Vancouverite Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 The CBC, in the course of talking about Obama's visit to Canada, mentioned that Ronald Reagan brought about the acid rain accord, partly because of his good relations with Brian Mulroney. I'm surprised - I get the impression the CBC is usually anti-American, or at least anti-Republican. But maybe this is just Obamamania that's affected the CBC. Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 I'm surprised - I get the impression the CBC is usually anti-American, or at least anti-Republican. Funny, I've never gotten such an impression. Quote
Wilber Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 It's a new administration and anything is possible. They'll get over it. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
August1991 Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 The CBC, in the course of talking about Obama's visit to Canada, mentioned that Ronald Reagan brought about the acid rain accord, partly because of his good relations with Brian Mulroney.If the CBC said that, they were wrong.It was George Bush Snr. who signed the acid rain agreement with Mulroney. Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 If the CBC said that, they were wrong. Never said he signed it. He announced that they would work on it while he was in Canada. Quote
Shakeyhands Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Funny, I've never gotten such an impression. Part and parcel of Republican/Conservative paranoia. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
sharkman Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Oh please, every time the CBC reported on Bush in the news the sneer was embarrassing, except to a leftwinger whose sneer would match the one on the tv screen. Harper also gets negative coverage, which is par for the course. To answer the OP, the CBC is just experiencing Obama-mania. They are going to have to satisfy themselves with what Obama said during his visit, unfortunately he didn't read Harper the riot act or just out and out bitch slap him. Harper seemed to play things just right and will consequently face hours of micro-analysis and criticism from our media. Quote
Shakeyhands Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 see? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 see? Yes, now I understand. I never hated Bush or Harper (though I didn't root for them...although I did vote for one of them) and I can honestly say that that I don't see the bias that some here are talking about. Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Harper seemed to play things just right and will consequently face hours of micro-analysis and criticism from our media. You do realize that all politicians get this type of analysis from the media. Quote
sharkman Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 see? You could see the sneer too? Good for you, you're on your way to analyzing the bias behind the report. Smallc, keep looking, and wipe that sneer off your face! (I'm kidding!) Now read the following carefully and consider this: Obama doesn't get negative coverage for anything he does. His administration pushed a 787 billion spending bill(without parallel in history) through the congress without anyone so much as reading the bill, and the media did not question this. I am not making this up. Now consider what would have happened if Bush had tried to ram a similar bill through. Can you objectively imagine what the media would have done? Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 OK, maybe not the American media, but the Canadian media picks all politicians apart. Quote
guyser Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 Now consider what would have happened if Bush had tried to ram a similar bill through. Can you objectively imagine what the media would have done? You mean like WMD? Yeah, the press (circa 2002) really hammered Bush on that one didnt they? Quote
Oleg Bach Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 The CBC, in the course of talking about Obama's visit to Canada, mentioned that Ronald Reagan brought about the acid rain accord, partly because of his good relations with Brian Mulroney. I'm surprised - I get the impression the CBC is usually anti-American, or at least anti-Republican. But maybe this is just Obamamania that's affected the CBC. CBC being a secularist socialist elite orgainization are heavily dependent on idolitry and humanism to get by - Obama fits right into the emotional socialist con game perfectly - of course they are going to embrace one of their supposed own --- then once everyone is EQUAL...a tyrant rises from that equality - always. Quote
sharkman Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 OK, maybe not the American media, but the Canadian media picks all politicians apart. They haven't been picking Obama apart. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 They haven't been picking Obama apart. Humanist Idolity Is Policy...Where is Barbara Frum when you need her? CBC may as well be a subsiduary of the European Unionist Broadcasting Corp...They should remove the C from their title...They are much like the members of the Supreme Court Of Canada who are more interested in things over the hill in other parts of the globalist heaven...then matters domestic. CBC thinks they are just to hot and smart to remain a pubic broadcaster that serves Canada - They like our high ranking judicary - want the WORLD as their oyster..they are better than common us. Obama is not an American Phenomena - but an international one - and CBC - arrogantly believes they have hit the big time... Quote
