On Jesus and Porcine Fellation from Grandinite
Kate blew the lid off a story about the student newspaper at USask publishing a cartoon of Jesus fellating a pig, and it’s reached statospheric proportions, having been picked up by Canada.com and Fark. It looks like plenty of readers of the c... [Read More]

Tracked on March 8, 2006 2:43 PM

Christian Cartoon Crusades! from MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
APOSTASY! BLASPHEMY! Burn the embassies! Burn their flag! Boycott Canadian products! Boycott their beer…and…and…I dunno, whatever the hell else they make! Goofy movies, or hockey or something! I just got a text message that sai... [Read More]

Tracked on March 8, 2006 7:09 PM

A Response From the Cartoonist from Verum Serum
The cartoonist who created the capitalist piglet cartoon has now responded in the comments section of the Small Dead Animals post about this. There is also a longer and somewhat confusing defense published in the new edition of The Sheaf out today. Fir... [Read More]

Tracked on March 9, 2006 1:57 PM

Well said Kate,
Too many things are taken for "grant"ed

"..demonstrate the courage of their left-wing convictions."

That would take too long. I say fire-bomb their houses - death to the infidel and all that - as it seems to be quite effective these days.

And where the hell is PETA? Thought they'd be all over this one.

I wonder if we capitalists can use that piggy thing, good god, as much as I despise all those "hate speech" laws and commisions and what not, seeing some lefty idiot hoist on that petard would be very hard not to smile about.

Schadenfreude - it's not just for lefties anymore.

Yes the Human Rights Commission was taking it a bit far, but then again,it was wrong to post it.

Substitute your PC minority group and then suddenly it is alright to complain as we are standing up for equal rights.

Ironically, and if anything, this is a debate on protecting our freedom of speech, not surpressing it.

Kate:

Having a lazy streak, I'll just repeat a comment I made on a previous thread. Did you see it, BTW?

Think of it this way:

The interesting part of all this cartoon foolishness, (Mohammad insult, no, Christian insult, yes) is the context, not the content.
It's a University publication. A University was supposed to teach you how to think, but it has become a reality that to get an Arts degree, you must merely regurgitate whatever a particular prof thinks, and by extension what the institution thinks. Ergo, "Capitalist Piglet".
Where is "Socialist Piglet"?
Again, context.
On the positive side, the kid who drew that cartoon, and the kids who publish the Sheaf, have likely gotten more genuine "education" from this entire canard than a year of university provides!

One of my favourite T-shirt slogans comes to mind;

"I Have A Liberal Arts Degree...
Would You Like Fries With That?"

Which shines a baleful light on the diminishing value of a U of S "education" in the real world.

Kate:

Maybe it's time for another "editorial" from you, a la 'Best of SDA', asking what these kids are really learning in this institution. And who's teaching. On our dime. I doubt very much that most working taxpayers really know.

Posted by Mad Mike at March 6, 2006 12:35 PM

If there really is hate shown by the cartoon towards, so-called, capitalists, the irony is that it would be hate directed towards the cartoonish Marxian understanding of free enterprise.

Capitalism was invented by Marx as a foil for his theory of communism. He had to have an invented group as a foil because individualist free enterprise is not a unified economic force.

Students should pay 100% of education costs. They get the benefit. The benefit to society is that there would be fewer socialists.

Kate:

Another item. You were on the CFQC TV news last night. Of course all they mentioned was "a blog", not your blog. I noticed the camera shot of a computer screen twice, once cropped to show only the cartoon label, and once to show your blog page, carefully out-of-focus.
They don't want to give credit to the newest competition, do they?

I wonder if all the lefties in Schools today remember how one of the most famous lefties dealt with adversity, greed, and corruption... I refer of course to Stalin.

"All aboard the train to Siberia... except you Mr. Teacher, can I get you to just follow that nice man with the gun to the other side of the building."

In our PC world today, TV and movies can no longer depict "bad guys" who are members of any ethnic or racial group (e.g., Mafia, Islamic terrorists, etc.) so the "safe" target group is corrupt business leaders who literally kill off the competition! Many years back I recall a PBS program that examined students' attitudes towards business. They framed it around the then-popular TV show "Dallas", where corporate greed, corruption, etc. was a recurring theme. Students commented that they realized that this was fiction and believed that it did not influence their opinion of real businesses. However, when these same students' attitudes about business were subsequently suveyed, they noted that many students believed that business leaders would commit murder to improve corporate profits. No wonder so many people today believe capitalism is evil. Yes, I know there have been some big corporate scandals recently, but I don't believe they involved murder for profit! After 28 years in the (mostly) honest real world of capitalism, I am constantly offended at how the media portrays business.

Let's start with the local highschools. I've tangled several times now with local Saskatoon highschool teachers who were Che Guevera worshippers, pushing their crap aggressively during classtime. Michael Boore, Noam Chomsky, and so-called docuementaries like F-911 and The Corporation were shown and treated like fact. 90% of the students believed the teachers in question and the dissenters were treated like fools. When I challenged the teachers they backtracked like the cowards they were, but continued until a call to a superintendant got some of the Che posters and attitude trimmed.

In fairness, there are one or two rightwing teachers I know that go too far as well, and could use a trimming. What ever happened to giving kids a balanced approach.

I ask, do you know what is going on in your child's classroom? Do you know what is going on on your campus... much of which you fund with your tax dollars? To think that we as the general public have no input is wrong, we can at the very least demand balance in all educational institutions. I don't know where the U of S is at today, but when I attended in the 80's, it was a nest of Socialism, mostly in the humanities departments; and the socialogy department might as well have been the local CCCP headquarters. The proffs were all kickbacks to the 60's and Castro/Trudeaupia worshippers. The few among them who were not stood out like roses among thorns.

I'd like to hear from students who are on campusses now. What's it like?

Well said, Kate. You nailed it exactly as it is ... and exactly as it should be. As the last few days have passed, I have drifted past my initial anger and rage at this totally unacceptable insult to our society ( which includes everyone of faith of any stripe, and those who profess no religion). I still am hoping that Y!th and his budds, will find out the true results of their totally stupid actions.I do believe that anyone can make a mistake, but I do not and will never, believe that this was a simple mistake. I am, like you Kate, a little skeptical of how our "politically correct" Human rights commission will react to the many complaints received. It is my sincere hope is that Y!th and those of like mind( or lack of mind, as it were) will find out the real results of their actions will come from how they are received by an enraged public. Like it or not, this has more to do with common decency than it does about anything else. I believe that we all tend to try to stretch the boundaries when we are young. Looking, back, I can hardly believe some of the things we did when in college. It does seem to me though, that we did some crazy things, but there was always a "magical line" that we understood was not to be crossed without consequences resulting. I think we need to allow our youth to find themselves, but we also need to teach them that they also have to pay the price for their own stupid stunts, that cross the decency line. I firmly believe that a true mistake only occurs when it is repeated. I hope this will become a "life lesson" for Y!th and others of like mind. Somehow, I sense from his posts that he hasn't learned a thing. Too bad! Too sad!
As my outrage wanes and my anger subsides, I now see this event as possibly being a milepost for us all. Maybe there are lessons for us all. Maybe we need to cut through some of this political correctness bull s**t and call a spade a spade and a wrong a wrong, as many of us finally did when our decency was challenged past it's breaking point. But we also need to do more than whine about all the wrongs we see in society. We also need to commend the good stuff we see. We need to raise the good to a higher level so that Y!th and his friends have something to strive towards. As the old saying goes, "you an attract more flies with sugar than you can with vinegar"
To Y!th( all the other Y!th's out there)I would say, we will find forgiveness in time, only after we see that you have learned something from your actions. If you don't learn, well, you deserve to spend your life probably working in some extreme leftist organization, totally unable to see the good in our society and only able to bitch and moan about it. To me, Hell would seem like a better place. Only you can make the decisions to where you want to go in your life. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Part of the problem with this cartoon is trying to relate to those that are in favour of it, the level of disgust the rest of us feel. How do you communicate one's level of outrage to a limp-wristed leftie? What's a good "moral equivelency" that would bring said socialists to the same level of outrage?

Hmmm, let's see...you could call Oprah the "C" word? Call Hillary Clinton the "B" word? Suggest "Brokeback" be re-released with two queer goat herding fundamentalist Muslims in the leading roles? Remind them that even their messiah, Karl Marx had to seek employment in the capitalist system (he worked for a printing company) because spewing rhetoric atop an apple box all day was tiring and didn't pay the bills. Tough choices.

I like the prospect of having these modern day hippie wannabes having to cough up the full freight for their alleged education. Nothing makes you take something serious like having to pay for it yourself!

Kate - excellent post - no wonder yours is about the only blog I still visit!!!

Your questioning of whether the U of S lefties would take your suggestions to heart is laughable - I have found that lefties look to the right for all the blame and neglect to look in the mirror to see what is looking back at them!

I cannot tell you how disgusted I am with the cartoon. I am not going to riot or throw stones. I will just pray for those who have pepetrated this monstousity, as they obiously need a lot of help.

Right now the universities are pushing for more government funding. No doubt Harper will give them something but we do have an opportunity to require something in return. And Kate, I'm still "choking" over that "swallow" at the end of your post.

Now that the Sheaf has cemented their apology to an "editorial mistake", seeing as a small oversite let this Jesus blowing a pig comic through the defence lines, and does not represent the usual actions of the paper.

So I guess the Sheaf has never before run a comic mocking a religious faith before this one slipped onto it's pages.

It would be difficult for the Sheaf to hold this moral high ground if one or more catoons surfaced from back issues, and established that the paper regularly printed offensive material to Christians or other religious groups while at the same time holding an apparent double standard for Muslims.

Or maybe nobody bothers keeping back issues?

What these little anti-capitalists need is a semester abroad in Cuba the last bastion of the communist "worker's paradise". No extras either.

They can sit droning platitudes without debate in Cuban classrooms. They can hustle to find extra rice and laundry soap before dinner. They can write a term paper on the wasted efficiency and degradation of a barter economy.

They should live paired with random Cuban families making it possible that a few of them will learn a useful trade like boat building from scrap and celestial navigation at night.

You and I know that the coven of Marxist professors on campuses, of which there are plenty, wouldn't last a year living the life of a regular Cuban. Why these bold faced liars of an empirically proven failed system continue to spew Marxism at our kids and get away with it is beyond me.

I fail to see any relationship to Christianity in that cartoon other than the "Jesus Christ" as exclamation.

As for the poor attempt at imitating the marxists of past generations, its pathetic. By the University rag standards of the late sixties / early seventies that cartoon would have been considered mild and amateurish. Many of those responsible in those days, have gone on to become fat-cat capitalists.

Ignore them, you're making Zundle's out of them. Let the prepies play in their sandbox, sooner or later they will have to enter the real world.

isn't publically funding a university leftist. Having to pay 100% of their education costs seems pretty capitalist to me, so I don't understand how that would teach them the realities of a society without capitalism.

ps. interesting enough STM, where the cartoon creators supposedly attend school, has been the most prominent institution at the university to attempt to remove private funding. This was most notable in their refusal to place Coke machines in their building, at the cost of losing incentives from Coke.

sorry my mistake with regards to STM. They simply refused their share of money coming to university from Coca-Cola I think.

I've been silent in this mess up until now. Not because I was not outraged, but because I did not believe that my outrage and anger would make a difference. Or maybe, I have been desensitized to this kind of university rag crap. Personally, when I saw the cartoon, the first thing I thought is that it was like most any cartoon in any university "newspaper" I have seen. At my undergrad university, where we paid mandatory fees for the creation of smut, the same type of creation could be seen from time to time. I hated it then, I still hate it now.

As a conservative, both small and uppercase c, with a liberal arts degree, I dealt (and still deal) with many of the complaints about academia that are often heard here. However, I personally view it as an opportunity to understand the other side's arguments, so I can strengthen my own. I came out of one of the most left minded schools a stronger conservative than when I went in. I knew the weakness of my arguments and sought to strengthen them. Unfortunately, I was always a minority. In political science classes, I was often the only voice of the right, amongst a sea of leftist theories. That leads me to my final point, one which was mentioned above: the problem must be starting earlier than university. Whether it be the public education system or even parental malaise, I don't know, but I do know that many university students' minds are already shaped before they step foot on campus. Once they are there, the freedom to "become their own person" fosters the illusion that means they can do what they will, consequences be damned.

Do I think the end of subsidization is the solution? No, education is one of very few areas I believe the government needs to be financially involved in at great levels. But I do believe, that the schools that rely more on corporate donations often have a more balanced sensitivity within. (Sure, naming a room or building after a company like Imperial Tobacco gives the leftists something to scream about too, which I always got a kick out of - watching the protests right after a class in which those same students used the new technologies made available by donations from the company they sought to vilify - but then again, I never thought the left understands irony very well, and hypocrisy is another story altogether.)

Reading some of the comments at Fark makes me nauseous at the number of punks supporting the cartoon.

Scary.

