jdobbin

Sounds like a poll commissioned by US television companies. I think people would have a different opinion if you asked them specifically about news programming. That might be. A lot of people are more concerned about getting HBO than that anything about Canada. I don't think there is any accurate numbers out there on pirating U.S. signals. Walk around your neighborhood and look at how many people have Direct TV satellites. The company doesn't operate in Canada and yet I could walk in any neighborhood in any city in Canada and see Direct TV satellites. Those satellites do not have *any* Canadian stations on them.

You got to be kidding. Most Canadians would not be happy to have their news outlets owned by Americans. Many public opinion polls showed Canadians wanted unfettered access to American signals. A lot of people asked said they wouldn't mind if there were no Canadian stations because they never watched them.

A good reason to keep at least one alternative around that is not subject to the pressures of stock market valuation. Is this some sort of sly defence of the CBC? Fess up. After Global gets sold, it might be the only alternative to CTV. I think many Canadians though would accept no Canadian stations in favour of being affiliates of American stations.

CTV will be a goliath.

Our local CITY news staff were all just fired.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories Anyone with CITY TV stations can expect scaled back news programs, it is said.

I think what the Israelis need to do is go in there with tanks to clear out all the Arabs within several miles of its borders, then bulldozers to wipe out every building, every house, every shed, then drop agent orange to kill every bit of vegetation, plant mines, and make it clear that anyone seen in the area will be shot on sight. See how long the southern Lebanese villagers will be dancing and setting off firecrackers in celebration of THAT. I see much of Lebanon as a victim of decades of big powers tossing them about. Syria and Israel have contributed to the instability. I think many Lebanese just want to be Labanese but factions supported by big powers make things miserable.

Canada did not deliberately exterminate anyone. That is not fair. Smallpox took the laboring oar. My God this is the reason educating the mainstream is critical, You want to talk about fairness! come on. Canada inforced manditory sterilization for First Nations women, not only canada but all of the Americas, and imposed starvation tactics on First Nations by the Empire to control the Native populations, and the mass slaughter of First Nations peoples so that their scholars can determin the physical characteristics of an indian, they were trying to determin and decide if the First Nations were an equal race, what is fair? the canadian legistaltion of First Nations Identity, take a look at the Indian Act, all the many vairations it comes in Pierre Trudeau and Jean Creatien were there to support the white paper, back in the late 60's and early 70's, and what about the residential schools, you take the children away from thier roots and culture so that they can become civilized...how civilized were those priest when they were taking children as thier own muse. Dirty I say. take a look at the Hudson's Bay Company aboloshing the traditional trade routes so that they can become the founding enterprise! small pox on those lovely blankets - ever wonder why Native people needed those blankets, why their food was rationed, and why soo many First Nations people were dying, It wasn't because we didn't know how to survive in our own territories. Canada may not have been as obvious as the slave trade, because they don't want to recognize their dirty deeds, they want you to believe in the illusion of Multiculturalism, and equal prosperity, but how was this nation built, who determined and decided the manifest destiny of this Nation. Chi Meegwetch Anishnawbe Kwe- The UrbaNish This all may be true. How can the problems be solved today?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/12/mideast/index.html Yeesh. All hell's breaking loose there. Just when you think it couldn't get worse.

Greg, the moderator can fix it if you ask him politely. "Report" the first post and explain the problem. Reported it. Didn't realize I couldn't correct typos in titles until too late.

Reserves of any type simply perpetuate the racist policies that created the mess that exists today. I see no problem providing aboriginal groups with some land (with fee simple title) and cash to compensate them for historical wrongs, however, the entire concept of 'aboriginal title' is racist and has no place in a democratic egalitarian society. I would like to see the education system spend more time explaining what 'aboriginal title' really means and how granting 'aboriginal title' to a minority ethnic group will create endless social conflicts in the future. The elimination of the reserves probably has to come from aboriginal people themselves, I believe. I certainly am open-minded to a discussion of how to remedy the problems of First Nations. I just don't think it can be done unilaterally.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/12072006/6/n-us...eto-threat.html The scientists and other backers are asking Bush to reconsider the veto.

heh. I can't correct the typo in the header. Should read Harper.

