I have always found it rather humorous when right wingers flap in concern about the left. Are we too believe that Rafe WANTS the NDP to win an election and is giving advice to bring that about? I think not!

I would have to agree with Rafe on this one and that doesn't happen very often!
Carole James HAS been a major disappointment.
The upsurge in NDP support in the last provincial election came more from a dislike for Gordon Campbell than anything she has done.
Which is very little.
She could have done better had she grown some cajone's but instead, chose to sit back and say very little about anything really.
I also think the fat raise for MLA's and her weak attempt at arguing against it, rendered another hit for the NDP.
Had she come out strongly against it,she may have recovered some points but again,she did very little.
Make no mistake about it,I dislike Gordon Campbell and his sheer arrogance toward the voting public.
History may very well prove him to be one of the worst leaders we have seen in years,but I cannot even consider supporting the NDP under Carole James.
One day, perhaps the NDP will get over this habit of shooting themselves in the foot everytime they turn around, particularly when it come to choosing leaders.
But I do not believe for one second they will attempt to go to the polls again with James at the helm.
That would once again be political suicide.

Rafe, I don't think you are doing British Columbians any favours by suggesting that " Adrian Dix is the best bet" to lead the NDP and potentially this province.

I have watched him arguing in the Legislature. Scary. He seems to be always one breath away from hyperventilating and losing it altogether.

That's the last person I would deem suitable for the job.

Of course, if the left wing voters wish to opt again for a scrapping fulminating bug-eyed ideologist let them complain later all they want if there are some bad results; they asked for it.

I think Carole James was a good choice, but (by not being NDP) I am probably *flapping in concern* about a matter that really is no skin off my backside one way or the other.

Cheers!

Who is Adrian Dix? Never heard of him.

I have heard of Bob Simpson. I think he can take on issues quite well. His abilities may be wasted in a leadership role.

Carol James had a major impact on the revival of the NDP, touring the province and encouraging members during what was obviously a demoralized period. It was predominantly due to her efforts that the NDP was able to take advantage of the downturn in Liberal fortunes and come back so gratifyingly, so let's not underestimate her abilities.

I suspect that many NDP MLAs are chomping at the bit to be more aggressive, but we were often told a few years ago that BC needed a new kind of politics to replace our provincial blood sport. Well, we now have that with Carol James, and what happen? We get complaints about lack of drive. Is it that BCers actually like the blood sport component of our provincial legislature?

Yeah, let's go back to the NDP heyday when Glen Clark-types were in charge. That worked out real well for the NDP, didn't it?

Rafe hates Carol James for one reason and one reason only: she's a woman trying to an old white man's job. Ain't that right, Rafe?

I have no trust for Carol James because she intimated support for the BCSTV before the election and then after the election when BCSTV got 59.8% of the vote she said nope, the citizens of BC did not get the 60% required, so to bad for electoral reform. For Carol James .2% short of the benchmark set by Gordon Campbell was enough for her to kill the Citizens Assembly process regardless of a clear majority will of the people.

Carol then went on to say (after the election) that she in no way supports BCSTV because she supports a party list proportional rep system of government. BCSTV will be back on the ballot in 2009 and Carol is now on record opposing electoral reform in BC that is supported by 60% of the population in a previous vote that saw no funding for the yes side.

What this clearly says to me, and should to others, is that Carol James is all about closed door politics working out of the view of the public and values the perspective of party insiders over those of the public in general as expressed at the ballot.

Carol would like to appoint your representatives through party list and does not want accountability through a transferable ballot, which would take the party hack out of the nomination process.

Clearly the biggest democratic deficit in Canada and BC is the power of party insiders to set the agenda over those who are nominated for the voters consideration at election time. Party hacks are the root of all the hidden agenda's and erosion of our rights and democracy. Citizens of BC should not support any politician that openly supports that kind of politics.

