Sunday, May 31, 2009

Shaping the News, The Alexander Panetta Way

From the beginning I suspected that something very strange was afoot regarding the
Michaëlle Jean seal eating story. Oh sure, you can always expect protests from PETA type activists on the Radical Left, but beyond that I just sensed that this story was being overblown.

This was absolutely confirmed today during Rex Murphy's Cross Checkup show on CBC Radio 1, which you can listen to here. Considering that their core audience is Left and "Further Left" (I'm being polite) I didn't know what reaction to expect from such Canadians across the country. Other than missing a few minutes at two junctures to answer phone calls, I caught the entire two-hour show. Of what I listened to, everyone but one was an adamant supporter of Mme. Jean's actions. Read this sampling of e-mails and you'll see more of the same. I was shocked, in a good way, by this tremendous support for her.

On the show, more than a few people suggested that this was a media contrived story. What precisely they meant by this, I do not know for certain, but at the very least one could construe that the story was slanted unfairly.

I did a little digging and the name "Alexander Panetta" of the Canadian Press kept on popping up. He was clearly the CP reporter assigned to cover her tour up there. Here's one snippet from the many stories he wrote:

Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean was awarded a certificate yesterday for her respect of Inuit culture, after images of her eating a bloody chunk of raw seal heart raised eyebrows around the world.

The emphasis is mine. One has to wonder if this was a news story or the caption of an upcoming horror film?

Panetta's latest story is another interesting case. The headline reads, "Clarkson unimpressed with Jean's seal-eating", which was extracted from the first paragraph: "At least one person's unimpressed by all the fuss over the seal-skinning adventures of Michaelle Jean: her predecessor as Governor General."

The word "unimpressed" has several meanings but when presented without any further explanation, most reasonable people would conclude that Adrienne Clarkson was "not impressed" or "not approving" of Michaëlle Jean's actions. Yet read the story all the way through, and that's NOT AT ALL what she said or meant.

I did some more digging and found this from July 2006. The writer there challenges Panetta's truthfulness and professionalism, indicating a similar pattern of deception.

Turns out there's more. Back in October 2006 both Kathy Shaidle and Kate McMillan had a run-in with Panetta here and here respectively.



Alexander Panetta: Poster-Boy for the Downfall of the Canadian MSM

In the past few years he had ample opportunity to clean up his act but instead his tradition of highly biased, inaccurate reporting continues unabated.

Sad. And pathetic. Any wonder why polls continue to show journalists near the bottom of the list of trust and respect?



Update: This posting was kindly linked to by Kate at SDA here. Some of the comments therein are absolutely priceless. Pay particular attention to the running debate by SDA regular 'EBD' and someone claiming to be an actual MSM reporter. The latter got caught in logic trap and EBD lit him up big time.

Through the comments, we learned of yet another example of Panetta's reputation as a spinmeister.

Alexander Panetta is, in essence, a columnist. If his writing was clearly published as editorial content then I'd have NO PROBLEM with it whatsoever. But it's published as "news" and, as such, violates the most important tenets of journalistic integrity. Yet none of his bosses, nor the newspapers that print his work, seem to care.

A Primer for Americans on the NDP's Jack Layton

The name "Jack Layton" will be appearing in headlines across America over the next few news cycles. He's going to be appearing on behalf of the Democrat Party as an avid proponent of the Canadian Health Care system.

Do listen to what he says but also be aware of the following:

  • He belongs to a party that is in 4th place in terms of seats.
  • 4 out of 5 Canadians consistently reject the socialist class warfare message of Layton.
  • You'll learn in this interview (beginning @ 7:00) that not all is rosy here in Canada.
  • His nickname is "The Video Professor" due to his striking resemblance with John W. Scherer.
So, before you take him too seriously, please realize that most Canadians don't either.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Saturday Flowers






video

Female Monks at Granville Island

I'd never before seen female monks. They were sitting at Granville Island, in the heart of Vancouver, taking in a show from a Comedy Juggler.





Update: As per the comment from North Burnaby's David, I may have been incorrectly using the term "female monk". I'm not sure though. According to this article on Wikipedia, such women are known as Bhikkhuni aka Buddhist Female Monks aka Buddhist Nuns. I await clarification from others.

Obama's Strongest Adjectives

Mark Steyn shares his thoughts on Barack Obama's fecklessness when it comes to threats from Barack Obama. Here's a sampling:

The president's general line on the geopolitical big picture is: I don't need this in my life right now. He's a domestic transformationalist, working overtime – via the banks, the automobile industry, health care, etc. – to advance statism's death grip on American dynamism. His principal interest in the rest of the world is that he doesn't want anyone nuking America before he's finished turning it into a socialist basket case. As the comedian Andy Borowitz put it, "President Obama said that the United States was prepared to respond to the threat with 'the strongest possible adjectives'."

Michaëlle Jean vs. Sonia Sotomayor

Rex Murphy provides a fascinating analysis.

Equality & Empathy: The Primary Values of the Left

I've been engaged in an interesting discussion on SDA with two regulars there. I thought it worthwhile to transcribe the conversation here.

"Barack Obama famously says that a key quality he wants in a Supreme Court justice is 'empathy.' As many commentators have observed, 'empathy' is really a cover for lawlessness. But it's actually worse than that, because empathy, as that term is used by Obama, is inherently selective.

"Does Obama mean that his nominee will have empathy for the unborn? Well, no. He doesn't have in mind that kind of empathy. How about empathy for taxpayers and small business owners? No, that isn't exactly the right sort of empathy either.

"Obama's favorite example of the right kind of empathy is Lily Ledbetter. As Paul has pointed out, Lily Ledbetter was a liar with a lousy case that was properly barred by the statute of limitations. What 'empathy' is at work here? Empathy with unions and, perhaps even more important, the people who profit more than anyone else when lousy cases are kept alive in the courts--plaintiffs' lawyers, among the largest contributors to the Democratic Party. What Barack Obama means by an "empathetic" judge is one who has his or her thumb on the scale on behalf of politically favored groups. This is the opposite of the traditional view that a judge should be neutral, i.e., have equal empathy for all litigants."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/05/023673.php

Posted by: EBD at May 29, 2009 10:20 PM


EBD - what Obama means by 'empathy' is a belief that the most desirable judiciary opinions are not the result of objective reason applied to factual evidence, but are the result of memories of personal life experiences.

