gdp's Comments

Macleans.ca : Edge and muscle

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:24:50 +0000

Bob Rae: "May no vapid platitude be left unturned".

Macleans.ca : There, isn't that better?

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:00:53 +0000

Feschuk is often funny; this is just lame.

Macleans.ca : Sorry to rain on everyone's parade, but . . .

Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:59:10 +0000

It's refreshing, though not surprising given the author, to read an article so full of reflection, cognition and general intelligence. I wonder how strongly the paradigm of autocracy still holds. In our lifetime, we have witnessed the fall of the paradigm of communist autocracy. In the Western world, we assume that the fall of the paradigm of theocratic autocracy must follow. It is natural to be under the mistaken belief that other societies will 'progress' in the same manner that ours has. Outside of the Western world that likely seems an arrogant and naive assumption. Even if there are indications that there are cracks in the wall of that fortress, Amiel may be right on the mark with the warning of a lost generation. Who really knows the strength of that fortress or the size of cracks in the wall? It is likely that democracies have been more often born out of a strongman's desire to get out of Dodge than a magnanimous gesture on his part to advance his country. I doubt relaxation is their usual state of mind in such cases. Comparisons of contemporary autocracies with those past should take into account remarkable shifts in mass access to dialogue. When a regime attempts to stifle all dialogue, as in the Iranian case that Amiel cites, it may be the an early indication of a lost cause in an age where free dialogue is flooding even the most repressive societies.

Macleans.ca : We get the politics we pay for

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:02:32 +0000

You think Acura is a Euro car?

Macleans.ca : We get the politics we pay for

Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:25:31 +0000

Gilles Duceppe has done more for national unity than anyone else has, or could, in our lifetimes. By rendering the BQ benign, he has served unity better than anyone.

Macleans.ca : We get the politics we pay for

Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:55:02 +0000

Reading this, it seems obvious to me that Coyne started with the conclusion that he liked and then just made up any old argument that, in his cleverness, he thought sounded good. This is not to say there aren't grains of truth in his article. Its just that there is far too much hypocrisy in his arguments. He laments for the good old days when the structure of funding allowed for more choice. That's ridiculous, voters today are all over the map with party support. There is clearly more choice now than in the past, so its hard to accept an argument that there is a structural deficit. Coyne argues that attack ads are ineffective, offering as evidence that the parties support has plateaued with no change between them. A look south of the border, where the vindictiveness in advertising makes Canadian ads seem almost chummy, together with their wildly changing electoral outcomes would suggest Coyne is off the mark. Coyne also makes the argument that with money, people become less interested in quality. Yeah, high end manufacturers like Mercedez, Acura, BMW, these are hallmarks of low-quality. Its absurd to suggest that with money, you become less interested in quality. Coyne offers that politics are an industry in decline, citing the falling voter turnout numbers. I don't think voter apathy suggests that politicians are doing a poor job running their industry. It likely means that the voters feel that the politicians are doing a good enough job that the voter doesn't have to go through the effort of determining the most deserving candidate. It may also mean that some voters do not see enough differentiation to bother choosing between candidates and parties. Its also a little ironic that Coyne begins his article with a loathing CPC beat-down on the very day that the Liberals unveiled their own series of attack ads. Had Coyne not resorted to making up specious arguments and favouritism, I think his message would have been much more worthy. Attack ads should be criticized because they are demeaning, simple as that.

Creativity and Innovation : Windows 7 + Rails 3.0 + mysql2 Gem fix

Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:30:05 +0000

Awesome. I did spend hours sifting through supposed fixes, but this will save me countless additional hours of frustration. Thanks Allan.

Macleans.ca : 19th Annual University Rankings

Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:12:28 +0000

No. Who really cares? I think that falls under the 'protest too much' category.

Macleans.ca : The only good xmas present

Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:10:43 +0000

Bean counters! You could never put a precise dollar value on the act of giving. The is an intrinsic value simply in the act, for both the giver and recipient. An interesting aspect of the article is that it focuses on Christmas, but the case works against all gift giving, so why limit the complaint to Christmas giving?

Macleans.ca : Will we ever have a black prime minister?

Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:21:57 +0000

do you all really think Harper and Ignatieff are, of all Canadians, the two people in Canada most qualified to be PM? Emphatically yes, because along with ability come equal parts of ready and willing.

Macleans.ca : 'This debate is not simply about an epidemic'

Tue, 3 Nov 2009 16:54:50 +0000

It is really only unfortunate for those who want to make political hay out of this tragic death. We know already this flu is going to cause death, especially in those with immune system disorders. Regardless of whether this one child died with it, or from it, the response of the government should be the same- and that is to provide the best possible protection.

