Canada is a Leader!

And Dion isn't, apparently. Ok, that's a cheap shot but I can't help myself when I read stuff like this. Another news story today echoes the sentiment found in April's Angus Reid poll, that 64% of Canadians feel "Canada is shouldering too much of the burden of NATO's mission in Afghanistan". Thank god Stephane Dion doesn't feel the same way:

“(Canadians have) said that Canada will not move unless everybody moves. This is the recipe for failure”


Sorry, sorry, I have misquoted Mr. Dion. Dion really doesn't believe Canada is a leader, he thinks we've done enough and should pull our troops out of Afghanistan. Stephane only wants Canada to be a leader on the easy stuff, like HE was on the Kyoto file. Is Canada a leader? If so, let's lead in Afghanistan, too.

More Kinsella Hypocrisy

It's hard to believe that Warren Kinsella's blind hypocrisy could get any worse, but it has. After Ezra Levant wrote a piece decrying the use of kangaroo courts, also known as Human Rights Tribunals, Warren waded in with this personal attack on Ezra. Warren is purposely obtuse in attacking Levant for using THE COURTS to attempt to settle disputes when any moron (and I can only assume Warren isn't a moron) can see that Ezra specifically refers to the much higher level of evidence necessary to prevail in court, as well as the personal financial burden on the claimant, in comparison to using HRCs to stifle free speech. He makes it clear that the courts are the place to seek remedy for libel or defamation, even hate speech. What Levant says is that it is utterly inappropriate to use HRCs to censor speech, that HRCs were never intended for that use, and that the much lower threshold of evidence coupled with the activist bent and lack of qualifications of tribunal members makes them a danger to free speech.

Kinsella takes great pride in taking on the neo-Nazi movement and I strongly agree that Nazi ideology is utterly repugnant. Where Kinsella and I (and I might add most of the great thinkers of history) disagree is in how to combat noxious thoughts and speech. Kinsella seems to think that outlawing nasty thoughts is the way to go and lauds Richard Warman for using HRCs to prosecute neo-Nazis. That position is dangerous, much more dangerous than some pathetic skinhead. The very idea that we can somehow deny free speech to one group because we vehemently disagree with them strongly implies that we can do the same to others. At what point will my thoughts be censored? Or yours? Or even Kinsella's? Should I really trust Warren Kinsella, or some unqualified HRC member, or even the courts to draw the line as to what speech is acceptable? Absolutely not! Society must draw that line not through censorship but by engaging ideas we find repugnant, repudiating them, ridiculing them, and marginalizing them with better arguments. On this, I will stand with these great minds:

"Our whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds." -Thurgood Marshall

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." -George Washington

"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." -John Milton

"You have not converted a man because you have silenced him." -John Morley

"To hear one voice clearly, we must have freedom to hear them all." -Kerry Brock

"The first principle of a free society is an untrammeled flow of words in an open forum." -Adlai E. Stevenson

"We are willing enough to praise freedom when she is safely tucked away in the past and cannot be a nuisance. In the present, amidst dangers whose outcome we cannot foresee, we get nervous about her, and admit censorship." -Edward M. Forster

"I am opposed to any form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson

Liberal Hypocrisy Chapter 319

I've said it before and I will again, there's nothing I hate more than hypocrisy. Fortunately for me the Liberal-left of the spectrum is a stinking cesspool of it. The latest bit comes from the dual crapholes of BigCityLib and his gay friend at SaltySleveen. Now, I wouldn't normally mention someone's sexual orientation as I figure it's mostly irrelevant, but in this case it is at the core of this little turd's hypocrisy (pointing out BCL's inconsistent thinking has become a full time job, applications accepted at www.warrenkinsella.com).

BCL started out this little immorality play by posting this. In typical BCL distortion he misconstrues whackos targeting abortion clinics with whackos targeting restaurants, and schools, and markets, and residential neighbourhoods, and . . . well, hopefully you get the idea.
(If you're worried about terrorists in the US or Canada it may be a good idea not to hang out with Henry Morgentaler, and anywhere else in the world you just have to take your chances.)

