sharkman
-
Posts
9,209 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by sharkman
-
-
If we consider the recent tirade their leader went on regarding Israel, it sheds light on things. His rantings betrays him. I don't think he'd sacrifice his regime, but use the new influence that nukes bring to pressure whomever he doesn't like, and menace the borders of Iraq just because their gov. is now friendly to the U.S. And they could try to nuke Israel.
Israel is now sweating what to do about this new threat. They could take out the offending Iranian facilities, but that would have a bad downside. But is it worse than a nuke going off in Israel?
-
So this Moore guy (unfortunate name) is only 28? Good grief, he's at 12 years away from being an age most Canadians would vote for. Bring back Mulroney, even with his reduced physical capacity he could knock the stuffing out of Martin in a debate any freakin' day. I wonder when he'll announce his preferences for this election.
-
Everyone has missed the boat here completely...the only thing to be "done" about softwood lumber is to allow the appeal processes of NAFTA and the WTO to run their course.
One of the only sane commentaries on this issue has come from former U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The WTO ruled in favour of the U.S., NAFTA ruled in favour of Canada...both rulings come with appeal rights / procedures. These are the treaties we have, so we have to follow the process.
We cannot demand money be paid before final rulings are made...it's that simple. And to breach NAFTA as a way to force compliance with NAFTA is stupid. At least right now we can show the tribunals that we are in compliance and the U.S. is not.
If we ever want to see duties refunded we can't put ourselves in a position where a tribunal can say...oh well, you guys are doing it too...
And besides, what makes anyone think that the U.S. will just pay whatever we say they should for oil & gas? They won't. And before they are totally screwed due to lack of supply, we'll be long since destroyed due to a lack of an economy.
Unless someone can tell me how we re-route our pipelines across the ocean to China, we'd best just do fair business with the U.S. on oil and gas.
FTA
Thank you for a most revealing post. I hadn't heard that the Americans have a ruling in their favour, it's amazing how this slipped Martin's mind when he was bragging about standing up to the Americans and telling Dubya to pay the 5 billion. Our media has dropped the ball on this as well, most Canadians think the Americans are ripping us off when they are not. What's new...
-
I dunno, I think the 8,000 people who were forced to abandon their homes might think it's more than just PR. If whites in Canada were forced off of native lands it would be the start of separation(depending on the province involved) or the sudden appearance of all those unregistered guns.
At any rate, it seems like the Palestinian leaders are unwilling to do anything else than the status quo, not building an infrastructure for their people. At least the Jews are doing something.
Also, this might surprise you Blackdog (not really) but I see the wall being the Palestinians fault. After how many decades of suicide bombers killimg innocent civilians, the Jews have run out of options.
-
And of course the fact that newspapers' subscription numbers have been sliding downward for years has nothing to do with the lay-offs.
Here's another one for you, although you may have heard. About a month ago, USAToday had a picture on their website of Condi Rice. There was an odd look to the photo since they photoshopped it and gave Condi demon eyes. After much outrage they came out with a statement on how there was an error in the process that got missed blah blah blah it wasn't our fault blah blah photo was hard to blah blah...
Several photo professionals contacted the blogger Michele Malkin with the expert opinion that there was no way you could do that by accident, the effect would show up on the whole photo, not just her eyes. So pathetic. But no, there's no bias, those are groundless accusations!
-
Yes, I've read about this incident, and the whole point is that the far left wing is very hateful. Michele Malkin gets the most horrid threats and comments and she's far less a controversial writer than Anne Coulter. Trevor Lautiens,(sp?) who was conservative and used to write for the Vancouver Sun would get used baby diapers left on his driveway and hate filled letters.
It only damages the credibility of their side but these rabid haters can't stop themselves. And the mainstream left reacts with denials.
-
You either totally misunderstood the crime policy announced by Harper or are trying to spread inaccuracies about it. At any rate, I suggest you would be better off voting for Jack Layton.
gotta go.
-
Are you ignoring the fact that you feel if a majority of Canadians agree on something, it should be enacted? Because I'm willing to bet that gay marriage never would have passed last summer if the will of the people had been considered. I know, I know, we can only listen to them on their desire for drugs.
-
You are making an assumption, my friend, and assumption is the mother of all evils. Just because Harper hasn't stated a policy on it, doesn't mean one doesn't exist. Your memory on Mulroney forgets that Canada did quite well with the U.S. during this time, we've always had the occassional disagreement. But I know, you prefer Martin's approach, which we never actually hear or see except afterwords when he claims to have stood up to Bush. Yah, right, he couldn't stand up to a stiff wind.
-
For example, Harper inexplicably and bizarrely this weekend in British Columbia let all of Canada know that he opposed the decriminalization of marijuana despite the fact that a majority of Canadians support decriminalization as do the Liberals...
This is where I got the idea that you support the will of a majority on issues. It was like 3 posts ago. Please, I'm hoping you don't get into another convoluted redefinition explanation like you did with 'bible thumper'. (I refer to a follower of any religion when I say bible thumper, even if they don't actually believe in the bible, they may follow the Koran or some other book but if they thump it then...)
-
Hey Shoop, apparently we are the same guy since we agree on conservative issue, disagree with Norman and never post at the same time. Lookin' good buddy!
-
Yes, that's what I said alright Sharkman. What is that you think I've said subsequently that contradicts that?
Harper's plan to send Canadian patients at public expense to private clinics in the US if necessary is not fiscally conservative. Do you think such a plan is fiscally conservative?
My point is you are anti-CPC on almost everything, not just social issues.
