blueblood

Yah but does Toronto have more pull on Federal matters than an entire province????

If people are smartening up nowadays to get lawyers, then it would look like now it is a bigger problem, if more and more people are getting lawyers of course it is going to APPEAR to be a bigger problem based on case load. I don't think you can base a drunk driving argument based on amount of legal practice that is obtainied, imagine if people back in the day were inclined to use lawyers as much as now, there would be a legal gong show back in the day, sorry but from what i've seen at the grass roots level it's going down, but I will say this if losing your vehicle, loss of liscence, a steep fine, or jail time is not going to phase you then I don't think a drop in drunk driving will occur. So in essence both our arguments are sort of biased, if I could find a police stats sheet on drunk driving occurences, i will concede my point.

Thats as unfeasible as having the cops stop every fifth person from leaving, what about the bars with a few hundred people attending there would be people there till 9 in the morning plus the fact that they are smashed... that's a can of worms. The only person who has the right of detaining me is the RCMP or other recognized police force, joe bouncer doesn't have a right to detain me, that's borderline kidnapping and whatever funstuff a lawyer can come up with, a bouncer is no where near qualified to arrest someone, cripes a lot of them are gang members themselves. Drunk Driving isn't nearly as big a problem as people make it out to be, it's gotten much better over the years. Most kids don't do it anymore, those laws that are getting tougher are scaring a lot of people, but there wil be outliers. Out in the country it took getting your truck taken away and a loss of liscence for a year to put the kibosh on it (taking away something we value tends to make a person smarten up). I used to drive after a few drinks back in the day on occassion just out of convenience, I've gotten a lot more flack about it by people in the city than a guy who snorts coke. According to them (now I'm generalizing here) it's a bigger problem of driving drunk than drug use, so as a "society" they denounced it as a whole and there are more drug users than drunk drivers in the city (that I know of) From what I've seen if something isn't viewed as "cool" nobody really does it.

Well, Bill Clinton didn't inhale. All kidding aside, new laws don't impress me, particularly on drunk driving. The politically easy thing to do is pass a law. If society were serious, the police would stop every fifth car leaving a parking lot or on-street parking adjacent to a liquor-serving establishment at a late hour, say, after 11:30 p.m. The problem is the tavern operators would scream bloody murder. Well I guess it's up to society to start telling people who aren't on board to start flying kites. If stopping every fifth car after leaving a bar at close is going to make a difference, society needs to step up and tell bar owners and other opponents to go **** themselves I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that the anticipated uproar of tavern owners has relatively little to do with why such a proposal is not done when compared to the manpower issues. Seriously, do you know how many police officers this would take? FTA I was just playing into the hypothetical situation proposed earlier, I know full well that it would take a lot of manpower and wouldn't be feasible which is why more and more I believe society needs to step up and govern itself and smarten up, more officers won't make as much a difference as that.

Bogging down parliament? What would you recommend be done when the Bloc put forth its motion? Instead of debating something as trivial as this, we could be debating something more important hense bogging down. I'd honestly have to say what harper done was the fastest way out. Why does the Bloc feel its so important to put forth this motion in the first place? Yah quebec is different, the rest of Canada knows it and recognizes it, so why does parliament need to devote so much time to something as trivial as that. This is approaching arrogance by Quebec, how about they recognize Rural Western Canada as a nation then or Newfoundland, we're different but you don't see us making a big stink about it. Already have, Bill 101 anybody? Or as I call it the totalitarian language law, good grief it had to go to the UN to be watered down.

Well, Bill Clinton didn't inhale. All kidding aside, new laws don't impress me, particularly on drunk driving. The politically easy thing to do is pass a law. If society were serious, the police would stop every fifth car leaving a parking lot or on-street parking adjacent to a liquor-serving establishment at a late hour, say, after 11:30 p.m. The problem is the tavern operators would scream bloody murder. Well I guess it's up to society to start telling people who aren't on board to start flying kites. If stopping every fifth car after leaving a bar at close is going to make a difference, society needs to step up and tell bar owners and other opponents to go **** themselves

I have no problem with the motion, I have a problem of WHY there was a motion and the fact it is bogging down parliament and our Country

Heres a solution, throw out the party system and have them all run as independants and toss out the senate just like it was done in antiquity

