|
|||
|
« March 2008 | Main | May 2008 » April 30, 2008Only In Canada, Eh?I guess ironic is what you get, too, when the Alberta Separatists, who currently run Canada under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, vote against a motion expressing full confidence in Elections Canada, put forward in the House of Commons by the White N*ggers of North America, aka, our "we're still here" Quebec Separatistes. Just Society DessertsHow ironic is it that one of the most prolific propagandists for the War on Terror, a U.S. establishment enterprise of trillion $$$ proportions that is all about restricting domestic civil rights and invading with impunity sovereign countries, a pundit who is an uber-alarmist about a mythical beast known as the Islamic Menace, which serves as the U.S. establishment's sole ongoing yellow alert justification for the War on Terror, is in good standing to win a World Press Freedom Award - thanks to our very own Canadian Human Rights Commission's recent zeal in fighting for the right of the great unwashed to not be offended by the exercise of free speech? On a scale of one to ten, I mean. Ten? And the winner is: Mark Steyn! April 29, 2008Obama's WifeAs always, when slagging the candidate isn't working too well, RevRend Wright being kind of a fun guy when the sermon's over, afterall, the candidate's wife (and here's where Hillary certainly has the upper hand - eh?) is fair game - especially if she's a Democrat with more of the Black Panther about her than pearls and a sweater set. Come on down Michelle Obama and get ready for the prime time news feeding frenzy like Laura Bush, current first lady but a white Republican, never had to face for this little misdemeanor: And now for a different take on the same story (which is only available in Google cache these days): Now, sit back and imagine if Michelle Obama (or Hillary Clinton in the olden days of Bill) had anything even remotely resembling that kind of driving record - which was essentially wiped clean after marriage to the son of the Director of the C.I.A. who would himself become President of the United States and who might even have had a second term had he not puked on the Japanese Prime Minister. Seriously, imagine a black Democrat candidate running for President whose wife had run through a stop sign once. Still, I guess some things are just too hard for voters to get past and projectile vomiting at state dinners is one of them, no matter the first lady's or daughter-in-law's driving record, not that it does matter, I guess, as long as both are white Republicans. Oh wait, did they even have cars in Barbara Bush Sr's early years? April 28, 2008And The Band Played OnGood news from CBC TheNoive! everybody: Canada has condemned Sunday's Taliban attack on a military parade in Kabul that left Afghan President Hamid Karzai and dignitaries, including the Canadian ambassador, scrambling for cover. That would be the parade referred to here: EverybodyLovesAParade Anyway, here's some further analysis: Joanna Nathan, an Afghanistan analyst for the International Crisis Group, told Reuters news agency that the attack was a propaganda victory for the Taliban. No kidding. They crashed their own victory parade! So, Why Can't We Be More Like The Islamic Menace?I mean, really. If Muslims are busily waging war and taking over Western society, SO STEALTHILY THAT WE DON'T EVEN HEAR THE BOMBS, why don't we copy what they're doing instead of invading their countries so noisily that we end up involved in years of conflict and miles of debt with no viable exit strategy in place once we've effectively, "smashed their countries and killed their leaders", to quote the foremost American military strategist, Ann Coulter? Yes indeed. I read yet another piece from Mark "I am not an Islamophobe" Steyn's site (you know the link by now so I'll just link to the piece): CulturalJihadistsSlyer'nBumblingWarMongerers Honestly, what is there left to say Sooey, you ask? Nothing, I know. So, I'll repeat myself - if the Islamic Menace is really that much smarter than us in its quest to take over the world that it can do it without us even noticing, then maybe we should let it. That way, it can owe trillions of dollars to China, it can find an exit strategy from Iraq, it can figure out how to occupy Afghanistan without "occupying" Afghanistan. Gawd. If I didn't know better, I'd think the Islamic Menace is getting way more credit than it deserves for its effort to take over the world. I mean, c'mon. Speed up the Cultural Jihad before we blow it up real good, too. Hate the Sin, Fire the SinnerJust when you thought Human Rights Tribunals have had their day in court, or not in court, as the case actually is, along comes Christian Horizons, a publicly funded community living service provider: I don't really want my tax dollars funding religious organizations, but, waddaryagonnadoo - they do. But the fact that they benefit from my hard earned tax dollars, means that they are not allowed to discriminate in their hiring practices based on the sexual orientation of their employees. No give, no take - or face the consequences when taken to an obviously still very necessary (thanks to religion) Human Rights Commission for discrimination. Yabbut, what kind of consequences really ensue for Christian Horizons, you might ask? Well, rightly so, since we, the hardworking taxpayers, fund not just Christian Horizons, but the Human Rights Commission it has been taken to for discrimination, as well as the payout to the fired employee(s) (because this isn't the first time Christian Horizons has been taken before a Human Rights Commission for discrimination). So, maybe in the interest of fairness for families, Christian Horizons should be fired from the public payroll so we don't have to pay its fine every time it ends up before a HRC for ignoring a fundamental Canadian right to employment regardless of sexual orientation. April 27, 2008Sooey Rides The TTC StrikeSolidarity Forever - NOT! But hey, Comrades, that's one Mutha of a strategy if the intent is to get the TTC declared an essential service. Excuse Me, But...... Are we allowed to ask why in the living hell American and Canadian dignitaries were attending the annual Afghan celebration of the Mujahadeen's defeat of the Soviet army when we are currently fighting the Taliban, i.e. the modern incarnation of the Mujahadeen - and stand quite a good chance of being defeated by it ourselves?! Call me a Terrorist Stooge, or just tired of the propaganda coming from the New Conservatives and their in-house organ CTV about why we're at war in Afghanistan, but I find myself unboohooey that President Karzai escaped the gunfire. Maybe if he'd taken a bullet he'd care more about Sayed Pervez Kambaksh SignThisPetition a young journalist awaiting hanging on death row for handing out pamphlets about women's rights in