Wild Bill

Interesting. It was YOUR premise that western separatism was either trivial and/or non-existent but somehow you've twisted it around that it is MY responsibility to disprove it! You're good! You're actually better than the Witness who came to my door yesterday! He seemed to feel that it was MY responsibility to prove a challenge to HIS beliefs as well. Apparently, you both have something in common. A strong faith! Since I am not and have never been a man of faith I'm afraid that's not enough for me. However, as with the Witness I respect your right to hold that faith. I can never share it without completely negating the memories and experiences of decades of my life but nonetheless, I will respect it. I notice you did NOT answer my question about your age! I do feel that is relevant to these kinds of arguments. You see, direct experience trumps debate every time! As FireSign Theater said "Take that! Mr. Monday morning quarterback! Mr. Armchair general!" Your posts on various topics have proven time and time again that you are very adept at debate. Debate is a useful tool but far more accurate at explaining a truth than at predicting one. Sometimes you remind me of the old joke about two hunters who find some tracks in the bush. One insists that they are bear tracks and the other is adamant they are wolf tracks. Each has an extremely well formulated argument but while they are debating the train ran right over them! I submit that you love to win a debate more than you love to discover a truth, Waldo. I believe that you would ignore or dismiss anything that might contradict your argument. I cheerfully admit that your debating skills best my own! Still, as I said I just can't accept argument over direct experience. To jump from Galileo to Kepler, the finest arguments "prove" the planets travel in perfect circles but direct observation proved they do not!

Again, despite the lack of cites detailed enough to meet YOUR standards, proving me wrong will take somewhat more. You will have to convince all those Westerners who DID feel alienation and considered separation that they never actually did so. Moreover, you will have to convince all those who feel that way today! You simply dismiss them as not really existing! Like Scrooge, you turn up your nose, sniff and declare "You're nothing but an undigested bit of gruel! There's more of gravy than the grave about you!" This is where the academic approach can fail. You can build an airtight, logical argument that in the real world is completely false. Out of curiosity, how old were you in 1980? Did you directly experience those times or do you just dip into whatever history bits are convenient to your argument? Deny it all you want Waldo. Eppur si muove!

This is from 2005: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20050809/separatist_poll_canada_050809/ "CTV.ca News Staff Date: Tuesday Aug. 9, 2005 2:23 PM ET At least one-third of Western Canadians think it's time for their provinces to consider quitting Canada, a new poll suggests." Here's some history: http://politicalpapers.ucalgary.ca/wcc "The Western Canada Concept was a Western Canadian political party founded in 1980 to promote the separation of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia and the Yukon and Northwest Territories from Canada in order to create a new nation. " "A member of the party, Gordon Kesler, was elected to the Alberta legislature in a 1982 provincial by-election in Olds-Didsbury riding that drew national attention. The Party's best electoral results came later in the same year during the Alberta general election, where it took 11.8 per cent of the vote, though it did not elect any MLAs and Gordon Kesler lost his seat. " 11.8%? Seems a significant number to me! It was more than enough to get Elizabeth May into a candidate debate. More history: http://www.canadahistory.com/sections/eras/trudeau/western_alienation.htm "By 1981 almost half of Albertans were in favour of separation from Canada. Their feeling that the Canadian government was controlled by Ontario and Quebec interested was relatively correct in the vast majority of the population of the country lived in those two provinces and they had therefore had the majority of the seats in Parliament. The isolation of the west was briefly alleviated in 1981 when Lougheed and the Fed's came to an agreement over revenue sharing but when oil prices collapse in 1982 Alberta was faced with difficult times and many blamed the Federal government for the bad times." When Waldo says "There was no public sentiment towards western separation... there is no public sentiment towards western separation... there has never been a public sentiment towards western separation." I don't see how he makes such a strong assertation when a simple quick google gives pages and pages of sites! There are likely MILLIONS of Westerners still alive that vividly remember those times! Perhaps he can explain this apparent contradiction.

Here we see another example of the typical Waldo approach to debate: "You claim there is a large percentage that feels or felt that way? NAME THEM! NAME THEM ALL!"

That's it! Once again I'm a personal target. Time to hit the 'ignore' button, AGAIN! Gave it a chance but it was a waste of time. Angus, you of course are free to make your own decision.

