Wild Bill

It IS wrong! Most likely, it was initiated by the team under the MP for that riding. That alone should have earned the MP a reprimand and some internal party punishment. However, for the party to defend him is also a bit much. I could understand a cautious approach, in order to see all the facts as they come out and also to see if the issue might fade away! After all, it would be stupid to believe the word of the Opposition as gospel, or that of a newspaper owned by TorStar. They have a vested agenda and have never hesitated to follow it. But once and if guilt becomes clear then they should have dropped that MP like a hot potato! That's what Reform under Preston Manning did, on more than one occasion! Just another indication that there's nothing left of Reform in the present CPC party. The integrity appears to have suffered. This is much more like the old Mulroney PC party than Reform.

Quite right! I hadn't thought of that, CC!

Perhaps you are too young to remember. When the invasion of Afghanistan to oust the Taliban first was being organized, Pakistan was basically a Taliban state themselves! They certainly had been no friend of the USA. Bush needed Pakistan on side to close off that border so he basically told the Pakistan government that they had to decide - they could be an ally or they would be treated as an enemy, the same as the Taliban in Afghanistan! He also sweetened the deal with a lot of money, of course! Pakistan essentially had no choice but they were never a committed ally. That is why there have been such grievous problems with security, to the point where finally Pakistan was cut out of the intelligence loop. Too many times the Taliban fighters were tipped off and/or sheltered. So Pakistan is a special case. The west would be fools to treat that country as a committed ally.

They will have a say when they are legally adults! The ancient Greeks pegged the age of adulthood at 30! As for an 80 year old's life being behind them, you should also keep in mind that they have memories and have seen the consequences of many political approaches. A kind saying would be "He who doesn't know history is doomed to repeat it!" I would be a bit edgier. "A politician's worst nightmare is a voter with a long memory!"

True, but at least they have some life experience, even if they don't always remember it clearly! Scientific studies have shown that the adolescent brain is not fully developed. It has more difficulty with cause and effect and envisioning future consequences of actions. This is why many young people can appear more rash than their innate intelligence would suggest. Sadly, it is also why they make such good soldiers. They tend not to fully grasp that THEY may die! At least until the shells start hammering, of course. When we are younger we are capable of absorbing new information more quickly. We just have poor filters! Our lack of brain development and life experience means that we tend to accept all such input as gospel. It takes another decade or so before we begin to develop a healthy skepticism. For this reason I would be against lowering the voting age. In fact, I think it should be restored to its former level of 21, with the exception of anyone in the military. If you're old enough to put your life on the line for your country you should be allowed to vote for its leadership. I agree with the point that this is just a naked power play by the NDP. Traditionally they tend to attract youth emotionally, by highlighting their idealism and humanity. They also tend to lose voters as they get older, as they tend to fare more poorly with practicality and pragmatism. They try to counteract this by attacking any criticism of flaws with their methods as being attacks on the nobility of their goals. Someone asking about any flaw in their approach is instantly branded as being 'mean-spirited' and generally 'not a nice person'. Their defense becomes ad hominem and somehow they never have to answer those awkward questions! Anyhow, I just don't think the average citizen is mature enough at 16 to make a considered choice.

You're quite right Waldo, I can't! As I said in my earlier post, I have no other option so I just grit my teeth and resent it! I'm well aware that I likely represent a virtually non-existent demographic but every meme is born somewhere! I was heartened a year or two ago while shopping, when I was examining the label of Heinz can of beans. Nowhere did it say the country of origin, just that it was "Union Made". I didn't think this was very helpful. It could have been a Chinese union, for all I could tell. I emailed Heinz and I got a reply that ALL their products were made in Leamington, Ontario from Canadian beans. I then asked why they didn't promote that on the label but never got an answer. Anyhow, while I was perusing the can I noticed an old gentleman beside me, doing the same thing. I asked him "Checking to see where it came from?". "You bet!" he replied. "After some of the things in the papers you can't be too careful!". I have a very low income and it hurts to take this attitude sometimes. If you read the labels of all the house brands in the supermarkets they are mostly Chinese. So I'm costing myself a bit extra money. Still, I can afford to lose a few pounds and I sleep better at night.

