Black Dog

First, I've been posting here longer than you, kid. Second: am i bitter? Cynical, totally, but bitter? Naw. I'm used to the hypocrisy of "conservatives" who piss and moan aboyut how badly the West gets screwed by those "eastern bastards" without even noticing how their own homegrown oligarchy sticks it to them over and over again.that's the really hilarious thing: there's an implicit assumption that a independant Alberta would be free of the corruption and arrogance indemic in Ottawa: but even a coursory look at the history of Alberta politics shows that this province constitently produces leaders that make some of the federal crooks look like pikers. If my fellow Albertans devoted a quarter of their energy towards keeping the bloated, complacant and arrogant provincial government on its toes that they do to tilting at eastern windmills, we'd probably all be better off. Yeah, we're also going around at night with jackhammers to make potholes. Boo yah.

One the one hand, I have no trouble believing the Liberals would stoop to this kind of trick. On the other, though, I really can't beleive they wouldn't consider the risks involved. We know they are crooked: the question now becomes "are they stupid?"

Again, we have a lot of ranting and raving by Conservative supporters about Liberal corruption (which no one in their right mind disputes). But what's still missing is any compelling reason to turn the keys over to Harper and the gang. Outrage will only take you so far. At a certain point you have to tell people why you're a credible alternative. "We won't be as corrupt as the other guys" isn't a complelling message. The Cons haven't done that. They've overplayed the outrage hand.

EKOS poll in depth

Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs Putting aside the usual quaetions about praciticality, arms races, aggression and such, I wonder if these people ever stop and think about how they are going to pay for these gadgets. The U.S. is already on the verge of spending as much on "defence" as the rest of the world combined.. At the same time, the U.S. is rushing towards a financial crisis precipitated by record deficits, massive foriegn debt, colossal spending and shrinking revenues. And yet, we see, not calls for restraint, but more extravagant spending on new weapons systems and military adventures. What's going on?

Backstabbing is backstabbing. McKay made a pledge that he would not merge the PC's with the CA. And then he did. It was a slimeball move. As for the latter comment, since when are conservatives oppossed to unearned privilege? Citation? No one's disputing Stronach's lack of qualifications. I'm simply saying sghe has been the subject to the kind of treatment a male politico in a similar situation wouldn't encounter. Simply possessing a vagina doesn't make one instantly qualified to comment on sexism. Both Wente and Blatchford have amde carers out of apologizing for power, so I'm not surprised by their reactions. I shudder to think that the only female politicians of note you cite include the demonstratably vile Thatcher, Meir and Rice (not to mention the right-wing's favorite punching bag Clinton). Word. I agree. So far their moderation has led them to the brink of power. I would love to see the Cons immoderate themselves right out of existence.

*Sigh.* As usual, your ever-so enlightening analysis is a mile wide and an inch deep. You cite differences between religious people in NA and elsewhere as if those differences were soley the product of the religious beliefs themselves and not part of a bigger picture of which religion is but one element.

Sure: and in the interest of fairness, they can repay Canada al the money we've sunk in over the years, not to mention their share opf our national debt, the federal defecit. In other words, you want to have you cake an eat it too. The way I see it is: what have you done for us lately? Why should the ROC give two hoots about the fate of post-secession Quebec?

Galloway takes names; kicks ass

A sentiment shared by observers here and in other circles I've seen. Just because you won't see something doesn't mean it's not there. It would also help if you later didn't undermine your own point to wit: But I'm sure Paul Martin would field questions about his looks and Stephen Harper would get asked about what kind of product he uses to acheive his unique "World War One Prussian Army helmet" hairdo, right?

Let me explain something you don't seem to get. See, there's this thing called the media. The media employs reporters to write what's called news. Reporters in turn talk to people who know about the subject at hand. These people are called sources. The information these sources give is referered to as a quote. These quotes do not necessarily represent the views of the reporter or the media they work for. In conclusion, to cite the position of a single source as evidence of the media's bias is and incorrect. Clear enough?

Funny how Quebec never had a problem taking the money, though. Jeez, I thought you conservatives were all about personal responsibility. But I guess that goes out he window when you get a chance to bash Ontario. BTW, i remember it was a certain Conservative PM who set the standard for pork-barrelling in Quebec. I'd have no problem with Quebec separating provided they footed 100 per cent of the bill and created their own institutions (ie. monetary, military, health) to run tehir own show. No "soverignty association", no asking Canada to pay their way. That would be like the afore-mentioned teenager saying he's going to move out, but maintain access to the car, the fridge and the TV. Once your out, you're out.

Agreed. The Cons are just feeding the media circus and keeping teh notion that Paulie Pockets fleeced them alive. They should have issued a strong, terse statement and walked away. Instead, you get a bunch of clowns shooting their mouths off, which just reinforces the existing notion that the Cons are buffoons. Harper doesn't seem capable of controlling the loose screws in his caucus. Political watcher says Stronach backlash sexist

Okay, I keep hearing about how Gomrey is causing so much outrage in Quebec and bolstering the separatist cause there. Which is weird to me, because there's a long and cherished history in this country of federal politicians shovelling buckets of pork into la belle province and getting nothing but grief in return. So my question is: what's Quebec's problem? for as long as I can remember, they've been threataning to take their ball and go home, this despite teh fact that are not a contributer to the rest of the country. Are there legitimate beefs I'm not seeing? Or is the case for separation simply that of a bunch of whiny brats using the threat of running away from home to get more stuff out of their parents?

I've seen sly innuendos and sexist invective directed at Stronach that you'd never see towards a male politician of any stripe. One columnist suggested her choice of political parties is no different than her choosing between Prada or Gucci shoes. Did Peter McKay get called a whore when he sole out the PC's?

Well, in Huxley's dystopia, both the sex and drugs are instruments of state control. Today? Pfizer=Soma?

For a super secret club, these cats sure are slopy about their membership lists getting out.

Let that be a lesson to you! Let's jump into the wayback machine, shall we?Anyone remember the "single, unreliable source" responsible for much of the Bush admin's pre-war information on Iraq's WMD? Will we be hearing a "retraction" from the Bushies about their WMD claims? I won't hold my breath.

Keeping America hard

Oops.

Of course she's opportunistic. In business terms, she saw the CPC's stock was bound to take a dip, so she shifter her holdings to a blue chip stock. It's the free market in action!

I have a better idea: why don't you pack your bags and go. It'd be a lot cheaper than breaking up the country and fewer people would miss you. Buh bye. Sure and maybe you could get the U.S. to help safeguard the oil, since they are the bigest users of oil and gas, and since so much money from Alberta's resources already flows to the U.S....

Y'know, it just struck me how sordid this whole thing is. First Peter screwed Joe to get with Stephen. Then Belinda and Peter started screwing each other. Meanwhile, Stephen and Gilles got together in hopes of screwing Paul but then Belinda turned around and screwed both Peter and Stephen by jumping into bed with Paul. And, in the end, we're all screwed.

Sure, just like the Cons exist soley for gaining power a goal that, if acheived, would evolve into maintaining power. Is anyone so naive as to think either party has any grand ambition beyond keeping their place at the trough or muscling in for a feed?

Whast's western separation at now? Less than 10 per cent? It would take a lot more than a political scandal to get it even close to the levels needed for it to be a serious issue. Rural Alberta != the west. The Cons are Liberal lite (albeit with a tinge of social conservatism that most Canadian find downright creepy). That's the problem. People either didn't see the difference, so they would rather stick with the devil the know, or they're uncomfortable with the Cons stance on issues like gay marriage and Canada/U.S. relations. Quite simply, there's nothing compelling about the Conservatives, starting with Harper.