Traveller

In general, you are correct. I should have been more accurate in my previous comment. They did opt back in in 2008, but with conditions. They still do not participate in the Nuclear Planning Group nor have they added any forces to the general NATO pool, nor do they contribute any funding to the organization. So again,yes the French participate , but in that uniquely 'French' way that we all know and love

Agreed. In a free society such as ours, we should not need a reason to make something legal but rather, government should need a reason to make something illegal. As you pointed out - that has never happened.

France. They voluntarily withdrew from all military aspects of NATO back in 1963 (which is why NATO HQ moved from paris to Brussels). They retain diplomatic and political/economic ties with NATO, but they do not participate in the NATO military comand and control structure.

Hear, Hear! This issue is currently dead and it needs to stay that way.

He's not even an Evangelical - that was Day's bag. Harper is however, a backroom policy wog with all the personal interaction skills of a rock. Remember he was Reform's Chief Policy Officer before he was ever a candidate for office. While he's a social conservative, he has actively worked to avoid 'moral' issues (abortion, same-sex marriage, etc). Don't forget he broke from Manning and Reform over populist issues, not returning until Manning was out and Day had dragged the Alliance into 'Stupid-Land'. I'm no Harper fan; but he's not an Evangelical.

As negative examples of the above, I direct your attention to Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Pat Robertson, to name three examples.

Your arguement, and the entire premise of the thread, is based on female prostitution. I accept that any other form is the exception, not the rule; but we must view the arguement in non-gender terms. Legalizing prostitution implicity includes male prostitution, so trying to base a response on the opinion of 'wives' is a bit ludicrous. It also ignores the reality of customer/clients who are not in a relationship - ie, single. Far better that the argument and the point be made in the abrstract - enough people will object to legalization without trying to specify wives/spouses as a sub-set of opposition. For my own perspective, the question legalization is being addressed in reverse. Proponents should not be looking for reasons to legalize; rather, they shold be arguing that there is insufficient reason to make it illegal. In a free democracy, the onus should be on government to substantiate reasons to outlaw an activity; not to legalize one. For myself, I find the current arguments against prositituion to be insufficient.

Sir John A. MacDonald, speaking to the people of Canada: "If I had influence over the minds of the people of Canada, any power over their intellect, I would leave them this legacy: ‘Whatever you do, adhere to the Union. We are a great country, and shall become one of the greatest in the universe if we preserve it; we shall sink into insignificance and adversity if we suffer it to be broken."

Oh come now - have some faith in the perfidy of man. No American involvement woudl simply have meant Pol Pot would have overthrown the SHanouk regime instead of the Nol regime...the coup against Shanouk simply delayed the inevitable.

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." Attributed to Plato

An amazing piece of history recvoered. Hopefully, I'll get to see the finished product - I'd consider it a treat...

I'd go with the wake-up call thing - and it looks like Boston needs another one. To be elading 3-1 with 12 minutes left and then end up losing 4-3 in triple overtime - something went wrong in Beantown...

National Aboriginal Day = 21 June (annually)..... why this even came up as an issue, I don't understand. I will observe that Elizabeth May is no longer mentioning it...

ooooh - can I be Spotteswoode? I love cocktail hour! LOL

Very true - but from a land of committed bourbon drinkers - I was pleasantly surprised by the wide variety. I hope my friends in Kentucky can forgive me

Just a travel tip for all the 'serious' whisky drinkers out there: Visit 'The Whiskey Bar' in Seattle, WA. Over 200 diffeent whiskies available! I never realized our 'sothern cousins' could have such refined tastes! Cheers!

For Class: "Against Reform" by John Pepall; his arguments against reforming the Canadian Senate. also reading "They Fought For he Motherland: Russia's Women Soldiers in World War One and the Revolution" by Dr Laurie Stoff For Fun: "America But Better" by Chris Cannon and Brian Calvert. Humourous political manifesto. For Relaxation: "1356" by Bernard Cornwell; historical fiction concerning the Battle of Poitiers during the Hundred Years War. With my granddaughter: "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" by JK Rowling; because she's old enough now to like them. Cheers,

Actually, Pol Pot came to power after the Americans ceased supporting the Lon Nol government in the post-Watergate environment. You're correct that the US did help to oust the legitimate government of Prince Sihanouk. Pot's actual support (both logistical and actual combat forces) came from the North Vietnames and the Viet Cong. The US failure was to continue to support the government they put in power. Without US support, Nol was out; Pot was in; and 2,000,.000 Cambodieans would die as a result.

His own beliefs aside, Harper has been astute enough to ensure the issue never came up as part of his agenda (though he has erred in letting his backbenchers raise it - of all the things he DID NOT clamp down on, THIS he let thorugh...sigh). The religious right wing is a paper tiger - They can scream and bleat all they want but this is not the United States. They don't control the reins of power in the CPC and since their only other political option is the Christian Heritage Party (who only ran 46 candidates, got less than 20,000 votes, and less than 1% of the total vote) they have NO OPTION but to support the CPC, if they want any voice whatsoever. They are a group that can (and should) be ignored by the powers in charge.

Absolutely true. After Seven and a half years of Tory government, and two of that as majority, fatigue is setting in, and I don't think anyone is, or should be surprised by this. The entire tory campaign strategy was based on "We're not the Liberals", playing on voter fatigue with Chretien/Martin. People are tired of the Tories now and they are going to be more tired of them in 23 months. The onyl real question is - who replaces them?

The potential leadership challenger to watch is on the sidelines right now - Jim Prentice. Recall that Prentice had previous leadership ambitons, and later served in cabinet, then resigned with his ''Red Tory' credentials intact. For now, he's biding his time until the '15 election is over, but if the Tories lose seats, and especially if they lose power, then look for him to make a leadership challenge.

Goldring should get together with Rathgeber and form a dissident caucus ala Strahl, Hangar, Lunn, Solberg and others did back in '01. It might surprise a few people (especially in the PMO) just who would be willing to join such a beast. Let's not forget either that Rathgeber is an Edmonton MP, a city which has previously elected Liberal MPs on a regular basis despite the province being a Tory stronghold. Now if they just had a Strahl or a solberg to speak for them...