Well, forgive me for disagreeing a bit. I WAS a Reformer and a rather active one so perhaps I saw some things that you missed. Also, there are a couple of "behind the scenes" books that came out that you might want to read. Anyhow, the consensus was that Manning was dealing with a very strong western separatist movement in the early days of Reform. There were a LOT of people who wanted to make Reform a western ONLY separatist party! Manning developed "The West Wants IN!" to counter this movement. It took a lot of finangling and manipulating but he got his way. The Party decided to be a truly national party and passed a motion to allow new members east of the Manitoba/Ontario border. I know this because I had to wait to join! I still have if not the first certainly one of the initial Ontario Reform memberships. The western separatist movement at that time was very strong and almost completely unknown by eastern pundits. They all took it for granted that western separation was a tiny fringe feeling and would never happen. They were all dead wrong! If Manning had not got the party to expand nationally Canada might be very different and likely smaller today. Eastern people never understood that Alberta at least could easily afford to separate, which is quite a different "fish kettle" than Quebec. It is always easier for a giver to leave than a taker.

Don't forget that in such situations no one has the time to sit around and discuss various options, GH! Apparently, he was a danger to other students. What if one of those students was your own child? Have you got another quick and fast solution that would have been instantly obvious to everyone there? My attitude has always been that if someone doesn't have a WORKING alternative he really has no right to criticize. Anybody can demand someone ELSE think of a better solution!

"generosity, justice, hope", that doesn't suggest a merger to me, Capricorn. This is just "Mom and apple pie" stuff! ALL parties believe in those values! They disagree about how to go about them but surely they all share them! One party might believe the other parties are mistaken but only an irrational partisan would believe that his opponents are AGAINST such values by intent!

Of course we have synagogues, JBG! Not as many in proportion to the USA. For some reason,we never acquired as high a percentage of Jewish folk. Maybe we weren't as attractive a destination for an emigrant than America. Still, in certain areas we have a LOT of Jews! Montreal has a thriving textile industry that was founded and is owned almost exclusively by Jews. The lion's share of business reps for imports are Jewish firms as well. Along with, of course, some incredibly good delis and restaurants. Yet in my home town here of Hamilton, Ontario, which had a population of about 330,000 most of my life I never met one Jew until my mid-20's, not at school or in my social circle. Later I discovered there where some large businesses owned by Jews in Hamilton but they mostly lived in the older part of town and the west end, while I grew up in the eastern and more rural areas. I guess there were fewer Jewish farmers. Our demographics have always been quite different, both due to politics and geography. We were initially French settlers abandoned by their home country and a lot of Brits, many of whom were refugees from the American War of Independence. Over the decades our immigrants tended to be mostly Europeans and some Chinese on the west coast who built our national railroads, fed us and convinced the dirty lot of us to take off our filthy clothes so they could wash them! I'm convinced those Chinese were the ones who got the rest of us to finally practice some decent hygiene! I'm 58 years old and I've never met anyone of Spanish descent here in Canada. When I have crossed the border for business or pleasure I have met lots, even in Buffalo which is only about a 90 minute drive away. Once on a flight to Texas the stewardess asked me if I wanted a refreshment in Spanish. I looked dumb and replied in French! She gave me a big grin and a free beer! Despite their relative scarcity, I would not feel at all uncomfortable in one. A lot of singing in a language I don't understand. What's different between that and the Latin I heard in church as I was growing up? I didn't understand that either! We DO have a lot of mosques and yes, I will confess, I would feel uneasy in one. I don't care if it would be politically incorrect. I would think it simple prudence.

You don't think it's possible that a large number of Quebecois could switch to the Tories? After all, the Liberals still have the reek of scandal in much of Quebec. Why should any drain from the NDP automatically go to them? Especially since it looks like Harper may well win more elections. Why would Quebecers decide to keep on being shut out? From my POV, I think the NDP should wait at least one more term to see which way the wind is blowing. Instead of getting their act together, it's perfectly possible for the Liberals to keep on being screwed up, waiting for another philosopher King/Messiah. They could keep on sliding, as did the old PC Party, to the point where the only thing that could save them was a merger. If the NDP then decide to allow a merger with a tiny rump of Liberal survivors, they should take a tip from what happened to the Reform/Alliance. The small number of PC's have ended up controlling the party, stamping out all traces of Reform and making it over into a clone of the old Mulroney party, the one that millions had abandoned in favour of the Manning dream. As I like to say, looking back at what's happened you can't help but wonder why all those Reformers even bothered! The same thing could happen to the NDP. If the Liberals are dying out, the best approach for the NDP would be to stand back and let them die! Even more, don't pick up the pieces! They may be contaminated with "Liberal virus" that will infect them all and turn them into Liberal clones!

Or Hedy Fry's twin!

You obviously missed the joke! Not so much Alexa but certainly Libby is well known for always siding against Israel and backing Hamas and the Palestinian terrorist groups, sometimes to the point of just looking silly. Up till now it hasn't mattered, with the NDP always being in perpetual 3rd place. Now, when Jack got them all the way to a strong Opposition position, they can't afford to look like a party just of flakes. They have to appear to be more mature and responsible. Less the union party of 1967 and much more like the Labour Party of Tony Blair. Libby just did it again, when a day or two ago she announced she was going to introduce a private members bill to erase the 10 year wait period for old age pensions for new immigrants. A new Canadian would be able to bring their granny over here under a family reunification program, a granny who had never invested a dime into Canada's tax base and immediately start collecting a pension! This would of course cost us a fortune in new taxes and upset a huge number of Canadians, namely those who would have to pay for it! Before, nothing much would have happened. The private members bill would have died a quick death in the Commons and we would have moved on. However, as I said, being in Opposition is a different situation and within 24 hours the NDP Party damage control was in full bore! Libby was quietly told to get out of the limelight and keep her mouth shut. Wayne Marsten, the party's pension critic, stood up in her stead and announced that the whole thing was just floating an idea and never intended to be serious. Libby hadn't paid attention to how things have changed, obviously. She made what in the private sector we call a CLM, or Career Limiting Move. Something tells me that the NDP party brass has finally got their heads together. If they keep on developing their party to be more sensible, it may well be the Liberals who are condemned to perpetual 3rd place!

Sounds like a marketing suit just put Dale Carnegie back about 50 years! Is satellite an option? How about OTA, or Over The Air? That's where you get your own antenna again! I'm recently separated and poor as a church mouse. I've moved into an old house in the poor part of town but I'm getting all kids of digital and UHF channels! What's more, HD picked up on an antenna is FAR sharper than by cable! There are thousands of amplifiers in any big city cable system and probably 30 or more between you and the cable company's antennae. These amplifiers can't help but degrade an HD signal a little bit but they all add up. You lose all the specialty cables but hey, only a few of those are any good. Around here to get a channel you want you have to take a bundle of channels filled with crap! I really don't miss The Shopping Channel or The Watching Paint (CCL-Canadian, of course!) Channel. Besides, for $60 I got a new video card for my computer. It's got a jack for an HDMI cable that I use to feed my "flat" new TV. Lots of networks keep a library of their shows at their main website. So I watch them on my TV and screw the cable company! There's a website called "tvfool.com". You can enter your location and if you know it your expected antenna height and it will give you a chart of all the channels you can expect to receive and even compass directions for the antenna! I'm fortunate here in Hamilton. For another $50 I bought a two-bay UHF antenna (All the digital broadcasting is done on UHF - VHF will be sold to cell phone companies or whatever in a few years). The two bays are hinged in the centre so that I can point one to Toronto and the other towards Buffalo. That's the directions where 95% of the channels are coming from and the missing ones are just repeats of others anyway. Just a thought.

