« February 2008 |
Main
| April 2008 »
IsItReal?OrIsIt"GayNaziBlond"?
Seriously though, Geert should have called his movie "Death To The Great Sultan". Or "Dude, Where's My Fatwah?" Or even, "Three Prophet Mohammeds and a Baby". I mean, if you're going after crazies, you have to put crazy in the title. Like, "Jesus Camp" or "Spice World".
But maybe the West should outlaw official cowardice. That way, every time a threat is made by an Islamic extremist to restrict freedom of expression by killing us all if something is shown, said, drawn (and here's assuming it wasn't Geert's agent with a Kleenex over the receiver who called in the death threat), nothing would be done and the person behind the movie, book, cartoon pointing out how evil Islam is would just be another run-of-the-mill bigot instead of a freedom fighter.
Cripes, I'd kill for the kind of publicity Islamic extremists get every time they want to shut something down, not to mention the publicity whatever it is they want to shut down gets, too. Imagine Sooey on the nightly news every time some legislator here tries to restrict her right to have an abortion - so that every morning when she wakes up and says to her mirror mirror on the wall, "Gee, I think I'll get pregnant today so I can have an abortion later", she ends up on the nightly news: "WTF? Some wad is trying to take away my right to an abortion!"
And, I mean, it's not as if Geert's movie isn't on the Internet for everybody and his Auntie Ilsa to see, with or without LiveLeak. He's even being sued already for getting his Islamic murderers mixed up with his Islamic rappers: I'dLikeAChickenShawarmaToGo,Please
I mean, c'mon. Aside from the shaved heads due to male pattern balding and the de rigeur compensatory beards, they look about as much alike as Britney Spears and Aileen Wuornos.
Okay, okay. Islamic rappers and Islamic murderers DO all look alike. And like FuzzyWuzzy. Say, and a bit like Britney Spears and Aileen Wuornos, too, if you squint and imagine Aileen with a shaved head.
To be fair to China, those are some beefy looking Tibetan monks protesting Chinese oppression - Chinese oppression which is nothing new to Chinese dissidents, I'm sure - so it's no wonder China is accusing the West of subterfuge.
And, I mean, c'mon - it's not like it hasn't been done before. Cripes, even Dudley DoRight Canada had Quebec police instigating unlawful behaviour in the midst of legitimate political protestors at the American Partnership for Prosperity and Security Summit in Montebello last year.
Look, let's face it, the U.S. (like us, too - no pun intended) is in debt to China - bigtime. And a boycott of the Beijing Olympics when China is out to prove it isn't just an oppressive communist dictatorship turned rapacious capitalist superpower, would be a much bigger snub, the old "haha! your country isn't up to Olympic hosting standards", than even the boycott of the Moscow Olympics was back in 1980.
Oh ironies of ironies, eh? Imagine boycotting an Olympic Games over an invasion of Afghanistan now. Of course, it'd just be the winter games and bye bye Vancouver 2010, so - it would be purely symbolic for most boycotting countries, anyway. And being the New Canada that we are we could just switch the name to the "New Canada Games", and invite only northern Christian democracies like us, New Canada, to participate.
But the U.S. is in debt to China in a way that should be sending chills down all our spines - free monk Tibet or just regular monk Tibet - and although any time is a good time for a boycott, I think, Olympic boycotts are pretty yesterday. And increasingly hard to justify when everybody's hands are so dirty between the coming together in the international spirit of sport and drug testing - and a lot of "young people fucking".
So, I propose, as punishment for its oppression of both Tibetan monks AND the Chinese workers who made the Olympics possible, China be forced to sign on to Kyoto or somesuch climate change agreement that will actually make IT - weather - the global concern that human rights would be if not for such threats to the West's freedoms that the Islamic Menace has presented to it over the past several years - threats that have necessitated torture and and an ongoing War on Terror.
Because, to be fair to the U.S. and any Olympics hosting country, it's always going to be something, isn't it, that makes having the Olympics in your country make everybody feel kind of hypocritical for attending - as good a reason as any for making one of those old timey days superpowers like Greece or Rome the permanent host country - and it's not like you can always prevent yourself from looking like the human rights bad guy when, really, you're just responding to provocation.
Take 9/11, for example. There wouldn't be a War on Terror if it wasn't for 9/11. I mean, it's not like Bush Inc. pulled the whole thing out of its ass. Still, with the acquittal of those marines accused in the Haditha massacre, it's not likely the War on Terror is going anywhere faster'n Tibet is - even though, like I say, 9/11 was hardly the fault of the U.S.
Anyway, since Kyoto is there and the U.S. hasn't signed on and isn't likely to, and we all know how China loves to save face in the same way that we in the West like to call a bluff (think JFK during the Cuban Missile Crisis where we almost got blown to bits except that Khrushchev turned out to be saner'n JFK who called his bluff but good) - why doesn't Canada step in as peacemaker (remember those days? me neither) and say, "Hey - sign this, China - and we'll call it even"?
That would make for two birds with one stone, really, too - because then China would have to slow 'er down to meet greenhouse gas emission targets OR pay through the nose for NOT meeting them, Ontario would get a much needed leg back up in the manufacturing sector - in spite of Jim Flaherty - the U.S. would get some breathing room (no pun intended ) to beef up its industrial output while China pays the piper, and everybody would get to go to the Beijing Olympics as scheduled a decade or so ago when they were so awarded by the I.O.C. before all the jockeying for the privilege of hosting the 2008 Summer Olympic Games even began. Three birds. Or four, even.
TheAntiImmigrationFreedomParty?
Wilders, leader of the anti-immigration Freedom Party, has called for a stop to migrants from Muslim countries as well as a stop to the building of new mosques in the Netherlands. He claims he isn't against Muslims but against their religion.
Dutch officials were bracing for violent demonstrations against Wilders's film, and Dutch Muslim leaders urged restraint.
Late on Friday, two cars were set on fire in the town of Utrecht in a protest against the film, according to police.
Gee, that's gotta hurt. But on the bright side, maybe Muslims are finally getting the message from the Christian Right that the Koran is crazy and hateful, not Islamic Fundamentalists.
C'mon. Let's be real. If Obama represented change, he wouldn't be running for President. His wife would.
Gee, I guess Earth Hour is the new Islamic Menace to Rightwing bloggers, eh? Or did I just imagine reading a bunch of 'em bragging about counteracting any good effects of other citizens turning out their lights during Earth Hour by turning on more of theirs?
Clever. Except their Moms are gonna be sum mad when they get the Hydro bill in a couple of months.
Still, their behaviour ("let's spray pesticides in all the ponds to kill frogs so they can't be harbingers of bad environmental news anymore") makes it pretty clear that, for energy use to be reduced, users need to pay for the energy they consume. No more hidden subsidies for suburbanites and country farmers. Pay what it actually costs to live where you live and let's go from there to dealing with environmental clean up as a collective.
In other words, use less energy or pay through the nose for your suburban lifestyle that is one of the most heavily subsidized individual rights and freedoms on the planet.
Next to banks that give out sub-prime mortgages, of course.