Afghanistan. You know, the reason blahblahblah... Gawd. Wake me up when it's over. April 26, 2008Everything You Need To Know About Bill C-474Exclusion of defence "Child"? What "child"? Oh, and: Reduced offence Uh... WTF?! Speaking of IndividualsThere's a non-debate going on right now in the one dimensional blogosphere (Right R Us) about how if women ran the world there wouldn't be any science, math, or engineering - or jets, even. I guess that's because if women had all the power, God wouldn't have invented education. You know, so men wouldn't feel bad when they still couldn't catch up. Pa-dum. I'm here all week, folks. Try the hummus. Steynicalisms & Forgetting the FlockI just read a (an?) hysterically ironical piece claiming that Judeo/Christianity has respect for the individual over the tribe which then goes on to claim that Muslims are a collective menace because of Islam. Here's the link if you want to play: "Spot the Inconsistencies in the Islamic Menace Argument of the Day on Mark Steyn's Blog" MarkSteynLivesHere Euro/MuslimTension-ThanksToMuslims But catch the yellow alert at the end of the piece: Forty years ago last weekend, British classicists and politician Enoch Powell warned that if immigrants bringing alien values and customs into Britain were allowed to continue their immigration, a sense of alarm and resentment would develop in the indigenous British population. He was ejected from British politics for giving that warning. Uh... by the Islamic Menace? Or by Judeo/Christianists... In any case, here's a tip for all you Islamophobes - it's not the religion, it's the theocracy. See, Christian churches are all about community, too. That's the whole point. We're all children of God in God's house, when we're in God's house, which we call "Church". We're a community. It's not about the individual. We're all one when we're with God in his house. So really, it's up to us, believers and non believers, secular society, the west, to prevent True Believers from getting anywhere (come on down Bill C-10 and Bill C-464) near power. That's because religion is about faith in God as the Supreme Being, the Creator of the Universe, the All Knowing and All Powerful, not individual rights and freedoms. I mean, you can say it's about the individual, you can even say ONE religion is the One True Faith and better than another, you can write that Judeo/Christianity is all about individual rights and freedoms and Islam isn't, Mark Steyn can even post your piece on his site as if it has some kind of profound truth to it, but it's still complete and utter bullshit pulled out of your ass for partisan political purposes - the Church of PPP. April 25, 2008Two Questions of the Day1. Where are all the non-celebrity Scientologists? Smells Like Justice!Today, even in Stephen Harper's New Conservative Canada, the Supreme Court ruled that the random use of police sniffer dogs breaches the Charter. Thank you, once again, PET. In celebration, I suggest freedom fighters everywhere shout out a special "Fuck U" to those g-man brownshirts who say things like, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear". It's a good day for justice in Canada - mark it on your calendar. By the way, all you kids out there, police showing up at a high school with sniffer dogs would have resulted in an extra surly attitude and more bitter contempt for authority in my day. Now get your slack asses moving and snarl at a uniform today. Of course, that was in my day. In my older sister's day, there would have been a walk out or a sit in or some kind of actual political response to THE KIND OF FASCISTS WHO THINK WARRENTLESS INVASIONS OF CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE OKAY! We've come a long way, baby - NOT! Now take your iPods out of your ears and hit the pavement, you no good bunch of loafers! Geez Louise. Don't make me come down there. I'm wearing plaid. April 24, 2008Puttin' on the Ritz - CrackersThis past winter in Ottawa has given me cause for concern this spring as I gradually try on my summer wardrobe. Yup. Slogging through piles of snow to work, a brisk 30 minute slog - each way, has rewarded me with East German swimmer thighs and a Jamaican sprinter butt. I look good, but not in my last year's summer wardrobe. In my cream coloured pants that I wore to the Police concert so I'd look cooler'n Sting (I'm that competitive, seriously), I look like Randy from Trailor Park Boys. With a shirt on, I look like my Uncle Mac. But it's all muscle, so now I have to go out and buy new bottoms to go with my tops, which, of course, haven't changed in fit. What's it take to brisk walk into a C-cup in this town, anyway? But I shouldn't complain, I guess. When they drop (and everything does, you know, check out an 80 year old woman and an 80 year old man in matching bikinis like I did last summer when I was in Toronto and you'll see what I mean), my breasts will just bounce off my ribs instead of my knees. And that's gotta be good, right? Guys? Am I right? Good? In the meantime, on my way to work I go by a dry out house for men. This morning, they were all out having a smoke (it must be a bugger of a thing to try and quit smoking in AA), and when I walked by in my last summer's jeans, there were actual catcalls and low whistles. I was embarrassed because I turn into a shrinking violet at the most inopportune times (I'm like the dancing frog from the Bug's Bunny show that way) and I just wanted the ground to open up and swallow me whole. And then tunnel me through the ground and bring me up right at the corner Bridgehead so I could be among my own kind (politically correct, earth mother types with whom I have nothing in common) and not feel the urge to shriek, "Not flattered, you sexist goons!" Still, I reasoned, for I'm still capable of reason, I was kind of asking for it. I mean, my pants are so tight if I breathe out my buttons will pop so hard they're likely to smash a window. And I didn't want to discourage them from trying to get out there and meet women (it's tough for newly non-drinking men to meet women - although, somebody should tell men that women don't like that kind of attention when they're out being people, as opposed to... uh... I dunno... what DO men think women are up to when they're out and about, anyway?) so I let it slide. Gawd forbid I should send a sobered up dude back to the bottle by being a Feminist on his first day out dry. Good thing, too, because just as I was getting past the gang, a young fellow in his early twenties said quietly, "Hey, sorry, eh?" and jerked his head toward the hooters and howlers. So I gave him a blow job. HAHAHAHAHAHA! Just kidding. I gave him a big smile and wink and thought, "What a nice young man". Then, of course, as I tripped over a crack in the sidewalk and they all stopped caterwauling, I thought, "Omigawd... I probably reminded him of his poor