Evidence in the Killing of Bhutto
At least we know that Benazir Bhutto wasn't killed because she wasn't wearing a hijab.
|
« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »
December 31, 2007
Political Books
I never read political books because politics and politicians bore me, but it occurs to me that a lot of Germans probably didn't bother reading Mein Kampf for the same reason - even though Hitler reportedly gave it away for free to wedding couples.
So yeah - if anybody out there read the memoirs of those Two Old Monsters, Chretien and Mulroney - just PM me if I should sink the French navy or anything - 'kay?
Other Cultures
Instead of just killing all the Taliban and hoping the remaining men in Afghanistan will be down with women's rights, why don't we, like, kill ALL the men in Afghanistan?
I know it sounds like "overkill", but... well... since we're there anyway - why not do a thorough job of it instead of leaving it to chance that the men we don't kill in Afghanistan will just start up Taliban II as soon as we're gone?
Global Rich People Warming
Maybe if every rich person took a little global warming and shoved it up his or her ass this coming year, the rest of us could go about our business just a little bit cooler.
Because really, it's not like poor people have had any other benefits from climate change.
Here's to Britney, Paris, and Lindsay
Cheers to 2008, you CBGs (Celebrity Bad Girls). Keep on sluttin' on, lettin' it all hang out, partying to the max, skankin' it up to 11, flashing and smashing and crashing your fans.
Use it or lose it, SooeySays.
Because everything you do helps to break down barriers between men and women, rich and poor, white and... uh... Michael Jackson!
I hope to see at least one of you sprawled drunk and pantiless at a cockfight, one of you sprawled drunk and pantiless over an Entertainment Tonight cameraman's head, and one of you sprawled drunk and pantiless at your wedding to a guy you met while you were sprawled drunk and pantiless at a cockfight.
Love ya!
{{{HUGS}}}
December 30, 2007
Funding Blatant Sexism
I read this earlier today and against my better judgement decided to post around it:
WarrenKinsellaWritesAYearEndLetterToGod
Cute. Except for the fact that we all know the Catholic Church will never ever allow for women to become Priests. A woman will never be in the College of Cardinals from whence the Pope, who will always be a man, is elected, either.
God is the Father and Jesus Christ is his only begotten Son.
I can't care about why people continue to fund a blatantly sexist organization with their own money. It's none of my business, really, and I've got enough on my plate as it is without taking on Catholics, who clearly love the contradiction of adhering to a blatantly sexist, unrepentently hierarchical, organized and powerful, unredeemably patriarchal religion - while living freely in a democratic society.
What is my business, in the Year of our Lord, 2008, which is right around the corner, is that the Government of Ontario fully funds a blatantly sexist education system with public money.
The Catholic Church will never evolve and Catholics know this - or should. It is completely disingenuous, in my opinion, to pretend that the Catholic Church will ever be anything other than what it is and always has been and always will be.
It is up to the Government of Ontario to evolve and show some respect for women's equality to men and taxpayers of both sexes by refusing to fund religious education with public money. It's not rocket science, where women have managed, in spite of EVERYTHING, to gain a foothold. It's the Catholic Church - where women will never be treated as equal to men.
Ever.
This is our children's education system we're talking about here. Religions - all of them - teach that women are women, not people. Only men get to be people in the World's Great Religions. It's wrong and it's backward and I have no idea why we pretend that it isn't.
Agent Bin Laden
Osama Bin Laden reminds me of that Simple Minds song now:
An audiotape purportedly prepared by al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden threatens Israel and Iraqi Sunni Arabs who are working with the U.S. forces in the country. The tape was posted on a militant Islam website Saturday. Its authenticity cannot be confirmed.
Okay. So... The Americans can land a man on the moon (or at least, they used to be able to land a man on the moon...) but they can't authenticate a video tape?
Seriously, if I didn't know better (and I don't, really, come to think of it...) I'd think Osama Bin Laden is working for the C.I.A. he's so good at not getting caught by it.
December 29, 2007
I've Got It!
This is what I mean: What kind of stupid timing is this for any government anywhere in the world to want its country to be more like the United States?!
I mean, WTF?!
Ah, finally. I've got it. Whew. Thank you for your patience, Dear Reader.
Last Call
Remember back in Bill Davis' Ontario when "Last Call" was a big drag? Unlike nowadays when it's a big relief?
The Canadian Pursuit of Happiness
Sometimes I think what really makes us different from Americans is our definition of Happiness as opposed to theirs.
I mean, down south, where life is two-thirds tropical paradise, Happiness is wherever that Pursuit may lead, as guaranteed by the Constitution. Up here, it's really just stability, with a little state security tossed on top, just in case.
Maybe it's the climate, but your right to pursue Happiness pretty much runs smack into my right to not allow you to freeze to death.
But tell me, Dear Reader, is it nature or nurture that sets our national Happiness bar at the level of a basic need while south of the border, well, there is no Happiness bar?
Fighting It Out In the Court of Public Opinion
Too funny. No wonder Mark Steyn is such a big fan of Conrad Black.
I just hope American fans of Mark Steyn don't actually take out a subscription to Macleans, thus increasing the size and breadth of Ted Rogers' already humungous wealth. I mean, pretty soon, Rogers will be a monopoly in everything Canadian. Which in turn will lead to more aggressive telemarketing campaigns to sell captive consumers more unreliable and expensive products.
Just when you sit down to dinner.
Nevermind the CHRC, American fans of Mark Steyn. Help Canadians bust up the Rogers' monopoly on everything Canadian by not buying Macleans.
Canada's New Militarism
I dunno, but it's as if Peacekeeping, as perilous as Canadians know it is, has taken a back seat to the New Conservative ego. And is it just me, or are you, too, Dear Reader, sick of how Afghanistan has been elevated to WWII status before Hollywood has even made the movie: "The Best Years of Canadian Lives"?
If at all possible, this New Conservative re-writing of our national Post-War identity galls me even more than the post-election-during-which-no-mention-was-made-of-Afghanstan-amping-up-of-the-mission-from-Peacekeeping-to-Warmaking.
It actually out-offends the New Conservative Government of Canada's American military import of labelling Non-New-Conservative-During-Wartime-Canadians as UnCanadian.
Slapping a New Conservative stamp on our country and preaching to the converted seems to be the only real priority of this New Conservative Government of Canada. The fact that most Canadians simply do not believe in what it's selling (with our money, of course) seems lost on it between elections. Not just because its version of us doesn't reflect what used to be true, but because it only risks the selling after it's been safely elected.
I mean, just as a minor point of interest, how many Canadians even know anymore that it was Chretien who actually put us in Afghanistan?
Not many, I'll wager. And that's because the mission has changed from a Peacekeeping gimme to Bush Inc to save us from Iraq (and I'm well aware of the fact that there was no peace to keep - but this is the consummate Liberal government I'm talking about here) to a military operation with a Made-in-America stamp and our own General Petreus ready to step up to the microphone to promote his war.
Let's face it - a Canadian army general is dictating Canadian foreign policy through our New Conservative Government of Canada as if that's how it was always done in this country.
So, is it just me, again, Dear Reader, or do you, too, remember a time when it wasn't?
Call me UnCanadian, but my sense is that Canadians do not, in any way, want to go down the American military foreign policy road that we are currently on in Afghanistan. Before the War on Terror was declared and the New Conservative Government of Canada was elected, I thought we considered ourselves and were considered abroad as Peacekeepers - a dangerous and deadly pursuit for the greater good that Americans left behind with isolationism and the Peace Corps.
Personally, I believe that, like the Americans in Iraq, we have no choice now but to stay the course in Afghanistan. And while I have the best of hopes for the soldiers who must do that, I have nothing but contempt for the governments that put us there. And while I know who Hillier and Harper are talking to when they beat their war drums, it isn't me - despite their laughable claim that we are in Afghanistan to promote women's rights.
In any case, if we're stupid enough to elect New Conservatives to Parliament again, we've no one to blame but ourselves for the New Militaristic Canadian identity our children will grow up to remember.
December 28, 2007
How We See Ourselves
Matters.
We see ourselves as a Peacekeeping Nation, therefore - we are a Peacekeeping Nation.
Ever since the start of the War on Terror, we've been fed this line, and it's just a line, by the Right that, in fact, Canada is NOT a Peacekeeping Nation.
Well, I'm sorry, but we are. In fact, we have made a conscious effort over the generations to distinguish ourselves from the United States by having a foreign policy that is not invasive and not militaristic any more than it is isolationist, as U.S. foreign policy so often has been.
THAT is what makes us a Peacekeeping Nation, Dear Reader. We collectively strive for peaceful resolutions of conflicts both real and potential - in spite of our great big powerful neighbour to the South.
You know, it occurs to me that the United States used to have a Peace Corp and it used to be quite isolationist. We were never that because we had a consciousness to our foreign policy that did not require a proactive peace movement and an involvement in the foreign policies of other countries that made the notion of isolationism seem defeatist.
Trudeau didn't pull the expression "Citizen of the World" out of thin air.
In any case, I'm prepared to argue that this new insistent line coming from inside the country that we are NOT a Nation of Peacekeepers is just more illegitimacy from the Right. Like I say, how we see ourselves matters and we see ourselves as a Nation of Peacekeepers.
Therefore, a Nation of Peacekeepers we are. Rick Hillier and his New Conservative government be damned.
Go ahead, Dude, resign your military office and run for political office. You'll find out what we think of military leaders who meddle in politics.
Haha! You're NOT Adopted!
So, with all these celebrity adoptions in the news I suppose it's only a matter of time before the adopted kids of celebrities will be saying to the biological children of celebrities, "Haha! You know who your parents are!" and that whole, "Haha! You're adopted!" schoolyard taunt will be turned on its head.
Bhutto's Murder
Well, since no one else seems to be calling it, I'm going to go with the C.I.A. Yup. You heard it on SooeySays first: The C.I.A. murdered Bhutto.
Benazir Bhutto, that is.
But is anybody really surprised that Benazir Bhutto was murdered? I mean, c'mon. I'm not even sure her death wouldn't more appropriately be labelled a suicide. It sure seems wilful enough to me. It wasn't a matter of if, as far as I could tell - it was more a matter of when - in 2007.
It was almost as if she was completely deluded as to what sort of protection she had while the rest of us were like, "Get out of Pakistan, you idiot!"
In any case, it proves Musharref was right to declare martial law earlier and that he was right about the instability of the country and he was right about not wanting an election.
Right, right, right.
The thing is, we all knew that, didn't we - particularly the part about the instability of the country. And when you stop and think about it (which no one ever does, Dear Reader, until it's too late), Pakistan pretty much got that way under Musharref's watch - even while the War on Terror was raging all around it. I mean, other than to oversee a dramatic slide into chaos and Islamic Fundamentalism, what was Musharref good for, exactly?
Well, whatever. One thing is for sure, the Americans should invade Pakistan now because, as we all know and are constantly reminded of whenever we try to forget it for even a second, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a crazy mad population of Islamic fundamentalists - unlike Iraq which we all agree maybe the Americans should not have invaded, but, well, there's no use crying over spilt milk as we in the West say of such trifling affairs.
So, yeah. This seems like a no brainer to me so it probably will to Bush Inc., too - with the up side that it brings us that much closer to winning the War on Terror by doing the opposite of what we started out doing when we invaded Iraq.
Invade Pakistan, Fortress America!
Wow, just when you thought it wasn't at all, Mark Steyn's "America Alone" seems almost prophetic. You know, the way even America's biggest and best allies in the War on Terror are turning out to be of no use at all, really, and, in fact, seem more like the enemy of freedom than anything else. Not that he said any of that, I don't think (I haven't read the book because I'm boycotting rightwingers until it's all over - all of it - and I'm very vague on "all" and "it" - so it's unlikely I'll ever read his book) - I just mean how he called the book "America Alone".
