Montgomery Burns

I've never been terribly impressed by many intellectuals (with the exception of Victor Davis Hanson); they tend to overthink and debate things endlessly. Ever noticed that intellectuals generally make poor leaders? That's what I like about him. O'Reilly is more rhetorical but Hannity has his facts down and he is a bulldog. However that Mark Levin guy contributed nothing. All he did was insult Baldwin. Moore and Baldwin exert a lot of influence. And that moron is a tenured professor who claims that the 300 innocents, including 24 Canadians, deserved their death because they were "little Eichamanns". One of the things I like about the FNC is that they expose these radicals that have hijacked the Democrat Party. The other channels "hide" them. Do you recall any prominent Democrat standing up to Ward Churchill?

Hey Gerryhatrick. Here's another political song for you to listen and watch. Please move all throwable objects away before you click the above link.

Anybody see Sean Hannity vs Ward Churchill last night on Hannity & Colmes? It was supposed to be David Horowitz (Front Page Magazine) vs Ward Churchill, but it turned out to be Hannity who got into it bigtime with Churchill and gave him a major butt-kicking. Churchill resorted to pretending that he couldn't hear Hannity (typical leftist--la la, I can't hear you; Saddam wasn't involved in terrorism!). I admit I enjoy watching Hannity whupping liberals on a near nightly basis. How could you not love the Fox News Channel? Nowhere else in the MSM do you see such a diversity of opinion. If you want to watch the Hannity/Churchill scrap, here is the link. Enjoy.

My Election Analyst: Leftist talking point: Vietnam! Quagmire! 57% less splodeydopes in the last 2 months. Civil War! I disagree with the last half of this paragraph, but he is entitled to his opinion. Are you suggesting that the liberal MSM is biased? Where is my civil war?

....especially in light of the growing deficit America is facing. If nothing else in the article rings true, at the very least this line fits GWB like a glove The American public tends to go for a bird in the hand instead of two in the bush.

I'll let the President handle this one (replying to a liberal audience member yesterday who made a statement full of "progressive" leftwing talking-points; he did NOT ask a question): I like President Bush. I believe that history will treat him kindly. A lot of people are going to have egg on their face. The Mid East will slowly reform and people will remember who spoke about freedom from tyranny.

Black Dog: I'd rephrase that to, "I'm happy to learn a new word today. Thank you Monty." Please stick to the issues and drop the spin. I think we're all a bit tired of your Clintonesque "it depends on what your definition of is is" nuance. Why do you think that the "illegal" wiretaps story has dropped off the radar of the MSM?

Black Dog: Translation: They're Republicans ergo they are liars. They lied about Saddam and Al Qaeda being linked. They lied when they said Saddam sponsored int'l terrorism. They lied about Iraq being a terrorist haven. If only they had listened to Uncle Saddam (or any other mass-murdering dictator). Saddam and his ilk are always to be trusted. Republicans are nothing but liars and the people who continually elect them into power obviously do not live in the reality-based community. It's super-duper quick to get a warrant. Just snap your fingers and it's there, pronto! Iran is developing nukes for nuclear power. They said so. Who ya gonna believe? Republicans?! How does the US know that terrorists want to attack the homeland and kill Americans? Do Republicans have photographic evidence, DNA evidence, or audio...er scrap that last one. Just ignore the first sentence of the article: A panel of former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges yesterday told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that President Bush did not act illegally when he created by executive order a wiretapping program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA). Another BD lie, unless you count DEMOCRAT arguments as being "universal". I don't know how BD can look at himself in the mirror. And BD proves once agains that he is both. It must've been frustrating for the chap to be unable to attack a Rupert Murdock news source on this thread.

Good for them. Except the issue never was never about spying on "international agents", but U.S. persons, which is expressly against the law. I don't expect a dishonest partisan hack like MB to get that, though. Speaking of dishonest partisan hacks.... Apparently BD thinks the entire forum is clueless as to the definition of "international": 1. Of, relating to, or involving two or more nations: an international commission; international affairs. 2. Extending across or transcending national boundaries: international fame. Perhaps these dictionaries should be more nuanced.

