|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| When has the leader of my country disrespected the US? |
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2003/nf20031024_1823_db046.htm
MISSING A DEFINING MOMENT.
How did things get so bad? A key factor, of course, was Canada's refusal to support the U.S. invasion of Iraq. When Bush named his list of pals before the war, starting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Canada was noticeably absent. And while Canada was clearly entitled to withhold support -- as did much of the rest of the world -- it did so in a way that some pundits saw as smug and morally superior.
Things didn't start off well between Chretien and Bush. Before the election, Canada's then-ambassador to Washington -- Chretien's nephew -- suggested that Canada would prefer to see a victory by Democrat Al Gore. Then there was Chretien's halting reaction to September 11, which reflected more of a wait-and-see attitude rather than the realization that the events were a defining moment for U.S. national security policy. "He didn't get it," says a Liberal Party insider.
Since then, the Canadian leader has taken swipes at Bush's handling of the economy, and his chief spokesperson, Francie Ducros, even called the U.S. leader a "moron" last year. Adding to the insult was Chretien's initial refusal to accept her resignation.
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| Are you telling me that you ascribe values and personalities to internet user ID's? I guess that makes you part of the insane America. |
If everyone that read that, save you, understood the intended meaning of that statement, what does that say about you  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pyongshin Sangja
Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| MISSING A DEFINING MOMENT. |
Yeah, missing. Misjudging, making an error. Disrespecting? I don't see it. Besides, consider your source. Quite a few Canadians were happy to see what's left of our troops stay out of Iraq. Maybe you shouldn't have bombed us in Afghanistan. The new relationship with America is a harsh one.
| Quote: |
| How did things get so bad? A key factor, of course, was Canada's refusal to support the U.S. invasion of Iraq. When Bush named his list of pals before the war, starting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Canada was noticeably absent. And while Canada was clearly entitled to withhold support -- as did much of the rest of the world -- it did so in a way that some pundits saw as smug and morally superior. |
In the new America, anything that doesn't blindly support the Bush administration is seen as smug and morally superior. Remember, many of these pundits have called for the invasion of Canada, referred to Canada as retarded and threatened to close the border to trade. You agree with everything they say?
This article is from 2003. Let's see something a little more current on Iraq and see if Canada's stance doesn't make a little more sense.
| Quote: |
| Things didn't start off well between Chretien and Bush. Before the election, Canada's then-ambassador to Washington -- Chretien's nephew -- suggested that Canada would prefer to see a victory by Democrat Al Gore. |
A diplomatic blip. Just like your Ambassador chding our Prime Minister last week during our latest election campaign.
| Quote: |
| Then there was Chretien's halting reaction to September 11, which reflected more of a wait-and-see attitude rather than the realization that the events were a defining moment for U.S. national security policy. "He didn't get it," says a Liberal Party insider. |
Halting. Wait-and-see. Doesn't say disrespectful.
| Quote: |
| Since then, the Canadian leader has taken swipes at Bush's handling of the economy, and his chief spokesperson, Francie Ducros, even called the U.S. leader a "moron" last year. Adding to the insult was Chretien's initial refusal to accept her resignation. |
That would be a quote from his spokesperson, not from him. His initial refusal to accept her resignation? Seems to me that a few of Bush's closest friends have been in trouble this year, too.
I don't see any disrespect.
Last edited by Pyongshin Sangja on Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:47 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:43 am Post subject: Re: Mayor of Toronto Blames U.S. for Shootings in His City.. |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
Interesting article.
Of course, if W. Bush were not president, Canadians wouldn't be saying things like this, because all of the anti-American hostility is related to the current Administration...
l |
Really? Links please? 
I don't think that anyone has said "ALL". It has definitely risen though, no denying that. But I don't blame the Mayor of Toronto (who is a clueless clown by the way) I blame Michael Moore.  |
Links to back up my sarcasm?
I've heard people reduce all/the most significant part of/much of of Canada's antiAmericanism to W. Bush so many times I don't need to cite it. Or that it didn't really exist when Clinton was president because Canada loved the U.S. then, or that Clinton could be the next prime minister if he wanted the job, etc. Come on, dude. At least acknowledge this.
