Leafless

Well then, why don't you post it so we all can see the political EXPERIENCE Obama has, even compared to Hillary's? Post both. Stop trying to feed your minority fantasies, you are halluncinating.

Obviously, you DON'T think what I say is funny or you would not be making a condescending effort to trivialize what I say. And thanks for identifying yourself BubberMiley.

Well when you consider Obama is the creation of MSM and in reality is a 'NOBODY' with a blank resume and with a name of 'Hussein' who will be 'Commander -in-Chief' while the nation is fighting the 'Hussein's' of the world is proof extreme liberalism is alive and well. Hang your head in shame Melanie as your type is helping to destroy not only the U.S. but Canada.

I agree with what you are saying but the problem you are talking about is complex and leaves society with no real answer relating from discrimination to extreme violence by minority groups and government should not place that burden on the majority of its innocent citizens in a democratic country. That problem is: http://www.erces.com/journal/articles/arch.../v01/v01_05.htm

You would also have a hard time believing our country is politically dysfunctional due to the political socialistic havoc extreme liberalism has created and that you are obviously part of. So laugh on Melanie as the only ones who think what I am saying is funny are the ones who denounce democracy in the name of traitorous aspirations driven by extreme liberalism.

Like I said, I would not want our poor U.S. friends to get suckered in with an individual that is charismatic and only turn around and do the same thing that was done in Canada and that is feed their minority culture with ideologies that are harmful to the majority culture. And I did not say minorities have no value and said there simply should be restrictions on individuals from minority groups running for president in the U.S. or PM in our country. Those suggested restrictions would be no minority would be allowed to run for president or PM in Canada unless their numbers equalled 50% of the largest cultural group. I can see you are in favour of allowing a small minority group to destroy the country. And why wouldn't you if you belong to a minority. It is your gain, right.

You mean the undemocratic arrogant audacity of a bilingual loving Liberal premier (Dalton Mc.Guinty) to show such disdain for the majority English speaking population of Ontario without the primary condition of demanding the implementation of at least, a city of Ottawa municipal referendum since the province of Ontario is NOT officially bilingual. Mike Harris premier of the previous Ontario provincial government was asked the same question from French groups several times but refused on the grounds it is not a necessary requirement. Whether the City of Ottawa is our nations capital or not, is entirely irrevelent relating to undemocratic IMPOSED language requirements. Bilingual language policies is the responsibility of the federal government in provinces that are not 'officially bilingual' , which is well represented in all entities of the federal government in Ottawa. And oblivious to you as you don't want to identify what exactly you are talking about or don't know what you are talking about. It is obsolete when you fail to include important demographics like the fact we are part of North America and not the rest of the world. Since the U.S. like Canada stretches from sea to sea and the majority primary language of both countries being approx. 333 -million people is English, I dare say French is totally obsolete with basically the only people speak it are residents of Quebec, Canada, with a population of about 6-million people who speak the French language.

IOW you are telling me it is none of my business, which is a typical lefty tyrannical response. If I was running for president of the U.S., I certainly would include that information. Which demonstrates even with these rather primitive people, it is a very serious problem. Your very response indicates you are one of another culture and are biased against the larger majority White English speaking culture culture of Canada and favour volatile minority representation to feed and harbour minority ideologies, like that which have been proven in this country with the harmful political actions of Quebec PM,s.

Yes, and under their own conditions and thriving in an atmosphere of a segregated community away from the larger common culture with customs that greatly help personal careers. Like many other cultures Jews have a bias preventing personal association with members of another culture. This is the problem with multiculturalism in general as it encourages a bias against groups that segregate themselves and disassociate themselves from the larger common culture of the general population and even minority cultures. We have these serious problems and biases between cultures of other countries. Why would we foolish enough to create these same conditions within a country with a single common culture with the inevitable result of destroying our primary culture?

Trudeau was right about Meech Lake. But with Quebec for years now, voluntarily and unilaterally implementing discriminating language laws and the rejection of federal type bilingual policies, they have succeeded in segregating themselves with no one to blame but Quebec itself.

The Canadian view is our Canadian history. British history is our past history. Currently and since confederation all CANADIANS contribute to OUR country. How can you be overlooked if you are a Canadian citizen regardless of your culture or race? Why don't you admit you are not compatible with Canadian culture and migrate back to your country of origin and stop screwing up our country with your traitorous views.

Meech Lake is about the only piece of Quebec legislation Trudeau was against for the simple reason he did not want to see Quebecers segregated. Borg is right.

This is what Mark Steyn said that got him into trouble with 'Canadian Human Rights Commission'. http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...c58&k=16602 This of course does not say much for the federal government who allow Muslims into this country WITHOUT knowing for sure they are terrorist. With the terrorist track record Muslims hold for atrocities around the world one could possibly wonder why this group is not banned from immigrating to Canada initially since identifying terrorist is next to impossible to determine and since there is 'just' requirement being 'national security'. I think Mark Steyn is only reiterating what most intelligent Canadians are thinking anyways.

