pinko

Saipan is a confused Czech. He has a liking for oppression.

A number of provinces still strenuously opposed this guarantee. While there was opposition to the whole concept of a Charter of Rights among the provinces, the actual content of the proposed Charter was of less concern, with the exception of the property rights guarantee. Accordingly, this guarantee was omitted from the Charter contained in the proposed resolution of October 1980. In the absence of a consensus on this issue, the government was prepared to defer it to the "second round" of constitutional reform, when it could be incorporated pursuant to the amending formula in the new Constitution. http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/bp268-e.htm

As I recall the provincial premiers and there officials were involved in the discussions that culminated in the repatriation of the constitution and the eventual promulgation of the Charter. To subscribe such power to Ed Broadbent is, to say the least, a stretch. As a property owner I am certainly aware of the parameters of property ownership as it relates to land and housing. I doubt there is much difference between the mechanism here and in many of the states in the USA.

Saipan I would like you to identify the large firm you allege Stephen Harper was employed at.

You seem to be looking for some attention so I will oblige you but before I do I am wondering if you can explain to me the relevance of your statement to the topic at hand. I take it the link you have provided is intended to highlight the plight of children in distress.

I watch both of these gentlemen from time to time and suggest to you neither of them come close to Caribou Barbie when it comes to inflamatory rhetoric.

"Sometimes, though, in domestic violence cases the victim/accuser withdraws the charges, making it more difficult for charges/prosecution/sentencing to take place." Yes and that is regrettable as in such circumstances the abuse usually continues and may lead to death and serious injury. In urban areas there are shelters available to women and their children and as well resource centres to help these distressed individuals in transition. My wife worked as a flight nurse for several years and witnessed first hand the conditions in the more remote areas of the province. It was not a pretty picture she painted.

Manitoba is a perfect exmaple. Doer was(is) something other than social democratic in his views.

You have put forward a well thought out position and it is difficult for me to quibble with much of what you have said. I am wondering if you can provide an example or two of those individuals choosing advocacy as it is unclear to me what you are intending to convey in that regard. Although I realize advocacy can have several meanings advocacy to me is the utilization of legal counsel once a person is brought up on a charge or charges. A second point I would like to explore is the cost factor. If we use the recent incident in Arizona as an example it appears budget cuts may have resulted in a decline of resources available to address those with mental health needs. I would like to make it clear that I am not proposing that anyone be apprehended on a whim although if violent conduct resulting in injury occurs I support the idea of confinement if the circumstances at the scene dictate such action. In the city I live in there is a zero tolernace guideline in domestic violence cases. In my view no one should turn a blind eye to violent conduct.

Good morning. I am not proposing that. What I am suggesting is that the use of violence by an individual must require a consequence and that, depending upon the circumstances, an institutional setting is the most appropriate place for such a person.

Despite the disproportionate number of mentally ill people among the homeless population, the growth in homelessness is not attributable to the release of seriously mentally ill people from institutions. Most patients were released from mental hospitals in the 1950s and 1960s, yet vast increases in homelessness did not occur until the 1980s, when incomes and housing options for those living on the margins began to diminish rapidly (see "Why Are People Homeless?," NCH Fact Sheet #1). However, a new wave of deinstitutionalization and the denial of services or premature and unplanned discharge brought about by managed care arrangements may be contributing to the continued presence of seriously mentally ill persons within the homeless population. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/facts/Mental_Illness.pdf

Do you have any statistics and/or reports to backup your assertion?

People were removed from institutions and placed in the community with the promise of adequate resources for these individuals. Unfortunately many of these people fell through the cracks and either live on the streets or in some wretched bug infested building.

Yes I do subject of course to the rule of law.

I take it you are referring to the current circumstances federally. History shows the NDP(CCF) has played a signifigant role in shaping public policy here in Canada. While I certainly have some issues with the position my local MP (Jim Maloway) took on the long gun registry I do, on balance, normally support the NDP federally. Given the stance Jim Maloway took on the long gun registry my vote will go to the Green Party in the next election. The current leader of the Liberals is too conservative for my liking and as such I wouldn't even consider a vote for that party until it demonstrates that it presents policy consistent with my social democratic views. I have never voted conservative and it is highly unlikely I ever would vote for such a party.

Those who are unable to manage anger and resort to violence ought to be confined to an institution and/or medicated.

I tend to agree with you although in the case of the junior players they haven't attained the status of paid mecenaries. Monetary considerations aside I really enjoy Olympic hockey as it is fast and exciting in addition to highlighting the skills of these elite athletes.

Loughner is hardly unique By: Allan Levine / Now & Then Posted: 01/15/2011 1:00 AM We may never know for certain what prompted Jared Lee Loughner, a troubled 22-year-old college student, to open fire in Tucson, Ariz., on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her supporters, killing six innocent people and seriously injuring Giffords and many more. Easy access to guns facilitated the shooting. This is particularly the case in Arizona, where as one pundit put it, "someone can buy a Glock semi-automatic as if it were a quart of milk." But a profound fear and hatred for government also appears to have provoked Loughner into acting as he did. The consequences of the events in Tucson are devastating. Yet in a sad commentary on American history, Loughner is hardly unique. From almost the first day the United States was established, there have been far too many Loughners, individuals who have defined "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" according to their own distorted values. Then, instead of protesting peacefully or using their vote to effect positive change, they have opted for violence. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/loughner-is-hardly-unique-113752424.html

I agree that allegiance to one's country is fine provided that doesn't foreclose criticism of government policy from time to time. The Blue Jays had a pretty good team in the 90s. You might notice expressions of patriotism at hockey games especially when Canada is playing the Russians or Americans. The Russians beat us recently in the junior tournament.

My son took his fellowship specialty in Texas and while he lived there I visited him on several occasions. While it certainly had some interesting cultural features I found all the people I came in contact with down there to be quite friendly. When we took in a Texas Rangers baseball game I did notice an element of patriotism expressed at the outset of the ball game. Each society expresses its patriotism in a different way with some more or less attached to such a commitment.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/11/armed_but_not_necessarily_dangerous As the 20th century neared its end, the anti-government skeptics infused their theories with a millennial sense of urgency. "The wolf," said popular conspiracy writer Milton William Cooper, "is at the door." The X-Files' many devoted fans agreed with one character's assessment of the federal government in the show's fifth season: "No matter how paranoid you are," she explained, "you're not paranoid enough." No one could say that about Jared Loughner, cluttered with a toxic jumble of left- and right-wing conspiracy theories, his sources ranging from Marx to Hitler to heavy metal. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/11/a_very_american_conspiracy_theory?page=0,1

There will also be provincial elections in Manitoba and Quebec in the fall as well as B.C. I believe.

Yes and we all remember what happened to the Conservatives when people finally figured things out.

From what I have read Harper's affilation to the liberals in his earlier life was very tenuous. You do realize that Harper and Nicholls were both involved with the National Citizens Coalition. There is nothing at all liberal about Harper, a man with an obsession for secrecy and control and a disdain for parliamentary democracy.

I am dreaming of a time when the Harperites are soundly defeated much like Mike Harris and his bunch of neoclowns.