Anyway, I think it's time the Left took over the climate change argument on behalf of poor people, who don't use up much of the Earth Resources and who should be lauded for that fact instead of encouraged to join all the other energy hogs on the planet by becoming rich and consuming more and taking up ever increasing amounts of space.
Being poor and not owning a car and living in an apartment should be the Holy Grail of our society. Enough of Al Gore et al. There is a political argument to be made by the Left that since poor people bear almost no responsibility for climate change, and rich people bear almost all of it, they should be the citizens held accountable at clean up time.
Because if you take a deeper look at the Right's actions during Earth Hour (of turning on lights instead of turning off lights) it's basically a rebellion against wealthy people, as personified by Al Gore, telling everybody else to cut down on energy use to save the planet. It's the most egregious example of "do as I say and not as I do" out there today in the public sphere.
So why has it been left (Left) to the Right to point it out? Eh? I mean, if you don't want to be excused of acting like silver spoon socialists, don't act like silver spoon socialists.
I've lived in a house in the suburbs and owned a car and now I live in an apartment and don't own a car and I can tell you - I'm doing my bit for the planet just by making minimum wage. It's egregious to me to be lectured by a wealthy person about climate change. It really is. And I'm telling you, whoever is reading this, that the Left needs to take a page from the Right's comic book and make the argument that environmental devastation is subsidized by our governments to the benefit of middle-class suburbanites and wealthy people - everywhere.
And that's not fair.
Oh, and don't forget that the added benefit of espousing the environmental clean up argument "Make the Rich Pay for It" is that you'll finally off load all those silver spoon socialists who like the idea of a pristine planet (if only for the resale value down the road) but don't want to actually be out of pocket for one.
For those of you who are afraid Feminism is turning men into women (and also for those of you who assumed Sooey's beauteousness is unassailable by time), be warned that I just plucked a grey eyebrow from an area of my forehead where no eyebrow has gone before. So, it could be that the opposite is happening and women are turning into men.
Or, it could be that all Scottish people end up looking like John Knox.
That is all. Now we will never speak of this again.
Apparently, according to the blogosphere on the Right wing side of cyber space, hosting this movie makes you a hero, so, even though I'm on the Left wing side of cyber space and we normally eschew such blatant and grandstanding heroics - here goes:
Fitna,TheMovie-ViaDustMyBroom
See, here it is:
UnrepentantOldHippie
Here's that biblical quote again:
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."
Okay, Feminists. I hereby declare the War on Gawd, then. Bring it on, Gawwwwwwwwwwd! Because, seriously, no way is a mythical fucker gonna have more rights than me. No way.
There's a new study out claiming that men are depressed to be men now because women have too much power these days. Apparently, they want to go back to a time when they had all the jobs and women stayed home to raise their children.
IfYouDon'tLikeTheseNeoConLies,We'veGotOthers
Hm. I don't believe that study. I know men. They like it when the little woman goes out to work because it brings home more money for them - and at divorce time, it gets split 50/50. They also like it that they get paternity leaves and even have the option of staying at home with the kids if they want to, without fear of being laughed at by all the Feminist moms at the playground.
In fact, they get a lot of praise, men who stay at home with children. Lots of praise. Way more praise than do women who do the exact same thing. It's all, "Ooh, look at him. What a real man he must be. A terrific father, too. He's made some ugly Feminist bitch a lucky woman. What kind of ungrateful skank goes out to work while her wonderful husband has to stay home with the children and do her job for her while she tarts around town trying to be one of the boys?"
I don't know any men who are afraid, embarassed, depressed to call themselves a "man" either. Not a one. In fact, they sing it, these days - loudly - when they're playing Guitar Hero or Rock Band: "I'm a man! Don't you know what I am!"
I get it that men would like Feminists to go away, though. Tough nuts, boys. Seriously. Toughen up your nuts. Because we're just going to become worse ballbusters as we prune up. I mean, I'm really vain and I have no intention of having any kind of surgery to make me look weird and completely discredit anything I have to say about grrl power.
Because that's the other thing isn't it. This push to convince women they need to have surgery to look good when even the visually impaired among us can see very clearly that all surgery does is make you look weird - and probably shorten your life - which is the one place we had it over men now that we've stopped bleeding to death in childbirth.
(And I speak of here in the West. In Africa, 1 in 8 women still dies in childbirth. I haven't seen the study, so I'll do it here for you, boil it right down, too: Feminism = A better life for women.)
Anyway, I think all this whining about how Feminists have ruined being a man is coming from the Right. That's because it's just as terrified of men having role choices as it is of women having role choices. And guess what? Women will continue to take over in the workplace because men enjoy spending more time in the home. They really do. And they won't give it up. So soon, the workplace will be chock a block with women trying to break through that glass ceiling that won't even be there anymore, so egalitarianized will the workplace have become.
Because I don't know if you've noticed, but it's all about teamwork in the workplace nowadays. That's bullshit, too, of course, but most work is, you know. I've worked and I've stayed at home raising kids and now I'm back working. If you're looking for meaning in life I can tell you where you'll find it and it ain't at work.
Better yet, just stay home and don't raise kids. Before you know it, you'll have so much meaning in your life you'll have to write a book.
Anyway, if there's one thing studies about how Feminism has ruined men all leave out - conveniently - it's that men do NOT do things that are not in their best interests. If there's one kind of primal wiring that's in no danger of being switched around by Feminists it's that men have an uncanny knack for sussing out what they want and going for it and ignoring what everybody else thinks - including Feminists.
So I think we can all count on social progress going forward. Sure, NeoCon men will be depressed, but who cares? They're clearly just a bunch of whiny assholes who can't keep up. Take a pill, dudes. I'm sure that's where this study about men being depressed to call themselves men is leading anyway - a new depression medication for men who are depressed to call themselves men thanks to Feminism - "Feminisgra".
I've noticed that many bloggers in favour of the section of the Canadian Human Right Commission that allows for complaints against offensive speech to be made by citizens, that are then investigated, prosecuted and judged by the CHRC, point out that they do not think the complaint made against Mark Steyn and Macleans will go ahead to the prosecution stage of the process set out by the CHRC.
???
I dunno. I don't think I'd be going too far out on a limb to argue the opposite, quite frankly. I mean, I really have to wonder how many articles of Mr. Steyn's these bloggers who don't think he'll be found guilty by the CHRC have read to think he doesn't have a bit of a thing going on about Muslims. For instance, even now, it seems to me Mr. Steyn's defence against the charge at hand (which is essentially that he is Anti-Muslim) is to argue that his Islamophobia is justified BECAUSE of the danger presented to the western world by Muslims. He has even, in several articles since the charge, gone on to accuse Feminists and anyone else who doesn't agree with his version of reality, of aiding and abetting an Islamic Menace in its determined and illegitimate attempt to take over the world.
You know, Conrad Black's lawyer didn't tell Conrad Black to shut up, either, is all I'm sayin'. I just wonder why the defenders of the CHRC are so reluctant to ponder the possibility, which seems quite likely to me, that the complaint against Mark Steyn WILL progress to the stage of the CHRC process that leads, so far, in 100% of all cases, to conviction.
