Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Program on the CBC this evening called "Canadian, SO?"

Dec 4, 2004 10:43AM PST

featuring some of the people from the States who were taken in by the inhabitants of a number of small communities around Gander, Newfoundland when their aircraft were redirected on 9/11.

Gander, while it has a large airport and is a former Canadian and US Forces airbase is a very small community with not a lot of room for overnight guests. People were taken by school bus to nearby communities and given a place to sleep, bedding from the homes of the inhabitants (there being no big stores in the area), food, various necessities tooth-brush, baby-formula, a whole list that I wish I could recall in order to put it down here. The laundry and towels were taken away every day and laundered in their homes and brought back fresh every afternoon. The bus driver was quoted by a lovely woman from Ohio in a very creditable Newfie accent as introducing himself as "Me names Moody, but dat's me name an' not me nature." On the drive to a community 45 miles away which was taking the passengers in, they passed a moose on the roadside and when the passengers remarked on it he stopped, backed up the bus and let people photograph and video the moose and its companion which emerged a few minutes later and then asked, "Has ye all had a good look? Well we'll be gettin aahn (on) den." Newfoundland is a place of rich and vibrant culture. A lot of people there are musicians as they were everywhere 80 or more years ago, and the locals entertained the visitors with folk songs and other entertainment.

The conclusion of the participants in the program was that Canadian cultural values are closely related to small town values of connectedness and participation, and of helping one another.

The reason I write all this is to try to counter Kidpeat's posting of an unpleasant and inaccurate Chicago Sun-Times editorial that is so utterly unlike the Canadians I've met, and the Canadians other Americans have met and been moved to write and speak about. I don't take Speakeasy's rather hard-nosed participants to be representative of the US, or even of the Republican party, please don't confuse Canada's not acting like the 51st state with detestation or despising. It's not that. It's a different and not malign point of view. Just remember that only 53 million out of 280 million voted to support the current administration. That's roughly 25%, although, of course, probably 80 million aren't voters.

Like it or not they (we) are your best friends and are more likely to understand and to help than anyone anywhere.

Rob Boyter

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re: Program on the CBC this evening called
Dec 4, 2004 2:01PM PST

Although my Canada is by far large in geographical size compare to the my USA, our soldiers ratio is 1 compared to 10 of my USA. Our war artilleries and do dads if I may call it, is not as sophisticated as my USA but we're getting there through Canada-U.S. defence agreements deal with training, information-exchange and sharing in the development of defence industry.. So with this to say, should my Canada be under attack by any countries for that matter --- My America is my Canada's WMD and should My America be under attack by sophisticated flying objects, My Canada is the buffer zone for USA.

I would think that all these American vs. Canadians, Canadians vs. Americans is what I would call sibling rivalries as a result of few global issues apart from national issues but in the end of the day -- it's still a family by many definitions.


.

- Collapse -
Re: Program on the CBC this evening called
Dec 4, 2004 8:05PM PST

I, for one, appreciate our ties and friendship. I also respect our right to be different and for Canada, the same. I am a first generation US American. My folks were both Canadian and taught us to love and respect both cultures.They never lost their love for Canada but the USA offered them advantages for employment, that weren't available in Canada at the time, the same reason many immigrants came from many parts of the world. You have every right to opinions about USA policy. After all we are neighbors. But that is a two way street and when we disagree with your policies, it should also be received as just that: a difference of opinion.

- Collapse -
Neat. Your parents did what we did in mirror image.
Dec 4, 2004 10:02PM PST

I have already posted that I knew very little about Canada when we first came up here, and was extremely pleasantly surprised at how nice everyone was, and how I felt at home with the differences, if that makes any sense. Certainly I agree with your point about differences but if you read the SunTimes editorial there appear to be some down south who are less tolerant of that difference. Perhaps I have caught the zeal of the newly converted about Canada and am inclined to go a bit overboard in my feelings. I do hope that things settle back to the old rather easier way they used to be regarding relations between the two countries.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
Hardnosed attitude
Dec 5, 2004 12:01AM PST

I think is a reaction to the unrelenting torrent of hatred coming from the left for the last four or so years. Probably the blame lies with both sides, but the Democrats, the haters, the Michael Moore crowd have been so over the top and irrational that they have provoked this attitude,and in the process competely demolished their own credibility.

No matter what "we" ever said about the disgraceful Clinton, we didn't equate him to Hitler, call him a terrorist or accuse him of being a war criminal (even when he bombed Kosovo) (well, maybe a few did). And in spite of his many truly stupid actions we didn't routinely refer to him as an imbecile or a chimp. This is the everyday attitude of many on the left towards Bush (It's ironic that people stupid enough to be fooled by Michael Moore can call Bush an idiot).

