benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 my MLA's and MP's are all Conservatives, so we are on opposite sides of the street so to speak. Someone being on the opposite side is not an excuse not to write to him/her, all to the contrary! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 yiminee... take a little ole break and Argus runs amok with deflection/distraction/distortion! Absofnlootly the Liberals had a plan - hence Maple reactors. Poorly designed, with shoddy, second rate materials, and the reactors, basically useless for year after year with scientists at AECL standing around scratching their heads trying desperately to figure out how to make them work. part of the real story here is the firing of Keen... the replacement AECL management team and Board that the Conservatives appointed in January 2008... and the overall intentions of the Conservatives to sell off AECL. Keen and her people would be the ones who said the Maple Leaf reactors were so unsafe that they refused to allow them to operate, right? ... for reinforcement - particularly for Argus' benefit, the other part of the linked post mentioned above... the position/response from Dr. Harold J. Smith, the ex-Manager of the MAPLE Nuclear Commissioning:Yes, yes, the guy in charge of the project, who said "Don't worry! Be happy! Nothing wrong with the reactors here! Let's start em up!" Except for over a decade Keen and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commision refused to allow these reactors to start up. Are you telling me that Smith never suggested these ideas to them, that he just came up with it? The government is junking $300 million worth of reactors and enduring endless bad publicity nationally and internationally just.... because? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Poorly designed, with shoddy, second rate materials, and the reactors, basically useless for year after year with scientists at AECL standing around scratching their heads trying desperately to figure out how to make them work.Keen and her people would be the ones who said the Maple Leaf reactors were so unsafe that they refused to allow them to operate, right? Yes, yes, the guy in charge of the project, who said "Don't worry! Be happy! Nothing wrong with the reactors here! Let's start em up!" Except for over a decade Keen and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commision refused to allow these reactors to start up. Are you telling me that Smith never suggested these ideas to them, that he just came up with it? The government is junking $300 million worth of reactors and enduring endless bad publicity nationally and internationally just.... because? While you are busy pointing finger, others are busy finding solutions: The isotopes being made at McMaster are as effective in scanning for bone cancer as the ones made at Chalk River but Gulenchyn points out they do have shortcomings."The number of doses that can be produced in one centre is relatively small. It costs a lot to operate a centre like this, which means that the cost of each dose is greater." The isotopes must also be used within a few hours of being created. Health Canada has also approved isotopes being made in Toronto, using a cyclotron at the Centres for Addiction and Mental Health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Someone being on the opposite side is not an excuse not to write to him/her, all to the contrary! Oh I write them, but we just don't see eye to eye, at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Oh I write them, but we just don't see eye to eye, at all. Corrupting lobbyists will try to see ministers holding the keys to natural resources eye to eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Corrupting lobbyists will try to see ministers holding the keys to natural resources eye to eye. Which is why we need legislation that would serve to eliminate access to special interest groups for any member of the government. Let them talk to the opposition groups to find their support, not the government itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Which is why we need legislation that would serve to eliminate access to special interest groups for any member of the government. Let them talk to the opposition groups to find their support, not the government itself. Transparency from all would-be political candidates is what we need I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Transparency from all would-be political candidates is what we need I think. How do you get that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 How do you get that? By a law forcing would-be politicians to make public their meeting agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 (edited) How do you get that? Camera crews should follow all politicians and their aides like they do during reality shows. Edited June 12, 2009 by daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 By a law forcing would-be politicians to make public their meeting agenda. I don't see that as very feasible. However legislation that makes special interests tabu for the government could do well in debate I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Camera crews should follow all politicians and their aides like they do during reality shows. Someone afraid that her/his privacy may be invaded should indeed simply stay away from politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Someone afraid that her/his privacy may be invaded should indeed simply stay away from politics. It's much like showing your hidden talents - once you show people you have a special skill or gift - then attention is upon you - with that comes the responsiblity of heroship ---Politicals or celebs....that are gifted don't have a problem with a breach in personal security and privacey -- they except it as part of the territory..Those that get irked with noteriety - are usually not deserving to take on the cloak of notoriousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The truth is the truth. Harper walks the same path as BUSH.1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). http://www.dangardner.ca/Coloct0308.html Bet you won't read this.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) It's much like showing your hidden talents - once you show people you have a special skill or gift - then attention is upon you - with that comes the responsiblity of heroship ---Politicals or celebs....that are gifted don't have a problem with a breach in personal security and privacey -- they except it as part of the territory..Those that get irked with noteriety - are usually not deserving to take on the cloak of notoriousness. Raitt went in politics with under the guise of a conservative ideology which states, as its first article of (bad) faith, that people with talents have the rights not to share with others all the fruits they get for free from these talents. Edited June 13, 2009 by benny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.