I've never visited Stormfront, the notorious White Supremacist site allegedly frequented by Canadian Human Rights Commission employees, and ex-employees - doing the job, or ex-job, as the case may be - but I have read several Canwest editorials in real live print newspapers that I've found to be both sexist and racist - it's why I cancelled my subscription to the Ottawa Citizen a few years ago - so I'm wondering now if anyone has ever made a complaint to the CHRC regarding Canwest editorials that didn't make it on to the agenda for one reason or another.
I mean, lots of people who aren't White Supremacists have read offensive editorials in Canwest newspapers, but how many people who aren't White Supremacists - or see above - looking for hate speech to be delighted - or repulsed - by, visit Stormfront? Sure, I could see accidentally clicking on Stormfront thinking you're linking to a weather site and reading a few posts and wondering, "Grampa Angus?" but it strikes me that Mark Steyn might have a point about the CHRC being a bit of a selective racket if no one, ever, has complained about a sexist and/or racist Canwest editorial causing them offence.
Because, you can cancel your subscription - and, like I say, I did - but since Canwest is often the only game in town, it does mean going without a local newspaper, which for many people is a cherished daily ritual. You know, like a morning constitutional.
And it does seem unfair that those of us who are offended by sexist and racist editorials should have to go without news gathered by perfectly good reporters who have to work for Canwest because it owns such a huge chunk of the Canadian news market.
I dunno, readers might mistake a dog turd for the Vancouver Sun, Canwest, but a Pro-Palestinian parody? (best line: "The truth is biased against Israel."):
CanwestVsRealFreeSpeech
The Canwest suit lists a print shop and Mordecai as named defendants, and then pads the list out with six unnamed defendants: John Doe #1, John Doe #2, John Doe #3, and Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #3. While ostensibly centering on a commercial violation of trade mark, the charges read like a political attack. They assert that Mordecai and the six John/Jane Doe defendants have been involved in "anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian media activities", and have written or spoken "harshly critical of the State of Israel and of the plaintiff and anyone who publishes articles or views which the defendants perceive to be contrary to their own views". In Canwest's Writ of Summons Mordecai's name is repeatedly linked to Canada Palestine Support Network, a group that is not even alleged to have anything to do with the parody. They demand a sweeping variety of remedies including an injunction restraining the defendants from "publishing injurious falsehoods by way of newspapers or other publications, on the internet or otherwise".
So, newspaper chains in Canada, eh, fellow Canadians who no longer read newspapers? Thank Gawd for our foreign ownership restrictions, at least. Well, here's hoping all the NeoCon Free Speech Warrior Pundits who work for Canwest will resign in protest of the owners' and their truckloads of lawyers' (and in Vancouver, Canwest owns both competing Rightwing newspapers - the Province and the Sun, "Dumb and Dumber") over-the-top attack on having their hilariously biased editorial stance on everything to the left of Attila the Hun mocked.
Disclaimer: {{Hugs, Israel - Sooey Luvs U!!!}}
Do what you can. So, to all those men on the Right, here, who fear the Islamic Menace, there, Sooey invites you to become Feminists and join in our neverending battle for reproductive freedom!
Even Churchill is one of us now! (See quote below):
"We shall defend our autonomy over our bodies, whatever the publicly funded healthcare costs may be, we shall fight in our homes and in the streets, we shall fight in the hospitals and the schools, we shall fight in the churches and in the courts and in the legislatures; we shall never surrender our wombs to the State."
Keep Canada safe for women, become a Feminist today.
I don't like Stephen Harper. I don't like the men behind Stephen Harper. I don't like the men in front of Stephen Harper. I don't like men who like Stephen Harper.
But is he any more of a strongman than any of our Liberal Prime Ministers were? Is he selling us out to the U.S. more than Paul Martin did? What about The Old Monster? And Mulroney? Don't forget Mulroney. Is Stephen Harper any worse than Mulroney in terms of selling us out to U.S. interests, for instance?
I'd say yes, but I'm a Canadian Federalist - which Mulroney was in his way, too, and which Harper is most definitely not. He is, in fact - the letter signed, sealed and delivered - an Alberta Separatist. Still, if there's one thing that is distinctly out of fashion in Canadian politics these days, it's Canadian Federalism. You almost never hear anyone in Canadian politics say they want a stronger federal government and less provincial autonomy, do you. Somewhere along the road in Canadian politics, Federalism was kicked to the curb.
Alberta Separatism, meanwhile, is probably stronger than Quebec Separatism was on its heyday of November 15th, 1976.
And, you know, we associate Power Corp (speaking of Rene Levesque), the traditional maker of Prime Ministers, both Liberal and Conservative, with an essential Canadianness, but is it really true? Are we safer in the hands of a Power Corp choice for PM? Or are we just conditioned to think we are while their picks are really just more skillful at politics and selling us out to Power Corp interests that may or may not be Canadian interests?
Because I don't know what goes on behind the scenes but from what I'm seeing up front, Stephen Harper, who comes to us straight from the Rightwing think tanks of Alberta (I know, it's almost a compound oxymoron if you add a word: think tanks/Alberta politics, an oxymoron if you take one away: think/Alberta) is anathema to what I consider a Canadian Prime Minister should be, first and foremost - Canadian, but Stephane Dion and Jack Layton, who don't seem to be affiliated with any specific power group, let alone Power Corp, both seem to me to be very Canadian - and yet hung out to dry by the media in a way which would seem to want to convince Canadians that they are bad for the country, or would be if they got any kind of favourable press that might lead to either one of them being elected Prime Minister.
So, is it really the Canadian political system that isn't working? I mean, Stephane Dion certainly defied the odds the media set out for him by winning the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. Stephen Harper defied another set of odds the media set out in becoming Prime Minister. Afterall, Canadian elections aren't rigged. Somebody voted New Conservative in the last election, somebody stupid, in my opinion - but the choice was either Stephen Harper or more of Paul Martin (Canadians being determined, it would seem - and who knows? maybe rightly so - to keep the NDP an opposition only party) so how stupid, really. Would more Paul Martin and less Stephen Harper make for a better Canada? I doubt it.
Anyway, my point is, I don't think it's the political system in this country that's the problem, if there even is a problem (and lots of Canadians on the Right would argue there isn't - if they could stop complaining long enough about the "damn gubmint" to realize it's their guys who are in power) - it's the perception some of us have that Canadians are not being fully informed by our media - enough and until it's too late - as to who is behind the winners and, more importantly, sometimes, who isn't.
If Obama's so different, why WAS he attending a Church led by the politically inconvenient RevRend Wright? I mean, how is his situation any different from the succession of white male politicians who have been apologists for the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons and Billy Grahams of their world? What sort of change does he really represent if he's just another Gawd fearing American politician?
I realize no one cares, but Feminists get blamed for a lot of stuff by the same people being investigated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for alleged hate speech against Islamic Menaces (I mean, read Mark Steyn et al and you'll note that Feminists are actually blamed for Islamists becoming such Menaces), but they also get blamed for a lot of stuff by mainstream Conservatives, too - especially Pro-Lifers. Pro-Lifers hate us - to the point where I feel nervous every time I make a Pro-Choice entry on my blog. I really do. I use humour to deflect possible gun shots through my apartment window, but from what I've read, even by mainstream religious leaders, it's risky business to speak up too loudly for women's reproductive rights - no matter where you live.