If not, I'll put together a series of quotes and links from this board, if you are seriously challenging me on this point. |
Come on Mr. Gopher. Look at the smilies. I was joking. And I was only questioning the "all" statement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Since then, the Canadian leader has taken swipes at Bush's handling of the economy, and his chief spokesperson, Francie Ducros, even called the U.S. leader a "moron" last year. Adding to the insult was Chretien's initial refusal to accept her resignation. |
That would be a quote from his spokesperson, not from him. His initial refusal to accept her resignation? Seems to me that a few of Bush's closest friends have been in trouble this year, too.
I don't see any disrespect. |
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| I don't see any disrespect. |
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| I don't see any disrespect. |
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| I don't see any disrespect. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pyongshin Sangja
Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
NOFX LYRICS
"Idiot Son Of An Asshole"
He's not smart, a C student
And that's after buying his way into school
Beady eyes, and he's kinda dyslexic
Can he read? No one's really quite sure
He signs stuff and he executes people
Maybe that's why, he doesn't have any friends
Cocaine and a little drunk driving
Doesn't matter, when you're the Commander in Chief.
Idiot son of an asshole
He's the idiot son of an asshole
Idiot son of an asshole
He's the idiot son of an asshole
Put on some make-up, turn on the 8-Track,
I'm putting a week back on the shelf,
Suddenly I'm the President, of the United States,
But then I woke up, and realized I'm still me.
He's too dumb, to eat pretzels, apparently smart enough to fix an election.
Moved boldly into the White House,
but most people voted against him.
He likes naps, He really likes naptime, A couple of naps and then a nap and then he's ready for bed,
He may be from Bush descent, but he's always gonna be the unpresident.
Idiot son of an asshole
He's the idiot son of an asshole
Idiot son of an asshole
He's the idiot son of an asshole
Idiot son of an asshole
He's the idiot son of an asshole
He's our president! |
http://www.bushflash.com/buddy.html
Now that's disrespect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pyongshin Sangja wrote:
| Quote: |
| Remember, many of these pundits have called for the invasion of Canada, referred to Canada as retarded and threatened to close the border to trade. |
Pyongshin:
Could you provide links to some of these "many" pundits seriously advocating an invasion of Canada? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pyongshin Sangja
Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
TalkLeft: How Bush and Kerry Differ on Domestic Issues
Yeah, well maybe we should just invade Canada and TAKE all those cheap drugs.
They're OUR drugs anyway. Posted by steelreso at October 13, 2004 05:19 PM ...
talkleft.com/new_archives/008267.html - 25k - Cached - Similar pages
JustSmile Ministries > Before you vote!
Maybe we should just invade canada! lol well that'd be kinda pointless... but
it'd get rid of the border so somebody could come visit me a little easier... ...
justsmile.ipbhost.com/lofiversion/index.php/t1325.html - 69k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
Balloon Juice
Canada hasn��t had the will or the courage to take a tough stand on freedom and
democracy ... Maybe we should just invade China, and bring Democracy to Asia. ...
www.balloon-juice.com/?p=6081 - 129k - Cached - Similar pages
F150online Forums - Did we invade the wrong country?
Maybe we should just invade Saudi Arabia. we have a nice big country called Iraq
to use for staging our ... if we need a win, can't we just attack Canada? ...
www.f150online.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160392 - 108k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
Roger L. Simon: Talk About Fogeys - Reuter Cheerleads for Fascism
Maybe we should just invade Canada and take our drugs back. Posted by: chuck [TypeKey
Profile Page] at December 29, 2004 03:39 PM ...
www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/ 2004/12/talk_about_foge.php - 229k - Cached - Similar pages
AboutFilm.com Message Boards: Archive through February 21, 2003
... LB As long as it's not written in French.  Maybe we should just invade both
Mexico and Canada ... good ski resorts and good beaches. ...
www.aboutfilmboards.com/community/ messages/134/1102.html?1045864771 - 101k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
The Babbling Brooke: Hotsheet
Maybe we should just invade Canada and take their oil out of Alberta. Just a
thought. Egan, you were a little harsh toward me, and you will probably feel ...
thebabblingbrooke.blogspot.com/2005/12/hotsheet.html - 87k - Cached - Similar pages
Club Chopper Forums - Phantom Phrankenstein is finished!!
