Shwa

God forbid we not allow unions a political voice and then let them pay for it. BTW - its the taxpayers who pay everyone's salaries and benefits including pensions.

Completely suicidal seeing how driven into the ground our economy was. I mean, I could barely go to MacDonalds back then. I believe it was about that time that McDicks started keeping that leftover nickel change and chocolate bars doubled in price to 20 cents each. And we all know why: Trudeau. Unless Scotty meant "ran our economy pretty much into the ground" referring to the increase in mining production. Can't really argue that.

Well, if they do, you can pretty much guarantee they will all march lock-step as they sweep over the country with their smarmy fascism and please-do-my-laundry-mom economic policies. We all know how that worked out in the 60's. Damned "liberators."

Yeah, Trudeau really ran us into the ground. Completely wrecked our economy, damned wage price controls. How dare he attempt austerity during the 70's?? I mean how on earth did we even get into the G7 with our economy so driven into the ground? Eh, Scotty? How?

bloodyminded, you are babbling again.

Does having a facebook friend mean you are supporting another leader? Perhaps she was a fence sitter and was weighing the issues and what each leader was offering. I agree that these campaign stops or media-ops, but the CPC blew this. She is going to be annoying and disruptive, there are enough campaign workers there to shout her down, drown out her protests - then hustle her out. IOW, there was a better way to handle it. But I suppose it beats showing up at a rally and starting a donnybrook like in days of yore. {sigh} I say open the rallies right up to anyone and have it out right there, front and centre, on TV, in front of everyone. Surely each party could hire a qualified stand-up comic to write heckler come-backs.

To me, Sterling was a Tory's Tory. I would have voted for the guy. But this shift is a little too iffy and, for what it's worth, property ownership is a federal fight that a provincial government simply cannot win. So why pick off the Ontario Tories and why did Hudak allow this sort of thing to happen? I think that if Smarmy Tim get's in there will be a whole lot of people wishing for a moderate government like Harris if this is the direction they are going in...

From the Star: Broad antitrust probe looming for Google, U.S. sources say Of course poor Microsoft could be behind this, and justifiably so, since BING blows. Sure. I wonder if Larry Page and Sergey Brin are working on a movie deal like 'The Social Network?' No doubt they will call it 'The Google Guys.'

[quote name=Jack Weber' date='05 April 2011 - 02:25 PM' timestamp='1302027914' post='650342]Ask Mr. Carson... I am certain that his credentials were well known by the PMO, RCMP, CSIS, etc.

You don't think that PMO staffers, ministerial aids, etc., require an enhanced security check by the RCMP?

Go back and read. Never name called, your comprehension of English is bad. Go back and read.

There is no defensible opinion when you are dealing with Dustpan, Mr. Non-Sequitar. My apologies for not providing you the debate you wished for. Some other time perhaps.

You lost more. No morals are never irrelevant, especially when you are going overseas as a friend to defend democracy and all that jazz. The point being we must be seen as offering the higher road despite how some of those cultural aspects inevitably crash. It is much easier to trade and enact commerce in peace than it is with people shooting at you. Oh come on, you got "sexual insecurity" out of a joke that you requested. LOFL!

No, American bashing or equating the acts of one lunatic in Florida as representative of "America" is a useless exercise. However, responding to it all the while generalizing about another is an equally, if not worse, exercise.

Yeah, and here are some more places: Middle East Council of Churches

No I mean like this one in Washington. Which is all you can see, in generalities. Right? And you whine when others pass it right back to you. Huh. How weak. Is that what your wife says to you in bed?

Well there's the rub - did you intend to protest the generalization of the US by way of a generalization of Muslims? Or did you just get caught doing the same thing you protest about? Because either way, it is absurd. And in what "way/context" is the western word "infidel" applied to Muslims as a whole by you a demonstration of their disrespect for "our" religion? The only "way/context" is you and your understanding and it is this sort of thing that leads me to believe that you got caught generalizing about Muslims. You need to pay more attention to what is written and less time on what you want something to mean while you try and read between the lines. Like I said, poor form. To refresh your memory: Do you understand this in the "way/context" of us being over to help the people rather than strictly there to defend "our freedoms?" You know what battle plans are right? The things that, should they get into enemy hands, put our soldiers at a higher risk. If being careful and prudent are no longer concerns, why not throw caution to the wind? And what possible reason could there be to enact a law that bans the burning of the flag. I am saying "feelings." You Really? That sounds like respect to me. If they want to duke it out, then that is their problem. If some retard in Florida wants to exercise his Constitutional Right to free speech and burn a Koran in an anti-Islam protest that imperils troops, civilians and all the work accomplished over there so far then I ask, what are we doing there in the first place? Petraeus: Quran burning poses security threat in Afghanistan

Yes, and you have a nice shiney black granite wall in Washington to show for all that effort and expense. Nice consolation prize. No moral position, then it all of this shouldn't matter to you. But yet it does. Huh. Whadday know, more bullshit. Did you foam at the mouth a little when you typed that out?

Yes, the flag burning laws. What do you think I mean by "we?"

If you think that me posting something "publicly" is "meant" for you, then you're an idiot. You see there? Now I am posting something "publicly" that is meant for you. See the difference now? If you want to act like a moderator when clearly that role for you has been rejected, that is your right. But I would still tell you to piss off just the same.

But many more - the vast majority - didn't. Your noble sentiment is wholly underwhelming when it comes to the facts. I shall because so far you have done nothing but spout the same old, tired, party line. If people wait long enough you'll equate your moral position based on the possession of military hardware. Been there, read that. Yawn. Why not fly in to Kabul and ask a few?

So what you are saying that sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and that one poorly formed argument requires another to illustrate? I can go for that. So long as the absurdity of it all is clear. First of all, I am not sure how you are equating "infidel" with lack of respect: Infidel - Merriam-Webster Please note that this is a Western term that applied equally to Christians. Strawman, I said no such thing. Thus: No, we are to be careful and prudent where our soldiers, civilians and aid workers are concerned. Did you not get that part? Otherwise, why not just hand them our battle plans and give them a sporting chance. "feelings need to be tipted around?" If I recall correctly it was only a few years ago that flag burning was close to being law in the US. So I am sure you'll excuse Muslim extremists to be extreme when their holy book is burned as a symbol of free speech in the USA. Please note, however, that the Muslim inifdels in, say, Chicago didn't kill anyone. Why is that I wonder. The troops were in Vietnam fighting for "freedoms" too and eventually the Vietnemese got what "they" wanted. Coincidentally that is when the killing of American troops effectively stopped. I wonder if the same phenomenon will occur when we pull out of Afghanistan?

.How about all the dead people at My Lai, whose "freedom" was being protected then B-C? Were some of their relatives among those "Boat People" you fondly recall? Oh wait, dead men (and women and children)tell no tales isn't that true? Yawn. Nope, still not even remotely believable even spouted by a self-proclaimed expert like you. No, Afghans don't mind being bombed at all.

Said from the nice, safe comfy confines of momma's basement. Keep rolling the dice DP, you'll get Kanchatka yet. Amuse yourself with YouTube videos until you do. Body of fallen Canadian soldier comes home