This perspective totally rejects the function of Reason, it rejects the value of factual evidence, and instead insists that evaluative judgments are derived from and only from, subjective personal experience. In a very real sense, this inserts a requirement for decision-making based on a supposition that a particular group has a specific identity.

This also denies Obama's oft-repeated insistence on non-partisanship. What can be more partisan than decision-making based on membership in a group identity? And what can be more biased than evaluating an individual based on their presumed membership in a group rather than their individual behaviour?

His nominee is also a deliberate political strategy, geared as usual to bring a particular Set of the population under his sway. He requires that a Supreme Court judge have a particular Set of Memories. In this case, he's after the female, single, Hispanic, and low income Set of Americans.

Is he after justice? Absolutely not. His focus is on controlling a particular Set of the American population by defining them as 'his' by virtue of him giving them 'their very own judge'.

Posted by: ET at May 29, 2009 10:57 PM

I'll go further and say that "empathy" is just a code word for Leftist political philosophy.

The U.S. talk radio show host, Dennis Prager, often talks about the difference between the Left and the Right. On the Left, the primary value they ascribe to is "Equality". But the key to understanding the mindset is to realize that they don't mean "Equality of Opportunity" but "Equality of Results".

Even after 70+ years of seeing the disaster of such political objectives, the Left keeps on trying again and again and ... you get the idea. :-(

Posted by: Robert W. at May 29, 2009 11:12 PM


I don't think that equality of results is the sole criterion of 'the just society' any more.

That does indeed suggest that the man who works hard, whether in investment in obtaining contracts, as a surgeon, as an engineer, as a farmer, ought to receive the same results for his work and expertise as the man doling out hamburgers at the local fast food diner or the clerk in the grocery store. This is indeed a hard core ideology of the socialist left, where what you do, what you know, what you 'put into' something is totally irrelevant to the outcome.

The left assumes that your skills and work are all due, not to your ahh...skills and work..but to being 'privileged'. Skills and work are assumed to be commercial artifacts; you pick them up in a store. Some people are wealthy enough to purchase both; others are not.

That's like saying that all the input, which includes material, work and expertise that one puts into, eg, making cheese, is irrelevant. All cheeses, whether manufactured out of water, sand, poor milk or top quality products, whether made with expertise or ignorance...ought to come out exactly the same.

The results of using an ignorant surgeon ought to be identical to a skilled surgeon.

And so on. Yes, this is a basic criterion of the left. But they've added a new switch to the twitch. They've added a hierarchical order.

So, the equality of output is no longer the same, for some of us ought to receive less. This 'less received as output' is calculated according to input. The MORE input you put into your work, the LESS output you ought to receive. So, if you work with skill, knowledge and years and years of training as a financier, as a car dealer, as a surgeon, you ought to receive LESS than if you chucked hamburgers at the local diner. Why? Because a new criterion enters the picture.

The output (lots of money, which is a symbol of your input) means, according to Obama, only one thing: Greed. Your output, the result of your work is evaluated on a scale. The more you get, the less you merit it.

Great results are no longer related to hard work and education. Again, skills and hard work are no longer psychological attributes but are commercial artifacts that you either have the money to purchase or not.

Furthermore, the psychological aberration of greed is defined as a key genetic characteristic. It replaces skills and hard work as a cause of wealth. White people are, according to Obama and his wife in particular, the key mutant holders of this gene of greed. Again, skills and hard work have disappeared as input criteria of wealth.

Strange, but Obama himself earned millions last year from his narcissistic books about himself. Greed? But he's not white so he doesn't have the gene? Michelle apparently bullied her way to a very large salary prior to their Elevation; but again, she's not white so doesn't have that gene.

Interesting how the left changes reality.

Posted by: ET at May 30, 2009 10:29 AM


ET, thank you for your excellent analysis. I hope that everyone on here reads it ... carefully!

Regarding Obama's perceptions of Greed, only time will tell whether he truly believes it or whether it is just effective political class warfare rhetoric.

Here in Canada, hasn't Jack Layton been espousing something similar for years? Yet it has not bought him any more votes than his core constituency. Perhaps the difference is that Canadians have viewed socialism first hand for 40 years and clearly see the flaws in the theory, whilst it's brand new for Americans and they still are mesmerized by the sparkle and promises of the Obama snake oil.

Posted by: Robert W. at May 30, 2009 2:00 PM

Michael Ignatieff Thinks You Are Stupid!

Michael Campbell was on fire this morning, explaining the duplicitous nature of Michael Ignatieff. You can listen to it here at 32:00. Well worth listening to because he describes a fundamental problem with all governments in most countries the world over.

Friday, May 29, 2009

A pox on the houses of ALL of the federal political parties. As I said from the very beginning, no bailouts should have ever occurred. But the Conservatives listened to the Liberals, the NDP, and the Bloc Quebecois. Now look at where we are! :-(

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Moon Bloodgood on Craig Ferguson

I think Moon Bloodgood is one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen!

Latest Video from the Latina Freedom Fighter


More of her videos can be found here.

Sonia Sotomayer: Postergirl for the Leftist Elites

Directly before our eyes is a perfect example of how democracy is being eroded by the elites of our society. Drip-drip-drip, it is happening slowly but it is happening nonetheless.

Sonia Sotomayor is Barack Obama's first nomination for a Supreme Court Judge. If she gets the job, and there's every indication she will, she will have the job for life. In many ways that makes sense, as such judges should not be affected by political influence.