But I digress. The real point is that Jay, an open homosexual, takes a rather intolerant shot at Christians in BCLs comments:

"I have absolutley no sensitivity or respect for faith heads at all. Those who keep it to themselves like all a personal flaws I have no beef with. Keep your relusions to yourselves they have no place in public domain."

(All spelling and grammar errors are the responsibility of Jay, despite his higher education. I think what he MEANS to say is clear enough, I just can't be bothered to clean up his writing.)

But the really rank hypocrisy comes when you check out Jay's latest post, in Praise of the Charter:

"The charter is the very important to individuals like me. It made me equal to everyone and enshrined that right.

Without it I wouldn't be living the way I do and would have to had to pretend to be someone else and resort secret relationships in back alleys somewhere. I also would not have been able to marry my husband as I wouldn't have any rights anyway."

And there we have it. This slow thinker can't seem to make the connection between his rights and those of others. It's incredibly important that HIS rights be protected so he can live openly but on the same day he DEMANDS that those he doesn't like hide their "flaws" and keep them "out of the public domain". Strange, but that's almost exactly what the Freedominion freaks want gays to do. And at least their religious rights are explicitly deatiled in the Charter.

How delicious that our two hating groups are so much alike. And both are such huge fucking hypocrites!


Ps Some extra content from Jay, in his comments, after I pointed out his little "flaw"

12:09 PM
Jay said...

"Geez Rat,Thats a tough one. Let me see. Who is responsible for going against gay rights? Who is against SSM? Who wanted to reopen the debate? Who don't like the charter? Who wants something called DORA? Ther are many reasons why I can say this. Faith heads have dogged people like me for millenia. Even murdered them. ALL IN THE NAME OF RELIGION.

The only flaw with the charter is the inclusion of irrational beliefs as a right aka freedom of religion. Not so hard now was it Rat? I'm not a hypocrite at all, I am telling it as it is. So fuck off and stop leaving off topic comments. The next one will be removed."

Yup, more incoherent thought, as if homosexuals were the only persecuted minority needing Charter protection, followed by the typical threat of censorship from our open-minded lefty friends. This guy is the total package.

Laws Schmaws

You gotta love the CBC, they don’t let the law get in the way of a good story line. Tonight’s episode of "Little Mosque on the Prairie" takes a light hearted look at the Muslim custom of polygamy. Nice. You see, the mother-in-law of our young Muslim man, so the radio ad goes, is “special” and needs a second wife. His present wife, rather than point out the little fact that it’s FREAKIN’ ILLEGAL, takes issue with his mother and says it’s either her or his mom. Choose. Now that’s cultural understanding.

What isn’t so nice is how the CBC takes such a superficial view of one of the stronger methods of subjugating women in Muslim culture. What’s next? An understanding look at female genital mutilation?

***WARNING - The Last Link is GRAPHIC

Young, Urban, and Ignorant

It's not easy being green. It's a cliche, but it's also true. The toughest part is realizing that as a young, urban greenie in TO, you haven't got a clue as to how you really maintain that urban lifestyle. You can calculate all your carbon emissions 'till the cows come home (a cliche, too, but where are those urban cows???) but just living in an Eastern urban centre hurts mother earth. Afterall, where does that vine-ripened organic tomato come from, in February, in frozen Toronto? How did it get there? Or the organic milk in your fair-trade coffee? How much energy did it take and how much bad, bad carbon was spewed so you could live in your downtown condo and still eat like a central american peasant? Just the fact that you can survive in sub-arctic Toronto is a testament to your disdain for Gaia, for you must heat your abode in winter, cool it in summer, reduce the humidity most of the time, pipe in your water (after chlorintaing it), buy synthetic clothing so as not to freeze on your commute, and generally use massive amounts of unclean energy just to survive.

I am so much better than you just because I live on the West Coast. I barely have to heat my apartment at all, I don't need to buy four different season's worth of clothing, humidity just isn't a problem, and my organic, vine-ripened tomato is grown a couple of kilometers from here. Yup, it's not easy being green, but it's not too hard being me.

Those French . . .

I found this at Bourque. I'm not sure who is paying Bourque to smear the French, maybe the English, or possibly some Spaniards, but me, I'm doing it for free (I don't give Blog for cash)

Those French, they're so whacky.

