RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Marc A. Schindler wrote: literal sense of the word, to pre-judge). After all, Canadian individuals, government and companies spends less per capita and less as a percentage of GDP on medicine than the U.S. does, but we have longer life expectancies, greater quality of life (as judged by international third-party standards), and greater infant survival rates. But you have fewer McDonalds. And we have similar demographics to boot. Well if we booted our demographics, we'd probably be just as well off. If not better. *jeep! --Chet Start by doing what's necessary, then what's possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
[ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
I dunno, Marc. You claim that Canuckles have the market cornered on hysterics and going overboard and such, but Stephen Beecroft sure is right up there with the best I've seen come from the Great White North. Perhaps you could grant him honorary Canuckle status and maybe give him a job in socialized medicine. Maybe after a few months of seeing how it really should work, you'll have converted him to northern liberalism. Heck, he may even learn to speak French! K'aya K'ama, Gerald/gary Smithgszion1 @juno.comhttp://www .geocities.com/rameumptom/index.html No one is as hopelessly enslaved as the person who thinks he's free. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Gary Smith wrote: I dunno, Marc. You claim that Canuckles have the market cornered on hysterics and going overboard and such, but Stephen Beecroft sure is right up there with the best I've seen come from the Great White North. That was the point of my sarcasm. Perhaps you could grant him honorary Canuckle status and maybe give him a job in socialized medicine. Maybe after a few months of seeing how it really should work, you'll have converted him to northern liberalism. Heck, he may even learn to speak French! Greater miracles have happened... And it's hard to argue with results unless one is ideologically prejudiced (in the literal sense of the word, to pre-judge). After all, Canadian individuals, government and companies spends less per capita and less as a percentage of GDP on medicine than the U.S. does, but we have longer life expectancies, greater quality of life (as judged by international third-party standards), and greater infant survival rates. And we have similar demographics to boot. Both systems have their problems and triage is exercised one way or another; we just do it differently. -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on Winston Churchill Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
-Marc- A customer is not in any way responsible for what one of its subcontractors say unless it is in the context of both of them acting together. -Stephen- So then, why do you bother including the disclaimer at the end of each of your posts? -Marc- I don't follow you. I don't have any clients, nor am I anybody else's client on this list. I have faith in you, Marc. If you keep on trying, I'm sure you'll finally get it. But I *will* tell you why I started putting that disclaimer on all of my email. Once, on a non-LDS list, a geography list on about.com moderated by a young geography prof at UCDavis, someone took exception to something I said and threatened to take his complaint to my boss. What?! You mean, you were threatened with having your views attributed to the guy signing your paycheck? Whoda thunk that a customer (or employer) is indeed often implicated, fairly or not, in the words of its subcontractors (or employees)? Amazing! -Marc- If you can't even get that right, it's no surprise that you get everything else wrong, too. -Stephen- Thanks for the kind words. -Marc- Hey, it's my job. Seriously? You get paid for being insulting? Just pointing these things out, like you like to do. Who watches the watchers? Marc Schindler, of course. -The Watchers Watcher- Jim was wrong, as I've demonstrated on several ocasions. I don't care about his dictionary definition. Ducros is no Ari Fleischer. -Stephen- So then, the dictionary is only correct if it agrees with your personal definition? -The Watchers Watcher- He was wrong when he said it was a public statement -- he's never retracted that, even after being shown that it wasn't a public statement. It was a statement made in a public setting, which makes it fair game. But I don't recall you going ballistic over the public vs private nature of the statement so much as Jim's use of the term politician to describe Ducros. And it is illogical to claim that because I disagree with someone's interpretation of a dictionary in use in one particular country, that I therefore hold an idiosyncratic definition of my own. How about that? And here I thought it was illogical to maintain that you were correct in the face of proof that you are wrong. Silly me. Hello? Hello. How's it going? Nice tantrum you're throwing. There are far more anglophones outside the USA than inside the USA. Well, that