The BQ was about to use one of its supply days in the House to present a motion declaring les Québécois to be a nation. This would have embarrassed the Liberals and Tories and NDP since some of them may or may not have voted in favour. Notably, the Tory caucus could have split. This forced Harper's hand.Harper then worked out a wording with Dion that threw the whole thing back in Duceppe's face. (A cartoon in Quebec showed Duceppe looking down a garden hose trying to figure out why there was no water - and then Harper standing with his foot on the hose about to release it.) Harper used Duceppe's wording but added the key phrase "... within a united Canada." In addition, Harper noted in his remarks introducing the motion that all Canadians were implicated in how Quebecers define themselves. So much for the tactics. Let me try and translate this into English Canadian. Bill Clinton was always mindful to state that he respected the sovereignty of Canada and he did not want to interfere in domestic Canadian politics. English Canadians took this as a sign of goodwill. It's the equivalent of bowing when you meet someone from Japan. Meaningless to us but important for them. What I don't understand is that you acknowledge that the groups of people in different areas of Canada are unique to the point of Canada being ungovernable, but you are stressing that parliament should recognize Quebec as a nation etc and not the others. The problem that I and maybe others have is that we already know Quebec is different, we don't care, go fly a kite and lets get on with business, but when it's being rubbed in our face you can bet your ass it's going to piss us off, look at it this way when I go to the city for parts or whatever else, I get stared at I have my dirty ass diesel with so much junk in the box, I wear my oil stained hat and work boots all the time and have permanent stubble -> people know i'm different, if I were to make exclamations and demands like those in Quebec do, people are gonna get pissed off. I believe that now Quebec is recognized as a nation, all the other groups should be recognized in parliament too, it's only fair as long as its only symbolic.

That's number 2 red flag old Inky didn't vote for, my riding must be hoored off at the french

Michael Chong said that he could not vote his conscience and be allowed to stay in the party. He chose to resign his position to just abstain from voting. Even as a back bencher it sounds like if you vote against you would be OUT. This whole thing is important. You Harpnocrats would yell bloody murder if it was a Liberal government that would not allow their ministers (let alone a backbencer) to vote the way they wished. Hypocritical to say the least. Umm my MP, a CPC MP voted AGAINST the plan brought up by Strahl concerning the wheat board so I wouldn't say this happens all of the time, he did that due to his constituents screaming bloody murder on the issue, but you have the good point in saying that it is happening way too much, but what do you expect with political parties?

The fear in the west is that everyone will have to learn how to use left handed scissors to get a job and that left handed people will have to be hired even in areas where everyone is right handed. The fear as well is that if you recognize left handedness as distinct that the left handed people will want to ensure more rights for themselves to the detriment of right handed people. Also, the left handed people might want to break up the family simply because they think no one understands their left handedness. You forgot that if you use right handed scissors in Quebec where everyone is left handed, the crap hits the fan

I figure that if all the provinces charged the same tax on their resources there wouldn't be discouraged development, I don't blame the oil companies for going to Alberta if they're practically giving it away when next door theyr'e charging a fortune, if all oil provinces (don't know about good ol' manitoba, i know they have a drilling rig going in Melita that just fired up this year, plus others in that corner of the province) would have had a reasonable tax rate somewhere in the middle the oil industry in Canada would be in much better shape. I don't know if I was the federal government, I'd almost spend the surplus on developing the NFLD oil industry, i'd think i'd get a pretty good return...

Harper is now proposing a resolution of the Commons (not a Constitutional amendment) that states the Quebecois (not Quebec) are a nation within a united Canada. That's it, that's all.There's a big difference between what Mulroney tried to do and what Harper is now doing. Anyway, I'm sure Harper's thinking has changed on this issue - everyone else seems to have changed their mind. For myself, Quebec is not a province like the others. I'm inclined to believe that Canada would work better as a country if someone could figure out how to state that in the Constitution in such a way that others don't think Quebec is getting a special deal. I gave the flippant example above of left-handed people. They're not like right-handed people. They're different. Their scissors are different, for example. Why is this such a big deal in English-Canada? I agree with you that Quebec is not province like the others. If we said that then you'd have to be fine with saying Nfld is a province unlike others, urban and rural Canada are different, western Canada is not like Eastern Canada, all of that would have to go in and on top of that No perks for anyone, and someone mentioned that in fact Quebec would in fact get some perks, what they were under meech I don't know and if someone would clarify that would be great. Personally I think the constitution should be tore up and we should go back to what we had before it, Canada was fine enough then.

You should contact the National Academy of Science with your information. This could turn the scientific certainty about Global Warming right on it's head. I'll get right on that when you go to any Geologic department at any University saying that the Earth's temperature and CO2 levels were at X level all throughout Geologic time and only now have been rising and are sky high.

Hmm. something i remember from a geology class back in the day, more like paleo oh well here goes, there have been ice ages and massive amounts of global warming all throughout geologic time. The amount of CO2 in the air in the Carboniferous was much much larger than it is now, but then it dropped. How you ask, the Earth has a way of naturally balancing everything out, so when its warm and theres lots of CO2 in the air more and more plants grow in areas that there weren't any plants and the oceans soak up more and more CO2, the opposite happens when there are dangerously low levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, so in the extreme long run this is just a minor blip on whats going on and why im not too worried about global warming.

