Blame it on conservative christians

[porkchop]

The liberal left media's new excuse for losing the election.

Comparing Conservative Christians with Muslim fanatics..

WW4 starting at home with the Liberals dividing this country further?

 

Read on!

 

Religion bating — The elite media declared open season on the President and his supporters (Joe Scarborough)

 

A nasty streak of religious intolerance is rearing its ugly head in America. And it's coming from America's cultural elites.

 

The election of George W. Bush has exposed an ugly anti-Christian streak in many of those who work in America's most powerful newsrooms. A flood of vicious opinion pieces over the past few days have generalized Christians who helped elect the President as a group of knuckle dragging neandrethals whose aims are nothing less than anti-American.

 

Not surprisingly, some of the most offensive, bigoted rhetoric came from the opinion pages of the New York Times, a paper that at one time embraced diversity of thought and belief. But apparently those positions of convenience are closeted away when it comes time to opine on conservative Christians.

 

The day after George Bush's victory, the Times ran an Op Ed by famed historian Gary Wills, who questioned whether a people who believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus can be called an enlightened nation. Wills suggested that because of those Christians who helped elect George Bush, America now shares more in common with Al Qaeda and Saddam's Sunni loyalists than modern Europe. Wills wrote, "Americans wonder why the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous...They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed."

 

So according to the Times Op Ed page, if you believe in the Bible's account of Jesus' birth, you are on par with those terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans on September 11th. Strip it down anyway you want, but that is what lies at the base of Wills' jihad argument.

 

Thomas Friedman, long one of my favorite columnists on all matters foreign concluded that Mr. Bush was elected by Christians who are hell bent on legislating social issues and "extending the boundaries of religion so hard that it felt as if we were rewriting the Constitution and not electing a president."

 

Rewriting the constitution? Just because George Bush carried Ohio by 100,000 votes? Talk about one of our most gifted writers losing all perspective.

 

Meanwhille, The Washington Post's EJ Dionne swung wildly at windmills blasting away at the "exploitation of strong religious feelings" and the "radical efforts to destroy the achievements of progressive government."

 

George Bush and Christians radicals want to destroy American government? Oh really? I guess I missed the debate when the W. laid out that plan of attack.

 

Michael Moore blasted the President, of course, for pandering to the Christian conservatives, while Maureen Dowd accused Mr Bush of taking America into "another dark age, where we replace science with religion and facts with faith."

 

The Pulitzer Prize winner concluded that "The new evangelicals challenge science because they have been stirred up to object to social engineering on behalf of society's most vulnerable: the poor, the sick, the sexually different."

 

Dowd also accused the President of running a "jihad along the fault lines of fear, ignorance and religious rule."

 

Never in my life as a practicing attorney, a newspaper publisher, a Congressman or a news host have I witnessed America's cultural elite become so unglued over any historical event. And most distressing is the fact that these opinion leaders are singling out a group of Americans for no other reason than the God they worship.

 

To paint all Republican Christians as angry, hate-filled, science-loathing, right wing beasts only helps explain why the Mainstream Media continues to lose market share and why those Democrats who take solace in their bigoted anti-Christian screeds remain out of power for another four years.

 

It leads me to wonder, can we only be good Americans if we turn our backs on our faith, or become champions of abortion on demand, stem cell research without reservation, and marriage defined in a way that conflicts with the spiritual beliefs of a majority of Americans?

 

Isn't it interesting that when pluralism and diversity of thought become politically inconvenient, it is the cultural and media elites who become the most close minded and bigoted?

[Scottdog]

Jesus Christ? I f**ked him!

 

How many hundreds of years did his story get passed around and over exaggerated before it got written down. So it must be true. Ignorence is bliss. Oh, it's to perplexed for you to understand? Then it must be "GOD's" way. Never mind Math and science. What a bunch of muroons we can be!

 

Other than over population, the problem with sociaty these days is that we are too afraid to say what we feel for fear of what other might think of us. Oh my, he is so immoral.

 

That's probably why I stay to myself and hold back my thoughts so much.

 

S

[Canuck]

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

[Mongo]

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

 

 

I stopped reading after the first paragraph. It really pisses me off when someone trys telling the story how the north freed the slaves, when in fact most of the northeners had slaves them sleves.

