American Conservatives are extremely nuts.

[Big Blue Machine]

I watched the CBC show tonight, I went berserk. These people are nuts. Bill O'Reilly shows no respect to anyone, and lies all the time. Coutler is a loonie, but she's no worth one ! I wouldn't trust these people with anything!

[Argus]

I watched the CBC show tonight, I went berserk. These people are nuts. Bill O'Reilly shows no respect to anyone, and lies all the time. Coutler is a loonie, but she's no worth one  ! I wouldn't trust these people with anything!

While I frankly have little time or patience for the likes of Coulter, I found it interesting the CBC was doing a show which was described as being about the "decline of public discourse" and went to the US to do it. They could have found many examples right here in Canada. Only here, it is the left which has washed away any discourse with accusations and attacks on the morality and patriotism of anyone who dares to question their left wing political views.

They could have started with - the CBC, which adamantly opposes and demonizes any conservative opinion and politicians and accepts no deviation from its own views.

[Big Blue Machine]

These people are completely absurb. They say 'shut up' too much. They are just rude. Making up facts don't make them true. Personal attacks doesn't help to get your point across.

But Canadians did sign up in America for the Vietnam war. But that doesn't count as Canada sending troops.

[Fortunata]

You just have to laugh at nutjobs like O'Reilly and Marsden. They are so incredibly out in la-la land that any rational person could not really take them seriously.

[caesar]

Only here, it is the left which has washed away any discourse with accusations and attacks on the morality and patriotism of anyone who dares to question their left wing political views.

Well, it is the right wing people who love to attack anyone with any compassion or concern for the environment as "lefties" or even "communists"

[Conservative1]

While i agree with most of the report (ie. that there is bias in the american media) I must confess i catch quite a bit of american news and i have never seen such ridiculous ramblings on the other major networks at least of the like that were depicted on the CBC mostly courtesy of fox. The CBC managed to reduce the story to a right leaning problem. What they almost entirely failed to mention was that the media traditionally has had a similar problem in the opposite direction. On a personal note i find Canadian media far to left leaning. THERE SHOULD BE NO SPIN, OR LEAN ON THE NEWS IN ANY FASHION! That being said with the overwhelming presence of liberal media here in Canada, a little right leaning news might come as a refreshing change...just kidding.

[Argus]

Only here, it is the left which has washed away any discourse with accusations and attacks on the morality and patriotism of anyone who dares to question their left wing political views.

Well, it is the right wing people who love to attack anyone with any compassion or concern for the environment as "lefties" or even "communists"

Conservatives have compassion and concern for the environment, too. The difference is we also have a concern for what is economically sound - or at least possible. The Left rarely pays much attention to such things.

[Big Blue Machine]

The scary part of those nutjobs is that millions of people watch and believe them.

I like our moderate conservatives in Canada much better.

[I Miss Trudeau]

Conservatives have compassion and concern for the environment, too.

In so far as it doesn't hinder business, I guess.

The difference is we also have a concern for what is economically sound - or at least possible.

Perhaps in the short term. Unfortunatly, by consistently making the environment secondary to the economy, you'll lose out on both in the long run.

The Left rarely pays much attention to such things.

Or perhaps they know that any short term economic gains we make by destroying the environment will have to be repaid later. And with one hell of an interest rate, to boot.

[Argus]

Conservatives have compassion and concern for the environment, too.

In so far as it doesn't hinder business, I guess.

It's called the big picture. What happens when "it" hinders business? Well, business loses money, businesses go bankrupt, lay people off. Unemployment rises, more people wind up in poverty.

The difference is we also have a concern for what is economically sound - or at least possible.

Perhaps in the short term. Unfortunatly, by consistently making the environment secondary to the economy, you'll lose out on both in the long run.

Unlikely. When it becomes economically sound to do so then we'll wind up using more economical energy sources, and conserving energy more.

[I Miss Trudeau]

It's called the big picture. What happens when "it" hinders business? Well, business loses money, businesses go bankrupt, lay people off. Unemployment rises, more people wind up in poverty.

