Scotty

American politics are of interest to Canadians, else this particular forum would not exist on this particular web site. If you're suggesting Canadians shouldn't be discussing American politics then maybe you should delete your account and get lost, because the counterpart would be you have no valid reason to be discussing anything about Canadian politics on a Canadian web site. So leave. I guarantee you nobody here will miss you.

Television likes blood and violence. There's lots of it in and around Israel. Of course, there's lots of it in a lot of places. But Israel is unique in that it is an almost perfectly save environment from which to observe and report such things, with a government which is not going to take revenge on journalists for reporting nasty things about it, even if untrue. Also, it is a modern city with 5 star restaurants and hotels, and all the comforts of home. Would it have been a great story to get video of the Russians bombarding Chechnian cities? Sure. But it would also have been extremely dangerous. The Russians were known to be targeting journalists. Even if you tried to report on it from Moscow, far from the fighting, you would likely have had your visa cancelled and been deported. Likewise reporting on riots in China would have gotten you deported. Trying to report on wars and violence in other parts of the world lands you in hot, bug-ridden hell-holes with no modern conveniences and the possibility of being kidnapped or killed. Not to mention being arrested by the local government. Israel is almost perfect for the media, and so it gets on TV ALL THE TIME. And because it's on TV ALL THE TIME there is immense interest in what is going on, much like other popular television shows...

Was reading a column by Robert Fulford the other day which basically dismisses all the current Republican presidential contenders as unfit for office, and has little good to say about Obama either. So I was wondering, discarding all the rules about party politics and primaries, who people think would, if plucked from whatever they're doing now, make the best US President, and why. I'm guessing it would either be some other politician, or someone high in the business world, a person of great accomplishment. But that's probably because those are the only people we know. Maybe the dentist who lives next door would make a great leader, but it's unlikely he'll ever be given that opportunity.

Modern education producing top notch results! Our teachers deserve every penny we pay them! In total, 42 per cent of Canadians are semi-illiterate. The proportion is even worse for those in middle age. And even when new immigrants are excluded, the numbers remains pretty much the same. Illiteracy Canada's Shame

Most expensive teachers in the world and our colleges still have to put incoming freshman through rudimentary grammar courses.

Maybe if there was a conservative alternative.... Certainly Hudak didn't offer one. So desperately afraid of incurring the wrath of labour or the Left that he basically told people he would continue all McGuinty's policies, but somehow or other do them better.

The PCs had a campaign?

Palestinian land is conquered land. Maybe if the Arabs would sign a peace treaty and actually agree to not attack Israel the Israelis would pull back. You can talk all you like about 'international law' but the problem is there is no cop to call on when someone violates it. That means, when Israel was attacked again and again it was up to them to defend themselves. And it still is. If it feels the need for a larger perimeter to defend itself, if it feels that Palestine as an independent entity would pose an even larger security risk, well, who can really judge that from thousands of miles away? If I was in charge of the world and could enforce my orders I'd order all the Jews off that land, then I'd give the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt and say that's that.

Certainly higher here. Especially if you include everyone getting a pension, a GST rebate, or a child benefit. There was a guy talking about why McGuinty wasn't hurt more by his raising taxes on the TV the other day pointing out that 43% of the population of Ontario pays no income tax anyway, so why would they be annoyed with him?

The problem is the interrelationship of banking and financial institutions. I don't mind if a few banks go under. And the Greeks deserve to go bankrupt. What I don't want is banks all over Europe collapsing, runs on other banks, stock markets crashing and the collapse of the financial system.

I've just discovered a quick way of skimming through lots of posts. You simply ignore any which have those stupid smileys in them! It works great, since the posts with the smileys tend to be largely substance free and full of insults anyway.

That's because we feel its important that 'them' become 'us'. Their old culture should have been left behind in the miserable hole that they came from. They came here to partake in all that is Canada, and that means abandoning their primitive, failed cultures. We should be encouraging them to do so, not aiding them in retaining them.

Are you kidding? I mean, is this some sort of dry, stylized humour which attempts to mimic the brainless far left social engineering crowd? Here's a news flash. When you're at work, you're paid to WORK. You can go 'find yourself' on your own time. And enforcing a monoculture is a necessary thing given the wild variations of human behaviour and the close interaction needed in many work places. Anything else leads to constant fighting and arguing which disrupts that WORK you're supposed to be doing.