pretty much sums up the argument, doesn't it? Assuming for a moment that Jim's dictionary definition of politician is, as you insist, strictly an American usage: Jim's an American. Do you expect him to quit using his native tongue just because he's talking to Marc Schindler? I confess, I had no idea just how important you are. I explained the difference between Ducros and Fleischer. Yes, you did. Exhaustively. Repetitively. In minute detail. And, above all, condescendingly. (And thanks for that.) I have worked with provincial counterparts of Ducros. I think I can speak on the basis of direct experience. Ah. I see. You're looking for genuflection. Allow me to be the first: All Hail Marc Schindler, The Wise, Compassionate, and Darned-Near All-Knowing! -The Watchers Watcher- Your ignorance just makes you look silly. -Stephen- How true this is. Thanks again for more kind words. -The Watchers Watcher- Well, you're the one who's used to being in the keep 'em straight saddle. Not familiar with that saddle. I assume that what you're saying is that, despite the condescending tone you take with others, you don't like being publicly corrected or shown to be in error. And why should you? Heaven knows you've performed enough public service to the rest of us provincial ignoramuses (or should I say, Americans -- or even Republicans) by gently cluing us in via your wondrous condescension toward us and your genial manner, that you should be far removed from anyone actually daring to offer a different opinion from yours, much less actual correction. I'm in complete agreement. I meant nothing personal or insulting. Of course you did not. Just another example of my silliness! Why, I am sure you would happily tell your boss, your co-worker, your wife, or your dinner-party guest, Your ignorance just makes you look silly. How could they possibly take offense at that? It's neither personal (except perhaps for the you part) nor insulting (except perhaps for the ignorance and silly parts). Thanks for pointing that out. Your clarifications are so helpful, and your strict, self-searching honesty refreshing. Stephen // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here:
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Stephen Beecroft wrote: -Marc- A customer is not in any way responsible for what one of its subcontractors say unless it is in the context of both of them acting together. -Stephen- So then, why do you bother including the disclaimer at the end of each of your posts? -Marc- I don't follow you. I don't have any clients, nor am I anybody else's client on this list. I have faith in you, Marc. If you keep on trying, I'm sure you'll finally get it. I'm not going to play games. If you have a point, make it. Neither you nor Jim seem to want to respond to my direct requests to admit that you were wrong. I've demonstrated the two errors Jim originally made in his post (the original one where he posted the Toronto Star, the post which started the thread, I'll remind you), and have not had *direct* responses to either point, just emotional responses dripping in clumsy sarcasm. Look, we're human here. No one has to be perfect -- we've all made mistakes in remembering or interpreting things. I often write from memory and have made mistakes, and admitted them. Why can't we just have discussions? If you're wrong it doesn't mean you're bad. Most of us have apologized for being wrong or have thanked people for setting us straight. What is it about you and Jim that you can't seem to bring yourselves to be, well, human beings? -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on Winston Churchill Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Marc A. Schindler: Neither you nor Jim seem to want to respond to my direct requests to admit that you were wrong. Larry Jackson: Perhaps that is because they disagree with your assessment. Marc: No one has to be perfect -- we've all made mistakes in remembering or interpreting things. Larry: Well worth remembering. I know of no exceptions. Marc: What is it about you and Jim that you can't seem to bring yourselves to be, well, human beings? Larry: They are busy being too much like, well, you. It's a very common human being trait. [smile] Larry Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mirror, mirror, on the wall ... Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Stephen Beecroft: All Hail Marc Schindler, The Wise, Compassionate, and Darned-Near All-Knowing! ___ I don't know, Stephen. Do you think Marc will ever be able to forgive you for leaving in the Darned-Near part? [grin] Larry Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