For the record in the few excursions I have made into Canada I have found the people to be friendly and helpful. But there is that certain element.

- Collapse -
Re: Hardnosed attitude
Dec 5, 2004 3:13AM PST

It's not that simple, Ed


The novel, "The Ugly American" , which coined the phrase, was first published in 1958. Though it's focus was on southeast Asia, there were anti-American feelings in other countries, including after WWII.

In my memory, the "underground" smear campaigns began with the JFK/Nixon one. LBJ pulled the nuclear bomb TV ad against Goldwater, the first that started the downslide into muck. We learned how far Nixon would go to win. The TV scare ad in which a senior couple expressed concern re: "the government getting into our medicine cabinets" is now moot, because it now is. Some may or may not agree that anti-Clinton tactics began before his first nomination. Now, with the internet, there is even more fertile ground for spreading rumors, half-truths, suspicion and downright lies through emails. Each side has it's partisan web site (Drudge Report and Move On).

(I have a friend who was very upset when she got an email - and forwarded it to me - that said to look on her bottle of Heinz Ketchup because it would say "Made in Mexico". Which, of course it did not. But she had taken the email at face value, and did not even think to look at her bottle first. That was only one of more than 20 emails she forwarded to me that were totally untrue. Hate plays tricks on one's good sense.)

IMO, the polarization we have today began in earnest with the '92 election season. Whether folks felt anger, shock, dismay, disgust, fear or whatever, I don't know. But it has become almost impossible to express a moderate view, as if having one is a sign of "not understanding the issues" at best, or idiocy, at worse. The Moore's and Falwell's feed into their bases, and, IMO, cloud the issues by promoting fear. And the world watches and listens.

Ah, for the days of the whistle-stop campaign trains! Happy

I listened to Chris Matthews on his local network show this morning (he doesn't scream like he does on his cable one), and he said what I thought was wise re: media bias and watching/listening/reading to one's biased favorites exclusively. "Listen to both sides, and make your own decisions."

Angeline
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
Re: Hardnosed attitude
Dec 5, 2004 3:31AM PST

Hi Angeline;

(Hate plays tricks on one's good sense.)

Sure does and wastes a lot of energy. Most of the people you hate don't know it and the rest don't care.

George

- Collapse -
Drudge vs. Leftists
Dec 5, 2004 4:06AM PST

Angeline, the Drudge Report is not to be compared to MoveOn. That's an unwarranted insult to Matt Drudge and at the same time an undeserved compliment to the anti-American leftist MoveOn punks.

Drudge reports real news and has been first to report much of it. Remember the "stained blue dress" thing? That was Drudge. Any day of the week you can check The Drudge Report and see what will be reported on TV ahead of time.

Every website wishes it had the traffic Drudge gets but the probability of that occurring for any of them is remote. Here are the latest stats for Drudge:

VISITS TO DRUDGE 12/03/04

008,813,241 IN PAST 24 HOURS
322,216,308 IN PAST 31 DAYS
3,071,195,141 IN PAST YEAR


Over THREE BILLION hits per year. He's big now. MoveOn is still, and forevermore shall remain, leftist sewage. That is as it should be.

DE

- Collapse -
The record of candidates endorsed ...
Dec 5, 2004 5:26AM PST

... by MoveOn.org was pitiful.

OTOH, Drudge may be from the right, but he has never endorsed or actively campaigned for anything.

Sorry Angeline, but if there is a comparison to MoveOn on the right, nobody has ever heard of them.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
Re: Drudge vs. Leftists
Dec 5, 2004 5:29AM PST

I have visited both sites, DE, and found both to be as pure as the driven slush. I got a kick out of both of them.

If that is an insult to Mr. Drudge, I do not apologize. I defend his right to "speak", but I have the right to prefer a mixture of sources for guidance, and biased web sites that focus on an agenda are not at the top of my list.

If that makes me an anti-American leftist, so be it. I defend you right to your opinion.

Angeline
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
DSNS, WBNS!!!
Dec 5, 2004 6:01AM PST

If you don't want to hear what's bothering us, don't call us haters. We're obviously going to respond with explanations. When you call us anti-American, we're going to try to tell you why we feel a better path could have, and should have, been taken. That's not anti-American. Nothing we say seems to get through to you guys. It's very frustrating, so we go over the top sometimes. I think it's by design that y'all don't acknowledge a single point we try to make. I think you LIKE hearing us screech. There's no conversation when all you are trying to do is to hang a label on us.