I agree with Owl that Bob Simpson would be the logical choice for NDP leader if the party was an open party for the middle class and not a closed party of ideologs with hidden agenda's of incompetence and betrayal.

Time Will Tell

"...she's a woman trying to an old white man's job."

I think James took over from Ujjal Dosangh and he was neither old nor white at the time.

Since then he became *liberated.* Go figure.

Oh, for the gold old days of Glenmania...and fool's gold.

Canadian Pol Calls SPP A 'Coup d'Etat'
7-31-7

Connie Fogal says the SPP ["Security and Prosperity Partnership"] is the "hostile takeover" of the apparatus of democratic government and an end to the "rule of law". There has been a kind of coup d'état over the government operations of Canada, U.S.A. and Mexico.

The first formal step towards the NAU was NAFTA. Ron Pastor of the Council on Foreign Relations has affirmed that. The Canadian Action Party, a registered federal sovereigntist political party in Canada, began as a party in 1997 precisely because none of the mainstream parties were calling for the clear, outright, unequivocal abrogation of NAFTA, or for control of our national monetary system.

Even now, our mainstream Canadian political parties and significant citizen groups are still stuck on re-negotiation of NAFTA (they talk of fair trade) which completely misses the point. As such, they remain blinded, and of no use to the citizens who care about our nation and our sovereignty, our independence, our civil liberties, our civil rights, our culture, our freedom .

The second formal step was the integration and subjugation of Canada's military into the US military command under NORAD, NORTHCOM, and the Bi-National Planning Agreement. That is why our Canadian military is in Afghanistan.

The third formal step in the creation of the NAU was the implementation of the respective liberty-stripping anti-terrorist legislations, the Patriot Act in the USA and the Anti-terrorist Act in Canada. This has been the mechanism to implement the police state apparatus necessary to enforce Fortress America.

The fourth formal step is the SPP, Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement. That agreement is a "hostile takeover" of the Executive branch of government, a coup d'état over the government operations of Canada, U.S.A. and Mexico.

(The three branches of democratic governance are: 1, the legislative arm, i.e., the policy makers, the people we elect; 2, the judicial arm, i.e., judges who interpret and apply the laws created by the policy makers; and 3, the executive arm, i.e., the civil service, the bureaucracy, who implement and run the policy and operations of government.)

The SPP is a treasonous metamorphosis of our federal and provincial government bureaucracies into formal instruments to implement the agenda of the shadow government - the military/ industrial/ financial complex exemplified by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives who in turn are dominated by the U.S Council on Foreign Relations, and the US military apparatus. The S.P.P. has created the competitiveness council (10 to 16 people from industry and academe unelected by citizens, unaccountable to citizens, unrepresentative of citizens ) in each of Canada, U.S.A., and Mexico. They meet with our Prime Minister and the two Presidents. They actively direct the restructuring of the civil service apparatus and governance of Canada, U.S., and Mexico away from instruments serving the public interest and nationhood, and into tools to serve the power and greed of the industrial, financial, military complex. This Competitiveness Council will be at Montebello directing the three leaders in August, 2007 finalizing the last steps of the NAU.

Since March, 2005, under the direction of three senior cabinet ministers of each country, about 100 working groups of unelected officials from government and industry have been meeting at taxpayer expense deciding on and directing the implementation of the restructuring of the apparatus of governance and the form of rule over the people. Their command goes out down the chain of bureaucracy expending vast amounts of taxpayer dollars implementing the changes in our border crossings, in our airports, on our airplanes, in our skies, on and to our roads and highways, in our personal identification systems, in our health, in our vaccines, over our food supplements, in our pesticide safety levels, in our schools and universities, in the exploitation of our natural resources-our rivers,lakes, oil, gas, in our environment, in the arms industry,in the manufacture and use of depleted uranium, in the exploitation of and experimentation on our indigenous people and our military personnel, in immigration, over our right of Habeus Corpus, in our right of due process, our right to assemble and our freedom of speech, etc., etc.

