noahbody

Global warming has more to do with marketing a problem versus problem solving. The rebranding to "climate change" was done as "global warming" had a limited shelf life. When the earth starts a cooling cycle as it will most certainly do if it hasn't already started, the gig would have been up.

Seems to me you've been criticizing the Conservative government on the environment for some time. In reality, this broader approach to environmental concerns was what they presented in their original Clean Air Act. What the Opposition parties did as you mentioned was divide and conquer. This fixation on CO2 emissions is what is poisoning the environment. There are real issues such as smog that need to be addressed that won't be because countries put their entire environmental budget into the collection plate of the GW preachers.

I think it was called Pass the Buck.

The above are actual problems, but they have absolutely nothing to do with GW.

Their mandate is based on human induced global warming. This is how they frame the debate. They can say we can do something about human induced global warming. Whether we can impact global warming is a different story.

Emotionally charged? The emotion is love. Is being a loving parent a problem? Pain can be torture. Watching someone you love being tortured is painful.

Link?

Robert Latimer was denied day parole. He says he does not feel guilt about what he did. I doubt his position will change. He felt it was the only option available to him to end his daughter's suffering. For cases of cold blooded murder, feeling guilt should be a requirement for parole. With mercy killings, should this apply? It's not as if Latimer is incapable of guilt. It's that watching his daughter suffering was the greater guilt.

And they should both have to give lap dances to Peter Milliken.

Here's a link to the story: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories Apparently, this occurred on the eve of the Montreal Massacre. What she saw was an opportunity to make political hay. The claim is that he had a scantily clad picture of a woman on his laptop. No mention of a "Playboy-like site" which infers he was surfing porn sites. Maybe he was visiting this site: http://www.garth.ca/weblog/2007/08/26/screwy-in-skeena/

Talk about a bunch of children. "Teacher, can you get him in trouble?"

Funny how you used hurting the economy as an excuse for Liberal inaction and at the time they'd only have to make a 6% reduction over a decade.

They could have a referendum on the issue. I think if you outline what kyoto will achieve without the US, India and China and the costs in doing so and give alternatives such as a domestic plan which would comply Canada to invest the money, they'd be giving away through Kyoto penalties, directly into the environment, the majority of Canadians would choose the domestic plan. Of course there would be other options that would include balanced reductions and funding for further study.

According to your post, were they not having trouble before the bush made his comment? This timeline proves your theory false.

He's referring to New Brunswick

Canada did sign on to such an agreement. No, it didn't help.

So your position on the issue is we should send $10 - $20 billion to other countries because you don't believe the conservatives want to spend it on the environment? My point is don't throw money at a non-solution. If you're in favour of a carbon credit scheme, why wouldn't you do it on a domestic level? We can agree then by the time Chetien signed Kyoto, he was useless. What year was that again? The reality is they signed something without knowing what it would cost. Terribly irresponsible governing. The only way the Liberals could have met the targets was if they'd appointed Joe Volpe as environment minister. He could have offset the per capita based targets by doubling our population with dead people. None of this makes Kyoto a solution. If you care about the environment and you believe the man-made CO2 mantra, you should settle for nothing less than a solution. If you back Kyoto, you're the one hurting the chances for the environment, not Harper.

I wonder if he gets paid in envelopes.

From your link: Is this a useful tool if the serial number provides the same information? Another idea that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

How about this: Harper sues the Toronto Star for $2 million for defamation, donates the money to the Canadian government. All in favour?

You think it's easy to make priorities?!!

Also, have you ever been probed?

Bryce never characterized the treatment as "murders." There is evidence of a policy of assimilation and negligence, but claims of genocide are ridiculous. To the point, if the government was attempting to commit genocide, the last thing they'd do is send the head medical officer of the Department of Indian Affairs to survey the conditions?

Are you referring to the 1844 surrender specifically or an earlier one? The 'not people of responsibility' is usually reserved for Joesph Brant. I don't see how it would be relevant in the 1844 signing as names would be evidence it was signed at a public meeting.

Not true. It was because it could not be proven Mulroney profited from the sale of Air Bus. They may turn out to be lovers, but unless there's proof Mulroney profited, it's irrelevant.