shoop

George Allen is an interesting name. I don't think he will win, but he could be a dark horse like Kerrey. About as appealing in the general as Kerrey was. So I hope you are correct! Hillary will not have a tough time getting the nomination. The left-wing of the Democratic Party that might turn against her isn't big enough to affect the outcome. They couldn't get Dean the nomination, but they are gonna give Hil the boot? come on... Your quote from Ann Coulter goes to prove everything that is wrong with her. Outright lies and histrionics. The Democrats *always* double-cross the voters? wtf? How? When? (btw, her second sentence doesn't even contradict her first, even though she used the phrase "to the contrary....") Hmmm, Clinton actually ran surpluses, fought a successful war in Kosovo. What was scary about that? Monica? Sure scary, but just goes to show how desperate the Republicans were to find something on Clinton.

How old is old? Where is this coming from? Other than curling, in which age isn't really that big a deal, I can only think of one other Canadian athlete who might be considered *old*. Pierre Leuders is 35, but 35 isn't *that* old... I think there is something very Canadian in falling exactly one medal short of our target ...

Finally we have a PM who will make Canada's military a priority. The troops will be ecstatic when Harper visits. This will boost morale immeasurably. Smart move PM Harper, smart move.

You have no credibility gerry. Oh no don't accuse me of wearing a tinfoil hat. The only mistake McKay made in this one was giving the families false hope. He called them personally and apologized for the misunderstanding. That shows a level of class and sincerity that the Liberals just don't understand... This story hasn't had legs because of McKay's kind move to correct his mistake.

There isn't really much reason to think about an election short-term. The bloc and the liberals have to work together to force an election. The Bloc have stated they have no interest in forcing a snap election. Which means the Government will last until at least the new Liberal leader is chosen. The new leader is likely to be chosen in the spring of next year which means the Liberals won't want to go until the fall of 2007 at the earliest. Which could coincide with the next Quebec election. The bloc and PQ don't have enough resources to run two campaigns close together. So look at spring of 2008 at the earliest.

My bad, meant on the ticket. Why couldn't she run again? Reagan lost the first time he ran for the nomination. So did Papa Bush. Again, my bad. I think Jeb will be in the veep slot in 08. I truly think a McCain-Jeb ticket is possible. With McCain not seeking a second term. ---- If you were right I would say that is very bad news for the Democrats. The five biggest names being floated are Hillary, Obama, Wesley Clark, Evan Bayh and John Edwards. Edwards is the only *true* southerner of the bunch. Edwards couldn't even win his own state in 2004. No way he gets the nod in 2008. The Democrats are going to pick somebody who can win. The whole good ole southern boy thing is an illustion. Johnson won in 64 due to the grief over Kennedy plus a very unattractive to moderates Barry Goldwater. Carter *barely* won in 76. Bill Clinton was a rockstar - and the only candidate of the "southern" presidents who was truly helped by his southerner status. Gore was pathetic and should have won easily.... The southern states are so solidly red now that they don't really care if a Southerner is the Presidential nominee. Gore won *zero* southern states in 2000. (Florida, whatever...) The Democrats will be focusing on states like Missouri, Indiana, Ohio, maybe Virginia or Florida. I don't see any southerner helping win those states.

I am saying if your last name is one of those three there is a good chance, 1 in 4 you will see it at the top of the Republican ticket in 2008. McCain-Jeb? Giuliani-Liddy?

You are coming from the assumption that CBC *has* to continue to broadcast over the airwaves. Why are you making that assumption? There would be long-term cost savings associated with making the CBC only available on cable. So instead of continuing to post point after point based on this assumption why not deal with the broader argument? Defend your assumption. I am saying that the government should not be providing this service if the costs outweigh the benefits. People aren't clueless if they disagree with you, as long as they can logically support their argument.

Tee hee hee. Very true.

As good as Crosby is, he ain't Gretzky. It is experience that matters. Crosby didn't have it and we clearly needed it at these Olympics. ps, as the old saying goes, you don't know the value of experience until you have it.

Neither should have been on the team. Pronger is having a shite year, and injured. Bertuzzi has a history of boneheah penalties. Crosby was too young. He'll be ready in 2008. This could be the wakeup call Canada needs. There will be a hell of a lot more pride involved playing in Canada, and the cancelling of the World Cup, will make it that much more of a pride issue to play for your country at the olympics. Not a surprise that the final four teams in the tournament are European with the olympics being held in europe.

Wow. That proves it. You are an absolute, unabashed Liberal hack. If Gomery hadn't proven the theft of $3.8 Million dollars of taxpayer funds by the LPC they would, sadly, still be in power today. That you can't admit that most basic of facts is a good thing. Shows the Liberals aren't learning their lessons from this election defeat. The arrogance remains, even in opposition. Strange thing arrogance. What is their left to be arrogant about at this point?

No, just trying to adopt their sanctimonious and self-righteous tone. Guess I was successful.