Government of the people, by the people,for the people has been eliminated while those people we have elected stand idly in the sidelines apparently blissfully oblivious, or deliberately careless of the termination of their policy making role except as a rubber stamp. Those we have elected have abused their responsibility to protect our power, the people's power. They have permitted an undemocratic elite to control them and the operation of government. It is by us, the general citizenry, that Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assemblies and city councillors,and Senators and congressmen are supposed to be ruled in all matters, not by the military/ industrial/ complex that General Dwight D. Eisenhower warned about on his final address to his nation. The Prime Minister and Presidents along with their most senior Cabinet members and officials really now do apply a "Divine Right of Kings" mentality to their role. They have metamorphosed into a cancer rotting the life out of our democracies.

For this reason the Canadian Action Party calls for electoral reform not just in how we elect candidates, but why and how the bureaucracy operates. In particular, we call for a curb on the exercise of power in the executive branch of government, and especially in the P.M.s office.This need is of paramount importance because it is the key to why and how three nations (Canada, USA,Mexico) are being dismantled.

Remember, if you believe in democratic accountable representation, there must be a universal franchise. Government of the people, by the people,for the people still is right. It is not government by officials of any organization or interest group whether public or private who are unelected by, unrepresentative, and unaccountable to the general public. We need to reform our government structure so that we can recall and replace any person we elect when they fail to keep their promise or do their duty to us, the citizenry ; and we also need to turn our executive arm of government back to being the servant of the citizens.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement (S.P.P) is deliberately not a formal international treaty such as NAFTA which is set out in a system of rule by international law .As a legal treaty the SPP would never have flown because it would have been exposed to scrutiny. It remains a work in progress agreement of incredible treacherous magnitude. It has already succeeded in implementing profound changes to three nations integrating the geographical region of North America. We do not even know the full extent of what has been completed or what little is left to be accomplished..

We know that a powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

We know that the final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the http://www.csis.org/ Center for Strategic & International Studies.

We know that the data collected for the report is based on seven secret roundtable sessions involving between 21 and 45 people and conducted by CSIS. The participants are politicians, business people, labour leaders and academics from all three countries with equal representation.

We know all this because it is described in a CSIS report,

We know all this because it is described in a CSIS report,

[url}http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf {/url][url]http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_
2025.pdf%3E%22North American Future 2025 Project[/url]

It will be interesting to see who the think tank representatives will be that appear before our Canadian Parliament and how it is presented since so many of our Canadian MP's deny this integration is happening. They need to realize that the vote still works in Canada and if they want to be re-elected, they must repel the submissions for integration. In fact, their duty to us is to refuse to hear such a delegation. SInce when has it become lawful to entertain discussion or debate on any form of treason??

This kind of presentation by such influential players will likely be a formalization of the integration as a done deal.

We, the citizens, must demonstrate to our governments that we demand an end to the integration of North America . And, we must tell them we are not asking for a front row seat at our hanging party. We do not want to be involved or to have them involved in any negotiations or discussions or debate about how our nations are to die. We already know we do not want a North American Union, period!!! They must repel the formal instructions coming to them this fall from the shadow government.

In recognition of our sovereign democratic rights and powers as citizens promulgated by the respective founding fathers of three nations, the Canadian Action Party calls upon all Canadians to join with our neighbors in the USA and Mexico to stand and defend our distinctive nations, NOT TO CALL FOR DEBATE AND DISCUSSION ON INTEGRATION. We must DEMAND SOVEREIGNTY AND INDEPENDENCE We must make a sound and sight so that uninformed citizens can be alerted. How can we do this?

Right now, focus on being at the 25 km perimeter around Montebello, Quebec on August 20 and 21, 2007. In a separate e mail I will send suggestions.about Montebello actions

I don't know what NDP Chadermando was listening to, but the NDP I am a member of always said they preferred a different proportional representation system with most MLAs elected and a few appointed from published party lists according to the percentage of votes each party got. However, the NDP refused to campaign on the issue and insisted that it was a voters' decision, not the parties', and they would work with whatever system the voters approved. I do not believe the Liberal viewpoint was much different, and the Greens want party lists.

