I am Groot

Yes. I agree that this is the view Putin wants people to have. Those who have studied the man merely laugh at the suggestion Putin was ever anything but implacably hostile towards the West. Those who know Russia the best, are, of course, the nations which live closest to it. Those are the ones you seem to be suggesting above we should have left to Russia and not brought into NATO for fear of offending the kleptocrats in Moscow. That, in effect, we should have left them to Moscow's tender mercies and simply hoped there would be no attempt to put the old Soviet Union back together by force. And that if there was, well, they'd leave us alone, turn against us last. That's a cowardly way to run foreign policy. But we don't run foreign policy based on hope or cowardice (Canada exepted). No one with more than half a brain does. That's mighty white of you there, Hoss. This tries to equate a brutal authoritarian government attacking democratic countries near it with what we would do if a brutal authoritarian country attacked nations next to us. It assigns ownership of free nations near to Russia to Russia out of fear Russia will be angry at us if we don't. It masks itself as thoughtful geopolitics but it's just raw cowardice and short-sighted thinking. Russia didn't attack Ukraine because it was being hemmed in. It attacked Ukraine because it could, because Putin felt both Ukraine and the West were weak, and he could take the place over in a fortnight while the West wrung its hands and shook its collective fingers but ultimately did nothing. The "smart" Republicans you speak of are political opportunists who could not possibly care less how many people die there or in their own country or in their own state as long as they can craft a message which keeps them in power and makes them money. These are men and women clad in jewels and fine clothing who would yawn and examine their nails as they walk past children being beaten to death. They have no morals, no integrity, no patriotism, and no values. I have nothing but contempt for them. Its sad to see some Canadians doing their best to emulate them.

Sorry, chum. But in those days, the early days of Harper, he expressed nearly complete disdain for both Russia and China, and wanted nothing to do with either. No one much cared about Russia, but China, woah. The Liberals and NDP were AGHAST. How dare he not go and visit China!? How dare he not lead a trade delegation over there!? How dare he not show his admiration for China and its accomplishments!? The Liberals, in particular, have always had a fascination for China, which extends from his father to junior. Even today junior can't say a bad word about the 'basic dictatorship' he admires for its efficiency. And he has put not one drachma towards our national defense or security as the military rusts away from neglect. As for the NDP (lol) give them a majority and they'll take us out of NATO and Norad and plead with Russia to respect our neutrality. Blaming Harper for not seeing how things were going while the NDP and Liberals STILL admire the Chinese is kind of heavy partisanship.

Disagree. Traditional conservatives are also for smaller (but big enough to do what's needed) government, as well as a strong national defense and national security. Unfortunately, we haven't had much work towards any of that lately out of conservative leadership - and that includes Harper, once the war was done. But there is a difference between making a careful assessment of the rising dangers of the world (and I accept they were not nearly as obvious in Harper's time) and buying nonsensical conspiracies. Traditional conservatives also see Russia as the enemy while too many on the "republican" side admire Putin for his 'strength'. I'm not going to accept putting temporary pandemic isolation and vaccination into the same category as national security or national defense. Therein lies the difference between conservatism and trumpist republicanism.

Well, the soft on crime approach isn't limited to BC, unfortunately. Just look at this charming individual. The jury heard about parts of Barkhadle’s monstrous past, including evidence about three other vicious sex attacks on on different women. One survivor testified: “I couldn’t breathe.” (Barkhadle strangled her, then raped her as her infant slept in another room.) So, while Barkhadle, a longtime sex predator and crack dealer, is finally going to prison, this was far from his first trip through the Elgin Street courthouse. He was last set free on Oct. 26, 2016, after Justice Heather Perkins-McVey denied a Crown application to brand Barkhadle a dangerous offender, which would have kept him behind bars for an indeterminate sentence. The Crown also brought an application to designate Barkhadle a long-term offender, which would have come with strict supervision once he was released into the community. Perkins-McVey also denied that application. Five months later, Barkhadle would rape and kill the single mom in this case. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/guilty-mohammed-barkhadle-convicted-on-charge-of-first-degree-murder-in-womans-2017-death

Oh eat me. Someone like me has never complained about more doctors, more mental health, more addiction treatment and rehab, Even though I'm one of the people who actually pays the taxes that support it all. And what does that get me? I pay several thousand dollars a year to be a member of a private medical practice where I can get proper access to doctors who won't rush through whatever issue I might present. The ones where we pay half a million per apartment or townhouse? Good drugs are their problem, not their solution. Incarceration and forced treatment should be society's solution. If we had anyone to do the treating.

