It's been six months, and I have yet to hear a CBC "news report" that wasn't critical of Prime Minister Harper. Why is this a bad thing?
Considering how hard the CBC failed to re-elect the last government, Conservatives should be grateful those losers are NOT on our side...

Speaking of the media, why aren't they reporting on dead terrorists in Lebanon? Because they're all being lumped into the civilian head-count is why:

http://71.18.16.165/2006/07/something-to-chew-on.html

Heh. Thanks, Kate, I did think this morning that Mr. Goldstein's article was rather excellent. And as I mentioned here last week, I do think Mr. Coyne's been on a roll lately. Glad you're back safely.

LOL!!!Still laughing.. Your "Editor's Note" made my day! Thanks, Kate, for this and for all the great posts and to all the great posters here on this blog (especially you ET, I don't know your background but you obviously have great insight into Middle East politics and you seem to be one "very smart cookie"!). Keep up the fantastic work Kate, I am one of your biggest fans!!

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Cheap shot comments regarding any purported physical resemblance between these animated seagull characters and CTV's Craig Oliver will not be tolerated on this thread.)

awwww shucks...

So is the ctv. montreal gang fair game?
please, please please!
;-)

Craig Oliver Graham said:

"Mr. Harper is proud of the fact he wasn't nuanced about this," Graham said. "Nuance has kept us in a position where we could help. Lose the nuance and you lose your capacity to act and help others . . . .we lose our position to work with moderates."

Of course, the woodpecking you hear is Norm Specktor expectorating:

"Harper's stand will play well with his core constituency of small-c conservatives, Albertans and evangelicals, Spector said."

Sooo... lettuce pray all you cores, rednecks, and small-c's:

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

On to Damascus. ...-

Not at all like Oliver, no specs.

Craig Oliver, Seagull?? why even to suggest that shows a lack of understanding or knowledge of Raptors. Eagles, hawks, et al. Now we're talking.

Pat

A friend opined that Bush drives the left crazy because he is utterly devoid of nuance, i.e., cannot be re-interpreted. WYSIWYG.

I've had a feeling lately that Harper is going to pull a Reagan and communicate directly and successfully to the public over the heads of the Fourth Estate. This is a companion theory to my long-cherished one that the public is much more conservative than we've come to believe after all those years of Liberal "Canadian Values" propaganda.

Will someone pinch me, please!

Nuance is supposed to get us something. Exactly what is it that Hezbollah has that we Canadians are supposed to want? Since the leader of Hezbollah has publicly stated: "We do not fight to get anything from you. We fight to eliminate you.", could Mr. Graham please name the moderate members of Hezbollah that we would get to work with?

Seagulls... Aren't those the birds that s**t on you from the air?

Has anyone else noticed how much more aggressively CTV has been campaigning again Harper ever since that big takeover a couple of weeks ago? It's less than subtle. CBC used to stand alone, but they're now part of a tag-team of broadcast networks.

This broadcast activism under the guise of "news" is all going to come to a head, though, because of simple demographics. The broadcast media, dominated by a group of producers and journalists who have an unwavering, abiding belief that they have a right and an obligation to be activists for a cause, are increasingly finding themselves at odds in a very unpleasant way with the print media, which is much more balanced, with no shortage of proponents on either side of any given issue.

It completely makes sense that the print medium is where the right would find itself more properly represented, not only because print journalists, can obviously, aaah, "write good", but also because those who consume their product can "read good". In stark comparison, the constituency who get their news from television only need to know how to stare, and to remember to keep their mouths open when their noses are plugged.

This split between a media where sane intelligent and well-informed perspectives are given voice, and its sister media which is heavily populated by spokespersons for the activist left, can only grow so wide before the proverbial shooting starts in earnest. I think we're just seeing the opening skirmishes.

In order hasten the necessary and cathartic battle to come, Canadian consumers of news (and, in the case of CBC, taxpayers) need to demand more of a presense of writers from the right -- Coyne is, quietly, a pioneer -- on the broadcast side of things so that they might, how you say, "cloud the issues with rational thought."

Can you imagine seeing Mark Steyn having a go at Mansbridge on the CBC discussing, oh, say, media bias? Nope. Strange how we all know that that's impossible, huh? We've been collectively hammered by the LPC's fictional (outside of LPC stronghold urban areas) "Real Canadians" who walk among us during broadcasts, who are apparently used to having their fictional way with the nation via their broadcast proxies. It's amazing the reaction that a little non-fiction causes whenever it pokes through -- witness the stir cause by Coyne's minor, minor shot at the Maestro of the Truth Orchestra -- Peter Mansbridge -- last week.

Thanks, Kate for Goldstein's column; I hadn't seen it, but, it's perfect.

As for 'nuance', it is indeed, as Goldstein says, "one of those fancy-shmancy terms that makes us all sound like pompous jerks". Actually, nuance is best exemplified by Woody Allen as the indecisive, spineless, dithering neurotic jerk. That's the Liberal Canadian.

And Craig Oliver DOES look like a seagull. It's the beady eyes.

I dont see any resemblance at all, could you show us the backside of said birds?

I thought about "photoshopping" in the trademark round spectacles, but it's been a hot, long weekend, and there really wasn't time.

Frankly, I don't see the resemblance between the seagulls and Craig Oliver. Now if you had some owl pictures...

I'll never be able to look at Craig Oliver again without thinking of a squawking seagull.

Did anyone see question period today on CTV? They are so blatant in their contempt for PMSH that it is almost funny to watch. Most of the conversation was bashing PMSH and defending various terrorist organizations.I think the word nuance came up a number of times.

The MSM thinks that they are going to turn the public against PMSH with all this propaganda but thanks to people like Kate at SMDA the public is actually able to get the facts and make up their own minds.

I think that this whole exercise the MSM is engaged in is going to backfire. The average tax paying citizen of Canada is getting increasingly fed up of being used and abused by all these needy groups. Many people who were born and raised in this country struggle to provide the basic necessities for their families and watch as their hard earned dollars are siphoned away by an increasing number of needy,demanding, ungrateful special interest groups.

