Why Not Be The First?
"Cadmangate"
|
« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »
February 29, 2008
Chuck Cadman's Last Words
Enh. I didn't know Chuck Cadman so I'm going to go with this scenario, that, because he knew he was about to shuffle off this mortal coil, he was easily talked into denying publicly that he'd been offered an illegal $1,000,000 bribe - just in case it ever came up - by the same people who'd offered it to him. I mean, if the New Conservatives were sleazy enough to offer a dying man a $1,000,000 life insurance policy to switch his vote and bring down a government, I'm guessing they'd be sleazy enough to say something later, after he refused, like, "Nice reputation. Shame if anything were to happen to it after you're gone. But, you know, you could go on record as saying we never offered you a bribe and poof - these pictures go up in flames."
I'm not saying it DID happen. I mean, what the hell do I know? I don't know any of these people. Except that they've got all the power - almost - that they've ever wanted and are changing the very fabric of our country.
Let's face it. Had you ever heard of Charles McVety before Stephen Harper and his Goody Alberta Party came along? Because he says he's got power and influence with the Government of Canada that people like you and I can only dream of. Who knows? Maybe it was the spectre of Charles McVety running the show from behind the scenes that eventually repelled Chuck Cadman from the Goody Alberta Party:
Charles McVety,OurVeryOwnBig"C"Christian
But, like I say, what do I know? I don't know any of these people. They all seem to have come out of the Blue.
Anyway, here's a brief rundown of who Thomas Flanagan is, not that it means anything other than, well, you be the judge:
The Liberal Election Theme
ElectionFever?TakeTwoAspirinAndIgnoreIt
Ouch, baby.
February 28, 2008
Pants on Fire
OhNo!NowThereIsAJihadAgainstStephenHarper!
"I knew Chuck Cadman very well," Harper said. "The leader of the Opposition would have us believe that Chuck Cadman was offered a bribe, then went on national television and denied it ever happened. This is completely false, completely irresponsible and the leader of the Opposition should offer an apology."
Offer an apology to whom, HeWhoDeniesSoAggressively? Chuck Cadman's dead. And it's not the Leader of the Opposition who would have us believe that, it's Tom Zytaruk, Dona Cadman, Dan Wallace, and you, Stephen Harper, if that even IS your real name:
Harper is also quoted in the book, confirming some of the details. CBC News has obtained the audio recording of Harper's interview, confirming the quotes. The prime minister said his understanding of the offer to Cadman was that "it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election." Zytaruk stands by his book. "I've got Dona saying that this happened and the executive assistant who was in the office with him at the time doesn't really want to speak about it but says that Dona has no reason to fabricate anything, and Stephen Harper speaking his piece," he told CBC News.
Okay. Well. I think I'll believe the three people who have no reason to lie, thanks, Mr. Prime Minister
Why the Widow Is Running As a Conservative
From the allegation by his widow that New Conservatives offered a $1,000,000 bribe to Chuck Cadman (by way of a life insurance policy in his dying days) has sprung the question from various and sundry, "so why is she running for the Conservatives?"
Well, Dear Reader, I expect it's because she's a Conservative. And why should she have to leave her Party of choice just because some people in it are amoral to the point of being indistinguishable from mobster hooligans or Liberals?
I mean, I remember when a group of Goody Albertans wanted the Progressive Conservative Party to devolve its already-less-than-Progressive ideals and the Party said "maybe later", so the Goody Albertans splintered off to form their own Reform Party which would later come back to swallow the old Progressive Conservative Party whole.
Why do you think that happened, Dear Reader? It happened because people who believed in those already-less-than-Progressive ideals didn't hold fast to their slightly-less-than-legitimate principles and when the Goody Albertans came back to steal office supplies, they were able to swallow the Progressive Conservative Party whole.
Unless... wait a minute... did that really happen or was that a Star Trek episode?
Real Freedom of Speech
Enough of the Cyber Supremacist Stalkers (CHRCers) vs Islamic Menace Alarmists (FreeSpeechers), let's check out what those Class-A alleged Bribers in Ottawa are up to preventing you from knowing:
Mulroney? Who Cares About Mulroney?
In 2005, Stephen Harper and his New Conservative Party allegedly offered a $1,000,000 bribe to Chuck Cadman, MP, to vote with them and topple the Government!
Heheh - One More Time!
So, the New Conservatives, under the leadership of Stephen Harper, allegedly offered a $1,000,000 bribe to a Member of Parliament to vote with them to defeat the sitting Government of the day.
Oh no! I'm going into schadenfreude overload! System! Cannot! Process! Implications!
Move Over Brian Mulroney
Make room for the Stephen Harper story: "Like A Rock, A Slippery, Slimy Rock".
Stephen"IfAnybodyAsks,IWasn'tActuallyThere"Harper
Harper said his understanding of the offer to Cadman was that "it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election."I don't know the details," he's quoted as saying in the book. "I can tell you that I had told the individuals - I mean, they wanted to do it - but I told them they were wasting their time. I said Chuck had made up his mind he was going to vote with the Liberals."
Harper also confirmed the people who met with Cadman were "legitimately representing the party."
Phew. I notice you didn't, as Leader, allegedly say "offering up a bribe to a politician is illegal", though, so screw you, buddy. Your turn on the rack.
Gee, Conservatives, new and old - I guess you can bribe some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you just can't allegedly bribe all of the people all of the time, eh?
February 27, 2008
Bill C-484 Again (In Case You Were Ignoring It)
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offence)
As a citizen, I'd like to remind our Legislators of a very salient fact with regards to the wording of Bill C-484: There is no such thing as an unborn child.
Therefore, it stands to reason, of course, that you will, to a man and woman, vote against it.
Flaherty Tells Americans:
"Don'tElectABlackManORAWoman!"
Adding for good measure:
"NAFTA is of tremendous benefit to Americans. And perhaps the nominees have not had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the benefit to Americans and the American economy of NAFTA."
The greasy little New Conservative shit speaks the truth, Americans. Just ask Canadians. And please, take us with you when you go?
Thesis Me This, Riddle Man
DavidWarrenPutsItAnotherWay,JustNotFarEnoughToPunctureAnything
One of the persistent themes of these columns, especially over the last couple of years, might be abbreviated to, "Scientism versus Christianity." It is a way of looking at the postmodern revolution that has swept through all Western societies in the last few decades. I say "postmodernism" because it is the fulfilment of a much older "modernist" project, going back centuries: to replace the authority of the Christian religion with some "enlightened" human authority.
But, haven't we just been, like, kind of taking your word for it that there IS an authority of the Christian religion? Because, well, hasn't it usually been a human telling us what's up with God, too?
RePost For Extra Stupid Liberals
One more time, Liberals: It's not Dion. It's you.
Mulroney's Lawyer
Finally.
I mean, I didn't realize he didn't actually HAVE to appear before the Committee before. I thought that's why he did - because he had to. Cripes, I wouldn't have even done it the first time, if I'd been Mulroney. Seriously, I wonder if these guys' lawyers are worth what their clients pay them or it they're like those specialized doctors who only see a certain income level of clientele so that after a while they end up not being very good doctors - you know, as compared to public health doctors who see everybody.
I bet a legal aid lawyer would have said, "What? Are you crazy? If you don't have to appear - don't appear. Whaddaya got to gain by showing up and telling the truth? Or not? C'mon - you're Brian Mulroney, former Prime Minister of Canada. Not some chump who appears before a Committee."
Get Whoopi - In Whiteface!
So, apparently there's a controversial SNL skit about Obama and IRONICALLY the controversy isn't about the fact that the skit isn't even remotely funny while it nevertheless manages to be both racist and sexist (depicting the black man as lecherous and the woman as unable to speak up for herself):
Say, you know what WOULD be funny, now? To have a black comedian do a Lorne Michaels sketch. You know, maybe Whoopi Goldberg or somebody like that - in whiteface - to inject a little humour into SNL and play off the WTF? controversy of a white comedian playing Obama in your usual run-of-the-mill not funny SNL skit.
Haha, William F. Buckley Died
And that crazy bitch, Germaine Greer, IS STILL ALIVE!
So, I guess we know who won THAT debate, eh? Suck it up, Rightwingers! U drool!
Sooey's Comments Section - Unpublished 'Til Now
I know many of you have been pining for my comments section, so I thought I'd post a few I've received since I stopped publishing them. Oh, and don't worry, Stalkwell, I am:
"Sooey, I hope you're as beautiful as you are brilliant so men can't in all honesty and fairness resort to calling you derogatory names just because they're jealous of your big brain!"
Stalkwell, Your Number One Fan
"Sooey, ever since I invented The Internet I've been waiting for a natural source of energy like your beautiful and brilliant self to come along and illuminate it. By the way, I've taken your advice and cut down on the roasted pig on a spit barbeques we like here on the ranch and it's made all the difference. The vertically striped pajamas were a bit controversial, though."
Al Gore
"Sooey, I just want to say that as brilliant and beautiful as you are, your brains and beauty are outmatched by your keen sense of humour. I laughed so hard at one of your Feminist jokes the other day, that I absolutely turned gay once and for all."
Christopher Hitchens
"Thanks to you, Sooey, even I know I'm an out-of-control egomaniac now. Thanks, eh. And "Support the Feminists!"
Rick "I Am So Great" Hellyah
"You suck, Sooey!"
Steve Harper
Sure, Sure - Just Tell That To Judas, Dude
Hey, everybody - I found Jesus:
HeWasWarrenKinsellaTheWholeTime!
Here's one of Warren's truisms, then: legitimacy is not found in numbers. Rightness does not equate with popularity. You can be entirely, utterly alone, as Jesus Christ was in the end - as the other prophets were, like Mohamed and Moses, at key moments in their lives - and still be irrevocably right.
Heheh, okay. We'll nail you to something, too. But it won't be because we want to, it'll be to save the world.
Another Win/Win for Denmark
My, oh my. Those Danish cartoons just never get old, eh? They're like Family Circus or TinTin or AndyCapp for Danish newspapers AND Muslim protestors, I guess:
WithNothingElseToDo,SudanProtestsDanishCartoons
But, this time, in a surprising Win/Win twist for Danes:
"We don't want them to come to our land nor will we like to go to their land," al-Mutaafi said of the Danes.
Ah Allah, peace be upon him, afterall. Although, he could stand to do something about the mess he's made of Sudan, if you ask me.
February 26, 2008
You Guessed It, Liberals - Nobody Likes You
What's with all the Liberals thinking Dion should call an election over the Budget? I mean, how would a Liberal Budget be any better or worse and not just pretty much the same as that BigFuckWad of a Budget just delivered by that LittleShitWad Flaherty?
By the way? It's not Dion, Liberals. It's you.
Bill C-484
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offence)
As a citizen, I'd like to remind our Legislators of a very salient fact with regards to the wording of Bill C-484: There is no such thing as an unborn child.
Therefore, it stands to reason, of course, that you will, to a man and woman, vote against it.
Indirect Misenergy
You know what I'd like the media to do? I'd like the media to find out who benefitted and how from the Old New Conservative Party of Ontario's break up of the energy sector with the resultant popping up of seemingly fly-by-night gas distribution companies.
Because that whole fiasco, as far as I'm concerned, is a symbol of Mike Harris's Ontario - corporate thuggery with absolutely no consumer protection offered up by the government we all pay for because we assume it is there for all citizens and not just a bunch of corporate thug buddies of whatever group of politicos happens to be in power.
It can't just be me who remembers those guys who looked like they might be awol carnies or day parolees going door-to-door with name tags like "P-20569" and clipboards with nothing on them but a bunch of forged signatures demanding to see your gas bill: "Hey lady, show me you fuckin' gas bill! I gotta see if you got yer fuckin' rebate!"
Now, I'm not totally opposed to free enterprise, I just have a problem with corruption and fraud and last I looked, there was a lot of corruption and fraud going on with all these sleazy overnight operations run out of offices that didn't appear to be on any "legitimate" city maps. Believe me. I tried to get to one of them to discuss having been signed up, unawares, to have my gas delivered by a company that was not the company who had delivered my gas before Mike Harris et al came along to run the province into the ground.
And surely it's not just my imagination that there was a line-up of consumers as long as the Family Compact has been in power complaining about having been bilked - BILKED - out of money because they'd been signed up without due process - or in many cases, without their knowledge - at the door by people who were no longer on the payroll of whatever gas distribution company had sent them door-to-door in the first place.
So, c'mon. It's still going on because I saw a couple of those guys the other day. At first I thought they were Rogers employees trying to get into an apartment building to harass people to sign up for cell phones because lots of apartment dwellers have "no junk mail" put on their mailboxes so that Rogers can't just stuff their mailboxes full of unsolicited mail anymore such that there's no room for any legitimate mail, but alas, no such luck. They were from one of those gas redistribution companies.
Anyway, it would be nice to know what really went down and continues to go down with that scam because I want to know and I'm sure a lot of other Ontarians would like to know the names of any politicians currently active in politics who might have been involved with ALL THAT.
