The Broom would like to do some sweeping:
This post is aimed at all his human garbage supporters who worked extra hard to “make it happen”. Piss on you – as much as you will scream at the top of your lungs that this is about free speech, I have a thought for you that everyone else in the country is thinking – you are not Canadian and you will never be thought of as one.
Hawaii Report gives a LONG and detailed report on the state of NATO, its importance, its transformation, and its future:
What is NATO for? After 57 years of normally excellent service to its member states and 15 years from the end of the cold war which was its rationale, it seems appropriate to ask this question.
Money for Nothing @ Celestial Junk:
It must be nice, or so the saying goes. Imagine, being paid to write op-ed that wouldn’t pass the grade on most political blogs.
Add your links to the comments.
Concerning the CBC Web site’s latest socialist Viewpoint drivel by Larry Zolf, I noted in their brief bio of him that Zolf is “now retired.”
I wrote to the CBC to ask them, please, could they keep him retired?
The Manitoba Teachers Society website published a list of recommended summer reading for their 15,000 members.
“It was only when we saw who compiled the MTS reading list that we got our answer to how the description of The Black Rod could get so distorted.
It was George Stephenson, MTS website manager, and sometimes freelance columnist to —wait for it — the Winnipeg Free Press.
Yes, the same George Stephenson who wrote a blistering attack on bloggers in January. (Rogue journalists. Bloggers take on the world in cyberspace. Thu Jan 26 2006)”
blackrod.blogspot.com/2006/07/black-rod-required-summer-reading.html
Aw c’mon guys — don’t be so hard on ol’ Zolfie.
He’s just t-t-t-t-t-alkin’ ’bout his generation…
What’s going on with this Zolf character? Not one mention of Harper eating babies. The worst part of this slop for me is that when I return to work,the loony left will pull this drivel out and portray it as positive proof that PMSH is just a baby step from braeking out the white sheets and swazistkas.
“How ‘liberalism’ became a bad word”
Eww, Toronto Star today. Please wait at least half an hour after eating before attempting to read it.
Not sure about the filter so I’m not even going to attach the link. On the front page though….
Ole Larry may get “his money for nothing” but I doubt he gets “his chicks for free”. [with appologies to Dire Straits]
I just love how the CBC describe Larry Zoloft as a political expert. speaks volumes about the leanings of this MSM.
Kate,
great link to the Hawaii Report examination of NATO. The report is accurate, balanced, right on the money, and dangerous.
What are your winged monkeys supposed to make of a Europe that does not consist of surrender monkeys, whose assessment of the Iraqi threat and post-invasion scenario “was indeed correct”? How do they deal with the possibility that the Chinese “threat” is not what it’s cranked up to be to feed “the military-industrial complex that rides so high in the US …”? How do they avoid apoplexy when reading about “the clear desire of this administration at least, to achieve global hegemony,” its “long term partiality towards Israel,” about “overt and covert oil imperialism,” and the possibility of “a more balanced administration” to follow Bush?
Hey, agitfact, us winged monkeys know a set-up when we see one.
Agitfact: I see you bit… that’s why I put up the link. So… what do you suggest be the role for NATO, or did you miss the point on this as well. If the oped is accurate… how much of a military should Canada have; and how large should NATO get? What, in fact, does Agitfact see as the role of NATO and Canada’s contribution to it?
agitfact, unlike Liberals, socialists, etc, we of the so-called ‘right’ support the right to make dissenting opinions. Even ignorant ones.
I’m unsure of your meaning of ‘monkeys’, so can’t comment.
But with regard to your other comments and dire threats of ‘apoplexy’, it just won’t happen. You seem to be ‘crowing’ about something. Surely it can’t be the opinion piece, because it is shallow and focused only on the immediate rather than ‘la longue duree’.
And, it’s ignorant. I’m sure you know, that the US isn’t interested in ‘global hegemony’. However, Islamic fascism is. You know that, don’t you? Just listen to what the imams say. Facts are important, not empty opinions.
And no, the war against fascism isn’t about oil. It’s about fascism. Enabling democracy is one strategy to deal with fascism. Another is loudly and clearly rejecting Islamic fascism.
