Sir Bandelot

Another proud moment for Mackay and the CPC.

What you want me to say... No? Its not about Afghanistan, it's about Obomba. Guess he hasn't tried "reaching out" yet, despite what Karzai says would be the right solution, and some US Generals. Unless he means, reaching out with more troops and bombs... I'm not even talking about Afghanistan. I don't know the first thing about it. Do you?

U.S. troops have launched a major operation against Taliban fighters in southern Afghanistan, U.S. military officials announced in Afghanistan early Thursday. About 4,000 Americans, mostly from the Marines, and 650 Afghan soldiers and police launched Operation Khanjar -- "strike of the sword" -- in the Helmand River valley, the U.S. command in Kabul announced. The push is the largest since the Pentagon began moving additional troops into the conflict this year, and it follows a British-led operation launched last week in the same region, the Marines said. It is also the first big move since U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal took over as the allied commander in Afghanistan in mid-June. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07/0...tion/index.html Change you can't believe in...

Been reading Plato?

"Central Party" Sounds communist

If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Jean Chretien certainly had character. He often said things in plain language, some if which he took criticism for but people admire a person who is strong, as long as they are fair and stand for fundamental justice. (Contrast this with Bush). Chretien even famously walked up and choked a heckler in the crowd on National Flag Day. For which there's a famous photo on the internet. I really must provide the link- http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6...illclennett.jpg Known as the "Shawinigan Handshake"! Happy Canada Day!

There is no connection between improving the ease of voting, and elimination of partisan politics. Regardless of the methods used for voting in elections or referendums, scandals and abuses of power will continue. Neither is it always a good idea to put every issue to referendum where the general public is not well informed, or where there is no other option due to treaty obligations. Most people do not have a political consciousness, simply because they don't have time to keep up on the complexities of every issue, between working full time and taking care of a home, raising the family. In many cases they will either vote on their "gut instincts", or which candidate has a nicer smile, or listen to advertisements created by the parties, in 30 second sound bites. IE. propaganda that excludes the important details. This will be true whether we use the TV or internet. So where does that leave you? Nowhere else.

I think the implication is that the government is not acting on this. She has been waiting for assistance for about 5 weeks now. The slackards in Ottawa need to get off their butts, stop surfing the internet and do some work... for a change. It should be fairly easy to confirm her identity, considering her family lives here. She has her passport and citizenship card, and drivers license, But of course, that would require someone to take an interest in this case, and get directly involved. Seems more like a problem of apathy. Away with these useless and vacant-minded maggots, the bureaucrats.

Really... I think Paul Martin would have a completely different opinion.

Have you got the demographics of people who use the internet? Almost every kid I know does. Not too many retired people I know do. Bet you a donut

A retiree is not going to learn to use a computer or the internet, not necesarily because they are lazy. It has to do with adopting to change and new technology, not laziness. Also some people can't afford a computer. There could be lots of reasons why. My main reason is still about security. There are concerns about computerized voting, in general, let alone via the internet. Those rumours about the Diebold machines come to mind. But in any cae, if an internet based system were to be introduced, the same opportunities to vote and give opinions would have to be in place, for people without the internet. Or, will there be a government program to provide the internet in every citizens home, as part of their right to be a voting citizen? Duh

Not in favour of it. For one thing I don't trust the internet enough to agree with that. Second thing is, it will be more attractive to mainly young voters. Lots of older people don't have the internet or even know how to use a computer, so most of the increased voting will be by younger voters. Not that is bad in itself, but it skews the distribution of voting population. Same goes for online referendums, or the idea of a suggestion box. In other words, equal steps would have to be taken to give a voice to anyone who wants to vote or give their suggestion, not just those with access to computers.

Jack Layton: "There's no bread!" Stephen Harper: "Let them eat donuts."

Yeah good on him. Maybe now we can get a decent donut in this town. I posted the same thing today, maybe the two threads can be merged.

Parent company Tim Hortons Inc. (TSX:THI) announced Monday it has filed documents in the United States that would shift its corporate ownership back north of the border. Its current Canadian headquarters is in Oakville, Ont., west of Toronto. The company says the move - which it had said it was considering earlier this year - will save on taxes and make international expansion easier. The migration back to Canada will allow Tim Hortons to reap benefits of the lower federal tax structure that was announced last year by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/06...9969361-cp.html Interesting... Why is it suddenly more attractive to operate out of Canada. Of course, the corporate whores have no loyalty to borders, only the almighty dollar. Maybe now we can get a decent donut at Tims again... they really became crap over the last few years.

Oh please, share... Its not only about what I like

Again, I try to avoid pure conjecture. Who cares what one "thinks". Demonstration permits are also required in our society, as with meetings of the WTO or during Olympic games. Theres even a designated area for the demonstrators, like several kilometers from the event. under a bridge. Nicely tucked away. Such demonstrations seem useless, unless they cause some problems.

I thought it was Napalm... Gawd, what is it bout you 'merikkkans and that catch-phrase? Ever since Bush started using it, "Make no mistake...", y'all like to use it, like, all the time.

Muddy Waters was your Dad?

Probably about as much as Bill Clinton, less than Obama

Is that BBC link supposed to be to an article? When I click it, I get a video about Neda getting shot.

Of course he would never say that, since they are the source of his power and he is like their whipping boy. Nobody gets power, unless they kiss the hand of the Theocrats. Ironically, neither would Moussavi say anything like that. All our debating, and the protests of the Iranians are moot since both are loyal to the Ayatollahs. Obama and the US political media also recognize this- there is hardly any difference in the choice of these two, as far as the west is concerned. President Barack Obama said on Tuesday there appeared to be few policy differences between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and rival Mirhossein Mousavi. "The difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised," he told CNBC. Several U.S. analysts have been cautioning for weeks against any giddy optimism over a Mousavi win and said he should not be seen as an easy sell in any negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, which the West suspects is aimed at building a bomb and Tehran says is peaceful. http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews...6?symbol=9432.T

This is so good, I have to quote it from the USA Today article: President Obama said this week the United States "is not at all interfering in Iran's affairs," rejecting charges of meddling that were renewed Thursday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Asked how the democracy promotion initiatives square with the president's statement, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said, "Let's be clear: The United States does not fund any movement, faction or political party in Iran. We support … universal principles of human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law." Obama is like a smiling, friendly liar.

Links to real news, is not opinions. Give me something to work with, in other words, debate, and I will continue. Otherwise, zzzz