What does not make sense though and is, in fact, the antithesis of the spirit of the democracy itself, is Sotomayer's view of what a judge's job is. As this article clearly illustrates, she absolutely believes that it's a judge's right and even duty to make policy, even if that policy conflicts with the will of the politicians who were elected by the people; unlike her.

The Radical Left love judges like her because they know that only through them can they get their unpopular policies foisted on the majority of the citizenry, who disagree with them.

I know all of the Left Wing claptrap to explain why giving judges the power to make policy is the best course of action for society. It's absolute bunk. The same disastrous thing has occurred here in Canada. The result is that politicians are often afraid to effect any new policy for fear that such policy will be overturned and their political careers damaged in the process. So effectively, it's unelected judges who ultimately rule over us.

Lest we forget, judges are not God. Their decisions are often not based on wisdom but simply on their own political views. Politicians in a democracy can be removed by the people at the ballot box. Supreme Court judges cannot. That is why it is absolutely critical for them to never be able to make public policy.

The video below is of a judge long ago named Roland Freisler. I am not making any comparison between him and Ms. Sotomayer. But is critically important to be aware of how out of control a judge can get. We all have to accept the inherent paradox of our system: in order for a Supreme Court Judge to not be affected by political influence their decisions have to be paramount and their job tenure has to be guaranteed. Fine. But allowing the scope of their job to go beyond ruling on existing laws is very, very dangerous.




Update #1: For anyone who still believes that judges have a greater wisdom than us "mere mortals", I strongly encourage you to read about the Dred Scott decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. And if you think that is the only time that judges have made bad decisions, you are in severe denial!

On SDA I received a fascinating comment about what I've written:

Robert W - yes, an unelected, which is to say, unaccountable authority, is the antithesis of a democratic state.

The democratic state operates by and only by, the will of the people. This Will is not utopian, which is to say, it does not function within a belief that society can attain a state of perfection, whose attributes are accessible and knowable only to an elite or distinctive Set of people.

This Will is, instead, a perception that societies are piecemeal processes, whose rules must be answerable to the diverse and flexible needs of the people. The laws must therefore be answerable to and made by the people. That is why the Legislature must make the laws. Because the Legislature represents the people; they are elected.

The Courts have a different role; they must ensure that the legislated laws developed by the people fit with the long term structure of the society, as outlined in the Constitution.

For an unelected judge to move into judiciary activism is a violation of democracy because it denies this basic Will of the People. Instead, such a perspective operates within a sense of 'hubris', arrogance, elitism, a sense that the Judge has some special innate attribute of wisdom, lacking in The People that gives the judge alone direct access to Wisdom.

Note that this perspective assumes that there is One Truth, an Essential Truth, and this moves the society into a utopian notion of ultimate purity - as found in communism and fascism or any fundamentalist sect.

Ms Sotemayer is clearly an elitist; she assumes that her genetic identity as a woman, as Hispanic, affects her capacity to reason, and gives her unique and special access to Ultimate Truth. Such a view of cognition is invalid, and such a view of society is the antithesis of democracy.

Posted by: ET at May 28, 2009 10:33 PM



Update #2: Rex Murphy shares his thoughts.



Update #3: Mark Steyn shares his thoughts:

Re: Empathy vs Activism
[Mark Steyn]

Jonah, that's a very good point. "Empathy" seems to me to be defining activism down. I can't say I care for it, but at least "activism" requires a certain art — the ability to detect in 18th-century parchments that a bunch of guys in powdered wigs had cannily provided for partial-birth abortion or gay marriage or whatever. By contrast, "empathy" absolves you of the need to bother with any pretzel-like argument and lets you simply announce your bias, as Judge Sotomayor did in the Ricci case, like the schoolkid who knows the right answer but can't work out how to get to it.

Justice Sotomayor will not be good news for the United States constitution.

05/27 10:24 AM

The Limits of Sotomayorian Empathy [Mark Steyn]

I was interested to see that Sonia Sotomayor was the judge in the New York Times v. Tasini case, a case close to my heart. The authors of various freelance contributions to the Times sued over the paper's subsequent licensing of their writing to electronic databases that then re-sold the pieces to customers for $3.95 per. It was a fairly obvious breach of the 1976 Copyright Act, as well as of the more basic principle that rights not specifically assigned remain with the owner.

Judge Sotomayor cheerfully sided with the Times, a ruling that (as appears to be not uncommon with this jurist) was subsequently overturned at the Supreme Court — 7-2 (with David Souter being among the seven). Despite being a "wise Latina" enjoying all the benefits of "the richness of her experiences," she was sadly unable to empathize with the impoverished writers in their garrets eking out a thin crust from their freelance contributions to the appallingly low-paying Sulzberger GloboCorp Inc.

As I learned during my battles with Canada's "human rights" commissions, almost all "diversity" issues have a "property rights" component. I don't think Justice Sotomayor will be any great friend of the latter. And, alas, there will now be no David Souter to overturn her decisions.

05/27 09:20 AM

Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves

I often discuss with a good buddy of mine in Seattle the distinct possibility that all liberal democracies like ours have a built-in self-destruction mechanism.

The best way I can explain this is with the micro-example of a family. A parable, which was told to me by an economist, is known as "The Story of Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves" :

1. The first generation couple comes to America penniless, often not speaking English. But they work hard in blue collar jobs or perhaps starting their own small business, making sure their kids get a great education. By the time they pass away they likely have saved up a few hundred thousand dollars in equity, often in the form of a house, the mortgage of which was completely paid off.

2. The kids of this couple are instilled a good work ethic by their parents. They work hard in school and then work hard in their white collar professions. But they also want their own children to have a better & easier life than they did. So they start giving their kids things and more things and more things. What they don't realize is that in doing so, they're destroying the work ethic of their children.

3. By the time the kids - now the 3rd generation - graduate from high school, they have been handed everything and don't have a care in the world other than where to find the next party. Their work ethic throughout college, which they might not even make it to, is questionable. Ditto for when they enter the workforce. Implicitly they know that they will inherit everything from their parents, who have become very successful in their work lives, so their motivation to achieve anything on their own is muted.