Bullshit Polls
Does anybody really believe polls commissioned by openly biased news services like CanWest/Global? I mean, c'mon - CanWest/Global is to New Conservativism what laps are to lap dancers:
CanadiansWillLoveWhateverBudgetNewConservativesIntroduce
Overall, though, a narrow majority of 53 per cent said the idea of running a deficit would be very acceptable or somewhat acceptable.
What the fuck does that even mean other than that the CanWest/Global will put a positive spin on whatever the hell budget the New Conservatives introduce?
Good grief. Yeah. Okay. Canada officially sucks. Thanks, CanWest/Global and the New Conservative Government of Canada. You win. Just not in Afghanistan, which I notice wasn't mentioned - at all.
Because I guess the War in Afghanistan isn't costing "hard-working Canadian families" any of their "hard-earned tax dollars" and therefore they'd rather have a cheap little tax handout to totally stimulate an economy that's about to suck thanks to those idiot Republicans south of the border instead of just about anything else - including Federal help for Ontario's manufacturing sector?
Uh hunh. Sure. I believe you, CanWest/Global, even where others might not.
February 25, 2008
Sure, Blame the Taliban
ParliamentScramblesToMeetHillier'sDemands
The debate comes on the heels of a warning issued Friday by Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier, who urged Parliament to come to a quick decision on the country's role in Afghanistan.
Yeah. Don't even think about it. Just do what Hillier says. He's the Prime Minister General of Canada.
Hillier said the longer the Canadian Forces go without clarity about the mission, the more difficult it will be to protect the soldiers.
Tell them to stand still, then, so nobody gets killed in a vehicle rollover or by a roadside bomb, while Parliament debates the mission.
He said that if the Taliban sense weakness, they may try to take advantage of it and attack Canadian soldiers to prevent a cohesive mission.
Sure, blame the Taliban. What are they going to do? Write a letter to the editor complaining it's not their fault their spidey senses are always tingling?
Is There A Dr. Martin In The House?
Good grief, eh? Okay, okay - you're a Dr. Gawd. Dr. Martin, Dr. Martin, Dr. Martin. Oh, oh, quiet everybody. Dr. Martin has something to say. Shh. (He's a Dr., you know.)
Keith Martin, Dr., Dr. Keith Martin, that is to say, said something in favour of free speech if you haven't heard already, ad nauseum, as if - otherwise - Keith Martin isn't the flake of flakes in the Western Hemisphere.
Sadly for Dr. Martin, some bad people said something in favour of free speech right after he did. They were like, "Yavol! Ve agree vit da Goot Herr Doktor!" (Heheh - probably because he's a Dr., and they were like, "Yaw! Yaw! He's a Dr. Vike Mengele. Yaw!")
I hate it when that happens, too, though, I must admit. I'll say something brill and then a bunch of bad people come along (male bloggers, mostly) and they're all like, "Ygluck! Ygluck!" (That's the worst part - the "lost in translation" copying.)
Anyway, the fact is, Dr. Keith Martin said something that bad people agreed with, so, I guess Dr. Keith Martin is bad, too.
Unless, bad people are sometimes good.
Ooh... Hm... Nope. Too dangerous. Dr. Keith Martin must be bad.
Speaking of Freedom of Speech
Should men be allowed to be bloggers? I mean, I've noticed when they aren't defaming each other, they're suing each other for defamation.
And the same men who do both - defame and sue for defamation - use derogatory terms to describe women bloggers they don't like or don't agree with politically. I've noticed that, too. Which I think is kind of misogynistic, but, hey - I'm a woman blogger so I've learned to suck it up, take it in stride, BE A WOMAN.
But it's a bit of a drag knowing they can say endless shit about us knowing we won't sue or threaten to sue because we're women and must therefore not be seen to be whining, offended, not TAKING IT LIKE WOMEN, while they muck up the Internet to such a degree that, well, it's all about them, isn't it. I mean, when isn't there a defamation shitstorm involving male bloggers on the Internet?
And most of them already have jobs with some kind of public profile, too, so, in the interests of WOMEN and all that is rational, I hereby pledge to not click on a blog or Internet article or anything that has to do with men who defame and/or sue for defamation and/or otherwise just go on and on about themselves and who they are being sued by and who they are suing and so on and so forth and more of the same etc etc. It'll be my way of STOPPING THE INSANITY!!!
By the way, Dear Reader, they're all buddies behind the scenes, you know - every single one of them. And it's no wonder because they make a pretty good living off each other. Just don't expect to find a WOMAN buddy in the gang. You won't. They're all "men".
February 24, 2008
It's Gonna Purple Rain
I can feel it in my hip:
Godspeak
I watched "Castaway" last night on television. I love that movie, how time goes from being such an absolute manmade concept to something relative only to whether you are living or no longer. And how a sane person will bestow humanity upon something, anything to stay sane when just yourself and your memories aren't enough anymore.
Children do that, of course, too, bestow humanity upon something. To a child, anything they decide is a companion assumes humanity - and a soul. Parents know it. That's why it's such a preoccupation with us that our children not lose who they love most - Teddy, or Olive, or in the case of my son - Tshirt.
Tshirt was an old tee of his Dad's, who used to travel a lot, that I gave him one night, introducing him as one of Dad's old tee-shirts. Eventually, Tshirt was just a patch of cloth, but by then, Tshirt's Cousin had come to visit and Tshirt retired to being a neckerchief for Patch, who was a patchwork teddy never played with but always there, watching. (The cat had bitten off his eye, so he was wary and liked to be up high on a shelf.)
The first time I saw "Castaway", when Wilson floats away, my oldest cried. I was choked up, but I make it a rule not to cry in front of my kids. I don't know why, exactly, that I have that rule - except that my mother never cried in front of us, or at all that I know of, and I always found that very reassuring.
So I kept up her tradition. I'm sure any pychologists reading this are having a bird right about now, so know, too, that I have a reputation for not really celebrating special days much, or at all. My kids know me as she who observes one day no differently than the day before and will observe the next day as the same, and so on and so forth and more of the same etc etc until life, which I refer to as a mystery that is just there and death something we never know ourselves, is well, like I say - who knows?
My mother also never discussed religion or God, although we went to Church for most of our childhoods and she even went for a bit after we were gone from home. I think that's because my father may have been a religious person and she kept it up because he would have wanted that for us. My own children have never been to Church, though. My ex's parents are much younger than my own - 60s parents - and as soon as he said, "Ugh", to Church - they didn't bother going any more and we kept with his family tradition, as well as his own beliefs which are a combination of science and science fiction.
I countered, of course, with - "there's no such thing as aliens" - which was just me being me because I didn't take any science in high school beyond grade 11 physics so I really don't know if there are aliens or not. I just know I don't care about space, space travel, other planets, possible life on other planets, and anything and everything to do with the universe beyond the ozone layer of Earth.
Anyway, when you don't go to Church, you end up discussing life in other ways with kids, more heathen ways, and so it is with movies like "Castaway" that you end up talking about such things as humanity and time.
Now, when kids are little, they don't just give souls to teddy bears and blankets, they believe in angels and fairies, too. The latter comes from other people, of course, but the former? I dunno. I think that's just instinct. What's striking is how real it is, such that, as long as your child believes Tshirt has humanity, you do, too. I know that to be true because, not only can I remember feeling that as a child about Smokey, but I felt it a bit for Tshirt when he no longer mattered to my son.
Once a soul has been bestowed, Dear Reader, there's no uncreating it. We can create. But we can't uncreate.
So, what is it about others' beliefs in Deities that is so offputting to me, then? Well, I think it's quite simply the insistence that divinity must be bestowed upon the supernatural for life to have meaning, that humanity isn't enough - when I know that it is. It's a power we have, to bestow humanity upon anything, and I guess I just don't see the need to inflate it to the divine. I'm nervous of people who can't see that humanity is enough. They scare me.
Because humanity IS enough.
February 23, 2008
Yes We Can
Not.
I'm going to make a prediction now that is so chock-a-block with irony, it is to laugh: Michelle Obama will be the downfall of her husband. Yes indeed, sexism will out in the end. And the U.S. will elect a white Republican man to be President of the United States of America.
The end.
Dream On
Has this ever happened to you, Dear Reader?
When I was at university, I used to go to the pub once a week to seek male attention for my looks AND sense of humour but, because I was shy about actually dating anyone, I would stick pretty much to sitting with girlfriends and drinking brewskis.
I also developed a pathological fear of dancing which may or may not have had to do with being a) left-handed; b) from the Sault; c) a tail-end boomer caught between rock & roll and disco - neither of which I could dance to on account of rock & roll is not dance music and disco is gay (in the retarded sense, I mean).
Anyway, this guy - AND HE WAS BLACK - took a shine to me and one night kept bugging me to dance to the point where I was forced to tell him I was a lesbian, "I'm a LESBIAN?!", which normally worked and was enough to put an end to the pestering. Guys would back away, "Hey, I don't want any trouble - sorry, eh - lemme buy you a beer", and that would be it.
But this guy was like, "I don't believe you", and kept bugging me until I was forced to say, "Look, I said I was a LEZZZZZBIAN?!"
Anyway, I forget what happened, how I got out of dancing (not with him, just in general), and so on and so forth and more of the same etc etc, but later that night I had a dream. Not like Martin Luther had a dream, more like a dream where I said to the guy, not, "I'm a Lesbian?!", but, "I don't dance with *******."
Yup. It was awful and in that dreamy way of, "Hey look, a toilet. Right in the middle of the party. I think I'll get naked and sit down and do a big poop."
Everybody heard. The whole pub was quiet when I said it, of course. No music, no laugher, just me saying, "I don't dance with *******". And the guy got really violent and pulled out a gun and was going to shoot me because it was all justified on account of I'd just said in front of a whole pub full of university students, "I don't dance with *******", except that some kindly arts students talked him out of it, said I didn't know any better and obviously I was just a racist, and they'd call the police and let them deal with me, and to put the gun away.
Needless to say, my life was ruined, over, done. Luckily it was only a dream and I woke up, completely sweaty and freaked out, but conscious.
Honestly? It was the scariest fucking dream I've ever had. You'd know it was, too, if you ever had that dream. C'mon. Have you? Have you ever had a dream where you've said something really, really, really inappropriate and wrong, wrong, wrong and everybody's mad, mad, mad and your life is pretty much or as good as over because you said a bad word for no good reason and no matter how hard you try to justify it you can't because it's just so frowned upon and there's simply no denying that you said it and in front of lots of people?
I mean, there was context in the dream, too, so, it was pretty clearly racist.
Anyway, just so you know - THAT'S how shy I am about dancing in public.
Free Speech - Less or More?
Let us do an experiment here on Sooey's using broad and leading statements from each opposing side in the Freedom of Speech vs Human Rights Commissions debate to see where our visceral reactions to each statement land us - shall we?:
"We need less freedom of speech."
vs
"We need more freedom of speech."
There. Now I know where I landed because, even though I'm a woman on the left, I want to know what people are REALLY thinking. I don't want them to just tell me what they think I want to hear (well, I do, but that comes from my mother's side of our family and they're all Liberals - all of them - right back to the first Cave Sooey who said, "Just tell them what they want to hear, get elected, and do whatever. Works every time.")
So, okay. I guess what I'm saying is, I don't want them to just tell YOU what they think you want to hear (think tax cuts and no mention of the Mission in Afghanistan during the last federal campaign, Dear Reader).
But back to the freedom to say what you believe without fear of prosecution.
I worked at the Provincial NDP in the 80s and we had a women's committee that did language checks on their fellow staff and, although Members were never approached for their misogynistic views, staff were regularly hauled up on the carpet for accidentally using the word "girl" when they meant "woman" - it was a real point of contention during my time there and, I swear, led to me saying "girl" more times than if I'd been running a Republican strip club. No wait, that'd be "boy" I'd be saying. Okay. Forget the analogy and nevermind that one of our Members who went on to be the Minister of Labour referred to his legislative assistant as "his girl" ALL THE TIME I worked at the NDP.
But he was a Member and, obviously, a man d'un certain age and therefore - off limits for the women's committee - who to a woman seemed to me people anyone other than the NDP would figure were best left to muttering to themselves as they shuffled along the corridors of Ward8 of The Mental - as opposed to in charge of politically correct (freedom of) speech in the workplace.
Now, the reason I mention this is because I almost got fired for calling another staff member (a higher up MAN, who was much beloved by the women's committee because they were seriously fucked up women who didn't know any better and were easily fooled by MEN telling them what they wanted to hear: "Your brain looks beautiful in that muumuu, Ms") a misogynistic pig BECAUSE he'd called me a bimbo AND was trying to get me to do work, through his boss, a Member, that would normally have been done by the Member's constituency assistant.
Alas, the constituency assistants were engaged in a strike action or work to rule or somesuch and the Member was trying to get around that inconvenient fact by having another staff member - me - who wasn't engaged in a strike action or work to rule to do what would normally be a job done by his constituency assistant.
