Shwa

And also, it is directly participating in the playing of the game, when you are the scorekeeper for the league your kids are playing in.

OK, so why do you think that this is what 'co-payment' means?

Really Saipan? Do you need to be told why again and again?

So then sculptures in public spaces are out of the question, as are paintings in public buildings and government offices? No free access to arts and culture for the disadvantaged of course, because their "quality of life" needs no affect. Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?

Well, unless you are retarded, even the most basic opinion should have grounds or some sort of base in fact. Well, if that is all you can refer to when it comes to Canadian tax-funded art, I can see why you hold your "opinion." It appears that that odour you smell is the result of you pulling your "opinions" directly from your narrow anus. Now, go read some Canadian literature like Atwood, Ondaatje or Kinsella, while viewing some Tom Thompson paintings. And plenty of people liked Dan Akroyd, John Candy and Catherine O'Hara when they were on 'Coming Up Rosie' when it was on the CBC.

Not in this thread it doesn't.

"...more prisons for all the criminals we are harboring." A neocons wet dream statement. Using the word "prisons" and "criminals" in a sentence is one thing, but you tied it all nicely together with illegal immigration with the suggestion of a "harbour." Well done!

That is what you get when the ruling party has their caucus meetings in Drumheller.

I live in Ontario and already pay health insurance premiums that result in eligible coverage through the Ontario Health Insurance Plan. These premiums are calculated based upon income. How does this differ from "co-payments?"

Except it is a lot harder to hit a round ball with a round bat than a flat one. So the degree of difficulty goes to baseball. Plus the batters in baseball don't wear protective gloves, while in cricket they do. Since you mentioned gloves. As for rugby, well, football was invented to improve upon it, especially the forward pass.

Absolutely! Why do you think they analyze the game with so many statistics? It is a fans game since there is enough time for the fan to think about what should or will come next and many of the real baseball fans do exactly that. I read an interesting quote from Chomsky about the ability of the average baseball fan to understand and calculate basic stats formulas as an indication that there is certainly no lack of intelligence, at least, in baseball. And yes, I can score a baseball game.

They come from Tampa Bay.

You might have a point IF the money spent in a riding goes directly to line someone's pockets with some shady contracting blessed by the Minister for Public Works. Show me one of those and I am with you. However, dropping 4 million dollars into a region that experiences seasonal income discrepencies and allowing that money to filter down through contractors, then to their workers, then to the grocery store employees and Timmies servers, then to the banks and eventually find it's way back into the tax pool... I say go for it. Other than pure savings accounts, where does that 4 million eventually end up when everyone has had their touch of it? Any idea about that?

Well volcanoes and tsunamis weren't mentioned, which would put Canada closer to the top I think, if they were. You know, because volcanoes and tsunamis are so 'violent' and must disturb the peace a great deal. However, they are only referencing man-mad disasters that affect peace. Sort of like climate science I guess. But my mention of volcanoes was purely tongue-in-cheek and a little kick at those peacefully smug Icelanders.

More from Dr. Feelgood at the Star: Canada among 10 most peaceful countries I dunno about Iceland being #1 though, with all those volcanic eruptions and such. But what the heck, it's an evolving "science" to determine such things...

huh. Sounds EXACTLY how the Liberals operated for decades... Hey, if the CPC took a page from the Liberal playbook and achieved the same results... fair game...

Pride likely to receive city funding after threats over controversial group What I find interesting is a couple of passages: So any notion that this was a Mayor Ford initiative seems to be wrong. This was a Mammoliti initiative and he might have been on his own with it and destined to fail, likely one of the motivations for him taking the Pride organizers at their word. But what about Mayor Ford's deafening silence on the issue over the past few months? Perhaps he listens to his caucus after all: I wouldn't link someone for freedom of speech as being an "ally" that is crappy journalism. But Milczyn has the right idea. Let the lunatics speak and remove all doubt in public.

Most of the hockey watching public is in the East and HNIC has to make their money. I was up until bloody 1 AM last night watching a pretty good hockey game. I was rooting for the Canucks, as I usually do when they go this deep in the playoffs. I did in '82 and '94. And I will this year too, for two main reasons: Chara & Krejci That is, if they end up playing the Bruins. If they end up playing Tampa Bay, well that is easy: no one likes Tampa Bay in any sport.

I, for one, would like to see this debate and all the unequivocal evidence of a left-wing media bias finally placed on the table for everyone to see. Seriously, if one is going to argue for the existence of a left-wing media bias, then the evidence should be fairly clear and rather extensive. So... let's see it. But alas, like active alcoholics who cannot discern their drinking problems, it appears that anyone with even a sniff of left-wingedness cannot perceive this bias. On the other hand, that is cop-out and itself an unproven premise. So... bring on the debate between Pliny and Bloodyminded!

And yet you say this, but provide no proof of your claim, no evidence to support it and no rebuttal to anything I have written thus far, including the clauses and articles from the various Acts with their clear wording, etc. You just pull stuff out of your ass and expect everyone to believe it. So how can anyone take anything you say seriously when you continually prove yourself to be grossly incompetent when debating anything? Again. "Oh, it's Scotty's opinion and based upon the intrinsic truthiness of Scotty himself, it must be true." LOFL! Seriously Scotty, Alberta Natural Resources Act 1930, Section 10. It's consitutional son. LOFL! "...the Crown..."

