Funny CNN Clips

[Black Dog]

Yet the left in Canada seem to be tolerant of nationalities with exception of Americans and religions except Chistianity and Judaism. In fact they extremely prejudicial towards these groups of people.

I think that's b.s. Now personally, I can't understand why someone would buy into the whole God thing, but that's none of my business. What is my business is when religion is used to shape or direct public policy (as in the case of gay marriage). I hardly consider the fight to limit the influence of religion on affairs of state to be presecution, as some would suggest.

Can you cite some examples?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear I miss Reagan,

the left in Canada seem to be tolerant of nationalities with exception of Americans and religions except Chistianity and Judaism

I would expect that the reason is most Canadians are sick of the rank hypocrisy of the above. When it comes to a 'holier than thou' attitude, there isn't anything more unholy than a US televangelist.

[Black Dog]

This article by Frank Rich neatly encapsulates how fundamentalist elements in the U.S. are promoting a mindset of victimhood in order to muscle their way in.

a poll found that 84 percent of American adults call themselves Christian, 82 percent see Jesus as the son of God, and 79 percent believe in the virgin birth. Though by a far slimmer margin, the presidential election reinstalled a chief executive who ostentatiously invokes a Christian Almighty. As for "The Passion of the Christ," it achieved the landslide of a $370 million domestic gross (second only to the cartoon saviors Shrek and Spider-Man).

Yet if you watch the news and listen to certain politicians, especially since Election Day, you'll hear an ever-growing drumbeat that Christianity is under siege in America. Like Gibson, the international movie star who portrayed himself as a powerless martyr to a shadowy anti-Christian conspiracy in the run-up to the release of "The Passion," his fellow travelers on the right detect a sinister plot - of secularists, "secular Jews" and "elites" - out to destroy the religion followed by more than four out of every five Americans.

What is this about? How can those in America's overwhelming religious majority maintain that they are victims in a fiery battle with forces of darkness? It is certainly not about actual victimization. Christmas is as pervasive as it has ever been in the United States, where it wasn't even declared a federal holiday until after the Civil War. What's really going on here is yet another example of a post-Election-Day winner-takes-all power grab by the "moral values" brigade. The idea is to intimidate and marginalize anyone who objects to their efforts to impose the most conservative of Christian dogma on public policy.

[Newfie Canadian]

Well the Americans don't pay much attention to us up here, but perhaps it's about time Canada suffers the consequences for it's open anti-Americanism.

The humour I found in that part of your post, IMR, was the use of the term "enemy".

To me an enemy is someone out to destroy you. I hardly think Canada and Canadians are out to destroy the US.

According to a recent poll reported on by FoxNews {shudders}, Canadians aren't as "anti-American" as some of America's other allies.

A majority of people in Britain, America's strongest ally in the Iraq war, have an unfavorable view of Bush. Six in 10 Britons said they were disappointed he was re-elected.

In Canada, about the same number of Canadians said they were disappointed with the re-election.

...

Just over half of the people in France, Germany and Spain had an unfavorable view of Americans, but a solid majority in Australia (69 percent), Britain (60 percent), Canada (80 percent) and Italy (56 percent) expressed a favorable opinion.

I think it is worth distinguishing between anti-Americanism" and "anti-Bush".

[I miss Reagan]

BD I'm not sure what kind of examples you are looking for. Regarding persecution during Christmas, examples are everywhere from here to Plano Texas. In Denver a nativity float was banned from the Christmas parade, in cities around the province nativity scenes are being hidden away. At a school near my home children are not allowed to sing christmas carols but are permitted to sing other religions songs. At a hospital here a cross was covered in the chapel. In NYC two children were punished for bowing their heads before eating then humiliated by the teacher in front of the class. Another great example is the "Jesusland" map and all the commentary which tried to portray the Bush win as a result of irrational religious thought. To say that all this is some fundamentalist agenda to shove Jesus down everyone's throats is secularist spin. Even the use of the word 'fundamentalist' used so often in the media implies a negative conotation. You yourself have taken many opportunities to bash and generalize about Christians.

[I miss Reagan]

The humour I found in that part of your post, IMR, was the use of the term "enemy".

To me an enemy is someone out to destroy you. I hardly think Canada and Canadians are out to destroy the US.

