Cory,

Cheap shots at the Americans isn't the ideal rhetorical strategy ~ given the number of Canadians in the US entertainment industry, one might suspect that the problem is not so clearly a question of US interests riding roughshod over the rights of the Canadian people.

I won't argue in favor of the legislation, but the near-constant modeling this as a US / Canadian confrontation does a disservice to the complexity of the situation, and thus undercuts your argument's credibility.

Best,

Lanval

Note to self: Buy V for Vendetta mask. Do NOT look at it while purchasing.

Seriously, I'm going to start wearing mirrored shades everywhere I go ~ I don't care if it seems anti-social, our society is anti-social.

Effing Corporations.

The comparison to Brown vs. the Board of Education isn't apt; that was about the rights that are guaranteed by the constitution; the constitution however, says nothing about drug (or alcohol) consumption.

Thus the federal gov't is not involved the regulation of alcohol; when I was a kid, states had different drinking ages. The only reason that isn't true today is that the scumbags, er, Republicans in the 80's did an end-run around states rights by refusing to contribute federal money for other things (like roads); if the states didn't bow to federal pressure, they lost funding for things that were in NO WAY associated with the real issue: drinking age.

Now the government seeks to undermine the states at every turn, because that would allow the people to make laws themselves via representative agencies, something the Bushite Plutocracy doesn't have time for... they've been continuously pummeled in Oregon vis~a~vis the assisted-suicide law (you're only allowed to die for Bush's oil buddies, not because you're in immeasurable pain from a terminal illness), and they're doing it in California, as well as any number of unsuspecting places.

It's almost enough to make me throw away my copy of the Constitution ~ almost.

Lanval

And when isn't having your personal property stolen part a "good time" I ask?

In a way, this makes me happy because it reminds he that the human race truly is one big unhappy, dysfunctional family ~ no moral/ethical/intellectual superiority for any of us...

Hamadryad said: "Well no, but they have had their subway system attacked. Are you daft?"

Hama ~ listen, the word "daft" has become obsolete per the example set by American media, which has set the goal of reducing daily English to approximately the vocabulary of Britney Spears. Using words like "daft" isn't helping their cause, or your own, since most Americans will think you've mis-spelled "draft" and start protesting.

Seriously, the cops have a lousy job, and yeah, it goes to their head. Happens to everyone though; can't tell you how many times I've dealt with tech support people who treat customers like shite because the customer doesn't understand the system as well as the do... all the while not recognizing that if the customer DID understand the system, the tech would be out of a job.

Nothing special about the cops here in this video ~ I've ridden bicycles seriously for years, and while I agree with the goals of the Critical Mass movement in general (particularly in these recent days of expanding gas costs AND waistlines in the US, both of which contain tremendous hidden costs to the public), their methods are counterproductive and illegal.

As someone who rode for years in a country redneck town, let me also suggest that we be cautious about vilifying the police as a whole. They're most likely the reason some pissed-off redneck hasn't given us all the "Easy-Rider" treatment.

Best,

Lanval

Fine enough, but in post #4, the author uses "then" correctly as an adverb, then immediately uses it incorrectly as a preposition of comparison. Is the difference between "then" and "than" beneath the gaze of a professional scribe?

The author's response shares more than a bit of the "tantrum" quality he claims for the OP...