Get A Room! Oh, sorry, you already had one . . .

At the Canadian Taxpayer's Federation

"In addition, documents show during the 2005 Kyoto conference in Montreal, Mr. Dion opted to lodge at a hotel at a cost of $5,548, even though he maintains a residence in Montreal where he is the Member of Parliament for Saint-Laurent–Cartierville."

Wow. Wow.

Were the Liblogs seriously bitching about THIS? Diane Finley has a degenerative eye diseasease, she need to be chauffeured, and she is driven in a sedan (not a limousine, honest). What's Dion's excuse? Did "Kyoto" crap in the bed?

Big City Lib a Big City Pornographer?

The rather distasteful Big City Liberal once again shows us just how big a tent the Liberal Party of Canada has. Aside from anti-semitic posts that drove Warren Kinsella to out BCL's identity, we can now add child pornogrpaher (warning - under age male, naked)

The Case:

Daniel Radcliffe - Born July 23, 1989

From Wikipedia:

Canada

Under the Criminal Code provisions in Canada, material that shows someone who is or is "depicted as being" under 18, and is engaged or "depicted as engaged" in explicit sexual activity, is classified as "child pornography". Photographs of the genitals or anal region of someone under 18, "for a sexual purpose", are illegal, as are written texts that advocate sex with a child.

The penalty for making or distributing child pornography is up to 10 years in prison. Possession or "accessing" carries a potential sentence of up to 5 years.

And BCL comments:

Warner Brothers is worried about his movie career, but with an ass like that he can always do porn.

And so we can add Child Pornographer to the list of distasteful things BCL does. You can't claim artistic merit when you are commenting on Radcliffe's ass in a sexual manner. Where are those conservative judges when you need them?

Whatever Happened to Y2K??

The more I read of the crisis caused by global warming, the more I feel like I’ve seen this all before. Recently. When I started out in the IT biz it was just in time to partake of the hysteria and profits from the terrible Millenium Bug. I worked diligently to update my company’s computers one hot August weekend, where soon I discovered office buildings turn the air conditioning off on weekends. Nice. Soon after, the company sold me to Ministry of Health to do some of their Y2K remediation. That was a sweet contract. I got paid well, and my company charged my time at almost $100/hr (remember, I was a know nothing noob! ) I got to travel across the province, stay in nice hotels, and all I had to do was look at computers and research if they, or their apps, were certified Y2K-compliant. Many weren’t. Then I set-up the new equipment and waited for midnight, December 31st, 1999. You see, I couldn’t party, drink, or even go out that night, I had to wait by my phone, on call, in case the world really ended. It didn’t.

At least it didn’t take the media long to find the next earth shattering threat to human survival. I wouldn’t want anyone to be bored.

Dion - Does he speak English or . . .
Jason Cherniak has a problem on his hands. Today he proudly posts Stephane Dion's latest speech on Canada's relationship to Israel. Frankly, it's more of the same say nothing crap that has lost the Liberals significant support in the last year. But Dion, in his speech, brought up the firebombing of the United Talmud Torah school in his riding.

Here in Canada, when the United Talmud Torah school is attacked in my riding of St. Laurent-Cartierville in Montreal - its windows broken, its library burned - it is an attack on the values of every Canadian. When even one Canadian child is threatened because of her religion, we all feel the cold breath of intimidation. We can only imagine the insecurity that Israelis feel day after day.

At the time of the incident Dion made a major gaffe, implying it was acceptable to attack Jews if they supported Israel or Ariel Sharon:

Stephane Dion, MP for St. Laurent-Cartierville, also present, later found himself having to backpedal on a comment attributed to him in the Globe and Mail April 6, in which he said it was regrettable that this happened when not all Jews support the policies of Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

In a letter to the Globe and Mail April 7, Dion wrote: "No matter what one's opinion of the Sharon government's actions, violence is never an acceptable response. When I said, 'Why link all Canadian Jews with the policy of a government?' it was in the context of expressing my admiration for the pluralism of opinions among Jews of Canada and elsewhere."

From that story it appears Dion's troops went into immediate Spin Mode and tried to say he was misunderstood. But Michael Coren was given a different spin:

Dion publicly condemned the outrage but said it was wrong "because not all Jews support Sharon's policies."