Meanwhile, Canada is totally the opposite now of what it was then (when "all of it" started). Under Stephen Harper and his New Conservative Government of Canada, we've done a total 180 and it's like we're the best America Firsters in the World (instead of somewhere just ahead of France) - right on time for Benazir Bhutto to be murdered next door to Afghanistan where we are - already - fighting the War on Terror otherwise known as the War in Afghanistan!
Although, sadly, Peter Mackay looks a little dated on that whole Iran thing, doesn't he. I hope he shuts up before we end up looking like we don't even know where the War on Terror actually is.
Today. Now. Right this minute, anyway.
December 26, 2007
The Man Who Wouldn't Celebrate Christmas
So, basically, what we have with Christmas, our big national holiday we are so desperate to protect from the Terrorists! et al, is a Judeo-Christian society totally geared to shop until it drops, which it does right up to the Big Day when we all take a breather to gorge ourselves on turkey and plum pudding, before returning to the malls on Boxing Day to start all over again.
I say we extend the Statutoriness of the Holiday Season to December. That'll confound the Terrorists! et al.
Because Christmas is a lot like Judgement Day, isn't it. We're all supposed to strive for the Christmas that doesn't exist because it's supposed to be meaningful when in fact it's just Big and Stupid. A great big stupid stuck at the end of the year, every year of our lives, forever and ever and a day, until the crabby hand of death slaps us dead.
But does it really have to be like that, Dear Reader?
I worked with a guy who decided one year he was just going to ignore Christmas. We bugged the crap out of him for it, too. "You mean you're just going to be a big ol' Scrooge?! Bah, humbug and all that?! A selfish ungrateful bastard who doesn't celebrate Christmas anymore just because he hates it?!"
But he stuck to his guns and now lives a Christmas-free life. He has kids, too. And he's divorced. But he finally decided he was tired of feeling bad and stressed out because of an annual and seemingly inescapable holiday that brought him no joy or satisfaction and so he just completely opted out of it all and took our protestations under advisement and shut his office door.
For years afterward he would still get presents from rellies who wouldn't take no for an answer, too. For all I know, he still does. He even told us at work about how his siblings would complain to him in annual phone calls from around the world about how much money they'd spent on his gift and how hard it was to find him just the right thing and here he was not even bothering to return the favour. Eventually, he took on a kind of mythical status because of his refusal to do what everybody wanted him to do - which was to participate in Christmas. It became what defined him. "Don't bother asking him to do it - he doesn't even celebrate Christmas. Even his own kids can't guilt him into celebrating it. He's a stone. Ask somebody else."
Anyway, I get a vicarious thrill every time I think of him working up until the holidays and then saying, "Enjoy your time off. I know I will. See you in the New Year." It was just so lone wolf of him, so manly, so something I would never in a million years have the balls to do but wish everyone else did so it would cease to be such an annual emotional vortex and I could enjoy life without any rude interruptions like Christmas.
Because that's what Christmas is for so many of us - just an annual emotional and consuming vortex we get spun through and spat out the other side of into the New Year. An annual Judgement Day. A great big, stupid annual Judgement Day that serves absolutely no purpose other than to perpetuate the myth that we've got something the Terrorists! et all want.
Gawd. We should be so lucky.
Women - Can't Argue With That
Read this and I guarantee, even though I'm not a pop psychologist who's just written a book, that if you are a woman, your blood pressure will rise, but if you are a man you'll be okay because you won't read past "Read this":
"Women have been influenced by popular culture and feminism to think, 'We fought too long and hard to get our way for somebody to tell us what to do,'" said Dr. Haltzman, noting that a male gesture as innocuous as recommending one gas station over another can be misinterpreted as his way of asserting control."A lot of the reason why we get involved in these power struggles is that we don't understand the other person's motivations."
Actually, Dr. Idiot, women behave like individuals in arguments - not women. That's because women are individuals. Never, ever, never, ever (and I'm speaking in absolutes, here) have I thought as a wife, "Women fought too long and hard to get our way for somebody to tell us what to do" and proceeded accordingly. I have thought, "I don't want us all to die penniless and starving in the streets, townsfolk throwing rocks at us and so I simply must win this argument", however.
I mean, really. Sometimes I think pop psychologists who write books about gender just want to perpetuate a lot of stereotypical nonsense that was put out there in the first place by pop psychologists who write books about gender - in order to sell their books to people who want to believe that women behave like stereotypes and not people.
Here's a title for your next book, Dr. Idiot: "Men are from God, Women are from the Devil".
December 25, 2007
Miracle on 34th Street
It's my favourite Christmas movie but as much as I like Mr. Galey, I'd like the ending better if he and Maureen O'Hara just got married and stayed in the apartment in downtown New York with that great view and she kept her job at Macy's and could still wear those smart outfits to work and be all business-like-mother with Suzie so that Suzie grows up knowing how important it is to be financially independent of men - especially a man like Mr. Galey who, good guy though he may be, did quit a secure job with a solid law firm to strike out on his own and defend Kris Kringle because he believed in him.
Good lawyers know their clients are guilty and proceed accordingly.
Poise Pads
I just saw a commercial for a new product - "Poise" pads. It featured a couple of women d'une certaine age laughing about something.
Now they need "Poise" pads. Because it wasn't something so funny they should have peed themselves laughing over it and yet, apparently they did.
What would society do without new products, eh? I mean, thanks to "Poise" pads, guys, women won't be squirting pee in your eye whenever you say something funny to impress them. It'll go right into their "Poise" pad instead, where special enzymes will absorb any odour so you won't even know she's peed her pantyhose laughing at your jokes.
A Christmas Message
I posted this on my forum and didn't realize how true it was until I'd re-read it for the 100th time.
This Christmas (and I play the whole thing by ear, letting everyone else have their way with Christmas first, before I do mine, which is lame, a fact everyone is well aware of by now) I'm making poutine with a large all white turkey breast that cost $22.00.
Now, I used to make an effort to introduce some health into my Christmas dinners, but as that went not-so-quietly unappreciated, I am going for broke this Christmas with poutine for sheer delight, Stove Top stuffing for that Christmassy smell, and homemade cranberry sauce - mostly so I can cook it in undiluted orange juice concentrate AND maple syrup. But really, if it is even human(e)ly possible to do, I believe I have succeeded in upping the Christmas dinner ante with poutine added to the menu.
Am I right? Of course I am. Frozen fries, lots of curds, and turkey gravy made with the butter drippings I coated the turkey breast skin in and a can of turkey gravy added for - yup - that Christmassy smell.
What is alarming (or not, even, I guess I'm so far down that road already) is that I used not to care how loved I was and would never have used food to buy devotion. That's how one survives the toddler years, Dear Reader, although people don't like to admit it. You can only love people at that time in their lives, you cannot expect love back and you show your love through healthy meals that make no attempt at indulgence.
And I was happy with the one way love flow. It didn't bother me a bit. In fact, it was the least of my concerns. Meals were healthy because health mattered to me - not love.
But then, as life happens, so too does the inevitable and all that goes with it. For women, it's easy. As we get older, we buy love back. It's an overnight thing, too, so your loved ones really don't see it coming. One day, you're the Belle of the Ball and love is just another thing to juggle, the next - you're trying to clog everyone's arteries with it.
And it works. It's pathetic, manipulative, possibly even murderous. But it works. Because your loved ones are getting older, too, and they want that special someone they trust more than anyone with their very lives to go the extra food mile and add poutine to the Christmas dinner menu.
Love really is a terrible thing at the end of the day - isn't it?
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Dear Reader.
December 24, 2007
Dressing Up & Going Out
So, I was explaining to my companion today how hard it is for me sometimes to be better'n everybody else at parties because I don't normally (or naturally) wear fishnet stockings and little pointy boots and hiphugging skirts with tight little sweaters over even tighter push-up bras.
It's quite an effort, actually. But due to some sort of bizarre oneupmanship syndrome, I cannot not do it.
Anyway, I don't expect others to do it, too, I'm not like that about it. It's just something I have to do. At this point he interjected helpfully that it's a good thing others don't do this oneupmanship thing, too, because then I'd have to up the ante to absolutely painful getups to look just that much better. You know, higher skinny heels with even pointier toes, tighter thighhugging skirts so I can barely walk, actual fish net stockings with lures and hooks dangling off them for that "fresh catch" look no one else thought to go for. Until, one evening, there she is with a couple of cod dangling from her garter.
But I said, no, that if everybody else started trying too hard, I'd just do the reverse and show up in baggy old flannel pajamas, running shoes, face all scrubbed clean and ready for bed. Glasses. Maybe bring a bag to fill with goodies from the buffet table. Oh, and I'd have a sign explaining what I do for a living, "Typical Office Drone", so I wouldn't have to bother talking about my job, trying oh so hard to make it sound more interesting than it is and another sign explaining my marital status "Happily Married", so I wouldn't have to justify my living arrangements to strangers - not that strangers want to hear about my marital status anyway, I just feel compelled to go on and on about it, to explain myself to all and sundry thereby justifying my continued existence on the planet to people who never thought to question it but probably do after they've met me at a party.
Family - Building Block to Fascism
Why do we refer to the Family as the basic building block of society when families are actually authoritarian dictatorships with no inherent (or inherited) democratic values at all?
I mean, really. How bullshitty and for how long?
And who are we trying to kid, anyway?
Cripes, we started off swimming around in schools. I vote for going back a ways and making public schools the building blocks of society. Sure, public schools aren't exactly democracies, either, but everybody's got to keep their hands where we can see them, at least.
And no hitting allowed, either.
Annapolis Then and Now
Yes, Dear Reader, that was then:
"The Annapolis conference has been the beginning, not the end, of a new serious and substantive effort to achieve peace in the Middle East," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday evening. "This work will be hard, it involves risks and sacrifices for all concerned. To be sure, the issues to be resolved by both parties are very challenging," she said. "But difficult to resolve does not mean impossible to resolve."
This is now:
The confirmation of an Israeli plan to build 740 apartment units in areas the Palestinians view as their own will complicate planned Mideast peace talks, officials and observers warned Sunday. The Israeli government plans to allocate $25 million to build 500 new units in East Jerusalem and 240 nearby in the West Bank, Rafi Eitan, the cabinet minister for Jerusalem affairs, said Sunday. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Fatah party controls the West Bank, said building the apartments will breach Israel's agreement to halt construction while the two sides try and work out a peace deal. "We can't understand these settlement activities at a time we're talking about final status negotiations," Abbas said.
I guess Israel just doesn't give a shit what the world thinks of it, anymore. Fair enough, I guess. Why should it, really? The U.S. doesn't, either, and it's doin' alright, Jack.
Anyway, I guess we're well into the New World Order two generations of Bush Inc. warned us of and there's no going back now, eh?
In the meantime, I've come to realize that people who argue online in defence of Israel no matter what the reality for the Palestinians are really just suffering from betrayal and hurt feelings that their side is so clearly not wearing its white hats into battle while the other side doesn't even have white flags to wave in response.
It's over. Why is the world pretending that there can be any kind of Palestinian existence alongside or even within Israel when Israel is very clearly showing the world that there can't be and there won't be and that's it and that's all?
It's absurd and cruel, this pretending that what is a done deal - isn't.
December 23, 2007
A Funny Christmas Story
My ex has this friend, who, when he was younger, was even more of a sadsack than he is now. He used to come over to visit us whenever he was between girlfriends, which he frequently was, and we'd drink beer and smoke cigarettes until he went home.
There was nothing else we could do with him. So that's what we did. Drank beer and smoked cigarettes.