old ma back at the van down by the river and he was thinking, "Ooh, lady. Classy was either 20 pounds ago or two sizes back. Have some self respect." I either gotta get out my head or get me some clothes that fit. Hollywood SexistSay, you know what's really, really, really sexist? Hollywood. That's right. Hollywood. I mean, where is the wage gap between men and women bigger'n it is in Hollywood? Compare actor and actress salaries and it's like being back at the turn of the century - the 20th century! Gawd. What a crock the whirld is when you really stop and think about it, eh? But that's just it, isn't it. Nobody ever does because we're too busy watching the big screen and buying into the myth of America. Obama and ChangeSeriously, Obama's changed. So, I think he should change back into Obama and give up the "I have a dreaminess" thing he has going on with Americans before they wake up all cranky and out of sorts and ask, "Who the hell are you?!" And I don't know if you've noticed, but he's got one irritated look on his face when he glances over at the ol' ball and chain (Hillary, not Michelle) during a debate. It's as if he wants to finally break out of his coolitude and punch her in the face and out of the race, "To the moon, Hillary!" By the way, has he been smoking, lately? Or did he quit for politics? Because that's the kind of thing I like to keep my eye on with these "out of the blue" scene stealers. "Look at me, fat ass America - I'm different. Cool. And slim. Because I smoke." Of course, maybe that's why he looks so fed up, he's having a nicotine fit and there's ol' Hillary, blocking his path to glory and not even good for bummin' a smoke. April 23, 2008Bang, BangCanadianCynicGetsReady,Aims,Fires Ah, McVety. Please. In Gawd's name. Shut.The.Fuck.Up. Linda McQuaig Rains On the ParadeThe military parade, that is: Finally, it should be noted that the killers got a rather soft ride in the media. Last Friday, the Globe and Mail ran a front-page story by Christie Blatchford suggesting the courtroom tears of the killers showed they felt genuine remorse. Right on. Free Speech in an Age of IdeologuesThere seems to be a bit of a right/left thing going on (Internet-wise) with the Free Speech brigaydos (anti-choice, social conservatives in favour of government censorship of the arts via Christian Fundamentalist lobbyists, REAL, as in NOT, Women and assorted Islamophobes, White Supremacists and ProWarOnTerrorists) and the Canadian Human Rights brigahdos (politically correct, finger-wagging, sanctimonious, long-nosed, insulated elitists and government insiders). My problem, as none of the above, but as a Feminist having more in common with the CHR brigahdos (I'm not bragging), is that: a-z) I find nothing to support in their argument that a group of government bureaucrats should be taking complaints from John Q Public about what Suzie Q Public said, particularly if it was on the Internet, and then assessing, investigating, prosecuting and judging that complaint. Nothing. Because here's the thing - what if Stephen Harper, New Conservative Prime Minister of Canada-at-large, decides to stack the CHRC with ideologues like he's stacked our Canadian judicial selection panel with ideologues, giving yet more power to Christian Fundamentalist government lobbyists - like Charles McVety (just to pick a random good ol' boy name out of a fat cat hat) - to censor the "Just Society" that brought about the CHRCs in the first place? Eh? Sooey - always' t'inkin'. Taxpayer AbortionsYou know what I say now to people who claim they just don't want their tax dollars funding abortions for Canadian women? "Move." The Race Right Now For PresidentI'm going to go out not very far at all on a limb and disagree with the pundits who think Hillary staying in the race is bad for the Democrats. It isn't. The longer she stays in, the longer the focus is on whoever wins - which is good for her AND good for neophyte "The One" Obama. Meanwhile, McCain looks for all the world like an also ran left far behind, another place, another time, stuck in an unchanging, hopeless, unwinnable war, irrelevant to the exciting Presidential race of 2008. We'reNotAsSmartAsYou,SoWeDisagree,Sooey You keep goin', Grrl! April 22, 2008Doing Business with OutlawsSay, why are we pretending Mexico isn't a lawless, corrupt third world backwater with no middle class and that the United States isn't two thirds tropical with a taint of the banana republic, a history of deal breaking and a social order that can be torn asunder by a hurricane? Oh right, New Conservatives want us to be like that, too. Things You Never HearHow come nobody ever says, "Teenagers are the future"? If It's Good for Bush Inc...... How could any Canadian possibly think it is good for us? "It's bad, it's elitist, it's corporate-driven," Barlow said of the SPP. Gee, it's a wonder she doesn't get tired of stating the obvious. But, always remember, no wait, never forget, Steve, every time the President of the United States heaps lavish praise upon you, a lot of Canadian confidence in you dies. You know, I'm starting to think the Prime Minister might be quite stupid. April 21, 2008Select MediaGee, would you really want to be the media selected by the government to handle its press? Or does that kind of make you look like... well... the government's press secretary. Yeah. That's right. There's no question mark on the end of that question. I dunno. That's some media we've got in this country. I hear the media that was excluded was "indignant". Yeah. That's the right word - "indignant". No word on how the included media felt. Flattered? April 20, 2008What Do CEOs of Health Boards Make, Anyway?I don't know, should CEOs of Health Boards really be blaming government cutbacks for problems in Canada's healthcare system? Okay,GeorgeTilley-Define"Main" George Tilley, the former chief executive of Eastern Health, also testified Friday that legal advice was not the main reason the authority decided not to inform cancer patients by mail that tests used to determine their course of treatment might have been wrong. Speaking of Goons and Thugs for LeadersIf everything we import from China is junk, why are we importing it? If Not For Feminists...... Who would the Right blame for everything that is wrong in the world? Old NewsOne of the interesting (or not, depending) aspects of Internet reporting is the reaction to new news and old by various and sundry. This story is currently making the rounds on a few Canadian blogs (I posted about it on my forum) and yes, it is horrific: The comments, though, are wary and, you'll notice, tend more to question the source of the story and the terminology used in it, than the fairly accepted knowledge that Indian children weren't always treated well in residential schools. In any case, here is the horse's mouth: HiddenFromHistory-ByRev.KevinArnott