Since you're so pleased with yourself with your "leftist" thing, why not go ahead the extra step right away? "Leftistism" That's where you're headed ain't it? No response required? No considering necessary,,, that any slightest grain of truth may be motivating anything we say? You're saying we ARE leftists. Not that we're people who believe certain things to be true, and that other perspectives ARE valid. Give us a "point acknowledged" once in a while. You might be surprised how reasonable we can be.

Dave, Don't Start No Sh_t, Won't BE No Sh_t!!! Know what I mean? What ever you say, what ever you call us, it won't make a single truth go away.


I've got myself a new resolution: To avoid sarcasm. I don't believe I crossed over here. (?)

- Collapse -
Re: DSNS, WBNS!!!
Dec 5, 2004 8:25AM PST

Somebody had to say it, it was begging to be said. I'm glad it was you.

Happy

- Collapse -
No
Dec 5, 2004 8:37AM PST

It's one thing to be the opposition, to disagree vehemently and another to call people nazis, klansmen, bigots and idiots. That's been the left's brand of rhetoric for a long time, NOT presenting an alternative point of view, but just smearing the opponent.

Everyone does it but the left does it most and worse. With Bush the hate has become reflexive. Often the whole argument is "he's an idiot and a nazi." That's the Michael Moore/MoveOn point of view. And it is NOT a valid one.

And often, by the way, the smear is extended to hating the USA as well. Can you understinad that some of us find that offensive?

- Collapse -
Labels are cheating.
Dec 5, 2004 4:18PM PST

Lots of name calling on both sides, I agree. It's hard to talk politics well. It takes a special bunch of people to do it. I'm going to try to remember that a point of view is a point of view and a person is a person. People are not their truths. Labels are cheating.

I disagree that "the left does it most and worse" . Worse maybe, (a couple notable exceptions notwithstanding) but not most. Not by a long shot.

"... the smear is extended to hating the USA as well" . That is a tough one. I DO see 'em when they're there. Some folks claim to see 'em EVERYWHERE.

So let the healing begin,,, one leftist at a time ... <break> ... No. That's sarcasm. I'm going to attack wrong headed ideas and I'm going to attack labels. And I'm going to acknowledge a point once in a while when I see one. Mostly I'm going to do what I HAVE been doing and just hold my water. Is that funny? Take my word for it.

Well here I am again, talking about talking instead of talking about issues. I got'a quit that.


.

- Collapse -
Have you a source for this twaddle? I don't recall any of
Dec 6, 2004 12:04PM PST

those terms being used here Ed. If you saw them on protest signs on the news, how sure are you that its current as opposed to file footage? And sorry but your side started the reflexive hatred with its behavior toward Clinton for 8+ years. As ye sow so shall ye reap.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
twaddle?
Dec 6, 2004 6:19PM PST

I wasn't talking about here, though there has been plenty of anti-Bush hatred here too. Perhaps you just don't recognize it when you do it? Are you really so blind that you have not seen this stuff ramped way up the last four years? Did you miss the ANSWER hate fests among others?

I addressed the anti-Clinton rhetoric in my earlier post. Rough as it was it never reached the extreme over-the-top sludge of the Bush haters. I don't remember seeing him burned in effigy, called a nazi and a terrorist, etc. Not even close.

Clinton'e gang were pretty good at character assassination too by the way.

- Collapse -
You are quoting highly conservative and partisan sources
Dec 7, 2004 8:38AM PST

and they are spouting their opinions or in the case of the Gallup poll people are reporting what they have been told for the last 35 years (that there is a great liberal media conspiracy), not even handed evaluation of an issue. They don't count as evidence IMO except for the other side of the argument i.e. that the Right has been predominant since the time of Jimmy Carter.

While I don't agree with the current perception that all media in the United States is a left wing conspiracy, I was in fact talking about the Pundits and Experts that you see on television being interviewed or asked for comment by Rather, Jennings Brokaw et al. and who are far more influential, in my opinion. I'm talking about people from the American Enterprise Institute, the Hoover Institute, the Cato Institute, and the Heritage Foundation all of which are well funded explicitly Conservative institutions.

I'd be willing to swap your list of liberals in media, excluding the newsreaders, for my list of Right Wing Ideologues and Mouthpieces, I bet I win by nearly 2 to 1.

