Posted on 01/02/2006 8:40:34 PM PST by steel_resolve
The Canadian media got all jacked up recently over the fact that an American pundit let loose with an anti-Canadian rant on a cable TV show. Not since the president of Hershey's saw that crane-necked alien E.T. with Reese's Pieces in its hand has anyone been so giddy about high-profile brand placement.
Canadians don't get to respond very often to comments made about us by Americans, because more than a decade of Liberal rule has set our once-great country on a depressing descent into irrelevancy.
You know Canadian media are desperate for attention when they offer serious reportage and heartfelt, defensive analysis in response to comments like: "Canada is a sweet country. It is like your retarded cousin you see at Thanksgiving and sort of pat him on the head. You know, he's nice but you don't take him seriously. That's Canada." Or this one: "Canada is essentially a stalker, stalking the United States, right? Canada has little pictures of us in its bedroom, right?" Both gems are from MSNBC's Tucker Carlson.
I'm not sure where you have left to go in a debate when you start off by calling someone a retarded stalker. Why not do what everyone in America does with Carlson and ignore him? But judging by the reaction of some of our media, you'd think President George Bush had flipped us all off himself.
What Canadians should find far more troubling isn't that an American entertainer is talking smack for ratings, but that our own Prime Minister is doing the same thing for votes.
Paul Martin built himself a giant Uncle Sam "straw man" and was punching away at it when U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins walked in and asked Dithers the Clown what the heck he was doing.
Accusing an entire country of lacking a "global conscience" with respect to the environment when your own record is worse than theirs is really only a good move if you're auditioning for Tucker Carlson's job.
You can thank our Liberal government for the fact that Canada rarely registers at all on the American radar anymore -- except when it comes to things like harbouring war resisters or terror suspects, not to mention gay marriage and pot.
Starting with Jean Chretien and now under Martin, the Liberals have driven a wedge between Canada and our onetime best friend for the sake of a desperate power grab, constantly playing to insecure leftie voters who think our identity is dependent on being as different as possible from the U.S.A.
Now we have former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Montana Senator Conrad Burns falsely stating that the 9/11 terrorists entered the U.S. from Canada. But Americans can't shoulder all the blame for the fact that they don't have all the details right -- because when Canada actually does register on their radar, all they likely see is one big blur of leftie lunacy. A few terrorists, notably the would-be Millenium Bomber, Ahmed Ressam, have entered the U.S. from Canada. And it seems barely a week goes by these days without a Canadian being paraded in front of the media as a potential terror suspect for Americans to extradite and deal with.
Maybe if we dropped the leftie fruitcake act on the home front, and started pulling our weight on the world stage rather than criticizing those who do, we would be treated with a little more seriousness by our southern neighbours. And perhaps they'd pay more attention. Respect isn't granted simply because we think we're worthy of it -- it has to be earned.
Arroooooooooo!!! She can appear on American tv any time she wants. In fact this wolf would like to urge Fox viewers to have O'Reilly get her on his show. Oh, you know what I mean. I have the feeling I'd probably agree to anything she said.
Do tell? I clicked on the Wiki link you provided, Mole, and among other groaners I found this interesting reference to The Washington Times:
"Her commentaries have also been published by conservative media owned by Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church, such as United Press International and the Washington Times."
If the above quote is a virtually perfect match for your style of political discourse, then you have given us a big fat clue as to the caliber of the references you have provided to us re Ms. Marsden. I had been planning to read the Wiki article all the way through, and then browse your other links, but there didn't seem any point to it after running across this tired old "WT = Moonie" smear that leftists are so fond of.
The Marsden story is an incredible one. In American terms, it's as if Anita Hill recycled herself as Ann Coulter and along the way got convicted in court of stalking Rush Limbaugh.
. . . . . . . .
Dang! Shoulda listened to my better judgment.
My summary of the Wiki article:
The Case of The People versus R. Marsden seems to boil down to:
Okay, the "ex-boyfriend" one is the only ding against her that I consider to have any merit. And I consider it a fairly mild one - when taken in the context of a sexual relationship that has just ended - as opposed to truly serious cases of "stalking" - such as when a celebrity is followed by a permanently disturbed person who's never met them.
It's too bad that the same word is applied to both types of situations. As such, the word "stalker" is often used as an unwarranted smear, because just providing the word with no context leads people to assume the worst case usage of the word.
Bottom line: I see nothing so far in her past which would make me discount in any way her well-written column.
Been out of town most of the last few weeks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.