Wild Bill

I vividly remember being a kid in the 60's who was addicted to science. I read and heard a great deal about fusion. I also clearly remember how it was said to be 40 years from commercial development. Wonder what kids will be hearing 40 years from now? Meanwhile, we could already be enjoying cheap solar power from space-based satellites, if we had of had just a bit more vision...

Here's the link: http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStorie...mp_drugs_071217 Now how can this be? Were we not all assured that the real problem was guns stolen from legal gun owners? Surely, after we spent a billion dollars or so for the Liberal gun registry this news account must be totally bogus! I guess it's just a figamentation of our imagination, as Bullwinkle J Moose used to say.

Well, just for purposes of argument let's assume that you are 100% correct that Harper has let me down and that's a reason for me to seek a "new party to vote for". Now what? I haven't a single other blessed choice! All of the other parties seem even worse to me! Proving one choice smells bad doesn't automatically make another smell sweet! I'm afraid that even if it were true your suggestion is of no value to me and perhaps others of similar persuasion.

I think you need to be a bit more cynical, my friend. I wouldn't count on Harper as a new convert to global warming at all! The Tories learned very quickly that GW is a popular myth that can affect votes! Most Canadians never took any more science after they got a B+ 'cuz those beans in the jar full of toilet paper germinated and rose up of the jar. Claiming all their numbers as some kind of supporting proof is just nonsense. Science is not run by concensus. A fact is true or it isn't. The majority has supported an Earth-centred universe, a flat earth and all sorts of silly things over the years. The Delphic scientific method just doesn't cut it. We all know what 5 billion flies eat but that doesn't mean we should follow suit. Nonetheless, sufficient voters buy into the myth that any government that wants to stay in power had better pay lip service to the idea. Harper seems to be trying to steer us into some sort of positive result regardless of whether GW truly exists or if Man has any hope of affecting it. He accepts the GW premise at Bali but rejects bankrupting Canada while letting the significant producers off the hook. He's been proposing made-at-home solutions that would help our domestic environmental system while rejecting simply spending billions in foreign aid third world emission credits. it seems obvious to me that he doesn't really believe in GW at all but he knows he'd better say so if he hopes to win the next election! Meanwhile, what's wrong with forcing the oil sands companies to turn to underground storage of CO2? Or a host of other green initiatives that never actually got a cheque to start up during all those years of Liberal rule? No, I'm sorry. It just looks like political expediency to me.

With apologies to Dr.Greenthumb, we vividly remember the example set here in Ontario by Ruth Grier, the environmental minister under Bob Rae's government. Bob's people were rabidly against incineration of waste, in any form or by any means whatsoever! This severely crippled our hand in dealing with waste, as it meant far greater volumes sent to landfills. Now it happened that there was a private company from the States who had an incineration system that they claimed gave off "mice nuts" amounts of emissions into the air. The heat was used to drive generators for electric power, which was sold to the local grids. The final ash products were very clean and easily disposed. The company had pictures and video of one of their plants in Florida, where it was carved into and under a low hill that was covered with grass and trees, making a beautiful park. Ruth and the NDP gang refused to hear their presentation and blew them off! So the company came back and offered to fly Ruth and a dozen or so of her entourage of politicos and any scientific types she wanted down to see their Florida plant. All expenses would be paid. They just wanted Ruth and the NDP to take a fair look at the operation to see how environmentally friendly and how cost-effective it was. Ruth and the NDP flatly refused to go! So Borg, you make a viable suggestion but I'm afraid that Dr.Greenthumb's champions might not be the best vehicle to affect positive change...

Partially true, but here's another factor not always mentioned. China has artificially pegged the value of its currency. They have been deliberately keeping it VERY low to give themselves a huge trade advantage over other countries. There has been mounting pressure from other countries to force China to let its currency float to a more accurate level but so far China has made only token moves and no other country has made any effort to retaliate. As it becomes more of an issue on the home fronts we'll likely see our politicians finally stand up to China and force a more fair arrangement but we're not quite there yet. There have been many dark rumours that China bribes western politicians to allow the situation to continue but I myself don't buy into these conspiriacy theories. It's more likely that our "leaders" just haven't been paying attention! It's not as if any of them would be affected by manufacturing job losses! There's an old saying that you shouldn't attribute to evil what can be more easily explained by stupidity.

