Catchme

Not slave labour, they can sleep outside (within the walls of the prison) and not eat until they die if they so choose. It shouldn't be a free ride. They have a debt to society, in terms of whatever crime they committed on top of the cost to the taxpayer. If the private sector can do it cheaper, then have at it. They are paying their debt by being locked up, now you want to penalize them x2. Private sector cannot do it cheaper, they are there to make a profit. Distance education, if you have the time to sit there and do the work and write the tests and pass without any classroom instruction why should you have to pay? Slave labour is what you asking for. You are paying for them to be locked up to keep you safe. You cannot double penalize someone.

Agreed. Some stay at home mom's do a great job of raising their kids too. In a market sense yes. Why should someone be automatically entitled to another's income? If the stay at home person makes an effort, then they have somewhat of a point, but if they sit on the couch and watch their ass grow then no, they aren't entitled. It's a case by case basis, but no they should show why they should get a say in the finances. They are entitled because they stay at home and provide the foundation so that person can work, that is if they are doing so, and raising the children, and yes it entitles them to half the income. It is called partnership. If you do not want to share your income do not get married, and have children. Moreover, if you have the idea that a man should work, keeping all his income for himself while the government pays the mom to stay at home, you really need to think further. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ August my example was only to show how way off base some are if they feel day care does not allow for children to be properly raised.

How right wing of you. If the kids become law abiding citizens who work hard that's being raised properly. I've also seen some kids that attend day care that weren't raised properly, it happens. Day care has nothing to do with it IMV, it is the nature of the child and the family. For example, my daughter attended day care from the time she was 3. She got her first job when she was 14 and has worked ever since, all through school to graduation, and college, and is now a business owner. Her partner and her, they are in their later 20's, own their own home worth about a half million now. They bought their first bungalow 7 years ago, sold it after fixing it up for a 200k profit. Bought the home they have now for 220k and and have turned it into a half million home. They did this working full time, and having on side jobs out side of work hours, plus renovating and are also raising a very wonderful daughter, who is fluently bi-lingual, well adjusted, loving and happy, and who also went to day care. Her partner was raised in a stay at home mom family and is way less independant and broad thinking than my daughter is. Plus a heck of a lot more needy. Though they are now positioning themselves to buy a second business, worth well over a million, within the next 3 years. Dominate partner? So you are saying stay at home parenting and living is makes the other person less than and their efforts worth nothing? You bankroll your kids because they are your kids, you brought them into this world you pay for them. I simply cannot wrap my mind around someone who could care so little for their children, they would not want to support them.

Slave labour? Hardly. You are really laying the foundation for arguing for privatization of of our penal system. They are already learn employable skills, if they so choose. Unless of course, the CPC government keeps cutting them. Moreover, there are many many programs here in BC, where inmates do community service projects, or projects for private enterprise, and get paid 3-8 dollars a day or some other equally low amount.

Does this stay at home mom have a working husband, or are we talking single moms? Does the question apply also to stay at home dads? Yah, I'll say she has a working husband, i think single stay at home moms already receive welfare. Good point, It also applies to stay at home dads. I'm just really curious at this. On one hand, if she wants to get money he/she should go out and get a job like everyone else. On the other another income makes it easier for the family to get ahead, he/she can more afford to stay at home and properly raise the child, thus help reduce the burden on daycare and the other costs of a non properly raised child. Another point is in the case of marriage when it comes to divorce it could essentially negate gold digging. I'm on the fence as far as my opinion goes. No, if they want to have kids support them themselves, and don't have em. I have known plenty of stay at homes moms who did not raise their children properly. And whose definition of "properly" are you using? To say that children who attend day care are not properly raised is ludicrous. And what do you mean cut down on gold diggers? Are you saying men should not be finiancialy responsible for their children, and that a woman hads no right to half the assets and sousal support if needed?

Yeah, that's too bad I support the Green Party sherlock. Baylee, really get a life. Go on rabble.ca I'm sure you'll be more than welcomed. Nope, wouldn't last 2 minutes. And I suppose you would be Green Party, as Ms May used the very same words about Canadians. Funny that a national party leader would call those she is trying to get votes from stupid. These 3 missing men are a failure on the part of Canadians military brass, they are legally and contractually bound to check on those they turn over monthly. They didn't.

No!

Madmax made a very good post, that pretty much sums up how I feel about this too. I am angry for those Afghan civilians being subjected to this. I am angry that the soldiers, are so frightened, sick, weary, disillusioned and over wrought that they could do this. But they still need punishment. Now, how about punishment for those that sent them for nothing? And keep them for even less.

