Wild Bill

Yeah, and let's hope that Danny has no intention of ever running for a federal position. He's upset so many in the rest of Canada that the chances of our ever having a PM from the Rock are pretty remote.

I once worked for an American company who had its head office in Pointe Claire, Quebec. I worked from home here in Ontario and talked to the order desk daily and drove out a few times a year for special events. The staff were all francophones but perfectly bilingual. Apres quelques molsons my high school french improved greatly but I learned a few new wrinkles on this issue. First off, nobody seemed to care if TROC was bilingual! Outside of Quebec was "Here be Dragons!" territory on the map. Pockets of francophones in Manitoba, northern Ontario or wherever might as well have been Martians for all they ever thought about it. So the idea of "Look! We've put French everywhere, from sea to sea! Now, don't you think you should reciprocate somewhat and appreciate what we've done for you?" was totally foreign to them. They never wanted it, thought it necessary or for the most part were aware it had happened! People anywhere are more pragmatic than that. These folks were bilingual because it was essential to operate their business. Their daily lives were in French and they spoke English to English customers and business contacts. If bilingualism was truly about unity it seems to have been very poorly thought out. My high school french instantly branded me a "bloke" to the Quebecois ear. In TROC they don't teach Quebec french! They teach Parisien french. It's like someone schooled in Trois-Riviere speaking English and sounding like Winston Churchill. To try to correct one difference we used a tool to cause another! Plus etrange... So we spent and are spending all that money to buy something never asked, not to make us more similar but to make us more different. We do employ thousands of civil "serpents" making equal numbers of French and English government brochures and send them to places like Red Deer or Owen Sound, where they are promptly thrown out as space-wasters...

Yeah, I'm with you! The pols ban breeds because it's a no-brainer. Dealing with bad owners takes more effort and money. Breed bans are simplistic and anybody with hair in their ears can recognize a pit bull so it looks to the unwashed like the pols actually did something. Being Canadians, they never think about how effective this approach will work or even audit dog problems after a few years of the ban. They just go to sleep in quiet confidence that the pols have looked after us. Years later, the bad owners will have picked another breed of choice and then banning that breed will look like a new issue. Actually, it's already happened. There have been reports of "'roid bag" "tough guys" training large breeds like Great Danes to be vicious...

Yeah, all these PLO apologists seem to think that Israel should give back the lands her enemies used to set up all their rocket launchers, so that they can set them up again! She should not worry about these rocket launchers because even though the Arabs have said repeatedly that they will wipe Israel off the face of the earth this is just a cultural expression that really means "We're only slightly pissed at you. Do what we want or we'll write a Letter to the Editor!"

Who said anything about a bikini? The report was "scantily clad" which could have meant anything short of a burka. This is how smears always work. You say something that's a total stretch but because there are a lot of people who don't like your target anyway when you're proven wrong in your accusation it doesn't just stop. The folks who WANT to believe the worst about your target will keep twisting possibilities, trying to come up with one that will stick. The woman was dead wrong and was forced to apologize. Get over it and move on.

Save your typing fingers, jbg! We rational folks never seem to get a sensible answer to this sort of question. It's like when your kid is being repeatedly bullied at school. Those few times the bully is caught gets him some "sensitivity training" and "anger management" classes. Meanwhile he continues to bully his victim with impunity. If the victim is caught fighting back then BOTH are punished! In effect, your kid becomes a victim twice. This illogic comes from accepting questionable premises before properly considering evidence and then ignoring all such evidence afterwards that might deny your original flawed premise. It also usually comes from people who have never been attacked themselves. They can only comprehend the idea of self-defence when it's for their own benefit. Meanwhile they hold ridiculous beliefs like "It takes TWO to fight!" and "Violence never solved anything!". Except for 9/11, no one has lobbed rockets into American or Canadian cities, repeatedly striking civilians at random. Many folks on this side of the pond seem simply incapable of the empathy or wit to understand the position Israel is in. Remember the old "Billy Jack" movies? The rednecks in town were always beating up the hippies in the farm commune just outside. The hippies believed in non-violence. Billy Jack would come in, kick the crap out of the evil rednecks and save the hippies in the name of peace, love and dove. No one ever seemed to realize that if Billy Jack had not been willing and able to fight those hippies would have been done like dinner and their non-violent commune would have withered up and disappeared.

Here's the link: http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/292110 Near as I can figure, this guy feels that he has some form of "super diplomatic immunity" where he can steal a car, try to run some one over, beat up some tv camera men and some other actions but due to his belonging to a "sovereign nation" the crown has no right to even charge him. I always thought that diplomatic immunity was something only granted to high-ranking officials of foreign countries that were specifically in their country's diplomatic service. I've never heard of the concept blanketing anyone and everyone from another country! If this guy is correct in his defence, does this mean tourists have carte blanche immunity to break any law they want? Does this mean I have the right to walk into Six Nations and "go nuts" with total impunity? Or am I missing something here?