But, people who are ignorant of the deeper infrastructure – well, all one can do is acknowledge their ignorance. Ignorance is not something to ‘crow about’.
From Yahoo news by Jennifer Ditchburn:
“OTTAWA (CP) – The Conservative party appears to be doing just fine without the help of corporate donors, raking in nearly $18 million from individual Canadians last year.
“That’s double the $8.3 million the Liberals collected, according to party documents released by Elections Canada on Saturday.”
Actually, Jennifer, the $18 million the CPC collected from individual donors last year is MORE than double what the Liberals were able to collect, $1.4 million more to be precise. (And what’s with using “raking in” when referring to CPC donations? Watch it, your leftie tendencies are showing…)
Doesn’t this put the lie to the CPC being the Party with big ties to “corporate” Canada? Just another Left/Lib myth busted. ‘Not a bad statistic to tell people when they start spouting the Left/Lib line about Conservatives supporting and being supported by BIG BUSINESS.
The small guy in Canada supports the CPC. Yeah, baby!
ET: The Hawaii report takes some “typical” America bashing swipes, but it raises some very important questions… and that is the role and purpose of NATO in the future. NATO was primarily set up as a defense against the East Bloc, which no longer exists. The article points out that no clear articulation has been made as to NATO’s new purpose, if any. It also suggests, tepidly, that NATO members have been freeloading on the American military. Since Canada is a part of NATO… what will our role be?
I get such a kick out of typical lefties like Agitfact who blast the Americans any chance they get, yet they have no grasp of geopolitics, least of all military complexities. There is an enormous vacuum in the world today… and it is there because Agitfact and his leftist counterparts in Europe and Canada have not been willing to fill it, they have fully and completely given it over to the United States. Nobody in the world today, not even NATO, can provide the logistics needed during huge natural crisis, except the USA military. Even the UN, can hardly deliver a crumb of aid without massive US support. What an irony, that while the utopians squawk and starve their militaries, they have given the United States the role of world policeman, world relief agency, world dominator… and it’s all because they are long on talk but to bloody socialist to spend a penny on NATO and give it the tools to be a force for democracy; independant of the American foreign policy (no matter what that policy).
The fact is, we can’t even handle our Afghan committment without American airpower at our disposal. It is so funny to watch the Agitfacts of this world fume away, pick out the parts of an oped that they “like”, and ignore the larger implications of the piece and questions it raises. The piece takes is its shots at neoconservativism (indirectly), but it raises critical questions.
Agitfact: If you don’t want the USA to be completely dominant in geopolitics… what are you willing to do besides bitch about it? I’ll give you a hint… N.. A… T…. O…..
PISS ON YOU ALL, my feelings exactly. You can’t discuss anything reasonably with the left or the muslims, they are right, period. I don’t care if they live die shit their pants or steal second, and the reason why I never rebut their views or give a second thought to anything they say is because they are ignorant and stupid. You just descend to their level. If the old adage that civilizations die from suicide not murder is correct, and I think it is, it makes one wonder who should be the target. You can read into that whatever you want.
Off to spend another hard day on the golf course. To all the lefties and muslims I can only offer you this advice, if you ever get the opportunity to F— off, take it.
I find it quite amazing that the CBC,LPC and a good chunk of the MSM seem to find it impossible to change tactics against the right.
The fear-mongering and scary Harper/right BS is STILL the mainstay of the left’s political strategy,even after their recent disasterous campaign backfired,based on this same unconstructive,hateful crap.It is also AMAZING that anyone,no matter their political leanings,could still defend this party’s disgusting past and it’s current visionless leaders.
I’m starting to believe that the only things the LPC really care about are staying in power(a no-brainer)and destroying everything conservative in NA.At least,these are the ONLY messages I ever hear them rail on about.
The MSM,sadly,and for the most part,seem to also see the right as an enemy,virtually ignoring how badly the LPC has hurt this country…And they arrogantly trumpet the same twisted bigotry inherent in the LPC itself…We love and accept ANYONE who thinks as WE do!….the rest of you are unCanadian!