For those reasons there was almost no discussion of the issue during the last election. Incidentally, I prefer a system where all MLAs are elected. I do not approve of party lists and many New Democrats agree.

The 60% threshold had nothing to do with the NDP. The Liberals set that up in legislation they introduced and passed when there was an opposition of three MLAs and the Liberals completely dominated the Legislature. Carol James was not one of those three MLAs, so had absolutely nothing to do with it. Blame the Liberals 100% for that. To try to blame the NDP for a Liberal decision is low even for Chadermando. Still, revisionist history is easy if nobody corrects the falsehoods.

As the government after the last election the Liberal party could have introduced legislation approving BCSTV despite being just short of the 60%. They refused to do so. That was a Liberal decision, not the NDP's. They still could introduce it as a matter of fact, so why don't they?

I would suggest to Chadermando and others like him who want to blast the NDP every chance they get, even making up NDP opinions after the fact like those he spouts here, that this issue of how our representatives are chosen is far too important for his partisan nonsense. This is an issue that supercedes party politics altogether.

Well, you confirm/admit that it is a voters' decision and that their decision was short of the required 60%. Then you say that the Liberals could/should still have overridden the voters' decision by simply introducing legislation and approving BCSTV regardless of what the voters wanted!?

Have you forgotten the meaning of democracy ?

Isn't it an abuse of democracy to simply move the goal posts AFTER the fact and get your way one way or the other?

Really, the only thing that would top such undemocratic shenanigans is to later blame them on someone else. I suppose recall legislation could be subjected to the same after the fact legislated *adjustments*?

Chad, keep the info on the infamous SPPA coming. There isn't one of the main parties that is totally clued in on the scary consequences.

Diplomat, I will otherwise we will not have a sovereign country in a year or two. I wish the government could come clean with their negotiations, but it is all driven behind closed doors. TILMA is another one that is a precursor to the grand SPP North American Union. They both effectively scrap local democratic law making for the least common denominator regulations that suit corporate interests.

Its a lose of sovereignty pure and simple. It coincides with the recent moves to make citizens guilty until proven innocent on a wide range of issues makes for a very scary future.

Harper is playing with fire. The last conservative party was dismantled because it sold Canada out with the free trade deal a precursor to a much worse SPP.

Ammonra, I guess you missed the part where I said Bob Simpson would give the n.d.p. a good chance at my vote. I don't know where you get that I am a partisan. I attack all parties that sell the citizens of BC out.

Now for the word twisting. I think Ammonra is far more guilty of that. I did not say Carol James came up with the 60% need to pass the referendum. I said it was an arbitrary number picked by Gordon Campbell and in light of 98% of BC ridings passing it with 59.8% of the provincial vote that BCSTV had more of a mandate than either the ndp or the liberals, and that in light of that Carol James could have voiced support for BCSTV by forwarding legislation respecting the will of the people, but instead she came out and said she had no intention of supporting BCSTV, and that she wanted a proportional rep list system. She thumbed her nose at the whole Citizen Assembly process and in effect said her personal opinion was all that mattered. That my friend is a partisan.

I know of a number of people that would not have voted ndp and will not vote ndp again because of her position on this specific issue. Like it or not this is a order winner and not an order qualifier for the majority of voters.

The BC liberals at least had the courage to implement a non-partisan BC Citizens Assembly to come up with a form of electing our governments and remained impartial during the vote even though Campbell had the balls to say he didn't support it, but would enact the legislation if it met 60% voter approval in 3/4 of all ridings. Carol James avoided comment until after the election and then threw cold water on it.

Had Carol James had the conviction to represent the majority we would be using a new electoral system in 2009 and begin the process to real democracy, but because she would not force the issue the province might lose that opportunity. Its as despicable and anti democratic as the Election BC interference banning the reform party in the 2001 election giving the liberals a dictatorship.