 

The civil war was not fought over slavery as it is taught  in public schools. It was over economics. One of the main reasons the war was fought was the south shut the north out and stopped all access to the shipping ports. Slavery was somewhere at the bottom of the list.

[badcad]

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

That link speaks the truth. On another note the National Park service is being pressured into erecting some type of memorial to the 9 slaves who served Washington while he stayed here in Philly, directly in front of the Liberty Bell. Estimated cost 4.5 million. That about covers the "40 acres and a mule".

[chris114]

[firebird77clone]

"Thank God we came to our senses and worship a carpenter whom died two thousand years ago"..  Bart Simpson

[chris114]

[porkchop]

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

Screw you Canuck..Like Canada has all the answers.

A divided country

When will Quebec and their liberal language culture proctectionism

Secede from Canada. What will happen to your economy?

Your former Prime Minister Chretien (French Canadian Liberal) Okayed secession if there was a popular vote.It was close last time. But it will come.Your Current Prime minister Martin not French Canadian but from a faction of the same Liberal party.Your government is already overrun with liberals.That already lean too far left.And they can afford to stay out of world politics and promote protectionism.

For we provide the umbrella of security from war . We are your economy,  as your largest trading partner.

There is no doubt your country would ever be attacked with your big brother standing guard to the South

Weak dollar? Not a bad thing.Depends on which side of it you are on.As you bragged about in a previous post.

As far as poverty goes

I have been on Indian reservations in Northwest Ontario that would bring tears to your eyes.A level of poverty I have never witnessed before. Yet you speak with such high handedness on American issues.

Don't get me wrong I love Canada! I spend alot of money there.Mainly fly in fish camps in Fish Camps in northwest Ontario.

 

You can have our Michael Moores and Susan Sarandons. They lost the elections for their U.S. Liberal party. They do not reflect core American values.

 

This thread started about the liberal left in this country losing the election and blaming conservative Christians. Some going as far as to say we are the same as fanactic Muslims.

 

 

 

Canada to Make Same-Sex Marriages Legal

 

From Susan Munroe,Your Guide to Canada Online.

Federal government will not appeal court rulings

 

The federal government will redefine marriage to allow same-sex unions in Canada, Prime Minister Chretien announced after a cabinet meeting on June 17, 2003.

 

The federal cabinet has decided not to appeal provincial superior court decisions that say that excluding same-sex marriages violates equality rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

 

The new legislation to legally recognize same-sex marriages is expected to be ready in a matter of weeks. A statement from the Prime Minister's Office stresses that the proposed legislation will also "protect the right of churches and religious organizations to sanctify marriage as they define it."

 

The proposed legislation to allow same-sex marriages will first be referred to the Supreme Court of Canada. After that the legislation will be put to a free vote in the House of Commons, which means Liberal government members of parliament who don't agree with the bill will be able to vote against it.

 

In Canada the federal government is responsible for defining what constitutes a marriage. Provincial governments are responsible for the administration and procedural requirements of the marriage ceremony and for issuing marriage licenses.

 

In Ontario, same-sex marriages are already taking place, as couples take advantage of the Ontario Court of Appeal ruling that provided a new definition of marriage as the "voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others."

 

As a result of the federal government plans to redefine marriage, and the Ontario court ruling, the BC Court of Appeal also gave the go-ahead to same-sex marriages in British Columbia on July 8, 2003.

 

If the legislation passes, Canada would become the third country in the world to allow same-sex marriages, after Belgium and the Netherlands.

 

Canada Stays out of War on Iraq

Canadian Government Position on the War on Iraq

 

Related Resources

• Canada and War

• Canada and the War on Terrorism

 

From Other Guides

• War on Terrorism Headlines

• Terror Alert Colors - U.S.

 

Elsewhere on the Web

• Canada and Iraq - Department of Foreign Affairs Canada

• Chretien Interview With ABC "This Week"

 

 

Dateline: 03/18/03

 

Jean Chretien, the Prime Minister of Canada, has announced that Canada will not join the war on Iraq. The major reasons the Canadian Prime Minister has given are:

 

   * there was no UN Security Council resolution on military action against Iraq

   * the diplomatic process of Iraqi disarmament was working, and might have been successful given a few more weeks

   * forcing a change in regime sets a dangerous precedent.

