Here's my favourite:
I can only assume that Jack Layton is as outraged as I am. 191 fatalities this year (compared to 66 military deaths), many of them young Canadians, is completely unacceptable. And that's just one province. This is not what Parliament signed up for when we permitted cars on our roads. Canada should stick to its traditional transportation role of riding bicycles and leave the driving to our aggressive American neighbours. The freedom provided by the automobile isn't worth the loss of life, and I expect Mr. Layton to call for Canada's immediate withdrawal from the roads. Some freedoms are simply not worth dying for.
John Ewing, Burlington, Ont.
Well done, John!
Actually, Jack Layton likely would support a car ban. I understand he doesn't own a car, and bikes everywhere. And think about the carbon credits Canada would accumulate!
Win-win for sure.
17 comments:
Check out the Montreal Gazette's editorial on Afghanistan. My favourite part is where they compare Afghanistan to Darfur, where Layton has previously called for military action.
Yes, the "if they stop the war because it kills too many people, they should stop having cars too". Probably someone will make the "smoking" arguyment, i.e. tobacco kills when used exactly as directed. Cars do not kill when used as directed, while the military does.
I've presented a similar "if they do this, they should do that" case as well. I think it's funny when I compare the gun registry to the car registry, and your usual suspects try to argue that registering cars is ok but we shouldn't register guns. Sometimes they talk about the cost overruns in the gun registry, and I agree with their indignation there, but my solution is to sue the consultants instead of scrapping the registry.
Actually, Jack Layton likely would support a car ban. I understand he doesn't own a car, and bikes everywhere. And think about the carbon credits Canada would accumulate
I doubt he would, though he would support transit being made as convenient as cars.
But I thank you for answering a question I have had. If Al Gore rode a bicycle and had a small house, you would claim he wants to ban cars too. So the "hypocrisy" label really is the lesser of two evils for him. If he wore the hair shirt, he would be accused of wanting impractical solutions that put us back to horse and buggy days. He gets accused of that anyway, except that he wants that for everyone except himself. Wearing the hair shirt, he'll never get people on side. Being accused of "hypocrisy" is generally countered by "you hire the poacher to be your game keeper". Look how Arnold, Mr. 5 SUVs has pulled that off. Now he has a hydrogen SUV and is considered Mr. Greem.
Not to mention that Toronto's current murder rate makes an Afghan war zone five times safer for Canadians than Jack's hometown.
Check out the Montreal Gazette's editorial on Afghanistan.
Yeah, great piece. Link here.
L.S. - It was meant as a tongue-in-cheek comment, but if you want to use it as fodder for some spurious argument, be my guest.
Well that's what I like about you, joanne. I prefer the "spurious argument" dismissal, to the "your head is located in your bum" kind of sneering disdain I get elsewhere!
Though I most prefer when I learn something new or gain some understanding of another's point of view. Talking does not imply agreeing or capitulating. Even when there seems to be no point in bothering, talking often produces something of value.
L.S. - I'm just saying that I never meant that in a serious manner, so no point debating it. It was meant as a joke. (Maybe a lousy one)
*
joanne... you should also explain that the 66 deaths in afghanistan are spread out over a period of 6 years.
statistically... that's 11 per year.
we had 6 traffic deaths in ontario alone over just this last long weekend.
*
Neo - Good point!
*
"if it saves only one life"
*
It is quite improbable and maybe even impossible to be too sarcastic when mocking Layton!
To LS ...""I've presented a similar "if they do this, they should do that" case as well. I think it's funny when I compare the gun registry to the car registry, and your usual suspects try to argue that registering cars is ok but we shouldn't register guns.""
It's because you seem to actually think that there's logic in that mishmash. Irony is an art that requires some actual reality to make it work.
L.S. I think the more appropriate comparison is the Darfur to Afghanistan. Layton wants us to go to Sudan, a country where we are not welcome to fight a war against heavily armed government-backed forces (and the government itself) who have everything up to attack helicopters.
The losses in Darfur would be catastrophic compared to Afghanistan. We'd likely suffer 66 casualties in a week instead of over 6 years.
Both Afghanistan and Darfur and good causes to become involved in. But no one can say that we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan but should go into Darfur without being hypocritical. Which is what Layton has done and now is.
Oh and L.S. take it from me on this, hydrogen SUVs are only slightly more efficient pollution-wise than tradition vehicles. But a hydrogen-powered vehicle costs something like $250 000+. Which is slightly out of reach for most traditional middle class families.
66 deaths so far (In 6 years) in the Ghan and the left is mostly screaming "run away!" and/or questioning ad nauseum "why are we there?"!...
WWI and WWII combined had 66,000 Canadian heroes give the ultimate sacrifice so that L.S. and I can be free to write whatever we want on blogs today.
Jack Layton likely would support a car ban.
I know you meant this as tongue in cheek, but I would hope he'd support it for parents who are guilty of this. (Sorry to be OT. The link, btw, is courtesy of Red Tory.)
As far as the topic of your post, I must say: "Thanks for the link." My favourite comment for the category of "moon-bat lunacy" is the one that says in part: War apologists like the National Post do not seem to understand that the Taliban is flourishing because of the NATO presence in Afghanistan. The poster clearly implies that if all NATO forces would leave Afghanistan, the Taliban would wither and die. If so, I think I'd be excused for wondering what the poster has been inhaling.
If so, I think I'd be excused for wondering what the poster has been inhaling.
Yeah, I guess even Calgary has a few crazies. ;)
WWI and WWII combined had 66,000 Canadian...
That would be 110,000 combined Canadian casualties. 66,000 is the number of fallen for WWI alone.
Hel-lo, Joanne
Hel-lo Omar...
Thanks for that.
Post a Comment