4. The 3rd generation stumbles through life, not at all clear about what's important. Even the term "strong work ethic" sounds square and irrelevant. All they care about is vacation time and getting high, be it from alcohol or drugs or sex. When they have kids, these youngsters have little to no moral guidance and no memory of who their great-grandparents were or how they struggled to provide for the generations below them. So when these kids graduate from high school, if they even do that, they're back to working in blue collar jobs, just like their ancestors who first came to America.

It's clearly a generalization, but I think it's quite profound. In the larger picture of North America I think it speaks volumes about the predicament we're in. Too many in our society, having been given so much, seem to have lost track of the notion that it's the inherent duty of each of us to give more back to our communities and our nations than we should ever expect to get in return.

Once this mindset becomes too widespread then society will have reached a tipping point from which it will be exceedingly impossible to recover.

This is my fear for the future.

Dennis Miller on the O'Reilly Factor

Double Standards for Racism in Canada

This afternoon Roy Green interviewed the allegedly "racist" mother of an 8 year-old girl in Winnipeg. You can listen to it here at 34:00.

Here's the letter I sent to him afterwards:

Roy,

Great interview! It was very honest radio and I appreciate that. While that woman & I would probably never be close friends, I do believe she has a valid point regarding political correctness and double-standards aplenty.

Let me share a quick story with you: Three and a half years ago I founded a non-profit organization in Vancouver that refurbishes used computers and gives them for free to less fortunate families throughout British Columbia. In our first year of existence we had a young man join our team of volunteers. He was a high-school student. He and his family had moved to Canada from China about 10 years prior.

This young fellow was one of our techs, responsible for doing the actual refurbishing. Since he didn't drive, I had all sorts of other volunteers dropping off to his home computers needing work and picking up refurbished machines.

One day he called me up and had a very serious tone. I asked him what the matter was. He hesitated and then said, "I need for you to stop sending [a certain volunteer] over to my home any more. My parents insist upon it." The fellow he was referring to happened to be a dark-skinned man from Sri Lanka. I thought about it for a second and responded, "Is it just this particular fellow or all darker skinned people?" He quietly said, "All of them."

Roy, tell me honestly, do you think that any Child Service Agency in this country would ever dare to take away such a child from his Asian parents?

Robert W.

Barbaric European Food Practices: The Snail

The National Post fights back, against the hypocrisy of the European Union, PETA, and the Humane Society of Canada.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

There's an old adage, "Be careful what you wish for." Too bad for the newspaper and TV journalists that they did not heed this wise advice. The vast majority of them clearly wanted Barack Obama to win. More than a few of them shelved their journalistic ethics in order to push their guy over the top. That's not speculation, that's a fact.

Just a few months later, it appears that many of them are going to lose their jobs, directly because of Obama's policies. Kate McMillan, at SDA, explains why.

Absolutely delicious irony. Too bad so many are going to be hurt by their shortsightedness though.

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Jack Bauer vs. Nancy Pelosi

Quote of the Day 2

"The key factor to being a successful Canadian Liberal is that you must have no short term memory at all!"

Lorne Gunter, talking with Roy Green, May 27, 2009

Quote of the Day

"Liberals . . . creating a Canada without your consent since 1968."

Posted by: kursk at May 27, 2009 11:56 AM


It's in reference to this pretty shocking arrogance from Michael Ignatieff:

Vancouver Last Night

This photo came off of the Burrard Street Bridge Kat Kam, which is linked to on the right. Pretty nice!

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Interesting Analysis of the Sotomayor Nomination

Listen here

E-mail Received from a Friend

In 1972, Joe Miller was on holiday in Kenya after graduating from

Tulsa Junior College .

On a hike through the bush, he came across a young bull elephant

standing with one leg raised in the air. The elephant seemed

distressed, so Joe approached it very carefully. He got down on one

knee, inspected the elephants foot, and found a large piece of wood

deeply embedded in it As carefully and as gently as he could, Joe

worked the wood out with his knife, after which the elephant gingerly

put down its foot.

The elephant turned to Joe, and with a rather curious look on its

face, stared at him for several tense moments. Joe stood frozen,

thinking of nothing else but being trampled. Eventually the elephant

trumpeted loudly, turned, and walked away. Joe never forgot that

elephant or the events of that day.

Thirty years later, Joe was walking through the Tulsa Zoo with His

family.

As they approached the elephant enclosure, one of the creatures turned

and walked over to near where Joe and his Family were standing. The

large bull elephant stared at Joe, lifted its front foot off the

ground, then put it down. The elephant did that several times then

trumpeted loudly, all the while staring at the man.

Remembering the encounter in 1972, Joe could not help wondering if

this was the same elephant. Joe summoned up his courage, climbed

over the railing, and made his way into the enclosure. He walked right

up to the elephant and stared back in wonder. The elephant trumpeted

again, wrapped its trunk around one of Joe's legs and slammed him

against the railing, killing him instantly.

Probably wasn't the same elephant.

This is for everyone who sends me those heart-warming bullshit stories

Pushin' the NY Times Agenda

Mark Steyn is so hilarious. Here's how his latest piece begins:

I was in one of those hotels where they give you The New York Times whether you want it or not. And, even if you leave it in the corridor, the maid brings it into the room and places it invitingly on the table. And, even though you ignore it, you call down for a pot of tea and the room service guy moves it to put the tray down and then drapes the paper slightly over the edge between the cup and the single flower in the mini-vase as though posed for a “Still Life of Afternoon Tea with New York Times” that fetches $1.6 million at Sotheby’s. And at that point, fearing the next stage would be when I slid into bed to be awakened 20 minutes later by the hooker from the lobby curled up on the adjoining pillow and reading Frank Rich into my ear, I gave in and opened up the paper.

As to the article at hand, is not what Steyn describes in Maryland, somewhat familiar to the strange world that has become Toronto?