Given the way they govern, are you sure Harper's Conservatives still HAVE any Reform roots? You could ask those MP's tossed from caucus for showing the slightest signs of independence.

I have a gay friend in Toronto who absolutely despises the NDP! Apparently one election campaign years ago some of their canvassers came to his door. His wardrobe and speech patterns make his persuasion obvious and once they twigged to this they instantly made the assumption that he was already their supporter! To this day he calls them "those patronizing bastards!" He's an incredible rock drummer, BTW. Puts the lie to those who think gays are only into show tunes!

Now there's an idea for a thread! "If The NDP Were In Charge..."! We could adapt all sorts of old jokes, like the one about how the Witnesses banned sex standing up 'cuz it might lead to dancing! Thinking about that female NDP MP and how the whole thing fizzled in her face got me thinking about an old Britcom called "Rumpole of the Bailey". It was about an old British barrister who bumbled through his court cases yet somehow usually won. The key point was how he was always sneaking a shot of whiskey or some food treat away from the eyes of his shrewish wife, who was constantly bossing him around and telling him what to do. "for his own good!". He called her "SWEBO", for "She Who must Be Obeyed!" There's just something about socialists that wants to paint the whole world battleship gray...

This point has become "muddy" today. To grant rights to non-citizens seems bizarre. Why be a citizen? Are rights reciprocal with other countries? The Libs declared that the Charter applies to non-citizens. Jump out of the plane and as soon as your feet hit the ground you're covered! Of course, this was done by mere fiat. They never campaigned on the issue. They simply did it once they got in power. Similar to the change of flag and the new Charter/Constitution in the first place! Of course, if you define democratic as anything done by the Liberals then this wouldn't bother you. I submit that this and many other such fiats were actually contrary to the views of the majority of Canadians. Most Canadians are not political junkies and only slowly came to realize what had happened. This disconnect between the government and the will of the people caused a buildup of simmering resentment that has not stopped after all these years. It can explain Mulroney's MASSIVE majorities and the eventual repudiation of the old Tory party, the rejection by the people of the Charletown Accords and the low regard for the Liberal party in the polls today, especially in Quebec. Anyhow, it's common sense that if you allow immigrants to move ONLY to the big cities you will develop problems! You can argue moral points all you want but you still have to cope with the associated real world issues. I also find it interesting that no one has mentioned the numbers of immigrants that came by claiming refugee status. While of course there are genuine refugees the amount of abuse by those using the system to "jump the queue is considerable. At my own daughters' elementary school we've seen a number of "refugee" families who supposedly could not stay in their home country for fear of their lives who nonetheless take summer vacations back to their old home every year. This is fact! We've also had a huge influx of tuberculosis cases here in Hamilton (my wife has connections with the local board of health). Apparently we have not screened immigrants or refugees for years and years. It had been decided that this was too costly so we opted to accept a letter FROM A LOCAL DOCTOR IN THE ORIGINATING COUNTRY as to having done all tests and immunization shots! How much do you think that letter costs in countries like Sudan? How easy is it to forge? All this talk about immigration criteria is totally moot! The system is broken and a total sham! We get good immigrants IN SPITE of the system, not because of it! And the Liberals never cared because it got them new votes! And not just the Liberals. In Toronto there was a serious motion to allow non-citizens to vote! I wondered why they were bothering. The scrutineering system of someone knocking on your door asking how many citizens of voting age are in your house has been totally an honour system since the last Ice Age. No one checks unless there's a challenge and no one will challenge either for fear of being accused as a racist or perhaps because they have fraudulent "shills" of their own!

You're probably right! There's something about the typical NDP woman MP or MPP. They always seem to be prudish and while not outright butch they always make me feel that they would scold me harshly given the slightest pretext. Sorta like everyman's shrewish wife! If you worked with them you'd have to watch every single word you said for fear they'd make a big deal out of it. No laughs, no joy, no fun. Remember the "Penguin" Mother Superior in the original Blues Brothers? There's an old story about Winston Churchill, who was caught drunk at a bar by a female opposition MP. She scolded him with "Mr. Churchill! If you were my husband I'd give you poison!" Churchill is said to have replied "Madame, if you were my wife I'd drink it!" For all we know the MP was looking at some clothing ads for his wife and the NDP lady literally made a federal case out of it.

Let's fast forward 10 years and imagine a Senate dominated by CONSERVATIVES! Now tell me again that you think "Our senate works fine". Times change and that's why we need a good structure and system, not a fortunate happenstance for those of us who happen to hate Conservatives at the moment. Something tells me that if Harper held the stacked deck you'd be whining louder than anyone.