The destruction of ecosystems and the atmosphere results in similar or greater loss to the economy than being environmentally sensible. You don't need to look much farther than the impact of environmental damage on food production to see that.

"Hey, we may not have any food or water, but maaaaan we gotta big stacka cash!"

Unlikely. When it becomes economically sound to do so then we'll wind up using more economical energy sources, and conserving energy more.

If we're going to have to do that anyway, why not do it sooner rather than later? The answer is, of course, that conservatives want someone else (namely, their children) to pay for it. Hence the short term view.

[Black Dog]

Unlikely. When it becomes economically sound to do so then we'll wind up using more economical energy sources, and conserving energy more.

The biggest problem with the free market model described here is that it assumes people will act in their own long-term best interests. Corporations aren't people, but they are run by people and responsible to people (shareholders). Shareholders want quick returns on their investment. Consequently they will act in their own short-term interests, which usually calls for making a quick buck by whatever means necessary, enviornment, or people be damned.

Take the enduring popularity of SUVs as an example of the kind of human behaviour that the free market doesn't account for. If people acted in their own best interests, they'd avoid tehse dangerous, gas-guzzling, environmentally unsound maschines. Yet, despite pollution, despite high gas prices, people still snap them up. Why? Because the short-term gains in status and (precieved) safety outweigh long-term economic or ecological considerations. We can't expect people who run companie sto behave differently in that role than they would in their role as onsumer.

The problem is that people will only change their behaviours when forced to do so, by which time it's usually too late.

[Unpolarized]

Its not conservatives that are the problem, its people who don't think about what they are saying and just base their outrageous opinions on unexamined doctorine. Lots of "conservatives" have well thought out positions and are just as afraid of the likes of AC or the religious extremism that has taken over the agenda of the Republican parties.

Quote from John Danforth

The historic principles of the Republican Party offer America its best hope for a prosperous and secure future. Our current fixation on a religious agenda has turned us in the wrong direction. It is time for Republicans to rediscover our roots.

He goes on to say:

But in recent times, we Republicans have allowed this shared agenda to become secondary to the agenda of Christian conservatives. As a senator, I worried every day about the size of the federal deficit; I did not spend a single minute worrying about the effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today, it seems to be the other way around.

The entire editorial

Although I can not agree with a lot of Danforth's political views , I can at least understand it and perhaps even with with with engaged conservatives.

You can not work with AC. AC does not think, analyze or engage. She is funny, like a stand up comedian but is ponied around by FOX as a politican pundit. Real conservatives are probably just as mortified by her as anyone else and she is best ignored because she is just fluffy garbage.

[moderateamericain]

you surely must mean AMERICAN MEDIA CONSERVATIVES are extremely nuts, to lump a whole group of people into a category that would define them as mentally unstable because they vote for a certain political party is well...nuts.

[Black Dog]

Its not conservatives that are the problem, its people who don't think about what they are saying and just base their outrageous opinions on unexamined doctorine. Lots of "conservatives" have well thought out positions and are just as afraid of the likes of AC or the religious extremism that has taken over the agenda of the Republican parties.

The splintering of the American right along religious fault lines seems to be getting worse. I've been documenting this in the thread "Bush: Conservative?" for a while (to lazy to link right now).

However, I wonder if those right-wingers who traditionally identify with the G.O.P, yet who are uncomfortable with the direction the party has been taking, will ever get up the nerve to leave or start their own party. (Bring back the Whigs!) Such an exodus would be a disaster for a Republican party facing a divided elctorate.

[Big Blue Machine]

Ues, America Media Conservatives, and some regular conservatvies too.

[Argus]

It's called the big picture. What happens when "it" hinders business? Well, business loses money, businesses go bankrupt, lay people off. Unemployment rises, more people wind up in poverty.

The destruction of ecosystems and the atmosphere results in similar or greater loss to the economy than being environmentally sensible.

That's certainly true. Fortunately, our ecosystem is not being destroyed.

Unlikely. When it becomes economically sound to do so then we'll wind up using more economical energy sources, and conserving energy more.

