Tucker Carlson/Ann Coulter

[GostHacked]

You cannot really take anything Coutler or Carlson seriously. Tucker was respectable to an extent when he was on CNN's Crossfire, but we know what happened there. He got owned by a Bush bashing jokester. (Jon Stewart) And Coutler is there simply to rouse feathers, that is her job. Any person with reasonable intelligence would simply laugh at these two.

Also, everyone does recall the nice friendly words of the former US Ambassador to Canada. Mr. Paul Cellucci. Bush even appointed him to the position. Now this is a concern, when the ambassador himself is cranking out the bashing. It can be tolerated on inane banter back and forth shows like Tucker on Crossfire. And I can even tolerate it from Coutler, cause I know she is an alien for a fact. Either that or she had a sex chage (check out her adams apple dude)

And the way things are being reported these days, (Bush lying about the reasons for war, secret prisons, ect. It really makes it easier to bash the US government. I do not believe the majority voted for him, rigged (but thats another story)

So put it into perspective.

Coulter , Tucker, both are media whores who sensationalize and rant about anything.

But that is just it, they are media whores and nothing else. When it's all said and done, The Dayly Show is a much better news source.

Paul Cellucci was an Ambassador, his comment should be taken more seriously, for the simple fact he is representing his entire country. And that did not help the American view from Canada. Essentialy saying, 'in the short term you are gonna pay for not joining us in the war'.

So, next time you react that quick to someones comments, look at who delivered them, then put it into perspective.

[newbie]

I didn't say he did pocket. But most Americans I'd be willing to bet feel this way. It's in their advertising, on their TV shows, and the politician says this all the time. Of course "best" is subjective.That was part of my point. Hence the word crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Com'on, obviuosly we have a strong sense of nationalismm in the US. I don't doubt that but, you are infering that Candians don't. Have you ever read the Globe and Mail? They constantly come of like Canadians think they are "more sophisticated" then the US all the time? They seem to think we just got "lucky" to be where we are today. Like we are some dumb hicks that stumbled into being a powerful economy and military.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's your intrepretation, not mine. I don't think we need to constantly remind ourselves that we love our country, unlike some of your citizens who fly flags on lawns or wear flags on lapels.

[Black Dog]

So put it into perspective.

Coulter , Tucker, both are media whores who sensationalize and rant about anything.

If I may add an addendum to that statement, GH, it would be so that the above reads: "Coulter , Tucker, both are media whores who sensationalize and rant about anything and who know nothing at all about the subjects they are paid to rant about." Not only would I not worry about what they have to say, I wouldn't piss on either one if they were on fire.

[America1]

I don't think the Americans started the "anti-americaism" in Canada.

You must admit that your last 2 PMs and their gvts have been much more hostile to the Bush admin then Bush admin has been to them.

You'd have more of a case if that hostility wasn't shared by pretty much every world leader who's name isn't Blair. Maybe the bully mentality you've displayed in this thread and Bush has shown the world has something to do with it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Bully mentality" - this must be a joke. I'm sorry if it hurts your feeling that I'm (and the Bush admin) are AWARE that our country is the world military and economic power of our time. You act as if we should be ashamed of the fact? You act like we did something wrong by being a powerful country. Don't all countries aspire to be in our current position? I don't think we should have to apologize at all. I think many Americans work their asses off to get what they have, no LUCK involved.

BTW, I think most Americans realize not too many Europeans and Canadians "like" us at the moment, and although I’d rather they did, I’m sure we’ll do just fine either way. At the same time, that's why we consider the English our closest allies. Come hell-or-high-water (and defiantly popular opinion) they hang with us.

[America1]

That's your intrepretation, not mine. I don't think we need to constantly remind ourselves that we love our country, unlike some of your citizens who fly flags on lawns or wear flags on lapels.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Constant reminder is a bit over-the-top but, not to have pride in your area shows some internal issues. If you're not proud of it, get off your ass and make it something to be proud of.

