I get FOX. It is crappy. How any Canadian could like it is beyond me because they certainly don't like Canada much.
do you have the backbone?
- Thread starter Stretch
- Start date
According to FOX we're a nation of socialist pinkos. Liberal isn't even a bad word here (yet) and FOX can't stand for it.
We also have no military. You should have heard one hosts' comments about how weak our military is and what wussies we are for wanting to leave Afghanistan when our commitment ends. Canada is basically a second rate liberal country without any moral values according to FOX. We should be very grateful God put us next to the best country on earth and just shut up:roll:
It stands to reason, Tracy. FOX is a Republican, conservative news outlet. They regard Canada (when they notice Canada at all) as a Socialist, Communist country.
They see our universal health care, no restrictions on abortion, no death penalty, legalized same sex marriage, free availability of contraceptives to teenagers etc. and think that Canada is another word for Hell. Or at least another word for Sodom and Gomorrah, and we all know what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah.
Indeed, Fox’s worst nightmare is that USA may be headed towards imitating Canada. No wonder they don’t like Canada.
I don’t choose to hear most favorable slant on a story, Lone Wolf, I want to hear the most unbiased version of the story. I am likely to get that from CNN or New York Times, but not from FOX. FOX will give me the right wing version of the story. I prefer my news unbiased.
China
Why " don't they like Canada"? ( the Fox )
There was time during and after the second world war that Canada had a great armed force ......and then came 1968 .Fudle dudle the liberals .
Why " don't they like Canada"? ( the Fox )
I am well aware of the above .As the matter of fact ( while living in Canada) I was sending many letters to the liberal government to allow the FOX onto "Canadian ether ".Some of those letters were not very nice letters .According to FOX we're a nation of socialist pinkos. Liberal isn't even a bad word here (yet) and FOX can't stand for it.
__________________________
© 2008 Scott Free, all rights reserved.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/members/scott-free.htmloffline
3,370 Posts
California
2 hours ago
Quoting Scott Free According to FOX we're a nation of socialist pinkos. Liberal isn't even a bad word here (yet) and FOX can't stand for it.We also have no military. You should have heard one hosts' comments about how weak our military is and what wussies we are for wanting to leave Afghanistan when our commitment ends. Canada is basically a second rate liberal country without any moral values according to FOX. We should be very grateful God put us next to the best country on earth and just shut up
There was time during and after the second world war that Canada had a great armed force ......and then came 1968 .Fudle dudle the liberals .
Last edited:
Sir Joseph Porter
Well JP Sir ,So all you care for is the "most unbiased version" of the story . Well it doesn't matter what version of the story it might be ,it is still a crap .You want the truth ?..go to the source of the story ... don't want the truth ? don't be choosy , stop complaining .
SirJosephPorter said:
"Sorry, Yukon Jack, numbers don’t mean a thing. Numbers are meaningless. Thus National Enquirer has a much bigger circulation than say Globe and Mail. But I will believe what Globe and Mail says in a heartbeat, I wouldn’t believe anything I read in the Enquirer.
So don’t confuse popularity with reputation. There are plenty of right wing extremists in USA, they watch FOX news. That means squat. CNN has a much better reputation, is much more highly regarded that FOX news. FOX news is really a mouthpiece of the Republican Party, nothing more.
Numbers you quote only say that more people (right wing extremists) watch FOX than CNN, it say nothing about how reputable the sources are. CNN is much more highly reputed than FOX."
Numbers don't mean a thing, of course. Numbers don't mean squat. Numbers are meaningless. So you say. Especially (or perhaps ONLY) when those numbers prove you wrong, since they don't agree with your point of view. But they are a pretty good indication as to whom the public - and make no mistake not just your favourite scapegoats, the "right-wing extremists" - place their trust for fair and balanced news coverage.
