kengs333

No it isn't, what?

Jim Harris was PC. Elizabeth May praised Mulroney for being the "greenist" PM. Some aspects of the platform is conservative. The party has drawn support from the right, people like me.

What? I'm being "excessively alarmist" for stating the fact that the ice cap is breaking apart. This is something captured on satellite images over the course of the last year or so. And did you even read the article that I posted a link? If you did, you clearly didn't understand it. Also: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...17-sea-ice.html

Actually, it would appear that they are feeding themselves now that they don't have to produce grains for export to the SU. This is the best that I can find at short notice, but it clearly shows agricultural exports of significant dollar value in some respects, and increasing. http://indexmundi.com/trade/exports/?country=cu In general, Cuba's exports are increasing. Why would they be doing that? The standard of living in the country has more to do with the way that the US deals with the country than the government. I'm no fan of Communism or Socialism, but you have to give them credit for being able to succeed despite the problems they face. They also have an unemployment rate of a mere 1.8%. Yee Haw!!! score another one for kengs333....

Yes. Yes.

Isn't a depression part of the process of an economy "fixing itself"? http://www.mises.org/tradcycl/econdepr.asp The fact that bush_cheney2004 thinks that yours was a "good post" is an indication that you likely have misinterpreted the situation.

I take it that nobody watched this... that's too bad. If you don't want to suffer through the whole thing, at least watch the last five minutes--the look on Flaherty's face is priceless when he learns his result.

Why do people persist in thinking that the Green Party is a "left-wing" party?

Seeing that you can't make arguements based on fact, I guess this is all that you can muster now, eh?

"You read both of them again. Ice WAS declining. Now it's increasing. Sea Ice is up 9.4% over last year, and we've seen an increase of 77,000 square kilometers in the last week alone." This suggests that you were trying to show that the general trend was reversing. If you didn't think that it was an extended trend, then it was completely pointless to mention this slight one year increase.

I agree. It seems to be the NDP lot in politics to look decent during an election campaign and then flounders in the end when everybody rushes back to the Liberals. As Bryson said during the X-Challenge debate: "the NDP don't understand the economy..."--which is why they will never form the government, or the opposition.

Actually, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba switched over from conventional agriculture to sustainable organic farming and is now able to feed itself. http://globalpublicmedia.com/articles/657 Yee Haw!!! score 1 for Urban Ontarian

Goodness! You're clearly totally incapable of interpreting data. Click on this link, and go to "Figure 3": http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2007.html Notice the downward trend over the past 30 years, and the sharp drop in 2007. Notice, too, the nature of the downward trend (up and down, up and down--but on average always resulting in a downward trend). What does this suggest??? A slight increase could occur after a low year, but this does not change the fact that there is a definite trend. Face it: you are wrong.

You might want to take a closer look at that second link a little closer, the one about sea ice... "According to scientific measurements, Arctic sea ice has declined dramatically over at least the past thirty years, with the most extreme decline seen in the summer melt season." The amount is still quite below the average... also: http://www.thestar.com/article/492217

Anyone watch this? It was actually quite interesting... http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/voterto...her-debate.html

What difference does it make if he's sustainable in that respect. He's introducing a host of chemicles into the environment that has a negative impact on insect and animal life, and basically ruins the soil that he farms turning it into nothing more than a growing medium rather than a living, healthy entity. He has to use chemicles to maintain fertility, otherwise the soil becomes nothing and incapable of sustaining much plant life.

Why should I believe you. And that's been happening for what? A year or two now? No consumers means that what you produce has no market. If you can't sell your produce, you got no income.

There's a difference between glaciers gradually receding over the course of centuries and the arctic ice cap breaking apart within the course of a year or two. You trust NASA so much, then I'm sure you'll agree that the satillite images that they provide of the arctic ice disappearing is quite disturbing.

The only one twisting anything here is you. The war that the Iroquois waged against the Huron and Neutrals is well documented. If you do not accept these accounts, then there is no validity to any claim that SN now makes.

Oh, yeah, like all that "hard data" showing all the ice melting in the Arctic? Too bad your source is an avowedly right-wing rag known for having an anti-environment agenda. In other words, it has no credibility when it comes to this issue, so nobody cares what they write.

Who says he was following Bush on this one?

Could have fooled me. Try visiting a city some time. Earning large revenues to compensate for high operating costs does not equal "make a killing". It's real neat that you can operate at a level where your accounts are in the six and seven figure range, but if that means being permanently dependent on the bank and making a barely liveable income, then big deal. Well, if people "in [my] industry" don't exist, neither do you. There's always two sides to the equation.

But they have to be married to an Indian. That means that there is always a racial connection. There children would then be classified by race, also. Whatever. So no member of Six Nations is really a full-blooded Indian, then? This is such a fanciful fabrication. It's like reading something denying the Holocaust. So a band of Indians raiding a settler's house and hatcheting the parents is not "brutal murder"? You see, again you look at things in terms of red and white. You assume that I'm a racist and wouldn't view whites killing innocent people as also being murder, which isn't true. I view all acts of murder as being just that, regardless of perp and victim. I also consider the extermination of the Huron and Neutral by the Iroquois as acts of murder, but I believe you have denied and/or defended these acts. On any given day on APTN the term "white man" will come up scores of times. I can even find you a website that lists Indian terms for Europeans, and the majority translate as "white man". And any time members of Six Nations are discussing Caledonia, the term "white man" is always bandied about. The only thing that is obvious in this is that Indians are racists and and that you will go to any length making excuses and apologies for anything that portrays Indians as less than noble. So it would appear that there are a lot of shoes that fit on your feet rather than mine.

If it has its roots in the US then it has a connection to the way that the US allows its economy to function. In that case, why should we want a government that has the same neocon approach to our economy?

Not really. I don't care how much money you have or the amount that you have invested in your supposed farm, you have such a low-born personality that no amount of money will ever buy you the sophistication and intellect required to function properly in civilized society. You serve one purpose in this world: to do work that the majority of people in this country wouldn't degrade themselves to doing because the have the education and intelligence to pursue more meaningful and important endeavours. Farming has always been one of the least esteemed occupations, and the fact that it is now more mechanized and "efficient" doesn't change that fact. At least the Amish have the inclination to pursue their occupation in a manner which leads them to be more thoughtful and respectful, in general more balanced and all around good people. Unlike you, they don't lose perspective of what life is all about by zealously attempting to maximize profitability and assuming large operating costs which they have to devote all their time to paying back and living in fear of that one bad harvest that will ruin it all. Personally I don't buy your bravado; I've listened to enough farmers whining and complaining about the state of farming in this country to know things are nowhere near as good as you would like people to believe.