Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Enough that Border Services said it threatened the integrity of the Canadian immigration system.

cite?

  • Replies 493
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

That's a dumb thing to say and doesn't help your argument at all.

Really? As opposed to other dumb things being posted here? Why aren't you calling out other posters for saying dumb things?

Edited by WestCoastRunner
I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

Really? As opposed to other dumb things being posted here? Why aren't you calling out other posters for saying dumb things?

Because yours was the dumbest.

Posted (edited)

Because yours was the dumbest.

Right. Got it. I am being held at a higher bar. Edited by WestCoastRunner
I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

Right. Got it.

You don't refute Argus' source by saying "they're a bunch of thugs at the border... how could they know about the immigration system"?

First off, the people strip searching you at the border (is that why they're "thugs"?) are not writing a report about the abuse of our immigration system. It'll be some dude looking at case files and analyzing data from behind a desk somewhere. That's your "thug"?

Second, you don't even know what report Argus is talking about because he didn't provide a cite, so how can you dismiss it out of hand?

Posted (edited)

You don't refute Argus' source by saying "they're a bunch of thugs at the border... how could they know about the immigration system"?

First off, the people strip searching you at the border (is that why they're "thugs"?) are not writing a report about the abuse of our immigration system. It'll be some dude looking at case files and analyzing data from behind a desk somewhere. That's your "thug"?

Second, you don't even know what report Argus is talking about because he didn't provide a cite, so how can you dismiss it out of hand?

I know what report argus is citing. He's restating a quote from the article he linked to.

However, you are right. Border guards being thugs deserve its own thread.

Edited by WestCoastRunner
I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted (edited)

You don't refute Argus' source by saying "they're a bunch of thugs at the border... how could they know about the immigration system"?

First off, the people strip searching you at the border (is that why they're "thugs"?) are not writing a report about the abuse of our immigration system. It'll be some dude looking at case files and analyzing data from behind a desk somewhere. That's your "thug"?

Second, you don't even know what report Argus is talking about because he didn't provide a cite, so how can you dismiss it out of hand?

BTw, you have just reinforced my point about border guards not being experts on the integrity of our immigration system. Edited by WestCoastRunner
I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

In other words, not a made up premise at all. Thanks for playing.

Why won't you expand on this?

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

Why won't you expand on this?

Why are you badgering me on this....please go back and follow the post trail.

In general, you can't make other members respond as you wish. You didn't even say the magic word.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Why are you badgering me on this....please go back and follow the post trail.

In general, you can't make other members respond as you wish. You didn't even say the magic word.

Little old me is badgering you? I need to say a magic word in asking for further clarification? Doesn't this go against forum rules? Why should I need to ask for further clarification to respond to your post? Because, clearly I am stumped as to how to respond to it, which is why I'm asking for more information. Are you refusing to offer more information so I can intellectually respond to your post?

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

Why are you badgering me on this....please go back and follow the post trail.

In general, you can't make other members respond as you wish. You didn't even say the magic word.

Little old me is badgering you? I need to say a magic word in asking for further clarification? Doesn't this go against forum rules? Why should I need to ask for further clarification to respond to your post? Because, clearly I am stumped as to how to respond to it, which is why I'm asking for more information. Are you refusing to offer more information so I can intellectually respond to your post?

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

BTw, you have just reinforced my point about border guards not being experts on the integrity of our immigration system.

Border guards don't write these reports. :rolleyes:

Posted (edited)

Border guards don't write these reports. :rolleyes:

I know that. Tell that to argus. Rolls eyes.

Edited by WestCoastRunner
I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

In other words, not a made up premise at all. Thanks for playing.

I never said it was. I asked for the numbers to better understand the scope of the problem.

So yeah, thanks for providing those...sort of.

Posted

Really? Those thugs at the border.

If you were treated badly it's most likely because you were rude and obnoxious.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

cite?