So, maybe Obama's alleged high approval rating numbers don't mean a thing. After all, using your logic and condescending smear and name-calling in reverse, there are enough left-wing extremists in the U.S.A. to give a pass to Obama.
You once again use your favourite tactic of comparing apples to oranges by comparing the National Enquirer to the Globe and Mail. Mind you, had you compared the Enquirer to the New York Times, I would agree with you.
You never watched FOXNews, yet you "KNOW" that it is a mouthpiece of the Republican Party. In a very gullible and close-minded way you believe left-wing extremist Democrat Party mouth piece such as CNN, aka Clinton News Network, aka Communist Nonsense Network, but categorically reject any other news source just by "reputation".
I DO watch CNN. I am not opposed to give the other side a chance to be heard and listened to. I have a mind of my own for not having to rely on opinions and "reputation" formulated by someone else. I prefer checking things for myself and not stubburnly and blindly parrot one side only.
Based on this post of yours, I feel my previous reference to concrete was quite appropriate.
"Sorry, Yukon Jack, numbers don’t mean a thing. Numbers are meaningless. Thus National Enquirer has a much bigger circulation than say Globe and Mail. But I will believe what Globe and Mail says in a heartbeat, I wouldn’t believe anything I read in the Enquirer.
So don’t confuse popularity with reputation. There are plenty of right wing extremists in USA, they watch FOX news. That means squat. CNN has a much better reputation, is much more highly regarded that FOX news. FOX news is really a mouthpiece of the Republican Party, nothing more.
Numbers you quote only say that more people (right wing extremists) watch FOX than CNN, it say nothing about how reputable the sources are. CNN is much more highly reputed than FOX."
Numbers don't mean a thing, of course. Numbers don't mean squat. Numbers are meaningless. So you say. Especially (or perhaps ONLY) when those numbers prove you wrong, since they don't agree with your point of view. But they are a pretty good indication as to whom the public - and make no mistake not just your favourite scapegoats, the "right-wing extremists" - place their trust for fair and balanced news coverage.
So, maybe Obama's alleged high approval rating numbers don't mean a thing. After all, using your logic and condescending smear and name-calling in reverse, there are enough left-wing extremists in the U.S.A. to give a pass to Obama.
You once again use your favourite tactic of comparing apples to oranges by comparing the National Enquirer to the Globe and Mail. Mind you, had you compared the Enquirer to the New York Times, I would agree with you.
You never watched FOXNews, yet you "KNOW" that it is a mouthpiece of the Republican Party. In a very gullible and close-minded way you believe left-wing extremist Democrat Party mouth piece such as CNN, aka Clinton News Network, aka Communist Nonsense Network, but categorically reject any other news source just by "reputation".
I DO watch CNN. I am not opposed to give the other side a chance to be heard and listened to. I have a mind of my own for not having to rely on opinions and "reputation" formulated by someone else. I prefer checking things for myself and not stubburnly and blindly parrot one side only.
Based on this post of yours, I feel my previous reference to concrete was quite appropriate.
Yes it does. I may conclude that others think it is a trashy, pornographic magazine. Since I haven't seen it, I don't know what it is. I only know what others think it is.
What,s there to notice about Canada not only by US but by the rest of the world JP Sir?...I am deadly serious ,mister.
That's because you are closed minded. I would love to meet them just to talk to them and see what makes them tick. To solve a problem one has to understand the problem. You obviously have no desire to understand.
Both CNN and Faux have agendas and biases. I will watch them both, just like I will watch CTV and CBC. You have to be in tune with both sides to be fully informed. Anybody that says CNN is unbiased is fooling themselves. I will say that Faux is more entertaining though. Sometimes I laugh so hard I almost pee.
Tracy, I am quite sure you did not stay up till 3:00 AM and actually DID see and hear what Gutfeld - carelessly and stupidly - uttered on a show that in that time slot is watched by just a few people.
