[The Darkest Canuck]

isn't Strom dead? he should be, guy's oooooolllllllllllllllld!

[prz]

And what's this about a house of cards? Canada is one of the world's stablest and most successful socially-minded states. The American Empire will stumble under its own weight before Canadians revolt against helping those around us!

now that makes me laugh. Canada is what it is because it has the opportunity to be right beside the US. Make no mistake on that one. If the US were to fall which it wont in any of our life times, Canada would go down right with it.

Yes Canada has a unique system, but there so many examples where Canada gets a free ride from the US. From military security to American companies spending and investing in Canada, the list is endless.

[The Darkest Canuck]

actually if the US was to fall, its population would most likely seek safe haven to the north, and then we could defend the continent together , and then if we'd won the whole continent would be CANADA!

[The Horrible Esthete]

Dude, I respect your opinions, but you don't want to give a shread of creedence to anyone opposed to your views. It benefits no one to never see the point of view of the other.

And as for tolerance, which one of us posted this again?

"I think there will be a groundswell for Kerry when democrats re-ignite the less-educated, more gullible faction of their constituency."

I literally had to rub my eyes. That coulda come straight from the mouth of George Wallace, Strom Thurman or Huey Long.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think you can preach tolerance and self-righetousness when you're posting stuff like that.

Oh, good grief. You are reading certain attitudes and meanings into that quote which simply are not there, and assumptions like those are perhaps the A#1 reason for the polarization of ideologies in our society.

Please, indulge me. Where in that quote do I state that I believe that less-educated, gullible voters are exclusive to the democratic party?? That’s right - nowhere, because I absolutely do not believe that to be true. And don’t try to lay some line of bullshit saying that it was insinuated, because it certainly is not. There are, in fact, plenty of uneducated, gullible people out there, and I definitely agree that they are not restricted to one class or one party. My belief is that it would be extremely beneficial to the Kerry campaign to employ a strategy which targeted the portion of those aforementioned individuals who are democrats and already believe (or want to believe) that the Republicans “stole” the 2000 election.

I specified those in the democratic party because a) I don’t think such tactics would appeal to those particular voters in Bush’s corner (obviously), and b) because the percentage of these voters aligned with the democratic party were already up-in-arms about this perceived “injustice” four years ago, and could easily be spurred to become impassioned over the issue when it matters most. This, in turn, could lead to a surge in new democratic voter registrations, and drive those democratic voters who habitually fail to show up on Election Day to the polls THIS November.

C’mon Steve...don’t fall into the tired old stereotype of the hypersensitive reactionary who throws a shit-fit over “intolerances” that don’t even exist in the first place. It’s dangerous, and it hinders the democratic process.

And since when don’t I “give a shred of credence” to anyone opposed to my view? Are you saying this based on the two or three posts I have made on this topic? Not a very well-populated sample you’re drawing from. I’m 31 years old, and unlike many Americans, I began developing sound political philosophies before I even got to high school, and continually re-evaluated and molded my beliefs along the way. Suffice it to say that by now, I know what I believe, and while I don’t feel that differing views are “wrong” or necessarily lack credibility, I know that there’s not much chance of anything significantly altering my perspectives on such fundamental principles at this point.