Remiel

I doubt it. If Jim " Canada Will Be Just Fine " Flaherty is not a more bald faced liar than McGuinty could ever be, then his incompetence must really know no bounds.

I think the majority of Liberals have too much pride in their party to throw in the towel just yet. Depending on how the Ontario election goes, it might be a much more likely scenario for the Liberals to try and absorb the Greens than merge with the NDP. That may be unlikely because the Greens too have pride in their international brand, but a compromise between Red and Green could pay dividends to real agendas of both parties: the Greens, the support of a much larger party to push environmentally friendly legislation, and the Liberals a forward looking policy area that they can " own " .

Who but the very wealthy start businesses when they believe their chance of at least breaking even is less than 67%?

This could I think be disputed to some degree, but for the purposes of debate it might be better to change the question rather than belabour that point: We need not ask whether corporations are evil if we can answer whether they do evil.

This is semantically a terrible generalization, Rue. There is no way for a human not to unintentionally abuse animals (or more correctly, other sentient creatures) in the real world. You mere existence is bound to be an assault on something.

A quick but by no means extensive search turns up the fact that Angus used to be in a band called L'Etranger, but that is indirect evidence and the only evidence of any kind I found...

Laser hair removal seems like a bridge too far in some ways. I mean, it is fairly simple if annoying procedure to remove unwanted hair if you do not have the procedure. If you do have the procedure, there is nothing that brings that hair back if you need it. I suspect that if you were to interview people who are stuck in freezing cold conditions whether they want to shave their hair or not, any with a lick of sense will respond, " Why the Hell would I want to help myself become more cold? "

Davies is kind of a fruitcake. She would be an unmitigated disaster for the NDP. Of others not mentioned so far, I have always kind of liked Charlie Angus.

Is Stoffer not going to make a run for it? I remember a time when he seemd the natural alternative to Layton.

You know, I am neither an atheist (not even agnostic), nor am I unable to cope with religious folks trying to convince me of their beliefs. But I do not understand how some of you have the fortitude to continue debating betsy's ridiculous arguments for so many pages...

On my, Argus has not in fact abandoned Maple Leaf Web after all...

While I feel the same way, I can understand how it could be attributed to increased peevishness. Something about coming back after a long absence and seeing the same old crap has a way of clawing out your will to rise to the occassion. I mean, I recall last year someone commenting on the fact that I had written something in anger and they said something along the lines of " You have even roused the normally calm Remiel! " whereas this year I am practicaly swearing up and down and every which way, and just generally grumpier...

This is an odd argument. On one hand you seem to be saying that we have all the reason in the world to respect, admire, and empathize with dogs, because allegedly we could not have progressed to where we are today without them, while at the same time saying there is no reason at all to respect, admire, or empathize within various Muslim cultures, despite the not merely alleged fact that we could not have advanced to where we are today had Muslims not preserved and grown the body of knowledge at precisely the time Christianity eschewed it entirely. I mean, I am not saying that the outcome of this argument is that one must respect, admire, and empathize with Muslim cultures, but rather that the argument for why we should give those things to dogs in particular, as is, sucks.

Does not mean anyone is getting the coke back.

Sure, maybe. That could mean however that the police did wrong it seizing marijuana, but that they were well within their rights to seize the " cocaine and designer drugs " .

Under Canadian Law, can a prohibited substance even be considered the " property " of the person who has it in their possession? I mean, the Act may seem clear about seizure of personal property, but it does not necessarily address what counts as personal property. Even if they can, it does not necessarily mean that anyone other than the root producer could be properly considered the owner, because it seems any sale who be considered a void contract under the law. Remember, some of what they seized was harder drugs. I am betting, for instance, they were not growing cocaine on the reserve.

Why does the burning have to be the same as heat burning? Acid " burns " too, and it not the same as heat burning. All that is important is that it is a sensation from which one would seek immediate and ongoning relief. I recall once eating a hot pepper on a dare and I ended up spending most of the next fifteen to twenty minutes drinking water to cool off. It would have been brutal without that relief.

You should get out your map, Bonam. Take a look at where Canada is, then take a look at where Europe is, where the US is, and compare them. Geography is not a negligible influence on changes to the health care system.

Are you seriously trying to tell me you do not think it is somewhat warped to suggest that it is more " fair " to make those in the middle poorer to make those at the bottom better off which at the same time making those at the top even richer? People often object to mere levelling down, yet this is an even worse solution.

Something tells me that the attempts by the wealthy to pay less tax would not be measurably less fervent if the money was going to poor Africans rather than poorish Canadians.

Dancer was banned, ?

Tampering is built into the system because of the floors on seats.

Keep in mind what that article mentions about rural discontent. Most seats that go to the big cities are going to be also up for grabs for Liberals and NDP, depending on the area.

I added it to me previous post.

There already *is* a formula. It is by this very formula that it was determined those provinces need topping up. The Bill it just an implementation of what is already apparent. http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?lang=F&ls=c12&Parl=40&Ses=3&source=library_prb#a7