[Black Dog]

"Bully mentality" - this must be a joke. I'm sorry if it hurts your feeling that I'm (and the Bush admin) are AWARE that our country is the world military and economic power of our time. You act as if we should be ashamed of the fact? You act like we did something wrong by being a powerful country. Don't all countries aspire to be in our current position? I don't think we should have to apologize at all. I think many Americans work their asses off to get what they have, no LUCK involved.

When I was talking about the bully mentality I was refering to the kind of threats people like you, pundits like Coulter and political figures like Wilkins who keep warning of the consequenses we'll face if we don't stop hurting your collective feelings. This from the country that turned "freedom fries" into a national obsession, proving that, like most bullies, the U.S. can dish it ot, but it can't take it.

BTW, I think most Americans realize not too many Europeans and Canadians "like" us at the moment, and although I’d rather they did, I’m sure we’ll do just fine either way. At the same time, that's why we consider the English our closest allies. Come hell-or-high-water (and defiantly popular opinion) they hang with us.

This is funny beause it shows how little you really know. The people of England were overwhelmingly against the Iraq war. In fact, the only country where there was not overwhelming opposition to the war was the U.S. itself, and even then, the population was sharply divided. So while the UK government may be Best Pals with the Bush regime, don't think for a second that it is a popular position.

[America1]

When I was talking about the bully mentality I was refering to the kind of threats people like you, pundits like Coulter and political figures like Wilkins who keep warning of the consequenses we'll face if we don't stop hurting your collective feelings. This from the country that turned "freedom fries" into a national obsession, proving that, like most bullies, the U.S. can dish it ot, but it can't take it.

This is funny beause it shows how little you really know. The people of England were overwhelmingly against the Iraq war. In fact, the only country where there was not overwhelming opposition to the war was the U.S. itself, and even then, the population was sharply divided. So while the UK government may be Best Pals with the Bush regime, don't think for a second that it is a popular position.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never said you did, if you look, I quoted !!!. Please pay attention to the thread you’re posting in.

What's really funny is that Blair was the PM that sent the British into the war with the US and he is also the PM that just got re-elected despite the “overwhelming opposition” to the war . Seems to me that voters PROVED who they "like" and what they think. I guess the anti-American media and crowds in England aren't that many after all.

Oh yeah, same can be said about Australia.

[Black Dog]

I never said you did, if you look, I quoted !!!. Please pay attention to the thread you’re posting in.

I am !!!. !!! is no more.

Apologies for the confusion.

What's really funny is that Blair was the PM that sent the British into the war with the US and he is also the PM that just got re-elected despite the “overwhelming opposition” to the war .

Um... this may come as a bit of surprise, but the war was not the sole issue of the campaign. Few elections are decided on a single issue. Further complicating things was the fact that the other major party in the UK is also pro-war, leaving anti-war people with little to choose from. However, despite those factors, Blair still lost nearly 50 seats and his share of the vote dropped five per cent, while the pro war Conservatives picked up only a single seat and the anti-war Leb dems picked up 6 seats and a four per cent increase in their share of the vote. So while Blair was reelected, its clear he was punished for his Iraq stance.

Seems to me that voters PROVED who they "like" and what they think. I guess the anti-American media and crowds in England aren't that many after all.

Seems to me your understanding of the situation is completely superficial.

[America1]

I never said you did, if you look, I quoted !!!. Please pay attention to the thread you’re posting in.

I am !!!. !!! is no more.

Apologies for the confusion.

What's really funny is that Blair was the PM that sent the British into the war with the US and he is also the PM that just got re-elected despite the “overwhelming opposition” to the war .

Um... this may come as a bit of surprise, but the war was not the sole issue of the campaign. Few elections are decided on a single issue. Further complicating things was the fact that the other major party in the UK is also pro-war, leaving anti-war people with little to choose from. However, despite those factors, Blair still lost nearly 50 seats and his share of the vote dropped five per cent, while the pro war Conservatives picked up only a single seat and the anti-war Leb dems picked up 6 seats and a four per cent increase in their share of the vote. So while Blair was reelected, its clear he was punished for his Iraq stance.

Seems to me that voters PROVED who they "like" and what they think. I guess the anti-American media and crowds in England aren't that many after all.