As this party searches to redefine itself,may I suggest the following name change..LCC…The Liberal Cult of Canada.And maybe this could be their new catch phrase…You are either with us or against us!(this should scare quite a few back into the fold)
Debris Trail
If you think N..A..T..O is not in the American back pocket you are even more naive than you sound. If any country, Canada included and perhaps especially, tried to separate its foreign policy goals as being anything remotely seen as unproductive to America we would be punished economically.
If we are passive observers or active participants, when invited, we will be allowed to maintain our economic and political freedom. If we ever decided not to cooperate as described above then we would pay the price that countries like Cuba, Iran, ro Iraq suffer. Everyone knows this so they don’t dare go down that road too far. We can decide not to help in Iraq but we will not work against the US either.
Lets not pretend to be more free than we really are. What NATO’s use by the US proves is just how much these wars and the Bush tax cuts have undercut their ability to swagger like they used to. They used to plan to cope with two regional wars and one world war…that is over for the time being. There will have to be a major rethinking of how American foreign policy will proceed.
Debris Trail,
six months on SDA has convinced me that this is not the forum for discussing such questions in earnest. That’s why I wondered what Kate (or her substitute) were up to.
But I will run with the lure a little –
1. Canada and NATO. The first non-peacenik to seriously question Canada’s involvement in NATO was Gen Chris Vokes in his memoirs. He had commanded two Canadian divisions in WWII, and recommended a complete pull out.
2. Size of the Canadian Military. That should depend on Canadian domestic, foreign and defence policy that, in turn, should be driven by an OBJECTIVE assessment of current and future threats. We will continue with expediency, patchwork and band-aids until we get such a thing, so anyone’s guess is as good as anyone else’s. But do beware of institutional imperatives.
3. Role of NATO. Mutual defence, as before. Size of NATO? What’s the threat to the whole group, or to individual NATO countries? Certainly not something Small Dead Animals would know anything concrete about, so what’s the point of raising it?
4. Canada’s Contribution to NATO. What we’re currently doing seems about right – consultation, planning, liaison, and equipment and training to maintain professional standards and enhance interoperability, followed by a troop commitment if necessary and warranted.
Debris Trail, I do thank you and some of your fellow monkeys for making my point before I had even posted it.
agitfact,I seem to remember we both 1st showed up on this site about the same time.I also remember both of us not being too far from center,albeit from different sides.
Your point about blogs NOT being a proper forum for quality debate is dead on.Since you obviously have come to realize this,why do you keep coming back to this conservative blog then?
It seems to me you still try to offer logical points,however you have lowered yourself to the same gratuitous partisan insults you used to take others to task for.I read your comments about’Kate’s winged monkeys’and anything else you have to say,no matter how intelligent,loses it’s validity.
BTW,to put things in perspective,I have seen you treated with much more respect on Kate’s blog than I have EVER received on any lib blog.You seem to completely forget your own observations about the blogosphere when you come here and slag all the regulars.Nobody is making you come to this site that you so obviously have little respect for…
Agitfact: I find it amazing that when you are given a chance to add substantively to a debate or question, without the diatribe, you fail. You didn’t answer my questions, other than with incredibly vague generalities. Or, is it that you don’t know what you are talking about outside leftist anti-American and anti-conservative talking points. I am, believe it or not, actually interested in what you think about NATO, but, “Size of NATO? What’s the threat to the whole group, or to individual NATO countries? Certainly not something Small Dead Animals would know anything concrete about…” just does not make for an arguement. It amounts to nothing more than a smarmy and childish comment. What makes you think that if you presented a rational and articulate thesis on NATO, it would not be accepted in whole or in part at least by some of us.
If, on the other hand you exist to only denegrate those who frequent SDA, then I’m not sure why anyone would take anything you have to say seriously… as your only purpose is to quibble. And that, if true, is infantile.
agitfact – you haven’t said anything in your reply to DT.
1. Because one individual recommends a pull-out of Canada from NATO does not mean that such an act is correct.
steve d makes the same kind of statistical errors in his post, except his is the ‘everyone knows this’ error. No steve d, everyone does not know this, and an ‘appeal to the majority’ is without evidence.
2. What’s your point about this? It sounds like a brochure. No-one can agree or disagree.
3. Same as #2. What’s your point? You aren’t making any argument, and are instead, adding an insult. Why are you insulting people?