Anyway, one year he dropped by just before Christmas with a case of beer, which was very unusual because he was usually between jobs as well as girlfriends and we weren't used to him showing up with refreshments. So, we're having a beer and shooting the shit as they say when he leans in and gets real serious, "Okay. I've gotta tell you guys something because it just happened and now I'm thinking I didn't do the right thing at all."
Now, this was a guy who was a series of unfortunate incidences, but to realize it, well, this was new territory. We were intrigued.
"I was walking down Yonge Street and I ran into Nancy, you know, my old girlfriend. You guys met her. She has brown hair. Anyway, we were talking and suddenly I realized I'd never gotten her anything. You know, like a present or anything, because I wasn't working when I went out with her. So, well, she was just about to go on her way and it was all good so I pulled out my wallet and gave her $20. That was what I made in tips last night, so it was all I had. I dunno now, though. Do you think that was enough? Or do you think she'll be mad that it was only $20?"
Long story short, some woman actually married him and now he's got a house and two kids.
Clear Your Drains, Taxpayer!
By the way, if you live in Ottawa, you may have seen a segment on CBC news at six involving a reporter out and about showing Ottawans how to find out where the drains were on their streets in order to clear them of snow.
Apparently, there are paint markings that, if you clear the road of snow and ice, will point to where the drain is so you can clear that, too.
It's true. Apparently, none of this is covered by your taxes so if you don't get out there and clear the city's drains and then there's flooding everywhere - IT'S YOUR FAULT!!!
December 22, 2007
The Smoking Gun
HarperAECLAppointeeBurnsLands10MillionDollarGrant
Michael Burns, the B.C. businessman and backroom Conservative who recently resigned as chairman of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., is also chairman of a Vancouver wind power firm the federal government approved for up to $10 million in alternate energy funding while Mr. Burns was AECL chairman.The offshore wind power company, NaiKun Wind Energy Group, has two former assistants to Prime Minister Stephen Harper as senior officers and also has other well-connected Conservatives on its board of directors.
Okay. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that this is what we've been looking for on Mr. Harper. Let the big fall of Humpty Dumpty begin.
Christophobia
Wouldn't it be hilarious if the media went on a Christophobic campaign to equal its Islamophobic campaign based on the behaviour of those idiots who phoned up and harassed an Ottawa public elementary school for planning to take the word "Christmas" out of a carol (in the end they were so terrified, they left it in - so the Christianists won - just like Terrorists do when they harass Canadian public elementary schools over Ramadan - NOT) because a bunch of hate radio phone-in show hosts incited them to do it?
You know, I've never heard anyone from any other religious culture complain that their holidays aren't statutory but that Christian holidays are. Their kids take their days and make the lost time up later. Christian kids get the motherlode of holidays (that don't even apply to kids of other faiths) and it's all officially sanctioned and they don't have to make up for the time off and yaddayaddablahblah.
And yet, these people who are catered to and molly coddled like no other group in the country still cry about how hard done by they are.
Well, I just think it's time the media gave them something to cry about, that's all.
December 21, 2007
Hate Radio Hosts
I was thinking maybe I should incite everybody to phone up hate radio hosts and tell them what bulbous wadporks they are but then I realized they like that phone-in hate shit.
I mean, really. They know their listeners are stupid idiots because they're listening to them. They know they have nothing better to do than phone-in their hate because that's what phone-in hate radio show listeners are all about. So to incite them to harass a public elementary school at this time of year, tie up the phone lines and terrorize staff, is, I think, criminal.
Seriously, whoever they are, these hate radio hosts who incited this nasty mayhem, I hope they are charged with something. Anything. In the meantime, and this isn't relevant to the behaviour of the types of witless bozos who would encourage their stupid idiot clientele to phone up public elementary schools for the purpose of harassment, we need to add a word to "Freedom of Religion" so it reads "Freedom of/from Religion".
Fair is fair.
The True Meaning of Christmas
That's right. If you can't be exclusionary, be mean:
WhoTheFuckTookChristmasOutOfTheCarol?!
An elementary school in Ottawa was flooded with hateful and threatening e-mails and phone calls after media reports that it had removed the word "Christmas" from a song to be performed at its Christmas concert.
I dunno. Elmdale parents should tone it down a bit. That school was on the OCDSB chopping block when my kids' school was on the chopping block and it was only saved by its sheer wealth in numbers.
Literally. It was money what saved it. The absolutely gross incomes of the kids' parents. Because otherwise, it was older and in need of a lot of repair and didn't have nearly the numbers of students relative to its capacity that other closed down schools had.
That was before Lynn Scott was Chair, though. She used to just be a regular old rightwing Trustee who routinely voted to close down schools like ours - which was in good repair, 100% full, in an townhouse-type neighbourhood chockablock with young families.
Oh my. I'd forgotten all about fighting the OCDSB for years and years for no apparent reason because you could have all the evidence in the world that they were making a mistake in closing your school and it didn't make a whit of difference in the end.
Oh dear. Now see? I'm mad all over again. That's the effect the OCDSB has had on me.
Anyway, here's an Ottawa factoid. Did you know it used to have 8 school boards? Well, it did:
Ottawa Public, Ottawa Catholic, Ottawa French Public, Ottawa French Catholic
Carlteon Public, Carleton Catholic, Carleton French Public, Carleton French Catholic
But then, when Ottawa et all was amalgamated, the four Ottawa boards combined with the four Carleton boards to form the Ottawa Carleton Public, Ottawa Carleton Catholic, Ottawa Carleton French Public, Ottawa Carleton French Catholic.
Our school board was/is the Ottawa Carlton Public, more formally known as the Ottawa Carleton District School Board (OCDSB). I grew to know all the Trustees and like only one by the end of it all and I only really liked her because she was sane, not necessarily because she was a particularly good Trustee. It was the dirtiest of political experiences and environments and almost a relief when the bastards finally voted to close our school.
Trustees are not people to spend any amount of time with, Dear Reader. That's because only crazy fucked up assholes want to be Trustees.
So, long post short - what do I wish Dalton McGuinty would do in 2008? Scrap the school boards.
Oh, but first, maybe police could lay charges against the radio hosts responsible for this. Or better yet, maybe somebody could lay a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission:
Teachers had originally intended to replace "Christmas time" and other Christmas references from the song's original 1951 lyrics with words referring to "a festive time." When news of the plan reached the media, some radio call-in shows and blogs encouraged people to contact the school in protest.
Because I think that's inciteful behaviour. I really do. At the very least it's being a public nuisance. C'mon. Somebody lay a charge. Those hateful pricks who called the school and sent e-mails are practically begging for it. We've got freedom of religion here in this country, dumbasses. If that means taking the word "Christmas" out of a carol, tough nuts. It's none of your gawddamned fucking business if Elmdale, a public school, takes the word "Christmas" out of a carol. None.
Whackjobs. Lock 'em up and make society safer for the rest of us, I say.
December 20, 2007
A Hope for the New Year
Here's what I hope for from the United States for the New Year:
Less prayer, more thought.
Ottawa Weather
NCC spokeswoman Kathryn Keyes said the commission -- through its contractor, Capital Property Guardians -- is trying two strategies to get the skateway going. Between the National Arts Centre and Patterson Creek, the contractor is flooding the snow-covered canal and developing an ice surface that is fairly thick, about 30 centimetres, but of poor quality.South of Patterson Creek, the contractor is taking the more traditional approach of waiting for the ice to get thicker, then clearing the ice of snow.
The ice south of Patterson Creek is only at about 7.5 centimetres thick, and 20 centimetres of ice is needed to safely support heavy equipment.
Seriously, could Ottawa's weather be more bureaucratic, do you think?
Because I don't think it could.
I'd Sue, Myself
I mean, this scam is just too easy, isn't it? I'd be half inclined to sue the government for entrapment. No... make that three quarters inclined. No wait... half. Half inclined.
Hey,NewImmigrants!OpenAConvenienceStore!MakeMoneyFast!
Police say the four Toronto co-workers purchased a Lotto 6-49 ticket in June 2004 at a retail outlet in central Ontario. Malik, who used to operate a small convenience store in Toronto's west end, is alleged to have claimed the $5,750,256 jackpot in January 2005.
Public Funding for Book Banning
TheGoldenCompass&TheCatholicSchoolBoard
At a board meeting Tuesday, the majority of members of the Halton District Catholic School Board voted to ban the title, which they deemed was "not in line with our governing values," board chair Alice Anne LeMay said, according to the Toronto Star.
Okay. So are the Halton District Catholic School Board's governing values in line with the Provincial Government of Ontario's governing values?
Looks like. Which means the Government of Ontario is in favour of banning books from the education system because they aren't religious.
Tsk, tsk. And John Tory was the bad guy for putting this nonsense out there where everybody could see it?
Pandering Governments
Say, remember when we didn't have governments that pandered to the racist vote? Or am I just imagining a Canadian history that never was?
Anyway, I was thinking of Muslim Women this morning and how unfair it is to them living here in Canada where they get it from all sides all the time by anyone and everyone.
On that note, remember the Holocaust everybody. The kids are studying it in school these days so they are very aware of the steps taken by governments that can lead to tragedies like the Holocaust, but adults tend to forget the details and isolate the result as some sort of evil aberration only Nazis are capable of perpetrating.
I think, anyway.
December 19, 2007
Islam & Women
What strikes me about this "Islam is the problem for Muslim women" argument put forward by some in this society is that it dismisses the many Muslim women who practice their faith because they are Islamic. It's incredibly western-centric and patronizing to my mind that conservative westerners think it their duty to save women from Islam. Why would Muslim women want to give up their religion because of how it's interpreted by others, whether those others are Imams or conservative westerners?
Anti-Catholicism on The Agenda
1) Give me a fucking break.
2) Boo hoo.
3) Now buy yourself some Pope soap on a rope.
4) Wash those painful anti-Catholic taunts away.
5) Don't go on TV again to reveal yourselves.
Now for some reality. Nobody is stopping you from congregating to share your beliefs in places of worship. Nobody is even trying to stop you from congregating to share your beliefs in places of worship. There is absolutely no discrimination against Catholics in this country. None. It is, in fact, grossly nonsensical to argue that there is and not argue instead that Catholic men are probably the least discriminated against group of people to ever have existed in this country. I really truly deeply cannot believe what I am seeing on TVO tonight.
There but for the grace of god go I.
Re Mark Steyn Again
Okay. I've boiled down my argument to this: There shouldn't be a law, however quasi, against being an asshole.
The fact that it's Mohammed Elmasry behind the Human Rights complaint against Mark Steyn made it easier to boil that argument down, by the way.
But seriously, if the best the Islamophobes can come up with against Mohammed Elmasry is something he said a couple of years ago on Michael Coren's show about Israeli citizens being legitimate targets of violence for suicide bombers because every Israeli citizen over the age of 18 is in the army, well, I dunno but I really don't think that's such an outrageous thing to say, given the context of the Middle East and the fact that the Palestinian side sends suicide bombers off into Israeli neighbourhoods while the Israeli side sends its army in to Gaza to completely level Palestinian neighbourhoods in retaliation.
I mean, since when is any of it legitimate? Talk about splitting irrelevant hairs. Uh... okay... they're not legitimate targets of violence, then. Happy? Geez Louise, at least Elmasry put an age limit on who was a legitimate target of violence and who wasn't.
Yeah, yeah. Save your finger wagging for another tribe betrayer. I'm not agreeing with Mohammed Elmasry that Israeli citizens over the age of 18 are legitimate targets of violence either, okay? I'm just saying if that's the best the Islamophobes can come up with, I'm not impressed.
And there still shouldn't be a law, however quasi, against being an asshole.