I think the behaviour of the MSM is going to bring people together behind the PMSH and the CP is going to win a large majority in the next election.Maybe at that point these very annoying pinko journalists will start treating PMSH and the Canadian taxpayers with respect.

Golly Gee! Is that Kevin Newman?! Second from the right, top row?!

Critics are saying that Craig Oliver is now irrelevant.

.... Mansbridge and Boager as well ?

Since Craig is exempted from cheap shots does that mean left-lib Giggling Gidget is fair game?

Here is a scenario I would pay good money to get-

Ann Coulter, or Laura Ingraham,
Conservative women ( or Kate MacMillan?)

In our cities,
On Canadian National TV,
In prime time,
Seven days of the week,
Twelve months of the year,
In Canada,
I am not making this up!

(OK, maybe I am dreaming)

Nuance = jellyfish = utopian = progressive = Liberal = Democrat

Joe Lieberman is about the only Democrat that isn’t nuanced; he actually has opinions and states them, that’s why he’s being driven out of the party.

John Kerry is nuanced. He promotes his Vietnam War heroism while simultaneously making a career out of opposing that war - that’s nuanced.
His enemies were in Washington, he never mentions Pol Pot.

The only question for us is – Are there enough Canadian voters that prefer to nuance - honest, straight talk and opinions? Are there enough who will vote in a majority Conservative government? I’m gaining confidence that the answer is yes.

But we need to get ready for a growing onslaught from the MSM. We are about 5 years behind the US on this enormous gulf between the nuanced “progressives” and conservatives. Our MSM will continue to plant virtual landmines in our path because we oppose their transnational, elitist plan to create an expansion of the EU socialist state to counterbalance the USA. The progressives were using multiculti and changing demographics as a weapon to get us capitalists and champions of individualism to heal. Plan A fell with the Berlin Wall. Now their multiculti demographic Plan B is failing too and they are mad. They are like rats in a corner – watch out.

The word nuance is a code word for Liberals sitting on that old picket fence. There is no question middle east politics is complex. However, when people say Israel has a right to defend itself and then bash them for using their army to retaliate they are spouting unadulterated bullshit. They don't think Israel has a right at all. Otherwise what should they do. Hold a conference, issue a press release like the Liberals in Canada would do and then not take any action at all.
The actions of the MSM are disgusting and like they are quick to point out that they will not help Harper in his time of need. I guess this is one of them and they are writing furiously about the supposeded ineptitude of the government. However, reading the letters to the editor in various papers Canadians are sympathetic to Harper's evacuation efforts.In fact those Lebanese "tourists" who criticized the government are in fact being criticized for their apparent ingratitude shown for rescuing them. There is a backlash taking place. Notice how the Globe and Star have backed off the "horror" stories. Our voice on the international stage has been silent for too long and it is time we began to speak and many agree that we need to take a position at long last.

Interesting. Maybe the pendulum is starting to swing back away from the conservative dominance and bias in the media.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200607200006

Summary: "In Media Matters' third examination of guest appearances on ABC's This Week, CBS' Face the Nation, and NBC's Meet the Press, research demonstrated that Republicans and conservatives outnumbered Democrats and progressives from April to June of 2006."

funny editor's note....no cheap shot coming from here about resemblance to a seagull. However, I think there's a definite resemblance to an owl, minus the wisdom.

Absolutely, hungry_valley, and if you think that's gross, you oughta see them regurtitate half digested fish on their enemies.In Manitoba, we referred to them as "shithawks".

Seagulls should be Canada's National Bird, they're in every province and territory, they make a lot of noise over nothing, they're greedy and self serving, and don't know when to shut up.
And just when you think things can't get much worse, they fly over and defecate all over your freshly washed car.

I firmly support any attack on PMSH by MSM. Give her hell!

Display all the rescued "citizens" that have something other than gratitude ... do it 30-40 times a day ... days on end. Really, 2 hours is to long to wait if your ass is being saved.

Show the rallies against Israel ... do it all.

I'm on your side MSM ... I know some people aren't ... step it up.

Ted,

The statistics you cite are for appearances on US media. I don't know of any group doing similar studies of bias in Canadian broadcast media, but if there were I think the results would be obvious, even to you.

Media matters???

Might as well start quoting Larouche or Phelps.

jonathon livingston seagull is in my email address book and has taken umbrage at being compared to mr oliver.

LOL !!!

well at least now I know the political sympathies of all the sh*thawks leaving their mark on my car all day long.

LOL !!!

anyway, with the decades long history of MSM leaving their mark on Conservative leadership, what the mark do they expect but to be left in coach class?

I'll be up front about my biases for starters, I'm not much on Tories and their leaders. Still I try to be fair and I like to view the political process as honestly as I can, notwithstanding my bias.

Harper has done a reasonable job from the perspective of a political operative and certainly the novelty of a Canadian Prime Minister actually taking a stand on a contentious issue- Isreal/Lebanon - has been amusing to me. Maybe not the smartest politics but it is my viewpoint too so it was fun to agree for a change. But this picking a fight with the media and taking a snit with them ( like at Vimy), dumb, dumb, dumb. If you Tories want to make this minority a majority he needs to reel that whiny behaviour in pronto.

I used to consider myself conservative for my views. Reading this blog though has made me believe that the mark of a true conservative is the inability to accept, consider, or even respect divergent viewpoints. Along with a willingness to prostrate before your chosen masters which leaves no room to question and critique and thus evolve.

There's only one side to the issues here, the criticisms far from constructive. All these scraps of bias you post to weave a shield against the media, public, various and sundry organizations...foes created because if they're not with you then they must be against you, right? Thank god this will be your undoing since today's interconnected society is founded on compromise and not paranoid isolationism.

At least it's clear now why you're here, life would no doubt be a pretty lonely place if it weren't for all that time you can spend staring into each others navels in admiration - and reassurance.

Best of luck, really. But now who the hell am I going to vote for...

The Liberals. Same as the last time and the time before. Nice try.

Or the NDP ... same thing.

Heed the call Arbee, and lead the Rino party out of the wilderness.
Evolve lad,evolve!

Arbee have you considered journalism? Responsible to no one ... you don't care about anything but selling advertising and getting a patronage appointment. You would be well above the scum ordinary citizen.