Actually, yes! She truly doesn't seem to understand that she's big! In her mind she's still a puppy, I guess. She loves to sprawl across your lap while you watch tv. My wife and daughters had already named her Maddy (Madeline) before they got her home. I might have preferred "Big Rhonda", from "That 70's Show". I'm not sure what she'd do if she confronted a burglar. Slobber him to death, I suspect!

Or worse yet, made into a "token".

Am I misunderstanding you? Are you saying the majority of Canadians are behind Kyoto? I find that very hard to believe! I know we Canadians tend to be very shallow thinkers on these issues (a trait that the Liberals have always been the best to exploit) but surely the bulk of us aren't THAT simple! Would you be willing to have Kyoto put to a referendum, in a clear question as to the costs if we catch up on the targets that the Liberal regime missed? So that everyone is aware of lost jobs or higher costs/taxes? And please don't tell me we'll all be employed in new "green" industries! We're already behind many other countries in that department. "Johnny Come Lately" has a hard time competing. Besides, even if it were true it's never the same guy who lost his high-paying job in an auto plant who gets that job making solar panels. The solar panel plant wants younger guys and also pays a lot less! The auto worker is usually over 50 and thus unemployable in practice, despite all the government programs and propaganda to the contrary. Myself, I'd prefer a referendum! I don't think it would pass but if it did there would be at least one blessing. Canadians would get a bigtime reality check that would educate them to be more practical and less idealistic that would last them a long, long time! Pain is a very good teacher!

Who cares if he's gay? Now, working for the CBC, that's quite another matter!

My dog is a Lab/Golden Retriever cross. Black fur with Golden fur and body. She's 11 months old. 80 lbs and still growing. She shows no signs at all of being dangerous, except for being clumsy while she tries to slobber on everyone and everything in sight. The only thing her jaws like to rip are sofas, tvs, cushions, napkins, garbage bags, refrigerators and a multitude of socks...

I agree, a bit simplistic. Have you considered that most of those social programs that "take us to the cleaners" came from the Liberal Party? Note that most of these programs were noble in intent. They just were implemented in a bonehead, wasteful fashion since success was never measured by how well the program helped the people but by how well it helped the Liberals get their votes! Did you consider that historically much of the Conservative vote came from the "middle" class? Also, poor and hardworking farmers. The Liberals have always been strong in cities. They've always been "also-rans" in rural areas, except for the Maritimes once Liberal "regional disparity programs" became the only way a lot of them could feed their kids. Somehow, over all these years those programs have never gotten very many of those Maritimers off the "dole". The programs seemed to really have been designed to keep them stuck and dependent on government support. Only off-shore oil has given any hope and the Liberals can't take credit for the oil being there. As for colonialism, wasn't Sir John A MacDonald a Tory? And please, enough of these references to British heritage patriotism being somehow "colonial". I'm proud of my British heritage and have never felt any less an independent Canadian! This whole idea is a relatively recent outgrowth of multi-culturalism, where our original core culture has been hell-bent on repudiating its own heritage in favour of that of anyone else! No, the reason the Liberals have most often been in power is because they've always been willing to give the people what they want before what they actually need! To paraphrase Bill Gairdner, the Liberals have always offered prostitute type services instead of that of a good wife. Of course they've been more attractive more often at the polls! Also, since we've never had a Senate that could represent us by regions the political power has always been in the cities. The Libs have been very good at getting the city vote, usually at the expense of the rest of the country, which simply does not have enough political power to defend itself. Now for the first time in years we see what's happened to the Liberals when their top backroom boys of Warren Kinsella calibre bail on someone like Stephane Dion. The top elite of the Liberal party knew full well that after the Quebec reaction to Adscam and the backlash in the rest of the country, along with a united alternative with the Conservatives, they were going to be out of power for at least one election, if not two. None of them wanted to lead or work for a party that would be in opposition. So Dion is a caretaker and he's not getting their help. After he's gone there will be more distance from "the bad old days" of Martin and Chretien. The big guns will come out and play again and the Liberals will again be an effective force. The big question will be what the Tories do in the meantime. Every day that Harper seems to be running a sensible style of government is another day when the old Liberal tactics of smearing the Conservatives as "Scary-Boo!" fade out some more. By the time Dion gets through caving with confidence votes because he's scared of an election the Tories may be so well entrenched that the Libs will have to fight for votes like they never have before. We live in interesting times.