That's why men who can actually "make it so" (equality for women) - won't. They don't even care enough about women's actual rights to risk the professional fallout, let alone the personal. Oh - and they don't want to give up their communion wafer on Sunday.
Because, bear in mind, doctors who perform abortions have been shot and killed for doing their jobs and yet, I notice no one has had the stones to make a complaint to the CHRC about the anti-choice rhetoric out there in the mainstream media and legislatures across this country, including the House of Commons, that certainly gives me pause every time I decide to take it on here at SooeySays.
Anyway, this morning I've read enough backpatting vs growling about the current CHRC case against Mark Steyn that I almost can't believe how deftly men on both the right and the left can argue this sow's ear (I mean, c'mon - the same media who fawned over the man behind the scenes is the same media accusing him now of being the man behind the scenes) into a silk purse.
White supremacists are easy, ordinary Conservative legislators and their friends in the media are hard. You want hatred? Try being a Feminist and a woman in this country and defending yourself against men on the Right AND Left who argue that we're in Afghanistan to establish women's rights while those same men make every attempt to destroy them here at home. Bill C-484 is allowed to be argued, disingenuous as it all is - as being a bill to protect women from violent men, when, in fact, it is an attempt to recriminalize that which gives women personhood - the right to control our own reproduction.
I've read, in the comments on a certain blog, an anonymous opinion that women who have abortions should be put to death. You tell me. Hate speech? Or are you not a Feminist woman fighting to maintain legal access to abortion services (which really are not what our governments pretend they are - especially here in Ontario where the Premier is a very skillful politician, to put it mildly), so it's just Internet chatter of no consequence.
Men who believe Feminists are forsaken form our Government, the Government of Canada, and they constitute the bulk of our Media. They aren't on some website inciting racist posts (and, I'm sorry, but when the rest of us can't tell the good guy racist posts from the bad guy racist posts, it's time to take a break from playing Al Pacino in Cyber Cruising) - unless they are - from Internet racists. They're making laws and setting policies and giving all the right press to men who hate Feminists for everything that is right AND wrong in the world.
This is the problem, isn't it - these people: InSearchOfABetterWayToKill see themselves as the Great World Hope and truly, madly, deeply want to make it over in their image.
Gee, I'm seriously starting to think China doesn't give a Year of the Rat's Ass what the West thinks about how things should be for Tibet.
Gawd, I really hope Bush Inc.'s legacy isn't the War on Terror AND a nuclear showdown with China.
Crap, what if Bush Jr. thinks The Great Wall is like the Berlin Wall and all he needs to do is tell China's leaders to "tear down that wall" and democracy will flood into Tibet like the sea over a broken levee?
I forget, what was the reasoning for the ban on cigarette advertising, anyway? To make smoking seem even cooler to kids looking for the edge in sophistication?
I mean, hasn't the rate of smoking among teenaged girls been on a steady rise for years?
I live in Ottawa, downtown, and today, Easter Monday, we all went for lunch at Dunn's, a restaurant on Elgin Street, the same street where the Canadian Human Rights Commission vs Mark Steyn is meeting on March 25th - which is TOMORROW as luck would have it.
Anyway, thinking today was March 25th, I kept my eye out for Neo-Nazis milling about Elgin Street. (I was going to tell the wait staff to give them "waitress eyes" if any came in and sat down to order lunch - "waitress eyes" being an expression my ex came up with to describe how an ex-girlfriend would walk about her apartment looking just over his head if they were having a tiff so he couldn't quite make eye contact with her "to ask for a cup of coffee - at least".)
Well, I don't know if you've noticed this or not, but the lunchtime crowd at Dunn's on an Easter Monday looks surprisingly Neo-Nazi-ish (when you're looking for Neo-Nazis, anyway) but in the end I thought, "enh - maybe they're big tippers" and didn't say anything about all the Neo-Nazis who seemed to enjoy a bowl of matzo ball soup for lunch. (And none of this is meant to imply that only Neo-Nazis support Mark Steyn in his trial(sentencing?) against(thanks to?) the CHRC - as many plain ordinary decent people to the Left of Mark Steyn AND Neo-Nazis, er, not that Mark Steyn isn't also to the Left of Neo-Nazis, support Mark Steyn vs the CHRC - some of us because we don't want our Rogers cable fees to go up if he loses.
(Finding the correct terminology for this... case(?) is tricky because the CHRC is both prosecutor AND judge in these... situations(?) so the usual legal terms don't apply - I don't... think(?)...)
Anyway, still not realizing it's not quite March 25th, I went back to my apartment to get the dog and take him for a walk to look for Neo-Nazis. (Which is hilariously ironic, I realized later, because my dog, a terribly racist sheltie/beagle cross has something against black labs and, okay, ALL black dogs, and throws a shitfit of barking whenever he sees one.) We went a bit off course so we could check out 160 Elgin where the case is being heard to give "hairy eyeballs" to Neo-Nazis AND hopefully snap a piccie of Mark Steyn standing close enough to a Neo-Nazi to snag a reward one blogger is offering up (this thing is BIG in the blogosphere, if you're a first time SooeySays reader) and maybe even get Mark Steyn to autograph my "AbortionRights4Ever!" placard but - although we saw lots of Neo-Nazi-ish types walking up and down Elgin, we didn't see any of them go into #160 and we didn't see Mark Steyn - ANYWHERE.
So, imagine how creeped out I am NOW to realize that I saw Neo-Nazis EVERYWHERE (although no Mark Steyn) even though the... event(?) isn't until tomorrow. Seriously, either Ottawa is over-run 24/7 with Neo-Nazis OR we've reached that fashion breaking point in "not still winter/not quite spring" when no matter what your politics, you LOOK like a Neo-Nazi.
Maybe it's the bright spring light against the cold hard mountains of snow reflecting off the pale wintered-out Ottawans wearing sunglasses to protect their weakened eyes from the glare? Maybe?
Timing is everything, as they say, but isn't the U.S. in hawk to China - bigtime? So... I'm just sayin'. Free Tibet and all, sure (although, here's hoping little Tibetan girls will be able to grow up to be monks one day, too). And the Olympics are a big bargaining chip, but, c'mon - it's not like any of the Shantytowners would be going, anyway.
Yeah, yeah - I'll give back my international humanitarian award tomorrow. But like I said in a previous SooeySays:
YeahSure,BoycottTheBeijingOlympicsNOW
This just in - Cub Reporter, Dick Cheney, has discovered that Hamas is a roadblock to peace. I quote here directly:
"There is evidence that Hamas is supported by Iran and Syria and they are doing everything they can to torpedo the peace process," Mr Cheney said.
Well, personally, I would have been quite comfortable leaving out the "is supported by Iran and Syria" and just going with "Hamas is doing everything IT (not they, Cheney, you ignoramus) can to torpedo the peace process."
Of course, being more passive aggressive than Cheney I would have added "such as it is" at the end.
