scribblet

Well gee, why don't we all just curl up and die. I agree there is an over population problem, but I'm not going back to living in a cave either. http://citizensofcaledonia.ca/ check this out, gives picture and details. Good website here with information on this native terrorisim. We have a rather romantized vision of what natives where and are, they are no more Part of the problem is that reasonable, sensible, discussion on native issues are almost always interpreted as racist or bigoted, which does the job of stiffling debate. Indians deserve to be treated equally given the same rights and obligations Treaties signed two hundres years ago have little relevance to today, despite the Supreme Court. To actually presume that aboriginals cab return, to a life their ancestors once lived is just plain silly. Few Indians today live, or could live, as their ancestors did. Heck, even the term "First Nations" is rhetoric No people have built in right to anything simply and only because they were somewhere first.

-both are evangelical Christians big whoopy do, so what, Harper doesn't wear it on his sleeve, in fact its mainly people in discussion groups who seem to think its an issue. Both Martin and Chretien are RC's, and we know were their church stands on abortion and birth control don't we? However, whatever happened to freedom of religion ? I've never heard say the "God" will save us from environmental degradation - please provide the source/link Harper does not want to make abortion illegal, he has said so over and over again - what part of that don't you understand. As far as abortion goes, one does not have to be a fundamentalist anything to want to see some limits on it. I'm not religious, I'm pro-choice, with limits on late term abortions.

Well, descent is allowed on most small bills. When Belinda crossed the floor, she did so because she wanted the budget to pass (or so she says, I haven't seen damning evidence to the contrary, so we'll give her the benefit of the doubt). Emerson crossed so he could complete a very successful softwood agreement with the US. All of these are ethical decisions. Which paid off, thank goodness. All in all it looks like Emerson/Harper did the right thing, so we have around around 10 years anyway before it heats up again I suppose.

I can never do it without messing it up, if I try trim, it is never in quotes anymore. bummer

Wonder how long it will take for the Liberals to start taking credit for this deal...you know - oh, it was in the works, we would have got the deal, we would have finished it had we stayed in office "

Exactly. MacLeans Magazine last week did an article on the proliferation of private health care, there is certainly more around than I had thought. No HMOs involved so that bogeyman doesn't fly, if you can afford it, you pay, that simple.

Trying to equate Harper to Bush is on a par with equating today's Tories to Reform - bit od a stretch to say the least. It is simply pandering to the knee jerk anti U.S. liberal attitude .

Stignasty, Harper's accountability act may deserve criticism (Harper has a policeman view of enforcing rules) but Reid's criticism has nothing to do with that viewpoint.Instead, John Reid (as Information Commissioner, salary paid by you and me, ex-Liberal MP) says that "governments are dishonest". Reid, Dossanjh and the rest of the Chretien/Martin Liberals have one schtick: Promote, claim and make a case. In Quebec, and in the West, this schtick has been an utter disaster for Canada. I heard Ignatieff this morning, on RC/CBC in English and French, making strenuous attempts to claim that he's not like that. Who will believe it? Dossanjh isn't even a Liberal. He's a fraud. The federal Liberal Party is in serious trouble, and the CBC, John Reid, Ujjal Dosanjh and Michael Ignatieff do not have quick fixes. Well, all the liberals have right now is some ability to take a swing at anything the CPC does, and this act hits them where it will hurt the most. Even the NDP are on side with it and are willing to give it a chance, unlike those who cannot ever see anything good about anything the CPC would ever do. What Martin, Chretien & their band of merry theives did to Canadians and the Liberal attitude of "only liberals know whats best for Canada" along with their sense of entitlement, will not be forgotten soon. The liberals have allready said they will not adopt the new political party financing rules until they have to, although the CPC will. We know where the liberals stand don't we. It is obvious that the Liberals don't like the new rules because theytake political power away and hamper their ability to push their own agendas. These measures will change the way the liberals normally do business, they don't like it they simply want to return to the status quo. What the bill would do and sounds good to me: Reform the financing of political parties to reduce big-money influence by banning secret donations and donations from companies, unions and associations. Limit individual donations to $1,000. Reduce the influence of lobbyists by toughening the Lobbyists Registration Act. Strengthen the role of the federal ethics watchdog with a new conflict of interest act and a new conflict of interest and ethics commissioner. Create a budget officer to ensure objective analysis on government finances. Ensure government appointments are based on merit. Create a transparent process for awarding government contracts, including appointing a procurement auditor. Provide protection and reward whistleblowers who disclose government wrongdoing. Expand access-to-information legislation to cover some Crown corporations, federal foundations and agents of Parliament such as the Auditor-General. Give the Auditor-General more power.

