No offense, but I could give a hot d*mn about what other people think about me when I know what's in my own heart. If someone is dissuaded by the opinions of some of the more strident members of a particular political group, then their convictions weren't that strong to begin with.

Ah.. but that would be the Feminazi view... the feminists that I know support the pro-life view because they value the life of the fetus as much as they value their own. The difference really comes down to when one considers the fetus an individual life-form (and not a parasite as I have heard some refer to it as).

A person's politcal leanings can not be easily pegged based on one issue... plenty of "left-wingers" support pro-life or the military or other "conservative" hot topics, and the reverse is true as well.

OK...off topic...anyone in the Toronto area think that The Star is obsessed with Jack and Olivia? There have been quite a few articles on them as of late.

ETA: If there are so many versions of feminism, then why is it that university women's studies departments tend to be filled with people who are more along the lines of "feminazi" (which is a term that I was told not to use in high school)? I usually got the cold "that's nice, dear" kind of comment from professors from that department or from courses that tend to be more "feminist" in view. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I don't know.. perhaps because they are the most "commited" they are the ones that are willing to apply themselves to become a professor.... but then again it could simply be an educational trend, much like Marxist interpretations of History (judging everything as a product of class struggle :rolleyes: ) or the re-interpretation of historical personages with our modern perceptions of sexual diversity? Who really knows...

I think the reason the Star is focusing on Jack and Olivia is because of their past visibilty in Toronto politics, they are familar to the writers and they have a lot of background material to work with.

Did anyone watch the debates? What did you think?

I watch a bit of the English Language debate. I thought Martin came off best. Harper needs to learn to look at the camera more directly (it makes him look shady when he adverts his eyes to much)... and for goodness say, Jack Layton needs to learn to not talk over people so much!!

I think they all need to learn not to talk over people!

I watched bits of the debate.

is it me, or is Gilles Duceppe the worst public speaker ever?!

Well, English isn't his first/best language. I think he tried his best.

No that's not it. I didn't have a problem with his English. I thought it was fine. I couldn't understand everything he said. But he's so monotonous, and he never had an opinion of his own. I found him to be a bit flakey.

I watched both.. mainly because themes from the French debate would carry over into the English debate...

I found that the leaders could have, and should have, hammered Harper more on his foreign policy and domestic policy views... I mean come on, the guy said that he would "in very select instances" ignore rulings of the supreme court about abortion or same-sex marriages... or they could have roasted him on his letters to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, or the Washington Post apologizing for Canada's "cowardice" about not going to Iraq with the US. Instead they sniped amongst themselves when not attacking Martin...

From one of The Colonists, Canadian Polotics and voting is just about as hard to understand on both sides of the Border a peice of land that says oh oh, new country!

What say, if you speak French, you so start a New Country?

What trade do you have?

What say the South rises up against the North?

What does that gain.

In reading a book lately, yes, I do read that the European Commonwealth becomes self dependent, or say all of the Asian countrys, what would be wrong with an North American Common Wealth of Canada, Mexico and the USA!

Our Continent against your Continent, or is that cald NAFTA!

Coop, Brother, I wish We Could get together over a Flaggin of BOOZE!


Up The British!:D

Did anyone else get headache from watching last night's debate - I swear, no one could get a word in. Unfortunately I thought Harper was by far the most eloquent and charismatic speaker.

I think it had something to do with the fact that there was four people each debating their own platform... when there is just two sides it's easier to control a debate, but with four....

They should work on developing a new format to allow for many party representatives (espically if Green gets 'official' status).

I think they should allow all party leaders to speak whether they have party status or not. Obviously, it will be more difficult to have a coherent debate, but they can work on that.

Ummm...then the debate could take twice as long!