But yeah, Hamas doesn't want peace with Israel. Good call, Cheney. So... is there... like... a plan B?
Okay. Now that it looks like Obama's going to get the Democratic nomination, in spite of the fact that white Americans are now quite comfortable openly expressing their racism (as if it's the same thing as black resentment of white power, and not just revRend Wright - who's probably on crack - doing black power chuRch seRmons) and will not vote for him in numbers sufficient to beat McCain, Hillary needs to do for her country what Carrot Top should do for his career - if Sooey was his manager:
That's right. I'm talking about doing her next speech in blackface. Just send it up, girl. That L'il Obama thinks he can pull off a speech on race that has him compared, by the Democrats for Obama half of the media, to Thomas Jefferson?! You get out that shoe polish and you make that speech for gender equality and you show America the Beautiful who's got the real stones to be President.
Bearing in mind, of course, that even Thomas Jefferson wasn't Thomas Jefferson, if you catch my drift, but a fun house mirror held up to American society never hurt anyone's career, now did it. Well, not counting the time Ted Danson showed up to a Whoopi Goldberg roast in blackface - but hey - she thought it was hilarious. And, I'm sure, at the very least, Bill will, too.
Look, now is no time to be a lady, especially a white lady Democrat running for the presidential nomination.
Oh, and don't forget the hair. I'd go with orange dreadlocks. But that's me, always with the subtle homage to Carrot Top. But do it up big so America gets the joke. Now is the time to pull out all the stops and go for broke, Hillary. Take it all the way or go down swinging those dreads.
Remember back in the 80s when Ernst Zundel was a Holocaust denying crank in a yellow construction hat, the Britney Spears of the Nazi brigade?
I mean, the WORST Holocaust denying crank in a yellow construction hat. Because, make no mistake about it - I agree with everybody else on the Internet when it comes to Ernst Zundel. Everybody who thinks he was the WORST, that is.
Well, it seems like ever since we deported him to Germany, he's all the rage again. I mean, you can't go to a political blog these days without reading Ernst this and Ernst that. BAD Ernst this and BAD Ernst that, of course.
I just wish somebody would explain the point of the yellow construction hat. I never did get the why of it.
There's about to be another Internet go 'round about why our fathers fought in WWII. Mine died when I was young so my Mom had to do the talking for him, and although she never said specifically why he fought in the war, she had a general explanation of why everybody else she knew did: "it was your duty, there was no choice but to go".
But, of course, she was speaking about what she knew to be true - THEN.
Well, I suppose life is in vain, too, isn't it. But a blogger took a lot grief a while back for pointing out the selfishness in making a personal argument to continue a political war - which all war is, of course. It was an argument pretty much summed up by, "my son died and I feel like his death will have been in vain if this war doesn't continue".
We can assume the "to a successful conclusion".
While I don't agree with that sentiment, I appreciate the honesty of it. I appreciate even more the honesty in confronting it. Because that's the devil, isn't it. Government's are capable of such evil in the name of motherhood. If we, the people, don't confront the lies, who will?
Just know that the honest reaction to an honest reaction, can result in a lynch mob. But so it has been ever thus for truthtellers. It's a losing of your head (we're conditioned to lie from birth, afterall) that can quite literally result in losing your head.
Anyway, the mythologizing of war (it's eventually a Hollywood production, they all get put up there on the big screen) puts me in mind of the Deerhunter, the movie that wasn't Apocalypse Now. It's a powerful movie with an ending that goes right to the heart of what's either right or wrong with America (and not knowing gives me pause about the outcome of the upcoming Presidential election).
After all the characters go through as a result of America's War in Vietnam, the movie ends with the survivors, sitting around the dinner table, singing "God Bless America". And you believe it, you really do. Because you can't imagine the human will it would take for them to confront the truth.
Welcome to Christian Corporate Canada brought to you by Christian Corporate America, workers, whether you like it or not:
CallingAllChaplains,TheReceptionistWantsAnAbortion!
The concept comes from Marketplace Chaplains in Dallas, Tex., which oversees 2,000 chaplains in 300 companies, says Bruce Mitchell, national director of chaplains at Outreach Canada.
No. American Corporate Christian Evangelicals moving up into Canadian territory? We'd never have guessed it, what with our New Conservative government and all, headed up by Christian Evangelical Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, and his Family Values (except when it comes to the Budget) Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, and assorted Gawdlurvin' Feministhatin' Members with their desperate no-holds-barred ongoing attempts to recriminalize abortion through such backdoor means as Bill C-484.
Not to mention stacking the panel that selects who will make up our country's roster of judges with Pro-Lifers, while Liberals hold off calling an election until a good man reason comes along, I guess.
But I'm sure this isn't political. Oh wait, I stand corrected:
"We assume it must be a fundamental threat to our civilization or something. It's an emotional reaction and it's usually not based in knowledge or rationality," said Williams.
No. Believe me, it's based on knowledge and rationality, too. Also history and reason and experience. But you seem pretty closed minded and defensive for someone who claims special insight into what what workers want, pastoR, or revRend, or fatheR, or whatever title has been bestowed upon you by your chuRch.
Gee, I wonder if anybody has thought to make a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission about this very serious invasion of a Feminist worker's right to be free of religious proselytizing in her workplace by misogynistic Christian Evangelicals? Because I figure these so-called chaplains are mostly all about the violent and hateful Pro-Life movement down in the United States - how 'about that, pRofessoR of marketplace theology and spirituality at Regent College, Paul Williams?
Oh damn, I mean, darn (shit, that otta net me another eternity of burning in hell). I keep forgetting that Catch-22 for Feminists - religion is protected under our hate speech... by-laws? - not women. Or, well, religion would just have to shut the fuck up, wouldn't it.
Anyway, a list of corporations that inflicts these true believers in cReationism on workers would be appreciated in order that I can, at the very least, begin a personal boycott of whatever else, beyond a big ol' sexist ManGawd, it is that they're selling.
Wow. I'd like to sit in on a course called: "Marketplace Theology and Spirituality". I bet I'd learn a lot about sales.
And what does WRABO stand for? Why, White Rightwingers Against Black Obama, of course.
Look, you can be FOR Hillary because she's a woman, but being against Obama because he's black? That's racist. It is. There's just no way to dress that one up, even as political incorrrectness.
And, I mean, if you're afraid of THIS black man because he's black? Yikes! You are one big ol' white rightwing racist.
NDP and direct it at the New Conservatives, please.
PersonalProfit,SocializedRisk
Do NOT blow it and direct the above slogan at the Liberals, thank you. Either direct it at the New Conservatives or give it to the Liberals to direct at the New Conservatives.
That is all.
You know, I like that the NDP has stayed pretty much out of the mostly Internet debate concerning free speech and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. I mean, it's not really free speech so much is it's offensive speech that we're talking about here, but the CHRC isn't so much a human rights commission on matters of speech as it is a discredited old fashioned/futuristic censor, either.
Really, we have laws against hate speech in this country (except for women - never forget... no wait... always remember - women are not protected against hate speech by our legislators because that would mean men and their Gawd would have no one to legally direct hate towards), so I'm not sure why we have government bureaucrats operating outside the law for it, too.