Seems to me your understanding of the situation is completely superficial.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wait a second, so you agree, both the major parties in England are pro-war and you still don't think the people are behind it? Sounds kinda fishy to me. If there was truely "overwhelming opposition" don't you think that a major party would be willing to run on that issue to galvinize their supporters and get the WIN. Or, perhaps the anti-war crowd isn't as HUGE a % as you think.

And yes, the war was a MAJOR issue in the elections and,,,,, the voters proved who they side with.

[newbie]

That's your intrepretation, not mine. I don't think we need to constantly remind ourselves that we love our country, unlike some of your citizens who fly flags on lawns or wear flags on lapels.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Constant reminder is a bit over-the-top but, not to have pride in your area shows some internal issues. If you're not proud of it, get off your ass and make it something to be proud of.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My point is (again) that we don't need to embrace symbols to be proud of our country. I am very proud of Canada and wouldn't want to live anywhere else.

[BHS]

That's your intrepretation, not mine. I don't think we need to constantly remind ourselves that we love our country, unlike some of your citizens who fly flags on lawns or wear flags on lapels.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Constant reminder is a bit over-the-top but, not to have pride in your area shows some internal issues. If you're not proud of it, get off your ass and make it something to be proud of.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My point is (again) that we don't need to embrace symbols to be proud of our country. I am very proud of Canada and wouldn't want to live anywhere else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Um, $250 million mis-spent on advertising Canada to Quebec says otherwise.

[BHS]

This reminds me of an interesting piece I heard on CBC radio last week.

Apologies for having no names to cite, but I was driving at the time and hardly in a position to take notes.

Anyhow, the guy being interviewed was a political science professor.

The topic was right-wing vs left-wing opinionists (if that's the correct word).

His premise, when broken down to its bare-bones basics, was that the main difference between left and right pundits is that the right-winger media-personality types have their main stock in trade in stirring up anger. Get riled up about something. ANYTHING.

With the current situation in the USA, they can hardly get riled up about the government, because their own boy is in power.

So, they look for any other little thing to get steamed up about.

He went on to give examples.

A few of these included the attitude towards France.

(Why wasn't there the same hostility toward Germany when they too vetoed Iraq???

Good question. No answer.)

Recent jabs at Canada. (Coulture's comments several months ago about "rolling over and crushing Canada". Other comments were also included).

Not to mention the always dependable "traitors to the USA" which is commonly directed at anyone who publicly disagrees with the President and or his poilicies.

Also, the ever-ready "Liberal protesters are directly responsible for the deaths of American soldiers"

The list went on and on pointing out many right-wing rants that never even would have been brought up if there were a Democrat in power who the right-wingers could REALLY slag.

The guy was equally as critical of left-wing pundits, but pointed out that the lefties are not as quick to point fingers at outside factors in a search for someone or something to blame, because by nature of the left policies there were always plenty of internal targets at which to take aim.

A lefty doesn't need an external target when there are ALWAYS "social injustices" like racisists and anti-abortionists and anti-SSM's and so on, not to mention the dreaded  NRA.

He did mention the habit of some on the very-extreme left who bandy about words like "fascist" and "neo-con" on a regular basis, but pointed out that the mainstream left in the media are generally more moderate.

Which brings me around to my point (finally).

What we're seeing is just more of the same pointless posturing.

Martin brought up the same old points he's been harping on for months (years???) regarding softwood and Kyoto for purposes of his campaign, and to give the appearing of taking a tough stance with the USA. "David vs Goliath" is always a great campaign tactic.

Wilkins, in criticizing Martins campaign tactics played right into Martin's hands.

These right-wing talking heads are doing exactly the same.

The more they yammer about "crushing" Canada, the more Martin can stand up and say "See, I told you so", and the better his "David/Goliath" image will appear.

Which brings me to point #2: If Canada is so insignificant, as these right-wing pundits seem to say, then why do the words of any of our politicians matter to them at all???

Well, simple really. It gives them, as detailed above, something to get really good and riled up about.

Best thing for the US right-wingers to do??? Simply dismiss Martin's comments in a casual "no big deal" manner, or ignore them completely, and that will take the steam out of Martin's sails.