Personally, I don't doubt, ever, the possibilities of institutional inhumanity. It strikes me, too, that Indian children were at a special disadvantage in residential schools because society at large - if it thought of them at all - held a fervent belief that they were better off in the care of religious institutions than they were on Indian reservations. Or what some people might call being caught between a rock and a hard place - both of which (the rock and the hard place) were by government design, so we're guilty as a society at the very least of not doing well by a population - but which has no bearing on the here and now. Except that it does. Afterall, we are our history and if we have a reluctance to dig, literally, into the past to uncover the parts that reveal us to be not who we believe ourselves to be, then we're no better than all of those countries we set out from our shores to make over in our image, are we? Or am I a crackpot. Too. Maybe. Certainly, the longer Canada goes on, the less enamoured of it I am. My patriotism fades with each passing government, to be honest. I no longer feel that stirring of national pride when I hear the anthem played at the Olympics anymore - if you can believe it. I dunno. Maybe because it still has Gawd in it and I'm sick of Gawd. Gawd, Gawd, Gawd. Because it seems to me that, in the name of Gawd, there's a lot of denial and power in the same old hands and no real movement away from religion and into the light of rational thought. Even all this hate speech nonsense that has permeated the Canadian internet for the past few months has come about because we are so fervent in our protection of religion that we are willing to sacrifice individual freedom of expression and, more importantly, the truth. Why? April 18, 2008Hollywood BoresHere is an interesting review of Judd Apatow's latest: KatrinaOnstadSays"Enuff,Already" I've said it before but it bears repeating: The women in these movies get short shrift. There seems to be a nicely democratic division of jokes amongst the guys, and the ladies are tossed the leftovers. But I have a question: If Hollywood is supposed to be so liberal, why all the stereotyping of women as appendages to men? For that matter, why don't openly gay actors ever get the leading man role - EVEN WHEN IT'S A GAY LEADING ROLE?! "Ooh, thank Gawd we found a straight actor to play this gay cowboy!" But the fact that women are so nowhere in Hollywood explains why television shows like 30 Rock and Weeds do so well on DVD, I guess. Women don't have to suffer through lines like this from every Matt Damon etc movie: "What's happening to you?" when he comes home to her waiting daily question from his job at the spy agency. Blech. Thank Gawd for the 1940s, is all I can say. Morally ImpairedApparently, 200 people have 40% of the world's wealth. I mean, I'm no economist, but that can't be good for anybody. Except for the 200 people with 40% of the world's wealth, of course. And wouldn't you have to be somewhat morally impaired to be one of the 200 people with 40% of the world's wealth? Cripes, and here I was feeling guilty for not doing much (okay, anything) to alleviate world poverty. But I'm not rich, so I would feel guilty about doing nothing to help those less fortunate than myself, wouldn't I. So, the rumours must be true. Rich people don't have souls. The Pope Tells The JokeSpeaking of rich: "What Do You Call Your Act?" April 17, 2008Censorship As Defined By Charles McVetyThis is interesting: DenyingTaxCreditsToFilmsWeDoNotLikeIsNotCensorship So says a Christian Coalition of Fundamentalists headed up by the very unelected Charles McVety. Actually, yes. Yes it is censorship. In fact, it's Christian Fundamentalist censorship via an express lane/inside track due to Charles McVety's special relationship with Stephen Harper. When the government suddenly decides to change public funding for the arts to not fund things it doesn't like because a Christian Fundamentalist preacher has the ear of the Prime Minister, that's censorship. Mayor LarryMayor Larry O'Brien of Ottawa, the New Conservative choice of candidate, ran on a promise to scrap a $700 million lightrail transit deal for the City. Of course, lawsuits are flying, what with New Conservatives all over Ottawa municipal politics like cheap suits, so I'm not sure if I can say anything about the spectacular level of incompetence he has brought to public office, but yesterday, I distinctly heard him say in a radio interview that he has now studied the numbers and is in full support of a lightrail transit system for the City of Ottawa. To the tune of $2 billion. Church WealthWhy are Churches wealthy? Is it because their wealth isn't taxed? Is it because they hoard their wealth? Why do Churches have any wealth at all? Shouldn't everything that comes in, go out? Why Churches? STFD!Just so everybody knows, I will not now not ever qualify my Feminist udderances with disclaimers such as "not all men" because that's not what Feminism is about and it never was and I'm not going to let the new millennium whining by Men's Rights Groups hither and yon dampen my strident and shrill and absolutely uncompromising message - which is this: If it's good for women, it's good for everybody. So, SHUT THE FRONT DOOR, already! Suspiciously High Food PricesYes, you're hearing it first on Sooey Says, but I think these suddenly skyrocketing food prices that are causing rioting in poor countries (not to mention hunger) are the lead in to what the genetically modified food industry has been seeking ever since we found out what it was up to with our food supply - a genetically modified food industry with public and government approval and a healthy dose of taxpayer subsidizing. Call me a cynic, but that's how I'm calling this one. Tasering, An Exhibition SportI think tasering should be entered in the Vancouver 2010 Olympics as an exhibition sport. We could win a gold medal easily with the Canadian RCMP team, I bet. Maybe a silver, too, with Vancouver's transit cops. April 16, 2008Take This Job And I'll SueHey, the New Conservatives should sue the Opposition for trying to take their jobs. If the Opposition ever tries to take their jobs, I mean. Media Stereotypes & Islamic Terrorists, I Mean, FundamentalistsOkay. Media. So tell Canadians, why all the articles ringing alarm bells about Islamic Fundamentalism threatening our secular way of life, when Charles McVety has the Prime Minister's ear on censorhip in the arts? Because it's not about funding, as claimed. It's about Christian Fundamentalism deciding how it's going to be for Canadians now that Stephen Harper is Prime Minister. Canadians know that and you know that, so why aren't there daily handwringing articles about Charles McVety's pervasive influence over Canadian public policy? Party Stunts and Flying LawsuitsIf the RCMP raid on Conservative Party