Smallc Posted February 19, 2009 Report Posted February 19, 2009 They haven't been picking Obama apart. Yes, there was no talk of Obama being bad for Canada when the Buy American stuff started. He will get more of a pass for now, because he's new and because there is something about him that many people like. Obama's time will come. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Yes, there was no talk of Obama being bad for Canada when the Buy American stuff started. He will get more of a pass for now, because he's new and because there is something about him that many people like. Obama's time will come. I hope so.. so what do you think Cheney is thinking right about now? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 I hope so.. so what do you think Cheney is thinking right about now? Mrs. Obama's butt? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Mrs. Obama's butt? Dah Booty? I like our GGs butt better. If Dick continues to think about butt - it might just wear down that battery....can you imagine being the most powerful corporate on earth and you are totally dependant on some creepy doctor and a battery made in China to keep the ticker going? No wonder he wanted to take us with him...miserable snnoood. Quote
Shakeyhands Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Mrs. Obama's butt? Naw he's older, he's probably thinking about Nancy Regan's MaD SKIllzzzzzzzzzzz, if you know what I mean. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
kimmy Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Part and parcel of Republican/Conservative paranoia. Even the CBC's own ombudsman, Vince Carlin, concluded that they're pretty slanted when he filed the report on his investigation into complaints about scumbag Heather Mallick's despicable smear-piece on the Palin family. (click here to flash back to the heady days of September.) Yes, there was no talk of Obama being bad for Canada when the Buy American stuff started. He will get more of a pass for now, because he's new and because there is something about him that many people like. Obama's time will come. I caught a piece of Anna Maria Tremonti's show yesterday morning, in which she had a couple of guests speaking on the Obamamania rampant in anticipation of the chosen one's visit. One guest, I don't recall his name, argued that Canadians are so smitten with Obama the celebrity that they've failed to actually listen to what he stands for. The other guest was Linda McQuaig, from the Toronto Star, who argued that Canadians are smitten with Obama because he's so different and progressive from other politicians. The first guest pointed out that Stephen Harper gets called everything from a fundamentalist Christian crackpot to Hitler for his position on Same Sex Marriage (which is, civil unions yes, marrage no.) The guest pointed out that Obama has the exact same position (and quoted Obama as saying "I oppose same sex marriage because I am a Christian") yet nobody calls him a crackpot or Hitler. McQuaig conceded the point, but argued that she was talking about "the overall thrust" of Obama, not one specific policy. She launched into greenhouse gasses to prove the point. She ranted about how Stephen Harper is a holocaust denier who supports the tar sands and clings to "worthless technologies" such as carbon sequestration in hopes of reducing greenhouse gasses. The other guest pointed out that Obama has downplayed talk about the tar sands because Obama himself has to stick up for the massive US coal industry, and is himself beholden to fake technologies like carbon sequestration and "clean coal" ("clean coal" is kind of like "shiny turd", apparently.) That did not go over well with McQuaig, who more or less went ballistic and shouted about "overall thrust!" for the remainder of the segment. Though she had argued that Obama was "so different and progressive", she failed to articulate any piece of policy where Obama is more progressive than Harper during her airtime, and Tremonti gave her plenty of opportunity to do so. Personally, I think the mysterious guy won the debate. People aren't smitten with Obama because he's "so different and progressive." People are smitten with Obama because he's a rock star. Obama is able to look "so progressive and different" by standing in stark contrast to Dubya, who was simply a knucklehead. Obama, when contrasted to Canadian politicians, any of them really, doesn't stand out as especially "progressive", and is "different" only by being darker in complexion. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Smallc Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Even the CBC's own ombudsman, Vince Carlin, concluded that they're pretty slanted when he filed the report on his investigation into complaints about scumbag Heather Mallick's despicable smear-piece on the Palin family. There are some things that are slanted (columns and editorials), but there is virtually no slant (if any) when it comes to programs like The National or Politics with Don Newman on TV or The World at Six or The House on Radio. Quote
Vancouverite Posted February 20, 2009 Author Report Posted February 20, 2009 (edited) Since when has the CBC ever spoken well of the Republicans? Or, in particular, of Ronald Reagan? Or either of the two George Bushes? Or the American involvement in Vietnam? I've never seen any thing other than diatribes. Edited February 20, 2009 by Vancouverite Quote
Smallc Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Since when has the CBC ever spoken well of the Republicans? The CBC (in terms of their news organization) doesn't 'speak well' of anything. They report events. Now, nothing is ever completely unbiased, but they do a rather good job of it...better than CTV (they can at times generalize and gloss over things) much of the time. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.