Wild Bill

Mostly. I'm a bit uncomfortable with a provincial court telling the feds what to do. Still, that's why there's a Supreme Court of Canada, I suppose. Still, I guess that if Quebec wants to pay for folly, as I had said, I believe that's their right. As a populist I have always believed that people have to be able to make mistakes in order to learn from them. If someone is "cocooned" from reality when they are raised then they will only turn out inept.

Oh Yeah, Waldo! Of course that was my point! Except I don't recall ever labeling YOU as a heart thinker! Then again, my memory is not always what it was. It would have surprised me if I had done so, however. After all, first I would have had to be sure you HAD a heart! Then again, the warmth and kindness of your typical post would have assured me of that!

Perhaps you saw the movie "Mars Attacks", Waldo. Essentially the same thing happens when the Martians first arrive. They are greeted by "Peace, Love, Dove" and get blasted to smithereens! The message is obvious, I would think.

In the context of my quote you cited, I was referring to "some" as some lefty posters on this board, including yourself, eyeball!

By suggesting that he hates lefties! Hate is a strong and often irrational emotion. Why would he hate them? Demonizing and actually hating your opponent seems to be mostly a lefty thing. Every morning my FB feed is full of sophomoric joke pictures of Mitt Romney, making him out to be some kind of retarded hillbilly thug. I get almost none doing the same with Obama. Hell, the posts here on MLW will easily prove that point!

That's nice! We ALL got to share in paying for a useless bit of symbolism. That's so warm and inclusive!

Do you remember in the opening of the movie "Independence Day" all the lefty groups were gathered to welcome the aliens, directly under their ship? And they got blown to bits? I could see WWWTT there, raising his arms in welcome and chastising anyone who even suggested the aliens were anything but benevolent!

I doubt if he is that petty, eyeball. I think you are just being partisan and demonizing all non-lefties.

I can't argue either, Tim. If Quebec wants to make a useless gun registry of its own I say let them! However, I would prefer they pay for it themselves! The Quebecois do seem to be far more "heart" people than "head" people. Gun registries would never have stopped that wingnut Marc Lepine from killing all those poor girls. Heart people always seem to accept symbolic gestures as useful and worthwhile. I have never understood that sort of thinking. However, as a populist I champion everybody's right to be an idiot! Let Quebec make its own mistakes, just have Quebec fund it herself.

This might surprise you Topaz but I too am starting to think there is a hidden agenda! Not for goofy reasons, of course. Some would say that Harper is doing it just because he hates Canada and the Americans have bribed him with a guest spot to play Beatles tunes on American Idol. That sort of thing is just nuts! Still, when they try to muzzle the auditor general and shoot down the idea of a revived Arrow so quickly, one can't help but start to think that they have made a commitment to the F-35 that cannot be broken, no matter what happens. Why would they do this? Happens all the time! Two countries negotiate something and when it is a very expensive something one might feel the cost must be hidden, because they consider the "something" so critical to their country that they do not want to take any chances that domestic politics might cancel it. It might be that something is brewing, probably in the middle East, where Canada is going to desperately need a competitive plane like the F-35. Or it could be that Uncle Sam has promised to buy billions of dollars of oilsands product that would save our economy and provide thousands of desperately needed jobs for Canadians. My point is, SOME DEAL has been struck and our government feels that at all costs the deal must stand! Nowadays, opposition parties couldn't give a damn about what's good for Canada. They haven't for a long time. They care about what's good for THEM! If they can use such a deal to topple the government and get themselves into power they would in a heartbeat. The good of Canada be damned! Remember how Chretien cancelled the EH-101 helicopter? And rigged the new tender to make sure it could not be considered again? When all the other choices sucked in comparison? Does anyone truly believe the Liberals cared about the best helicopter for Canada at that time? So I would agree something is being hidden but I don't agree hiding it is guaranteed to be for nefarious reasons, although when you are talking politicians it is certainly possible. The chances of Steven Harper being the Anti-Christ are in reality much slimmer than some partisan wingnuts here on MLW would have us believe. Just because someone is not in your chosen political party does not make him an agent of Satan, you know.

They probably break down over a few weeks or months! This isn't 1947, you know!