OK, eveyone.
Ignore, for just a moment, the attack on a religion.
The whole thing is framed by "Capitalist Piglet"!
Shouldn't the attack on capitalism be an important concern? Considering the source?
Why do we blithely ACCEPT that our universities are rotten with socialist crap? That is the insult. That is the greater danger to our free and capitalist society.
Again, Where is the cartoon strip called "Socialist Piglet"?
There's 2 issues here, not just one. And in the long run, the anti-capitalist atmosphere of our institutions (which we pay for) is the more salient point.

What really matters is that this cartoon must not be investigated anymore than the Muhammed cartoon. This is supposed to be a free country.

Both were seen as very insensitive by their targets.

One difference that should be investigated perhaps is the ways the targets have reacted. Burning and killing on the one hand, debating (and some calls for censorship) on the other.
It certainly shows that Christendom has been forced to become civilized through liberalism and enlightenment, whereas Islam still hasn't reached their enlightenment period.

Where all these opinions and dissecting of the childish antics of some naive university students are mostly well thought out and intelligent,are we not barking up the wrong tree?
In high school,my friends and I "published" newsletters as vile and anti-establishment as this.Has no one ever read Hustler?

Now here we sit,again hurling insults and accusations at fellow Canadians as to where they sit on the political and religious planes.Have we forgotten where all this started?Propagandists
fueled by their desire to exterminate us and these freedoms we debate here today.

These stupid,attention-seeking,unworldly kids have played perfectly into the hands of terrorists half-way around the world,now the rest of us seem all to gleeful to follow.

Am I the only one who feels like a puppet on a string?....I thrive on a good debate like most of you here,just think we are being manipulated to feed on our own.The very real enemy our society faces today is not some immature egomaniacs at the U of S.

You know, it really cracks me up that people are so outraged. Typical hypocrisy among Xian types. The Danish cartoons are "just cartoons" but since "Capitalist Piglet" defames Christianity it's "lefist this and leftist that".

All religion is stupid and has slowed the progress of humanity for thousands of years via holy wars, the Inquisition, jihads, draconian laws, etc. based on words written long ago an interpreted by power-mad control freaks to keep their flocks in line.

Any intelligent person should be able to see religion for the command and control mechanism that it is but still, in 2006 we still base much of our lives on ridiculous superstitions.

Get over it. It's just a cartoon.

Sorry, most of you got it. And got ahead of me on the keyboard.
I think we should all be taking a closer look at both the curriculum and the professors at these schools.
I left the U of S in the early 80's, disgusted with the attitude of many profs. Evidently nothing has changed there.
It should. I'd be willing to debate the merits of freedom and capitalism with these clowns. Anytime. I will only charge one dollar. Anybody else?

;)

yes it is interesting to see that most people on here are more outraged about socialism than they are about a religious insult.

Human rights commissions can be an ugly vindictive little tool.

Ask the print shop operator who was judged by one such 'animal', in Ontario I believe, to be guilty for refusing to print material he felt to be against his beliefs.

He was fined some thousands of dollars, even though there were many other shops who would have taken the money without comment.

It appeals in some tiny way, to hold those responsible for publishing this set of images, *also responsible* for standing behind 'their product' before a tribunal of other than their peers.

Standing behind one's product, or service, or publication is a sizable function of being a business owner, a capitalist.

How does it feel now, knowing that some folks are waiting to spike that call to the Commission, which will know what to do with it from there....sadly?

Some are handing in resignations, and graduating soon, but that doesn't release them from complaints arising from this in the future.

Also troubling is that this paper does NOT pay its own way.

Does it respect those that *do*?

Does it matter?

What does the public do with that, besides cause a good dust-up, bringing it into focus to a larger audience?

And....Any bets more eyes will be on *all* of the student union papers for future content now?

Perhaps that will be penalty enough.... a kind of teaching tool if you like, about who actually pays the freight in the public systems.....what supply and demand and good business sense does in the real world.

Supporters of the editorial staff have a finer edge to walk explaining this to their communities.

A reasoned tone generally earns the ear.

Nat, very good points.

Personally, I feel this nonsense that has degraded so many universities/colleges will not stop until parents/the public demand academic diversity. State level bills demanding academic diversity are being drafted in a few states here.

Universities should be fair and balanced marketplaces of ideas not indoctrination camps of bad science and lame ideology. Look at Larry Summers demise.

Marxism is a failed idea by every empirical measure. It's bad science to say otherwise, but the hacks and ideologues keep the falsehood alive. Conservatives are so frozen out of positions that there is no meaningful voice to challenge their garbage.

I beg everyone who is concerned to spend some time at David Horowitz's site. He was an old radical lefty that saw the light and understanding firsthand the left's dangerousness has been documenting and exposing them for years. His book and articles on campus radicals are eye-openers.

As someone in business and a corporate type I want to thank Kate for pointing out what should have been an obvious point in this debate but was largely missed but everyone.

I copied this posting and filed it a while back.

The commenter said he was a human resources executive who was writing the advice that he was not allowed to say out loud at work.

"Who To Hire"

•Must have at least some base level of hygiene.

• Are easy to get along with

• Are interested in the company’s success.

• Are not self-centered narcissists.

• Are not negative about work.

• Have not sued other people or organizations.

• Smiles more than he or she frowns.

• Who is there mentally and not somewhere else.

• Who treats others with respect, not arrogance

•must not feel justified to steal

•must not lie to suit themselves

* must understand profits are essential to the health of a company.

Avoid those

* who hate others on the basis of their race or gender

• Shows no motivation to learn and work

• Whines about their life, whether true or not

• Are pretty miserable all the time—like a perpetual bad mood

• Will back-stab, gossip, and make up things to suit themselves.

• Shows no interest in being part of a team

* Demonstrates no understanding of basic economics or business principles.

"The very real enemy our society faces today is not some immature egomaniacs at the U of S.
Posted by Canadian Observer at March 8, 2006 11:50 AM"

Canadian Observer,

Those little commies at U of S are just as much the enemy as those terroroists half way around the world. They do their work for them and their work is to destroy our way of life.

They should not be let off lightly. They should be held to account. They will take their beliefs with them out into the world and continue to work against the greater society.

Most of them will wind up working in government offices or classrooms since they don't have the right attitude to work for a capitalist piglet.

They are evil people and they are indeed dangerous. There are several countries now involved in shooting the muslim terrorists in their own lands, but who is shooting the terrorists right here at home?

These students are enemy combantants in my view and should be charged for aiding and abetting the terrorists who share their contempt for our way of life. A bit extreme? ... these are extreme times.

Religion is not stupid, & I'm speaking as an atheist. For many people it seems to provide purpose to their lives, and gives them support in situations that they may otherwise be unable to deal with.

Much of the Left appears to despise religion, particularily Christianty, probably seeing it as a competitor for "command & control".

Yes, there certainly has been injustices done in the name of religion; if we want to refer to the injustices commited underCommunism, the Left can hardly claim to be free from the same guilt.

While I don't proclaim to be a perfect Christian, nor a spokesman for the faith, I find it interesting the amount of scholars out there telling me how I should react when I see Jesus portrayed as a BJ'er.

While for others, the protest is about the Sheaf being hypocritical not publishing one cartoon and then turning around and publishing the other.

But wait, the term "hypocritical" would mean there has to be some standard in place to gauge by - and from what I see in the editorial process of the paper and the skills of the so called cartoonists, this seems to be lacking.

Just for the record, I think the cartoon was lacking in taste and if this was some dipwad magazine, I'd probably would have ignored it.

Seeing the Danish cartoons have been out since September, it wouldn't be right to publish the Danish cartoons now if we knew they would offend Muslims.

Likewise, it wouldn't right to publish Capitalist Pig cartoons if we knew they would offend Christians or Jews to prove a point.

I have to ask, to what purpose? If one needs to prove freedom of speech, then maybe they never really had it at all.

cheers
tom

Duke!!

Thank you for proving my point so well!!

They are NOT evil,they're just stupid kids blindly trusting their profs until they reach the real world.

and obviously duke is at about the same level as them

OK correction. ORGANIZED religion is the problem.

If someone needs a fairy tale to get them through life, they are free to follow whichever one they want.

The minute someone else starts exploiting this then the problems start re: command and control. The problems continune when these same people want to regulate the behavior of those who do not require such crutches as religion, or as is the case here denouncing one "offensive" cartoon while defending another set because they happen to slag Islam. I consider myself a fiscal conservative and extreme civil libertarian, and honestly, if the right could just loose the religious bunk and stop trying to legislate morality then it would probably be more popular among sensible people.

Just came from the Fark...

Erk...feel like I gotta shower or something now.

Oh well, if everyone thought like me, we'd be a perfect society...

;-)

Kate,
I was wondering why you have keep this post in such a prominent position, Thought it might just be to keep us busy while you were busy in the paint booth.

But your "tangent" as you call it cuts through the rest of the rhetoric and hits the nail right on the head.

"That these small-minded refugees of Marxism are receiving a heavily subsidized education at an institution funded by tax revenues.."

They are funded by the very system that they wish to destroy.

It shouldn't be taken for granted that more students studying for more years will improve our world. The reason that so many can do this is because of generous government subsidies and loans.

Another concern put forward by Mark Steyn was something to the effect that:

- keeping large numbers of people in the education system until their mid to late 20's delays adolesce to such an extent that they have a difficult time becoming adults and assuming their responsibilities as such.

The baby boomers made perpetual adolesce an art.
The later generations have made it into a science.

Thanks for keeping the spot light on this.
You have highlighted the foolishness of our current education system. I hope that the MSM and the population in general wake up to this ongoing threat to our society.

Paul,

You shouldn't assume that all people here that hate this cartoon did not feel the same about the Danish cartoons. I personally hated both. But I am more offended by the choice to responsibily decline publishing one set, while negligently (or purposefully, whichever is true) publishing one which will invoke similar offense to another religious group. It is this double standard that is appalling. I believe in free speech, but believe those that advocate for free speech cannot do so without recognition of consequences.

Paul:

You're from Fark, aren't you.

To those of you who do not frequent it: The political and religious threads on Fark.com are populated largely by the sort of people who got kicked off Democratic Underground for being too far LEFT.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen Farkers making arguments that boil down to nothing more complicated than "All Religion Is Poison, And By The Way, Bush Is A C-nt."

Penny,

Diversity in academia exists, you just have to look harder to find it. Unfortunately, not many students desire to put that effort in. There are some that do, but not many. It makes me remember the maxim of many students: D is for Degree. It is sad to me that there are students that do not see the future value of their efforts, or any effort for that matter.

I think my favorite part of this whole uproar was the response by the artistic genius Y!ph in the origional thread, where he excuses his cartoon by saying he published it to "open some eyes".

Because you know, the rest of us all walk around with our eyes shut, right?

Sorry, that should be:

THE CREED OF FARK
1. All Religion Is Poison
1a. Christianity Is Particularly Corrupt And Evil
1b. All Religious People Need To Fuck Off And Die, Like, Right Now
2. America Is Evil
2a. Everything That Is Wrong With The World Is Our Fault
2b. Bush Is A Cunt
2c. Bush Is Stupid
2d. Bush Is Evil
2e. Bush Is Hitler
2f. Bush Is Hitler
2g. Bush Is Hitler

Check out what Rick Mercer is up to.
it's actually funny for him.

http://tinyurl.com/n6dxu

Well yes, of course that's too hard to swallow, the whole premise behind the leftist mantra is that the state pay for everything - they also own everything, and control everything, and it collapsed for a reason that they don't get.

How come we never idealize capitalism. For centuries we have idealized the theory of socialism, and when it failed in practice we blamed falible mankind. But just for mo, fancy capitalism idealized. All children would be educated to the best of their ability, the better to serve the system. Medical treatment would be based on the profit motive but working on the margins that the market would impose. All would recieve treatment, for it is advatageous to the system not to waste human capital. Art would have to appeal to the public and not just an acredited elite. Those who fall through the cracks would recieve effective treatment based on theories that work as opposed to treatment which keeps them where they are, and provides employment for "social scientists". I could go on. The point is why is socialim the only path to a heaven on earth (not that I belive in such a thing)? Why can't we have a fanciful capitalism to counter the equally fanciful socialist ideal?

Just a thought.

The net result of cartoons of religion seem more to cause hate and resentment between different groups while *Humour* is almost incidental.

Cartoons serve the Jihadists as fuel for their rampages and cover for the stealth of warlords who we allowed to take positions in Afghan government.

Those warlords are wolves in sheeps clothing and our troops are at tremndous risk. This comes from Abdule Saraf. Saraf is a true Afghan leader on the side of citizens.

The Afghan conflict opposes the opium industry, the Mafia, the Jihadists and those who enjoy total dictitoral power. Ominous.

The Russians backed years ago. We can not afford to do the same. The momentum that will give to Jihadists will imprision millions of muslims in Burkhas and lock millions out of schools. TG

The Russians backed out, that is.

""That these small-minded refugees of Marxism are receiving a heavily subsidized education at an institution funded by tax revenues.."

