Charles Anthony

Simple: I do not trust civil servants with private data. Do you? Yes, it is a problem. Data can be fudged. Call me PN008E and I will call you Mark Furman. Yes, anarchists do not have a great reputation. However, I also object to my taxes going to fund the collection of boondoggles. Do you?

You are smarter than that. Why are you so complacent? Paying civil servants to collect data, pretending they have authority over this information and trusting the connection this data has with the identities of real people is a stupidly submissive acceptance of technology. I call that suckers with cellphones.

There is a helpful inversion. Do people get chicken-pox for their children too? Illiterate? It does not cost that much to learn how to read -- maybe in the Union of Saturn's Satellite Republic it does but not on planet Earth.

Now you must say tell us: what distinguishes a charlatan from a politician? Otherwise, you have just changed the name too. Instead of calling him a prophet, you now call him a politician.

Hmm.... let me pick your brains on this one. Is the invasiveness the only problem to you? I can take your fingerprints, scan your eyeballs and leave you without any knowledge of my invasion of your privacy. Would that be fine with you?

Was it simply a lack of space that prevented your from accepting them? Forget about the laws for a moment, do you think it was right to refuse his son?

No imagination is necessary to appreciate the Soviet experience. It is quite vivid. What criteria is used to determine "invest enough" or "underinvesting" in your edge of the solar system?

The insidious nature of RFID chips is that it is easy to implant them into people without their consent. They are tiny little objects under the skin (but can really be inserted deeper) and a person may never know they have it. With the help of rooffies, a person can wake up with the a bruise hiding an injection site without knowing the source and Voila! he is on the grid. I just got a great business idea: design an anti-RFID detection scanner service. Maybe I should "copyright" or "patent" this "intellectual property" right really fast before anybody steals it! Ooops! It is now out there in the open! Maybe I should develop a unique surgical extraction technique! or an anti-RFID jammer that can neutralize them!

Before this thread turns into a scroller coaster ride through extraneous whitespace, I am stepping in on a point of order: Condense your quotations. It is not necessary to repeat an entire post in a quotation. Check out these threads: NEW RULE! - Trim Your Posts, Please take the time to remove the bulk of the post your quoting Trim Your Posts and Quotes, Don't just hit "Reply" Using the [ Quote ] Feature:, Avoid using more too many quotes! You guys should go back, edit and tidy up the formatting in your posts.

Answer: God is an anarchist. That explains everything.

Do we need a new electoral reform thread? Here is a recent one: Electoral reform? I have a better way: abstain. I disagree. No matter what voting system you choose, you will still have a select few people who exercise coercive power over other people. I agree. However, any type of voting will do well enough: eliminate the ability for politicians to assume they have permanent control over their jobs.

I hope his advisors can also tell him how to fix bridges. Petty politics are forgotten (Charest is mistaken.) but if Perry Mason's party wins, they will be expected to fix the bridges. That would sweet.

Separate from the rest of Canada.

FigL and TheL, I would like to hijack your thoughts and redirect them to the following abstract question: What if we (and all other entities) had no long-term memory? Apart from the obvious difficulty we would have functioning, we might not even think of the concept of origins or before or after. We would probably just think in terms of to be or not to be.

I read all of this: and I automatically think: "Gee. This is not something I support." but what can I do?? Nothing -- of course, my taxes go to pay for it all. I read this: and I wonder: "Did the troops know what they were getting into ahead of time? or were they ignorant like I am now?" If the answer is YES, then I do not support the troops either. If the answer is NO, then clearly the whole thing is a treacherous and deceptive dupery.

There are more than one Global Warming threads that are currently active. It is not necessary to create a new one.

Why not just tell us idiots the answer to this highly important riddle? You started this whole thread with "As we all know" which is utterly ridiculous. Can you also give one good reason why anybody should give a hoot about Marxist scholarship?

Conclusions from last night: Ottawa has a 99% chance of securing a playoff spot. Toronto is still holding onto its 1% chance and Montreal still has a reason to dream. The NHL schedule was planned many moons ago for these three Eastern teams and this debate just happened to be on the same night. Hmm... Charest's biggest gaffe: he used his "rabbit from a hat" metaphor twice. I thought Charest was tap dancing well enough until he repeated the metaphor. That made him sound (I can not say "look" because I had to catch it on the radio) weak.

Like, how recently?? Like, the day before?? Might this: United States Conference of Catholic Bishopsjust be a coincidence?

In a practical and a moral sense, I do not think it should make a difference. Whether somebody is mentally ill or deficient or senile or quadrapeligic or intoxicated is the same to me. No. Again, no. Now, what if he wheeled her up into the foyer of city hall and abandoned her? For argument's sake, let us say that he accidentally dies of a heart attack on the way out.

The linked article in the Opening Post makes it very clear that the main reason why Ontario is a net contributor is because the average income in Ontario is higher than elsewhere. I quote: same article that everybody readIf you accept the status quo by believing Ontario should stay within a united Canada, what is there to fix?? The only "fix" is for Ontarians to stop paying their taxes.

My statement of opinion was to the Opening Post, not to your post. It was the Opener that asked for opinion, not you.

My statement of opinion was to the Opening Post, not to your post.

Huh ??

I will be blunt: I find your sense of entitlement to be distressing. Please understand that my following statements and replies are my attitudes in general for ALL parts of Canada. I genuinely believe that Canada should dissolve into independent countries. Do not take my comments personally vis-a-vis the Atlantic provinces. I did not vote on it and neither did you. Why should I be obligated to follow it? Such a goal is incredibly vague. Again, this is a vague goal. I doubt they did. The politicians of the Atlantic provinces imposed this upon their people. Please understand, somebody like me, may think that the economic salvation of a province and the "common interest of the whole country" is best served by gutting all of government and abolishing all subsidies. Whoever is undergoing financial hardship should get up and move or starve. Therefore, my recommendation could qualify as accomplishing the above vague goals.