-Marc- A customer is not in any way responsible for what one of its subcontractors say unless it is in the context of both of them acting together. So then, why do you bother including the disclaimer at the end of each of your posts? And please read properly: it was the *Alberta* government in the MediaWorks situation, not the *Canadian* government. Good point, duly noted. If you can't even get that right, it's no surprise that you get everything else wrong, too. Thanks for the kind words. Jim was wrong, as I've demonstrated on several ocasions. I don't care about his dictionary definition. Ducros is no Ari Fleischer. So then, the dictionary is only correct if it agrees with your personal definition? Your ignorance just makes you look silly. How true this is. Thanks again for more kind words. Stephen // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Stephen Beecroft wrote: -Marc- A customer is not in any way responsible for what one of its subcontractors say unless it is in the context of both of them acting together. So then, why do you bother including the disclaimer at the end of each of your posts? I don't follow you. I don't have any clients, nor am I anybody else's client on this list. But I *will* tell you why I started putting that disclaimer on all of my email. Once, on a non-LDS list, a geography list on about.com moderated by a young geography prof at UCDavis, someone took exception to something I said and threatened to take his complaint to my boss. Also, when I had a calling in public affairs, I was asked not to write any letters-to-the-editor on Church-related matters (not even to defend the Church against a bad article, for instance). And please read properly: it was the *Alberta* government in the MediaWorks situation, not the *Canadian* government. Good point, duly noted. If you can't even get that right, it's no surprise that you get everything else wrong, too. Thanks for the kind words. Hey, it's my job. Just pointing these things out, like you like to do. Who watches the watchers? Jim was wrong, as I've demonstrated on several ocasions. I don't care about his dictionary definition. Ducros is no Ari Fleischer. So then, the dictionary is only correct if it agrees with your personal definition? He was wrong when he said it was a public statement -- he's never retracted that, even after being shown that it wasn't a public statement. And it is illogical to claim that because I disagree with someone's interpretation of a dictionary in use in one particular country, that I therefore hold an idiosyncratic definition of my own. Hello? There are far more anglophones outside the USA than inside the USA. I explained the difference between Ducros and Fleischer. I have worked with provincial counterparts of Ducros. I think I can speak on the basis of direct experience. But Jim never acknowledged that either. Your ignorance just makes you look silly. How true this is. Thanks again for more kind words. Well, you're the one who's used to being in the keep 'em straight saddle. How does it feel? I meant nothing personal or insulting. As a favourite saying of mine goes, there's a big difference between ignorance and stupidity: ignorance can be fixed, but stupidity is forever. I never called either you or Jim stupid, but I do believe that, based on this exchange and your refusal to see that things don't necessarily work the way you're used to outside your sphere of influence, that you were exhibiting a lack of knowledge -- ignorance, iow. Stephen -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on Winston Churchill Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Stephen Beecroft wrote: --- Marc, I'm baffled at your insistent glee on this topic. --- Wresting a scriptural passage for particular emphasis-- But behold, it is the effect of a frenzied mind; and this derangement of your minds comes because of the traditions of Canadians and leftist liberals, which lead you away into a belief of things which are not so. ;- --- Mij Ebaboc // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Stephen Beecroft wrote: -Marc- Odd that we get critized for merely reacting to the U.S. but now a truly insignificant molehill is over-shadowed by a mountain, and all the Marc, I'm baffled at your insistent glee on this topic. I have seen no mountain regarding this. I would have missed the initial report altogether if not for Jim's pointing it out, and would probably have thought nothing of it afterward had you not gone ballistic. The first newspaper report I've noticed of it was in Tuesday's, I think, Seattle Times, on page A10. About three column-inches (47.6 Canuck-Celsius-column-centimeters). It may have been bigger news in DC, giving many there a laugh, but I really don't think many Americans paid much attention to it. Glee? Where on earth do you see that? I am appalled, not gleeful. And the news made CNN, several large US dailies, and was on the network news of one of the Big 3 we get from Spokane (ABC, I think). But I suppose that's bad, too. Either we don't pay enough attention to Canada and Canadians, or we pay too much attention. As I mentioned before, I suspect you're merely demonstrating that famous Canadian thin-skinnedness. Jim was the one who was incensed. I told him sarcastically to let us do the thin-skinned act as we do it better. IMore tommmorow, but I'm glad to see you've dropped your claim