shoop

Yawn. Hmm, I recommended Martin use the money to pay down the debt. Alberta has no debt. I did criticize the spending and stated that the money would be better spent on infrastructure. I would much rather see that money spent on a high speed rail link between Edmonton and Calgary. Dingwall and Adscam are much bigger 'shortcomings' than anything Klein faces in his administration, nice effort trying to find something in Alberta though. You can`t compare Klein to Martin because: Klein hasn't only gotten a minority in any election, hasn't presided over a scandal anywhere near the size of adscam and he isn't facing another election. I'll give you credit sparhawk you are more reasonable, albeit equally as misguided as mirror was.

Never claimed a systematic biased. Claimed a gross example of bias in the Michaelle Jean coverage. If you come up with a reasonable reason for why they sat on the story for so long, former friends doesn't count it, I am all ears.

How was it informing me by ignoring the Michaelle Jean story for almost a full news cycle? If it is just part of the media mix than the CBC should be able to fund itself. Why single me out in your post? The majority of the posts on this thread have supported the belief that CBC has a political bias. Is there any reason why I am the sole recipient of your venom?

I don't know if that is the situation. I thought I read it would be an average of $133 depending on tax bracket. Either way it is a terrible idea. They are going to get attacked from all sides. The left will argue that the money would have been better spent on social issues, while the right will argue that the money would have been better used paying down the deficit. This is yet another ploy that will explode in Martin's face. Sad, sad attempt to distract attention from Dingwall and Adscam.

Canada Free Press. Boy what a major player there! The point is that government money shouldn't go to fund a "public broadcaster" with a political agenda, of any kind. None of your sources is funded by the Government of Canada, and my tax dollars, thus I really shouldn't have any say in their take on the news. If the Libs had the balls to spin the CBC off, then fine let it become the official voice of the party.

You are so right it is painful. There is no arguing that point at all. Montgomery, is MSM = mainstream media?

You clearly don't 'get' the importance of Hockey Night in Canada within Canadian culture. It is REPEATEDLY the hightest ranking telecast on the airwaves in this country. Fans would have been outraged if they hadn't made the deal. Sure you can watch other games on other channels, but it is a tradition for many, many Canadians. Anybody want to bet that the game on Saturday night gets the highest ratings of any TV program in Canada this year?

Dead on as usual kimmy. Alas lost on sparhawk....

Completely agreed on the need to tone down the rhetoric. I think you need to understand the hatred that grew in Alberta because of the NEP. Klein is using that simmering anger for personal gain. I honestly don't think a cheque is the best use for the money. I personally would have favoured using it to build a high speed rail link between Calgary and Edmonton. If people could do that trip downtown to downtown in an hour and a half or so, it would be great for the economy. Don't really know what I will do with my cheque. An extra student loan payment perhaps? Pay my health care premiums for the year? Nothing extravagant...

I repeat, there was a story there. You agree, although are having a hard time admitting it. If Jean's actions at the end of September changed your mind than you agree with the premise of CBC bias, because it was a story in your mind before she gave that speech. I personally don't have an issue with her being GG. But I do have an issue with the way the CBC handled the story, which I think is related to this thread. Not really a fair critique of the, otherwise flawed, article. Academic studies take a long time to come together. Say the surveys were done fall of 2002, results collated and categorized spring 2003, numbers crunched summer 2003, article written and submitted to journal in fall 2003, peer review and revisions for first half of 2004, article accepted late 2004 or early 2005 and finally published summer or early fall 2005.

Already dealt with the high dollar. High energy, hmmm.... We are a trading nation. That means respecting the world price of commodities. Whether or not it hurts Ontario in the short-term, because in the long-term it also hurts Ontario. If the Feds were to try and artifically suppress the price of oil in Canada, a la a new NEP, it would be bad for Ontario. Never mind the catastrophic effect on Alberta, and serious damage done to the economies of Newfoundland and Saskatchewan. Here is why it would be bad for Ontario in the long-term. Subsidizing the price of oil, would allow inefficient companies to survive when they wouldn't in a free market. This provides an unfair drag on the Canadian economy and is not sustainable in the long run. Additionally, foreign investors would lose confidence in a Canada that shows such blatant disregard for international trade rules (don't even talk to me about softwood, nuf said that Canada can't throw it's weight around like those jerk Republicans do when they are running the show in the U.S.) To attract foreign investment the Bank of Canada would have to raise the prime interest rate ... which would hurt ALL Canadian businesses. Don't believe me? 23 years or so ago is a textbook example of how protectionism would hurt all of Canada.

What exactly are the costs you are referring to? Are you talking about the "costs" of a high dollar? The article, and the study it reports on, doesn't even touch on the equalization payments that Alberta pays into C.A.P.

No matter how many excuses you can think of, the facts prove that none of them are justified. There definitely was a story there. Credible journalists should think of doing their jobs, not protecting their colleagues. No matter what they thought beforehand, the CBC played this story incorrectly.

