kimmy

I think peoples' assessment of what constitutes a fringe and what constitutes a significant element of a group depends in great measure what their a-priori opinion of that group was. -k

Personally, I think it's a great response to the sense of moral superiority that many on the left seem to have adopted. "We on the left are open minded and educated and able to adapt to change! The right, on the other hand, are closed minded individuals who hate and fear anything that is new or different. It's physiological, don't you know. Liberals have larger anterior cingulate cortex volume, which makes them able to deal with complexity!" As I watched the videos I was completely blown away at the high levels of anterior cingulate cortex activity on display! "Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." Oh yeah? Watch the video! But of course we know that if a white supremacist buys a Conservative Party membership in Prince Rupert, or a Minuteman attends a Tea Party rally in Sheboygan, it's proof of the deep undercurrent of hate inherent to the political right. Whereas a bunch of racist, violent left-wingers at a rally are just ... uh huh. ORLY? -k

That's just not true in Canada. The cost of homes has risen dramatically relative to income. That's easily verified if you spend a few minutes with Google. You'll find plenty of graphs like the one I linked to earlier in the thread, or this one: http://vreaa.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/income-vs-house-price-changes-1996-2009/ -k

I'm a little surprised that people don't recall Martin telling Nova Scotians not to vote for Peter McKay because Calgarians would be running the show. I'm certainly surprised that people don't recall Paul Martin standing on the stage next to his new best friend Buzz Hargrove, applauding while Hargrove accused Harper of being from Alberta and having Alberta values and not Canadian values. And in particular, I'm surprised that nobody outside of Alberta even seemed offended by it. I felt a little "kicked" at the time. -k

I bet his throwing arm makes Barack Obama look like Roger Clemens. -k

I found that homes in Windsor were dirt cheap when I visited a couple of years ago. Of course, jobs were a little scarce. Ditto small prairie towns or sawmill towns in BC after the sawmill shuts down. There are affordable homes in Canada... but most people need to live where there is work. I can't convince myself that these prices are "real". It seems like a perpetual motion machine invented by banks and realtors. I suspect that the new tougher mortgage rules might start to take some of the steam out of it. -k

Alberta's disappointing use of its oil royalties isn't the business of any federal party. -k

Seeing this thread title on the front page makes me want to shout "This is SPARTA!!!" then kick charter.rights down a bottomless pit. -k

This is outrageous. Sending Tom Green to Afghanistan is clearly some sort of attempt to inflame tensions and antagonize more Afghans to take up arms against Canadian troops. -k

It's highly unclear whether what Carson has done qualifies as lobbying under the legal definition. It might, which is why the matter was referred to the RCMP. Likewise, no fraud of any sort is being alleged. His relationship with the young woman, while probably distasteful to many, is certainly not illegal. Nor is the manner in which H2O Pros disburses the proceeds of a sale. 20% is probably an unusually high commission, but what of it? The grand sum of allegations against Carson are that he broke lobbying rules. Claims of fraud are completely unsubstantiated. -k

The biggest thorn ever? Holy, some people have either short memories or a serious lack of perspective. The grand sum of her sins consist of yelling at some airport security clowns, marrying an imbecile, and letting that imbecile use her phone and email to conduct personal business. If she'd been in the Chretien-era cabinet, that track record would make her revered for her integrity. -k

...so, what you guys are saying is that Helena wasn't really snorting cocaine off an escort's breasts after all? I am totally going to have to rewrite the screenplay now. -k

They've been handed all kinds of excellent ammo to work with by the Conservatives themselves. That they'd instead decide to go with something that's completely off the radar, and reach into their own closet to dig up their own skeletons, is just baffling. -k

The cost of housing has risen far more rapidly than disposable income, so my conclusion is just fine. -k

What does your ability to shop at WalMart have to do with the topic at hand? We had American retail chains long before FTA or NAFTA or G8 or G20. The loss of sovereignty is, we agree to not attempt to make Canadians buy Nova Scotian-made tube-socks by slapping punitive tariffs on tube socks made in Alabama. We've voluntarily surrendered our ability to promote Nova Scotian tube-socks at the expense of tube-socks made by our American friends. That's a loss of sovereignty. In return, our American friends voluntarily stop attempting to promote American-made wood products by slapping punitive tariffs on products made in Quebec. They've surrendered some sovereignty as well. Good for Alabama tube-sock mills and Quebec shelving-unit factories, bad for Nova Scotia tube-sock mills and Indiana shelving-unit factories, but everybody gets cheaper tube socks and shelving units. -k

August's point is that a very short time ago it was the Liberals who enjoyed a plurality of support among women. What changed in just a couple of years? Conservative policies? Liberal policies? Womens' political philosophy? I think the answer is obvious. -k

There *is* a loss of sovereignty when you enter into global communities and agree to cooperate with other nations. That loss of sovereignty is the price we pay for the benefits that participating in these communities bring to us. Are those benefits worth the price? That's controversial, but the great prosperity we've enjoyed over the last couple of decades seems like a pretty strong endorsement. -k