They are funded by the very system that they wish to destroy"

Are you joking? Do you even know what the left or socialism is? I'm assuming you dont because of your statement. Socialism basically is a more prominent role of government(eg. crown corps, public health care, PUBLIC EDUCATION) Your so called Leftists are not funded by the system they want to destroy. Saskatchewan has a mixed economy where the government provides subsidies to the university through the use of tax revenues. If they were funded by the system they wanted to destroy it WOULDN'T be tax dollars funding them, it would the students paying their own way.

and jason we do idealize capitalism. That's why North America has a primarily free market.

....if the right could just loose the religious bunk and stop trying to legislate morality then it would probably be more popular among sensible people.

Paul, get a grip. There is a large percentage of the Right that isn't religious. Stop the assumptions. And please point to where the all-powerful religious right have won anything of significance. They can't even have a public nativity creche or clean up porn or the Piss Christ artists.

The US and Canada aren't theocracies.

Your angry diatribe against Christianity reveals an intolerance that isn't very becoming to an alleged educated and balanced person.

More people have perished under godless fascism and communism then religion in the past enlightened century. Maybe more God and less State would have averted the catastrophe.

Anyone that starts off with ALL religions are bad is dismissable. And, most religions are organized whether you are Navajo or Jewish because religion is a heritage and part of a culture.

Your so called Leftists are not funded by the system they want to destroy. Saskatchewan has a mixed economy where the government provides subsidies to the university through the use of tax revenues.

Duh, where do you think the tax revenues come from?

I have always heard that the "A " students usually end up working for the "C" students, once they get out in the real world. After several years of thinking about this, I think there are exceptions. Some ( not all) of the "A" students end up in academia as Professor this or that, simply because they could not exist on their own anywheres else. So we allow this group to dream about life as it should be and allow then to teach our children. I had some amazing teachers at the U of S, but there were also a bunch of off the wall leftists who probably would have trouble finding their ass with both hands.
But then, there are another group of " A" students who have gone out and made a difference. Our beautiful and talented Kate probably falls in this group. We really need more Kate's in our society... people who are not afraid to really live life.. people who are able to use logic... people who know the difference between right and wrong, without having an extremist view. People who can laugh .. even at themselves from time to time,people who are extremely intelligent and who know how to sift through the crap to the real issues at hand. My personal thanks go to Kate for bringing us all provocative thought and debate. If you ever decide to run for politics, I personally will take 3 weeks off and work 24-7 for your campaign. It kinda has a nice ring to it... Prime Minister Kate....

"
"Your so called Leftists are not funded by the system they want to destroy. Saskatchewan has a mixed economy where the government provides subsidies to the university through the use of tax revenues."

"Duh, where do you think the tax revenues come from"

You can't be serious. Of course some taxes come from businesses(Not a majority. Of course our economy is mixed. No lefty in the Canada would be stupid enough to want a pure socialist economy. Taxing businesses in order to pay for public education is an aspect of socialism. Thats what I'm trying to get across PUBLIC EDUCATION IS SOCIALIST BY DEFINITION. How could removing tax funding, wherever it comes from, be considered socialist.

Of course some taxes come from businesses(Not a majority.

Heh, if the taxes don't come from business, it comes those who work for business.

Thats what I'm trying to get across PUBLIC EDUCATION IS SOCIALIST BY DEFINITION.

Of course it is, but socialists wish to destroy the free enterprise that funds the socialism.

Socialists would distract us with cartoons and various other fluff to dirvert our attention from this reality.
listen to part two:

http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2006/200603/20060308.html

http://tinyurl.com/rmpjb

ok fair enough ol hoss. If thats what you think thats fine, but I have never met a socialist who wants to destroy free enterprise. Most simply want to have increased taxes and funding for things such as public education.

Most simply want to have increased taxes and funding for things such as public education.

Increasing taxes drives away business, in turn drives away people, in turn lowering tax revenue. That's why Sask. has so few people while having as many or more resources than Alberta.

Not a bad thing so far as I'm concerned, I like lot's of room:)

Jason, the french coined the word for capitalism as an ideal, its call "laissez faire". The problem with it is it translates into "Leave to do", as in you can do what ever you need to do.

Unfortunately, the Marxist left decided it was synonomous with "Don't care". As a result, it's almost a dirty word now.

The best example of a "laissez faire" economy is, of course, the US, while we hold to a mixed economy of social and capitalist sentiment.

Anyway, the students at UofS are just kids, and when they go out and get real lives, with real problems, and real Tax assessments that don't give them returns, when they've discovered that the best they can hope for is that at least once in their lives they will get a red letter from Revenue Canada, (I pray every year for a second one) then they will understand how much better it was when they were kids.

In the meantime, their just dumb kids, fucking around... just like most of us did when we were that age.

Nothing like a re-assessment from Rev Can to make you grow up to hate Socialism.

of course, Kate, if you had the courage of your convictions, you'd be enlisting in the Marines when you're stateside. In fact, all the soft, pudgy, right wing blog people could do likewise; if they had the courage of their convictions. osama

RE: human rights commission

That is something that could NEVER happen in the U.S. a "human rights commission" that is?

Why? you may ask.

Because it sounds like something right out of the Stalinist purges.

And Canadians think Steven Harper is scary?

You people ARE ASLEEP!

kmm - I feel that socialists by definition want to redistribute wealth. They want to unevenly tax the most hardworking, cleverest, thriftiest and most entreprenurial members of society in order to subsidize the less competent.

The benefactors of this redistribution keep them in power.

I'm not saying that the truly sick, impaired and handicapped shouldn't be subsidized.

That's why I'm in favor of a flat tax across the board. It's fair.

Hey osama,
If you had the courage of YOUR convictions, you would come out of your rat hole and face the US Marines.

Since you're not really OBL himself, but a soft coddled leftist, why don't you go to Iraq and be a human shield for your beloved "minute-men?"

Chicken-dove.

Osama, anyone of US citizenship, regardless of residency or dual status, upon reaching the age of 18 and/or under 35, is required by law to register for the draft.

So said God... I mean Ronald Reagan. Who inadvertantly seriously screwed up my sking vacation as a result when I turned 21.

You should be thankful that law doesn't exist here.

Great post, Kate. I was a sheep for five years, but in the end, the attempted indoctrination I received into the pomosocialist/moral relativist groupthink did not work.

There are many great professors across the country, but much of the arts and humanities
faculties are not trying to teach critical thinking; they are trying to define Critical Thought. It is Clooney Bravery: criticize capitalism, Christianity and a high standard of living in a free country. Islamofascism, Theo van Gogh and people facing Taliban oppression are on their own and in a detached, theoretical manner are really victims of White Male Patriarchal Capitalist Imperialism. There were much more pressing issue to discuss, such as transgendered washrooms.

In 2004, whilte still fairly leftie, I was told by a professor that I should read The Communist Manisfesto, after writing that communism had been proven not to recognize human rights. She said that the USSR hadn't been "real" communism.
Now that I'm working and funding this shit (as opposed to screaming in front of the the legislature to pay even less of the tuition myself), I'm pissed. I share your offense as a proponent of capitalism, Kate.

Some pimply lefty punk rages at the keyboard using "osama" as a handle, now that's original.

kmm
The marxist anticapitalists admittedly hate the evil capitalists.
Capitalists are subhuman gay swine, apparently for the U of S Sheaf reading students.

Only money created by captilists contribute to the tax base.
There is no other money, there is no other part to your "mixed economy".

So take away the hated capitalists money that pays for their anticapitalist marxist education and the marxists have ...nothing, just a proven marxist lie for an ideal.

kmm - I feel that socialists by definition want to redistribute wealth. They want to unevenly tax the most hardworking, cleverest, thriftiest and most entreprenurial members of society in order to subsidize the less competent.

The benefactors of this redistribution keep them in power.

I'm not saying that the truly sick, impaired and handicapped shouldn't be subsidized.

That's why I'm in favor of a flat tax across the board. It's fair.

Posted by penny at March 8, 2006 02:05 PM"

apparently I'm not making myself clear enough. The perils of jumping between studying and posting on the internet I guess.
I know too much socialism can be bad and I know not enough of it can be bad, but I wasn't argueing either way. I was simply saying that removing public funding for the university is a lessening of socialism. So I just don't see how this would make them realize that socialism is bad and capitalism is good. Obviously any student that sees their tuition double or whatever will want to go back to the more socialist method of subsidization through tax revenue. Notice I'm not saying pure socialism, I understand that lots of tax of revenue does come from the free market.

um richfisher, have you ever been to saskatchewan. We have these little things called crown corporation(ie. publicly owned business) Admittedly they don't match the private sector for profits, but they still exist, thus making a mixed economy.

Also a mixed economy isn't they only part of socialism. A province could have a completely private market, yet tax it in order to pay for public funds and it would be considered socialist.

For some reason Minister of Complex Files comes to mind. lol

kmm - south of the border, i had one kid choose a state subsized university and another choose a non-subsidized expensive private college. trust me, younger daughter carrying a hefty amount of student loans is more appreciative of capitalism. she has to hussle more to pay those loans and will never appreciate a government that wants to tax her more. our retirement is shot to hell, but that was our individual choice, too.

all tax money basically comes from the free market.

americans, i think, are bigger risk takers because we can still be. we have less government on our backs. i'll take that anyday over socialism.

Courage,... like posting under a mass murderers name who's presently cowering in a cave.

You could self detonate yourself if you were'nt such a pussy, Osama.

hey penny thats a good point. I still think that suddenly cutting funding to the u of s would serve no purpose other than to alienate the students.

IMO, the only action that should be taken against the University, the paper, or the authors is exactly the action that is being taken. More speech.

If those involved decide, as a result of this speech to self-censor, then that is their choice to make. Forcing them to do so under threat of governmental action is overkill, and may well be a decision that comes back to haunt those calling for it.

So much anger tsk tsk
Listen folks these are young people kicking at the boundaries. In this case the boundaries of a "free" press and "freedom" of speech.
We want them to test boundaries and challenge assumptions don't we?????
Besides, these kids have been brought up on the syrup of Capitalism. It's good for you and everyone else. No one tells them about the dark side and dark history of Capitalism until they get to University. So they are a little angry that they've been lied to by media and parents. Not so much for what they've been told but for what they haven't been told. So they rebel for a little while. We all know that when they graduate they will resume their totally predictable existence as carriers of the flame of Canadian Ideals. So relax everyone.

William, I believe that draft registration may be required for all residents of the USA, regardless of citizenship.

Also one must register at 18, not 21 and what has that got to do with Pres. Reagan? The draft and the draft registry were around way before his terms.

Also there is NO draft, a rather important point you "forgot" to include in your lame complaint about your ski vacation.

Why can't we have a fanciful capitalism to counter the equally fanciful socialist ideal?

Ever read Atlas Shrugged? Part of the reason it's enduringly popular is that it illustrates such an ideal.

Some pimply lefty punk rages at the keyboard using "osama" as a handle, now that's original.

He's just a pimply punk, eh? Thank goodness, he had me shit-scared for a while. I really had to confront myself and my white male hetrosexist capitalist assumptions there. Wow, what a challenging, alternative thing for him to do!

Angela,

"faculties are not trying to teach critical thinking; they are trying to define Critical Thought."

Excellent bon mot! Mind if I borrow it?

In which province do you reside?

No, I said register for, not be, drafted. I also pointed out that it was required from 18 on. I wasn't aware it was for all residents, regardless of citizenship. I pointed it out in regards to being stopped for speeding and then arrested for not having registered, for which I had to spend a night in jail, as it was to late in the day. I did not allude to a draft. Ronald Reagan made it an offence not to registar in 1978 or 79, I can't remember which. Until that time, it was voluntary.

"I'd suggest a not-so-gentle push towards a little moral purity of their own - by removing the stench of "capitalism/consumerism" from their university education. Allow the enlightened to demonstrate the courage of their left-wing convictions. Present them with an invoice for the total cost of their education to date, adjust tuition to cover 100% of the costs, and cut off of any tax-funded student loans."

What a strange argument. Leftists, who argue for state-subsidized education, can "demonstrate the courage of their convictions" by paying for 100% of their own education.

The only people who want students to pay 100% of the cost of their education are those on the extreme right. If you were arguing that they should put their money where their mouth is I would understand your argument.

Subsidized education is not capitalism.

Sorry Osama, Kate couldn't join the US Armed Forces even if she wanted to, unless she's an American citizen or landed immigrant; if my memory serves me correctly about the post 9/11 correspondence I received from a Lt Col Kuhn of the US Marines.

Before you ask, they held me overnight because I also have Canadian Citizenship, and were worried I'd run back to Canada. At the time there was a fair bit of discussion regarding the registration.

I know too much socialism can be bad and I know not enough of it can be bad, but I wasn't argueing either way. I was simply saying that removing public funding for the university is a lessening of socialism. So I just don't see how this would make them realize that socialism is bad and capitalism is good. Obviously any student that sees their tuition double or whatever will want to go back to the more socialist method of subsidization through tax revenue. Notice I'm not saying pure socialism, I understand that lots of tax of revenue does come from the free market.

