Bryan

You are arguing with a straw man, because that is not what I said.

Are you just arguing for fun? I said their perception is their orientation. How they view their own sexuality is what their sexual orientation is, by definition.

I did. It was a disgusting piece of left-wing propaganda. It sums up the entire problem with teachers unions perfectly, they are only in it for themselves, the actual education not their primary concern.

Nadon was a good choice, rejecting him was a mistake the SCC will regret. Are you ready for Chief Justice Vic Toews? If it happens, the left will only have themselves to blame.

It's something you're certainly attributing a lot of myths to. If you cannot provide an example of anyone who has actually been NOT allowed in to Trinity, you have no grounds to make the claim that anyone is not allowed in. It's your claim, defend it or retract it.

It does. It means he did not stack the deck with people just to do his bidding. He put people in whom he expected to do a fair non-partisan job. Guess he won't make that mistake again.

There's the biggest disconnect. The tax cuts were and are the biggest factor in why we did so well. Consumers had more money in their pockets, employers had more breathing room on their bottom lines, it made Canada a better place to do business creating more jobs. It was the best possible policy at the time that it was most needed.

Some previous governments were considered credible internationally, Martin wasn't even considered credible within his own party.

The Supreme Court has done enough to erase their own credibility in the past few years. Compared to the democratically elected government, the SCC has NONE.

Please cite an example of someone not being allowed in.

Those are a nice small step in the right direction.

Not even remotely true. It's an open invitation to people who already believe in those stated principles to be able to study in a non-hostile environment. No one who does not believe in them in being forced to even walk in the front door -- they have plenty of of other choices.

That's what I just said.

You can dodge and weave all you want, but he very clearly stated (in the quote that you posted) that children are not what they care about, that they do not have a vision for public education, and that advancing the interests of the teachers are what they are concerned about. It absolutely is what he said.

I just did. Try to keep up.

standard noun 1. a level of quality or attainment. "their restaurant offers a high standard of service" synonyms: quality, level, grade, caliber, merit, excellence More 2. an idea or thing used as a measure, norm, or model in comparative evaluations.

It's the lunacy of the left in a nutshell: Innocent? Kill 'em, it's our RIGHT!!!. Guilty? No! Killing is wrong!

It's a standard you can use to determine if the death penalty is imposed.

Do you think no smoking policies are bigoted?

I don't question his objectivity either, just his judgement. Like you, I would not want to do his job either. That said, as I said to him a couple of days ago, it almost seems lately that his actual objective is to drive as many people away as possible.

Their perception is their orientation.

So what are you kicking about then?

You said if people didn't have the guts to be there and do, they should shut up. I've got the guts, give me a there to be.

You looked wrong. The scope is significantly narrower than that, and in a very specific context.

Indeed. Under Martin, Canada was never a serious member of the G7. It was an honorary position, that was subject to be changed. The last few years have changed all that. The rest of the G7 WANT Canada around now, because they want to learn how we were able to do so well, not just compared to our contemporaries, but also compared to past Canadian governments.