Drea, he did, it is uppity women demanding that a man share in house work and child rearing when both husband and wife works. I guess if women work they are supposed to do their "traditional" roles as well.

That is the goal we strive for. Perfection has not arrived. My denominatin of Judaism does not use the "Eruv" system. Also, for all but Chasids (a small part of the Jewish community) we speak fluent English and particiipate fully in the life of the nation. I would suggest that all immigrants participate fully in as much as Jewish persons do, as well. Most immigrants, I know, also speak fluent English and have came across very few who do not, and those are usually just recent immigrants. That would be your denomination, a good many exist outside of that demographic or Eruv's would not be found all across Canada and the USA.

Man, anybody who makes a dumb statement like you have, doesn't deserve to be Canadian. Even in the preamble to that notorious piece of social engineering called the 'Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms', states: 'Whereas Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of GOD and the rule of law'. Who's God do you suppose their talking about? Allah?[/qb] Who are you, that you think you can judge who should be Canadian or not? Every person's notion of God and not just the "Christian" God. This country was built by many peoples: Asians from near middle and far east, FN's, Jews, by single men immigrating from their country of origin to find a better life and start a family, or bring their family over, non-religious and religious people's. Christian couples did not have sole responsibility in the building blocks creating Canada, contrary to what you think. They never acknowledged in writing "Christian" anything. God does not = Solely Christian. And just what are the "Chrisitian values" that you are speaking of? r

There is serious doubts about regarding angis reid's online polls of last week that showed the CPC having 40%. It seems they are trying for a bandwagon effect, eh? Nor does it show the Green's advancing. Ipsos's poll does not bear the numbers out. The margin of error in this poll is 3.1% which again means neck in neck, and no real changes occuring and certainly not a CPC surge. The CPC have also dropped in PQ. CPC 36% Liberals 32% NDP 15% Bloq 8% Green 8% Party fortunes in Quebec - now in the midst of a provincial election - showed the most movement, and the news was good for Liberals. The party climbed four points to 29 per cent, probably getting a bounce from their leading provincial counterparts in the early stages of the election, Bricker said. The Bloc dropped four points to 34 per cent, and Stephen Harper's Conservatives dropped three points to 18 per cent. In Ontario, the Tories and Grits were in a close race. The Liberals had 39 per cent, down two points from the last survey, while the Tories had 36 per cent, also down two points. The NDP support was up two points to 15 per cent. The four-point national spread between the Tories and the Grits in the poll was significantly narrower than the gap shown in two other polls this week. An online poll by Angus Reid Strategies had the Liberals trailing the Conservatives by 14 points. The split was 40 to 26. That poll also reported the Green party was at 13 per cent, five percentage points higher than the Ipsos-Reid finding. Bricker pointed to the survey's finding regarding the Green party's support to explain the wide Tory-Liberal spread in the Decima poll. He said the poll suggests the Greens are pulling support away from the Liberals. Bricker said, however, the Green party traditionally does better in public opinion polling than it does on election day. He questioned, however, the online poll's finding of 40-per-cent support for the Conservatives. "You can say they are moving in the right direction, but have they moved up to 40 per cent?" he said. "I don't think that's credible. ..." The CPC isn't at any 40%

If you are in some sort of denial that marriage when combined with to-days feminist demands and materialism and unreal expectations does not constitute marriage being an ordeal, I don't know what does. The stats that I provided indicate this and that is only divorces and does not include legal separations, common law break up's, and walk aways. Ah, so you think that equality demands are damaging marriages, those pesky women demanding their rights and to be treated as humans, eh?! What responsibility do menhave in this breakdown in marriages? I do not agree, at all, and you have provided no evidence to support your contentions. Not hateful at all, just in disagreement with your contentions, disagreeing does not equal hate and it gets very tiring when people insist that it does. Again, Christianity and traditional marriages being building blocks for canada are in fact not plausible.