Well Waldo, with this one issue I agree with Ezra but from your POV I guess I'm worse! I held these views for years now! In my whole life I have only bought $2 worth of PetroCanada gas, since I was aware from its inception that there was never a drop of Canadian oil or gasoline in their pumps! When the company was first formed they bought from Libya and Venezuela. Later sources may have changed to favour more from the middle East. That only made me MORE uncomfortable! I couldn't afford an electric vehicle, even if one was available. Especially since I was an outside salesman with a large territory. Despite sources I didn't respect, I had no choice but to keep buying. So I just gritted my teeth and resented it! The $2 came from being up in northern Ontario on a fishing trip and I was riding on fumes while driving a 1980 Rabbit VW convertible! Gas stations up there were sparse so I had no choice but to pull into a PetroCan and buy just enough to get me to the next gas station. That was about 1981 or so, which predates Ezra by a fair bit. My consumer goods policy started in the early 90's as a reaction to how the Northern Telecom deal to export our electronic manufacturing business and jobs to China was affecting my own personal area of income. I could see the day when everything in the stores came from China and no one earned enough money to buy anything. My aversion to anything from China, India or Russia started about the same time, when I became aware that these countries had not only taken our manufacturing jobs but they also spent ZERO on anti-pollution measures! Later, when Kyoto was signed and I downloaded and read it I was disgusted with the hypocrisy being shown by the environmental movement and lost almost all faith in them. Clearly, they truly didn't give a damn about "saving the planet". It was just warmed over Marxist wealth re-distribution masquerading as environmentalism. I started paying attention to my groceries in 2007, after the pet food poisoning Chinese scandal. Obviously, that country had as much respect for food inspection as they do for intellectual property rights with selling pirate CDs and DVDs. Since Canada for years has accepted "inspection at source" I felt I had virtually no protection until "after the fact". IOW, after pets or even babies start dying then and only then does Canada react. I'm an older guy, Waldo. I've been paying attention to this for a LONG time! Ezra is just a johnny-come-lately, as far as I'm concerned. I'm afraid your worst fears about me are confirmed!

Well, your concern is carbon standards, I guess. Me, I have moral qualms about middle east oil. This stems from having moral differences with the morals and cultural values of so many of the leaders of those nations. More simply, when I hear the term "blood oil" I agree with it! If I were a customer in Europe, I would feel better about accepting oil products from Canada's oil sands than Saudi oil. I would be even happier if Canada worked a bit harder to clean up its production process. Then again, I realize you might consider me an anomaly. Not only do I hold these views on middle east oil but when I shop I read the labels to discover the country of origin. If possible, I don't buy products from countries like China,India or Russia, who spend diddley squat on anti-pollution measures. I'm not totally a fanatic about it, since often it's all but impossible to find an alternate source, or one that's even close to as cheap, but I do what I can. Especially with food! The Chinese already killed a number of our pets with contaminants in dog and cat food. They also had a problem with baby foods. I really don't want to eat anything that comes from that country. Again, some things are almost impossible to source from somewhere else. Canned fruit for example. Or canned mushrooms. In those cases I buy fresh unless the price is too high for being out of season. I prefer domestic product, as local as possible but for citrus and such of course that is impossible, so I buy only products from a short list of countries. I even shun bulk raisins, as they usually come from Iran. Sometimes I have to hunt a bit but usually I can find California raisins elsewhere on the shelf. As I said, we likely have quite different priorities and values. You're entitled to yours, as I am to mine.

Yes, we did! Only because, as usual, we sent a good portion of our total capability. Most European members of NATO sent nothing or only a token force. Why? Because they're cheap! That still doesn't mean they don't have a lot more than us. It just means that most of the time they don't deploy it. There have been a number of threads on this before. If you're truly interested, you can do your own googling. However, it's obvious what you will find. Anyone with common sense should have already figured this out for themselves. Whenever our politicians talk about our military it's always about us having the bravest and the best trained. This might well be true and as a patriotic Canadian I would prefer to believe it. Still, it is NEVER about having the most or the best equipped! When politicians avoid mentioning something it's usually pretty obvious why.

Maybe in Quebec, August! I'd like to see some evidence that your premise is true! Outside of YOUR back yard, I don't think so! I think you're being "provincial" again, if you'll pardon the pun.

Quite right, Argus! Seems a lot of folks don't realize that Canada is "the little guy" as far as military might in NATO. Compared to Turkey, we'd only get in the way!

Whatever the claims of the EU, they are not buying any oil sands oil at the moment anyway! They seem totally dependent on the middle east. That being the case, things will be "hunky-dory" unless and until the balloon goes up and that region is engulfed in war. At that point the EU may be desperate for alternative supplies. By that time, Canada should be exporting a goodly amount to the USA and perhaps China and Japan. If so, I hope our politicians will remember the EU's actions when it comes time to decide about selling them any oil sands product and at what price. This is not meant to be a threat. It would simply be good business! What has the EU done for Canada lately?