http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=3674...580996d94743dff Fortunately Sweden didn't go for this. Problem is, these requests keep popping up, how long before they actually do get a foot hold? Separate laws for Muslims' idea slammed Published: 28th April 2006 10:08 CET Sweden's largest Muslim organisation has demanded that Sweden introduce separate laws for Muslims, according to Swedish television. Sweden's equality minister Jens Orback called the proposals "completely unacceptable". The Swedish Muslim Association, which represents around 70,000 Muslims in Sweden, has sent a letter to all Sweden's main political parties suggesting a number of reforms, SVT's Rapport programme reported. The proposals include allowing imams into state (public) schools to give Muslim children separate lessons in Islam and their parents' native languages. The letter also said that boys and girls should have separate swimming lessons and that divorces between Muslims should be approved by an imam. The letter provoked an instant, and damning, response from integration and equality minister Jens Orback. "We will not have separate laws in Sweden. In Sweden, we are all equal before the law. In Sweden, we have fought for a long time to achieve gender-neutral laws, and to propose that certain groups should not be treated like others is completely unacceptable."

Sob stories indeed, have you ever lost a child, I lost a Grandchild at 21, a husband at29, so how are you doing. Without the OHIP I would never have paid off the bills for my Husband. I lived when there was no OHIP and I hear a lot of young spoiled brats on here who have always had everything handed to them complaining because they have to pay some taxes. It makes me sick Maybe I have, and so did I (live when there was no OHIP ) and OHIP doesn't pay for funerals. No one was suggesting we do away with OHIP, why do you continually suggest that or twist things? Personally I've never had anything handed to me, I came from a very poor background were both parents were adamantly NDP, but they never whined and complained. I paid for my own education and worked hard for everything I have today thank you very much, it wasn't handed to me. It makes me sick that people seem to think that everyone else should look after them in perpetuity.

Much of this heat over the flag is uninformed hysteria. I had lunch yesterday with a group of ladies, most of whom thought it was awful that the 'flags' were not lowered. They had no idea that it was only the flag on the peace tower, and that it reverting to traditional protocol. Obviously the media doesn't make it clear, and more obviously people believe everything they read in the papers.

Quote from a person who can take care of himself. Lose half your body in a car accident tomorrow, and you'll be crying that the nanny state will ensure you are poor for the rest of your life. There has to be a social safety net, but there is a difference between that and being in a permanent welfare state. People need a hand up, not a hand out.

This is a pretty good deal, 34% is the same share of the market they have now, 4 B now is better than nothing,and slim to none chance of more later. If this deal is refused, there will be no more negotiations until the next President. Why should we wait that long? The only reason the opposition is going on about it is obvious to me, they don't like the idea of Harper scoring political points - to h..l with the country.

Just as an aside, maybe how doctor's set up their appointments need to be looked at. I like my doctor, but if I need to see him about two issues, then I have to make two appointments. I have an appointment for my general physical coming up, but he won't see me then for my weight loss check-up, have to make my regular monthly appointment, so two in one month when it could easily be done as part of the check-up. Can't see him in one appointment for an eye infection and ask about a re-occurrence of a basel cell on my face - two appointments. All billed to OHIP of course.

How many people in Canada can die and suffer before you change your dogmatic view of health care? There is alot of misinformation coming from your side too. If the government is covering the costs of private delivery, everyone gets access to world quality care. User fees prevent idiots from going in and getting splinters removed at a cost of hundreds of dollars to the taxpayer. Like I said, France and Sweden have private delivery, public single-payer systems. No waiting lists, top notch care. Instead, we hold on to some ridiculous socialist view (only Cuba and North Korea use our system) and watch as children, adults, seniors suffer and die... all for political points. You've been convinced by the 'Friends of Medicare.' I wonder when we will have a 'Friends of Patients' group. Medicare is no friend to the sick in Canada. Indeed. If a patient needs a diagnostic procedure e.g. maybe an MRI or CAT scan, the doctor won't do that right away because of the expense. They will start with the least expensive diagnostic procedure e.g. x-ray or bone scan for instance. If they get their diagnosis with that, then they've saved money on the more expensive treatment. If not, they move up to the next procedure and so on. I guess its russian roulette with the patient, my doctor told me that a couple of years ago. I had a problem while in the U.S. and the doctor wanted me to have a CAT scan immediately, my insurance wouldn't pay for it and chose to fly me home instead. My doctor here wouldn't order a cat scan, had to have an x-ray , then a bone scan, the bone scan showed nothing, so next was a CAT... They take a chance that the cheapest procedure first will pay off. Go figure.. I don't like HMOs either, but those dogmatically opposed to any form of choice seem to think that they will end up having to 'pay' for their health care. This is fear mongering and we know that this won't happen, so sob stories don't cut it, people will still be looked after.

