Hyperbole among Canadians?

[eyeball]

Harper is a fairly moderate fellow...

Oh, and welcome to the forum by the way.

...fairly moderate...

Edited August 15, 2010 by eyeball

[msdogfood]

Your argument is still....irrelevent....

No one knew at the time when Khadr was "arrested" that he was being sent away to be tortured. No one knew at Guantanamo that he would be tortured and held against his rights.

BUT! We found out all that after Harper became Prime Minister. He was asked by Khadr and his lawyers and family to do something. He did nothing. He knew he was being tortured and still he did nothing. The the case was taken to the federal court accusing Harper and his government of abandoning Khadr and not protecting him according to the Charter. The Federal Court ruled Harper couldn't do that and order him to do something to resolve his detention. Khadr was still being tortured and held without charge. Harper appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The SCoC ruled that the Federal Court was correct and told to do something but told him he didn't have to bring him home. Khadr was still being tortured and held unjustly.

Harper violated Khadr's rights, and no doubt once this is all over there will be a big law suit coming our way. That is only one example where Harper has violated a Canadian citizen's right. It is NOT hyperbole. It is fact. 100% true.

Thank- you for pointing that out???

[Alta4ever]

Thank- you for pointing that out???

Too bad it was nothing more then hyperbole.

[Moonlight Graham]

...and when I read this, I am reminded that it is seemingly impossible for some Canadians to communicate a domestic political concept without reference to US politics.

Similar to how it is seemingly impossible for some Americans to communicate a domestic political concept without reference to Nazi/fascist Germany or communist Russia/China/Cuba?

Get over it man.

[August1991]

I've noticed a lot of Canadians (especially supporters of the NDP) say things such as 'Harper is a fascist', 'Harper should resign', 'Harper wants to destroy our schools', 'Harper is just like Bush', 'Harper wants to take away our freedoms', etc.

When I hear this, I'm reminded of all the stupid Americans that think Obama is the worst president in history. It's just asinine.

Numbers, such are democratic politics. As a people, I think we are better served when politicians disagree.

The "Harper = Bush" stuff is a prime example of the sort of hype that the original poster refers to. Or now "Harper = Tea Party", as we discussed earlier this week.

The poster compared Harper to Obama, not Bush Jnr.

It's not "Canadians". It's the Left, to whom the US is the Great Satan. Thus comparing anyone with even mildly conservative viewpoints to Bush or Reagan, or some other deeply evil being is what serves for political rhetoric from people with no even moderately sane ideas to push.

I agree with Argus.

-----

Kimmy, going back to the OP, the only thing I can conclude is that the Left tends to radicalize issues.

For example, you gotta love this:

Conservatives go too far when they trample widely shared Canadian values by twisting truth to fit narrow ideology. Liberals will go nowhere until they are willing to risk something straightening it out.

James Travers, Toronto Star

Hyperbole?

Conservatives trample... Canadian values...

Liberals.... straightening it out...

----

Conclusion? I think James Travers should be sent to Political Correctness Camp. He should not use the word "straighten" in this way. Some of us are gay, or bent.

Edited August 15, 2010 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

Similar to how it is seemingly impossible for some Americans to communicate a domestic political concept without reference to Nazi/fascist Germany or communist Russia/China/Cuba?

No...not similar at all. I am still waiting for an American presidential debate or ad campaign that compares an American candidate to the present or previous Prime Minister of Canada.

Also, Americans don't wish they could vote in Canadian elections.

Get over it man.

I already have...and will continue to watch the show. Remember, when all else fails.....Harper = Bush. LOL!

[eyeball]

It's not "Canadians". It's the Left, to whom the US is the Great Satan. Thus comparing anyone with even mildly conservative viewpoints to Bush or Reagan, or some other deeply evil being is what serves for political rhetoric from people with no even moderately sane ideas to push.

And what is the "Left" to those who use the term like an epithet? I mean, you even capitalized it like it was Hitler or Stalin or some other Great...

Get a grip.

[Moonlight Graham]

I already have...and will continue to watch the show.