That's called strike breaking or being a two-faced hypocrite or a bad comrade or something but, you know, when you're the Member (boss) and you want something done and you have an evil henchmen to do your bidding, it's called, "I don't give a shit. Tell the bimbo to do it or I'll have her fired."
Anyway, the guy I called a misogynistic pig I also knew to have been charged with wife assault - which the press eventually got wind of when the NDP were in power on account of he was working in a Ministry reponsible for women's affairs or something like that, and, well, I don't know, don't care what happened to him after that - perhaps he's a Liberal, or even a New Conservative, now. The important thing is, I didn't get fired but I did get a blot on my work record at the Member's insistence.
Except I didn't get a blot on my work record - the Member just thinks I did - because I didn't think that was fair, either, this right of a Member to have my work record affected because of an incident involving multiple offences all 'round, in my opinion (although, not really, since I thought the Member and his assistant - who wasn't REALLY higher up than me, now I stop and think about it - were in the wrong and I was just calling a spade a spade and he was calling me by a misogynist pig's epithet for "woman").
So, I went to our Chief Steward and she went to our Office Manager and between the two of them they came up with, "Okay. We're going to tell Him we've put the blot on your work record and you're going to act penitent and apologize to Him, but, in fact, we've done nothing. There's nothing on your work record to indicate that this altercation ever took place."
Believe me, it may sound like a wise solution but I'm not wise and boy did it bug me having to fake penitence and apologize to that asshole. Seriously. I mean - c'mon. That happened 20 years ago and I'm STILL mad about it.
But that wasn't the point of my story. The point of my story is that, not long after, or maybe it was years later, I can't remember now (it's amazing how the years BC - before children - all swim together), I went on maternity leave. While I was on maternity leave, the NDP won the election and became the first NDP Government of Ontario. And I opted to not go back to work and instead stay at home with the baby (people couldn't believe my decision but the way I saw it was, well, nevermind how I saw it - just know it was one of the easiest decisions I've ever had to make).
However, around Christmastime, I did go to a big reception at the Legislature to celebrate the win and the story I tell of that room is the lesson I think people should take from political correctness - speechwise - which is this: It took me a while to figure out where the party was because the room that APPEARED to be the party room, also APPEARED to be a sea, an absolute sea, of young to young middle-aged white men who mirrored (in that special flattering mirror kind of way) the sea of newly elected Members.
See, that's what happens when people just pay lip service. Real life. It's why you want to know what people really think, not just what they think you want to hear. Because those Members were people I could have sworn would go out of their way to bring diversity and, more importantly, women on board if they'd ever had the chance at power and when one walked into a party room celebrating something as huge as the first provincial win by the NDP ever, that you'd think you'd stepped into the United Nations of Women Also Rans, at least.
Except that I'd had that little Real Life encounter (among several others, but who has time?) already and when I realized that the party wasn't a final Liberal blow-out or a waiting in the wings Harris orgy, but the new NDP government celebrating its win - it all made sense.
Seriously, Dear Reader, you want people to say what they believe, to not be afraid to put on the record what it REALLY is they believe in because otherwise, you'll just get blindsided. And when you do it'll be your own fault for insisting they just tell you what you want to hear.
February 22, 2008
Hey Kids! Abstinence IS Hot!
Today, boys and girls, your Health Education teacher, Sooey, is going to show you why you don't want to have sex. Ever. Also, girls, if any of you are planning to become groupies, this video will reveal your future - better'n an 8-ball, even. And boys, this is what sex with a set of fake boobs really looks like so you might want to downsize your priorities.
RockStarAndGroupieSex-Live! SortOf...
I know, I know. EW!EW!EW! Just think, though, at least your Mom and Dad probably looked better'n that making you.
People and Climate Change
There's nothing left I can do, nowhere to go to make my carbon footprint smaller. That's it for me. I'm done. Totally converted - right where I started out at the beginning of this debate - so you can stop preaching to me now. And at this point, if you have the wherewithall to give speeches about climate change, it's time to take action and reduce your carbon footprint down to mine. So get yourself down to minimum wage, a small apartment, no car, and no travel or big expensive purchases with lots of packaging.
We aren't responsible for climate change anymore. You are. It's all up to you, Baby. Now, go for it. Pare your lifestyle down to the tiniest fraction of what it is and give yourself a big old pat on the back for a job well done.
Aw, Just When You Thought
Everybody rahrahing the War in Afghanstan WASN'T a big fat liar about the war on Afghanistan, now you know - THEY ALL ARE:
NewConservativesFundRahRahingThinkTank
What's the money for? It's not for the technical work that militaries obviously require -- building better airplanes, for example. Instead, it sponsors policy scholars, who create the ideas, news and views that shape Canadians' perception of the military and the war. And the evidence suggests that the military and government have politicized some SDF grants. The same bureaucrat who administers SDF grants to scholars also manages DND's liaison with cabinet and Parliament. When DND needs a kind word in Parliament or the media -- presto! -- an SDF-sponsored scholar often appears, without disclosing his or her financial link.
McCain Isn't Gay?!
If there's one thing to be learned about the story on John McCain and his affair or not with the blond woman who looks like an almost dead ringer for his wife, it's that the New York Times is not the liberal newspaper American liberals, for whatever reason, so desperately want to believe it is.
I'm not sure WHAT the New York Times is, but when you believe to the point of knowing that the administration taking your country to war via an illegal invasion of another country is lying and knows it is lying about its reasons for doing so, and you don't report that knowledge to your readers, you're really not much of a newspaper. You're just this great big grand old established source of trust for a bunch of liberals who don't know any better.
Besides, if McCain isn't gayer'n The Navy then I guess Mike Huckabee is the only gay left in the running to be the Republican candidate for the 2008 Presidential election.
February 21, 2008
Live from www.sooeys.com
Regarding the Toronto Queen Street West fire yesterday:
"History is for the dead!"
Which ties in nicely with something I heard for the very first time just the other day: "Life is for the living". Because history is just so burdensome, isn't it. I mean, we're always trying to save it, or capture a bit of it, or learn from it for fear we'll repeat it - which for some reason is considered quite the doomed thing to do.
So, I'm doing a total 180 as of today, right here on this blog, and adopting the double-edged (in a good way) adage, "History is for the dead, life is for the living".
Because really, I think I had it ass backwards right up until now.
Two Irishmen
Here's your morning smile as told to my beau over in Ireland this past summer by a guy in a real Irish pub with a real Irish accent and everything:
Q: Why is there so much paedophilia in the Catholic Church?
A: Sexy kids.
Anyway, he told me that one because I was talking about how, in the shower, instead of singing showtunes, I was thinking about all the times when I was a little girl and then a bigger girl that I was in icky situations where I realized the grown up man would have done something perverted to me if I didn't get out of the room, car, park - wherever I happened to be when I realized, "Uh oh".
And I wasn't even a sexy kid. And I'm not exaggerating. Every other day or so, or maybe it was every other week, or every month, but certainly several times a year, I can clearly recall now being in what I knew were sketchy situations where I had to keep my wits about me and that almost always meant amskraying with a hasty explanation, "I gotta go... practice piano/feed the dog/iron my Gram's underwear!"
It's true. In my day, it was up to the kid to stay out of the pervert's clutches. The thing was - every man of a certain age seemed to be a pervert. Honestly. Maybe that's just because I'm a fatherless girl from Northern Ontario, but maybe it's not. Maybe it's because, unless there's another man around to ward off the other men, and you live in Northern Ontario, little kids seem a little too inviting to men and it brings out the pervert in them. And unless those little kids have a drill sergeant Mom who has pretty much hammered it into their little noggins that preventing sexual assault is THEIR responsibility, tough nuts, kid.
It's survival of the fittest at the end of the day. You don't want something bad to happen to you? Don't let it happen, then.
The reason I'm putting my nasty nasty nasty argument thusly is because while I was showering, I realized that much of the Rightwing argument against "overprotecting" kids comes from middle-aged people who probably grew up in circumstances similar to mine and what they're essentially saying is, "Look, prey has to be wary - that's just the way it is. Otherwise, the kids get sloppy and the next thing you know..."
And there is some merit to that argument because the whole idea is to prevent sexual assault from happening. And there's probably an analogy to be made, here, between kids and the domestic cat, which has become dumber over time because it doesn't have to keep its wits about it anymore. It's gone soft. It doesn't even have to hunt for food. It just pads over to the dish and there it is.
As a result, it's devolved and can be easily mauled by a dog - often because it's been declawed, too, so it won't scratch the upholstery on the brand new ultra suede couch.
On the upside (because there has been social evolution, at least) not only do kids have more rights these days - and know their rights - but we view the predator as the problem - not the kid who was sexually assaulted. Well, except for those same Rightwingers who DO blame the kid - either for not wearing a uniform or for having a single mom who picked up with a man or for whatever reason that allowed the sexual assault to take place because, for whatever reason, the kid didn't get out of the room/car/park.
So, they blame the predator, too, but there's still an element of, "Look kid, that didn't happen to me because I had the smarts to get out of the room/car/park."
But, like I say, I wasn't a sexy kid, either, so I can't say for sure if I know where they're coming from exactly. I'm just guessing this "over-protecting the kids" argument goes a little deeper'n wearing helmets during playtime.
Tomorrow I'll blog about a friend I had who WAS a sexy kid.
Just kidding.
Shooting Down Hazardous Spy Satellites
Isn't really free, you know.
Like healthcare.
I just thought I'd mention that since Rightwingers are always so eager to remind Canadians that just because it seems free when you're sick, healthcare is actually quite expensive.
Still, I'm glad Americans pay good money for the technology to shoot down their hazardous spy satellites because it turns out there was a 25% chance of that one, the one they just shot down, landing in Canadian territory.
February 20, 2008
Phew. Nevermind.
"All I would say is that I am not a candidate and I have not consented to my government advocating for me to take on this responsibility," Manley said Wednesday in an interview with Reuters.
It's true. I heard he's holding out for an official "Princess" designation.
MSM Shills for Wal-Mart
If you're one of those who, like me, dropped her subscription to a CanWest newspaper due to what I considered rampant misogyny and not so thinly veiled racism in its editorial pages, perhaps you might want to not reconsider renewing it - ever:
NowWeAdvertiseForWalMartInOurEditorialPages
The column starts off thusly:
Wal-Mart deserves the 2008 Nobel Peace Prize. And the Vatican may want to beatify the world's largest retailer.
And continues unabated until this final line:
How much more saintly can a corporate entity get?
Heheh - I recommend: WalMart-TheHighCostOfLowPrice as an antidote if you bothered reading the above CanWest Aditorial.
Oh, and here's more'n the author of the piece, an editorial pages editor with CanWest:
Hello? You Fucking Sacks of Shit?
THERE'S A JOURNALIST AWAITING EXECUTION IN AFGHANISTAN!!!!!
Mr. Harper also reviewed the Manley panel recommendations with Mr. Karzai."The Prime Minister confirmed that he is in contact with NATO allies regarding additional troops and expressed his hope that Parliament will support a motion that would see an extension of Canada's mission to Afghanistan," Sandra Buckler, the Prime Minister's director of communications, said in a statement. "President Karzai reconfirmed his support for the Canadian mission, a message he will carry to NATO in the coming weeks."
Oh. Yes. Of course. Whatever you say, President Karzai. Can I carry your bags for you, President Karzai? Thank you. No, after you, President Karzai.
More Lunacy
Tom Stoppard's play, Jumpers, was one of the first plays I saw in Toronto when I first moved there to go to school. I saw more plays after that because my boyfriend was best friends with an acting student (who is still an actor - he plays menacing characters in Hollywood movies and supposedly dated Mick Jagger's daughter, although, if true, she must like her men like she likes her flowers - "gay in springtime", if you catch my drift).
Anyway, the leading lady did/does the entire play in the nude, in her bedroom, musing about the moon. Man has just landed on it, you see, thereby destroying moonlore and causing her to drift into a depression over the future of art and poetry. The theme resonated with me because I'm at odds with where man seeks to go, too (heheh - and it's funny how it's pretty much a bisexual "highway", when you really stop and think about it) - particularly in terms of space travel and going where no man has gone before.
Also, thinking about space gives me the willies, whereas "The Man In The Moon Is A Lady" from Mame is one of my favourite showtunes.
So yeah - fuck you, Trekkies.
Lunatics
Here is something funny. I feel like I want to punch the world in the face AND I just found out there's going to be a lunar eclipse tonight.
Anyway, when I pointed out to my beau this morning that I remember making the connection between a full moon, a smashed window, and flat out full on incomprehensible rage, a feeling like I was going to burst out of my skin and melt the ground beneath me with hot green bile - he said, "the moon is very far, but also very big".
Heheh - and those were the last words he ever spoke...
February 19, 2008
White People
Sheena, Neo-Feminist, posted this on my forum:
Okay. I admit it. I'm so white I'm going to have to change the name of SooeySays to SooeyTheHonkySays.
But gee, white people are so politically correct, we should have a White Pride Week or something to get everybody else on board.
