aphid

I tried to access the link, and this is what appeared. Colbert's implied message in this was also amusing... to a Canadian.

National government & supreme court offices. Also, all the foreign embassies associated with a national capital. Aside: I love Amsterdam and the Dutch people. Actually, the entire Netherlands is pretty damned great. In my working life, a significant portion of my customers were Dutch emigre's. An absolute pleasure to deal with. (imho)

In the interest of accuracy, they travel on Canadian passports. The United States lacks authority to screw with them (the passports). Beiber enters the US in all likelihood with a special visa reserved for entertainers, artists, athletes. That is what the US could seize/cancel. Then with the allegations against him elsewhere, US Customs could legitimately decline future entries. (I do think that is what you intended to infer) It's just my opinion, but I think a more accurate reason he was handled gently is entirely because the border-dorks and attending cops know that Beiber's profile is such that everything they do will be scrutinized exhaustively. Being the worms too many of them are, I would contend they prefer to use and abuse their powers against the little people who enjoy little means to fight back. John

The Winter Olympics spectacle begins in days. Here are my predictions for the Gold hockey finals: Womens CANADA vs USA USA will win. They're just that much stronger than Canada this year so our ladies will have to settle for Silver. Mens RUSSIA vs SWEDEN Tougher one to call. Sweden has a better team overall, but Russia will be uber-motivated to win at home. I give it to Russia in a squeaker/thriller. (Canadian men will be fortunate if they even get a sniff for the bronze) John (what do I know... I bet on the Bronco's )

Hollywood managed to offend an entire country (Canada) by playing so loose with the facts.

Pretty much every American motorsport, most especially Nascar.

Justin Beiber

Isn't this the one? (full speech) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs (abridged version) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFcbpGK9_aw Truly an impassioned orator. (I also enjoy listening to Sir Winston Churchill).

I melt for Lab's. He is a fine looking beast!

Thanks everybody for the advice. It seems at this point the issue is at the solenoid. It's triggering but doesn't seem to be transferring the full voltage through to the starter. Some research suggests that over time on the early Evo's the internal contact would pit/corrode from internal arcing. Ultimately, I found a shop in town that does work on customs and they're going to upgrade both the solenoid and starter. And they are supplying the optional external solenoid over-ride/start button similar to the item suggested by Bigun. I'm considering having the bike re-wired completely as it's been on the road for 16 years with all the usual electrical decay found on rigids riding in all types of weather. Thanks again, folks. John

reminds me something of easter boogie in Eloy around 8 years ago, inside the Bent Prop Guilty, your Honour.

My '93 Evo in my custom rigid gave me a problem last week; it would start and run for about 5 minutes, then inexplicably would shut down. All electrical power ceased. No headlight, gauge lights, no start function, you name it, nada. Let it sit for 5-10 minutes and it would come back to life and start and run again for a few minutes then shut down again. Replaced both the main breaker (2 post metal style) and the starter relay (black plastic 30amp, 4 spade). Took care of the problem. Yesterday a couple of us skydivers enjoyed a casual all-day bar-hop with multiple stops. At the very last stop, in attempting a start I got one click at the relay (or solenoid, not sure which), then nothing. Tried the start switch again, and not even one click. BUT, still had plenty of power to the headlights, Vibe-Rider, etc. The only way I could get another start "click" was to cycle the ignition (key) switch to off, then on. Same result though. One click, then absolutely nothing. I'm about to dive back in and start checking all the connections, terminals, etc. but I'd appreciate any ideas. Unless of course one of you guru's is hanging at Skydive Arizona right now, 'cause that's where the bike and me are this month.(ETA: 'cause there's a cold beverage in it for you if you stop by my motorcoach and supervise) BTW: load-tested the battery and it is in stellar condition. Oh, and none of the Harley shops will even look at my bike because it's a custom. Thanks John

What need do the duck folks fulfill for you?

I suppose similar justification could also help folks with convenient senses of decency sleep better at night when encountering issues like enslaved labourers in the Middle East, the juvenile sex-trade in Bangkok, child soldiers in Africa, boy-toys in Afghanistan, honour-killings in SE Asia. Or would those cultures be exempt from your generous consideration because they worship different Deities?

I know it's not polite to laugh, but I can't help myself. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/12/29/ted-cruz-canadian-citizen_n_4515868.html

Copy/pasted from post #20, with emphasis' changed to reflect what you may have missed... Kindly remember, as said earlier, I don't give a hoot about your gun debate. All I ask is that if you choose to use Canada as a reference for your argument, try to be accurate. You will note that I did not take umbrage with statements about our weather, because yes, it can get damned cold up here. John

My kind of Movie Review!

While I hardly think my comment about their style or approach constitutes slamming, I certainly can't countenance getting into a pissing match over them. Or the other networks for that matter. You are correct, the actual source of the OP's citation was immaterial and purely dismissive on my part, so kindly consider that one paragraph retracted. John

Outside of the CBC who receives their annual 1+ billion dollar bailout, what print media news organization in Canada is NOT struggling these days? Note I said Sun Media, of which their print paper is a division. I was speaking of the broader company holding which is currently pushing the CRTC to force cable and digital broadcast distributors to carry and bundle the SunNews channel to all customers across the country, passing on the ancillary costs to the consumers.