Can't claim to be fighting Goliath when he's ignoring you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This was an interesting post, PR, and I'd like to add one more point. I think a lot of this thrashing about, looking for topics to report on and discuss, has to do with the advent of 24 hour cable news. Once the domestic topics du jour are all wrung dry it's time to look to what wacky foreigners have to say about America. Gotta fill that empty airtime with something.

[Yaro]

Yaro,

I realize that you are smoking cheap crack here but really...do you intend that this discussion continue in this most ridiculously childish fashion?

If you don't get my point then just say so, no need to get snippy.

Anyone in the modern era talking about military supremacy is an idiot. don't believe me? Then answer these questions.

Who would win in a War France or the US?

Who would win in a War China or the US?

Who would win in a War Russia or Great Britain?

Given 10 years to build up arms who would win in a War Canada or the US?

The answer to all of these questions is obvious, no one because in the first three they all have enough nuclear arms to completely destroy each other, and in the 4th question the answer is no one because Canada rather easily could build enough nuclear arms to destroy anyone.

Military power in the modern world when discussed as a comparison between modern nations is pointless and meaningless. If you can build nukes you should because that's the only way that countries like the US won't bully you.

Why don't you start small, like trying to get a navy that isn't falling apart.

hahahahahaha- you are on drugs! Your economy can't even be compared with ours. Get a clue!

Before I bother stealing your club and beating you with it, do you actually have any economics education because I don't want to waste my time on someone who will argue this point as feebly as most seem to.

I don't think the Americans started the "anti-americaism" in Canada.

You must admit that your last 2 PMs and their gvts have been much more hostile to the Bush admin then Bush admin has been to them.

Again you clearly don't know what your talking about, the animosity between the US and Canada has been almost entirely of the US's own making unless you can come to the table with a single instance in which Canada has economically attacked the US in the last 20 years.

It should also be noted that he personally animosity between Bush and Chretien started because Bush while governor of Texas refused to take a call from Chretien about a Canadian who was on death row in Texas (not saying that he should have or not just pointing out a historical fact you may not be aware of).

Com'on, obviuosly we have a strong sense of nationalismm in the US. I don't doubt that but, you are infering that Candians don't. Have you ever read the Globe and Mail? They constantly come of like Canadians think they are "more sophisticated" then the US all the time? They seem to think we just got "lucky" to be where we are today. Like we are some dumb hicks that stumbled into being a powerful economy and military.

Your probably unaware of the extent to which the US is unique in the world in there nationalism so I will simply say as an experienced world traveler that yes, the US is more patriotic then any nation on earth and by some distance.

I don't think people think that the US is lazy or stupid, just vicious and amoral. Note that's not traits that most assign to Americans as individuals but on the international stage the political evaluation is fairly accurate.

"Bully mentality" - this must be a joke. I'm sorry if it hurts your feeling that I'm (and the Bush admin) are AWARE that our country is the world military and economic power of our time. You act as if we should be ashamed of the fact? You act like we did something wrong by being a powerful country. Don't all countries aspire to be in our current position? I don't think we should have to apologize at all. I think many Americans work their asses off to get what they have, no LUCK involved.

I agree, I have myself called the US the current Rome, I also agree that many Americans work there asses off. I also don't think that anyone is asking the US to apologize for its current position, all anyone anywhere wants is for the US to stop being asses on the world stage and to stop trying to throw there imaginary military weight around.

BTW, I think most Americans realize not too many Europeans and Canadians "like" us at the moment, and although I’d rather they did, I’m sure we’ll do just fine either way. At the same time, that's why we consider the English our closest allies. Come hell-or-high-water (and defiantly popular opinion) they hang with us.

And this is the single biggest problem, I don't think you have any idea how much the US has galvanized the rest of the world against them. You say that you will do fine either way, that's ludicrous. The US is nearly bankrupt, and that's just not the US government that's many of the US based corporations, and a great many US citizens.

Constant reminder is a bit over-the-top but, not to have pride in your area shows some internal issues. If you're not proud of it, get off your ass and make it something to be proud of.

