Montgomery Burns

Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and John Kerry want a repeat performance for the Iraqis, a repeat of the millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians who were slaughtered when the US cut and ran from Vietnam--a war they were winning. Retreat and Defeat Video

I'm not surprised. Liberals passing themselves off as something else is a common liberal tactic. All one has to do is trot over to Amazon.com and see the reviews of books written by rightwingers. You always see things like: 1) "As an Independent, I am appalled at [insert rightwing author] ranting idiocy. Blah blah leftwing talking points. If you want the truth, read Al Franken's book" or 2) "This long time Republican was dismayed at the innacuracies and outright falsehoods in [insert name of rightwing book]. Blah blah No Blood For Oil, Dissent is Patriotic blah blah leftwing memes blah blah....As Michael Moore proved in Fahrenheit 9-11, Bush is a lying moron"

Yeah sure, but Stephen Harper is "scary" and "angry" and has a "hidden agenda"!

Good catch. More from Canada's state-run taxpayer-funded CBC: *Sigh* If only I was a liberal elitist, then I too could enjoy private healthcare.

I also read an article a bit back in the Wall Street Journal about some female Liberal Party member who was a higher-up in the Oil For Food Scandal that was being investigated by US authorities. Unfortunately, I forget her name.

I got a chuckle out of the subtitle of this thread "his distain [sic] for Canadians is apparent" If only he was more respectful of Canadians like the thieving Liberal Party...

Vote Harper. He uses less fuel. Oh brother. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good grief. Ideology is everything to these people.

If true (this is the Guardian), it is just another example of what a loathsome man Clinton is. Like Jimmy Carter, he continues to attack a sitting president, which is a no-no for former presidents.

MY COMMENTS: 1) The Washington Times is a VERY right-wing paper. I was in DC on business (and I think that Shoop said he lived in DC at one time) a few weeks back and when I started reading the editorials (oh man...) 2) No way a Martin majority government is centre-left. It would be socially moderate and economically right for sure. And U.S. relations? Same as with Harper. 3) I think that a Harper government would not be all that "scary." I think Harper understands, like Blair and Bush, that the system of government in Canada needs to be changed to bring in free enterprise. 4) If I vote for Harper, it will be because we need to stop the spread of protectionism and socialism and corruption present in Canada today and give way to a leader who will be moral, sensible, and strong. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1) You should read the editorials in the NY Times or the Washington Post. Whoa. Crazy stuff. 2) A Martin majority govt would be a centre-left govt. Socially, they are leftwing (legalize pot, prostitution, change the 2000 year definition of marriage, pro-UN and Kyoto), and would be centre-left economically with their govt-run daycare centres, refusal to change the law making it illegal for private citizens to have the option of private haelthcare, and discriminatory taxcuts (for the unproductive only) The Washinton Times is a fine newspaper and this article by a senior fellow from the highly respectable Cato Institute is spot on. Edited to add: Here is an example of the kooky editorials one comes across in the Washington Post. Today they editorialized the legalization of the radical Islamic Muslim Brotherhood.

Eureka: "Every country that matters" FYI, Tony Blair is opting out of Kyoto as is New Zealand. And China and India are two of the biggest polluters in the world. It is outrageous that you try to ignore their polluting ways while attacking the US--which has done a better job than Canada when it comes to emitting greenhouse gas emissions. Besides, this Kyoto is a farce. These enviromental scaremongers can't even make up their mind whether global warming is coming or if a mini Ice Age is coming. And your knee-jerk "let's cut off the US from Alberta's oil" is childish and econonic idiocy. Now you know why I fear you NDPers getting into power. Stark-raving mad knee-jerk anti-American zealots.

I would hope so. The Department of Foreign Affair’s new International Policy Statement (IPS) reads “Canada will focus on making a distinctive contribution to help build a more secure world, in particular with regard to failed and fragile states.” While 12 years of Liberal rule has decimated our military, we should at least offer some support. I hope the world will forgive the greed of our Liberal politicians (Chretien's son-in-law's father is the biggest shareholder in France's TotalFinaElf oil company...which had huge contracts with Saddam's Iraq, and of course, Saddam invested $1 million in one of PMPM's companies) who took Saddam's blood money from the long suffering Iraqi people.

sharkman: Ann Coulter is so dangerous to the liberal ideology that they're terrified to let her speak in public. Intolerant of other views. They have the collectivist mindset. Ideology is everything to them. Remember how they tried to justify Clinton's perjury and obstruction of justice? Remember how they claimed there was nothing coincidental with Clinton lobbing 450 cruise missiles at Iraq on the day that Monica Lewinsky took the witness stand? Take the very popular leftwing Democratic Underground site and compare it to the very popular rightwing Free Republic website. FR is a bit too much of an echo chamber for me (although it is invaluable for its news links, and of course, one of their posters broke the story of the forged CBS memos), but I have seen some liberals on that website. However, the DU will ban you for daring to break from their collectivist thinking. As an experiment, I registered at the DU to see how long it took me to get banned. I was banned after my first post. The thread was about how the US needs universal healthcare. I typed one word--"Why"? Bang. I was immediately banned. Have you ever noticed how so many lefties write, "Even [insert rightwing columnist] disagrees with you." They think that that proves their point and they win the argument. But righties do debate and disagree with each other--sometimes ferociously. They do not have that collective mindset. Remember the screaming from the right at Bush's cronyism when he selected Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court? P.S. Did you see the poll on CNN's home page the other day? It was titled "Who is more stupid...Ann Coulter or the U of Conn students?" Nothwithstanding that it was only about 20 students who refused to allow her to speak by shouting her down, but just imagine the screaming from the left if Fox News ever had a similar poll on their home page.

