Montgomery Burns

In a bizarre tidbit, the teacher’s union lawyer argued in front of the Labour Relations Board of BC board that teachers really aren’t that essential. The Vancouver Sun reported: You know things are a bit whacky in the ongoing teachers’ labour dispute when the lawyer for the BCTF argues in front of the Labour Relations Board that there is no evidence to suggest that lengthy disruptions or lockouts do long-term damage to education. Lawyer Diane MacDonald is quoted as telling the B.C. Labour Relations Board: “We have had job actions in the past that have been up to three months’ duration without significant impact on the student body.”

History ChannelReagan then did exactly that. Or as he put it, "I didn't fire them - they quit!" National Review <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And their education system has remained a sham ever since. Way to go, Gipper! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As was previously stated by August1991, I'm not sure what air traffic controllers have to do with teachers. Besides, every reasonable person admits that the left controls the education system. It's one of the pet peeves of many on the right.

Dear PM Paul Martin: This dispute could be over in a matter of minutes, not months, if you would pick up the phone and soothe relations with President Bush. Your party can't call the Bushies "morons", the "coalition of the idiots", and have a party member go on the state-run TV network and gleefully stomp on a George Bush doll like a crazed meth addict--and then be surprised when the objects of your childish taunts play hardball with you. Why did you run to the Wall Street Journal? Why did you go public? Quit being so damn reflexively anti-Bush/American! I don't know who is in the right regarding the softwood lumber dispute; NAFTA says Canada is in the right and the WTO says the US is in the right. But because the WTO is part of the contemptible UN, I tend to believe that the NAFTA judgement is the correct one. But if you picked up the phone, this could be over quickly. Also, IMO, the #1 duty of the govt is to protect its citizens from possible enemies. Your party has failed miserably in that regard. Also, there are enough non-combat related deaths in the best of times, but it is worse when the military has shoddy equipment. It is in the best interest for Canada to warm relations with the USA, work with them in protecting North America, "take advantage" of the USA's willingness to put up the technology and most of the costs, and build up the Canadian military to a respectful power that can defend its vast borders. No one is asking for a military build-up like the USA or the UK. However, something akin to Australia would be a start. Indeed, with our larger population and vaster borders, we should be stronger than Australia. If Canada didn't "buck" the US so much--if they worked with the US on defense--then I doubt that any sane person would be foolish enough to attack Canada. Attack a country with a no-pushover defense and said country has cordial relations with its next-door neighbor--the US? Not gonna happen. Also, dump the wasteful socialist daycare program, the junk science Kyoto accord (New Zealand, the UK and others are bailing out of it), and dump the ultra leftwing state-run CBC. And cut my taxes! PERMANANTLY!

Please, before you embarrass yourself even further, read the 911 commission report. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have read the 9/11 Commission, or as they are calling it now, Omission Report--amongst other evidence. Here is a quarter. Please go buy yourself a clue.

SparHawk: Does that apply to someone who signs a ceasefire treaty?

Good catch, August1991. I had forgotten about that quote; that's exactly what Reagan said.

The BC Liberals have already tabled legislation to force them back to work. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I believe it is the Labour Relations Board who ordered them to go back to duty. Anyway, the wage freeze was only to June/2006.

I think this is going to turn out to be another liberal wet dream--the case appears to be very weak

B.C. teachers demand 15% raise over 3 years; schools closed I'm so tired of these greedy taxpayer-sucking unionized govt employees going on strike, CBC, and know this. If only Canada had a leader with the balls to "Go Reagan" on them...

Overall, it seems to be good advice--but will the loons who have hijacked the party agree? There are no threats of terrorism! It's all a big lie. Ask Michael Moore. The Bush administration only says there are threats to instill fear and control of the populace. John Kerry connected. The average person can relate to a guy who dumps one heiress to marry another even richer heiress. The average voter can relate to a guy sailing on his yacht--while sipping a shrimp cocktail. The average voter can relate to a guy who goes to the press and says, "I don't fall over; the son of a bitch (the Secret Service man whose duty is to protect Kerry's life) knocked me over". The average voter can relate to a guy who dubiously collected more medals in 4 months in Vietnam than the average career military man. The average voter can relate to a guy who abandoned his mates after only 1/3 of his tour of duty. The average voter can relate to a guy who has his picture hanging in the North Vietnam Museum of War. The average voter can relate to a guy who managed to have 264 of 270 of his Swift Boat mates hate his guts in a mere 4 months (all 264 of the 270 being Republicans, of course). Got that? We must work harder--we must work harder at getting out our message that Bush is Hitler and that he hates black people (except for neocons like Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, etal). We must work harder at: registering more dead people, paying more drug dealers to get their customers to vote Democrat, slashing the tires of Republican Get Out The Vote vans on votring day, disqualifying the oversea votes of those baby-killing, blood-drinking neoc...er, I mean those troops that WE SUPPORT! Then we will have to get rid of the Christians. Not all Christians--just the ones whose religious beliefs interefere with our political agenda. Now, I'm not advocating violence against Christians--at least, not officially. For the time being, we'll continue to simply mock and ridicule them for the self-righteous, hateful bigots they are (while graciously granting them the gift of our tolerance and understanding). The only thing I have seen is that more businesses are moving from the coasts to Jesusland! Why would anyone want to move to intolerant Jesusland? My cousin went to uiniversity for 4 years in Jesusland. In the whole 4 years, she never saw one transgendered albino midg...er, short person on campus. Where's the diversity?! Calling John Kerry! Calling Doctor Dean! I'm starting to think these 2 Democrat political analysts are Karl Rove plants. It's womyn, not women! Gender neutral! You'd almost think this article came from Faux News. We are the moderates. There is nothing wrong with our message. It's just that we have difficulty getting our message out because of the rightwing-biased MSM. "We just don't have one"? Is this person deaf? After much thought and consideration, we came out with a coherent foreign policy. Here it is: GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!!!

