hitops

Yikes, a lot of dumb comments from this guy. Not saying that has much to do with how the country would go under him, but it will sure make for some interesting politics in the near future.

Israel's best times of peace were immediatley after stomping the varoius malcontents around them. Their times of greatest risk were when they tried to make peace, give up territority etc. I see no rational reason why they should discontinue the stomping approach.

Every single election, people say they dislike negative ads. And every election, those ads influence them anyway whether they like it or not, and that's why they get run. The people who hate the ads were not going to vote CPC anyway. The question is whether the ads will push them away from Trudeau towards Mulcair.

You mean scientists who's direct financial interest is served by promoting those companies would want to promote them? You are bringing us some stunning findings.

The past 'debts' were taken out by nobody alive today. That's not how debts work. It's time to stop forcing people who were never perpetrators to pay for people who were never victims. It's cute that you think somehow settling these 'debts' will fix things. The debts will never be settled in the eyes of those who believe they are owed, no matter how much is given. That's the nature of the victim mentality, nothing is ever enough.

I like your general position, but this is a terrible argument. Smartphones are largely entertainment devices and specifically designed to be as absolutely easy to use as possible. Facility with smartphone is not in any way a marker of a successful or productive person. Learning something common is no remarkable. Learning something hard is.

Biting the bullet would be best accomplished by nullying the Indian Act and all lands claims, and telling them to either join civilization with everyone else or don't but stop asking us for cash. Within a few generations they would learn to deal with real life like the rest of us rather thna blaming others and holding out their hands, and much of the inequalities would dissapear. You can't raise a people up by handing them things, you can only do it by forcing them to hand themselves things.

You're starting to tune in. Not all countries are the same. Get diddled does not = become poor and violent. What does determine that is your culture and belief system. Countries that were totally destroyed in WWII are highly prosperous today. Not Muslim ones though, they just kept doin' there thang, and they got the predictable results from doing so. It's not the region either, Israel with a completely different value system and culture has got completely different results.

You mean somebody who's financial livelihood is totally dependent on government, rejects cutting in government spending? Startling.

lol at faux outrage Maybe I'm missing something, but that poster doesn't appear to say anything about teachers at all. The commentary in the article suggests they are suggesting Trudeau is gay because he is a drama teacher. No idea how they made that quantum leap. Almost certainly the opposite is true. Find an area where most voters vote conservative, and schools in those areas usually have the best behaved, most focused students as well. Goes with the whole stable 2-parent household, financially secure thing, or the rural thing. Teachers want to teach those kids, and they all want to work at those schools. Find the areas where most people vote NDP, and you will have found the schools teachers are trying to avoid because of the kinds of kids those voters raise.

Jacee you need to get a clue. There is a 0% chance natives could mine the diamonds. The mine exists because non-natives built and oversee everything required to do so. If non-naitves dissapeared, natives could be sitting on top of the world's largest diamond mine, and they would starve to death. Now they could of course learn to get into business, technology, engirneering etc and be part of that effort just like everyone else. But that's not what they want, they want to sit back and collect because of being born in a certain area. That is not condusive to a prosperous nation, and obivously totally destructive to any kind of long-term viable sense of independence for the native people's. People like you are doing your best to ensure natives continue to live stagnated, poverty-stricken lives for several more generations. You just don't know it. Like children who don't understand that it's better to be taught to cook rather than be handed the cookie. Instead of looking to what other poor groups did to get out of their slump, you will continue with the same nonsense that keeps them right there, dependent on others forever. It's sad, and it's going to cost all of us.

What you're saying here eyeball is just a rehash of the standard, politically popular social narrative about how when you get people down they start to make trouble. This a load of nonsense, and eventualy the pendulum will swing away from this once it is no longer in vogue. In the meantime we deal with it. Your worlview requires a large degree of willful blindness to counter examples. Firstly, middle eastern countries have been killing each other, and the countries around them for centuries before they dealth with European colonization. The first one to try it were the founder of Islam and his friends, and their foundational doctrine fully supports it on principle. When he died, they just fought amoung themselves, in the name of the religion. Secondly lots and LOTS of people have found success and prosperity despite being persecuted. Sometimes repeatedly, such as the Jews or the Mennonites to name two groups. They lost many lives, repeatedly were dispossed and exiled, faced institutionalized discrimination etc. Yet, they suceeded based on their value systems, and they successded very well. Thirdly, is the obvious fact that displacing the so called 'western backed' dictators has not worked out very well, and in almost every case resulted in a worse situation. You don't understand that a large plurality of middle eastern peoples do not support the revolutions because they want democracy and equal rights for all, they support them because they are looking forward to more opportunity to exercise their own brand of persecution and vengeance against whatever group/tribe/minority/family/sect they hate. That is the difference between real life in the middle east, and the sanitized softy nonsense pedalled as socially correct thinking. The most important predictor of how a person or group will turn out, is that's group value system and view on life. Our ancestors had a certain type of value system and we live in the blessings of what they built. That includes countires that were completely destroyed (Germany, Japan) but who's people had a certain type of culture that lent towards success. People in other parts of the world do not have that history, culture, religions heritage of system social behavior, and they get different results. I hope you tune into this one day.

