I miss Reagan

Black Dog first you talk about the gross exagerations used to argue between left and right then you proceed to do the same thing with republicans. I would also like to point out that if anyone lacks originality it is you. All of your posts seem to be from last nights reading from counter-punch dot com or Salon magazine. Your opinions of US foreign policy are remarkably similar to those of Noam Chomsky, which is why I found it so funny when you finally posted one of his long winded quotes and tried to portray him as the final authority. This, along with the ostentatious, scholarly-journal type of postings lead me to believe that you either work as an assistant at a college or perhaps work as a beaurocrat for the government. As for the "triumphalist displays", as you call them. I have to say that after the Bush win, I did feel like it was a major victory against some pretty hateful people. Bring in the sour grapes displays by people such as your self and others with the "we'resorry.com" etc. and I couldn't help but gloat . And as for your little pscho-analysis of "The enhanced sense of identity and belonging, in which the grandeur of the group reinforces individual self-esteem, is a phenomenon not without historical antecedents." Look no further than this little microcosm you and the other bitter anti-Americans have created in the "US Politics" section of Mapleleaf Web. You guys wallow in your own bitter hatred of the "US fascists", patting each other on the back for the best jab. There is no balanced discussion of actual US Politics. It's a one sided gong show of vitriolic and non-sensical tempertantrums about George Bush and US foreign policy. There is no reasonable or rational debate. I don't even no why Monty would waste his time.

Black Dog is just upset that he can't control all of the topics in the "US Politics" section of the forum and degenerate it into Anti-American hate spewing like the rest of the topics in the section.

Thankyou Daniel.

You know me well. Come on now admit it though, it was a stupid post.

"reasonable basis" . Once again, according to what you define as reasonable. Right in line with my quote below. What a cop out. Ya, Day's personal beliefs in evolution are a public issue. Give me a fricken break. You're putting him down because of his religion. Religious bigotry and discrimination in it's purest. I love how you guys pull out the 'freedowm of speech card' when ever you're caught in your own intolerance. Don't try to squirm out of it, you know exactly what I'm saying. Come on let's hear some of that freedom of speech with respect to their beliefs and your definition of 'reason'. Oh it's completely supported, it's right in front of your face.

Jesus Christ, Reagan. How obvious does a sarcastic post have to be anyway? Do you believe the news items you hear on Air Farce are real too? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm sorry but, when I read your posts I have no way of hearing the tone of your voice, the look on your face, or any other body language. I don't know who you are or what you are about. Obviously, parts of the post had some truth to it. No need to be an asshole.

Good point. On the other hand I would argue that those in favour of same sex marriage are unwilling to compromise, while most of us righties have no problem with civil unions. I think that is pretty fair. A good argument, I disagree, but it's better than the usual ad hominem some choose to use. As strategically bad as we seem to be, I think we're smarter than that. I think our guys know that this isn't the hill to die on, and we would die on it. See you're just belittleing his beliefs. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You're basically saying "you can beleive whatever you want, as long as it falls within our definition of reason". You guys crusified Stockwell Day because of his beliefs in evolution and dinosaurs. Was it Kinsella who brought out a stuffed dinosaur on a talk show to make fun of Day? Would it fly if our leader was a Hindu and he brought out a stuffed Elephant with a womans head on it to make fun of him? Would you question the decision making skills of the Dali Lama simply because he beliefs fall outside the realm of reason? or is reincarnation within your realm of reason. Just admit it, you guys are bigoted against Christians. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

