canadian involvement. I was assuming Lincoln would would. I have the opportunity to see The Artist on both TMN and Netflix and have yet to find the motivation to see a "Talkie" The Oscars are a good show, but they often get it wrong when it comes to best picture.