In any case, once you're on the Internet attacking the lawyers who defend people charged by the CHRC with some sort of speech crime against another citizen or group of citizens (bearing in mind that the CHRC, as a government body, prosecutes with the full weight of the State behind it and at taxpayer expense), I'm not sure how much more clearly you can state your position.
At least the NDP, my party of choice (because I overall weigh what I like in a party and ignore perfection - and winnability, I guess) has had the good sense to pretty much steer clear of this issue, since it comes down with both goody-two-shoes on the side of censorship (and it's funny how the biggest defenders of the CHRC are mostly rabidly anti-NDP Liberals, eh?) and would come across as even more Orwellian than it already does if it were to weigh in on the matter.
But if it were ever to speak out against the lawyers defending the accused by way of character assassination, that would pretty much cancel out the "overall" for me. Because when they come for the lawyers, it's over. Politics is way beside the point. The Internet is as yesterday as freedom fries. The fat lady has sung.
Thankfully, it hasn't said much. Or anything, really. In fact, what's been said has mostly been said by the aforementioned rabidly anti-NDP Liberal lawyers. Lawyers, Canadian lawyers, picking one issue (although I'm sure they could find others) to attack defence lawyers on because they do not believe in a certain accused's right to a fair trial even when it's the State doing the prosecuting.
I don't even know the bad name for that kind of politics.
In the meantime, a lawyer, now a judge, once said to me in answer to this question, "What do you do when you know your client is guilty?" with his eyes wide, arms up in the air, absolutely incredulous at what I was asking:
"I'm a lawyer?!"
I dunno but there's something inappropriate sounding in a hearty "Happy Easter, Christian!"
But, of course, I am a heathen.
Cripes, being a heathen is so awkward on Good Friday. Thank Gawd it's a Statutory Holiday and we all get to celebrate it in our own Christian way, away from Christian co-workers. And it's really so much more humane, now, than when you were a little girl and powerless against Christianity being shoved down your throat by educators, politicians, family friends, uncles, ministers, the whole time thinking "what a sexist load!" - while you sport a brand new Easter bonnet.
Indeed, little girls grow up feeling just like Judas must have felt, the way we betray our core beliefs just to get the religious bling. And there's always the upside for literally fatherless girls of pleasing so easily men who really really really just want you to believe in Christianity so your soul will be saved and you'll stop agitating for the right to wear pants to school.
Still, without Judas and hypocrites, what would there be to forgive, eh? And I remember reading once that forgiveness is the cornerstone of Catholicism. Not confession, but forgiveness. So yeah, I forgive you, all you Christian men who fed me a steady diet of misogynistic propaganda so that I could grow up to be a Feminist and enjoy watching people cross the street when they see me marching towards them with my placard "Get Your Hands Off My Womb!"
But seriously, there's something vaguely anti-Semitic about these annual Easter parades, don't you think? I mean, c'mon. They seem to get more elaborate every year, too - especially in that "they knew not what they did" passive aggressive way martyrs have of damning everybody else to a figurative hell, the old "when did you stop beating your wife" leading lynchpin of Christianity always dangling in your face, while you're left with, "That wasn't even Christ, you fuckers."
Or is it just Christian culture asserting itself in the face of the Islamic Menace? You know, sort of a home front resistance movement, as the faithful do their bit in the War on Terror. Still, okay okay, we get it. Christ was killed. Over and over and over. By persons in the wrong place at the wrong time. No wait, the right place at the wrong time. And you're just... reminding us year after year after year - with a Statutory Holiday and Holiest of Holy parades in communities all across the country.
Not that Jesus wouldn't be down with it, I guess. At least, if you can believe Paul, otherwise known as, "Shifty the Chronicler". Because that's the latest, isn't it. That this whole charade/parade/crusade is all about Paul and what he wanted everybody to believe forever and ever, Amen.
Tsk, tsk. As Jesus would have said if Paul had thought of it, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we choose to deceive".
I wonder if the same guys who went door-to-door selling sub-prime mortgages in the United States are the same guys who go door-to-door in Ontario claiming to be from the gas company and demanding to see your bill so they can give you your rebate.
It's hard to believe Ontario elected Mike Harris twice. But then I look at Stephen Harper and his New Conservative cabinet and I realize Mikey's worst henchmen were elected a whole level of treasury looting higher.
Anyway, seeing Shantytown, USA, made me wonder - how come the United States looks more like Mexico and less like Canada in these NAFTA days, and if we could have a look down the road to our own future, will we be on our knees in gratitude to a rigid unmoving government bureacracy and a stolid parsimonious banking system?
Coincidentally to a story in today's Toronto Star about three Canadian soldiers kicking a homeless man to death in a public park, I'd been thinking about the erosion of our civil liberties over the past few years, as well as the anti-social encroachment of private property into public space at a time of increasingly aggressive government attempts to criminalize homelessness, the end of the poverty rainbow.
But the article threw me enough off course that I ended up thinking about how vociferous our governments have been in insisting we hail Canadian soldiers as heroes, whether it's renaming highways, wearing red on Fridays, or driving around with yellow ribbons tied to SUV antennae, in what has been an orchestrated top down attack on dissenters against the war.
Government bullying, in other words.
Well, I guess it should come as no surprise when the two converge, the soldiers' belief in the government's p.r. campaign that they are heroes, and those same thugs' belief in the government's p.r. campaign that people forced to occupy public space, because they have no private property, have no human rights. Sure, alcohol was a factor in the murder, but so, too, was the belief that they had a right, as Canadian soldiers, to claim public space as their own by virtue of the fact that they had a home in the army and the guy they kicked to death, didn't.
In fact, he had nowhere to go to get away from his killers, did he - another factor in the murder.
Because, no offence to anybody in particular, but I remember as a kid steering pretty clear of cadets (we lived near the Armoury). It was considered a wise thing to do, to put some distance between yourself and boys who wanted to join the army - because their reasons for doing so had everything to do with one day being able to shoot people and not a whole lot else.
So, being smarter in those days about who you had to keep your eye on, no matter what your government might tell you, if you were a little girl, out and about, alone, enjoying public space, and you saw a cadet or a group of cadets headed your way, you didn't stick around to find out if they wanted to play. You assumed they were trouble and you gave up the public space to them for the safety of home.
Anyway, I'm not making that up. I remember being a kid and I remember who wanted to be what when he grew up and I doubt a lot of that has changed, quite frankly. Some boys are trouble and, sure, the army's a good place for them - as long as they aren't going around thinking they're heroes for being in it, which, thanks to our governments, many of them now do.
Whoever is asking for these public apologies by politicians, please stop. Thank you.
That's it. Jim Flaherty must never win another election as long as I live. And to make sure he doesn't, I suggest a Referendum be held to take away the voting rights of the unspeakably stupid citizens of Whitby-Oshawa. Who's with me? Everybody who resides in Ontario, with the exception of Whitby-Oshawa? Good. Oh - the unspeakably stupid citizens of Whitby-Oshawa are with us on this, too, having come to terms with their unspeakable stupidity? Even better.
