ScottSA

I read an article that said we never really landed on the moon. I read another article that said space aliens have taken over the leadership of all the countries. I don't know how they managed to find room in the rush to do that, what with the illuminati, the Elders of Zion, the Knights Templar and other such Black Handish groups rushing around trying to do the same thing, but hey, that's what the article said, so it must be true.

It ought to impress your Canadian constituents when they hear their concerns are not uppermost in your mind. Novel way of politicking, I must say. Cutting edge.

Dobbin, I don't know if you have "said so" or not, but the thread on Jewish lists is howlingly transparent innuendo whether you admit it or not. I don't want to rehash the entire issue here, but you say you make your living from writing, and I haven't seen any evidence that you're a particularly poor writer or that you're stupid. That's why your attempt to evoke Nazi Germany by couching greeting cards in the language of concentration camps defies your denial. If you were unacquainted with the English language, or one of the lower end thinkers hereabouts, you might get away with it, but you aren't and you can't. You could use some work in subtlety to be sure, or failing that, in faking wounded innocence.

That argument simply has no merit. In fact there's no argument being presented; just a lot of mud slinging. Are you saying that they should be let across because they didn't try to sneak across?

Steyn had a good article on that. In view of a distinct lack of draft to snivel about, the anti-war crowd has taken to calling the soldiers "kids." Girls are "women" when it comes to deciding to abort at 14 without parental permission, but boys are "kids" when they volunteer at 18. The argument of Code Pink seems to revolve around an imputed moral authority by virtue of motherhood. They are mothers, but their kids are adults; not 'little Johnny' anymore, and they have no more moral authority to speak to the issue than anyone else.

What in God's name are you talking about?

That was the thread I had in mind.

*yawn*

They are not slaves by virtue of what they wear, but what they wear is symbolic of the intensely patriarchal lifepath they belong to. Under Sharia they are slaves, or worse; property, and Islam is unique in that it is both a religion and a lifepath.

All trouncings seem a little unrealistic before the election is called, and often even during the beginning of the actual campaign. A lot of people thought the PCs might lose in 93, but very few saw the annihilation that was in store for them and the wins out of right field for Reform. In fact no one even saw the PC win coming last election...it was supposed to be another Liberal walk in the park, assured by the usual ramped up panic and a few "scary scary" ads. One of the quirks of canadian elections is that parties either run on leaders, or on parties. The leader campaign can be wildly successful, as witnessed by Trudeaumania, but it's much less stable than a party centric campaign. It can backfire in a big way like the "Kim" campaign. When the 93 elections began, the Tories hung their hats on "Kim!" instead of "PC", to take advantage of the freshness and female aspect and to avoid the giant Mulroney hate-on. As soon as her inexperience and downright incompetence became obvious, that turned against them with a fury...the Chretien ads were just the last nail in the coffin, not a determinant. Chretien won subsequent majorities by shutting his mouth, keeping a low profile, and flogging the "Red Book", actually stolen from Reform, who started out with "Green Books". The much anticipated "Martin" era just never seemed to materialize. A giant as Finance minister turned into a dithering simp as PM, but the Libs had by that time earned such a scorned reputation that they couldn't run on a Liberal platform, and had instead to run on Martin platform as the lesser of two evils. Neither option would have worked by the time of the election. Harper is the anti-thesis of a demagogue, but has a great reputation for intelligence and competence, so the Tories will fight this by presenting themselves as a party, with a competent leader; not as a "Harper" party. More important, he has proven that he's not likely to put soldiers on the streets or make everyone go to church, so the scary scary of the sort that dobbin is trying to whip up doesn't have any legs. Dion, true to form, has drawn so much scorn that he has no choice but to fight the campaign on the merits of his own leadership. He might as well just shoot himself. Now that his performance has driven even the CBC into a feeding frenzy, it can only get worse...especially since the Tories are even now framing the debate around leadership. Dion has the worst of both worlds: a disorganized party and a weak leader, with the focus starkly on the leader.

I'm going to frame this post and hang it on my office wall as a reminder that miracles do happen.

My experience is that folks overly concerned with maturity are those under 15. What does "maturity" have to do with whether one wants a republic or constitutional monarchy?

It effectively gives Harper a way to avoid fighting the next election on Afghanistan. After all, how can the Liberals dare presume what the panel will arrive at? Poor Rae was falling all over himself today to find some way to tiptoe through this minefield...he admitted that Manley was knowledgeable and that the panel would be very helpful, and couldn't quite answer the question as to why, if that were so, the Liberals planned to stick to their own policy of w/d before hearing the findings of the panel in 08. If the Liberals stick to their avowed policy of w/d in 09, now that they've for all intents and purposes accepted Manley and the panel, they have squeezed themselves into a conundrum that will make them look inconsistent on one hand and downright ridiculous on the other. It's not an issue...it removes an issue from play. Unless of course Dion blunders right into it, which is a distinct possibility, given his record.

Yes of course. Heuristically resorting to half-understood first year Marxist-Leninist slogans is no doubt a much more viable measure of maturity.

There's already a thread on this.

I don't think thread needs to be consulted on that question. Try the US constitution.

"Simple" is the operant here.

What does that say about the electorate? What does that say about democracy?

Neither the US nor Canada has a libertarian democracy, and civil disobedience most certainly isn't a cornerstone of anything but civil disobedience.

When exactly was Code Pink beaten up and carted off in police vans for peacefully assembling?

Harper has just appointed a panel to determine Canada's future in Afghanistan, led by John Manley. Another brilliant move by Harper, which has in one fell swoop knocked another leg out from under Dion.

Ughhhh. Cannabalism?

I suspect I've read at least as many history books as you, and the concept of "civil disobedience can mean many things. My understanding of this woman's "civil disobedience" is that she chains herself to every availble lamp-post, or alternatively lies down in every available road, as lonf as it causes stress to people, and has a fair bit of a record for doing it. She's also on record ranting a whack of anti-American rhetoric, and I'd be very surprised if she wasn't on an FBI list during wartime. Mosley was too, in Britain during WW II, and I don't imagine you would have complained about that. Further, there are degrees of "repression." If you had some experience with other countries, you'd be able to distinguish between, say, Amin's Uganda and Bush's US. Putting someone on a list for the perusal of a neighbour is hardly equivalent to taking someone into a field and shooting them.

Oh, I thought you meant within the last century or eight. Not very relevant to now.

In one of the cities with a proportionately huge number of homeless, and after living in Winnipeg for well over a decade, I have yet to see a "homeless child" in Canada. I'm sure they exist, but I'm equally sure they are either 'homeless' because they ran away from home, or miniscule in number.