... where have you been...it is called a "loon" as in bird...just ask Rippo Dippo ,
he can tell you how things work in Canada. ... Maybe we should just invade. ... www.clubchopper.com/t7621-15-1.html - 101k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.clubchopper.com ]
Archinect : Discussion Forum (Printable Version) : 1 : I Ran - I Raq
Maybe we should just invade the whole world and make everyone americans So we can
... gaurantee that ol' norm will be sitting at the end Of a bar in canada. ...
www.archinect.com/forum/ threads_print.php?id=4379_0_42_0 - 30k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.archinect.com ]
KUsports.com Message Boards: If Bush wins Iran is next....
Maybe we should just invade Canada. post Extras: Print post Remind Me! Notify
Moderator. Mtn_Jayhawk Lawrence Legend * * Reged: Thu Posts: 2068 ...
boards.kusports.com//showflat.php?Cat=& Board=politics&Number=102006&page=11&view=expanded... - 95k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
KUsports.com Message Boards: If Bush wins Iran is next....
Maybe we should just invade Canada. post Extras: Print post Remind Me! Notify
Moderator. Mtn_Jayhawk Lawrence Legend * * Reged: Thu Posts: 2264 ...
boards.kusports.com/grabnext.php?Cat=0& Board=politics&mode=showflat&sticky=0&dir=new&... - 95k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
RE: [32SIG] Digest Number 1198
Maybe we should just invade all the vacation spots in the Carribean and annex them.
... Maybe we chould annex Canada and Mexico. they don't ...
www.postfinder.com/post/24381012.html - 11k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
Packing.org, the Concealed Carry Database: "Kut out the RepubliK ...
Select STATE, Alabama, Alaska, All of Canada, All of Mexico ... Alternatively,
maybe we Should just invade CA and nonchalantly conquer the place the Way ...
www.packing.org/talk/thread.jsp/6888/ - 75k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
Daily Kos: GOP waves adios to Latinos
Maybe we should just invade Mexico, overthrow the government, ... I routinely
note the high rates of illegal immigration from Canada and countries when I ...
marisa-mcnee.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/19/134244/94 - 311k - Cached - Similar pages
LaLa & Netgyrl's Tavern Wall: Archive through April 19, 2005
more than 110 million people enter The United states from Canada through land
ports of entry ... Personally I think Maybe We should just invade them! ...
|
| Quote: |
'The great white waste of time'
Cristin Schmitz
CanWest News Service
March 28, 2005
Canada is a "great white waste of time" whose "docile, Zamboni-driving," Molson-sucking citizens consume seal casseroles as they export terrorism, mad cow disease "and even deadlier Gordon Lightfoot and Nickelback albums" to the United States. The portrait, only partly satirical, emerges from stories in influential U.S. media outlets last week ahead of the March 23 summit with George W. Bush, Paul Martin and Mexico's Vicente Fox.
It began with an eyebrow-raising cover story on Canada in the Weekly Standard. In "Welcome to Canada: The Great White Waste of Time," senior writer Matt Labash observes most Americans -- when they think of Canada at all -- regard it "as North America's attic.''
It is ''a mildewy recess that adds little value to the house, but serves as an excellent dead space for stashing Nazi war criminals, drawing-room socialists and hockey goons." Canadians delude themselves that they are a "superior race" but Americans see them as "a docile, Zamboni driving people who subsist on seal casserole and Molson," he writes in the Washington-based conservative magazine. More serious perhaps was The New York Times editorial a week ago in which the newspaper repeated unproven, but persistent, allegations that terrorists in Canada routinely slip into the United States through a porous border. "Suspected terrorists have long been entering the country from Canada," asserts the Times, calling it "shocking ... how little progress has been made in securing our borders."
Canada's ambassador to the United States, Frank McKenna, fired off a letter to the editor that was published in the Times on Saturday. "The ambassador is very keen on having these sorts of issues ... responded to within the news cycle," Bernard Etzinger, a spokesman for the Canadian embassy in Washington, said yesterday. ''He said we should answer the editorial and state the facts about the security relationship.'' In his letter, Mr. McKenna pointed out that in 2001 then-U.S. attorney-general John Ashcroft acknowledged that none of the Sept. 11 hijackers entered the United States through Canada, a fact acknowledged by the editorial. Mr. McKenna also pointed out that Canadian authorities helped the U.S. apprehend "millennium bomber" Ahmed Ressam in 1999.