You are a fuzzy thinker KMM ..

When you say lots of tax comes from the free market ... Try ALL TAX comes from the free market.

Students and others find out that Capitalism is good, when they go out and make something of themselves and reap the rewards. The only rewards in Socialism is the receiving of other peoples money because you present yourself as one of many types of loser.

By cutting off free money to students, they will only be more aliented from the main ...

This is the same logic that Neville Chamberlain used re the Nazi's and many Westerners now use regarding the terrorists. Appease then gets more of them. Kill them gets fewer of them.

Half of the students being subsidized for their watered down useless BAs would do much better learning a trade so they can work to produce wealth rather than piss away their lives in a useless government job or in a class room.

You need to think things through to a more logical conclusion and also to learn a bit more about human nature.

YOu are probably an insecure person and that is why Socialism appeals to you. Or you may just be uninformed. You tell me.

One gentleman has reportedly suggested that the "cradle to grave" support is most responsible for the poor lifestyles that natives endure. He is a former judge, and fluent in six or seven languages, including Japanese, Mandarin & Russian.

He has also stated that natives have been well compensated for the undeveloped land they held at the time. Racist bastard!...

He also happens to be one of the founders of the AFN, and a former Chief on his reserve. Apparently his views don't sit well with some in the native community as he has been banned off some reserves.

My apologies, wrong thread.

Hi Steve,

"No one tells them about the dark side and dark history of Capitalism until they get to University. So they are a little angry that they've been lied to by media and parents. Not so much for what they've been told but for what they haven't been told."

Have you been to a high school history or sociology class in the past 15 years?

Believe me, they've been told about the "evils" of capitalism long before they get to university.

But I agree with your conclusion: they are just kids, and they will learn better very soon.
...............................

As to the whole "critical thought" issue:

Once at university, people are told to be "critical". Unfortunately, "critical thought" is defined as socialist/anti-globalist/radical femminist thought, and anyone who questions these orthodoxies is told that they aren't "thinking critically".

Angela described this process very well above.

"Critical thinking" is a process. It involves freely and rigorously questioning ideas and assertions. It is absolutley necessary in both a university and a free society.

"Critical thought", as defined in many universities, is nothing more than a label for all left-wing thought.

Ironically, "critical thinking" is very effective at breaking down "critical thought".

Re: "Ronald Reagan made it an offence not to registar in 1978 or 79, I can't remember which. Until that time it was voluntary."

As far as I can recall draft registration was not made voluntary when the draft was abolished in the 70's.

And Pres. Reagan was elected in 1980 and took office in Jan 1981.

And all that is required to register for the draft (besides the will to do so) is a stop at a post office.

Who else has noticed John Gormley's flipflop on cartoon freedom of expression? It's ok for the Western Standard to publish offensive cartoons depicting a religious figure from Islam, but it's very wrong to publish an offensive cartoon featuring Jesus, apparently.

What a strange argument. Leftists, who argue for state-subsidized education, can "demonstrate the courage of their convictions" by paying for 100% of their own education.

Another candidate for Minister of Complex Files.

Yes Bozo, but you have to do it. Thank-you for correcting the date. Your breaking the law if you don't register on you 18th year. Also, non-citizens are not required to register as they can't be drafted, and typically you can't serve in the US military unless your a citizen. There are exception of course, but as a general rule, unless they have a reason for wanting you, you can't be a foriegn national.

Anyway, the point I was making was that Canada is fortunate not to have such legislation in place, nor has it had it since the second world war. That is the difference in attitudes on the Left/Right discussion.

For Osama to say that Kate should enlist is, besides not being necessary, not necessarily avoidable in the States. While there is no legislation calling for a draft, the registry is used in the event of the need for a draft.

People are drafted under certain critria, starting at 18 years of age, when that age catagory is exhausted, the next age group is called and so forth. If they actually got to 35 year olds, you can safely say they are probably giving everyone tall enough a gun, regardless of age, as it supposes that they have exhausted the remains of the 35's and under.

Canada has no such registration requirement, and in a draft senario, would have to accumulate the data prior to the action being put in place.

The purpose of the US registry is to be able to start calling up right now. At the drop of a hat.

Osama should consider himself lucky he lives in a country that would have to go through a great deal of trouble to institute a draft and then organize it.

In the states, if congress says go, the notices go out in a matter of days.

All this talk about "what is socialism?" is interesting but, the internet makes it possible to go right to the source.

Here is a link to the world socialist website.

http://www.wsws.org/index.shtml

http://www.therealcuba.com/Page8.htm

Here Bozo, in case your interested in Selective Service:

http://www.sss.gov/

The UofS cartoons are like the Mohammed ones - gratuitous insults, unfortunte and best ignored. The Dane didn't have to label them Mohammed, and the Sask didn't have to include a halo.

But some questions for Kate: Why are you reaching for the "hate" cudgel? What is "hate?" Have we reached the happy state of political correctness where you cannot express disapproval, disgust, ridicule or anything short of outright approval without facing accusations of fomenting "hate." Have you considered the possibility that you and a lot of your fans are fomenting "hate" against Liberals and - dare I even speak the name - Socialists?

After reading some of the comments in this thread, I now know that the official Socialist/Liberal university degree is a liberal arts degree, and that the Conservative degree of record is a business degree. Divides the country up nicely.

I know non-citizens could most definitely be drafted.

Length of Residency and age, not citizenship, determined the requirement for registration.

Non citizens could not be sent to the front lines.

Good thing you are not Swiss William (2 years mandatory military service).

I wasn't aware that non-citizens could be drafted but its on the site as true. I think the age thing has changed to. Well, it was my fault anyway, they did send me several letters which I ignored.

There you go, you learn something new every day.

For those of you who enjoy peeling Jason Cherniaks flesh back, one word at a time, he's gone and stepped in his own shit again.

"IN DEFENSE OF SCOTT BRISOM"

ol hoss,
Thanks for riding shotgun while I was visiting my daughter's government subsidised kindergarten.

Some people have trouble seeing the big picture.
The generous government subsidies for education are provided by the successful capitalist enterprises of Canada.

Any responsible government should carefully look at what these subsidies are being used for.
If they determine that there will be a need for people with a PhD's in gender studies or heavy duty mechanics, by all means, they should support those programs.

If they don't predict a societal need for large numbers of certain graduates, it would be irresponsible for the government to subsidise them from the public purse.

kmm posted

“If thats what you think thats fine, but I have never met a socialist who wants to destroy free enterprise. Most simply want to have increased taxes and funding for things such as public education.”

You just don’t get it do you?

Of course they don’t want to destroy it. That’s their free lunch for God’s sake!

But they do need to remember TANSTAAFL. (There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch)

As a taxpayer I expect my tax dollar to be spent responsibly. I do not consider funding students and profs who continually bite the hand that feeds them a good investment of my tax dollar.

If they don't predict a societal need for large numbers of certain graduates, it would be irresponsible for the government to subsidise them from the public purse.

Like they predicted how many medical personnel would be needed?

I think that something like 90% of ALL income taxes are paid by the top few percent of income earners in Canada.

As Randy Bachman was saying on the CBC (!!) one Saturday night, Canadas high income taxes drive away her most valuable (and talented) tax payers.

Mike Sutton, Author of "Too Many Christians Not Enough Lions" has made himself available for comments and/or criticisms of his cartoon. I remind letter writers to be civil and respectful towards Mr. Sutton, no matter how upset you may be.

mikesuttonstjohns@yahoo.ca

Kmm...Do you know what socialism is?
Socialism- Wiki
"Socialism is an ideology of a social and economic system in which the means of production are collectively owned and administered by all of society. Amongst other things, this is intended to produce a more evenly spread distribution of wealth. The idea of abolition of private property became a part of the idea in the early 19th century.In Marxist theory, it also refers to the society that would succeed or supplant capitalism, and would later develop further into communism, where the state would wither away."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Daniel

"The only rewards in Socialism is the receiving of other peoples money because you present yourself as one of many types of loser."

Well said Duke.

Steve

Marx claimed that Capitalism would self destruct because the owners of capital would end up owning virtually everything. This is perhaps not happening as quickly as Marx anticipated but it is happening. Below is a quote from the March 6th issue of the New York Times from a column by Paul Krugman.

" Between 1979 and 2003, according to a recent research paper published by the I.R.S., the share of overall income received by the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers fell from 50 percent to barely over 40 percent. The main winners from this upward redistribution of income were a tiny, wealthy elite: more than half the income share lost by the bottom 80 percent was gained by just one-fourth of 1 percent of the population, people with incomes of at least $750,000 in 2003."

So Capitalism is working BUT FOR WHOM?
So be careful what and whom you are defending when you defend Capitalism. Are you brainwashed?
Maybe. Maybe the kids know something the older folks don't. They are going to be treading water economically over their work life. Not much different from what they are doing already.

Another Marxist who doesn't understand wealth creation, thinking that wealth is static and is divided like a pie.

"Like they predicted how many medical personnel would be needed?

An excellent example of bad government. If they had done the proper demographic research they wouldn't have closed the nursing schools.

A responsible government should look at what and will be needed and fund accordingly.

Not just more stoopid marxism,

but Krugman,

PAUL KRUGMAN,

Mr. "I PREDICT KERRY WILL WIN"

What a joke!
That Moron!

The latest from the KRUGMAN TRUTH SQUAD

ol hoss
when your share of the pie decreases from 50% to 40% you are losing some of the pie relative to what you had 25 years ago. Regardless of the size of the pie. Further half of that missing 10% is going to the top quarter of one percent of the money earners. Maybe you don't miss your 10% of the pie but I do.

Doug
No this was Krugman quoting the IRS. So if you don't like the numbers tell it to the commie IRS.
You know, that part of the commie American Government that collects taxes. Hey, maybe America is going commie and i didn't notice!

"I think that something like 90% of ALL income taxes are paid by the top few percent of income earners in Canada." - no bozos allowed, at 5:16 PM

Now that is the kind of fact that would blow away a lot of smokescreens. Bozo, would you mind giving the source of that statistic? I would like to see what else is there.

Doug: I live on Prince Edward Island. (a contender for Canada's most socialist province).
Go ahead an borrow that term. It's not mine, my professors seriously said that we had to develop a Critical Consciousness. What we were supposed to be critical of was already blatantly defined for us.

Best site I've found that defends Christianity and capitalism (though that's simplifying a bit) is The Acton Institute.

"The Mission of the Acton Institute is to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles."

Great articles, podcasts and scholarship.

Saskboy, no flip flop whatsoever on Gormley's part. The fundamental difference between the Western Standard and the Sheaf is that no one is forced to subsidize the Western Standard. The Western Standard doesn't beg the government (aka the taxpayer) for more funding. The Western Standard faces the economic consequences of its publication decisions. The only commonality is that both publications are subject to Canadian and provincial laws (i.e., human rights legislation, libel & slander, etc.).

The problem with the socialist media in this country (CBC, Sheaf, etc) is that they can't stand up on their own merits and taxpayers are forced to fund them. That is what is wrong with this Sheaf issue.

steve d

I've been sittin on the sidelines here and I just love pie, all types of pie. Saskatoon, cherry, banana cream - Heck I better stop it's making me hungry!
I can't recall what share of pie my relatives had 25 years ago but I'll take you at your word about that.
Can't really follow all that about the half of that missing 10% going to the top quarter of one percent. I haven't had as much schooling as you.
But it's never surprised me much that the top earners get more pie than the likes of you and I..

I don't blame you for being miffed about losing 10% of your pie. From what I've seen you write I figure it could be a bunch more than that.

And that's not a pretty thing to ponder for any of us trying to make the world a finer place.

A few of the responses remind me of a theory I've mentioned here before - that one of the core underpinnings of leftist ideology is poor reading comprehension.

Steve d:
So, you would rather the alternative, where the government owns every last thing, wealth creation stagnates and we end up trying to escape on dingys like Castro's Cubans?

What socialists don't understand about private ownership is that you are always free to open up a competing business. With true socialism (rather than the mixed economy we have), everything is a monopoly. Think of the frustration you encounter with our healthcare system occurring in every single industry, including food.
Do you have any problem with the fact the province owns all healthcare?

Kate
One of the pre-requisites for being a true-believer conservative is pig headedness. No matter what they read in opposition they still don't get it.

Angela
Government shouldn't own every last thing. But because wealth is created BECAUSE the people allow it to happen doesn't mean those that have and control wealth now can begin to direct government. Corporate taxes used to be 50% of all tax income now they are about 16% with the regular taxpayer picking up the slack. Corporate welfare costs the state far more than actual welfare programs.
In the end, the power elite must remember where all power actually lies and act accordingly. There is a small elite which is vaccuuming up more and more of everything there is to own. The gap between the rich and poor is growing.
I know this situation will eventually correct itself one way or another. Greed and the obscene accummulation of wealth and power after all is not new.

An excellent example of bad government. If they had done the proper demographic research they wouldn't have closed the nursing schools.

It's forever the complaint of socialists that if only socialism worked better it would work.