Wrong. You keep criticizing Canadians who compare Canadian politics to American politics. You're hung up on it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wrong. You keep criticizing Canadians who compare Canadian politics to American politics. You're hung up on it.

You are even more sensitive to my straightforward observation. If a tree fell in Canada, does it make any noise if not compared to a tree falling in the USA? Nope....

Edited August 15, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

And what is the "Left" to those who use the term like an epithet? I mean, you even capitalized it like it was Hitler or Stalin or some other Great...

Get a grip.

Capitalized or not....he is right. Conservatives in Canada do not make such comparisons for practical reasons...maybe they could compare Dippers and Grits to Hugo Chavez instead?

[P. McGee]

No...not similar at all. I am still waiting for an American presidential debate or ad campaign that compares an American candidate to the present or previous Prime Minister of Canada.

You seem to have missed the point of the post you were quoting. The poster was saying that American politicians make comparisons to Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany, not Canada. This would probably meet the definition of hyperbole in most cases.

It's true that American comparisons to Canadian policies are infrequent, although the recent health care discussions provided many counter-examples to this. It's not difficult to see why more Canadians would know a bit more about US politics than vice versa (hint, we all get US tv channels), so in most cases a reference to a specific Canadian politician in American politics would not be understood by many people.

What's wrong with comparing Canadian policies to American ones anyway? Can you think of a more pertinent example when discussing the repercussions of a stricter drug policy? The inevitable comparison here with any policy further "left" than what we've tried would be the Scandinavian nations, but in the US the first thing that seems to come to mind is Soviet Russia. Which country uses the most hyperbolic comparisons?

[bush_cheney2004]

You seem to have missed the point of the post you were quoting. The poster was saying that American politicians make comparisons to Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany, not Canada. This would probably meet the definition of hyperbole in most cases.

Correct...not Canada, and certainly not in the same context, i.e. "Obama = Putin!!"

It's true that American comparisons to Canadian policies are infrequent, although the recent health care discussions provided many counter-examples to this. It's not difficult to see why more Canadians would know a bit more about US politics than vice versa (hint, we all get US tv channels), so in most cases a reference to a specific Canadian politician in American politics would not be understood by many people.

Of course, but it goes beyond that. It is not uncommon to have members here try to increase the credibility of their posts by explicitly invoking a US reference. "Getting US tv channels" is certainly where it starts, and Canadians must watch a great deal of such programming. It's as if Canadians can more readily and universally understand an American reference over anything more domestic (and fractious) in Canada. My favorites are those that begin, "Even in the US....".

What's wrong with comparing Canadian policies to American ones anyway? Can you think of a more pertinent example when discussing the repercussions of a stricter drug policy? The inevitable comparison here with any policy further "left" than what we've tried would be the Scandinavian nations, but in the US the first thing that seems to come to mind is Soviet Russia. Which country uses the most hyperbolic comparisons?

Which country? Probably Iran.

[eyeball]

Capitalized or not....he is right.

Excuse me but, Satan, for real? You honestly think that's what critics actually believe?

Get a grip.

[Moonlight Graham]

It's as if Canadians can more readily and universally understand an American reference over anything more domestic (and fractious) in Canada.

For most Canadians, yes you're right. Probably most of this has to do with the fact that U.S. politics and history is a part of U.S. pop culture, which Canadians are greatly exposed. TV yes, but Hollywood movies are huge also in educating Canadians on U.S. politics/history. Unlike TV where Canadians watch both American and Canadians shows/channels, the movies Canadians watch are virtually identical to those that Americans watch. The very rare Canadian-made flick will make some noise in cinemas, but i can't name any popular films about the Vimy Ridge, Canada in WWII, the FLQ crisis, Quebec referendums etc., but just like Americans we inhale the tons of U.S.-centric Hollywood flicks about WWII & Vietnam, & all those Oliver Stone & Michael Moore political movies etc.

Compound this with the pathetic lack of Canadian history taught in schools (I can barely remember any history taught in elementary school, and maybe only 4 courses throughout grades 7-12). The first time i ever heard of Samuel de Champlain or Jacque Cartier was in a grade 7 class. It's quite pathetic, and it's no wonder Canadian nationalism is so weak.

