Alexandra

Actually 'it' does not 'emanate' from any hardcore Alberta Con base. It may seem it is Alberta which is most 'virulently' anti-Trudeau from where you sit in Ontario. From where I sit in B.C. except for the actual downtown core of Vancouver and groups of NDippers scattered around Greater Vancouver there are B.C.'ers equally if not more vociferously anti-Trudeau than many Albertans. For good reason. Many are equally as 'virulently' anti-Chretien as well; it may be that most B.C.'ers are very, very wary of Quebec and Ontario - period. When it comes to all of the sneering and disparagement of the natural resources of Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan by the Bob Raes, Ignatiefs, the Layton crowd of Babblers, the Quebecers braying on and on about the tarsands and climatebloodychange then is it such a surprise that Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan still loathe everything that Trudeau did to turn our country into the socialist nirvanna he paid such lip service to but in fact treated the citizens, particularly those of the West, with disdain. More contempt than disdain for the fools he believed us to be. Trudeau and his official language Act? I mean really. Who speaks Quebec french in the West! `

Bravo Borg. Being ex-pats and living/working in the center of the storm is a humbling experience with no room whatsoever for the smug, self-righteous and overbearing false patriotism Canadians are now becoming known for. Such as that on display by the poster you have replied to. `

Oh gawd, it's you again, SAGA! How many incarnations is this after you have been kicked off this board a dozen times or more? Back again under Tango must mean you have been kicked off Babble -- again? How about you take your own advice and wander the earth for centuries looking for a new Message Board to rant on ad nauseum about your tribes and six nations and, yada, yada. Other more intelligent and moderate people than you have been shown the door from this board and why you persist in your efforts to return here again and again after people have complained to Charles about you and your 'agenda' just proves how desperate you are to have a space to rant and rave. Try babble again. `

Neither am I. Neither is the editor of the magazine which you are well aware of and if not, should be. Did you not know that discussing separatists/ism is 'treasonous'? tsk, tsk. (must have hit the rewind button, hmmm)

I couldn't agree with you more. Take it up with JDobbin if you wouldn't mind. This is his thread in connection with Separatists! It is called = Irony. Obviously some fail to recognize same. `

I couldn't agree with yoou more. Take it up with JDobbin if you wouldn't mind.

No, dobbin. Wrong again. Where I come from in the West all of the Tories I am familiar with are cheerleaders and support wholeheartedly Quebec separation. `

Well, of course one such as dobbin tends to relish the latest and most provocative gossip-sensationalism about any other political party when one professes blind loyalty to his cause and nothing but disdain for those of a different political party. Ignoring in total the other side of the equation, such as: http://www.cfrb.com/node/901388 The "Urban Male Magazine"? `

Truth replacing satire? A few Liberals thought it amusing. `

We do have the IDS. Right on this thread. It looks like it's contagious too. `

From the same Nanos poll: [but never on this Board has the following been linked to by any of the 'opposition'] QUESTION: Of the following individuals who do you think would make the best Prime Minister? ANSWER: Stephen Harper the 'following' individuals were: Stephen Harper Michael Ignatieff Gilles Duceppe Jack Layton and, Elizabeth May Canadians are a contrary bunch of people it seems .http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W09-T362E.pdf

Trudeau paid untold $Billions to buy a Belgian Oil company's Canadian subsidiary, Petrofina-Canada to re-name it Petro-Can: Petro-Can has divested itself of some(?) of those assets over the years and has had a reputation of poor management, vision, throughout the industry. `

It appears from the above IRONY is wasted on you. On Guyser, perhaps and then, perhaps not. `

Answer? Failing grade, Guyser. Being deliberately obtuse doesn't become you. `

Have you posted those polls which say evolution is how we came into being? Jonathon Kay's discussion re "polls" vis a vis evolution - creationism - in today's NP: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/s...html?id=1399884 This is what started this contretemps: And, this: The problem with the usual tempests in teapots is that by creating or seen to be creating 'news' there will always be another journalist or blogger whose curiosity is piqued enough by such teapot tempests to ruthlessly rebut with truth or facts the original reporter's truth or facts. Jonathon Kay rebuts McIlroy's statement that whatsisname Goodyear refused to answer whether he believed or did not believe in evolution, hence, of course he is a 'creationist', whatever that is. So, Dobbin. If 34% stated in a poll that they think (believe) it is a combination of both evol. and create. then how do you arrive at the 'majority' believe in evoluton? And, if this MP Goodyear actually does, as Jonathon Kay states, (who by the way is not a -- christian, catholic or evang.) have a belief in evolution, what purpose would McIlroy have in claiming this Goodyear was a -- cough -- bible puncher therefore ineligible to be a Minister of Science, or whatever? Were you taught evolution, creationism or, a combination of both in your science classes btw? Of course you are not obligated to answer that question, are you jdobbin? `