Saying the liberals too could have introduced the legislation is not enough. That is what opposition leaders are elected for IMO. Gordon Campbell, as wrong as he was on almost every other issue was, right on this one to the point where he didn't have an opposition that wanted democracy, and as a party hack himself wasn't about to ensure he wasn't premier for the 2010 Olympics. We can blame Carol James for having her own agenda, and we can blame Gordon as well for his own agenda, but only the opposition leader is to blame for not defending this issue.

HepCat I would argue that you are fighting yourself if you support Carol James. If in fact you are serious about getting the old white man club out of politics, then why in the world would you support a politician that advocates party list appointments through a party partisan process.

Would it not make more sense to have choice in who you elect? If you felt women were under represented would it not make more sense to have a ballot that gave you choice to pick only women candidates from your party or others through a transferable ballot that allows you to bi-pass the party selected white males?

I really think you need to re-evaluate your position of supprt for Carol James as she would take that right away from you and have old white men making your candidate selections for you.

Its amazing how some special interest people are their own worst enemy because they find it easier to make knee jerk feel good reactions that are politically correct in spin, but not in reality.

Cheers

Chandermando. Take a break. Two years from now we will be doing the same as we are doing now. Find something else of interest besides the **Great Conspiracies**

Lydon B Johnson said that if we did not stop the communists in Vietnam then we would have to fight them in Hawaii, and the next week in San Francisco. Did you notice after the Vietnamese kicked the Americans out of Vietnam any big problems in Hawaii, or San Francisco. George Bush says if we do not fight the terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq, we will have to fight them on American Soil . (Any similarities)

These guys are not smart enough to fire a starters pistol. Before Johnson decided not to run again, they had to force him out of bed, as he was seriously depressed and wouldnt get out from under the covers.

Before George Bush became Governer of Texas, and ultimately President of the USA he was a no name in the Texas Air Force learning to fly jets that would never be used in combat, so he could avoid Vietnam. He disapeared for approx 4 months and was never accused of being AWOL. Dick Cheney got five (5) deferrments, that kept him out of the Vietnam War. These are your American leaders.

Proportsional Representation is a lazy mans way of electing a Government, and is especially well suited to socialists, Ndp'rs, and others who cannot form or run a Government under the present system. Who needs it??

It would be nice if Gordon Campbell and Carol James both resigned, so we could get a fresh start with both parties.

Please don't take things out of context Diplomat. I was responding to a criticism of Chadermando who said that Carol James refused to accept BCSTV because it was 0.2% short of the required 60%. My comment was to accesntuate that it was a Liberal decision to set it at 60% and they controlled the Legislature. If anyone is to be criticised for refusing to overrule the last 0.2% then it should be the Liberals not the NDP.

Of course the goalposts should remain where they are. Neither the NDP, the Liberals (nor the Greens for that matter) have suggested that it should have passed. I was merely pointing out to Chadermando that it was set by Liberals and adhered to by Liberals to this day and had nothing to do with Carol James. Read his post again where he blames Carol James for the 0.2%.

Actually, Chadermando, I did get your comment about Simpson, and should he ever run in a leadership race I am sure he will get significant votes. However, there is not a leadership race even being discussed.

Carol James has been consistent in her support of a elected/party list blend all along. My point is that your claim she supported BCSTV before the election is not true. She never supported it at all. She has been consistent in her opinion all along. Like any other citizen she is entitled to her opinions. What she said, and it was (and is) also NDP policy, was that if the BCSTV system was approved by the voters it would be implemented by the NDP if they had formed government, but that it would not form part of the election platform so New Democrats would be free to make their own personal choice. I would note that nobody knew at the time whether BCSTV was going to be approved or not. No money was provided to conduct a proper campaign, as it should have been with both Yes and No sides. However, as it turned out BCSTV was NOT approved by the voters. I hope next time it will be. If there is a Yes side, I will work for it, as will many New Democrats.