Could resist posting this headline from the on-line version of the Star: Seven killed on long weekend as OPP targets unsafe vehicles If you are a headline scanner - and driving an unsafe vehicle - the OPP will target and kill you... Here's the actual story.

Well, etiquette, or any other form of proper social behaviour, has always been present in all of human history and recorded in one form or another with all socities and culture groups I have ever read about. Perhaps it is not such a plague more than simple human nature. The political power structures may have changed, but each structure had it's own mode of proper social behavior, not matter how crude it may appear to us today. Even tribal peoples have their version of political correctness. One of the obvious signs of this phenomenon is in a culture's mythology, where mythological ideas are used to re-enforce the prevailing ethic of a particular group or class. God-kings, and all that. Committees, tribal councils, parliaments, it is all the same. I would imagine, back in the day, there was some form of respect required, with a smile and a hearty grin towards 'comrade.' All the stress of such an act could be reduced with copious amounts of vodka. I am not sure if anyone has been exiled for poor table manners, but etiquette reaches much further into human life than the dinner table of course. True, but have we ever seen this in human history - the idyllic, the utopia? Maybe for small periods of time, but class is simply one form of group and there have always been groups - cadres, associations, societies, etc. One could argue - one of the deconstructive arguments against Marx, is that "class" is beholden to the one making the definition. We can define all kinds of social groups and make broad statements about them. But would, alas, risk being politically incorrect with such statements. Again, everyone has their ideal, their utopia. But has there ever been a time when the market has been totally free? In my read of history, etc., there are always controls on the market for one reason or another, from the simplist tribal groups in the jungle to the mightiest of kingdoms to the most modern of democracies. Perhaps too, that control on the market is part of human nature somehow, of our hard wired psychological make-up.

Now you are getting it. They were granted to the provinces, as administrative privledge. Oh, but they do. As yourself have already said, the lands are "held" by the provinces, and such administrative privledge, as noted in the Acts, are subject to the supremacy of the Parliament of Canada. The language is right there, clear as a bell. Not really. It doesn't take detailed scholarship to understand the obvious and clearly written. Any obfuscation is all yours. Now you are shifting the goalposts and trying to shirk. I said the Government of Canada can - is able to. That they haven't only means there has been no need. I am not saying they have, I am saying they can. http://www.aboriginal.alberta.ca/956.cfm You see? Even the Government of Alberta agrees. Parliament giveth and Parliament can taketh away. Of course, because, you know, Parliament can't do anything about our Constitution. Trudeau did what was expedient and look what he did just with the tools he had on hand. Not too shabby. He didn't even need to open any constitutional talks. He just used existing provisions. And was probably light handed about it. Sure. But more Government of Canada powers in Alberta. To respect them so long as the provinces play ball with the rest of the country. As soon as they don't, all bets are off. Including Treay 8 lands. Agreements can be altered, that isn't any stumbling block to be worried about. It would, as things stand now in our peaceful national family. But put a separatist Albertan government in place, and there are many areas which can be successfully squeezed and there is not a thing that Albertan government can do about it. Alberta is only a province of Canada. Play ball, keep pumping our oil. And let's be clear, NEP was a policy of the Federal Government, not a law, as opposed to the Anti-Inflation Act, which gave us wage and price controls. One would have to ask upon which basis could a mere policy be enforced? Well, any ideas about that?

I would wholly agree were it not for the peasant - or anyone else - getting their head lopped off for not bowing, or otherwise being quite rude, to the King or Queen. Etiquette - whether at the dinner table or the King's Privy Chamber, was always ruled by 'politcal' correctness.

Again, you confuse title with administrative privledge and seem unable or unwilling to grasp the difference. I can understand you would be unwilling, since it basically dismantles your argument. The Alberta Natural Resources Act proves my point, otherwise, why is such an Act necessary in the first place? Quite right, and Alberta holds the rest, in a trust, based on administrative privledge. Nothing more. Read the Act carefully. Either you are not reading it carefully enough or you have a problem understanding the language. Here is an example (emphasis is mine): The point is that Alberta will `unilaterally` give the land back to the Government of Canada to settle land claims. The approval of the Albertan Legislature is a formality since their claim over the land is an administrative privlidge arising from an Act of the Canadian Parliament. They have no title to the land and no inhernet rights to it. It's an Act of the Canadian Parliament that can be amended by Parliament at their leisure. Parliament amends Acts all the time. No, but the Government of Canada, through Parliament, has the effective power to do so. You see provinces on the same footing as the Government of Canada and that is a very naive point of view that is often espoused by the delusional separatistes. A part does not usurp the whole and it never will. Heck, Alberta doesn't even have a provincial police force. Of course, and this is all true. But it is important that those irritating Albertan separatists understand the rules. That is why when Jack replies, "Go back and pump our oil" it is so damned hilarious. Because in Ontario, we really don't care. Along with Quebec, we can set the price of Albertan oil if we really wanted to.