Macleans.ca : '4,476 pages of contempt'

Tue, 3 Nov 2009 16:18:14 +0000

Try to take a minute and think about that. No matter what format the information was summarized in, there would have been a complaint that the government was hiding something, or massaging the data to make themselves look better. Page was very clear that he wanted all the information in real haste. If you had ever tried to coordinate thousands of documents from a multitude of sources, you would understand that it is not a trivial or easily expedited matter. Also, typically, auditors want to see paper because electronic documents are too easily manipulated, and they want to see any notes that have been added to original type.

Macleans.ca : '4,476 pages of contempt'

Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:36:02 +0000

Get real. Page has been incredibly ambitious with his expectations. No matter what form the government gave the records in, there was room for his complaint. The only possible way to remove the possibility of complaint, was to give him everything. I think they were sending a clear message that if you complain that you are not getting everything, and complain that it would be simple to get everything, then you should expect everything. Page under-estimated the scale of the project, which is reflected in his past criticisms. Complaints have been raised here that the government didn't give him 'the spreadsheet', like there is 'a spreadsheet'. Similarly, complaints were raised that the government was not providing the specific information Page wanted, yet there was no previously defined specification of the data. I think that Page would do well, to make his appeals reasonable, or face being held to the same standard that he is demanding. If the only data Page wanted was on BLOODY GOOGLE MAPS, then he could quite simply taken a soft copy from BLOODY GOOGLE MAPS. If Page started focusing on accountability issues, instead of power politics, then he could perhaps keep up with the growing independent analysis that increasingly shows that complaints of partisan spending are unfounded.

Macleans.ca : '4,476 pages of contempt'

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:53:23 +0000

Page's complaint would resonate a whole lot better if he had been a little less emphatic about needing all of the information, now! It shows a profound lack of judgment to let Mulcair show up with one of his boxes, that just screams partisanship.

Macleans.ca : Liberal media conspiracy infiltrates Harper cabinet

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:29:29 +0000

You've just made a compelling case for shutting down the CBC news department. How could anyone working at the CBC not worry that their bosses would act in the same manner regarding state-ownership and state-expansion, when they work for a state-owned corporation.

Macleans.ca : Liberal media conspiracy infiltrates Harper cabinet

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:12:38 +0000

How incredibly illiberal of you, Jack, to presume that a woman who has made it to the top echelons of media can't assert her own thoughts and must be swayed by her husband.I think on the whole, the Liberals would be the more encumbered party if policing such relationships was enforced.

Macleans.ca : Canadians don't know much about Prince Charles. Lucky for him.

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:10:16 +0000

I think every royal in a contemporary world, has a choice to make. Either break out of the traditional mold and role to become an outspoken intellectual, or recognize the role for what it is, send letters to centenarians and smile a lot. Elizabeth understands that. Outside of championing some motherhood issue - like banning land mines, they should remain quiet, lest they expose the surreal nature of their own social and intellectual development. For Charles to speak of the insignificance of 'technological ease', is to make himself immediately susceptible to charges that his life full of privilege has seriously skewed his understanding of the toil of work and the hardship that often accompanies that.

Macleans.ca : Buried under rubble

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:33:41 +0000

Conservatives don't hold a monopoly on crazy beliefs. In fact, if your primary concern is the efficacy of ideas, you are by definition, a conservative. Once again, who is arguing against a fair and open court? The article's issue is to try to prove his innocence outside of court.

Macleans.ca : Buried under rubble

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:14:41 +0000

Saying we have a federal court, so that is the due process, is to obscure the whole nature of international law. In every case, there is a problem with jurisdiction and contending principles and practices. In this case, the United States took a determined shift in policy to severely limit the civil liberties of international terrorists. The United States have now taken a determined examination of whether those changes were legitimate. What does our federal court and the relevant cases have to say on that matter? Where are those answers in our case history? Clearly, the legal aspects of the case are not as simple as you imply. The issue the article wants to advance, is Khadr's innocence. It fails in that attempt.

Macleans.ca : Buried under rubble

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:40:47 +0000

Who is suggesting that waiting for trial for 7 years is acceptable? The Bush regime was obviously outside the boundaries of legitimacy in their handling of terrorists. Excusing terrorists, people who are responsible for the deaths of many Canadian soldiers and who would revel in the deaths of Canadians on Canadian soil, because of how Guantanamo was run, would only compound the errors. This article is one suggesting that Khadr is really an innocent. On that issue, I think there is a clear case that he is not.