-
Yes, I feel that Martins strategy has been quite silly as well. I think your memory is a little selective regarding Mulroney, but we are talking about Harper and BUSH not Reagan.
There are consequences to actions, Norman and our governments actions have been decidedly anti-american for many years now.
-
No doubt most of us are more tolerant than we were in the past. But Harper's runnihg for Prime Minister in 2006, not 1956.
And the socially intolerant Harper is not just to the right of the Liberals, a middle-of-the-road party by Canadian standards today. He's also to the right of the NDP, BQ and Greens. By positioning himself to the right of all four of these parties, Harper guarantees that CPC remains unelectable.
For example, Harper inexplicably and bizarrely this weekend in British Columbia let all of Canada know that he opposed the decriminalization of marijuana despite the fact that a majority of Canadians support decriminalization as do the Liberals, BQ, NDP and Greens. Sure, in the 50's Canadians didn't feel this way but Harper's running for office today.
What in the world does 'socially intolerant' mean to you? Because I don't think you mean anti-social, which is actually what it means.
The CPC may be to the right of the other parties but notice how they poll above all the parties save one by 4 points( which is within the margin of error)
Oh, so now you think that a policy needs to only be supported by a majority of Canadians to be right? Perhaps we should take another look at gay marriage.
You are all over the map. You're like a socialistic green conservative!
-
The big reason why the lumber thing dragged on was that the Canadian gov has been stand offish to the Americans on a host of issues. It got so ridiculous that our ships were not 'needed' to patrol the Persian Gulf since Chretien's policy was if our navy captured any terrrorists from Iraq they would be released. Who needs friends like that.
In our present non-friendship, solving Canadian concerns is not a big priority to the U.S.. But if Harper gets in, I think he could have a dialogue with Bush where Martin's only strategy is to brag in our media how he stood up to the Americans, done no doubt to appeal to the anti-american vote.
-
Uh, it seems a little history lesson is in order. It can be said with certainty that most people in Canada and therefore most politicians are waaaayyy more tolerant now they were, say, 50 years ago. That the CPC party and Harper is to the right of the Liberals on social issues only makes them intolerant to some lefties.
-
I can't find any links thus far, but I remember seeing in the news yesterday that there was already some public funds going to private health. Has anyone else heard this?
-
I wouldn't lose any sleep about Canada joining up to help in Iraq. Our ragtag military is stretched with all their present involvements in Afghanistan. Plus, they don't need us, the U.S. will be drawing down their numbers before too long.
-
What's this Norman? I remember you saying you only oppose Harper because of social conservativism, or did you forget. I like your logic, though. Since Harper says nothing to absolutely rule it out, it also must mean that he's agreeable to letting enthusiastic aliens operate on patients when needed. And Martin must be in complete agreement since he never ruled the alien scheme out either.
Here's a reminder of what you said on social conservatism a few days ago Norman:
I'm not a socialist and CPC supporters are mistaken if they think that every Harper opponent is a socialist. What I oppose is social conservatism, not fiscal conservatism. I'd have no problem voting for a Progressive Conservative or any other party that was not full of social conservatives.
-
firstly, I've only seen it on the CTV, I said the CBC has not refered to them with activism. That you found it on the CTV site shows their still at it.
Secondly, perhaps not you, but if there had been some gay slight, many would be outraged. Try to imagine the G&M having in any article whatsoever a slight on gays. It'll never happen, and rightly so.
However, I'm not as outraged as you suppose, I do tend to worry a bone like a dog sometimes, though. I still contend that the CTV and G&M or any other source would never be so careless with a gay story.
-
Look at it this way. The U.S. border staff have a holster with a nasty lookin' gun. The Canadian border staff actually have a holster for a nasty lookin' stamp.
-
Well, you find nothing wrong with a national paper making fun of Christians and then find nothing wrong with a newscast that is the only one found to have reported the hostages as christian activists(which is in itself telling, since no other reference has been made to their 'activism'). It's a mindset that doesn't see anything wrong with belittling or marginalizing a certain minority in Canada.
Although, maybe I'm wrong. Tell me, what comments made by a newscast on christians would you find offensive?
-
But they are activists.Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of nonviolent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations. CPT projects connect intimately with the spiritual lives of constituent congregations.
(From the CPT website)
They are also Christians. Hence: "Christian activists".
But they are not activists. They take no sides and only try to help. If they were missionaries you would get no argument from me. No other News organization I have heard thus far has called them that, so even the CBC might disagree with you. Even a later report on CTV did not stoop to such reporting. But your mindset is common among some who do not understand Christianity except from afar.
-
The only way the U.S. can protect their borders from us is to build a fence and guard it. Then we'll be moaning at the effects on Canadian commerce. It'll stop the terrorists we let into Canada from slipping into the U.S. though.
Sexual Orientation and the Canadian Voter
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
An interesting survey conducted in 2004 and covering a wide range of issues showed that only 1% of Canadians consider themselves to be gay. This is surprising since gay activism has always held that 10% of the population is gay at least. Here is some of the relevant data:
CCHS Cycle 2.1 is the first Statistics Canada survey to include a question on sexual orientation. This information is needed to understand differences in health-related issues between the homosexual (gay or lesbian), bisexual and heterosexual populations. These issues include determinants of health, such as physical activity, mental health issues, including stress, and problems accessing health care.
Among Canadians aged 18 to 59, 1.0% reported that they consider themselves to be homosexual and 0.7% considered themselves bisexual.
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040615/d040615b.htm
Gay marriage vs civil unions has proved to be a real hot button issue for some, so it's interesting to quanitify what numbers in Canada are directly affected.