Bryan

Yes, but they are expanding funding for arctic research in general, just not focussed on ice cores specifically. It's a reallocation of funding priorities, not a cut or a ban.

My address, yes. They do have to mail me my renewal notices. But I've never had any questions about mileage, where my work is, where I park the car at night, or anything even remotely related to that.

They do? I've been driving for 30 years, and I've never once been asked a single question about how or where I use my vehicle.

I don't know about ice cores specifically, but this government has actually increased funding for arctic studies substantially, and the current programs extend well into the 2018/2019 fiscal year. http://www.science.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=078AA8A0-1

He clearly doesn't. His position on this subject is idiotic.

If a story can just "blow over" with a short time out, that alone is evidence that the time out was the right thing to do. If it's a real issue, it will still be front and centre whenever they come back.

Translation: you actually have no idea, but like to repeat things you're heard others say.

As usual, you're spouting nonsense. You're a cartoon at this point. The census is an added expense to obtain redundant information. They already have it, all they have to do is compile it. You know, they very thing that StatsCan already does? What questions specifically are on the regular census that can further critical research in a way that existing records can't? What earth shattering research is being done based on how many nights a week my oldest son sleeps at home?

That's ridiculous hyperbole. There's nothing they need to know about me that could in any way be a factor in public policy they don't already have on record in multiple places.

I don't see what the big deal is. I've never filled out a census form either. I always just throw it in the trash. There has never even been a threat of consequences. Why did they pick this woman to go after?

Not anything remotely close to slavery. You're free to leave any time.

Anyone who claims to have been offended by these guys quoting lines from a sit-com to each other is just an asshole. If you weren't in on the joke, then the post obviously wasn't meant for you, ignore it and move on.

It's really simple. Want to make public statements on your own work? Go to work for yourself. Want to work for the government? STFU and do what you're told. Government employees don't speak about their work publicly, and they don't speak for the government, UNLESS that is specifically the job they've been assigned. If you can't handle that, seriously, just leave. Obviously, you're not cut out for government work.

At least you get to have that CD. I got my last MRI here in Manitoba very quickly (total wait = 6 days), but neither me nor my doctor were allowed to actually SEE it. All we are allowed to see is the radiologist's written report. When my local surgeon said he couldn't help me, I wanted a copy of the MRI so that I could get another opinion elsewhere, and I ended up having to go to the states to pay for another one in order to do that.

If anything, I think it's remarkable how affordable our university is in Canada. I recently paid for my son's first year of university, and the total tuition was barely any higher than it was when I went to the same university 20 years earlier. The big cost increase was the books. He had several that were approaching $300 each.

The maps are fairly accurate, through the context might be somewhat misleading. The "pre" 1946 map is of the unincorporated Palestinian territory prior to the UN giving much of it to Israel. Zionists will argue there was no Palestine prior to 1946. That has the dubious distinction of being both technically true and deliberately misleading. There was no country of Palestine internationally recognized as an independent state, but that's because it was a British controlled territory. The boundaries are still accurate. The green areas really are where all the Palestinians lived (most of the region), and the white areas really are the few places where Jewish settlements were at the time. The 1947 map really is how the UN cut up the territory. They absolutely screwed the Palestinian people over. The difference from 1947 to now is pretty close too, but for different reasons. A chunk was taken all at once in 1967 when Egypt, Syria and Jordan got involved in a few border disputes. Israel was backed by the US, and had much more formidable armed forces. Instead of just declaring victory against those other countries, they used it as a cover for taking even more land and screwing the Palestinians over even more. The 2010 map is also accurate yet misleading at the same time. Since 1967, the loss of land has been incremental, and less obvious. The grey areas are not all within Israeli borders, but they did take control of those areas largely at the point of a gun and the force of a bulldozer. Instead of moving the borders, they left them fairly close to 1967 levels, but just started marching troops into Palestinian land, forcing Palestinians off, and building Jewish settlements inside the Palestinian territories. So the green spots on the last map are the parts left of their own country that they still live in and control -- mostly isolated enclaves that they've been confined to rather than one contiguous area.

These things happen. Flaherty knew about it and was already drafting the fix long before it hit the papers. The issue is that banks also get a discount off the full tax rate, just less of one than the credit unions got. Instead of specifically saying that the credit union discount is changed to the bank discount, it said that credit unions no longer get their special discount. CRA mistakenly took that to mean they should get no discount at all, which was not the intent.

The only people who would believe this story are people who WANT it to be true for the gotcha factor. The source, National Report, is specifically geared towards that. While very little on their site is satire in the comedic sense, all of it is fake.

That's the rationale usually given when a dictatorship is established.

The dictionary is wrong, that's rich. Typical left-wing behaviour: you can't understand reality, so you make up your own. No. People should be addressed based on the fact of who they are. You can choose to be called Mr. Prime Minister, that doesn't make it so. If you actually believe it, you have a mental illness.

And Bambino showed you the dictionary definition that showed with absolute clarity that the WHO is using the terminology incorrectly. You can explain it as many times as you like, you will still be wrong about this.

Absolutely. That's what the Conservatives are doing right now with senate reform. The SCC has their proposals, and will rule on what they can or cannot proceed with. It is smart in that it should pre-empt later constitutional challenges, but the downside is the SCC takes it's dear sweet time. They've had the proposal for quite some time already, and have said it could be as much as another year before they make a ruling.

I have to wonder who they asked, and what their methodology was. Attendance at the churches I'm familiar with is up substantially. My church has expanded almost ten-fold since I've been going, and most of the ones we're affiliated with are in the same boat. The biggest issue is having enough space for everyone. We've had to move into progressively larger facilities every 5 years or so.

That's your opinion. Corporate support in this country has historically been overwhelmingly Liberal. It's the LPC and NDP who were hurt the most by the bans on corporate donations, it barely made any change whatsoever to Conservative support, because they never had much corporate backing to begin with.

That's an unsubstantiated opinion that has no basis in reality.