 

No UN Resolution on Military Action Against Iraq

 

In response to a question during Question Period in the Canadian House of Commons on March 17, 2003, the Prime Minister formally stated the position of the Canadian government on the war on Iraq:

 

   "We believe that Iraq must fully abide by the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. We have always made [it] clear that Canada would require the approval of the Security Council if we were to participate in a military campaign. Over the last few weeks the Security Council has been unable to agree on a new resolution authorizing military action. Canada worked very hard to find a compromise to bridge the gap in the Security Council. Unfortunately, we were not successful. If military action proceeds without a new resolution of the Security Council, Canada will not participate."

 

Disarmament of Iraq

 

The Prime Minister has also indicated that he felt the diplomatic process of Iraq disarmament was bringing results, and that if Iraq had had a few more weeks it might have been successful.

 

Canadian government policy has been to seek a peaceful solution to the Iraq crisis through the UN system. The Canadian government supported UN Security Council Resolution 1441 which called for Iraqi disarmament. Canada did its best to persuade Security Council members to be flexible in deciding on the next steps and to do so with the greatest possible unity. As recently as March 11, Canada made a presentation to the Security Council suggesting the development of a prioritized list of key remaining disarmament tasks and a deadline for Iraq to implement those tasks.

Forcing a Regime Change

 

Prime Minister Chretien has also said that he is very uncomfortable with forcing a regime change from outside a country. He argues that only the country's people have the right to change a government, and imposing a regime from outside could set a dangerous precedent. "If we change every government we don't like in the world where do we start? Who is next?"

 

Canada is!!    Got oil?   This is getting interesting... :rasp

[XUXAW]

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

Screw you Canuck..Like Canada has all the answers.

A divided country

When will Quebec and their liberal language culture proctectionism

Secede from Canada. What will happen to your economy?

Your former Prime Minister Chretien (French Canadian Liberal) Okayed secession if there was a popular vote.It was close last time. But it will come.Your Current Prime minister Martin not French Canadian but from a faction of the same Liberal party.Your government is already overrun with liberals.That already lean too far left.And they can afford to stay out of world politics and promote protectionism.

For we provide the umbrella of security from war . We are your economy,  as your largest trading partner.

There is no doubt your country would ever be attacked with your big brother standing guard to the South

Weak dollar? Not a bad thing.Depends on which side of it you are on.As you bragged about in a previous post.

As far as poverty goes

I have been on Indian reservations in Northwest Ontario that would bring tears to your eyes.A level of poverty I have never witnessed before. Yet you speak with such high handedness on American issues.

Don't get me wrong I love Canada! I spend alot of money there.Mainly fly in fish camps in Fish Camps in northwest Ontario.

 

You can have our Michael Moores and Susan Sarandons. They lost the elections for their U.S. Liberal party. They do not reflect core American values.

 

This thread started about the liberal left in this country losing the election and blaming conservative Christians. Some going as far as to say we are the same as fanactic Muslims.

 

 

 

Canada to Make Same-Sex Marriages Legal

 

From Susan Munroe,Your Guide to Canada Online.

Federal government will not appeal court rulings

 

The federal government will redefine marriage to allow same-sex unions in Canada, Prime Minister Chretien announced after a cabinet meeting on June 17, 2003.

 

The federal cabinet has decided not to appeal provincial superior court decisions that say that excluding same-sex marriages violates equality rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

 

The new legislation to legally recognize same-sex marriages is expected to be ready in a matter of weeks. A statement from the Prime Minister's Office stresses that the proposed legislation will also "protect the right of churches and religious organizations to sanctify marriage as they define it."

 

The proposed legislation to allow same-sex marriages will first be referred to the Supreme Court of Canada. After that the legislation will be put to a free vote in the House of Commons, which means Liberal government members of parliament who don't agree with the bill will be able to vote against it.

 

In Canada the federal government is responsible for defining what constitutes a marriage. Provincial governments are responsible for the administration and procedural requirements of the marriage ceremony and for issuing marriage licenses.