You're indignant, and rightfully so. However, that one insignificant show and and ignorant attempt of humour do not reflect the essence of FOXNews. I would like you to quote, or at least make a valid reference to any programs on FOXNews that besmirch or disrespect Canada.
How do you suppose Americans would feel if they ever watched Rick Mercer's stale and sanctimonious tirades about them? And while Gutfeld showed edisresprct for Canada just once, Mercer never misses a chance to spew his anti-American venom.
You're indignant, and rightfully so. However, that one insignificant show and and ignorant attempt of humour do not reflect the essence of FOXNews. I would like you to quote, or at least make a valid reference to any programs on FOXNews that besmirch or disrespect Canada.
How do you suppose Americans would feel if they ever watched Rick Mercer's stale and sanctimonious tirades about them? And while Gutfeld showed edisresprct for Canada just once, Mercer never misses a chance to spew his anti-American venom.
As I alluded to earlier, the only difference is that Mercer is funny. Anybody that has a problem with Americans criticizing Canadians should turn off Mercer.
"As I alluded to earlier, the only difference is that Mercer is funny. Anybody that has a problem with Americans criticizing Canadians should turn off Mercer."
When you are the target of a joke, that joke may or may not sound funny. Depends on your maturity, and to what degree you have forgotten the simple rhyme every kid knows about sticks and stones.
I maybe wrong, but didn't you mean: Anybody that has a problem with Canadians criticizing Americans should turn off Mercer?
BTW, Mercer WAS funny, once.
When you are the target of a joke, that joke may or may not sound funny. Depends on your maturity, and to what degree you have forgotten the simple rhyme every kid knows about sticks and stones.
I maybe wrong, but didn't you mean: Anybody that has a problem with Canadians criticizing Americans should turn off Mercer?
BTW, Mercer WAS funny, once.
SirJosephPorter, I HAVE read Hustler, way back when I was an impressionable youngster. I even enjoyed it about as much as you profess to enjoy "Married with Children" and the "Jerry Springer Show".
The difference is that I have matured enough to recognize filth, while you - again by your own admission - still enjoy it.
Also I read about Ceylon, when I learned that one of my favourite SciFi author had taken up residence there. Read about the civil unrest and its exported version of it. That is somewhat more open-minded than your view of FOXNews, which - again, by your proud admission - you know squat about, by personal experience.
I begb to disagree with your analogy. The TV entity that most closely resembles Hustler is MSNBC. Just another cable station, that you may or may not have been cheap enough not to subscribe to.
(Obviously, you were, regarding FOXNews, since you never watch it).
Let me whet your appetite. MSNBC is the most virulently anti-Republican, anti-conservative pretender of news organization. ALL of its programs are such. At least FOXNews have guests on ALL of its shows with a liberal leaning, as opposed to MSNBC, which features a conservative view only in the morning and very seldom in the afternoon, but never in prime time.
And if you need a lesson in unbridled hate (well you probably don't) watch Keith Olbermann on MSNBC at 8:00 PM ET, with his never-changing cast of usual gang of idiots "guests". (with apologies to MAD magazine)
The difference is that I have matured enough to recognize filth, while you - again by your own admission - still enjoy it.
Also I read about Ceylon, when I learned that one of my favourite SciFi author had taken up residence there. Read about the civil unrest and its exported version of it. That is somewhat more open-minded than your view of FOXNews, which - again, by your proud admission - you know squat about, by personal experience.
I begb to disagree with your analogy. The TV entity that most closely resembles Hustler is MSNBC. Just another cable station, that you may or may not have been cheap enough not to subscribe to.
(Obviously, you were, regarding FOXNews, since you never watch it).
Let me whet your appetite. MSNBC is the most virulently anti-Republican, anti-conservative pretender of news organization. ALL of its programs are such. At least FOXNews have guests on ALL of its shows with a liberal leaning, as opposed to MSNBC, which features a conservative view only in the morning and very seldom in the afternoon, but never in prime time.
