GCn20

Specific examples of mainstream media bias? CNN, Fox News, Sun Media, CBC...pick pretty much anything published/broadcast by the above. 2011 election the CBC went off air refusing to call a Harper majority even though all other networks had done so hours earlier. Peter Mansbridge was visibly upset and teared up when it became apparent and refused to call the election. That's our national broadcaster and it was a gross display.

Booked yurts to stay in for a wedding in August and was in and out in under 10 mins. Logged in right at opening. Checked back 10 mins later and was 488 in line but the line was moving really quick. Gave up my spot after 4 minutes and was down to 240 in line. I think the new site is excellent. Just can't be even a minute late, and that is a supply issue more than anything else. If Manitoba would pull it's head out of it's arse and allow for more private campgrounds and cottage lots this wouldn't be an issue.

Damn MAD magazine....I was going to order one for lunch today until I looked closer.

I have no issue with news reports that are verbatim from the source so long as context is not left out which happens all too often these days. Whenever an issue is discussed with opinion, both sides of the issue should be represented and without bias or picking a winner. Social media is a quagmire of fictional news, and mainstream media's biases prevent what should be reliable intelligence gathering and has turned it into propaganda. Get educated people say. Well that's all fine and good but not everyone can spend hours a day doing that on numerous issues. Many rely on the media to inform them and that is not what is happening these days. Then we sit and wonder why people on the extreme rights and lefts of the political spectrum are so loony....it's because their information has been left to their own imagination.

That would be fun to watch too.

Yes they certainly appear to be. Yes, and we are not seeing that these days.

Nor did I say they did?

No one can say with any certainty who is most or least biased because there is no baseline to measure from because none of them report the whole truth, nor are they given the whole truth by the government. Anyone who says they have all the facts is quite simply full of it because none of us have access to all the facts.

I actually would love to see Willie get some reps on O lining up in the slot. The opposing DB and Lbers would be crapping their pants. I doubt he would ever get open, but it sure would be fun to watch.

None of them. That's the problem. It's why I wish the horse's mouth was a little more forthcoming.

I have never heard anyone summarize all educated people as woke. There are many woke people of little to no education. Just as there are many people who wouldn't consider themselves woke that are highly educated. Saying that woke equals educated is simply not necessarily true. You say it's easy to spot bias. Is it? There are many on here who defend a clearly biased CBC on their accuracy for instance.

Sure, so long as you have open, honest, and transparent government that doesn't spew word salad constantly, and a media without bias, one can use critical thinking. However, that is not the case right now with governments. How do you become informed when a government refuses to be transparent. Those who are hyper interested might be able to weed through it but most people simply don't have the time or the inclination. Right now the only people to blame for voter apathy are the politicians themselves. The Liberals finding voter apathy amongst their core is a direct result of their own actions.

Democracy has always seen periods of disengagement, but yes I do agree that apathy creates problems for democracy. As for informed populace....that is impossible in today's day and age. Politicians lie, or with hold the fact, and the media is completely biased one way or the other. Couple that with the massive amount of BS on social media it is near impossible for anyone to get accurate information without exhaustive fact checking missions, and who has time for that.

2019-Bombers released Kongbo but he was heading into his option in a few weeks anyway. 2021- Bombers released Kongbo but he was on an expiring contract anyway. 2023 - Yes the Bombers released Ford a year earlier than they needed to.

Imports and non drafted NATs can sign 2 year deals with an option after the first year. Drafted NATs cannot anymore. Kongbo could because the mandatory 2+1 contract did not exist at that time and he was able to sign a 1+1. Hate to be a TBurg but the part about having to sign a 2+1 is accurate and there is no NFL option until year 2 is completed, this was put into the CBA in 2021. Kongbo's contract provided the option window that year, we just allowed him out of his contract early because (I would assume) he promised to return or we had a desk drawer new contract in place should he be released.

Recovery won't be a pleasant task.

If Trump wins again then I will really lose faith in the USA.

Nik Nanos suggests it is both according to his polling. Support is down, and confirmed Liberal support appears soft. I would think that Trudeau will begin ramping up some wedge issues soon. Can't say I blame anyone for being pretty uninspired by the choices out there. Voter apathy is a natural part of democracy. The party that best taps into the disenchanted/disillusioned and gets them out to vote while keeping their base will win.

You may be right and I am certainly not suggesting that Poilievre is perfect by any means. Meant to point out just how disappointed people are with the Liberals by contrasting it with the latest polls. When Poilievre is the people's choice right now that speaks volumes about how Canadians feel Trudeau is doing. Singh...I don't understand that at all either. Not sure what to make of it. Pretty small sample size then. The House of Commons voted in favor of a public inquiry by a pretty large margin. The Liberals are members of that same house, and while it wasn't a confidence motion, the will of the house should be respected. I think that any party that thinks they can operate without the support of the house should be removed.

It is what most of the Liberal interviewees have said. The House of Commons majority does not agree. Even the Liberals best friends, the NDP, want an inquiry. It is extremely undemocratic of the Liberals to continually ignore the wishes of a House majority. Huberus. We shall see. Liberals continue to slide in the polls. Right now the CPC holds a significant lead in the polls, power index, and preferred leader for Prime Minister according to Nik Nanos today. You guys can mock Poilievre but he is preferred by more Canadians than Trudeau and that is terrible news for the Liberals and very importantly the power index now favors the CPC and the Liberals PI has plummeted.

I don't mind push back if it is respectful. When it is childish and immature it is annoying.

I'm not sure how, that's why we need a very open and far reaching conversation about it as a country.

Typical non-sensical rebuttal by you. The adults here, will continue to talk amongst themselves, your childishness can go take a short walk off a long pier. The "adults in the PPC, NDP, BQ do not seem to be as enlightened as you are on the matter as they voted for an inquiry. Maybe you should call them all childish too.

I am a very firm believer in the Whistleblower Act, or any public servant coming forth with information when it involved threats to national security. Liberals are just mad because this time it burned them. Probably....and we need to snuff it out openly and publically.

Exactly....and it should be done with full transparency so that there is trust in the system. Same could be said about Trudeau and his hand choosing of which fat cats he gives cash for favors. No doubt. Now we need an open, honest, and bipartisan inquiry into this so that the public can follow along, and to raise awareness of how/when/why/ and where it is being done so that we can snuff it out. If it embarrasses one party more than the other, than that is their cross to bear.