A Rightwing Canadian Museum For Human Rights
I mean, c'mon. This is CanWest's baby and Stephen Harper has pledged $100 million now and $22 million annually to it and now submissions are being solicited as to what goes in it and REAL women is ready aye ready to offer up suggestions.
HowAbout"CanadianMuseumOfIrony"?
I dunno 'bout you, Dear Reader - but CanWest offends me. Its newspapers offend me such that I go without. Its television network, Global, offends me to the point where I want to leave the country. Personally, I find CanWest/Global overwhelmingly and astoundingly "white male" - if you know what I mean. And, as a Feminist, I'm pretty sure that's a backlash I'm getting every time I come across a CanWest editorial or a Global newscast.
REAL Women, on the other hand, is what I think of as CanWest/Global's natural constituency:
"The Advisory Committee for the Museum, selected by the former Liberal government, consisted mainly of feminist, homosexual and regular Liberal stand-bys, such as a former Liberal Prime Minister John Turner, former Liberal MPs, Cabinet Ministers and some Senators. The museum was intended to be a monument to former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and his Charter of Rights."This has raised concerns that the museum, with its left-wing Advisory Board, would be used as a powerful tool to champion the Liberal government's interpretation of human rights, such as abortion rights, feminism, homosexuality, etc. with only some legitimate exhibits sprinkled here and there to give the museum the appearance of legitimacy.
"Fortunately the Conservative government changed the Advisory Committee in October to include individuals, mostly business men and women, with no known bias on human rights issues.
Yes. "Fortunately". Because now we know what the Canadian Museum of Human Rights is REALLY about, don't we. And Feminists like me won't have to spend any money - voluntarily - to check it out once it's been built with $100 million of our tax dollars and is humming along on a $22 million/year bribe from Stephen Harper and his New Conservative Government of Canada for more of that good ol' boy rightwing bias in CanWest's editorials and Global's newscasts.
No Country For Weird Looking Old Bags
What's up with all the plastic surgery actresses are having to look younger? Because they don't look younger after having had plastic surgery, they just look weird.
Middle-aged and weird, old and weird, I thought she was dead twenty years ago and weird.
And I've noticed they don't score any more roles looking weird, than they would have if they'd just aged naturally and played mothers and grandmothers to the important characters the men in the movies are playing.
Someone should tip them off to the fact that it's not because they're getting older that there aren't any roles for them in Hollywood, it's because girlfriends and wives in the movies are all supposed to be young and pretty and secondary to whatever important roles the men in the movies are playing.
It's a fact. A Hollywood fact. Women are always supporting characters in the movies unless they're playing a blond or a prostitute or an unwed mother.
Boys, Boys, Boys
I'd listen to your arguments about hate speech (pro and con the right to spew forth) except - I'm a woman, so I JUST CAN'T GET IT UP ANYMORE!
Geddit? Well? Do ya? Hunh?
Look, as long as your Gawddamned Eeeeevil Patriarchal Religions (and that's all of 'em, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu) three of which I know fully well to be Misogynistic in practice as well as theory (Muslim, Christian, Jewish) are protected from hate speech and women aren't - fuck you and your twisted inside out and upside down logic - whether you are pro or con hate speech rights.
And here's a hint: Nobody who is sane is either.
The absolute fact is that no one is more discriminated against in this world than a woman. And pretty much all of that discrimination is a result of Religion - a direct line extends from the word of your imaginary Deity to discrimination against women purely for being women.
That's a fact, Jack. A fact women experience every day in one way or another no matter where she lives on this crazy fucked up planet thanks to men and their stupid obstinate dogged faith in any bullshit institution that counsels keeping women away from exercising any real power - which they absolutely do in one way or another.
Change? Not in this lifetime.
Now, this discrimination against women might have a point if God/Allah/Buddha/Krishna was real. But HE ain't real. HE is an invention to keep power in the hands of men. And yet, Religions all, still, hold sway - all the while pretending Feminism is radical. It really is a kind of insanity, and yet it persists - legally. There is absolutely no logical reason for Religion to have any power whatsoever in 2008 and yet it does. Meanwhile, Religion is responsible for pretty much all that is wrong in the world, including pretty much all hate speech against women - not to mention actual physical crimes against women and the men who take up women's rights issues - and yet it, Religion, is protected under our laws against hate speech and women aren't.
You have no leg to stand on here with me, boys. Not a one. I don't care which side of the fence you're arguing on - you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You have absolutely no idea of the discrimination women live with day in and day out BECAUSE OF RELIGION and you never will because you're men.
What do White Supremacist leaders and Church leaders and Legislative leaders and Media leaders and Corporate leaders all have in common?
That's right. They're all men. And their religious beliefs, no matter how hateful towards women they are - and they are - have protection under our hate speech laws and women do not.
So there. Now just shut the fuck up because you're all full of shit - absolutely stinking mounds of God fearing shit - and I'm sick to death of you and your misogynistic evil Religions that all actively and without conscience discriminate against women and actively and without conscience seek to deny us the human rights we would have under NO GOD'S LAW.
February 18, 2008
Overheard On The Street
Two teenaged girls talking about a commercial for "Pretty Woman", the movie (which I have never seen):
"That's disgusting. Who would want to go out with a guy who wants to pay for you?"
I'm not sure, but it sounded like they were more disgusted with him than with her and found the very idea of such a movie theme offputting, so I'm putting it in the "Yesssss!" column.
Dammit! I'm A Feminist, Not A Computophile!
I am/was up for 4, count 'em, 4, Feminist Awards over at CreativeRevolution and I've got a badge to prove it except I don't know how to download it.
Now, most women I know who blog, also know how to set up blogs and download images and upscan original art and all that fancy stuff related to modern blogging - but I have a website manager who designed my site and I don't know the first thing about anything related to computers except wordprocessing.
So, the problem is, do I learn how to do all the fancy stuff, thus rendering him somewhat superfluous AND using up writing time for which I'm already not paid, to do yet more blog-related work? OR do I let him continue managing my site, gratis, even though he sincerely believes that the reason I can't do it is because I'm a woman and he's a male chauvinist pig?
Le sigh. It'd be a bit hypocritical for me to learn how to do the fancy stuff, too, I think, because, while learning how to type has earned me all my money to date, it has also destroyed all my professional self-worth and is the reason why I seek validation through blogging - a non-paying pursuit with absolutely no employment future.
None of which advances the cause of Feminism, I don't think. Or does it? I dunno, I'm not a very good judge of what advances causes anymore. I have the leisure time to do the blogging, I guess, and it's the blogging that gives me a voice I wouldn't otherwise have by disseminating my views to others.
But money makes the world go 'round, too, doesn't it.
Unless, maybe that's what the mainstream media is so frightened of when it comes to blogging, that money has no real influence on opinion in the blogosphere, that with money taken out of the equation, people will write what they actually believe.
Fortunately, my webmaster doesn't read my entries. He just likes dicking around with the website.
Settling Afghanistan
Whoa. Dog fighting, eh? That sure got everybody's attention. But I like how one Amir Mohammed, who has been a regular at the dog fights in Afghanistan for some 30 years, said, "It is our culture. Fridays are holidays. There are no parks, no picnics. We want to have a good time."
Sure, sure. And we want you to have a good time, too, Amir Mohammed. Just... at dog SHOWS, not dog FIGHTS. See, while we understand it's YOUR culture, it's OUR war and, to be fair to us and frank with you, we're waging it BECAUSE we don't like your culture.
You know, I hate to say it (mostly because it's a movie cliche I doubt you'll recognize, anyway, Amir Mohammed) but I think what we have here is "a failure to communicate".
So, here's my solution.
I think we, Canada, should start up permanent settlements in Afghanistan. Permanent CANADIAN settlements called "CultureVilles" (bilingual, you'll notice, or not) - so that you, AFGHANISTAN, can learn a little more about OUR culture and what WE like, and, more importantly, what we don't like because we consider ourselves to be a much more evolved culture. No offence, eh. But seriously, this really isn't going to work for us - this dog fighting thing. We put people in jail for that kind of day off over here.
Of course, we used to put people in jail for opening their stores on Sundays, too, until we made it pretty much mandatory that they stay open 24/7. Until "Family Day" came along this year and everybody was told to "shut her down" for the day. You get used to it. We sort of have a preoccupation with shopping vs not shopping.
Anyway, my reason for the "CultureVilles" is that we also have a knack for relocating people to areas we think will better meet their needs - and ours. Now, normally the people we relocate are Indian/Inuit people, but I don't think that would work so well in this case on account of they're having trouble finding their footing with regards to our culture, too, so Sooey was thinking maybe a good idea would be to relocate some of the really big time supporters of the War on Terror to your neck of the woods. You know, to teach you a thing or two about how we like to do things so there aren't any more surprises like... dog fights every Friday.
That's really gotta go if we're going to feel like we're getting anywhere with this Afghanistan mission, Amir Mohammed. Really. We have people here who would go to war against you just for that, nevermind the rest of your culture. NDPers, even (although not me - I'm down with dog fighting, myself - yup - down with dog fighting and up with peace).
So yeah. We've got a bunch of Conservative types who could probably make the transition to permanent settlements in Afghanistan without too much trouble. And I think, Amir Mohammed, you'd find a fair degree in common with them politically, too - especially with regards to women's rights, although not so much with animals unless, maybe, you set the dogs free after the fights and hunted them down for sport. That might be a good compromise.
In any case, I think it would be good to nip these more glaring cultural differences in the bud and have a group of Canadians living and working on permanent settlements in your country until everybody has a better understanding of why we're bothering with this war.
Because I really think somebody forgot to fill you in, Amir Mohammed. This isn't about you and what you want. This is about us and what we want for you.
February 17, 2008
Deity Wars In A Real World
By November 2008 it will be seven years since 9/11. I wonder if the election of a new President will cause Gawd to break the spell of seven years bad luck that was placed on the United States of America when the Terrorists flew those planes in the Twin Towers under the orders of his arch rival Allah?
Unless - what if Gawd isn't real and there is no spell? I mean, I've already determined through a couple of scientific experiments (which I'd prefer to keep to myself for fear of having one of those deep fried fatwahs slapped on me) that Allah isn't real. So it's a scientifically (although not necessarily religiously) sound conclusion to reach that Gawd isn't real either and therefore the War on Terror isn't actually a War on Terror but simply a kneejerk response by one group of humans to an attack by another group of humans.
Anyway, I think atheists have to step up to the plate and start preparing politicians for a little harsh reality just in case by heckling more during campaigns, "Gawd isn't real!" And, "There's no such thing as Gawd!" And, "Fucking fucked up fucker, cunt, shit, damn, FUCK, no Gawd now, no Gawd now, no Gawd now!"
Because, you know, I'd be all over supporting a War on Terror if it was all about ridding the whirld of psychotic religious nuts who believe in Gawd so much that they're willing to blow themselves up for it? him? her? (heheh - as if) - and take a bunch of other people with them who just want to go about their day on Earth ignoring other people's delusions.
It's just that this War on Terror doesn't seem to be focussed on doing that. If anything, it seems to be accomplishing the exact opposite. Which makes me wonder if we're killing all the wrong people because we still, deep down, believe in Allah - in addition to Gawd, I mean - and this really is a fight to the death of a Deity.
I dunno. Should I make my scientific experiments public? I do have conclusive proof that Allah is just a figment of the Islamic imagination. Albeit, conclusive SCIENTIFIC proof, not RELIGIOUS proof.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to believe. I mean, deceive.
February 16, 2008
The National Post and Me
How come it has money for Kate McMillan and Kathy Shaidle, but I got let go as a freelancer because there supposedly wasn't enough money in the budget for little ol' stay-at-home Mom me? Eh? Well? How come?
Anyway, seeing as I'm up for some 4, count 'em, 4 blogging awards at: SoYouThinkYou'reAFeminist,Eh? I thought I'd better make fun of somebody who's not up for 4, count 'em, 4 blogging awards but who is having WAY more success with the paying MSM than anyone who is up for 4, count 'em 4, blogging awards.
Gawd. That vast "Definitely Not Feminist" conspiracy, eh? It's gets me, right in the cheque book. Well, until I'm hired as a full-time columnist, let the boycott continue, I say.
Anyway, here's Kate McMillan's column, for which she is a hero among all the non-Feminists out there in Rightwing blogger whirld as well as in the MSM via the National Post.
If I sound bitter, Dear Reader, it's because I am. But all in good fun.
Now, I have taken what I say are the key points in Ms. McMillan's column and elaborated on them to save you the bother of reading it, Dear Reader. It's basically Kate McMillan whining about how other Canadians are too whiny these days (a view I TOTALLY agree with, by the way - especially when it comes to those Men's Rights groups - shut the fuck up and get shovelling, asshat!) to get brain damage or lung cancer or die of starvation:
WhatAboutTheRetards?ShouldTheyWear2Helmets?
Okay, here's Kate on people dying nobly of diptheria (unlike today, I guess when people have to lobby for the right to "die with dignity" - a cult which scares me a bit, the "right to die with dignitiers", because I'm hoping to really dodge and weave when the crabby hand of death tries to strike me dead):
The account makes no mention of grief counsellors.
