Higgly

Believe it or not, being a market watcher involves listening to what the government might say. Incredible. Are you saying we should ignore that?

Well then there should be some kind of legal action against Brison. In any case, the market drop was what unleashed the most tongues - this was scornfully referred to on ROBTV as the "Goodale Hiccup" for months. There are plenty of ways to send a signal. When BCE announced it was going to trust (and the Chair of BCE actually called Flaherty to warn him), the Tories could have said, on the numerous opportunities they had to do so, 'We are looking at the mattter and expect to have a policy decision in the next few months.' Not saying what they are going to do, but simply that they think a re-think might be in order. They could also have said, as the Liberals did, 'We are putting a freeze on new trust conversions and looking at the matter.' Instead what they said was 'No comment.' In other words, the status quo stands.

When you have made a commitment, then you have an obligation to send some sort of signal that things might change or at least that they are being looked at. This was a sandbagging pure and simple. Ask the people who logged on to their online broker and looked at their investments this morning whether they think it is out of the news cycle. Funny how the same right wing press that howled and growled at the Liberals for even thinking of doing the same thing are now full of apologies for the Conservatives...

The comment was about how many had been killed by the rockets. Stick to the subject. As for the link, the number of Palestinians, children and otherwise, greatly exceeds that of the Israelis. How many Israelis have died in the past 6 months? How many Palestinians? What kind of horrendous pictures do you think the Palestinians could put up? The quote you provide is typical of its type. "We are innocent and have never done anything wrong. Why do they hate us? It's all their fault. They are scum." The comment about Lebanon particularly shows the writer's ignorance. The death toll in Lebanon (over 17,000) from Ariel Sharon's little adventure in the 1980s (a response to 105 Israelis being killed by PLO terrorists) puts a whole new face on the concept of 'self-defence'.

You did that sir. What is that "something" the buzz would accomplish? Well people might start to think it possible to hold a government accountable for its words.

Economics ahead of optics. Nice soundbite. People invested in these things because they believed what the 'accountability' government told them. Optics be damned. Principled government my fanny.

Sure it was. That's why the only thing you've managed to do so far is slap down one liners. Of course your howlers on uncompensated housework really raised the bar here. And speaking of Homer Simpson... D'oh! The trust index fell some 15%. A lot of people had a lot of money in these things because they were counting on the government to keep its word. Pulling a stunt like this without a whisper of warning after having made a commitment is why so many are ticked off. They have every right to be. My guess is that your comments on my posts are coming from an entirely different direction altogether. If you can't attack the facts, then you attack the messenger.

Yes it would! Sorry Higgly, but you've got this one dead wrong. Legally Parliament can pass whatever laws it wants. I think the only exception is when Parliament passes a law that goes against the Constitution. So what was said in an election doesn't matter at all. Very eloquent responses though. I really had to raise the bar to respond to Ricki Bobbi Would be fun to see someone try this. Just the buzz would accomplish something.

Who are they?

Good point. The Speaker of the House, regardless of party affiliation, does not participate in the debate.

Not surprised you'd duck the question Argus. No Israelis have died because of those pathetic little rockets. Here's one for you... How many Palestinains have to die before the Israelis look in the mirror one day and see a funny little guy with a funny little moustache?

O'Reilly is a simple fool. A hundred or so years ago there was no country called Iraq. It is something the Brits cobbled together to suit themselves. It took a despot to hold it together. No brutal despot, and all the factions that had their own little fiefdoms for centuries start to fly apart again. What does win mean to O'Reilly? The perpetuation of an artifical state? The man's a bad joke. Figleaf: Faux News. I love it.

Cheney had a lot to do with it, but even more was the guy who brought the idea into the US government in the first place - Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense under Rumsfeld. Wolfowitz first came up with this while working for Benjamin Netenyahu during his campaign to become Israeli Prime Minister after Rabin was assassinated. The idea had been a Likud dream for some time but Israel didn't have the juice to pull it off. Wolfowitz then went to Defense and started pushing the idea to George Bush Senior during the gulf war. Senior had too much smarts (or rather Colin Powell did) to go along with the dumb ass idea and he pulled US troops out of Iraq after Sadddam had been kicked out of Kuwait. Wolfowitz had convinced Cheney and Rumsfeld though, and together they then went to work on junior who hasn't got the brains God gave a turnip. There is an interesting photo of Bush, Wolfowitz and Condoleeza Rice leaning on a split rail fence out at the Bush ranch sometime shortly before the first election that brought Bush into office. Here we have a guy who has been consulting to the Prime Minister of Israel, and who is in a senior position in Defense (but not a cabinet minster) getting an invite out to the ranch. Touching isn't it? You are right that Bush had wanted to do it for some time. He was actively discussing it in cabinet with Rumsfeld before 9/11. It has been argued that Bush junior missed the clues to 9/11 because he was so totally focussed on invading Iraq. Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush were all obsessed with it from day 1.

Funny how that all came about isn't it?

Yes it would! Well gee, what do you think?

I'm wondering if a class action lawsuit against the Tory government might have some legs here.

Hee hee. The Common Sense Revolution. Hee hee.

I just finished wathcing Jane Taber launch puffballs to lyin' Jim Flaherty on CTV. I guess that shows the kind of crap you get when financial survival is more important than news coverage for a telelvision network.

The Globe and Mail is quoting it here. See the part at the end titled "In Their Own Words."

Keep this in mind the next time you're tempted to compare me to Homer Simpson, August.

Well the trading day has come to an end and some $25 billion has been sliced off of the Canadian capital markets. That's some blip. D'oh!

Israel had no choice but to pull out of Gaza. The cost of defending a handful of settlers was horrendous, and even an idiot like Sharon had to recognize that Gaza is completely unmanageable. How many people have those rockets killed? Say compared to the constant extra-judicial helicopter gunship assassinations that Israel now carries out as an almost daily routine....

Well there was a little episode during which it was planting them in theatres and mailboxes in Egypt. Does that qualify?

Another convert to the "Poor us, why do they hate us?" mythinformation campaign.

Not from what I've seen so far.