Actually it can work quite well, as many middle eastern dictators who have held the peace for many years know well. Egypt is a lawless no man's land right now breedin all kinds of groups. Iraq has never been more dangerous, full of crazies, with democracy not really doing much except allowing every group who wanted to blow up another group the opportunity to do so. In fact the most stable muslim nations are those with absolute power in few hands. Rubs us the wrong way, but its what they need until they really want to stop blowing each other up. I was all for the dumping of dictators and hopeful for democracy, but the middle east has again shown us that it is more important to them to jump at the chance to get back at the tribe/group/religion/faction they don't like than move on. For now they still need the hard-handed dictator. Hopefully one day they will want to develop civil secular society but I'm not holding my breath.

I can't wave a magic wand and make arabs fall in love with civil society and rule of law, I would if I could. They are going kill each other until the guy with the best organized gang wins. What I can do is plead that our leaders at least help prop up the least troublesome warlord of the available choices. It's worked pretty well in some places, and in others not. What can you do? Just sit around and hope they all play well together?

Nobody will publicly support dictatorship, it is not possible to explain to people that dictator A is better than dictator B in a way that wouldn't get you crucified. Who's freedom are we supporting? Most of the time revolutions in the middle east don't bring much freedom, just another bad guy. We might as well go with the bad guy who makes the least trouble.

It's a little odd that you don't recognize this is standard for all parties to do in all occasions.

Could be but if she wins her riding, then I guess enough people either agree with her or don't care.

I know, the argument of throwing off corrupt dictators sounded good for awhile but I think we forgot why the leaders of our grandparents generation put those corrupt puppets in their in the first place. It was the best available option, both for the locals and for us. And it seems it still is in many of those places.

Indeed, that's probably true though it's impossible to to really isolate the variables.

Since being rational means absolutely nothing, I'm beginning to see how you think his positions are substantial.

No I think they do, their biweekly payments do not change in the summer time. They put in more hours per day in the school year and then get far more than that back during the breaks. Regardless at the end of the day, nobody put a gun to their heads and forced them to become teachers. It's amazing to me how many people feel they deserve a great salary just because they are doing the thing they chose to do. The role of government hiring should be to provide a service to Canadians, not provide jobs to individuals. There is no evidence that highly paid public sector teachers are any better at delivering that service that lowly paid ones. The only place it's true is in private schools, where teachers can be paid more at prestigious ones if they are good, and the kids coming from those schools obviously do much better.

You're talking about sitting members who were elected by their constituents. This was just a candidate. The NDP has not prevented her from running, they have prevented her from running under the NDP banner. I totally support her right to say what she wants, and get elected if her constituents support that. Completely different that the situation of duly elected members being silenced.

WWF is fake, you know that right? Look at me, I'm so clever.

The only thing he seems clear on is that he's against coalitions with separatists in Quebec, and he is against the CPC and NDP. Was there something I missed? Maybe you can describe what he would do.

Not sure how that article helps the NDP though. He just kinda sounds thoughtless. Seems like a nice enough guy but I'm not sure he knows what he wants or what direction he's going. He was outclassed by basically every other speaker at the meeting. He sounds like a kid trying to represent something.....he just doesn't know exactly what that is yet. He's the leader because of lack of alternatives and he's good looking. Maybe in time he will ease into things, but he will still need to figure out what he believes before anybody else believes it. I may yet vote for the Liberal Party but Justin is a little embarrassing. I realize in many cases the leader is just the mascot anyway, but speaking as an academic he holds zero appeal. His statements have about as much depth as a board meeting trying to craft a mission statement at my place of work. I do realize his appeal will be greater to the American Idol demographic, which is of course massive.