August1991

Maybe. But then there's the DC-10. A well-designed, arguably better plane with an engine in the back. Yet, accidents happen.

Airbus must be happy. But why did federal Liberals (Garneau) take so much time to ground Boeing? Hint: Air Canada has many Boeing 737s.

Virginia, Is Andrew Scheer an American citizen? Does he have to file with the IRS? ===== I ask this question because some people/politicians want to expand the right to vote while increasing taxes on richer, fewer people. As a Canadian, in a world of 7 billion people, I fear expanding the right to vote to a world democracy.

The background music is irritating, awful. (Apparently, the "music" is based on systems available in 1969. Whatever... ) OTOH, this movie/documentary includes sound clips of the guys talking while behind the moon, and video clips of people. I saw LBJ with long hair, Johnny Carson, Howard Cosell (?). Spiro Agnew. Heck, there's even a reference to Teddy Kennedy. The movie shows mostly male, American/white nerds. I have a different view of life.

For older Anglos, note what she said about Diefenbaker, and Pearson: https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1809599217 Barbara Frum (the CBC, As It Happens) has a reputation for being a good journalist. In fact, IMHO in this interview, Frum was awful. So many questions, of an intelligent/wise woman, left unasked. === This interview occurred in 1974. Munsinger was born in East Prussia in 1929 - she lived through the war. Frum was born in 1937 in upper New York State - she moved to Canada.

Justin Trudeau faces re-election in October 2019 - because of a "law" that can be easily changed. Donald Trump, by a "law" very difficult to change, faces re-election in November 2020. I see a difference. ===== How do I vote dumb question?

And Pearson stood on principle too: respect for our international agreements (NATO, NORAD). ===== Similarly, Trudeau Jnr is also standing on principle (employees should not suffer a corporation's illegality.) As I say, Scheer should do as Pearson in 1962: respect our international agreements/respect the rule of law.

From the Bomarc story, there are two minor anecdotes. 1. Trudeau Snr almost became a candidate in 1963 but because of Pearson's "unprincipled" position, chose not to run. 2. Pierre Sévigny, a decent man who lost a leg in a war abroad, chose to resign. Later, the federal Liberals involved him in a scandal. ==== Right or wrong, I see parallels between the situation of our current PM and our PM in 1962. Both have big egos. Both are charismatic. Both have die-hard supporters. Both have recently lost ministers. And both seem incapable of admitting fault.

No. In opposition, Pearson merely said that Canada should respect its international obligations. Similarly, Scheer should say now that Canada must respect the rule of law.

Reading through this thread, I just saw this. I am surprised that you make such a remark.

I tend to agree with you. In 1914, Europe got rid of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. But surely, there are better ways to do this.

Some people are left-handed, and other people are right-handed.

Everyone is looking for a similar scandal/imbroglio/affair to understand this one. IMHO, Diefenbaker in January 1963 faced a similar situation as Trudeau Jnr faces now in Spring 2019 - with a few minor differences. In addition, Pearson's response offers some advice to Scheer. **** Harkness resigned first then Hees and Sévigny - after saying they supported their PM. All resigned on a point of "principle". Pearson (take note Scheer) did not advocate putting nuclear weapons in Canada; he advocated respecting our international agreements. (Pickergill's autobiography is a delight to read.) IOW Scheer, make no statement on SNC-Lavalin - as opposition leader, that's not your job. Merely say that Canada must respect the rule of law. At the time, Diefenbaker was a charismatic leader, big ego who had die-hard supporters (like Trudeau Jnr). They both faced/face opponents who were remnants of perceived corrupt/entitled regimes: Pearson in the case of Diefenbaker, Scheer in the case of Trudeau Jnr. (Or rather, Pearson after St-Laurent and Scheer after Harper.) Differences? Diefenbaker in January 1963 was in a minority situation. Trudeau Jnr has a majority but faces an election in October 2019. So, not really a difference After the Cuba Missile Crisis of October 1962, Pearson/Diefenbaker debated Canada/US/NORAD relations. Not really a difference. Now, SNC-Lavalin donated 10x more money to the federal Liberals than to the Conservatives of Harper. To my knowledge, SNC Lavalin gave nothing to Layton and the NDP. If there is a difference, it is this. In the case of Diefenbaker in 1962, no money was involved - to my knowledge. **** Prediction: As in 1963, this will lead to a series of minority governments: die hard supporters of Trudeau Jnr fighting Scheer, with the NDP/Bloc/Green dividing parliament. Then again, if Trudeau Jnr resigns - well, what if George Hees had become leader in 1962?

Argus, The right to vote is separate from the obligation to pay a tax. In Canada, one vote = one person. Outside of public corporations and apartment associations, taxes/fees paid do not determine the "power" of a person's vote. Everyone, even all the many disheveled, homeless, men in the street have a vote - as equal as yours.