This is one of the area's where many Canadians and Americans tend to disagree, loving your country for the sake of loving your country is stupid. Be proud of the positive aspects of your country, and work to change the negative ones. Mindless adulation or degradation is pointless.

Wait a second, so you agree, both the major parties in England are pro-war and you still don't think the people are behind it? Sounds kinda fishy to me. If there was truely "overwhelming opposition" don't you think that a major party would be willing to run on that issue to galvinize their supporters and get the WIN. Or, perhaps the anti-war crowd isn't as HUGE a % as you think.

And yes, the war was a MAJOR issue in the elections and,,,,, the voters proved who they side with.

Disapproval of the War ran and still runs above 75% in England. The fact that both major parties in the UK supported the US says something but it isn't that the people do.

Wow did this topic spin out beyond all reason. To think that people like Tucker could possibly actually start such a bitter conversation.

[tml12]

Yaro,

You clearly do not understand culture here. I am currently here in the states on a business conference. There is a military mentality here that does not exist in Canada. Canada building nukes? The people of our country would never accept that.

Do not attempt to antagonize the relationship between the largest trading relationship in the world. In doing so, you play into America1's hands.

[Yaro]

And you really think I care about the US's opinion? I understand the nature of the US VERY well, I have lived there, I employee almost 100 people in the US and I have a winter home there.

I studied in the US, and am intimately familiar with there sociology and I can assure you I am far more familiar with there military-industrial complex then you are.

[tml12]

I never said you did, if you look, I quoted !!!. Please pay attention to the thread you’re posting in.

I am !!!. !!! is no more.

Apologies for the confusion.

What's really funny is that Blair was the PM that sent the British into the war with the US and he is also the PM that just got re-elected despite the “overwhelming opposition” to the war .

Um... this may come as a bit of surprise, but the war was not the sole issue of the campaign. Few elections are decided on a single issue. Further complicating things was the fact that the other major party in the UK is also pro-war, leaving anti-war people with little to choose from. However, despite those factors, Blair still lost nearly 50 seats and his share of the vote dropped five per cent, while the pro war Conservatives picked up only a single seat and the anti-war Leb dems picked up 6 seats and a four per cent increase in their share of the vote. So while Blair was reelected, its clear he was punished for his Iraq stance.

Seems to me that voters PROVED who they "like" and what they think. I guess the anti-American media and crowds in England aren't that many after all.

Seems to me your understanding of the situation is completely superficial.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wait a second, so you agree, both the major parties in England are pro-war and you still don't think the people are behind it? Sounds kinda fishy to me. If there was truely "overwhelming opposition" don't you think that a major party would be willing to run on that issue to galvinize their supporters and get the WIN. Or, perhaps the anti-war crowd isn't as HUGE a % as you think.

And yes, the war was a MAJOR issue in the elections and,,,,, the voters proved who they side with.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The British election was won on one simple issue: the British economy. It is strong, vibrant, and growing fast.

Do you really think Tony Blair campaigned on the war? The UK Conservatives voted for it and the Lib Dems are a fringe party. Are you suggesting an "anti-war" party with no past in the UK elections should have been formed? They would have been marginialized by the Labour and Conservative interest backers. Tony Blair was challenged by the father of a soldier who died in the war and Blair won handily.

Really America1, if your only reason to come here was to trash Canada, I suggest you go to the Ann Coulter Forum. Please do stay if you wish to have an even-handed debate though.

[tml12]

And you really think I care about the US's opinion? I understand the nature of the US VERY well, I have lived there, I employee almost 100 people in the US and I have a winter home there.

I studied in the US, and am intimately familiar with there sociology and I can assure you I am far more familiar with there military-industrial complex then you are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe you Yaro but my point is that, certainly if you have a winter home here you understand that the people in this country are not against our country. Sure there are jerks here but the majority of Americans, it would probably be fair to say, do not have an opinion of Canada and those that do have a positive one.

We cannot encourage the destruction of NAFTA and the largest and most productive trade partnership in the world. If the U.S. doesn't play fair, we will fight back. But an unfair U.S. government does not mean anti-Canadianism is vibrant in this country.