"Since then, our two countries have implemented a 'smart border action plan' as well as national security policies, including almost $10-billion in security investments and the creation of a department similar to the Department of Homeland Security, that help keep North America closed to terrorists and open for business," Mr. McKenna wrote.
"Earlier this month, Michael Chertoff, the new [U.S.] Secretary of Homeland Security, visited Canada and stated that together we are 'keeping terrorists out.' " Concluded Mr. McKenna: "In open societies such as ours, we all know that no security arrangement can be 100% effective. But between Canada and the United States, the record is clear: our co-operation has reduced the threat of terrorism in both our countries." The New York Times also ran a story March 23 by its Canadian correspondent, Clifford Krauss, headlined "Canada May be a Close Neighbour, but it Proudly Keeps Its Distance." The story notes that "with the possible exception of France," a nation known for its anti-U.S. sentiment, "no traditional ally has been more consistently at odds with the United States than has Canada."
The story recited a litany of Canada/U.S. disagreements since the Second World War. They ran the gamut from Canada's refusal to fully back president John Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis, to the welcome of U.S. draft dodgers during the Vietnam War, to the Liberals' refusal to sign on to the U.S. ballistic missile defence shield and Canada's push for the International Criminal Court and the Kyoto climate control accord -- which are opposed by the Bush administration. Noting Canadian historian Jack Granatstein's observation that anti-Americanism is "Canada's state religion," the story states that while Canadian and American leaders "always claim the greatest fondness for one another, more often than not they have not gotten along very well. When they have, Canadian leaders have sometimes had to pay a political price." 'Our Canadian Problem':
An excerpt from Welcome to Canada, in the March 21 issue of The Weekly Standard, by senior writer Matt Labash:
If we have bothered forming opinions at all about Canadians, they've tended toward easy-pickings: that they are a docile, Zamboni-driving people who subsist on seal casserole and Molson. Their hobbies include wearing flannel, obsessing over American hegemony, exporting deadly mad cow disease and even deadlier Gordon Lightfoot and Nickelback albums. You can tell a lot about a nation's mediocrity index by learning that they invented synchronized swimming. Even more, by the fact that they're proud of it. But ever since George W. Bush's re-election, news accounts have been rolling in that disillusioned Americans are running for the border in protest.... It may be time to stop treating Our Canadian Problem with such cavalier disregard. In fact, largely as a result of Bush and his foreign policy, what was once a polite rivalry has become a poisoned well of hurt feelings and recriminations.
These days, Canadian publications are chockablock with surveys showing that Canadians see themselves as something akin to a superior race. The prime ministers of what was once a reliable ally that ponied up in times of war have treated us like traffic-light squeegee-men when we've stopped at their corner, asking for assistance with our latest military adventure. They have spurned our missile-defence shield out of spite, even knowing it would save their Canadian bacon. Ran with fact box "'Our Canadian Problem'" which has been appended to the story.
© National Post 2005 |
| Quote: |
Bomb Canada is a simple Palm game. The object is to bomb all the buildings to allow the plane to land before it crashes into them.
Bomb Canada is freeware. |
http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/asciimation/palm/
| Quote: |
Bomb CanadaBy Jonah Goldberg
Canada is, quite simply, not a serious country anymore. It has internalized the assumptions of U.N.-ology: not just anti-Americanism but also the belief that Western nations don't need military might. As a consequence, they are simply unarmed. If al-Qaeda launched a September 11-style attack from Canadian soil, we would have only two choices: ask Canada to take charge, or take charge ourselves. The predictable — and necessary — U.S. action would spark outrage. We certainly don't need the burden of turning "the world's longest undefended border" into one of the world's longest defended ones. And that's why a little invasion is precisely what Canada needs. In the past, Canada has responded to real threats with courage and conviction (some say more Canadians went south to enlist for war in Vietnam than Americans went north to dodge it). If the U.S. were to launch a quick raid, blow up some symbolic but unoccupied structure — Toronto's CN Tower, or an empty hockey stadium — Canada would rearm overnight. |
| Quote: |
Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by wehrwolfs
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by bballwiz13
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by bossmanpc
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by ballzov
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by wehrwolfs
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by cossaks
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by havlat
»Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by brinson99
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by sens_rule78
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by junkcult
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by moneyshot879
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by mikebecker11
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by ype3me
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by ype3me
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by schmalzel
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by ype3me
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by schmalzel
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by dilliodawg
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by havlat
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by tomm0511
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by tomm0511
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by havlat
��Re: Bomb Canada!!!!!!!!! posted by schmalzel |
| Quote: |
I think Canada has done everything in its power to fight terrorism; in other words, not a damned thing. Canada has been emasculated by its government to the point where it is a pathetic shadow of its formerly bold and militarily strong self.