According to a recent poll reported on by FoxNews {shudders}, Canadians aren't as "anti-American" as some of America's other allies.

A majority of people in Britain, America's strongest ally in the Iraq war, have an unfavorable view of Bush. Six in 10 Britons said they were disappointed he was re-elected.

In Canada, about the same number of Canadians said they were disappointed with the re-election.

...

Just over half of the people in France, Germany and Spain had an unfavorable view of Americans, but a solid majority in Australia (69 percent), Britain (60 percent), Canada (80 percent) and Italy (56 percent) expressed a favorable opinion.

I think it is worth distinguishing between anti-Americanism" and "anti-Bush".

I see what you're saying. Canada certainly does not have the might or will to ever take on the US in a military capacity. However, the days are gone where Canadians merely approached the Canada-US relationship as petty rivalry. I think Canada is an enemy. Our government has shifted to taking an antagonistic approach to US policy rather than a neutral approach. It seems as though Canada will go out of their way to push the limit of pissing off Americans such as providing a haven for AWOL US troops, who volunteered for service BTW. I think I posted the Fox poll on here before which showed the majority of Canadian teens see the US as "evil". That kind of opinion comes from our anti-American media and education system. And although Bush is a lightning rod I don't think the hatred is solely the result of he being president. Carolyn Parrish certainly doesn't distinguish between him and the rest of America.

[Newfie Canadian]

I appreciate your points, I Miss Reagan.

Our government has shifted to taking an antagonistic approach to US policy rather than a neutral approach

Some would say that Canada has begun to assert it's own will in regards to domestic and international policies irrespective of the wishes of the American government, as is our right as a democratic, soveriegn nation.

And some would say finally.

It seems as though Canada will go out of their way to push the limit of pissing off Americans such as providing a haven for AWOL US troops, who volunteered for service BTW.

No arguments here. They should be sent back.

Hopefully the Immigration Review Board will do the right thing and send them packing.

However, in defence of the system, it is there for everybody, and the US does not have a monopoly on due process and rule of law. Before we say we're harboring these people, let the process take it's course. If the review board grants them assylum (which no American service person has been granted, BTW) I'll be right there with you saying it's not good.

I think I posted the Fox poll on here before which showed the majority of Canadian teens see the US as "evil".

It wasn't a Fox poll, if I understand the poll you're talking about. It was a poll "...commissioned by CanWest News Service and sponsored by the Dominion Institute and Navigator Ltd...." O'Reilly and Gibson really took up the charge over it though.

In a telephone poll of 500 teens aged 14 to 18,

A telephone poll of 500 teens?

IMR, that is hardly a reliable indication of the attitudes of young people.

How many teens do you know that have a workable, even passable understanding of international affairs?

I wonder what the results would be like for British, Australian, French and German teens?

Just to be sure we're talking about the same poll, is it the one where:

more than 40 per cent of respondents saw the U.S. as an evil global force. Among French-Canadians, that number jumped to 64 per cent.

If it isn't the same poll, I apologize.

Carolyn Parrish certainly doesn't distinguish between him and the rest of America.

I'm on the record as saying Carolyn Parrish is out to lunch, and she is hardly representative of Canadians as a society.

I find that the Canadians I know have much more maturity and class.

[August1991]

It seems as though Canada will go out of their way to push the limit of pissing off Americans such as providing a haven for AWOL US troops, who volunteered for service BTW.

That's hardly a new development in Cdn/US relations. In fact, I think it's a long tradition.

[caesar]

It is just doing what we believe to be the fair thing. How about how the American government likes to tick us off. Clean up their own backyard and homegrown terrorists.

This is not one sided. Let them deal fairly and under international rules in trade and foreign affairs; then we can talk.

[I miss Reagan]

Some would say that Canada has begun to assert it's own will in regards to domestic and international policies irrespective of the wishes of the American government, as is our right as a democratic, soveriegn nation.

I would say it's them same people who are unable to discern between democratic sovereignty and diplomatic and econmic consequences for antagonistic actions.

Hopefully the Immigration Review Board will do the right thing and send them packing.

I think just having the review is offensive. We're not talking about Syria here. I think it's meant as a snub.

I'm on the record as saying Carolyn Parrish is out to lunch, and she is hardly representative of Canadians as a society.

I find that the Canadians I know have much more maturity and class.

