err
-
Posts
884 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by err
-
-
Sorry Cyber... If you read what the real news is, instead of using your imagination to come up with home-made facts, you might have come up with a different answer...... Environmental groups rated the NDP as "greener than the Greens" last election.....Which Party Best for Environment?Uh....The Green Party?
-
Authority figures are and should be subject to scrutiny, and should conduct themselves appropriately for the office they hold. If you find it incorrect that this teacher was penalized for criticising homosexuals, then would you think it equally OK for him to be critical of the lifestyles of Jews or blacks....
Don't look now, but I don't think there's actually such thing as a "black lifestyle" or a "Jewish lifestyle". However, there are indeed significant numbers in the homosexual community that continue to lead a high-risk lifestyle which is known to lead to astronomical drug and disease statistics in the gay community. Is it hateful to acknowledge that there are problems?
How about if one were to talk about stereotypical "black lifestyle", portraying them as theives, unfaithful husbands, etc... That would be an unjust, unfair, and incorrect generalization.... and any teacher that publicly promoted these ideas should suffer some consequences. Is this generalization statistically more or less accurate than the teacher's description of one element of the gay population...???? Is it not as hateful ??
And because a woman can similarly accuse a man of sexual assault, and result in devastating consequences, should we remove the legal system... in case it damages an innocent man's reputation.... ???? See my previous comment... (below)
Was it a "gang problem" ?? If so, what's wrong with discussing it.One can look at Caribbean gang problems in Toronto or aboriginal gang problems on the prairies that have been allowed to fester and grow for years in complete silence because people have been so scared of causing offense that legitimate discussion of social problems has been stifled.I don't believe there's anything wrong with discussing it. However, I would point out that just because I feel that way doesn't mean it's feasible. In theory it would be easy for any offended minority to file a human rights complaint against any such discussion; as I understand it, they don't need to show that the statements are harmful or without merit... all they need to make a complaint, apparently, is to fire off a letter. People can suffer legal expenses and damage to their reputation as a result of complaints, even if the complaints are without merit. But more seriously for society at large, it is quite possible that merely the threat of complaint stifles discussion of relevant issues.
Just because some people abuse a valid and good system, doesn't mean that it should be discarded. For example, if sexual perverts are conducting themselves indecently in public washrooms, the solution isn't to ban public washrooms, but rather to find a better method of policing them.... If human rights commissions are being abused, this should be dealt with to make the system function as intended, rather than shutting it down....Sure. But now instead of dismissing the topic out of hand, you're discussing the topic, and even agreeing there's potential for abuse. It's not something to be dismissed out of hand. It could be quite important. As I said earlier, the possibility that "human rights" commissions could infringe on our constitutional freedoms is something we should be mindful of.
-k
-
Harper being part of Perle's cabal is very scary stuff.
And the CPC wonder why most Canadians don't want to join in the USA's games.... It's anti-Americanism you know... we should be just like "our best friends and trading partners".... If they want to kill tens of thousands of people to secure oil for their friends, well ... aren't we friends... we should support them, no matter what they want to do...
... All under the guise of morals and "promoting democracy".... Ideals just like Harper's..
Well the Bush administration isn't promoting democracy for Saudi Arabia... In fact they have a deal with the Saudi royal family to use military might to prevernt democracy from taking the royal family's power.... (Oil more important than democracy)...
The USA helped overthrow the democratically elected Mossedegh government in Iran in the 1950's when Mossedegh tried to nationalize their oil.... they overthrew a democracy and installed the Shah of Iran in power because he would give them something more important than democracy and morals.... OIL.
The American spelling of Democracy is Hypocrisy. These are the kinds of values that Harper wants us to share... and not dare criticize....
-
The entire Conservative campaign has been designed to blind the public with money so can't see the truth.
Don't look at the fact we are destroying childcare, here's a hundred bucks a month.
Don't look at the fact a GST cut favors the rich, here's 2%.