[Yaro]

I believe you Yaro but my point is that, certainly if you have a winter home here you understand that the people in this country are not against our country. Sure there are jerks here but the majority of Americans, it would probably be fair to say, do not have an opinion of Canada and those that do have a positive one.

And I am not against the US, I am not trying to "destroy America", and you will find that I hardly ever even say anything bad about them. I would say I like far more Americans then I dislike regardless of whether I agree with American policy decisions. I don't take it personally when someone insults Canada and hell if I agree I will say so, its not like I don't think Canada has problems. But when it comes to Canadian policy decisions I won't consider US opinion any more then I would expect them to consider ours, it’s not a position that comes from any kind of animosity but one born of practicality. It’s not like I will pay attention to Chinese, or Japanese, or European or anyone else’s opinions beyond considering them on there merits.

We cannot encourage the destruction of NAFTA and the largest and most productive trade partnership in the world. If the U.S. doesn't play fair, we will fight back. But an unfair U.S. government does not mean anti-Canadianism is vibrant in this country.

NAFTA will eventually be destroyed; the fact of the matter is that there are too many interests in opposition to it. I know that most Americans aren't Anti-Canadian, in fact I am well aware that they really don't think of us at all which is something I consider perfectly understandable we are literally 1/10th there size population wise and we hardly ever do anything to offend them. However I am not under the delusion that the US media will not turn the US population on Canada in the same way that it turned them on the French or the Germans or the same way that they prevent them from turning on the Saudi's and the Chinese.

The US is a country like any other, it has positives and negatives. But I do think they are going through a rough period that will get allot worse before it gets better. You want to know my honest feelings for America in general? I worry for them, there are millions upon millions of Americans that are going to be literally destroyed in the next decade, there are going to be millions of seniors that are going to be forced into jobs they can't physically do because there pension has been mismanaged, and there’s going to be millions of Americans who can't get any kind of health service because emergency rooms are disappearing at an astonishing rate because they are money losers (because they service the uninsured before knowing it).

I hope that I am wrong, but my experience says that the US is in for a rough ride and when it comes out it won't be the world’s pre-eminent power. This exact situation almost destroyed the French, and it’s still something that the British psyche is finding hard to deal with.

[PocketRocket]

The Americans always go the undrying well with their schoolyard chant, "We are the best country in the world" crap. No one is in a pissing contest. Martin is simply standing up for Canada. You guys may be powerful but most of the world dislikes you. A great legacy for Bush.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, NEWBIE, America1 did NOT say anything about being "the best" country.

I give him great credit for this, because "best" is a highly subjective term, and is a matter of personal opinion and nothing more.

But he DID say the USA is a "much more powerful country in every possible way", which is a simple statement of fact with which I have to agree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't say he did pocket. But most Americans I'd be willing to bet feel this way. It's in their advertising, on their TV shows, and the politician says this all the time. Of course "best" is subjective.That was part of my point. Hence the word crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My apologies. I thought I saw an implication in your post.

[PocketRocket]

Actually, NEWBIE, America1 did NOT say anything about being "the best" country.

I give him great credit for this, because "best" is a highly subjective term, and is a matter of personal opinion and nothing more.

But he DID say the USA is a "much more powerful country in every possible way", which is a simple statement of fact with which I have to agree.

(Although, when it comes to the "pissing contest", if the rules have anything to do with being able to write your name in the snow, you'd have a hard time beating Canada        )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly, it would be like Canadians say you can beat the US in hockey. I couldn't argue b/c it's easily provable (put them on ice and you win 8 out of 10 times).

Note: I know canadians do other things well besides play hockey, it's just an example.

That's right, we can also piss our names in the snow

And we make GREAT bacon.

And we're also very polite, sir

I'm not saying Canada is weak and a terrible country, it's just not in the same class in terms of "power" as the US at the momment. Not bragging, just the honest truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can't disagree with this.

Well said.

[America1]

The British election was won on one simple issue: the British economy. It is strong, vibrant, and growing fast.

