Thursday, January 31, 2008
Set your cell phones to "vibrate"
Coming soon to a cell phone retail space near you....
Chuckercanuck walks into a cell phone dealership.
Clerk: Can I help you?
CC: Yes, I'm here to see about the family pack offer you had in the paper.
Clerk: Yes. Four phones, unlimited calls for up to five phone numbers each, 1 year contract.
CC: That's the one.
Clerk: Great. Let's look at some of the models available in the package.
(Clerk and CC inspect the models available.)
Clerk: By the way, this weekened we have an additional special "adult package".
CC: What's that?
Clerk: For an extra $4.99 per month per phone, you get unlimited access to the largest porn collection in Canada, viewable from the comfort of wherever you and your cell phone may be plus membership to our exclusive adult dating services.
CC: Porn on my cell phone? C'mon!
Clerk: Absolutely. Its the next generation in both cell phone technology and pornography. Actually, in Europe, its been a standard feature in purchasing a new cell phone for years.
CC: Europe?
Clerk: Oh yes, there's a huge apetite for pornography in Europe and this is a convenient way to satisfy that urge.
CC: I didn't know Europeans were such big consumers of pornography.
Clerk: Huge porn consumers.
CC: But why don't they have many babies then?
Clerk: You know - Europeans like the trip, hate the destination.
CC: A bit like monkeys at the zoo.
Clerk: Exactly, but with real-time access to a vast catalogue of human perversion and vulgarity. Sound tempting?
CC: Hmmm.... I don't know. I suppose if Europeans are doing it. They are more sophisticated and progressive than we are - so maybe its the right thing to do. What's ths adult dating service?
Clerk: Ah, its cutting edge. You have 24 hour access to our call centre. When you are in the mood for anonymous sex be it with a single partner or several, you simly call our toll free number, submit your request and within twenty minutes, we identify eagre partners in your area.
CC: Twenty minutes? Is that a guarantee?
Clerk: Uh-huh. Or else that month's fees are waived.
CC: I don't know. Your call centres suck. Do I have to punch in my 12 digit account number and then talk to a computer?
Clerk: Our market tests show that consumers would prefer to access these services via a talking computer.
CC: I guess so.
Clerk: Do I sign you up?
CC: Oh. Okay. I'll do it. Put that on two phones for now and call me a Eurochic wannabe.
Clerk: Very good, sir.
Chuckercanuck walks into a cell phone dealership.
Clerk: Can I help you?
CC: Yes, I'm here to see about the family pack offer you had in the paper.
Clerk: Yes. Four phones, unlimited calls for up to five phone numbers each, 1 year contract.
CC: That's the one.
Clerk: Great. Let's look at some of the models available in the package.
(Clerk and CC inspect the models available.)
Clerk: By the way, this weekened we have an additional special "adult package".
CC: What's that?
Clerk: For an extra $4.99 per month per phone, you get unlimited access to the largest porn collection in Canada, viewable from the comfort of wherever you and your cell phone may be plus membership to our exclusive adult dating services.
CC: Porn on my cell phone? C'mon!
Clerk: Absolutely. Its the next generation in both cell phone technology and pornography. Actually, in Europe, its been a standard feature in purchasing a new cell phone for years.
CC: Europe?
Clerk: Oh yes, there's a huge apetite for pornography in Europe and this is a convenient way to satisfy that urge.
CC: I didn't know Europeans were such big consumers of pornography.
Clerk: Huge porn consumers.
CC: But why don't they have many babies then?
Clerk: You know - Europeans like the trip, hate the destination.
CC: A bit like monkeys at the zoo.
Clerk: Exactly, but with real-time access to a vast catalogue of human perversion and vulgarity. Sound tempting?
CC: Hmmm.... I don't know. I suppose if Europeans are doing it. They are more sophisticated and progressive than we are - so maybe its the right thing to do. What's ths adult dating service?
Clerk: Ah, its cutting edge. You have 24 hour access to our call centre. When you are in the mood for anonymous sex be it with a single partner or several, you simly call our toll free number, submit your request and within twenty minutes, we identify eagre partners in your area.
CC: Twenty minutes? Is that a guarantee?
Clerk: Uh-huh. Or else that month's fees are waived.
CC: I don't know. Your call centres suck. Do I have to punch in my 12 digit account number and then talk to a computer?
Clerk: Our market tests show that consumers would prefer to access these services via a talking computer.
CC: I guess so.
Clerk: Do I sign you up?
CC: Oh. Okay. I'll do it. Put that on two phones for now and call me a Eurochic wannabe.
Clerk: Very good, sir.
Labels: Irene Mathyssen better be blowing a gasket
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Segregation by any other name....
Toronto's school board - Canada's largest and perhaps its most regressive - has voted to open an Afrocentric school. Don't get them wrong, white schoolchildren will be, hm, tolerated, if they insist on going to this school. But the focus will be black Canadians. The goal is laudible: 40% of black children do not finish high school and they want to reduce that drop-out rate (as one activist said on CBC, "opening school doors will close prison doors" - so there's a promise that this school will cut crime too.)
Does a laudible goal justify this velvet-gloved segregation? Well, before asking that question, you have to show that this segregation does anything to accomplish the goal. Maybe it does. Maybe they had it right 100 years ago when people argued that peace and harmony will be achieved by having blacks live, work and learn among blacks and whites live, work and learn among whites. But if so, this afro-focused school will only delay the discord by a few years.
Afterall, once these black children have been rescued from the destructive environment of Eurocentric education, they will be shoved back into it when they hit university. They will be unable to cope and will drop out - according to the logic of the Toronto school board. If we are to save them from dropping out of college, we had better get on with the business of setting up an afrocentric university so that blacks do not wither on the university vine. But even that move only pushes the inevitable failure off by a few years. Once finished their college education in the cloistered world of an afrocentric university, blacks will be unable to secure meaningful and positive work in the eurocentric economy. In order to protect them from the certain disaster that will befall them, we must set up an afrocentric economy so they can avoid the eurocentric one. That means, black schools, black neighborhoods, black companies, black restaurants, black theatres, black mass transit.... segregation, full stop.
Also, this school will not be able to seat every black child in the Toronto school system. To those left behind by this progressive initiative, Toronto is sending them a message: you're right to quit; you're right to give up and become alienated; the system is set against you; and should that turn you to crime, you're right to do that as well.
Does a laudible goal justify this velvet-gloved segregation? Well, before asking that question, you have to show that this segregation does anything to accomplish the goal. Maybe it does. Maybe they had it right 100 years ago when people argued that peace and harmony will be achieved by having blacks live, work and learn among blacks and whites live, work and learn among whites. But if so, this afro-focused school will only delay the discord by a few years.
Afterall, once these black children have been rescued from the destructive environment of Eurocentric education, they will be shoved back into it when they hit university. They will be unable to cope and will drop out - according to the logic of the Toronto school board. If we are to save them from dropping out of college, we had better get on with the business of setting up an afrocentric university so that blacks do not wither on the university vine. But even that move only pushes the inevitable failure off by a few years. Once finished their college education in the cloistered world of an afrocentric university, blacks will be unable to secure meaningful and positive work in the eurocentric economy. In order to protect them from the certain disaster that will befall them, we must set up an afrocentric economy so they can avoid the eurocentric one. That means, black schools, black neighborhoods, black companies, black restaurants, black theatres, black mass transit.... segregation, full stop.
Also, this school will not be able to seat every black child in the Toronto school system. To those left behind by this progressive initiative, Toronto is sending them a message: you're right to quit; you're right to give up and become alienated; the system is set against you; and should that turn you to crime, you're right to do that as well.
Labels: Too bad not all blacks are roman catholic eh Dalton
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Fact of Life: It Takes Different Strokes
Now, Alan Thicke and I have a lot in common. For instance, we both spent as little time as possible in Kirkland Lake, Ontario and we both have a talent for writing lame pop songs that invade your brain and require a lobotomy to remove. However, the wheel of fortune (I promise, the last Thicke-ism in this post) has been a lot kinder to Alan Thicke than me; he is a quasi-celebrity with likely a hefty balance in his checking account.
Today, as the Embraer 190 left La Guardia Airport for Montreal, I was flipping through En Route magazine only to find Alan Thicke staring at me with some wooden sculpture at his side. The article was some regular one-page filler where a well-known person talks about so object that he or she loves. For Alan Thicke, it was this wooden sculpure he picked up on a trip to Namibia.
You see, Alan Thicke "loves going to Africa". He "takes every chance he gets to go". He loves going to Africa to "bond with the people." He stuffs lugage with t-shirts to trade for handicraft.
