en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/658364 Comments by skyroamer http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/17/what-do-you-think-of-the-government%e2%80%99s-handling-of-tamil-asylum-seekers-in-b-c/#IDComment94373780 The boat should never have been allowed to land. These are neither refugees nor immigrants; they are migrants, here to take advantage of our good-heartedness and our once good economy. As Mark Steyn wrote in this magasine a few weeks ago, "We are too broke to be this stupid!" The Third World is going to haul us down to their level in short order and then the entire world will be the Third World with Third World economies, industrial ability, and standards of living. My suggestion is that the Third World begin to look after its own problems, beginning with controlling their populations, instead of simply using North America as a dumping ground for it's excess population, and an ATM for welfare cash. Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:03:30 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/17/what-do-you-think-of-the-government%e2%80%99s-handling-of-tamil-asylum-seekers-in-b-c/#IDComment94373780 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92831754 Go to Rome, Cairo or Istanbul on Porter old son! If you can. Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:57:32 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92831754 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92831155 I notice that now that Westjet is becoming an airline rather than a small, hick, provincial carrier, its down-home, aw-shucks image is also disappearing. Face it, this is a business not some massage parlor where your little whims are all catered to-- a business that provides a safe transport for you from point A to point B, not a touchy-feely joke dispensing feel good parlor. Why don't you all grow up already? Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:55:29 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92831155 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92829020 I gather, Barb, that you have never flown on any American carrier. Air Canada' service, bad as you may think it is, is head and shoulders above any of the US carriers. I flew to Amsterdam on KLM four years ago and was only too happy, on my return flight, to get to Toronto where I could board an AC flight to come home to Vancouver. Careful what you wish for, you might get it! As far as Sedi is concerned, politics was a bogyman that the Know-nothings came up with in order to have a talking point against AC. Jean Chretien hated AC and even with all of his support Canadian couldn't make it nor could CPA before it even it CPA was given fully one-half the world to service. Contrary to the Know-nothing propaganda, AC had exactly NO support from the Canadian taxpayer--this was simply a lie. Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:48:55 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/13/the-aviator-antagonist/#IDComment92829020 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/05/13/will-the-habs-play-in-the-stanley-cup-final/#IDComment75455048 AND, like, who gives a damn? The Habs are Quebec's team, and maybe they care, but who in the ROC (as the rest of us are disparigingly referred to) should give a damn what happens there? Quebec wants to be a nation unto its own, and so they should be, but why then should the rest of us care if their teams do well or not, or really what happens to them? Fri, 14 May 2010 19:24:57 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/05/13/will-the-habs-play-in-the-stanley-cup-final/#IDComment75455048 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/12/how-do-you-feel-about-helena-guergiss-departure-from-the-federal-cabinet/#IDComment68656096 You hit this nail right on the head! The only thing you missed is the obvious comparison of our so-called democracy to the USSR of Joe Stalin. Elitist politicians; hate crimes--all you had to do was denounce someone in the USSR and you were guilty; kangaroo courts--the HRC; politicians are dictators--after you vote do you have any say, can you control the pols?; yes the pols will keep taking until we're sucked dry--how is that different from working for the state like in the USSR?; no freedom of speech, or even thought--see the HRC and the Charter of Rights. We are free to speak and think as long as you are speaking and thinking the "correct line"--see the Human Rights Commission and the Charter of Rights again. Native rights, minority rights, collective rights, criminal rights--where does the majority, the individual, and the law abiding, tax-paying citizen fit into this scenerio? I'm sort of happy that I'm nearly at the end of my life because I won't have to watch the continuing crumbling of this country thanks mostly to Trudeau and the Trudeaupians! Sun, 18 Apr 2010 05:52:53 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/12/how-do-you-feel-about-helena-guergiss-departure-from-the-federal-cabinet/#IDComment68656096 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/07/does-hamid-karzais-recent-threat-to-join-the-taliban-change-your-opinion-about-the-mission-in-afghanistan/#IDComment66921555 Except that it was the Liberals, Jean Chretien, that put us in Afghanistan in the first place. Secondly, they voted as a block with the Conservatives to stay in Afghanistan until 2011. And finally, it is Iggy that was first on record saying that perhaps we could stay there in a "training role" beyond 2011--and wouldn't our guys still be shot at and killed for a bunch of people that hate us? Sat, 10 Apr 2010 02:30:25 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/07/does-hamid-karzais-recent-threat-to-join-the-taliban-change-your-opinion-about-the-mission-in-afghanistan/#IDComment66921555 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64300600 I believe that you are the four year old. Ann can simply make your viewpoint irrelevant because she has facts to back up her opinions. Opinions without facts are simply B.S., and Ann has very little tolerance for people just talking to hear themselves. Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:32:59 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64300600 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64300246 I disagree. A discussion is when you allow differing ideas, something we don't allow in Canada anymore. We only allow speech when it agrees with the politically correct opinion, therefore, no free speech or even more important, no free expression. With no free expression, no democracy! Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:28:35 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64300246 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64299920 If you think debating Ann is like debating a 4 year old, you are either stupid, ignorant or both. She obviously is so far beyond your understanding that she wouldn't even have to work up a sweat with you. She's a Suma Cum Laude law school graduate who has worked for Supreme Court Justices; you are just loud. Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:24:39 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/26/coulter-live-and-loud-in-calgary/#IDComment64299920 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/10/09/do-you-take-issue-with-governor-general-michaelle-jeans-recent-claim-to-being-canadas-head-of-state/#IDComment39151383 Wrong! The GG is only the Queen's REPRESENTATIVE in Canada. Therefore the Queen is Head of State and as the GG only represents her is technically not the head of state. The government thus has the right to object for the Queen. Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:38:57 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/10/09/do-you-take-issue-with-governor-general-michaelle-jeans-recent-claim-to-being-canadas-head-of-state/#IDComment39151383 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment39113838  IntenseDebate Notification <DIV>AND your reality is lack of proper representation for the three provinces that are the drivers of the Canadian economy? A senate that is the Liberal party's control of that representation? A Liberal leader whose recent book reads like it was taken right from the nearest geography book? (He drove out of the Eastern Boreal forest onto the Great Plains east of Winnipeg and had to stop to view the vista. Skip to stopping his car just west of Calgary to see the sun set over the foothills.) Who the hell is he, Captain Canada, leaping out of the bedroom of Toronto to the living room of the West? The Forest doesn't just stop on a dime, and anybody with halfa brain know that the sun sets over the Rocky Mountains, not the foothills. Next, he will be seeing buffalo herds and hearing the voyaguers singing and paddling down the river.I know, it all sounds good in the coffee house circuitin the Center of the Universe.</DIV> <DIV>Yeah Trudeau ruined the economy of the west for a decade (the NEP), gave the finger to everyone west of Windsor, he and Lewis gave us the debt that we're still suffering under (from $60 billion in 1970 to nearly $600 billion by 1978), his sidekicks, Chretien and Martin brutalized health care in Canada and raised taxes by 54% to get rid of the Trudeau inspired deficit, and you are still worshipping at the feet of the Liberals.</DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>Granted Mulroney fell in between, but he was a simpleton that continued the liberal policies. I had no use for him either.</DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>Funny all of the governments that I mentioned were all Quebec governments led by Quebec Prime Ministers. Now we've had a Western PM for less than three years, no secret agendas, stable, tight government and you idiots can't stand it. That's modern reality!</DIV> <DIV style=\"FONT: 10pt arial\"> Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:12:12 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment39113838 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment38326469  IntenseDebate Notification <DIV>Poor analogy, but Pieree Elliot Trudeau certainly proved that a miser never goes broke or is poor. The man never carried a penny with him or a credit card; he expected everyone else to pay for him, and by god we did!</DIV> <DIV style=\"FONT: 10pt arial\"> Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:29:06 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment38326469 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment37408210  IntenseDebate Notification <DIV>There are none so blind as those who will not see. Yes the Harper Government is doing its best not to spend all of the money demanded by the Liberals and NDP--this is why they are doing a good job. And Iggy is screaming that they aren't spending enough on one hand then screaming about the deficit on the other. He should make up his mind. Layton and Bob Rae just scream. </DIV> <DIV>The economy will recover on its own. All of the government spending in the world doesn't help, especially in the long term, as goverments, having no money of their own and having to pay for all of the borrowing (deficit and debt), have to take money out of the economy (raise taxes) to do it. This slows down the recovery and causes inflation. Remember the 1980's after the Trudeau/David Lewis excesses of the 1970's? \"It's the economy, stupid\", as Bill Clinton told George H.W. Bush. You cannot spend yourself rich, I don't care what kind of airy fairy Socialist economics you preach.</DIV> <DIV style=\"FONT: 10pt arial\"> Tue, 6 Oct 2009 02:33:08 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment37408210 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36977776 Finally, to all of those who are screeching about Harper's "over-spending", remember that it was the Liberals and the NDP that demanded, and are still demanding, all of that spending. We needed "stimulus", and "social programs", and more EI, and universal daycare, and, and, and.... Socialists have no idea that the government has no money of its own; it has only what it takes out of the economy via taxes. If the economy is in recession, there are fewer taxes collected and thus deficit for already existing programs, never mind more spending. Sat, 3 Oct 2009 06:20:46 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36977776 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36974460 Along with democratizing the Senate, the bill that was blocked by the Liberal Senate also gave proper representation in the House of Commons to three provinces that are horribly under-represented: BC, Alberta and Ontario. So this PM, Harper, that you all hate, wants to make the country more democratic (elect the senate, and give rep by pop to under-repped provinces), and has acted as a proper steward of the economy according to two UN economic bodies. What a horrible man! You should be so lucky as to have this PM! Sat, 3 Oct 2009 06:06:46 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36974460 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36973307 Harper and the Conservatives have done a great job. So say the IMF and the World Economic Council, both UN bodies so should be loved by all of the left-wing liberal nuts. The biggest reason that the Liberals want an election, besides an insatiable lust for power and their hands on the purse of the country, is to prevent the Conservatives from appointing any more senators and thus gaining control of the Senate. The Liberal controlled Senate has already twice blocked democratization of the Senate by making it elected, and limiting the terms that senators may hold their positions in the Senate. This legislation has been passed by the Commons but blocked by an unelected, unrepresentative body--shame on the Liberals. Sat, 3 Oct 2009 06:02:05 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/28/how-would-you-rate-the-harper-governments-handling-of-the-economy/#IDComment36973307 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/09/whats-the-biggest-downside-to-a-fall-election/#IDComment34389491 Yes the Conservatives might not get elected. All of you very smart people should be happy that the Socialists (Liberals, NDP, & the Bloc) haven't totally had their hands on the levers of power for the past two years: the recession would be much deeper in Canada, the recovery in Canada nowhere in sight, and taxes would be going up like the Shuttle to pay for all of the socialist "programs" that the Coalition would be installing for their welfarite friends. Mon, 14 Sep 2009 05:47:48 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/09/whats-the-biggest-downside-to-a-fall-election/#IDComment34389491