The Globe and mail right or left wing?

[BubberMiley]

BTW regarding Manitoba (from Wikipedia): "Doer's government has been moderate and pragmatic in tone, and free of the more dramatic sort of reforms undertaken by previous NDP governments, though it has continued the NDP's traditional support of organized labour. Manitoba's economy has remained prosperous, and its 4.8% unemployment rate (2004 figure) is the lowest in the country. Auto insurance rates are also significantly lower in Manitoba than in any other Canadian province."

Sounds like Doer's more moderate than the federal NDP, eh Bubber?

No, that supports exactly what I've been saying. They're on the same page. In fact, Jack Layton's first chief of staff was (ta-da) Gary Doer's first chief of staff.

[RB]

And during the election campaign, Harper made every effort to appear moderate and mainstream by telling the socon/neocon wingnuts in the party to shut up, and by reminding the American conservatives that any support from them wouldn't be helpful. So the CPC hasn't moved left (and they even haven't "evolved" that much from Reform); they just did what they had to do to get elected.

So is this the meaning of "playing politics", that the conservatives and their surrogates will say anything to secure a win?

[Riverwind]

I'm ok with the CBC for now... but I am not ok with government paying for media. Privatize the CBC and I'll be a happy camper.

You will not get the same coverage if the CBC was privatized - it would just become a clone of CTV and Global.

PBS and NPR get 1/3 to 1/2 of their budget from the US government (compared to 2/3 for the CBC today). It is extremely naive to think that the CBC could survive in a market 1/10th the size as a 100% privately funded network if PBS/NPR can't do it.

[tml12]

I'm ok with the CBC for now... but I am not ok with government paying for media. Privatize the CBC and I'll be a happy camper.

You will not get the same coverage if the CBC was privatized - it would just become a clone of CTV and Global.

PBS and NPR get 1/3 to 1/2 of their budget from the US government (compared to 2/3 for the CBC today). It is extremely naive to think that the CBC could survive in a market 1/10th the size as a 100% privately funded network if PBS/NPR can't do it.

PBS is generally regarded as centre-left in the states...why don't we just be honest with ourselves and put CBC in that position???

[Yaro]

The Globe and Mail is slightly right wing as of right now, not long ago it was fairly balanced and not long before that it was slightly left.

I'm ok with the CBC for now... but I am not ok with government paying for media. Privatize the CBC and I'll be a happy camper.

I totally agree the CBC should be privatized...

So the two of you are ok with all of your media sources being controlled by corporate interests? Its certainly an interesting debate, there was a time in the early 70's when Naom Chomsky agreed with you a great deal, so much so that he wrote an entire paper on how dangerous it was to have the government in control of a media source. I wonder now if even he still believes that the corporate media is somehow less corruptible. Just thought you might find it interesting you agree with Chomsky on something, I am sure it must be a short list.

[BubberMiley]

I don't think anyone disagrees with Chomsky's theory on generative grammar.

[geoffrey]

I don't think anyone disagrees with Chomsky's theory on generative grammar.

If it came from Chomsky I do.

[compaq905]

You have to ask yourself why a multi-million dollar media corporation like Bell would direct its resources towards disseminating left-wing propaganda. Right-wingers who complain that the media is left-wing are like Christians who claim that Christmas is under attack: they try and make their practically non-existent opponent seem like an actual threat.

And your saying that left wingers don't complain that the media is right wing!

[tml12]

I don't think anyone disagrees with Chomsky's theory on generative grammar.

If it came from Chomsky I do.

Got your back there Geoffrey...

[Yaro]

Have any of you even read a single book by Chomsky?

[compaq905]

no

[Yaro]

Then it would probably be a good idea that you do. Especially if you don't agree with his philosophies (which are generally left leaning and anti-american imperialism).

Specifically his classic

American Power and the New Mandarins: Historical and Political Eassays

Which is in large part a discussion of the deceptions and psychology surrounding the vietnam war and is very applicable to current affairs.

also the very short book

Media Control

Which is also very relevent to the modern world.

Although almost all of his work is very good fodder for thought.

[Montgomery Burns]

KNEE SLAPPER OF THE DAY:

Sparhawk:

I think it shows a lot of stupidity on the part of the CPC. The CBC audience is much more diverse than right wing pundits would like to beleive.

[geoffrey]

KNEE SLAPPER OF THE DAY:

Sparhawk:

I think it shows a lot of stupidity on the part of the CPC. The CBC audience is much more diverse than right wing pundits would like to beleive.

Sparhawk is right.

[Montgomery Burns]

Then it would probably be a good idea that you do. Especially if you don't agree with his philosophies (which are generally left leaning and anti-american imperialism).

Specifically his classic

American Power and the New Mandarins: Historical and Political Eassays

Which is in large part a discussion of the deceptions and psychology surrounding the vietnam war and is very applicable to current affairs.

also the very short book

Media Control

Which is also very relevent to the modern world.

Although almost all of his work is very good fodder for thought.

I am open to most views in this world, but you would do this forum a favor by leaving. Go back to rense.com or whereever the hell you came from. You are a disgusting person that makes no attempt to engage in reasonable debate. You are championing the cause of an anti-semitic radical linguistics professor whose knowledge of history is not only devious, but openly dishonest. Chomsky has called the US "worse than Nazi Germany" and has said: "The so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception". Chomsky's defense of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge and his support of holocaust revisionism is utterly repulsive! He travelled to North Vietnam and said that the Communists "heroism revealed the capabilities of the human spirit and human will".

He tried to minimize Pol Pot's genocide of 2 million people as a "few thousand" and tried to blame it on the failure of the rice crop. Even as late as 1988, when the skulls were piled too high to ignore any longer, Chomsky insisted that whatever had happened in Cambodia, the US (of course!) was to blame. In 1967 Chomsky wrote that America "needed a kind of denazification."

Be still Yaro, I know that word denazification makes your cold heart go a flutter.

Chomsky has attacked every president from Wilson to GW Bush as the front men in "four year dictatorships" by a ruling elite and "they've all been either outright war criminals or involved in serious war crimes." Even Democrats. Nobody is safe from the wrath of this America-hater. Remember his rage when the Berlin Wall came down, communism collapsed, and the USSR disintegrated? I do.

Chomsky sees Israel as a terror state "with points of similarity" to the Third Reich.

Remember Chomsky's support of the French hatemonger named Robert Faurisson, the nasty anti-Semite who was fired by the University of Lyon for his hate-filled screeds? I do.

On September 12, while bodies were still being pulled out of the rubble of the Twin Towers, Chomsky was charging that the US military response against the terrorists would immediately lead to a "silent genocide" that would cause the wintertime starvation of 3-4 million Afghanis.

Although you will likely get an "Amen" from CC Girl, I think the rest of the forum would like you to piss off and go back to Rense.com.

[geoffrey]

I don't know about telling the poor guy to piss off Monty...

Chomsky is a complete idiot though, you shouldn't insult your intelligence by reading him. I have four books by him and they have all made me less intelligent by the page. I kept searching for what makes people believe and like this guy but I simply couldn't find it.

This guys a linguist, he plays with words for a living. No suprise he can BS so well.

His views are most definitely anti-semetic. His hatred of Americans is appauling. The man is an utter failure and I wish people would stop egging him on by actually supporting him and his work.

[BubberMiley]

If he's anti-semitic, he must be filled with self-hatred.

[tml12]

If he's anti-semitic, he must be filled with self-hatred.

Bubber,

I do hope you realize Chomsky is the most anti-Semitic Jew out there that I know of.

[YankAbroad]

Hey, I've debated Chomsky years ago in Boston.

He's a half-wit. Once he realizes he cannot play his word games with you, tar you as a neo-imperialist, or attack you for lacking nuance, he has a temper tantrum and declares you hopelessly lacking in the superior wisdom necessary in order to understand the truth.

He ended up attacking me for my "age and lack of experience" (I was in my mid 20s at the time). What a dufus.

[tml12]

Hey, I've debated Chomsky years ago in Boston.

He's a half-wit. Once he realizes he cannot play his word games with you, tar you as a neo-imperialist, or attack you for lacking nuance, he has a temper tantrum and declares you hopelessly lacking in the superior wisdom necessary in order to understand the truth.

[BubberMiley]

Bubber,

I do hope you realize Chomsky is the most anti-Semitic Jew out there that I know of.

I don't think it's anti-semitic to disagree with Israel's policies, just as I don't think it's anti-American to disagree with Bush. These "anti-" labels are too easily slapped on anyone who questions anything (at least that's what I've been told at the "Minorities and Polling Stations" thread).

[August1991]

Going back to the OP, anyone else notice this headline in the G&M today - after the three by-elections in Quebec in which the Tories won Roberval?

Tories steal seat form Bloc as Liberals lose Outremont

Steal?

[Higgly]

The Globe and Mail traditionally supported the Liberals but I haven't read their paper in years. Apparently recently they have shifted to the right with John Ibbitson, etc.

That etc would include the likes of Marcus Gee, Margaret Wente... any number of neocon op-ed contributors.

The Globe and Mail went right when Greenspon became Editor-In-Chief. It advocated the invasion of Iraq in editorials. The Globe and Mail is a right wing hawk in chicken feathers.

[geoffrey]

I find the Globe and Mail quite balanced. And I'm a non-partisan (I don't really even call myself right or left).

It's very pro-business, and some may mistake that as being right wing.

[M.Dancer]

I'm not an employee but I've been working forn the Globe for over 15 years. The rank and file are union members and they have one of the most closed minded and highest paid shops in Canada. Editorially the paper is quite centrist with a definite pro business slant. And it is decidedly the best paper in Canada.