Don't look at the fact in the past Harper has been very clear about his far right ideals and beliefs, "God Bless Canada"
Don't look at the fact Harper wants to limit rights to minorities, " A free vote in parliament" and "I won't use the notwithstanding clause.....on this issue"
It is the basic morality of the country at stake here. A Harper govt. will ensure that the poor stay poor and the rich get more. Is that what Canada is about?
The left must be terrified. A Harper government is very possible!!!
Given the FACTS presented above, anyone with a brain would be terrified that Harper would get to roll his Trojan Horse onto the hill....
-
I hope that, for all Canadian's sakes, you won't get the chance to....Out of the Pot and into the Fire.... ???I've said this before.
I'll give Harper a chance to govern,if he messes up,he's gone.
Is this one of those fixations.We Canadians are too fixated on leaders and parties,it's time to think what's best for the country and the public. The Liberals have had 13 years,far too long for what we got in return from this government in power. -
Eureka,
That's a really lame excuse.If Martin was sincere and the Liberals really wanted this daycare in place it would have been in place and running by 1995.
If Martin can make agreement with provinces on healthcare waiting times in a matter of months, the Liberals could easily have had the provinces on side just as fast.
The fact is the Liberals really don't give a shit about the Canadian public.
They become worried about losing power, and even then, if they retain it,it's only promises,promises.
Liberals have lost their connect with the Canadian voter.Time for a change.
Out of the Pot and into the Fire.... ???
-
The LIberals pledged $5 Billion after the 2004 election(never happened)
Now Liberals pledged $11 Billion til 2015 to crate 650,000 warehouse spaces for kids.We've been waiting since 1993 and pledging with dollars has been real easy for the Liberals.
It discriminates against stay-at-home parents, or parents who choose options other than an institutional day-care program for their children.
How do you arrive at the "discriminates against stay-at-home parents" thing... If the Department of Lands and Forests gives out free fishing licenses next year, will that be discriminating against people who don't fish???
As you suggest, many parents will "choose options other than an institutional day-care program for their children"... That's great. It will reduce the demand for institutional day-care, and hence, less requirement for government funding.
That sure is a lot of kids. Probably most of the rest of the 77%'s kids are too old now... like you say that yours are.... And I'm sure a lot of parents want to be "stay at home" like their parents were.... It would be interesting to see a breakdown....Only 23 per cent of parents in Canada choose to place their children into the "institutional" daycare supported under the Liberal plan.
A minority government .... Similar to how we got health care when the Progressive Conservatives bitterly fought against its implementation.... (Thank God for Tommy Douglas, eh ?)What makes you think the Liberals will deliver?
Because, hopefully Jack Layton will have the power to force him to.If you think Harper won't get 125,00 spaces, why do you think Martin will get 650,000?Promises,promises.
However, if Harper has a chance to roll his Trojan Horse into the House of Commons, we certainly will not see a day-care program.....
-
Err,
"I bear no hatred of you CPC types..."
Then stop being a hypocrite and prove it by accepting Conservatives CPC'ers and their thoughts, as Jack has accepted Sven Robinson and Ed Schreyer.
I'm not being a hypocrite. I don't hate hate-mongering morons like you Canuck, but truly feel sorry for you for your poor upbringing or whatever causes you to espouse the ideas you do. And it would be impossible for me to accept the CPC's ideas about discriminating against homosexuals, the poor, unwed mothers, etc...
-
CPAC had three strategists from the three parties. They were entertaining phone calls to the station to answer this question: Which of the parties runs the most effective campaign.
One caller from Toronto blasted the Liberals for the crimes ...and the disintegrating FAMILY VALUES under the Liberals. By the accent of the caller I assume he's from an ethnic group.
The arrogance.... unbelievable... whose "family values" should we all follow.... White english speaking "Christian"... or maybe your caller thinks we should all have good family values and not eat pork... or beef... because those are good values to some religions. Perhaps we have some Mormons in Canada who think good family values mean several "moms" to look after the kids....
The CPC bullshit morality of preaching how everybody should live has to stop, and this is one of the number one reasons to reject that racist CPC party....
-
We've hardly heard a peep about this since the campaign began, when Harper flatly stated that he would hold a free vote in Parliament on the subject.