I'll start: Irving Kristol, George Gilder, Michael Novak, William Tucker, Philip Terzian, Tucker Carlson, Robert Novak, Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Cal Thomas, Alan Keyes, Dan Scarborough, Ann Coulter, Mary Matalon, Bruce Fein, Ralph Reed, William F Buckley, Norman Podhoretz, Bill O'Reilly, Elliott Abrams, Kate O'Beirne, that's 23 to start covering TV, Radio, and Print.

The trouble with the Right is that for them there is no middle ground, either you're a good conservative or you're the Anti-Christ. Personally I'd put newsreaders in the middle or neutral ground. If they speak about welfare as an existing entity, they are accused of "lauding the welfare state".

I think its rubbish.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
Wow ...
Dec 7, 2004 10:04AM PST

... three names obscure enough that this conservative has never heard of them, another two or three of marginal prominence/exposure at best, and at least one improperly labeled as conservative. I suppose if you want to pad your list ...

Cato is libertarian, not Republican. You'll get much support for your anti-war position there, and it is painful to listen to your bellyaching over some well funded conservative cabal when there is far more money (often taxpayer) floating around the mouthpieces of the left -- Carter Center, Emily's List, Planned Parenthood, Naral, NOW, NAACP, ACLU, AFLCIO, NEA/AFT, etc.

Prior to Fox taking the Equal Time and Crossfire concept to a greater extent in all their programming, it was hard to find a conservative view even given airtime. I vividly recall watching gavel to gavel coverage of the Anita Hill/Thomas debacle. In addition to the editorializing summaries at every break, that bore no relation to the testimony I had just heard, they repeatedly turned to NOW for the "woman's perspective" as if all women thought with a singular mind. I called my local NOW chapter at the time to complain about some of their comments and was told that I should send in my dues or shut up cuz nobody at NOW shared my views. They may be right, that debacle was the beginning of their rapidly shrinking membership ... but I digress.

Perhaps the reason you see so many conservative pundits is that the "mainstream" make a habit of pointing out and labeling them as such, but present the liberal counterpart without such identifiers.

- Collapse -
Thanks, Evie for your compliment on the depth, breadth and
Dec 7, 2004 5:30PM PST

extent of my reading. If you'll post the three people you think are too obscure and the wrongly labelled one, I'll try to find some stand ins you like better, or at least send you some of their work.

My point was not Republican columnists but conservative ones. The Cato Institute is a conservative institution, Libertarians are natural allies and harsh critics of even middle of the road policies.

I have watched William F Buckley since the mid 60's. They used to interview Curtis Lemay in his post military life until his candidacy with George Wallace kind of put him beyond the Pale. And there were lots of Pro-Nixon people on the television before the meltdown.

Here's another stack to be getting on with, all recent or current on network news or its equivalent, or in print and on the lecture circuit.

William Bennett John McLaughlin (McLauglin Group). William Safire, Paul Weyrich, Pat Buchanan, David Horowitz, Brent Bozell, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Morton Kondracke, Dan Quayle, Mickey Edwards, Richard Lessner, R. Emmett Tyrell, Seth Lipsky, Matt Drudge, James J. Kilpatrick, and Marvin Olasky. That totals 41 to date without doing any research, and though some of them are in semi retirement they are still producing.

I haven't gotten to names of organizations as you have so quickly but if necessary I will go there, and to the Religious Right all $300 Million of it.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
You really are out in left field ...
Dec 7, 2004 8:05PM PST

... Mort Kondrake? Perhaps you meant Fred Barnes? I won't waste time going back to the other list, but I've never heard of Edwards or Lessner, Kirkpatrick & Lipsky ring very faint bells. Katie Couric trumps at least those four and then some for the average consumer of network news and pseudonews. Let's take the big three Sunday news programs -- George Stephanopolous at TW on ABC -- yep, George Will is the token conservative on that show at the round table. Russert at MTP? Doesn't show his politics as badly as some, but a Democrat at heart, and his round tables usually only contain the one token conservative. It is difficult to distinguish the supposedly neutral participants from the token liberal. Nobody watches CBS anyway Wink, but the "news" on that network slants firmly left as this past year on 60 Minutes of Bush Bashing has adequately demonstrated.

Dave K considers liberals closer to libertarians than conservatives. Well, unless the Cato Institute supports a position that disagrees with him. Speaking of Dave, you forgot his favorite "conservative" -- Charley Reese. You should love him Wink

You are really missing the boat concentrating on the funding of four think tanks. What? At least they are THINK tanks that actually put out policy. Unlike Hollywood, Soros, and the Rock the Vote gang I suppose.

William Safire. Hmmm... big ta do about his retiring from NYT and a clamor to replace him. Why we can't do without our token conservative. Don't you think the commentary over at an outfit the size of the NYT could include more than one conservative?