 

In Ontario, same-sex marriages are already taking place, as couples take advantage of the Ontario Court of Appeal ruling that provided a new definition of marriage as the "voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others."

 

As a result of the federal government plans to redefine marriage, and the Ontario court ruling, the BC Court of Appeal also gave the go-ahead to same-sex marriages in British Columbia on July 8, 2003.

 

If the legislation passes, Canada would become the third country in the world to allow same-sex marriages, after Belgium and the Netherlands.

 

Canada Stays out of War on Iraq

Canadian Government Position on the War on Iraq

 

Related Resources

• Canada and War

• Canada and the War on Terrorism

 

From Other Guides

• War on Terrorism Headlines

• Terror Alert Colors - U.S.

 

Elsewhere on the Web

• Canada and Iraq - Department of Foreign Affairs Canada

• Chretien Interview With ABC "This Week"

 

 

Dateline: 03/18/03

 

Jean Chretien, the Prime Minister of Canada, has announced that Canada will not join the war on Iraq. The major reasons the Canadian Prime Minister has given are:

 

   * there was no UN Security Council resolution on military action against Iraq

   * the diplomatic process of Iraqi disarmament was working, and might have been successful given a few more weeks

   * forcing a change in regime sets a dangerous precedent.

 

No UN Resolution on Military Action Against Iraq

 

In response to a question during Question Period in the Canadian House of Commons on March 17, 2003, the Prime Minister formally stated the position of the Canadian government on the war on Iraq:

 

   "We believe that Iraq must fully abide by the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. We have always made [it] clear that Canada would require the approval of the Security Council if we were to participate in a military campaign. Over the last few weeks the Security Council has been unable to agree on a new resolution authorizing military action. Canada worked very hard to find a compromise to bridge the gap in the Security Council. Unfortunately, we were not successful. If military action proceeds without a new resolution of the Security Council, Canada will not participate."

 

Disarmament of Iraq

 

The Prime Minister has also indicated that he felt the diplomatic process of Iraq disarmament was bringing results, and that if Iraq had had a few more weeks it might have been successful.

 

Canadian government policy has been to seek a peaceful solution to the Iraq crisis through the UN system. The Canadian government supported UN Security Council Resolution 1441 which called for Iraqi disarmament. Canada did its best to persuade Security Council members to be flexible in deciding on the next steps and to do so with the greatest possible unity. As recently as March 11, Canada made a presentation to the Security Council suggesting the development of a prioritized list of key remaining disarmament tasks and a deadline for Iraq to implement those tasks.

Forcing a Regime Change

 

Prime Minister Chretien has also said that he is very uncomfortable with forcing a regime change from outside a country. He argues that only the country's people have the right to change a government, and imposing a regime from outside could set a dangerous precedent. "If we change every government we don't like in the world where do we start? Who is next?"

 

Canada is!!    Got oil?   This is getting interesting... :rasp

~ ' CHATBOT ' ~

 

[whadayawant]

Sure am glad I found this political soapbox, otherwise I might have ended up on some site for those assholes that ride Indian motorbikes. Oh oh, should have been p.c. and said motorcycles.

[Scottdog]

Sure am glad I found this political soapbox, otherwise I might have ended up on some site for those assholes that ride Indian motorbikes. Oh oh, should have been p.c. and said motorcycles.

Like an Indian Motoscoot is PC to begin with. Would be "Native American Motorcycles" if it was.  

[Maldev]

Redskin Transportation Vehicle

[Fat Charlie]

Sure am glad I found this political soapbox, otherwise I might have ended up on some site for those assholes that ride Indian motorbikes. Oh oh, should have been p.c. and said motorcycles.

Yeah!  Watch that shit....

[pablo94]

Sure am glad I found this political soapbox, otherwise I might have ended up on some site for those assholes that ride Indian motorbikes. Oh oh, should have been p.c. and said motorcycles.

Yeah!  Watch that shit....

Either way, at least the sheep are no longer sleeping in this country!

 

This decade looks more and more like the 60s everyday.

 

war, protest, division. People exercising their rights to disagree. Now that's healthy, constitutional, and american.

