Robart

I don't know about canada's sex offender list but I have seen american ones on the net and they have kids who fucked their girlfriends on them.

The rule can be applied to all. A 16 year old fucking his 14 year old girlfriend is NOT a sex offender. I wasn't saying a divorced father taking his kid without the mother's permission is a sex offender; just that treating it as needing an amber alert is the same as making a teenager having sex with his girlfriend register as a sex offender. Fuck, do I have to spell everything out!!!!

What is she famous for? I know she's a newspaper writer but I never heard of her name connected to any controversy.

Martin did it when he was finance minister, but you have to admit external factors played a part in Harper's spending. It's a global economy now.

is "instantiated" even a word????

I believe everyone should have access to sex offender lists, but there should be some set criteria that eliminates the poor shit who is on there because he fucked his 14 year old girlfriend when he was 16 and her parents decided to drag his poor ass to court. The same thing happens when an amber alert is issued because a divorced father takes his daughter out of town without the ex-wife's permission. Both instances cheapen the validity of such issues and makes most intelligent observers cringe at the "abuse".

Examples of early canadian literature describe explorers' experiences travelling with native canadians as they track down and kill northern natives (ancestors of modern inuit) just because they didn't like them. These pieces, as I remember from my first year canadian lit classes, were taken from diaries of the first settlers to this country. Those who regard native north americans as peaceful keepers of nature are delusional. They were just as capable as white settlers of being homicidal bastards.

animal rights? you think anybody at the UN is concerned with the rights of animals????

you're saying they want their own "Quebec"?

Someone on another web board found the above material. I think it outlines that the liberals are the ones who set canada straight, not Harper. he just inherited a sound financial situation.

• Paul Martin, the finance minister for the national Liberal Party, unveiled a budget in early 1995 that shocked all the cynics accustomed to smoke-and-mirrors accounting. It reduced program spending by 8.8% over two years (and our politicos quiver over a mere hint of spending freezes). • As part of this radical spending rationalization, federal government employment was reduced by 14%. • Federal grants to the provinces were reduced by 14% as well, but the trade-off was that they were allowed to control how the money was spent. Provincial governments also needed to provide half of all funding (i.e., put skin in the game). • While some taxes were raised (and, according to the authors, these worked against the recovery), spending cuts were 4 ½ times tax hikes. • Canada’s welfare system was dramatically modified. Rather than just providing a blank check to the provinces (which administered the welfare programs), Ottawa incentivized them to put the funds to better use. Benefits were cut for single, employable individuals and aggressive efforts were made to get them back in the work force. • Despite accusations from the far left that the poor would suffer due to these changes, the percentage of welfare recipients fell in just a few short years from 10.7% of the population to 6.8% by 2000. From 1997 to 2007, the percentage of Canadians classified as low-income plunged by over 30%. • The tax structure was dramatically redesigned. Corporate tax rates were cut by nearly a third, taxes on corporate capital were abolished, and personal income and capital gains taxes were reduced. • The General Services Tax (basically a consumption tax or VAT) was instituted to pay for the tax cuts described above. While initially very unpopular, it was a key part of the rehab plan. • The Canada Pension Plan (CPP), the country’s version of Social Security, also underwent major surgery. Instead of payroll taxes gradually rising to 14%, the increases were pulled forward but capped at under 10%. This produced immediate surpluses that were invested in higher-returning corporate securities. (As noted in past EVAs, this is a huge defect with our Social Security system; its many trillions are tied up in low-yielding US government bonds that simply add to our overall national indebtedness.) The CPP today is well-funded and actuarially sound. • As a result of these actions, and many others I’ve left out, the federal budget was balanced within three years. After achieving this remarkable feat, Canada went on to produce 11 straight budget surpluses. This allowed our northern neighbors to reduce their federal debt from 80% of GDP to 45%. Further demonstrating how quickly good policy can turn things around, the provinces enacted similar measures. Most of them also moved to balanced budgets or surpluses within just three years, though in the case of Ontario it took five years. However, that was still one year ahead of schedule (pronounced “shh-edule”, of course).

Not only that, but future coke and heroin dealers won't have the pot business to enter to learn the ropes and gain a stake in the drug business - as in any business, you got to start at the bottom and work your way up, and this was/is an easy bottom to enter