Even in this modern irreligious age, it matters in the same sense that Bill Clinton was the first black president. Harper's a WASP even if he doesn't go to church.My point in the OP was that if Harper can't be a successful PM, then I'm inclined to believe that Canada is so intolerant that it is ungovernable. Canada intolerant?? Many Canadians view Harper's problem as being an intolerant so-con and most Canadians don't want a an intolerant so-con as Prime Minister. Just like many Canadians don't want an intolerant so-lib for prime minister

In case you haven't noticed, Quebec has 3 times more seats in Parliament than Alberta does. On top of that, no matter what Harper does, he won't lose more than a seat or two in Alberta. He isn't sneaky, he is smart enough to realize that. A lot of people in the west don't want Quebec getting special powers and what have you and to be honest why should they, they are different, not better. You are talking about the region which gutted the Progressive Conservative party, like I say it's not wise to piss off a sleeping dragon because if he ever decides to wake up there will be hell to pay. A lot of people in the west don't want Quebec getting special powers but they won't vote against the Conservatives over it anyway. If they do, then the whole long live Reform - kill the PC party thing will happen all over again. Harper has hit the peak in all regions except Quebec and he needs Quebec to get a majority. He knows that he won't lose more than a few seats in the Prairies over giving Quebec special powers. He is smart enough to know that and he will use it to get a majority. If it comes down to that, I also know that most Quebecers don't agree with many of the policies of the CPC, and if the whole quebec unity thing was solved, i'd think they'd be voting Liberal unless the CPC went through a major policy overhaul.

In case you haven't noticed, Quebec has 3 times more seats in Parliament than Alberta does. On top of that, no matter what Harper does, he won't lose more than a seat or two in Alberta. He isn't sneaky, he is smart enough to realize that. A lot of people in the west don't want Quebec getting special powers and what have you and to be honest why should they, they are different, not better. You are talking about the region which gutted the Progressive Conservative party, like I say it's not wise to piss off a sleeping dragon because if he ever decides to wake up there will be hell to pay.

National Security is still a - well - national jurisdiction. Why have twelve different flavours of ice cream when one will do? Because people want choices. We don't want to all be the same across the board. There should be more than only 13. There should be an unlimited number of health-care administrations - not simply one government-supplied health-care. A Free Market would allow people with different needs to receive the treatment they require. Education has been, is being, and can be provided by the private sector - often with greater results than the public system. Government doesn't have to cost us so much. Also, astoundingly, many private schools provide education not only of a greater quality--but at a lesser cost per student than is spent in the public system. Whoah there, a person has to be careful government programs that benefit everyone are good things and i have no problems paying taxes on them. A free market healthcare would screw over a low income earner, private healthcare should have STRICT government controls

Hah!, you and I both know a rich person is just as capable of toting guns and joining gangs as a poor person. If your talking about prevention being better than the cure i'd say put a cap on immigration and deport the immigrant gang members, there would be a sharp drop in gang activity. Here's a better idea for prevention, instead of asking the government to solve everything, look how a small town operates, our worst crimes are drunk driving and bar fights, we have guns all over the place, poor people all over the place and no gun and violent crime taking place, no its not being poor or having guns, it's society and it's up to society to fix itself.

just the ceremony in the church is enough for me to be committed, for others too, why do you need contracts or legal documents, to me that is the true joke needing to be bound by a paper contract to someone. I'm in agreement with the marriage is forever though and the church ceremony is the icing on the cake.

Mother Russia is rising again, watch out!!!

Doubtful. Many would just be two miserable people forced together. I fail to see how having two miserable adults together creates a benefit for the kids. Well, the way I see it is slightly different. If those two people would have had their butts kicked by dad when they were kids, they'd probably have the wherewithall to work out their problems and be happy. Unfortunately, they probably came from broken homes or weren't forced to be decent human beings while they were growing up. The cycle repeats. If they'd stop thinking about themselves only as such people do, and instead, sacrifice themselves for a time so the kids can see happier times, they might actually wind up being happy. I have plenty of experience working problems as such. We got through it and it's not impossible or the easy way out. The end however, justifies the means in this case. Tell me how long you've been married or why you think the way you do. I'd be fine with chucking out the whole legal thing associated with marriage, no shared money, no nothing, just the ceremony at the church and the party afterwards. I don't see the importance of that piece of paper, the ceremony would suffice. I think the legal part of it and the money part of it just cause problems and are completely out of tune with the times. With chucking the legal and money part of it out, those who don't take marriage seriously can get out of it without being ruined and for those who take it seriously it shouldn't matter.

The spanking they received on the Plains of Abraham and the benevolence of the British Empire. j/k