I have a theory on Harpers strategy for this election and beyond....hs hidden agenda... forget the notwithstanding clause, it won't be needed or used, he is telling the truth but not the whole truth.....
At least half of Canadians in general are opposed to SSM. More than half of the supporters of Harper are opposed, but much of this opposition is soft. There is however a significant and vocal minority in the Tories grassroots who will not let it die. They are loud and influential enough that they cannot be ignored forever by the Tory leadership.
......
Harper has counted and knows this. He risks little politically by just throwing this dead fish on the order paper, has a free vote, and walks away..... He gains much internally, in that he can go back to the hardcore anti-SSM and say - 'You've had your day and then some. be quiet, it is over".
Let's just pack it up in the Trojan Horse and shut up about it. .... for now.
-
It's funny that they suspended testing after Raytheon's last anti-missile test .... missed the target by more than a mile.... So rather than having embarrassing situations like this reported, which could eventually lead to a cancellation of the work, the testing stopped.... so the funding wouldn't... funny eh ?
No, what's funny is, for some reason, you think that all new innovation and technology is perfectly functional from the beginning, and requires no testing and further experimentation. If the great innovators of the last 100 years had your attitude, we'd still be using horse and carriages to get around in. Apparently your attitude is, if you can't get something right, stop trying. Great idea. LOL.
If you'll stop and think for a moment, there's good reason not to implement the Star Wars system. Supposing they can get the accuracy up to say 80% hit rate on the defence shield (which is highly unlikely). What do you think the future mystery assailant will do ???? The most likely scenario is that they won't use an ICBM (inter-continental ballistic missile) that the Star Wars is to defend against. Wouldnt they show up near the coast in a fishing boat with a short-range missile.... Or how about delivering it in a suitcase. Or how about firing 10 of them... the fallout in the atmosphere would do the job anyways....
It stands to reason that the real objective of the Star Wars program is to deliver is ..... to deliver huge amounts of funding to the military companies that finance the Republican party campaigns... (has anybody read about the recent military contract kickback scandals???)
-
Am I wrong in saying that Bush's decsion to spend billions of US taxpayers' money on missile defense is not an issue in this election? Also, why should I care what Ted Turner thinks of George Bush Jnr or what 49 retired US generals think of their government?
They wanted Canada to be a "partner" and put up $10 Billion if I remember correctly. They also want their weapons stationed all over Canada... All over the east coast... all over the west coast, and all over the north...
Isn't that good enough of a reason....
-
l.
"Why was Harper dumbstruck a few weeks ago when asked if he loved Canada?"
Because the randomness of the question surprised him.
Randomness? It was a simple bloody question. One word answer: YES.
If Harper isn't quick enough on his feet to come up with an answer to such a simple question, he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister.... Maybe he should get his coaches to teach him how to answer simple yes/no questions too....
-
I love how you CPC people project your own hatred onto those who disagree with you. I believe in tolerance and acceptance of my fellow man.... That is the NDP's position... whereas the CPC is the party with the hatred of homosexuals.... hiding it under a guise of morality...Wow, err, you must be a christian. With all the hate filled rants you make, I never would have guessed. Oh wait, putting your own words in Jesus's mouth and politicizing him shows you're just another angry lefty.I bear no hatred of you CPC types... I feel sorry for you though...
Care to bet on which side of the gay marriage issue Tommy D. would have come down on being that he was a baptist minister?Tommy Douglas left his position as a preacher because he knew that he could help more people as a politician... And he did. I would bet that Tommy Douglas would be against the hatred of and discrimination against homosexuals... And if you really had any idea of what Jesus taught, you would understand that he would have held a similar position.
-
Authority figures are and should be subject to scrutiny, and should conduct themselves appropriately for the office they hold. If you find it incorrect that this teacher was penalized for criticising homosexuals, then would you think it equally OK for him to be critical of the lifestyles of Jews or blacks....Freedom of speech... verbal abuse of particular groups is ok.... Should we not protect against good conservative-voting white english speaking Christian males like Ernst Zundell ?? Maybe you should give some good examples...I can't wait for them... Like the anti-seat-belt arguments about drowning in a car because the seatbelt is on... So bring on the examples ....