That is a terrible analysis of the way the CBC handled the Michaelle Jean affair. They sat on the story for at least ten hours after it was out on CTV, the Star and the Globe sites. Their original story had NOTHING new that wasn't on the previously mentioned sites half a day earlier. You picked a bad example to support MotherCorp on. Their handling of that one will go down as the definitive example of their bias at the start of this new millennium.

Hmmm, arguing about the premise of the study without any support of your own. After looking at the study, please give some example of the activity that would take place anyways. Your knee-jerk leftie analysis is totally off on the petrobuck. The strengthen of the dollar in the immediate short-term (i.e. up and down since Katrina) has taken place in spite of mixed results for the price of oil. A stronger dollar is better for the entire country. When we sell our goods abroad we are getting more money for them. Hmmm, good thing. Canadian manufacturers are forced to find more efficiencies and cost-savings which make them that much more profitable when the dollar returns to historical averages. Hmmm, good thing. Please actually explain how the Government of Alberta is the only one that gets 'new' money from the royalties. With highrer incomes and a higher level of economic activity there is an increased flow of income tax to the federal coffers. This income wouldn't be increasing if the price of oil weren't rising. Ohhh yeah, you forgot to mention that Ottawa also directly gets a small percentage of the royalties from oil production. Hmmm, maybe it is good for the entire country after all...

According to the Canadian Energy Research Institute - Ottawa shoud take in $51 billion from the oilsands over the next twenty years as opposed to Alberta's $43.7 billion. http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjou...0e-b8643ac6d3c0 Guess the Feds are getting more than half the tax revenue the way things are now. No need to grab for more....

Very weak methodology. I'd say more but no need to build on another great job by kimmy. Good work fair lass! The article does give credence to claims of a Liberal bias in the CBC...

Your economic argument is false. Please explain it. Oh I get it, attacking me personally is easier and 'saves' you from having to defend your incorrect statement.

What? Hmmm, Mulroney laid the regulatory groundwork for the boom of the 1990s. Your assertion that the "economic performance" has declined under and since Mulroney shows your true stripes and what a simpleton you are. Y'all aren't dangerous cause you have no power, or realistic chance to gain any.

Orchard was unrealistic. If the parties hadn't merged they BOTH would have starved to death financially. He was a one-issue guy. Switched from free trade, which was idealistic yet misguided to the saviour of the Progressive Conservative Party, which was unrealistic. Are we actually agreeing on something?

Oh, now I know why Mirror got banned. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What are you talking about? Why are you dredging up posts from three weeks ago? Aren't you the least bit offended he couldn't even spell your hometown correctly?

Why? Does anyone actually believe the Liberals will be successful in making the timing of the election an issue? 16 plus months for a minority government is a fair amount by historical precedent.

Harper was out selling his vision all summer. What about those TV ads in Ontario? While Harper was getting bashed for being ineffective and wasting his time this summer he was out doing exactly what you said he should. Considering that the tax cuts the NDP got "passed" have already been re-introduced, Jacko sold his soul for a relative pittance. A couple billion for affordable housing, hmmm the man's soul had gotta be worth more than that. What would be worth it? One example, please since Harper started re-directing the tone this summer? Anything in September, you can actually ponit to? Already started with the aforementioned TV ads.

What it means is the Liberals really saw the writing on the wall. The regular guys who kick back every Saturday night, drink some beer and listen to Harry Neale's terrible commentating while watching Hockey Night in Canada and the bad play of the Leafs. These Ontarians are the voters who ideologically should support the Conservatives but vote Liberal due to inertia and scare tactics. A Saturday night without Ron Maclean and Don Cherry would be enough to turn these guys against the Liberal party and drive them to their ideological home ... for good.

Like Harper played nice all summer? Despite taking hits for it at the time Harper's BBQ tour looks like it actually did pay off. Can he stay on a positive message during the heat of an election? History tends to prove that is a losing strategy during a general. Why would Harper want to get some of his platform passed with this government? The time is now for the CPC to strike. What would they honestly gain by giving Dithers et. al a free pass for the fall session? Do you honestly think the Liberals would let the CPC pass anything of significance to hang their hats on before the next election? Hmmm, by the nature of your comment you might be attempting to protect yourself from having to support your 'unique' assertion. However, there are a number of faults with it I will deal with politely and appropriately. 1. It truly does go both ways. How often do some Liberals/NDs/socialists refer to the CPC as Reform/Reform in drag/you pick the derogatory name or CPC supporters as fascists/rednecks/hicks? 2. I don't really think the mindset you talk about really exists. Personally I support the CPC because I think a government with more of a focus on the economy, and less intrusion into the personal lives of Canadians are good things. Sure CPC supporters get taunted by ND and Liberal supporters (it also goes the other way around), but I would never choose to cast my ballot just because a supporter of a different political party attacked me and my beliefs. I have been in party policy meetings, should I quit the party because other members attacked my proposals? 3. There is a difference between supporters of a party and the party itself. If the CPC "figured out" your "reality" how would the party go about stopping its supporters from "insulting and belittling" those who are ideologically inclined to vote Liberal? They couldn't, so why even think about it...