 

 

   

[homer]

Posted: Nov. 09 2004,20:21  

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote (Canuck @ Nov. 09 2004,17:05)

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

 

That link speaks the truth. On another note the National Park service is being pressured into erecting some type of memorial to the 9 slaves who served Washington while he stayed here in Philly, directly in front of the Liberty Bell. Estimated cost 4.5 million. That about covers the "40 acres and a mule".

 

nope..as the resident black indian rider here, i want my monument (cause i mite be related to one of those slaves....or washington   ) and my 43 acres (40 as stated and 3 for wrences' quarters an test track cuz i'm always having the chief worked on), 1 mule and about 97 horses (from my PP 100) and my chief out of the shop....is that too much to ask for????

eric

[KC Cheef]

Hey eric;

I worked in West Africa for 20 years. I have Godsons all over Africa.

Friends and coworkers named their sons after me, and most of my helpers called me Pappa Ed.

I also ride an Indian.

DAMN IT I want my 40 acres too!!!

[badcad]

Posted: Nov. 09 2004,20:21  

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote (Canuck @ Nov. 09 2004,17:05)

Someone emailed me

 

this link this morning.  I can't help but

   

 

Just adding a little fuel...

 

With the nation roughly split in two, radical hardliners on both sides, increasing poverty, decreasing dollar value and a military running short of man-power, the future is going to get interesting.

 

On the plus side, a weak dollar means it's financially more responsible to keep the jobs at home instead of exporting them like mad.

 

That link speaks the truth. On another note the National Park service is being pressured into erecting some type of memorial to the 9 slaves who served Washington while he stayed here in Philly, directly in front of the Liberty Bell. Estimated cost 4.5 million. That about covers the "40 acres and a mule".

 

nope..as the resident black indian rider here, i want my monument (cause i mite be related to one of those slaves....or washington   ) and my 43 acres (40 as stated and 3 for wrences' quarters an test track cuz i'm always having the chief worked on), 1 mule and about 97 horses (from my PP 100) and my chief out of the shop....is that too much to ask for????

eric

I new I'd knew you couldnt stay away from that one. Dont try pullin' too many mules outa that powderpuff 1oo she wont last too long. Better swap it for a real motor.

[KC Cheef]

Pablo I'm with you buddy!

War-protest-division. Just like the 60's man.

Only this time I'm hoping there is enough passion that if war protests get violent, pro war folks get out there and kick some ass too!

Nothing like a mutual ass kickin' to get the constitution healthy again.

We kind of let the anti's get their shots in in the 60's, man lets be American, and let every one demonstrate their beliefs!

             PEACE-LOVE-ROCK AND ROLL

[Fat Charlie]

NO!

Don't go back to the 60's.

I can't grow that kind of hair anymore.

[KC Cheef]

Charlie -- WE won't worry about the hair.

You ever see one of those base ball caps with the pony tail sewn on the back?

Man that works for me

[chris114]

[Canuck]

Screw you Canuck..Like Canada has all the answers.

A divided country

When will Quebec and their liberal language culture proctectionism Secede from Canada.

 

About the same time The South rises again.  

 

What will happen to your economy?

 

It would take a beating, but we'd have more money in the end.  We give Quebec more money than they give back.  Montreal has some nice scenery we'd like to hang on to though.

 

Your former Prime Minister Chretien (French Canadian Liberal) Okayed secession if there was a popular vote.It was close last time. But it will come.Your Current Prime minister Martin not French Canadian but from a faction of the same Liberal party.Your government is already overrun with liberals.That already lean too far left.

 

Yeah - you got me on that one.  The majority of government in Canada's history has been Liberal (with a capital L).  Repeatedly voted #1 country in the world to live - we haven't done so bad with those Liberals.  And - regardless of whether they've been Liberal or Conservative, all the Prime Ministers have come from eastern Canada where the bulk of the population is and all have been at least marginally bilingual.  See, here in Canada knowing more than one language doesn't make you a fag, a traitor or a France-lover - it makes you educated.

 

And they can afford to stay out of world politics and promote protectionism.