Well her constituents overwhelmingly voiced their support for her by reelecting her. I think a lot of people in this country feel the way she does. I think the NDP showed their lack of class when Layton tried to incite a massive anti-US protest during the Presidential visit.

[I miss Reagan]

Here are just some examples of bigoted anti-Americanism displayed by "tolerant" Canadians on this forum:

Battle of the Bulge Anniversary (Pages 1 2 )

USA commemorating it's own failure? theloniusfleabag 20 176 23rd December 2004 - 09:21 PM

Last Post by: Big Blue Machine

  Pat Tillman killed by 'friendly fire' (Pages 1 2 )

USA, home of trigger-happy morons theloniusfleabag 22 224 19th December 2004 - 11:28 PM

16th December 2004 - 02:17 PM

Last Post by: The Terrible Sweal

  Oh! Oh! Trouble in Paradise? 

Kerik Out As Homeland Security Czar maplesyrup 2 30 13th December 2004 - 04:05 AM

Last Post by: maplesyrup

Terror against an Americans (Pages 1 2 )

Why? Edgars 16 122 11th December 2004 - 12:23 PM

Last Post by: caesar

  US A Hated Nation, Thanks To Bush (Pages 1 2 )

When will Americans wake up? maplesyrup 26 268 9th December 2004 - 04:59 PM

Last Post by: eureka

  Brilliant President: Attacked by Osama bin Laden 

Captures Saddam Hussein Instead! maplesyrup 1 31 5th December 2004 - 02:40 AM

Last Post by: maplesyrup

Last Post by: chris29

How Evil is George W. Bush? (Pages 1 2 3 ...7 )

MapleBear 103 770 30th November 2004 - 09:55 AM

Last Post by: caesar

[Cartman]

But IMR, would it not be anti-Canadian if I asked Greg to change my name to "I miss Lenin"?

[Newfie Canadian]

I think just having the review is offensive.

Anyone has the right to claim assylum in Canada, as well as the US I believe, whether they are from Syria, the US or Mars. But then there is a process to approve or deny it.

Why is our own rule of law and due process offensive?

Well her constituents overwhelmingly voiced their support for her by reelecting her.

She may do a lot for her constituents.

I believe that many people vote for the person who would do a lot for their constituents, as opposed to do a lot for the country.

I think the NDP showed their lack of class when Layton tried to incite a massive anti-US protest during the Presidential visit.

LMAO.

Everywhere the President goes there are going to be protests. I don't think Layton had to do anything. Not that I support Layton or some of his tactics mind you.

There are bigger protests against Bush in hte US than we will ever see here.

[PocketRocket]

As for our relationship, I guess it requires one to define the "line" that seperates symbiotic from parasitic.......

Well, Okay......

Following quotes from Dictionary.com

PARASITE:

1 Biology. An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

2    a    One who habitually takes advantage of the generosity of others without making any useful return.

      b  One who lives off and flatters the rich; a sycophant.

3        A professional dinner guest, especially in ancient Greece.

parasite

1: an animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another animal or plant); the parasite obtains nourishment from the host without benefiting or killing the host [ant: host]

2: a follower who hangs around a host (without benefit to the host) in hope of gain or advantage [syn: leech, sponge, sponger]</

SYMBIOTE:  referred me to "See Symbiont"......and so......

Main Entry: sym·bi·ont

Pronunciation: 'sim-"bI-"änt, -bE-

Function: noun

: an organism living in symbiosis; especially : the smaller member of a symbiotic pair called also symbiote —sym·bi·on·tic /"sim-"bI-'änt-ik, -bE-/ adjective

So....Let's try "Symbiosis:.....

SYMBIOSIS:

1: Biology. A close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member.

2: A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence.

Can it be successfully argued that the USA does NOT benefit from us being her neighbour???

I think not.

We are not a drain on USA's resources. Nor are we a source of cheap-labour-illegal-immigrants like Mexico.

We are not the recipients of huge American monetary handouts, like Puerto Rico.

We have never become a potential threat by allying ourselves with an enemy, like Cuba during the cold war.

If for no other reason than Canada is non-aggressive to the extreme, our position as neighbour benefits the USA. But, we are also a major provider of various resources, which, despite NAFTA, the USA does not seem to mind placing tariffs on.

