blueblood

I don't see why everyone says the US army is spent. They sent in what 10% of their force into Iraq. They're broke? The US was in worse shape in the great depression and mustered up one of the most massive armies ever seen for WW2. As for the bomb shelter, the Russians won't shoot any US troops, they aren't that stupid. If there are US troops there, expect things to wind down very quickly. As for GW being a wacko, it must be nice to live in a country where you can make fun of your leader and not have to worry about being dragged out in a sack in the middle of the night.

Those stats have jobs in which the people performing those jobs aren't trained at all. I'm familiar with most of these jobs and can assure you they aren't trained like police officers are. If cops had as much training as these occupations, there would be more dead cops. As for the OP, so much for Montreal being the most civilized city on the continent. People have got to start realizing that when a cop says throw down the knife, throw the damn thing down. If a person wants to fight a cop, there's a place for that, it's called court; the chances winning there are a lot better than out in the street.

According to the CWB, China isn't even in the top three for wheat. The American's buy more than the Chinese do. Chretien snubbed the U.S. games in Salt Lake, according to your logic, the U.S. our #1 trading partner should be miffed and considering trade action. That hasn't happened, and I don't think it will, China likes our goodies too much. I think China has too much invested in that big oil pipeline going to BC, which the Americans ARE upset about.

If your an equestrian and sailing fanatic your SOL. Ditto about the american coverage.

When the feeders (cattle on grain feed) are ready to be processed, they go on grain feed in feedlots where they are packed like sardines in order to fatten up. Angus cattle have a specific genetic trait concerning this. Their fat "marbles" in their carcasses on the rack. In other words their meat sort of has a marbled texture. Now it is the fat that gives the steaks their tenderness and great taste. Angus, as far as the meat industry goes due to its marbled fat texture is the tastiest and tenderest. Forty bucks for an angus burgers??!! I'm unloading angus feeders for 650 bucks a pop, and a burger is forty bucks. I knew Ontario was expensive but that's ridiculous. The beef still goes through the meat grinder. Angus is better, not forty dollar burger better. At Montana's and Earl's the Angus Beef doesn't get that kind of premium.

ha ha ha. What can I say I like my steak. And if needed I'll explain why Angus beef is better than the rest.

Don't worry there is a billion person country right next door. We can get our cheap goods manufactured there.

In this case the consequences were Harper snubbing the Chinese olympic games. Harper will go to china when he wants.

Harper's a big boy he can do what he wants. We all know Chretien's stand on the U.S. gov't. I forget if Chretien went to Salt lake or not. But other games were missed, so what? Who cares what the Chinese say, if they want to act like that they can face the consequenses. Will Harper care if the Chinese leadership doesn't show up in Vancouver, probably not. There is another country next door that Canada can invest in if the Chinese don't play nice.

Flipping through the guide on the old Star Choice, I know that the CW in the U.S. is carrying the degrassi show for a couple of hours on Sunday morning.

As for Dobbin's OP, no argument there. As for my steaks, I butcher my own steers that way I know that my steaks are perfection. If I want lean steaks, they go on grass feed, if I want tender, they go on oats/barley. Also the benefit of butchering yourself is you get to make em as big and as lean as you want them. As for cooking, the barbeque will suffice, so will a spruce log campfire.

I see the connection, 1920 isn't that far off from the wild west when you think about it. The political will was there to enact prohibition and lawmakers were willing to give it a shot. As for it being a gong show, does any of the going ons of those days still exist? Of course, I know what I'm saying concerning this is pure speculation. My position is all the aspects of organized crime are going to exist no matter what. I see organized crime as a business and a business makes money as efficiently as it can. When everything is legal and is a free for all, that's when organized crime can be real dangerous as per the wild west example. When booze was illegal, it is much easier for organized crime to provide a business. Why would they be concerned with doing things they did in the old west when bootlegging was more profitable and much easier to do. I'll go out on a limb and say during prohibition most crime was revolved around alcohol which really doesn't hurt the customer and keeps the gangsters busy with that. With booze legal, I believe its gone a step up, the same thing is occuring with pot which is alright, but now there are other substances coming out that are much more dangerous. In a nutshell what I'm saying its better to go around chasing gangsters doing whatever it is they do concerning pot, which does not harm the consumer than to have a double whammy chasing gangsters doing it is whatever they do concerning harsher drugs which will probably have a larger following and actually do harm the consumer. Lesser of two evils. The Argentinian president in her "infinite wisdom" is wanting to legalize all drug use in her country. This is the same president who wanted to slap an export tax on exported goods so that the country would be full of cheap goods, in the process screwing over the producer. I am curious to see what will happen with organized crime there, not to mention other factors of that country.

What you are describing in your statement is the crux of the problem. According to the law Vigilante Justice is not acceptable in modern Canadian society, no matter how quick and effective it is. Nevertheless it was still a gong show, Hollywood has to get its ideas from somewhere...

This is an unfortunate incident. I don't see why we have to all of a sudden rush to the U.S. to stop the big russian menace, they have their hands full. Mind you that's typical of modern day European nations, useless as tits on a bull. I feel sorry for the Americans here, heads you win, tails the US loses. This incident is scary, this would be exactly like if the U.S. invaded Canada. I don't see why people always bash the US foreign policy, the Russians are much worse. If the US had a foreign policy similar to Russia's we would be singing the Star Spangled Banner instead of O Canada.