that she was a politician. Jim did not drop that claim, as far as I can tell. At least, I hope he didn't. He was right. He changed the term to public official. Why don't officials have the right to free speech? Who says they don't? Publishing private conversations overheard in a public setting is hardly comparable to, say, bugging someone's telephone. Secondly, Jim, you don't seem to have read the article you posted, just as you misremembered what the nature of the position. But he did not misremember the nature of the position. He misunderstood it, assuming that her position was the equivalent of Ari Fleischer's. When I pointed out that this wasn't so, he responded with heavy-handed sarcasm. The article does *not* say that any public officials or politicians said anything. It was a private company, MediaWorks, who made the comment True, so you are technically correct about Jim being in error. But he is correct in spirit. MediaWorks was acting in its capacity as a contract media advisor to government. So while the Canadian government did not make the comment, their hired help did. In either case, it reflects on the Canadian government. He was not even correct in spirit. A customer is not in any way responsible for what one of its subcontractors say unless it is in the context of both of them acting together. The government even hires Mark's company. Does that mean anything Mark says is a statement of the Alberta government? This is idiocy. And please read properly: it was the *Alberta* government in the MediaWorks situation, not the *Canadian* government. If you can't even get that right, it's no surprise that you get everything else wrong, too. Are you going to admit you were wrong in both instances, truly hoist by your own petard regarding the nature of both incidents. I really don't understand your bloodlust here. Jim was right, not wrong, in his assessment of Ducros as a politician, as he clearly demonstrated by appeal to a dictionary definition. Why are you so insistent that Jim admit his supposed error? Jim was wrong, as I've demonstrated on several ocasions. I don't care about his dictionary definition. Ducros is no Ari Fleischer. If you insist she is, you are telling me rather than asking me. If you have a question about how the Canadian government works, ask, don't tell. Your ignorance just makes you look silly. -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on Winston Churchill Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
RE: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
-Marc- Odd that we get critized for merely reacting to the U.S. but now a truly insignificant molehill is over-shadowed by a mountain, and all the Marc, I'm baffled at your insistent glee on this topic. I have seen no mountain regarding this. I would have missed the initial report altogether if not for Jim's pointing it out, and would probably have thought nothing of it afterward had you not gone ballistic. The first newspaper report I've noticed of it was in Tuesday's, I think, Seattle Times, on page A10. About three column-inches (47.6 Canuck-Celsius-column-centimeters). It may have been bigger news in DC, giving many there a laugh, but I really don't think many Americans paid much attention to it. But I suppose that's bad, too. Either we don't pay enough attention to Canada and Canadians, or we pay too much attention. As I mentioned before, I suspect you're merely demonstrating that famous Canadian thin-skinnedness. IMore tommmorow, but I'm glad to see you've dropped your claim that she was a politician. Jim did not drop that claim, as far as I can tell. At least, I hope he didn't. He was right. Why don't officials have the right to free speech? Who says they don't? Publishing private conversations overheard in a public setting is hardly comparable to, say, bugging someone's telephone. Secondly, Jim, you don't seem to have read the article you posted, just as you misremembered what the nature of the position. But he did not misremember the nature of the position. The article does *not* say that any public officials or politicians said anything. It was a private company, MediaWorks, who made the comment True, so you are technically correct about Jim being in error. But he is correct in spirit. MediaWorks was acting in its capacity as a contract media advisor to government. So while the Canadian government did not make the comment, their hired help did. In either case, it reflects on the Canadian government. Are you going to admit you were wrong in both instances, truly hoist by your own petard regarding the nature of both incidents. I really don't understand your bloodlust here. Jim was right, not wrong, in his assessment of Ducros as a politician, as he clearly demonstrated by appeal to a dictionary definition. Why are you so insistent that Jim admit his supposed error? Stephen // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
