Wild Bill

Your example is both old and false. It implies that the efficiency of the city is high and that there is little waste. Therefore if we want better services we must pay more. In actual fact, Toronto historically pays more than it should and on too many things that are not primary needs of the city. How many pot holes could be filled for the cost of some of those arts grants? What about the insistence of union only manufacturers for new street cars? And on and on and on.

No, Walkerton was quite different. At Walkerton, Mike Harris held a gun to the Koebel brothers' heads and forced them to get drunk, then falsify the tests. Harris also paid off the Walkerton council to hire the Koebels in the first place and then insisted that they never check up on what the brothers were doing with the town water system. With this accident, someone simply forgot to set the brakes. Not the same thing at all.

You had to remind me, Guyser! That has stuck in my craw ever since it was forced on us by some judges - that no one ever voted! They chose to interpret the Charter in that manner and the way our system has evolved, those unelected judges can just stick it to us! I have never understood why something as undemocratic as rule by judges was allowed to happen but I can't deny it has. I suspect it is because whenever a hot button issue comes along the politicians use the Supreme Court to deflect heat away from themselves by abdicating their responsibility for making the laws that govern us. I'll bet you a bottle of The Glenlivet that including non-citizens would never pass a referendum among the citizenry at large.

Of course they will, BD. What's their alternative? Going back to what they had before - a mayor and politicians who kept driving taxes UP?

Well Dre, I guess my vote cancels yours! However, you were born a Canadian. Suggesting changes to our political structure is the right of any Canadian. However, an immigrant applying to become a citizen has no rights. He is by definition a foreigner! As such, he should mind his manners and keep his mouth shut. If he wants to criticize our system, let him become a citizen first! Until then, he is like a guest who stays in your house and thinks he has the right to demand you change the decor. Screw him and the horse he rode in on!

No No No, Keeps! I remember vividly the debates at the time of Walkerton! We were told by good authority (such as McGuinty's Opposition Liberals, for one) that it was ALL Mike Harris' fault! Apparently, he not only bought the booze that got Frank and Stan drunk but put a gun to their heads to make them falsify the tests! Although never proven, there were dark rumours that Steven Harper had hired mercenaries to run undercover missions to keep the pressure on the Koebels, masterminded by...you guessed it! A younger (but already thoroughly evil) Rob Ford!

BD, the whole crack video think was fishy! No video, unnamed sources, the very idea that a fat guy like Ford was a crackhead in the first place and even wilder - his first choice of crack party companions would be Somali drug dealers - the list goes on! Law suits that don't stand up in court, Star photographers leaning over his fence, spying on him, suggestions that because of the controversy HIS ENEMIES CREATED he should step down until the air is clear - like that will ever happen! It all makes sense to YOU because you hated Ford and anyone like him from the start! It is obvious you just don't like people who are not left wing. That's your right, but other people are going to chose what to believe themselves also. Hence the present situation and the loss of credibility of Ford's attackers by a significant number of people. If Ford's critics want to do a GOOD smear campaign, they should hire an expert like Warren Kinsella. And Guyser2, the vast majority of Ford's criticisms did NOT turn out to be true, especially before a judge! They are true in YOUR mind! Others have a different opinion. Me, I don't really like the guy either but that doesn't mean I don't support his right to presumption of innocence. I champion that right even with people NOT of my political stripe! That would seem to put me in a VERY small group these days, particularly on MLW.

Don't you see, BD? The criticism of Ford is so over the top that many of us never bother looking at his record. We are already turned off by what looks like a bunch of loopy lefties barking like hyenas! It all seems so whacko that Ford's critics just can't be taken seriously, even when and if they are right.

Exactly. Who's to say? Still, he had enough time to pull a Mel Lastman and scream like a little girl for the feds to send in the army! LOL