Well said. Enough is enough, but will any gov't ever have the guts to stand up to this blackmail?

http://www.stephentaylor.ca/ (in the Comments Section) Comment from Kandahar: I've been watching this debate on a number of different blogs and it is guys like jdave who piss me off royally. How about this jdave. If you happen to be so unlucky as to have someone from your family killed in an accident, why don't you run to the nearest media outlet and let them stick a mike in your face. Nothing like seeing the crying faces of the dead soldiers kids on TV, or a grieving wife. I am in the military, blogging from Kandahar. My comment to you is f---off. The last thing that I'd want is my wife and kids seen across the country if I am unfortunate enough to run into harm's way. This is not a media event, but a very private time for the friends and family of those who have died while serving their country. Each of us has voluntarily signed on the line, even to put ourselves in harm's way. But I sure in the hell didn't sign up to give the Liberals or anti-Bushites some type of propaganda item as the result of my death. And trust me every soldier that I've spoken to over here feels exactly the same. You type of people make me sick. Ed the Hun

Actually not only was Mulroney 'greener' but he had the best economic record, at least when this was written: Canada lags behind the U.S. http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/pressro...ws/20051013.htm TTAWA -- Canadians have no reason to feel smug and righteous when comparing their efforts at cleaning up air pollution to the much better performance of the United States, an environmental coalition says. "In many ways, [President] George Bush's America is doing a much better job of cleaning up pollution than our own country," Rick Smith of Pollution Watch said yesterday. The United States reduced air-pollution emissions by 45 per cent between 1995 and 2003, he said. "At the same time, Canada has reduced its air pollution by an embarrassing 1.8 per cent." http://www.mcgill.ca/files/economics/foreward.pdf In November 1993, my colleague Al Riggs and I published a comparative study of Canadian Prime Ministers since the end of World War II, and concluded that Brian Mulroney had the best economic record since Louis St. Laurent. We have updated our study to include the Chretien years. Mr. Chretien is still in office. His term is incomplete. But his objective record does not fare well in our statistical comparison, where a PM earns points not for basking in good times but for improving his inherited situation; for doing a better job than his competitor in the Oval Office; for showing a upward trend in desirable numbers during his term; and for making a difference in the later development of Canada. When we crunch the numbers to measure by these standards, Mr. Mulroney still has the best economic ranking of any Prime Minister in recent times, and Mr. Chretien ranks last, closely trailed by Mr. Trudeau.

Just last night friends were discussing this and the main point was "does Harper live in a cave?" Does he not know that 80% of the world despises GW? Does he not know that by following in GW's footsteps he is alienating Canadians? Regardless of whether or not he "wants" to follow Bush, he is percieved as doing so. If Harper wants to hold onto his govt he should realize that the majority of Canadians want to distance themselves as far as possible from GW (currently, the most despised man on the planet). Personally I don't care who or how many 'despise' Bush, it doesn't matter. The U.S. is our ally and main trading partner, so it makes no sense whatsoever to alienate them any further than the Liberal gov't allready has. Too bad people can't put their personal hatreds aside for the good of both countries.

First Nations protesters enraged anew over comments by Caledonia, Ont. mayorWell this caused a storm of controversy. The council couldn't back away from her comments fast enough. They muzzled the mayor from speaking further on the issue. I don't see how the mayor's comments were inaccurate in any way. While I can't seem to find anyone who is on the Native's side in this dispute, I think as a country we are hampered by a sense of guilt. This sense of guilt causes us to shower benefits and special treatment on native groups far beyond what we do for anyone else. It time we got over it. Its time native groups got over their sense of entitlement for special treatment. If they want to stay on there reserve, fine, but do it without the economic support of the taxpayer. If they want to integrate into society, fine too, but don't expect special treatment. But do one or the other and stop this constant display of childishness. The mayor tells it like it is but gets in trouble for it, just not pc you know to tell the truth about of taxdollars. Wonder how the people who do support the natives would feel if these guys decided to squat in their subdivision and claim it. Its time the politicians took a stand and said enough is enough. Not mention demanding accountability for where the billions of tax dollars go.