4. Again, same as above. Nothing. We are in Afghanistan. Why? What is the threat that we are fighting? I know that you assert that no-one at SDA (do you mean all bloggers?) would know, but, do you know?
steve d. Again, none of your opinions are substantiated. All you do, is inform us of your opinions, but, never, ever, provide any factual or logical evidence to support them. A blog is a bit more than a coffee shop. How about some evidence for your anti-Americanism?
Debris Trail – as you point out, the entire world is freeloading on the American Military, except for a few mature nations, such as the UK, Australia etc. Europe and Canada certainly have been freeloaders. Finally, under Harper, Canada is starting to mature and take on some adult responsibilities rather than allow the US military and US taxpayer alone support freedom and democracy in the world.
As for wars, I think the West has to come to terms with a different type of war, one that is not so much nation between nation, each with their own military, but, at the moment, democracy versus tribalism. And tribalism uses terrorism, based around civilian-terrorists attacking civilians. The US Supreme Court decision was wrong, in my view, to treat these terrorists as civilians. (I agree with Scalia’s dissenting opinion).
Canadian Observer said, “I find it quite amazing that the CBC,LPC and a good chunk of the MSM seem to find it impossible to change tactics against the right.”
I think that’s the definition of stupid, verdad?: You just keep doing the same old thing even though it’s proved to be ineffective. They’ve got fancy blinkers on and as they do business, talk, and party only with each other, it’s little wonder that they have no idea of what to do except the same-old, same-old now that PMSH and the CPC are in power. I mean this is just so unacceptable, they think, that it’s just got to “go away” somehow. They fiddle as Rome burns.
CO, you also said, “The MSM,sadly,and for the most part,seem to also see the right as an enemy,virtually ignoring how badly the LPC has hurt this country…” I think the reason they ignore the mess the LPC have made of Canada for most of us is that the LPC didn’t make things bad for them. In fact, they were on the Librano gravy train and never had it so good. Money for life.
‘Didn’t matter how hard life was for the rest of us chumps, who were being taxed to the max and paying our and our kids’ own way, they and their kids were getting the juicy jobs, hyper-salaries, benefits, and expense accounts, all paid for by US, so “who cares if the LPC is ‘a little’ shady? We can look the other way AND it works for us.”
Doesn’t that sound like how Communist dictatorships work? Under the LPC, Canada has become a Socialist dictatorship–that is until PMSH and his CPC were voted in. Wow! It’s got to be freaking the Left out, with not a new idea or policy between them. The Left is not adapting to the new reality, so I’m hoping that means they go the way of the Do-Do. I’m not holding my breath, but…they’re not handling this sea change very well.
ET
The pot calling the kettle black.
As if you substantiate.
What would you like me to substantiate?
That America is an economic superpower?
That America is a military superpower?
That America uses its military power more regularly than other countries?
That America punishes countries that don’t cooperate?
These are all well known facts. Since when is it necessary to substantiate the obvious?
NCOTB
I think the LPC has made things bad for themselves, but Canada?
You would think a Conservative would be thanking the Liberals for finally opening the door to power. In that sense the Conservatives should be saying the Liberals have saved Canada. You are way too negative for a bunch who finally can show us what great governance looks like. I don’t even see references to anything Harper is doing. Its as if you are not happy with his leadership. The focus is still on the out of power, Liberals. What is that about?
Again the resident socialists are missing the entire point of the Hawaii Report … or what is stated as the point in the last paragraph … I think they call it the conclusion.
I think that the author’s fear is not that Canada, France, etc leave NATO, but rather that the US will abandon it.
steve d:
“That America punishes countries that don’t cooperate?”
Interesting socialist thinking. Since when is rewarding those that help, punishment for those that don’t?
We still focus on the liberanos because there not dead yet. I will not rest til the last one is either on the end of a rope or at least behind bars.
steve d
You are simply argumentitive. Further, the damage to Canada is quite evident compared to the standard of living Canadians enjoy compared to the US; lack of productivity; lack of independence in trade; dependence on a cheap currency etc. In order to appreciate how damaged Canada is you have to live outside of it for a time to either have some perspective and/or something to compare to. The healthcare I received when I was a boy isn’t what it is now; the cost of post secondary education isn’t what it was, even adjusted for inflation; infrastructur now needs to be either subsidized by the private sectors or entirely arranged but what was formerly built by the public purse.