In terms of the party platforms, I was leaning toward the Liberals until they unveiled their Three Big Programs. Only one of those was much of a hit with me, the assistance for post secondary education. I'm not much of a proponent of Big National Daycare, but could live with it if there was some form of means testing. The Big National Seniors Care plan really aggressively annoys me and is enough to make me question whether I would want these guys to be in charge after all. Conversely, the Conservatives platform is devoid of big expensive plans, but I've lost my confidence in how they manage the public purse and I have come to suspect that despite the absense of big expensive promises, they'll manage to spend a lot of money anyway. And I don't think canceling the planned corporate tax rollbacks is such a bad thing, because I'm not sure those tax cuts are really helping the economy. On the leaders, I find Harper greatly preferable to Ignatieff. I don't mind that he came from an aristocratic background, I do find it slightly off-putting that he tried to spin it like his family were paupers after the Russian revolution. I don't mind that he's worked and lived in other countries. I don't mind that his wife isn't a Canadian citizen. I'm reading one of his books. I wasn't predisposed to dislike the guy. But this election was Canada's big chance "to get to know" Michael Ignatieff, and as I get to know him, I find that he completely bugs the hell out of me. I'm a smart rational person, and I'm not going to support somebody as Prime Minister based on whether I could imagine myself having a beer with them. But I absolutely could not have a beer with Michael Ignatieff. But none of that actually matters, because I live in a riding where a landslide Conservative win is inevitable. I can vote for whoever I like without any illusion that it makes any difference in the national big picture. I'm voting for my local Liberal candidate because she seems like somebody I'd really admire if I knew her in person, and I think she's deserving of my support. My local Conservative struck me as a bit of a knob when I met him. The remaining candidates are granola-headed flakes. So this isn't a terribly difficult choice for me. -k

I think that most two income couples both work because they want to provide a lifestyle for their family that isn't affordable with a single income. My dad was easily able to provide a big house with a nice yard on a single income when I was little, and he wasn't long out of college at the time. That was in the 1980s. Think you can do that on a single income now? If you live in most major Canadian cities, fat chance. -k

That's fine for those who are already old and set in their ways; they were able to purchase their homes when it was more financially feasible. Big houses are probably still within reach for the well-off, and possibly Double Income No Kids couples. For those of us who are single, have just one income, and don't need a lot of space for our non-existent children and non-existent spouses, this might sort of thing might work out ok. Not everybody can live in the middle of town, or close to where they work. It's generally a trade-off between cost of living and commuting time. -k

Surprising that women have left the Liberals in light of the Big National Daycare plan that seems like a calculated play for female votes. Maybe women really do vote based on "feelings" instead of logic. Logic says "Big National Daycare could really help me out", but feelings say "That Ignatieff just creeps me out." -k

Personally I was quite enchanted when I visited Barkerville a couple of years ago, and gave serious thought to buying an adorable little house I saw for sale in the nearby town of Wells. Quesnel looked quite lovely as well; too bad about all the native gangsters. -k

How could they possibly think this is a good idea? Chretien is a piece of dog crap. His endorsement kind of makes me want to go set fire to Liberal lawn signs, even though I'm voting Liberal. If Ignatieff punched Chretien in the face, he would immediately become my top choice for Prime Minister. -k

...God? -k

Let's go through this kook's video claim by claim: -Libya is "the first great war of the 21st century". Not Iraq or Afghanistan, in which foreign countries were conquered and occupied, but a conflict where western involvement is limited to enforcing a no-fly zone and firing missiles at Colonel Moe's heavy equipment. By what possible rational can this possibly be "the Big One" as he claims it is going to be? -Obama, Cameron, and Sarkoszy have never served in the military. Is this a prediction? An analysis? -Obama, Cameron, and Sarkoszy take it up the ass, apparently. Is this a prediction? An analysis? -Hilary, Rice, and Samantha Powers support this, proving that women are not kinder and gentler. Wow! This is truly the sort of Trend Research Prediction that you can only get from a true Trend Research Expert. -the US and UK are losing wars left and right apparently. Oh, I dunno. The process of rebuilding the conquered nations has been slow and laborious... but the wars? The war part was a piece of cake. If NATO does decide to take out Colonel Moe, that's not even an issue, because they don't have to create a new country from the rubble, they just leave and hand it over to the popular revolution that's sweeping Libya. They could take out Moe, wreck the key pieces of his military, and just walk away and leave the rest in the hands of Libyans. It would be the easiest war since Gulf War 1. -"they" are going to bomb London and France and New York. He offers no claim as to who "they" are. Are "they" Libya's miltary? That's clearly ludicrous. They have no capability of attacking America or France or England. Or are "they" the same angry Muslim terrorists who we have been fighting since 2001 (and before)? If "the great war" of the 21st century is actually the war against Muslim terrorists, he's 10 years too late for this to count as a prediction. -we're not there for humanitarian reasons, we're there for oil. He's hardly the first to say this. -calls on people to stop paying taxes. It's a call for action, not any sort of claim or prediction or analysis. -the economy is sinking. The empires are in decline. He's hardly the first to say this. So tell me what, in all of this, Gosthacked, are we supposed to look at and think that this guy is some kind of great analyst or futurist? It's a dog's breakfast of stuff that's either jibberish or has been said for years by people way smarter than this hollering idiot. -k