<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/637022</link>
		<description>Comments by IntenseAlex</description>
<item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The Sun sometimes shines on TV: Dept. of office memos</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/10/the-sun-sometimes-shines-on-tv-dept-of-office-memos/#IDComment79648332</link>
<description>I think I&amp;#039;m still more excited to order Al Jazeera English than to see this &amp;quot;Fox North&amp;quot; Kory has in the works.  Although I&amp;#039;m glad that David Akin will be a part of it.  One voice of reason is better than none. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/10/the-sun-sometimes-shines-on-tv-dept-of-office-memos/#IDComment79648332</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Family Guy Does Jerry Lewis</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/05/03/family-guy-does-jerry-lewis/#IDComment72079373</link>
<description>Jamie, what did you think about the &amp;quot;Brian and Stewie&amp;quot; portion of the episode, prior to the musical bits?  I never saw the &lt;i&gt;All in the Family&lt;/i&gt; episode that served as the inspiration for last night&amp;#039;s story.  It was definitely and odd episode.  Also, what the hell was up with the Ke$ha opening on &lt;i&gt;The Simpsons&lt;/i&gt;??? </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 May 2010 15:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/05/03/family-guy-does-jerry-lewis/#IDComment72079373</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Gaming it out</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/22/gaming-it-out/#IDComment69815804</link>
<description>John, your point about his connections to both the CBC and the LPC aside, I would hardly say based off Martin&amp;#039;s article that Graves is advising the Liberals to &amp;quot;screw&amp;quot; the west. They&amp;#039;ve been advised to stop worrying so much about losing support in the west if they decide to pursue a left-of-centre agenda. To say that the Liberals now have some sort of &amp;quot;hidden agenda&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;screw&amp;quot; the west is a stretch, at best. It&amp;#039;s like trying to say the Conservatives have some sort of hidden agenda to screw the east. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/22/gaming-it-out/#IDComment69815804</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Senators! Penguins! Typing!</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/22/senators-penguins-typing/#IDComment69750916</link>
<description>Scott, I know we&amp;#039;re now doing this live chat instead of a mailbag, but I just found this article and feel it needs to be addressed.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/elin-nordegren-flies-to-sweden-as-tiger-woods-rocks-at-nickelback-concert/story-e6frewyr-1225856624416&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/el...&lt;/a&gt;  Now, I know their marriage is going down in flames, but still... Is that an ok excuse to ditch a hot blonde in order to hang out with Nickleback???  As further evidence, I didn&amp;#039;t notice Laureen Harper in that picture of Chad and Stephen on the steps of 24 Sussex Drive.  Does Chad Kroeger&amp;#039;s lady-hair have some sort of strange bromantic effect on guys that makes them abandon far more attractive people in order to hang out with him? </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 15:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/22/senators-penguins-typing/#IDComment69750916</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Mailbag questions. You heard me.</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/14/mailbag-questions-you-heard-me/#IDComment68116954</link>
<description>Dear Scott,  My Twitter feed no longer enlightens me with thoughts from the voice in the PM&amp;#039;s head.  What gives? </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:54:41 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/14/mailbag-questions-you-heard-me/#IDComment68116954</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Baba&#039;s World</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/24/babas-world/#IDComment64153168</link>
<description>Outstanding.  Thanks for sharing this! </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 06:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/24/babas-world/#IDComment64153168</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Insert mailbag questions here</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/10/insert-mailbag-questions-here/#IDComment61198185</link>
<description>LOL  I like this question better.  Many more possibilities.   </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:19:05 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/10/insert-mailbag-questions-here/#IDComment61198185</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Insert mailbag questions here</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/10/insert-mailbag-questions-here/#IDComment61170799</link>
<description>Dear Scott,  What would the &amp;quot;Mighty Ducks&amp;quot; franchise of films have been like if Charlie Sheen had been cast as Coach Bombay instead of his brother Emilio? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:44:53 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/10/insert-mailbag-questions-here/#IDComment61170799</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : And now a word from Mark Tewksbury</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/05/and-now-a-word-from-mark-tewksbury/#IDComment59897393</link>
<description>LOL Comment of the day.  Hands down! </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/05/and-now-a-word-from-mark-tewksbury/#IDComment59897393</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Excerpts from Jim Flaherty’s budget speech (with Super-Expert Analysis)</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/04/excerpts-from-jim-flaherty%e2%80%99s-budget-speech-with-super-expert-analysis/#IDComment59827577</link>
<description>LOL  I see I wasn&amp;#039;t the only one watching The Colbert Report last night. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Mar 2010 02:56:50 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/04/excerpts-from-jim-flaherty%e2%80%99s-budget-speech-with-super-expert-analysis/#IDComment59827577</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Simultaneously liveblogging the NHL trade deadline and the Speech from the Throne</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/03/simultaneously-liveblogging-the-nhl-trade-deadline-and-the-speech-from-the-throne/#IDComment59586591</link>
<description>CBCNN just showed that P.J. Stock et al are hosting a trade deadline special on CBC.ca, if you want to cover 50% more ridiculously boring deadline specials. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Mar 2010 17:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/03/simultaneously-liveblogging-the-nhl-trade-deadline-and-the-speech-from-the-throne/#IDComment59586591</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Simultaneously liveblogging the NHL trade deadline and the Speech from the Throne</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/03/simultaneously-liveblogging-the-nhl-trade-deadline-and-the-speech-from-the-throne/#IDComment59584584</link>