Agreed, but I think there are a couple reasons for that. Many journalists don't come across well when speaking at press conferences for three reasons. 1. Being good at speaking publicly really isn't a requirement of the job for print journalists. 2. The arrogance factor makes them look idiotic. 3. A lot of talent leaves journalism for bigger paycheques.

Since 1952 every U.S. Presidential election but one has had a Bush, Dole or Nixon on the ticket for the G.O.P. Richard Nixon - 52, 56, 60, 68. 72 (Veep 52-56 and Prez 60, 68-72) Bob Dole 76, 96 (Veep and Prez respectively) GHW Bush 80, 84, 88, 92 (Veep 80-84 and Prez 88-92) GW Bush 00 and 04 (Prez) So who will it be in 2008? Jeb? Liddy? Random fact 1. The 1964 Republican ticket was Barry Goldwater and Congressman William Miller (NY). Random fact 2. Nixon is the only man to win to elections as Veep and two as Prez. Random fact 3. The 1964 election, the only one in 56 years without a Bush, Dole or Nixon on the Republican ticket, was the Republicans biggest defeat of all the Presidential elections held in that time span.

Dude, what kind of jobs have you worked? Have you ever worked a job where the average guy has a high school education? That would be my guess for *average* intelligence. Most reporters aren't as smart as they think they are, but they are definitely of *at least* average intelligence. Maybe not Julie Van Dusen come to think of it.

Uhhh aren't message boards for debate? Let's count your follies. 1. You disregard Rona Ambrose's qualifications and chalk up her appointment due to her looks. 2. You wrongly state that Deepak Obhrai is from Edmonton and arrogantly brush it off because "Edmonton and Calgary are both prairie cities." wtf? 3. You talk down to the majority of Canadians who do not have university educations and belittle the hardworking employees of Canadian Tire in attacking Michael Chong. Hmmm, this appears to be taking fault with how weak your *answers* are. Nice false cheap shot against Conservatives. Please try and not post such weak stuff next time around. Kinda tedious dealing with petty insults that are so easily discredited.

These Olympics will probably end up in the good, not great category. Definitely won't be a disaster. But we will probably fall just short of the 25 medals, third place goal. My bet is 22 medals and fourth or fifth place overall. Losing men's hockey sucks arse though.

The accuracy of SES was just amazing the last election. For each of the four parties in the House of Commons the last SES poll before the election was off by *exactly* 0.1%. It was remarkable. These guys are number one in my books after pulling it off two elections in a row. Whatever they are doing is working. That being said, it is way, way too early to be looking at polls.

Yeah, that tends to show your ignorance right there. They are both among the six biggest cities in Canada. Too bad you can't give them any respect. Your silence on the snottiness about Michael Chong and Garth's tantrum is defeaning? You never did answer this one. How would four cabinet ministers from Calgary have gone over in the rest of the country? You can't really call me irrational for point out the flaws in your thinking? Well, you can't do it *rationally* at least.

Uhhh, the ire of the electorate at the party would lead to heavy moral suasion for Fortier to step down on the part of Harper. Methinks thou art a silver-spoon socialist. Are you saying a university degree is a pre-requisite for being in cabinet? Is that in the constitution or just your fantasy world? Just how many members of cabinet from Calgary would you want? Harper and Prentice made two. Kenny and Abloncsy would have made four. *That* would have gone over well in Ontario. Ambrose also happens to be the only cabinet member from Edmonton. Actually Deepak is from Calgary. Turner was the only MP to through a public tantrum because he didn't get into cabinet. (A tantrum which started *before* the naming of the parliamentary secretaries. Actually sounds to me like you are filled with irrational hate for Harper. At least be accurate when ranting about him.

I know the opposition parties are hoping the Canadian public buys that pile of horse sh*t!

What about a review aimed at creating a much more targetted apporach for what the CBC provides? A short-term increase in funding, with the clear understanding that it was short-term only, would be welcomed if that came as a part of returning the CBC to its role as a true public broadcaster. Vastly reducing the scope of MotherCorps operations would be welcomed all around. Get rid of sports? Hmmm, possible but that would have to go hand in hand with necesary cuts to News and programming.

Do you have any actual examples of private-sector libraries that have flourished in the absence of a public-sector alternative? The question then is how much funding? Re-focusing the CBC on a much smaller scale, including less government funding is workable. But the status quo is definitely not working...

How about we only cut it in those instance when the free market can provide a viable alternative. None of your examples fall into that category. Only the CBC does. So instead of the histrionics and whining. Why not make a case for keeping the CBC around? At least agree to some changes.. The former Chariman of the Board of the CBC had a very good article in today's Citizen. (Sorry I don't subscribe so no link.) He made some very interesting points. *The CBCs funding has been cut more by Liberals than Conservatives. (First two terms of Chretien compared to Mulroney.) *He argues that the board of directors of the CBC should appoint the President. *He argues for two positions on the board of the CBC to come from CBC staff (English and French). All good steps in the strategice re-focusing of the CBC. Either be a pure public broadcaster and quit picking political sides or go private and be free to pick whatever side they want...