I always thought Craig Oliver looked more like Pinocchio

That nose!!!!.......Looks like someone carved it with a Paring Knife!!

"Nuance" is the word liberals use to turn a tragic flaw into a virtue. When the cognitive dissonance of leftist thought and the real world hits you in the head, you have two choices: leave the left, or crack open the thesaurus and explain yourself away with words like "nuanced".

I PRAY that the libs use the "nuanced" attack right through the next election campaign. It was a disaster for the Dems and Kerry, and it will be even more of a disaster in Canada. All it shows is contempt for the audience, and arrogance for those claiming to be smarter than their opponent. Even the most "nuanced" of Canadians knows: Stephen Harper is the smartest PM we've ever had, and he never has to say it.

Arbee. "today's interconnected society is founded by compromise and not paranoid isolationism" simply brilliant statement. NOW Which group would you like to start this brillian process with , Hezbollah, Hammas,Tamali Tigers, pick any one of the terrorist groups that you wish . Be sure to drop us a line and let us know how the talks are going. GOOD LUCK

arbee

I hear ya.

What's the matter. You don't like two week old roadkill?

You are soooooo ageist, hombre.

Nuance this Craig Oliver....

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51191

July 23, 2006

"The bodies of Iranian Revolutionary Guard soldiers who were killed by the Israeli army in Lebanon have been transported to Syria and flown to Tehran, senior Lebanese political sources told WorldNetDaily.

The information was confirmed by Israeli and Egyptian security officials. It follows scores of reports the past few days Iranian soldiers have been aiding Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon in their attacks against Israel, including help with the firing of rockets into Israeli population centers."

And while you are at it, Oliver, and CTV, nuance this admission that you have been reporting as fact all day long:

arutzsheva.com/news.php3?id=108122

"BBC Admits Many Lebanese Casualties are Terrorists
15:22 Jul 23, '06 / 27 Tammuz 5766

(IsraelNN.com) The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians. A BBC reporter said he saw Hizbullah terrorists using a private home and added, "It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian."

Media reports have emphasized that Israeli air strikes have killed more than 350 Lebanese civilians, prompting accusations that the IDF is carrying out "collective punishment" on the country."

Arbee: I have a quite sincere wish to learn about the "conservative" views you used to hold but of which you have now disabused yourself. In other words, how about sharing your Road to Damascus experience with us.

gray: That was quick after your rather tenuous, timid, bemused and mildly ironic introduction. Are you always that gray?

Were you looking for Nuance? That's here, just down the hall a couple doors! This is just the anti-nuance thread for folks in the early recovery stages after decades of highly-nuanced Liberal inanity. Be patient.

arbee and gray,

Simple solution - if you experience to much pain anywhere ... go somewhere else. As far as I know, SDA isn't compulsory reading for anything.

Now that NCF TO mentions it, Kerry was about as nuanced as nuanced gets. Eye-glazingly nuanced, nuanced to the point where even his staunchest supporters surely felt compelled to shout "Oh for Ch***'s sake, man, spit it out!"

Canada has been ruled for years by a party of John Kerrys. Andrew Coyne noted how Bill Graham recently reinvigorated that LPC-style nuance when he spelled out his position on recent events in the ME: Israel absolutely has a right to defend itself, so long as it doesn't use it's army. Which is better, I guess, than the really lefty version, which is "Israel is completely missing the point by defending itself."

me no dhimmi
I prefer "tentative" which is the way that all classical liberals should hold opinions.

Ural
I'll take my lumps. But it gets better than
"ooh I hate socialists"
"yeah me too"
"darn liberal media"!
right?

Did somebody ask for divergent opinions? Ok: those aren't gulls, they're terns. Tenuous, tendentious, tentative, three for a dollar, and we're givin' away the present tents, some assembly required, batteries not included. How do we do it, how do we do it, nuance, nuance, turn up the nuance. Step right up. C'mon c'mon, step right up.

A favourite daydream of mine:

The Canadian government decides to privatize CBC.

And the Fox Network buys it.

A favourite daydream of mine:

The Canadian government decides to privatize CBC.

And the Fox Network buys it.

I prefer "tentative" which is the way that all classical liberals should hold opinions.

"Tentative", just another word for unsureness.

They come to critisize but are unsure of the correctness of their criticism.

Laughable. Tentatively, of course:)

I prefer "tentative" which is the way that all classical liberals should hold opinions.

"Tentative", just another word for unsureness.

They come to critisize but are unsure of the correctness of their criticism.

Laughable. Tentatively, of course:)

I prefer "tentative" which is the way that all classical liberals should hold opinions.

"Tentative", just another word for unsureness.

They come to critisize but are unsure of the correctness of their criticism.

Laughable. Tentatively, of course:)

Sorry about the triple posts.

Tentatively, of course.

I think the reason the MSM hates Harper is because he is, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself "why".

If everyone hates Israel, maybe there is a reason why...

Still embarassed to be Canadian, and no, I am not in Cuba.

The one thing the press of today fails to understand {majority today I think} is that they are progressively digging a themselves a deeper and deeper creditability hole. For one, I no longer read the newspaper and accept anything I read as anywhere near the truth. I will give today’s "journalists" credit for one thing though, they made me realize that most of what you read in a history book should certainly be taken with a grain of salt. Watching how they twist and turn today's events to their liking you begin to realize that it was probably the same way 100 or 1000 years ago. We call and know what they are today, politely, the lib/left, I can just imagine what they were called when you were allowed to publicly call and say things as you saw them. As a whole I would have to regard their lot as morally and ethically bankrupt.

Iran

(sung by Craig Oliver to Kate Werk, with a tip of the hat to the 80's technopop band, Flock of Seagulls)

I balked along the avenue.
I never thought I'd meet a girl like you;
Meet a girl like you.
With acrylic brush and prairie wise;
The kind of wise that runs me through;
Runs me through.

And Iran, Iran so far away.
I just ran, Iran all night and day.
I couldn't get Volpe.

(Craig Oliver electric drum solo)

A cloud appears above your head;
A beam of right comes shining down on you,
Shining down on you.
The crowd is moving nearer still.
George Stephanopolous comes in view;
George comes in view.