The logic of the statement, of course, was that the firebombing would have been acceptable if all Jews did in fact support Sharon.

Dion and his people went into a political spin and explained it was all a language issue and he had not meant to say that at all. Firebombing schools was, it seemed, never a good idea. He was, we were told, lost in translation.

That really tweaked me because Cherniak and a whole slew of other Libloggers have been beating the drum for Dion, denying he has any difficulties in English.

Well, if that is true, why claim Dion's gaffe was just an issue of translation? If Dion speaks solid English one can only assume he meant what he said when he implied Jews who support Israel are valid targets. Given the terrible record the Liberals have displayed on the Israeli question, the outright anti-Semetism of a number of Liberal blog commenters, the smearing of Bob Rae at the convention, and the exodus of prominent Jews from the Liberal party, I think I will believe the bloggers who say Dion's English is solid.

Warren, I still respect you . . .

There are few things in life I dislike more than hypocrisy. Abuse of position is one of them. Both, that’s the worst. That’s why I find Warren Kinsella’s latest post so disturbing. I like Kinsella, his support of Israel and anti-racist stance are things I take some comfort from. I even grudgingly admire his attack on Stockwell Day (but I do find a little hypocrisy in mentioning Christian values in his letter when he seems so un-Christian in his tolerance of other's beliefs) . But I also know that he has a strong streak of the hypocritical. His post regarding his daughter and her school is just that. While I can understand wanting to stand up for her, I think Kinsella has gone a little too far. His beef appears to be that a fund-raiser at a private club is inappropriate as that club may have, in the past, discriminated against people on racial grounds. Not that they do so today, no, that they may have in the past.

. . .at that point, a parent who is also a proud First Nations person wrote a letter to alert people to the fact that [the Club], quote unquote, "excluded and specifically banned people of different race and colour in the past."


While I would hardly want to defend that record, I know better than to throw stones. And so should Kinsella, who takes great pride in the Liberal Party of Canada. All one needs to do to show the rank hypocrisy is look at the record of the Liberal party in regards to the Chinese, or the Jews:

Sir Wilfrid Laurier was Prime Minister in the Liberal Government that passed this:
The Chinese Immigration Act, 1904

Mackenzie King was Prime Minister in the Liberal Government that passed this:
The Chinese Immigration Act, 1923
And he was also the Liberal Prime Minister who turned away the SS St. Louis

But if that were all, I’d probably not write this. After all, I can understand how a parent can get a little out of hand when his daughter is involved.

In the past I have been a volunteer administrator in children’s sport and have seen so many people volunteer time for the wrong reasons. The worst involved a person who abused their position on a regional board to benefit their own club. After lodging a formal complaint I found the board would not act and I resigned. Imagine my schadenfreude when that person was charged with embezzling money from that club! Abuse of power is a terrible thing. I think Kinsella has done that here, he used his Liberal connections to intimidate a school principal and a school board.

“ . . . I have communicated my concerns to the Minister's office, and we are confident that you will help to ensure that the decision-makers at the school conduct themselves in a more appropriate, and dare I say Christian, fashion from this point forward.”

Warren is a well connected, powerful back-roomer in the Liberal Party. His line there makes it pretty clear he has used those connections to apply pressure on the board. I don’t like that. I believe it is an abuse of his position.

Global Warming – I’ve Done My Part

Call me a skeptic, call me a “denier”, whatever cranks you up. I don’t trust the UN, nor the political pushers of Global Warming, to give us anything but the most fearful spin on what we now call Climate Change. Kyoto? Just a cynical method of transferring wealth to Russia in thanks for running their communist economy into the ground! It doesn’t address real reductions, or the incredible growth in emissions from China, India, or Indonesia, and who really believes any of them will sign Kyoto II?

Still, just to show you I can play the game, I took the One Tonne Challenge and won. You see, I paid my way out of the trap, and it only cost me $27.50 USD. Geez, it’s even tax deductible! I just ponied up for 5 Tonnes to cover off my apartment, and voila! I’m guilt free. Now all I need to do is find me some indulgences . . .