But there is, I guess, and since there is, I can't see that Mark Steyn isn't guilty of breaking it. In fact, I think there are a lot of Islamophobes who have been breaking it for the past six years. Not that I care. Islam isn't a person, it's a religion. And religion is just sexist bullshit preached by crazy men in dresses.
What to Say at Parties
So I just came up with what to say to somebody who's defending somebody else who's an asshole, really, and who wouldn't be being defended except that he's really good at what he does. Just say, "Yabbut, it's not like he's saving the elephants, is he?" because chances are, that's not what he's really good at and therefore there is absolutely no justification for him being an asshole.
Try it. Like I say, I just came up with it but I'm planning on using it a lot because I'm really tired of people who get away with being assholes just because they're good at what they do when what they do isn't even saving the elephants.
Because there's nothing more important right now than saving the elephants. So unless that's what you're doing, you're not at all important and have no excuse for being an asshole.
The Politics of Stephen Harper
Gawd, Stephen Harper is a puke, eh?
Anyway, I was going to say that Stephen Harper is really only good for winning when he's perceived as an underdog, but now that he's not an underdog, what came out was, "Gawd, Stephen Harper is a puke, eh?"
And that's without any Mulroney taint, too. Imagine if he gets any on him. Ooh, that'll be beauty. Stephen Harper splattered with the taint of Brian Mulroney.
Please let it happen, Oh Merciful Gawd.
December 18, 2007
Speaking of The Agenda
I notice there's a priest on tonight's episode called "The 24/7 Lifestyle". His name is Raymond de Souza and I recognize his name from several sexist columns he's penned for the National Post.
Now, I hope he figures that because he's wearing a priest's collar it protects him from me blogging, "Go fuck yourself, de Souza, you no-necked pea-brain!"
Haha! Because it doesn't.
As Multicultural As It Gets
Have you ever noticed that even on shows as aware and genuinely politically correct as The Agenda they only have people of colour on the discussion panel when the topic is something multiculturalism related? I mean, I'm not a person of colour, but I think I'm starting to understand why they always seem so pissed off when their topic finally rolls around and they get to go on tv to complain about how society still favours white guys and the white guys on the panel are like, "What the fuck are you talking about?"
Ottawa's Private Property Rights
Anybody who thinks private property ownership is at risk in this country should just visit Ottawa. Right now and for the past couple of months and for an indeterminate time in the future, a delinquent property owner is holding Centretown in Ottawa hostage. An unsafe, structurally unsound building stands surrounded by barricades, the streets cordonned off, no buses allowed through, police on duty with cars idling 24/7, traffic gridlocked for blocks.
Today, an ambulance couldn't get through all the mayhem.
The city councillor for the Centretown area is really good, too. But even she can't work around the rights this guy seems to have. Businesses in the area are suffering because nobody can get to them, the city offered up free parking to encourage people to shop in what is essentially a walk by downtown shopping area, so, of course, the parking spots have been snapped up by government workers looking for free parking spots.
Now, with the crazy amount of snow we've had, the situation is even worse in terms of traffic gridlock and less room for pedestrians who can't take the bus anymore all the way up Bank Street because a huge section of it is blocked off and buses are detouring around it.
You wouldn't believe it. Or maybe you would. I don't know. What I do know is that the private property rights of one person are impacting on the public property rights of thousands of people with no end in sight and it's becoming very clear very quickly to a lot of very inconvenienced people that what we need in this country are public property rights to check and balance this insanely unfair situation.
December 17, 2007
Souls For A Christian God
I know I shouldn't, but really - I can't help myself. What difference could it possibly make to anyone except a Christian God if a soul isn't sent His way because it wasn't ever conceived?
What's the "pro-choice" line? "Every child should be wanted"? Not anymore. The progressive position has subtly evolved: Every child should be unwanted.
Sigh. No. Actually. The pro-choice line is still the same, Dear Reader, in spite of Mark Steyn. Essentially, if you want a child, have a child. Or don't. Just don't tell another women that she has to have a child. And maybe if you're a man accusing Muslims of being backward and you're being called on it and expecting Feminists to rush to your defence because the group calling you on it is the Canadian Islamic Congress, sigh - just. shut. the. fuck. up.
I support free speech, you support free speech. And nobody likes the Canadian Islamic Congress. Nobody. And yet, you make it so hard, dude.
See, you can European it, (hehe), Western it, but you may as well just come out with it - for some reason, you think (obsessively) that more white Christian babies is the answer to all the world's problems.
Why? I mean, really. What is it about white Christians that you think is so Gawddamned superior? I mean, read yourself:
The birth of a child. On the one hand, what could be more powerless than a newborn babe? On the other, without a newborn babe, man is ultimately powerless. For, without new life, there can be no civilization, no society, no nothing. Even if it's superstitious mumbo-jumbo, the decision to root Christ's divinity in the miracle of His birth expresses a profound - and rational - truth about "eternal life" here on earth.
Um. No. No, it doesn't. It just goes to show you that people will believe anything if told it to them by men wearing bossy hats.
Meanwhile... THERE ARE SIX BILLION PEOPLE ON THE PLANET!!!!!!! WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT COLOUR OR RELIGION THEY ARE?????!!!!!!! THERE ARE SIX BILLION PEOPLE ON THE PLANET!!!!!!!!
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa - Who let Diwali in the Holiday Season?
Wow. I can't believe how Christmas is being totally drowned out in a sea of Multiculturalism. I mean, Diwali, Diwali, Diwali. Gawd. Enough already with Diwali. It's the Holiday Season you, you , you, Diwalians - and that means Christmas, dammit!
At least it does in this country.
December 16, 2007
SpokesImams
You know, if every time a Christian woman was murdered by her ex for leaving him, the media went to a Christian leader for an explanation as to why this had happened - or perhaps, REAL Women, to ask their opinion as to why this had happened - I imagine we'd all get pretty tired pretty quickly of hearing from Christian leaders and REAL Women as if they represented the entire Christian community with regards to women's issues and, in particular, violence against women.
I'm just saying.
Also, I've noticed a number of Rightwing Pundits are blaming Feminists and Feminist women's groups for not preventing or speaking out against the murders in Canada of teenaged girls by their Muslim fathers every single gawddamned time it happens.
Uh hunh.
It reminds me of when Mark Lepine gunned down a lot of women because he was crazy and had a gun and hated Feminists and those same Rightwing Pundits got angry about how all men got tarred with the violence against women brush by some Feminist women's groups such that they are STILL angry about the injustice of it all and even re-run columns annually to re-express their outrage lest we forget how unfair it is of Feminists to blame all men for the actions of one man.
Yup. Like shooting fish in a barrel it is. And yet, I'm just the office clerk and they've got the public pulpits.
December 15, 2007
Dangerous Ideas
I think Conservative men believe in dangerous ideas. But I'm a Feminist, and I would think that, wouldn't I. Because men who think that the women of their tribe should be the ones giving birth more often than the women of other tribes, are the same men who believe the State should be the enforcer of those beliefs, who are the same men who believe that the State has too much power in their lives such that there should only be the State of the Family, who are the same men who believe they should be President for Life of the State of the Family.
The biological clock is real, but now that women are in control of it, the men who believe in the dangerous ideas above want to turn back time. They genuinely believe that women cannot be allowed to have freedom because freedom means choice and choice means power and that's what they want - power - power for the President for Life of the State of the Family.
If you don't see women as people, why would you want them to have power? And Conservative men don't see women as people. Conservative women don't mind that, I guess. But I do. So, I can't allow what Conservative men (and women) want to happen, because it means I will no longer be a free person. I'll just be a woman.
Marriage Tip of the Day
Okay all you younger female Dear Readers out there. Here is Sooey's marriage tip of the day:
It's all about timing. What you want now, you didn't want when you were 8 and you won't want when you are 35. And all you really want now is not to give up a bird in the hand so some other woman can have him.
So, your marriage won't last, but after several years of playing "Who Suffers More" you can rest assured that he will finally respect you when you leave him AND all the effort you put into trying to change him into someone else was not wasted because you'll have learned that trying to change people makes them think maybe you don't like them the way they are and then they end up being resentful and passive aggressive and being even more like they are than you ever thought possible.
Which is by now the direct opposite of who you want.
Also, be prepared to only want him in the event he finds someone new. This can be a very awkward time for you personally because it's hard to accept that all your efforts to change him are going to be to the benefit of someone else while you really haven't got much going for yourself in the meet someone new department on account of you've wasted so much time on making your bird in the hand better for someone else.
UNLESS, and this is very important Dear Young Female Reader, you are blissfully happy yourself in a new relationship - in which case you desperately want him to be happy in one, too. There is no time for being bigger'n all outdoors as when you are blissfully happy in a new relationship. It is absolutely the best time to wish goodwill upon your fellow man, especially your ex.
And that's how it all ends. Everybody gets to be happy because after 40 you'll be so busy being yourself and being blissfully happy with someone else being himself that you won't have time to work on changing him into someone better for someone else.
"The Pat Martin Story
Right? Am I right? That guy thinks he's starring in this movie, doesn't he. He thinks HE's the star and Brian Mulroney is just some studio hack who gets set up with a few cheap lines and taken out in the second scene by some killer squirrels or something.
Look, dude - it's not "The Pat Martin Story". It's Brian Mulroney starring in "The Biggest Mistake Of My Life".
Gawd.
Scene stealer.
December 14, 2007
Arguing On The Internet
I figured out something out on my dog walk tonight with my companion. (That doesn't type out right, but it's me and my companion walking my dog. I am not the dog. The dog is the dog. Although he does tend to pull me around on his leash in the worst way.)
Anyway, my companion doesn't bother much with the Internet (my dog not at all, although he does watch TV and will run at the screen if there's a bad dog on it - and all dogs are bad because he knows stuff about his own kind that we humans are alarmingly oblivious to) even less with arguing on it (almost to the point where he doesn't argue at all on the Internet because he doesn't post on it, either) so sometimes my conversations with him about MY arguments on the Internet are a little one-sided, but he offered up tonight that he thought maybe people saw things in a more polarized way when they were arguing on the Internet.
Which led me to my brilliant theory, Dear Reader.
I think people don't argue about how they see things at all when they argue on the Internet. I think they argue with how OTHER people see things.
Cool, eh? It just came to me like that, too. One minute I was thinking people saw things in black & white when they argued on the Internet, but then I realized - no. They see the OTHER person as seeing things in black - and only black. So they argue white - and only white - to bring the person who argues black in to a grey area.
Then, someone else, who has had the benefit of reading both the black, and then the white, argument - will offer up the grey argument. But even he isn't arguing about whatever issue is supposedly being argued about. He's just responding to the argument as it has sprung up and away from the actual issue at hand and offering up what he thinks is reality.
But it's not. Because a grey argument really isn't an argument at all. It's just the middle ground. Like limbo or somesuch. Meanwhile, the black argument arguer, who sees things in black & white and therefore argues black, thinks the greyer is just as bad as the white argument arguer - while the white argument arguer is incredulous that the greyer can share any degree of commonality with the black argument arguer and isn't instead arguing the white argument with the white argument arguer.
Those people really bug my ass - the greyers. I mean, really. I think the white argument arguer can see that there is a grey area, dude, that's why he's posited a white argument on the Internet - to counter balance the black argument of the black argument arguer.
Geez Loufuckin'ise. Some people. Thanks. But maybe just fuck off the Internet, greyers.
December 13, 2007
Tryin' Brian
Okay. Here's a fact I didn't know existed until today. I can't watch Brian Mulroney try to pretend he's telling the truth. I just can't. It's a physical thing. My body shrivels up and my eyes squish shut. When it's over, Richard Nixon echoes through my brain, "I am not a crook. I am not a crook. I am not a crook."
