ScottSA

That's simply not true. Your understanding of public sympathy for war seems to be generated directly from CBC, who describes each death as a "terrible setback" or some other ridiculous catchphrase. Deaths happen in war. People expect deaths to happen in war. Public sympathy is not directly linked to the "number of bodybags"; it's linked to perception of the utility of the war.

Why would they face the fact when it's not a fact? Where in God's name is this coming from? Or is it just more fearmongering?

Dion is throwing all his huff n' puff behind "the environment". Stupid move. This fad can capture the public's imagination on a slow news week, but when an election begins all Steve has to do is throw some nice-sounding rhetoric at the issue and then get on with the real issues, and the Libs will be stuck in the environment rut. Besides, it will cast more light on the politics of the Green Party, and focus attention on things Dion would rather not defend. No upside and tons of downside for the Liberals. Dion is showing why he doesn't have the smarts to be PM or even the leader of a credible opposition.

Stop not stalking me then. Whatever it is you're doing or not doing, stop.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?en..._Mountains&only

That doesn't change the fact that certain classes are ignoring the "protection".

Blanket statements makes fools of people. I am mildly conservative. However I DO NOT listen to Rush Limbaugh,Mike Savage,or ANY other conservatives.Who are on the air. I rarely read anything from either Coulter and Limbaugh.I never paid my way onto Limbaughs website membership. I object to your divisive pigeonholing of a political group.It is hateful. Why not drop it. Woody starts by dropping his foot in his mouth and then spends the rest of the debate trying to ram it in further. It's when he gets out the mallet and pounding on it that things really get funny.

Hey sweetie, I went and looked thet big werd up. Thenks! BTW, the only thing worse than overt ignorance is ignorance masquerading as knowledge. You, my dear, are a prime example. Your knowledge of agribusiness is taken from the "Hippies Handbook on Growing Dope and Other Far Out Stuff", which explains why it focuses on hemp as the panacea for agriculture and probably dope as the answer to the healthcare crisis.

If the Liberals are so weak (maybe they are) then why does the CPC feel the need to bash them in a TV ad every few weeks? Because the Liberals can't mount a coherent defence, so it's fun. What are they supposed to say in rebuttal? "You're almost as bad"? "I know I am but so are you"?

He didn't really come up with anything new, outside of class analysis. As an "observational economist", all he did was identify value-added and paint it as 5 different types of "alienation" with the help of Feuerbach. In other words, he simply took what Adam Smith and others had already discovered and rewrote it with a scary soundtrack and sinister lighting. Funny thing is, the most profound economic analysis I've read in a long while is a little book selling at Coles on the cheap table, called "The company". It is a teensy Grand theory in it's own right...arguing quite convincingly that the establishment of the limited liability company is at the root of western economic acscendency, and even at the root of the British empire's surge to pre-emminence during the industrial revolution.

What a dysfunctional thread. In effect, it's a rehash of the pro-normalization sad, tired, and nonsensical propaganda. Hint to CB: "Tolerance" is not something that applies to the forcible backdoor entry (excuse the punnishness) to heterosexual institutions like marriage. The tolerance myth flew out the window a long time ago, except in the case of folks stuck in the 80s and 90s. Hint to guyser: Sure, I have a disdain for fags, but not a hatred, and certainly not a fear. I don't even particularly care about the sexuality of folks like Liam, who doesn't shove his pudenda in anyone's face and gyrate. Hint # 2: there is far more than adequate research out there to ascertain that homosexuality is by far the greatest sexual spread of the HIV virus in North America, and pointing at drug paraphenalia as being just as bad is hardly a stirling endorsement of bumbuggery. Stop perpetuating the myth that AIDs is a heterosexual disease. In north america it's not.

I think she's on to us. I'm using my secret decoder ring to put out an alert to Dr. No's Ultrafarrightwing base to round them up in the next secret roundup of people getting too close to the TRVTH.

Wow, warm day in Vernon today.

I hate cheap plastic toys. Are 3/4 of the Canadian jobs involved in fossil fuels? I don't believe it. Woody, try to expand that Luddite mind a bit. If you work in any industry, you are working in an industry that depends on fossil fuel. Take away fosil fuel and you take away the industry. Even sales depends on fossil fuels, unless you plan to hawk your wares on a streetcorner. If you sell things on the net, they have to get from point a to point b, so they require fossil fuel. Make a wind turbine or an $100,000 electric car and it requires fossil fuel. No matter what you do, it requires fossil fuel. You can't just prop up a windmill in the back yard and generate anything like the requirements of the industry you work in. Not without laying off 90% of your workforce, anyway.