Here's the link: http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46519 "Andrew Walden of American Thinker explored nearly 2 years ago the demise of the 37-turbine wind farm at Kamaoa Wind Farm in Hawaii: “Built in 1985, at the end of the boom, Kamaoa soon suffered from lack of maintenance. In 1994, the site lease was purchased by Redwood City, CA-based Apollo Energy. Cannibalizing parts from the original 37 turbines, Apollo personnel kept the declining facility going with outdated equipment. But even in a place where wind-shaped trees grow sideways, maintenance issues were overwhelming. By 2004 Kamaoa accounts began to show up on a Hawaii State Department of Finance list of unclaimed properties. In 2006, transmission was finally cut off by Hawaii Electric Company.California’s wind farms — then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity — ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills.”" This would confirm what many of us have been saying all along. Wind power cannot compete without large subsidies. It's only good for politicians to get photo ops to impress the scientifically ignorant!

I wouldn't call it a warm embrace, Michael. I happen to believe that no communist country EVER prospers economically and ALWAYS looks to other countries for bailouts! However, as I said, the problem is not that they are communist. If they can make it work more power to them. They just would have a hard time finding a successful model to emulate. How about North Korea? That's worked out well! Meanwhile, the problems of countries like Greece were there long before they joined the EU. If they ever had any intention of being fiscally responsible and productive I've yet to see any evidence of it.

No contradiction from me, Michael. If a nation chooses to be socialistic or even communist that's their business! Expecting to be bankrolled by their more productive neighbours is another thing altogether...

Why not? A communist is only a problem if he decides to rob you because his own system doesn't work. There were may communist governments in Europe before the fall of the USSR. France or Germany never cared about the economic problems of communist Poland or the Ukraine, except maybe to gloat a bit! No, most folks can get along with anyone as long as he buys his share of the beer!

Perhaps they are, Michael. So what? As long as they pay their own way they are entitled to have any political system they want. My point is that many of the EU nations have NEVER paid their own way and eagerly joined the EU to sponge off the productivity of others. I think that if you worked in Germany you would feel very resentful of Greece, Spain and Portugal right about now. Certainly you would have little consequence that having to be taxed for a bailout won't mean constantly being taxed to do the same thing over and over, since those countries have learned they don't have to! After all, they've been bailed out before, are being bailed out now and will likely be bailed out again! Perhaps resentful is too mild a word.

And I've seen hundreds of other technical sources that say that's crap! You have to remember that the music industry made a huge investment into CDs and digital technology. They are about as unbiased in the press as a tobacco company! The dynamic range alone was one vital factor where vinyl outshone digital. The truth is that digital has only recently met and exceeded the quality of unscratched vinyl. BlueRay dvds ARE better than vinyl! This is the reason that Neil Young, who has steadfastly refused to allow any of his songs where he still had the rights to be released on CDs, to change his mind. CDs were not as good as vinyl, period. Neil himself is a bit of a techy and understood this. Now his fans are delighted to be able to buy BlueRay collections of his material.

Yeah, what would those grasshoppers do if the worker ants like Germany and France can't hold it together anymore? The entire EU concept always seemed a "Little Red Hen" story to me. A couple of producing countries and a whole passle of socialistic deadbeat nations looking for someone else to sponge off when the budgets needed to be balanced. The entire Union was always a political thing and never a true economic one. How could it be after allowing countries like Greece and Spain to join up? Yup, it's classic "Little Red Hen" and the chickens have come home to roost!

Back in the late 90's I was working for an American electronics parts distributor, selling to the Celesticas and other big manufacturers and a whole passle of smaller ones. I was on my own here in Ontario, working from my home and answering to a branch office in Montreal, which was the only physical presence for the company in Canada. One early spring I was on the phone with my boss and he started talking about taxes. "I just wrote a cheque to Ottawa for $6 million dollars!" he said. "Don't let anyone out there tell you we are NOT a Canadian company! We are giving 14 Canadians an income they pay taxes on and just paid all those millions in tax on our profits!" The oil sands may not be entitled to any subsidies. I don't agree with corporate welfare either. Still, if you are implying that they don't contribute ANYTHING to the taxpayer then I respectfully suggest you are conveniently ignoring a few factors.

Oh me old trout! I'm a transplant from the east coast that lives in Ontario and I tell you, you couldn't have followed the Conservative campaign last Ontario election! Tim Hudak of the Tories and his campaign team made watching paint dry look like Olympics topless womens' volleyball! Hudak started the campaign with over a 10 point lead in the polls and successfully snatched defeat from the jaws of victory! With no disrespect to the mentally challenged, Hudak's team of "bright young turks" would be better described as "special".

If you didn't catch his reference, then you have little knowledge of the history of how Canada was involved. How can you have a considered opinion? If I were you, rather than betray my ignorance I would have done a quick google before replying.