I would hope you have some form of a right to self determination, happiness, self defense, etc. You're not cattle, right? What that has to do with us not having a 2nd or a politician named Feinstein is beyond me, but, if you are legitimately interested: An Overview of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms http://www.pch.gc.ca/eng/1355760105725/1355760725223 The implied scandal that perhaps a particular firearm may enter restricted status means quite little in real fact. It is legal to own/possess them. You just have to go through some hoops. Some folks will fail. That, as in many things, is life. Source: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms#Canada) "Possession of a restricted firearm requires a Restricted Possession and Acquisition License or RPAL. An RPAL may be obtained at the same time as, or subsequent to, a PAL with additional testing and scrutiny by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. An Authorization to Transport allows RPAL holders to transport their restricted firearms directly to and from gun ranges and gunsmiths or to a change of address." Rob said in his OP: "I thought we elected politicians to make laws so we had some sort of controls on them - like they campaign on them, then once they're in the house they debate them before voting on them. But it seems here in canada some want bureaucrats to pass laws. " The article he cited opens with: "The RCMP is pushing Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney to list more guns as restricted or prohibited". Mr. Blaney is an elected official serving in the cabinet of the ruling Conservative Party of Canada. He is not a bureaucrat. For the record, once again I could give a ratzass about the gun debate. On either side of the border. Or either side of the debate. I just attempt to correct apoplectic hyperbole and misinformation to promote an agenda. ETA: In the interest of full disclosure, I own firearms. The part of the country I live in is well-known for some very fine large game hunting, featuring deer, elk, caribou, moose, bear, sheep and more.

We don't have a Second Amendment or a Feinstein therefore I'm not sure what Canadian rights you are speaking of. For what it's worth; Our "pro-gun lobby" represents a minority. Sun Media is struggling to financially survive by achieving a national footing so unsurprisingly concentrates on emotional or inflammatory types of items to set itself apart. In some cases, attempting to overemphasize perceived discord. (IMHO) Some Canadians unfortunately allow the influence of US news, broadcasts and op/ed pieces to confuse their perception of Canadian concepts in law, parliamentary procedure, and our justice system.

Cool cars and hot chicks?

That speculation was proffered by a different poster in the thread, not me. Perhaps that is leading to some confusion? I'll say it again - I have zero interest in that part of the discussion. To repeat: if you read my post carefully, I intentionally said I was limiting my reply to statements that (imho) mis-characterized two items regarding Canada. Never thought I'd see the day when somebody would suggest that English and French Canadians would blend well with each other. Excepting skydiving and hockey, we unfortunately haven't experienced tremendous success at harmony between these two disparate groups. In purely relative terms, I agree with that statement. You initially wrote though; No, we haven't. . Call it splitting hairs if you will, but all I ask is folks be a little more careful with incorrect information about us up here. Again, I intentionally said I was limiting my reply to statements I perceived that referred to Canada. For a variety of reasons, I don't give two hoots about the American gun debate. I think it was SkyDekker that made the comment; "Lack of guns does not hurt". Perhaps your debate is with him. Regards John

1. There are more Countries than the US and Canada. 2. Canada: British Isles origin 28%, French origin 23%, other European 15%, Amerindian 2%, other, mostly Asian, African, Arab 6%, mixed background 26% US: white 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate) And using the CIA data, Canada has a higher MIXED, but that does not mean non-homogenous. In fact a mix is more homogenous. ***Actually, no we haven't. On two separate occasions (2002 & 2004), federal politicians have failed to decriminalize simple posession in modest quantities. From your own source: Superior and appellate courts in Ontario have repeatedly declared Canada's cannabis laws to be of no force and/or effect if a prescription is obtained Do you care to do the comparison on convictions in Canada and the US for pot as a rate? 1) The post I responded to specifically singled out Canada by name and comparison. 2) You said in that post: "I found that Countries with homogenous cultures normally had lower violence than Countries that had a mix of cultures and races." Then later responded to the data I cited with: "Canada has a higher MIXED, but that does not mean non-homogenous. In fact a mix is more homogenous." I'd listen to clarification of the apparent contradiction of the two statements. Am I missing something? 3) "Superior and appellate courts in Ontario have repeatedly declared Canada's cannabis laws to be of no force and/or effect if a prescription is obtained" Meaning simple possession without prescription is still prosecutable. That is not to say that our police services sweat the little stuff... 4) There is no debate from me on this matter. Your country incarcerates exponentially higher numbers for marijuana possession. Actually, I think (without checking) your country incarcerates at exponentially higher rates for any offense. I am willing to be corrected if mistaken. If you recall, I was attempting only to clear up some common mis-statements about Canada as I'm not the least interested in engaging in the discussion arising from the OP. John

(Thunderous Applause icon)