Maybe they were the first to die of diptheria, Kate. Didja ever think of that? Eh? Well? Didja? Hunh? Gawd works in mysterious ways, you know. Sometimes, really fucked up mysterious ways, too. Really twisted and evil and, well, funny, I guess, if it's not you getting worked on, ways.
When the sea of societal ills is so shallow that "phone calls I don't like" is scraped from the bottom and added to the legislative agenda, when the public tolerance for disagreeable things has dropped so low that "I have to hold my breath" is a complaint worthy of the commiseration of 100,000 radio listeners, we have a problem.
Yeah, well I hear ya there, Kate. Hello? Radio losers? Ever hear of the Internet? It's a whole cyber whirld invented by Al Gore that's sitting there waiting all day 24/7 just for you. You can complain about ANYTHING, ANYTIME on the Internet. But you know what would be funny? If smoking was allowed ONLY in the House of Commons. And hospitals. That'd learn people to run for political office or get sick. And since I have no plans to do either, SKRU U GYZ!!! (Buttons for sale when I start my CafePress site, everybody.)
This is why I have come to believe that what Canadians need most at this moment in our history is a good famine.
Er, okay. You lost me there a bit. Climate Change? That might do it. If it's real, I mean, and not just a giant hoax perpetrated by the melting Arctic ice. Otherwise, I dunno - the government could stop subsidizing farmers and the banks could call in all their loans, I guess. Food could be priced according to what it actually costs to produce. We could stop importing food grown and picked overseas by slave labour. Gee, okay. There are lots of ways we could induce a famine, Kate - even without climate change. Right on. Okay.
A half million 20-somethings would emerge from their parents' basements, if only to search for food.
Ah, I see where you are going with the whole famine thing now. Nope. They'd just head on over to Gramma's house where she's got a full-sized freezer still stocked with meat from 1970. It's a fact, Kate. A Canadian fact. It would take years for the effects of a famine to be felt in Canada - thanks to all those crazy old ladies who lived throught the Great Depression so that they could burden the rest of us with their baby boomer offspring and ridiculous hoarding habits.
Heheh - crazy ol cunts. Ya gotta love 'em, though. To get those random cheques for $1,000, I mean. "Ya, ma. It's called inflation. Remember? You're the one who voted for Trudeau. Not me. And baby needs new shoes."
February 15, 2008
Gay Icons - A Continuing Theme
Here's gay icon George Washington crossing the Delaware:
Clearly what's missing is a big old woody down his pants and for the life of me, I can't understand why this hasn't been corrected by at least one sophmoric doodler.
What is wrong with the youth of today?
Bush Veto
So, President Bush is planning on using his veto power to allow for torture to be officially sanctioned by the United States of America.
I dunno, but I'd say the administration down south has done quite a good job of dehumanizing people, wouldn't you? What's left, I wonder?
When I was a kid, torture was the big bad, the kind of thing only a psychopath would do. It was unforgiveable.
Vlad
You know, to witness via the media Vladimir Putin flexing his muscles, literally, threatening Kosovo et al with a nuclear strike, and just generally acting like a madman and former KGB thug turned semi-dictator-for-life, you really have to figure he's in the employ of the Republican Party of the United States of America.
I mean, c'mon. He is clearly campaigning for John McCain - from the vantage point of grey bleak hopelessly oppressed alcoholic Russia where the lifespan for journalists is measured in dog years so it won't look like they're all being shot and killed in the prime of their lives. He's saying, in a roundabout way, "You weak pathetic American scum had better elect John McCain as President because you're going to need him on account of I am quite insane. Quite. Insane."
Let's just hope Americans don't do that thing they always do and panic and elect the crazy corrupt lying bastard candidate, in this case because they think they need an equally insane President to handle Vladimir Putin - with a kind of like meet like strategy.
Because my guess is that Vladimir Putin is probably really really unbelievably super duper racist and Barrack Obama would scare the shit out of him way more'n John McCain ever could, anyway. John McCain would be more likely to invite him to his ranch or somesuch for an endangered species barbeque. Or perhaps just a night of staring, hands held over candle flames, the intoxicating smell of burning flesh filling their nostrils, until finally they collapse in each other's arms and make passionate love to their candlelit shadows.
Although, we already know how really really unbelievably super duper sexist he is, so maybe Hillary Clinton would scare him even more. I mean, imagine. A woman President?! And a feminist?!
Omigawd. That might actually shut him up once and for all.
Hey Toronto!
Shovel snow much?
But if you're going to blame somebody for the weather, blame the 905ers. Remember how they elected Mike Harris and for cheap larf porpoises (I assume - which makes an ass of u and me) he amalgamated Toronto into one big huge megatropolis and sold off lots of taxpayer-owned services to his buddies - with the fantastic result of higher fees as opposed to lower taxes and fewer government services all 'round for the big huge megatropolis he'd created?
That was funny.
But then, remember how, to really drive home the "we want bad government and we want to pay through the nose for it, too" msssage, the 905ers elected Mel Lastman to be mayor of this big huge megatropolis when even he was saying, "Don't forget - everybody's rich in North York, where I was mayor for life before this gig came along and fell into my lap dancer!"
That was hilarious.
Anyway, I'd say you're just reaping the rewards right about now of your fantastic electoral choices. Here in Ottawa, we have always coped with winter a little better, so having a mayor who is crazier'n a bag of hammers AND up on charges for rigging the election he won because people really are THAT stupid, hasn't really affected us too much. Which is a shame in a way because, how will Ottawans learn the lesson Torontonians have learned that guys who run for political office because they want to run government like a business, are the same guys who think government is their personal trough to gorge on while the gorging is good until they waddle on over to the corporate boards where they laze out their daze like so many Jabba the Huts?
You have learned your lesson - riiiiiight Torontonians? I know, I know - David Miller is Mayor and he's an NDPer or somesuch, but look, he can only work with what was left behind and, well, once Mike Harris and Mel Lastman were done lootin' the Treasury and buying new galpals and inheriting old kids, there just wasn't a lot left for the next guy to offer the citizens of Toronto.
Here's a good rule of thumb (which was once an actual rule on the books meaning, "Do not beat your wife with a stick thicker'n your thumb"):
Don't let it become a vicious cycle. Do yourselves a favour and never elect Conservatives to Government in the first place. And only elect Liberals to Government if it is necessary to prevent Conservatives from being elected to Government. Which it often is on account of Canadians are a selfish stupid lot as most of them are baby boomers and want money for nothin' and their chicks for free, but, because they aren't rock stars, have to settle for politicians who promise them the equivalent in lower taxes and better government.
Gawd. That damned new math. Oh - but too bad the army's in Afghanistan, eh? 'Cause I bet those "Support the Troops" decals look pretty ironic on all the city vehicles stuck in snowbound traffic right about now.
February 14, 2008
VD 2008
3 Questions:
In Saudi Arabia a woman is facing the death penalty because she's a witch, says her accuser, an impotent man.
Q: When is Laura Bush going to make a goodwill trip there to tell Saudia Arabian doctors about Viagra?
OJ Simpson's girlfriend is in hospital with a head injury suffered during a fall which reportedly had nothing to do with her being OJ Simpson's girlfriend.
Q: How is it that OJ Simpson has a girlfriend?
Roger Clemens, a baseball player, is appearing before a Washington Congressional Hearing accused of having taken steroids.
Q: Why hasn't the Republican Party drafted Roger Clemens as a candidate for the 2008 Presidential campaign?
Cut and Run
I'm curious. When Americans (and stupid Canadians) accuse peace mongerers of wanting to "cut and run" from Iraq (or in the case of stupid Canadians, Afghanistan) what are they talking about, really?
Because if the choice is between "cut and run" or drop the Atomic Bomb somewhere (and c'mon - you have to know by now that there are only two strategies for Americans when it comes to modern warfare - even if you're a stupid Canadian) maybe we should just, every once in a while, drop an Atomic Bomb somewhere.
Handily, too, it could even be a Democrat President who drops the A-Bomb - if precedent is any indication. Just as it was a Republican President who did the old "cut and run", with another Republican President just doing the "cut" without really needing to do the "run". (So, I suppose there might be a third choice - just "cut".)
And maybe, in most cases, or even ALL cases, there isn't really any other way to call it a day than to cut and run - after a while, like (if we opt not to drop the A-Bomb somewhere, I mean). Maybe cutting and running is as good as it gets in modern warfare. You invade, kill some leaders and a bunch of other people, then leave.
I mean, at least you invaded and killed. Message delivered, message received. Perhaps, that's as good as it gets before the going gets tough and the tough had better get going back home so they can do it again the next time there's a shout out for a new world order.
Happy Valentine's Day
Now get out there and massacre!
But seriously, speaking of massacres, what's going on with the Liberals? Because here's what I think is going on - I think everybody who ran for the leadership against Stephane Dion is really a New Conservative and THAT'S why they don't want to go to the polls. I mean, they agree with Stephen Harper and the New Conservative Government of Canada because, well, they're New Conservatives.
Sadly, their leader still thinks there are some actual Liberals in the Liberal Party, reportedly saying at a caucus meeting, "'There is a difference between us and Conservatives."
Ouch. I mean, if you have to say it out loud - and at a caucus meeting. Face it, Dion. You're the Liberal Party of Canada now. And if I were you, I'd take it to the mat and run as an Independent Leader, campaign slogan: "I be da one true Liberal Party of da Canadian".
Meanwhile here's what Garth Turner had to say on being a Liberal, "In any caucus, you're going to find hawks and doves," he added, calling himself a hawk.
Which is another way of saying, "Look, I'm a Conservative, just not a New one. Give me war over peace any day. This is so great, being in the Liberal Party of Canada - I can't believe it."
It's not rocket science, Liberals, it's Afghanistan. You put us there. It's your responsibility to get us out. Now get it fucking together and DO IT!!
February 13, 2008
Speaking of Pranks
Remember when the National Post ran that cover story about a new law in Iran demanding that Jews there wear yellow badges to identify themselves as Jews?
I fell for that one. Totally. And I was, deep down, hoping that Israel would just bomb Iran, flatten it, completely wipe it off the map - that's how sick I was of Arab countries and all their threats.
Then it turned out to be not true at all and instead Iran was planning a new law to demand that women dress more conservatively (which nobody cared about for some reason) and it was semi-mea-culpas all 'round except for National Post readers who were all like, "Yabbut, it COULD have happened which makes it just as real as if it DID happen". And the National Post which was all like, "It's still nooze!"
Phew. I'm glad to get that off my chest about Iran. Seriously. I was like, "Fuck you, Iran!" And pumping my fist, "Yes!", when Israel's Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter responded to the "new law" saying, "Whoever makes Jews anywhere wear the yellow star again, will find themselves in a coffin draped in black."
But I'm glad now it happened because then when Bush Inc. was all about starting WWIII with Iran, I wasn't all over it like a cheap suit because I'd already been had by the National Post.
Pick your armchair battles, I always say. Like, now I always say it. After I just said it two sentences ago.
February 12, 2008
Western Supremacists
You know what we are over here in Fortress America? We're Western Supremacists, politically correct colonizers and invaders who just can't let other cultures be, so sure are we of our superiority.
I mean, I'm not saying that in a "you guys" kind of way, I feel it, too. I'm just pointing out that, really, we're so much victims of our own p.r./b.s that it must be pretty galling to the rest of the world that we think our military invasions are principled and our aid tied to trade deals is humanitarian.
Gawd. Even I think we're assholes. I can't imagine what the rest of the world thinks of us.
Oh yeah - The Great Satan.
Hm, when you really stop and think about it, that's pretty funny: The Great Satan. I wonder who came up with it and if he got any local fame for it, you know, sort of a Paris Hilton and "that's hot" kind of fame in the neighbourhood cafe: "Heyyyyy... Amir - who's got your goat today? Eh? Is it THE GREAT SATAN? C'mon, say it for my nephew Rashid."
"Okay, okay. THE GREAT SATAN."
"No, no. Not like that. Say it like you mean it. Say it like, DEATH to the Great Satan, or something."
"Okay, okay. DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN."
"See? See? Rashid is smiling. He likes that one. Death to the Great Satan. It's better. Let's all say it three times. Death to the Great Satan, Death to the Great Satan, Death to the Great Satan."
Aw crap. Whaddaya wanna bet "Death to the Great Satan" comes from some obscure Christian rock tune and migrated over there because an American soldier on patrol or a C.I.A. assassin on a mission was humming it and it got picked up a by a corner drug dealer or hotel prostitute with a keen ear for a hit phrase?
Yup. Ten bucks it originated over here.
Hey, All You Teenaged Girls Out There!
Sooey has the best test available to find out if the guy you like is gay or not. (And he probably is gay, so don't get your hopes up.)
Ready? This test is accurate 7 times out of 10:
If he wants to have sex with guys but doesn't want to have sex with girls, he's gay.
There. Now you know how to tell if a guy is gay or not.