Fixing the Hubble Telescope

Monday, May 25, 2009

Give Your Children a Big Hug!

Something incredibly touching happened Saturday morning that I've hummed & hawed about whether I should write about publicly. But I've had nothing but a positive reaction from the close friends I've shared it with so I don't see any harm in doing so.

As I wrote about last week, my charity, BC Digital Divide, recently received a large donation of used computer equipment from a corporate donor of ours. This has reinvigorated the organization and our techs are busily refurbishing the equipment to be donated to families in the near future.

On Saturday my mom & I drove to 3 locations to donate computers to the recipients therein. The last one was to the home of an 8 year old autistic boy. His mom met us at the door and welcomed us in. We were then introduced to her son. Physically he looked completely normal and if you didn't know otherwise, you'd think that he was just somewhat shy. The fact is though that he is unable to speak, not because of any problems with his vocal cords but because his brain is unable to perform the function of speech. So all he can muster are occasional one-syllable outbursts.

Seeing others around him talk effortlessly, he gets incredibly frustrated and upset.

We gave them an old laptop my mom had been using since 2002. Though it's ancient compared to today's technology, it was a worth a million dollars to that young man. For it will open up an entirely new world to him, and who knows where that will take him and his future learning.

The boy's mom insisted on giving my mom a big hug and then gave her a card with this letter:

When I walked down the path to the car, I immediately thought of all the little kids I know and how they all appear to be completely normal functioning children. Their biggest daily challenge is figuring out how they can eat less vegetables and more dessert.

If you are so blessed to have such children of your own, please give them a big hug the next time you see them. And realize how incredibly fortunate you are too!

Lorne Gunter: The Liberal way with hypocrisy

I LOVE this article by Lorne Gunter! Much of it focuses on the hypocrisy of Liberal party members wrt Ignatieff, but it's the first 2 paragraphs that really hit a chord with me:

What hypocrites the Liberals are. For more than four decades, the Liberal Party of Canada has deliberately confused its policies with our national interest, then labelled as "un-Canadian" anyone who disagreed with them.

Not a fan of government monopoly health care? You're un-Canadian. Not big on easy unemployment benefits, official bilingualism, dismantling our military, beggaring our economy in the name of environmentalism, coddling criminals, huge public debts, activist judges, multiculturalism, foreign investment reviews, national energy policies and so on? Shame on you for being so un-Canadian.

Throughout my adult life, I've been to social gatherings in Vancouver and Victoria and Toronto and Montreal and Sudbury and Ottawa and Kitchener and . . . where I've heard such nonsense spewing out of the mouths of ignorant sheeple who thought it "completely inappropriate" [and un-Canadian] for me to express any ideas that didn't echo those of the Liberal Party of Canada.

Bravo Mr. Gunter, Bravo!



Update: You can hear Lorne Gunter discuss his article here @ 7:00.

Dennis Miller's Views on the Clueless vs. the Helpless

The Hypocrisy of the Obama Administration

Here's a great podcast about Barack Obama saying one thing but doing something very different.

My Favourite Dog in Seattle

His name is Rufus and he's an absolute delight!

Proof Positive of the Idiocy of Multiculturalism

Out of Toronto comes a story about a Muslim man filing a formal complaint because another man said "Good morning" to the Muslim man's wife in their shared apartment building hallway.

A dirty little secret amongst Canadians is that Toronto has been lost to the dumbest, most politically correct policies ever conceived in this country.

Incidentally, for those not aware, there is a HUGE difference between the terms "multicultural" and "multiple cultures". The latter is more commonly associated with the "melting pot" concept where people from all over the world harmoniously blend together under one new nation, under one flag, providing a delightful blend of cuisine, art, music, relationships, etc.

But make no mistake, that is NOT what "multicultural" means. It refers to the belief that all cultures & customs are precisely equal and any questioning of any other culture makes you a bigoted racist.

Toronto has been pushing multiculturalism to the extreme for decades and that is why we end up with situations like in this story.

The Forthcoming [Fraudulent] Global Warming Tax

The Telegraph has published a very informative article regarding the actual costs of upcoming Cap & Trade programs (read "taxes") in both the UK and the USA. Current estimates are as follows:

  • UK: £760 per household every year for four decades
  • USA: $4,500 per household every year (duration not provided)
Talk about kicking a person when they're down! This is the full intent of Gordon Brown and Barack Obama toward their citizens.

And remember, this is all to "fight" a "problem" that a growing number of skeptics say does not exist. Gordon Brown, who has come close to bankrupting Britain during his reign as the Exchequer and now as the Prime Minister, clearly DOES NOT CARE. Watch for Barack Obama to leave a very similar legacy. :-(



Update: Later in the day I discovered that Lord Christopher Monckton discussed this very subject with Roy Green. You can listen to it here, beginning at 6:00.

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Mark Steyn [Rightfully] Mocks the New Stimulus Programs

The Left's greatest fantasies are quickly becoming reality in America. Mark Steyn slices & dices the absolute bureaucratic stupidity that is Obama's America. Here's a snippet:

Ever since last November, many Americans have been ready for free health care, free day care, free college, free mortgages – and, once you get a taste for that, it's hardly surprising you're not ready for gainful employment.

Clare Werbeloff: Internet Sensation

The Internet has changed our world in ways that few can fully comprehend yet. Take for example the recent case involving Australian beauty, Clare Werbeloff. Here's the raw footage of her "eye-witness" account of a shooting:

Her use of the term "wog" sparked off an uproar from uptight white "progressives", who deemed her to be the reincarnation of Satan himself.

Now it turns out that the whole thing was a prank on Ms. Werbeloff's part. So the last laugh clearly is on the media and those "progressives". I hope to see Clare Werbeloff appearing on a silver screen as early as next year!

The New Obamanation Auto

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Hanging New Lights

There'll be night lawn bowling in Vancouver this summer!