Apparently we are on track for the coldest April in 19 years in BC.

I suspect that as far as open violence goes, not including domestics, it is true. But I don't have the stats. Perhaps you do? Do tell. I was making two seperate points, but perhaps I could have been clearer.

Dunno...the forum I admin chugs along with no rules whatsoever and lots of posters. Its sister forum got into the banning game and its as lively as a gassed Kurdish village these days.

Careful or figgy will report you for causing profound damage to my psyche by calling me names. If the "ultraconservative Muslims", who happen to be most of them, get their way, there won't be much hoisting of beers unless it's followed by the hoisting of the drinker by his neck. You have noticed Paris lately, right? And London before that? Muslims have the spotlight at the moment, but it's just a matter of time before the Balkanization that is taking place throughout the west steps into the limelight. Clearly a number of Hindus are not interested in tolerating the current laws either, underscored by the fact that "Asian gangs" are responsible for most of the inner city violence going on in Canada today. My point is that if we are to keep this country on an even keel, and maintain the social system that made it great, we cannot keep the immigration floodgates open. It won't work otherwise. It's hardly a leap of imagination to suggest that if we give the country a complete population transfusion, we'll lose all semblence of our society.

There sure are a lot of poplar logs in your head.

No sir I will not. Rumours are not my style either. But you're already starting rumours...specifically making claims about me. If you have something to say, please continue. If not, please apologize for starting silly rumours.

Woody, this is pathetic. Bulgaria was forced, on pain of invasion, to allow German forces free access into the country. How much choice do you imagine it had? As it was, it tried to stay as neutral as possible throughout the war. This is a lame attempt to pull your irons out of the fire.

Still it isn't as funny as the Harper worshippers falling over themselves to defend their hapless leader, no matter what he does. Good one. Ha. Ha. Very droll.

Judges just use the law as a guideline. President rules, ................ Spelling mistakes aside.....I wonder what exactly you think "the law" is.... It hovers above the secret headquarters of international Kikery bankers, ready to swoop down upon the unsuspecting anarchist who is foolish enough to acknowledge his birth to the state.

Don't let this type of nonsense bother you. Like Blueblood said, no-one hates homosexuals[/b Homosexuals did this for years...took the odd gaybashing incident and blew it up into an almost entirely fabricated epidemic of "hate" and "homophobia". It don't mean nuttin'. Please visit this site. So what? I'm sure I can dig up a website comparing Goebbelian propaganda to homosexual propaganda too, and using the similarities to argue that homosexuals are Nazis. Use your reasoning powers.

That rather depends on your definitions, doesn't it? Sure does. Marx spawned a "grand theory", in that it explains all things everywhere and always. That is its strength and its flaw in one. It's helpful as a scholarly tool in some cases. Marxian class analysis, by which I mean the simple treatment of people as divisions based on economic groups, is a lens through which to examine social dynamics. It can be very useful, and it's a relatively new way of looking at things. Unfortunately the subtext to both Marx and Engels is thoroughly normative, and it seems difficult for most people to seperate the normative from the analytical. Another problem with class analysis is that it is only one stream of Marxian thought, but it's often taken as a totality...researchers all too often assume the causality of Marx along with the analysis of class, and that leads folks down all sorts of garden paths. Probably the greatest flaw in class analysis is that scholars have taken it and run right out of the ballpark with it. So-called "Marxist feminists" have done an end run around Marx's economic classes by positing women a class by virtue of gender instead of economics. Homosexuals, race activists, handicapped activists and everyone else who can possibly set themselves apart from hegemonic society have adopted the same class analysis, although it has nothing whatsoever to do with Marxian economic class analysis. There is even a school of international relations represented by Wallerstein and others that posits an economic class relationship between nations...this is where the "imperialism" meme comes from. The irony would have Marx doing somersaults in his grave. Having said all that, Marxian class analysis is something new and quite brilliant if it's used as an analytical tool. Everything else about Marxian thought (especially the early Marx) is essentially a rehash of Kant, Hegel and other philosophers. There's nothing new in the so-called "Marxian dialectic". Hegel was there long before and explained it so much better than Marx's turgid attempt.