manhn

Well, that's the issue I'm talking about. There are plenty of conservatives/Republicans who are not religious. There are plenty of Democracts who are extremely religious. There are plenty of Democrats willing and ready to strip fundamental rights away from people. The neocons have so co-opted the right that anything not neoconservative is then deemed "liberal." When people view conservatism in this manner, it changes what it is to be "moderate" and "liberal." I chuckle when I hear Americans wanting a "moderate" government. What is happening is that people tend to have a more concrete idea of what constitutes conservatism. It's harder to pinpoint liberalism, so people use the "if it's not conservative, it has to be liberal" point of view. First off, how is "Armageddon" liberal? Isn't about a meteor coming down to earth and a bunch of austronaut types saving the world? The other examples I can see as liberal in the sense that it's not particularly conservative, but really, it's not even close to liberal. On Degrassi, a Canadian show, we'd actually see the kids smoking weed. We'd see them have sex and have abortions (a Degrassi episode featuring a character having an abortion has not aired in the US). And the cast would not be as pretty and be more diverse. Meanwhile, That 70s Show is a show primarily dominated by the male point of view; the female characters are all secondary characters. With the exception of the stereotypiocal foreign exchange student, there's virtually no characters of colour. And the cast conforms to societal views of "beauty." If W&G were a British show, Will would be shagging a guy every other episode. In the US, Will got his first boyfriend in the show's seventh season. And Jack got married--to a woman. The show deals with upper/middle class folks consumed by materialism and the only semi-regular character of colour is the maid. Dazed and Confused is most definitely a left-of-centre piece of entertainment, but that's why it was not made under the studio system. It was an independent movie directed by a then no-name person. As for gay content, how many shows feature a gay character? I bet I can name a lot more current shows without one than with one. Besides, interesting that a show that features a gay character is automatically deemed liberal. This assumes that all conservatives must hate gays. Just by believing that shows how skewed the US media is when it comes to determining what's liberal and what's conservative.

SO, protecting citizens from natural disasters isn't much of a priority for Bush? Regardless, Bush himself can't deal with this by himself. That's why he hires and selects people to handle these issues--in the case of natural disaster, that's the people of FEMA. So, what does he do? - appoints a man with no prior experience in disaster management to head FEMA - changes the focus of FEMA from managing natural disasters to fighting acts of terrorism - in September 2004, FEMA denied Louisiana's pre-disaster mitigation funding requests. Says Jefferson Parish flood zone manager Tom Rodrigue: "You would think we would get maximum consideration....This is what the grant program called for. We were more than qualified for it." Despite the fact that this disaster was predicted several years ago. - the budget for constructing and repairs on the levees have been slashed

One example. The way the media describes the Republicans as conservative and the Democrats as liberal when in most other western countries, the Dems would be seen as a conservative party. In Canada, John Kerry would make a very comfortable fit with our conservative party. Oh, I'll give another. The way they describe FOX News as conservative and CNN as liberal. I can't imagine what Americans think when they watch the BBC or CBC.

What I heard from US officials that aid from other countries have not been declined. They have been accepted either. So, a lot of countries are giving the money to organizations like Red Cross. What bugs me is hearing people (American, Canadian, whomever--but usually conservative) blasting other countries for not helping out the US. That ticks me off.

I would love for the US to be "harmed" by liberal thought. The things Americans view as "liberal" amuses this Canadian.

Ultimately, you can't separate race and class like some people want to do. I mean, how many predominantly upper-class African American cities exist in the USA?

It's on live out here in the west coast. Not the greatest performance, poor acoustics. I bet Chris is not a happy camper.

Bono did a lot oh photo ops during the Canadian election in support of Paul Martin (who eventually became Prime Minister), in the hopes Martin would agree to increase aid to Africa. Once elected, Martin does no such thing (or he doesn't increase it to the levels Bono wanted). Ultimately, all of these invitations are attempts by politicians to get a nice photo-op with a cool celebrity whose fans would then find the politician cool. If the band is loathe to allow their music to hawk soft drinks, then the band probably doesn't want to be used to elevate the power of politicians, unless the politician is doing something the band really, really believes in.

It isn't awful. It's perfectly inoffensive. The song is still gonna be a hit--because of radio.

IIRC, I believe they're the first British band. I'm sure some American band like nsync and Backstreet Boys have accomplished this feat.

Not to mention a diss an entire genre of music. Chris Martin even wrote a song for one of the Kings of country and western, Johnny Cash.

Whose generation was defined by Oasis?

Please, you were the one going on and on about the UK, as if the UK is the only country in the world.