Another reason why those "greatest Canadian lists" are pointless exercises in "feel good" voo-doo nationalism.
Whatever one may think of him, Pierre Trudeau made Canada interesting.
However, when asked if he had a positive or negative effect, Canadians have flipped flopped. How can he be among the "greatest" Canadians and have a negative impact?
Time magazine's person of theyaer is " the person who is deemend to have had the most impact, negative or positive" over that year. Maybe Canadians use the same criteria.
ReplyDeleteHow can an antibiotic be good for you if it makes you have nausea and vomitting for a week?
ReplyDeleteMaybe nothing in this world is a win-win, and we just have to settle for what we perceive to be the best cost/gain ratio.
What the hell is a trudeau?
Well, we DO have our own government up here, Ginx.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think you make a good point. It's impossible to please everyone - especially large, fragmented places like Canada and the U.S.
Time and Newsweek are just as bad as Fox if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteTime and Newsweek are just as bad as Fox if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteWhere is this coming from... the lady doth protest too much, methinks?
Let me make something about Fox clear: Media Corps is a huge company. I know people who work for them, a liberal and the other very conservative. As a general rule, local Fox affiliates are as [un?]biased as any NBC, CBS, or ABC affiliate at the local broadcast level. Fox News, the cable network with original programming such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and the morning show Fox and Friends, is the most laughably bad television I have ever seen.
The level of discourse on Fox News hovers around that of Mel Gibson and former BP CEO Tony Hayward getting hammered in a posh, luxury hotel's private lounge.
So if you say "Fox is not biased," I have to hope you aren't talking about Fox News, or I'm seriously disappointed in your critical thinking ability. Even the commercials are dumber on Fox News, like selling you overpriced antique gold coins as "investments."
So if you say "Fox is not biased," I have to hope you aren't talking about Fox News, or I'm seriously disappointed in your critical thinking ability. Even the commercials are dumber on Fox News, like selling you overpriced antique gold coins as "investments."
ReplyDeleteDon't worry. It's not what I'm saying.
Thank the gods. Now I can still have faith in you. What color candles do you prefer I burn as I sacrifice the goat?
ReplyDeleteCranberry scented.
ReplyDeleteI still say, for publications like Newsweek (or Time I forget which) that are "mainstream" to publish "Is America Islamophobic" is moronic.
Yeah. It's not a question, we definitely are.
ReplyDeleteIf you're islamophobic, then what the heck is Europe? Curious.
ReplyDelete... so if the US is Islamophobic, Europe can't be? I don't understand. We are Islamaphobic at maybe a 3, Europe is maybe a 6 on average, France is at about an 8, Holland maybe 7 or 8... it's really subjective but I can ballpark it.
ReplyDeleteWhen you have large portions of the national population opposing basic things like where mosques can be, where Muslims can be buried, a general acceptance of Muslim profiling among law enforcement... I don't know why there's a question.
And maybe "Islamophobia" isn't the best word for it, because it's not fear, it's hostility. It's more like anti-Muslim sentiment. Though there is occassionally Islamophobia, like when peopel are afraid to burn a Quran or draw Mohammed.
You answered the question. I even think your ball parks are pretty good as I saw it that way.
ReplyDeleteYou know the USA better than me - obviously - but even a 3 seems low to me. Canada is in the 2-3 range I reckon.
When I say it's low, it's a good thing.
ReplyDeleteHe changed the very definition of Canada.
ReplyDeletePerhaps this is punctuated by the fact that he was the first P.M. to serve his entire tenure under the Maple Leaf Flag.