Headquarters was some kind of publicity stunt, why doesn't Stephen Harper sue the RCMP? That way, it'll never go beyond publicity stunt to election fraud because, when the Opposition raises the matter, it'll be before the courts. Think Mulroney and the Airbus kickbacks, except with Stephen Harper and his SLAPPhappy knuckledragging NEW Conservative government. More'n PoliticsOver at Broadsides, Antonia Zerbisias is showing this montage: HillaryKnows-VerticalStripesSlimTheThighs Her point is one of sexism, how the media consistently covers Hillary's campaign from a sexist point of view. Fair enough and quite true, but I feel compelled to add - doesn't it say even more about the moronism of punditry these days? I mean, those guys may as well be sporting togas and downing keggers while actual frat boys look on in horrified disgust for all the credibility they bring to the media with their silliness, "Ew. A girl running for President. Let's unzip and wave our peepees at her." Quite frankly, that montage says everything we need to know about the media and nothing about Hillary Clinton. But the snippet in there with RevRend Wright preachificatin' about Hillary never having been called a "n*****" is quite the reach, eh? I mean, that's some lack of bonafides, RevRend. And hard to argue with, I guess. (Although, Bill could be kind of a prick, so - who knows?) But nevermind Hillary, how many times has Obama been called a "n*****" I wonder, RevRend? Zero, maybe? Not counting Grammy Obama's daily "Back off my purse, n*****!" of course. In any case, it really is about sex and race, afterall, I guess. At least, it is to the media. I mean, I realize Geraldine Ferraro is not supposed to say this out loud, "Obama is only where he is in the race because he's black", but surely she can say it without Obama's supporters getting away with, "What? Obama? Black? Oh, well, we hadn't noticed. Geraldine Ferraro must be looking for it, the bitch." Besides, isn't it a good thing for his supporters that Obama's the front runner for the Democrat nomination because he's black? Isn't that the main thrust of their campaign? A black man, not a lightweight inexperienced nobody, could be the next great President of the United States? Otherwise, wouldn't it be John Edwards running second to frontrunner Hillary Clinton because she's a woman? I mean, who's kidding who here? Dude, when you've got Oprah supporting you with, "He's the one", you're black. And Americans want you to win because you're black. Get over it. Yeah. Life is tough. Try being a woman. And calling Hillary a "Monster" is some kind of insult? Since when? If I'd been her campaign manager I'd have said Samantha Powers steps down over my dead body. "Monster"? So? Damn straight Hillary Clinton is a monster - that's what some of us like best about her - just like some of Obama's supporters are all over him like cheap suits BECAUSE HE'S BLACK! Woman/monster - I don't care. Elect her. I mean, what? We can't call a spade a... Uh... nevermind. But yeah, Hillary Clinton is a monster - like all women of a certain age are monsters. Tough nuts. But just what in Gawd's name can explain those pundits in that montage? Eh? Anyone? Anyone? April 15, 2008The Definition of GeniusI once read on the back of a Mensa workbook (Should You Be In Mensa?) the definition of genius: The confidence in knowing you are right, that your answer is correct. Meanwhile, according to the American Mensa Society, there is no definition of genius: I dunno. I just can't tell from the text if the AMS is saying that with the confidence of knowing it's right or not. But that's exactly how I ended up almost second guessing myself into special ed in grade school, too - reading between the lines, seeing what isn't there - or worse, NOT seeing what isn't there. Weight IssuesI've been reading forever about women and weight, with everyone and her mother trying to figure out why it is that women will try so hard to lose weight (if they were not born with the holy grail gene of the naturally slim) and I've come to realize - there is no answer as to why. Weight for women is simply beyond reason. Like fashion. I mean, really - if you saw someone walking towards you in the latest fashions straight out of the style section of last weekend's newspaper you would probably scream and reach for your taser. Unless it was a man, in which case you would just scream - WITH LAUGHTER! Clothes look good on models because they're professional clothes wearers. Then it's all downhill for the clothes. And don't forget, Gawd did invent fashion just to humiliate people - especially women people. It's a fact. A Biblical fact. April 14, 2008I Have A Question, Your HonourWhere do all the Nazis go when I log off the Internet? Patriots on the RightLooking back on the original National Post, what offended me most about it was its obscene, to the point of grotesque slavering, reverence for all things American, while it disowned, day after propagandistic day, with a sneering private schoolboy contempt, all manner of Canadiana. I wouldn't be offended now, however, I'd be amused. That's because somewhere along the way I realized that those same self-loathing Canadians were admiring of that which makes Americans so intolerable to the rest of the world - their deaf, dumb and blind Patriotism. It also occurred to me that those same self-loathing America-lurvin' Canadians were/are lacking that which Americans revere even more than freedom fries: deaf, dumb and blind Patriotism. Ironical, eh? (I know, I know - "deaf, dumb and blind" is so politically incorrect I may as well be a Rightwing Canadian. Or write for the National Post.) Boycott Beijing Olympics - NOT!I'm doing a 180 on my boycott strategy for all things Sooey-anti with regards to the Beijing Olympics. My reasoning is thus: If we're going to continue with this now bi-annual charade (and I think the bi-annual part signifies a world at one with getting together in the name of sport in spite of whatever is going on otherwise, which is a good thing) I think we should show solidarity to it and boycott the boycotters of the Olympics until boycotting the Olympics becomes an International taboo. And the sort of thing only pariah countries get up to while legitimate countries deal with their political differences between Olympics. I mean, let's face it. Everybody who's anybody is guilty of getting to where they are on the back of somebody. At least with the Olympics the most powerful countries in the world can duke it out with each other in sport and occasionally, just occasionally, a gymnast from some tinpot rathole wins a bunch of gold medals and we find out how they trained their Olympic gymnasts to be so damned good that, in spite of no freedom or human rights and oppressed countrymen living in squalor, they beat the Americans at the Olympics. Priorities, people. And every two