The richest city in Canada has infrastructure falling apart and despite outrageous fair market value property tax, it needs a hand out every year. T
For Gods sake, a backwater like Buffalo had a publicly paid for gleaming professional arena 5 years before Toronto’s private cabal of pensions funds, banks and wealthy built a rink no one can afford to go to.
steve d. I didn’t ask you to substantiate general statements, but your specific statements:
1) steve d wrote: “What NATO’s use by the US proves is just how much these wars and the Bush tax cuts have undercut their ability to swagger like they used to. They used to plan to cope with two regional wars and one world war…that is over for the time being.”
Kindly substantiate all points in the above paragraph.
2) steve d wrote: “Lets not pretend to be more free than we really are.”
Kindly substantiate.
3) steve do wrote: “If we are passive observers or active participants, when invited, we will be allowed to maintain our economic and political freedom.”
Please provide examples and substantiate.
4)” If we ever decided not to cooperate as described above then we would pay the price that countries like Cuba, Iran, ro Iraq suffer. Everyone knows this so they don’t dare go down that road too far”
Again, please substantiate.
5) steve d wrote: “you think N..A..T..O is not in the American back pocket you are even more naive than you sound. If any country, Canada included and perhaps especially, tried to separate its foreign policy goals as being anything remotely seen as unproductive to America we would be punished economically”
6) steve d wrote: “That America punishes countries that don’t cooperate?”
These are not ‘well-known facts’. Please substantiate and provide examples.
Otherwise, your statements are empty coffee-shop opinions.
Again, please substantiate.
jrb
You don’t think I ask good questions?
I realize that a lot of people don’t want discussion but rather approval or some rah rah bully for our side kind of BS, but I am here, and I like to remind even those with blinders on that there is indeed two sides to a story or point of view.
So who in the world has as high a standard of living as the US? On the other hand they have as many working poor as we have people. So I would be willing to bet that per capita we live better than Americans. Their top 10% is better off than our top 10% but as you move down to the average working stiff our guy has it better.
The cost of their post secondary education was more slow to rise than ours was but they are there now. State colleges and universities were $4700.00 in 2003-4. Private colleges were $20,000. Even community college was $2000.00 (all US figures).
Cities go through these cycles. In Ontario we chose to take tax cuts rather than put money into infrastructure and education. Our choice, now we are more willing to pay, but we have some catching up to do. It will take several more years to redress our selfishness.
Buffalo is now going through what Ontario went through a few years ago. They now short of funds and have had to cut public spending to the bone.
Roger Smith of CTV said Harper was greeted by the crowd as though he were a rock star. Rock on, Harper. Rock on. LOLOL. Cheers.
———————————————-
Harper celebrates Canada Day on Parliament Hill
Norma Greenaway, CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, July 01, 2006
OTTAWA – Stephen Harper celebrated his first Canada Day as prime minister by offering a special salute to Canadians working outside the country, especially the Canadian Forces serving in Afghanistan.
At a sun-soaked party on Parliament Hill, Harper appeared thrilled to be marking Canada’s 139th birthday, and made a point of citing by name and location some of the other events going on across the country, including a swearing in of new citizens in Markham, Ont.
He reserved his most heartfelt remarks for Canada’s soldiers, diplomats and international aid workers. He praised them for sharing the peace, prosperity and freedom Canadians enjoy with those torn by war, poverty, disease and disaster elsewhere in the world.
“Our country, our way of life did not happen by accident,” he said at one point, citing Canada’s English and French roots and the waves of immigration as adding to its character. “Canada leads by example.” …-
voy forums
Thanks, jrb and FREE, for answering steve d. for me. I barely have the energy to do it. You know? If you have to explain ad nauseum, ad infinitum, then it’s too late.