Certainly different races have different characteristics. Eskimos tend to make poor basketball players. The Japanese design better robots. Consider all the different breeds of dogs. Some are smarter than others, some stronger, some faster. What makes the human animal so special? That being said, while in general collies are not that smart one does meet many SMART collies! And not all Jack Russells are PITA's. Generalizations are always inaccurate and the intelligence of a specific individual of a particular race cannot be accurately predicted. What's more, the very concept of pure races is vanishing faster and faster in today's Star Trek world. Young love abounds and results in children and we are genetically programmed to consider the exotic or different as a more attractive breeding partner. This is just Nature's way of trying to prevent inbreeding. Good thing, too! Mutts tend to be stronger, healthier and smarter. Purebreds tend to develop early hip dysplasia or whatever and die. If you want to have healthy grandchildren don't be too cranky about your childrens' choice of partners. When I had my second daughter my friends started to tease me, asking what was I going to do when they started to bring home boys. I told them as long as they didn't bring home country singers I could handle anything!

It's interesting how you miss the point. Many citizens don't want freebies. They'd like to be able to bake their OWN doughnuts! More simply, they'd like real jobs and not hand outs in the form of government programs. I've had relatives in Nova Scotia tell me a couple of elections ago that they felt they had no choice but to vote Liberal, even though they despised them! They had to feed their kids and their income came from these make-work programs. However, if you see nothing wrong with everybody looking for freebies and no one actually creating wealth then I guess the concept is just irrelevant...

There's been a growing amount of support among Canadians to disband or privatize the CBC. It's ironic that the CBC seems to be helping this meme grow...

I'm raising two teenagers and I too "understand". However, understanding is irrelevant. Murder is murder. Sure he may have been frustrated but if he came to Canada then he accepted Canadian law. To me, his actions merit either a TRUE life sentence (no automatic parole in 10-15 years) or he should be hung. That at least would prevent any repeated offences.

I think some folks are perhaps making this issue too complicated. To me, it's really quite straightforward. A man was raised in a culture that treats women and children quite differently than we do here in the West. This particular culture is Moslem, almost entirely. While you can argue that Islam for the most part does not condone this particular cultural trait, it is pretty obvious that that's the way this PARTICULAR strain of Moslem culture happens to think! While the father may have felt no special desire to adopt our value system, his daughter growing up here seemed to feel differently. She wished to dress as did her peers and not as her father wished. His worldview was such that he felt driven to kill her rather than allow her to go against his wishes. While most of Islam is no doubt as horrified at his actions as anyone else it would be impossible to deny that there are indeed SOME moslem cultures that condone if not approve of his actions. So the question is really which culture in our "multi-cultural" Canada prevails? Obviously, we cannot go so far as to excuse the man and allow him to go unpunished. The big danger is that his culture and/or religion might be considered as mitigating factors in his sentencing. If we do this then we are starting down the proverbial "slippery slope". This man should be treated as a murderer ONLY! His religion and cultural background should be deemed as inadmissable in his defense. Over the past few years many defenders of our multicultural system have described our core values as the framing pieces that hold the mosaic together. Well, this is one of those instances when we should champion such "frames". You can't suck and blow at the same time. Either fish or cut bait. Make a choice but be sure it's the right one. We're all gonna have to live with it, to our pride or to our shame, depending on which way we go.

Seems to me your analogy is flawed. A better example might be: You're in a leaky boat with 6 people. Only one has an actual bailing bucket. The other 5 have only thimbles. If the one with the bucket decides not to bail, who cares what the other 5 do! I'm constantly struck by how many people take math and quantative concepts for granted in this debate, as if somehow equal participation and "togetherness" makes any difference to the planet.

So, you would be in favour of natives granted sovereignty over their land, federal monies cut off and they be treated no differently than Canada would treat Belgium. that is, just any old foreign country?

And so the innate problems go on and on and on.... Canada has always had severe regional disparities. Whether by chance or intent it grew from conception into a system that dramatically favoured central Canada. Starting in the 60's we finally started admitting to the problems but instead of fixing the structure the Liberals began programs of what amounted to federal welfare to attract votes. This was perhaps most strong in the Maritimes, which were declared a "economic disparity zone" and bushels of federal money were dumped in supposedly to create longterm, sustainable industry. Of course, 30-40 years later we saw very few long standing new industries. We did see a lot of people that needed that federal money to feed their kids! It was the old story of selling your soul to the company store. Only the gas/oil discoveries have shown any chance of breaking out of the dependency cycle. Those parts of Canada that were not happy with the situation really weren't asking for handouts, just some reform to the system to give them more equal opportunity. Of course, then they wouldn't be beholden to Ottawa anymore so of course we have seen virtually no reform to our political structure in generations, if ever. Whenever these parts complain they are told that "Canada needs a strong federal system!" and that they are being somehow "un-Canadian" by complaining. It's like belonging to a club where you have to do all the work, pay the lion's share of the dues and yet never get to eat any of the doughnuts. You can scold the rest of the country all you want but that's hardly the way to inspire their support.