To have Quebec 'officially distinct' as part of our Charter makes all the difference in the world. Quebec could implement laws and policies based on different aspects of being 'officially distinct'. Case in point. Federal official languages meant initially to be served in the language of your choice relating to federal services. So look what happened. It opened doors so that Francophones could work in the French language in the federal public service. IOW, it created an unjust, undemocratic, discriminatory French society within the federal public service resulting and to where it created conditions where federal jobs became mandatory bilingual and usually filled by Francophones, ignoring the fact the country is de-facto unilingual English. Look what happened to some municipalities in provinces to date, OUTSIDE the jurisdiction of the federal government. They adopted undemocratically again, a mirror image of the federal official bilingual policy making the French language compulsory in a city such as Ottawa, Ontario a majority English speaking city, resulting in stealing jobs from the English speaking majority and making employment difficult to for the majority unilingual English population of Ottawa to gain employment unless they became bilingual in a province that is NOT classified as being 'officially bilingual. There are other bilingual issues I won't get into such as a proposed bylaw forcing private employers business signs mandatory bilingual in nature. I would love Quebecers, like many other Canadians, if they are married to an obsolete French language to that extent and that they are unable to generate adequate French job opportunities for their Quebec French population to move to France or separate once and for all. Where are the federal politicians who are allowing this to happen and are not supporting English majority rights both under their jurisdiction and out of their jurisdiction?

Your poll makes no sense. The question you ask: How would Canada be more united with Canada in the superior position as a 'distinct society'? How would Quebec be unequal if they were in a superior position as a 'distinct society'? A superior postion cannot be seen as bad for a have not province. It should be noted Trudeau did not agree with Quebec being a distinct society. http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/...87/mlr-ch5.html In my estimation Quebec is a distinct society anyways, since Mr. Harper designated Quebec as a 'nation within Canada' with distinct language rights Charter language rights Sec.16, Constitution Act, 1982. Mr. Trudeau was correct as Quebec now possess rights that other provinces do not have i.e.-immigration, French charter, etc. and as a result Quebec does pose a threat to unified federal authority.

Well, it is just a matter of time before all you country dwellers will be flocking to the city anyways. When gas reaches the $2.00-$3.00 level or more, you will all be mothballing your tin boxes anyways.

He did and became Christian. But how do you know the forces of Islamic law won't hunt him down, as apparently he could be subject to the death penalty. All I am pointing out is this man is problematic. He is not a home grown American with American parents. A country has a right to make and enforce rules that could threaten the security of that country. Canada is a perfect example of what I am talking about. The English speaking majority of Canada has been humiliated and subjected to derogatory, discriminating linguistic laws at the hands of a linguistic minority that represents less than 25% of Canada's population. This is undemocratic and for this to happen suggest Canada is no better than a banana republic. So what! Others home grown Canadians would easily replace them. This applies to ALL minority groups. If the French don't represent 50% or more of the largest cultural majority, certainly, they would not be able to run anyone for prime minister. No he still has only one agenda, the anti-White religious one with the conditions of his church that sound like a Black racial bible. Islamic law says he can't move away from his Muslim religion, but I would not consider this part of his religious agenda that he cast aside, but simply a worrysome threat that hangs over his head, that could turn out to be a serious problem a some future date. Link please. Being anti-gay or pro life is a personal discession based on morals. This does not compare to Obama's church that has anti-White religious conditions. And Obama wants to be president! Mr.Harper's church is a Christian church, with no Black racist agenda, period.

If there is anything to convince people to walk or take a bus this is it.

There is no difference. Both are inappropiate and are racially based. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people Your question is a racially bated question. Sorry, I don't answer this type of question so you can turn around and label that person a 'racist'. Most democratic societies are multicultural in nature and include the races you speak of without any type of fanfare and without someone like you asking derogatory racial questions. Why don't you grow up.

What you are saying is silly. Naturally I do not condone violence and their are many views relating to the White/Black conflict, but in reality members of the KKK are home grown citizens of their own country trying to defend their perceived or real cultural interests. To-day the KKK are pretty well inactive. Muslims are not and their cultural interest are worldwide and include the slaughter and murder of innocent victims who are no way tied in to Muslim cultural and religious ideologies.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't have a hate for no race or culture. All I am concerned with is allowing the majority culture of a country to maintain that status and not be undermined by a minority racial/cultural conflict caused by inappropriate political controls of any given minority. I would hate to see my American friends go down the cultural tube as we have in Canada by having our own federal government sell out majority cultural interest as with the case of Quebec and to a lesser degree foreign immigrants.

You are simplifying by suggesting the difference is comparable to differentiating a male vs. a female. Digest this, and tell me how one is supposed to identify an extremist, unless of course they found out by investigation or by accident. All Muslims could be recognized as being extremist as the burden of proof lies with Muslims and not hapless, innocent Canadians. http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/1977

His entire post pits race against race.

He can't move away from that religion. I believe any minority group must prove itself as being politically stable and comprise as a group of being at least 50% ( or more) to the largest cultural majority before being allowed to run a candidate for the presidency or in our case prime minister to help prevent a conflict of interest that could be harmful to the larger majority interest. Not different but one with a racial agenda, one Obama obviously supports or he would not be a member of that all Black congregation. Does Harpers church have a written racial agenda? I have no idea what you mean by this, please explain.

Heritage and Canadian identity are two separate things. I know many White Canadians who could not care less about their past heritage. Most White Canadians don't have their personal cultural baggage tied around their necks, unlike the rash of emotionally disturbed immigrants who come to Canada for a better life, including I take it for granted, a superior culture.