You know what I notice about our resident socialists/lefties/trolls, whatever label fits apply it?: They suck the energy out of you. There’s a point where you just have to say, “Sorry. I’ve tried conversation, I’ve tried discussing, I’ve tried explaining, and you still don’t get it. Maybe you don’t want to get it.”
Perhaps not getting it is a permanent state, and if it is, I’m sure not the person who’s going to make you understand. God can do that, not me. In the meantime, jrb’s and FREE’s and ET’s attempts to enlighten you, steve d., will have to do.
steve d wrote: “ET. The pot calling the kettle black. As if you substantiate.” (sic) and sick.
Toddler behaviour, steve. ET has just answered your questions–on THIS thread! (ET has actually answered them many times on many threads.) It seems that you have very serious language processing problems. I think you need a tutor.
Why don’t you find someone who really knows about the issues you talk about, in a much wider context? Also, someone who’s able to understand the content of posts, such as ET’s. That person could help you process the immediate information and then synthesize it within the larger framework.
“The pot calling the kettle black”? That you would presume to put yourself on the same level as ET is almost blasphemy! This person’s vast knowledge and superlative ability to present it analytically in all sorts of contexts beats your paltry, one-track-mind opinions any day. (Don’t get me wrong: You have a right to your opininons, steve d. But I’d appreciate them far more if they had any gravitas, which, in my opinion, they don’t.)
Think about that tutor, steve 😉
I like “empty coffee-shop opinions”. That way, you get better service than when the coffee-shop is full.
steve d: I’ve just read to my nearest and dearest some of the unsubstatiated vapidity you spout. We think that a Canadian revision of the universal term “useful idiot” might be called for here.
I’m making an assumption: I think you’re Canadian and probably on the short side of 35. So, in that context, how about “entitled idiot”? (Charter: Get it?)
Of course, to be inclusive, I’ll throw in “useful [to trolls and tyrants everywhere] idiot” as well.
P.S. NKOTB (NB, steve, it’s got a K, not a C), I share your frustration, as you see.
Make that opinions, not opininons!
Frustrated? Gastrointeritis? Perhaps you should take a break. Plop, plop, fizz, fizz, oh what a relief it is. By the way, the coffee-shop I attend sells antacids. Under the counter, of course, along side the Handbook of Gracious Behaviour.
I hear you, Vitruvius. But sometimes, people don’t deserve “gracious behaviour”.
The steve ds of this country–ignorant, immature, entitled lefties–have treated too many sda types–reasonable, intelligent, non liberal–with the utmost contempt, e.g., ungracious behaviour, for far too long. Oh ya, while doing so, they also congratulate themselves on how tolerant and inclusive they are.
So, I’m drawing the line–actually enjoying a nice glass of red wine and feeling quite fine!–and letting steve d know that my tolerance and inclusiveness don’t encompass giving credence to his small-minded AND small-brained sophistries. (Again, he has a right to spout them. But he needs to be prepared to take the heat. Lefties always seem to discount that aspect of “freedom of expression”.)
So, there you are. (I’ve just received two beautiful gifts as thanks for generous hospitality.) Please pass the handbook on to someone else.
steve d. I’m still waiting for your to substantiate your empty coffee cup opinions. I asked you. You are the one who promotes ‘dialogue’. So, answer the questions. Dialogue.
You state that the US has ‘as many working poor as Canada has people’. That’s about 10% of their population. What’s wrong with that? Do you expect everyone to be at the same income level? The pilot of the plane should earn the same as the street sweeper? The engineer with several degrees and 20 years of experience should earn the same as the waitress in the corner Starbucks?
Why?
Ever looked at a statistical chart showing a bell curve of normative percentages or wages? Do you know what a bell curve looks like, and that a robust economy can’t be all at one level? Do you know which economy, and there’s only one, has all its population at one economic level? The hunting and gathering economy. Is that your utopia goal for Canadians?
Did you know that Canada has a higher unemployment rate than the US?
Did you know that Canada relies almost exclusively on the US to purchase its export goods? That means that Canada isn’t competitive on the world market.
And now, instead of throwing out empty opinions, substantiate them. Answer the questions.
ET
Lets pretend that you didn’t realize that the spending was balanced before 9/11. Since then the congress has had to okay a $9 trillion debt. You never heard this?