Like Stockwell Day? You guys were real accepting of his religious beliefs about evolution . Real tolerant. And at the risk of drawing in our resident philosophers into a "there is no spoon" type of debate, it should be pointed out that our legal system is based on Christianity. It's almost like beaming sunlight on vampires when you point this out to the secular humanists, but the facts are that the building of our countries involved, heavily, the belief in Christianity. Evangelicals are not 'restricting freedoms', they are fighting to preserve government monuments, statues, and traditions that have existed for centuries. Yet somehow the secular humanists are offended by the word God. (Oddly, it's these same people who fight for the right of terrorists in Guantanamo to pray and read the Quran.) Obviously you have been spewing this kind of garbage so long that you think this is actually a goal of all Christians. Ok then Sweal, don't cry when voters in the US and Alberta vote against it. And it is their business if they believe that the breakup and assault on the family is causing decaying of society. Then walk the talk. Show a little tolerance of other's beliefs. Some people see little difference between a baby 5 minutes from leaving the womb and a baby 5 minutes after. Besides, how many times do you need to hear: ABORTION IS NOT ON THE TABLE!!! The CPC is not going to touch it. You really have no idea how much religious organizations contribute to the social safety net do you? These religions you hate so much, save this country millions in food donations, clothing, homeless and abuse victim housing, private welfare, and volunteer time. And 3rd world country? See you're sounding ridiculous. If you keep up those kinds of statements you'll end up like Takeanumber or PaulPaul, where no one pays any attention to your insanity. Really who's that? If you are Canadian your taxes go towards buying off Liberal voters and wasteful government programs. It's sick when you think of it in terms of money that could go to say, feeding the poor in Africa.

People who express concern about Christians are talking about the subset of Christians who are usually called fundementalists or evangelicals. These kinds of Christians are equivalent to a muslim fundementalist that wants to impose Sharia law on everyone in the country whether they believed in Islam or not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This is insane. I'm not a fan of so called "evangelicals" myself but this comment is way out of line. Somehow the radical lefties fail to see the hypocrisy when disparaging Christian groups they disagree with (and seem to loathe), while at the same time claiming to be the guardians of tolerance and acceptance.

Man, what would we do without the left watching out for us. For people who hate us so much, they sure do care about how we run our party and about us having proper leadership. But I agree with Argus, it is a problem when you get groups organizing, what amounts to a coup, to take over nominations. I saw this happen in my riding last year. A group brought out their whole church, 14 year olds and others you knew had no idea about any of it because they had people right by their side telling them who to vote for. But how do you stop it? by hand picking candidates?

I actually think Layton is a good man. I think he's sincere, he believes in his cause, and he wants to make a difference. He obviously isn't power hungry otherwise he'd be a Liberal. Although I'll never understand how any sane person could embrace socialism, I think Captain Jack wants to do some good. This is the difference between us righties and you lefties on the board. You practically claim Harper is the devil himself, and refuse to acknowledge any positive attributes. Ad hominem is your weapon of choice. In Canada, this tactic is working.

Sweal, I really meant to engage you in this topic, but it appears it got away from me. Sorry

Can anyone verify that this interview with McClellan was real? I'd like to see the video in it's context. While it is clearly obvious that this is the Liberals' way of thinking, it seems odd that she'd be so openly accepting of terrorists and admit that it is because of voters. It's pretty frightening.

Picton innocent? I'm not talking about becoming Texas. All I'm saying is why not put some of these people, who we know are guilty, to death. Look at these people, they get paroled after a year or two and are out doing it again. I say two strikes then warehouse them for life. At the very least we should know who these people are in our neighborhoods. I think this is the right path. However, if someone commits a violent offence while under the influence of drugs, they should be given no special treatment. I think DUI offences should recieve much harsher punishment. Today in Calgary, a chick who ran over 2 people got off with no jail time. That is a joke. It's offensive. And I say hold Judges accountable if people they let off easy go and commit crimes during the time which they would be in prison had the judge instituted the maximum.