We also provide brilliant minds. Many of our best professionals move to the USA to make more $$$, and to earn it in US dollars.

Our police forces co-operate with those of the USA. The list goes on and on.

So, in short, we are definitely a benefit to the USA, not simply a drain on their resources.

We may be the greater benefactor of the relationship between our two nations, but to describe Canada as being "parasitical" would be ludicrous.

[I miss Reagan]

But IMR, would it not be anti-Canadian if I asked Greg to change my name to "I miss Lenin"?

I don't see your point Cartman...

[Black Dog]

Regarding persecution during Christmas, examples are everywhere from here to Plano Texas.

I call B.S. Most incidents you cite are blown out of proportion or ouitright fabrications. Take the Denver float issue for example: the organizers had a a longstanding policy against overtly religious and political themes, so to characterize the issue as being about a religious-themed float being banned is a distortion.

The whole "faithful versus secularists" is spin by the powerful lobby that is the religious right.

[Shakeyhands]

http://mediamatters.org/static/video/cc-20...00412010011.wmv

Disgusting.... And this is my issue with the Right Wing Whackos, they believe this crap.

[Black Dog]

Yah. I'm looking forward to the day Ann Coulter blows her brains out on Colombian marching powder in the Green Room on the "O'Reilly Factor set". I like people, which is why I loathe that peroxide viper.

[kimmy]

I'm looking forward to the day Ann Coulter blows her brains out on Colombian marching powder in the Green Room on the "O'Reilly Factor set".

That was superb.

I don't know if it has been mentioned here or not, but Tucker Carlson, aka "Bowtie", was axed by CNN recently. Verbal jousting with Carolyn Parrish was not a direct cause, nor was the verbal ass-kicking he received at the hands of Jon Stewart. However, in dismissing Carlson, CNN chief Jonathan Klein referenced Stewart's assertion that partisan bickering like Carlson and Coulter (and their counterparts on the left) engage in isn't constructive and doesn't contribute much to public debate.

"I guess I come down more firmly in the Jon Stewart camp," Klein told The Associated Press.

Yahoo! news article

He said all of the cable networks, including CNN, have overdosed on programming devoted to arguing over issues. Klein said he wants more substantive programming that is still compelling.

-kimmy

[Black Dog]

I've heard it said (on this very board, even) that Coulter's raison d'etre is to rile up "liberals" with her invective. Now, notwithstanding the fact that such petty vindictiveness is better suited to the playground than political discourse, I fail to see how having someone whose main debate ammunition are lies and personal attacks proves anything about the so-called liberal proclivity towards lies and personal attacks.

[kimmy]

I suspect that Coulter's raison d'etre is to sell books, newspapers, and radio/tv advertising, and that she's discovered that her over-the-top rhetoric is highly popular with her target audience. Whether she actually riles up liberals or not, it surely delights her fans to think that she does.

-kimmy

[August1991]

I suspect that Coulter's raison d'etre is to sell books, newspapers, and radio/tv advertising...

Can I say "duh" without sounding insulting?

A columnist is supposed to be polemical. There's also an element of entertainment - call it bear-baiting if you will. It is the verbal equivalent of a hockey fight, or a car wreck. We all like to see drama.

True drama must be spontaneous, genuine and unpredictable.

The more interesting question, IMV, is whether Coulter really believes what she says or whether it is just an act. (I must admit that I rarely watch TV and so I barely know who Coulter is.)

I suspect that, as Somerset Maugham said about melodramatic novels, the author must believe otherwise readers will quickly detect the falseness.

[kimmy]

The more interesting question, IMV, is whether Coulter really believes what she says or whether it is just an act.

Or whether Tucker Carlson really believes that a bow-tie is a stylish fashion accessory in 2005. I believe the answer is that the bow-tie, and Coulter's over-the-top barbs, is part of an image that's been created.

During his rant, Jon Stewart compared Crossfire and its ilk to "pro wrestling"; his crack ("You're 35? And you wear a bow-tie?") wasn't a put-down so much as a comment on the theatrical nature of the production. Tucker Carlson's bowtie and Captain Insano's mask are just costuming, the difference is just in degree. Does Coulter *really* believe the US should attack Canada because we speak French? Probably about as much as Captain Insano really wants to hit his enemy with a chair.

-kimmy