The Terrible Sweal

Egad, more Vogon poetry!

That's just dogma. Money is wisely spent if it provides efficiently for a need. In the majority of matters, individual choice drives this most efficiently, but in certain instances (e.g. for economic reasons: natural monopolies or public goods; or for political reasons: justice issues) it may be wise to deploy an authority of some kind to acheive an outcome. Oh, come on. The position on SSM for one thing. It is not the business of our government in any way at all. BTW, Look at you! Supporting religious involvement at the same time you claim conservatives do not support religious involvement. Can you say hidden agenda?

Exactly.

How can you accept the sacrifice of young minds so heartlessly?

Excellent points, especially the last one.

There is no doubt, substantial public debt accrued under Trudeau and increased under Mulroney. Mulroney's economic policies were disastrous, adding to unemployment, and sharply increasing the carrying cost of the debt. Another consideration is what was bought with te debt money under respective governments.

Given the extent of territorial reversion that would entail, native peoples would probably take that offer like a shot. However, pragmatically, we know Canada will not do that. Historically, a massive bait-and-switch scam has been played against native peeps on the treaties. It is based on commitments made in substitution for an honest adherence to the treaties. It is not based on racial caracteristics, it is like a CAA membership -- those wo have purchased it get service, those didn't don't. Right. What would be needed is the acceptance of the settlement by the involved parties.

Now I'm pretty sure there's more than one Conservative around here. C'mon out and have your say ...

August, what sort of utter nonsense are you yattering about? From the Vancouver Sun:

If you are refering to native people, please be advised that their entitlements arise from treaties which mostly predated Confederation. The entitlements arise from these treaties, and it is thus not in the power of the government to rewrite them. Further, the enetitlements are thus not based on race at all, but rather are based on an exchange.

Are you profoudly uninformed, or are you simply willing to say anything for your partisan purposes? Belinda was a member of Firewall's shadow cabinet.

Many Con supporters ask repeatedly why Canadians support the Liberals. Whenever anyone explains that these Tory policies are undesirable, the Tory supporter tends to go intoa bizarre form of denial. So, maybe your replies to this poll will help clarify what you're saying.

True. Republicans scandalously and falsely derided Kerry's patriotism for having come forward with his conscientious opinions of his time in Vietnam. They funded an attck ad campaign, and slandered both Kerry and the Navy in regard to his medals. In Canada, on the other hand, the Liberals pointed out factually that the Alliance/tories had clearly criticised Canada for simply adhering to its U.N. treaty obligations. Yes, these ARE worlds apart. People who deny the evidence of their senses out of ideological loyalties lose credibility too.

Naturally. I had to make a duplicate thread to make that possible.

I began net-life as a mere Sweal, but as my reputation grew, so did my self-image. It was terrible to behold!

You know, I read a comment in Le Devoir the other day from Gilles Duceppe. I was appalled because the reporter didn't ask him about his thoughts on B.C.'s response to aboriginal issues. How shockingly self-centred!

August, your all consuming hatredof the Liberals has finally led you completely into the realm of the ridiculous. The TORONTO Star is a local paper, in a city in (Golly gee!) SOUTHERN ONTARIO. How dare it focus on loca issues. I suppose you'd prefer if peeps in southern Ontario would focus their entire beings on the need of Quebec?

Scary look into the mind of the left. 1. Set a protocol based on the bright lights in government 2. Have midlevel paper pushers apply that protocol to every situation 3. Make sure that you protect people form themselves by making decisions based on broad generalities <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Scary look into the mnd of willy. Fabricate any old bullcrap in support of personal prejudices, and attribute these fabrications dishonestly to others. :angry:

My fellow Canadians! I am deeply, deeply touched that you are willing to place such confidence in me. Your trust is not misplaced. Let me make one thing clear, I intend t govern for all Canadians. My goals will be the...

I think Ted Morton is a self-satisfied, lying, traitorous jackass who should be, if possible, deported.

Well thanks a lot. I didn't know whether to snort with derision or cough with disgust and now you've made me spill my drink. Anyway, the tories need to CHANGE their tactics, not just resort to their usual tricks.

I'm afraid you are dead wrong, and aslong as conservatives persist in that error, they wiil remain dead at the ballot box. The majority of people don't want what the tories are selling, and packaging is not the problem.

Just FYI -- Alberta isn't allowed to separate.

I think my post above, to kimmy, indicates why these questions are premature, in my view. Of course we would need acertain that mal-education exists in a given case. But the question is, to me, where it is present, is religion an excuse? BTW I think we can safely speculate that SOME mal-education exists, both religious based and not. Clearly some criteria for mal-education would have to be devised. Well I don't know what parricular religions you refer to. But, no, I don't accept your proposition that anyone's education should be sacrificed because we presume upfront that their future job options are limited because of who they are. You misunderstand the situation. I am questioning whether society should permit violations of children's rights out of deference to their parent's beliefs. I am not dealing (yet) with whatever those beliefs may contain.

Actually, I have not gotten to what society may say constitutes mal-education specifically. I'm still at the level of concepts here . Whatever we end up considering to be mal-education, the question is whether society should endorse it. Well, that's not my position. My position would be that there may be SOME belief systems we don't want imparted to children, and that parents should have no exception in that regard.