"I Am Not An Islamophobe"
This is my favourite line in Mr. Steyn's attempt to link the murder of a teenaged girl by her Islamic father to a Human Rights complaint against him by the Canadian Islamic Congress, while essentially re-implying that there is a Muslim Menace threatening our very existence at this moment that we ignore at our peril (Note the "They" that starts off the quote):
They now happen in the heart of western cities, and western feminist groups are silent, and western media rush to excuse it as just one of those things, couldda happened to anybody.
Well, actually, Mr. Steyn - western Feminist groups would probably like women to be included in the protection provided by hate crime laws and religion excluded from the protection provided by hate speech laws, but there you go - certainly New Conservatives here in Canada and Old Republicans there in the United States would disagree.
I dunno. Call me a Feminist, but I think it's largely thanks to guys like you that Imams et al can preach hatred against women - if and when they do. And it's thanks to guys like you that women often have nowhere to turn when confronted with violence in the home - if and when they are.
Because keeping women safe from violent controlling men requires government funding, not tax cuts.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but guys like you have disagreed from your mainstreammedia pulpits with every Feminist advancement made in this country for anybody and everybody - EVER.
You know, women are murdered by controlling men in Canada often enough (and Canada is where this girl was murdered, she was Canadian, and just as dead here as if she'd been killed in Pakistan) - usually because they are gunned down by a formerly law-abiding ex - and I don't see any columns from you boohooing that fact. Although... come to think of it... you have reprinted often enough a twisted column that you seem to think is worth reading annually about the Montreal Massacre - you know, how the murderer was Algerian-born and that's why it happened - or somesuch (I'm just guessing, I've never actually made it through the column) - not because he was crazy and had a gun and was able to kill lots of people with it.
So yeah, long post short - selfserve with righteous indignation much, Mark Steyn?
Oh, and don't forget to write about the next man who murders a woman in Canada so it doesn't look like you only notice the Muslim Murders.
You know, Mark Steyn, as a Feminist, I'd like to take the Canadian Islamic Congress and shove it up its own ass. But, I feel that way about all Patriarchal outfits.
Including you.
Baird in Ottawa
I know someone who voted for Larry O'Brien based on his promise to cancel the lightrail project. I'd forgotten until today that John Baird had a hand in that, as well. Ottawa really is a small town to swing big deals in, especially when one party is a crazy nut from loonytuneville and the other one looks like John Baird:
In October, Larry O'Brien asked the Treasury Board, the department that oversees federal spending, to conduct a value-for-dollar audit of the light-rail contract. Mike Patton, a spokesman for O'Brien said the then candidate "just wanted to make sure the federal government had done due diligence." And as it turns out, the president of the Treasury Board agreed it needed a second look.Enter John Baird.
Alberta Bound
I can't imagine any amount of money is worth it, but there you go - tarsands are tarsands, I guess:
As many as 10 people have been taken to hospital after a passenger bus and a semi-trailer collided on the highway to Fort McMurray. Some of the injuries are described as critical.
Alberta bound, Alberta bound...
TooLittle,TooLate
The report stops short of calling for a moratorium on the weapon, but says the force needs to limit its use, increase training for officers and conduct more research on the weapon's effects.
Of course it does. That's because the litigious threats of Taser International must be considered first on account of we're a country of scum-sucking-bottom-feeders what does business with greedy petty thugs now.
Thanks, New Conservative Government of Canada.
OhPleaseOhPleaseOhPlease
Let John Baird be involved up to his beady little eyeballs in this sleazy bit o' Rightwing politicking:
Ottawa'sDulyElectedMayorLarryO'Brien
Mr. Baird has said he never had a scheduled meeting with Mr. O'Brien, but may have bumped into him at Hy's. In an interview with OPP detectives, Mr. Baird said he told them he was dining with a constituent -- not Mr. O'Brien. The cabinet minister declined to tell the Citizen the identity of the male constituent.
Santa? It's all I want for Christmas...
RedCrossGetsCross
The ICRC says it recognises Israel's right to take measures to defend itself."[But this] needs to be balanced against the Palestinians' right to live a normal and dignified life," said Ms Roggo.
Haha, Red Cross. Clearly, it doesn't.
Harper Rolls The Dice
ON NUCLEAR ENERGY!!!
EvenLapdogToNuclearIndustrySaysShut'ErDown
Can we impeach this New Conservative bunch of incompetent partisan boobs? I mean, yeah - I don't care much for Liberals, either - but I do prefer them to a nuclear meltdown.
December 12, 2007
Nucular Government
Okay. I get the need to have isotopes for cancer patients, but I'm not so clear on the whole re-opening of the nuclear plant in Chalk River when its backup system is inoperative or not working properly or whatever it was that caused it to be shut down in the first place by somebody who was actually paying attention.
And, call me paranoid, but it strikes me that Stephen Harper is willing to go all the way to a nuclear meltdown to make the point that the previous Liberal government was partisan.
I mean, what if, in this case, the safety regulator is telling the truth about the nuclear power plant's current state of UNsafety, even though the safety regulator also happens to be a Liberal appointee?
What if everybody who was ever appointed to a position of responsibility by a government ISN'T a partisan liar and that, in fact, the odd one is actually telling the truth and trying to protect public safety by telling the truth about A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NOT BEING SAFE!
Canadian Culture
Why are we tsktsking about what is happening to people from other cultures, within their culture, when they come here? I mean, obviously, the failing is ours as a society if women from elsewhere in the world AND/OR women who are native born to Canada are being murdered in our midst by men who see it as their right - for any reason.
It seems to me we are much less than we think we are with our insistence on protecting religion - all religion - as we do here in Canada.
Rights and freedoms belong to individuals, not Institutions.
Tip Of The Day
If you don't believe in women having reproductive choice, including the right and access to legal abortion services, then you believe in the state having ultimate control over the individual.
December 11, 2007
Good Golly Gee, God
Ouch, baby. Did you know that if we have Imams, or any other religious leaders, inciting hatred against women, that they can't be charged under our hate crime laws because women aren't included in Bill C-250? Oh, and also, that religious hate is exempt from Bill C-250, anyway? So, even if women were included, because religion is exempt, God's double negative prerogative is met under Canadian law?
Status of bill C-250: The bill was given royal assent by the Queen's representative in Canada on 2004-APR-29. It took immediate effect. It is now part of the legal code of Canada. Some propaganda directing hatred against persons of any sexual orientation, heterosexuals, homosexuals and/or bisexuals, is now a crime in Canada. Sexual orientation has now joined four other groups protected against hate speech on the basis of their "color, race, religion or ethnic origin." However, a "not withstanding" type clause allows hate speech if it is religiously motivated. In essence, the law states that the freedom of one person to express religiously-motivated hatred is given higher priority that the freedom of another person to be free of hatred expressed against them.
Hm. I guess this is where the Canadian Human Rights Act takes over?
Or does it?
And if it doesn't, why doesn't it?
Good God in Heaven, why have you forsaken women?
Even under Canadian law?
Tidy First, Talk Later
I think this guy is doing his best Monty Python here:
"They believe that such operations will harm the resistance and weaken it, but they are mistaken," said Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum.
What else is there to do, I suppose, but threaten more violence:
Muslim Murder
Subtitled: "SHE JUST WOULDN'T DO WHAT I WANTED!"
Okay. Before the Internet goes crazy with Islamophobia, let me just say, murder is murder is murder. When a quiet guy takes out his ex and their kids, it's because he's depressed, things are out of his control, no one can go on without him (because he's going to off himself, too), women are bitches, he has money woes, she has a new boyfriend/job/life, he can't stand not seeing his kids, he has nothing to live for, yaddayaddablahblah, on and on and on it goes.
It's always something, as Gilda Radner so famously said.
Meanwhile, in other news, most Muslim Canadian fathers did not kill their Westernized daughters today.
This Muslim man who did will be charged with 2nd degree murder. He'll be convicted. And then he'll join all the other men in prison who have killed women in this country.
Finally, it certainly seems like the appropriate time to abolish the legal right of parents to hit their children. That would send a crystal clear message to all Canadians as to where we stand on the fundamental right of our most vulnerable citizens to live free of the threat of physical violence from their parents, at least.
December 10, 2007
Further On Steynsense
Yeah, yeah. Defend. Rights. Speech.
But here's the thing that I can't really square with making too strong a defence of Mark Steyn (et al) and their version of free speech (and it is a version, Dear Reader). He HAS engaged in an alarm bell campaign in both his columns and his book "I Slam, You Slam, We All Slam Islam" regarding the migration of Muslims to the West - at a time when the country he lives in is engaged in a War on Terror - i.e. bombing the countries where Muslims live. He has warned over and over that the Muslim culture is to be feared by the West (particularly by women in the West, who he warns will be stripped of their rights and burka'd), that the Muslim birthrate poses a demographic danger to the West such that women in the West should be forced to give birth, and that we underestimate at our democratic peril the negative political influence Muslims already here are having and will continue to have on our once idyllic Western way of life.
I know this because my co-worker believes everything both Mark Steyn and David Warren say to be true. He reads them day after day in the newspaper and online and because he is naturally impressionable and of a certain political bent (RightWingNut) he agrees with each new spin on the same argument (and they make it day after day year after year) that there is a Muslim menace and that it is to feared to such an extent that we need to support our governments when they take action against the countries where Muslims live and that we need to restrict their entry into the West because they will irrevocably alter our way of life - in the worst sense of alter.
And again, I know all this because he quotes them and then follows up his quotings with warnings about lefties and feminists and all those other Terrorist Stooges and Taliban Jacks who are preventing the good guys from beating the bad guys in the War on Terror - even though we're not - even. Grr.
Now, the reason I mention this is because, until very recently, I tended to believe, deep down, that these same two columnists were right about Israel and the Palestinians, that Israel wanted peace, but the Palestinians in electing Hamas, really didn't, that they were thwarting Israel's very believable claim that it just wanted to live in peace with its Arab neighbours and reach some sort of accomodation with the Palestinians that would allow everybody to go forward - together.
Then, as I reported in this entry:
WhatThe...?Where'dThePalestinianTerritoryGo?
I saw a map showing how absolutely opposite reality was to my assumptions about who wanted what in the Middle East.
My point is, I'm not a Rightwinger. I'm not even a Centrist. I'm a leftyleftlefterella and I believed what I believed because I kept reading it - over and over and over. And, for me, what I read re-inforced my natural prejudice in favour of Israel wanting peace and the Palestinians thwarting its efforts. Israel was good, the Palestinians were bad.
That's just a personal point on how impressionable I believe many people actually are. Combine that tendency with the attack on the WTC by Islamic Fundamentalists and you've got even big tough outfits like the New York Times suppressing what it suspects to be the truth because it doesn't want to get in the way of something as just-as-easily-fascist-as-not as one's patriotic duty to one's country.
To be frank, every time I revisit this issue of free speech and Mark Steyn et al, I'm shocked by what they have managed to get away with to date, except then I remember that absolutely all of the power of free speech (and paid speech) is on their side. They haven't been challenged by their editors/publishers/etc on what have actually been very inciteful arguments against Muslims being anywhere, because so many of those people also believe that there is a Muslim menace. Or maybe they just like the idea of a War on Terror. Either way, they're willing to let Steyn et al say anything, really, in order to convince the rest of us (the non-true-believers) of the rightness of their views and therefore of the need for ongoing undefinable (for reasons of security) incursions on our civil rights and the sovereign rights of other countries. I know this to be true (that their arguments are inciteful) because, in spite of the fact that I have only ever done business with Muslims (taxis, corner stores, shawarma huts, hair salons) and never had any kind of untoward experience, I keep an eagle eye out for any trespassing on my rights as an Infidel - because I can't leave the country at the moment on account of I don't have a passport.
