willy

You make an interesting jump in logic here. You first argue that the system is underutilized. Then you make a big judgment that it is just a matter of money. Yes I agree they can not use the physical resources in the system but if you went back and read what I actually wrote you would see that my diagnosis was a systemic problem. They do not have the flexibility or the culture to enable them to achieve full utilization. Indicators are what you measure to check long term success. West Jet has by far the best market position, they have many new planes coming online that use less fuel and will spend more time in the air. They have a huge efficiency advantage. it takes 120 Air Canada employees to fly a plane it only takes 70 West Jet employees. West Jet planes are in the air 12 hours a day compared to less than 8 hours by Air Canada. Your indicators would be the quarterly earnings. (guess) I hope you don't buy stock or you will be a drain on the social safety net as you age. Air Canada sold of some major assets in the last 2 quarters that are showing up on the books now. West Jet has made some investments in that same time. Who do you think will have huge profits 3 quarters from now? Long term sustainability is impacted by your ability to maximize your resources and to have a dedicated workforce that is the engine that drives you forward. In the public healthcare systems they have a mistrusting environment that has been toxic to employee moral. To rid the system of this cultural dynamic would take a management feat I have never seen.

Have you ever heard of the Luddites? Times are a changing and for the better. Father does not always know best and it is time the vote buying Liberals had their allowance cut.

I think you can include the Pope in this statement. The problem is people like Pat Robertson proclaim the truth in the bible and then make statements that contradict that truth. The story in Genesis, the 10 commandments and the sermon on the mount lay out the context for the entire bible. The golden rule needs to be applied, treat others as you would want to be treated and the great commission; Love thy neighbor as I have loved you. But I will say to be a Christian you have to believe in Christ. This is a choice and I believe that others have the right to make that choice. If they don't believe God calls me to love them as if they were my brothers and sisters in Christ. Believing in Christ does not make them infallible but just forgiven. If they misuse the teaching of God then I think it is for God to judge not me. I have stated that I believe in Jesus. The great I AM. According to the scriptures he is the one way to heaven. To through this part of Christian theology out would make the rest worthless. At what point does God remove salvation I don't know. Christ came to live the perfect sinless life and then died an undeserving death that we might be able to have a relationship with God through his perfect sacrifice. (General foundational Christian theology, but to remove Christ or to say he was a great teacher and only that would greatly diminish the whole faith. In fact why bother; it might as well be some new age feel good faith where we can pick and choose what we like) Pluralism to me does not mean that I have to some how adopt all beliefs; the major religions have much different views on salvation. They can not all be true. In our Country and our culture I think it is important to enable people practice and grow in their own belief. That is not to say that they can all be equally true. Faith and spirituality is a choice and external pressures don’t remove the choice factor.

At least Bert took responsibility, apologized and took the penalty. Svend blamed stress and a hard life. Poor spend had to do it, he had a metal illness and now he must be all cured. Come on, should he really be back in politics one year latter. I really don't like Hedi but Svend is not going to restore trust back in politics. To come back to the comparison; I never expected to trust a hockey player. If his association says he can play, then he can play. Sports heroes are just images, and should not be placed up for morale comparison. Politicians on the other hand are running for public service and should be held to a higher standard. BD, you don't strike me as a sports fan. Are you really or do you just like high horses?

To many people that would make him an ideal hockey player. This is not figure skating. He is going to play hockey. Svend wants to write laws. Do you not see a difference?

He was accorded his punishment and did his time. Bertuzzi is an amazing hockey player! That is why he is on the Olympic team. Does your view suggest that we investigate all the athletes now not only for drug use but also character. What rules would we use to judge if they can represent us? Silly. He is good at hockey and does not have the behaviour problems of many of the professional clowns out there. He was part of an incident that was judged on the injury result and not the level of violence. I have seen sucker punches in hockey my whole life. The difference was only the strength and pile up that ensued. Forgiveness is no longer a Canadian value.

Basic coverage with the ability to purchase extra insurance right now. If you have blue cross coverage for instance you can get a much nicer cast. I personally like the fact we have basic public insurance, but I wish they would put mind to how they open up new delivery opertunities. This should not be done because of a failing systems but designed to enhance our access to quality health care.

Believe how? I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. Comes with being a Christian. In your terms that makes me a fanatic? The evidence I have seen and how I have been taught to read the bible it holds true to for me. Yes I believe Jesus is who he said he was. I have some fine company. We are about to celebrate Christmas and it is based on the Bible. This is the book you refer to? Some of the bible is literal, Actd for instance. Other parts are letters and other parts are allegory. Who wrote each section and who were they communicating to with each book? The bible is not one book but many and yet they all fit together and yet they were written over a long period of time by many different authors. I was at the Getty in LA last year and they had some very early translations. It is cool to see how the integrity of the original text has managed all these years. I could have a long conversation about why I think the bible is so important to my faith but I don't know your experience or your learning’s. I would not presume to know what you have explored and why you have come to your conclusions.