err (deny deny deny): A leftist admit that socialism does not work? Surely you jest. The left is still trying to implement their failed policies into society. The old Benjamin Franklin quote comes to mind: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." He compared the two largest provinces versus the 4th largest province. And he "concluded" with those pesky official data and figures--that privatization is better for consumers than a govt monopoly. How could you have possibly missed that?! Oh, that's rich. A cheapshot from the guy who denies that Al Qaeda wasn't in Saddam's Iraq. The irony. They are good jobs..and that is the problem. If you owned a retail store, would you pay your employees $17.50 to $25 per hour to stock shelves and run the till? Would you additionally lavish them with benefits? That's a very good salary and benefits for someone who only has a highschool diploma - or GED - living in Saskatchewan (wages are low here). They are grossly overcompensated for the work they do--and I am forced to pay for this gross waste of taxpayer dollars. 2904 - 950 = 1954 workers added to the workforce. Over 3 times more jobs created. Over 3 times more people working and having less chance of getting into trouble. Over 3 times more people gaining dignity by paying their own way. Consumers get competition, more products to choose from and more stores to shop at. Those evil greedy capitalists and competition. :angry: Monopolies always provide the best service and value. Good jobs versus "shitty" jobs. Since over 3 times more jobs were created, I assume you are suggesting that the salaries of these 2904 employees dropped by over a third. First of all, $17.50 is the low end. Top seniority gets $25/hr. Plus they are lavisahed with benefits. I know--I have 2 friends/acquaintances that work in the LBS. Second, it is not jealousy, but disgust at getting ripped off by the govt.

You shouldn't go around calling people "completely ignorant" about Iraq, when you were the one who claimed that Iraq had no ties with Al Qaeda. I read a few of the Iraqi blogs and think I have a better understanding of Iraq than you. And you "forgot" to mention this from the article: Don't you ever get tired of being intellectually dishonest?

And your point is....? Since when is donating money to a political cause the mark of a radical? If that's the criteria, then Richard Mellon Scaife is Che Guevera. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1) What part confused you? 2) "...defeating Bush in 2004 [is] a matter of life and death". Comparing the Bush Administration to the Nazis. Giving $5 million to an organization that produced ads likening Bush to Hitler. Yeah, he's just your typical political donator.

Kimmy: My cat's name is Mittens.

I should try it out. Burns, really how old are you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Old enough not to suggest that people be "punted" from the board if they dare to use the word "socialist" in a sentence. Also old enough to know that people who assert others should be "punted" for not using draconian PC speechcodes, are not being honest with themselves. Your silence regarding the "N" word was not only hypocritical, but also telling.

Man, I support the CPC but would not watch Fox News Canada if it ever came into existence. Power to them as long as my tax dollars aren't paying for it to exist. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What would you watch instead?

CTV and Global are rightwing? You are correct that the Liberal Party-controlled CRTC lifted i ts 5 year ban of the Fox News Channel--but only after extreme pressure from the public which was outraged that the CRTC had approved Al Jazeera, a full 5 months before lifting their FNC ban. The CBC should be sold and privatized. It is worrisome having a state-run, taxpayer-funded Soviet-style news service broadcasting hard-left propaganda to every nook and cranny of this country. I resent being forced to fund them. They should sell the Liberal Party's Pravda and use the money from the sale, and future savings ($1 billion plus annually) to cut our taxes.

Hot off the press (from yesterday). Alberta earns more from privatized liquor sales: Outdoes Ontario and Quebec And Sean Hamilton, a spokesman for Ontario Minister of Finance Greg Sorbara, reminds Canadians that they are stupid people who cannot be trusted to make their own decision. Only Canada's liberal elites in the govt can hold the public's hand and guide them correctly through life.