So I'd really be screwed if Muslims started taking over my rights here in Canada.
Anyway, my point in making this entry is that today it's Muslims who are the threat to all that the Right here in the West believes is good and true and, although the free speech argument trumps the rest of it for me, I think it would be naive to the point of negligence if we didn't also plan ahead to ask: Who will it be tomorrow?
Meanwhile, In Neo-Con Times
Conrad Black picks up 7 - 8 years in the slammer.
He's lucky. Personally, I think the judge really took a shine to him and that's why he's getting such a light sentence.
Lest we forget, American justice ain't. It's just whack.
Of course, the Neo-Con Canadian definition of what constitutes a good businessman is pretty whack, too. From inherited wealth to Dominion, The National Post, and straight on down to prison.
Gore Gives A Little Back
PesteringHectoringLecturerAtLargePicksUpPrize
Gore has said he'll donate his half of the $1.5-million US prize to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a non-profit organization devoted to conveying the urgency of solving the climate crisis.
Uh hunh. Yeah. Sure. Non-profit. Urgent. Crisis.
Way to make the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change look bad when it blows its half on pizza and beer, Gore.
December 09, 2007
Free Stupeech
Stupeech is a compound word combining stupid and speech. See below. Click on any link. It doesn't matter:
Just know that it's what we're defending.
(See DamningWithFaintPraise below.)
I know, I know: Italian Whores... Italian Whores... Italian Whores...
December 08, 2007
Damning With Faint Praise
The article below is from "The Corner" and is somewhat (I guess) a defence of Free Speech in America via Mark Steyn and a complaint against him by the Canadian Islamic Congress. I suggest you read it, Dear Reader, to better understand the lack of understanding a certain segment on the Right has for fair comment - which it seems to think means it should be able to say anything it wants to because that's what Free Speech in America is (vs the Nanny State that they think is Canada - even though our Prime Minister is way further Right of their President, in my opinion - and which we kind of are when it comes to matters of free speech).
By way of full disclosure, I'm a woman, so my "free speech" tolerance stops somwhere short of "yabbut, that's what we've always said" but extends past "as a woman, I take exception to that comment".
However, the article below seems to me to begin its argument from the viewpoint that Arab Muslims ARE a menace (it's just that the rest of us don't seem to get it - yet) and the fact that the complaint against Mark Steyn's writings (and these are writings, not just some nut on a street corner yelling stuff at passersby - although...) is coming from the Canadian Islamic Congress is just more proof of it.
What?Steyn'sNotFreeToTellTheTruthAboutMuslims?!
Now, personally, I think it's quite a stretch to assume Mark Steyn doesn't have the full backing of the entirety of the American Republican establishment and current administration and a very large portion of the mainstream media, as well as the entire Canadian Right, which includes the current government, CanWest/Global, etc, so - no little guy is he.
He's a big guy, I'd say.
So, on to the real question - does he have the right to say what he says - in print? Well, I would like to think that he does, but I also see no reason why he can't be challenged on what he says, too - and by anybody, really. It shouldn't have to be a big outfit like the Canadian Islamic Congress - it should be possible for little Amira Aboud to challenge his writings - if she feels threatened by what he is saying. If it can be proven that his writings are racist, well, okay. Personally, I think he's been well into racist territory for a long time.
But - so what?
Mark Steyn didn't start the War on Terror. And he isn't responsible for Guantanamo. And he didn't pass the Patriot Act or start up a Homeland Security Department or issue a Yellow Alert or initiate a No-Fly list - or any of that stuff that actually impacts on the lives of ordinary people and continually stigmatizes all Muslims for the crime of 9/11 - and, ironically, does more to restrict Freedom of Speech (if you're not on the side of the Powers That Be, which Mark Steyn is) than does any old Canadian Human Rights Commission.
So, really, when you come right down to it, even Mark Steyn would have to admit he's just a cheerleader for Bush Inc et al - who did do all of the above and who, in spite of their many protestations to the contrary, have led the world on a campaign of vengeance against Arab Muslims unlike anything before in our history.
Except maybe when Israel has done it.
And that's where I come down on this whole free speech thing. Like his female counterpart, Ann Coulter, Mark Steyn is just givin' 'em what they want. He's not self-publishing. He's got editors, publishers, the whole racket. And he's not in a position of actual power, he's not telling anyone to go out and attack Muslims - he may be advising in his columns, etc, that Bush Inc et al attack Muslim countries, but so do a whole raft of Rightwing Pundits - every day. Day in and day out. All over the mainstream media in both the United States and Canada.
And they can argue over and over and over as they do that they genuinely believe Muslims to be a menace - because based on the actions of the most powerful country in the free world - it is quite understandable that they would think that to be actually true - and that the rest of us should believe that to be true, too.
Otherwise, they truly believe, we are doomed to be taken over by Islamic Fundamentalists and have all our freedoms taken away from us.
Now, as to the Canadian Islamic Congress. Well. Personally, I only know what I've read about it - and most of it is very alarming stuff indeed. And all of it comes from Rightwing Pundits employed at various mainstream media newspapers. Oh, and this outfit, which I took the time to look up - just now:
So, although I could offer up the opinion that I don't like the Canadian Islamic Congress any more than I like Mark Steyn, that's about as relevant as this story I'm about to tell.
When I was in university, I had a Jewish boyfriend who lived out in a suburb of North Toronto. We spent a lot of time at his house because I lived in residence and although he lived at home, his room was in the basement (nudgenudgewinkwink). Anyway, his Dad was always saying racist things about Arabs (when he wasn't saying racist things about blacks) and going on about Jews being the superiour race, yaddayaddablahblah. Now, I had a Scottish uncle who had his views, too - but in his telling of it, Scots were the superiour race. Arabs and blacks didn't figure into his narrative so much but, Asians, Whoa Nelly - look out - which I would have done except the Asian population of Sault Ste. Marie was pretty low. Very close to zero, actually.
Anyway, one day I said, "Gee, 'Mordecai', your Dad's really racist" and he's like "Oh! Oh! For a JEW you mean?!"
I didn't really know what to say, because, well, I did kind of mean that - but I knew I probably shouldn't say it out loud because, well, this guy had a persecution complex you wouldn't believe and he could hold a grudge for like, two thousand years.
So I just said, "No, I mean for a guy who's never actually met an Arab".
Gawd. I can't believe I just put that in writing. I should know better by now, shouldn't I. Still, let's be clear. He was just one boyfriend of mine, who happened to be Jewish, and who had a father, who happened to be racist. And even though several of my boyfriends... no wait... ALL of my boyfriends had fathers who... oh dear... ALL happened to be racists...
Okay. Ignore all of the above. I've got to go rethink this one.
In the meantime, why doesn't somebody lay a complaint against the Canadian Islamic Congress? I'm sure there's something here about women or infidels or women infidels that is inciteful:
Although, would Mark Steyn or any Rightwing Pundits even recognize it if they found inciteful stuff against women infidels?
Personally, I doubt it. But I find most of what these people have to say to be outrageously sexist, not just racist. Nevertheless, even as a lefty feminist heathen of little to no power (and they hate me even more'n they hate any old Muslim Menace) - I'll defend their right to say it.
Grrr - Still Angry Addendum
The implication in such an allegation was that Mr. Moore is a pervert. As a result, a mortified Mr. Moore was forced to issue a public denial that he was looking at pornography. Turns out the woman in question was his girlfriend -- which means Ms. Mathyssen had spuriously humiliated not one person, but two.
1. Hunh? Maybe the NatPostEdBd thinks Moore is a pervert. I think he's just a typical New Conservative.
2. Why was Mr. Moore mortified? Because he was looking at pictures of his scantily clad girlfriend on his laptop during a sitting of the House? Or because he was caught doing it?
3. Who spuriously humiliated not one person, but two? I dunno but for me, the answer to this one is a toss up between the NatPostEdBd and James Moore.
No One Expects the NationalPostEditorialBoard
This is not surprising to me, but I invite you, Dear Reader, to have a gander at this explicitly sexist, bordering on misogynistic, lecture by the NatPostEdBd to its readers:
ScantilyCladGirlfriendViewingGood,BitchesBad
I fail to see a single valid point in its defence of the behaviour of MP James Moore - just as I fail to appreciate MP Irene Mathyssen's reaction to his behaviour.
See, that's what I call being reasonably non-partisan on an issue like this - recognizing that he's an idiot, but she's an idiot for calling him on it.
But to spin it the way the NatPost has done here, well, it shows how deeply partisan (not to mention, uncomprehending) the editorial board of the National Post truly is.
Now, it's a fact that James Moore, New Conservative MP, was looking at pictures of a scantily clad woman on his laptop during a sitting of the House. It's also a fact that Irene Mathyssen, NDP MP, complained about it. Since then, she has apologized.
But here's where it spins out of control, as far as I'm concerned. It actually makes me wish the NatPost would just choke on its own bile, quite frankly, and its members cease to take up any more of the world's valuable oxygen:
We applaud Ms. Mathyssen's act of contrition. But it doesn't change the fact that she displayed such poor judgment in the first instance. We expect voters -- especially those precious few who have ever looked at pictures of scantily clad women, whether in Sports Illustrated's swimsuit issue or in Cosmopolitan -- to remember her actions the next time they go to the polls.
Yeah. SHE displayed poor judgment. And objectifying women is good because everybody does it. Women should learn to suck it up and shut it up.
For my part, I hope sensible readers of the National Post (if there are any left) remember this editorial the next time they don't buy this drivel.
Boycott the New Conservative Party of Canada - don't buy the National Post.
December 06, 2007
Blogging Heads Video
Watch David Frum's forehead get shinier as he loses an argument to Daniel Levy:
WatchDanielLevyKnockOutDavidFrum
Anyway, as I said on my forum (this video was posted there by another poster) that's pretty much how the Israel/Palestine debate went down on The Agenda, too. My favourite commenter was this guy, who was also the best looking person to ever appear on TVO:
Oren Yakobovich is director of the video department at B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights organization addressing human rights issues in the Occupied Territories. He has worked as a director, producer, screenwriter and photographer, combining these skills with his dedication to social concerns to produce documentary films. He is a former officer in the Golani brigade of Israel's Defense Forces.
Personally, I think the David Frums of the world don't really understand that the right thing to do is also the only thing to do for the people who actually live in Israel. But he doesn't live there, does he. So really, it's all academic to him, isn't it.
And crazy talk to anyone with a sense of humanity.
Old Battles Resurrected
If you're on the left, it seems like every other day you're refighting an old battle resurrected by the right because it just can't stand not living in Naziland. Today is no exception.
Some knob at the Ottawa Carleton District School Board (it's Ottawa Carleton because there used to be two school boards, one Ottawa, one Carleton - now there's just one BIG school board called Ottawa Carleton) has re-introduced the uniform debate.
Not that it's a debate, really. It's just some knob of a Trustee who wants kids to wear uniforms because he's a bit of a Nazi and Nazis like uniforms.
I guess.
I can't think of any other reason, quite frankly, why someone would want to introduce a mandatory uniform policy for public school kids.
Of course, he's the same knob who wanted to introduce a mandatory "Wear Red On Fridays To Support The Troops" policy for public school kids, too.
I'm guessing he's a New Conservative. And a Christian. And white. And male.
And a knob.
Mark Steyn's Big Brush
I guess Mark Steyn has decided to appeal to the Court of Internut Opinion on this one:
IAmNot,NorHaveIEverBeen,ATerrorist,Er,Islamophobe
Well, that's always risky, since Internutters usually aren't considered admissable as evidence and don't necessarily make the best character witnesses, even though the Internut is where most of this stuff is best discussed. But I will defer to his judgment on this one because as Kate points out here: SDAStatsLieHere - there isn't much point in a Honky (Steyn) going up against The Man (Canadian Human Rights Tribunal).