<description>Scott, how does Sportsnet&amp;#039;s coverage stack up against their 2007 effort?  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/03/03/nhl-trade-deadline-day-t-minus-245000-speculative-words-from-pierre-mcguire/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/03/03/nhl-trade-dead...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Mar 2010 16:59:32 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/03/simultaneously-liveblogging-the-nhl-trade-deadline-and-the-speech-from-the-throne/#IDComment59584584</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Presented without gloating</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/25/presented-without-gloating/#IDComment58708913</link>
<description>I was looking in the Russian media for reaction today as well.  Specifically, I wanted to know what Ovechkin had to say, since he apparently hasn&amp;#039;t been giving interviews to English language media.  I found an interview, but am still trying to figure out &amp;quot;Now we pour the mass of mud&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;defeat jim-jams&amp;quot; are really supposed to mean.  Haha  &lt;a href=&quot;http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;amp;prev=_t&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;amp;layout=1&amp;amp;eotf=1&amp;amp;u=http://olympiada.sport-express.ru/2010/reviews/4174&amp;amp;sl=ru&amp;amp;tl=en&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;amp;pr...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/25/presented-without-gloating/#IDComment58708913</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Team Canada&#039;s ferocious wounded pride</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/25/canadas-deadly-wounded-pride/#IDComment58707979</link>
<description>I was born in 1985, so I obviously don&amp;#039;t have much memory of the last few years of the Cold War.  But I certainly feel differently about the Russians than say, the US, when it comes to hockey.  I&amp;#039;m not sure I can put my finger on it, but the closest I can come to explaining it is that I feel the Russians are a worthy adversary, whereas the Americans are like a cocky sibling.  I don&amp;#039;t want us to lose to either one of them, but for different reasons.  Maybe some of that is a feature of our post-Cold War attitude toward the Russians, but it&amp;#039;s definitely not a product of living through the &amp;quot;Good ol&amp;#039; days&amp;quot; of hockey.  Like I say, not quite sure how to explain it. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:16:57 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/25/canadas-deadly-wounded-pride/#IDComment58707979</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Private lives and the public interest</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/22/private-lives-and-the-public-interest/#IDComment58284783</link>
<description>&lt;i&gt;We should, for example, have &amp;ldquo;reasonable and probable grounds&amp;rdquo; before we go asking a prying personal question. When Pamela Wallin famously asked John Turner whether he had a drinking problem, she was not just fishing: the matter was widely rumoured, if not publicly discussed.&lt;/i&gt;  Andrew, I&amp;#039;ve heard that there&amp;#039;s an affair going on in Ottawa involving the spouse of a very high-profile MP.  It&amp;#039;s widely rumoured, but definitely not publicly discussed.  In your opinion, are there circumstances when the actions of a political spouse become fair game for questioning/reporting?  If so, what are those circumstances? </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/22/private-lives-and-the-public-interest/#IDComment58284783</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Weekend Discussion: Olympic commercials</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/19/weekend-discussion-olympic-commercials/#IDComment58281762</link>
<description>There&amp;#039;s a McDonald&amp;#039;s commercial that&amp;#039;s starting to get on my nerves, since it&amp;#039;s on pretty much every four minutes.  Four attractive 20-something women put their lipstick on, hop in a cab, and head to an art show, where they proceed to stare at a step-ladder that&amp;#039;s been painted pink.  Deciding the art show is lame, they go across the street to McDonald&amp;#039;s, where an attractive McDonald&amp;#039;s employee serves them chicken nuggets and fries.  Oh, and for the entire commercial, you don&amp;#039;t actually see anyone&amp;#039;s face.  Just smiles, legs, shoes, etc. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:50:59 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/19/weekend-discussion-olympic-commercials/#IDComment58281762</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Martin Brodeur: Not a goaltender</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/22/martin-brodeur-not-a-goaltender/#IDComment58094084</link>
<description>Why does the Heritage Minister hate our athletes? </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:28:04 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/22/martin-brodeur-not-a-goaltender/#IDComment58094084</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Does drinking six beers make the skeleton interesting to watch in person?</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/20/does-drinking-six-beers-make-the-skeleton-interesting-to-watch-in-person/#IDComment57836289</link>
<description>Scott, you didn&amp;#039;t get up to anything untoward after those six beers, did you?  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ctvolympics.ca/news-centre/newsid=47541.html#rcmp+investigate+possible+threat+athletes+whistler&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.ctvolympics.ca/news-centre/newsid=4754...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:24:47 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/20/does-drinking-six-beers-make-the-skeleton-interesting-to-watch-in-person/#IDComment57836289</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : Canada loses</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/12/canada-loses/#IDComment56551034</link>
<description>Everyone take note.  As of 5:00 pm EST, 12 Feb 2010, hours before they even begin, the Winter Olympics have already been &amp;quot;a complete bust.&amp;quot;  Thanks for the heads up, Big Dave. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/12/canada-loses/#IDComment56551034</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Macleans.ca : The invisible generation</title>
<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/12/the-invisible-generation/#IDComment56538845</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m giving you a thumb up purely for that alliteration. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:11:01 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/12/the-invisible-generation/#IDComment56538845</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>