kraychik

Yes and no. Globalization is a double-edged sword when it comes to economic risk for Canada. On the one hand, risk is more dispersed along a broader economy. On the other hand, we have less control over the flow of goods and services we might consider "essential" as the means of production for these goods and services are beyond our sovereignty.

Well said. Contemporary immigration policies in Canada are a disaster and have been for decades. Worse, we actively agitate against assimilation with insane "multiculturalism" policies which were bad enough when they were merely targeting English, French, and Aboriginals. The clincher? We can't even really talk about it in public. The left has been very successful in destroying all honest discussion on the issue. It's become a taboo. There was not ONE mention of it in the last "debate".

Trudeau clearly panders to Islamism. He has chastised Harper for describing "Islamicism" as a national security threat. He panders to, and (insincerely) prays with radical Muslims, and is courting their support. He has defended the wearing of niqabs and suggested that calling for their banning under certain circumstances amounts to a sort of "War on Women". Nobody is pushing a Manchurian Candidate Narrative about him being a secret agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, so spare us the straw man argumentation.

Yeah. Let's not pretend that lawyers don't generally have an affiliation with the left. So it's unsurprising. It's also irrelevant what lawyers think about the language of public/political discourse.

Yeah, I get it. I'm not judging. I just think my forum behavior has changed over years.

My lawyer friend told me it's voluntary. He's not a member.

Meanwhile, Canada is (mistakenly) bringing in thousands of supposed refugees from Syria. Not to mention Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia.

Glad you're still fighting the good fight.

Just curious - how long do you intend to go back and forth with someone who obviously doesn't engage in good faith and is driven to conflate Islamic fundamentalism/radicalism with Islam-at-large while drawing false delineations between culture and religion as they pertain to shaping society?

Texting a lawyer friend, now. I think it's mandatory.

Are you seriously suggesting the CBA isn't a left-wing organization, and that lawyers aren't an overwhelmingly left-wing bunch?

Not only is there no way for a free enterprise daycare operation in a competitive marketplace to be profitable at a $15 a day rate, but imagine how it's going to be with a bloated bureaucracy of governmental managers above them? There is no question that if such a program were implemented, the real cost would easily be over $150 a day in true total costs (if not more).

There should be zero funding for any media in Canada. The only exceptions I am willing to contemplate are those pertaining to national security issues for peripheral populations/communities (i.e. natural disaster warnings, outreach to explain emergency preparedness, etc). Other than that, governmental manipulation of the media landscape (particularly the CBC, but also funding for "the arts") has been hugely damaging to Canada's political and popular culture through its taxpayer-funded dissemination of left-wing propaganda wrapped up as honest-to-goodness information.

I agree with your Marxist approach, which is why I want regulations to impose different penalties on criminals based on their assets. In other words, when wealthy individuals commit violent crimes, I want stiffer sentences for them than for those imposed on criminals of lesser means.

I am sure Canadians across the country really care what left-wing lawyers have to say about acceptable political dialogue and cultural contrasts. I mean, this must be why so many Canadians have such high opinions of the profession's practitioners.

Mind if I use this as my signature? This is awesome.

Amazing. God bless you. I initially thought you were trolling. You were insufferable back when I was here. Glad you burst out of that shell. I'd love to talk to you about it.

I say we just nominate Trudeau as the Czar of a new Canadian-English dictionary. He'll tell us what terms are and aren't acceptable in political discourse. Naturally, he'll assemble a crack team of "language experts" as technocrats to guide us helpless plebs on the march to perfection.

What happened to you?

Here we are, years later, and left-wingers are still trying to excise those they disagree with from MLW. It would be a lot simpler to simply ignore posts/posters one is uninterested is, but no.... the totalitarian impulse of left-wingers like Big Guy is to make you an unperson from the forum. So typical. Bingo.

Also Medicaid. Also mandated group-benefits via employers. Also the VA (which while justifiable, needs some free market reform).

He uses Mondoweiss as a source without irony. Also the Guardian. Impressive. I love this Marxist approach. The morality/justness of a belligerent is measured by their perceived power. Given that the Arab ("Palestinians") supposedly have less power, we can't judge them by the same standard as the Jews. Assessments of morality are relative, and based on (perceived) power. Lovely.

Naturally, the left wants to usher in national suicide by pulling emotional strings with photographs of migrants/refugees on a dinghy. #Compassion #Feelings #EconomicsBeDamned #CultureBeDamned

The left is all about dropping relevant context and nuance in order to attack a straw man. And the straw man argument is almost always an implication that those of us on the right are mean-spirited, greedy, bigoted (they coined this nonsense term "Islamophobia"), or even worse - racists. That's pretty much the entire left-wing playbook.

Again, there's a deliberate attempt by leftists to conflate Islamic fundamentalism/radicalism with "moderate" Muslims. Once that conflation is made, then they presume to hack away at the straw man of "you're calling all Muslims barbaric!". See how it works?