G.P. Lehmann

No one is proposing that the foundation of the monarchy be removed. Your right that it is the underlying basis for our institutions and jurisdictional divisions. However when the topic of removing the monarchy from Canada is discussed, as indicated in the preamble to this thread, we are referring to the symbolic aspects such as its influence on our head of state, the armed forces and so on.

As much as I support the notion of Canada as a Republic, most Canadians do not feel that this is a pressing matter and would rather see their elected officials focus on more prominent issues.The monarchy is purely symbolic and in no way affects the quality of life for Canadian citizens. Once all our other problems are solved we can address this matter.....

Nothing disturbs me more than the thought of Dalton Mcguinty being premier for another 4 years. Tim Hudak is not going to be the man to replace Mcguinty. The Conservatives need to present a better candidate and not just bank on voters distaste for Mcguinty to win them this election. Hudak has to much Harris stink on him; he should have been replaced by now.

Canada has typically been very socialist and the concept of fiscal restraint would indeed produce a downsizing of some social programs to an extent;however, one can see a federal deficit and attempts to alter CPP as forshadowing a "downsizing" movement. I think its just a matter of time before something like this gains momentum.

Do you feel that there would be enough support for a party based on fiscal conservatism in Canada? ala. The Tea Party?.... obviously Canadianized with less right wing rhetoric but I think something like this could have legs north of the border.

Harper will do anything it takes to destroy the Liberals! Even if that means being a viable alternative!

At least he gets results

I comment on the 17th, they print it on the 18th. Well played National Post, well played.

My point is, although University's are supposed to be a haven for debate and democracy they are becoming more and more isolated in what ideas they wish to present. The Ann Coulter speach was organized by a student and the university did everything in its power to deter her from coming. I don't consider myself a conservative by any means but even a balanced or moderate approach is difficult to find. My concern is how impressionable these kids coming out of High School are; they revere the profs and accept everything they are told, so one would hope that an impartial presentation of the facts would be priority. Although one could argue its not the professors fault so many students are incapable of forming their own opinions, and one could point to a number of reason for this. All I'm saying is, unreasonable protests like this are a product of the biased political environment of University's

One can easily see this is a reoccurring theme in post secondary institutions. As a present student I am inundated with far left views on a daily basis. The professors don't try to hide their political views and the students refuse to challenge them out of fear of retribution or possibly respect, thinking these academics are far too worldly to be questioned. Unfortunately some students mindlessly subscribe to the far left propaganda they are shown and this is the product; an attempt to silence all those who disagree with them.

This is a good concept that should be explored. Scholarships awarded to fill a need this country has, with a term of service included to prevent a dine and dash. Frankly this helps both Canada and those who receive the scholarship. I have had this experience myself. I worked for a couple years before going back to university and the student loans given to me were inadequate, forcing me to work during my schooling. This prompted an endless circle of me keeping up with school while working and receiving inadequate loans. whereas if I was fiscally irresponsible spending all the money I made, the government would have rewarded me with bursurys! The whole system for OSAP is flawed.

Your arguments contain contradictions. No they didn't. And they seemed to be more concerned with my financial stability, strangely enough. Sorry. According to this, its not the color of their skin, but actually the fact they are living on a reserve that prevents them from obtaining a mortgage. Same rules would apply to a fair skinned person living on the reserve. As a previous poster mentioned, if one was to invest off the reserve and display adequate financial stability, they would be privy to the glory of housing debt. . Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. Anyone can make up vague stories to support their claims. I fully support equal treatment. Those who are most qualified for the position should be the one to get it. Eliminate nepotism, eliminate untouchable seniority. Unfortunately it is not equal when government positions are closed to a certain racial group and favor others, as is the present situation and what you apparently support. The most important thing is not to mirror public racial population trends in the government, but to give those most suited to the job.....THE JOB. If this means that the workforce will be dominated by Asians or Indians; who cares? As long as the individual selected is the BEST. People like yourself are so preoccupied with accurate racial representation you are creating MORE racial tension and shirking the real problem.

Those are some great privileges, I was sure lower interest rates on mortgages would be based on race. They must have missed that one.

I support fairness through an apolitical consultant.

I cant believe I have been so blind as to not see this invisible privilege that cant be circumscribed or defined. Did you grow up in a white affluent neighborhood receiving racial discounts on products and services? Now you assume all others have had your privilege and your guilt has driven you on a moral quest to make those aware that they are being racist without even knowing? if so, you have a perverted view of reality my friend. But i can play your game. Lets pretend for a moment that there is invisible white privilege because of their majority in Canada (unevenly distributed of course). Would you then concede that in China there is an Asian privilege and in Iran there is an Arab privilege?

wow, you hold some deep seeded racism towards whites. You forget that there are a large number of whites living in poverty, where is their privilege? What about affirmative action? That must be another tool of the white man to keep minorities down? you see racism where it doesn't exist, and by doing so perpetuate it.

Is there any doubt Quebec will get one?

@ charter.rights 1. Your argument is based on a double standard. You say racism exists solely against non-whites; when one uses derogative, race related terms against whites it magically become "pejorative". You imply whites are the only ones capable of racism and have the monopoly on its distribution. 2. Regardless of ones race if they are using race based terminology its still a racist term. 3. These anti-racism groups do nothing but increase ration tension by telling us everyone is being racist all the time; ESPECIALLY by singling out one race as the problem. So in fact these people are major racists.

I was inferring the lack of state imposed authority on the reserves. There is a lack of structure which facilitates a reliance on an underground economy. This serves only to erode the social fabric of the first nations.

I was inferring the lack of state imposed authority on the reserves. There is a lack of structure which facilitates a reliance on an underground economy. This serves only to erode the social fabric of the first nations.

One might be able to make the argument that native self governance, that operates without adequate government intervention, has not been as successful as originally hoped.

Wasn't it the Liberals that originally entered into the F-35 program?

People only have to vote once every four years and the voter turnout is ~60%; It would bottom out if citizens were expected to vote on every piece of legislation. This would put even more power in the hands of lobbyists and special interest groups. Furthermore this would exemplify what is what is primarily wrong with democracy; having the uneducated public making public policy based on opinion rather than fact.

If plastic bags are banned, how are the company's that charge for bags under the false pretense of the environment, going to make up that loss of revenue?

If we are all supposed to be grounded with common beliefs and values, I wonder what Mr. Ignatieff would say in regards to Canada's divisive multiculturalism policy.