Shady

Exactly. The problem is, ideology is the most important part of a leader of a political party. What Jack doesn't have going for him are his positions on issues, and his affiliation to the NDP. Both are highly unfavourable. He also has the Canadian leftist media in love with him, as opposed to Harper, who they dislike immensely because of his political views.

I highly doubt Bob Rae would help at all. Bob Rae was a miserable failure and every Ontario voter remembers his disasterous term in office. If anything, he'd do much more harm then good.

This type of language really scares me. Are you seriously in favour of organizations being shut down if they're not in the "public interest"? And who decides what exactly is in and not in this "public interest' of yours? Let me guess, people like you. Hitler would be very proud.

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen somebody so wrong before. And in just one thread! Ouch.

In my opinion, staying in Canada, and fighting for what's right, is having the true courage of our convictions. Not running away from the problem by moving away.

It sure seems that way. I guess, all you needed to do was inject a little logic into the discussion. Apparently it didn't sit well with his anti-American/anti-Bush rant.

I'm just pointing out the lack of priorities, and the misplaced outrage. When a Canadian journalist is killed by Iranian officials, you people barley make a sound. However, you have no problem coming to the defense of a drug dealer. Just an observation. I guess if it doesn't involve the American government, it's just not important. Are there laws in America which prohibit the sale and/or distribution of marijuana seeds? The answer, yes. Did Emery sell and/or distribute marijuana seeds in the United States? The answer, yes. No further questions.

Wow, I must say, the conspiracy generator is really impressive. I almost wish I was a member of the kook-left. Just think of how much fun one can have generating all the conspiracies your heart disires. And just think about all the time you can save! However, the only problem I see, is that it's specified to President Bush. I think it needs to be broadened to include others, such as Prime Minister Blair. If you haven't heard yet, the latest kook-left conspiracy, is that the London bombings are all part of Tony Blair's plan.

You're exactly right. I will shed no tears for Mr. Emery. He clearly broke American drug laws by selling marijuana seeds in the United States. If we expect other countries to respect our laws, we must show the same respect to other countries. However, this is just another example of the anti-American zealots, using any issue they can, to spread their rabid anti-Americanism (and in some cases anti-Semetism). I wish there was half the outrage when Iranian officals murdered a Canadian journalist. Canadian journalist 'beaten to death' Iran has acknowledged that a Canadian-Iranian photojournalist was beaten to death after her arrest outside a prison in Tehran. Vice President Ali Abtahi said Zahra Kazemi died "of a brain haemorrhage resulting from beatings". Ms Kazemi, 54, was detained on 23 June for taking pictures of Tehran's Evin prison. She was later pronounced dead after falling into a coma BBC Talk about misplaced priorities!!!!!!!!! Can you imagine what these same zealots would be saying if this happened in America by American authorities? Pathetic.

I agree 100%. I also wish that images could be posted.

The main problem with discussing issues of economics with liberals is that they don't really know how the economy really works. They have no concept of the creation of wealth, and they have no concept that to have a strong, vibrant, growing economy that provides good jobs for people and taxes to the government, THERE NEEDS TO BE PEOPLE WHO BECOME WEALTHY, GASP, EVEN VERY RICH! Oh the horror, the horror. The fact that liberals have no real idea about how the economy works can be illustrated in their ridiculous economic ideas. Let's increase taxes on evil corporations. Corporations then pass their costs onto the consumer, who pays more for a particular good or service. Therefore, brilliant liberals have only succeeded in taxing the regular consumer. Another idiotic idea is raising taxes in general. They actually think that raising taxes is a legitimate means of correcting government overspending, as if you can constantly raise taxes over and over and over. Have you ever heard of the phrase "you can't get blood from a turnip?" There's a pont where you reach (here's a economic term most liberals have never heard of) diminishing returns. There comes a point, whether it's a price of a good or service, or the rate of taxation, in which you actually find profits or revenues declining, even with rising prices or rising tax rates.

Not one soldier is going to be in Afghanistan for a 20 year tour. That's not how the military works. A Canadian military presence may last for that long, but an individual's tour of duty isn't anything close to 20 years.