What Do You Get With Your Airmiles?

Have you ever wondered what you really get when you swipe your Airmiles or your Safeway Select? What you should really ask is what you give up: It’s your privacy! Maybe it’s not worth much, you think, but I bet you just haven’t really considered it. These cards track what you buy, when you buy it, where you buy it, how often you buy it, what you buy it with, & how you paid. They have your name and address, and other identifying and classifying information. Add it all up and they know you better than your spouse, your mother, your friends, and maybe better than you know yourself. And then they sell that knowledge.

So, what can they possibly tell about you? Would you worry if the Government knew your voting preference? You should. Or maybe you might be concerned about your sexual preference. Are you sure Airmiles data can’t end up with groups like this? The fact is, a good data miner could easily discern, with a high probability, your voting preference, your marital status, your sexual preference, whether you’re having an affair (swipe the Airmiles card at the No-Tell Motel much?), or if you’re declaring all your income (did you answer honestly when they asked your household income?). Are you environmentally conscious or are you an evil polluter? I sure hope you don’t make regular trips to Bangkok on business, you might just be marked as a potential sex-tourist . . .

Maybe I’m just paranoid, but in this age of computers, it’s very easy to compile a very detailed profile. Are you sure that toaster you’re saving points for is worth it?

Read the Small Print:

SAFEWAY CLUB CARD CUSTOMER
AGREEMENT STATEMENT
We respect your privacy. Safeway does not sell or lease personally identifying
information (i.e., your name, address, telephone number, and bank and credit
card account numbers) to non-affiliated companies or entities. We do record
information regarding the purchases made with your Safeway Club Card to
help us provide you with special offers and other information. Safeway also
may use this information to provide you with personally tailored coupons,
offers or other information that may be provided to Safeway by other companies.
If you do not wish to receive personally tailored coupons, offers or other information, please check the box below. Must be at least 18 years of age.

The AIR MILES® Privacy Pledge
The Loyalty Group does not give, rent or sell Collector lists from the AIR MILES® Reward Program to any organization or individual other than business units of The Loyalty Group, Sponsors of the AIR MILES® Reward Program and companies contracted to process and manage Collector transactions, redemption requests and communications. In addition, a Collector's specific transaction information from one AIR MILES Sponsor is not disclosed to any other AIR MILES Sponsor.

Biometrics – Mark of the Beast?

Ok, so I’m not seriously saying that Biometrics are the Mark of the Beast (although some are), but I am very concerned about them. Today we learn that ICBC, British Columbia’s government agency that has a monopoly on auto insurance and responsibility for licensing, is in discussions with the US Department of Homeland Security about implementing a biometric drivers license. It sounds like the main reason for this is to ease movement across the border and removing the need to get passports. Frankly, I’m appalled.

You might have guessed I lean conservative in my thinking but I believe this issue is too big for left-right fighting. Biometrics, the use of distinguishing features of our body for identification, is a very dangerous thing. For a conservative this should hit at the heart of privacy and personal security, and a more liberal/progressive should be concerned about the dampening effect on protest and agitation this will have.

Imagine the prospect of being tracked wherever you go, having that information stored in a gigantic database, and the government having control of that. On a basic level, I don’t believe it is the government’s (or anyone’s) business where I eat, where I drive, where I recreate or do any of the lawful activities I am entitled to. It may be argued that if I am doing nothing wrong, why should I care, but that is a terrible argument that leads very quickly to a police state. Imagine a camera in your bedroom, if you’re doing nothing wrong . . .

More problematic is the effect biometrics will have on dissent. I am virulently opposed to the radical left’s agenda but I am not at all willing to use oppressive tactics to prevent people from exercising their basic rights (I do wish some on the left felt the same way – see “Hate Speech”). The use of biometric tracking, especially facial recognition, will be major impediment to social progress. Would the gay rights movement have been successful if the government could easily identify and out the closet dwellers?

What I find most disturbing is the ease with which people give up their right to privacy for trinkets or convenience.

"[It's] so much easier than a passport," he said. "No worry of identity theft.
"Actually, we use it now to get into work," added Poore, who uses his thumbprint to get access to his laptop. "I think it's easier than having to reset a computer every 90 days or whatever it is. I like no muss, no fuss."

