Ricki Bobbi

When did camermen become 'journalists'? If Mudie didn't want to respect the rules that was a choice he made...

Harper has a much better clue about Alberta than any Prime Minister, save Clark maybe, since Diefenbaker. This argument will get a little play in the media, just because it is a minor story. People will try and say the Conservagives are weaker in Alberta because of the decision. This is all somke and fethers about nothing...

Who is that?

what? 'a politically sustainable first step to modernizing our corporate taxation system? what does that mean?

The NEP wasn't truly in the best interest of the country. A decision that *devastated* the major industry in Alberta in favour of marginal benefits to the rest of the country isn't such a good thing. The income trust decision is. The benefits to the If the best people can come up with out of this decision is it will *hurt* the Conservatives in Alberta ... it's pretty sad. What are the alternatives Alberta Tory voters DO have?

OK, so the native casino is under Federal, not Provincial jurisdiction so it is Prentice's decision to make. I thought smoking bylaws were a municipal jurisdiction because, as the CBC story says, ther is currently no provincial ban on smoking anywher ein the country.

Gaming and smoking are provincially regulated in Manitoba just as driving and licensing are provincially run. It isn't driven by specific to any one group or people but to all. Are you sure about the smoking bans being a matter of provincial jurisdiction in Manitoba? Doesn't make sense to me. Gaming, driving and licensing are provincial jurisdictions everywhere. I know that smoking is a matter of municipal by-laws in Ontario and Alberta so I find it odd that Manitoba would be different.

Yes, not very much but I have. I post quite a bit so it's entirely understandable people could miss the few objections I have presented. The flag flap was bad optics and not handled well. The Emerson appointment wasn't an ideal decision. MacKay should have apologized, but not resigned over the dog comments. I have stated that MacKay's ethics were never a question because he showed his lack of ethics with (Which brings up a joke I have heard floating around. What would you call a movie about Peter MacKay and his Parliamentary Secretaries (Peter Van Loan and Deepak Obhrai)? Dumb and dumber and dumberer! ) Generally speaking I have been happy with the Government but there are some issues I have talked about.

Gaming is a provincial jurisdiction. Smoking by-laws are municipal. In Alberta you can smoke in Calgary casinos, but not Edmonton. That is a pretty weak analogy with the brothel. Prostitutiion isn't legal *anywhere* in the country and never has been. Smoking laws are a patchwork. The City of Edmonton tried to push it on the Band, but they have a pretty weak case. The casino isn't within the city limits. Still reeks of the paternalistic white man telling the ignorant indians how to run their bands. They saw a strategic business opportunity here. Power to them for trying to make money.

Which one? Seems like the promise on income trusts was to protect the income of seniors. They have done that by increasing the age credit and allowing income splitting...

Pandering? Hmmm, seems like the same old paternalism to the natives. "If they can't understand what is in their best interests the white man should enforce it on them." Self-government should be just that. Including the opportunity to make decisions of this nature for their communities. I'm not familiar with the situation in Manitoba but I know there is really nobody hurt by smoking in the new native casino just outside Edmonton. All of the casinos in the city are smoke-free. Because of the employment market they are all crying for staff. If smoking is such a big deal to the staff they can work in a casino in the city. If smoking is such a big deal to the players they can play in a casino in the city. The native band on the Enoch nation (just outside Edmonton) saw it as a strategic choice to allow smoking in the casino. Allowing native self-government means allowing decisions we don't necessarily agree with.

That's fair and expected. Not all people are as high-minded here. My post that started this exchange was in response to a poster who is an egregious example of exactly what this board shouldn't be.

Poltically correct? Don't see how arguing *for* making smoking available in a public place is politically correct in any estimation.

I don't know if a lot will be deserting Iggy, but he doesn't have much room for growth. IF Kennedy appears to have any momentum going into the second, or subsequent, ballot look for the Quebec delegation en masse to form their own quelqu'un mais Kennedy movement....

OK, fair enough. But what about my comments about the person who started this thread? Have you *ever* seen them say anything positive about the government?

Jeb in '08? Probably not. Later than that ... who knows. About your earlier comment on nominees in '08. Definitely won't be Obama. Hillary is a huge shot to win the Democratic nomination. Same with McCain. The geographic consideration thing isn't so important. The Dems want to avoid the Northeastern Liberal tag again. Republcans will try and use that against Hillary but it won't stick.

They campaigned on it. Had to make a choice between cutting the GST and the various other tax cuts they have implelemented and abiding by a short-term Liberal policy....

This is a good situation for Prentice. Where the right thing to do meets with the politically shrewd thing to do. Natives lean Liberal. This coiuld help swing some votes to the Conservatives.

Fair enough. But do me the favour of responding to this question. I debate things here. I will admit mistakes and question Government policy. For example, I said many times during the last Government that PM Dithers was a great Finance Minister who was doing a terrible job as PM. The attacks of Herper are nothing but attacks. No consideration, no space for consideration of other opinions. Attack, attack, attack. Have you ever said anything good about the PM or this Government? I know the person who started this thread hasn't...

He's far more than a 'little weaker' in Quebec. Take a look at the super weekend results excepting Quebec and Kennedy is by far the second choice. His pathetic 11 delegate sin Quebec killed him. But he's young and can spend the next six to eight years working on his French and building support in Quebec.

Attacking the Canadian Government wasn't the primary focus of the meeting when we agreed to attend.

Please Gerry. You always make it about you. If you didn't want to become the object of banter on the forum, you wouldn't reply on the forum. You would reply with PMs. Don't try and fool people. You have broken many rules on the forum over and over and over. You have gotten away with multiple infractions htat have gotten other posters banned. There is no 'right' to try and turn a publicly-funded message board into your forum for attacking *everything* the Government does at every opportunity. Start a blog, and pay for it yourself, if you want to do that. I have used my right to state my objections in polite, respectful terms. Please don't choose to use disrespectful language in replying to this. If you can't respond with a reasonable, respectful response don't take up bandwidth.

Fair enough on the first point. Statesmanship? Why should Harper go 'face the music'? He made a decision as the Prime Minister of Canada. He doesn't want to waste his time going to a meeting just to be lectured to for the decision he made. *scary* *scary* *scary* by comparing him to GW. tsk tsk tsk....

This is a good test in how committed people are to the concept of aboriginal self-government. If bands are to govern themselves that should also include the opportunity to choose how to govern where people can smoke on the reserves. Seems like this will be a popular decision with native groups. Huh, imagine that a Minister of Indian Affairs making a decision that is overwhelmingly supported by natives.

I don't think the U.S. is ready for a black President yet. The outcome of the Senate race in Tennesse will be a good gauge of how open white southerners are to having a black man holding high public office, at least in Tennessee. If Ford cracks 45% of the vote on the election night it will be a pyrrhic victory. Don't know if he'll do that tough...