Well, Britain DIDN'T do it! Iran DID! Doesn't that count for anything, while you are trying to establish some sort of moral equivalency? Wouldn't occupying an embassy for months and months, while holding everyone who worked inside hostage, be even SLIGHTLY more wrong behavior than Britain only threatened to do? As I had said, I find these moral equivalency arguments to usually be a huge stretch. They appear to just start with an assumption that anything the USA does is evil and then use that as justification for countries like Iran or Syria to do even worse! I just can't agree. Particularly when so many younger Iranians seem to have a disconnect with their religious rulers.

That is your opinion. You are implying it is fact. If that is not a religious type of argument tactic then what is? Apparently, deniers are heretics.

Too close, as far as I'm concerned! What are you implying? Two wrongs make it right? I don't follow your reasoning. That was the excuse I tried to sell my mother when I was a kid. "Hey Ma! You have to let me off the hook cuz my brother did the same thing once!"

Well, he also has encouraged provinces to choose their own senatorial candidates, either through direct election or through provincial appointment. That also is a first, in our system. The idea was pioneered by Reform. Not all provinces are interested but that could change as their people see other provinces doing it. It will start to appear as if things are more democratic in those other provinces. Once a precedent is set it tends to become more entrenched as years go on, until it has the force of law in practice as strong as by statute. Eventually, a statute can be passed. Harper is trying to give the people examples. If the idea behind those examples catches on their elected officials will have no choice but to get in front of the parade. As has already been said, at least he has made some small steps. That's more than any other PM has done for us! More than the other party leaders would do for us now!

I dunno, CC. If he is right when he says that we only have records for the past 40 years, surely that is a good point! To Mother Nature, that is a millionth of a blink of an eye! I find the apparent contradiction of some sources rather strange. We have a warming Arctic that is showing formerly frozen evidence from warmer times. What made those older times warmer? The implication today is that only changes caused by Man's industrialization are to blame for changes in climate. Somehow, I doubt if Monsanto can be blamed for what happened to the mastodons. The picture seems confusing to me, because some always want to keep dragging everything back to Man being the prime mover of evil effects on the planet. This distorts the argument, like some religious whacko who drags in the idea of an Intelligent Designer to explain the evidence of evolution. The arguments of many about climate change strike me as being very fundamentalist, at times.

So therefore you must believe that Chretien's Liberals were far right? After all, Chretien stacked the Senate with Liberals, only tossing in someone from the other parties once in a while, when the numbers were such that the gesture was only a token. With a clear and strong majority, it was totally safe to throw in the odd Opposition Senator. I never thought of Chretien as "far right". Who would have thought? Thanks! I learned something new!

Would someone please move this thread to its proper forum? That way those of us interested in Federal politics can not be bothered by yet another nit-picking, anal retentive climate change argument.

GH, Iran stormed the US embassy! They occupied it and took everyone inside hostage! Even when the Japanese declared war by bombing Pearl Harbour, both sides respected each other's embassies. That is a basic rule for ALL civilized nations for a long, long time! Iran broke that basic rule. By definition they were no longer a civilized country. Now you defend their actions? My friend, you and I have dramatically different definitions of morality and ethics. I often have to think about mine, since I find that in the real world things are not always clear. I envy you. It seems that for you things are very simple. Everything Uncle Sam does is bad. Anything anybody does to them is ok! You will never get an ulcer.

What "War Criminal bit"? Is this something real or just another stretch to slam Harper?

Hey, they were my co-workers and my friends. Their families had been Quebecois for generations. There were at least 6 of them who told me about this! They had no reason to lie to me. Frankly, I find your implication insulting to them! I don't care if you think it BS. I knew them much better than I know you and have much more faith in their word!