Wow, just looked on line a bit for this exopolotics stuff. Weird http://www.exopolitics.com? Judi McLeod ???? Wow, this guy Dr Salla has a whole university dept in Washington DC http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper2.htm Michael E. Salla, PhD. is a pioneer in the development of 'Exopolitics', the scholarly study of the main actors, institutions and processes associated with an extraterrestrial presence that is not acknowledged to the general public, elected officials or the mass media. His interest in exopolitics evolved out of his investigation of the sources of international conflict and its relationship with the undisclosed extraterrestrial presence. He cites evidence of as many as sixteen different extraterrestrial races currently interacting with humanity in a variety of ways, with a number of other races simply monitoring the Earth. His groundbreaking Exopolitics: Political Implications of the Extraterrestrial Presence presents the first scholarly framework for understanding the political implications of the extraterrestrial presence. Dr. Salla is an internationally recognized scholar in international politics, conflict resolution and US foreign policy, and is the author/editor of an additional four books including The Hero's Journey Toward a Second American Century (Greenwood Press, 2002); Essays on Peace (Central Queensland University Press, 1995); Why the Cold War Ended (Greenwood Press, 1995); and Islamic Radicalism, Muslim Nations and the West (1993). He has also authored more than seventy articles, chapters, and book reviews on peace, ethnic conflict and conflict resolution. He has held academic appointments in the School of International Service& the Center for Global Peace, American University, Washington DC (1996-2004); the Department of Political Science, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia (1994-96); and the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, Washington D.C., (2002). He has a Ph.D in Government from the University of Queensland, Australia, and an M.A. in Philosophy from the University of Melbourne, Australia. He has conducted research and fieldwork in the ethnic conflicts in East Timor, Kosovo, Macedonia, and Sri Lanka, and organized peacemaking initiatives involving mid to high level participants from these conflicts. He recently convened an international conference on Extraterrestrial Civilizations and World Peace in Hawaii: www.etworldpeace.com

What is your definition of a "traditional marriage" and where is it derived from? How is it a ongoing test relationship? And what responsibility is it minus? Why would it be lacking commitment anymore than a "marriage"? And what solid guidance would be missing? You put a lot of coulds in there and those could's could be present in a marriage. Interesting that you equate marriage with an ordeal. What lack of support for a "traditional" marriage? And where are you driving "traditional" marriage from? And I am still waiting to hear what you have to say about "tradional" marriage being one of the building block of canada, and how is it a so? Your lack of commentary on the substance of what you saying, by way of using: "traditional" "building blocks of Canada" and "mutli-culturalism destroying marriage" are suggestive of the fact you may be/are regurgitating something you have heard from the pulpit and it sounded good so you picked it up, but you have no clear idea of what those words and phrases actually mean.

I believe you threw them into the mix earlier. That said, your initial post had nothing to do with the concept of the melting pot. May as well provide an example of yourself for it would be more accurate then the stories you provided. Yeah. You have a point. Sorry. As far as your earlier comment, however, it is not vacuous to demonstrate the advantages of very high incentives to integration, as opposed to remaining separate. JBG you are also a good example of remaining separate, if you are a practicing Jew, and I New York has an Eruv or so. So how is that melting pot and integration?

People contract AIDS because they don't use protection and sleep with numerous partners. You can be a virgin female have sex once and get AIDS, number of partners has nothing to do with it. There are a variety of ways and means of gwetting AIDS and yes unprotected sex is is one way, but within that 1 way are numerous reasons in each and every case of AIDS why sexual inercourse is unprotected. Fot example AIDS and STDs rates are increasing amongst young Christian girls, because they have oral sex to remian a virgin, and do not think they will get a STD. Define a truly religious person? They are saying that the Catholism is enhancing the spread of AIDS, and it is a fact. Self-professed religious persons cherry pick rules in the Bible all the time.

This is the type of play book they are operating from, one sees it in play here every time they do not want to discuss anything that is fact a proves Harper and the CPC for the crinminal liars they are. http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/05/01/con05013.html

Playing the victim while victimizing. http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/05/01/con05013.html

The USA is busy making more messes than it has ever cleaned up.

The USA is busy making more messes than it has ever cleaned up.

No, I am saying that the tower was down when they were reporting, only they were using old footage on a green screen from earlier to report. Like the view behind her, when she was reporting, wasn't actually live. Poor editing of a shot from earlier in a green screen situation, it is just implausible they got a report ahead of time, after reviewing all the info.

Yes, I agree riverwind, and had said just that, can't see how you miscontrued what I was saying as believing this latest 911 theory. Have been reading a whole bunch of stuff about the fires that were going on wtc7 and what caused them. It is all more than likely shoddy background editing and showing on a green screen, then reporting IMV.

The building blocks that have created Canada up until recently have been created by religious marriage unions. What type of building blocks that created Canada were created by religious marriage unions? seriously please give examples of these building blocks. If marriage needs help from business and government to survive, it was not a good marriage in the first place. There is no break down in marriage because of a break down in basic values. Please provide proof of this assertation. Why should marriage grant you any type of special status over others who simply decide to live together? Non-causian foreign immgrants have nothing to do with other's marriage breakdowns, amazing how far some will go with their xenophobia. Again a platform for your xenophobic rant.

Have been researching this BBC thing, and I have to say, I have been waiting for those to post what they say were their home videos from BBC that day, and have not been able to find any. So, it seems this WTC7 stil being there, is just more BS and distraction.