So, on perhaps the most important question of all, Americans have an open mind, and want their children to be exposed to ideas they, as parents, don't necessarily hold.It's a pity the rest of the world is not the same. The federal court has ruled that this is a question of church and state, a constitutional matter. Is creationism a science or a religious view? The court has said it is a religious view and as such can't be taught in public schools.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/11072006/2/nati...e-thoughts.html Interesting. And not surpising that he might like to get the tough part of news conference done first. What is sad is that so many people in the west hate that he always begin in French. I wonder if they feel the same way about Dion starting his speeches in English.

I don't think I know enough about the situation to comment. I'd like for land claims to settled in a more timely fashion. I'd also like to see more urban reserves because it is the one area where I think there could be some real economic success. There is a lot of fear out there and only education will help eradicate that fear.

Not exactly sure what you mean. Nonsense. Check revenues. They're up. Yes, during his second term, deficits were under control. When you pursuit a strategy of pseudo-peace and pseudo-prosperity, leaving all the difficult desicions to future Administrations (terrorism, Iraq, social security, immigration, education, dependency on oil) it's amazing how well things can go, short term. Revenues are up. But the deficit is still ringing in $300 billion a year. And Clinton wasn't the only one to share in defeating the deficit. He did so with a Repubican-controlled Congress. Most studies have shown that despite all of the spending on Iraq and Katrina, the majority of the deficit has come from tax cuts accompanied by not enough service cuts.

That is utter and complete nonsense. Or perhaps I should say that balanced government budgets should not be a fetish.Read this: Slate That article is 6 years old. And since then, the deficit has climbed to record levels. Some new conservative thinking is that deficits are not bad if they involve tax cuts. Phooey. The piper will still have to be paid. And given that U.S. spending is still $300 billion more a year than it should be, I don't see how any Bush's tax cuts will be permanent unless he is planning to slash spending like no other President before him.

To play the devil's advocate, the Canadian federal governments have been off-loading to the provinces and the provinces off-loading to the cities. In turn, the cities amalgamate (sucking up rural residents to increase the tax-base) which is effectively an off-loading from the big cities to the small towns. The little guys pay more and still get less. Thank you federalism. Everyone had to tighten their belts starting with the federal government in Canada. Subsequently, deficits are are under control in a majority of jurisdictions. As far as off-loading, people can't have it both ways. They can't ask governments to cut the deficit without a major cut in service. Now that the deficit has been cut and revenues are strong, it has allowed the government to cut tax and to increase some spending. I disagree on rural residents being caught up in metropolitan mergers. There is simply no data to make that claim. Most of the mergers have been of major urban centers. You can argue the worthiness about those mergers but it isn't a case of rural farms communities being swept into a big area like Toronto or Montreal.

For all the criticism of Clinton, he did have the deficit under control. In Canada, there isn't a political party that advocates deficit spending and thankfully, nearly every province is deficit free or moving far quicker than the U.S. in that direction. It is by far the worst form of legacy you can leave to the next generation.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/11/bud...t.ap/index.html That's still a huge number with no end in sight.

It is just a viewpoint that many Americans have. Nothing wrong with that except that some scientists in small numbers now but maybe in greater numbers later, are leaving the United States because of the anti-science stance that is being taken some American quarters.

It is not surprising given the evangelical rise in the last few years. The interpretation of the Bible in a literal sense drives the argument. The science backlash has already resulted in some scientists coming to Canada.

Why are liberals the hypocrites? Reverse the question somewhat. Why do conservatives want to protect life in one stroke and want to take it away with another? Can't they be consistent?

I know that is the history but are you absolutely sure of that? Obstructing Parliament may be a good short term tactic for an opposition in a system where a government can call an election but I think handcuffing a government for months or years in system where it cannot would end up backfiring badly. It would take some huge balls to risk the publics wrath by willingly denying them a government for an extended length of time. The Governor General can act unilaterally in dissolving Parliament but it would probably cause a constitutional crisis. There is nothing written in the Constitution about that type of action but is in theory a possibility. But no Governor or Lieutenant-Governor has *ever* dissolved Parliament for bell ringing. Historically, bell ringing has lasted months but not a full term of office. Parliament is filled with rules that most people don't know. Parliament can only function if it retains confidence. This is why the prime minister can now call the Opposition's bluff, dissolve Parliament and go to the people. This issue isn't quite so black and white as set term...no problem. Yes, there can be problems.