Don't governments routinely ensure that their scandals are put before the courts in order that they will be off limits as to further development by the opposition (and media, back in the olden days when media informed the public on government activities)?
So why isn't the same true of the land under dispute in Indian land claims currently before the courts?
Ah, those engineering students. This time, it's a controversy at Ottawa U, where "Oral Otis", the engineering students' newsletter, published a sex advice column that contained some misogynistic material. Oh, and more (ahem) obviously, material that mocked the disabled. Here is the editor-in-chief's apology: That'sRight,I'mALittleShitWithoutTheDisturber
I'm no expert on insincere apologies, but that one reminds me of when I'd ask one of my kids to apologize to another one for something or other and they'd quite willingly run up to the offended party and shout, "Sooooorrrryyy!" in her (occasionally, his) face.
As every mother knows, 3rd party demanded apologies are for suckers.
Still, I'd like to see the material because my guess is, it just wasn't funny enough to get away with the misogyny. Engineering students aren't exactly smart with the humour, if my experience hanging around with engineering students at U. of T. for the few minutes I was trapped in a shopping cart waiting my turn to be thrown into a shower in a men's residence, fully clothed in a Calvin Klein suit, is any indication.
I wasn't even a student at the time and was simply walking through the campus on my way home from work, having forgotten about orientation week, when I was set upon by drunken dufii sporting purple arms, "A girl! Get her!" When I realized what was happening, I played possum, so terrified/powerless was I in the situation (they were a lynch mob in number and drunk enough to be irrevocably stupid).
So, I dunno, Zach, my little man. Tragedy + time = comedy. I'd say engineering students in Canada have a few more decades to go before anybody's going to find violence against women jokes in your newsletters very funny.
By the way, here's Zach's original reaction to the complaint:
Er,IronyIsMyLetterToTheFulcrum,Too
I'm with RevRend Wright, 'cause a Wright ain't a wrong. Besides, maybe he meant it like, "GawdDAMN America!" Whatever. Even if he meant, "Gawd damn America" - so what? It's not like he said, "Fuck U, America".
Say, everybody - Obama's Grandmother sounds like a... Gramma, eh? Racist old biddy. He should make her be his running mate now. "Okay Obama, but I want a separate microphone, you understand me, boy?" "Word, Gramma Racist. I licked them all, anyway."
But seriously, a few years back, my ex and I were invited to dinner at his co-worker's home. Now, this guy was the white man half of an interracial couple and not so much my ex's co-worker as his boss, so, naturally, all the way there we joked about NOT saying the WRONG thing (ala Faulty Towers in the episode with the German guests, "Whatever you do - don't mention the War!"). So, no talk of checkers, or penguins, or Truman Capote's infamous Black & White Ball. (That would be me. I get EXTRA pretentious when I'm nervous.)
Oh, and definitely no Al Jolson routines, "Swaaaaanee, how I luv ya, how I luv ya, myyyyyy dear ol' Swaneeeee."
Anyway, we're sitting there having an ordinary interracial couple dinner (I guess, it was my only one), a couple of WASP guests so politically correct we actually look alike, my ex and I, and all of a sudden Grampa Fred (of the white half of the family), who was sitting at the head of the dinner table, fixes a steely gaze on my ex and asks, "Have you ever been to Florida?" So my ex, an honest enough chap, replies falsely to avoid any and all possible complications - or conversation, as you and I might say, "Why... no." To which Grampa Fred nods sternly, "Good. It's black with n*ggers, you know."
Well, apparently this wasn't entirely unexpected because, although we were both like, "GULP", and not even making eye contact with our own retinae, the host and hostess just tsk tsked and said, "Now, Grampa Fred. We talked about this before, remember? You've never even been to Florida."
Personally, I think calling for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics - now - if you're a person of any political stature who didn't start calling for a boycott of China somewhere around the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989, is a lot like, well, nothing. Really. It's so not anything I can't even come up with an appropriate simile. That's how like nothing it is.
Remember, Lickspittles - We the People despise you for saying, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear".
Still, "Free Mark Steyn!"
And by scarecrow, I mean the straw man argument put up by the Right that the Left excuses Cuba because it comes off better in terms of human rights than most other notorious dictatorships.
Hay - some straw man arguments just aren't that bad, I guess. Kind of like Cuba (she said from her perch in the Right's Cuba North).
But say, here's a kneejerk litmus test for you, Rightwingers: Would you rather be a new mother in Cuba? Or a new mother in Gaza?
Apparently, Canadian politicians have sex with prostitutes, too. I know, hard to believe.
Sorry, I can't be bothered linking to the article. Rest assured, though, that the escort agency owner mentioned (not by name) said his girls are classy.
Twice.
Gee, that must make for quite a contrast when they're blowing our politicians, eh?
The BBC visits the Third World:
ShantyTown-USA
Commenter #1 makes the connection:
ThanksToSpitzer
Gawd bless America.
Sooey Says the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada MUST BE A WOMAN. So either switch genders or move over for Martha Hall Findlay.
P.S. NO SWITCHING GENDERS!!!!
Well, the trial of the century is coming up, Canada. March 25th. I don't have the address, perhaps some kind commenter can supply it for me.
FreeMarkSteynWebsite
Little fascist Mark Steyn, backed by Macleans, backed by Rogers, backed by government funding, not necessarily in that order, goes up against Big Brother, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, thanks to a complaint against Mr. Steyn's alleged incendiary scribblings about the Islamic Menace.
The complaint was made by the Islamic Menace, as personified by some Osgoode Law School students in Toronto.
I hope Mark Steyn wins. Not just for free speech porpoises and to prevent his martyrdom at the hands of the State (the one he'd like to enslave western women to in mandatory childbirth, you know, in order to up our demographic which he fears is at risk of being swamped - you guessed it - by the Islamic Menace) but also because, if he doesn't, then the Terrorists! will have won.
And by Terrorists! I mean the Islamic Menace, of course, the one Mark Steyn has been telling us, ever since 9/11, is after our Freedoms (and not via the Patriot Act or Homeland Security, either, but by breeding AND Sharia Law, which Liberal Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, managed to squash like a bug a while back, along with some pretty whacked out Jewish and Christian laws, too).
Heheh - it was pretty hilarious, actually. Citizens, by and large, had no idea this misognynistic b.s. was going on, so it was a bit of a big ol', "Hey thanks, Islamic Menace, we had no idea. Now stfu, stop listening to Imams, and make like it's Canada in the new millennium. That's NOT what we meant by Judeo/Christian culture."
I dunno, Mark Steyn. Maybe vote Liberal next go 'round.
Oh wait... do Libertarians vote?
P.S. For those who may not be aware of what the CHRC does and does not do, it processes complaints by every Tom, Dick and Hamid who have been offended by the speech of others. Unless you're a woman offended by the virulent misogyny inherent in the mainstream religions in this country, virulent misogyny which is preached far and wide, unabated, including in the education and healthcare systems of Ontario, which are funded with our tax dollars by our very own government, led by the aforementioned Liberal Premier, Dalton McGuinty.