Can not.

I read this on the CBC site, and felt an immediate sense of recognition. It's talking about the UCP in Alberta, but what the author said could also be applied to conservatives everywhere. The two factions within the party simply do not speak the same political language and as has become clear during the recent leadership race, they don't speak the same social language either. In my original piece, I identified the two factions as conservatives and republicans: conservatives being aligned with traditional Canadian conservatism, republicans being aligned with the ascendant philosophy within the Republican Party in the United States. And yes. I see that in the federal party, and in other provincial parties, and most especially online. There are conservatives, as I feel I am, and then those whose viewpoints seem to have been wrenched away from traditional Canadian conservatism and into... whatever the hell the Republicans now consider proper policy. Assuming they ever develop proper policy other than owning the libs and admiring Vladimir Putin. It's not that I don't agree with their resentment and contempt for 'woke' and its anti-intellectual, anti-merit ideology of paternalistic identity politics victim worship. I don't at all mind incorporating that into my conservatism. After all, my conservatism has always been about merit and fairness, about equality and not equity. But the conspiracy nonsense is not something I or most other conservatives can ever accept. And yes, that includes their absurd Trumpian beliefs on vaccines and the proper precautions against infection. My approval of Poilievre took a radical downturn when he started mouthing these things. And I, like most conservatives, are watching him somewhat warily to ensure that was just a temporary political ploy that will fade as we get near election time. Also, having such an appalling alternative in Trudeau buys him a lot of compromise from conservatives. For now. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/conservatives-alberta-united-conservative-party-annual-general-meeting-edmonton-1.6623529

Don't be silly. The competitive handgun shooting will continue as usual on the streets of Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Montreal and other cities.

Oh is that all? They just need mental health support? Well that's not a problem! We've got so many doctors sitting around doing nothing, after all! My best friend's daughter wanted to commit suicide at seventeen. Lilly white, middle-class, straight-A student from suburbia. They put her in hospital for a few weeks, gave her some drugs, then told her to get lost. A psychiatrist? Nope, none available. Especially those who deal with youths because they're overwhelmed. Maybe in a couple of years? Until then they decided her school would see to her. Her school didn't. Nobody got the forms. Now because she had capable parents they were able to yell at the school and at the hospital enough to figure out what happened, and get her off the drugs she was only supposed to take for a couple of months - after almost a year, and pay for private therapy. But the system is a hot mess. Okay. Even for pretty, middle-class white girls who are straight-A students. Now what do you think the system is going to do for some street addict on the lower east side? There are no doctors. There are no psychiatrists, psychologists or therapists. End of story. Every province in this country dropped the ball on training new doctors and is only now sluggishly starting to approve a few more seats in medical schools, a few more residency positions in hospitals. Mental health support? Why don't you just suggest they all be given a castle in Spain while you're at it? Yeah, because that's never been done before. Building housing for homeless people!? What an idea!

The police are not the issue.

Are there a lot of cases where crowns asked for remand, or high bail, particularly for violent offenders, and judges are denying it due to this bill? I have not heard it mentioned as any part of the issue involved.

But the people who enforce it are provincial. Provincial crowns appointed by the provincial justice minister working for the provincial ministry of justice. Most criminal cases, 95%, are heard by provincial court judges appointed by the province.

Something in the water out there in BC I guess. Definitely screwed up bleeding heart justice system https://www.tricitynews.com/highlights/surrey-man-who-killed-girlfriend-burned-body-gets-seven-years-5973449

Well, if I didn't really believe it existed it would be kind of odd for me to be outraged by it. And what is a 'hard-boiled right-winger"? I don't really think I qualify. This may be a case of you presuming those who don't agree with you must be the evil and nefarious people way out there who are deplorable and bad and immoral and all that sort of thing. As long as they're threatened enough. But I have a feeling this sort of thing is going to cease having as much influence as our Asian population grows. I have yet to meet one who does more than roll his or her eyes in contempt at all the woke stuff and the endless claims of victimhood by other groups. I sense a profound lack of sympathy and growing antipathy towards such 'victim' groups among both whites and asians.