In the Corner - With the Eedjit Kids
What's in a name? [Mark Steyn]It's not just Anglican Archbishops who are determined to make the transition painless:
Dutch Catholics have re-branded the Lent fast as the "Christian Ramadan" in an attempt to appeal to young people who are more likely to know about Islam than Christianity.
02/12 07:51 AM
Meanwhile, SooeySays:
A religion by any other name is still a religion.
And maybe it's the Dutch Catholics who are poaching the Islamic youth. Didja ever think of that, Mark Steyn? Eh? Well? Didja? Hunh?
I mean, do Muslims go around stealing Christian holiday names?
No. No, they don't.
Celebrity Status
I'm one of those rare birds who thinks Britney now is in better shape than Britney then, so read no further if you think it's normal for children to be raised by the Disney machine (and why nobody is pointing a finger in that direction while this all plays out, I have no idea) and dutifully morph into X-rated Adult Mouseketeers.
Most kids need a rebel stage to assert themselves and break away from the authority of their parents (if not, you do it when you turn 40, or so I've heard) and really, Britney is just rebelling. That she's doing it in public is the problem for everybody isn't it. Because we feel guilty watching on account of PEOPLE AREN'T MEANT TO LIVE OUT THEIR LIVES ON CAMERA!!!!!!!!!!
But that's what Disney et al set her up to do, isn't it. And I don't know about you, but my two favourite things about my own mom are that 1) she didn't care what we did as long as it didn't involve her; 2) she didn't pimp us out to Disney.
So I can't imagine being Britney. BUT I can't imagine Britney being anyone else. She's kind of stuck, like the inverse of Peter Sellers' character in Being There, to live out her days in the spotlight. Wouldn't you go kind of crazy? I would. Or I'd fake it. I mean, she's getting older, her talent was pretty much limited to being d'une certaine age (I love that expression - it's French, you know, and means literally "Ladies with burgundy hair") and she's not so completely uneducated that she can't read the writing on the wall - which says, "Baby's gettin' fat". I know, I know - I used the "F" word. My kids weren't allowed to use the "F" word growing up because my son once asked a family friend, "Why are you fat?" Of course, after I'd made it clear about the "F" word in public, he told a couple of visiting kids, "We don't say words that start with "F", like fuck and fat, because they hurt old ladies' feelings".
I'm sure I didn't put it like that, but who the fuck knows? I can't remember the toddler years. My kids' toddler years, I mean. My own I remember like they were yesterday. Me and my two sisters and brother running around Narnia, killing vampires with a wink of an eye - no one even noticed us missing - until the day my older sister came home with her clothes on backwards and the shit hit the fan.
But Britney. Who told her what not to say? Well, remember when she had to pretend she was a virgin because if she didn't it meant that she'd had sex with Justin Timberlake? And people might start asking questions about Disney's industrial parenting skills and wondering why pimped out industry kids were acting like regular same old same old American teenagers?
And it's interesting that nobody's gone there, eh? (YET) To, you know, ask around a bit, maybe dig up a couple of funny Disney uncles who hung around the Mouseketeer Club a little too much, the kids calling them behind their backs, "Uncle Flieslow" and so on and so forth and more of the same etc etc.
Anyway, I don't feel sorry for Britney so much as I feel hopeful that some light will be shed on the truth of America's addiction to celebrity, which is her addiction, too, isn't it. So when she's trying to kick the habit - who do they send in?
Why Dr. Phil, of course - a celebrity doctor. I mean, if you weren't crazy already, that would pretty much put you over the edge, wouldn't it. Nobody's real, nobody's acting without motive, nobody's worthy of trust. That's the environment she was raised in and she's the crazy one?
It must be like starring in a horror movie with endless sequels. And should make us appreciate our own non-interested even remotely in our childhood parents even more, I think. Never before have I cherished so much the memory of my mom asking every time we entered a room and then replying before we could answer, "What the hell are you doing in here? - Go outside!"
February 11, 2008
Oh, This IS Rich
Uh...DefendingPranksIsOnThe3rdFloorInternet,We're"FreeMarkSteyn"
"There's Jokes, And Jokes"
Are. There ARE Jokes, And Jokes. Grammar, FreedomFighters. Grammar.
Ah, Et Tu, Ezra?
Uh, Kate McMillan? This is why Amateur Girl Pundits shouldn't pull pranks involving Professional Boy Pundits in ANY of their crusades:
That's called "damning with faint praise". If he sounds a lot like your nemesis and the object of your prank, it's because he's the same beast. I can almost guarantee you, Miss Kate, they will both be appearing soon - together - on a political panel near you (CBC, Coren, The Agenda, etc), the best of buddies in these bad, bad times some people may live in - but not them.
They live in good times of endless new employment by the same old employers.
Fickle political allegiances, suing to silence adversaries, grandstanding drama queens, mugging mugs on political panels spinning spinning spinning. Do you see a difference?
Because I don't see a difference.
It's showbiz, baby.
Idler Thoughts
One of my forum regulars pointed out in a post today that if a certain percentage of Americans wouldn't vote for a woman and a certain percentage of Americans wouldn't vote for a black man, maybe an even larger percentage of Americans won't vote for a white man and that's why voter turnout in America is so low these days.
Good one, eh? I bet nobody in the MSM ever thought to put it that way, either. So there, MSM. Take THAT from the Blogosphere.
Turning it inside out and flipping it upside down and pulling it out the wrong end to get at the other truth.
Come Play on the Internet
Where every day is Holocaust Day:
FrankPranks?WeDon'tNeedNoStinkin'FrankPranks!
I dunno, Kate McMillan. Warren Kinsella is easy, it's the Holocaust what's hard.
But let me just take this opportunity for a cheap shot and point out to all and sundry on the Internet that both parties above are (less or more) supporters of Stephen Harper and his New Conservative Government of Canada AND the War in Afghanistan AND the current Rightwing Israeli government's "Kill Or Be Killed" foreign policy and "Kill - Just In Case" domestic policy.
Oh, and never forget... no wait... always remember, Dear Reader: Holocaust pranks are a hard sell.
Ah, it's a good day to be a smug Leftie on the Internet who didn't try to pull off - or worse?, fall for - a Holocaust prank.
But yikes! Look out for April Fool's Day on the Internet, everybody!
February 10, 2008
In A Hunnerd Years
I wonder which will prove to be the most egregious in a hunnerd years:
The mythologizing by the Republicans of that evil corrupt simpleton, Ronald Reagan?
Or the mythologizing by the Democrats of that misogynistic clan of horse-faced brutes, The Kennedys?
Today in the MSM
It was the women who put Trudeau in power, and kept him there: the women's vote in English Canada, plus the Liberal fiefdom in Quebec. It is the ditzier range of women in the borderline Red States that could elect President Obama: lonely women, and to some extent, their weak, "sensitive" men.The ditz vote will never go gooey for Hillary Rodham Clinton: for a nasty woman puts women on their guard. But my gut, and innumerable female correspondents, tell me Obama is the man. The very sort of women who sustained Trudeau, up here, think he has some Philosophy, or something. They think he is speaking to their Inner Selves. They think he Wants them, he Needs them, Secretly. They think, He's Not Like Other Men.
That's the way it is in the MSM on February 10, 2008.
P.S. Please bear in mind, Dear Reader, that this is a Pundit on the Right who is representative of all those New Conservative and like-minded Canadians who would have the rest of us believe that they support the War in Afghanistan because they want the women THERE to be free of the Taliban.
McCain on Torture
Has anybody asked, by the way, what John McCain's views are on torture?
Anyway, I came across this weird item on Bourque this morning:
A former Vietnam veteran with top secret clearance says he has personally spoken to numerous POW's who dispute John McCain's claim that he refused to provide information after he was captured and tortured in Hanoi, saying that in fact McCain's code-name was "Songbird" because of his willingness to tell all to avoid torture.
Aside from this article, which may or may not have any validity to it, I've often wondered, "How much information did John McCain have to be tortured over for five years?!"
I mean, c'mon. How high up was he that he'd be worth torturing for five years for information about American military operations in Vietnam? Seriously. And even if you did "sing like a bird", what if you just weren't very well-informed or happened to be a really good liar? Wouldn't your torturers get a bit suspicious if you STILL had relevant information to squeal to them after being in captivity for five years?!
I dunno. Maybe the Americans should have just let Communism fall on its own and stayed right the hell out of Vietnam.
Immigration - Who's It Good For?
I've got to admit something not very white of me. I really don't give a rat's ass about new immigrants not necessarily being able to practice their professions here in Canada. I'm a little bit - "gee, that's too bad - but get in line, pal, because this is Canada, not some country where you pay thousands of dollars to acquire a post-secondary education and then can expect to be employed accordingly".
And notice everybody's always trained as a doctor but nobody's ever trained as a nurse? I mean, c'mon. Who the hell is everybody trying to kid, here?
Anyway, why don't we have an immigration policy that would satisfy everybody and allow in people who want to deliver pizzas here because back in the old country they were so poor that the only hope they had for a better life was to donate a kidney to some bastard who was born into so much money he could afford to buy an extra one.
Meanwhile, why ARE taxi drivers always from somewhere else and what could possibly be the point of hiring people who don't know where anything is to chauffeur people who don't know where anything is, either?
Seriously, is our immigration points system really working for anybody or is it just some really stupid bureaucratic hangover from a simpler time when men went out to work for money and women stayed in to work for free and neither even knew we had an immigration points system that would lead to such fancy pantz nitpicking about who does what from where.
February 09, 2008
Misunderstandinating
DavidWarrenGetsLeftThinkAllWrong
For owing to the prior triumph of the leftist "multicultural" ideology, which holds that one "culture" is as good as another, and "therefore" it is wrong to preserve our own way of life, there is considerable opposition to discussing these facts.
No. Actually. We believe in secular humanism in the state and religion in church.
This is why, Father Warren:
At another level, the (Anglican) Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, publicly called this week for the recognition of "some form of" Shariah law for Muslims in Britain, and said it should be given equal status with Parliamentary law.
See, ALL you religious wackos need to keep your battiness in your belfries and leave matters of state to the rest of us.
Really. Go ask Gawd if you don't believe me. He'll tell you I'm right. Unless he's a lying bastard.
So?
But it's worse than you think, Mark Steyn and Fan. A lot of the white babies are being born to Raving Ranting Feministas!
FuckFaces
I have just one thing to say to these fuckfaces:
Why don't you bunch o' fuckfaces do the rest of us a favour and fuck off and die?
Liberals Setting Up Liberals
It's getting harder and harder to tell who's a New Conservative and who's a Liberal leadership candidate waiting in the wings for another kick at the can, eh?
The call for an extension is partially based on the review of the Afghan mission prepared by a panel led by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley.
Luckily, those opportunistic bastards are nicely out of step with Canadians and an election call should see all those New Conservative Republicans and Liberal Rats in Beaver Hats kicked to the curb.
February 08, 2008
Boycotting Hate Speech
For that matter, why aren't the many pundits pontificating on the importance of HRCs leading boycotts against national news outlets that publish the opinions of Mark Steyn and a whole host of Rightwing Pundits? Certainly we have newspapers and magazines guilty not just of publishing steady streams of anti-Muslim bigotry and Rightist propaganda to promote a JudeoChristian Supremacist ideology that insists the West must wage war against Muslim countries, but also of publishing editorials that regularly assault Feminists and others seeking recognition of rights for ALL people in our society, not just New Conservatives predisposed to a white Christian patriarchy.
The mainstream media is the largest and most influential purveyor of intolerance and misinformation and bigotry in this country - by far. And without a doubt, there has been an all out assault on Muslims since 9/11 led by the Right in both politics and the media, the mainstream media, in both this country and south of the border, that has been fueled by hysteria and paranoia and greed such that feeding the basest instincts of the lowest common denominator in our societies (the New Conservative voter here, the Republican voter there) is their bread and butter.
So why haven't the people so keen to protect us all from hate speech been leading boycotts against the MSM? Eh? Well? Why not? Hm?
Adults Can't Handle the Truth, Kids
OnceAgain-Canada'sBestBlogTalksKidStuff
Here is the original article:
TheKidsAreAlright,TheParents-NotSoMuch
But when I was a little girl, I wanted to be a boy. I dressed like one as much as possible except when I'd go to school because in those days, the good old days, girls had to wear dresses to school so we could be discriminated against more easily by sexist adults.
Anyway, this whole situation seems like too much too soon for Dave M. - parent-at-large:
"I just find it ironic that they can dictate the dress style of children to make sure they don't wear inappropriate clothing, but they have no controls in place for someone wearing transgender clothing," said Dave M.
I think, in the interests of safety, the kid in question should just stick to pants, plaid is okay, and leave the dresses for high school when maybe Dave M. has adjusted to the idea of "no two snowflakes alike"...
Modern Medicine
I remember hearing about doctors in the 50s telling new mothers that they couldn't breastfeed for one reason or another but not to worry because formula was better for their babies anyway and would free up more time for the new mothers to take valium so they wouldn't be at all stressed out about being at home alone all day encased in crinoline and chiffon and trying to wax their floors in high heels.