Well, that may be true, Bubba. Still, we should consider the nature of this event. It wasn't something like the Red River floods that happened over several weeks. It was an overnight thing - a huge thunderstorm. The power went out. The streets were flooded. It was the middle of the night. By the time they could have gotten in contact with Ford, let alone got to him and taken him somewhere to start coordinating action, it would be over! We're talking only a few hours here! That is not enough time to begin any sort of action. By the time they could have gotten Ford to a microphone it was over. The water was well on the way to draining out of the system. The reason it was so intense a problem is that Toronto, like many cities, has allowed much new development without investing in more sewer infrastructure. We have similar although smaller floods here in Hamilton all the time. Without more sewers when you get a huge amount of rain in a very short time it backs up and floods over the streets. When the rain stops, the water very quickly drains away. Hell, I bet many people slept through the entire thing! I'm surprised no one has been chasing the police over their role in this event. Citizens have been calling talk radio shows saying they saw nary a cop anywhere, with flooded sections, stranded GO trains and countless intersections with dead traffic lights. This IS prime vacation time for cops! Obviously, they were not available when we needed them. Still, the same factors apply to them as to the mayor. By the time they could have gotten organized it was already over. They would have been of great help getting things back to normal, however. Kinda seems to me that if Ford invented a cure for cancer some folks would jump on him for putting doctors out of work. Things must be taken in context and real world realities must apply.

Well, I guess this is another case of public perception. I don't share it but it would be silly to deny it exists. Personally, it just seems silly to me but then again, Oprah bores my ass off! If the ship is sinking I don't want to waste time looking for someone to make me feel good about it. To me, good leadership would be someone who can quickly organize some bailing.

I just don't understand this at all. The guy is only the mayor! What possible use would he be during this flood? Would the good citizens of Toronto have expected him to stop the waters? Or did they need their mayor to be standing with them, telling them "I share your pain!"? I've never had any use for that sort of thing. If I'm in pain, I don't feel the slightest bit better just because someone else is hurting. All I care about is stopping my own pain first and then perhaps doing something to allay the pain someone else is feeling. If my home is on fire send me a fireman, not someone to hold my hand.

Actually, I was thinking of the physics behind using an inconstant source of power with no ability to store it, thus forcing extra generation capacity as a backup. That is a crackpot notion. Also, setting up the system so that the wind and solar capacity must be subsidized by tax monies. That is a crackpot notion. Or legislating that the equipment must be made in Ontario, in order to generate jobs, in an industry that absolutely needs the volume of export orders in order to get the price down. Not only did other countries refuse to buy the Ontario equipment, they filed suit with the WTO and won. They set up their system so that they have to pay their neighbours to take surplus power, again because of an inability to store it, which any high school science student should have been able to see at the start. Besides Squid, I was referring to being a crackpot in general, rather than things like the Dean Drive. I was unaware that you could only be a crackpot with matters of physics. If that is the case, then I must apologize for criticizing McGuinty. I had thought that implementing a system to give us cheaper power, more jobs and a new manufacturing industry that resulted in power at twice the price, lost jobs and no new industry was a good example of being a crackpot but I will bow to your definition.

BC, I actually saw a model airplane kit that consisted of two plastic halves you snapped together. There were no decals, the two pieces were pre-painted. The box said "For ages 12 and up"! Unbelievable! If that is considered suitable for today's 12 year olds then I think we didn't get the lead out of our gasoline soon enough. An entire generation that by previous standards would be considered "special".

Sadly Bonam, some of those crackpots get elected! Consider McGuinty's approach to green energy, with wind and solar power subsidies. I rest my case!

I wonder if you could still buy him a Mechano set?

At least Harper sticks to classic rock. So far we have seen nothing from the other guys. I guess they don't play any instruments. Justin might be good for some Celine Dion impressions. As for that NDP guy, I just dunno. He doesn't look all that hip to me. Probably a Walter Ostanek polka fan...

Well, if I am going to be indulgent I might as well post another. I particularly liked the video editing. They show that a low budget can be offset with creativity. This is a Beduoin Soundclash cover.

Thanks, CC! I would love to see them achieve some commercial success. I think they have worked long and hard enough to deserve it. They have 2 original songs, Good Alien and its later sequel, Bad Alien. Many of the scenes are of an alien walking the streets of Toronto. Oddly, no one else on the street seems to find it odd!

Again Guyser2, who cares? My point was that Mr. Owen Sound holds a popular perception. The opposing view seemed to be that Toronto deserves money and that the rest of the province should just accept it because it is true!. I am trying to point out that there is a widespread feeling that Toronto just wastes money while expecting the taxpayers in the rest of the province to help bail them out. Not that this is true but that this is widely believed. Policians, if they are to be successful, have to deal with such perceptions. They will not go away just because you lecture or scold those people outside of Toronto. The only way you can fight such perceptions is with success stories. I already suggested publicly citing examples where Toronto HAS been fiscally responsible! If this is done repeatedly it would do much to change the perception. Beating me up to agree with you is pointless. Here! I totally accept your argument! You are absolutely right and I am absolutely wrong! Now, what are you going to do with the several million Mr. Owen Sounds out there? If you are working on a political campaign, you don't have the luxury to take an academic viewpoint.