Sweal, why oppose penalties which protect our own liberties? Why not sentence people like Picton, Homolka to death? Why not increase sentences for violent crime like rape and child abuse? Sure there is a place for rehabilitation but don't you think we are far too light on repeat offenders and violent offenders. I don't know, maybe it is just a philosophical difference, but unless someone is stealing bread for their family, I generally think the individual is responsible not society. Ya but so what? Aren't we tolerant of everyone's views even if we disagree? I'm all for helping out the less fortunate but Canada is out of control. At what point do we take care of ourselves rather than believing the government should change our diapers for us? I mean free daycare for everyone? It's insane. It's unsustainable. I honestly don't think you are a classical liberal Sweal. To me you sound alot more in line with the NDP.

I'm sick of this revisionist history with respect to Mulroney. Get your facts straight. For anyone interested in a balanced perspective on Mulroney: Turmoil

Hey that's what I've been saying all along! That's why they like us Albertans so much, we hate whining liberals.

I wouldn't. Look at what it has done to them. I agree with what you say but the problem is, not what it costs us, but what it has cost them. The Libs have ruined them by ignoring them and basically paying them hush money. In fact isn't Canada's treatment of our natives what keeps us down in the UN quality of life surveys? (not that I give a lot of validity to UN surveys anyway).

How about being a little more realistic. You expect people who were born and raised here to just pick up and leave the lives they've established here? I think a lot of people are willing to leave for the US, and many do, but it's tough to get in. Perhaps you should ask the leftist Albertans on the forum, like Black Dog, I Miss Trudeau, and Takeanumber why they don't leave Alberta. But I have a better idea, why don't you just help Quebec and Alberta to separate? That'd solve a bunch of problems wouldn't it.

True, the Cons are held to a different standard by the press than the Libs are. Though not fair, we need to accept that handicap and either work around it or work smarter. Here we go . You failed to mention the influence Walmart plays... Although I agree Klien needs to go, they are nothing compared to the federal Libs. I love that "phantom alienation" comment. As if the NEP, Kyoto, Gun Registry etc. etc. are figments of our imagination. proof? I'm not sure I can provide you with proof that the sky is blue at this time, but I assure you it is. Lighten up my friend. BTW what is your profession BD? I'm wondering how you have so much time to waste on this forum? You're repeating yourself. Examples: Paul Martin (AKA the Dirty Ditherer): "I love Kraft Dinner but I don't know how to make it", John Kerry: "I love peanut butter sandwhiches but my cook makes them for me", Belinda Stonach: her answer for everything is "it's very complex", Hollywood elite: very rich, very stupid and very liberal, ya we could go on but I think you get the point.

Democracy requires all sorts of messy compromises. I am sure Martin and Goodale hated the idea of making concessions to the NDP on tax cuts but they did because the NDP was the only deal on the table. Harper could have used his leverage to get many items on the CPC agenda into the budget and even get credit for it for keeping the Liberals in line. But he decided to stand on 'principle' and ended up with nothing but a hope he might get a minority a few months from now. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe you're right, but I'm not sure it would've worked. As I see it the biggest obstacles to the CPC's gain power are: 1) They aren't as wily or cunning as the Liberals. The Liberals play the game better. 2) They don't muzzle the few radicals in their party as well as the Liberals do in theirs. 3) The press. They are crusified by the media for every little gaffe or mistake while the Liberals seem to get a pass on everything.

Interesting, but I wonder if the study was done by Canadians from Ontario . And wonder what the study will look like when Gomery is finished and when they find out where that missing 400 million that dissappeared into thin air out of the gun registry went to. And what is this obsession that you libs have with comparing everything to the US? You guys just love to bring them into every debate. I'll try to find the Russian article, but I imagine it might be difficult given my limited Russian.

Hmm, Alberta; better health care and education, lower unemployment, lower taxes, no debt. Yes, I can see how horrible it would be if the rest of Canada were like that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LOL, So true.

See, you want the CPC to be the Liberals but with blue signs. Others on the forum have pointed this out. There are only so many concessions Harper can make before he becomes a Liberal. Then what happens is the party splits again (which is lovely for you guys) and the Liberals once again are the only party. Canada as it now stands is ungovernable.