One could look at well-publicized incidents surrounding "human rights" complaints against groups like the Elks or rec hockey leagues for excluding women. One could look at Scott Brockie, the Christian printer that was sued for refusing to print gay and lesbian pamphets, or Chris Kempling, the teacher who was suspended from his job for writing letters to the editor critical of homosexual lifestyles.
Was it a "gang problem" ?? If so, what's wrong with discussing it.One can look at Caribbean gang problems in Toronto or aboriginal gang problems on the prairies that have been allowed to fester and grow for years in complete silence because people have been so scared of causing offense that legitimate discussion of social problems has been stifled.Just because some people abuse a valid and good system, doesn't mean that it should be discarded. For example, if sexual perverts are conducting themselves indecently in public washrooms, the solution isn't to ban public washrooms, but rather to find a better method of policing them.... If human rights commissions are being abused, this should be dealt with to make the system function as intended, rather than shutting it down....
-
If it involves putting their heads in the sand, when they pull them back out, it won't be better.While I am sure the left has already spilled their morning coffee with my prediction, I think of THE BIG THREE (Liberal, Conservative, NDP), the Conservatives will do the most for the environment without hurting our economy.
Harper has stated that he doesn't believe in Kyoto, and wants to get together with the USA to develop a plan.... At least the USA has finally acknowledged that there is such a thing as the greenhouse gas effect.....The Liberals, in their state of hyposcrisy, lies, and corruption, signed Kyoto and allowed our greenhouse gases to go up 24% since then (source: Montreal Gazette) including 12% more than the evil environment-hating Americans.
During the last election campaign, environmental groups rated the NDP as being "greener than the Greens"....The NDP probably has the most environmentally-friendly plan, yet I am not sure they take into consideration the economy. -
The element of the Conservative CPC plan Liberals conveniently ignore is the 125,000 employer-sponsored spaces that will be created.
That could be created..... This program would only be available to those people whose employers to implement the program..... And usually, that's not the case for the low wage earner's company, is it... It is not universally accessible... is it ???
And then you have to think about employers who implement this type of program right now... It's a complete tax write-off already, so the CPC plan is a giveaway to Corp Canada.... It's a bribe to impement something that's already a tax write-off....
I think it would be money better spent if it were to go directly to creating day-care spaces.....
-
As I've said before, I am a private home daycare operator who provides quality service from my home.
To me, and to a lot of people like me, this is our only source of income. A fellow-home daycare operator chosed this business so she can be at home with her mentally-challenged child. Several colleagues in this business are middle-aged, who have been doing this for years.
I have no children of my own. And most of the skills, professional training and experience I have are all centered on childcare.
Right now, under the Liberals, I am paying dearly to fund government-funded agencies who operates home daycares. In other words, I am financially supporting my own competition.
I would not mind paying and supporting these agencies...except that I think it quite unfair when only such agencies are allowed to take on people qualified for subsidies. I am funding my competition who has a monopoly.
If you are properly trained and provide a good, safe, enriching day-care program, good for you. Unfortunately, there aren't enough such services, especially accredited ones.... Not nearly enough.
The unfortunate consequence of this is that many families are forced to leave their kids in questionable circumstances during the day so that they can afford to give them food and bed at night.
I would sympathize with you for any loss of business that you might suffer should a decent federally-funded day-care system be implemented in Canada so that hundreds of thousands of children could be put in safe, approved day-care facilities. I have to weigh the cost and benefits.... Betsy and a few hundred like her... or hundreds of thousands of children....
But it does not have to be a mutually exclusive choice, and would not be so... It would take years to impement what either the Liberals or NDP are proposing, so it is unlikely that your home business would be substantially affected for several years, and even then, there will still be a cry for daycare services. I find it highly unlikely that the feds would over-provide such services.
If such a system were put in place, and it did eventually affect your home business, you would be well qualified for a management post in a Federally run system, and would be highly employable in such a system, so you are not at a big loss there either.