Sideshow: If oil automatically equals money, then why is Saskatchewan poor? Doesn't Newfoundland have oil?

Ever notice that the far-left gets wound up over the dumbest things? SHOCKER!!!: A January 31/2003 memo has sufaced (months after the October 16/2002 Joint Resolution to use force against Iraq was signed into law) that claims that Bush planned to go to war with Saddam if he didn't abide by UN resolutions! SHOCKER!!!: 72% of American troops want to be back home with their wife and kids within the next year! And they claim that they live in the reality-based commuity?

Drea: You should be careful, especially when you are at war. Major terrorist arrest in Newmarket: He was planning to go to the US but he was nabbed first. The US is doing a poor job with their Mexican border, especially during wartime. The Republicans are leery because of the cheaper labor it provides to some businesses (who generally support the GOP), and the Democrats see them as an opportunity to expand their voter base by "helping" these lower-income immigrants.

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/...006/thomas.htmlThat woman's got moxy. She's a one trick pony. Let's take a look at some examples of her penetrating "questions": The day after the allies started bombing Iraq in 1991, President Bush denounced Hussein's Scud attack against Israel in a news conference. The bigotted Arab crone chimed: Gerry never posted the part in his link where it says that this was a flower-buying campaign by the ultra-leftists at the Democratic Underground web site. Does anyone think that helps her already diminished credibility? I saw the video clip (Bush called on her) and Dubya gave her a good public spanking. It was wonderful to see.

Fashion tips. and this picture--sure to be used as a dartboard by progressive liberals.

Margrace: It's those social programs that makes everything so expensive here. Many people say they holiday in the US because it is cheaper. Take fuel; it costs much less to drive in the US.

Or we could debate about the value of a farrightwing "think tank" masquarading as some kind of credible entity. The Fraser "institute". What a joke. It's difficult to take you seriously when you make such over-the-top claims.

Why do you want to exclude church donations?

Riverwind: You've got to be kidding. Churches donate a lot. It's the parasitical govt agencies and UN idiots who force taxpayers to pay for their well-funded social club.

Source? The article that started this thread. Do you have proof he is wrong?

Riverwind: It was you leftists that got DDT banned.

It's not "whatever" and it's not a perceived war, except to Democrats. Just because the homeland hasn't been attacked for 4.5 years, there's no need to let up. Indeed, some attempted attacks on their homeland have been foiled. You can't call a Congressional Meeting for every little thing during war. It would take too long and that could be dangerous.

Gerryhatrick: Whoever could Gerry being talking about?

I'll ignore Gerryhatrick's insults and post this: Greenland's ice caps grow/thicken 66 cm (26 inches) from 1992-2003: How ya like them apples?

Ottawa stops funding One Tonne Challenge: Boy. Talk about taking a dump in the enviromentalist's cereal bowl. Looks like we're going to hear about more Liberal corruption. I'm liking this govt more and more...especially when I see photos like this.

This is a fun thread. A few things that come to mind: Raise the Social Security age limit; Canadians live much longer these days with an average life expectancy of 84 yrs for females and 77 yrs for males. A flat tax. A moral stance in the fight this generation's enemy--Islamic extremism, and backing it up with conviction. Like Harper and MacKay are doing now. A law or something in the Charter defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. Don't legalize drugs. Don't criminalize someone caught with a few grams of marijuana. It's unfair. Also Term limits. I like the US style of 8 years maximum for President. I believe the longer you are in power (eg, Chretien's Liberals), the worse you preform. How many administrations have a better 2nd term than their first one? Get out of Kyoto. It's deeply flawed. The USA's greenhouse gas emissions rose half of Canada's during the last 15 years. If the US can do it on their own, then so can Canada...and it won't cripple our economy.