And Iran, Iran so far away.
I just ran, Iran all night and day.
I couldn't get Volpe.

Reached out a hand to stop the mace;
You're slowly disappearing from my view;
Disappearing from my view.
Reached out a hand to try again;
I'm voting in a stream of right with you;
A stream of right with you.

And I ran, I ran so far away.
I just ran, I ran all right and Stockwell Day.
I couldn't get Volpe.

http://www.oz.net/~davester/AFOS/Lyrics/IRan.html

All Rights Reserved, Plato's Stepchild and Neil Sedaka

"I think the reason the MSM hates Harper is because he is, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

Fair enough. But surely that works both ways:

"I think the reason people hate the MSM is because they are, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

"If everyone hates Israel, maybe there is a reason why..."

No doubt because they're nasty, hook-nosed Zionists who, working through the Bilderberger group, the Freemasons, the Royal Family and the NSA are busily proceeding with their evil plans for world domination.

"I think the reason the MSM hates Harper is because he is, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

Fair enough. But surely that works both ways:

"I think the reason people hate the MSM is because they are, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

"If everyone hates Israel, maybe there is a reason why..."

No doubt because they're nasty, hook-nosed Zionists who, working through the Bilderberger group, the Freemasons, the Royal Family and the NSA, are busily proceeding with their age-old evil plans for world domination.

what would be useful for Fox in the CryBitchComplain Network. Im sure the cameras are old , the union is f--ing crap, the offices are in the highest priced real estate the crown could subsidize and all the re-runs of Rainbow Country are already on DVD.

Id love to see the sale just so I could see PeterPansbridge say "critics say" one last time whilst some unknown bitcher comes on in a room full of disheveled books ( I truly think its a CBCpravda set) and pages back and forth through some report.

Kneel McDonald CEEBEECEEnews unemployment line Ottawa.

Does anybody know where to find the interview with Peter Pansbridge and Andrew Coyne.

With all those seagulls looking like that it must be BODAGA BAY where you can feed the seagulls and they will EAT OFF YOUR HAND

Headline: Trudeau ... Not Dead Enough. ...-

All Mid-east evacuees flow through Trudeau

940 News - 1 hour ago
Montreal has been named the official gateway for all Canadians returning from Lebanon.

How long before CBC interviews someone who wanted to get to the GTA non stop?

CMSHIT
Canadian Media Support Hezbollah International Terrorists will soon be their slogan by the sound of things. I'm too far off in the boondocks to notice - are Hezbollah flags flying on any of the hdqtrs in Tor.? Or maybe they're wearing the twin flag pins - like mine, which is the Star of David and the Canadian Maple Leaf.

Good to see montreal the gateway, they deserve each other and hopefully most will say in quebec. They deserve each other and should fight together quite well.

CanWest News has a wire story day from the Ottawa Citizen that is reported in the Montreal Gazette with the headline: "Half think Harper too pro-Israel". The lede is: "Canadians are evenly split on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's stance on the conflict in Lebanon, according to an Ipsos-Reid poll released Sunday." Paragraph three starts by saying: "It said 45 per cent agree Harper's position is "fair and balanced and completely appropriate," while 44 per cent say it is "decidedly too pro-Israel and is not appropriate."

Why do I mention this? Because the next sentance says: "Eleven per cent say he has not supported Israel strongly enough." So, for those of you keeping score at home, 56% say the prime minister should be supporting Israel as he is, or even more.

Moving on, in the middle of the article we read: "The poll said residents of Quebec and Atlantic Canada are the most likely to feel the minority Conservative government's position is decidedly too pro-Israel. In British Columbia and Alberta, four in 10 felt that way." (So 60% didn't -Vitruvius.) "Residents of Saskatchewan and Manitoba (58 per cent) are the most likely to feel the minority Conservative government's posture is fair, balanced and appropriate, followed by a little more than 50 per cent everywhere else except Quebec and the Atlantic region."

So what did CanWest just attempt to hide: Alberta and BC are more in favour of Israel's positition than the rest of Canada, even more so than the prime minister. Perhaps someone should send CanWest that old school-yard ditty: Liar, liar, pants on fire, hanging by a telephone wire. Or maybe we should encourge them, and then Alberta can just separate. Step right up.

I can only dream that BC and Alberta could separate. Just think what a Country like that could do without all the eastern teat suckers dragging it down in self pity, false caring, cretien morals, a constitution that is nothing more than the quebec and legal full employment act and just plain old fashioned stupidity. When the voting numbers once again dictate/vote a good man like Harper out once again, then maybe, just maybe.

nolongerproud: How about a brief essay on what is loathsome about Harper? I'm encountering quite a few people I'd describe as left/lib who seem to be growing fond of the man. He is a honest man, a man of integrity don't you think? Please don't tell me he's "shrewd"; that is a job requirement.

Also, how about at least letting us know what country you went to? And maybe the trigger for the move? Are you quite well off? If so, inheritance or did you make it in the free markets?

Hezbollah has won the hearts and minds of the Lebanese people.

PMSH has won the hearts and minds of conservative twits.

The MSM has won the hearts and minds of everyday Liberal lefty Canadians.

Israel has won the hearts and minds of Jewery.

Nobody has won the hearts and minds of everyone.

Kate,

I agree with you fully. Under no circumstances will i comment on the extraordinary physical resemblance between the animated seagull characters and CTV's Craig Oliver.

That would be totally unacceptable.

Me No Dhimmi,

I'd be happy to respond to your requests if you send me your email address.

A few variations on the theme of Nolongerproud… (8.00am) to the key of Vitruvius:

“Harper is…quite loathsome.”
Saddam Hussein is loathsome, Bernardo and Homolka are loathsome. Anyone that thinks “Steve” is loathsome lacks “balance and nuance.” :-)

Does anyone still wonder why the credibility of the political left is declining? As a somewhat simplistic differentiation, core left-Liberal supporters (known as radicals in earlier generations) redefine terminology and erase distinctions, whereas core right-Conservative supporters (known as liberals in earlier generations) realize calling a rooster a hen won’t produce eggs. More simply put, left-libs appear to see the world starkly in black and white, while right-cons see the grey…

A polar reversal of such magnitude within a generation is bemusing. Regardless of why, it is very encouraging.