years (but especially every four, since the Winter Olympics are most definitely the maiden aunt of the Olympic Games) the Olympics should take priority over everything. Think Christmas, but internationally. Then think Diwali beating Christmas. April 13, 2008Richard The MenaceAnd to think, the media was hailing Richard Warman as an unassailable crusader for human rights just a few months ago: What to believe, who to believe. But this is highly ironic, given that the New Conservative Government of Canada is currently suing the Opposition for informing on its nefarious activities involving Chuck Cadman ("Cadscam"), thereby effectively silencing debate on the entire sordid affair: But John Dixon, a two-term former president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association who has locked horns with Warman in the past, says it's disingenuous for someone with Warman's means and legal acumen to run from the consequences of his cases. "Unless you're an idiot, you have to be thinking about what kind of conception of the law, what conception of freedom of expression, what conception of the relationship between the individual and the state is cemented in place by your action," he says. "Cases like these foster an atmosphere in which sensible people who know they can't summon the resources to defend themselves will censor themselves. It creates an ever-growing body of very regressive law when it comes to the integrity and freedom of a democratic forum." You mean, like Parliament? But sure, Richard Warman is the threat to free speech, not Stephen Harper and Bush Inc. and the Patriot Act and Homeland Security and no-fly lists etc etc etc. Give. Me. A. Fucking. Break. Macleans. Which Jihad?You know, judging from Mark Steyn's site from where I pulled this... FreeSpeechInTheAgeOfJihadAndArmchairWarriors ... you'd hardly know the west is the side actually waging a real live official war. It's as if these guys don't read their own press. Look, dudes. Whatever the Islamic Menace is up to, we're the guys attacking Muslim countries and musing aloud about attacking more Muslim countries. It is quite possible, you know, that we are viewed as the Western Menace by the other side, as opposed to the good guy free speech warriors we know ourselves to be. The Business About The CHRCAs much as many of us question the power of the CHRC to censor speech (after the fact, mind), it is important to note that it is also a government department that is very successful at what it does, particularly with regards to Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act: Interesting that a government department that actually recovers money from offending parties singled out for investigation, prosecution and a verdict of guilty (it has won 100% of the cases it takes on, so - no supposedly typical government inefficiencies there, that's for sure) seems so questionable - now that we know about it. There was a similar reaction several years ago to a plan by HRDC's Emloyment Insurance Department to detect E.I. fraud by checking with customs to compare its travel records with their E.I. records. It would have nailed anybody collecting E.I. while travelling (a no-no because you're supposed to be available for work) and recovered lots of $$$s, but the Privacy Commissioner, Bruce Phillips, a Tory appointee and former media guy, vetoed it as an invasion of privacy - once he found out about it. (I'd be more inclined to question why a media guy friendly to the Tory government had been appointed to a government watchdog position, but, such is the small pool of talent in Canada that becomes our Overlord Class, I guess.) Anyway, I see the Internet (and media) as one big sitting duck for Sec. 13 and am not at all surprised that the CHRC does, too, and would wonder if it wasn't prosecuting hate speech spotted on assumed white supremacist sites, why it wasn't. They're gold, baby - gold! But it occurs to me as well that Canadians of all political stripes really don't like it when the government acts like a business, as the CHRC has been doing while nobody was paying much attention until it affected the media itself, at which point it was all over the story like a cheap suit. And wanting the government to act like a government, not like a business. And that's a good thing. Because if there's one person we should never trust with our vote, it's the politician, supported by the media, who wants to run the government like a business. So, why do Canadians continue to elect them to public office? April 12, 2008"America Alone"Gee. Mark Steyn should capitalize on all his recent publicity regarding freedom of speech vs Islamophobia and change the title of his book about America facing down the Islamic Menace - alone - to "America, No Longer Alone Thanks To Mark Steyn". Why Can't Men Be More Like Women?I'm a regular reader of Feminist blogs, particularly Antonia Zerbisias of Broadsides, because she's actually of the MSM (which matters, mostly because of how rare such a creature is in the MSM), and I've come to realize that there is even a scientific bias in favour of male characteristics being the positive in almost every study cited re gender. As if bigger is better and women will only ever be as good as men the more like them they become. Well, it seems to me that the opposite is true of evolution and that men who become more like women are the better for it, as are the rest of us. That's my inverted take on the media's traditional one, anyway - turning men=positive into women=positive. But since I'm placing female characteristics as the positive, it would be - wouldn't it. If you come at the study from the opposite angle, your conclusion may be the same but it will be reported quite differently. Anyway, part of being a Feminist is undoing a lot a lot a lot of programming that insists, in order to be successful, you need to compete with men on a male playing field. Fair enough. Except that women are now over 50% of medical students and law students (another positive standard that, well, I'd prefer a good nurse and a society that didn't require me to have a lawyer on call, thanks) - so maybe it's time to turn the equation on its head and play female=positive science now and see if women are suddenly more in demand than ever - especially in leadership roles. Because women are never going to be as big as men. BUT men will never be as curvy as women, either. In terms of speaking up, as Ms Zerbisias talks about here: LetMeThinkAboutIt maybe women are just more thoughtful. My guess is that women are more concerned with the fallout of getting it wrong, but why isn't that considered a positive? Getting it wrong is the biggest problem with our current crop of world leaders - isn't it? I mean, look at the world. Men run it. What could possibly be the reason for any of us to look up to the characteristics of the world's leaders - right now - as positive? So beware the boohooers about the Feminization of society as if that's a negative, as if making men more like women is a negative. Because I think it's a positive. But, being a woman, I would say that wouldn't I. Well, no, actually. Being a woman, I would only say that if I was absolutely certain that I was right, that I was so sure of my rightness that I wouldn't be struck dead for saying it, that there is absolutely no way saying it could come back and bite me in the ass. That's because, as a woman, I think there's a lot more at stake than there probably is if I get it wrong. So I don't want to get it wrong. Now why isn't that a positive characteristic given all we know about male leadership and that whole rolling of the dice thing they all do - not just with their lives, but with ALL of our lives? Because if MAD (and we seem to have gone beyond MAD in the west to "we can just wipe you out, as long as China isn't looking") represents the nadir of male leadership I'm not sure why female characteristics aren't the positive to which men should aspire for a change. And with regards to speaking up/speaking out, I refer you to Fran Lebowitz - "enough with the vox populi already". April 11, 2008Don't Forget Backdoor Bill C-484Remember everybody, New Conservatives and lots of Liberals voted to recriminalize abortion through the backdoor Bill C-484. This Bill that does nothing for women except expose them to a major rights rollback has passed second reading. Stephen Harper and his New Conservative agenda to strip women of their reproductive rights is winning, Canada. Vote the bastards out next go 'round, please and thank you. Internet ExtremistsI just read an article by an Internet Islamophobe about how typically unfair it is that anything bad they say about Muslims gets censored or challenged by all the Terrorist Stooges on the Left who control our society, but crazy dangerous Islamic Fundamentalist Jihadists can post anything and nobody except the Internet Islamophobes says "Boo". Which got me to thinking, isn't it even more unfair to Muslims that Fundamentalist Islamic extremism, making them look like the Islamic Menace the Islamophobes keep insisting they are, is up there on the Internet for all and sundry to see and be linked to by accusing Islamophobes as proof that the Islamic Menace is real and getting realer by the video, death threat, and call for Jihad? Because, one thing is for sure, click on the offered link in any Islamophobe's article and proof of everything they say about the Islamic Menace will be right there on your computer screen. Neo-CapitalismI've solved what's wrong with us, everybody. We're living in what I've termed (right here, right now on SooeySays) a Neo-Capitalist society. Here's how Neo-Capitalism works: A completely unnecessary product is created, and then, an advertising campaign is waged to create a need for this revolutionary new product in the minds of consumers. Seriously, ask your doctor if Neo-Capitalism is right for you. I can pretty much guarantee she'll say yes. She may even have a trial sample on hand to give you for free. April 09, 2008John McCainThe outraged indignation from the McCain Camp to silence anyone who dares to question John McCain's version of his wartime heroism reminds me of that Simpsons episode when a kid falls down a well and everybody's going on and on about what a hero he is, and they're really making a BIG point of it, too, until finally: Lisa: "Why is he a hero?" Sticks & StonesMy webmaster, Ou81aswell, posted this timely reminder of a Lord of the Flies tail-end boomer childhood on Sooey's yesterday: Whatever happened to the old adage "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."? He's referring to the free speech debate here and about because he's a huge fan of Michael Coren and all the free speechers were featured on his show last night to discuss the demerits of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Anyway, I hated to do it, because it's a cheap shot (and it IS a cheap shot on the Internet, 100% of the time - if I was one of the elves living in the Internet, I'd scramble it to "cheap shot" every time) - but I responded "The Holocaust". (Although, in between, fenderbender posted, "Someone got blindsided with a dictionary." to really take away from the pithy gravitas of MY post. I hate it when that happens. I would have switched our posts, but unfortunately, I'm a total techno'tard.) But it was reflexive, posting "The Holocaust". Because I suspect that's what free speechers are really up against when they try to make their debate in the context of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It strikes me that the CHRC was created because of what people at the time saw as a need, on moral grounds, to deal in a governmental capacity with the kind of speech that had been determined to have led to The Holocaust. With the result that it was set up almost with a retroactive preventative mandate, if that makes any sense at all. And it doesn't, of course. But it also doesn't make any sense to recite childhood rhymes as some kind of ode to free speech, either. Words do hurt and people are damaged by the words of others. Lives are ruined, jobs lost, opportunities denied, relationships ended, hope destroyed, and then, of course, there's The Holocaust. Words matter. But how much do words posted anonymously on Internet websites that are already recognized as hate speech matter - in 2008 - in a multicultural society with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and bully awareness programs in all its public schools and same sex marriages next door and pay equity studies at work and abortion rights action groups on the march and so on and so forth right up and back down the line so that when bigoted behaviour is brought to light, the duly elected MP guilty of it is forced to apologize and wear it like a cream pie? Because that's where we're at now. And the fact that the free speech vs CHRC debate has become so tawdry should be proof enough that we don't need to have it. McCain/Hillary TicketThat's what the Democrats deserve now, I think. Hillary could be all like, "You want Obama?! I'll *!#$*!# give you Obama! Smell yuz in November, #*!$*#!