At 04:10 11/27/2002 +, Gib Mij wrote: Another article worrying about Canadian political insults. http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=%7BAFC42C56-BB5F-457B-AEAF-5D58F21AB39C%7D; Those Canadian political officials can't seem to keep their lips buttoned. Sounds to me more like they need the services of a good bootmaker. One who can discern subtleties of fit that the rest of us might miss. Till // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Canada: Bush is an idiot
Odd that we get critized for merely reacting to the U.S. but now a truly insignificant molehill is over-shadowed by a mountain, and all the [sorry, I can't finish the rest of this. I feel a seizure coming on and will have to go to bed (in our timezone it's long past my bedtime anywaah). IMore tommmorow, but I'm glad to see you've dropped your claim that she was a politician. Let me tell you what communications do in the Westminster system. They are not household names like Ari Feischer [sp/), who hold press conferences. But I've had direct experience withh how communications directors (I've worked with 3 different ones within the Alberta government) work; they brief the PM, they issue official statements to the media in the name of the minister (be prime or merely stewing meat...) but they do not hold press confeence. They organize them, and they research and put together mediabut they then become background figures who are with the minister when the *minister* calls a media release. They're part of the background people who don't say a word during the press conference. Incidentally, the official involved, Francie Ducros, has quit several weeks before she was going back into the general civil service pool But sometimes what is meant as unintional becomes a kind of lightning rod, or attractor internationaly (we [in general] claim the U.S. ignores us (Condoleeza Rice, for instance, when asked who the US's largest trading partner is in terms of exports and imports, said it was Mexico. It's not -- cross-border trade between the U..S and Cannada is the largest. I think there's a reason this has struck home, but more or lesss in a symbolic way. So beelow Ive posted ah article . Ironicalyy these incidents are often an expression at the right time and space, as it wre. I don't agree with everything Paul Knox wrote, but he basicaly makes the ppoint I'm trying to make. And, on two ending notes: 1) Ducros resigned today. After 5 years inthe PMO she wanted to move on and was due to quit in several weeks ayway; 2) Why don't officials have the right to free speech? The Alberta public affairs group in the Premier's office would not make public someone made in private -- leaks are just not our way, as a rule. Secondly, Jim, you don't seem to have read the article you posted, just as you misremembered what the nature of the position. The article does *not* say that any public officials or politicians said anything. It was a private company, MediaWorks, who made the comment about Bush being an idiot (what's next, an imbecile?). I happen to know them because they were in my sector when I was at work at Alberta Innovation Science. The Premier's office has contracted MediaWorks for website-related work, and some individual departments have also contracted out to them. So no public official or politician called Bush an idiot, but rather a person at MediaWorks, which is a private company. You are straining for gnats and are getting camels ;-) And I still haven't heard a peep out of you when I pointed out that the Toronto Star, which was actually following behind other media (it was a National Post writr who overheard the private conversation. You again did not seem to have read what the articles actually say, but have yet to acknowledge it. It seems you're surfing the web trying to find out about incidents like this. For once the tables are turned; normally Canada is simply ignored by the current US administration and feel thin-skinned when someone satirizes us, like Jonah Goldberg did (although not me personally, but it's common amongst Canadians). Are you going to admit you were wrong in both instances, truly hoist by your own petard regarding the nature of both incidents. Jim Cobabe wrote: Another article worrying about Canadian political insults. http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=%7BAFC42C56-BB5F-457B-AEAF-5D58F21AB39C%7D; Those Canadian political officials can't seem to keep their lips buttoned. --- Mij Ebaboc -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on Winston Churchill Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. === Bushs big-stick folly By Paul Knox, Worldbeat, [Toronto] Globe and Mail, 25/09/02, pA19. The roots of George W. Bushs first-strike folly go back a century, to another Republican who had a talent for marrying foreign policy and water-cooler wisdom. Theodore Roosevelt led his country to world-power status, first as a cavalry commander and then as its 26th president. It was he who advised the United States to speak softly in global councils, and carry a big stick. Seeking to end the influence of Europe in Latin America,