Well, nowadays, thanks to one of those latest-prescription-drugs-on-the-market Infomercials on Global Nooze, I heard about a medical breakthrough for children who may or may not be suffering from bi-polar disorder who can take drugs that do something or other and it's all good and right and legal, apparently.
Anyway, that got me thinking about the 50s and how formula companies, after a couple of decades, figured they had a way bigger market in Africa, so they infiltrated the market there and convinced new mothers to use forumla to feed their babies instead of breast milk. Unfortunately, the new mothers had to mix the formula with dirty water so their babies all died of diarrhea and the formula company had to deal with a boycott over here in the West because people were so disgusted by their sleazy money-grubbing tactics that they would use and abuse children in such a way to get rich.
It just never ends, does it. Corporate greed, I mean - where Capitalism doesn't meet a need with a product, it just kills babies and makes a lot of money doing it.
Meanwhile, here's something that the usual Capitalists of Third World disasters don't like: It's a very cheap and easily marketed filter straw through which people in Third World countries can drink contaminated water. It's called the "Lifestraw" and it costs $2 and I only just heard about it the other day - even though it's been around for years.
Madcap Blasphemers
Okay. Here's the thing. It doesn't matter if the complaints against Levant and Steyn will be thrown out anyway (and the latest news which is apparently quite old is that Steyn's wasn't). We should not be living in a State where one citizen can go to a Human Rights Commission and make a complaint against another citizen and that second citizen has to cross his fingers that the employees of the HRC will exercise good judgment and throw out the complaint before it proceeds and he has to appear before the State - at his own expense - to defend himself. It's wrong, wrong, wrong and I doubt many Canadians knew we were living in such times.
But now that we do know we are living in such times, take a good look at the people defending this system. There's a word for people who want to live in a State where citizens can accuse other citizens of giving offence and then have the full weight of the State on their side. Right now, the excuse is that it's all necessary to fight the White Supremacists. Tomorrow the excuse will be that it's all necessary to fight the dissenters to the War on Afghanistan.
It's not a slippery slope. It's a seriously flawed system operating autonomously that has no place in a modern democracy. Who it's meant to fight right now is irrelevant because the people running it can change with the breeze, anybody can make a complaint against anybody else, and the result can be that an individual must go before the State to defend himself at his own expense - and 100% of those citizens who are ultimately told they must - lose.
It sounds Fascist because it IS Fascist, Dear Reader.
February 07, 2008
Communism Vs Terroism
I caught the tail end of a speech by Condi Rice today. She was bragging, I think while in Afghanistan, about how Americans had defeated Communism and that the new struggle was to defeat Terrorism. Or something like that. Anyway, it struck me as Ameramermerican-to-the-Max, whatever exactly it was, so I tried to find a reference to it but instead found this - which tells me that maybe Afghanistan isn't the first place she's bragged about Americans defeating Communism:
"This is really scary. Ms. Rice's personal complexes affect the entire field of international politics. This is an irritating factor for everyone, especially for the East and the Islamic world. When they look at her, they go mad."
Ooh. Sore loser or what, eh?
The Wrong Fight
NATODefenceMinistersMeetToIgnoreReality
Nato defence ministers have dismissed talk of a crisis over its operation in Afghanistan, saying the alliance was making good progress in the country.
Someone should tell them about the journalist who has been sentenced to death for doing his job. Not that Canada's New Conservative government has a whole lot of respect for someone doing her job. Well, here in Canada, anyway.
Switching Topics
I was thinking on my way to work how accomplished I might be if I switched my obsession with politics, which is actually an obsession with the politics of others, to an obsession with art.
Although, I like making money, so, I dunno - it'd have to be the kind of obsession that came with a lot of nerve, I guess. Because nerve is really all that is required these days to make your mark, isn't it. Nerve and a certain absolute confidence in your own talent that even the little devil's advocate living in your brain (I call him John Knox) shouting "You can't be an artist - you can't draw!" (and it's never "You can't be an artist - you haven't suffered!" - which would be true, too) - can't dissuade you from going for it.
And to be honest (I almost never am, Dear Reader - I'm a mother, afterall) is because last night I realized I'm lying about something I used to not lie about - for the wrong reasons.
Let me explain.
I stayed home with my children because I have the kind of ego that required that I stay home with my children. I am paying the price for that - financially - now, but I have to be honest and say that I have absolutely no regrets about having done it. Part of the reason for that is because my mother stayed at home with us when we were children (and there are 4 of us) until my father died, fairly suddenly, after being diagnosed with inoperable cancer and she had to go back to work - and luckily she had a teaching certificate.
After that, she was a working mother - she loved working, actually, and became involved in local politics, as well. And, although I was proud of her, I really wanted her to be at home with me - not out at meetings. My grandmother lived with us, too, so I wasn't even subjected to daycare or babysitters (much).
So, when I got pregnant and everybody at the NDP (at Queen's Park, so it was Toronto) started advising me about waiting lists for daycare and which ones and how much and yaddayaddablahblah, I just listened politely and nodded and played along until one day I fessed up that I hadn't done anything by way of making childcare arrangements because I was planning on staying home with the baby. (I was also planning on having more in short order because I was in full "copying sister-in-law" mode, too, but I saved that fess-up for six months after baby #1 was born - so that even my ex was caught by surprise.)
My co-workers kind of laughed it off until they realized I was dead serious, then they tried to reason, cajole, threaten me out of my decision. They were right, of course. I hadn't thought through any of it (I was copying my sister-in-law on the stay-at-home with children part, too) but I knew it would be a lot harder FOR ME to put my kids in daycare than it would be to FOR ME to stay at home with them - no matter how isolating, lonely, financially devastating, ultimately not great for my marriage - it would be. (The marriage part is tricky because I keep reading about how successful marriages with a stay-at-home parent are and I can't imagine how that is - I really can't.)
In any case, my point is that I am very much on the Left and although I don't belong to a political party, I share many of the beliefs of the NDP, particularly with regards to its policies on universally accessible affordable childcare for all parents who want it. The New Conservatives, on the other hand, offend me with their blatant hypocrisy about childcare because, although they insist it's important, they don't want to pay for it. They just want to strip women with children of any participation in economic society (thereby excluding them from power - because money is power, Dear Reader) for having made the decision (or not...) to have children.
They disgust me, in other words. I loathe them. They are anathema to me. I wish death and destruction upon their grotesque abomination of a Party.
Liberals? Well, Liberals are smart because they talk a good and caring game and make lots of promises about childcare that would meet the needs of pretty well everybody, but they also know that the childcare years are short and after that, well, nobody wants to pay for anybody else's childcare. That's just the way Canadians roll. And Liberals know it.
Still, there's no reason why I shouldn't be honest about my personal experience, is there. This is just a blog, I'm just one person, and although I wouldn't have done childcare any other way - and that's in spite of some significant fallout - my reason for that, to be absolutely honest, is that I truly believe it was the best thing for MY children that I stayed at home. Our family has since undergone a bit of a revolution, so, there you go, but - I am standing by my choice now because, well, I didn't always on account of it's tricky to stand by a personal choice that can be so easily co-opted by all the bad political guys our there (New Conservatives) for all the wrong reasons.
And that's kind of why I got to thinking about switching my political obsession with the politics of others to something more articulate - like art.
February 06, 2008
Hillier Fans
This comes courtesy Rick Hillier's fan club: "smalldeadanimals". Please, check out the comments. Seriously. They are not to be missed:
Ash Wednesday for John Baird
Oh please, Gawd. Vindicate all the poor welfare children bullied by John Baird when he was Mike "The Thug" Harris' Minister of Community and Social Services and find him guilty of political interference:
OttawaCitizenReportsOnCrookedNewConservatives
Here are the facts, Gawd:
Mr. Baird's intervention in Ottawa's light-rail project made headlines during the 2006 municipal election when he was president of the Treasury Board.It was Larry O'Brien who asked Mr. Baird to review the proposal.
Mr. O'Brien, then a mayoral candidate, told the press that as "Mr. Accountability for Canada," Mr. Baird had every right to review the commuter system.
Mr. Baird stepped in and was accused of trying to derail the project, which was later voted down under a new council led by Mr. O'Brien after he defeated former mayor Bob Chiarelli, a proponent of the commuter line.
Mr. Baird's review of the rail line came as a surprise because the city had already been given assurances that it would be funded.
The city is now being sued by the light-rail contractor for millions of dollars for breach of contract.
Gawd? What does millions of dollars for breach of contract work out to in welfare payments for needy children?
Here's Something Fucked Up
"Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray the Lord my soul to keep
If I should die before I wake
I pray the Lord my soul to take"
Okay Christian moms and dads - that's fucked up. Really fucked up. Stop making your kids say their prayers at bedtime - or I'm calling the Devil and He's going to fix your wagons - BUT GOOD!!
Haha! Jesus's got your nose! Come get it! Oops! There it is! Stuck on the dog's butt!
February 05, 2008
Agreeing With Hate Speech
Mark Steyn has this posted on his site:
WhoDoIHaveToBlowToGetALetterToTheEditorPrinted?!
But the ending is the piece de resistance:
As for the Osgoode Hall students' patron - and, in fact, the real "complainant," at least in the British Columbia suit -- the Canadian Islamic Congress is headed by Mohamed Elmasry, who declared on TV that he approved of the murder of any or all Israeli civilians over the age of 18. Good for him: I don't begrudge him his freedom of speech.
I think Elmasry should up the ante and make another complaint to the CHRC now about Mark Steyn saying it's good that he thinks killing Israeli seniors is okay.
Because it's not, you know, Dear Reader.
Creating the Conditions
Immediately after 9/11 when everyone and their uncle was offering up their opinion as to how such a thing could have happened to Fortress America, there was also an offside question of why - why had 9/11 happened. We soon knew the facts of how: Saudi Arabian Islamic Fundamentalists who'd been living and working in the United States for years, had paid cash for commercial flight lessons, and once they'd learned how to make mid-flight turns, they hijacked American planes out of American airports and crashed them into the WTC.
The why was answered by the Bush Administration, "Because they hate our Freedoms", and any dissenting opinions of that absolute (not to mention, bizarrely simplistic and completely uninsightful) view were branded traitorous or of the tinfoil hat conspiracy nut variety. Even our own Prime Minister at the time, who would send troops to Afghanistan, ostensibly because the Liberals believed it was the right thing to do (ahem, sure: Liberals = right thing to do; we aren't immune to being deluded by our government, either, I guess) opined traitorously that American foreign policy had a lot more to do with 9/11 than the official line was allowing for - that poverty and the effects of poverty and a sense of having no control over their futures were factors that Americans should take into consideration when assessing the rise of what was now known as Islamic Terrorism coming from muslim Arab countries.
But, of course, the Terrorists were Saudi Arabian, the War on Terror supporters would point out to completely negate the forwarding of that argument. And they were right. The people who had carried out the attacks were Fundamentalist Islamists from Saudi Arabia - not poor peasants from a Third World hellhole. And what had the people working in the WTC done to deserve such a fate, even if the Terrorists had been poor peasants from a Third World hellhole? Nothing. They were many of them just file clerks and receptionists and food court vendors - from all over the world.
Nope. 9/11 was clearly the work of a well-financed terrorist network headed up by an evil mastermind who was planning to take over the world and force everybody into the cult of Islamic Fundamentalism - if he wasn't stopped fast and by any means necessary.
Around that time, too, there was a pop culture incident that still sticks in my craw. The President, who had gone - overnight - from being the butt of late night talk show jokes to being the War President, would refer over and over and over to the Terrorists as cowards. Cowards who hated our Freedoms. Well, Bill Maher lost his show "Politically Incorrect" for calling the President on his use of the word "cowards" to describe the Terrorists who had flown the planes into the WTC - and he was right, although he still lost his show. Suicide bombers are most certainly not cowards. The masterminds who send them out to blow themselves up for the sake of a shared political ideology may be cowards, but suicide bombers themselves are not cowards.
Suicide bombers are a last resort and the result of having no other way to fight an oppressor. But killing yourself for a cause you believe in is terrifyingly brave, to my Western mind. Not sane or rational - but brave, nonetheless.
Still, I never agreed with the notion that American foreign policy created the conditions for Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorism - mostly because I don't really know that much about American foreign policy. So much of it is out of the public purview that I doubt many people who aren't actually involved in the shady world of covert operations have any inkling of what really goes on "out there". And even though what we know about Afghanistan would certainly point the way to American foreign policy in the 80s having led to the Taliban in the 90s, it doesn't explain the Saudi Arabian Terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC.