As to Rush, I only saw the TV show a few times so can't really comment on that. But he has addressed several times your specious accusation that he has beat the drum on the Vince Foster thing.

There is no use in trying to convince you of the obvious. Have fun playing a name game it demonstrates that you miss the boat entirely.

- Collapse -
Re: You really are out in left field ...
Dec 7, 2004 8:23PM PST

And proudly so. I am an old line FDR Democrat.

I saw Rush Limbaugh cleverly imply that Vince Foster was assassinated, at the behest of the Clinton's because "he knew too much", several times with my own eyes on his television program any denials are specious and deceptive. Michael Reagan on the other hand stated unequivocally that they did on his radio show.

I will accept your offer of Fred Barnes and Charley Reese,and will look more closely at Kondracke but i have seen him and not been very happy with what i saw. If New York can support the Wall Street Journal which is, heaven knows, a conservative enough paper, why bother with a single columnist on the New York Times?

I only metioned the 4 largest conservative ThinkTanks. I've got lots more. I just thought we could try to go head to head on Liberal vs Conservative Columnists before getting into the murkier areas of large organizations.

Have you had occasion to read Eric Alterman's "What Liberal Media?"? I don't expect you will agree with it but its still worth the read. Just as I have read Ann Coulter and Peggy Noonan and various others I don't agree with.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
Your view of Kondrake is the telling part ...
Dec 7, 2004 9:03PM PST

... he is the Democrat of the "Beltway Boys" on FNC. He is described by most as a liberal with a sense of logic Wink

I don't read Alterman's screed. In my line of work (academia) I get my fill of left wing bias just walking down the halls and reading the fliers. Grin

Why bother with a single conservative columnist at the NYT? Perhaps because they present themselves as an objective news organization. At least the opinion pages should have some balance, with the full understanding that editorializing is limited to those pages. Sadly, one cannot usually make it through the first paragraph of a NYT "news" story without seeing some editorializing injected. Now one might make the same charge for right-leaning publications, and one might even be correct. Two wrongs don't make a right, and while the NYT generally still enjoys a reputation as a credible news source, outfits like the Washington Times are still marginalized by the journalistic elite.

Listing columnists is no way to make an appropriate comparison. You could go down the lists at Townhall.com, National Review, etc. and I could go down the list at Washington Post, New York Times, Common Dreams, etc. What would be the point?

- Collapse -
Since many here label me right
Dec 7, 2004 11:33AM PST

I take offense at

The trouble with the Right is that for them there is no middle ground, either you're a good conservative or you're the Anti-Christ.

How is that not doing exactly what you're accusing the "Right" of doing? lumping everyone right of your view (who ever is speaking) as agreeing with that?

Phooey.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
I see lots of people in the middle ground, right of me but
Dec 7, 2004 4:25PM PST

left of the firestorm of high profile conservative commentators. I don't see network news people on all channels except Fox as liberal, I see them as middle of the road by and large. If there were as many liberals in a position to influence the news as you say there are then I doubt we'd be in the grip of Bush. At least not from 2000.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
"in the grip of Bush"
Dec 7, 2004 6:38PM PST

Maybe your perception of what is right, left and middle is affected by where you are standing.

So when I see things on the network news or CNN or MSNBC, PBS etc. that strikes me as left biased or just inaccurate and I get mad enough to yell at the TV, that's just an illusion, right? Jennings, Brokaw, Andrea Mitchell, 60 Minutes, Dateline, all of them are right-wingers correct?

I'm trying to imagine how bad it would have to get for you to think things are balanced! Maybe if they played L'internationale before each newscast?

- Collapse -
BOTH of our perceptions are affected by where we're standing
Dec 7, 2004 8:07PM PST

And I still say that most network news, Fox excepted, is middle of the road. There have been times I thought that news pieces or commentators were Right Biased but I realized that was the result of MY bias. I'm sure the same occurs from your side of the argument.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
True, but ...
Dec 7, 2004 8:47PM PST

... the completely lopsided political affiliations of the media elite in this country make the left-bias undeniable.

- Collapse -
That's extremely understandable.
Dec 11, 2004 5:53AM PST

I have no doubt that you see most as to your right.

- Collapse -
?
Dec 7, 2004 5:53PM PST

Is this supposed to be a response to me?

- Collapse -
No, Ed, its not. Its actually a mistake on my part.
Dec 8, 2004 3:09AM PST

I was posting to Markatnite and got messed up. My apologies.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Get a grip Bob :(
Dec 5, 2004 9:00AM PST