Shwa

Aye, there's the rub. However, the tens of millions of dollars that the whole Pride thing brings to the City kind of balances off the whole kids-pool-hot-day thing doesn't? All those tens of millions being the source for tax revenue for the City of course.

Have you looked here: Department of Finance Canada - Reports and Publications

Your assertion that a mayoral sweating-in ceremony is not a cultural event is a non-starter; it is by any well known definition of the word "culture." No you have to understand Rue, that if the City provides funding to "cultural" events that allow platforms for people to express their personal political views, then the platform is open to anyone so long as they don't cross the line into 'hate speech.' Period. If you are for limiting freedom of expression just come right out and say so. No need to play coy about those sorts of leanings. Come out of the closet Rue. And, just in case, while you are up standing on guard for everyone, here is a list of the 2010 Toronto Arts Council grant recipientsfor you to vet. You know, to make sure they are all up to your standards of politics-free expression on City dime.

That makes perfect sense of course. An alleged comment, referred to on an obscure tweet by a candidate currently under a cloud of suspicion from a leaked Auditor General's report, if it were reversed, would cause mass outrage. The Conservatives are to be commended on their fortitude during such an attack and will be presented with medals at the brand new $25 million dollar Huntsville Opera House to be build sometime after the election is over.

No. In the Globe story: I am presuming that the Monday they are talking about is yesterday, April 11th. This story is a week old now. If the LPC wanted him off their rolls, they had about a week to make it happen and it doesn't appear they did so. Why the delay? Did the LPC run out of coal for their steam powered Internet calculatory device? I mean, they seem to get their own internal party news by Pony Express...

The equivalence is all yours, when it suits you, which puts you into contradiction. I actually couldn't care less about Cherry's remarks per se, but you admit they were partisan and the "platform" for him to express his "personal political views" was paid for by the City of Toronto funded, in part, by it's citizens. The Mayoral Swearing in Ceremony is a cultural event by any other name. Call it a political event or a social event, they are all cultural events. The 'word' ceremony should have clued you in. Actually I got a kick out of his comments, they were funny. There is no trauma. The only reason I used Cherry's remarks is to point out the gross inconsistency with your have-it-both-ways type of argument. The only one suggesting that is you, my quibble is with the strict idea that the City should not fund events where individuals are provided platforms to express their personal political views. Of course the City does this all the time at all kinds of events, paid for by it's citizens. I am just using Don Cherry's remarks as an example. No, I am saying that "the City" funds plenty of events - and always has - that provide platforms for individuals to express their personal political views. I could care less about Don Cherry or some anti-Zionist group. If you are OK with one having the platform then don't whine when another takes advantage of the opportunity. No, it would be better to make people aware that at public events, people will be public with their views. Has nothing to do with partisanship and everything to do with a freedom of expression, which both Don Cherry and the anti-Zionist group did at events funded, in part, by the City of Toronto. So you are admitting you are all for limits to freedom of expression in Canada now because it offends your sensibilities? Not me, I say allow the Don Cherry's and the anti-Zionist group their platforms, speak, be heard and be evaluated on what they have to say. There was no trauma for me, but there appears to be some with you from this anti-Zionist group. Of course it never dawned on you that even the most partisan political event could be "purely cultural" in the same way that partisan Catholics and partisan Protestants are still "purely religious." (and religion too, is cultural BTW) You stated: So, now you are stating that others should adhere to your personal sensibilities when it comes to expressing their views? Sauce-goose-gander. Trendy leftist?? LOFL! You need to get out in the fresh air a little more Rue.

Agreed. However, then it becomes an issue of content. Was the entire report leaked or just bits and pieces or was it leaked as part of an advisory process to some printer or mid-level bureaucrat? Only the press knows and it would be a tough sell for them to cough up the details.

I think the outrage is absurd, but I doubt it is feigned.

Hmmm.... Ok, some of the reports were leaked... So the "Conservatives" released a second draft of the report that was already leaked. Isn't that just as much an "illegal act" as leaking the first draft?

There are plenty of 'mays' in the federal act. That would be a tough thing to prove - an infraction serious enough to warrant dismissal would have to border illegality.

No kidding. Or we could make stuff up and then be outraged. A sort of emotional fiction to stir the masses to action. Why... what a novel idea...

Nice catch capricorn, but... you are citing the Ontario Auditor General Act... here is the Federal Act. Auditor General Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. A-17) Advisory powers I am not trying to exonerate someone who acted illegally, but it has to be actually illegal before someone can be charged. In the case of this sort of information release, I think it would be very, very difficult for someone to be successfully prosecuted, let alone charged. For example, the leak might have come from a printer at the Queen's Printers or a sub-contractor. And, as it was 'read' at this point it is pure hearsay.

http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/Pride_Toronto_financial_statements_show_big_losses-9689.aspx Or any other simple Google search will help you out...

I am aware of the literacy problems in Canada, but the focus is on the current school system: It would appear from the statistics you provide that "the average "end product" of our education system" is NOT an ignorant schmuck. Or does 20% somehow indicate an overall average of the other 80%?

More truthiness. (I had the URL hand, so I figured I might as well use it again) What laws can be used to prosecute someone for reading a confidential AG report to a reporter? Do you know? Can you cite the law please? Just so that when we throw around words like "illegal act" or "prosecute" we know what laws have been broken and under which someone can be prosecuted.

So you quote a tweet from Tony Clement who is making a comment about a supposed tweet by the local NDP candidate. Do you have the actual tweet-quote from the NDP candidate or can people make things up as they go and counts its 'truthiness?'

You raise some interesting points, but the thread title is pure hyperbole. In what way does this single incident point to the "state" of Canada's legal system, which is comprised of millions of other incidents?

So in other words, no "illegal act."

No, he is effectively fired from the Liberal Party, but will remain on the ballot as a 'Liberal' due to electoral law. Now why his name was still "on the list" is baffling. Why wasn't his name taken off the list since this story is about a week old now...

What makes you think this leak was an "illegal act?"

So let me get this straight: APTN breaks a story about water contracting to First Nations with poor water quality that reveals some iffy dealings by a former PMO aide with a shady past and they do this - their purpose for the investigative story about First Nations issues - is to... protect their "gravy train?" BWAAAA - HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!! If you object to "State-financed advocacy" then I presume you have a beef with Health Canada's 'Food Guide,' Labour Canada or practically everything Service Canada does? Seriously August, you never cease to amaze me with your ability to narrow the focus.

They would have - heck, I would have - but not any longer. And it has nothing to do with "vitriole" and more to do with trust and the run-around on Canadian democracy over the past few years. A Con majority SCARES "centrist Liberals" it does not endear them.

Really Scotty, you think the average "end product" of our education system is an ignorant schmuck?

If you click the link to the BMJ Abstract there is a link on that page to the full article.

Yeah, and they never learned to walk to school barefoot in the snow, 5 feet deep, uphill, both ways. And we liked, we loved it! Hallelujah