Michael, I do not care to debate with you. Frankly, I find you antagonistic and lacking in courtesy. I am sorry to be so blunt but you leave me no choice. I have already suggested we simply avoid each other. If you can't or won't do that then there is no problem. I will simply leave. I may or may not check back in another year to see if things have changed. MLW will survive just fine without me. I have no wish to be the spark of conflict, but neither will I submit to being the butt of it.

Oh, I am not at all sure about how much Toronto pays for the province. Especially when you consider that much of the business in Toronto consists of head offices and not buildings engaged in production. However, that is merely my own opinion and thus irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I would never presume to think my own personal opinion is both gospel and that important. However, as to what Mr. Owen Sound should do I very definitely think he should do whatever the hell HE wants to do! That's freedom! People have the right to believe any cockamamie thing they like! They should never be forced, only persuaded. Without the right to be ignorant there can be no true democracy, only elitism. The point is moot, anyway. Mr. Owen Sound is not going to change his mind just because some one scolds him! Once again, I am simply saying that perceptions are real, particularly in politics. You cannot simply dismiss them with a lecture or a scolding. You have to deal with them if you wish to command popular support. I would agree that being truthful is a more positive approach in dealing with perceptions but not that you can simply feel righteous in your own POV and dismiss that of others.

"what is a fact and what is opinion"? I can't help but smile. That is exactly the question I considered asking of you. As for disdain for uneducated people, that is not a fact! That is YOUR opinion of MY opinion! Can YOU not tell the difference? First off, we must define what is meant by "educated". The word can be used in more than one context. I was referring to education of life experience. Many academics are highly educated. At least, by some definitions of the term. However, I've usually found the education to be a mile deep and an inch wide. They are very well educated but in very narrow fields. Anyway, I'm sensing some personal antagonism from you, Michael. Since due to your position I can't put you on my ignore list and also due to your position there is little point in complaining I am left with just asking if we can politely ignore each other. My participation after a long absence is more of a personal experience. If I am going to suffer antagonism, no matter from what poster, I may just leave again. Not as some kind of statement. I am just another poster, after all. MLW can get along perfectly fine without members like me. It's just that I have sensed a whiff of "rubble" creeping in this past year or two and that spoils my enjoyment of being here. If you think I am totally baseless in my POV about feeling some personal antagonism, I would be perfectly content with the results of a poll of other readers. Again, let's agree to disagree and try to be polite.

double

"discuss the impact of facts"? How does that make any sense at all? This is a discussion and debate board. Who decides what are facts??!! If a "fact" is in dispute, how do we arbitrate the issue? I did not say that reality "doesn't matter so much". I said that perception in politics is everything. That is quite different. If something is a fact yet the public at large has a different perception, one would think that it should be easier for someone to modify that public perception. Having reality on your side in an argument is like having high cards in your hand. Certainly, it would be harder to sell the public on a load of "horse puckey". Yet "horse puckey" wins all the time! Why? Because of the average baseline of the intelligence of the common citizen. If you are more poorly educated in critical thinking and have a less effective stock of common knowledge then you are more easily fooled. Hence the success of politicians like Chretien's Liberals and "Lyin' Brian". I'm not sure what you mean by your response, Michael. Are you saying that MLW is a place for only academic discussion on what are defined by "someone" (Me? YOU?)? to be facts? I would appreciate Greg's thoughts on this matter. Is this what the founders of MLW intended? Discussion of pre-defined "facts" in an academic atmosphere, ignoring what is happening in the real world? Somehow, I don't think so but I am willing to be shown. Logic is just a mental exercise useful in pursuing truth. It is not truth in itself, since you can prove anything simply by restricting the argument to only those "facts" and evidence that support your premise. There once were logical arguments by learned academics with what they considered "facts" that Man would never walk on the Moon. One actual event in reality completely blew their academic arguments away. I have no problem with the championing of principles. I do it with some myself. I just take exception when someone arbitrarily insists that principles are facts, or rather THEIR principles are facts and someone else's are NOT, simply by THEIR definition! If someone believes something to be a fact they should have no fear of offering it up to debate, rather than expecting everyone to honour their assumption. That expectation is not reason, that is religion.