Do you really think Tony Blair campaigned on the war? The UK Conservatives voted for it and the Lib Dems are a fringe party. Are you suggesting an "anti-war" party with no past in the UK elections should have been formed? They would have been marginialized by the Labour and Conservative interest backers. Tony Blair was challenged by the father of a soldier who died in the war and Blair won handily.

Really America1, if your only reason to come here was to trash Canada, I suggest you go to the Ann Coulter Forum. Please do stay if you wish to have an even-handed debate though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Trash Canada? More like, not let you kick around the US to make yourselves feel better. For no reason that I can see, many Canadians feel they are one-up-on us dumb meathead hicks from the US. Point in case; listen to how pompous Yaro is coming off.

Yaro, yes, I've had enough economic schooling through my years to understand Canada is not on par economically as the US. Again, if it hurts your feelings, I feel bad but it's still true.

[PocketRocket]

Com'on, obviuosly we have a strong sense of nationalismm in the US. I don't doubt that but, you are infering that Candians don't. Have you ever read the Globe and Mail? They constantly come of like Canadians think they are "more sophisticated" then the US all the time? They seem to think we just got "lucky" to be where we are today. Like we are some dumb hicks that stumbled into being a powerful economy and military.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing wrong with taking pride in your own country.

Unfortunately there are those on both sides of the border who look down upon those on the opposite side.

As an aside, a few years back I was touring with a band in the USA.

The vast majority of the people I met were incredibly hospitable, and many were interested in Canada.

There was, however, one jerk we met. He was working at a gas station.

When I got out of the truck, wearing a sweatshirt with a maple leaf on the front, the guy asked if I was from Canada.

Of course I said yes.

He came back with a comment about "Why the hell would anyone want to live in (sneeringly) Canada???"

We tried to brush off the comment, but when he continued on about how Canadians are all wimps, and the USA has never lost a war, I asked if he had ever heard of the war of 1812.

The reference was totally lost on him, and he continued being a jerk, so as a parting shot, after he had filled our gastank, I told him that one of our customs in Canada was to give guys that pump gas a $5.00 tip, and I pulled out a $5.00 bill and held it out to him.

He smiled broadly and said "Hey that's cool, man", and reached for the money.

Then I told him since Canadians are all wimps, that maybe we should start acting more like Americans, and put the $5.00 back in my pocket.

He was, needless to say, not happy.

But, as I said, he was the exception in a tour that was otherwise filled with some really great people.

I like Americans, and I like America, make no mistake about it.

However, sometimes I don't like the policies of the American administration, and am always ready to voice my opinion accordingly.

[PocketRocket]

This was an interesting post, PR, and I'd like to add one more point. I think a lot of this thrashing about, looking for topics to report on and discuss, has to do with the advent of 24 hour cable news. Once the domestic topics du jour are all wrung dry it's time to look to what wacky foreigners have to say about America. Gotta fill that empty airtime with something.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Point well made. And thanks for the compliment.

[Drea]

Which is why I say we build 300 small cap nukes point them at the US, then we are all equal. Because at the end of the day the only requirement for the big boy table militarily is to be able to destroy your opponent. Economically we are already FAR more important going forward then the US.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why don't you start small, like trying to get a navy that isn't falling apart.

hahahahahaha- you are on drugs! Your economy can't even be compared with ours. Get a clue!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL You sure got that right!

WE have a SURPLUS!

YOU have a DEFICIT!

Neener neener neener!

btw surplus means extra money in da bank -- deficit means no money in da bank.

Now, how many TRILLIONS of dollars is your country in debt?

I'm at work now but will find a link and post it for you when I have more time.

LOL

[America1]

LOL You sure got that right!

WE have a SURPLUS!

YOU have a DEFICIT!

Neener neener neener!

btw surplus means extra money in da bank -- deficit means no money in da bank.

Now, how many TRILLIONS of dollars is your country in debt?

I'm at work now but will find a link and post it for you when I have more time.

LOL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Again, see what I 'm talking about when I say Canadians come off very arrogant at times.

2004 GDP

United States $10,980,000,000,000

Canada $957,700,000,000

Are we done talking about economic strength yet?