And really, I don't see how Mark Steyn can be cited for having a history of Islamophobia when the rest of the MSM (and I mean "mainstream media" here, NOT "men who have sex with other men" which is what MSM means when someone is talking about HIV/AIDS, apparently - like THAT'S gonna help with tolerance and understanding) suffers from Islamophobia, too.
Cripes, I'm pretty sure I suffer from it and I'm practically a terrorist, myself. Er, well, you know what I mean, Dear Reader.
Anyway, I agree with Mark Steyn (which actually makes me like him even less, I hasten to add, for all you SooeyHaters) but I do wish he'd put away his leftophobia long enough to remember his Islamophobia - at least for the duration of his trial:
The "progressive" left has grown accustomed to the regulation of speech, thinking it just a useful way of sticking it to Christian fundamentalists, right-wing columnists, and other despised groups. They don't know they're riding a tiger that in the end will devour them, too.
Now, Mark Steyn - WHO is making the complaint against you? (And we do know about the tiger turning on us - we do. Trust me.) That's right. It's not the "progressive" left, it's the Canadian Islamic Congress, as we see here: We'reMadAsTerrorists,AndWe'reNotGoingToTakeItAnymore
Now, get off the Internet and get a lawyer and fight this thing.
Oh Dear. The President's Pants Are On Fire. Again.
CaughtWithHandInJarANDBruiseOnCheekFromCookie
This is the bit that really gets me, though:
But Bush said Tuesday the report "doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world."
Yeah, well - me neither, Mr. President. It's just that, to be honest, it doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger YOU pose to the world, either.
Do you see where I'm going with this, Mr. President?
Oh, And...
"This was a baseless personal attack, and I am disappointed she resorted to such an outrageous tactic to score a headline," Moore, first elected in 2000, said in a statement last night on his website.
Uh, no. Actually. You moron. A baseless personal attack would be one in which you WEREN'T looking at pictures of a scantily clad woman on your laptop during a sitting of the House of Commons.
Excuse Me?
What the fuck difference does it make if this asshole was looking at pictures of his scantily clad girlfriend or some other woman when he's on our dime in the House of Commons?
"Yo,DaBitchIsMyGirlfriend,Cunt!"
I mean, I don't REALLY care one way or the other - I can't stand New Conservatives no matter what horrors they're getting up to (and at least he's just quietly playing with himself and not quietly making over the country in the image of all things Republican American) - but really, I don't see how his defence that the pictures are of his girlfriend is any kind of defence at all.
I mean, does this woman KNOW she's his girlfriend?
Maybe that's the question that should be asked today in the House today.
A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To A Healthcare Argument
I was making a spirited defence of public healthcare on my forum when I felt my blood pressure rise.
Literally. And I have naturally low blood pressure. (My sister-in-law told me that - not a doctor. My doctor understands that I don't like bad news so she just sends me for tests which I don't go for and then says a year later, "I notice you haven't gone for any of these tests yet so I'll just do an examination and fill out some new requistion forms and you can not go for tests for another year.")
Anyway, there I was in full flight, when I stopped and realized - people aren't just yanking my chain for an argument. Canadians no longer want public healthcare.
It came to me as clear as day - Brian Day, to be specific. There are just too many private healthcare interests at play in Canada and south of the border wanting to have their way with us and they will slowly but surely wear down public healthcare advocates and have it. That's just the way it goes. I experienced the same feeling under the Mike Harris government (over school closures - we closed - it took a couple of years, but, like the OCDSB said during the Save Our Schools campaign - "you're done - once we put you on the list - you're done") as I'm experiencing now - and I don't even know which government, if any, is causing it. It may even be the media causing it. Certainly CanWest/Global has been on a campaign for years to convince its readers (not that they'd even need convincing, the loons) to want private healthcare.
And even though Canadians in general say they want public healthcare, they really don't want to pay for it - or, at least, they don't want to pay for someone else's - and that's the bargain, isn't it. But Mr. Suburbia just isn't buying in anymore. That's why he votes for governments that either cater to private healthcare lobby interests or harbour private healthcare agendas themselves.
Look, we know New Conservatives believe in privatizing public services. We know that. Sure, they tell their borderline supporters what they want to hear during election campaigns - they even joke about not having a hidden agenda. But the fact is, Canadians, when they vote for New Conservative governments, know what they are voting for and they are doing it fully aware of what is eventually going to happen.
And they're okay with it.
So fine. Public healthcare will go the way of all the rest of Canadiana and life will go on.
Unless you can't afford it to, of course.
December 05, 2007
Wal-Town
I just watched a documentary on Wal-Mart. It was on TVO (of course) - The View From Here.
Anyway, I've been to a Wal-Mart (once) and I honestly cannot fathom why anyone who had a choice (and you do have one - at least until the Wal-Mart wipes out all the other stores in your town) would choose to shop in one.
It was like being caught in limbo, I thought. You know, that state of non-being religious people describe as the space between heaven and hell. I mean, really. How stupid do you have to be to want to shop in a Wal-Mart? Let alone allow one in your town - given what we know about the effect a Wal-Mart inevitably has on the local economy (the local economy being all the little retailers that tend to keep their profits in town, rather than shipped directly off to a head office in Arkansas).
Well, guess what? It took a few years, but Wal-Mart eventually bought off - literally - enough city politicians in Guelph, Ontario (which had been a conscious and deliberate holdout to Wal-Martizing) so that now Guelph has one, too.
What's wrong with people? Seriously. If we're such zombies we can't even stop ourselves from going for a hideous shopping experience at a crappy soulless megacorp that actually calls itself Wal-Mart (as in - it's not even pretending to be anything other than a crappy soulless megacorp), well, I don't hold out much hope for our civilization.
And isn't the only job of city politicians essentially to grow (while protecting) the local economy?
Well, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone at this stage that Wal-Mart is ruining town after town, city after city - without firing a shot.
I dunno. Even if the terrorists win now and release us from our consuming bondage it'll be too late because Wal-Mart will just switch to selling Korans and burkas because it'll be the only store left standing to do it.
Still, I wonder if the Islamic fundamentalists would force it to pay wages and benefits in line with its massive profits, at least. 'Cause if they did, they'd be better'n what we've got for political representation now, that's for sure.
Lyin' Schreibin'
Here's what I don't get. A guy charged with fraud, bribery, etc keeps copious records of his activities and the activities of others that are then entered into the record of a public inquiry as evidence after much blather and ballyhoo - based on what? That they're the records of a guy charged with fraud and bribery?
So? How is that evidence?
And since he's already contradicted himself a million times that we know of already, why are we listening to his "testimony" still?
Good grief.
If he tells us next that Stephen Harper is the only good politician left on Parliament Hill, then I say we put an end to the charade and deport him.
Although, I am starting to sense Stephen Harper is a pretty good politician. Just not in a good sense.
Phew. We're Still Safe
RobertLatimerDeniedParoleByNationalParoleBoard
The board said Latimer should stay in prison and receive more counselling.
Ah. Until he lowers himself to meet National Parole Board standards, I guess.
Ah, Reverse Intelligence
UndermisestimatingDavidWarrenInc
Instead, I am inclined to a darker conclusion. The Bush administration has decided to back down from its confrontation with Iran, and has advanced this report for rhetorical cover.
My thoughts exactly, almost, not. But I know what you mean, hardly.
I call it "The Inverted Sleeve Lining".
It's a metaforronicalism.
Beep Beep. Oh - The #$!*!$# are here again. Zoom.
December 04, 2007
Stephen Harper's New Best Friend
Opposition politicans have been trying to link the current Conservative government to Schreiber.
Oh. Really? Are you sure it isn't the other way around?
He said he wrote to the Prime Minister's Office at least twice recommending he call an inquiry into the Airbus affair, saying in one letter that Harper's "political enemies" were undermining his efforts to clean up government.
Uh Oh - Lock Your Doors
Er, your car doors, too, Saskatchewaninagoggins, 'cause:
Well, I hope he learned his lesson, is all I can say: Stay away from doctors in Saskatchewan.
If I Had An Ick List
I'd have just this guy on it:
DrDay&HisCampaignToDestroyPublicHealthcareFromTheInside
I'm guessing, too, (if the story is even true) that his little girl turned out to be just fine. But maybe Dr. Day should be charged a fee every time he overrides another medical professional.
That would be fair by me. Oh, and whoever made him head of the CMA should be beaten with a board with a nail in it.
That is all.
I Know What of I Speak
"Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous, and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."
That's George W. Bush, of course, being quoted here:
Could somebody please tell the President of the United States that, at this point, even more than we fear this hypothetically dangerous Iran of the future, we fear him?
Rightwing Governments
The thing I don't like about rightwing governments, is that they scapegoat citizens to justify their mean ideologies. Ever notice that? I mean, think about Mike Harris. Remember how he made out like "welfare moms" were the real scourge of society and not corporate polluters or insider traders or tax frauders or any of those big wigs that rightwing governments are so afraid of that eventually their boots get all warped from quaking in 'em?
Personally, I think Stephen Harper is worse than Mike Harris because, where Mike Harris knew he was just a thug to whom voters were dumbassed enough to hand the keys to the Treasury, Stephen Harper believes himself to be better than the rest of us - certainly better than everybody left of his mean self.
And the proof for me, that he's mean, that he's just a rightwing ideologue who doesn't give a rat's ass about actual people, is that the worst of the Harrisites are in his Cabinet, and that rich and powerful Corporate CEOs were welcomed into the Security and Prosperity Agreement with Bush Inc while all other Canadian citizens were left to hang out and dry.
Oh - and that anyone who had the nerve to protest this assault on Democracy was left to deal with police forces (that we pay for with our tax dollars but who evil hench for Stephen Harper and the New Conservative Government of Canada) deliberately inciting violence against them in an effort to discredit their more than legitimate protest.
That's what I don't like about rightwing governments.
Okay. As you were. Carry on. I just thought I'd get that off my chest this morning.
Actually Supporting the Troops
I posted this yesterday on my forum to show what actually supporting the troops looks like for all the rightwingers out there who think they support the troops more'n lefties like me do (which is with my taxes and not much else since I'd pretty much prefer the buggers would quit signing up so that General Rick Hillier could hog all the glory for himself - legitimately):
This is the paragraph I'll highlight because I admire George Smitherman for being out of the closet, unlike every other male politician in this country:
George Smitherman, deputy premier and minister of health and long-term care, said the elimination for military families of the three-month waiting period that typically applies to all new residents of Ontario will help up to 8,500 people each year.
This guy is still in the closet but I like this initiative, too:
Labour Minister Brad Duguid said the special leave for reservists acknowledges their sacrifice for their country and community."Ontarians who put their lives on the line to serve our country should never have to worry that their civilian jobs back home are on the line," Duguid said in a statement.
See? That's supporting the troops. Only governments can do it, really, and we the people have absolutely no say one way or the other once we've elected them (think about that when you vote for another Liberal or New Conservative Government of Canada, please) so it's nice when they come up with stuff all on their own, however after the fact it may be.
Anyway, my new position re Afghanistan is that we can't leave. It mirrors my position re the Americans in Iraq. That's because I just don't see how we can justify it in any way, even us, in our isolated moral universe of Fortress America. We can't invade and occupy other countries and then leave because the goings got tough.
Nope.
So this measure taken by the McGuinty Government is a good thing. It will teach voters that wars are expensive and you have to support the people fighting them with actual real dollars, over and above what regular citizens get by way of government support.