And if you need a lesson in unbridled hate (well you probably don't) watch Keith Olbermann on MSNBC at 8:00 PM ET, with his never-changing cast of usual gang of idiots "guests". (with apologies to MAD magazine)
China, Canada’s accomplishments are too numerous to mention. Canada is one of the most liberal, most tolerant countries in the world. It is in the vanguard of human rights (it is one of the few countries in the world to legalize gay marriage).
We look after our poor relatively well. The country is for the most part prosperous and peaceful. Crime rate is reasonably low; quality of life here is very high. I personally have lived in USA and Britain for several years each, and I can categorically say than Canada is a much better country that either of them, enjoys a much higher quality of life. UN publishes the rankings according to quality of life each year, and Canada is invariably near the top (sometimes it is number 1). Canada is easily one of the best places in the world to live.
But one advantage of Canada is that it is a well kept secret. People world over don’t know what a great place Canada is (I wonder how many of them even know that Canada exists, they probably think that we are part of USA). Even Canadian achievements are not widely known. Thus I wonder how many know that the universally used Blackberry is a Canadian product, manufactured by a Canadian company (Research in Motion) right here in Canada.
And personally I prefer it that way. It is just as well that rest of the world is not aware how great a place Canada is. The poor, impoverished lot from India, Pakistan etc. tries to migrate to Britain, while the impoverished lot from Mexico and South America tried to migrate to USA. Nobody thinks of Canada and that suits me fine.
In other words, Canada is a well kept secret and let us keep it that way. You don’t know what is there to notice about Canada? Well, there isn’t much really, it is just a boring, humdrum country. Don’t bother with Canada.
So, maybe Obama's alleged high approval rating numbers don't mean a thing.
Quite right, Yukon, the high approval numbers don’t mean much at this stage. His numbers will go up and down. The important number will be how he stands in four years’ time at the next election. So Obama should govern as he sees fit, as he thinks will benefit the country, and not worry too much about the polls right now.
After all, using your logic and condescending smear and name-calling in reverse, there are enough left-wing extremists in the U.S.A. to give a pass to Obama.
Let us see, according to last poll published on CNN, Obama had an approval rating of 63%. So are you saying that 63% of the US population belongs to extreme left? I suppose you may be right, almost anybody is extreme left compared to you.
You once again use your favourite tactic of comparing apples to oranges by comparing the National Enquirer to the Globe and Mail.
That is a very fair comparison. Both are news papers. But larger circulation does not necessarily equate good reputation. Equate Enquirer with FOX, Globe and Mail with CNN, and there you have it.
In a very gullible and close-minded way you believe left-wing extremist Democrat Party mouth piece such as CNN, aka Clinton News Network, aka Communist Nonsense Network, but categorically reject any other news source just by "reputation".
That is only your opinion, Yukon Jack, and you are entitled to it. If you think that CNN belongs to extreme left, or is a Communist network, and that FOX (and perhaps Washington Times) is the only voice of reason in USA, that is your business. It won't surprise you to know that I disagree.
Quite right, Yukon, the high approval numbers don’t mean much at this stage. His numbers will go up and down. The important number will be how he stands in four years’ time at the next election. So Obama should govern as he sees fit, as he thinks will benefit the country, and not worry too much about the polls right now.
After all, using your logic and condescending smear and name-calling in reverse, there are enough left-wing extremists in the U.S.A. to give a pass to Obama.
Let us see, according to last poll published on CNN, Obama had an approval rating of 63%. So are you saying that 63% of the US population belongs to extreme left? I suppose you may be right, almost anybody is extreme left compared to you.
You once again use your favourite tactic of comparing apples to oranges by comparing the National Enquirer to the Globe and Mail.
That is a very fair comparison. Both are news papers. But larger circulation does not necessarily equate good reputation. Equate Enquirer with FOX, Globe and Mail with CNN, and there you have it.