Seagulls don't look like Craig Oliver.
Cartoon characters that represent greed, stupidity and hysteria look like all squacking scavenger carrion eating liberal appologists.

Second from the right top, looks Mansbridgey.

David Brown,

"Hezbollah has won the hearts and minds of the Lebanese people."

Since Hezbollah is a banned terrorist organization, what does this say about the Lebanese people?

I would have to disagree with you though. I still hope that the majority of Lebanese are not fans of terror. If they are, I'd have to say I'd be more in favour of the type of collective punishment you (and your MSM Joo-hating friends) seem to disdain.

PMSH has been growing in popularity with people who are solidly center and often used to vote liberal. Not everyone hates the Joos David.

"The MSM has won the hearts and minds of everyday Liberal lefty Canadians."

You can also ad "those who hate the Joos" to fans of the MSM. Since they do so love to bash Joos whenever possible.

Remember: Liberal Willy Graham is the guy in the middle with the nuance feathers in his mouth. ...-

The Hill Times, July 24th, 2006
BACKROOMS
By Angelo Persichilli

-Angelo Persichilli is political editor of Corriere Canadese, Toronto's Italian-language daily newspaper.

Harper catches Liberals off-guard, Grits could lose substantial Jewish vote in next general election

Criticizing the PM's reaction without denouncing the cause is a futile political exercise typical of a political organization that has no ideas. The Liberals just don't get it.

TORONTO–The situation in the Middle East is too complicated, dangerous and important to be a footnote in a column on Canadian politics. ...-

Criticizing the Prime Minister's reaction without denouncing the cause is a futile political exercise typical of a political organization that has no ideas, neither in foreign, or domestic politics.

In fact, this is the second time that Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is supposed to be a foreign political novice has caught the Liberals off guard on an international matter.

The first one was during the vote on the Afghanistan mission. The Liberals, obsessed by their criticism against the government, were pushing for a Parliamentary debate on the extension of the mission, and tried to embarrass Harper by portraying his decision as undemocratic. ...-
http://www.voy.com/178771/18445.html

Dosanjh was spinning "hearts and minds" talk on CTV or CBC the other day...

He was babbling something about no longer having the "hearts and minds" of the Afghani's.

He made that pronouncement while standing in the sweltering heat, near our Pacific shores, within steps of air-conditioned shelter.

He declared that finding, all while 'our men and women of our military', continue to stand *with* the Afghani's in their sweltering heat, 24/7, for months at a time.

The Canadian Government continues to do far more for Lebanese nationals with Canadian passports than is required under the 1977 Immigration Law which requires the country of residence to take responsibility for their nationals - in the case of many of these refugees that is Lebanon.

Yes, Canada is doing much more than required by law and I, along with many Canadians who do not hold other nationalities, support this compassionate effort. What we cannot abide is the broadcasting of the views of those who complain about the rough seas they have been transported over at our government's expense. It is irresponsible of the CBC, CTV and other media to continue this thinly-veiled attack on our government -- the government of all Canadians.

Aren't Universals fun?! You can say absolutely anything about anyone, asserting your claim as Ultimate Universal Truth, with no need for proof, no evidence, zilch. That's fun.

So, we have David Brown with some super great Universals:

1) Hezbollah has won the hearts and minds of the Lebanese people.

Ahh, heck. So, ALL Lebanese people are ALL emotionally bonded with terrorists. Wow. Proof? Who needs it? Reasons? Who needs it. After all, it's a Universal Truth because David Brown said it.

2) PMSH has won the hearts and minds of conservative twits.

Again, an emotive conclusion. Again, no evidence. Oh, and what is a 'conservative twit'? Actually, this is a 'Begging the Question' Fallacy. But, never mind...

3) The MSM has won the hearts and minds of everyday Liberal lefty Canadians.

Oh, here we go again. Yet another emotive assertion. Proof? What's an 'everyday Liberal lefty Canadian..as differentiated from a not-everyday Liberal lefty Canadian?

4) Israel has won the hearts and minds of Jewery.

This is getting boring. I suggest he read Ha'artz Daily.

5) Nobody has won the hearts and minds of everyone.

Who is Nobody? Do you mean Odysseus?

And then, we have no longer proud, of whom we can also say, we are no longer proud of him. But his assertions are equally fun. How about:

"I think the reason the MSM hates Harper is because he is, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

This is yet another 'Begging the Question' error. Do you know, that the reason that a horse is a horse is because it is a horse??? So, as some have asked of you, nolonger, what's loathsome about Harper? Be careful of those logical fallacies in your answer.

How about, if 'everyone (in this terrorist group) wants to kill everyone in the West'..does this mean the problem is with Everyone in the West, or Everyone in the Terrorist Group??

If X-person wants to kill Y-person, is the problem with Y? Does he deserve it? Or is the problem with X? Hmmm?
Don't be mechanical, nolonger. Think. No longer.

Liberals "mine mine mine"

...with apologies to Jonathan Livingstone Seagull.

I find it bordering upon the insane that a comment such as the following makes it into anything like a rational discussion in this country:

"I think the reason the MSM hates Harper is because he is, in fact, quite loathsome. When everyone hates you, you might have to ask yourself 'why'."

In light of the certifiable insanity of the Iranian leadership, the craven complicity of Syria and the continuing indiscriminate, criminal terrorist attacks from south Lebanon, this comment about a duly elected leader and decent human being, Canada's Prime Minister, is beneath contempt.

All Canadians should be outraged and need to ask themselves "why" do we have to put up with this mentally deficient contempt from the ideologically captive MSM.

ET - NLP is not "begging the question", he's equivocating and excluding the middle.

This is actually refreshing - it's the arguments from ignorance (aka: precautionary principle in revisionist lingo) that really annoy me.

Garth Turner does interview on CBC suggesting dual citizens get sorted out on the docks in Lebanon.

It's all a money thing to Garth it seems.

They don't pay taxes here and all..

I'll pay Garth's airfare if he wants to be the one to stand on the dock and decide who gets on the boat.

One way ticket only Garth.

How many of the Liberal leadership contenders have dual citizenship?
Any problem with the leader of a country having allegiances to another country?

