Smitty

Not a no brainer; All those marchers during the civil rights collectively decided to accept the risk of repercussions: because the cause was that important. And talk about red-herrings! You really think the vast majority of people wearing masks are of the type saying to themselves "Gee, I don't want to get fired" vs "I like stirring up s**t and breaking stuff, and I am a coward and would like to avoid being caught." If anything, this issue should be considered a no-brainer the other way... No. Exact opposite. Whistle blowers are generally innocent of breaking the criminal code of Canada, rioters generally are not. Perhaps a little plausible not that much (earlier point). If the risk is too great, they have other means to make legitimate protest and protect their anonymity. Besides, those people have protection from repercussions anyways, employers aren't allowed to discriminate against you because of your associations; that's usually the purview of human rights legislation. Non -violent protest has gone way of the dodo it seems for many movements. I applaud the principles of of legitimate protest, and would defend their right to peaceful assembly, but the black-clad anarchists that have infected the environmental movement, the students in Quebec vandalizing property, etc; - no sympathy here. I say prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Smitty

Martin Luther King Jr. got Civil Rights legislation passed (obviously with a great deal of help from the Kennedy admin + congress). Two things about that accomplishment: 1) They did it with non-violence. 2) They didn't wear masks. So, I'd like to hear an answer to San Juan's question again; why do legitimate, non-violent protesters need masks? No sympathy here for people who break the law, including rioting, vandalizing so-called "protesters". And yeah, give them some extra time for the masks; some people just want an excuse to break s**t and get away with it. Smitty

I think you are way off the mark using that analogy, as in, not apples vs oranges, but apples vs zebras. Canada and Japan: vastly different countries, different economies, different issues. Smitty

Just to stir the pot; I think a sales tax is a much fairer way to tax people and generate revenue. Better to tax spending than people's earnings. I'd rather take home more pay and decide how much tax I want to pay with my spending. I know - never happen, in other words, the introduction of a sales tax won't translate into a reduction in my income taxes. Either way, this gov't better figure out something - sales tax or no, the gov't plays with fire by depending so much on resource price volatility that plays havoc with government coffers. Smitty

Thanks for the replies everyone! The rods are 5/6 weights. Looks like the ice is coming off Summerside; I'll test each outfit, and see how good the line is. Cheers! Smitty

So I was looking over some of the outfits I've put together for the kids...couple of the flylines don't look so hot, but I haven't flailed the water yet. If need to replace a flyline, does anyone have any experience with the Cabela's Prestige line or Cortland 333 lines? They're both around $30 - this is just in case I have replace some lines. Or if any other brand would do, please let me know! (Budget=about $35) Cheers, Smitty

Overall I am bullish on the Oil Sands, but I think it behooves this country to find additional buyers for our oil, besides the United States. I have always really liked Guy Lamphier, terrific business news writer for the Edmonton Journal. His perspective - and it happens to be be bearish in this article, can be read here: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/Lam...2452/story.html Interesting read. Smitty

Ok, Oilers banter is not nearly as interesting as Flames banter, simply because the Oiler's direction/plan is so straightforward; better start winning, sooner rather than later. But I am curious to know what you guys think of the Flames. Frankly, us up here in Oil Country, while we generally like the Sutters, most of us are no fans of Jay Feaster; especially since he (almost smugly) derided the Oilers approach by rebuilding from scratch. So what now Jay Feaster? What say you Flames fans? Is it time to throw in the towel and spend some years sucking as bad as the Oilers? Is it time to "blow" the team up and start over? Should the Flames wait a little longer for Iginlas value to drop before trading him? And Kiprusoff? Or, will it be Feaster's business as usual "Hey-we're-on-the-verge-of-a-breakthrough-with-this-old-team-chock-full-of-underachieving-veterans-with-no-trade-clauses"? Picking 14th, and not in the playoffs - that's about as bad as it gets. If there's any lesson I've learned from the last 3 years, if you are going to suck, be the suckiest team around. Smitty

Man I love this board when it comes to hockey; so many conspiracy theorists. Yes Everette, this multi-billion dollar sport whose leader (Bettman) is obssessed with getting the sport to take hold in US markets where there is virtually little amateur/kids participation, yeah, he put the fix in. He wants one of the smallest market, most northerly, Canadian teams to win it three years in a row. Or maybe Katz is just good at bribing...lol. Hi-larious! Keep 'em coming! Smitty PS On a more a analytical note, there is a serious serious serious amount of pressure on this organization now. Fans are reasonably expecting to have these picks (whether they're kept or not) parlayed at least into a Stanley Cup Finals appearance in, say, 4 years or less. Some fans probably going to have stupid expectations about next year, but there's no doubt we should be contending for a playoff spot next year.