The price of this convenience is going to be very high. Papers please.

The Great RRSP Scam

I have argued at length with many friends and co-workers that saving in an RRSP is often counter-productive. This article should go a long way towards convincing them. Basically, if you save less than $100,000 in RRSPs, when you retire the only people you're helping are in government. For every dollar anyone takes out of their RRSP the government will claw back 50cents, and then tax you on what you took out. You may only get 25cents on the dollar of savings and the article shows that other income-based benefits may be denied you, effectively moving you into a net loss situation. The only way to get ahead is to have a large RRSP such that you don't need the government benefits you have already paid for!

As a conservative kinda guy I do believe it is your responsibility to plan for your future, and that it is the family's job, first, to care for each other, but if the government is going to tax us at a high rate and promise us secure retirement in return, then I have already paid. Why should I help the government while denying myself vacations, or faster mortgage repayment? Why should I pay now and then pay again later?

The 200(Mega)Tonne Challenge

Is Rick Mercer available for this one? I can imagine the commercial:

In 2003 I challenged you all to take the One Tonne Challenge. We hoped that all good Canadians would respond and we'd reduce green house gases by 30 Megatonnes. What I didn't tell you was that we'd still need to reduce our emissions by another 170 Megatonnes in order to meet our Kyoto commitments. I'm happy to tell you that now that you have done your duty it's time for corporate Canada to step up and do their bit. That's why I'm calling on them to reduce their emissions by 25%. Come on Canada, you can do it!

Ok, maybe that's not how he'd put it, especially considering the dismal failure the Liberal's 1 Tonne Challenge was. According to Greg Weston, we need to reduce GHG production by 200 Megatonnes in order to meet Kyoto, and that means by 2012. He kindly lists the largest producers of GHGs right down to the 8 Megatonnes produced by domestic aircraft. Doing the math, it would seem obvious that we have to reduce emissions by an average of 25% (at least) to do it. We need to reduce 25% in the next five years to meet the Kyoto targets, something I think we can reasonably assume cannot be done through new, as yet un-invented technologies. The simple fact is that we would have to conserve and reduce through cutting production in industry and reducing the use of CO2 producing items like cars and home heating. Aside from the uncomfortable home life we'd have to endure (I wonder if parliament would redefine "Room Termperature" for us?) such cuts must mean job losses and a retraction of the economy. Most people would call that a recession. The two most recent recessions (US stats) indicate that even a small reduction in economic output over less than year can devastate the economy and bring real pain to the average citizen. Imagine a recession of 25%! Even counting on efficiencies, some new technologies, and fantasies like Wind Power, the necessary reduction in the economy would be almost unthinkable to the average Canadian. I think a more honest commercial would go something like this:

Hey Canada! We signed on to the Kyoto accord and you've made it pretty clear you expect us to comply with our International obligations. Well, were going to! You may be asking "How?" Well, next time you're at work have a look around, count every five people you see and imagine one of them out of work. The resulting reduction in economic output will put us most of the way there. To make up the rest of it, we are banning the use of all personal vehicles 2 days a week, one of which must be a work day. And finally, we will be installing a new thermostat in your house that only goes up to lucky 13C (55 degrees for you old fogies). We know this will cause great pain to all of us Canadians (well, not all of us, there'll still be 308 seats in Parliament) and our sacrifices won't actually reduce the risks of climate change in any real way, but our symbolic gesture will be a beacon of light (energy-saving fluorescent, of course) to the rest of the world. We are certain that China and India, seeing us shivering in the cold, will immediately take steps to reduce their GHG emissions. Thank you, Canada! You're the best!

Does anyone have the guts to actually tell the truth?

French Attempt to Surrender . . .

...without even going to war. Seriously. It appears that France offered to unite with the UK, or at least join the commonwealth, in 1956 because of serious economic problems and the pending Suez Crisis. I guess France was worried they couldn't take Egypt by themselves?

