tml12

I do not think I would use the term "inevitable." Prior to the sponsorship scandal, we weren't hearing much about sovereignty, it was a dormant issue. However, I do agree that I am seeing more apathy as of late. Whereas in the past, my friends from Ontario and Halifax were staunch federalists and my friends from the West were a bit more apathetic, now more of my Ontario friends are starting to say "let's just let the question go away...and if you guys vote for it then just go, whatever." That kind of "whatever" attitude may put the pressure on Ottawa to encourage federalism in Quebec but, alas, that can't really happen anymore. At this point, Quebecers will make their choice. I believe another referendum is inevitable...but the result? It's anyones guess at this point.

I really think Chirac ought to announce he won't seek a third term at this point.

Yes Burns, Bush won the second time. What is your point? No one is even talking about that anymore... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It was the 1 year anniversary of Bush's re-election where he won despite an all out assault on him by the liberal media, and where he garnered more votes than any prez in US history. No one is talking about that anymore?! Surely you jest. The Democrats are still spinning conspiracy theories about Diebold voting machines. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I hadn't read about the Democrats talking about it but it wouldn't surprise me.

Don't worry I am sure the Liberals will figure out something. They don't want to go to the polls or risk losing the government while the Conservatives are within margin of error.

Funny you said that, because that's exactly what *I* remember doing last night before *I* fell asleep. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Imagine the people who wrote it...

Doubtful. Bong smoke doesn't seem to be helping you get the point. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The mental picture associated with the last few posts is unbelievable.

No I cannot. I don't really mind a 14 year old having sex with another teenager. But with someone who is in university or older? It just doesn't seem right. The problem is, a lot of 14 and 15 year olds are having sex. A friend of mine was working in the YMCA and was talking with 15 year olds about sex. The only problem? 1/3 of them were already having sex on a regular basis. Is it right or is it wrong? The question then shifts to a moral one.

CBC had several stories about this starting with the dayit happened. You are not really qualified to comment about what CBC covers and does not cover because you don't listen to or watch it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I did watch the CBC the day that CTV reported the Cuban defection from the Communist Utopia of Cuba. I saw nothing on the CBC News. It took them days to report it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The CBC is most definitely liberal. Whether or not you are of the left or not you must admit this.

In that case, I would not be against paying us to have kids. However, I do not think it is appropriate to put all immigrants in the same boat. Some are bad, some are good, etc...I don't like to generalize. As for the dual citizenship issue, I support it, although that is only because I like having that option. Also, if Canada allows dual citizenship why would some immigrants never become Canadian? I don't understand your argument there.

How each MP voted on that Bill can be found here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus...htm#SOB-1387411

Thanks for posting the original link I had not seen it, only the BBC article reporting on the study. You are correct that Canadians come in eighth overall considering the multiple criteria of: behaviour; politeness; willingness to learn the lingo; enthusiasm to try the local delicacies; and how much money they put into the local economy. Apparently Canadians are last (alongside Russians and British) in the category of politeness which, as the BBC article puts it, "Americans were judged the most courteous and the British the rudest, alongside the Russians and Canadians." And that is what I based my earlier statement on, since it is the only time Canadians are mentioned in the BBC article. The direct Expedia link says basically the same thing; i.e., "‘Have a nice day’ Americans are the most polite, out-charming Germans and Japanese. Britons are judged to be the rudest, followed by Russians and the usually placid Canadians." Another thing to consider is the points assigned. The top three countries overall were the Germans, Americans, and Japanese who scored 41, 32, and 24 points, respectively. Canadians only scored 4 points so there is a large gap there. And let's not forget the real moral of this story. Canadians were not at the top. The world does not have the same image of you that you have of yourselves. In fact, the evidence is the opposite; Canadians are considered to be among the rudest citizens in the world when travelling overseas. And Americans are not the rude, arrogant, "Ugly-Americans" that we are so often called by Canadians. In fact, the evidence is just the opposite. Americans are polite to others when travelling overseas, exhibit decency, and basically get along quite well with others. It is time to bury this myth. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Unfortunately I believe this "myth" is ingrained in Canadian culture. Just the other day I heard two men talking in a coffee shop. One was a Canadian from Toronto and the other was his American friend. The American was talking about the Kashechewan water crisis. The American used the term "Indian" at one point and the Canadian said "Indian? Canadians will know you're American, we don't use the term Indian here." While we may use the official term "aboriginal" more here, I cannot tell you how many times I have heard Indian spoken by other Canadians and read it in the local papers. But I guess that is just what it comes down to...

OK putting it that way then the argument, in principle, must be more about 11 or 12-year olds going on the Internet and having sexually explicit chats. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I would think it unlikely that is going to be a major problem. The kids that age I know of hardly even think about sex except as something icky. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In that case, then I wouldn't go crazy other than to say we should still be wary of predators on the Internet.