Pink & Blue



Vancouver Today



Windows 7 Attempt on Old Hardware

I have an ancient laptop (circa 2001) onto which I wanted to see if Windows 7 would run. It installed fine but unfortunately there were no drivers for either the video card or the network card I have. So I couldn't get it working beyond this. Back to XP.

But for any newer hardware I get, I'll be using Win7 pretty darn quick!

Thompson, Manitoba Today

Yes, it's May 21st! More of the same expected tomorrow!



If you have the e-mail addresses of Al Gore or David Suzuki or Lizzie May, please feel free to forward these photos to them!

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

"I, Ruby" Gate Takes Another Twisted Turn

Full story

Very Cool Commercial

Here's the commercial itself:


And here's how they made it:

BC Digital Divide Has New Computers to Donate

My volunteer non-profit organization, BC Digital Divide, came to a screeching halt a few months ago when we ran out of computers to donate and there was no sign of any new donations coming our way.

But yesterday we received a large donation of computers from a very generous software company. These computers aren't new, they're typically 3 - 5 years old, but they're all decent speed and are more than sufficient as starter systems.

So if you know anyone without a computer who would be hard pressed to purchase one on their own, then please do get them to apply for one from us.

Carole James: Ego Rules the Roost

Dennis Miller on the O'Reilly Factor

The Delusions of the Left

I just heard a guy on the radio say that all conservative political parties are doomed because "smarter, more well educated people" only vote for left-of-center parties.

Really? This might be the nightly wet dream of Leftists the world over but I don't think it holds even a tiny degree of truth.

I wonder how this fellow would explain the massive landslide against his favoured Leftist thinking yesterday in California?!? Oh wait, facts don't actually matter for people like him so such results are irrelevant.

Common Sense Prevails in California!

California voters have resoundingly sent a message to the legislators in Sacramento. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says he's listening. Only time will tell if any of them truly are!



Here are the results from yesterday's 6 proposition votes:


To see how completely out of touch most newspapers are, look at this chart provided by Veronique de Rugy:

Dennis Miller on Global Warming Hysteria

Monday, May 18, 2009

Obama 2nd Big Test

Barack Obama has already had one big test: the financial crisis. Some say that he passed that one. I beg to differ - dramatically. Increasing the U.S. deficit as much as he did is going to put America into a crisis, though it might be delayed for a few years.

Now he's facing his second big test: The Israel-Palestine situation. According to all the Leftist pundits, Obama's charm and "great genius" are able to resolve any problem. Assuming this to be true, this conflict should be easy for him to resolve. After all, the only thing that Israel is asking for is the declaration by the Palestinians that a Jewish Israel has the right to exist.

I'm glad this is all coming to a head because it'll now clearly show Obama for who he truly is.

The Government: Wayyyyyyyyyy Out of Control

When you read this story from Montreal, please be aware that it is not satire. Big Brother has arrived and he speaks French. Badly.

Mark Steyn has a few thoughts too.

I hope that this case gets similar media exposure as the Robert Dziekanski one did. Sure, no one died here but it is yet another example of the police (and the State) deeply out of control. If Ms. Kosoian decides to sue then I will support her legal defence fund.

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Mark Steyn Podcast: 75 Minutes of Brilliance!

In a surprise appearance, Mark Steyn guest hosts an Internet podcast. Highly recommended listening!



Update: Welcome SteynOnline readers! As an ancillary suggestion to listening to his podcast, be sure to fill yourselves in on the travesty of rights that has gone on in Montreal.

What If . . . We Had Just Passed President Palin's 100 Days?

Victor Davis Hanson takes Barack Obama's actions during the first 100 days of his presidency and juxtaposes them into the scenario of a President Palin presidency. Do you think the media coverage would have been:

  1. Precisely the same
  2. Somewhat the same
  3. Somewhat different
  4. Completely different
Answer that question truthfully and you'll understand how incredibly corrupt the mainstream media is in the Year 2009.



In a parallel thread, have you been following the Telegraph's superb coverage of the rampant corruption amongst MPs in the UK? Imagine that identical corruption had been occurring in the Democrat Party in America. Ask yourself the same question as above about the media coverage of it. Does anyone doubt that we'd have another #4 ???

Reall Life Twitter

Peter Schiff's Video Blog

There was one especially profound thing he said:
"In America we have to figure out how to turn all of our malls and shopping centers into factories."

If the Left Could Turn Hate Into a Fuel, There'd Be No More Energy Crisis!

In this audio clip, David Axelrod suggests that Obama's dog be named "Miss California". Interesting how fat, ugly Leftists like him feel this incessant need to keep on trashing Carrie Prejean. H-A-T-E, the fuel that keeps the Left going and going and going. Now that's Hope & Change you can count on!

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Nancy Pelosi: Poster Girl for the Hypocrisy of the Left

Mark Steyn brilliantly cuts Nancy Pelosi to shreds in his latest editorial. Here's a snippet:

It's worth noting that, by most if not all of her multiple accounts, Nancy Pelosi is as guilty of torture as anybody else. That's not an airy rhetorical flourish but a statement of law. As National Review's Andy McCarthy points out, under Section 2340A(c) of the relevant statute, a person who conspires to torture is subject to the same penalties as the actual torturer. Once Speaker Pelosi was informed that waterboarding was part of the plan and that it was actually being used, she was in on the conspiracy, and as up to her neck in it as whoever it was who was actually sticking it to poor old Abu Zubaydah and the other blameless lads.

That is, if you believe waterboarding is "torture."

I don't believe it's torture. Nor does Dick Cheney. But Nancy Pelosi does. Or so she has said, latterly.




Hugh Hewitt and Steyn discuss the same here.

Mark Steyn: Live Free or Die

If you'd like to get a glimpse of why Mark Steyn is one of my favourite writers and, in my opinion, one of the most important voices when it comes to current affairs and our future, then please read this (or this PDF). Read it carefully but do read it!