Personally, I think if you're going to vote for governments that go to war in this day and age, then you should also be prepared to give up your tax breaks and all that other nonsense political parties promise in order to get elected and fork that money directly over to the people who will be doing the fighting.
Oh, and political parties that promise tax breaks during election campaigns while the country is at war should be lined up on Parliament Hill and have rotten tomatoes thrown at them for being the duplicitous traitors to the troops that they are. They should not be elected the New Conservative Government of Canada.
December 03, 2007
Iran the Bluffer, Just Like Iraq
HaHa,WeDon'tHaveNuclearWeapons
If true, the findings suggest Iran is susceptible to diplomatic pressure from the international community, according to analysts.
Gee. Great. Now how about applying some diplomatic pressure to George W. Bush, since he's the one invading sovereign countries when he isn't talking about starting WWIII.
Puck Bunnies & Abortions
Ah, hockey wives. Is there anything more undeserving of public adulation?
No, Dear Reader. There isn't. And I won't hear another word about it. They are impossibly rich layabouts married to brutish goons who make lots of money for absolutely no good reason.
And now this:
MallickUncoversOttawaSenatorWivesAntiAbortionFunding
The Better Halves are giving a third of the proceeds of this year's $50,000 Christmas Tree raffle to First Place Pregnancy Centre, an Ottawa anti-abortion group run by Pentecostal Christians.
I guess abortions are only for rich spoiled hockey wives.
But maybe Revenue Canada will do something about that, too:
Revenue Canada tells me that First Place is not a registered charity.
Well, then. I hope there are some penalties coming up.
The Smell of Carbon
And could it be? Yes, I believe it is. The smell of the rich getting richer:
What'sThatOtherReallyBigSmell?Oh,TheUN
One in five carbon credits issued by the United Nations are going to support clean energy projects that may in fact have helped to increase greenhouse gas emissions, environmental group WWF said on Thursday.
Seriously, I've got to switch my savings into a World Bank account:
"One out of five emissions reductions credits sold under the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) lack environmental integrity," WWF said in a statement. It said the problem damages the global carbon market, which is expected to more than double in value to around $70 billion this year. "The CDM is a new and very important tool and needs to be fine-tuned to reach its purpose," Stephan Singer, head of WWF's European Climate Policy Unit, said in a statement. The report recommends improvements in the CDM, a market worth some $5 billion in 2006 according to the World Bank.
The Christmas Nazis
Have you ever noticed how the Christmas Nazis, the handwringers who decry the supposed decline of Christmas to all and sundry starting the day after Halloween, get louder and more ubiquitous every single Gawddamned year?
Geez Louise. Dudes, if anything, Christmas is growing in inverse proportion to the pleasure any of us derive from it. Christmas hasn't changed - everything else has. Christmas is the same megamonolithic Holiday Season (I mean, I can't even NOT capitalize "Holiday Season"!!! for Christ's sake) that it ever was except more - in spite of the Global Village, the divorce rate, and the fact that Christmas is now made in China.
Let's face it. Christmas is a nightmare for separated families, an annual uber reminder that we have failed Society by straying from the unwritten commandment: "Thou Shall Fit Thyself Into The Family Template". I mean, it only takes having one foot off the grid before one realizes, "Hey... Society doesn't want me to pursue happiness at all!" By the time that second foot is off - if you're a woman, anyway - you may as well dig yourself a spidey hole with a sign outside "WMD Lives Here".
One is never more aware of Christmas than when one has jumped off the Family Template of Society. And since 50% of us have, you'd think we'd summon our numbers to tell Society to go fuck itself. Particularly over the Holiday Season. Just go fuck yourself, Society, and do it over and over and over. Because you obviously care more about Christmas than you do about us.
Oh, and by the way, Christmas is the Anti-Christ. You heard it here first on SooeySays.
December 02, 2007
The Problem With Mulroney
The problem with Mulroney is that he makes everybody else, everybody around him - especially the ones who've been told by the boss not to stand too close - seem better'n they are. C'mon people - let's leave off Mulroney and his German partner and get back to a squint-eyed watch on the current crop of politicians. Cripes, those shifty bastards will make Mulrony and his Irish eyes seem like a trio of pikers the way they are leading this country into the clutches of Republican America.
Religious Issues?
This first link I'm going to post here is to another hijab/soccer article.
Alberta?ThereAreMuslimsInAlberta?
Alberta Soccer Association spokesman Gary Roy said there are concerns that the headscarves pose a danger to players. He said this is not a religious issue.
You know what? I believe him. To him, it's not a religious issue - why would it be? He's no doubt a white Christian fellow who sincerely believes that head coverings prevent a hazard - to the girls wearing them - in sport. It would be no more complex than that for him. Sport associations are rule-based entities, there to enforce whatever rules have been decided on by the white Christian fellows made them up.
And they would be white, and they would be Christian, and they would be fellows - even when we're talking about girls soccer - they're fellows at the top. Men, men, men - it's always raining men because they're always above you if you're a girl. That's just the way it is.
Oops, there I go. Being a feminist bitch - again. But aside from all that, headscarves probably DO prevent a hazard on the field (and in the ring). That's my view, anyway (although... I'm just a woman). Still, and by all means, Muslim girls and ladies - challenge the rules. That's what Canadian women did and do - ALL THE TIME. And it has made for a leveller playing field for everybody, not just in the white Christian male world of sports, but everywhere in society.
Seriously. I know, I know. It probably seems like you're coming up against a lot of men (white, Christian) in your fight to dress in the style to which you are accustomed, but voting, er, soccer is a privilege - not a right. Er, like voting, I guess. But nevermind all that now because you are in a place where women are the most liberated women in the world.
And, we are, I have no doubt, the most liberated women in the world. Which is why over 50% of the graduates of medical school are women - beating by far the old percentage when women weren't even allowed to attend medical school in this country. And over 50% of lawyers are women. And soon engineering schools (this is funny, Muslim moms - not long after the Montreal Massacre there was a "No Means No" campaign to inform young men on campuses across the country that sexual assault is assault and an Engineering residence at Queens - one of our real "old boy" universities we used to have - staged a counter-campaign called "No Means Harder" - you know, because there weren't any female students in engineering then, anyway) will be graduating women in those percentages, too.
So, by all means - challenge the rules. ALL the rules. But, and it's a big butt (like JLo's), I couldn't help but notice this:
Safaa Menhem wears the kind of scarf that has a Velcro strap under the chin. Roy said the referee who pulled her from the game was concerned that the chin strap was a choking hazard and wasn't convinced it would break away immediately if someone were to pull on it.The decision effectively prevents Menhem from taking the field with her team on Saturday. She said she was planning to show up for the game, wearing her hijab, even if she has to remain on the sidelines.
Hm. So... What if a Muslim man was the head of the Alberta Soccer Association and he said (in accordance with the rules that he and his fellow Muslim men had made up) that you couldn't play soccer because head coverings are a safety hazard - for you - AND, since you HAVE to wear the hijab, well, maybe soccer isn't something Muslim girls should be playing?
I'm just asking because I don't think this IS so much the religious issue the media is making it out to be. To be perfectly frank, I don't even think it's a sexist issue, as I'm making it out to be here. (And will continue to do so for the duration of this piece - and probably the rest of my life, too.) I think it's very much a safety/insurance issue - just like Gary Roy didn't quite say - and anybody who has been involved in sport at all in this country over the past couple of decades knows all about the sports/safety/insurance issue. In fact, and I hate to sound like Rudy 9/11 Giuliani here, but, well, thanks to 9/11, insurance rates are through the roof in sports.
EVERYTHING'S a safety/insurance issue thanks to 9/11.
It's true. I know it sounds crazy, but, well, there's a connection between 9/11 and head scarves and insurance as sure as my friend in suburban Ottawa who ran a home daycare in our neighbourhood received a special letter in 10/11 informing her that home daycare rates would be going up on account of the safety/insurance concerns caused by 9/11.
Anyway, I kind of got off on a tangent there, but I meant to say: Just take off the hijab, play the game, put the hijab back on, 'cause this one ain't gonna get any more accommodating. In fact, the next one up will be sleeves and whether or not you should be allowed to wear long sleeves because of the unfair advantage long sleeves present - against you - when other girls, sleeveless girls, grab your sleeves to pull you away from the ball.
And it's not gonna be a religious issue then, either. It's not even gonna be a sexist issue. It's gonna be a safety issue or a competitive advantage issue or something like that. Trust me - nobody's out to get you. It just seems like that. And just because they're all men, well, they're not out to get you, either. It's just that everybody who's anybody is a man.
Seriously. I was a girl athlete. (Softball was my favourite sport. We weren't allowed to play baseball, of course - which I really would have preferred - because baseball was (is?) just for boys. And our coach was the Vice-Principal, a man, of course, because lady teachers had to wear dresses in those days to differentiate themselves from gentleman teachers and boys, who wore the only pants allowed at school - unlike back at the lady teachers' houses - if they were lucky enough to be married and have a man to cater to after work - where they could wear pants if their husbands didn't mind. Also, lady teachers weren't in Administration, so only men teachers could become Vice-Principals.)
Fortunately for us girls then and you girls now - even you Muslim girls - the men in charge of girls' sports really are the kind of men, sexist or not, that you want because it's like Gary Roy says, "It's not a religious issue". That's because it's really all about sports to those guys. They're not being dicks, they're being jocks. And there's a big difference, believe me.
I mean, check this out and you'll understand exactly what I mean:
YouMustShowYourFaceToVoteNoMatterHowIrrelevantItIs
See, that's an actual piece of legislation, supported by the male leaders of all three mainstream political parties in Canada (female leaders don't do well in Canadian politics because they're always either at the helm of the NDP or Kim Campbell) that doesn't have anything to do with anything except pure unadulterated bigotry. Now THAT is worth fighting - Bill C-6.
The hijab in sports? Well, if you CAN'T take it off - that's another battle and it's one even more worth fighting than Bill C-6. If you CAN, then take it off.
As they say very wisely - those who have fought them (not me, I just sucked it up and waited until some other woman came along and did something about it because I prefer being liked by men to not on account of I make for pretty easy pickings already, if you catch my drift) - pick your battles.
December 01, 2007
Homelands
Well, I watched The Agenda's week long Israel/Palestine-a-thon and actually came to an accomodation of the topic - after doing a couple of 180s per episode, too.
Anyway, I've finally decided that the Middle East is just so much nonsense, that it's populated by stubborn and uncompromising people so fixated on the past that they won't allow themselves a future. The Palestinians have been squeezed/squeezed themselves into a corner from which no kind of country worth living in can emerge and Israel, in its obsessive drive to outnumber its perceived and real enemies, has populated itself with zealots incapable of reason and doomed its future as a country worth living in, too.
Eventually, anyone with options will leave and all that will be left will be the hopeless on one side and the fanatics on the other and vice versa.
It's ridiculous, really, two peoples insisting on the notion of a homeland in a Global Village wherein a country built on immigration, populated by human tribes from all over the world, pulls all the international strings. You'd think they'd notice over in Israel how absurd the arguments for ethnic homelands have actually become, how past the due date they are. But it's like they've got this one idea and they're just going to cling to it like grim death while the mutts of the New World prosper and every few years bring the two old tribes together for peace talks that may as well be barn burnings for all the sense they make - given the agenda.
The point of it is, Middle East: Everybody's got a right to exist - so when you deny your neighbour, you deny yourself, too.
Pretty Woman
Watch this pretty woman win $25,000:
That's more'n lots of smart people make in a year AND she's donating it all to charity or a school or something.
Recent Posts
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Search
Copyright © Sooeys.com 2005-2006. All Rights Reserved.
Powered By MovableType.