If we're going to have to do that anyway, why not do it sooner rather than later? .

Because it's not economically viable yet, in part because of the imperfection of the technologies. No doubt the technologies will improve over the years.

The answer is, of course, that conservatives want someone else (namely, their children) to pay for it. Hence the short term view

It seems to be the liberals who want our children and their children to pay for everything, hence the lackadaisical effort at paying off the huge budget debt and willingness to pass it on to our grandchildren.

[Black Dog]

That's certainly true. Fortunately, our ecosystem is not being destroyed.

Earth's Health in Sharp Decline, Massive Study Finds

The report card has arrived from the largest ever scientific Earth analysis, and many of the planet's ecosystems are simply not making the grade.

The UN-backed Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report found that nearly two-thirds of Earth's life-supporting ecosystems, including clean water, pure air, and stable climate, are being degraded by unsustainable use.

Humans have caused much of this damage during the past half century. Soaring demand for food, fresh water, timber, fiber, and fuel have led to dramatic environmental changes, from deforestation to chemical pollution, the report says.

The already grim situation may worsen dramatically during the first half of the 21st century, the report's authors warn.

[I Miss Trudeau]

That's certainly true. Fortunately, our ecosystem is not being destroyed.

Because it's not economically viable yet, in part because of the imperfection of the technologies. No doubt the technologies will improve over the years.

Unfortunatly, its simply not profitable to do the research required for those technologies to improve at anywhere near the required rate.

It seems to be the liberals who want our children and their children to pay for everything, hence the lackadaisical effort at paying off the huge budget debt and willingness to pass it on to our grandchildren.

Didn't like the way the discussion was going? We we were talking about your claim that conservatives care about the environment, not about the fiscal policies of the Liberals.

At any rate, there is a world of difference between paying for your parents' actions through taxes and paying for it through lives.

[Big Blue Machine]

Point taken, IMT. Still those media people in America on FOX are nuts.

[caesar]

On a personal note i find Canadian media far to left leaning. THERE SHOULD BE NO SPIN, OR LEAN ON THE NEWS IN ANY FASHION!

Well, since the majority of our media sources are owned and controlled by the right winged conservative (Jewish) CanWest; where are you finding all this left leaning media?

The CBC is pretty much right there in the center.

[Argus]

On a personal note i find Canadian media far to left leaning. THERE SHOULD BE NO SPIN, OR LEAN ON THE NEWS IN ANY FASHION!

Well, since the majority of our media sources are owned and controlled by the right winged conservative (Jewish) CanWest; where are you finding all this left leaning media?

The CBC is pretty much right there in the center.

Most of our media is owned by the Aspers, who are dedicated Liberals. The President of CTV described Jean Chretien as the greatest prime minister in Canadian history. And the CBC is a mouthpiece for the Liberal Party.

I don't know what religion has to do with the topic. Don't like Jews, Caesar?

[caesar]

Most of our media is owned by the Aspers, who are dedicated Liberals.

Yes sure. BS Have you ever read their papers.

Particularly the National Post.

Jewish interests that follow Bush and his preferential treatment of Israel.

[caesar]

It seems to be the liberals who want our children and their children to pay for everything, hence the lackadaisical effort at paying off the huge budget debt and willingness to pass it on to our grandchildren.

The Liberals HAVE been paying down our deficit; it was the Conservatives that wanted to lower taxes and spend big time on a military to help the USA in their world aggressions.

[Argus]

That's certainly true. Fortunately, our ecosystem is not being destroyed.

Earth's Health in Sharp Decline, Massive Study Finds

The report card has arrived from the largest ever scientific Earth analysis, and many of the planet's ecosystems are simply not making the grade.

The UN-backed Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report found that nearly two-thirds of Earth's life-supporting ecosystems, including clean water, pure air, and stable climate, are being degraded by unsustainable use.

Anything you use gets "degraded". How can five or six billion people not degrade the atmosphere, water and earth? That doesn't mean it's about to be destroyed. Note that degrade and destroyed are entirely different terms.