Always burns me when I see Dosanjh as critic of our armed forces. Another person with allegiances to a country other than Canada.
enough

ET,

Nice smackdown.

I must remember to refrain from easy pot-shots in the vicinity of both you and Vitruvius which is too bad cause the gratuitous slaps to our trolls are fun!

Nolonger's problem is a smugness which is clearly a symptom of never questioning his own opinions and never having to back up his assertions logically. He must surround himself with nothing but like-minded people. I'd say he grew up in Toronto's Annex or some similar place (despite his claims to be elsewhere.) Definitely he is under 40 (and probably under 30) and went to public school in Ontario. Maybe he also got a degree in a second-rate university like Carlton - in sociology, English or some other humanities subject. In other words, subjects who have been degraded in recent years. These subjects especially are now taught through indoctrination rather than logical/critical thinking. You learn what to think (and not to question it) instead of how to think (which involves questioning everything.) Same goes for David but I doubt he earned a degree. Even the humanities wouldn't graduate someone that logically challenged...

One of the most annoying habits of some people (regardless of politics) is their tendency to take everything they believe as a given (begging the question as ET points out.) This leads to a general (sorry ET, Vitruvius) tendency to forget to argue the point and move directly to the "so you must be stupid" part. Starting with "everyone knows that..." is not an argument but an assertion to be proved. If you take your assertion as a given, use it as proof of your point, you have accomplished nothing but make yourself look uneducated and foolish.

As for nolonger's assertion that PMSH is loathsome, I find a lot of people loathsome. That isn't an argument.

As for the so-called point that if lots of people hate you that you have done something wrong, learn from Churchill. He said (and I paraphrase from memory,) "it's good to have enemies as it implies that you have taken a stand." You can also turn around the old adage to read "judge a person by who his ENEMIES are" which I take to be as important as who his friends are. In other words, I judge people by who they chose not to associate with as much as who they do associate with.

I'd be proud of myself to have enemies like nolonger, Dithers, the CBC as they represent in large part what I have taken a stand against. I find no reason to question my positions in the face of opposition from those I do not respect - quite the opposite.

Not to quibble, Henry Schriemer, ...much..just a tiny quibble. But, I think that NoLongerProud of himself's assertion that Harper is hated because he is loathsome IS a 'begging the question' fallacy, because he hasn't defined the 'Is Loathsome' attribute of Harper. He just asserts it.

Now, the 'everyone hates you', which NoLonger actually wants us to accept as the Cause of 'Being Loathsome' is more interesting and brings in another fallacy, of causation rather than definition.

According to NoLonger, IF you are hated, then, it means that you are hateful. That's actually a 'modus ponens' fallacy; the fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.

He set it up as:
IF you are Hated, THEN, you are a loathsome person.
This should, logically read:
IF you are a loathsome person, THEN, you will be hated.
Our NoLonger has reversed it and set up an erroneous causality. That's the fallacy. So - zero marks for his inability to think logically and critically.

Red Dodge - I find it difficult to understand why I should be required to pay for repatriation of Canadians of convenience: those who suffered (maybe) 3 years max to get their passport and then buggered off to their homelands, knowing that they are entitled to pensions, medicare, protection, etc, - all on my dime.

This sense of entitlement is endemic amongst those who pay little or no tax and yet believe that the minority who work and pay through the nose year after year are obligated to perpetually support the non-productive, non-contributing parasites.

Too many years of too many liberal governments have eroded the concept of personal responsibility and replaced it with a collective sense of entitlement, victimization and resentment.

Fuck you and the camel you rode in on.

ET - Hmm, this requires a beer (but then I'd have to stop marking exams), and some further thought.

I must admit, I had Shakepear in mind when thinking of the equivocation, and my earlier post for the excluded middle.

I must find the time to brush up on formal logic...too much time in geek-land.

Thanks, everyone who's posted with altogether fair criticism of the loathsome comments made about our PM. nolonger, using your faulty logic, the pretty well universal censuring here of your unsubstatiated opinion obviously means that it's not up to snuff--no arguments needed on my part to prove my point. What magic thinking!

I notice your cop-out response to Me No Dhimmi: You've posted on a blog. Prove your case for all to see. We're waiting, no longer!

BTW, it gives me some pleasure--schadenfreude, I'm afraid--that it's people like you who are no longer proud to be Canadian: Until very recently--PMSH has had a lot to do with my change of heart--that's how I've felt since Trudeau set in motion the dismantling of Canada's social and behavioural norms, as government policy, at taxpayer expense. The Charter spawned the tyranny of political correctness that has decimated the equanimity, fairness, self-sufficiency, and even native intelligence of a critical mass of Canadians. (Such people never grow up: They cry foul at the drop of a hat--quite allowed under Charter "etiquette"--and expect others to fight their battles for them at public expense. And every time they win, which is often, the "rights and freedoms" of the rest of us are diminished. Not a pretty picture.)

Under the Charter, "victims"--often manufactured and/or totally undeserving ones--almost always win, at the expense of responsible Canadians who pay (and pay and pay), not only with trucated rights and dignity, but all the bills too, e.g., criminals have loads of rights and consume bucket loads of Canadians' $$ while their [true] victims are left to their own devices--and wallets--on the sidelines.

Rory Leishman, in his fine new book, Against Judicial Activism, exhaustively catalogues the many travesties the Charter has foisted on the hapless citizen-victims of this country. All Canadians, especially soft-headed ones like nlptbc, should read this expose of the Hydra-like corruption at the heart of the Charter culture in this country.

As a Canadian who used to be proud, but isn't anymore, I guess that nolonger, wittingly or not, supports the use of the Charter to, among other things, browbeat fine Canadians and remove their rights to freedom of belief, speech, and association. Perhaps this person could explain why he/she thinks the Charter culture--brought to us and nurtured by the Libranos--which is used over and over to discriminate against whole groups of upstanding Canadians, is a cause of such pride. (Or maybe nlptbc hasn't given this aspect of the equation a moment's thought. Maybe nlptbc hasn't given this topic a moment's thought because he/she is completely ignorant of the facts. Actually, if that's the case, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.)