Socialism is akin to spinning one's wheels in the mud.

Maybe we gotta spin faster to get something done. Something must be happening, I see a lot of, uh, mud flying and lots of movement and the noise, oh that wonderful noise of circular motion...

when your share of the pie decreases from 50% to 40% you are losing some of the pie relative to what you had 25 years ago. Regardless of the size of the pie.

Interesting, that socialist math.

50% of 100 = 50

40% of 200 = 80

Nevertheless, socialist math says 80 is less than 50.

The author of "Too Many Christians, Not Enough Lions" has responded to my E-Mail, and shows that I was right in my initial assesment all along:

http://uncommontruths.blogspot.com/2006/03/cartoon-madness-part-four-final.html

This guy is one hell of a piece of work. Wow. We have met the opposition, and he is ignorant.

***ALERT***

The Sheaf has released Thursday the 9th's edition, online now.

Go to http://thesheaf.com/ and near the bottom right is tte .pdf download link.

Page two has the apology and resignation of their editor.

steve d, another IRS evaluation:

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200510130903.asp

...."the latest Internal Revenue Service data on distribution of the tax burden:

The data show that the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes in 2003, although they earned just 16.8 percent of the adjusted gross income.

The top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than half of all federal income taxes, the top 10 percent paid two-thirds, and the top half of taxpayers paid 96.5 percent — meaning that the bottom half paid just 3.5 percent.

Another IRS report deconstructed the top 1 percent and found that the top 10 percent of the top 1 percent (the top 0.1 percent) increased their share of all federal income taxes from 7 percent in 1980 to 15.3 percent in 2003.

