daniel

The act of homosexuality isn't what causes the health risk. It's the practise of non-safe sex. (And don't try to equate this to any sort of promotion of homosexuality.) The danger of marijuana is compared to as less than that of tobacco and alcohol. Plus it does have medicinal value.(And don't try to equate this to any sort of promotion of narcotics.) If smokers decide to picket McDonalds, that would only give the current debate an added push to label transfats on all our foods. Inform the consumer and let him decide. no comment required.

You should have asked the question at Freedominion and then just reported back the results.

Either in the same place as Saddam's WMDs or hiding with GWB's National Guard records.

Proves my point. Meanings change over time just as "Kemosabe" may have one time not been offensive.

Where have you been in the past twenty years? You'll find out quickly enough if someone doesn't want to talk about a certain subject. Continuing to pester someone about it can become harrassment and if it's in the job environment can mean some sort of disciplinary action. If you don't believe me, try it. And you're saying being insensitivity IS a human right? I disagree.

Your logic is backwards. Being insensitive is NOT a human right. If the newest addition to the Charter is to protect people from being offended, then the offender(s) are the ones to be sent to special reserves.

That is your opinion alone which also shows disrespect. Some people don't want to talk about the war (WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Korean etc). Some people don't want to talk about the Holocaust or the Nanking Massacre. Some people don't like the term Chinaman's peak. Then amongst the same peer groups, some people don't mind talking about the War, the Holocaust, the Rape of Nanking or care less about the name Chinaman's Peak. As far as I know, being insensitive is not a human right. But when one chooses to be insensitive in front of an audience he knows takes particular offence, that is provocation for which I will not take part.

You just won a referendum with the slimest of margins. Are you going to play George Bush and trounce on all your opponents as if you had a majority and thereby risking alienating the swing votes against you for the next time around or are you going to be flexible and give in to the powers that be? I'm sure I already know your answer, but Canada's heritage from James Wolfe's victory had been conciliatory.

I bet you didn't know that the word Chinaman was derogatory too. That's why it was changed. Others argued to keep the name to remind us all of the Chinese people who sacrificed their lives in Canada's racist past. The new name is in recognition of the man who climbed it on a dare. If you want to rename "White Man's Gap" put in your proposal and let the authorities hear the arguments fore and against.

Many years ago, I asked my boss, who was a black man (he still it a black man), why blacks prefer to refer to themselves as black instead of negro. I explained the "negro" is a legitimate English word that describes one's race, like Asian, or Caucasian. Describing oneself as black is describing the colour of his skin, a visual trait. He said that the term negro has bad connotation because it derives n*gg*r. Using the term black turns the visual trait from negative perception to a positive proactive one. Much like "Gay pride." So if that K word was ever legitimate, it apparantly, so we learn now, brings negative connotations. Reminding the First Nations people of the stereotyping back in the days of the Lone Ranger where a native plays subservient to his white cowboy master, who is of the people who took over his land.

"If the rightwing had their way, there'd be nobody working." John Kenneth Galbraith Paraphrasing from what I heard on the radio: Those who support tax cuts seem to believe that the rich don't have enough money and the poor have too much. John Kenneth Galbraith

At the time people wanted tax cuts, mainly because it was driven by the right wing who criticized the high rate of taxes Canadians were contributing. Repeating the mantra eventually becomes accepted and so the people selected governments that put tax cuts as the top of their priorities. People didn't realize that with tax cuts comes budget cuts from somewhere and were oblivious as long as budget and program cuts did not affect them personally. It took a long while and alot of culture and class struggles for people to realize that their true Canadian values were in jeopardy. ~ The spending on flags and other things are a tricky one. Firstly, on the flag flap and sponsorship scandal, we were in the midst of another Quebec referendum and who's to know how close the result would be? It's easy to say that we overspent on both accounts or even that we totally wasted money on them. Is there any indication that this kind of spending perhaps was the factor that the "No" side prevailed? Who's to know? And who can deny it? If it were any other place and time, Quebec separation could have meant civil war. In Canada we did it our way. Scandalous and wasteful? Maybe, but we had a war to fight.

I agree but when guess who's first in line to criticize the kind of expenditures you list? The result is the budget cuts and elimination of programs that were supposed to do that just those things. In the past ten years, people had considered that tax cuts were more important than to maintain these programs. We repeatedly heard that the money spent were just good money thrown into a bottomless pit. Now ten years later, we find that the extra cash received from tax cuts isn't as much as we expected and these social problems have grown worse.

Do they have a petition against polygamy?

It hasn't been mentioned that the Japanese tests every cow something we ought to do too. Another question that always bugged me, we all know that cows are herbivores, so how is it that they can't tell protein feed isn't real food like grains and hay they also feed on?

And how would you like your steak done, Mr. Bush? And your pototatoes? None today? Would you like to look at our alternate menu for vegetarians? Today, we have Buddha or Soy - an excellant meat substitute rich in primary protein.

Time will tell how long Fox News will survive up here. We gave Howard Stern a chance but don't hear much of him lately.

Back in July of this year, Canada was ranked number 4 in the world with only two Scandanavian countries and Australia ranking better. Did things change that much in just four months?

The ball's in our court and also in our favour. We are not obliged to resell the drugs back to the US. 1) We can resell them back to our American customers but at a favourable markup so that all could still benefit - high enough to fill the Romanow Gap but still low enough to give our customers a savings. What's so different about this scenario when comparing how Canadian resources get resold back to Canadians? (This would not be favourable in the eyes of the drug companies.) 2) We can keep it all to ourselves and sell any surplus to the world market. (Drug companies may agree to this.) 3) A negotiated agreement in which the US has to concede to the Kyoto Protocol, UN authority in international conflicts (especially Iraq), poverty in Africa, missile shield, and a whole host of other Bush/Cheney initiatives that generally placed the US on planet of their own. (Drug companies might be neutral to this.)

I didn't realize there were so many Turkeys in the US.

Q: What do Americans have that Canadians don't? A: A place to escape to.

for 58,309,946 people and Osama Bin Laden. But what about the other 5billion people around the world?

How effective is this? I remember Dukakis criss-crossing the country to 4am the night before (actually morning before). Who's going to attend rallies at 4am? His own supporters would have already made up their minds to not attend and the undecideds would have better things to do.

And the Common Sense Revolution is....

There goes any hope of your pet project: Pay Equity.