Bryan

If it was a substance of that nature that our government allowed him to openly sell and pay taxes on the proceeds, absolutely. By the same token, if a gun dealer in the US sold a weapon prohibited here but allowed there through the mail to Canadians, I don't see how we have any right to go after him. I can't imagine the US ever giving in to an extradition request for something like that either. What he did, he did there, and should only be subject to whatever sanctions they would impose on him (if any). The person ordering the gun from Canada is the one who committed the crime, we should go after him, not the American dealer.

War criminals have broken international law, big difference. If he didn't commit the offense IN the US he should not be subject to their laws. Extradition treaties are to get people who committed the crime in one country and then fled to another. Why don't states where gambling is illegal arrest people for going to Vegas?

More seats are being added outside of Quebec. You don't think that is going to diminish the impact of the Bloc on federal politics? If the CPC goes forward with removing subsidies to political parties, the Bloc would be hit harder than any other party. You don't think that would diminish their impact? Who knows what other kinds of "gotcha" legislation the government has in mind down the road? Lots of other things could happen. Quebecers could get tired of having the majority of Quebec's seats go to a party that has no ability to do anything for Quebec when they're not part of government. People do change their allegiances. The founder of the Bloc was himself once a federal Conservative. Our Governor General was once a separatist. Our Prime Minister, the very stereotype of a Calgary Conservative, was once an Ontario Liberal.

If it's that black and white that he broke Canadian laws, he'd have been charged here. It's just not that simple. Charges for that offense are very rare, convictions even more so, and as far as I know nobody's been charged for it in Canada in over a decade. I still don't understand how US laws apply to a Canadian who operates his business in Canada. If he was operating in the US, I'd get it and support it. Heck, even if what the US authorities were demanding was his client list so they could go and arrest all the Americans who ordered from him, I'd even support that. But American law should never apply to Canadian citizens living in Canada.

A major drug trafficker got only five years and gets to keep the proceeds of his crime. He got off easy in my book. No tears from me. What I am having a hard time understanding is how the US has jurisdiction to charge him. His store in in Canada, the undercover officers who bought from him bought from him in Canada. If American citizens bought it from him and brought it into the US and/or had it mailed to them, then they're the ones who broke US law. It's a very dangerous precedence to have US laws applied to Canadian citizens for their actions in Canada. It directly threatens our sovereignty, IMO.

The Chretien/Martin fiscal management was all smoke and mirrors. They were not even remotely responsible by any marker. They starved the provinces, cut billions from health care, made spending commitments they couldn't keep, gave millions away to Liberal friendly ad agencies, blew billions on programs that were supposed to be self sustaining, stole over $50 billion from EI to create their phoney "surpluses", then turned around and immediately spent all of that surplus on other pet projects.

Global is the least bad of the three. I'd take their news over CBC or CTV any day.

CBC's news coverage is the MOST godawful thing on TV.

Sure they did. Lots of commentary about it in the paper, the blogs, and the podcasts.

The govt might return a few volleys with some zingers, but it's ALWAYS the Liberals who start the crazy personal attacks. "Mr. Speaker, why does this government hate women?" "Mr. Speaker, why does this government think all aboriginals should die?"

There's a lot of leftist indoctrination in many universities. It's institutionalized brainwashing.

Fiscally responsible Liberals? That is the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Making huge commitments while leaving the bills unpaid is not responsible. Moving spending off the books is not responsible. Stealing billions from EI is not responsible. leaving the Provinces hanging is not responsible.

All of the hospitals in Manitoba are privately owned, as are over 90% of the clinics. None of them, however, are allowed to operate outside of the public system. If the service is covered by Manitoba Health, that is the only form of payment they are allowed to take. Some have tried to find loopholes to operate outside the system, but the province finds ways to either shut them down or get them to rejoin the system.

That Mythbusters episode was bizarre. They claimed to have proved that the moon landing could not have been faked by perfectly faking it. >>>I'm not claiming I think the moon landing was fake, just that they didn't even come close to proving their case with the experiments they performed.

The Liberals never balanced the budget.

That's exactly what Conservatives are hoping for.

I SUPPORT the Prorogation of Parliament and the Prime Minister of Canada http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=240544201629

He probably will re-appoint Jean, but I wish he wouldn't. The Liberals appointed their choices, Harper should appoint his choice. Someone who is not a former CBC announcer would be nice for a change. My "dream" GG is Preston Manning. Both because I truly believe there's not another soul in the country who deserves it more, but also because it'll make people on the left's heads explode.

No argument there. I've never understood the reverence that constitutions get. When I hear that something is unconstitutional, my general reaction is "so what?".

Elections Canada info is wonky at the best of times. People who have made major contributions often don't have their donation ever show up on the site, even though the party has clear records of it. I don't pay much attention even when Elections Canada is actively investigating irregularities, but they clearly haven't got a clue what the real numbers are.

At the same time, revering it like holy scripture is equally irrational. Too many things just don't get done because the excuse is made that we'd have to change the constitution. So what, we have to change it. It's a piece of paper.

Frighteningly, I know people who live in Quebec who honestly believe this. When presented with evidence to the contrary, they simply accuse you of lying.

No one has said anything of the sort, and nothing like that is happening.

So true. The "far left" in the US and the "far right" in Canada pretty much occupy the same space.

Very interesting Capricorn. If I'm reading that right, it appears that the rebate is automatically tacked on to the regular election expense reimbursements if you qualify, and that the CPC (and the PCs before them) had been getting the rebate essentially against their will. And the fight to stop receiving these rebates goes back some 14 years. The CPC was not 'QNPO' until 2008. What was different that they didn't qualify before? Is it possible that the reason the NDP didn't get said rebate is not because they "didn't apply for it", but rather they just didn't qualify for it?