It was already cited in the article I posted. Howzabout you try reading the damn thing.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

BTw, you have just reinforced my point about border guards not being experts on the integrity of our immigration system.

The cite wasn't quoting 'border guards' but Border Services, the agency itself. This is the agency tasked with enforcing immigration regulations. Who else do you think would be an expert on the abuse of those regulations?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

It was already cited in the article I posted. Howzabout you try reading the damn thing.

I did... it said there's a report.

How many??? You must have read the report, didn't you? You seem so informed about it....

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

oh nooos! No 2016 budget money for the Harper Conservative "Office of Religious Freedoms"... that bold move pandering to ethnic and religious minorities in Canada..... err... promoting "Canadian values of pluralism and tolerance abroad". Clearly, Harper Conservatives relished the idea of formally linking politics and religion and presumed to both celebrate religious freedom while denying it to those whose religion they didn't care for - promoting religions... or religious freedom?

given prior funding runs out at the end of this month, the Office of Religious Freedoms will shutter... much to the chagrin of Harper Conservatives and their last ditch effort to save it with a HOC motion a few days ago... voted down 226 to 90, with the NDP, Bloc Quebecois and Green Party joining the Liberals in opposing the move. But it was enough to resurrect Stephen Harper's HOC voting presence... bringing him back from his Las Vegas dalliances and forays through American airports... no longer MIA, for now!

Our goal is to build on and strengthen the good work of the office by including the protection of religious freedom as a fundamental component of a comprehensive vision of the promotion of human rights

Religious freedom should not be disconnected from other human rights. Human rights are interdependent, universal and indivisible. How can you enjoy freedom of religion if you don’t have freedom of conscience? Freedom of speech? Freedom of mobility?”


.

Posted

In less than 12 months, those bleeding red Liberals are going to undo the good work of 9 years of true blue Conservative leadership. The sad thing is that this is going to set a precedent that makes it impossible to govern. If every change of party in the PMO leads to undoing the last party's work, very little will ever be accomplished going forward. That's the bed Harper Conservatives have made for themselves though. When your methods are purely adversarial with no consensus building whatsoever, it's pretty hard to be surprised when everything you've worked for gets dismantled overnight when people get sick of your crap. There's a lesson to be learned here about consensus. Too bad Conservatives and learning are about as antithetical as it gets.

Posted

This may even speak to the power of a more representative House of Commons. Proportional representation would force parties to build consensus, which may actually result in stronger and more stable legislation that survives changes in government. These artificial majorities are bad for Canada, including the current one. It means the party in power doesn't have to seek consensus and it leaves them open to having their legislation completely undone by subsequent governments formed by other parties. Chalk one up for the PR crowd.

Posted

Proportional representation would force parties to build consensus, which may actually result in stronger and more stable legislation that survives changes in government.

More likely it will mean that legislation will be littered with nonsensical payoffs to minority interest groups that can never be eliminated no matter how stupid they are (kind of like what happens in the US). The ability to easily reverse legislation passed by previous governments is a feature of the system; not a bug.
Posted (edited)

Consensus isn't radical enough for you, Tim?

Consensus is code for 'everyone gets a veto' which is generally a rotten way to run anything. Consensus for governments is even worse where different actors have mutually irreconcilable agendas. Edited by TimG
Posted

You really missed my point then and aren't thinking critically about Liberal legislation at the moment. What do you call undoing all of Harper's work right now? That is a veto. They all get a veto now and are only choosing to use it because the Conservatives refused to work with anyone on reaching a consensus. They just force fed legislation, cut short debate, refused to answer questions from parliament, and stonewalled any attempts at thoughtful research. If the Harper government actually worked on building consensus with groups, particularly the Liberals, they wouldn't be undoing all of this legislation because they would have agreed to its terms. So no, Tim. Consensus is not a code word for "everyone gets a veto." How you even draw that conclusions is beyond me, especially considering the Liberals are exercising their veto power right now and I'm arguing that consensus building could avoid this.

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,900
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Ana Silva
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...