These 129,000 tax filers earned 7.6 percent of the income and paid an average tax rate of 23.6 percent. This came to $114.6 billion — four times more than all the taxes paid by the 64 million taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent, who paid an average tax rate of 2.9 percent."

~~~~

KMM: "I was simply saying that removing public funding for the university is a lessening of socialism."

And that would be a bad thing? Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Yale. All are 'privately funded' schools, recognized for excellence. Can everyone afford to go? Obviously not. Yet both the rich and the poor attend. The rich have to meet the schools minimum standards and the poor by deciding to excel and meet the scholarship standards. Life may not be complelely fair, but you can bet the 'poor' person who excels won't be poor for long.

MIT and Stanford in particular, attract massive amounts of funding from the private sector because the schools recognize the benefits of partnerships - unlike Canadian universities that for the most part put their socialist noses in the air and actively resist any participation by the private sector.

KMM: (Crown Corporations) "Admittedly they don't match the private sector for profits"

And why pray tell, is that? They often have huge competitve advantages but because they 'can't fail' they become overburdened with bureaucracy and hidebound in practice. They don't evolve because they don't have to. In fact, too often they are government monopolies and not 'competitive business'. And they still, more often than not, lose money.

KMM: "any student that sees their tuition double or whatever will want to go back to the more socialist method of subsidization"

Reminds me of the all too true old maxim: If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you'll always have the support of Paul. Fortunately, most of the Pauls eventually become Peters when they see how much is taken off their paycheques to pay the 'Pauls' who follow in their footsteps.

Steve D: "No one tells them about the dark side and dark history of Capitalism until they get to University."

Free enterprise is not perfect, but like democracy, it clearly beats everything else. So what about the 'dark side' of the alternative? 20 million lost under Stalin's communism. 40 million under Mao's communism. These tragedies include deaths due to executions, forced labor camps and genocides of certain social/ethnic groups - none of which happen under western free enterprise. Is the shameful history of 'socialism' widely disseminated in universities? Didn't think so.

Hey! I just realized that I'm one of those capitalist pigs!
Being a self employed small businessman I do evil things like:

1. Pay my 2 employees ~$30000 before I see a single penny myself.
2. Spend +$40000/yr on local suppliers & subtrades.
3. Pay massive commercial property/education tax on my property.
4. Collect +$10000/yr in PST & GST for the government.
5. Pay for about a dozen useless licenses & permits.

All this so I can be a little independent & scrape out a living less than what the typical unionized janitor makes ~$30000/yr.

The worst thing is I've even taken work from government employees & union shops!

I feel so guilty. :

BTW, how many of you marxists out there contribute over $90000 into your local economy?

Sorry for the little rant. Doing my bookwork at the moment. Just wanted to put a human face on this.

Hopefully now we all can put this to rest, and moreso, hopefully some learned a lesson of what desecration, err, discretion means.

Chris in Manitoba,

"BTW, how many of you marxists out there contribute over $90000 into your local economy?"

Boy are you ever misguided. Marxists don't "put in" they "take out". In your case, and mine, we are short about $30000 (or more) each ... it's always more than you put in ... unless you put in nothing or less.

I guess we will have to wait for the Libs to get again to apply for a grant for a fuck-up parade.

'local' economy is now a mere illusion, comrade. the last time i looked down the commercial brick road it was paved with old navy, pier 1, and that luvable ol' home-town business wrecker, walmart.

"'local' economy is now a mere illusion, comrade. the last time i looked down the commercial brick road it was paved with old navy, pier 1, and that luvable ol' home-town business wrecker, walmart."

Well ... no. Check up on the stats for small business in Canada. The majority of business taxes are paid by people living in your community ... they also employ the majority of people (except for the government in some areas).

acedementia, you may not believe this but I make an extreme effort to purchase & support local/small business when ever possible. As do most other small businesses. We are in the same boat & tend to support each other. In my experience it's been the government tenders & contracts that have gone to the big boys or down south.
BTW, I hate all those big box stores! Poor service & quality. Does that make me a bad right winger?

This whole debate reminds me of this saying:

"A socialist is somone who feels he owes a great debt to his fellow man...and wants to pay it off with your money"

ol hoss,

I'm for:
1. small government
2. any money that is taxed from the public should be used wisely for the public good.

Apparently poor reading comprehension and Pavlovian responses to selected sentences rather than comprehending the entire argument is not totally exclusive to the left.

Canadians can serve in the US military, at least my niece can. Only restriction is the amount of security clearance allowed.

The comments by Paul about 50 back show him for what he is, a whiny sniveling leftie who is so inclusive of all that he tries pathetically to dis religion as a fairy tale. It is as if they are threatened by the very idea of religion.

"that luvable ol' home-town business wrecker, walmart."

Posted by academentia at March 9, 2006 12:50 AM

Man, guys such as you just don't get how markets work. I've been a small (thats small 's')business owner all my life and I don't have any problem with Walmart or any other competitor.

Walmart doesn't 'cause' other business to fail. (Most)People will always choose to shop where it's in their own self-interest. Nobody ever said they HAD to shop at a Walmart. And nobody owes another business owner large or small, an obligation to help keep them in business.

You know who's shopping at Walmart, don't you. You. Me. Young families. Teachers. Lawyers. Nurses. Everybody. Even the socialists.

Don't try and put another segment of society in the victim role.

Government shouldn't own every last thing.

Governments shouldn't own anything. There is no industry that they succeed as well as the private sector in terms of profits and shareholder value - an important element in all of our retirements and economic well-being.

So Capitalism is working BUT FOR WHOM?

Look around at what countries have the highest per capita incomes. Are you that lame or fact challenged? Capitalism works for anyone willing and able to participate.

I'm beginning to think that behind you and your prior incarnation "steve from bc"(?) is an anti-social adolescent geting your kicks from being the skunk at a garden party.

The most persuasive fact laden arguments you walk on past or respond ignoring direct challenges to your childish dribble. You parrot the stupidest trash without a factual basis that some lame professor constructed for you.

It's getting old, steve "d" or "from bc"(?)

Return to Fark, DailyKos or Indymedia where you can have a leadership position. Critical thinking isn't for you.

A few of the responses remind me of a theory I've mentioned here before - that one of the core underpinnings of leftist ideology is poor reading comprehension.

Agree, Kate, poor reading comprehension is a requirement of leftist ideology. If the ridiculous leftist sheeple ever read history, economics or decent literature they would soon be off the plantation.

Ever notice that your basic leftist's underpinnings are feelings(I feel it most be true.) rather than the empirical/logical quest for truth.

1. Where I stand: The cartoon is offensive to me because it's poorly drawn and not very funny. As far as offending the religious sensibilities of people, I can certainly see why Christians or Jews would be offended by the cartoon, but since when is offending Christians or Jews a crime? This afternoon on Rawlco there were actually call-in idiots who were characterizing the cartoon as "hate speech". This just goes to show how much "hate speech" laws suck: they have become an all-purpose legal cudgel with which to beat those who exercise their free speech (with or without exercising their common sense). I think that if we're serious about free speech as a foundation of democracy, we should not allow the State to determine what is acceptable. The remedy for speech you don't like is to speak up yourself and denounce it, but not to throw people in jail for saying something disagreeable (and no, this doesn't imply that speech should never be regulated, but the point is we already have laws against slander and incitement, and we don't need a separate category for a concept as ill-defined as "spreading hate"). Anyway, calling this particular cartoon "hate speech" is ridiculous even under the current definition of the term.
2. The hypocrisy the right-wing media in this town has shown over the cartoon is absolutely radiant. We have Gormley on his show salaciously describing in ever-more-graphic detail the content of the cartoon leaving absolutely NOTHING to the imagination while going on and on about how disgraceful the whole thing is, et cetera. Of course I'd be willing to bet that Small Dead Animals has certainly gotten its share of hits after printing the cartoon, eh, Kate? I guess these images are only deemed ultra-offensive when they are purveyed by the "left-wing". Conservatives seem to feel they can traffic in offensive speech all they want if it's in service to their demagoguery. It just goes to show the latent pornographic cravings simmering within the typical social conservative.
3. It's clear the Sheaf was wrong to ban the Danish cartoons on the grounds of respect for religious sensibilities, and then turn around and print the Jesus cartoon. On the other hand, there were a lot of conservatives who pooh-poohed the Muslim outrage over the Danish cartoons, citing their veneration of the concept of "free speech" (e.g. the Western Standard). I have also seen McNally Robinson excoriated on this blog for not selling the WS issue with the Danish cartoons. Will these champions of "free speech" now stick up for the students who put out the Sheaf? Are those of you who are howling for heads to roll at the Sheaf not "unwilling to make a modest effort at home", in the effort to "secure(e) secularism and liberty". The shoe now appears to be on the other foot, doesn't it?

Kmm...Do you know what socialism is?
Socialism- Wiki
"Socialism is an ideology of a social and economic system in which the means of production are collectively owned and administered by all of society. Amongst other things, this is intended to produce a more evenly spread distribution of wealth. The idea of abolition of private property became a part of the idea in the early 19th century.In Marxist theory, it also refers to the society that would succeed or supplant capitalism, and would later develop further into communism, where the state would wither away."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Daniel

Posted by Daniel at March 8, 2006 06:21 PM

Of course I know what socialism is. What's your point?

"KMM: (Crown Corporations) "Admittedly they don't match the private sector for profits"

And why pray tell, is that? They often have huge competitve advantages but because they 'can't fail' they become overburdened with bureaucracy and hidebound in practice. They don't evolve because they don't have to. In fact, too often they are government monopolies and not 'competitive business'. And they still, more often than not, lose money."

hmm, not sure of the point of this one either. I never did argue for or against socialism in any of my posts as far as I remember. I was simply making those statements in order to support my claim that cutting funding in order to teach students the perils of socialism is actually teaching them the perils of capitalism.

Meanwhile, Scottie was at the trough piggling away when Mr. Blackberry intervenined. Who is this Mr. Blackberry? Waht are Blackberry addicts? Why would Brison be tracking down a lady? Afraid of blackberry blackmail? Who is Mr. X? The thot plickens. Who is hunting whom? Will Mr. X help Scottie? Who is whom? Will scottie need scotties?

And now, a word from our sponsorship scandal...$$$$$$ +

Mr. Brison was trying to track down a woman who had taken a picture of him and his partner at an event in Ottawa at the National Arts Centre several weeks before. The woman, as it turned out, was a friend of Mr. Nowlan, so Mr. Brison e-mailed his old acquaintance to get her number, beginning the now infamous electronic exchange.

When The Globe and Mail published this story on Tuesday, Mr. Brison's office checked his agenda to see where he was when the messages were sent. Ottawa is filled with BlackBerry addicts and Mr. Brison is apparently one of the worst.

One of his strategists suggested yesterday that Mr. Brison was quite possibly in the House of Commons at the time, BlackBerrying away to Mr. Nowlan during votes. +
http://www.rapp.org/url/?A8P8FIRH

ol hoss,

I'm for:
1. small government
2. any money that is taxed from the public should be used wisely for the public good.

Excellent, you can now explain why you think gov't should be in the forecasting business when past experience shows them always to have been wrong.

Thanks for the data on the income tax breakdown Bufflo Bean.

Re: The data show that the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes in 2003,

Presumably this very wealthy top 1% has options.

If they get sick of paying high taxes they can take up residence elsewhere.

Unless, like their hero Fidel, the socialists make that illegal too and turn Canada into a socialist prison.

There are only 5 ways to create wealth.

1) Work, i.e., employment

2) Business, i.e., employing others.

3) Ideas, i.e., invent, market, consult.

4) Invest, ie., put your money to work.

5) Leverage, i.e., put other peoples money to work.

Thats all folks!

Kmm wrote:
"Are you joking? Do you even know what the left or socialism is? I'm assuming you dont because of your statement. Socialism basically is a more prominent role of government(eg. crown corps, public health care, PUBLIC EDUCATION) Your so called Leftists are not funded by the system they want to destroy. Saskatchewan has a mixed economy"

The reason I sent you the definition of Socialism is you seemed to me to be spreading disinformation about it. Socialism is far more than "a more prominent role in government" as you state...read my previous post for socialisms definition. By definition, you seemed to be the one who didn't know what socialism is.
You asked "what is my point?"
Let us go to the lab and look at the experiment to put the conversation in context:
First lets zip bck to the 1930's. Alberta and her twin sister Saskatchewan, born the same time in 1905 had basically the same agrarian based economies that failed by and large because of the depression. The populations were roughly equal immigrating about the same time from similar backgrounds. Land mass similar. Resources similar. Let us fast forward to today and look at the twins. Albertas popualation is about triple Saskatchewans. Saskatchewans biggest export is its best and brightest, its youth. Albertas number one import...you guessed it, youth from everywhere else. Alberta has one of the hottest economies in Canada, without a debt now. Saskatchewan is mired in debt with a sluggish economy.
With almost the exact same potential in resources, and it could be argued that Saskatchewan has much more because of potash and uranium, we are today two very different provinces. What is the difference? or what made the difference? Alberta has had strong conservative governments from the mid 1930's til present. Saskatchewan on the other hand had socialism take root in the mid 1940's when the patron saint of Saskatchewan, Tommy Douglas came to power with the CCF. By and large we have had socialist or left leaning governments since then with tenures by both the Conservatives and the Liberals for a time.
Today Saskatchewan has corporations competing with privately owned companies...For example, why does the government feel they have to provide my cable televison? There is a debris trail of failed government corporations, look into Spudco. We continue to lose millions in public money to ventures that would best be left to the entrepreneurial risk takers. If there is a need, the market is very good at filling it. Saskatchewan has become beaurocratically top heavy to the point of ridiculous for the size of our popualation and it is stifling the economy. Alberta is a lean mean fighting machine with a prosperous ecomomy that encourages and inspires growth.
I have lived in both provinces. Born and raised in Alberta, I moved to Saskatchewan in my mid twenties and have been in Saskatchewan for almost twenty years. I have seen both sides and Saskatchewan is failing from government interference, competition and controls.
Many people on this thread are very hard on "lefties". Those who feel that Saskatchewan is the right model for the future. Judge for yourself.
I have sent two sons to Alberta for education. One because we don't have the population to hold training for the trade anymore. The other because there were not enough spots avaiable in his area of choice.
The U of S and other institutions that continue to teach the wonders of socialisn are doing a disservice to the best and brightest in this province. We could be so much more.
I am tired of being someones lab rat!
Daniel

hmm, I'm still not sure where all this is coming from. It seems like we are argueing about two different things. I haven't expressed my own views on whether socialism is good or bad, nor will I in this type of environment. The point that I have wanted to make is that suddenly stripping funding for the uni is hardly the best way to teach the kids at the uni that socialism is bad. If you want to take away funding over the long term that is your opinion(trust me, judging by the recent jumps in tuition at the u of s its already happening), but suddenly cutting funding to the institution will serve no benefit to anyone in saskatchewan. Anyways i'm sick of writing the same thing over and over.

Anyways i'm sick of writing the same thing over and over.

Get well soon:)

Socialism needs capitalism like a mosquito needs a blood donor.

Thank God for dragonflies!

you are right OL HOSS I tired of writing the same thing over and over too. Apparently you can't teach an OL HOSS new tricks.
There is no need to argue in any event because at the present rate of dimunition of the middle class they will wake up in about 50 years when even true believers like Ol Hoss will see what I have been talking about.

Penny wrote:

"Ever notice that your basic leftist's underpinnings are feelings(I feel it most be true.) rather than the empirical/logical quest for truth."

Very true.

it's really too bad that universities, in theory the centers of the "empirical/logical quest for truth", do such a poor job of teaching these skills.

If only the liberal arts faculties were more conscious of their original purpose...

There is no need to argue in any event because at the present rate of dimunition of the middle class they will wake up in about 50 years when even true believers like Ol Hoss will see what I have been talking about.

Anyone else reminded of the childish "When I am dead, then you'll be sorry" retort when reading this?

True believing socialists are funny, in a keep an eye on 'em because history has shown they are dangerous sort of way.

Under capitalism, some are miserable, usually due to circumstances under their control. They can change their circumstance, and change their level of misery. Some, perhaps most, are happy. Most importantly, all have the equal opportunity to improve their situation.

Under socialism (pure), all are equally miserable (except those that rule) and no one can change their circumstance.

Neither system allows you to just sit home and smoke bongs and still improve your situation. Which is what I suspect most true believing socialists are after in any case.

Kmm,
Feeling better yet!