Interesting. I'm curious, Benz Are you of the "pur laine" yourself? You know, I did not get the idea of the separatiste movement being racist from outside observation. I got it from some Quebecers! I used to work for an American company who had a sales office in Pointe Claire, staffed by bilingual francophones. Several times a year I would go there to catch up on business stuff and in the evenings there would be a party at one workmate's house or another. They were great people and it was good fun to see how a few Molson's improved my french! It was there that I was introduced to this concept. What I never realized is that these people had experienced discrimination themselves as they grew up. You see, they were mostly descended from different stock outside of the "pur laine". Originally they had been Irish, Italian or Spanish. They told me that growing up they often endured "put downs" from other Quebecers, for not being of the pure wool! Even though we were not talking first generation but great great grandparents!. It was a surprise to me. To a modern Anglo kid, this was like history from the Victorian Era. We are so used to people having different ethnic backgrounds that we no longer even notice it, much less care. Whatever. You or I are not going to solve this problem here on this board, Benz. I recognize that Quebec will do whatever it wants. I just question the problems that Quebec will have to face that go along with separation. Frankly, from your posts I got the impression you think it will all be so easy and painless. I don't believe that for a minute. I think you are thinking only with your heart and are ignoring the real world difficulties involved. I think those difficulties will be far greater for Quebec than you imagine! Also, if Quebec chooses that path I don't believe TROC will lift a finger to help you! If there is a finger, it will be an extended middle one! And that will be a pity, for both of us.

Well, what is the point? I have been hearing these complaints for a long time and I truly don't understand the logic behind it. It always sounds as if somehow the Anglo majority went out of its way to screw the Francophones. I don't see how historically anything of the sort happened! If you are a small linguistic minority, there's really not much more the majority can do except pass laws to make sure you are entitled to practice your language. What else can be done? Guarantee a job? If all the jobs are at places that speak a different language how could any government expect businesses to spend the money and make the effort to accomodate just a few employees? How could they be expected to make companies promote them to better paying higher positions? If you live in a town with 100,000 Anglos and 100 Francophones, is it reasonable to expect the corner variety store to offer service en francais? Hell, I've gone into variety stores where the person behind the counter doesn't understand English OR French! They spoke a totally unfamiliar language! If you are in a small minority the world is going to go as it will. There is no malice involved, just circumstances. I will grant that by today's standards some acts of long ago were wrong. What else is new? You can't change history and it is not right to pay descendants for injustices towards their ancestors. All you can do is try to ensure that all people TODAY are treated equally! I do not understand why I should feel guilty for things my great grandfather might have done, or what other citizens down the street have done just because we are both of the same race. I have enough trouble dealing with my OWN sins, thank you!

Is it? Depends on how you define the point of origin of an attack. Consider Pearl Harbour. If the USA had seen the Japanese war fleet steaming towards them, would it not have been a defensive move to attack that fleet first? After all, it would have been obvious that there was no other reason for a huge passle of warships to come barreling down at them! With atom bombs it is even more crucial! Israel is watching a declared enemy, who has aided and abetted groups like Hamas and Hezbollah to rain rockets down on sleeping civilians, develop the capability of not just an atomic bomb but the rockets to deliver it on top of Jerusalem. The diplomatic rhetoric from the rulers of Iran is hateful and vindictive, to say the very least. And you say they should not worry about it? If they don't launch a first strike and people like YOU are wrong, what happens? Just what the bleeding hell do you expect Israel to do? If you expect them to just sit there and not do anything until and unless Iran has ALREADY dropped a bomb on them then you sir, are a loony! Iran could be far more transparent with International inspections if it wanted to prove that it does not have the capability of nuking Israel, or perhaps even some Arab neighbour. It wasn't that long ago it was in a fierce war with Iraq. It has chosen to do precisely the opposite! As far as Iran is concerned, it has a right to nuclear capability and the rest of the world can just piss off! If Iran says it is refining uranium for peaceful reactors, the world should just believe it, despite the fact it is refining hundreds of times the amount needed for reactors, in quantities only useful for making nuclear warheads. Iran says that it has developed rockets just to put satellites in orbit then everyone including Israel is just expected to believe them, even though the Safir rocket's 2nd stage capabilities have been kept top secret and the rocket would be perfect for carrying a warhead! Your argument seems to be that everyone should just take Iran at its word until and unless it has nuked a city or two, no matter what we see and hear before then. Very easy for YOU to say! If you are wrong, an "oopsie" from folks who believe as you do will not bring back a single innocent life.

At least we get to change our leaders! Unlike Iran, which has a facade of elections for what are essentially faceless bureaucrats. The real power is with the mullahs and always has been. Meanwhile, what do you think would happen if we tried to get access to ONE nuke, let alone a few thousand? "Hey Obama! We want to nuke somebody! Give us a couple, why don't cha?" Not a chance in Hell!