This article would seem to fit in nicely here. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/the-justice-system-that-refuses-to-stop-releasing-violent-criminals

Ah, I see. So you disbelieve something I've said? Well, how grownups deal with that in discussion is to question what was said they disbelief. Or at least point it out. But you've done neither. Just kind of... sulked. That'd an interesting paragraph. You invent a position for me, then suggest it's some sort of broad based behavioural pattern among 'you folks', whoever that might be, towards what you regard as social justice but many others regard as unfair and paternalistic racial quotas and regulations. If you detect 'bemused disgust' in people regarding your beliefs you can ask some of the more ardent Trump supporters to sympathize as I'm sure their own odd beliefs generate similar attitudes on a regular basis. You're not going to convince me you have any sort of sense to your arguments by such nonsensical accusations, you know. In fact, that's the sort of language that really only signals to like-minded people that you're one of them. It doesn't communicate anything else nor convince anyone your beliefs have any coherent logic or reality to them. Just like to point out virtually none of the abuses you speak of were ever proven in court. It was considered rude to ask for such things as evidence. Not to mention colonialist in not 'believing' the victims, or alleged victims. Or whatever. A few people said things happened. The government offered billions of dollars in compensation to victims. Astonishingly, many, many, many more victims came forward to tell stories and claim their money. Proof? Not needed. Anyone asking for proof, or even evidence would have drawn outrage, much as I have for asking for evidence of systemic racism.

And yet you chose to pretend you didn't recognize it rather than deal with the point I made. We cherish children, and have for our lifetimes. But back in the day, I won't say people didn't love their kids because they did. But it was very much 'spare the rod, spoil the child', and kids routinely got the hell beaten out of them. Nor did anyone believe them if they talked about being molested. And it was that way right through the 1970s no matter what the race of the child or family. Nobody seemed to believe stuff like that happened. We have stories of kids telling the police and getting lectured about lying and then being brought home to be spanked. In the 1970s and 1980s. There was nothing unique about children being abused in residential schools. I'm absolutely sure it happened in orphanages, in juvenile detention centres, and even in boarding schools for comparatively well-off children. Not to mention at day schools, churches, etc. I'm not surprised some children were beaten/molested there. I'd have been astonished if they hadn't been.

If you truly can't recognize such obvious sarcasm you might consider treatment yourself. The schools 'indians' weren't sent to.

And that never happened in white schools, regular schools, boarding schools, never happened to kids in the custody of the childrens' aid societies. Never happened in churches or boy scout outings. Never happened in their own homes. And you think that means giving preferential treatment to an immigrant kid because his or her skin is black or brown?

The change in single parent families in the black community has been enormous since 1960. It's rise has been in concert with the rise of violence in that community. I've seen nothing about native reservations but heresy because we don't really study things racially here. But this popped up in a search. It's ten years old but, I think, revealing. It's also revealing that its ten years old and nothing newer seems to be easily found. I think it's this which is causing both the criminality and the lower economic success in these community, rather than 'systemic racism' which is being reflexively blamed. I disagree. If you take the position that there is no real systemic racism, as I have, then you need to come up with other ideas as to the cause of such different outcomes between communities. Most of that difference is due to behaviour caused by culture. The Asians (and Jews) do better than the general white community. Why? Because they don't have children until they're married, stay married, or at least, the fathers stay in their children's lives more, and the parents insist on both discipline, respect and hard work at school for their kids greater than any other communities. Ask the schools who the discipline problems are. It's not the Asian kids. It's not the Jews. But western society seems to shy away from confronting communities which are variously labelled as 'troubled', 'challenged', 'at risk', etc. Suggesting any of their problems are due to their own behaviour is likened to 'blaming the victim'. Of course, that suggests they ARE, in fact, victims, which robs them of responsibility both for what is happening and for doing something about it. Which some in those communities apparently prefer.

I'm not in much dispute here. I don't have any inside information of how they spend their money in Chicago, but I'm pretty sure we don't do it that way in Canada. As to the cause of crime, or perhaps more importantly violent crime I go with those who say it's the destruction of the family unit and male parental authority in the Black community, and now in the indigenous communities in Canada. Many native reservations are festering social sores much like American inner cities and filled with too many young men who haven't been shown any discipline, and who are under the belief they have no economic future anyway so resort to crime.

I'm still not buying that the things we did in the past had a devastating impact on the people whose parents and grandparents didn't live here until after it was all over anyway. You might be able to make that case in the US towards Blacks, though even there it's fairly obvious the major social and economic failure of the Black community is due to fatherless families, and fatherless families were the exception until the late 1960s.

This is incorrect. The statistics for 'racialized' in Canada do not include indigenous people, who are counted separately. The term 'visible minority' also does not include indigenous people in government statistics. The last stats I found in a cursory search are for 2019 which give numbers from 2017, but that says over 38% of persons accused of homicide in that year were indigenous. When added to the racialized category you get 29% of homicides committed by whites. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jf-pf/2019/may01.html