Ah, the image of the rich, past-due tv personality descending on the African savanna to bond with the people. A modern day Francis of Assisi, if you forget the stupid poverty part of that saint's biography. Modern saints, thank God, are rich and good-looking. They descend from chartered jets to bond with Africans.
They never go to Europe to "bond with the people". No, you don't bond with Europeans. You bond with Africans. Africans, afterall, are simply folk full of happiness. They are the essence of joy and not much else. Africans, celebrity-saints assure us, have nothing to offer beyond that radiant joy that is such a pleasure to behold. You can picture a whistful Alan Thicke, sipping some Merlot off a Francis Ford Coppola vineyard, while jetting back to the America, getting philosophical with his companions....
"You know," he says, "the joy, the pure joy of Africans. The look on their face when you hand them a t-shirt like its Christmas on steroids. In LA, we have strip malls and five star restaurants and luxury cars and solar-heated pools. But what good is it? Stress, traffic, anxiety. And these pleasant Africans, so easy to bond with. Makes you think, doesn't it?"
The worst plague on the continent of Africa is celebrity-saints who seek to transform the continent into the world's largest petting zoo, with Africans the feature attraction.
Today, as the Embraer 190 left La Guardia Airport for Montreal, I was flipping through En Route magazine only to find Alan Thicke staring at me with some wooden sculpture at his side. The article was some regular one-page filler where a well-known person talks about so object that he or she loves. For Alan Thicke, it was this wooden sculpure he picked up on a trip to Namibia.
You see, Alan Thicke "loves going to Africa". He "takes every chance he gets to go". He loves going to Africa to "bond with the people." He stuffs lugage with t-shirts to trade for handicraft.
Ah, the image of the rich, past-due tv personality descending on the African savanna to bond with the people. A modern day Francis of Assisi, if you forget the stupid poverty part of that saint's biography. Modern saints, thank God, are rich and good-looking. They descend from chartered jets to bond with Africans.
They never go to Europe to "bond with the people". No, you don't bond with Europeans. You bond with Africans. Africans, afterall, are simply folk full of happiness. They are the essence of joy and not much else. Africans, celebrity-saints assure us, have nothing to offer beyond that radiant joy that is such a pleasure to behold. You can picture a whistful Alan Thicke, sipping some Merlot off a Francis Ford Coppola vineyard, while jetting back to the America, getting philosophical with his companions....
"You know," he says, "the joy, the pure joy of Africans. The look on their face when you hand them a t-shirt like its Christmas on steroids. In LA, we have strip malls and five star restaurants and luxury cars and solar-heated pools. But what good is it? Stress, traffic, anxiety. And these pleasant Africans, so easy to bond with. Makes you think, doesn't it?"
The worst plague on the continent of Africa is celebrity-saints who seek to transform the continent into the world's largest petting zoo, with Africans the feature attraction.
Labels: Quick Note - Go McCain
Monday, January 28, 2008
Global Warming will make your life a hellish nightmare..... maybe.
The pinnacles of journalism and "analysis" (i.e., quasi-science) marry to produce this heart-stopping headline:
Climate Change Could Trigger Civil Unrest.
The point of the article - you thought being in some cushy northern paradise would free you of the deadly upheavels climate change will wreak on "those people over there" but you are deadly wrong. Climate change will destroy your happy suburban life and transform you into some dirty pig-human from a Mad Max movie doing Tina Turner's sadistic bidding.
Oh come on, how's that? Well read the article. Read it carefully. Comb through it at the pace of a snail and you'll find.... you'll find.... you'll find nothing. No substantiation of the claim whatsoever. There's a little bit about eco-terrorism taking root. But the nice thing about eco-terrorists is that they would not likely ever resort to using a dirty bomb -- unless they are hypocritical eco-terrorists. Oh wait, maybe we should be scared.
The only thing to put meat to the bone that Canada will crumble under a tide of lawless citizen-fanatics is that the research was conducted by a group from Oxford. A journalist types "Oxford" into his article and we are all supposed to nod zombily and think, "truth". But before you swollow this concoction wholesale, pay attention to the disclaimer this think tank provides itself:
"Acknowledging that climate change and security is "a young area of analysis," the Oxford report said its predictions are likely to change, for better or for worse, over the coming decades."
Oh good, I'm glad we hyped and fear-mongered over something that is, under the most kind interpretation, a wild-assed guess.
Climate Change Could Trigger Civil Unrest.
The point of the article - you thought being in some cushy northern paradise would free you of the deadly upheavels climate change will wreak on "those people over there" but you are deadly wrong. Climate change will destroy your happy suburban life and transform you into some dirty pig-human from a Mad Max movie doing Tina Turner's sadistic bidding.
Oh come on, how's that? Well read the article. Read it carefully. Comb through it at the pace of a snail and you'll find.... you'll find.... you'll find nothing. No substantiation of the claim whatsoever. There's a little bit about eco-terrorism taking root. But the nice thing about eco-terrorists is that they would not likely ever resort to using a dirty bomb -- unless they are hypocritical eco-terrorists. Oh wait, maybe we should be scared.
The only thing to put meat to the bone that Canada will crumble under a tide of lawless citizen-fanatics is that the research was conducted by a group from Oxford. A journalist types "Oxford" into his article and we are all supposed to nod zombily and think, "truth". But before you swollow this concoction wholesale, pay attention to the disclaimer this think tank provides itself:
"Acknowledging that climate change and security is "a young area of analysis," the Oxford report said its predictions are likely to change, for better or for worse, over the coming decades."
Oh good, I'm glad we hyped and fear-mongered over something that is, under the most kind interpretation, a wild-assed guess.
Labels: Cambridge reports climate change will make Earth more tempting for Alien Invasion
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Undivide and Conquer
Tonight, Barak Obama crushed his opposition in the South Carolina primary - demolishing Hillary Clinton by a margin of more than 2 to 1. This gave him a chance to deliver his yadda-yadda-yadda stump speech about cynics and change and it gave CNN and other media types an opportunity to dream about a McCain-Obama faceoff. At least according to the "best political team on television", the contest would be fascinating since both men have the capacity to draw support from independents and the opposing side.
When it comes to John McCain, this is undisputable. Afterall, the Democratic VP nominee from the 2000 election, Senator Joe Liberman, endorsed him for president. And, you can list a series of issues on which John McCain breaks from Republican orthodoxy - at least as Rush Limbaugh defines it - and has worked with Democratic stalwarts such as Russ Feingold and Ted Kennedy. Immigration is supposedly John McCain's achilles heel, since his position is unpopular with the Pat Buchanans of America, but once out in the general election, he'll find company with the fat middle of that country. (His line, "I'm telling a soldier fighting in Iraq that we are kicking his grandma out of the country" is gold.)
But beyond Obama rhetoric and media wishfulness, can Senator Obama really draw on Republican support in any significant way? To be sure, there is an attraction in voting for the first black president - even if that's a terrible reason in principle. But beyond that aesthetic appeal, what could a candidate Obama offer Republicans to switch parties? Nothing. On every issue, Senator Obama is a stock'n'trade Democrat and, unlike Senator McCain, has no chance of pulling significant support from his opponents come election day. It is a media construction without foundation.
Advantage McCain.
When it comes to John McCain, this is undisputable. Afterall, the Democratic VP nominee from the 2000 election, Senator Joe Liberman, endorsed him for president. And, you can list a series of issues on which John McCain breaks from Republican orthodoxy - at least as Rush Limbaugh defines it - and has worked with Democratic stalwarts such as Russ Feingold and Ted Kennedy. Immigration is supposedly John McCain's achilles heel, since his position is unpopular with the Pat Buchanans of America, but once out in the general election, he'll find company with the fat middle of that country. (His line, "I'm telling a soldier fighting in Iraq that we are kicking his grandma out of the country" is gold.)
But beyond Obama rhetoric and media wishfulness, can Senator Obama really draw on Republican support in any significant way? To be sure, there is an attraction in voting for the first black president - even if that's a terrible reason in principle. But beyond that aesthetic appeal, what could a candidate Obama offer Republicans to switch parties? Nothing. On every issue, Senator Obama is a stock'n'trade Democrat and, unlike Senator McCain, has no chance of pulling significant support from his opponents come election day. It is a media construction without foundation.
Advantage McCain.
Labels: Yeah yeah we can go back to talking about Sandra Buckler tomorrow - boring
Friday, January 25, 2008
Neo-Nazi Idyll
This morning in the Post, you’ll find an article about a white supremacist turned FBI informant that has neo-nazi chat rooms scandalized. When I read the article, I was stopped by the expression “neo-nazi chat room” – its an odd way of describing such a vile cyber-congregation…. Afterall, what do neo-nazis “chat” about anyway? (Note: link not found, buy a hard copy).
No1Aryan: Mondays suck.
WhitePower: You’re crazy. I love Mondays. (sarcasm off)
Purity247: LOL! Woke up this morning and we’re out of coffee…. WTF?! I got two choices, drive down to Queerbucks for a latte or go into my bunker and use up some emergency inventory.
No1Aryan: Go to Queerbucks for that caramel swirl.
WhitePower: Hmmmmmmmm….. caramel. Purity247, my missus is just as bad – we got coffee, we ain’t got cream! I said, “damn woman – why didn’t you text me last night, I would’ve picked some up on the way home.”
HoodedWizard: Can’t have coffee all black. Cream’s the dream.
No1Aryan: LOL! Ah, women – can’t live with ‘em, can’t live without them.
SnowWhite: Oh yeah. You boys are pictures of competence without us. Woke up last night for a mid-sleep pee break. Dropped myself in a half daze down on the toilet – nearly fell clear into the sewers cause old Johnny boy forgot to put the seat back down. Try falling back asleep after that.
WhitePower: SnowWhite! Where’ve you been partner?
SnowWhite: Got hooked on a cooking chat room. Sorry boys, can’t be spending all my time KKKavortin’ with you!
No1Aryan: Never leave us again.
Purity247: Anyone test drive the new Malibu? Is it all that?
HoodedWizard: Decent mileage, smooth drive. Not impressed with the cup holders though. Why go all cheap on a detail like that?
No1Aryan: Mondays suck.
WhitePower: You’re crazy. I love Mondays. (sarcasm off)
Purity247: LOL! Woke up this morning and we’re out of coffee…. WTF?! I got two choices, drive down to Queerbucks for a latte or go into my bunker and use up some emergency inventory.
No1Aryan: Go to Queerbucks for that caramel swirl.
WhitePower: Hmmmmmmmm….. caramel. Purity247, my missus is just as bad – we got coffee, we ain’t got cream! I said, “damn woman – why didn’t you text me last night, I would’ve picked some up on the way home.”
HoodedWizard: Can’t have coffee all black. Cream’s the dream.
No1Aryan: LOL! Ah, women – can’t live with ‘em, can’t live without them.
SnowWhite: Oh yeah. You boys are pictures of competence without us. Woke up last night for a mid-sleep pee break. Dropped myself in a half daze down on the toilet – nearly fell clear into the sewers cause old Johnny boy forgot to put the seat back down. Try falling back asleep after that.
WhitePower: SnowWhite! Where’ve you been partner?
SnowWhite: Got hooked on a cooking chat room. Sorry boys, can’t be spending all my time KKKavortin’ with you!
No1Aryan: Never leave us again.
Purity247: Anyone test drive the new Malibu? Is it all that?
HoodedWizard: Decent mileage, smooth drive. Not impressed with the cup holders though. Why go all cheap on a detail like that?
Labels: are they on facebook too?
Thursday, January 24, 2008
No Carbon Taxation Without Misrepresentation
Last year, the Quebec Government, in its bid to do something that looked environmental, launched a Green Fund.
What would the Green Fund do?
Fund environmental initiatives to reduce Quebec's carbon footprint, says the environment minister. Alright, says the typical Canadian, sounds reasonable.
Who will Fund the Fund?
Polluters. But specifically, big energy producers. Not so much users of the energy, just the producers, promised the Liberal government. Quebeckers, half-asleep, think this impossibility makes sense.
So what's happened?
Gaz Metropolitain, the large natural gas provider in Quebec, has passed its green fund tax along to its consumers.
How do the consumers react?
Totally bamboozled. When their government said this tax would NOT be passed along to consumers but would defy economic gravity and simply reduce profits of the energy producers, they believed it. Which is why Chuckercanuck wants to remind these sophisticated consumers that there are still a few slots in Chuckercanuck's carbon offsetting services - he'll stay home and watch Food network on Friday night for $50.
How do the environmental agitators react?
The Sierra Club and Greenpeace are livid, saying that Gaz Metro is not being a good corporate citizen. See, the ugly part of environmental agitation is that the environment is a beard for socialism. If reduction of GHGs is the goal, consumers have to reduce consumption. Producers will reduce production as consumers reduce consumption. So, the idea that consumers should be protected from a Green Fund Carbon Tax is ridiculous. That these environmental agigators are upset at what amounts to an annual increase of $15 on the gas bill is even more pathetic - its a tiny, tiny price to pay; so tiny as to be negligible for most consumers. Tokenism at its best. However, the point was to stick it to big companies, not affect GHG emissions.
How does the Liberal government react?
Well, would you want to draw attention to the economic shell game you played on consumers last year when introducing a supposedly cost-free tax?
Conclusion
Watch out Canada! Liberals across the land fall asleep to dreams of tax-collecting sugar-plum fairies who will save the planet with cost-free tax schemes that "afffect producers not consumers". Costs cannot defy economic gravity: consumers pay for everything at day's end.
What would the Green Fund do?
Fund environmental initiatives to reduce Quebec's carbon footprint, says the environment minister. Alright, says the typical Canadian, sounds reasonable.
Who will Fund the Fund?
Polluters. But specifically, big energy producers. Not so much users of the energy, just the producers, promised the Liberal government. Quebeckers, half-asleep, think this impossibility makes sense.
So what's happened?
Gaz Metropolitain, the large natural gas provider in Quebec, has passed its green fund tax along to its consumers.
How do the consumers react?
Totally bamboozled. When their government said this tax would NOT be passed along to consumers but would defy economic gravity and simply reduce profits of the energy producers, they believed it. Which is why Chuckercanuck wants to remind these sophisticated consumers that there are still a few slots in Chuckercanuck's carbon offsetting services - he'll stay home and watch Food network on Friday night for $50.
How do the environmental agitators react?
The Sierra Club and Greenpeace are livid, saying that Gaz Metro is not being a good corporate citizen. See, the ugly part of environmental agitation is that the environment is a beard for socialism. If reduction of GHGs is the goal, consumers have to reduce consumption. Producers will reduce production as consumers reduce consumption. So, the idea that consumers should be protected from a Green Fund Carbon Tax is ridiculous. That these environmental agigators are upset at what amounts to an annual increase of $15 on the gas bill is even more pathetic - its a tiny, tiny price to pay; so tiny as to be negligible for most consumers. Tokenism at its best. However, the point was to stick it to big companies, not affect GHG emissions.
How does the Liberal government react?
Well, would you want to draw attention to the economic shell game you played on consumers last year when introducing a supposedly cost-free tax?
Conclusion
Watch out Canada! Liberals across the land fall asleep to dreams of tax-collecting sugar-plum fairies who will save the planet with cost-free tax schemes that "afffect producers not consumers". Costs cannot defy economic gravity: consumers pay for everything at day's end.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Year 2 of Pax Harpernia
I can't believe the day nearly slipped away without a formal acknowledgement that it marks two years of the Harper government.
Canada has never been so united in its history and our voice on the world stage hasn't been as firm or heeded in almost two generations. We have saved ourselves from cash-gulping social engineering projects and seen our taxes and debt fall.
With soaring approval ratings, the Prime Minister has set a standard of leadership that will be difficult for future heads of government to match: there are few issues on which the Prime Minister hasn't a very subtle, considered view. A rare feat for a politician, he can answer a question he is asked without resorting to a cheap platitude or, as with his major opponent, the promise of invading a country to reduce everyone's carbon footprint.
Like most other Canadians, I am excited by the prospect of many more years of the solid, principled leadership we have enjoyed since January 23rd, 2006.
Canada has never been so united in its history and our voice on the world stage hasn't been as firm or heeded in almost two generations. We have saved ourselves from cash-gulping social engineering projects and seen our taxes and debt fall.
With soaring approval ratings, the Prime Minister has set a standard of leadership that will be difficult for future heads of government to match: there are few issues on which the Prime Minister hasn't a very subtle, considered view. A rare feat for a politician, he can answer a question he is asked without resorting to a cheap platitude or, as with his major opponent, the promise of invading a country to reduce everyone's carbon footprint.
Like most other Canadians, I am excited by the prospect of many more years of the solid, principled leadership we have enjoyed since January 23rd, 2006.
Labels: Off to drop some fat at the gym
Selling Global Warming While We Freeze our Bits Off
Over at Calgary Grit, a discussion of the Liberals "strategically abstaining" from confidence votes in order to save the economy veered onto the topic of global warming (since, you know, megatonnes of cash will be made from environmental initiatives). Our friend, Jason Bo Green, postulated that this flickin' cold winter makes global warming a tough sell. In response, some Liberal automoton, rejected that idea and said Canadians were too smart to think a single exceptional winter negates the obvious trend of global warming and the massive science that supports it.
To me, its obvious: anyone trying to sell global warming right now will have a hard time of it compared to the middle of a heat wave. The reason "exceptions" (if that's what it is) have such powerful influence in the debate are twofold:
1. Human nature. Emotion trumps logic almost all the time - feeling a problem is a much stronger motivator than the abstract recognition of a problem. Particularly when dealing with something as complex as global warming. Afterall, measuring the temperature across the world is contentious enough - and that's well before you get into global warming mechanisms. I have already published entries on modelling complexities and strange results (e.g., cutting down all boreal forests in Canada would help fight climate change because the resulting wasteland would reflect heat back into space while the current dark green trees suck too much of it up). And recently, its been reported that Arctic sea ice is melting faster than expected (i.e., modelled) - which should give pause to anyone about whether current weather modelling systems are in any way accurate enough to do the predicting we pretend they do --- there's more to the weather than are dreamt of in your philosophies, Horatio.
All this adds up to: emotion trumps logic and the every Canadian cannot be expected to fully digest this massively complex phenomenon.
2) Climate Change hystericists established "the exception" as acceptable propaganda. Afterall, go rent "An Inconvenient Truth". What's on the cover of the DVD? A picture of hurricane Katrina. How about the drowning polar bear? Why does the Weddell shelf ice count but the rest of Antartica doesn't? Why Kilimanjaro and not the Franz Josef Glacier in New Zealand? Convenient exceptions that make for nice pictures and keep the story simple.
So there it is. This corner sides with Bo Green: while scraping ice off my windshield, I'd rather not hear some dork brain tell me that "cold winters just prove climate change is happening", unless they are looking for me to use their teeth as my windshield scraper.
To me, its obvious: anyone trying to sell global warming right now will have a hard time of it compared to the middle of a heat wave. The reason "exceptions" (if that's what it is) have such powerful influence in the debate are twofold:
1. Human nature. Emotion trumps logic almost all the time - feeling a problem is a much stronger motivator than the abstract recognition of a problem. Particularly when dealing with something as complex as global warming. Afterall, measuring the temperature across the world is contentious enough - and that's well before you get into global warming mechanisms. I have already published entries on modelling complexities and strange results (e.g., cutting down all boreal forests in Canada would help fight climate change because the resulting wasteland would reflect heat back into space while the current dark green trees suck too much of it up). And recently, its been reported that Arctic sea ice is melting faster than expected (i.e., modelled) - which should give pause to anyone about whether current weather modelling systems are in any way accurate enough to do the predicting we pretend they do --- there's more to the weather than are dreamt of in your philosophies, Horatio.
All this adds up to: emotion trumps logic and the every Canadian cannot be expected to fully digest this massively complex phenomenon.
2) Climate Change hystericists established "the exception" as acceptable propaganda. Afterall, go rent "An Inconvenient Truth". What's on the cover of the DVD? A picture of hurricane Katrina. How about the drowning polar bear? Why does the Weddell shelf ice count but the rest of Antartica doesn't? Why Kilimanjaro and not the Franz Josef Glacier in New Zealand? Convenient exceptions that make for nice pictures and keep the story simple.
So there it is. This corner sides with Bo Green: while scraping ice off my windshield, I'd rather not hear some dork brain tell me that "cold winters just prove climate change is happening", unless they are looking for me to use their teeth as my windshield scraper.
Labels: Not very funny but still pretty interesting
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Liberals to Canada: Only Harper can Save the Economy
Chuckercanuck is no fan of feeding an economic meltdown frenzy, mostly because I don't have a huge wad of cash available to sink into the markets while the rest of the world wants to sell me their assets at bargain basement prices. So, I raise the issue here only because it informs the latest Liberal political strategems.
You see, with the economy teetering on the brink of a possible recession (ugh, I feel like a slinky loop using that journo-jingo), Liberals have decided NOT to topple the government. Garth Turner - a supposed election hawk, albeit the kind of hawk that enjoys an endless supply of food in the comfy confines of a zoo - says replacing the Tory government is "not the right thing for Canada".
While Stephane Dion's promise of inaction is de facto support for the Prime Minister, he did urge the Prime Minister to implement the Liberal plan to spend a $1 billion on solar panels and Rick Mercer public awareness campaigns. Aides close to Dion tried to explain to him that $1 billion spent in a $1 trillion economy wasn't really much more than a drop of gravy in a salad bowl of poutine - but there were so many zeroes involved that Dion got confused and thought they were showing him polling data on his leadership.
You see, with the economy teetering on the brink of a possible recession (ugh, I feel like a slinky loop using that journo-jingo), Liberals have decided NOT to topple the government. Garth Turner - a supposed election hawk, albeit the kind of hawk that enjoys an endless supply of food in the comfy confines of a zoo - says replacing the Tory government is "not the right thing for Canada".
While Stephane Dion's promise of inaction is de facto support for the Prime Minister, he did urge the Prime Minister to implement the Liberal plan to spend a $1 billion on solar panels and Rick Mercer public awareness campaigns. Aides close to Dion tried to explain to him that $1 billion spent in a $1 trillion economy wasn't really much more than a drop of gravy in a salad bowl of poutine - but there were so many zeroes involved that Dion got confused and thought they were showing him polling data on his leadership.
Labels: Brave brave brave Sir Robin
Monday, January 21, 2008
With friends like this....
Live Blogging the Democratic debates ----
Hillary Clinton was a corporate lawyer for Wal-Mart while Barak was on the streets helping communities organize....
or, was he actually making his pal a slum lord rich?
End of Debate:
The most vicious debate I have ever seen, putting a large and wide smile on this bloggers face. Do not go gently into the general campaign, Democrats: Rage! Rage! Rage!
My impressions of these Democrats has been altered somewhat by this evening:
John Edwards? Who cares.
Hillary Clinton? I would like to know what she does to keep her horns from poking out of her forehead.
Barak Obama? The person most enamoured with Obama's oratory is Mr. Obama. Once he left me cold, now he is plain nauseating. He is not a fad that could last to November.
Hillary Clinton was a corporate lawyer for Wal-Mart while Barak was on the streets helping communities organize....
or, was he actually making his pal a slum lord rich?
End of Debate:
The most vicious debate I have ever seen, putting a large and wide smile on this bloggers face. Do not go gently into the general campaign, Democrats: Rage! Rage! Rage!
My impressions of these Democrats has been altered somewhat by this evening:
John Edwards? Who cares.
Hillary Clinton? I would like to know what she does to keep her horns from poking out of her forehead.
Barak Obama? The person most enamoured with Obama's oratory is Mr. Obama. Once he left me cold, now he is plain nauseating. He is not a fad that could last to November.
Labels: Like a Big Mac - I'm luvin it
Afghanistan, my Liberal friends, is not a big funny joke
Last week, Stephane Dion defied conventional wisdom that says "serious" and "frivolous" are mutually exclusive propositions when he announced that NATO forces should invade Pakistan. He quickly backtracked and clarified that such an invasion would be purely diplomatic - using the ultra-secret 12th Ambassador Brigades based out of Rammstein, Germany. However, even if we, like the Montreal Gazette, prefer to believe it was all a mis-understanding, its not the sort of misunderstanding you want your country's chief executive to be creating everytime he scrums. ("Oh, no, no Vlad, I wasn't talking about invading Russia, I was talking about invading Plusshia.")
Still, the incoherence and rabble-babble of Liberal foreign policy is breathtaking even without the accidental sabre-rattling. Today, Michael Ignatieff - who's evermore the Dick Cheney of the Liberal party (as in, secretly in charge) - announces that the Liberal Party will be taking the Manley Panel recommendations on the Afghan mission very seriously.
Iggy, like Cardianal Dion, operates on the premise that the average Canadian would lose to a goldfish in a memory test. Afterall, 5 days ago is a long, long time and we can't be expected to remember that the Liberal defense critic was telling us how illegitimate the Manley panel was.... can we?
How could the Liberal party, which pretends to be a government-in-waiting-a-long-long-time, tweak its policies on the basis of "a political gimmick". Doesn't that strike you as a bit of brazen foolishness? Are the stakes not substantially high enough to warrant a serious bit of thinking on the issue? If the panel is a gimmick, reject it outright and forever. If the panel is not a gimmick - but actually something that can inform Liberal policy making - refrain from such smears. To do both reinforces the old saying that Gilles Duceppe used to look so good because he had Liberals to compare himself against.
So why did Iggy change the tune so abruptly? Because rumour has it the Manley panel did a sobre, apolitical job and has some criticism of how the government is conducting the mission. In other words, there may be a point or two to score off the report. However, in scoring those points, the Liberals have lost the game.
Still, the incoherence and rabble-babble of Liberal foreign policy is breathtaking even without the accidental sabre-rattling. Today, Michael Ignatieff - who's evermore the Dick Cheney of the Liberal party (as in, secretly in charge) - announces that the Liberal Party will be taking the Manley Panel recommendations on the Afghan mission very seriously.
Iggy, like Cardianal Dion, operates on the premise that the average Canadian would lose to a goldfish in a memory test. Afterall, 5 days ago is a long, long time and we can't be expected to remember that the Liberal defense critic was telling us how illegitimate the Manley panel was.... can we?
How could the Liberal party, which pretends to be a government-in-waiting-a-long-long-time, tweak its policies on the basis of "a political gimmick". Doesn't that strike you as a bit of brazen foolishness? Are the stakes not substantially high enough to warrant a serious bit of thinking on the issue? If the panel is a gimmick, reject it outright and forever. If the panel is not a gimmick - but actually something that can inform Liberal policy making - refrain from such smears. To do both reinforces the old saying that Gilles Duceppe used to look so good because he had Liberals to compare himself against.
So why did Iggy change the tune so abruptly? Because rumour has it the Manley panel did a sobre, apolitical job and has some criticism of how the government is conducting the mission. In other words, there may be a point or two to score off the report. However, in scoring those points, the Liberals have lost the game.
Labels: Credibility matters
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Bloc-ing the Tory Majority
The Bloc Quebecois is holding a sort of election readiness planning session. Interestingly, you'll notice the Liberals are not a factor in their planning - that's right Ontario: the Liberals are not a factor in Quebec right now. Anyway, the "dogfight" as the Bloc puts it, will be with the Tories.
Now, we can all expect the usual grab-bag of silly ideas pasted together in some half-assed campaign platform: banning english, building a high-speed rail link between Rimouski and Tadoussac, free Burgundy on St-Johnny the Baptist day. But the clever part of their campaign is not being reported. Its called the two Gilles strategy.
In order to keep the separatist coalition together, Gilles Duceppe plans to present himself as two completely different, almost dissonant personalities: left-bank Gilles and country-boy Gilles.
Left-bank Gilles will be presented to Montreal islanders. This Gilles Duceppe will wear alot of turtle-necks and affect an Elysean accent to appeal to the square-rimmed glasses set. He'll eat spring rolls with peanut sauce and talk about the power of collectivism and transcendental nullities. He'll decry the lack of funding for post-colonial, neo-abstract art and of course, talk of an independent Quebec governed by a secreteriat of students and tam-tam players.
Country-boy Gilles will emerge everytime Mr. Duceppe heads off island. This Gilles Duceppe will snear at turtle-neck wearers and speak like a trucker from Rouyn-Noranda. He'll eat poutine and talk about Montreal as a trojan horse against the french language. He'll decry the funding of useless culture from the Plateau of Montreal when forestry workers need secure employment and of course, talk about an independent Quebec that thrives on the can-do nature of the Quebecois nation.
Since election campaigns are short, there's a good chance that neither side of the separatist coalition will figure out who Gilles would ultimately give the upper hand to: the artsy-perpetual students? Or the franco-warriors who can do things for themselves? And even if they do figure it out, they can rest easy: whatever he decides today, you can be sure he'll change his mind tomorrow.
Now, we can all expect the usual grab-bag of silly ideas pasted together in some half-assed campaign platform: banning english, building a high-speed rail link between Rimouski and Tadoussac, free Burgundy on St-Johnny the Baptist day. But the clever part of their campaign is not being reported. Its called the two Gilles strategy.
In order to keep the separatist coalition together, Gilles Duceppe plans to present himself as two completely different, almost dissonant personalities: left-bank Gilles and country-boy Gilles.
Left-bank Gilles will be presented to Montreal islanders. This Gilles Duceppe will wear alot of turtle-necks and affect an Elysean accent to appeal to the square-rimmed glasses set. He'll eat spring rolls with peanut sauce and talk about the power of collectivism and transcendental nullities. He'll decry the lack of funding for post-colonial, neo-abstract art and of course, talk of an independent Quebec governed by a secreteriat of students and tam-tam players.
Country-boy Gilles will emerge everytime Mr. Duceppe heads off island. This Gilles Duceppe will snear at turtle-neck wearers and speak like a trucker from Rouyn-Noranda. He'll eat poutine and talk about Montreal as a trojan horse against the french language. He'll decry the funding of useless culture from the Plateau of Montreal when forestry workers need secure employment and of course, talk about an independent Quebec that thrives on the can-do nature of the Quebecois nation.
Since election campaigns are short, there's a good chance that neither side of the separatist coalition will figure out who Gilles would ultimately give the upper hand to: the artsy-perpetual students? Or the franco-warriors who can do things for themselves? And even if they do figure it out, they can rest easy: whatever he decides today, you can be sure he'll change his mind tomorrow.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Letters, we get letters, we get lots and lots of letters
My weekdays end in the fashion that all good Liberals despise: a day's work done, I get off the train and walk through the park to my home. I walk in, take my jacket and boots off and announce, "honey, I'm home." My love rushes to the door, in her ribbons and apron, to give me a kiss and hand me my mail while Rainbow and Skypiper barely glance away from the television. Normally, the mail consists of bills, offers for credit cards and each week, The Economist. Today was different. Today, I got mail from Jack Layton.
Jack sent me a flyer proclaiming: "The Harper-Dion Coalition is Taking Canada and Quebec in the wrong direction." Good politics. His argument is that since Dion is propping up the Tories, Dion's Liberals are in effect a coalition with the Tories. If you don't like Tory policies, you must swap out Liberals for Dippers.
All this leads to an electoral calculus that is sure to put a smile on Stephen Harper's face. You see:
1. A vote for the Liberals is a vote for the Tories since Liberals will prop the Tories up through perenial abstentions.
2. A vote for the Dippers is a vote for the Tories since voting Dipper splits the left-wing vote between Grits and Dippers allowing Tories to win tight ridings.
3. A vote for the Green Party is a vote for the Tories since a vote for the Greens is a vote for the Liberals which in turn (see point 1) is a vote for the Tories.
4. A vote for the Bloc is a vote for the Tories because the Bloc and Dippers are ideological cousins who will both make a left-wing flank attack on Liberals thus splitting left wing votes to allow Tories to win tight ridings.
5. A vote for the Tories is, well, just that, a vote for the Tories.
No matter how we vote in the next election, Stephen Harper wins 308 ridings.
Jack sent me a flyer proclaiming: "The Harper-Dion Coalition is Taking Canada and Quebec in the wrong direction." Good politics. His argument is that since Dion is propping up the Tories, Dion's Liberals are in effect a coalition with the Tories. If you don't like Tory policies, you must swap out Liberals for Dippers.
All this leads to an electoral calculus that is sure to put a smile on Stephen Harper's face. You see:
1. A vote for the Liberals is a vote for the Tories since Liberals will prop the Tories up through perenial abstentions.
2. A vote for the Dippers is a vote for the Tories since voting Dipper splits the left-wing vote between Grits and Dippers allowing Tories to win tight ridings.
3. A vote for the Green Party is a vote for the Tories since a vote for the Greens is a vote for the Liberals which in turn (see point 1) is a vote for the Tories.
4. A vote for the Bloc is a vote for the Tories because the Bloc and Dippers are ideological cousins who will both make a left-wing flank attack on Liberals thus splitting left wing votes to allow Tories to win tight ridings.
5. A vote for the Tories is, well, just that, a vote for the Tories.
No matter how we vote in the next election, Stephen Harper wins 308 ridings.
Labels: Thanks Jack - but this mailing is your carbon footprint - not mine
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Bush's Poodle
Courtesy of national newswatch.
Please, please tell me my Tory friends are saving this for the next Dion ad.
Labels: Insert your own joke - I'm going to bed
How come the moderates never speak out?
Actually they do. Talking about asking for a fatwa..... makes me pray for two things:
1) An ounce of this woman's courage.
2) Never having to require even that ounce.
1) An ounce of this woman's courage.
2) Never having to require even that ounce.
Labels: My gut says she's voting McCain
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
What's below the bottom of the barrel? Ask Stephane Dion
A poll out today shows that Stephane Dion has done what many thought impossible: bottomed out after bottoming out. Many Liberals quote their boss and whine, "that's not fair!" They will point to 30 second ads released eons ago about how Stephane Dion is not a leader.
Negative ads, however, only work when they ring true and recent events confirm once again that Stephane Dion is not someone that could be cheif executive of the country.
Negative ads, however, only work when they ring true and recent events confirm once again that Stephane Dion is not someone that could be cheif executive of the country.
- A string of by-elections in Liberal strongholds are set for March 17th. Through Stephane Dion's brilliant strategy, the only one that is of interest is in Saskatchewan where Dion muscled out David Orchard - and a local nomination contest - in favour of forcing an NDP party-hopper on the riding. The Liberals will likely sweep the other three ridings but no one cares: Stephane Dion made this riding the test of his leadership. Even a Tory propagandist shakes his head in bewilderment.
- Concurrently, Stephane Dion is doing everything he can to belittle Bob Rae - one of his candidates in one of those by-elections. While Bob Rae is nominally the Liberal Foreign Affairs critic, he was left behind on the Liberal trip to Afghanistan in favour of Dion off-again, off-again playmate, Iggy.
- During the Afghan trip, Stephane Dion left the Afghan government with the impression that he is the Queen of Hearts from Wonderland. It doesn't matter what the facts are, he'll stick to his opinion thank you. It doesn't matter that his party made the original commitment to Afghanistan, he's happy to bugger off, thank you.
But the worst is yet to come:
Liberals have argued that Canadians don't want an election and therefore, they have a duty to abstain from every confidence vote in parliament. Well, the poll that shows Dion tanking shows that Canadians by a super-majority (66%) want the election in October 2009.
Either they sit on their hands until then or prove what Canadians suspect - Liberals act as huge carbon sinks for bovine emissions when they point to Canadians desire not to have an election as a reason for their abstentions.
Labels: Only Saskatchewan's By-Election Matters now
Monday, January 14, 2008
Blogger for Change
If there's one thing this blog is about its change. If there's two things this blog is about its hope and change. If there are three things this blog is about, its hope, change and more change.
Everywhere I look, I see an unquenchable thirst for change. The kind of change that made this United States of America great. The kind of change we got from George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and John F Kennedy and Dr. King. Mr friends, we can make change.
Now, there's cynics out there who say we can't make change. But they are the couch potatoes of change, content to snack and snipe from the sidelines while the brave, audacious and optimistic make the change even the cynics quietly cry for. Too long, we have listened to cynics. We let them throw up barriers to change and thought we couldn't surmount those barriers. But we can and I say to you today: let's climb over those barriers to the glorious world of change!
Now, there's sourpusses out there who don't want change. You know who they are. A small band of folks who prosper on the misery of no change. Well my friends, time's come to steamroll over these elites and insiders and pave the way to the land of change!
Who's with me? Let me hear you say it: change! change! change!
Everywhere I look, I see an unquenchable thirst for change. The kind of change that made this United States of America great. The kind of change we got from George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and John F Kennedy and Dr. King. Mr friends, we can make change.
Now, there's cynics out there who say we can't make change. But they are the couch potatoes of change, content to snack and snipe from the sidelines while the brave, audacious and optimistic make the change even the cynics quietly cry for. Too long, we have listened to cynics. We let them throw up barriers to change and thought we couldn't surmount those barriers. But we can and I say to you today: let's climb over those barriers to the glorious world of change!
Now, there's sourpusses out there who don't want change. You know who they are. A small band of folks who prosper on the misery of no change. Well my friends, time's come to steamroll over these elites and insiders and pave the way to the land of change!
Who's with me? Let me hear you say it: change! change! change!
Labels: I've watched so much CNN that my only language is Obamaspeak
Saturday, January 12, 2008
The Irrelevancy of Being Bob Rae
Stephane Dion has made it to Afghanistan, finally. However, the trip looked alot scarier than a booze'n'shmooze in Bali, so he took someone to protect him. And who should that be? Naturally, you'd take your foreign affairs critic; the person who would become, presumably, your Foreign Affairs minister as soon as you bring down the government. So, that would be Bob Rae.
But Bob Rae was nowhere in sight - probably brunching at some Bistro along the Danforth in Toronto while his pal and nemesis, Michael Ignatieff, got the PR spot.
In ordinairy times, this would be a terrible snub of Orchardian proportions and a clear sign of Stephane Dion's lack of confidence in his foreign affairs critic. But these are not ordinairy times - Bob Rae is running for office in a by-election and having him on that trip, pictured having tea with President Karzai, would be an excellent reminder of the pivotal role Bob Rae is supposed to play in the Liberal dream team. So, this is a snub of supra-Orchardian proportions.
Afterall, the next time a journalist wants a foreign policy question answered by the Liberals, it will be natural to go to Iggy first and then, only in a pinch, move on to Bob Rae.
But Bob Rae was nowhere in sight - probably brunching at some Bistro along the Danforth in Toronto while his pal and nemesis, Michael Ignatieff, got the PR spot.
In ordinairy times, this would be a terrible snub of Orchardian proportions and a clear sign of Stephane Dion's lack of confidence in his foreign affairs critic. But these are not ordinairy times - Bob Rae is running for office in a by-election and having him on that trip, pictured having tea with President Karzai, would be an excellent reminder of the pivotal role Bob Rae is supposed to play in the Liberal dream team. So, this is a snub of supra-Orchardian proportions.
Afterall, the next time a journalist wants a foreign policy question answered by the Liberals, it will be natural to go to Iggy first and then, only in a pinch, move on to Bob Rae.
Labels: You can picture President Karzai thinking - what a waste of my time
Friday, January 11, 2008
CBC Bias is Unique
You suckers are lucky I'm switching computers at home and therefore must, in my luddite fashion, figure out how to get my internet back up and running - what it proves is that for the wicked, there is occasionally rest.
However - I must insert a few pennies into this debate. Oh. Brother.
So we all know about the scandal. Conservatives, like me, get cracked up like Cracatoa over something like this. Liberals shrug their shoulders and say, "what else is new"? Now, we have two superstars of Liberaldom arguing a false equivalency as you can read for yourselves. But pointing out the fallacy to a Liberal will be very, very difficult. Still, I'll try.
Okay. The crux of the Liberal-CBC collaboration issue is that the CBC is a publicly-owned broadcaster that pretends to be "the voice of Canadians". To my mind, that would mean the strictest neutrality when covering political news which does not include colluding with political parties.
Private news organizations and media companies must generate returns to stay alive - without public consumption they shrivel up and croak. So, we can deal with bias very easily. What about a public broadcaster beholden to no public?
However - I must insert a few pennies into this debate. Oh. Brother.
So we all know about the scandal. Conservatives, like me, get cracked up like Cracatoa over something like this. Liberals shrug their shoulders and say, "what else is new"? Now, we have two superstars of Liberaldom arguing a false equivalency as you can read for yourselves. But pointing out the fallacy to a Liberal will be very, very difficult. Still, I'll try.
Okay. The crux of the Liberal-CBC collaboration issue is that the CBC is a publicly-owned broadcaster that pretends to be "the voice of Canadians". To my mind, that would mean the strictest neutrality when covering political news which does not include colluding with political parties.
Private news organizations and media companies must generate returns to stay alive - without public consumption they shrivel up and croak. So, we can deal with bias very easily. What about a public broadcaster beholden to no public?
Labels: L'Etat C'est Moi said a Liberal
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Canadian Surge
The New Hampshire primary is the most recent example that polls are as reliable as a Liberal book of campaign pledges. Polls provide opinion snapshots that represent a single nanosecond of public mood - and like that great Verdi aria goes, "La Demos e Mobile". (Okay, someone could proof read that into a very clever play on words). Translation: the public is forever fickle. Regardless, polls are fun and, when favorable, cheap ways to bash your opponents.
So, with that in mind, wow. The Tories have, over the Christmas holiday, regained any lost ground that came during the Schreiber/Bali two for one. The pollster suggests this is because governments look good when they are in low-profile mode. However, I'd suggest there's a bit more to it than that:
1. The end of year interviews offered, as they always do, an in-depth look at our Prime Minister. Canadians, a reasonable bunch, cannot help but admire the Prime Minister and take pride that our country produces such a sober, high-minded and intelligent man. Even when they disagree with him, Canadians see that the great substance to him (cue the fat joke).
2. The Liberals are mired in an eye-rolling broo-ha-ha that only Liberals could concoct. In Saskatchewan, they push aside David Orchard to force a party-switching candidate on a riding so they can stress their commitment to having female representation. If asked to choose between democratic processes and female representation, Liberals choose the latter seeing nothing weird about it. There is a whiff of high school student council politics in all this "principle" above democracy stuff.
So, the Schreiber stuff has been something like an iron lung for the Liberals. Without it, they have NDP baffoonery keeping them afloat and that's it.
And those Dippers have Dipped to new lows, or practically new lows. When I look back at December, I am not surprised by this awful setback. What does surprise me is that the Grits don't pick up any of the lost voters. There's a lesson there:
Grits, you must tack even more left to capture those available left-wing votes. Please, oh, please, go deep left; it will do us all good.
So, with that in mind, wow. The Tories have, over the Christmas holiday, regained any lost ground that came during the Schreiber/Bali two for one. The pollster suggests this is because governments look good when they are in low-profile mode. However, I'd suggest there's a bit more to it than that:
1. The end of year interviews offered, as they always do, an in-depth look at our Prime Minister. Canadians, a reasonable bunch, cannot help but admire the Prime Minister and take pride that our country produces such a sober, high-minded and intelligent man. Even when they disagree with him, Canadians see that the great substance to him (cue the fat joke).
2. The Liberals are mired in an eye-rolling broo-ha-ha that only Liberals could concoct. In Saskatchewan, they push aside David Orchard to force a party-switching candidate on a riding so they can stress their commitment to having female representation. If asked to choose between democratic processes and female representation, Liberals choose the latter seeing nothing weird about it. There is a whiff of high school student council politics in all this "principle" above democracy stuff.
So, the Schreiber stuff has been something like an iron lung for the Liberals. Without it, they have NDP baffoonery keeping them afloat and that's it.
And those Dippers have Dipped to new lows, or practically new lows. When I look back at December, I am not surprised by this awful setback. What does surprise me is that the Grits don't pick up any of the lost voters. There's a lesson there:
Grits, you must tack even more left to capture those available left-wing votes. Please, oh, please, go deep left; it will do us all good.
Labels: Cheap gloating that's good until the next poll comes out
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Birth of a McCainiac
I'm often told that Barak Obama is an inspiring speaker. He is, to be sure, very good - a lovely sing-song oratory that's as pleasant to listen to as a cardinal chirping in the early morning. But the words almost always leave me cold - I can never escape the sense that I've read them all before just above the "please recycle" line of a Starbucks cup.
Tonight, minus the frothy topping of an Obama latte, I heard perhaps the most inspiring political speech ever. It came, in understated and humble fashion, from John McCain. Were it not for the paycheck I must earn, I would be on a bus to Michigan to volunteer for the next big primary test.
America and the world should be so lucky as to have President McCain.
(Via Tiger, here is the speech in transcript. Churchillian indeed.)
Tonight, minus the frothy topping of an Obama latte, I heard perhaps the most inspiring political speech ever. It came, in understated and humble fashion, from John McCain. Were it not for the paycheck I must earn, I would be on a bus to Michigan to volunteer for the next big primary test.
America and the world should be so lucky as to have President McCain.
(Via Tiger, here is the speech in transcript. Churchillian indeed.)
Labels: Find that McCain Speech if you missed it
Canadian Ass
A fun poll came out today announcing a shocking result:
Canadians would vote, en masse, for the Democrats in the US elections, by a margin of 4 to 1. You have to wonder, does this mean "Canadians would vote for Democrats if Canadians were American" or "Canadians would vote for Democrats as Canadians looking out for Canadian interests"? If the latter, I suggest the Donkey-mania is, just that: a mania. When Bill Clinton argued for free trade, he was a revolutionary within Democratic ranks. On the campaign trails, Democrats rouse their rabbles with attacks on NAFTA and fantasies about a hugely wealthy middle class working nightshifts in textile mills. Canadian interests are best served by New England Republicans: socially liberatrian, security minded and fiscally conservative.
So, it must be, that Canadians answer the question as if they were Americans. In that case, I follow the logic - given that healthcare is the overriding concern here in Canada. However, I wonder if Canadians are as enamoured with the trial-lawyer culture and Hollywood-fetishization that Democrats bring to American political life. Well, if this poll shows us anything, its that the Democrats would be the only ones with imperial interests in Canada. To Republicans, we are just California without the pistachios.
With Friends Like This
More spectacular - Conservatives would vote for the Democrats by large, large margins. You know, the party that Liberals call "Bush poodles" or whatever. Maybe Stephane Dion should start demonizing Barak Obama....
Canadians would vote, en masse, for the Democrats in the US elections, by a margin of 4 to 1. You have to wonder, does this mean "Canadians would vote for Democrats if Canadians were American" or "Canadians would vote for Democrats as Canadians looking out for Canadian interests"? If the latter, I suggest the Donkey-mania is, just that: a mania. When Bill Clinton argued for free trade, he was a revolutionary within Democratic ranks. On the campaign trails, Democrats rouse their rabbles with attacks on NAFTA and fantasies about a hugely wealthy middle class working nightshifts in textile mills. Canadian interests are best served by New England Republicans: socially liberatrian, security minded and fiscally conservative.
So, it must be, that Canadians answer the question as if they were Americans. In that case, I follow the logic - given that healthcare is the overriding concern here in Canada. However, I wonder if Canadians are as enamoured with the trial-lawyer culture and Hollywood-fetishization that Democrats bring to American political life. Well, if this poll shows us anything, its that the Democrats would be the only ones with imperial interests in Canada. To Republicans, we are just California without the pistachios.
With Friends Like This
More spectacular - Conservatives would vote for the Democrats by large, large margins. You know, the party that Liberals call "Bush poodles" or whatever. Maybe Stephane Dion should start demonizing Barak Obama....
Labels: Interesting numbers
Monday, January 07, 2008
Road to Tory Majority Through Gender Gap?
To my eye, this type of story comes out every six months or so - in order to win a majority (or, in the old days, government), Tories must close the gender gap. Its sort of a nice filler story, looks almost like news analysis and covers up the fact that you haven't much to say today.
Tories have a weakness, they turn off women (from personal experience, I can assure you, that is merely in the political sense). The usual reaction from those Bush poodles like us is the obvious: doesn't the polling indicate the opposite? Namely, Liberals have a problem - they turn off men. When you look at the Liberal Dream Team - Dion, Rae, Ignatieff, Corderre, Holland, Kennedy, Dryden - you basically have a casting call for "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" So the gender gap works both ways, but even when they were in opposition, it was the Tory gender gap that makes news.
However, the other logical conclusion of this polling data is that in order to secure a majority government, the Tories shouldn't try to close the gender gap, they should try to widen it. If men voted Tory not 42% - 28% but 55% - 15% then we'd have ourselves a Tory majority. Its remarkable that no pollster or analyst who puts these silly pieces together ever points that mathematical possibility out - these experts in the field see "closing the gap" as the only option.
To my mind, widening the gender gap is a much easier thing to accomplish. All you need are a handful of policies targetted to making men happy. Including:
1. Abolishing the GST on chicken wings.
2. Declaring the day of the Stanley Cup finals a statutory holiday.
3. Introducing beer delivery via Canada Post.
4. Requiring all male pants sold in Canada to come with comfy, elastic waistbands to grow with our burgeoning bellies.
5. Abolish broccoli.
Right there are 5 simple, practical suggestions for widening the gender gap. Men across the land will flock to a party that promises to deliver those 5 priorities. And come on ladies, if any of you are like the ladies I know, then at least items 2 and 3 will get you thinking about the Conservatives.
Tories have a weakness, they turn off women (from personal experience, I can assure you, that is merely in the political sense). The usual reaction from those Bush poodles like us is the obvious: doesn't the polling indicate the opposite? Namely, Liberals have a problem - they turn off men. When you look at the Liberal Dream Team - Dion, Rae, Ignatieff, Corderre, Holland, Kennedy, Dryden - you basically have a casting call for "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" So the gender gap works both ways, but even when they were in opposition, it was the Tory gender gap that makes news.
However, the other logical conclusion of this polling data is that in order to secure a majority government, the Tories shouldn't try to close the gender gap, they should try to widen it. If men voted Tory not 42% - 28% but 55% - 15% then we'd have ourselves a Tory majority. Its remarkable that no pollster or analyst who puts these silly pieces together ever points that mathematical possibility out - these experts in the field see "closing the gap" as the only option.
To my mind, widening the gender gap is a much easier thing to accomplish. All you need are a handful of policies targetted to making men happy. Including:
1. Abolishing the GST on chicken wings.
2. Declaring the day of the Stanley Cup finals a statutory holiday.
3. Introducing beer delivery via Canada Post.
4. Requiring all male pants sold in Canada to come with comfy, elastic waistbands to grow with our burgeoning bellies.
5. Abolish broccoli.
Right there are 5 simple, practical suggestions for widening the gender gap. Men across the land will flock to a party that promises to deliver those 5 priorities. And come on ladies, if any of you are like the ladies I know, then at least items 2 and 3 will get you thinking about the Conservatives.
Labels: Winning Canada One Vote at a Time
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Cash is the most important human right
Mark Steyn and MacLeans magazine are being taken to court - well, not a court, a human rights commission - well, not 1 human rights commissions, but 3. In Canada, after Tim Horton's, the second most popular franchise is a human rights commission. MacLeans published an excerpt of Steyn's book, "America Alone", which ticked off a quartet of law students at Osgoode Hall and the Canadian Islamic Congress. The aggrieved parties feel that it was burning pile of Islamophobia and therefore should have been censored.
The case is, of course, ludicrous; trivializing the very notion of human rights: Rex Murphy sums up the point perfectly here. These commissions, in hearing these cases - along with the Danish cartoon stuff a couple of years back - corrode the value of human rights as their jurisprudence splits away from any strict conception of these rights to a busybody's fantasy of perpetual nicy-nice making.
The problem is that if these commissions stuck to their mandates, they would have little to do and would be hard pressed to justify the tax dollars they gobble up supporting organigrams like this. Like any bureaucracy, their first priority is to make next year's budget equal to or greater than last year's budget. That can't happen in a country where human rights are cherished and very largely respected - so you have to go about making work for yourselves. Thank god, for the human rights commissions, that there is a murder of activists who believe they have a human right to censor the materials the Canadian public are allowed to read.
The case is, of course, ludicrous; trivializing the very notion of human rights: Rex Murphy sums up the point perfectly here. These commissions, in hearing these cases - along with the Danish cartoon stuff a couple of years back - corrode the value of human rights as their jurisprudence splits away from any strict conception of these rights to a busybody's fantasy of perpetual nicy-nice making.
The problem is that if these commissions stuck to their mandates, they would have little to do and would be hard pressed to justify the tax dollars they gobble up supporting organigrams like this. Like any bureaucracy, their first priority is to make next year's budget equal to or greater than last year's budget. That can't happen in a country where human rights are cherished and very largely respected - so you have to go about making work for yourselves. Thank god, for the human rights commissions, that there is a murder of activists who believe they have a human right to censor the materials the Canadian public are allowed to read.
Labels: Human Rights Commissions - Part 1
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Freak out your profs, join the Conservative Party
I think the ads splashed across Canadian campuses urging students to "Freak out your profs, join the Conservative Party" are brilliant, tapping into a theme this blog has pushed hard over its life: today's rebel is a conservative.
Today's conformist is a matty-haired groovemeister gorging on a diet of garbonzo beans, draped in Guatemalan knits, never without his devil sticks and tam tams. They are boring, soulless creatures whose conversation sounds like the pamphlets they hand out in subway stations. They worship at the alter of Noam Chomsky, completely unaware of a time when that professor had something to say about linguistics.
They are, however, the darlings of the liberal arts world; parroting the slogans their professors cherish, asking "tough" questions as if in a slow-pitch game with the academics that shepherd them carefully along a very narrow patch of human thought.
Show me a student who says that liberal arts departments in the Canadian university are bastions of free thinking and I'll show you a socialist robotron who, if ambitious, will become a Liberal, and if not, a Dipper. (True enough, years of taxes and mortgage payments can grind away the ideological shapes sculpted by our professorial class, but only sometimes.)
So, its obvious then. If you are a young individualist, you should prefer the party of individualism. If you believe in your capacity to make choices, you should prefer the party that seeks to increase the choices you can make. If you believe in the inherent goodness of humans and their capacity to improve the world by a million small steps, freely taken, then you should prefer the party that does as well.
Today's conformist is a matty-haired groovemeister gorging on a diet of garbonzo beans, draped in Guatemalan knits, never without his devil sticks and tam tams. They are boring, soulless creatures whose conversation sounds like the pamphlets they hand out in subway stations. They worship at the alter of Noam Chomsky, completely unaware of a time when that professor had something to say about linguistics.
They are, however, the darlings of the liberal arts world; parroting the slogans their professors cherish, asking "tough" questions as if in a slow-pitch game with the academics that shepherd them carefully along a very narrow patch of human thought.
Show me a student who says that liberal arts departments in the Canadian university are bastions of free thinking and I'll show you a socialist robotron who, if ambitious, will become a Liberal, and if not, a Dipper. (True enough, years of taxes and mortgage payments can grind away the ideological shapes sculpted by our professorial class, but only sometimes.)
So, its obvious then. If you are a young individualist, you should prefer the party of individualism. If you believe in your capacity to make choices, you should prefer the party that seeks to increase the choices you can make. If you believe in the inherent goodness of humans and their capacity to improve the world by a million small steps, freely taken, then you should prefer the party that does as well.
Labels: Footnote here to say - Mr. Dion - keep up your betrayal against David Orchard
Friday, January 04, 2008
Dion scores Homerun
This corner hasn't said a kind word about Stephane Dion since.... since.... since... since he diagnosed me and my Tory compatriots as having no social conscience way back on day 2 of the Dion Era. But on the "enemy of my enemy" principle, I must salute Stephane Dion for his boldest decision yet.
As we all know, Stephane Dion would not be leader of the Liberal party without David Orchard's support - Gerard Kennedy would be. David Orchard, an ambition looking for a political outlet, expected some quid pro quo - at minimum the candidacy of his choosing. But it ain't gonna be.
While I found Stephane Dion's courting of the Orchard movement disconcerting, if it was all a big game to win a few delegates at the convention and then toss them all away like so much tissue paper, I'm a happy man. Stephane Dion has blocked an anti-free trade, anti-American goon with ridiculous facial hair from any official influence in Canada. Here's hoping Mr. Dion continues weeding out anti-trade, anti-Americans from his caucus going forward.
As we all know, Stephane Dion would not be leader of the Liberal party without David Orchard's support - Gerard Kennedy would be. David Orchard, an ambition looking for a political outlet, expected some quid pro quo - at minimum the candidacy of his choosing. But it ain't gonna be.
While I found Stephane Dion's courting of the Orchard movement disconcerting, if it was all a big game to win a few delegates at the convention and then toss them all away like so much tissue paper, I'm a happy man. Stephane Dion has blocked an anti-free trade, anti-American goon with ridiculous facial hair from any official influence in Canada. Here's hoping Mr. Dion continues weeding out anti-trade, anti-Americans from his caucus going forward.
Labels: Congratulations Mr. Dion on Rejecting David Orchard
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Endorsements from the Grave
In the canwest papers today (NP and the Gazette), there is an article about Iowa's biggest star, John Wayne, and how he might have caucused were he alive today. John Wayne, it seems, would have been a Guiliani man, not just because they both had three wives.
Now, since many of you are probably curious about how other famous dead people might have caucused, Chuckercanuck has used special powers granted to him after a bite from a radiated spider and communed with the dead to get their feedback.
John Edwards - Vincent Price has jumped on the Edwards bandwagon. Says Price from heaven, "I still have a weakness for the very creepy."
Barak Obama - Sammy Davis Jr. thinks its just swell that a guy who can slip under a door has a shot at the White House.
Hillary Clinton - Elanor Roosevelt has a thing for Hillary. Why? Err.. ummm.. I'll let you draw your conclusions after your own exhaustive google search.
John McCain - Elvis Presley is a sucker for veterans, his only problem with McCain was the whole "Bomb Iran" fiasco. McCain, according to the King, should have played it a little cooler and just voiced the "Suspicious Minds" we all have about their nuclear program.
Fred Thompson - Not so much dead as inanimate, Fred Thompson has huge support from bags of hammers everywhere.
Mit Romney - While voicing a note of caution for being "a little too grey", the original Glad garbage bag spokesman was effusive in his support for Mit.
Mike Huckabee - actually, no famous dead person would publicly back him, but sources close to the campaign assure us Jesus is a big fan.
Now, since many of you are probably curious about how other famous dead people might have caucused, Chuckercanuck has used special powers granted to him after a bite from a radiated spider and communed with the dead to get their feedback.
John Edwards - Vincent Price has jumped on the Edwards bandwagon. Says Price from heaven, "I still have a weakness for the very creepy."
Barak Obama - Sammy Davis Jr. thinks its just swell that a guy who can slip under a door has a shot at the White House.
Hillary Clinton - Elanor Roosevelt has a thing for Hillary. Why? Err.. ummm.. I'll let you draw your conclusions after your own exhaustive google search.
John McCain - Elvis Presley is a sucker for veterans, his only problem with McCain was the whole "Bomb Iran" fiasco. McCain, according to the King, should have played it a little cooler and just voiced the "Suspicious Minds" we all have about their nuclear program.
Fred Thompson - Not so much dead as inanimate, Fred Thompson has huge support from bags of hammers everywhere.
Mit Romney - While voicing a note of caution for being "a little too grey", the original Glad garbage bag spokesman was effusive in his support for Mit.
Mike Huckabee - actually, no famous dead person would publicly back him, but sources close to the campaign assure us Jesus is a big fan.
Labels: Beats talking about Danny Williams