Yes of course. I think they can and do co-exist. Science is not a religion but a process by which we explore creation. How it works and what it is made of. If my religious beliefs do not reflect scientific belief I best have a second look. At the same time much of science is based on theory that evolves with new information and my certainty in any one theory should be weighed by the amount of evidence that suggests it. We still have a choice to make in everything we believe. Our premises for belief may or may not be explicit but for a better understanding of our own beliefs, reflections on why we believe certain things is healthy for all of us I would think.

We have a two teir system. In BC WCB patients, criminals and police officers get access to private clinics. Those clinics will also operate on you if you pay. An aside: the clinics came to be under the provincial NDP governement. They thought the worker deserved to jump the que. We also have mixed clinics where some services you pay for and others are picked up by public health insurance. In Quebec they have many practices that have opted right out of the public system. Our system is failing and the governments don't have answers so they can not inforce the single tier system. No one wants to be blamed for waiting list deaths. If I were you I would be less worried about NAFTA and more worried about accessing the care you need when you need it as the baby boom ages. Cambie clinic in Vacouver is 10X more efficient that the public system. The health outcomes are also better due to the short wait times procedures tend not to progress into more complex problems.

Science can test and discribe what is. It can not tell you why it is. I must extend this category to include the non-religious who don't think about this at all. They drink, or work, or what ever to distraction of the fact we all die. The why are we here and how did that come to be is not a daily reflection. Many of my good friends resemble this category, and I wish only that they had the purpose in life God has given me. Like one of my favorite movies says "Aint no atheists in a fox hole." One of my favorite people is Preston Manning, and when he talks about his choice to be a believer in God he states it that way. At no point could he continue to ponder, at some point he decided. This is not in ignorance but in the realization that certainty is a relative thing and we don't have perfect information. We all deal with in a limited frame on how we see the world and have to choose a reality that best fits our experience. Turns out I think there is a God. From the sounds of much of the writing on this site many of you folks believe me to be a nutter because of it. Oh well I don’t need your validation to feel confident in my choice.

I heard it said that when you know enough to realize how much you don't know wisdom starts.

This week in Vancouver a judge gave bail to a man charged with shooting a young skateboarder a few weeks back. It was argued that the man should be able to spend the time with family over Christmas until the trial starts. This man was caught on tape chasing down the young man who was shot minutes before the shooting. Under a Liberal government criminals don't get punished. They fight strongly for no minimum sentences. They don't want to tie the hands of the judges. We need to do a little more than tie the hands. The gun used was not a legal gun. You will not eliminate crime by locking up those that commit them but really should there be no punishment. Not for rehabilitation but for punishment. You take a life, you sell drugs to kids, you steal and you should be punished. I guess it is the steal part that stops the Liberals. Judge yet thee be judged.

!!! Why do you use such dire language? I told you why I would not move along. I don't think the world would end on this issue. It is not my priority and it is not the priority of the Conservative Party. It does disappoint me how people like you can’t open up there mind long enough to see the long term impact to the freedom of religions to teach based on their doctrine. My concern is cases like the two women who sued the Knights of Columbus for canceling their wedding in one of there halls and won. The fact that the first question in the English debate was on SSM brings it to the front. Reporters keep asking the question. Liberals seem to love to bring it up. Priorities are cleaning up government, justice reform, family tax deductions and improving our international trade relations. Is it news when it is not covered? The news is always were the reporters are. Why this is discussed so much? I guess because people like myself keep responding. I respect that my opinion does not match that of many others. Oh well that is life. It is not the end of anything. People will get up tomorrow and I will try not to add to this cyclical debate. What if they use the scary not withstanding clause? Would that be the end? Nothing would happen except every five years we would have to revisit the issue to continue using the clause. Gays and Lesbians would have unions and they could even get legal separations. Not much different than now. Except a distinction is made and the consistency to protect religious teaching would make me for one feel a little better.

Sparhawk, Either Mr. Harper runs on the voted for policy or he lacks integrity. All of this good policy is based on the democratic process that happened in Montreal last March. Mr. Harper can not and should not change this policy with out consulting members. The policy was to hold a vote. The house of commons will decide the issue not a party whip or the Prime Minister. I understand that in urban Canada, specifically the media centers of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver that SSM is strongly supported. This does not make it a good issue because it acts like a wedge. Rest assured the policy would only change a title to civil union. All the rights and relationship cities associated would be maintained. I don't think at this point you will find enough MP's to overturn the decision. This is about a free vote. So the choice is a leader who does what he says and respects others beliefs and opinions or a leader who says anything to get elected and governs by polls with no clear direction for the country. Personally I favour civil unions because I think it is important for same sex couples to be able to enter into long term committed relationships that are recognized. This recognition should guarantee access to property and representation i.e. hospital access etc. My on going concern with no legal designation or difference between same sex couple and opposite sex couples is that it will be used in courts to argue access and persecute religious teaching. The Charter that Mr. Martin speaks in defense of will be used to affect the activities of churches, mosques etc. See that is the challenge, one decision for a good reason, can have a negative impact on anther group. The law of unintended consequences. If this is just about election strategy and not the impacts of policy. You are 100% right this is a bad policy for the Conservatives. If it is about being a good policy for all Canadians well that is debatable and I am still willing to be convinced.