It must also be said that U.S. politics are admittedly more exciting that Canadian politics. PM's don't get assassinated and we don't invade countries or drop A-bombs.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Moonlight Graham

[bush_cheney2004]

Excuse me but, Satan, for real? You honestly think that's what critics actually believe?

Get a grip.

Satan? or Stalin? You get a grip!

[GostHacked]

You are even more sensitive to my straightforward observation. If a tree fell in Canada, does it make any noise if not compared to a tree falling in the USA? Nope....

I hear there are bigger trees in the US.

[bush_cheney2004]

For most Canadians, yes you're right. Probably most of this has to do with the fact that U.S. politics and history is a part of U.S. pop culture, which Canadians are greatly exposed. TV yes, but Hollywood movies are huge also in educating Canadians on U.S. politics/history.

Thank you..I will give you credit in my doctoral thesis titled, "Canada, the other Americans". So we have American pop culture filling a void in Canada by design. If I type "Gilligan", you know exactly what I mean, and own it with equal measure.

Unlike TV where Canadians watch both American and Canadians shows/channels, the movies Canadians watch are virtually identical to those that Americans watch. The very rare Canadian-made flick will make some noise in cinemas, but i can't name any popular films about the Vimy Ridge, Canada in WWII, the FLQ crisis, Quebec referendums etc., but just like Americans we inhale the tons of U.S.-centric Hollywood flicks about WWII & Vietnam, & all those Oliver Stone & Michael Moore political movies etc.

Why? Or more accurately, why don't such Canadian-centric films exist in wide commercial release. Even the Americans spent money on Dudley Do-right (cartoon and feature length film). I know that Quebec does better than this.

Compound this with the pathetic lack of Canadian history taught in schools (I can barely remember any history taught in elementary school, and maybe only 4 courses throughout grades 7-12). The first time i ever heard of Samuel de Champlain or Jacque Cartier was in a grade 7 class. It's quite pathetic, and it's no wonder Canadian nationalism is so weak.

Be careful...Canadian nationalism is a bad word areound here...too much like...gulp...Americans!

It must also be said that U.S. politics are admittedly more exciting that Canadian politics. PM's don't get assassinated and we don't invade countries or drop A-bombs.

Well actually you do, but just don't want to admit it. That's why you call it "peacekeeping". I think that is just another symptom of the larger issues...Canadian identity....definition without America as a foil....and the internal tug-o-war in two languages.

[bush_cheney2004]

I hear there are bigger trees in the US.

This is true...the largest trees in the world are in the USA. Sorry....

[eyeball]

Satan? or Stalin?

Satan, Argus and you said Satan.

So are you guys for real - Satan?

[bush_cheney2004]

Satan, Argus and you said Satan.

So are you guys for real - Satan?

Yes...Praise Satan!!

[Moonlight Graham]

Why? Or more accurately, why don't such Canadian-centric films exist in wide commercial release. Even the Americans spent money on Dudley Do-right (cartoon and feature length film). I know that Quebec does better than this.

With help from the CRTC, there's lots of quality Canadian tv programming and Canadian music on the airwaves. Pretty sure the CRTC has no hand in what movie theaters can/can't show, so it is smaller Canadian films with meager budgets competing for a spot in one of the 10 screens at your local cinema against Harry Potter, Avatar, Borat etc. Money talks, so theaters screen what sells to the young movie crowd.

There are a good amount of quality Canadian tv movies and mini-series' though. I highly recommend the tv flick "Terry" about Terry Fox made in 2005 if you can find it, they even put it on DVD and i found it at Best Buy.

Well actually you do, but just don't want to admit it.

woops sorry i messed up on the "invading countries" stuff. But still, pies in the face aren't as interesting as the JFK assassination, and stealth fighters are a lot cooler than 30 y/o aircraft.

[bush_cheney2004]

With help from the CRTC, there's lots of quality Canadian tv programming and Canadian music on the airwaves. Pretty sure the CRTC has no hand in what movie theaters can/can't show, so it is smaller Canadian films with meager budgets competing for a spot in one of the 10 screens at your local cinema against Harry Potter, Avatar, Borat etc. Money talks, so theaters screen what sells to the young movie crowd.