It was hard enough not knowing whether to believe or disbelieve that the C.I.A. had no Arabic speaking operatives tracking the machinations of Al Queda. It seemed such a genuine admission at the time, that no one saw it coming because there were no Arabic speaking spies doing espionage or infiltrating Arab terrorist organizations - but looking back, all I see is disingenuous denials of any plausible explanation for why 9/11 happened, and why the reaction was what it was such that it ultimately lent credence to the tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists, let alone what traitors like our own Prime Minister were saying was the cause. But without infiltrating the C.I.A. myself, I guess I have to take its word for it that no one thought to have Arabic speaking operatives tracking the machinations of a well-financed terrorist network headed up by an evil mastermind who was planning to take over the world and force everybody into the cult of Islamic Fundamentalism.
So, let's leave off 9/11 and assume that the Terrorists did what they did because they hate our freedoms and that the American administration's response was all on the up and up - and take a hard turn over to Gaza and what is currently going on in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Now, I believe that there will never be two states in Israel - and that there never was any realistic prospect of there being two states in Israel. There will only ever be Israel and the Palestinian issue will never be resolved. It's always been over for the Palestinians, in my opinion, and the effort to pretend the opposite is just so much smoke and mirrors - albeit very instructive smoke and mirrors.
Because Gaza, Dear Reader, is where we can look - right now - to see how the conditions for Islamic Fundamentalism are and have been created. All you need is a population with absolutely no hope of a better life here on Earth, a group of young men (and women) who want to do something, anything, other than go quietly into the night, and a very clear target as to who your oppressor is.
Now, remember those elections in the Palestinian Occupied Territories? Well, think about it. Who would you elect if you were Poland and the choice was between Chamberlain and Churchill and Hitler had just taken you over? That's right. You'd vote for the guy who was willing to take it to the wall and not negotiate with the occupier.
Or would you? Maybe you wouldn't. Maybe you'd vote for the guy who's going to work with Hitler to get the best deal he can for his people. Personally, I'm not sure who I'd vote for but I know for a fact that most of the people I do know would vote for (analogy over) Hamas. They'd vote for the guys who were willing to die trying to defeat the enemy, and the enemy is always the oppressor, which in the case of the Palestinians is Israel. You can say that the Palestinians are their own worst enemies, but you can't say that Israel isn't their oppressor. And the two aren't mutually exclusive, in any case.
So, although Israel certainly isn't responsible for the Palestinian Issue, it most definitely is responsible for the conditions that gave rise to the election of Hamas. I really don't think there can be any disagreement there and I don't think there should be - in spite of all the arguments put forward by Israel that the Palestinians have done this to themselves. What is going on in Gaza is very instructive, there is a great big lesson being taught to the West right under our noses, and, although it doesn't answer the why of 9/11, it does answer the why of Islamic Fundamentalism and suicide bombers, I think.
Does Israel have to worry, really, about Hamas and the Palestinians? Of course not, Dear Reader. Every time Hamas fires one of its home-made rockets into an Israeli neighbourhood, it gives Israel the excuse it almost doesn't need anymore (because it's already got the vow from Hamas that it will never recognize Israel's right to exist) to tighten the noose around Gaza, kill more Terrorists, and put up new settlements to secure territory for Israel and Israeli citizens.
The conditions were created for Islamic Fundamentalism to take hold and hope and reason are nowhere to be found in Gaza. All there is left is a fight to the death. It's that simple, really. Gaza is full of evil doers now. Because you can't have nothing to lose and not expect the people who do to not be so terrified of you that Geneva Conventions and Rules of War and International Codes of Conduct, by necessity, go right out the window and you may as well call up your suicide bombers as go quietly into the night.
February 04, 2008
Public Service Announcement
Literally.
If you are studying French because you have a deep and abiding love and respect for the French language, or because you live in Ottawa, allow me to share some recently acquired inside knowledge with you.
Updates to follow as I encounter them.
There are entire verb tenses which exist only if you are performing, will perform, have performed, performed regularly, would have performed if certain conditions were being met simultaneously to the time the action was to be performed, are performing depending on your mood, opinion, or feeling at the time of the performing of the action - in French.
Do not try to translate French back to English, Dear Reader, or your brain cells will start snapping apart and instead of being twice as smart and bilingual, you will be half as stupid and bipolar. Accept that French people do things at times and in moods English people don't have the time or mood for because we are too busy running the world.
Also, bear in mind, ALWAYS, that objects are either ladies or gentlemen and there's no reason for it and French people will understand you if you mix up the genders and quantities of direct objects being modified by the verb IF such objects are in a certain order in the sentence and require such modifications BUT you must assign the object either a male or female, singular or plural designation - even if you don't know what it is - OR the French person will just stare at you uncomprehendingly until you switch to English.
February 03, 2008
Electoral Ironies
"Gee, I guess if black Democrats and female Democrats divvy up the votes for Obama and Hillary, it'll be the same old, same old of white guys deciding the winner!"
H/T to my teenaged son...
Verrrrry Scarrrrry
You know what it is about the United States that I find so terrifying? They assume it as their right to insist that everyone, everywhere, "Live Free or Die", when their grasp of the concept "Freedom" seems tenuous at best.
And quite frankly, even if the choice is between slavery and death, I'll make the best of slavery, thanks. You Americans, you just worry about your domestic economy for a while. I'll be up here in Canada.
Toiling. But alive.
Citizen Hate Speech
Margaret Kopala is a columnist for the Ottawa Citizen, a CanWest newspaper. According to her byline: Margaret Kopala's column on western perspectives appears every other week.
And by western perspectives, Dear Reader, I assume the Ottawa Citizen means "Old white Alberta Reform Party bigotry that a decent newspaper would never, in a million years, publish".
Of course, where IS a decent newspaper in Canada these days, you might rightly ask.
Anyway, I've got a sample column here of Ms Kopala's. It's the sort of tripe that shows up regularly in the Ottawa Citizen, and has since the Conrad Black Neo-Con Revolution bought what is now known as the CanWest chain of newspapers. Indeed, there was a brief hiatus of Big "L" Liberalickism when Izzy Asper bought the chain from Conrad Black - but even before he was dead his sons had taken the Citizen from bad to worse, encumbering the newspaper with a "western perspective" editorial stance that turned off pretty well everybody I know here in Ottawa.
Well, ALMOST everybody I know. My co-worker enjoys reading the Ottawa Citizen. Here is a rundown of his vital statistics. As always, Ladies, the line up forms to the right:
"Dirk" is a Rightwing War on Terror supporter who believes Feminists have ruined Western society; the Islamic Menace is real and must be crushed by any means necessary; the Government of Canada (except the current New Conservative one) is evil; the Free Market and unregulated Capitalism is good; everything privately owned is good, everything publicly owned is bad; a Chistian God rules the afterlife and Mother Nature rules the Earth; white Christian men are responsible for all that is right in the world and everybody else is to blame for all that is wrong in it.
Now, understand, Dear Reader, I am in no way exaggerating my co-worker's views. (He is also the website manager of Sooey's and Sooey Says, so I'm hardly in a position to make up scurrilous lies about him, either.) The above is also an accurate reflection of the editorial views of the Ottawa Citizen - which is why my co-worker enjoys reading it so much.
Those views are also the reason why I was more than happy to cancel my subscription to it a few years ago, something that had never occurred to me to do previously (I had subscribed to the local newspaper everywhere I had lived since I was old enough to do it). But one day, here in Ottawa, I woke up to a Sunday newspaper featuring both David Warren and Rondi Adamson on the same editorial page, essentially spouting hate speech against me (not personally, just everything I believe in) and that was it. I phoned the circulation department and said, "Cancel my subscription, please." The person at the other end inquired, "May I ask why?" So, I said, "No reason."
That's right. "No reason". The Ottawa Citizen was now my enemy and I didn't want to give it a head's up as to why.
Since then I've had the occasional column from the Citizen referred to me by my co-worker. It's usually to do with the War on Terror (it's failing because of lefties like me, or it's succeeding because of rightwingers like him) or Feminism (bad, badder, baddest) with the odd reference to brain size studies (racism and sexism are good, according to studies paid for by racist and sexist organizations), health studies (private healthcare is way better than public healthcare, according to polls conducted by lobbyists for private healthcare clinics or Dr. Brian Day, CMA head and private clinic owner/operator) and so on and so forth and more of the same etc etc - no smoking laws result in weakened immune systems, seatbelt laws discriminate against libertarian drivers, helmet laws have destroyed childhood (not traffic, of course - traffic weeds out the weak), and Feminists are to blame for the preceding and all other ills in society.
So, having given you a brief rundown of the sort of 50s-era bigotry that passes for political commentary in the Ottawa Citizen editorial pages, here is Ms Kopala's column for your amusement. My only preface would be to say that, after reading it, I realized Feminism needs to take it up a notch. No more competing with boys and trying out for boys' teams and playing catch-up to boys in sports. Nothing less than a Wide Wide World Of Girls' Sports will do and Feminists need to get the ball and the bank and lots and lots and lots of overdue surplus Government funds rolling.
What it means to grow up big and strong depends on your perspective. Margaret Kopala's is western, apparently. And by western, I guess, the Ottawa Citizen means bigoted.
February 01, 2008
The Truth About Those Danish Cartoons
The terrible or not so terrible thing to have to admit about this whole Freedom of Speech debate with regards to the complaint against Ezra Levant to the AHRC (and, of course, the complaint to the CHRC against his comrade-in-armchair, Mark Steyn) is that I have to defend their right to Freedom of Speech, even though neither man even believes in my most basic human rights on account of - I'm a woman.
However, such is life, which women really have to suck up - and twice as hard as men - before facing an eternity of damnation in hell for that whole apple thing in the Garden of Eden.
And in the case of Ezra Levant, the complainer, another outrageous Rightwinger and Sexist Asshole of an Imam, is such a less-than-legitimate character, to my mind, that I really couldn't stand it if he were to win this ridiculous case. It will be quite delicious, however, when the women who have made complaints against HIM win theirs.
Oh, the irony. How it snowballs in these situations of good intentions having paved the way to hell.
In any case, back to the REAL point of this entry.
I was thinking about the Danish cartoons and Mohammed and how stupid it all is that we have a system that allows for complaints about mocking prophets to gain any traction at all, and how the Right raises as part of its defence of Christianity vis a vis Islam, the supposed fact that all sorts of people make fun of Jesus and nobody says "Boohoo" about it, when I suddenly asked myself (aloud and on the street, too, I was that revelated), "Is that really true?"
Think about it. When was the last time you saw a cartoon of say, a white Mary giving birth to a black Jesus while a black Joseph mugs to the newspaper reader, his arm raised in a black power salute?
That's right. Never. At least, not in a mainstream newspaper you haven't. In fact, you'll notice that mainstream newspapers even capitilize "He" when referencing Jesus, so reverential are they to this very day, 2,008 years after his birth, of their readers sensibilities.
So, although Ezra Levant had every right to publish those Danish cartoons mocking Mohammed, particularly if it was a last ditch effort (which he would have owed to his creditors) to save his now bankrupt regional rightwing rag catering to a small group of Reform minded Albertans and a handful of other likeminded Canadians - it's highly unlikely that he would have published a cartoon depicting the above scene to broaden its readership to include readers like me - now is it?
Hell, Dear Reader, NO mainstream newspaper in this country would publish such a cartoon. And you know it, and I know it, and they know it, and Ezra Levant knows it. Sure, I think all of our mainstream newspapers most certainly should have published the Danish cartoons - particularly once the reaction to them became the story - and the fact that they didn't says a lot about them - doesn't it?
BUT, just in case you were falling for the notion that we're being forced to treat Mohammed with a reverence formerly reserved only for Jesus, think again, Dear Reader. Anything I've read about Mohammed in the mainstream media reveals him to be very unlike the peace loving Jesus (who, if the Bible is at all accurate, would seem to have been inciting the masses to Communist Revolution) and a lot more like, well, Osama Bin Laden.
That's the fact, Jack. Because I didn't know anything about Mohammed before CanWest et al started doing editorials and articles about him and my impression of him is pretty much the same as my impression of Osama Bin Laden and the guy making the complaint against Ezra Levant to the AHRC.
Anyway, my point is, Dear Reader, (Gawd, the straying from the point that Free Speech engenders, eh?) that hypocrisy looms largest in a Freedom of Speech debate when Rightwingers are involved because, well, because of the White Man's Burden. See, the White Man's Burden requires that the White Man have the Burden of Free Speech, but that everyone else can pretty much go fuck herself because she's not a white man, now is she, but she should defend the White Man's Burden of Free Speech because it's the right thing to do.
So it goes and was ever thus, I'm afraid, and perhaps forever will be. So while it's incumbent upon us in the West to publish cartoons depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban because that's who we know Mohammed to be, even if his followers can't see it, don't bother going looking for a cartoon of a, say, Jesus rallying the disciples under a flag displaying the hammer and the sickle while He presides over the wedding of two men in your morning newspaper.
And even if you were to see such a thing, you'll note that the "He" will be capitalized to offset the ensuing offence to readers followed by a mass cancelling of subscriptions that scares our newspaper owners a helluva lot more than any old Muslim riots halfway across the world do.
Alas, one magazine you will be sure NOT to see such a cartoon in is the now defunct Western Standard.
Rah, rah. You go, Ezra Grrl.
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.
