PocketRocket

That's all we need, another 16 or 17 fat cats feeding at the next-to-highest-paying portion of the public trough.

Well you wouldn't expect him to say that his plan is NOT working, would you??? Can you cite an independant source that can verify this claim???

Properly used punctuaion marks are a wonderful thing

Pocketrocket, you do your math the same as your fearless leader, Harper. The savings in your example would be $3.00 and not $30.00 but that's okay. Harper isn't very good with a calculator either. Actually, I didn't use a calculator as it is not hard to figure out that 3% of $1,000.00 is $30.00. Second, Harper is a far cry from being my "fearless leader". Have another look at what I actually said in my post, and perhaps some of my other posts on Harper, and you will find that I have actually spoken out against Harper the vast majority of the time. But when you come to a forum site ONLY at election time to pump your own agenda, and further, read only the posts which apply to said agenda, then I guess you don't really pick up on these things. It seems your math skills are second only to your ability to comprehend what you read. I didn't hear him talk about GST. And as far as the $2B worth of icebreakers for $3B, well, that's better than a $2M gun registry that has, so far, cost over $2B, and has not taken a single, illegal, unregistered firearm out of the hands of a criminal. But hey, it plays well to southern Ontarians, and makes them feel a bit more snug and secure in their 24-storey apartment buildings.

Agreed.

Good question. Some do, some don't. There's no real, nation wide consensus. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So, America1, from the previous posts, I'm sure you can see what I mean

Like this is anything different than what we have seen before, and will see repeatedly again??? Liberal pundits will continue to trash Conservatives, and Conservative pundits will trash Liberals, every time there is an election to be held, and, for that matter, at most times between elections. It's what they are paid to do. It's their stock in trade. It's their job. Their livelyhood. Therefore should be taken with a grain of salt. Can it be any clearer than that???

Short and sweet....... Merry Christmas to All (Even George Bush )

Perhaps, but it should be somewhat tempered by the knowledge thereof. Actually, I don't believe they had a policy. The word "policy" may not have even been invented at that point. There was also a problem with the fact that there were no real means of communication other than mail at that point. When you consider that the literacy rate back then was miniscule, and there was no written language among natives, it makes it kind of hard to make a policy common to all tribes/nations, let alone implement it. But that's all water under the bridge now. All the king's horses and all the king's men..... I have no problem with this line of thought. my objection is to those who would advocate a complete end to immigration. Well, we agree to disagree on that point. But we DO agree on screening. Well, next time I wake up in the morning and discover I'm black, I'll get right on it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10588528/ This actually makes sense to me. I mean privacy is one thing, but if you can literally drive by someone's house (hall/garage/office block/whatever) and point a doohickey at the building, and pick up some sort of radiation emission which is definitively linked to some sort of nuclear device, then as far as I'm concerned privacy concerns are right out the window. While I largely disagree with the Patriot Act, this is a completely different ball of wax. No way that this can be used under false pretenses to put away some kid who's growing a couple pot plants in his attic. This would address one issue, and one only; possible nukes.

Now BB, how can you NOT love Mulroney when you live in Canada. The need for good snow-removal is absolutely critical in this country. And with that snow-plow that Mulroney calls a chin.....well, if he lived in Toronto, they never would have had to call in the army to help clear out that snowfall a few years back.

I thought Loney was from Sault Ste Marie. I live in Sudbury (3 hrs from Sault), and stuff about him and his family has been all over the regional news here.

Wow, a snide Nazi reference, making up the totality of your first post. I wonder what sort of contribution you're going to make to the forum. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bite me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well BHS, there's your answer. Obviously a well-informed and literate contributer Equally obviously in favor of sexual contact between strangers He/she would do well in that thread about the legalized gang-banging

As much as I may agree with your opinions of Bush, I tend to disagree with your apprisal of how history will view Bush. (Again with apologies to America1) It seems that the USA loves a winner as a president. It also seems that America loves a president who will take them through a successful military campaign. Bush's spin-people have successfully de-fused every attack against his policies and actions in the public eye. The high number of people who are still rabidly faithful to Bush are testament to this, and make it extremely likely that Bush will be hailed as a great president who led the country through one of it's biggest crisis ever, and took the country into a necessary war, which, of course, the USA won in a glorious campaign which brought democracy to an oppressed people. Not that I agree with any of it, but I can see it all very easily unfolding that way.

You must be kidding. Al Queda is not a country - it has more in common with the mafia. A country cannot goto "war" against terrorists anymore than it can goto "war" against crime or drugs. (With apologies to America1) It must be an American thing After all, they had a "war on drugs" just a few years back Never heard who won that war, but there's still plenty of drugs around. Maybe there's something in the American collective psyche that just likes the word "war". Maybe all those leftist protestors down there are having a "war on war" Well of course it is. That's what politicians do; turn every possible thing to their advantage, use every possible thing as propaganda for their party.

I'm just not sure if I agree with the term "war". There is definitely some sort of conflict here, but is "war" the right word for it??? I'm not so sure. But it certainly makes great political currency for Bush. To tell the truth, I don't think your troops are doing such a bad job at it. Tough to police a country when there's a considerable segment of the population that simply don't want you there. I hope you mean nobody aside from myself, for ah is perfeck in evry whey That's okay, we seem to have gotten that in hand now.