I'm trying to see this from your perspective Junior, I guess I'll choose to agree to disagree. I see a vast difference between whispering the secret to one individual's ear who I've had a chance to get to know versus an anonymous audience potential of 4000+. One dilemma I am faced with is if the school board approves an overnight trip with kids in August, is that I am a little leery of where I take them; not really about secret spots here, but we all know that small creek fishing is a delight, and yet can I justify pounding a couple of creeks with perhaps a dozen youngsters? Kind of iffy...I know several spots where I can get these kids into a lot of cutts, but it is adding pressure to a relatively small system. Plus, if I am successful in getting kids into the sport, I have now added more anglers - good thing and bad thing, I know some of us will see it from perspective. Obviously that ship has sailed with me, if I didn't think adding anglers to the sport wasn't a good thing I wouldn't have a flyfishing club. I'll have to trust myself to have a thoughtful discussion with the kids about angling ethics...lol. Anyways, good discussion. Smitty

And a nice shout out to Hanson's Outfitters for their support in supplying 10 rod-reel-line combos at a ridiculously low price for a good cause. Smitty P.S. Mods: I felt it important to recognize them; if I have broken rule 10, understand my recognition is simple gratitude and not an effort to advertise for them; I've never been to their store even!

Just got the rods delivered; AWWWWEEEESSSSOOOOOMMMMEEEE! Now my ratio of rods-to-kids won't be like 1:4. Every student will have a rod. Thanks again to Chris and Murray. Can't wait to start up flyfishing club again next week! Cheers! Smitty

Thanks for the offer Rickr, we do have a plan in place! Cheers, Mike

No Rickr! Please don't delete, lol. Seriously, you make an excellent point. For the most part, you're absolutely correct, the system does run itself. Changes in a stable democracy are incremental. Yet change does happen, especially when it occurs at the leadership level. As a US example, there is still kowtowing to Wall street, and all the rampant partisanship, yet, this president still managed to get universal health care passed for the first time in the country's history. And yep, looks like the Supreme Court is going to shoot it down (or at least some provisions). Change is often frustratingly slow, and the changes - when they do come - by the time they filter down to the public level, many many people end up thinking "ya know, that really didn't impact my life on a day to day basis". But it does, even just a little bit, sometimes we have trouble noticing. Seemingly, the changes are somewhat invisible. Take the relatively simple example of Edmonton finally getting out of the stone age and getting an LRT all the way down to the southside. That actually has impacted me; I can go to Eskimo, Oiler, Teacher's Convention, Sportsmen show, etc etc without having to pay for $12 parking at Northlands. Also, the arena debate; its gone on forever (like the airport debate), but decisions made by people we elected will have a direct impact on the future - good or bad - of downtown Edmonton. Yours and Clives comments do ring true about alot of the parties having alot in common, and what does it matter who runs the show? Our political spectrum consists of parties "smushed" up in mostly in center, center-right, and center-left leanings. Occassionally, you get parties like the Wildrose and former Reform party that, socially speaking (an issue like gay marriage for instance), do separate themselves by being more "right-wing". Its tough gig selling democracy sometimes; I know this, because for the first time in my 15 yrs of teaching, I am actually teaching junior high Social Studies (instead of math). Trying to fire up 13 yr olds about an election is...ah,...a little difficult. But c'est la vie; its the natural by-product of living in a great, stable, first-world country, where, relatively speaking, the livin' is pretty easy. We take alot for granted, including the incredible gift of voting; depsite it flaws, its frustrations, its messiness. My solution (for the students) is somehow try and incorporate lessons about democracy using "software" like Minecraft or Call of Duty, lol. That will engage them! Smitty