What you are perhaps not aware of is that numerous long time New Democrats believe the proportional representation system used by the Socreds many years ago was responsible for our defeat in a general election and they are adamantly opposed to any proportional representation system of any kind. Many other New Democrats are very much in favour of it, noting that the proposed BCSTV system is quite unlike that older system. Neverhteless, that is almost certainly part of the reason why the NDP largely ignored the issue.

Finally, Chadermando, just a note about the people making up the NDP in various positions. One of our by-laws is that there must be 50% female representation at all levels. We are the only party that insists women be treated equally with men. Women in the NDP are involved at the highest levels in decision making. In other words, in the NDP it will not be old white men making decisions but women and men of all colours.

Ammonra:"As the government after the last election the Liberal party could have introduced legislation approving BCSTV despite being just short of the 60%. They refused to do so. That was a Liberal decision, not the NDP's. They still could introduce it as a matter of fact, so why don't they?"

I take this to be your opinion, because you made it in your comment.

Very well. Now the story takes a new twist:

Ammonra:"Of course the goalposts should remain where they are. Neither the NDP, the Liberals (nor the Greens for that matter) have suggested that it should have passed."

Well, of course not! You are the one who did!

If the goalposts should indeed "remain where they are" why did you state:"...so why don't they?"

I am not confused and I am not taking things out of context, I am however a bit puzzled by obvious contradictory statements made by you.

Testing. I don't understand why comments are not posting on the Letters webpage. the editor is not answering my e-mail. I just picked this article at random to register "my grievance".

Chadermando gave us 2748 words of dialog that I didnt read. Why? If I remember correctly Chadermando also believes in a seperate centeral province within BC.

Who ever you are Chadermando and you have told us at one time that you drive a flatbed truck. You should stick to truck driving the centerline is shwing up in your posts. They are right off the wall.

Cheers

It was a rhetorical question, Diplomat, and I did not expect an answer. If you want one, it is that it would be undemocratic to do so.

As I have already said, keep it in context - that being Chadermando's criticism of Carol James for not proposing it. If she is to be criticised for not proposing it, then so should the Liberals, for they did not propose it either and they formed the government. Context, Diplomat, context!

Ammonra:"Of course the goalposts should remain where they are. Neither the NDP, the Liberals (nor the Greens for that matter) have suggested that it should have passed."

Diplomat here: Then how does your statement:"They (the Liberals) refused to do so. That was a Liberal decision, not the NDP's" make even one iota of sense?

If no one asked for it, whose request did the Liberals refuse and how could they have refused it if no one ever made it?

NO ONE PROPOSED IT, so what the heck are you talking about?

Oh, I know, context, context, context...wow!

Chadermando proposed it in his criticism of Carol James. Try actually reading the posts in context.

ammonra on July 31 2007 7:32 PM:

"... Still, revisionist history is easy if nobody corrects the falsehoods.

As the government after the last election the Liberal party could have introduced legislation approving BCSTV despite being just short of the 60%. They refused to do so. That was a Liberal decision, not the NDP's. They still could introduce it as a matter of fact, so why don't they?"

The comment was made by YOU in the context of your posting of July 2007 7:32 PM.

It is an undemocratic idea. Sorry. Over and out.

And on and on it goes.

A number of years ago I suggested that if you had all the delegates at an NDP Convention put their pay stubs on a table, that you would find that 90% of them would be on the Government payroll, Union Payroll, BC Teachers (Government) Payroll, and that you would find very few if any, who either owned a business of their own, or who worked for private industrie.

If you had all the delegates from the Social Credit Party put their cheque stubs on a table you would find the opposite. 90% would work for private enterprises, or own their own business.