More on the Cookie Conspiracy <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well I guess it did not happen then, despite Michelle Malkin being on the record as saying she interviewed 3 witnesses who said it did happen. After all, Gadflyer.com says it didn't happen. Here is how Gadflyer describes itself from their own website: Check out Gadflyer favorites (blogroll). It's full of moonbat sites. MediaMatters Juan Cole James Wolcott Brad DeLong Alternet (run by the son of fired LA op-ed Robert Scheer, a guy with long ties to Marxist organizations) The only reasonable website on their blogroll is Ezra Klein who used to be a part of the Pandagon website--which has gone to shit since Ezra left. I can tell who you are by your friends...

My guess is that it's a foreigner with an axe to grind... -k <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Piercej2 is going to be in trouble with the "progressives". You're supposed to be gender-neutral. It's supposed to be spelled Womyn. Now, if you will excuse me, I am off to rub the inside of my thighs with a cheese grater to protest 2000 years of white male hegemony!

And we all know how well the handgun ban worked in the UK.....

Instead of the $2 billion wasted on the gun registry, I would have liked to seen that kind of dough go towards more prisons and law enforcement, instead of targetting law-abiding citizens. Or better yet, have OUR (taxpayers) $2 billion taken off our taxes.

Apparently the G&M issued a statement concerning the intolerant comments made by Jessica Warner: Ed Greenspon, our editor, asked me to respond to your email letter of this morning. You are quite right, the reference to "born-again Christians" that appeared in the Jessica Warner book review on Saturday was unacceptable. We acknowledge that the comment, though an attempt at humour, would be offensive to many. We are very sorry for having let this slip through our editing process. The editors who are responsible for the Books section, and who report directly to me, have been made aware of their error and regret their lapse in judgment. In tomorrow's Letters to the Editor section, we are publishing another letter of complaint we have received, which, we believe, sums up the nature of the offence rather well. In doing so, we are drawing wide attention to the error we made in publishing the offensive line. While the genie can never easily be put back in the bottle, we hope that this exposure, as well as our record of sensitivity in this area, will reassure readers such as you of The Globe and Mail's commitment to conduct itself in an unbiased, nondiscriminatory manner. Sincerely, patrick martin comment editor the globe and mail I had to chuckle at the "our record of sensitivity in this area" comment. Remember that comic from earlier this year that had the G&M writers outside their offices burning bibles? Oh well, at least they admitted it was an offensive comment.

Do you ever get the feeling that Normanchateau is Bill Clinton in disguise? Such an obsession with polls. Why do we bother with elections? Just do a poll instead.

Martin is traveling the country on an old Boeing 727 which uses 1289 gallons of fuel per hour. Martin leased the Boeing 727 from Cargo Jet, from his friend who sits on the board of Cargo Jet. Harper's campaign jet is an Airbus A320 which consumes 767 gallons of fuel per hour. The Martin campaign's jet uses 68% more fuel than the Harper campaign's jet. Vote liberal! They're not hypocritical!

Just like Chretien, Paul Martin is an embarrassment for Canadians. What's next? Is he going to go on our state-run, taxpayer-funded TV station, stomp on a George Bush doll, and stab the face of the George Bush doll with a pencil like a deranged meth addict? Oops. I forgot. Carolyn Parrish already did that.

After wasting $2 billion--1000 times more than they estimated ($2 million)--now they want to confiscate handguns. Some Liberal Party guy (I forget who, but it wasn't PMPM) said that citizens owning handguns is not a "Canadian value". Huh? What is a Canadian value? This is going to backfire bigtime on the Liberals. CTV is a liberal-left news organization and one could reasonably conclude that they attract more leftists than righties to their website. When I went to vote at their online poll (Will banning handguns make Candians safer), there was 25,600+ votes and 78% said no. Upon visiting the CBC's website, I saw the reader feedback to the Ban Handguns announcement and there was 30 letters/feedback and only 2 supported it--and one of the pro-banning of handguns letters was the ranting of the typical knee-jerk Anti-Americanism of some Canadians (if the wingnuts don't like it, they can move to the USA if they want to own a handgun). If the hard left state-run, taxpayer-funded spokespiece for the Liberal Party (the CBC) could only produce 2 pro-banning of handguns letters--out of 30--then you just know that this was a serious mistake on the part of the Liberals.

I'm unsure as to why the US should heed the advice of the continent that gave this world Communism, National Socialism (Nazism), and Fascism.

Black Dog: Just when you think that BD can't stoop any lower.... Thanks for the link, Bren.

They were panellists on a round table show. Not reporters. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They are the hosts of the show. I have to chuckle at BD trying to differentiate between reporters and panelists/opinionists now. When one mentions Fox News to a "progressive" leftwinger, what is the first thing they complain about? Bill "O'Lielly" and Sean "Insanity"--two opinionists. Surprisingly their 3rd most hated on Fox News appears to be Alan Colmes. I guess Colmes is too reasonable for them.

There is more to this story. The LA Times fired Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferer Marxist op-ed writer Robert Scheer and replaced him with rightwing op-ed writer Jonah Goldberg of the National Review. Looks like the LA Times is attempting to do something to couter their falling circulation numbers Barbara Streisand is upset and has cancelled her subscription to the LA Times. And, of course, the loonies at IndyMedia are doing what they do best--they're protesting in front of the LA Times (do any of these "progressives" have jobs?). Plus, the George Soros-funded MediaMatters.org is encouraging its readers to email the LA Times to express their displeasure at bowing to "rightwing pressure".