 

Protectionism?  Please.  Softwood lumber tariffs imposed by the US on Canadian lumber to protect American producers.  American purchasers of Canadian softwood say it won't slow them much as the Canadian lumber is of superior quality.  Tax grab by the government that did nothing for those bitching about our better product.  How about the closed border for beef?  You've got your own mad-cow issues yet you're worried about one cow in Canada?  It didn't go unnoticed that it was an American rancher in Canada who's cow got mad cow disease.  Screw your protectionist government and industries.

 

For we provide the umbrella of security from war .

 

From who?  See, we don't run around overthrowing governments and installing dictators like Saddam and Pinochet.  Thus, other countries aren't so interested in attacking us.  Hell, the US is the originator of the term 'Banana Republic' for overthrowing South American governments in order to facilitate profits for a New York based company.  Check it out - it's declassified information today.  Do you really think any country can do these things without reprisals?  The only people we need protection from is the US.

 

We are your economy,  

 

That's pushing things a bit.  

 

as your largest trading partner.

 

now that's true, but it's only half the story.  Canada is the US's largest customer too.  It goes both ways so as Rumsfield and his buddies run the US economy into the ground, we feel it here.  

 

There is no doubt your country would ever be attacked with your big brother standing guard to the South

 

Actually, the US has declassified invasion plans for Canada.  I don't buy for a second there isn't an updated version. You ain't standing guard buddy, you're biding your time.

 

Weak dollar? Not a bad thing.Depends on which side of it you are on.As you bragged about in a previous post.

 

Absolutely.  A weak dollar makes it hard to buy things from other countries.  In January of 2002, the Canadian dollar hit it's lowest point in years, perhaps ever.  The bikes I bought from Gilroy cost a fucking fortune.  Think your Chief is expensive at $22,000?  Try $38,000 for the Canadian version.  Look, I don't give a shit if your dollar is high or low - I make money either way.  My observation of your weakening dollar is just that, an observation.  

 

As far as poverty goes

I have been on Indian reservations in Northwest Ontario that would bring tears to your eyes.A level of poverty I have never witnessed before.

 

Yup, absolutely right.  The reservation system is fucked up, but Canada doesn't have the monopoly on it.  I never said my poverty was better than yours, only that it's growing in the US as industry exports more and more jobs.  

 

Yet you speak with such high handedness on American issues.

 

Ahhh, I get it - I'm not an American so I don't have a valid opinion on the war in Iraq, PNAC's imperialist agenda, job loss or anything else you discuss here?

 

Don't get me wrong I love Canada! I spend alot of money there.Mainly fly in fish camps in Fish Camps in northwest Ontario.

 

We do have good fishing.  I can't argue that.

 

You can have our Michael Moores and Susan Sarandons. They lost the elections for their U.S. Liberal party.

 

Not really - the people who voted for Bush and not Kerry caused the libs to lose.  You had a massive turnout (you should be proud of that) and the masses have spoken.  More people believe they're in danger of terrorist attacks at home than don't.  But you can keep those guys - we don't want them.  I might not like Rumsfield running the show, but Moore is a liar and I don't like that either.

 

They do not reflect core American values.

 

Nor Canadian values.  They aren't polite enough to come here.

 

This thread started about the liberal left in this country losing the election and blaming conservative Christians. Some going as far as to say we are the same as fanactic Muslims.

 

Yeah - I posted a link written by one of those raving lunatics.  I didn't write it but it seemed to fit in with your complaints and it bolstered your point of view.  

 

Canada to Make Same-Sex Marriages Legal

<snip>

If the legislation passes, Canada would become the third country in the world to allow same-sex marriages, after Belgium and the Netherlands.

 

So what?  Not going to change my relationship with my wife in any way whatsoever.

 

Canada Stays out of War on Iraq

<snip>

 

Damn Right, and most of us are damn happy about it.  The US installed Saddam, thereby allowing him to commit the atrocities he did.  The US sold Saddam anthrax.  You made the mess, you clean it up.  Besides, you can't possibly deny that control of the 3rd largest supply of oil played some role.  

 

Forcing a Regime Change

 

See my comments about Banana Republics.

 

Canada is!!    Got oil?   This is getting interesting... :rasp

 

We know.  Now if I could just get my tinfoil hat to stay on when I'm riding...

[porkchop]

La bonne réponse Canuck. Vous êtes un homme futé.  

[Te Heuheu]

Yeah, what he said.