Clive: Yeah, mandatory does offend some and for sure is controversial. But - if I may be melodramatic for moment - people have fought wars to protect our freedom and have died to preserve our right/duty/privilege to vote. You think people would consider it their duty - the least they could do. But I see what you're saying about forcing people to assume their duty; it is un-authentic at best and at worst does infringe on their rights to be lazy arses. Yes, we are in complete agreement about the comments on the forum versus votes; it just doesn't jive, especially when I asked people to focus only on how the SRD and our wildlife would be treated. I don't think Wildrose is the answer at all. Anyhoo, I have no problem stating publicly that I am voting Alberta Party; I know they are small, and my vote probably won't "count", but I have been impressed by their energy and earnestness in trying to listen to Albertan's and draw up sensible policies. Smitty

I disagree. The stat is useful, for example, in framing an argument favoring mandatory voting, so its much more than a non-starter. Mandatory voting is something I think this country/province should consider. It is true that even if more people voted, the results would likely stay the same. No argument here. And yes Clive, frankly, your "quality of vote" argument does sound...bad. I absolutely disagree about having too many parties. Instead of risking gridlock and hyper-partisanship that a 2 party system produces - i.e. the United States, I rather risk coalition fragility than the nonsense that goes on down south. Its seems incredibly out-dated to think you can label everyone under one of two labels. Its incredibly short-sighted actually. As far as alternatives, your argument is too cynical for me; for God's sakes, we figured out how to send a person to the moon, we figured out to put a world of information on an ipod; surely we can figure out methods to improve our democratic system. Its a matter of vision and creativity, and goes far beyond the overly-simplistic constitutional monarchy vs republican system debate. Lots of alternative hybrid democracy theories out there... Proportional representation, or proportional representation with a weighted seat/vote system, there are lots of alternatives that adhere to democratic principles. There are plenty of principles we could look at in terms of reforming the system. In other words, we don't have to abandon democracy to consider improving it; you are offering a false choice there Clive; its like you are saying "this is absolutely 100% the best manifestation of democratic principles and it can't be improved so we're stuck with it". Do I mis-interpret? The bottom line is AB is the poster child for looking at reform; literally hundreds of thousands of votes have been cast, and who they've been cast for and what they stand for have been unheard because of first-past-the-post. Its a gross distortion of reality. Smitty

I thought I'd share my Facebook status (just posted):

Well, this was all started unbeknownst to me by BBT's initiative, so kudos and a great big thanks to him for getting the outfits. So a grateful shout out to him on behalf of all the kids and now, to Murray also for doing this. Cheers, Smitty

Holy Cow! Murray, if you could do this, that would be terrific. I - and the kids - would really appreciate this! Let me know - reply here or pm me, and see if this can actually happen. Cheers! Mike 'Smitty'

And yet, if the unscientific poll above is to be believed, the Wildrose would win handily. Interesting. Smitty

How about: http://reviews.orvis.com/7532/6555/category.htm Never owned one, so I don't have a personal opinion on these. Smitty

Ok, I will ask some serious questions: How many of us are or were PC supporters? (I would guess...probably lots.) How many of us, self labelled as conservatives, have been happy with the way the province has gutted SRD (starting with Getty)? (I would guess...few of us). So here's my request: set aside - just for the moment - from the endless debate AB citizens love having over, say, health, education and the province's economy. This forum is about fishing, so my question is, all the support that seems to be flocking towards the Wildrose, I ask you: "Do you really think the Wildrose will enact policies favorable to fish and wildlife, and the protection of their habitat?" Because on one hand, I understand their support; If you are a "conservative" disaffected with the PC's, its the simple and seemingly logical alternative to just find a conservative alternative. On the other hand, I don't understand how outdoorsy types would even think of supporting the Wildrose. Have a I missed something? Has Danielle Smith made some scintillating promises in regards to the SRD budget, fish, wildlife, and habitat for this province? So, keeping in mind that those specific "outdoorsy" perspectives, my challenge to you: Wildrose Party supporters, defend your position. Smitty

Because this debate has truly split into 2 separate tracks, I'll say, I completely agree with Rickr. And I don't think that contradicts any of the points that I made earlier. Smitty

1400 posts. Fourteen-Hundred. 1-4-0-0. Ya damn rule-breaker. Oops... Smitty

I was going to add choices like: 6. "I don't give a damn Party" 7. "I don't vote Party" 8. "Trout Party" 9. "Native, non-introduced, non-exotic Trout Party, aka founded by Taco, aka WTF Party" 10. "Screw 9, its all about Brook, Tigers, and Cutbow Party" But I thought I'd keep it half-serious for now. Cheers, Smitty