Then you'd support one of the two options, in fairness to your fellow Canadians, since none of the conservative outlets are publicly funded: - cut all public funding to the CBC - pour several billion in startup costs to a purely conservative national media outlet, plus a billion per year in operating costs in perpetuity I know you'd be happy to do either, you want to be fair to all Canadians, not just those who agree with your political viewpoint. Which one do you choose? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd name that channel Fox News Canada--just to see the lefties foaming at the mouth. I can hear it now: "Liberal Canadians shouldn't be forced to pay for a state-run channel that is biased for conservatives!" :angry: I'll simply give them Daniel's reply: "I'm also glad that Fox News Canada is publically funded so that people will have a choice in which to watch or listen".

We get bored of listing them all. A few: Canada Free Press, Toronto Sun, NewsMax, Sinclair Broadcast Group, Murdoch's News Corps, Wall Street Journal..., not to mention the endless and vacuous rantings of conservative/republican talk radio. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Canada Free Press and NewsMax are part of the mainstream media (MSM)? And when you think of Canadian papers, the first that come to mind are the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail (both liberal, especially the Star), and the National Post (which used to be conservative but isn't anymore)--not the Toronto Sun.

Thanks a lot, Paul. You go on this year-end spending spree, then say that 1/3 of the surplus will go to social programs, 1/3 to debt reduction (good), and the final 1/3 a rebate. Why spend 1/3 on social programs when you already blew $5.4 billion on a year-end spending spree? Why not 2/3 back to the taxpayer and 1/3 toward debt reduction? Or better yet,...lower our taxes...permanently. Oh right. We can't do that because the govt will lose revenue. The socialist way of thinking: there is a finite amount of revenue. They ignore that the US govt took in $70 billion extra in revenue because tax cuts put more people at work and businesses who expanded and became more profitable, had to pay more in taxes. This country taxes heavily. Yet PMPM announced "tax relief" of $16 for 2005--by raising the Personal Amount $100, even though everyone knows that the Personal Amount goes up every year anyway--it's indexed to inflation. Canada's liberal press refused to call out PMPM's on his farce of a description of "tax relief". Canada already has nearly the lowest Personal Amount of all industrialized countries. It certainly doesn't help the poor. Far better to be poor in America.

I suppose we should not be surprised by this, but it is kind of scary if it is true. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How nice of the France's Finance Minister to go blabbing a private conversation to the press. However the irony is delicious. France, with its morbid economy, tut-tutting the USA's economy.

Monty, I've heard this label, radical, used countless times along with Activist Can you explain what is meant by this? Why is George Soros radical? Why are judges, among others, labeled activist? I'm asking an honest question here. As far as I can tell its to further vilify in the eyes of the right, am I correct? Its very similar to the Liberal label, meant to disparage. Am I right? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1) Claiming that America needed "a regime change" to oust President Bush, Soros said that he would gladly have traded his entire fortune in exchange for a Bush defeat in the 2004 election. In a November 2003 interview with the WaPo, he stated that defeating Bush in 2004 "is the central focus of my life"..... "a matter of life and death"....."America under Bush is a danger to the world, and I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is." 2) Asserting that "the Republican party has been captured by a bunch of extremists," Soros accuses the Bush administration of following a "supremacist ideology" in whose rhetoric he claims to hear echoes from his childhood in occupied Hungary. "When I hear Bush say, 'You're either with us or against us,' " he explains, "it reminds me of the Germans. It conjures up memories of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (The enemy is listening). My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me." 3) Soros also gave $5 million to MoveOn.org, the group that has produced political ads likening Bush to Adolf Hitler. That's why I call Soros a radical. As for activist judges, Answers.com writes: A judge is considered activist when he or she uses the power of judicial review to overturn laws or articulate new legal principles with insufficient precedent, especially for purposes of shaping government policy.

Media Matters and FAIR are two different organizations. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Two different organizations...of the same ilk. FAIR is a tax-exempt leftwing "media watchdog" organization founded in 1986 by radical activist Jeff Cohen. It's lavishly funded by the MacArthur Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and Bill Moyers' Schumann Center. It's political cult leader Noam Chomsky was keynote speaker at its 15th Anniversary party. It's promoted by the liberal media because FAIR argues that the media's bias is not liberal, but conservative, thereby providing a fig leaf that covers their own bias. It staged a "March on the Media" with radical Paper Tiger TV at 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City (remember those clowns camped outside Fox News demanding that the station shut up and be taken off the air?)

I'm sorry that you don't understand Radical Islam is at war against the West --which last I looked -- included Canada .