You have to remember BM, I'm old! I've followed trends for some decades now. The attitudes of those more in the left camp began to develop back in the 60's and has just started to peak. I hate conspiracy theories but you have to wonder. I do know from personal experience that the NDP here in Ontario, back in the 60's, pursued a well thought out strategy. At the time they were next to nothing as a political force in the province and were making little headway in getting more votes and more seats. So they targeted all the smaller positions, like municipal councilor positions that often would be won by acclamation anyway, or school board trustees. The goal was to gain influence at less obvious levels, levels that were not subject to party politics so it was never obvious if whoever won the position was an NDP'er. By the time my children were in school (90's) they would often come home spouting the most outlandish comments on well known conservative politicians, like Mike Harris only caring for the rich and the Reform Party loved to see poor people suffer. Invariably, when I talked to them to find out where they were getting these ideas the root source would be a teacher! It was never a case of constant, everyday incidents. Rather, it would be just a dropped comment perhaps every few weeks or months but what would happen is that the kids would pick up on it and swallow it unchallenged, just as they would swallow that Halifax is the capital of Nova Scotia. Parents who didn't like Harris or the Reform Party would never see a problem! They would blow it off as something trivial or even humorous. Of course, any negative comment against Bob Rae or David Petersen uttered by a parent on the school yard that could have been heard by the kids was treated as a crime against the universe. Most of what I'm describing here BM I guess is really "group think" more than any conspiracy but that makes it even more effective. If you talk to students and young people it's amazing how many think that conservatives pursue their policies out of a deliberate policy of making the poor suffer. They really seem to think that Harper gets up every morning and says to himself "Now, let's find another poor guy and make his children starve! That would be so much fun!" Hell BM, we've got posters on this very board that seem to believe that! I don't ever recall any similar feelings the other way against the left over the years. As I said before, one would hear mocking of leftist policies as been "loopy" but I've never heard anyone describe Jack Layton as "evil". I do sense an attitude that Libby Davis is actually the typical NDP'er but that's about it. It's almost as if someone has begun a meme that believes "liberal" means being a good person and "conservative" means a bad one. This is a purely emotional idea and there is no attempt to back it up with facts. As a typical example, I talked with one young lady about Christie Blatchford, the Toronto newspaper columnist, who had written a column about how Jack Layton's funeral had been hijacked into a political circus to advance the party's cause. The lass was livid and was calling for Blatchford to be banned from journalism! BM, some of the things she was spouting were so over the top that I went home and googled the article to read it for myself. I didn't see ANY reason to take exception with what Blatchford had written. She had actually praised Layton as a person and only made fair political comment about the "circus". I confronted the lady again the following day and finally she admitted that she had never actually read the damn thing herself! As so often happens, she was simply following along with a crowd. No one had made the effort to read and decide for themselves. Blatchford had been pegged by her peer group as a "conservative journalist" and that was enough. No need to read her words! She was an evil conservative and that was enough. I know you can't plot a curve with only one data point but damnit BM, if you ask around you find that the poor dear is typical! I'm saying that it is important to understand who started the prejudice first! I really believe that these attitudes have been deliberately created and sculpted by various groups on the left. Such propaganda techniques are well known, after all. I love to talk with people and have a wide social circle. Over the past 10 years or so I have noticed, particularly with my musician customers, that it is harder and harder to discuss politics with them without those emotional prejudices that I've been talking about. Disagreeing with them is not looked at as the start of a delightful debate over a few beers but too often more a branding of one's self as an "evil conservative person" who hasn't drunk the Kool-Aid. Worse yet, fewer and fewer of them are up to date on current events, not reading newspapers, watching the news on TV or even getting some from the Net. Yet they have extremely passionate beliefs, even though they have no argument or reason to defend them, beliefs that are always leftwing and accompanied with a great deal of vitriol against anything on the right. I no longer participate in such discussions except with a very small group of personal friends. Too often it has gotten out of hand. I don't 100% understand what's going on but I do know BM, the phenomenon is very, very real!

Well GH, most of the time you might be right but you weren't there and neither was I! The kid had mental problems! Have you ever seen some of the incredible physical feats performed by those mentally ill? Have you ever worked in an institution and seen how difficult it can be to deal with some patients? Not all 9 year olds are the same size and maturity level. There was a student at my daughter's elementary school who was almost as big as a man and he was only 11! It's easy to make sweeping generalizations if you don't have all the facts. Or more simply, nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself! The kid wasn't hurt, he was stopped from hurting others - looks to me the police did a good job by the only yardstick that counts - it worked!

"Almost half"? I'm surprised it wasn't a higher figure! Who wouldn't want the convenience of having the doctor come to you? And who cares how much it costs! It's all free, right?

So optimism and pessimism are not emotional?

Wow! They've got more nerve than a bum tooth! This is deliberate by your local provider, HB! To be fair, eventually there will be no support for analog tv. Nobody can support buggy whip users forever. Sooner or later they are going to have to put the horse out to pasture and buy a car. That being said, every other cable company that I know about is waiting, not wanting to stick their customers with too much all at once. They will handle the digital broadcasts first, as it costs them very little. Many of the channels they carry right now are digital anyway. In a year or two when everyone is used to the change I'm sure they will put pressure on their customers to upgrade their old tvs but slowly! If they wait an extra year there will be fewer "old people" to worry about and it will be easier to push them along. To hit your customers all at once seems a marketing blunder, from my POV. If I was going to be forced to get a new digital tv just to support what I already had I might go to a satellite service instead, just for revenge! The cost is competitive and the number of channels is similar. If I had a Bell phone service I could get a bundled cost if I took their satellite service as well. If they were going to push me into going digital who says I have to take THEIR digital? Then I'd phone up my old cable company, tell 'em to rip out their cable feed and go pound salt where the sun don't shine!

