dbd33

No one is a proabortionist but then you know that. Mother Teresa was certainly talking rubbish. George Bush is more of a threat to world peace, even old Preston Manning is still more of a threat to world peace than abortion. AIDS is a bigger threat. Lack of water in deserts is a bigger threat. The booming Chinese economy is a bigger threat. All in all, abortion is a threat to world peace on a par with failing to abide by the poop and scoop bylaw.

I don't know whether or not Mother Teresa could read but I assume that, given her vocation, she was poorly informed.

Are you perchance one of those abortion protestors I swerve to splash at Gerrard and Jarvis ? If so I have a genuine question. Why do you only stand out there when the weather's bad ? Is it about self-flaggelation ? Don't young women still need bullying when the sun shines ?

Gezza

No I am not into self-flaggelation!
George Bush is no worse than any other previous American President, many of whom presided over very similar wars and world events. And.. they were not criticised for them if not congratulated for what they did in. e.g. Panama, Granada,Vietnam,Bosnia etc. So what makes the big difference with this one? Do you know? Or shall I tell you: It is called a big push for Antiamerican sentiment in all world Media.Well I for one have continued to think for myself..thank you!

Oh yeah, feel free to tell me what Y O U think is different about this time and this war.

dbd33

In the case of this war the motivation of the US President was, I believe, personal profit and a hubristic craving to avenge his daddy. In the case of the Bosnian war the motivation was misguided idealism. In the case of this war the immediate objective was to topple a government, in the case of the Bosnian one it was to protect an ethnic minority. This war is venal, that one was merely stupid.

Bush is a worse President than Clinton because he has entered into a war which is wholely bad for the US, whereas Clinton could at least say that the standing of the US with its allies was improved by the military effort. Bush is also worse President than Clinton because, in his tenure the economy has fallen apart.

Furthermore, Clinton speaks coherently and is an object of desire. Bush blathers, he should have continued drinking so he'd have an excuse.

Panama and Grenada were vanity wars but Vietnam was pursued, misguidedly of course, for pure ideological reasons, the US administration did believe in the domino theory so, again, involving the country in that police action was not criminal in the war the Iraq war was.

Oh, and I don't think there's any evidence of previous Presidents lying in order to start a war. If you want a state leader as harmful as G.W.Bush I think you have to look back as far as Mrs. Thatcher.

Finally, I think you will find that Nixon, Kissinger (not a President I know) and LBJ have been the subject of some criticism over the years. Why, I believe I even once heard a scathing remark about President Clinton.

dbd33

btw, it's a bit of a leap from Mother Teresa to George Bush. Were they an item ?

CalgaryBlade

The fall of the Canadian government was 2nd headline on BBC World last night woo-hoo!

The reporter from T.O. basically said it was up to opposition parties to porve why they should be elected as opposed to the Liberals.

His words "the economy is booming, people are generally happy apart from a few local issues"

By the look of the markets it's not adversly affected the CAD either.

flashman

Darn it! Is it the end of being "Under the Radar"?

MikeUK

I think the worst part about elections is that they give the religious right the excuse to talk..

Bring back the Romans and a few hungry lions

Gezza

Look on the bright side you can always move back to the Soviet Union of Europe. They won't bore you with Religion.

dbd33

Religion has no place in government. Fortunately neither of the local contendors makes religion a platform :

http://tinyurl.com/ex2x5

Gezza

Absolutely! But it would be nice if we could at least preserve the Constitutional Freedom of Speech and Worship. Cause you know the States (countries) that have become famous for fighting those are not the ones you would normally want to emigrate to!

jcexit

Federal politics over here suffers from the same weakness as in the UK: a lack of strong personalities and 'fame sparkle' in the opposition leaders. Having said that I was amazed at how Tony Blair developed after he became prime minister. What a great Tory PM he has made and leader of the Labour Party at the same time! When it comes to a choice of the devils we know (the Liberals) and the ones we don't know I think I prefer the latter. I know for sure the Liberals make a mess of things, time to give others a chance. Canada will definitely suffer under yet another term of corrupt Liberal rule. So I will use my recently acquired right to vote against them.

dbd33

er, but you chose the country the Liberals created. If you wanted the sort of country Harper does wouldn't it have been simpler to go to Texas ?

jcexit

Your knowledge of history fails you! This country was created by much greater forces than the present Liberal government or the one directly before it.

Souvenir

They were carrying guns, weren't they?

Souvenir

Quite. I shall be using my own newly acquired right to vote. The Grits may be infected but, quite frankly, if I give my vote to anyone else, I'm voting for the Bloc. It's hardly in my best interests to do that.