I think the addage that fits here is "don't bite the hand that feeds you." Kates point was that many univesity students are unappreciative of the subsidized ride they are getting. If the true cost of post-secondary education were felt by those who are the recipients, there might be a different, perhaps more dedicated attitude to learning. As it is, many like Y!ph, who is the case in point feel free to test the bounds of societal tolerance with childlike behavior. I think what many would like to see is a commitment and a dedication to scholarly excellence. The lax attitude towards excellence in education begins in elementary school, is nurtured and exercised in high school so that by the time students are ready for post secondary, dependence on the system is for lack of a better word "systemic". Angela wrote "faculties are not trying to teach critical thinking; they are trying to define Critical Thought" Instead of learning independence, the culture of dependence continues.
In Saskatchewan, we need people who can recognize an opportunity and take a risk to achieve a goal. Independent thought fosters this kind of attitude. As long as we continue to develop and feed a culture of dependence in this province, we will never get any farther. We will end up as 254,900 square miles of retirement property for aged government workers!
Daniel

Apparently you can't teach an OL HOSS new tricks.

Your new tricks are really old tricks in new packaging. This ol hoss learned those a long time ago.

Steve d:
You responded to my post by bringing up corporate welfare. When did I write that I supported corporate welfare? I definitely don't, and I'm quite disappointed that Harper changed that particular promise he made in the 2004 election.

kmm: Obviously cutting taxpayer support of "Y!sh" or some other socialist's education will make them realize that they prefer socialism. But, it might allow them to realize that that money comes from the capitalist pigs they spend so much time attacking. (The lesson is that if the capitalist pigs stop working, there would be no money to siphon off to the U of S).

Then again, you're probably right, it would further convince them of the "perils of capitalism". Two years ago, I was screaming "Shame!Shame!" at the BC legislature, demanding they give more money to universities. The underlying assumption is the greedy government is witholding money. Most people don't grasp (if they ever do)until after graduation how money is created. Socialists can enjoy the benefits of an EMac G5, imported avocadoes and American medical innovations, while decrying the system responsible for these things as evil, greedy and fraught with "perils"....and act surprised if called a hypocrite.

It brings to mind an Ayn Rand quote "When someone tells you the root of all evil is money, ask them what the root of all money is."

Daniel finally said the key word.

Risk.

Something socialists (i.e., "the workers") do not take.

Angela
The root of all money is people's labour. Without exploiting people's work there is no Capitalism. Further, without exploiting peoples banked savings and government handouts(tax writeoffs,writedowns,expenses,deferrments etc)
there is no Capitalism. So you see it is the people as a collective that makes Capitalism tick NOT the other way around.

Hi Steve,

Two small points:

1) " Without exploiting people's work there is no Capitalism."

Please explain how people voluntarily trading their labour for compensation constitutes "exploitation".

2)"Further, without exploiting peoples banked savings and government handouts(tax writeoffs,writedowns,expenses,deferrments etc)
there is no Capitalism."

Writedowns, Writeoffs expenses, deferrments, etc. are NOT handouts. Stealing less money from somone is not the same as giving them something. Likewise, taxing less is not a handout. Tax writeoffs, etc. are merely an example of the government not taking money that didn't belong to them in the first place.

You are correct inasmuch as capitalism requires a common set of economic and legal norms to function (let's call this "social infrastructure"). The only justifiable government intervention in the economy, IMO, is that which is necessary for the existance of that social infrastructure (e.g. courts to enforce contracts, etc.).

Exactly, Steve d. The root of all money is people's labour, their work, their individual actions. Under capitalism, these actions are voluntary.

GM said it well. There can be no government handouts, prior to involuntary "hand-ins" to the government coffers. Steve d. seems to be getting caught in circular logic.

yes I am feeling better now. Thanks for the response from both you and angela. Although I disagree and think the outcome will be beneficial to no one. Nonetheless I think this topic is spent.......at least to the degree that I want to take it to.

Nicholas Todd aka Ralph Wayvone is back...

And he is still spouting his socialist dribble. When will he ever learn? Go back to Rabble where you have some friends...

It brings to mind an Ayn Rand quote "When someone tells you the root of all evil is money, ask them what the root of all money is."

Ayn Rand wasn't very Biblically literate. The correct quote is, "the love of money is the root of all evil". 1Timothy 6:10.

Not to be anal, but the root of evil isn't money...

It is the LOVE of money.

But hey, that's just splitting jots, err, tiddles, err hairs.

Hmmm...support the sheaf blog isn't getting a lot of uh, support.

http://supportthesheaf.blogspot.com/

Interesting comment from a guy who is "Professor of Law and Member of the Executive Committee, University of Saskatchewan Faculty Association".

"...It is distressing indeed that President MacKinnon has entered the fray because academic freedom, which accrues to students as well as faculty, and freedom of speech and expression, which apply to all of us, are under threat by his intervention."

Wait, isn't the President responsible for anything with "The University of Saskatchewan" handle attached to it?

Guess what The Sheaf known as..."The University of Saskatchewan Student Newspaper"...right there on top of their publications.

Guess the word "accountability" doesn't apply to The Sheaf.

Oh well.

Story in the University of Alberta student newspaper, the Gateway:
“I didn’t resign voluntarily; I was forced to resign by the rest of the student staff at the Sheaf,” Robbins said, adding that he hopes the campus can engage in valuable discussion as a result of this “unfortunate mistake.”
http://www.gateway.ualberta.ca/view.php?aid=5877

Haven't read all of the posts in this thread - just haven't had the time. But I wonder if there would be such a hue and cry about the Sheaf cartoon, if they had first published the Mohammed cartoons and had some open discussion about them first??

Seems to me that many of the 'offended' on this thread are more offended about the hypocritical stand taken by the Sheaf wrt the Mohammed cartoons, rather than by the slurs against the Christian religion and our 'capitalist' society. Just my observation.

Personally I find myself more offended by their hypocrasy, rather than by their stupidity in publishing such a trashy cartoon.

An interesting read about the Comic's alleged Author, Y!Ph, AKA Jeff Macdonald:
http://www.thesheaf.com/news/news_analysis/the_bold_and_the_beautiful
Here's his letter in the latest issue of the Sheaf page A-11(www.thesheaf.com:
“Capitalist Piglet”: Are some
jokes just not kosher?
As the sole writer and artist of the most recent
“Capitalist Piglet” cartoon I feel I must take
a step which I had not intended, and that is
to take credit for the comic. I do this now
for no reason other than to exonerate Mr.
Mark Watson from the misplaced attacks he
is receiving. As Mark points out to President
MacKinnon in his letter that some of you
might be fortunate enough to have read, this
cartoon was inevitable. I wonʼt say much
about how necessary something like this was,
and how in the very same week, two other
Christian-content comics were printed, but
I will mention a few things that I hope will
bring us back to reality and off those Inquisition-
esque high horses that are so popular and
easy to get on.
My fi rst thought is “Can we really take
the antics of an anthropomorphic ungulate
that seriously?” My answer is NO. How can
we if they donʼt exist?
Really, people, “Capitalist Piglet” is only
a comic and the Sheaf is a university newspaper.
Remember what that means? University?
Itʼs a place for open minds and that
should mean free speech and press. “Capitalist
Piglet” is quite obviously not a hate-
driven comic, and it is undeniably about more
than just shock value. If it was shock value,
Iʼm sure it would have been more graphic,
and it wouldnʼt have contained such a unique
quality as two punch lines in only two frames
– that is cartoon gold.
My question now is this: how is this
blasphemous, deviant, offensive, or worthy
of such attacks? Unless you view the actions
portrayed in the comic as representative of
characters of ill repute, then I see no problem
with the joke. And if you see homosexuality,
the attempts to adhere to a kosher diet,
or being an eager-to-please corporate intern
as fi endishly negative, then it seems an open
mind and a light heart is the next thing we
should all try and look for in our classes.
After all, people, Iʼm sure Jesus had a sense
of humour.
Now on that point: did Muhammad the
Prophet have a sense of humor? I bet he did.
The difference between these two comics
(you know the other one) is that the other
one was dumb. Yes, thatʼs blunt, but it had
no punch line, it had no style, and it was just
plain hateful. Bombs are bad, thatʼs pretty
straightforward. Imagine that comic with
Gavin Gardiner heading to Regina. Not cool.
But Gavin and, say, Brett Campbell in the
place of Piglet and Jesus? Not so bad.
Further with the comparisons here. One
of the points of the recent “Capitalist Pig”
comic was this: How many of you thought
“Why are those people getting so worked up
over that comic? Itʼs only a comic, we Christians
wouldnʼt have done that, no way.” Well
no, most people wouldnʼt, and at the same
time, most people havenʼt done that over “the
other comic” either. The media is handling
that irresponsibly to portray a group in a
negative light. Thatʼs a whole other topic, so
Iʼll try stay on task here.
Sometimes we need something to point
out to us how others might feel. Racism is a
skill we unfortunately learn everywhere, but
empathy is harder to come by. So maybe next
time, remember this: If Jesus loves you, he
probably does so enough to take a joke. After
all, he did die for us.
Feel free to email me at
Yphcomics@gmail.com if this still doesnʼt sit
well with you.
Jeff “Y!PH” MacDonald

Okay,

I am not a christian (though I respect all faiths). I am also an avid supporter of free speech.

But the justification for this cartoon in that email is the best example of pure, concentrated, moronic BULLSH*T I have ever seen.

Here's my running commentary:

.........................................

"Remember what that means? University?
It's a place for open minds and that
should mean free speech and press."

...which you refused to stand up for in not publishing the Danish cartoons.

.........................................

"Capitalist
Piglet” is quite obviously not a hate-
driven comic, and it is undeniably about more
than just shock value"

....yeah, right.

The "point" of that cartoon re: capitalism and christianity is both cliche and flat-out wrong and the depiction is hateful.

...................................

"And if you see homosexuality,
the attempts to adhere to a kosher diet,
or being an eager-to-please corporate intern
as fiendishly negative, then it seems an open
mind and a light heart is the next thing we
should all try and look for in our classes."

uhh....I think the problem was that you were depicting a revered religious figure as "an eager-to-please corporate intern" (a.k.a. "prostitute)

........................................

"If it was shock value,I'm sure it would have been more graphic,and it wouldn't have contained such a uniquequality as two punch lines in only two frames– that is cartoon gold."

More graphic?! It showed PIG SEMEN dripping down his face!

"Gold?!" "GOLD?!" Where in the HELL did you get that idea?

......................................

"The difference between these two comics
(you know the other one) is that the other
one was dumb. Yes, that's blunt, but it had
no punch line, it had no style, and it was just
plain hateful."

Actually you've just given a very apt description of your own work...

And...

Please explain how your comic wasn't hateful....

..........................................

One of the points of the recent “Capitalist Pig”
comic was this: How many of you thought
“Why are those people getting so worked up
over that comic? It's only a comic, we Christians
wouldn't have done that, no way.” Well
no, most people wouldn't, and at the same
time, most people haven't done that over “the
other comic” either. The media is handling
that irresponsibly to portray a group in a
negative light."

Oh I get it...it was the MEDIA that burned embassies and rioted and killed people. Right. And the number of dead from your comic is?.....
seems like the christians may have had a point.

...............................................

"Sometimes we need something to point
out to us how others might feel."

it's not about how the rioters FELT, it's how they ACTED. Big difference.

................................

I never call people stupid normally, and I am strongly opposed to hurling insults on a blog as a rule, but this crosses the line. It is insincere and utterly nonsensical.

Strange how the support the blog doesn't answer my question about accountability?

I think there is a law on the books called "gross negligence" which while doesn't really fit the mess at the Sheaf, the point I'm making with it does.

Lame duck excuses like "mistake" or "miscommunication" really don't cut it.

Just because one is "free" to say anything, does it mean you can exercise it at will?

If this was about freedom of speech, why then was the "to make a point" (cartoonists own words) under the COMIC section of the paper rather than the EDITORIAL.

Conventional wisdom would dictate that.

But what do I know, I see a forest.

I don't know what Y!PH has been smoking, but it must be pretty awful crap to result in those sorts of totally convoluted, bizarre, and illogical thought processes. :(

All this talk about capitalists and socialists reminds me of an old Polish joke from the communist era:

Capitalism, Socialism and Communism are sitting around a table in a cafe.

Capitalism says, "I just ate a whole plate of kielbasa - and it was delicious!"

Socialism replies, "Well, I shared a small amount of kielbasa for lunch with three other people."

Then Communism asks, "What's kielbasa?"

I'm beginning to be in agreement with taking the socialists responsible for this to kangaroo court, otherwise known as the human rights tribunal.

Two things will result. Those responsible will continue to feel the heat.

And the decision of the kangaroo court will publicly show their bias and hypocrisy when they make their decision to "exonerate" based on some twisted leftist reasoning. The kangaroo court's credibility will be forever damaged.

What could be better than that?

Can we get something straight here?

It is my understanding of the Danish cartoon that the cartoon Muslim man with the bomb in his turbin is a drawing of a Muslim iman from Denmark.

It is NOT a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed.

bigcitylib, if people want to read your terrible writing they will go to your stupid site.

However if you were to wait for that to happen I expect, just like President For Life Kim in Team America you will be very ronery.

I hope Y!PH ,aka.(Jeff Macdonald) types some more,... his logic is worse than his drawing!

I'm in awe!
He's boastful.
"that is cartoon gold."
"I take credit"

"Credit"Synonyms: acclaim, acknowledgment, approval, attention, belief, brownie points, commendation, confidence, credence, distinction, faith, fame, glory, honor, kudos, merit, notice, points, praise, reliance, strokes, thanks, tribute, trust

I hope his family gets to read his literary "gold".

richfisher,
Don't worry, I am sure that we haven't heard the last from Jeff. He was unapologetic and unrepentant, although he did apologize in one of his earlier posts on the other thread. This should maintain the spotlight on him at U of S and STM for some time to come and allow him ample opportunities to dazzle us with his defensive reasoning.
If one thinks about it, this probably will be around for years to come in academia as it is the perfect case for debate in the political science and social ethics classes. The Profs will have a field day pushing the freedom to offend.
Personally, I look forward to it all going away now. There have been apologies from the Sheaf as well as consequences. Some probably think the consequences were too light, others will think they went too far. That probably means it is just about right. I know there are some who think that there needs to be more accountability, that would be a good result if it comes but I am not going to hold my breath while waiting.
Time for those involved to do a little soul searching. As for Jeff (Y!ph), I personally think that he has already had far more attention than he deserved. I suspect that is what this is partly about after all. "Badges of honor" for the bad boys of the press.
Now about that toboggan...which lake are we headed to?
Daniel

it seems like blog comment pages are really good places for arguments to be poorly presented.

Wow, I just spent two hours reading the Capitalist Piglet posts. You guys have hit all the major topics: every major world religion, politics, communists, freedom of speech, hate speech, Voltaire, Marx, Stalin, freedom of the press, public funding for university's, capitalism, homosexuality and even the details of how my favorite student newspaper is run.

It's almost as though all you people in the real world wish you could go back to university where you can say rash and inflamatory things just for the sake of arguement.

I certainly have enjoyed reading every post so thank you, and I will have to thank the young fella that made the cartoon as well- there is nothing better than a good debate. It's nice to see the that Sheaf can still create debate as I was beginning to think I was the only one who still reads it.

The left-wing bias of Canadian educational publishers, education ministries, public—and most Catholic—boards, teacher unions, and the default position of most teachers (those who aren’t actually leftist keep their heads way down) is a serious problem in this country. Our kids are being propagandized at every turn, long before they hit the institutions of higher (sic) learning.

I'm a teacher in Toronto. Earlier this week I copied for a grade 8 student I tutor an article from the March 6th TCS, “For God’s Sake Just Stop Aid” (to Africa). We'd just finished studying the chapter in his geography text that explains (sic) the causes of poverty in the Developing World, as in Africa. Actually, make that "cause" of poverty: colonization. Yup, it's all those nasty Europeans' fault.

In this chapter, there was no mention that decolonization happened decades ago. No mention that many of the democratic ideas of government and judicial principles of due process introduced by the colonizers were more effective than the tribalism--not mentioned at all--that preceeded and followed the presence of the Europeans. Of course, Christianity was all bad too--no mention of the schools and hospitals established. No mention of the freedom from witch doctors and vengeance religions. No mention of huge influxes of Western dollars to prop up these countries, both during colonization and after. No mention that having learned European languages--and even English!--has been very helpful in terms of becoming educated at home and elsewhere and being able to take part in international symposiums, bureaucracies (e.g., Kofi Annan), and economies. No mention that what useful infrastructures were left in place were often those of the Europeans, many of whom remained to be part of the new life of countries they love. No mention at all of the totalitarian governments in these countries in the last decades. There WAS mention of a no-name religion, inimical to economic growth, which encourages large families and discourages the education of females. Hmm . . .

I've pointed out to my student that this text book infantalizes and demeans people in the Developing World by putting all the blame on someone else. We both see through that ruse. This chapter is sheer propaganda--brought to us by Gage, one of Canada's major educational publishing companies. I've pointed out to my pupil the errors in the book. Poor guy! He seems to agree with me, but then I have to say don't use what I've told you on your test. Talk about Brave New World. Poor Canada!

lookout,
That is a damning diatribe about educational content. We all know to some extent what the problem is. What hope is there for change and where would it come from? How many educators see things as you do?