Actually, before talk-radio, cable news and the internet, the mainstream media was a type of cabal, populated by mostly leftist journalists. Today, as you know, it is quite different. There is a wide spectrum of journalists and opinions. The main cause of uprising of the new media is specifically linked the cabal of the old media. Without the existence of the first, there would have been no need for the second. As for the "peddling red-state culture war", that's BS. You gain an audience by broadcasting what people want to watch. You said it yourself, it's a business. You can't sell a product someone isn't willing to buy. And who are you to judge what programming is moral or immoral? Isn't that what the left always asks? Personally, I there's plenty of it on all networks.

That's not my interpretation of neoliberal. A neolib to me, is one who parts from the traditional liberal causes that liberalism stood for 20 and 30 years ago. It used to be that conservatives were the protectionists and isolationists, but now, the neolib has adopted that ideology. That's a neolib to me, despite how others may use the definition.

Ideas from "south of the border" are usually the only new and innovative ideas that are concieved. Take a proposed flat-tax, personal retirement savings plans, faith-based initiatives etc. The only old, boring, sterile ideas are the usual government run, redistribution of wealth to solve societies ills ideas.

Again, some may not consider abortion a social advance.

I wasn't referring to FoXNews in general but to Bill O'Reilly, and not just to him but conservative personalities such as Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. But you're right, in a way, they're becoming more mainstream. The usual mainstream media is losing its control.

Yes it is worth it, in my opinion. However, if you don't wish to spend a year or two in Afghanistan peacekeeping then don't join the military. If you're currently in the military and don't want to be in Afghanistan peacekeeping, then don't re-enlist.

I would like to see us actually institute some type of democratic process instead of the current Canadian monarchy. At least in America there's political process in which elected officals advise and consent. Here in Canada, King Paul gets to pick pretty much however he wants without any political opposition.

Another great point. At least you know where he stands, unlike the mainstream media that pretends to be objective.

Exactly. It must be a true challenge to try and engage in intelligent discourse while being insulted by all the neolibs at the same time. I definitely wouldn't be able to keep my cool as long as Novak did.

That's being about as intellectually dishonest as one can be. Russia, China, France, Germany, etc didn't need to accept any intelligence from the U.S or UK. They had their own. They all had intelligence suggesting that Iraq possessed WMD and that Iraq was in violation of a laundry list of UN resolutions. They just didn't feel it was necessary to go to war over. You nailed it again Argus. There's a vast number of rich Saudi princes all with their own agenda. Unfortunately some of whom provide aid to terrorists and terrorist organizations, especially dealing with Israel. The country that was responsible for turmoil and bloodshed was Iraq and it's leadership. They were the ones responsible for invading Kuwait. They were the ones responsible for seeking and developing WMD. They were the ones responsible for a continuing pattern of lies and deception. They were the ones responsible for dismissing weapons inspectors for a 4 year period. And they were the ones responsible for the bluff of WMD.

Exactly. The IRA never deemed non-Catholics as infidels that deserve death. The IRA never embraced a culture of suicide bombers. The IRA never trotted out their youth strapped in belts full of explosives. They valued their lives as much as their enemies valued theirs. The same can't be said of Muslims today. The seem to love death more then the rest of us love life. It's a serious perversion.

No, most countries that signed up didn't recieve aid and financial assistance. And again, you can explain to the families who's members have shed blood that they're not "key" contributers, whatever that means. People that donate money to causes like cancer are likely to be "repayed" in medical advances. My analogy is apt. According to your standard, if all members don't contribute an equal share, thier contribution is deemed almost meaningless by people like you. In Iraq, "repayment" can be knowing you're doing something just, and more importantly, contributing to the long-term advancement of the middle east and world security. Again, if the war was a stupid idea based on a "web of falsehoods", then France lied, Germany lied, China lied, Russia lied, the United Nations lied, and half the world's intelligence apparatus lied. I'm well aware of the hatred the exudes from the kook-left in North America and across the world.

Let me just say this first. How noble of you to disparage the contribution of any country, no matter how large or how small. Have you ever taken a mintue to think that other countries may not have the resources or the military capabilities to send more then how ever many troops or services they're providing? Each year, when a coalition of people make donations to cure diseases like cancer, do you also disparage the individual who donates 5 dollars, instead of 100's or 1000's that others may be able to afford? I get it man, you hate President Bush. It doesn't mean you have to hate everything associated with him. Stop being so childish.