Well, I already posted that I was going by information given to me by friends who actually live there. If you from your perch in Winnipeg have info that would prove my assumption and that of the people who live there wrong I'd be glad to hear about it. As for loving or hating wherever I live, does how I feel about a place change what's right or wrong with it?

Yer right, me old trout! Just another example of Ontario hoggin' all the action, I guess! BTW, our families are neighbours. My mother's side is from Pictou, N.S. Occasionally one of my uncles would row a dory over to the rock for drinkin' and dancin', which resulted in a bit of Newfoundland blood running in the family tree.

Bud, I am no expert on the Israeli/Palestinian situation but to me it's very simple as to who I support. When Israel attacks rocketeers in the Gaza some innocents may be hurt or killed as collateral damage. When Gaza rocketeers lob rockets into Israel innocents ARE the target! To me, that's enough. If you deliberately target innocents, that's enough. You are a terrorist by definition and to me that makes you a rabid dog. You don't try to negotiate with a rabid dog. All you can do is to either kill it or drive it away before it hurts you. A rabid dog has no reason. That's not to say that Israel is blameless but to me the difference in targeting philosophy is enough. Drop me down on an Israeli street and my only fear would be from a PALESTINIAN attack! I would have no fears at all from the Israelis. I could not say the same if I was dropped into a Palestinian community. I could not get out of there fast enough!. You're entitled to your nitpicking legal definitions. As I said, for me the deliberate targeting of innocents is enough.

That may be "you" BM but I still think my perspective is correct. I think some of the "over the top criticism" from the 'right' comes from frustration. Some of it is simple resentment of being constantly declared an "evil" person (as in "If you supported Harris then you must be just as bad as him!) I think most comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of how a great number of "leftists" (I hate these labels but I have no other appropriate words!) think! Since those on the "right" tend to think in practical terms, leading from their "head" they will follow a leftist argument and reason the consequences, usually seeing that they can't work and will likely cost a great deal of money that could have been better spent. The mistake made is that they assume those making the argument must also see those conclusions and therefore WANT those negative consequences, to satisfy some sort of hidden agenda! This of course is just as wacky as assuming that conservative politicians want to hurt the poor because they get some kind of perverse joy from it! The reality is that virtually always the "leftist" making such proposals or calling for such programs has no understanding of any negative consequences at all! He or she leads with their "heart" and runs on the faith that goodness will always work and that all you have to do is believe! They have confidence that details will ALWAYS sort themselves out! They just don't think things all the way through like an equation or a flow chart. They will call for all babies to be issued free sugar water, so that no infant must cry! They never think those few extra steps and understand the dental danger. If challenged over their idea, they always will get their backs up and assume the challenger is just some mean person who is too evil to share their goal and WANTS babies to cry! I know that sounds unfair but I have become convinced that socialists rarely come from technical backgrounds. I know there are socialist scientists but they are always botanists like David Suzuki, not physicists like Hawking or Feynman. Both groups simply think very, very differently! There's no value judgement that can be placed on those of either camp. After all, any team made up of clones is only as good as any one member. Different players with different skills will make the team win far more often. Our society is becoming much more politically polarized and I think we are the poorer for it.

Seems to me that was my original point but I'm getting too tired of having to go back and research my posts.

Once again, I think you didn't read my words very closely. Perhaps you should slow down a bit. I never referred to Stoney Creek or Hamilton. I spoke of Niagara Region. You are correct that there are walk-in clinics in Hamilton. Pity that's not what I was talking about. However, in a short time you may be right about Niagara as well, hopefully. A major local hospital was closed as part of some kind of consolidation. There were all kinds of reasons given as to how this would result in better service for the citizens but considering it adds many miles and much time for anyone needing hospital services, particularly accident victims, the locals aren't buying the story. I do hope that some walk-ins are springing up to offer some local family care. I would assume that it's likely. Wouldn't want to live in Thorold and need an ambulance, however.

As I commented on the FB page, I think the only reason the question is being asked is because Dalton has been using health care as a supposed success story in his campaign ads. Dalton has very few real success stories, at least those that are important to the voters. That leaves trumpeting the hell out of whatever he's got, I guess.