It's probably just me, but I find it incredibly funny every time I hear Groundskeeper Willie from the Simpsons say "Cheese eatin' surrender monkeys" or I see magazine covers like "Soldier of Surrender". But this story isn't even a spoof! The French offered to surrender without a shot being fired or German on the horizon. I know it's been a while since France won a war, the early 1800's pops to mind, but they really need to keep their chins up, have some self-confidence, and maybe invade a small Caribbean nation. That did wonders for the Americans.

Bourque Bork-ed?
(Not the Swedish Chef, you moron)

I just wanted to state for the record that I, The Rat, do not, and have not ever accepted money-for-blog. I just felt I needed to clear the air considering how many other reputable blogs were discussing the subject. But, if you're really cute, female (I said I was straight, O.K.), and have something else to trade drop me a line . . .

The Repsonse Cherniak Won't Post

Jason Cherniak seems to have bone to pick with SPIN. And it seems his SPIN is the only one he wants to get out. In fact, he's so scared someone else might show him up he's begun moderating comments. I don't mean moderating for SPAM, or for obscene content, I mean for stuff he doesn't like. I posted this to his blog in response to his tirade:

Thanks for the morning comedy with the morning coffee. Oh, and for the morning Liberal SPIN. Funny, but I remember reading that, despite the DION BLOGS SPIN, France doesn't make anyone an automatic citizen, that Dion did, in fact, actively pursue his French citizenship. SPIN. And I do prefer Coyne's SPIN on Dion regarding Khan and divided loyalties. Further, I wasn't aware a friend of yours had named his dog "Trudeau". Know why? He hasn't publicly posed with the dog for publicity photos! If Dion didn't want to be mocked he didn't have to make his dog an issue in the campaign!

And a final note to the part of you, Jason, that should be thinking like a lawyer. You wrote:

"It is well known, if little discussed, that he has accepted advertising money from people with close connections to the provincial BC Liberals and the federal Conservatives."

Jason, how can you write that in good conscience? If you're really worried about spin or "unsourced" stories, why would you write speculative crap like that? Wouldn't be interesting if you had to defend yourself against that accusation in court? How would you?

And Jason chose not to post it. It isn't foul or SPAM or off-topic. It might not be brilliance but it's hardly objectionable. It makes me wonder how many other posts Jason is "moderating" because he's afraid people might see his posts for the SPIN they are. Come one Jason, what are you afraid of?

A funny thing happened this weekend: While cruising Vancouver's Craigslist I came across this week's pathetic American post. By that I mean the usual "I hate the US sooo much I'm coming to Canada" crap. Frankly, I despise these little whiners immensely and, being the jerk that I am, I fired off an e-mail detailing exactly how I felt about little pansy leftists, a human rights activist and a musician no less, too cowardly to fight for what they believe in their own country.

What's with all you whiny liberal Americans? Are you
too wimpy to work for what you believe in the most free country in
the world? No, a liberal human rights activist and a musician
aren't needed here, and frankly you couldn't afford the rent on
your Starbucks salary.

I figured that would be it.

It wasn't. Instead I got this reply (edited for length, this guy is longwinded):

Neither of us is too wimpy to work for what we believe in. But we both believe in perspective. It's hard to understand the big picture if you only expose yourself to the small one. It's like this: if you read a book, but you don't understand some of the concepts, you might turn to another book on the same subject, whereupon the first book makes a lot more sense. Or, if a committee . . .

(I told you this guy has a bad case of literary diarrhea) . . .

Maybe, just maybe we don't want to live in a fast-paced, money-solves-everything, buy-more-so-you're-happy, exploit-all, bigger-better-faster-now culture.

And frankly, I don't work at Starbucks, I'm a freelance professional
web designer with years of experience. She's a college grad and a
goddamned genius and can do whatever she puts her mind to.

Ok. This guy is a freelance webdesigner and she's a college grad. How special. More to the point, how does this bozo think he's going to get into Canada? On the point system these two don't come close to the 67 score needed to immigrate, and I doubt musicians are covered under NAFTA. Is he just going to show up and hope no one notices?

To be fair, lets look at his web design skills (and his rather large ego!). Uh huh. Use Front Page much? The third person bit is rich. And do people really compare you to " . . .Classic bands like Led Zeppelin, U2, REM, The Beatles, Genesis, and Pink Floyd"?

Is this guy for real?