The Iraq war has cost over $400billion. You never heard that either I suppose.
The debt is projected to be 9 by 2008 then 11 trillion by 2010. By 2015 the mandatory expenses begin to accelerate. By 2040 the mandatory spending outpaces what income based on historical tax rates.(dept of treasury budget)
Meanwhile, Bush has committed to cutting the deficit in half but not by raising taxes. So that leaves cutting his spending.
there’s your first point… more to come
ET
The pentagon military plans are interesting too.
Rather than me taking out parts you may as well read the article in its entirety.
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/Pentagon-Terrorism-Plan23apr06.htm
more to come..
K, I fleshed out my “Immigration Is Bad For Global Warming” theory a bit. For the record, I oppose Kyoto but do not dispute a causal link between human activity and global climate change.
Last election the Liberal Party of Canada pledged to bring eight million immigrants to Canada over the next ten years, more than tripling our current (highly backlogged and 90% unsecure) levels of immigration. Given our current population of 33 million people, the Liberals wanted to increase Canada’s population by nearly 25% to 41 million.
While simultaneously reducing C02 emissions to 1991 levels, when our population was 27 million.
See the problem here? 41 million is a bigger number than 27 million. Over 50% bigger.
And it’s actually worse than that, globally speaking. As we all know Canada is the biggest energy consuming nation in the world on a per capita basis. This is due in no small part to our cold weather and vastness, but perhaps to a greater extent it is because we are such an affluent society.
Those 8 million immigrants become C02 emitting machines when they come to Canada and adapt our ways (Minivan, furnaces, etc.); the net effect of immigration from less developed countries to Canada is an overall increase in C02 *globally*.
As for the Conservatives, Immigration Minister Solberg is maintaining the same immigration levels as the Liberals. The Liberals set a target of 300,000 annually but never met it. Sort of like how they set a foreign aid target of 0.7% and never met it, and set C02 emissions targets and never met them.
The point I am making here is that public policies need to mesh together; the Liberal plan to reduce C02 emissions 30% while increasing the population over 50% (from 1991’s 27 million to the Liberals’ proposed 41 million) appears unrealistic to an absurd degree. In a broader context, we need to recognize that immigration = net overall global increase in C02 emissions and proceed from there.
ET
Cuba was a friend of the USA before it was an enemy. Did Cuba attack the USA? No. What did it do? It declared itself independent. It wouldn’t allow American companies free reign. Venezuela is the latest country to be independent. America is cutting trade, starting with military parts.
Venezuela had a 1% royalty(like Alberta) but Chavez bumped it to 16% and now wants closer to 30% royalties. If Canada decided, say under a socialist government to up the ante regarding oil royalties America would give us the big chill too. You doubt it?
America it the only nation to have attacked us(yes before we were a nation, as if that would make a difference) and they have attacked Mexico in 1846(a land grab). They have made more recent plans to attack as well.
http://www.counterpunch.org/rudmin02172006.html
How free are we? As long as we agree with them we can be as free as they are. If we decide to go a different way it may be more difficult than at first meets the eye. Not that we would want to go a different way but, if America became fascist it may not even matter. Fascism is part of their past, present and…
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_american_fascism.htm
this just in:
curiously, I knew *exactly* what broom was referring to.
************************
also, I swung by the local lieberal’s constituency office and they dun tooks down my posters about pierre turdeau zooming thither and yon laughing at the Canadian soldiers going off to dispense with the nazi thugs.
so I replaced them with the larger 11 X 17 photocopies ready at hand. and then I hilited the key words ‘german uniform’ and ‘joke’.
jeezuz Lard helps me Ive hated that man right from the start in 1968. Ive seen thru his ‘debonaire’ crap all along.
tomorrow is a statutory holiday, I will do the same thing again as well then too if I have to and any left over are getting tacked up next weekend.
photocopies are 7 cents apice at staples and a roll of scotch tape goes a long way.
godamm lieing thieving lieberals, they brought all this on themselves.