$! arsewipes!" April 08, 2008Hitchens on Obama"He's black! Black, I'm telling you! But he's not Martin Luther King black! He's that new kind of black! Lippy black!" HitchensRelivesHisCivilRightsDaze But I'm sure Obama has other black people in his life to balance out RevRend Wright. In fact, I'm starting to wonder if he's not very religious at all. He didn't seem to know nearly as much about RevRend Wright as you'd think he would. I mean, it took everybody else about ten minutes to find out a lot of bad about RevRend Wright. Maybe he just said RevRend Wright was his spiritual advisor because he wanted to fit in with the other politicians. And he figured it would sound better than: "Wha chu talkin' 'bout, foo! I don' need no ****** tellin' me whazzup - I gots me my own spiritualizin' advisor right here, muthafucka!" I dunno. Should British people be allowed to express their poncey dandified toffee nosed twit opinions anymore? Okay, I Think You've Had Enough Free Speech, SteynMark Steyn connects the dots from crazy to crazier and lands on: Gagortion!Gagortion!Feminists!Feminists!GagortionAndFeminists! A feminist abortion provider who suggested that disabled people are "genetic throwbacks" would be doing no more than indulging in a particularly brutal reformulation of the rationale behind much pregnancy testing. "Feminist abortion provider"? I believe that's Dr. Feminist Abortion Provider to you, Mr. Numbnuts. Muslim Fury Goes MainstreamYa gotta lurve the headline on this story, as if Muslim parents are the first to react to a public school curriculum teaching human sexuality. Gee, if they lived in Ontario, they could just switch their kids to Catholic schools to keep them in the dark. Ages. Anyway, moving right along from the same old same old, condemning the sin, not the sinner, unless the sinner's the teaching staff accused of moving too fast for the parents, this really jumped out at me: Traditional Islamic views condemn homosexuality but there are liberal movements, such as the Al-Fatiha Foundation, which is dedicated to gay Muslims. A but, what the, yabba dabba, HUNH? "There are liberal movements, such as the Al-Fatiha Foundation, which is dedicated to gay Muslims"? Well, well. I guess there's a first time for everything, eh. Even for a wee spot of balance in the Daily Telegraph. Cuban ExilesA while back I asked the question to all those people, particularly on the Right, who accuse those of us on the Left of turning a blind eye to Cuba's failings as a capitalist democracy - which would you rather be: 1) A new mother in Cuba? 2) A new mother in Gaza? and now I'm adding 3) A new mother in Shantyville USA? But this entry is supposed to be about Cuban exiles so I'll just waive the political correctness and out with it. There's something third world dictator fallen on hard times about Cuban exiles that, in a perverse way, makes it hard to feel sorry for Cubans. You know, because at least they don't have to live with Cuban exiles. There. Well. That was easy. Feeling Feministastic!You know, I'm always amazed by how much some Pundits fear and loathe Feminists. I mean, really, they blame us for all that is wrong in that world and give us no credit for all that is right. And yet, perversely, the more I embrace Feminism, the freer I feel. My hair is glossier, my skin glows, and I put on a little weight in all the right places. It must be all those "fuck uz" I dish out as I go about my Feminist day. Soldiering While FemaleThis comes to SooeySays via RedJenny. I've read so many Pundits who think women shouldn't be in the Army because they present a safety hazard to men in the Army. But, as Gilda Radner so famously said, "It's always something." Sunny Hundal on the Islamic MenaceTo be fair, I lifted this from Mark Steyn's very own website. I dunno. Maybe he does have a sense of humour. In any case, if you, like me, have trouble seeing the Islamic Menace forest for the Raving NeoCon trees, read this. You'll thank me for it. April 07, 2008Muslim Devil's AdvocateI found this Globe editorial on an entry by a McGill Student who is in a spot of trouble with an ex-CHRC official (who has filed a number of complaints to the CHRC against Internet posters) for getting a couple of minor facts wrong in an earlier entry he did for the Tribune (a school newspaper) which was linked to by Mark Steyn in his ongoing battle to prove to his readers that it's not inciteful to write over and over and over that the Islamic Menace is trying to take over the world - because the Islamic Menace is trying to take over the world. Phew: MissingThePointIsThePointOfOurEditorials,DearLongSufferingReaders The editorial, if you can't be bothered reading a month-old Globe editorial this fine spring morning (and don't bother - it equates Ezra Levant's reprinting of the Danish cartoons mocking Mohammed with Mark Steyn's obsessive compulsive yellow alerts about the Islamic Menace taking over the world) pretty much dismisses the complaint against Macleans (via Mr. Steyn's yellow alert articles) as frivolous. But is it? Or is it just that political incorrectness when it comes to Muslims is the new black? And that once one of their own is called out for crossing the line, all the good old-fashioned non-Muslim Pundits hold their noses and circle the wagons? Because here's what the Economist says of Mr. Steyn's point, which he has been making since 9/11, single-mindedly and with absolute conviction - regardless of reality: And the excerpt from Mr. Steyn was derided by The Economist as "an alarmist screed" that is "notable for its simplistic demographic projections." Okay. I'd add "obsessive" to the front of "simplistic demographic projections", remove "simplistic demographic projections", and replace it with "drivel", but I'm a Feminist - another target of Mr. Steyn's "obsessive drivel". Still, I'm not a visible minority, so I don't feel that same sense of grievance I'm sure I would if I were Muslim, and the ongoing subject of Mr. Steyn's "alarmist screeds" full of "obsessive drivel". Because it isn't "alarmist screed" in the singular, Mr. the Economist, it's "alarmist screeds" - very definitely in the plural. One might even say a "systematic campaign of alarmist screeds". So, the Globe may not find Mr. Steyn's opinions very troubling - and indeed they might not be if they didn't appear regularly in Canada's alleged national magazine. But they do. And that makes this case quite different from what the media is presenting it as, and if the Canadian Human Rights Commission is true to its mandate, Macleans, via Mr. Steyn's "obsessive drivel", will be found guilty and fined accordingly. Because otherwise, it looks to me like this - when the ex-CHRC guy complains about white supremacist posts on the Internet, he wins, but when the brown guys complain about the white pundit writing an alarmist screed about Muslims, in a national magazine, they don't. And would there be such a terrifying Islamic Menace threatening our lives every second of the day if Mark Steyn (et al) didn't keep insisting there is? Because, you know, he also insists that women like me, Feminists, who do not necessarily support his accompanying belief that we must destroy this ubiquitous Islamic Menace before it destroys us - with violence - are also the enemy, not just to freedom in our own western democracies, but to women everywhere in the Muslim world. So, is he really just a harmless Propagandist for the War on Terror? Or does the CHRC have its work cut out for it on this one? |