Rather than throwing up our hands and saying "Oh well, that's the way it is" what would you say are some solutions to the systemic problem we have? I know there are many places like Calgary that are allowing charter schools that go back and concentrate on the basics. Any differences?
Daniel

Daniel- Good questions. I'm just off to the Support Denmark rally. I'll respond later. Cheers

Daniel -

Back to your questions.

How many educators see things as I do? I'd imagine there are more than one would know about but, in the gulag atmosphere we work in, very few will put their heads above the ramparts. Reprisals can be swift and decidedly unpleasant.

Unfortunately, Mike Harris's disastrous educational reforms--and I'm a true-blue Tory-Reform-Alliance-Tory--handed the keys of the asylum to the inmates: the opposite of his intentions, I'm sure. The new dispensation has given the non-union (and I'm no union cheerleader) administrators draconian powers: Teachers are now, de facto, serfs. Recourse for arbitrary measures on the part of administration? Not on your life: In my board, there are no policies or procedures for this. I'm not kidding. Virtually all the responsibilities of educating--academic AND behavioural--have been downloaded onto teachers, the one-stop service providers: "Your child needs a lobotomy? No problem. Mrs. X will just add that to the IEP (Individual Education Plan) for next term." (On occasion, I'm now saying, "No can do." It doesn't make me very popular with administration, though the parents of my kids are understanding.)

Administrators--I call them "enforcers"--are required, by the Education Act, to implement the politically correct and pedagogically unsound drivel gushing out of the Ministry and boards. Again, by law, teachers are required to do what administrators tell them. Talk about infantilization. And my experience has been that too many administrators are utterly incompetent sycophants and toadies. But they also remind me of velociraptors: They have primitive brains, very sharp teeth and claws, and many are fierce predators. These impostors appease the worst elements (sure, we have safe schools--for the bullies and their usually equally dysfunctional parents) and punish any kind of free thinking. (This used to be called tough love and common sense.) It's not a pretty picture.

I'm a literacy specialist. I've been begging administration, who have no expertise in special education, to allow me to concentrate on delivering my time-tested literacy program to my very challenged special ed students: no go. My timetable looks like a piece of Swiss cheese: My students MUST be integrated into unnecessary subjects where the reading/writing requirements are way beyond them--meanwhile NOT benefiting from the concentrated literacy program they really need. (Significant components of my highly successful program are sitting on a shelf in a cupboard. It's an utter scandal.) I fought back last year. My Teacher Appraisal was used to punish me: It was a vicious exercise in creative writing. (I had to use the union. After an inordinate amount of time, energy, and argument on my part, I had the grade and comments changed. The principal had not followed at least ten of the required rubrics. No repercussions for him.)

I support charter schools and home schooling. But I don't say so out loud. As I've said, any ideas outside the politically correct public education box are considered subversive: Teachers can be disciplined for insubordination if they stray too far from the script.

The picture's not rosy and I don't see how it can be. Too many administrators and parents don't behave like adults and a critical mass of their children seem allergic to being responsible or growing up themselves. Add to the recipe the large number of "whatever generation" teachers now in the system: They've grown up in the gulag and, poor things--I can't blame them--have learned, by osmosis, to shut up and do what they're told.

The only real hope for change in the public systems is to vote in a politically incorrect government that will be prepared to wipe the slate clean and ask real teachers about what should be in the academic curriculum and the students' texts. This government would also need to challenge the Charter (use--horrors!--the notwithstanding clause) in order to remove from the schools the stultifying "equity" fiats. I don't think either will be happening any time soon in a province near you! Kyrie eleison.

lookout,
It sounds like a stewing pot for more left of center students heading for post secondary well prepared.

Do you see any appetite for change on the part of the parents or teachers in the district(s) that you work in?

Care to enlarge on "the stultifying "equity" fiats"

The reason I mentioned the Charter schools is my brother lives in Calgary and has his two children enrolled. They have been atteding for about 6 years I think. The children wear uniforms and like I said earlier, it is back to the basics. Much concentration on readin' ritin' an' 'rithmetic. Guess you can tell I never went to a charter school. My brother says they are having amazing results both academically and behaviorally. When they applied there was a waiting list of 7000 hoping to get in. He tells me it is much longer that that now. The concept is catching on much faster than they can build schools.
Maybe rather than beating your head against the wall (I sense some frustration), this could be something to look into, either in Ontario or consider a move. Our nation needs passionate educators who love to teach and have that burning desire to see our youth become all that they can be.
There must be an answer. The public school system as it is now is just barely able to churn out students who can meet university standards. The drop out rates in school are apalling and illiteracy is rampant.
I was at a 7-11 store the other day and the power was down so the tills were not operating but they were open so the teller could make change. There was a (caucasian) young lady behind the till, I would guess 17 or 18 years old. My purchase was 75 cents for a pack of gum. I gave her a toonie ($2 coin). She pulled a calculator from beneath the till to figure out my $1.25 in change. At that moment I was embarassed by our educational system and a little confused and angry.
We are failing our youth. I keep thinking the problem is systemic. Perhaps you are right, the only hope is radical governmental change (not likely) and even if it does happen, education is a provincial responsibility so it would have to be duplicated many times over to change the nation.
Perhaps if people get fed up and disgusted enough, there can be change.
Perhaps there are others reading this thread who have constructive suggstions or opinions that can help.
I am an optimist and really want to believe there is hope. When I see what young Jeff Macdonald produced, it can cause even the most optimistic among us to despair. Keep you head up and do what you can. I read a quote yesterday attributed to Martin Luther. It went someting like this "Even if the world were going to end tomorrow, I would plant an apple tree today."
Daniel

Thanks, Daniel, that's an excellent and encouraging post. And I'm delighted to hear about your niece and nephew. When I was able--I did it sort of behind backs!--to do my literacy program and math--back to the basics--all day, every day, with my very challenged students, the gains were remarkable, both academically and behaviourally. Self-esteem? It's the product of knowing one's competent. The parents were most supportive. I had five years teaching my program in this way (largely ignored by the powers that be) and then the board closed the program to save $$ (I think). My kids' parents fought the closure all the way to the Ministry. I'm still in close touch with nearly all of the families from that class: a week ago, one student, who's now back in Hungary, called me! You've picked up on my love of teaching. Well done: I tell my students that good learners are good detectives!

In the case of public education, dealing with governments--what bad luck--is the hand we've been dealt. And, you're right--changing the agenda of so many Education Ministries is not likely to happen. Getting charter schools--I'd LOVE to teach in one--is not going to happen in most jurisdictions either. The unions and all the Ministry and board bureaucrats who are responsible for much of the mess we're in, wouldn't dream of it. I've actually thought of moving to Alberta ("weather's good there in the fall"!)--I'm a charter subscriber to Western Standard--and maybe should consider it more seriously.

Examples of the "equity fiats": When everything is equal (sic), everything gets dumbed down. There's no room for high standards and consequences because that would stigmatize those who don't or can't "make the grade". No one's held responsible--whoops, the teachers are--because doing so might single out certain groups. E.g., Teachers are really careful when disciplining visible minorities--and often get hung out to dry by administration if they do. So, the inmates run the asylum. Administration's so fearful of litigation, they cave at the slightest provocation from bullying students and their parents. An example of this is a student of mine--I'm very fond of him and he's making really fine gains in my class--who very likely stole a book from another of my students. The circumstantial evidence I gathered to "prove" it was extensive. Then the student's mother lied and insisted the book was her son's. The principal looked me straight in the eye and said, "If the parent says it's his book, it's his book." So much for truth. So much for accountability. A lot of teachers are just giving up. NOT involving administration, who regularly appease the wrongdoer, while downloading onto the teacher the expectations of more documentation and curriculum add-ons to deal with the problem, is a choice more and more teachers are making.

Another example: all family forms are considered equal. The fact that an inordinate amount of well documented problems occur in certain models is never allowed to be mentioned. (And some families that conform to this model do a heroic and laudable job.) Administrators avert their eyes from the most egregious lack of responsibility on the part of certain parents. To hold these people accountable would be considered very politically incorrect and definitely impolite. In fact, when these parents habitually renege on their responsibilities, the school will often pick up the slack--e.g., provide meals, happy-sappy little pep talks and high-fives when the student's wimped out, and $$ for trips the student doesn't deserve to go on. This simply teaches these students and their irresponsible parents that it pays to sit back and let someone else do the work. I've seen the number of this kind of parent increase substantially. I've seen a corresponding rise in the educational establishment's appeasement of their and their children's irresponsibility. (Being the teacher of these kids is challenging: I roll up my sleeves and rub my hands together! If I'm allowed to, I can make a real difference.)

Another example of so-called "equity"--of course, it's not: it's just a smokescreen to allow social engineering of all sorts--is the fact that homosexual activists are allowed into many schools, often under the guise of anti-bullying. Under the boards' equity rubrics, these people are able to proselytize about same-sex families in the public schools of my jurisdiction. Can you imagine someone being allowed to talk about the benefits of marriage and the mother-father family? YIKES!

So much for equity. It's pernicious political propaganda to radically change the face of this country. Many teachers feel the way I do but keep their heads down. Actually, so do I. I'd love to have my posts published, with my name attached, but my days as a teacher would be numbered. I might even be hauled before one of the kangaroo courts of this country--a Human Rights (sic) Commission. I'm paid by the state and am, therefore, apparently, expected to toe the politically correct line that most of our governments have adopted. (A veteran CBCer, at a party I was at, told me I had no right to express non PC views if I wanted to remain a teacher in the public system. If I wanted to express such opinions, he said I should resign!)

Public education wise, I'd say things are in a bad way. I wish I could be more optimistic. There is a way out but the powers that be and too many ordinary Canadians don't have the vision or the guts to go there. Again, kyrie eleison.

lookout
Wish I could have been there for the rally!
Thanks for the candor. Even though it is a rather damning endigtment, I appreciate it all the same. My brother lives in Alberta, "the land that flows with milk and money", myself I live in Saskatchewan, the land witht the fastest growing aboriginal poulation in Canada. I am not a racist but a person would have to be blind not to see the obvious. Many of the same problems you have described are prevalent here as well. It is funny that you mention the anti-bullying homosexual propogandists. I have worked at a school as a volunteer helper for 15 years so I have seen many things during my tenure. At the school, the division had hired a lady who was hired as a family councillor that went from school to school councilling...you guessed it, she was a lesbian. Now I am not sure how it was that she was councilled to council but I am thinking that it was not along the lines of the traditional famiy. (Don't get me started on that one tonight! arrrrgh)
You know, I think that there are many more than we think that see things the same way but like you said "everyone keeps their heads down". It is a little bit like the expression "Evil grows because good men (and women) do nothing".
There are no easy answers. I like your approach of trying to do what you can...one student at a time.
Perhaps enough said for tonight. Tomorrow it might be good if we go out and plant an apple tree and encourage a friend to do the same. On second thought, we still have 2 feet of snow on the ground and 3 feet of frost in the ground. The apple tree will have to wait. However, I will go to church tomorrow morning (after I spend a couple hours pushing snow with the tractor) and worship the only one who does have all the answers. Good night. It was nice meeting you and chatting a bit.Perhaps we'll link up again sometime.
Daniel

Daniel: So, you go to church! Am I surprised? I'll be heading there soon myself to worship the same God--there I said it! God's been thoroughly expunged from the public schools and the doors and windows have been bolted fast to make sure He stays out. I'm not saying everyone has to be a believer, but when Truth is denied and even derided, good things don't follow. The vacuum that's caused by truth's absence has been filled by expediency and the false idol of "equality": when school policies and procedures, as a result of directives from the ministries and boards, are skewed to fit this untruth, what really needs to happen doesn't. E.g., kids never "fail" now; they keep being "transfered" to the next grade and fall further behind. (My heart aches for these kids. See what happens to their self-esteem.) The corollary is that things that shouldn't happen do. E.g., Certain groups are favoured over others--equality, eh?--and kids from such groups are patronized and demeaned by having the standards dropped for them: I've seen it time and time again. I refuse to do it. I have the same high standards for all my kids. I've often had to take on administration over this. Re a disadvantaged student--a difficult but real favourite of mine--who bit someone on the yard: The principal first of all didn't tell me and then said, "Be nice to him." I was as "nice" to him as he needed at the time. I challenge administration on these miscalls with, "So you want to victimize this child twice? We know his life circumstances are difficult. My goal is to give him a fair chance by holding him to the high standards of truth and respect--for himself and others." Letting such students off the hook is a cowardly act of the utmost disrespect. I care too much for the well-being of my students to treat them this way. Shallow bleeding heart liberalism has seriously undermined our kids. The adults (sic) in Canada have seriously failed the younger generation. Respect for themselves and others and their ability to reason, read and write articulately, and truly empathize--in order to see another point of view--are on a serious downward curve. (There are still many fine teachers out there doing yeoman service. However, this is often in spite of the system.)

Back to the Sheaf crew: They've learned their equality lessons well. All they need to do is decide who the victims are: Once that's done, they accord them special status and allow the most transparent hypocricies. Deriding and ridiculing the opposite side goes hand in hand with this muddled thinking and false judgement. Intolerance, anyone? (And what if they're wrong?)

I notice that some people who post here are virulently anti-Christian. Grow up, guys! And have a good day.

Daniel, as I navigate the crowded streets, I'll think of you on your tractor under the big sky. I'll say a prayer for you too.

Daniel: Not to argue, but your statement might need clarification:

"My purchase was 75 cents for a pack of gum. I gave her a toonie ($2 coin). She pulled a calculator from beneath the till to figure out my $1.25 in change"

Maybe she was figuring in GST?

cheers
tom

This letter has three main sections. In the first, I argue that www.smalldeadanimals.com preaches tolerance yet actively refuses to tolerate views that differ from its own. In the second, I make it clear that www.smalldeadanimals.com has a driving need to preach hatred. And in the third and final section, I conclude that this is explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material I plan to present. In the text that follows, I won't bother discussing the flaws in its logic, because it indisputably doesn't use any logic. If there is one thing I have learned, it is this: If you want to hide something from www.smalldeadanimals.com, you just have to put it in a book. To wrap up, I'll just hit the key elements of this letter one last time. First, www.smalldeadanimals.com would rather talk about making changes than actually make them. Second, I am interested in facts, not in paregoric for www.smalldeadanimals.com's legates. And finally, www.smalldeadanimals.com's modes of thought are a grungy carnival of adversarialism.

Empty: Sound and fury signifying utter silliness. Have a good day.

The cartoon was a master piece. It exposed the true side of christians and the unmentionable neocons that hide behind it's robes.

It was a pleasure to see the shoe on the other foot and to hear people who claimed the mohammad carton was "just a cartoon" "freedom of expression" litterly flip out - BUT when there capitalistic figurine is exposed in a funny way it's REAL BAD.
Here you wanna see funny:
http://www.catholicsupply.com/christmas/othersports.html

The height of capitalistic neocon promotion. ROTFL You can fool some of the people some of the time mr neocon but you can't fool em all. Hahahahahaha

Just so some of you know, The Sheaf is funded not by the university or gov't, but by a mandatory fee each student pays. As it is a student organization, is run and regulated by students, not Mr. Mackinnon. The cartoon was made to offend and draw parallels to the offense muslims were taking to the comics in the spotlight recently. If it weren't for that already famous parallel you probably wouldnt even have heard about the cartoon.
To me this underlines the very essence of freedom of speech, not in that people should have the right to insult and degrade other people's ideas, but that this cartoon and the amount of support it has, opened up your eyes to the amount of bias the many youth may have towards religion. Which supports the underlining principle of freedom of speech, the quest for truth.
I understand how many of you found the comic tastless and insulting, however in a country of many differing ideals/biases coupled with freedom of speech its probably not the first or last time this is going to happen. I think that some of you are useing it as an excuse to spread misinformation and biased views about subjects it seems some of you know very little, but assume alot about.
The great majority of the "lefties, socialists, communists, hippies and liberals" I know are not interested in abolishing progressive industry, but placing a higher priority on human welfare rather than profit(and if you really do fundamentally disagree with that idea than I would be more than proud to separate myself into a category separate from you).
oh ya and to end on a controversial topic just for those of you who like to argue: FREE WILL AND CHOICE ARE ILLUSIONS; you're all the products of your genetics,social adaptation, and individual happenstance experiences (or god's preknowledge of your descions, if thats your thing)
HAHAHAHAHA(manical laughter)