I disagree, Lookout, that “sometimes, people don’t deserve ‘gracious behaviour'”. After all, if you wish to attempt to stab someone in the back, you must first get behind them. Yes you can attempt to shoot them in the face, but that’s rather pedestrian behaviour and tends to soil the upholstery, so I think it should be reserved for true emergencies.
steved. What’s with this ‘more to come’? Are you saying that you didn’t have your facts in front of you when you wrote all those opinions?
Again, you haven’t answered even one of my questions.
1) You state that the US normally planned to be able to cope with two regional wars and one world war. At a time. Please provide proof of this. Where does it assert this Three War At A Time Mandate? I’ve never heard of it.
No, you can’t just fling financial data around, for that doesn’t show how the US planned to deal with three wars (two regional and one world) at a time. Substantiate your claim.
No, don’t send me to a link. And the Pentagon doesn’t post its war plans. But, you, after all, made the assertion already. That meant that you already had the facts. Provide them.
2) You say that we pretend to be more free than we really are. Please substantiate.
3) You say that if we please the Americans ‘we’ll be allowed to maintain our economic and political freedom’. Please substantiate.
4) You say that ‘if we don’t, then, we pay the price’. Please substantiate.
5) You say that NATO is in the American’s backpocket. Please substantiate.
6) You say that any country whose foreign policy is unproductive to America is punished. Please substantiate.
7) And what about my question about the normal Bell Curve statistic for wages in a country?
So far, steved, your opinions are just empty coffee cups. And unless you substantiate them, that’s where they belong. In the coffee shop. In the dishwasher.
“steve d. I’m still waiting for your to substantiate your empty coffee cup opinions. I asked you. You are the one who promotes ‘dialogue’. So, answer the questions. Dialogue.”
ET,it is bad enough you continually feed the trolls here,but going outside and yelling’dinner’to invite them to the feasts you lay out for them is just too much!Why can you not realize you’re banging your head against a concrete wall?My guess is you just enjoy arguing with people.
Most importantly,why don’t you do the rest of us here a favor and take your personal little battles with steve d to private e-mail and leave some bandwidth for others to voice an opinion?
It is tiresome,repetitive,pointless and sets a combative tone to threads.To day after day subject everyone else here to your stupid,neverending peeing matches with trolls is arrogant.
Whenever a new thread comes up,the odds are good it will be eventually hijacked by you and one or two trolls dancing in circles.Give it a rest!
I come here to speak my mind and then ingest the varied opinions of many,not to watch the ET/steve d show!
I don’t agree with you, canadian observer. I don’t think that steved, agitfact etc, are trolls. I think that neutralsam is a troll. I think that steved and agitfact are representative of the majority of Canadians, who are, after all, of the Liberal and/or NDP alignment.
I don’t think it’s productive to simply say to this mindset – ‘You don’t get it; you don’t think like us; go away’. And refuse to discuss with them.
I’d instead like to point out to them, that their conclusions have no grounds, no evidence.
I don’t see the point of a blog, as is so common among the left, where everyone agrees with each other and violently rejects other conclusions.
canadian observer
You can pee but I can’t? I am stupid and you are…? I have battles and you have..?
Your head is concrete and its my fault?
I am tiresome and you are …?
You come here to speak your mind…? well excuse me…As far as I can tell speaking your mind would only take a line or two. Anyway, speaking your mind isn’t good enough…you have to substantiate.
I take up bandwidth and you…?
I “hijack” and you…?
I understand you need agreement. But the real world isn’t like that. Get used to it.
I must say, ET, that I do think you would earn a higher return on your investment if you were to spend more of you resources on explaining your own positions (most of which I happen to agree with) than you are currently reaping via your attempts to demand that others explain theirs.
ET
can you be clear about what you wanted substantiated and what ,in fact, substantiation is in your mind?
Substantial evidence to me is not substantial to you, so you would have be clear and concise about what it is that you would consider substantive.
ET,I didn’t expect you to agree with me,that’s why I suggested you continue on,just do it in PRIVATE and give the rest of us a BREAK…you seem to be the only one here naive enough to think you have accomplished ANYTHING with steve d in the past few months except give HIM a forum.
If you want to argue all day,every day with people,may I respectfully suggest you start your own blog!
BTW,look up troll in the dictionary,you’ll see a picture of steve d next to it.