Lets not get confused here. NDP'rs are for the most part nothing more than Government workers, Teachers, or Union Officials, and their main concern is to maintain the status quo, which is huge salaries, and benefits, with little or no responsibility. They talk a lot, but they produce next to nothing. Gibberish is there mainstay.

Unfortunatly a lot of the Liberals are the same, so we are inundated with non-producing socialist thinking, people who have basically taken over the civil service, the teachers, and God knows what else. Can we dig ourselves out of this mess. I really dont know.

Maybe the solution is to do what Jim Pattison did with Glen Clark. Give him a real job and send him to work. To acutally work for a living would be a shock to the system of most NDP'rs unless they could get a job where all that was required was talking.

nunweilerg - I do not think the letters to the editors page is working properly. I wish it were since it is the only place one appears to be able to start a new topic. I assume that is why some people who have some issues they wish to raise do so within other threads where the topic might be a reasonable "aside".

Palopu, try working in a hospital if you think public sector workers have an easy time of it and are non productive. You will be surprised. Stereotyping usually is ridiculous.

"They talk a lot, but they produce next to nothing."

Sure they do. They produce the opportunity for those who run their own businesses to write report after report telling others how to do something they really have never done themselves. They transfer money from taxpayer coffers to private enterprise coffers. That is a very important job.

If they were to do the job themselves, then there would be no work for the private sector.

If stereotyping is usually ridiculous than it should not be used for by anyone for anything or anyone, including B.C. Liberals.

Say what you will, we can always find some exceptions. In any event I am talking about card carrying NDP'rs. There may well be a lot of people who vote NDP, however they are not members of the **party**, and do not spend all their waking hours trying to maintain or inhance the status quo.

It is only in Canada, and more specifically in the Greater Prince George area where we can whine and snivel about not having enough Doctors, and then go on and build huge useless buildings that are under utilized. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars, on Multiplexes, Sportplexs, Useless Airport Runways, Underused Civic Centres, etc; etc;. Then we want to build a new 25 Million dollar police station, and maybe a 20 Million Performing Arts Centre.

After these projects are built we can go back to whining about not having any facilities for Senior Citizens, not being able to look after the disadvantaged, and of course not enough Doctors.

We can spend hundreds of Millions on the 2010 Olympics, and suck $900 Million a year out of Citizens pockets through gambling Casino's but we cant get 2 Doctors for Ft St James, or a couple for Mackenzie.

What a joke. We are being manipulated to the 11th degree and we are not smart enough to figure it out. Whiners and complainers one and all.

Only in Canada will you have a dual income family grossing $160,000.00 per year, whining and snivelling because they do not get enough from the Government for Child Care

$160,000 does not go far these days.

;-)

Some people on $160,000 should take budgeting lessons from those people who get paid $10.00 per hour and are restricted to 20 hours per week, so have to have 2 jobs, and no benefits.

These people actually have to earn their money, and try to get by as best they can.

Usually you will find them working in the service industry or restaurants, and being looked down on by the high paid people, who quite often complain if the service is not up to their standard.

Of course we could argue that if they had gotten a good education they wouldnt have to do these jobs, but then we would all be high paid workers, and would have to import workers to do the meanial work.

Pal:"Only in Canada will you have a dual income family grossing $160,000.00 per year, whining and snivelling because they do not get enough from the Government for Child Care"

I watch CNN and it isn't much different in the US of A. Some people have combined incomes much greater than that and they can't budget or manage.

And it is not only the ordinary overtaxed people either:

The same President who started a one trillion dollar phony war threatens to veto a bill that would require 15 billion to extend health care to 600,000 underprivileged children without coverage!

He says the country can't afford it!!!

And, the bridges are falling down or they are about to fall down.

I wonder how many doctors the federal government in Ottawa could hire with the 1 billion bucks it is spending on buying and fixing up of one hundred used Dutch Leopard tanks for Afghanistan?

A couple of years of duty over there and they will all be ready for the scrap heap.

We are indeed being manipulated to the 11th degree and we are not smart enough to figure it out.