Figleaf

I'm not sure. Could you outline a scenario where this might be a problem? It'll be easier for me to explain my views on an issue when I have a better understanding of what the issue is. They're two questions. There should be no need for an example for the first. An example for the second might be nuisance cases where one neighbor lets smells blow onto the land of another. It means that no other person has a higher claim to your life than you do. But why characterize that concept as 'ownership'? 1. Are people at liberty to restrict their own liberty? 2. If I 'own' an item, then you cannot own it. I have a right that you don't. Why/how is this justified? I'll have to answer the rest of your post later.

So you think overall MADD is a bad thing for society in Canada? No. I think Senator Marjorie Lebreton clearly did a bad job at governance and allowed MADD leadership to abuse the goodwill of Canadians. ... said Ricki Bobbi, attackingly.

As Senator Lebreton is the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of MADD I am guessing that there are many people who aren't especially partisan who respect her. Unless you consider people fighting against drunk driving are Tory hacks by definition. http://www.madd.ca/english/about/boardofdirectors.html MADD was recently implicated in a serious fundraising scandal. http://news.google.ca/nwshp?hl=en&lr=&ie=I...D%20fundraising So, where was Lebreton when those decisions were made?

Let's be precise. Israel withdrew its illegal settlers and ground-based military from a small part of occupied Palestine (the Gaza strip). Gaza's ports and borders remain under Israeli interdiction. The Palestinian struggle for freedom didn't 'start' then. It continued.

Marjorie LeBreton is Mulroney's legacy attack-dog. If anyone (other than tory hacks) respects her I'd like to know who.

G & M: To say the event was well-publicised at the time is an understatement. Margaret returned to Ottawa from New York, had a conversation with Trudeau and then was seen in public with a black eye or a bruised face. Of course she never admitted anything. This was the 1970s when wife-beating was still a taboo topic. In fact, some viewed Trudeau as a "real man" because he could show his wife who was boss. Joe Clark, on the other hand, was clearly not a tough guy since he let his wife keep her maiden name. Sounds like scurilous innuendo to me.

I think a certain gov't activity, if the gov't is reduced to doing only that, is a good step. And I think that if there should be a limited list of activities that the gov't can do, then it should be to protect (or prosecute those who infringe upon) the basic human rights to life, liberty, and property. Why these rights? Because they are the rights that every individual needs in order to be truly free. On what basis do you limit 'truly free' to being supplied by those rights and not others? How do you determine where 'protecting' someone's property becomes 'interference' with someone else's property? You "own" your life? What does that mean? The freedom of the individual to- or the freedom of the individual from- ? And to or from what? And how do you decide? Yes, but there's not way to operationalize a sentiment, or analyze its content. Government does numerous things, so where do you start pruning and how do you choose? Would you want to eliminate road maintenance? Why or why not? How about government archives? Why or why not? Search and rescue? Forest fire suppression? Legal tender? Anti-money-laundering efforts? Public parks?

Because I had been asked if I had ever said something bad (i.e. ever off any critcism) about the Government. I know what precipitated your question. What I am asking now is what your point was. And you're not answering. Try making a direct response to this: What if someone's analysis indicates to the them that the Conservatives haven't done anything to merit saying anything positive about them. Would it be some kind of issue if such a person never said anything good about them?

is just plain false.There are just as many Senators in Cabinet today as there were yesterday. Yes, Ricki you've managed to split hairs and be narrowly correct in an irrelevant way. Fortunata ought to have said "another cabinet role assigned to an unaccountable Senator. How democratic." Which is a good point. Harper has moved the CPC radically away from the concept of accountability and populism which animated the former Reform Party.

Discussed here: Reviving old threads -- what is proper netiquette? Well, that was ... interesting. Personally, I think of the board as being about interactive discussion, not an archive of accumulated opinion. So, I'm with Betsy ... let the old threads die and deal with today. Did you read them? You'll note that they each deal with different policies.

This conversation started when somebody asked if I had ever criticized the Conservatives. Which I have. The point was about blind partisanship. Somebody who has never criticized the Conservatives is just as blindely partisan as somebody who has never said anything positive. Are they perfect? No, they deserve some criticism. Are they absolutely terrible? No, they deserve some praise. Anybody whose *analysis* can't agree with that is blindly partisan. On either side of the aisle... Your comment doesn't seem to respond to my question. You asked Shakey whether s/he ever said anything good about the Conservative Party. I am wondering what your point in asking that was.

As a person who moved to Toronto after attaining adulthood, I'd like to inform you all that you're profoundly mistaken if you think Torontonians pay much attention to what people in other parts of the country think of them. Generally, Torontonians know that people hold a prejudice against them, and they don't really care. And BTW, 'ROC' is not about Toronto, it distinguished Quebec from "the rest of Canada".

Hey CA, what's with this habit of yours of flitting from thread to thread. Can't you just carry on a discussion where it happens? Jumping from a specific topic to a general one with hundreds of accumulated ancient-history posts makes it very difficult to follow the discussion.

What if someone's analysis indicates to the them that the Conservatives haven't done anything to merit saying anything positive about them. Would it be some kind of issue if such a person never said anything good about them?

'

Interesting comments, Jerry. In addition, I would point out that for people at the level of 'burger flippers', it seems plainly absurd to expect them to abandon their families and support networks, to invest in the cost of moving hundreds or thousands of miles, to a place where they can't afford any kind of home, all for a mere promise of a salary of '10-11 dollars and hour' (i.e. less than 30K/yr.).

The Fraser Institute! :lol:

What do you think that has to do with my comment you quoted?

"

These are two heroic young men. I hope the voters of Israel hear their message and begin to demand a sane and honest policy on the Palestinian issue.

That just sounds like doublespeak. Thatcher lead the government of a major state ... did she think that was a mere fiction? Interests which multiple individuals each hold. Answering a challenge to libertarian nostrums merely by referencing those nostrums is insufficient as an answer. Yes, I think that's sort of what I am getting at. Aptly said.

Thanks for your answer. I'm not sure if you are trying to dispute my contention about the paucity of content in libertarianism or if you are simply contributing information. Ultimately, based on the responses tendered so far, I'm more convinced of my stance than ever.

Lived in Toronto for 2 1/2 years. Met dozens of people who fit the stereotype and had the condescending attitutde towards westerners. "Dozens", eh? Did you know about 4 million people live in the Toronto area?

Still, that's not really responsive. Why is certain gov. activity thought good, but others not? How does Libertarianism draw its lines? What theoretical or conceptual framework allows a libertarian to determine that government should protect property from theft, but not protect common interests from devastation, for example?

How many 'Toronto silver-spoon socialists' did you interview to develop that opinion?