Here's a snippet:

In most of the developed world, the state has gradually annexed all the responsibilities of adulthood—health care, child care, care of the elderly—to the point where it's effectively severed its citizens from humanity's primal instincts, not least the survival instinct. Europe's addiction to big government, unaffordable entitlements, cradle-to-grave welfare, and a dependence on mass immigration needed to sustain it has become an existential threat to some of the oldest nation-states in the world. And now the last holdout, the United States, is embarking on the same grim path.

Friday, May 15, 2009

The National Debt Road Trip

Canada vs. America: Health Care, Taxes

One of my favourite writers is Amy Alkon, based out of Los Angeles. In the comments of this recent piece, her and some others delved into the cost of health care in America. Here's the comment I left:

This idea that health care insurance costs are out of control in the U.S. is pure fantasy IMO.

Amy is 45 and pays $300 per month.

I'm a year younger and pay $52 per month here in Canuckistan. I don't have a personal doctor because when my last one moved away it has become exceedingly impossible to find one who will take patients (and I live in a very urban area!). So if I get sick my alternatives are to go to a clinic or go to the Emergency at the local hospital. From anecdotal evidence from friends, I know that the wait each time will be in the order of 2 - 6 hours. Is that the "great" health care system you Americans are looking for?

Getting back to cost, here's a calculator to determine what Canadians pay in income tax. Plus, in BC we pay 12% sales tax (5% federal + 7% provincial) on most everything we buy.

How does our income & consumption tax compare with where you live?

Barack Obama Celebrity Roast

This fictionalized account of a future celebrity roast for El Messiah is written by one of the funniest satirists on the Internet. Here's a snippet [supposedly] coming from Queen Elizabeth:

Thanks for that swell intro, Shecky. By the way, I know how much you love our infidel nuclear technology, but we've got another 1940's invention you should really check out. It's called deodorant.

(rimshot)

Listen folks, I know you came here expecting me to start hurling some tasteless insults at Barack Obama. But, seriously, I just can't bring myself to do it. Barack is almost like another son to me.

(audience: awwwww)

Yeah, another jug eared idiot with a hard-on for horsefaced women. Barack was in London a couple weeks ago and rang me up, asked if he could drop by for tea. So he comes in, and I'm thinking, whoa -- those Yanks have really stepped up their space program, he's brought along a real live Klingon. Turns out it was his wife.

(rimshot)

Yep. Then, oh Jesus, in she starts with all the hugging. And I'm like, fer chrissake, somebody hand Lieutenant Worf a planet Earth protocol guide. Then Barack pops off and says, "hey Your Majesty, I brought a gift." Okay, I'm thinking, car company? Banking system? National Park? Then I open the box. It's an iPod. A fucking iPod. Preloaded with Barack's easy listening speech hits.

(stares at Obama amid nervous laughter)

Yeah, way to cement that special relationship, dumbfuck. Jesus Christ, was Wal Mart sold out of Sham Wows? Oh yeah, that iPod is going in the vault with the crown jewels. Right next to that sack of DVDs you bought for Gordy Brown.

The Arrogance of Environmentalists Redux

Here's an interesting article from NYC about the cost of owning a car.

Here's the comment I left:

I live in Vancouver, BC and haven't owned a car - by choice - for nearly 7 years. But my situation is quite extra-ordinary. I work for myself at my home office and so my commute is about 15 seconds. Pretty good transit is just a few blocks away. I don't have a family and am not dating at the moment.

If ANY of those factors were to change then my need for a car would as well. Immediately!

That's why I commend the author for taking the time to bring a little common sense to the Age of Lack of Intellect.

Here on Canada's Left Coast (in more ways than one) we have some of the most arrogant (& vacuous) Kumbaya Latte Drinking Limousine Liberal environmentalists anywhere in the world. They have tried to stop the building of bridges & improvement of roads and have encouraged dramatic tax increases to gasoline to prevent working class people from driving. In a nutshell they are open to virtually anything that will force people to adhere to their world view ... without a microsecond of thought to the consequences.

I have some good friends who live in a suburb called Langley, that's about an hour's drive southeast of Vancouver. They have a daughter who's very busy in many activities. Both parents work, in different directions, one half an hour away from home and the other an hour or more away.

When the Kumbaya crowd started suggesting that people like them should get rid of their cars and start taking transit (which would mean upwards of 2 - 3 hours each way) I definitively knew I was fighting the good fight against them!

Heads up: Our Far Left City Council, in their infinite [lack of] wisdom, has decided to waste $1 Million on this experiment.

In late June, go to YouTube and search for these words: Burrard Bridge bicycle. There you will find a time-lapse video shot by yours truly which will accurately show 3 packed lanes of traffic going one way, two fairly full lanes of traffic coming the other way, and one almost empty line of bicycles. Tied in with this video will be a "special" message for all potential Olympic visitors next February!

The Problem for the BC NDP: Way Too Much Hate

This morning there was a fascinating analysis of the recent BC election. You can hear it by clicking here and tuning to 37:00. Here's the first part of the discussion:

Bill Good: "Vaughn, we had an election on Tuesday. Not much has changed. The Liberals still govern. The NDP is probably trying to figure out what it has to do to remake itself. Your thoughts following the election?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Yeah, it was a status quo outcome with almost exactly the same gap in the popular vote as in 2005: 4 points. Almost exactly the same gap in the number of seats in the House: 13. Very few seats actually changed hands. The two parties sort of emerged from the election where they were going into it. And yeah the challenge for the New Democrats is - 42% is a pretty good showing in the popular vote - in tough economic times when people weren't inclined to change government, but what do you do? How do you get that last bit of the gap closed to form government or do you say, 'Well, we're going to be in opposition forever' ?"

Bill Good: "Keith, Philip asked this morning, 'Is the problem the horse or the jockey?' and I think that's a very good question. I think the horse is tired."