They have not. The core they are appealing to is the democratic roots of the Reform Party. They believe that everything should be decided by a vote. They believe the grass roots should run the agenda. Mr. Harper has tempered this by focusing on MPs being representative of constituents, but this is what drives the free vote on same sex marriage. By the way with a free vote even with a Conservative Majority it is likely to not change the last result. Other than this one issue how is he catering to the social conservative base? Putting drug dealers and violent criminals in jail for minimum sentences sure is not extreme. Is it? Enforcing the current law is not extreme is it? Taking money from in effective programs and redirecting it to policing resources seems a little like common sense. Having a flexible child care policy that recognizes the diversity of needs for parents across this country seems to make sense from a federal government. This of course does not stop the provinces from filling in with more localized early child hood learning programs. Which with the fiscal imbalance addressed would be a real possibility. It really burns my ass when on a discussion site the best many can do is continue with the rhetoric and not just focus on positive solutions. Any one can be a critic but what and how should they change the status quo. If you have noticed the pressures on the health care system will only increase as the baby boom ages and retires. Jack Layton’s defense of Medicare is like losing weight by smoking. You may look better initially but eventually your teeth go black, your skin gets wrinkles, and you can’t breath. We need a government that will look to sustainability, practicality and effectiveness. I don’t only want public healthcare, I want to be able to access it and then I want it to be of the best quality. None of us wants a doctor who finished last in his class. Sorry for the lack of focus but I have not posted in a while and it all builds up. Harper is not pandering; he believes that these things will be good for the country. Quebec at some point needs to choose Canada. You can’t force people to embrace you. You follow the golden rule and work at providing value and you hope they really want to be around because of who you are and they like who they are when they are around you. Canada can be that place.

Votes are now worth money. So vote the way you want your money to go as well.

Hey that sounds worse than what we have now. Be in pain or risk dieing in a line up or be in pain and risk dieing in a line up.

He did reduce their value and caused much unneeded stress to many seniors who depend on these investments to pay the bills. Again should I inclued more actual examples of Liberal MPs that lied or will you relent to the fact they are not trustworthy.

Let's start with Scott Brison who had to read a retraction letter in the house last week to avoid being sued for liable. How about the Health Minister that talks about not allowing private health clinics while they are poping up all over the country. Should I go on?

Maybe it is because of contracts like the one David Hurl recieved without tender to do polling on the release of the Gomery findings. Maybe the Dingwall severence makes us question. If the missuse of taxpayers money was limited to the ad agencey transaction investigation that was the Gomery inquirey we may not go after other MPs. Oh and did you buy your dividend stocks before the annoucement or are you not on the right insider list? :angry:

Liberal Corruption: Gomery Findings are not bashing, they are findings. The Liberals have been in government for 12 years and have a record to run on. The opposition only has positions. Critisizing acutual events is not bashing, it is articulating what they actually did and not a might do fear campaign. The Liberals based on experience have fuled many of our current challenges. Unity, Health Care, Trust in Government They have been in power and are responsible for the current state of affairs. If 12 years is not enough, I don't have time for their fix.

Did they work? Two women won a law suit against the Knights of Columbus this week after their wedding plans were canceled due to religous reasons. These women when booking would have know that the KofC would not support same sex marriages in there facilities. This is a slipery slop and the case law will now build in the favour of "human rights" and not religous freedom.

“Most Canadians would not, I expect, have a problem with that since it would stiffen the penalties for physical gay bashing.” The only party with any credibility for toughening sentences for violent crime is the Conservatives. Chuck Cadmen spent the last years of his life to ensuring those that commit crimes pay for it. Randy White also has spent his career working for victim’s rights and accountability for criminals. These men will not be back the legacy will continue only if a Conservative party is elected. All people deserve the protection of the law; this of course includes gay Canadians. The Liberals still battle any legislation that has mandatory minimum sentences for violent crime. The NDP thinks the whole problem is just a stigma issue for the poor and with adequate social housing the criminals will go away. (FYI they have a very active group of gay activists in Vancouver who work hard for the Conservative Party. These men and women believe in our democratic rights, lower taxes, and safe streets.)