I miss Reagan

The difference of course being that Martin is forcing his cabinet to vote in favour and coercing his backbenchers into voting in favour by threatening them with an election and "suggesting" they be absent for the vote. CTV

Crysight. I think there needs to be limits. Fleabag is right, you can't have people walking around with RPG's. I trust myself with a gun but not the drunk yahoo next door. And I think Eureka makes a good point, that more people are killed by gun accidents than are saved by them. I believe in pre-registry limits. That is hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols if they are registered and for sporting purposes (target shooting). I think hollywood is also guilty for creating a culture of violence. Perhaps we need to start cracking down on them.

You forgot to add: I wonder if he hangs with Ward Churchill.And that he signed: But what was funny was this: How is it that the extreme left manages to tie everything to George Bush. It has nothing to do with the question. Pure comedy.

Sign that someone is losing a debate...

No they don't have to use the notwithstanding clause. The surpreme court abstained from saying that the traditional definition of marriage infringed on the charter.

Oh BD, the eternal contrarian. The eternal conspiracy theorist. Just once admit the possiblity that you could be wrong. It's ok no one will think you're stupid. Really? better than when Hindu's were forced to wear nazi-like armbands? Better than when women weren't allowed to read and were executed in front of crowds for taking off their Burkas? Wow. Why do I even respond to this insanity. Reminds me of a clip I saw of some peace protesters talking about how life is so much better under a dictator (refering to Sadam Hussein). How you get free health care etc. Funny they didn't mention the hundreds of thousands murdered and tortured by Sadam. Nor did they mention how pleasant it would be to have your tongue cut off or raped "for peace protesting".

What was that about splitting hairs? Glick's implication was clear. He was blaming Americans for 9-11. I would have been pissed at him too. He had a captious attitude so typical of the elitest left. He dodged the issue by consistently blaming everything on the illigetimacy of President Bush. Nothing too surprising, considering his academic background, except that his father was killed on 9-11. That's why Bill was pissed.

Perhaps you should actually watch Fox News rather than form your opinions based on clips from biased sources. He actually does disagree with right wingers and critisizes the republicans, including the President. He complimented Moore and Afleck for the way they handled themselves on his show. If people are BS'ing he'll call them on it. Watch the show a few times, not just cut-and-past clips from CBC. Because it didn't show him as he really is. Once again you didn't see the whole story. The guy was blaming Americans for 9-11.

NaysayersEvery now and then we get a few moments of peace when the naysayers are humbled. The liberation day in Iraq, Bush's re-election, and the Iraqi election. I remember before we went into Afganistan, the same people were saying what a blood bath it would be. That it'd be another Vietnam. But now after successful elections we here very little about it. I suspect Iraq will be similar. Slowly as the country becomes a viable democracy we'll here less and less from the press. Unfortunately in ten years from now people will forget those who were so wrong calling it another Vietnam.

"widely noted"... by liberals of course. The problem is CBC portrays O'Reilly as always being this vitriolic yelling ogre. While it's undeniable that he has his moments, by and large he's usually smiling and giving others a chance to argue their point. He is, by his own admission, pompous and bloviating. That's his M.O. The CBC's one sided reporting takes the incidents out of context and portrays the other guys as inocent victims. Whether you like O'Reilly or not, just admit it, the story was unfair.

Liberal, admits Bush may have been right.

Good article Stoker. I'd love to see a Fox News Canada bureau.

I don't know Newfie, I just don't believe it. Especially considering 1/3 of Canada is French Canadian. It's not what I see here in Calgary and this is the most Americanized city in Canada. I just run into lots and lots of Canadians who hate Americans.

Ya I'm planning on tuning in to it tonight. I have noticed that they have been having a Canadian segment of emails, most positive. Many of them seem to say "Bill you weren't as bad as I heard". I already fired one off for the show. Newfie, I think Bill won't attack Canadians as he has in the past. But Newfie, why not attack Canadians? You are the minority. Most Canadians don't like Americans, our government publicly insults the United States, and our news is so anti-American it's laughable. You know generally Canadians hate Americans, that's why they wear the maple leaf everywhere.

