kimmy

oh? I'm sure I've heard that we turn away a lot of people and could accept way more than we do if we were so inclined. In fact, I've heard we're actually pretty choosy. If Ruby were to argue that we need to do something like this so that we can attract more immigrants, I guess she could do so, but I doubt she'd be so foolish. Well, I had hoped to illustrate why a moronic proposal benefiting only an exclusive group to the detriment of everybody else being touted as "for the constituents!" would be a complete load of crap, but I guess I missed the mark. No? Us blondes haven't got Ruby Dhalla in the House trying to give us money, that's for sure. I don't buy that for a minute. I bet Ruby doesn't either. -k

Yeah. The picture accompanying the article does not exactly look like a healthy body image for the typical young woman. There's nothing new about this, though. "High fashion" models have always looked like trainwrecks, and I don't think these sorts of productions actually have anything to do with what real people wear. They're some kind of weird performance art for the interest of the people in the industry, not the buying public. However... ever since Jennifer Lopez made it big, people have come to recognize that scrawny is way overrated. A lot of the biggest sex symbols right now-- Beyonce, Scarlett Johansson, Kim Kardassian, Rihanna-- aren't exactly waifs. To some teenager struggling with body image, I think seeing Kim Kardassian on magazine covers probably means more than seeing these emaciated-looking models dressed in crap that nobody would wear at some fashion show nobody cares about. -k

I've never read anything to suggest that Canada has any difficulty attracting young people. Yes, you've made that clear. And I've not accused you of supporting it. However, you and Dobbins both compared it to other programs that are supposed to be in the interest of the nation, so the question of how this is idea is supposed to be in the interest of the nation was a natural. And, you're claiming that she's doing this on behalf of her "constituents", and that is what I am pursuing. I'm interested in finding out what "constituency" wants this to happen. Yeah, no kidding. If the government decided to start giving money to natural blondes, I could see myself supporting such a measure too. If me and two friends wrote to our MP and suggested that tax credits for natural blondes was an awesome idea, and he stood up and proposed it in the house on behalf of his constituents, but 99.9% of people in this constituency actually think the idea is completely idiotic, does my MP still get to say it's what the constituents are asking for? I've not bothered to watch Dhalla speak on the subject, but if she wants to argue this as a social justice issue, I will be fascinated to see how that plays out. I am not questioning her right to do this. I am simply skeptical about her motive. I think it's a cynical ploy based on the assumption that immigrants will vote in blocks and that their loyalty can be obtained by championing a measure that-- if it were to succeed-- would be a bald-faced attempt to buy votes. -k

Some of the actions of hard-core environmentalists fit the definition of terrorism. I vaguely recall something about a powerline tower being bombed, for instance. Spiking of trees in areas being forested could be argued to be terrorism as well. The recent bombings of pipelines in northeastern BC is certainly terrorism, though it's not clear that it's environmentalists behind it. These Greenpeace folks? They're just trespassers. -k

As a taxpayer, it really gets me riled up when scumbags like United Way and UNICEF are going around taking money that ought to be going to Revenue Canada. That's all I'm saying. -k

How on earth did you get that out of what anybody has posted here?! -k

Sounds like a pretty cut-and-dried case of trespassing. -k

But I bet you were in favor of nationalized daycare when that was in the Red Book, weren't ya? -k

Boo! Charities rip off Revenue Canada! Down with charities! Harper's image is what it is. Everybody knows him by now, and everybody has an opinion. For me, Harper reminds me of men I know, men like my dad. A little tubby, not much of a fashion sense, not a very good haircut, not very eloquent, not very good at expressing emotion... but none of those things reflect their merits. If I judged the quality of a man by the quality of his haircut, my dad and my prime minister would both be sorely lacking. I know my dad isn't, and I don't believe my prime minister is either. I liked this because it reminded me of times when my dad did something completely unexpected that was fun and charming and reminded me that there's more to him than I usually saw. For people who don't like Harper, none of that applies. For people who don't like Harper, I'm sure this was just a calculated ploy to make the kitten-killing fag-hating Evangelical fundamentalist psycho seem like a nice guy, and they're not buying any of it. For better or worse, Harper's image is what it is. And if it were, so what? The song stands on its own merit, regardless of whatever in-jokes or bong-inspired experiences may have inspired it. -k

Well, they're all targeted at "segments" of the population, but things like the child tax credit and the sports tax credit are available to anybody who can procreate, while Dhalla's plan is of benefit exclusively to immigrants who want to bring their parents to live in Canada. I think, given all the worry about falling birth-rates, aging demographics, and so forth, that everybody should be agreeable that making it easier for people to afford to raise children is a praiseworthy objective. Conversely, I'm still stumped as to how bringing in old-people from abroad is of benefit to Canada as a nation. Well, you compared it to tax-credits designed to encourage "positive" behavior, such as sports and transit passes and child tax credits... so I figured there must be some "positive" to this that I must be missing. (You're just pleading for me to make this about race, aren't you.) You seem to be telling me that Dhalla's constituents are calling for recently arrived old-people to get OAS benefits. I believe that few Canadians would actually support such a plan, so I'm curious as to what "constituents" she's speaking up for. When most MPs talk about their constituents, they're referring to people who live within the geographic boundaries of their riding, the people who elected them. I suspect that the constituents in most ridings would kick the ass of an MP who presented such a proposal to the House, so I'm left with two possibilities. Either Dhalla lives in a riding with truly unusual demographics. Or, Dhalla considers her constituents to be not the people who live within the bounds of her geographic riding, but the immigrant community as a whole. So, I'm just curious, so that I can understand why a Member of Parliament feels that advocating for such a turd is a political winner for her. -k