"Bomb Canada . . . Bomb Canada . . ." |
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8362 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
PS...
All you did was a Google search for "invade Canada" and came up with a list of blogs and message boards... Not really credible as "pundits" are they?
You even found an editorial style essay? From the National Post?
And, a Palm game...
Wow. The straws have been grasped! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pligganease wrote: |
PS...
All you did was a Google search for "invade Canada" and came up with a list of blogs and message boards... Not really credible as "pundits" are they?
You even found an editorial style essay? From the National Post?
And, a Palm game...
Wow. The straws have been grasped! |
I really have to agree. Those "quotes" are useless, I would accept your little sister seeing a report on CNN and telling you the details before I accept those. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would say liberate Canada....invade is so negative.
Alberta would be a great addition to the US, but would make the shape of the map totally disjointed and boxy.
I definitely think we should send an invitation to Newfoundland, if only to claim Great Big Sea as our own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pyongshin Sangja
Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Published on Tuesday, November 26, 2002 by the Toronto Star
Canada Caught in the CNN Crossfire
Canada survives U.S. pundit ambush
by Antonia Zerbisias
"It's big. It's cold. Is it a threat?"
So says CNN. As if Canada is a terrible menace to the U.S.
But only intellectually.
It seems that some American right-wing pundits and neo-con artists have their boxers in knots over what amounts to the firing of a single yellow snowball over the border.
That would be — what else? — last week's off-the-record remark by Françoise Ducros, communications director to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, about U.S. President George W. Bush being a "moron."
Frankly, most Canadians, and quite a few Americans, would not see that as being all that debatable but still, last night, on CNN's Crossfire, they faced off on the subject.
Sandwiched between debates on Saudi terrorism ties and cockfighting, Canada was bashed for being a "remarkably undemocratic country" where members of Parliament can't vote freely and where citizens think Americans brought Sept. 11 on themselves.
From the left, as Crossfire puts it, was James Carville, the Democratic political strategist.Riding side-saddle was Ken Rockburn of the Canadian political affairs channel CPAC.
From the right, syndicated columnist Bob Novak. His deputy dawg was Jonah Goldberg, son of Lucianne Goldberg, who rose to punditry prominence thanks to mommy's exposure of the Linda Tripp-Monica Lewinsky tapes.
Don't get me wrong:I have nothing against snot-nosed neo-con snots as a rule.
But Goldberg, who penned that infamous "Wimps!" cover story about Canada this month in National Review, is the guy who defended the indefensible: Ann Coulter.
You know her.
She's the right-wing blonde with the voice that shatters TV screens.
Permit me a digression here.
Last year, in the wake of the horrible attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and the downing of Flight 93, Coulter wrote a hateful column for National Review Online, which Goldberg edits.
This is the one in which she said, in reference to Muslims: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.
"We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
When Coulter was dispatched from the National Review, Goldberg explained that it was due to her column's "sloppiness of expression and thought. Ann didn't fail as a person — as all her critics on the Left say — she failed as WRITER, which for us is almost as bad.
"We did not `fire' Ann for what she wrote."
Oh, so advocating hate against Muslims was not a problem?
Anyway, now you have the scene for last night's Crossfire.
Novak came out swinging, asking Rockburn if he "approved" of how Chrétien handled Ducros: "The Prime Minister is just so hard-headed he wouldn't even accept (her) resignation," he said.
Fair enough. Ducros called the president soft-headed.
Rockburn acquitted himself handily, replying that it was all "tempest in a teapot.
"This is nothing. Lighten up!" he added, to some audience approval.