Ya that's why he's running from Iraq... oh wait that's just because he's "an idiot"... no wait an "evil genius"... no wait a "war monger"... no wait he's just a "puppet". Make up your minds And a note to the new troll. You might want to watch and learn from the other anti-Bushites. They at least show a little bit of an effort to hide their irrational hate, although the vitriol escapes now and then.

It seems Black Dog isn't the only one not afraid to call a spade a spade. Not sure how far left you think Ted Turner is, but if you see him as 'wayyyy left' of you, I must shudder. Thankyou for addressing me simply as IMR . Ya I don't pay much attention to Ted Turner. I know where he stands on issues. There's no doubt that Ted Turner is a dyed in the wool lefty. Come to think of it you're probably right, BD and Ted Turner probably have a lot in common.

Black Dog, you're tough to take seriously when you make comments like that. The emotionally inflamatory name calling doesn't help, although I know it's just an attempt to marginalize conservatives. Besides Christian fundamentalist, I think your favorite word is fascism. I you are the guy who consistently jumps on others for hyperbole tsk tsk.

I know not groundbreaking insight. But the point is that it was very cleverly put together, if you don't know any better you believe it. That is what is so dangerous about it is the facade of objectivity and fairness. Ya their fear seemed obvious when they tried to connect sexual harrasment with that conservative radio woman in vancouver. Lol. I'm just excited that the trains will soon be running on time . I'm not sure which books I want to burn since I'm illerate. Perhaps I'll just turn on Fox and listen to what our fascist leader O'Reilly tells me to burn .

I haven't heard any good explanation as to why civil unions wouldn't be an appropriate middle ground. BTW I heard a quote from Paul Martin on Jun 8, 1999 where he said something to the effect of the definition of marriage is one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others and will always remain such. If anyone can find the exact quote I'd appreciate it. Can't help but wonder why it's so hard to find? Interesting how he changed his mind so quickley.

The tactic of the desperate left: use the explosive and defaming word "fascist". Paint us as followers unable to think for ourselves, ignorant and uncapable of even reading the books we love to burn.

After watching the 5th Estate, I now understand a little better the attitudes of those on this forum towards the right, and Americans. Being fed the leftist propeganda under the protective umbrella of the CRTC it's quite remarkable that we aren't even more socialist and anti-American than we already are. To me cbc was doing exactly to Fox what they claim Fox does to others. It was a very hypocritical story. Not only that but it was very Michael Moore esque in it's cutting and pasting clips of O'Reilly lowlights. Anyway who watches Fox News knows that this was a false portrayal of what usually goes on. The crocodile tears of the poor oppressed liberals in the story also had a manipulative Michael Moore ring to it. Oddly Stuart Smally and Phil Donahue were portrayed as "the experts" and victims of the evils of the American right. At least with Fox you know what you're getting. The worst kind of Bias is the subtle kind.

BD, you have cleverly shifted the issue to whether Iran and Iraq could have an alliance. I merely suggested that a likely senerio, as to where the WMD's went, was that they went to Syria and Iran. Given Saddam's past, it's naive to think that he destroyed his weapons. Nevertheless here are a few links:

Intolerance. Plain and simple intolerance of others views. The blind hatred of Bush by those on the extreme left is so intense they want to kill him. Liberal fascisim? The purpose of this thread seems to be to belittle conservatives and talk yourselves into believing that we really are uneducated and ignorant.

I agree with Eureka and would add that, as is so often the case, that those who claim ownership of tolerance and open mindedness are often the most intolerant of all. But I will say that the religious crowd doesn't do itself any good, and is actually quite pharisaical, when they call homosexuality evil and try to impose their religion on others. The other side is just as guilty by not accepting polygamy and other reforms to marriage.

The left understands that 'strategic alliances', with dictators and despots, have been proven to be more harmful in the long run, time and time again. The theory of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' is the mantra of the short-sighted, greedy fool. Short sighted, greedy fool? lol. That wasn't meant as a backhanded insult was it now. The point of the comment was that strategic alliances exist, not their effectiveness. But feel free to prove your point anyway. BTW, you can address me with a simple IMR. The pretentious 'Dear' saluatation is getting a little annoying .