You brought up the point about the "big box" daycare, and I would suggest that we see a big difference between the NDP and Liberals here. The Liberals will not try to prevent the foriegn "big box" "Walmart-style" daycares from taking over in Canada. As with health-care, the Liberals refuse to listen to the NDP requests to keep such services publicly administered and provided.
And then there's the question of the CPC position. What percentage of a week will $25 pay for with your private service ???? Will this $25/week tax cut they promise allow your business to expand and create more daycare spaces ???? Or will it just be a tax break, and those hundreds of thousands of kids still be sent looked after in questionable circumstances ?????
-
Well - clearly Harper's Day care plan is not sitting well with many moms... another reason not to pick him as leader.
First, what a wonderful post (the starter), but on this account you are totally wrong.....
You give Harper way too much credit. He does not have a "day care" plan... he's offering a child tax credit. Further, he's planning to dismember what the Liberals have started with respect to implementation of a real day-care plan, so realistically, Harper's plan is and anti-daycare plan.
There is no day-care system currently, so its tough to label someone as anti-daycare. As well, its not Federal jurisdiction so I have yet to figure out why any of the Premiers won't stand up and say no.
The Liberals have the framework and financing in place for a national day-care system.... Not strong enough, but they have finally started.... And Stephen Harper wants to cancel what has already started. I think that accurately constitutes an anti-daycare position.....
-
Wow.... Your logic is astounding.... But I suppose that you are a white "Christian" male, and giving rights to the "inferior ethnic minorities" and homosexuals, and "welfare bums" takes away your right to abuse them, take advantage of them, and exploit them.. It would appear that your "deep and abiding interest in the protection of personal freedoms" applies primarily to white, English speaking heterosexual "Christians" like yourself....
Now that's scary....Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society... It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.
Not to people who care about freedom. I have a deep and abiding interest in the protection of personal freedoms. So-called human rights commissions have no such interest.
Freedom of speech... verbal abuse of particular groups is ok.... Should we not protect against good conservative-voting white english speaking Christian males like Ernst Zundell ?? Maybe you should give some good examples...
Harper's statement that they're an attack on our "fundamental freedoms"... I wonder what kinds of freedoms... the right to bash homos and blacks.... The freedom to stop girls from getting abortions ???
Now that's scary....Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society... It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.
Scary? I think it's worth thinking about. Are there situations where our society puts limitations on freedoms in the name of political correctness? I think you could probably make a case that in some cases, yes we do. I don't see this comment as being out of line at all. I think it's something we as a society should always be mindful of.
How about freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? Freedom of association? These are all basic human rights which have been consistently attacked by so-called human rights agencies.
I can't wait for them... Like the anti-seat-belt arguments about drowning in a car because the seatbelt is on... So bring on the examples ....
-
31 exchange troops that were on an exchange program before the start of the war ???? Frigates in Iraq... Were they hoisted onto the shore ????...It would appear that we think we were not involved in the war in Iraq but facts below say otherwise ... hmmm!!After the US, Britain, and Australia, Canada was the next largest military participant in the war on Iraq. Canada provided airspace, 25 military planners to work with the US Central Command, 31 "exchange troops", and other troops as part of the Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft. Canada also led a multinational task force in the Persian Gulf. One thousand three hundred Canadian troops on three military frigates were stationed in Iraq throughout the war, accompanying US war ships to Kuwait. And the Canadian government has sold billions of dollars worth of weapons and military equipment to the US.
Your quotes refer to the FIRST WAR.... You have no quotes about the Operation Iraqi Liberation.... and use typical Conservative deception practices to try to fool people into beleiving your positon.....
-
Harper's statement that they're an attack on our "fundamental freedoms"... I wonder what kinds of freedoms... the right to bash homos and blacks.... The freedom to stop girls from getting abortions ??? (PS. Somehow you seem to be switching the colours of the text to, so I'll help you with an even prettier one...)And then some quotes.If so, here's another one that I don't think he added enough colour to....
Now that's scary....Stephen Harper Quotes:Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society... It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.