Then it was Carville's turn to go at Goldberg: "How does the government in Canada get in there? Is it like Saudi Arabia, is it just kind of a royal family, is it like the United States where the Supreme Court appoints it or do they actually have elections up there?"
"It's a remarkably undemocratic country. Yeah it is," said Goldberg, whose president was selected by judges. "Actually the Senate is entirely appointed by the prime minister."
"Is Britain an undemocratic country?" Carville demanded. "How is Canada less democratic than Britain?"
"Well, look, if you want me to get my comparative government textbook out ...," pouted Goldberg. "They deregulated the House of Lords in Britain. In the Parliament, you can have free votes and you can have members of Parliament ... actually break with your party. In Canada, you cannot break with your party. It's a total party rule."
(Huh? "Deregulated" the House of Lords? Can he mean that move three years ago to strip hereditary peers of their ancient right to be lawmakers?)
"This guy writes an article in the National Review and already got his facts wrong," lamented Carville. "I can't believe this."
"The reason the moron story is significant is not because it's a gaffe, it's because it actually reflects what the Liberal Canadian government and what the liberal elites on the east coast of Canada believe about the United States," retorted Goldberg.
"Nonsense, nonsense, we love you like brothers," interjected Rockburn. "In fact, what (Ducros) said was Mormon, not moron."
Needless to say, that infamous CBC clip from the one-year-after Sept. 11 interview with Chrétien was unspooled ... again. Viewers heard the Prime Minister say: "We're looked upon as being arrogant, self-satisfied, greedy and with no limits. And the 11th of September is an occasion for me to realize it even more."
"What he's saying is that it was America's fault," complained Novak.
"That is spin of the worst kind and you know it," said Rockburn. "He said we should start paying attention to the divisions in the world if we want the world to be a better place. That's what he said, c'mon."
And then Goldberg charged in again, "There have been polls of Canadians. Eighty per cent of Canadians think the United States is partly to blame for Sept. 11."
"Who said that? Which poll? Name the poll! Let's hear the poll!" roared Rockburn.
Asserted Goldberg. "I think it was the Toronto Star."
Me thinks otherwise.
The solution to the mess, as proposed by Goldberg? "Why don't they have the three western provinces come into the United States?"
That would be war, buddy. None of that warm and sunny desert fighting stuff neither.
And somebody ought to remind you guys what happened the last time you invaded us.
Copyright 1996-2002. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds eerily reminiscent of North Korean propaganda. As far as I understand it, states have more autonomy than provinces in most matters.
So if Alberta were to join, it could actually increase its autonomy.....might be wrong on this.
I repeat my call for an invitation to Newfoundland......the Hawaii of the North... Mari-Mac could become a sort of Song of the Union.....
You can keep Quebec and Ontario......
Manitoba would be nice, would make the Dakotas feel not only less lonely, but tropical and exotic as well. And most Americans are already acclimatized to BareNakedLadies tunes.
Saskatchewan remains a mystery to me......but certainly one of the coolest place names on the continent.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pyongshin Sangja wrote: |
| But why do you find it unsettling, indeed perplexing, that a different political consensus could exist in a continent as large as North America? Did you really expect us to buy the American dream hook, line and sinker? |
No, you're off here.
It's like a product you don't want to buy in a supermarket. Fine. Don't buy it. Walk away from it. But why must you reject it so ostentatiously and spitefully?
Personally, I don't know a single American, myself included, who cares whether Canada buys into American mythology -- one way or the other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pyongshin:
I asked you to provide examples of American pundits who SERIOULSY proposed invading Canada. From the Jonah Goldberg piece:
| Quote: |
| And that's why a little invasion is precisely what Canada needs. In the past, Canada has responded to real threats with courage and conviction (some say more Canadians went south to enlist for war in Vietnam than Americans went north to dodge it). If the U.S. were to launch a quick raid, blow up some symbolic but unoccupied structure — Toronto's CN Tower, or an empty hockey stadium — Canada would rearm overnight. |
So, Goldberg is saying that the USA should invade Canada in order to get Canada to STRENGTHEN itself militarily.
And you think he is making a serious argument? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pyongshin Sangja
Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Read the second article, Goldberg makes some statements there that reveal what he really thinks.
Of course they aren't serious, but I take them about as seriously as I take a Businessweek editorial pointing to Canada's lack of grovelling as disrespect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