That pretty much lets out anyone who believes in innovation and new ideas, and leaves behind dull, bureaucratic drudges who just plod along, doing the same thing over and over....

And they see it everywhere except in their own ranks.

Its certainly mainstream in that the media, academia and cultural elites all support it. I rarely meet anyone else who does, particularly on immigration. Even immigrants think our system is stupid. After all, they're here now, and like the rest of us don't like so many undesirables flooding in.

Remember when Ontario's "Big Blue Machine" was filled with brilliant political strategists who knew everything there was to know about how to win elections? Well, they're all gone. For the second straight election the Tories have introduced a candidate without a shred of charisma, with no vision, and with a policy platform built by cowards who are terrified at the thought of plain speaking. Vote for Hudak and... and... and he's not McGuinty, is basically the entirety of their platform. Why? Because there are hard choices to be made and they don't want to say so. Because pointing out how McGuinty has ridden Ontario's economy down into the ground would require explanations of how they intend to resurrect it, and again, they don't want to make those explanations. As a start, there needs to be a total freeze on any hiring or pay increases for Ontario's overpaid, bloated public services. Of course, the unions would instantly react in a predictable fashion, screaming bloody murder. The teachers would howl about how Hudak is trying to destroy education. The nurses and health care workers would scream about how he's trying to destroy the health care system (neither will explain how not giving them even higher wages will destroy anything). Hudak and his 'brain trust' are terrified of facing that, so they're swerving and dodging and shuffling and not really saying much about it. Just like they're not saying much about electricity for fear of energizing the left. To listen to Hudak, a Tory government would do everything the Liberals are doing, only would do it better for less money. And they think they're going to get elected with that? Of course, McGuinty is lying through his teeth, but that's par for the course for him. Nobody even particularly thinks badly of him for it any more. They just assume he's lying, no matter what he says and shrug it off.

Because he's smart enough to realize that it was bad PR to whip some girl for driving?

I'm sorry, but when did anyone claim the Conservatives, once in power, would not use all the parliamentary tools at their disposal? I think the claim was they wouldn't be as corrupt and self-serving as the Liberals, and so far they've accomplished that much.

The political argument took place in the sixties, which was when the prison and justice system were liberalized -- and when crime skyrocketed. Stats Canada says that it is. Do you have some evidence they're wrong? An interesting cite, but I wonder just what argument you think you're making. It seems to be that you and the other Lefties screaming about how Harper's crackdown on crime was going to send masses of people into jails and cost us billions of dollars was completely and absolutely wrong. Because that's what your cite says. You don't think prisons should ever be repaired or upgraded? And crime may or may not be falling. But there's still too damned much of it.

Well, to begin with, the word Canada is on the business cards, along with the coat of arms. It's the 'wordmark logo" which is not on them. I'd have to speculate as to why he wanted nicer business cards, but I think it's fair to say that the people he gives his cards to are probably foreign dignitaries: ambassadors, foreign ministers and even prime ministers and the like. I'd say it's also not much of a stretch to suggest he himself has been given business cards from his contemporaries, ie, ambassadors, foreign ministers, etc., and that he's found many of those cards are quite a big more impressive than the uninspired ones every low level bureaucrat in the public service has. So he wanted a card which was impressive looking, rather than some cheap knock-off like all the public servants. I can't say I find that worth making a big deal about.

I am capable of good judgement?

I'm all for helping them. I'd arrest every one of them and confine them to an institution until their addiction can be cured. That's help. It's more expensive and more complicated and more difficult, but I'd be willing to pay the money. I need a 'right' to write things which you don't like? How are you gonna stop me?

You're wrong. The decision was not about provincial rights. In fact, in the area where provincial rights to ignore federal laws was concerned the court found against the province. Supported by the B.C. attorney-general, the coalition was successful in persuading the B.C. Supreme Court and the British Columbia Court of Appeal to find Insite immune from the criminal prosecution under the doctrine of “inter-jurisdictional immunity.” But the Supreme Court overruled the lower courts on the finding of immunity, saying Ottawa has a clear right to administer the criminal law where it sees fit, provided it does not violate an individual’s Charter rights. Instead, in a rather odd finding: In its ruling, the Supreme Court found the decision in 2008 not to renew the site's exemption from drug laws violated the rights of Insite users under Section 7 of the charter, which protects the "life, liberty and security" of Canadians. In effect, it found the addicts had a right to use illegal drugs without fear of being arrested, which is frankly weird.

If they don't want it then let them die.