Fair enough, what I'm saying is look at the times before prohibition when it was a free for all. There was organized crime back then too and it was as big if not a bigger problem. The Wild West was close to outright anarchy. The law makers decided to drop the boom and hard, prohibition being one. The law makers were in effect choosing the lesser of two evils. The law makers also probably felt it was better that the cops go around chasing bootleggers rather than trying to control what used to be anarchy. I believe that the law makers at that time were trying to control what crime was actually taking place, and I say again it was better to be running around after booze makers than after something much worse. Which is why I believe pot should still be illegal, much better to be running around after this which doesn't really in all reality hurt anyone. Organized crime will always exist no matter what's legal and what's not legal. I'd rather the cops run around after kids on pot (which cops don't really enforce very hard anymore), then what's next up the ladder.

I've also heard that oil is supposed to go back to 150 dollars by 2010, another possibility is leveling off at 100 dollars in 2009. the fundamentals indicate that oil shouldn't fall to 70 dollars unless the world's economy crashes. Why a tax if oil falls to 70 bucks? We don't want to shoot our economy in the foot and be caught with our pants down, why should Canadians punish ourselves severely if we aren't a part of the problem?

The right being determined as a bully is dependant on ones point of view. Take for example the Iran debate and where lefties and righties stand on it. In my opinion the right is on this issue not going to allow appeasement. That policy has failed, case in point world war 2. The US which is right wing will not allow that sort of nonsense to happen again. They view it as better to piss off one part than to risk the world going to hell in a handbasket. The right on gay marriage is IMO defending the rights of a church minister or justice of the peace not being to forced to marry gays. I've heard leftists say that they should be forced to. Who's rights are being trampled. As for marriage, I believe the concept in today's society is totally dated and useless. As for marijuana use, the right IMO is not risking the free for all that used to be the wild west when everything was legal and it was a free for all. IMO the only reason alcohol was made legal again, was because of established rich domestic alcohol producers. Had liquor been made in stills instead of in factories before prohibition, booze would still be illegal. It was the lawlessness and chaos of the wild west that resulted in prohibition and the prohibition of mind altering drugs, and the tough criminal laws in the US that still exist today. Oh and in the days of the Wild West when everything went, orgainized crime was a much bigger problem. I wouldn't consider the right as bullies, just they won't take much for risks and consider the lesser of two evils. As for the left being bullies, one only needs to look at the young people from the Cuban baseball team defecting in the most right wing province in Canada.

There was a time when there was no prohibition of anything and it was anything goes like in your little dream world, it was called the wild west and guess what there was STILL organized crime and was a much larger problem then. The Americans fought long and hard and passed laws that will prevent that type of insanity from returning ever again. Prohibition being won. Prohibition on alcohol was let go because of pressure from the booze industry big wigs.

I'll take that bet. I'll refer to the case of Kim Walker, this guy snapped and killed a drug dealer. He doesn't apparently remember doing it, probably rendering him nuts at the time. But then again aren't most if not all people who commit murder "nuts" when they do so? If that's the case, then all the murderers would be in institutions and off in a couple months when the PhD says they are "better" As for Kim Walker, the jury HAD to find him guilty as instructed by the judge, from where I'm sitting, this guy has his hand more in the cookie jar than old Kim. The only question is, is how much time this murderer gets. As for the people on the bus not helping, an 8 inch blade in close quarters would result in a bloody mess, also the people DID help, they locked him in the bus and disabled it thereby giftwrapping the murderer for the cops. I'm shocked he walked off that bus alive.

Look for bus terminals to be rigged up with security like airports now I suppose.

Either this guy gets sent to the nuthouse for the insanity plea, or they might slap the dangerous offender deal on him. I'm leaning to the nuthouse, who honestly does that? I'm surprised they took him alive actually.

Perhaps the swimming events, the kayaking/canoe/rowing events, shooting, archery, sailing, short distance cycling. Those are maybe's. I'm pretty sure they can't set world records for javelin as they made the spears non-aerodynamic so as no fans/atheletes get impaled.

It was GW that implemented biofuels, not for the environment but for other reasons, keeping gasoline prices down being the main one. People have been starving for years, can't save them all. Only difference now is that our country's ag sector is back on track and there aren't tractor parades in Ottawa anymore. Plus the jobs generated from this. It's because of GW Bush's ethanol policy is why there isn't gas rationing in the states. I'll remember this argument for when you defend the oil industry from "gouging" poor consumers in Eastern Canada.

If starvation is such a problem now, why aren't the Europeans opening the floodgates on all their set aside farmland? Food prices are always on the rise. High transport costs ding the consumer more than high grain prices, due to sheer volumes of grain produced. People have been starving for years all over the world. The developed world needs oil to function, it has its food supply secure. Ethanol is helping to fill the void. People would still be starving today if there wasn't a drop of ethanol produced. People of developed countries would rather have the poorer countries go without dumped food than give up our lifestyle. Food supply secure, energy supply not secure. Without ethanol there would be gasoline shortages, to have gasoline shortages when there is an overabundance of grain to be used for energy would be political suicide in the developed world. The starving people of Africa and Asia do not vote for our politicians. More and more people can afford to pay the actual price for grain. Canadians are benefitting, there is no gasoline and no food shortages in Canada. Capping food prices is like proposing the NEP, it screws over the economy. If starving people are of such a concern to you, I suggest you can live on spam and kraft dinner and donate the rest of your grocery bill to charity.

Back the train up one PM, Trudeau gave us the ginormous deficit, Mulroney instituted policies at the end of his "administration" to get us out of this mess and it was unpopular; no wonder he bailed out and left Campbell to dry. All Chretien had to do was go into cruise control and it was out of the financial mess. The GST makes the gov't a lot of money.