There is a very good biological reason why women steer clear of dangerous animals, Dobbins. -k

I approve of the remarks of Wild Bill, and feel disdain for the remarks of Bach and Mr Canada. While I would shed no tears for the suicides of people such as Clifford Olson, Paul Bernardo, Robert Pickton, I see no reason to celebrate the death of someone who has not been convicted of anything. As to the question of whether the accusers/alleged victims will feel traumatized by his death... If their accusations were justified, they did nothing wrong and his blood is not on their hands. If their accusations were false, they deserve to feel guilty. Whichever the case, I am sure they are being cared for by a battalion of counsellors. -k

Giant Woman Learns Being Different Is Okay. Insectosaurus!! -k { }

I think the criticism in the professor's letter was directed only at Muslims who oppose free speech. -k

I don't think the comparison is accurate. We offer tax credits to encourage activities we think are of benefit to society. Getting more kids to participate in sports is supposed to encourage physical fitness (and lower healthcare costs in the future.) Encouraging people to buy transit passes instead of driving is supposed to help the environment. (etc) What benefit is providing Old Age Security benefits to people who just got off the boat supposed to provide to our country? Where's the pay-off? Help me figure out how in 10 years I'd think "hey, it's a good thing we started giving newcomers old-age security benefits". As far as I can tell, the only benefits are to their immediate families. What constituency is Dhalla actually representing here? She's proposing something where only some families of immigrants will benefit and everybody else takes it up the ass. Is her "constituency" supposed to be the people within the boundaries of her riding? Or is she representing some other constituency which is defined in terms other than the traditional "MP-constituent" relationship? -k

I think you're saying that people who are emotionally invested in a situation will often find ways to rationalize their position. And I agree. I agree that the age of consent is a kind of arbitrary line, but 13 is awfully young for me to be willing to be forgiving on that count. There are lots of 16 year olds who are more physically and emotionally mature than lots of 18 year olds. But I don't think you can say that about any 13 year olds. Thirteen is just too far from adulthood. -k

And a great amount of bread as well, from what I hear. Multitudes were fed. -k

Ok, this is a blatant ploy to use my tax dollars to buy the votes of that subset of Canadians who wish to bring their elderly parents to Canada and get them financial benefits sooner. Better? -k

Griz... is something wrong? Your post doesn't make any mention of First Nations at all. Are you ... feeling ok? I was hoping to hear how Rio beating out Madrid and Chicago is unfair to aboriginal Canadians. I feel kind of cheated here. -k

It sounds like a blatant ploy to buy immigrant votes with my tax dollars. That the dollar amounts will arguably be quite small doesn't detract from the appalling cynicism of the idea. But if you complain, you could wind up being called a rayyyyycist. -k

Link to a story mentioning the quote: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.htm...1#ixzz0SvkM4DR0 Honestly, it sounds like the guy has always seen himself as the victim. Like there's nothing wrong with what he did, it's just that people in America have such puritanical attitudes about drugging and raping 13 year olds. People want to make him pay because they're mad that they didn't get to do it too. Out of curiousity, can anybody furnish a quote from him where he's ever acknowledged that what he did was wrong? -k

Personally, I'm tired of all the hype about H1N1. What I have read is that it's no more dangerous than a typical seasonal flu. The flu kills thousands of people every year, but only the most frail people are in any danger. For the vast majority of people it is little more than a minor inconvenience. Why is H1N1 so much more worrying to people? I never bother getting a flu shot, and I won't bother getting an H1N1 shot either. I think the news coverage of this story ("holy crap, it's a global pandemic!") has given people a distorted view and caused people to lose perspective of the actual risks, which for most people are minuscule at most. -k

er, I think you mean that urban Vancouver is an NDP stronghold. I am personally kind of at a loss as to how things seem to be working out so badly for Ignatieff. He's the first Liberal leader in my lifetime that I've actually been willing to consider supporting. I mean, I was interested in Paul Martin for a while, until he actually became Prime Minister and we all had to witness what a spineless failure he turned out to be, failing to live up to any of the noble talk that I found appealing in the first place. Now along comes Ignatieff with what seems like a solid centrist alternative for Canadians who don't want radical goofy governmentalism but aren't sold on Harper. To me it seems like the sort of thing mainstream Canadian voters have been wanting for a long time. And yet it doesn't seem to be working at all. I'm kind of perplexed. Just read this editorial this morning, claiming that Chretien is still stirring up trouble behind the scenes, trying to boost the careers of his former allies, at the cost of undermining Ignatieff's authority. Perhaps this is part of what's going wrong for Ignatieff. -k

And trying to shift the topic to being socialism is where your argument "jumps the shark" for me. To me, this is about that gut-level response, the tightness in your chest when you're at that moment where your brain wants you to say "Stop it, this has gone to far!" but your herd instinct wants you to say "Hit him again, Jimmy!" That is a very in-the-moment thing. It's palpable at the moment when you're in danger of being ostracized from the herd. But it's not present when a group of adults are sitting around the table trying to create social policy. Except for the anxiety someone might feel about advocating for an idea that's unpopular within that group, or opposing an idea that's popular. But that would be equally applicable to any group of people trying to create social policy, regardless of their political leaning. People strive to avoid that feeling of panic when you're about to be singled out from the herd, the instinct to avoid that feeling... and people crave the corollary, that feeling of empowerment (as you put it) when your status in the herd rises. I think that's very relevant to bullying, and to people trying to boost their status among their peers by putting down others or beating down others. And maybe even to the whole "people of my ancestry are really awesome!" thing that started this thread. -k

So you're illustrating Canadian colonialism by pointing out how recent Canadian independence from Britain really is? ok then. -k