Scary? I think it's worth thinking about. Are there situations where our society puts limitations on freedoms in the name of political correctness? I think you could probably make a case that in some cases, yes we do. I don't see this comment as being out of line at all. I think it's something we as a society should always be mindful of.
Gee, could you help me think of a context where the meaning of this statement would be any different.... I'm having difficulty with this one.....And this one, of course,
is not worth discussing until we have the whole quote and the context in which it was said.Stephan Harper:Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion
How do I know it's not the whole quote? Because we don't even get to know what Harper says is of primary importance. Give us the whole quote and the context it was made in if you want to discuss it.
Maybe you should run for politics... You can talk a lot and say abolutely nothing.It seems that's what they resort too when they can't debate the truth.
Ok, since you insist, I've reacted to your 'truth'. Get busy.
-
To me, it's just this simple: I don't like the direction the current government is leading this nation. I'm tired of paying high taxes just to see the money wasted and line the pockets of Liberal cronies. I'm tired of being hood-winked. The amount of corruptions and scandals that had come out in the last year alone is mind-boggling. These are serious symptoms of a sick nation.
Perhaps a little too simplistic.... Tired of paying high taxes... Well, what do you get for them.... Think about people living in a third world country.. or second world country.... even a lot of first world countries... How much of their day they would be willing to work for the government (taxes) to ensure that they had full health care (including expensive stuff like heart transplants), clean safe water, safe streets to go out onto...
If you look at what happened in Ontario with Mike Harris's tax cuts, it is very surprising.... Aside from the obvious gutting of health care, longer wait times for health care, people dying due to un-treated water due to privatization, the poverty level that it puts the most vulerable at.... .
.. aside from these... the average homeowner gets a few hundred dollars less taxation... well, not exactly, because taxes were cut too far... so every working person has to pay $300/year health tax.... And due to the shifting of social services onto the municipal budgets, everybody's property taxes went up..... with the net effect of higher taxes for the lower and middle income earners, loss of services, many health-care services becoming "pay for" services now... But Corporate Ontario pays a whole lot less taxes.... So who got hoodwinked in Ontario..... The idiots who fell for the Conservative "tax cuts" agendas....
Ontario was fooled by the "lower tax" Conservatives.... Fool me once, shame on you... Fool me twice, Shame on me.....
By the way..... You could vote NDP... I am.
One of the key elements common to any of the Facist regimes that have held power is that they have no tolerance for organized labour... at all.... So which of the three parties is most "anti-union".....
-
If you look at the long list of good things that we have, several of them will be put in direct jeopardy by Stephen Harper...You know, relative to other places in the world, we certainly are doing quite well.And if people were considering replacing Prime Minister Martin with a military dictator or something, I'd share your concern. But this is Canada. We have a multi-party democracy with strong traditions. Paul Martin's opponents are Stephen Harper and Jack Layton. Not Generalissimo Tropogrosso.
- Government regulation of water (and the rest of the list) (we've seen the results in Walkerton due to Mike Harris's Conservative deregulation)
- Civil Rights ( if you're gay or a member of any of the other groups looked down upon by the CPC types)
Just look at the country south of us... and what a little "moralistic Christian values" can bring.... According to these morals, the deaths of tens of thousands of people is morally worse that a couple of blowjobs.... I'd rather get a few blowjobs, myself...
(sorry, it's late and I lost control)
Unless you use the "notwithstanding clause" or "change a few definitions"....Sleep easy. Rest assured that whatever happens, we have a strong constitution and the rule of law prevails.
What's the worst that can happen.... Harper gets in... we send our boys to Iraq.... maybe a few hundred come home in bags (or boxes), but, hey, maybe that'll improve relations... maybe be good for the economy... And so what if Osama comes after us as a consequence.... Harper would look brave beside Bush saying "Bring them on"....Take comfort in the knowledge that whatever happens on January 23, things will continue to be just fine on January 24 and onward. You'll still be free to express yourself in pretty blue script.
And heck... Osama might forget by then.... what's the worst that can happen......And you'll get to vote again on the government in 4 years or less.-k
He Who Understands TV Wins
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted