newbie

Do yourself a favour and read this: http://www.bcpolitics.ca/left_conservatism.htm. It might help you to understand that the left does not need power, but the right can't exist without it.

cgarrett, a great article. Thanks for posting the link. Some parts are a little over the top for me but it did address some concepts I've known all along.

Even for 427 troops whose deaths were not related to combat operations? "The U.S. military death toll in Iraq officially reached two thousand on Tuesday, with the announcement of the death of a soldier who was injured last week. The figure includes 427 troops whose deaths were not directly related to combat operations. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'll excempt Bush for those soldiers who bought their own ticket over there.

I can't believe the hate for Canada by some individuals on this site!

Thanks for that Melanie. I guess some of us are a little jittery post 911. Having said that, I still might not feel comfortable next to anyone shielding a knife or sword.

And yet another Tory rush to judgement. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...1026?hub=Canada

I'm not sure how else you can change the SCC over and above what we have now and still be democratic. There will always be cases that are 5 to 4, for and against. SSM came down to basically 1 vote in the House of Commons. But I can live with those narrow margins because I support the democratic system and the concept of "majority rules."

It seems to me a lot of these issues were raised and challenged back in the Mulroney years: turbans, ceremonial knives in school, etc. I think I have to agree re the knife on the train. I think we can accomodate religion only so far. In a related scenerio, a Sikh was told he couldn't work in a coal mine near my residence because of his turban. It didn't take him long to take it off and put on a hard hat.

Monty, all the major news media covered the 2000 milestone, even Fox. The only ones to be shamed on this day is George Bush and his administration.

August, you said Arguably, Canada is no more dangerous than the US and then went on to isolate one State in America for comparison. And then you set the parameter for white murders only. I would consider this a total manipulation of the stats.

You're comparing a U.S. state to an entire country. Let's try U.S. vs. Canada. In the year 2000, there were 12,658 murders in US. Canada had 489. And oh, that same year California had 2079 murders. Even if 50% of them were black, your comparison is out of whack. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur

Let's not forgot who passed into law Canadian Multiculturalism Act 1988; our old friend Brian Mulroney. Lest we forget, his was the administration of appeasement, from his failed Meech and Charlettown accords, to RCMP wearing turbans.

I choose Oprah.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/24/D8DEPLHGA.html

Can anyone tell me how Adam and Eve managed to produce the entire human race with only two sons? One of which murdered the other? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Best ask the creationists as they have the answers to everything. When they don't they simple reply that with God everything and anything is possible.

Well, I guess 44000 is a bit more than 34000. But realize this: Gunshot wounds are now the leading cause of death for teenage boys in America (white, African-American, urban, and suburban). http://www.familyeducation.com/article/0,1...24-6929,00.html I can pretty much guess the bulk of those deaths weren't the result of self-protection. Pretty sobering thought.

Being sodomized, not raped. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> At the risk of being politically correct, the action described falls well within the definition of rape: rape: forced or manipulated nonconsensual sexual contact, including vaginal or anal intercourse, oral sex, or penetration with an object. http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=define...nG=Search&meta=

V ery good point BD.

Are you a psychiatrist? This is one of the reasons why there is still a stigma in this country regarding people with mental illness.

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

Oh, that's right. He DID have a drug habit, and got his maid to get them for him. Sorry, I did forget about that. Cheapshot? Maybe, if you admit Limbaugh was a hypocrite for condemning drug users on his radio show.

FTA, it's statements like the ones below, in context, that bother me most about Mr. Harper. He supports an illegal invasion and war, and wants Canada to be a full participant. Afghanistan is one thing, but Iraq IS NOT OUR FIGHT. Montreal Gazette, April 2, 2003 Source: CP Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper lashed out at the defence minister yesterday, calling him an "idiot" and a "clown" over the government's position on Iraq. Harper started his verbal assault on John McCallum by shouting "idiot" during heckling in the House of Commons. Outside the House, Harper acknowledged that frustration with the federal government got the better of him. But he then went on to insult McCallum further. "It was probably not an appropriate term, but we support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win," Harper said.

I thought we went through this a few times already. But to use your word, I think it is "misguided" to tar every member of a group with the same brush (that is assuming valid corruption even exists). How about let's wait for Gomery to do his job.

Yep, he's a regular "love your enemies" kind of guy.