Where were you the past 20 years or so? When the CPC merger occurred it prevented what was left of the old PC party from VANISHING into thin air! When Reform came on the scene the old PC party had been knocked back to 2 seats! By the time the parties got back together Reform was the official opposition and the old Tories were still just a dozen seats in the Maritimes, trying desperately to stay above the magic minimum number to retain official party status. The Reform/Alliance were flush with cash, tens of thousands of party members and OWNED the seats west of Ontario! What's more, they were continually growing, expecting to take more seats in Ontario and eventually Quebec. The Tories were broke, with membership at an all time low and had problems scraping up ANY candidate to run in all ridings, let alone candidates with enough appeal to have a good shot at winning! The big fear in the old PC party over a merger was that they would be swamped out as a spit in the ocean amongst the much larger Alliance party. This fear was only logical, given the apparent factors. Yet if you look at the new CPC as to how it acts and how it's run, it truly seems that virtually every major plank in the old Reform/Alliance platform has been abandoned. For this reason I find it ironic that Harper now has to watch out for some of the mud slung at Mulroney sticking to him as well. If he hadn't worked so hard to cozy up to the Mulroneyites from the old PC's he wouldn't now have the problem.

Something tells me you live in Ontario...

Why on earth would I vote for a socialist party if I'm not a socialist? What's more, I too lived through Bob Rae's NDP government here in Ontario. I'm just too old to bear that kind of pain again.

Your quotes are complete non sequiturs, given that Harper's Conservative Party shows no signs of any Reform roots or component whatsoever. They are about as relevant as using them against the NDP.

OF COURSE they're upset with Canada! It's all about the money! Most of these countries see Canada as a huge source of foreign aid in the form of emission credits. Suddenly they see a Canadian leader who isn't such an easy mark. There is no one so reviled as he who always paid the bar tab for everyone but now has closed his wallet. You should remember that a Canadian prime minister depends on votes at home and not in Bali to keep his job. While you may be personally disappointed neither you or I speak for all the voters of Canada. Rest assured that sooner or later we will have an election and we will see who's views are the most popular.

Are you asking for bloodshed? As for disobeying the law, despite their claims to being sovereign if they take federal money then they have to take all the strings that come with it, like Canadian law. Personally, if they chose to refuse Canadian law, I would support them. As long as they understood that it would work both ways and they would no longer have any right to federal money. I would also expect that there would be a binding referendum amongst native peoples to be absolutely sure it was a majority choice and not just the wishes of a few militants.

Well, we all saw that one coming! Fantino got his way, I guess. He's made no secret over his feeling that the townsfolk of Caledonia should just suffer in silence and white guys like McHale should be banned from attracting any attention to the situation. Pretty obvious Fantino doesn't live in the town. This is what scares me the most! He's BREEDING vigilante-ism! What does he expect people to do when they law won't stand up for them? Or when the law punishes THEM for defending themselves? If my family was threatened I know what I'd do and I won't care a fig for a political animal like Fantino. When a cop can pick and choose which citizens he will defend then we're all in a heap of trouble!

I plead old age! I'm going to dig into the dustiest part of my library. You've piqued my interest and I want to see the context of what I remember. I agree that obviously he held all those constitutional meetings. He had to! My memory was of premiers meetings where the discussion was on provincial rights, powers and federal monies. That was the context to which I was referring. Still, the fault over context was mine and I cheerfully concede to you as far as YOUR frame of reference! You'll have to give me a couple of days. I have several guitar players crying for their amps to be repaired. Would it surprise you that the ones most impatient procrastinate the most to come pick them up?

No, I simply said that Trudeau had one and only one premiers meeting which he considered such an aggravating failure that he was quoted as saying "Never again!" I cited an historical fact. Don't put words in my mouth. If you're looking for a Trudeau champion to rail against I'm afraid you've chosen the wrong boy. I didn't like him then and I've never changed my opinion.

Sounds to me like YOU"RE the one repeating himself! The point has been made that gun control laws do nothing to affect illegal guns. You're droning on and on about the way things SHOULD work, ignoring how they DO work! If wishes were horses, and if my granny had wheels she wouldn't bang her ass when she hopped. How's that for mixing metaphors? We live in the real world. Only real world approaches work. You come across like some Nancy Reagan clone, saying we can stop drugs by "Just Say NO!"

I stand corrected! However, I still remain loyal. I accept that the Queen is in practice a figurehead, as a representation of our heritage. The fact that in the final analysis she wields power bothers me not a whit. If we totally severed our ties to the Queen, am I supposed to give the equivalent amount of respect to the last couple of Governors General the Libs appointed? Queen Elizabeth or ex-CBC hacks? Easy choice for me!