PMSH has nothing to do with creating or perpetuating the parasitic culture of entitlement and victimhood the Charter spawned. nolonger, I think that culture is altogether loathsome, and so were many of the Liberal hacks and crooks, including those at the top--some were PMs--who willfully turned this country from "the true North, strong and free" to "the Gulag of politically correct, jackbooted impostors, grovelling and sycophantic".

Now THAT'S loathsome.

PMSH is a politician cut from altogether different cloth than that of the LIEbrals and Dippers, thank God: Now, after decades in the political wilderness, I'M once more proud to be Canadian!

Way to go, lookout - my sentiments exactly.

After many years, i am again proud to be Canadian. I admire and respect the first non-loathesome prime minister this country has had in many a long year.

lookout - many thanks for your post on the Charter. I completely agree with your comments.

The Charter has set up the notion of the Rights of A Group against any and all individual rights. Individuals don't have rights in Canada; only groups have rights.

The Charter has also expanded this 'group-ism' by transforming Canada into an oligarchy rather than a democracy.

A democracy means that every individual citizen has an equal opportunity to engage in the economic, legal and political governance of this country. Most of the Charter is devoted to the insertion of official bilingualism in Canada (sections 16-24). This has set up a mode of governance which confines participation to a minority of the population, the bilingual.

Among anglo and allophones, after one full generation, the bilingual total amounts to about 10% of their 80% proportion in Canada. Among francophones, this amounts to about 45% of their 20% proportion in Canada. Result? Most of our governing authority is in the hands of a small group who self-define and self-select their membership. Essentially, over 80% of the Canadian population is excluded from governing roles in Canada. Is that a democracy?

And the specious assertions of 'so, go learn French' are empty. A unilingual individual doesn't have the time and money to spend months, and years, away from their employment, to learn that other language.

Canada's Charter rejects FACTS and is instead insisting on FICTION. Factually, Canada is not a bilingual country; to assert that it ought to be, is pure fiction. It is dangerous to live in a fictional world. That's the utopianism of socialism and its social engineering. Canada has spent a massive amount of money on this social engineering, and after one full generation, we must realize that, factually, you cannot make reality into fiction. You must acknowledge reality.

Factually, if you don't use and hear this other language, everyday, on the street, in the stores, at work - then - How can you learn it?

Yet, Canada insists, with less than 20% of its population as francophone, and more than 80% of its population who don't use the language - that any authoritative employee, must be bilingual. That goes for judges, for reviewers of all research grants in Canada, for heads of public corporations, for career diplomats, for careers in the RCMP, in the military, anywhere.

That's what our Charter has done to us - it has effectively disbarred the majority of the population from key roles in their own gov't.

The problem with the charter, as with any document that attempts to lay a framework for a nation's legal definition of itself, is in its fundamental character - prescriptive vs restrictive. The former describes the citizen in relation to government (eg. Canada), while the latter does the converse (eg. USA).

These two different frameworks arise from two diametrically opposed views on the nature of mankind (humanity, for the sensitive). The prescriptive approach arises from the belief that we are fundamentally good, while the restrictive approach derives from the observation that we are fundamentally bad.

Oddly enough, this has historically demarked the difference between left & right politically as well.

Just so, Henry. Indeed, as far as I know, no other state constitution has a clause like the 10th ammendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America.

Excellent comments, Henry and Vitruvius.

I like your outline, Henry. The Canadian charter is prescriptive in terms of prescribing the rights of the individual within the superior rights of the gov't, while the US Constitution is restrictive, in restricting the rule of the gov't over the individual. And, as Vitruvius points out, that unique Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution, which acknowledges the rights of the people.

I see your point about the prescriptive- and a view that mankind (I'm not politically correct) is basically good and the restrictive that mankind is basically bad. But, I don't agree.

I think that the socialist, which is to say, the prescriptive ideology, views mankind as basically good but also basically dumb and unable to express this innate purity and goodness except when guided by The State.

The conservative, or Real Liberal (not the invalid socialist Liberal Party), views mankind as neither good nor bad but both, and views the role of gov't as enabling the one and inhibiting the other.

The 'fundamentally bad' perspective is usually a religious socialism, where dogma is required to rein in the Evil That Is In Mankind.

It all comes down to the difference between selfish and greedy. Selfish is a synonym for alive, it means, oraganismally, that I'm first from my perspective. Greedy means I want what's yours. I don't do greed, it's most unbecoming.

These principles are translated into the concepts of negative and positive rights. Negative rights affirm the life-is-selfish axiom: that what's mine is mine, and the state can't take it away. Positive rights are greedy, they allow the state to deny the very nature of self life, and allow the state to commandeer individuals' resources in the name of the individual greeds expressed by a powerful collective (also know as special interest group).

Negative rights, or those that Henry calls restrictive (of the state) are one of the greatest accomplishments of the human species. They are typified by the Fundamental Freedoms elucidated in clause 2 of the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms, with supporting roles from the democratic and legal rights sections.

Positive rights, or those that Henry calls prescriptive, are, on the other hand, the statist embodiment of the evil of greed. In general, if a founding principle of a modern democratic state says: "the state can't...", that's probably a good thing, and if it says: "the state can...", that's probably a bad thing (although there are a few exceptions, I'm a minarchist, not an anarchist).

Hey jlc , just so we get this straight and before you run out and have camel sex consider this.

If we are pulling people out of a war zone because they hold Canadian passports then just do it.

Sorting and dividing families on the dock doesnt cut it.

BTW , six figures in tax paid this year doesnt hurt quite as bad if it gets the job done right.

And any SOB with the gall to bitch about how bad the conditions were on their trip out should be dropped right back in.

Without a parachute.

I believe Henry and ET are speaking of what the classical Western Tradition has long described as "fallen human nature". Now that's certainly not PC, but it is accurate, as the polsters would say, 19 times out of 20.

The PCs in the MSM have assumed that human nature is "born free but everywhere in chains". Rousseau was wrong. Humans need restrictions i.e. a moral code. That is what the Trudeaupian vision, which is now codified in the Canadian Charter of Rights, fails to comprehend.