Um, it was passed unanimously, from the article I liked to: That means everybody including Harper agreed with the policy at the time. Oddly enough, while looking at past votes in the House, I stumbled upon this one, Harper himself voted for the gun registry legislation at Second Reading way back in 1995. But changed his mind and voted against it later when he realized its implications etc. I guess no one cares that all the CPC are doing is going back to original protocol, and that the legion actually agrees with this. All this is political back stabbing to score points by using the funerals and deaths as a political football. Way to go liberals et al - not

Because it works ! As Norcap pointed out, GWB is highly unpopular and the easy tie-in will probably win political points with the masses. Harper needs to realize he's not operating in a political vacuum. We still rely on television sound bytes to frame our perceptions of what is happening. By not maintaining a forceful political presence, he's allowing the Liberal spin machine to get a huge head start on defining him in the minds of Canadians. I agree, that it does work, its simply a political strategy to score points. Its fear mongering, playing to the intolerance and hatred towards Bush and the U.S. - it works. I'm no supporter of the war but hatred of Bush doesn't consume me nor give me tunnel vision. Harper and the CPC is left of the U.S. democrats, but by asserting that we (Canadians) are different doesn't make us superior. In fact, our moralizing and continuing assertion that we are better and everything the U.S. does is wrong, makes us definitely appear inferior.

The half-mast protocol Many Canadians are outraged that the government is declining to lower the flag to half-mast when Canadian soldiers die in Afghanistan. They should not be. It has been the practice for decades to lower the flag for all soldiers on Remembrance Day, when Canada honours its war dead. Only in 2002, when four Canadians were killed in a friendly-fire incident in Afghanistan, did the previous Liberal government beginlowering the flag for individual soldiers who died in combat. The new Conservative government obviously meant no disrespect to Canadian forces, whose mission in Afghanistan it supports to the hilt, when it reverted to the traditional protocol. The government may have erred in its handling of the decision, failing to adequately explain its reason until the deaths of four soldiers on the weekend raised the issue again. But its reasoning is sound. However brave they were, these four were no braver than the Canadians who died in Bosnia in the 1990s, in Korea in the 1950s or in the two world wars. To lower the flag for more recent casualties was to make an unfair distinction. It is a grim fact that Canadian deaths are becoming almost routine in Afghanistan, the most dangerous mission for our troops since the Korean War. Canadians must steel themselves for the fact that quite a few more men and women may lose their lives as Canadian forces struggle to give hope to the Afghan people and prevent international terrorism from flourishing in their country again, an important and noble cause if there ever was one. To make a national show of mourning over each soldier who dies -- lowering the flag on Parliament's Peace Tower and other public buildings; sending the Prime Minister to meet the bodies when they are brought home to Canada -- almost suggests that the country has been shaken to its roots. That is not the message that Ottawa wants to send at a time when our soldiers are facing a ruthless foe in foreign fields. Far better to mourn in quiet dignity, marking the loss and then moving on. This is what soldiers do when they lose one of their comrades. This is what we at home should learn to do, too. Ottawa should not sanitize what is going on in Afghanistan or try to play down the fact that our soldiers are dying, but neither should it let grief undermine resolve. It is a thin line to walk. Deaths like this weekend's are a tragedy but they are not a crisis. We have seen their kind before in our history and we will see them again. They are the cost of defending freedom. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...FLAG25/TPStory/

check out this military forum, and again it seems that hatred of George Bush is the real reason for the apoplecty over not lowering the flag. http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?PHP...71428#msg371428 quote: Rant on: Once again, I'm fed up and disgusted with the media and their "spinning" of non-issues into something more. Yet again, TV tonight is awash with "Conservatives won't lower the flag" stories - presented with no background and with plenty of people saying what an "insult" it is to soldiers. They have no idea what soldiers think of this issue, yet are ready to jump to conclusions in an effort to speak for us. To the media reading this (and I have no doubt you are): how much is enough? You have plenty of coverage of the coffins being put on the plane and I have no doubt you'll have plenty of the funerals - invited or not. Get a grip. We are the Army; it is a sad reality that part of our job is to take casualties on behalf of Canadians and our elected political masters - of whatever stripe. Don't denegrate that sacrifice with an unseemly and politically motivated display of spin designed to promote controversy and generate ratings. "Canada's Iraq" indeed... Rant off.

Scary stuff IMO. Some crazy son of a bitch is eventually going to get ahold of a nuclear bomb and use it. The trouble is there is nothing we can do. If we kill off all the fanatical muslims the moderate ones will just become fanatics. I agree, it is scary, and he is a crazy son of a b... , maybe 'someone' can take him out before he takes out all of us. I don't have an answer, but there are more fanatical muslims then we would like to think there are, I do believe he would unlease a string of suicide attacks etc. in other words - you ain't seen nuthing yet. Too bad we need the oil, otherwise we could isolate them, leave them alone to stew in their own juices - you stay away from me and we'll stay away from you.