Oh dear. It just dawned on me why men on the Right hate Feminists so much. You know how they always take credit as white Christians for western civilization? Well, I guess they're expecting us to say "Thank you, Sir" and not "Please just shut the fuck up, you moronic idiot".
Here's another lifted comment (in its entirety) from smalldeadanimals. I believe it reveals, quite hilariously, the persecuted mindset of the average New Conservative on the Internet:
TC Rosedale hase very, very, very little "Rosedale" to it at all. Furthermore, there aren't all that many Lib/NDP in Rosedale - it's a conservative stronghold full of very good people with VERY conservative ideas. A few Joe Clarkites (John Tory, come on down) and some idiot media types and mentally deficient heirs. Unfortunately the riding is designed (along with the rest of the midtown Toronto ridings) to be dominated by the slums of St. Jamestown/Jarvis/Regnt Park as well as Boystown and Cabbagetown. Liberals have done very well to ensure that the core conservative constituency in Toronto is split up amongst a number of ridings, with no ridings having any actual identity or commonality of interests. Very nice gerrymandering to perpetuate the lie of "Liberal Toronto" so well that even conservatives believe it.
Posted by: Hey at March 17, 2008 6:54 PM
Heheh, yeah: "Damn Gubmint!"
Is the Lickspittle who snaps to heel, salutes the Establishment, and recites his Pledge of Obediance to the State with, "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear".
We, the People, despise you.
StageleftReportsInOnBootLickingToadyCanadiansOnTheRight
Just kidding. I can't really remember David Lewis. But remember that great line he came up with about corporate welfare bums? Bear Stearns and the Federal Reserve bailout of its sorry ass put me in mind of it today.
Although, Americans don't really have welfare as such, do they. Nevermind, then.
My downtown apartment building has become a campground for a couple of homeless people. So my friend, who lives in the basement, cleaned out the nest area they'd made under the stairs.
It reeked, an animal smell, with a chaser of eau de booze.
Anyway, she felt kind of bad about it, as did I. We both used to live in the suburbs (me Ottawa, her Guelph) where we'd have thought such a thing was cruel (what's the harm? we'd have said) but now that we live downtown where homeless people actually are (and looking for a place to spend the night) we're less inclined to think it's okay.
A friend in my suburban moms-at-home bookclub used to joke at our meetings, "Okay, ladies - I've got another bourgeoise problem I need solved." This doesn't feel like that, though, it feels more like hard honestly about where I actually DO draw my tolerance line.
Which turns out to be in a surprisingly literal place.
This is a direct quote from a comment I read this morning over at smalldeadanimals. It's one of my favourite comments, that I read and hear at least once per day and have for my entire lifetime. Then I look at our elected representatives and all the heads of all the corporations and every boss I've ever had and the owners of everything and all the leading men in all the Hollywood movies and all the media people and government bureaucrats and mafioso and police officers and even TVO panelists - and wonder - where does this commenter live?:
The thing that I find amazing that is going on and on, and on and on, is that everybody but White Christian Males can say anything about anybody, in no uncertain terms, and it's cool.
I try it and I'm a racist, homophobic, sexist Islamophobe, to name a few of the titles I'd have.
Very strange brew. Unhealthy for people like me for sure.
Gee, once Hillary is out of the picture, I guess it'll just be a matter of minutes before racism catches back up to sexism and the twin isms run neck-in-neck straight into the Presidential election - thanks to Michelle Obama. Man, is it my imagination, or is that woman getting blacker the closer L'il Obama gets to winning the nomination? I mean, if the media doesn't catch her in a black power salute soon, it's gonna have to photoshop her doing one.
Mark Steyn on Obama sleeping thru RevRend Wright's sermons, like a, like a, like a - WHITE MAN!!:
OneMoreTime-BlackPeople+Power=Bad
It seems hard to believe you could spend 20 minutes in this pastor's company, never mind 20 years (as the Obamas have), without figuring he's a race-baiting loon.
Maybe it's like living in a country surrounded by Rightwing race-baiting loons in the media and he learned to block most of it out to survive? Or maybe we're all like the frog in the pot? I dunno. Let's check out the comments at Kate's place, as you suggest she's the voice of reason here:
Kate's right about Obama's who-ya-gonna-believe-me-or-your-lyin'-eyes routine.
WeSayThisStuffForFree,Too!
Here's my favourite comment (no irony intended by the capital "C" Christian commenter, of course):
Why do they call places where this political shouting takes place all day long a church?
Tax break.
Amen, you otherwise complete freakin' moron.
I watched "Eastern Promises" last night. It was absorbing, in a made-for-tv movie-of-the-week kind of way, with plot holes as big as a President's ego, and a lot of sexploitation.
But I have a bias against anything to do with David Cronenberg because years ago I was at a party and people were talking about "Dead Ringers" and the conversation became quite pretentious and filmy in that way movie connoisseur conversations do, and some drunken hosebeast of a reveller, searching for the last cold beer in the fridge (I always left the warm stuff for the boys - they'll drink anything) piped up, "I think David Cronenberg is just a misogynist!"
I stand by that opinion, too.
But I think a lot of Hollywood movies are misogynistic, probably because most Hollywood writers and directors are misogynists. So it'd be a scant selection for your viewing pleasure if I was in charge of what you could and could not see, that's for sure. Believe me, as a Feminist, watching almost any Hollywood production with my kids drives me clear and clean out of my mind because the sexism in America is so ingrained, so pervasive, so rampant - that virtually every movie is based on women being there for the pleasure of men.
As a Feminist, I'm pretty much sick of it.
Indeed, according to Hollywood, if it weren't for just a handful of good men who speak in monosyllables (because women, not men, find that so attractive in a partner), women would be enslaved by the evil laughing closet-cases who comprise most of mankind, to be raped over and over and over, before being murdered at their (and your?) further viewing pleasure, their naked corpses given one last going over by a lingering camera close-up.
Ah, women in the movies. Even their sexuality isn't enough to save them in the end.
Well, I'm not buying it. The emperor ain't wearin' any clothes, as far as I'm concerned. It's all just misogyny with a thick coating of homo-eroticism - what I'm seeing up there on the big screen - and from here on in I'm boycotting the whole shebang - or shegangbang, as so often is the case in Hollywoodland.
You know, I'd put the Olympics on a par with the UN - good in theory, requiring a helluva lot of scrutiny in practice. Still, the International Olympic Committee has to be in a league of corruption even beyond the worst United Nations secretariat.
So why is the media asking Jacques Rogge his opinion regarding Tibetan unrest in defiance of Chinese oppression? I mean, it's not like he's unbiased. Cripes, the IOC has more in common with the communist dictators of China than Russian figure skating judges had with characters straight out of Animal Farm.
And excuse me for playing media watchdog, but in my opinion, interviewing him at all lends a legitimacy to his opinions that would otherwise not exist. I don't care to hear what Jacques Rogge thinks of what is going on in Tibet right now because his opinion is going to be as biased as it is irrelevant.
Say, have you started to notice that the further we get from 9/11, the lamer all those conspiracy theories seem as opposed to the truth? I mean, what's up with that, eh? Is consp |