Do motion pictures from America (or anywhere else) really dominate that much "cultural" bandwidth in Canada? They are only "movies" for entertainment, not windows into the soul of America. As for the CRTC, we know that CanCon rules made Anne Murray a star!

There are a good amount of quality Canadian tv movies and mini-series' though. I highly recommend the tv flick "Terry" about Terry Fox made in 2005 if you can find it, they even put it on DVD and i found it at Best Buy.

Yes...I am aware of it...the original film was re-hyped during the run-up to the Vancouver Olympics. Oddly, the original biopic was in fact produced by/for Home Box Office, which is an American concern. This suggests that even Canada's #2 rated folk hero (after Tommy Douglas) did not spark enough domestic capital for such a project, because it is/was far more difficult to muster. So the issue was not so much the dominance of American media, but the lack of Canadian media production. Perhaps this is changing.

woops sorry i messed up on the "invading countries" stuff. But still, pies in the face aren't as interesting as the JFK assassination, and stealth fighters are a lot cooler than 30 y/o aircraft.

Are you seriously saying that Canada is...errr...boring ? Is it that simple?

[Bonam]

For most Canadians, yes you're right. Probably most of this has to do with the fact that U.S. politics and history is a part of U.S. pop culture, which Canadians are greatly exposed. TV yes, but Hollywood movies are huge also in educating Canadians on U.S. politics/history. Unlike TV where Canadians watch both American and Canadians shows/channels, the movies Canadians watch are virtually identical to those that Americans watch. The very rare Canadian-made flick will make some noise in cinemas, but i can't name any popular films about the Vimy Ridge, Canada in WWII, the FLQ crisis, Quebec referendums etc., but just like Americans we inhale the tons of U.S.-centric Hollywood flicks about WWII & Vietnam, & all those Oliver Stone & Michael Moore political movies etc.

Compound this with the pathetic lack of Canadian history taught in schools (I can barely remember any history taught in elementary school, and maybe only 4 courses throughout grades 7-12). The first time i ever heard of Samuel de Champlain or Jacque Cartier was in a grade 7 class. It's quite pathetic, and it's no wonder Canadian nationalism is so weak.

It must also be said that U.S. politics are admittedly more exciting that Canadian politics. PM's don't get assassinated and we don't invade countries or drop A-bombs.

Sorry but more Canadian history is the last thing we need in schools. God damn, grade 10 and 11 history, 100% focused on Canada, was B O R I N G as hell. Canadians identify with US historical and political references more because there's actually interesting things there to refer to. Yes yes we have Vimy ridge, but it has historical significance only because it involved Canadians, it was a rather unremarkable battle otherwise, one of a vast number fought by the allies against Germany. We spent a freaking month on fur traders in grade 11 when we could have been learning something interesting.

If you want Canadians making more references to Canadian achievements, you need to get Canada to do interesting stuff first. Where are our moon landings?

Are you seriously saying that Canada is...errr...boring ? Is it that simple?

Damn right. Canada is like the nice quiet neighborhood you might want to retire in.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Bonam

[Guest TrueMetis]

If you think Canadian history is boring you missed a lot of it. There are many interesting aspects of Canadian history, especially when talking about the world wars. It's a shame so little of it is mentioned.

[Bonam]

If you think Canadian history is boring you missed a lot of it. There are many interesting aspects of Canadian history, especially when talking about the world wars. It's a shame so little of it is mentioned.

True, funnily enough, after months on fur traders and other boring stuff, Canadian involvement in WWI was literally given 10 minutes of one class. And WWII wasn't mentioned at all in the required courses (world 20th century after WWI is taught as a separate, elective, grade 12 course). That being said, I've learned a fair chunk of Canadian history since leaving high school, just for my own interest, and "boring" remains an adequate adjective in my opinion. Our role in the world wars is "the guys that helped out and did a pretty good job", solid, can't say we didn't pull our weight, but not particularly exciting.