JerrySeinfeld

What "societal" cost?

That's cause we need more troop in there.

Oh great. Another man with no plan. Gotta love it. Finally someone in government who doesn't think it's his god given right to impose himself on everyone. Vive la lasaiz faire (sp?). I always love hearing libs: "we GOTTA get more funding for (insert program)!!!" "there simply isn't enough regulation on (insert pet project here)" for god's sake: leave us alone already!!!!

I agree - so why don't you get it over with already and nominate Michael Moore for PM?

sure - but I am also pointing out the inordinate number of thugs who choose the USA as the lightning rod...

More to the point of the article: How is it that a woman get's gang raped, told that she's gonna learn to get "fucked leb style" and the backlash is against the sentence being too racist?

This comment would be sage wisdom if it came from pretty much anybody else. In this context, though, it can only be satire. Anyhoo, I've "played the ball" with Steyn on numerous occasions, but in order to do a comprehensive rebuttal, one first requires something of substance to rebut. Steyn's blubberings on any subject other than theatre are as wispy and ethereal as morning mist and evaporate just as quickly when exposed to sunlight. Indeed, it's almost safe to say that Steyn refutes himself by offering so little in the way of substance, analysis or even coherence. Strip away the bloated verbiage and the thin veneer of sophistication (which is belied by the vulgarity of the content) and his columns are shrill, unhinged rage-a-thons that could have issued from the food-intake of the basest internet troll over at Stormfront. That he's regarded as one of the right's best and brightest (a textbook triumph of style over substance) should be a source of shame for any intelligent and principled right winger. Excellent ad-hominem comment (if a bit redundant and tired). You are a master at avoiding the subject matter at hand with your own blubberings which have no pertinance to the subject matter. But then again, you're a lefty so it's to be expected

Yes sir DOGGY...gosh lefties hate good news. How about that shrinking ozone layer?

Yes, DOGGY. My new Burqa Clad sidekick:

Boohoo. Read the article and form an intelligent comment. That's what these forums are for.

The only reason these criminals and thugs get the time of day is because they spout anti-american rhetoric. The hilarious part is the same tactics work in places like Canada and France. The new fallback for any politician during an election is to "stand up" to the USA It is an easy tactic to use. Us versus them. Convince everyone in your country that the rest of the world is against you and that all your problems are a result of outside forces. This will keep the masses thinking of other things rather then the domestic problems that they might be causing themselves. Well, with Paul Martin or Chavez or Ahmedinejad it's more about playing off their own citizen's irrational hatred of the USA.

I believe the phrase comes from soccer.

I agree with you - although I would hardly call Guelph the antithesis of suburbia (although I've never been ) But people vote with their feet and dollars. As I said before, if people didn't like walmart, then it wouldn't be the world's largest retail chain. For me it's the people in Wal Mart that make me gag. I can only stand so much overweight parents screaming at their childeren in a long messy cashier's line up.

Impossible. Impossible. Haha - my prediction of a steady stream of ad-hominem comments by lefties has materialized Play the ball - not the man

Girls Rule By Margaret Wente, Saturday, May 31, 2003 Toronto Globe and Mail ** Post removed due to copyright infringement **

The only reason these criminals and thugs get the time of day is because they spout anti-american rhetoric. The hilarious part is the same tactics work in places like Canada and France. The new fallback for any politician during an election is to "stand up" to the USA

A good (older) article by Mark Steyn Full article (well worth the read) an excerpt: These days, whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it involves a fellow called Mohammed. A plane flies into the World Trade Centre? Mohammed Atta. A gunman shoots up the El Al counter at Los Angeles airport? Hesham Mohamed Hedayet. A sniper starts killing petrol station customers around Washington, DC? John Allen Muhammed. A guy fatally stabs a Dutch movie director? Mohammed Bouyeri. A terrorist slaughters dozens in Bali? Noordin Mohamed. A gang-rapist in Sydney? Mohammed Skaf. Maybe all these Mohammeds are victims of Australian white racists and American white racists and Dutch white racists and Balinese white racists and Beslan schoolgirl white racists. But the eagerness of the Aussie and British and Canadian and European media, week in, week out, to attribute each outbreak of an apparently universal phenomenon to strictly local factors is starting to look pathological. "Violence and racism are bad", but so is self-delusion.

Man, that was too much to take this weekend - the Liberal Party Convention. An embarassing display of two old friends: Canada's mainstream media (CBC, CTV nationally) and the Liberal party, cozying up to say "OK, we've had our time out - we've done our penance for stealing billions from Canada, now let's get back to serious business, pick a leader and continue our undisputed rule over Canada" I'd be interested to see the extent of coverage when compared to the CPC's leadership convention. I bet it's not even close....

If people don't shop at new wal-marts because they're unwelcome, then the small business have nothing to worry about, do they? Conversely if wal mart is welcome in a community, then people will shop there. Why must people always overcomplicate things by trying to involve the government?

Thanks for the input...now back to reality...

Let's test the theory that some people will always choose no war - no matter what.

Yea - you're right. Being forced to go to church or have kids is pretty much equivalent to sentencing women to gang-rape or shooting women in the head for adultery....

Your numbers don't show that. Unless you think Republicans actually won last election. Give it time my friend. Latinos are too won't just fall into the dem's lap and be taken for granted as African Americans have done...

I can't believe how much utter hatred of the USA is not only accepted, but even encouraged in this world. Why don't we gang up on france for a change? They're the REAL screwed up country

They didn't this past election. Maybe they were turned off my other Republicans who wanted them sent south. I concur. Bush got enormous praise for getting such high % of Hispanic/Latino voters in 2000. How many did he get? 40%. Whoop-de-frickin'-do. Bush was the sitting governor of a state with one of the largest number of Latino voters and, on top of the Elian Gonzales debacle, Gore still managed to get 60% of their votes nationally. Bush's 40% in 2000 was the high water mark for the GOP. I think Latinos are msart enough to see that they agree with the GOP on some ethical matters, but they know social support is better under the Dems. I really don't see the GOP as having a winning strategy either way. If they suppress their nativist wing to appeal to the Latinos, they might actually trigger the splintering off from the GOP a separate, mostly white anti-immigrant bloc of voters. If they maintain their adherence to the principals of the religious right (which is notoriously nativist -- just look at Pat Buchanan's "Culture War" speech to the 1992 GOP Convention, which is still the GOP image), the Latinos will stay in the D column. Only the dumb poor ones will. The majority will go with the GOP.