Yes, I've already seen all of this. The irony of this is that the French gleefully and lovingly showed every second of every minute of the LA riots, not to mention emphasising the racial element of the New Orleans floods. They are always acting superior, as though such things could never happen in France. Another irony. The US is much better at integrating people into its society. You don't see these kinds of huge Muslim areas in the US, though they are present in much of Europe. The Europeans have followed similar paths to congratulating immigrants on their cultures and funding their efforts at NOT integrating. This is what they get for their trouble. Canada, of course, has followed the same path as the Europeans. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This is coming down to the classic social science debate of multiculturism (Canada, Europe) vs. melting pot (U.S.) The melting pot model is more conservative, essentially, "you come here you become one of us, and leave the other stuff at home." The idea is you move to the states and you learn English and you bake apple pies and you say the Pledge of Allegiance. That is being challenged by American liberal who argue for a multicultural society, i.e. affirmative action (one is a Canadian American, a Lebanese America, a Chinese American, etc.) where people essentially become "ghettoized," as we see in France. What do I prefer? Well, I think as a Quebecer we have the most conservative society in Canada in terms of immigration. When you come here, and to immigrate here, you must learn French as a principle prerequisite for fulling participating in this society. You need not be fluent, but when you leave the island of Montreal you'd better know more than just "bonjour." I think this works better and facilitates integration into the community.

Yes. That is exactly what I'm insinuating. The bill did not "keep the age at 14." The bill REDUCED the age to 14, let's get that straight. Let's try to avoid the nazi-like technique of doing something and then claiming to do the exact opposite. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes I know that...it was 18 before that. The legal age for consent should probably be 15 or 16 but I wouldn't call an election over it. Also, I believe that 14 year old shouldn't be able to have sex with anyone over 30. That would not be healthy in either case...even someone in their 20s...I think a 14 (or even a 13) year old having sex with someone in or around their age is OK. A bigger debate is how we arbitrarily decide these ages (i.e. alcohol, tobacco, sex, age of majority) which are not only different in different countries but also different in the same country (i.e. apparently you can't drink and smoke in Ontario until you're 19 but here you can smoke and drink at 18.) I think it is all rather stupid and that we would be better off without any of these laws which are just dumb I think.

The real reason why I don't agree is there is no real heir apparent. If there were he would probably be gone already. It is very possible for the CPC to hold this lead for a few weeks. But it is all up to Jacko. Harper isn't going to risk getting screwed by the NDs again. Guess we will have to see what Layton says on Monday.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> For sure. Essentially, Layton's dilemma is whether or not to call an election and risk losing his influence (which he obviously would in a Conservative minority situation). I think Layton will dither a bit more and then continue supporting the Liberals.

This is true. We cannot have a truly educated discussion about this until we know whether or not they knew her age. Otherwise, it is just another case of the Internet is bad, etc. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Assume they thought she was 14. So what? What's wrong with having sex with fourteen year olds? Three of our federal political parties voted in favour of adults having sex with 14 year olds. And there was no great rush of national anger or disgust. Did it change a single vote? Is one person who voted Liberal or NDP going to vote Tory next election because the Liberals believe it's okay for adults to have sex with 14 year olds? You don't see any of the Liberal or NDP supporters here renouncing their party, do you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> OK putting it that way then the argument, in principle, must be more about 11 or 12-year olds going on the Internet and having sexually explicit chats.

There was a poll on aol.ca earlier today. Apparently 49% of Canadians do not think we could have riots, like the ones in France, in this country. Aside from the fact that these people probably live in the middle of nowhere it is extremely frightening to think that we could not be ready for this.

That is one of the most overly simplified logical arguments I have ever read in my life. Are you in grade 3? Seriously, are you insinuating that those who advocate keeping the age at 14 have child porn on their computers? That is not only a fallacious argument, it reveals your inability to be able to sustain a valid argument.

That pretty much sums it up right there. I do find it interesting how Belinda was there. Shouldn't Adscam be one of her files? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> She was drinking tea and eating brownies with Shiela at 24 Sussex Drive.

I think that if it wasn't of quebec, the provinces wouldn't existe anymore... because the liberal federal couldn't care less about respecting the provincial "juridictions". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How so?

To be fair, that article does not directly say the CIA is rioting in Paris, it says the CIA has financed riots in the past. I do not think the CIA would give money to Muslims to riot in Paris because they don't like the French.

That is a very good assessment Renegade.

Did you expect him to say something different?

I have noticed a lot of federalists that I know are increasing becoming convinced that the federal gov't should get completely out of funding programs in provincial juristition and lower taxes accordingly. I assume this would be a good basis to start a discussions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only political party that is proposing anything close to that is the Conservatives. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And its not a surprise that the bloc get along very well with the conservative. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The Bloc supports the Tories on this issue because they want to limit Ottawa's interference in Quebec...they couldn't care less about the implications in the ROC.