Spiderfish

His "apology" was quite amusing, if not outright contradictory to his own behaviour. I was particularly interested in this line: Apparently he feels that Canada would be better off without a leader like him.

Your comment is goofy and irrelevant. I think you're missing the point.

Where did I say he hasn't broken any promises?? We all break promises sometimes. A political mandate, like life is not static. we make a plan, but sometimes that plan has to be changed to reflect new circumstances.

Wow, a politician that hasn't kept every promise he has made, I can hardly imagine such an atrocity. His track record for keeping promises is pretty impressve when compared to almost every other leader Canada has had in recent history.

I don't see how setting policy that represents the majority of canadians rather than governing on pure idealism is a bad thing. Every leader is going to push political issues that represent their parties ideals where they can get away with it, this is not a concept unique to the conservatives. but only a fool would abandon the general will of the people who have given them their mandate in favor of pushing their idealism carelessly. Harper is no fool.

What?? This makes no sense. Keeping a promise generally makes a person more trustworthy, not less.

I can't imagine you would. But from someone who has no investment in the daily politics of Toronto and who is not currently dancing in the streets because of the ruling, the optics aren't as clear cut to some as they are to you. Regardless, I do agree with you that what he did was wrong.

I get it. I agree it was wrong, and I never said that the judge should have excuesd him. I just think the optics do not favor his opponents...that's all.

I didn't say that.

Sounds to me like the media was asking questions, then interrupting him when he tried to answer. Doesn't sound to me like they were trying to get clarity to anything! And I'm sure Mr. Kenny was happy to field some pointed questions after the numerous "softballs" the media throws at the Conservatives daily.

Hey PIK, could you post a link for us technologiaclly challenged? Thanks.

Fraud and abuse of office? Was he not trying to raise money for a sports team? There's no doubt that he screwed up, but he did not stand to gain personally. I realize his removal from office was madndatory if he was found guilty, but it seems like a bit of a harsh outcome for a guy who was trying to raise money for a foundation to help a youth sports organization.

Plus he's consistantly run on the promise that he would not attempt to open debate to try and change any legislation regarding gay marriage or abortion. It's novel to see a leader keep a promise, but I guess it does happen.

You've convinced me, load the kids up with Ritalin and give em all Ipads, cell phones, laptops, make em interact with a smartboard. Sounds like a recipe for success... Next thing you know, we'll be replacing the teacher with a synthetic human as well, and you'll be out of a career! There's always the pharmaceutical trade.

This thread just keeps getting more and more ridiculous. Your comments are like a train wreck, I want to just ignore it, but I can't help looking again to see what new travesty of logic you are puking out next. As I said before, if nothing else, you are entertaining...

But according to you, that's not your job. According to you, you should hand over your kids to the public system as soon as possible to avoid your corrupting them.

Well, they obviously aren't getting their lessons in tolerance from you.

Indoctrinate my child against common values of the nation?? Really? As a society, I agree we do have common values. If my moral and social values don't fall in line with common social values, it's comforting to know that I still have the right to participate in the moral/social development in my kids, even if it means putting up with judgmental and condemning statements from individuals who think they know what's best society as a whole. Imagine where we'd be right now if we just accepted common societal values without question, and didn't challenge them? We wouldn't be having this conversation right now, because a woman's place would still be at home, and they would be looking after the kids. Thank goodness for change. I don't want it. And I sure as hell don't want to have to help subsidize those who do. Many if not all provinces already offer subsidized daycare for lower income families. I think this is important and necessary, but is separate to the issue of offering subsidized daycare to everyone.

I would agree that we should differentiate and ensure separation between 'government' and 'education'. I would actually insist on it. We all know that social values are taught and instilled to kids in the education system, but who's social values are they? What if I happen to disagree with some of those social values that are being passed on? The logical question you have to ask is why is the government so interested in taking an active role in offering state run childcare? Believe me, as a parent who has made the conscious decision to give up one income in order to have a parent stay home and raise the kids, I understand how difficult it is to manage. If this was a program intended at helping out parents, then they would give parents a choice and offer equal and fair subsidies to parents who choose to stay at home and raise their kids, encouraging parents to take an active role in the upbringing of their kids. Unfortunately, this option never gets included in the government run childcare offer, it would give too much control to the parents.

I hope you're right, but with some of the extreme comments that are being put forth on this thread, obviously not all of society has learned this lesson. With the push towards government run, government subsidized daycare programs that we saw from the Liberals a few years ago, the concept has gotten more subtle, but it exists. How young do we want the Government to take control of the upbringing of our kids? I realize the education system takes their role of co-parent seriously, but is this the role we really want them to play?

If you're trying to surprise us, you'll have to do better than that. Removing kids from their families in order to remove parental influence from their upbringing and program them with your political philosophy would be an example of corruption to the extreme.

You have been groomed well, your masters would be proud.

And to address the ~5% of homicides its fairly obvious that banning Batman movies would be a good place to start.

It doesn't take a teaching degree to understand that the way you react and the bizarre ideals you adhere to would serve only to damage our younger generation.

With a response like that, I wouldn't exactly call your contribution to society wholesome or healthy. The mere thought of you having an influence on children makes me cringe, and is a perfect argument for the merit of homeschooling. And judging by your previous posts, it appears a healthy democracy is the last thing you are trying to promote. Hypocrisy at its finest!