In a very gullible and close-minded way you believe left-wing extremist Democrat Party mouth piece such as CNN, aka Clinton News Network, aka Communist Nonsense Network, but categorically reject any other news source just by "reputation".
That is only your opinion, Yukon Jack, and you are entitled to it. If you think that CNN belongs to extreme left, or is a Communist network, and that FOX (and perhaps Washington Times) is the only voice of reason in USA, that is your business. It won't surprise you to know that I disagree.
Let me whet your appetite. MSNBC is the most virulently anti-Republican, anti-conservative pretender of news organization.
I have heard of MSNBC, Yukon Jack. It sounds like reasonable network, but I have no desire to subscribe to it. I can’t even watch all of basic cable, without subscribing to additional stations. Whatever news I get about USA by watching CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS (the basic cable) is good enough for me.
But if I had to subscribe, I would subscribe to MSNBC, and not FOX.
Also I read about Ceylon, when I learned that one of my favourite SciFi author had taken up residence there. Read about the civil unrest and its exported version of it.
You may have read about Ceylon (incidentally, it is Sri Lanka, not Ceylon, also that author died recently). But have you read about Tamil Tigers, their manifesto, policy positions etc. before you concluded that they are a terrorist group? You probably didn’t. If you say you read about Ceylon, Tamil Tigers probably were not even around when the country was named Ceylon, so I assume you did not read about Tamil Tigers. But you had no problem tagging them as a terrorist group.
Or what have you read about Hamas or Hezbollah? Have you read any of their literature? Any of their positions? But you classify them as a terrorist group. Reputation counts for a lot. Many opinions are formed based upon reputation. That is why reputations so important.
I begb to disagree with your analogy. The TV entity that most closely resembles Hustler is MSNBC.
That is your opinion, in my opinion, it is FOX that most resembles Hustler.
And if you need a lesson in unbridled hate (well you probably don't)
Sorry, Yukon, but if I need a lesson in unbridled hate, I will read Townhall. Sometimes I do read their forums, and that really tells me what hate is about. Nobody can hate like the right. They hated Clinton with a passion, and now they hate Obama even more, if such a thing is possible. They are convinced that Obama is a Muslim terrorist and a Communist spy (somehow he manages to be both at the same time).
I have heard of MSNBC, Yukon Jack. It sounds like reasonable network, but I have no desire to subscribe to it. I can’t even watch all of basic cable, without subscribing to additional stations. Whatever news I get about USA by watching CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS (the basic cable) is good enough for me.
But if I had to subscribe, I would subscribe to MSNBC, and not FOX.
Also I read about Ceylon, when I learned that one of my favourite SciFi author had taken up residence there. Read about the civil unrest and its exported version of it.
You may have read about Ceylon (incidentally, it is Sri Lanka, not Ceylon, also that author died recently). But have you read about Tamil Tigers, their manifesto, policy positions etc. before you concluded that they are a terrorist group? You probably didn’t. If you say you read about Ceylon, Tamil Tigers probably were not even around when the country was named Ceylon, so I assume you did not read about Tamil Tigers. But you had no problem tagging them as a terrorist group.
Or what have you read about Hamas or Hezbollah? Have you read any of their literature? Any of their positions? But you classify them as a terrorist group. Reputation counts for a lot. Many opinions are formed based upon reputation. That is why reputations so important.
I begb to disagree with your analogy. The TV entity that most closely resembles Hustler is MSNBC.
That is your opinion, in my opinion, it is FOX that most resembles Hustler.
And if you need a lesson in unbridled hate (well you probably don't)
Sorry, Yukon, but if I need a lesson in unbridled hate, I will read Townhall. Sometimes I do read their forums, and that really tells me what hate is about. Nobody can hate like the right. They hated Clinton with a passion, and now they hate Obama even more, if such a thing is possible. They are convinced that Obama is a Muslim terrorist and a Communist spy (somehow he manages to be both at the same time).