Dr V

well said.

Someone with a financial background, please help me understand what is presented as obvious. Clearly I'm still not getting it. What are the terrible consequences of letting US banks and the likes of AIG die a natural death? I keep hearing that this is not an option, but I have yet to hear a convincing explanation of why. Savings up to a certain amount are protected (insured) in case a bank goes belly-up. So far, so good. This insurance is the only thing that should in all fairness be payed out (to investors, not the banks as such) in case of a bank's demise. From what I understand bailouts have nothing to do with this, they are something entirely different. Of course some large part of the economy will hurt for a while if the banks are not bailed out. But are they really the only game in town? Surely something more healthy and less huge will very quickly take their place (albeit a different place)- credit unions, co-operatives. Right...?

I can assure you Immigration Canada does not just take people's word for it. Where things go wrong is when Immigration Canada tells people that their credentials together with work experience (both of which require proof) are valuable here and that they will have no trouble finding work, and then these people wake up to a very different reality once they have immigrated. After all, the immigration authorities are not responsible for matching people with prospective jobs. So whether or not these credentials actually have value here is something we may never find out. As for these alleged doctors who think you cure cancer with spices - these poor souls will never survive the competition from our quality Made-in-Canada aromatherapists, acupuncturists, chiropractors, past-life regressionists and other practitioners representing the "alternative" to real medicine

I see your point. And yet these moderate Muslims not only exist (thankfully in reality, not just in the imagination of the Lefties ), but they are our strongest allies against the extremist Muslims. This is not wishful thinking on my part but a conclusion drawn from talking to people as people, not as Muslims.

They're here, driving cabs as they jump through the ridiculous bureaucratic hoops to get their credentials recognized and put to good use.

It's his curse that he's a white guy with an educated British accent. Now, imagine the same criticism levelled by a woman who has freed herself from Islam. ----> :angry: Then those same words would be hailed as courageous, progressive, inspirational, as well they should be. Why do people pay so much attention to persons and not to their words and ideas? I must have slept through the part where the Left became a stronghold of religion(s). When did this happen?

Thanks for the link, until this moring I had no idea who Pat Condell was. I'm surprised to hear you say that the "lefties" hate him. Why??? To me he sounds as progressively left as anyone could wish for. But maybe I'm so naive that I underestimate the rightness of these lefties Or maybe intelligent reasoning is just so insulting to some people that they don't even care what's being said? Liberal multicultural society... Makes me want to re-read Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind." And it's best done if you know nothing about Allan Bloom and the political philosophy he is alleged to represent, just read the book for what it is.

I've found that even the political discussions get side-tracked into discussions on religion vs. science, which isn't specific to election time. I think the difference is between people who wish to learn something new and welcome intelligent and respectful disagreement, and those who are looking only for confirmation of their already existing views.

Very true. And the proposed carbon tax is inevitably only symbolic at this point, an expression of good intentions and little more. Canada does not have the infrastructure to make a transition from fossil fuels to alternative energy (e.g. ethanol for vehicles). The proposed carbon tax is so low that large polluters will happily pay it and continue to pollute, and small polluters who are already used to spending a lot on their vehicles will also swallow it without much pain. No one, large or small, is ready to get hit with a real, workable carbon tax that can in fact be translated into CO2 emissions. So maybe I should vote Liberal because when this first lameduck version of the carbon tax falls on its face, it will be attributed to the Liberals. And maybe by then, when there is an alternative fuel infrastructure in place, a real carbon tax will be credited to the Green party. How's that for strategic voting?

[quote name='August1991' date='Aug 15 2008, 08:16 PM' post='329173' As they say, one spends half one's life earning a good reputation and then the rest of one's life benefitting from it. That reminds me of a distantly related saying: Копим крохами, просаживаем ворохами. I'm not saying it's more applicable in this case, though. In fact I hope it isn't I think part of Putin's legacy is not caring what the rest of the world thinks of Russia. There's a healthy element to this kind of indifference - it gives a country the freedom to define its identity without looking over its shoulder all the time. But not even can be self-sufficient, although it's come a long way economically. I'm not impressed with either Russia's or Georgia's behaviour in this war. Neither behaved honourably, and neither has moral superiority. How strange that these countries' shared Orthodox religion did nothing to stop the war or mitigate its vehemence. Or maybe not so strange?

You don't have to travel that far to illustrate this. Right here in Canada there are enclaves, for lack of a better word. They are called reserves and the people who live there are called Indians. Technically they are not Canadians, nor are the reserves Canadian territory. Ever since the Indian Act was first introduced, the status of "Indian" is seen as something in transition from savage to fully-fledged citizen. In other words, these people are minors, not entirely of age, politically speaking. Whether or not we realize it, this is still the unspoken view which has not changed very much for a couple of centuries. One way to grow up and stop being an Indian is to get educated and move off the reserve. Another is to marry a non-Indian. Yet another is to have a baby, then another, then another, because the government will give this person a house outside the reserve - in Canada proper. How's that for immigration being made easier? And contributing to population growth to boot

By the way, does anyone know where the Greens stand now on public funding for Catholic schools? A couple of years ago they were the only party to take a firm stand on the issue. Public means secular, no two ways about it. Are they continuing to maintain this?

After all these posts I still can't tell if you're a cynic or an optimist, PoliticalCitizen The Green party has more than one kind of supporter. Some supporters are not treehuggers or potheads. Others don't care very deeply about the polar bears. There are even those who do not acknowledge nature as their loving and benevolent Mother; who knows, maybe they have some other mothers who love them. Some even exist who are not convinced - oh blasphemy! - that global warming is the result of human activity. Maybe they're just deeply disgusted by the rampant consumerism and wastfullness that sweep the developed world, and want to establish a sustainable lifestyle. Okay, so the above is just a foolish fantasy. But there have got to be real reasons to vote Green beyond just rolling our eyes at the other parties!

That's just it. As long as Canada makes no attempt to assert its own jurisdiction over its citizens, the US remains free to design and re-design policies of dealing with "enemy combatants" the way it sees fit. Take a look at this link: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/feb/02/nation/na-gitmo2 Note that nowhere do they make reference to the citizenship of these detainees - as if citizenship does not matter at all once someone is suspected by the US to be a terrorist. Canada's silence over Khadr only reinforces this dangerous illusion that the US has been cultivating. In this sense it does not matter at all if Khadr is an innocent victim of his father's ideology or a dangerous criminal - this is to be decided by Canadian courts alone, and I'm not opening that line of discussion here. Whichever way you look at it, it does not look good. If you believe Khadr is a dangerous terrorist, then Canada's silence suggests it's happy to let the US do the dirty work while it steps aside. In fact, I've read posts that say pretty much that - maybe its authors don't realize how cowardly Canada looks if that really is its position. If you believe Khadr is innocent - well, that's already been discussed to death.

That is why I cringe at the "excuse" that Omar was only 15 when he was arrested. Canada should not have to make that excuse in order for him to be repatriated and tried by Canadian laws, military or otherwise. It should not matter one bit how old he was when the incident occurred. It's just a case of Canada mumbling excuses to the US, not something that makes me proud. I'm proud to be a Canadian citizen (going on six years now) and I did not emigrate to this country to make use of its welfare medical system - I came here to live in a healthy balance between freedom and social protection in times of need. I intend to live here full-time and give back to the community. I can't speak for the Khadr family or what their expectations were in becoming Canadians, but once Canada makes someone their citizen - for good reason, I hope - , it should be prepared to stand up for them.