Good question. Some do, some don't. There's no real, nation wide consensus. See answer above. No consensus. That's a good question, too. When you consider, however, that a lot of our military personel come from Quebec, it's tough to say how they would react if they were involved. Personally, I don't like thinking about it, but unfortunately it's rubbed in our national face too often to ignore it. No apology necessary, it's a good question, and shows genuine concern from one of our southern neighbours. Well, for honest opinions, come to "Honest PocketRocket's" for deals, deals, deals

Back for more??? Oh good. I did indeed!!! You are to be commended on having a good eye. Avoiding social uprising and preserving the country is part of any government's business. However, what makes you think the ideologies of the RIGHT are any more valid than those of the LEFT, or the CENTER??? Just because you personally don't agree with something does not make it right or wrong. Oh, I'd say for a really long time. The RIGHT gets riled at the drop of a hat. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. Maybe you'd prefer if our schools still taught kids that the Earth is flat, or that the Sun revolves around the Earth. *YAWN* Wake me when this rerun is over. Simple solution; buy an OLD car and an OLD home. "Valueless, unmoralistic, corrupt". Those words fall easily from your lips. You would rather, I assume, have a government that outlines in strict detail what is moral in the bedroom of its citizenss??? Further, it seems you would have the government pass laws about what a couple is allowed to do in that same bedroom. Thank God that we keep Church and State separate, otherwise people like you would be telling people like me that I'm not allowed to perform oral sex, even on my own wife, in my own house. Maybe you'd be more comfortable living among the Amish, then you wouldn't have to worry about hearing all these disturbing "immoral" trends, because you wouldn't have a radio or TV.

PR, this is hardly a relevant issue. I disagree. I believe it is supremely relevant. We are a nation founded on people looking for a better life. If you'll notice, what I specified was "against ANY immigration". As in "any and all". We do, perhaps, need a better screening process, but immigration has been the lifeblood of Canada since its inception. So let's turn it around. When our ancestors immigrated, it was because it was to their benefit to do so. But was it to Canada's benefit??? I suppose you'd have to ask the native population, and you just KNOW what their answer would be. Same stands now, But with proper screening, immigration SHOULD be to Canada's benefit. Sorry, but now I have to say that this analogy is not relevant for a very simple reason; a person may outgrow his/her bad habits, just as a child outgrows sucking his/her thumb.

Point well made. And thanks for the compliment.

Nothing wrong with taking pride in your own country. Unfortunately there are those on both sides of the border who look down upon those on the opposite side. As an aside, a few years back I was touring with a band in the USA. The vast majority of the people I met were incredibly hospitable, and many were interested in Canada. There was, however, one jerk we met. He was working at a gas station. When I got out of the truck, wearing a sweatshirt with a maple leaf on the front, the guy asked if I was from Canada. Of course I said yes. He came back with a comment about "Why the hell would anyone want to live in (sneeringly) Canada???" We tried to brush off the comment, but when he continued on about how Canadians are all wimps, and the USA has never lost a war, I asked if he had ever heard of the war of 1812. The reference was totally lost on him, and he continued being a jerk, so as a parting shot, after he had filled our gastank, I told him that one of our customs in Canada was to give guys that pump gas a $5.00 tip, and I pulled out a $5.00 bill and held it out to him. He smiled broadly and said "Hey that's cool, man", and reached for the money. Then I told him since Canadians are all wimps, that maybe we should start acting more like Americans, and put the $5.00 back in my pocket. He was, needless to say, not happy. But, as I said, he was the exception in a tour that was otherwise filled with some really great people. I like Americans, and I like America, make no mistake about it. However, sometimes I don't like the policies of the American administration, and am always ready to voice my opinion accordingly.

Exactly, it would be like Canadians say you can beat the US in hockey. I couldn't argue b/c it's easily provable (put them on ice and you win 8 out of 10 times). Note: I know canadians do other things well besides play hockey, it's just an example. That's right, we can also piss our names in the snow And we make GREAT bacon. And we're also very polite, sir Can't disagree with this. Well said.

Actually, NEWBIE, America1 did NOT say anything about being "the best" country. I give him great credit for this, because "best" is a highly subjective term, and is a matter of personal opinion and nothing more. But he DID say the USA is a "much more powerful country in every possible way", which is a simple statement of fact with which I have to agree. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I didn't say he did pocket. But most Americans I'd be willing to bet feel this way. It's in their advertising, on their TV shows, and the politician says this all the time. Of course "best" is subjective.That was part of my point. Hence the word crap. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My apologies. I thought I saw an implication in your post.

The man who wrote this was a very poor poet, but since no one told him, how was he to know it???

You're still here trying to save us all from ourselves??? Oh goody (rubs hands together gleefully), more fun...... Just a few hundred years ago believing the Earth was round was deviating from the norm. In fact, to dispute the "well known fact" that the Earth was not only flat, but it was also the center of the universe, was a heretical crime punishable by, well, VERY punishable. Let's just go back to those days. Repeat after me; Religion stands in the way of progress, religion stands in the way of.....oh, sorry, that's been done So does that mean you need to be bi-lingual to go to these orgies??? Does this mean someone would be obliged to perforn cunni-bi-lingus??? Actually, they are not imposing ANYTHING on you or me. They are simply NOT imposing YOUR viewpoint on these consenting adults who are all grown up now, and don't need your help to make their own decisions. What's with this "normal" fetish anyway??? Orgies have existed since time immemorial. As have all sorts of different marriages, beliefs, etc. Your "normal" is the next guy's "perverted". That's just it, they ain't imposing ANYTHING. They are, in fact REFUSING to impose anything, unlike yourself. This is so skewed it's laughable. On the one hand, you say the government should be passing laws against orgies. Yet, in the same breath, you say the government should not be imposing "morality" on the people. ???????!!!!!!!!?????!?!!!!?!????! Do you have any idea what the phrase "self contradictory" means??? Take this statement, and where it says "Liberal Party", you can cut and paste the name of ANY party, and you have the basic premise of every other party.