ReeferMadness

You'd think but it doesn't seem to make a dent in his credibility with Ford Nation. Political polarization in this country seems to be getting worse and worse. The tax cutting crowd would vote for Jack the Ripper if he could convince them all he really wanted to do was lower their taxes.

It's interesting, isn't it. Maybe Perrin will claim he counseled Harper correctly in his hearing with the bar society. The question is whether there will be any linkage back to the RCMP inquiry.

Your entire post sounds like the rationalization of someone who is suffering buyers remorse after a foolish purchase. Who are you trying to convince - us or yourself? "Yes, dear. The house does have dry rot and it's on a flood plain. But that other house was just too far from the pub!" You may be able to talk yourself into that the repercussions of your decision is somehow justified. It's too bad the rest of us have to suffer, however.

Individually, we may be victims but collectively, we victimize ourselves through our ignorance and apathy. A country gets the government it deservies

I can't speak for other Westminster parliamentary democracies. In ours, most people are confused about how it works despite learning about it in grade school and there being ample information on the web and elsewhere. Are you proposing to educate people at gunpoint? You assume that my goal is to replace the leader midterm. My goal is to fix our democracy so we're not tempted to replace the leader midterm.

Well, they pump poison into the ground and make your drinking water flammable. I suppose you think that's better than wrecking the view.

and it's always been about the money. Most things are mostly about the money.

As I read through the responses on this thread, it reminds me of just how low the level of discourse is around pot in general and medical marijuana in particular. No wonder our government can take such a neanderthal view on the topic and get away with it. Obviously, lots of the public do.

So now you accept the IPCC as authoritative? Or are you just accepting the pieces that you like? Because that's what denial is all about, isn't it?

It's way too soon to start making predictions about the election. However, I do predict that there are a lot of nervous Conservative hangers on looking at other career options.

Back to the original theme of this thread, Harper might soon be finding some new reasons to resign - they found Benjamin Perrin's emails! Mr Perrin faces his own problems relating to his alleged dealings in the senate scandal. He (like Harper) claims to have had no knowledge of the sordid affair; but his name appears in the RCMP documents. Here's the thing. If Perrin was aware of an illegal deal and failed to counsel Harper against it, he could be in trouble with the Bar.

I think that one of the biggest problems with the political system in Canada is that many Canadians don't understand it. How can you have a decent representative democracy when people don't understand how the representation works? The answer is you can't and we don't. I hate to say it but we'd be better off with a U.S. style political system (minus the unlimited money, of course). That way, when Canadians learn how politics work (by watching American movies, talk shows and late night comics) they would be learning something about Canadian politics too. And the next time some huckster of a politician tried to tell them that the opposition was trying to invoke a coup d'etat, they might not be so gullible.

Oh, yah. Munich re is one just one of those huge multinational corporations that is famous for joining the great climate change conspiracy. Another is Shell Global. Do you think they also suffer from a scientific bias? It must be starting to get lonely out there in Denier Land. Don't forget to turn out the lights when you finally leave.

Oh, now you're quoting the IPCC. So you accept their findings that climate change is happening and it is almost certainly caused by humans, you just think that there is no pattern of extreme weather events (yet). Is that it? As far as Munich Re goes, don't make me laugh. Are you seriously suggesting that the reinsurance giant is willing to compromise its core business for some renewable energy credits?

And you think it would be better if the area were covered in fracked gas wells?

Oh, now I get it. In Tim's world, all those climate scientists are a bunch of pinko liars and statistics proves that. Sooooooo.... if we ask the American Statistical Association for their view on this, they say: Geez, Tim. It looks like the science supports your position only if you choose your scientists veerrry carefully. Sort of like finding cancer cures on the internet.

And yet for all of these beautiful double-blind studies, the progress has been maddeningly slow. Treatments are brutal and progress slow to the point that the cancer industry has redefined success to be anyone who is still alive five years after the cancer has been discovered. Better diagnostic tools mean earlier detection and that means that the chances of people still being alive goes up even if there is zero improvement in the treatment. So, you go ahead and pick and choose which types of science you'll accept. After all, we wouldn't want to deprive you of your F350 for around town driving just on some pinko scientist hunch. Meanwhile, there are no climate change deniers to be found in the reinsurance industry. But hey, just the people who would go under believe it, no need for you to worry your pretty head over it. Just keep on wasting those fossil fuels. It's your patriotic duty.

And yet the internet is chock-a-block with "scientists" who hold "alternative" views on how to fight cancer. They're mostly quacks but they find an eager audience in people who don't like what traditional science and medicine are telling them. Many of these quacks have no credentials, crazy, too-good-to-be-true stories and bizarre theories. Just like those "alternative" views on climate science.

No, the real trouble is that smelly backroom deals can't readily be made presentable to the media. On this point, I cannot believe how easy it is for Harper apologists to accept whatever ridiculous explanation comes out of his mouth. Part of it is that you clearly have no idea (and likely no interest) in how these institutions are supposed to work. The senate does not report up to the Prime Minister. It's an independent body. So, the PMO had no business getting involved in the audit in any way shape or form. Harper is supposed to exercise wisdom before he makes the appointments, not interfere after. This whole event is just one more example of Harper playing on the ignorance of Canadians (and, in particular, his followers) on how the institutions are supposed to work. Anyone else recall how he convinced millions of unbelievably gullible Canadians that choosing a new PM after a non-confidence vote was a coup-d'etat? I wonder how many of the people on this board swallowed that whopper. And we'll never know how much Harper knew unless the RCMP dig it out of some emails. And even then, we may not know.

The problem with a good succession plan is that it can make it too tempting to dump the current guy. Harper the control freak knows this so my guess is whatever succession plan exists is thrown together in secret by people well outside of the lines of power.

You consider cancer treatment to be reliable science?

Oh, a rhetorical question.

Well, it's true that the average standard of living in the poor masses in India and China have approved but at what cost? Their countries have been terribly polluted The low wages have killed middle class jobs in developed countries Even worse, the low wages retard development of labour-saving equipment

The common man did better than what??

And yet there is a mountain of failure in treating cancer. And there are plenty of people out there who, because of that, decide that the cure is worse than the disease and go out and buy stuff off the internet. Of fly to Arizona for some health spa. Or go visit a faith healer in South America. We live in a world where it is so easy to get knowledge that knowledge itself has become a consumer choice. If you don't like what science tells you, choose to listen to someone else. The internet is full of experts. The recent tragic case of a Calgary mother whose son died because she insisted on holistic medicine is a case in point. Now the hapless criminal system needs to figure out what to do with her. Immunization has been one of the great success stories of modern science but thanks to an ex-Playboy bunny, we are starting to lose herd immunity. It's healthy to be a skeptic and I highly recommend getting multiple sources. But when you pick and choose science on the basis of perceived bias, then I wonder if you aren't projecting. Maybe it's not the scientists biases that are affecting you views. Maybe it's your own biases.