Keith Baldrey: "It is tired. The NDP, I think, has some fundamental problems and challenges. It's not fair at all to blame Carole James for this situation. A senior NDP strategist once told me some time ago, 'It's easy for us to get to 40 points in the public opinion arena. For us to grow after that is hard slogging.' Every vote after they hit that peak of 40% is tough for the NDP to pick up because then they're going after mainstream, middle of the road voters who can be turned off pretty quick by anything that smacks of idealogy, that smacks of something they're not comfortable with. And that's where I think the NDP hit a bump in this particular election campaign. Their relentless negative portrayal of Gordon Campbell, their advertising, I think was a turnoff to the key rump of voters that they needed to attract. I mean, that plays well to people who are going to vote NDP anyway, who hate Gordon Campbell, who hate the Liberals and would never vote for them at all. But when you're trying to attract people who are either undecided, maybe leaning one way or another, that is not the way to attract those voters. So Carole James certainly has responsibility for this outcome but there are a lot of people in the NDP camp who I think have to be held accountable here and I think are going to brought on the carpet presumably by other people in the party for making some pretty bad calls early on."

Bill Good: "Vaughn, the NDP focused on the carbon tax, run-of-river projects, privatization. Did they miss the mark about what the public was really concerned about?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Well, I think the comment many have made is that they were all over the map. They came with a scattershot series. They went after Kinsella for a few days, they went after the carbon tax and then dropped that. They went after run-of-river power. Someone worked out that they had 4 different slogans for the campaign. So there was a lack of focus. But I think Carole James pulled it out for them. With that performance in the debate and a strong finish, they really are in a dilemma. Their problem is, if they go to a 3rd election with the same leader - the last time they did that they lost 3 in a row: Dave Barrett. On the other hand, she did pull it out for them. She deserves a decent interval to think about her own future. But the other thing I think they've got to do - this other thing that Keith just referred to, this relentless negativeness - look, it pains New Democrats to admit it but the most successful politician in modern times in British Columbia is named Gordon Campbell."

Bill Good: "Yes, he's lost one election in 25 years and he lost that by a whisker."

Vaughn Palmer: "Yes, he's won 9 elections! They loathe him. They pander to the people who hate him. They think it's hilarious to run an ad showing him as a drunk. I've been hearing people from the election, 'The media let him off the hook for his drinking & driving'." Face it folks, this guy is your adversary, he's more successful in politics than you are so how do you beat him?"

Keith Baldrey: "Yeah, the NDP, by focusing on Campbell actually helped solidify the Liberals main strength, which is Gordon Campbell."

Bill Good: "Well you know, I thought the most interesting thing, or certainly one of them in the election, and I certainly didn't expect it, he was front and centre in every ad, he was on the posters, they didn't try to hide him. The NDP hid Carole James. She did a really good job, I agree with you, on the radio debate, on the television debate - whenever she was seen - but she was not seen in their advertising, she was not seen in their posters. Gordon Campbell they turned what many would have thought to be a negative into a positive and he was the centrepiece of the campaign. And they won!"

Keith Baldrey: "That wasn't Carole James' idea. This was the brains of the NDP campaign."

Bill Good: "So called."

Keith Baldrey: "[The NDP 'Brains'] who thought they'd come up with a winning strategy. So it's not Carole James. The NDP's campaign missed the mark on so many points and one of the strengths of the NDP is Carole James' positiveness, her warm demeanor, her personality, and they completely sheltered that and kept it from the public and focused entirely on Gordon Campbell. And again, one of the Ipsos-Reid polls before the election found that when it came to Liberal supporters and people who might be considering voting Liberal, Gordon Campbell was a strength for them. So by emphasizing Gordon Campbell I think just simply played into the Liberals hands of focusing on their best asset. NDP'ers are never going to vote for Gordon Campbell but that soft middle ground, they will vote for Gordon Campbell and they did this time."

Bill Good: "So Vaughn, how does the NDP grow? Or is it another party that comes along and says 'we're going to be centre left, we're going to be friendly to small business, we are going to somehow try to attract people who might not be onside with the Liberals but we're tired of the negativity of the NDP' ?"

Vaughn Palmer: "Well, I think they should - a question that arose, that Norman Spector actually raised when I talked to him on the TV show last night was, 'Do New Democrats ever talk up their own leader? Do they really go out there and say, here's what our leader's done for us and here's what's really worked?' They don't take pride in the fact, I don't think, not enough of it, that she's moderated their economic message. On the contrary, they gave her a platform that made it sound more left-wing than she is. She went around for 4 years, giving speeches to the business community, talking about growth, investment, how the NDP made mistakes in the 1990's and the New Democrats never talked that up. You get a New Democrat going and they'll tell you 'oh no, the 90's were great, there were no economic problems, it's all the media'. I think part of the problem is that they have to resolve among themselves to unite behind their leader and let her move them a little closer to the middle. They don't have to move very far, you know. The gap isn't huge between these two parties. It's like 4 points. Keith's right, it takes a bit of effort to get to the middle. The problem in the NDP you've got is that there's a bunch of people in the NDP that think the solution is to move left."

Keith Baldrey: "Yes, that's the problem. There's the class warfare element of the NDP who think that's how to win power in this province because they did it once in '96, where the vote was split big time, where the Reform Party was able to get 9 points. That's a lot of voters and that's what gave Glen Clark the election. It wasn't his assault on banks. But there are class warfare advocates in the NDP who think, 'If we just move hard left then we'll win' but that's just not enough voters."

Vaughn Palmer: "These people are crackpots. Here's their strategy summarized: 'We're going to move to the left and we're going to win - we're going to get our people really happy - we're going to win an election with 39 or 40% of the vote. How we're going to do that? Well, you know what we're going to do, we're going to talk up the Conservative Party because the Conservative Party will split the Liberals and then we get to split the vote in British Columbia and we'll win with 39%. This is a crackpot idea! It depends on the Conservative Party. Look what the Conservative Party did in the election: they took 20% of the vote in one riding, they took 17, 16 - they took a big chunk of the vote - they split the opposition vote. The Liberals won ever riding where the Conservatives did well. James should put the people that make those arguments on Call Block at party headquarters!"