Seein a LOT of assumptions in this thread that I just have to question? First off, shouldn't immigration be geared to those jobs for which we lack people? Are we letting in excesses in areas where we have no lack of people here already? I mean, it does seem wasteful not to honour engineering or professional degrees but are we paying any attention at all in the immigration system as to which ones we actually need? Has anyone considered that the typical immigrant of today may not be the same as that who came just after WWII? Those indeed where hard working folks who build this country during a period of large and rapid growth. Are we experiencing the same growth today, except for Alberta? Are immigrants even trying to settle into Alberta, or are they still heading for Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal? What is the ratio today of workers vs. family reunification in immigration? In the late 80's it was ridiculously high. Something well over half was family and extended family. I've got the StatsCan figure around somewhere and can post it later, if anyone wants to pick at the number and ignore the point. Grandmothers don't build houses. Perhaps we should also consider that excessive immigration can really keep wages lower. People would not be getting the wages they do in Calgary and Edmonton if there wasn't such an oil boom sucking up all available workers. Not enough workers may be a problem for an oil country but perhaps it helps the lower paid sector here at home to get a better wage. Issues of race to the mix are irrelevant, of course. Culture may not always be so. It's naive to assume that all cultures are equally "nice" and all their attributes will integrate perfectly into our domestic society. This is one negative to shunning the melting pot concept. Toronto used to be a far cleaner society than it is today. 30 years ago it was common to hear some American movie star or whatever exclaiming on the news at how clean the streets were in Toronto. That was part of our culture to keep the streets clean. Then we experienced massive immigration from many countries where they may not have even had streets! These people were not used to using waste baskets. They also came in sufficient numbers that they had less contact with "native" Torontonians and were not likely to learn that particular mores of street cleanliness. Before the flame begins about that last point I'd like to point out that I'm well aware that many immigrants to Toronto were perhaps cleaner than the existing citizenry. It's just it's obvious that something caused the streets to now look so dirty! Perhaps we got a lot of immigrants from New York. That city was never the cleanest, if I recall. I will also concede myself that Toronto's penchant for leftwing, impractical councils might also be a factor. They tend to put fewer waste baskets on the streets as a way to cut garbage removal costs, just as Bob Rae limited the number of medical students thinking fewer doctors would mean lower OHIP billings. Anyhow, I will state that I believe that while immigration should be colourblind we also have no obligation other than our own needs as Canadians in how we run our immigration system. If we need doctors then allow doctors in. That's not to say that we should accept any other country's degree as equal to a Canadian one. It would be naive to think that a doctor trained in another country would ALWAYS be on a par with one trained here. At the same time, many of the barriers put up by Canadian barrier groups don't seem to really be about the quality of education and training. They look more like simple guild-style protectionism! Professionals well understand that the fewer of them there are the more money they can command! Anyhow, just thought I'd toss these out. When I see unsupported premises taken as gospel I just can't stay with an argument. Even if every one of my points is refuted that's fine. At least then I'll know that everyone is not talking through their hat!

+1! Thank heavens for a REAL unbiased moderator! I'd pay to keep him in beer to see him have control over the "Rabble/Babble" bunch!

Sonuva gun! I just discovered that this board too has an "ignore" list in the control panel! Oh blessed silence! I'm one of those cursed by being an extremely fast reader. I say cursed because when I even glance over a "wacko" post I get the sense of it before I can skip over it. Now it will be like having a big dog to keep all the religious and energy broker solicitors away from my door!

+1! You're absolutely right! Pretty well every former British colony that railed against the Queen and Britain until they got their independence promptly went to hell in a handbasket the day after it was granted! It's taken India 60 years to finally get barely on the right track. Millions of Africans have starved to death or been slaughtered. All for an academic point of political pride...

I am a loyal subject of Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada and by happenstance also the Queen of Great Britain. For generations the majority of my fellow citizens felt the same as I do. Over the past few decades we have allowed the immigration of many from countries that do not share our British Commonwealth heritage. We assumed that these newcomers would adopt our values as they settled in to share our home but there is a significant number today that have a problem with our loyalty to our Queen and want to have ALL of us repudiate it it! I liken this to opening your house and adopting new family members who eventually demand that the house will now be run to THEIR liking and those of us from the original family should shut up and accept it! Sort of like having your kids get married but move in with their parents and then insist that the only "music" allowed in the house henceforth will be urban hiphop! Meanwhile the original family slowly gets more and more angry and resentful...

How long did it take you to become so obsessive? I have not read Black's law dictionary for a very simple reason - I don't feel it it worth my time! What's more, your style of argument is such that I am even LESS inclined to spend the time in such research! We all have priorities in life and only so much energy and resources available. Frankly, even if every single point of yours I have seen on this board was absolutely true and accurate I still would not spend any time on your cause for myself. Why? Because you argue like a zealot! You have an obvious obsessive fixation with your subject. We've all met zealots in our time and rarely are they right in the accuracy of their beliefs or the importance to us all that they attach to them. Consider, even when I start to think that maybe there's something to your arguments what do you do? You call someone a paid agent of an illegal government! If you want someone to pay attention to you then you should be nice. That's just simple salesmanship. You insult your potential converts. No wonder you don't seem to be having much success. Me, I give up on you. It's not likely I will read your words or answer you again. Not only do you keep crying wolf but even if there's really a wolf at the door I'd likely choose the wolf over you as better company!