Star, you have to be a long time conservative yourself to understand. Like people of any persuasion, most are not political analysts. They don't deeply understand the parties and tend to have rather shallow conceptions and misconceptions. To put it simply, most folks that consistently vote Tory regard the NDP as muddleheads at best and outright communists at worst! That is why the Tory vote always has a solid base. NDP supporters tend to get very frustrated with this and call such voters all sorts of names, regarding them as simple-minded sheep at best and reptilian kitten-eaters who rob babies and laugh to condemn them to a life of poverty and welfare at the very worst. It doesn't matter. People are what they are and they vote as they will. The NDP will never win over some Tory votes by getting them to change their values. It will only happen if they see some of their values in the NDP! Which isn't likely any time soon, now that Jack has died. Don't hold your breath.

You know, the last page or two in this thread actually started me laughing! It reminded me of the old saying that if you tell a lie long enough people will believe it to be true. I graduated from grade 13 in the class of 70/71. That very fall was the first opening of Mohawk College and the start of the community colleges program. There had been all kinds of talk about this new venture. One thing that was stressed was that the students would be taught by teachers fresh from industry! They were implying that many teachers tended to get behind the times, especially when we were entering the era of rapid change and technological advancement. Over a decade later I was working in an industrial electronics store on the order desk and used to cringe when we got a call from some of Mohawk's electronics profs, especially the head of the department! Here we were selling bucketloads of the new computer "chips" to manufacturers, while some Mohawk prof was asking for parts that had been obsolete for at least 10 years, like incandescent pilot lamps when the whole world was using LEDs. I guess that they may have been fresh when they were hired but once they were in the school they seemed to get progressively staler. That's not the main point, however. In all the media for the adults and from all the guidance counselors in our high schools we had been constantly told that these community colleges would eliminate the need for industry to spend so much time and money training young new hires! The promise was that the school would "pre-train" them. They could be hired and with a minimum of orientation go straight to productive work! By the 90's as an outside salesman I began to hear a different story. 'Personnel' had evolved from a small department that tracked the paperwork for employees, making sure they got their holidays and the correct amount of pension when they retired into a much larger department that had taken over most of the hiring process, leaving the department heads and supervisors that would receive these new employees out of the hiring loop. Mostly we saw a clerical worker making the decision as to who to hire. Naturally, it had become a much more bureaucratic process. A clerk checked off a list of little boxes as to what certificates and diplomas you had accumulated. If enough boxes were checked you were in! Of course, to a hands-on manager you may not have shown nearly as much aptitude as he would have liked. There is such a thing as talent and adaptibility which can make one candidate be a much better choice than another. To a clerk all faces are the same but many managers began to grumble, loudly! We now have people lambasting companies for expecting too much of school graduates, when the whole affair started off with the schools convincing businesses of that very thing! Who woulda thunk it!

That idea makes the most sense, CC! It does look like things have already been decided for Iran. There are parallels here with Iraq and Saddam. Like Saddam, Iran is boasting about becoming a nuclear power. They have never actually said they are NOT working on the bomb! They have said that their program is essentially for peaceful purposes and that it is nobody else's business, especially the USA, the other western countries and the UN! I can't believe that the better educated and western leaning younger demographic in Iran supports their government with becoming a nuclear power. These young folks have shown a desire for freedom and a contempt for the primitive ways of the clerics who rule them. They are more than well-enough informed to understand that becoming a nuclear power will not make them the strongest kid on the block! More likely, it will get a lot of them killed! If the balloon goes up I just can't see them siding with the mullahs. More likely they will launch an "Arab Spring" of their own. Meanwhile, after the release of the latest UN report the west obviously has decided to take Iran at its word. They simply can't allow Iran with its present government to become a nuclear power, complete with missile delivery systems. No one believes that Iran has been testing missiles for a space program. When it happens, I think the ayatollahs are in for a shock! Like Iran they may have a lot of war materiel but they have no idea of true MODERN technology! Iraq's tanks were basically slaughtered like WWII toys. Iran's submarines cannot possibly be quiet enough to escape detection from American and western forces. If they make a move they will be blown out of the water, in an embarrassingly short time. Like both times with Iraq, the strike will be both massive and swift. Despite Pakistan's lackluster support, other Arab countries no more want Iran to be a nuclear power than they want to be under Israeli rule! Look for them to quietly allow the west to use their landing bases, or at least give permission to fly over their territory. They won't likely take an active role themselves, at least not publicly. Still, they will give whatever aid they can behind the scenes. As for Russia and China, all they care about is the money they have invested in deals with Iran. If they have assurances that any new government will honour existing deals they will publicly grumble but not actually do anything significant. Afterwards, it will be interesting for the world to see just how real was the threat from Iran. It may have all been bluster, like Saddam before, but somehow this time I don't think so. Either way, Iran has played a dangerous game by making itself look like a threat. There was always a risk that somebody would actually believe it!