ET - I agree that socialism (rather than socialists, necessarily) needs to presume stupidity in all but the elite by virtue of its prescriptive structure (“We’re from the government and are here to help you!”). I will, however, quibble on your ascribing to the conservative position the view that mankind is neither good nor bad but both. This is more properly ascribed to two separate camps within the conservative tent. The more doctrinally-systematic Christians (Puritans, Presbyterians, Calvinists…) tend toward the “man is bad” camp, while the libertarians split across the spectrum (as it is not an issue for them). Neglecting the other camps (status quo ante conservatives, etc.), historically, the weighing was toward the former. Presently, I think the “man is good” view is predominant. (today’ conservative is yesterday’s liberal).
Regardless, I was careful to note that "fundamentally bad" derived from observational evidence. I will more carefully note that I am presently asserting this in an ensemble-averaged sense, assuming the ergodic hypothesis.

Of course, though, I'm not sure the degree to which the Boltzman-influenced Helmholtz theorm for the thermodynamic equivalents in classical mechanics, in particular, that the entropy is given by the circular interval of root(2m(E-phi(x,V)))dx, allow the ergodic hypothesis to be applied to an anthropological ensemble. I s'pect ET will be able to clue us in on the current best-practices semiotic model.

I knew that!

Red Dodge:

Six figure tax bill this year? yeah - $1001.32 maybe.

I'll show you mine if you show me yours. Year after fucking year paying taxes - as a Quebecer, more than anyone else in North America - for crap that I don't believe in or support.

Take your palsied bleeding heart libo-fascist crap and shove it.

Fuck you and the dodge you drove in in.

19 times out of 20.

I didn't know that, I had to look it up.

Whew!

BTW RD - the Canadian government (and those who subsidize it) have no obligation whatsoever to come to the assistance of citizens in foreign parts.

if you have ever applied for a passport or visited an embassy abroad, this is made perfectly clear.

I spend a good part of my life working in Latam, Asia, Africa, etc and I know that the last place an individual Canadian overseas looks to for support is the CDN embassy.

This whole farce is media driven and panders to ignorance, resentment and stupidity.

You can select which category applies to you and your Dodge.

ET says:
The more doctrinally-systematic Christians (Puritans, Presbyterians, Calvinists…) tend toward the “man is bad” camp, while the libertarians split across the spectrum (as it is not an issue for them).

One would want to add the CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH to the list of those who understand "fallen human nature" to be central to the human predicament. The CATECHISM (not a popular PC word) speaks officially for over 1 billion Chistians and is, on this point, in alignment with the views of many others of various faiths.

On balance, I believe the "man is fallen" view is the professed understanding and experienced reality of most humans (with the possible exception of post WW II western intellectuals and libertarians). Certainly this is true, if one includes what Chesterton calls "the democracy of the dead" i.e. the wisdom and experience of those who have experienced humanity before us. I grant, this is not an argument libertarians would find persuasive. However, they are, by all objective standards, a distinct minority, albeit not a happy one.

Unfortunately for our libertarian brothers (and sisters) the 20th century doesn't do much to challenge the "fallen" view of humanity. Arguably, more people were slaughtered in the past century under secular "man is good" regimes (Nazism - superman is better, or Communism - man is god) than during all other centuries combined.

Well, speaking as a post WW II western intellectual libertarian, I guess I'm not in much of a position to comment on fallen human nature. But I will say this: your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to stay under the radar and behind the fan. Remember, living well is the best revenge, and revenge is a dish best served cold. That's why it's best to live in polar countries. And so, I guess that's why I disagree with your conjecture, Ignatius, to the effect that libertarians are not a happy minority. Speaking as a founding member of the Libertarian Party of Alberta, in 1972, that hasn't been my experience.

Actually, Ignatius, ET didn't say any of the above; Henry did. He did it.

Vitruvius - heh- thermodynamic equivalent of classical mechanics. Heh heh heh. Hmmm. I said, the 'cut' is a 'cut', and you can never return to the symmetry of Eden. Once that ontological cut is cut, sliced through and through by that vorpal blade, it's over, and you can't go gallumphing back to any equivalence of the two. With or without the head.

Ignatius, the notion of the 'fallen' is a fascinating one; very Augustinian..There's a great book, which is somewhere in my library but would take me days to find..on the 'introduction of sin in the western world'...

Against that idea, is the romanticist view (Rousseau and pals) that man is basically, innately good (Edenic purity) and govt, rules, laws, bosses, employers etc..all conspire to Constrain This Goodness. This concept of 'goodness' is also held within any utopian ideology, whether fascist or socialist/communist. After all, the communist idea is that eventually, these good people won't need any gov't, because they are so good...
The socialist says they good, but they are good little children, who need a good socialist gov't.

My own view is that the notion of 'goodness', as a Universal is unattainable within the Particular. So, pure 'goodness' (or even pure 'badness') doesn't exist in the material finiteness of the Particular. We are a mixture.

Henry: I think it is technically incorrect to say Libertarians are in the "conservative camp".

Goodness/badness: I got in a very long and extremely heated "debate" with a putative friend who discovered that one of the 4 principles of libertarianism is "taking a amoral view". He told me "amoral" meant "extreme psychotic behaviour".

But of course, the word is much broader and -- dare I say it -- nuanced, and in this context it really means, "one person not having a view of the morality of another person's behaviour" only a desire not to be interferred with by that person (the non-aggression axiom).

The Charter: Being silent on propery rights -- the very wellspring of liberty -- makes it an unserious document which cannot bear much serious discussion.

..."as a Quebecer,more than anyone else in North America-for crap I don't believe in or support."

That would explain a lot jlc.

As an Albertan I've been saying the same about Quebec and Quebec politicians for years.

Your solution is what then?

Some good old ethnic cleansing on the seashore?

Well, certainly the notion of "original sin" is one of the greatest marketing scams in the history of man. Who do those people think they are? I didn't sign anything! And I do agree, ET, the various notions of pure tend, in general, to be insufficient. Nature abhors purity.

Yet I remain interested in your take, ET, on the current state-of-the-art semiotic model of the anthropological interpretation of the ergodic hypothesis.

On the matter of labeling, Me No Dhmmi, I'm a libertarian-leaning classic liberal. Yet, I think we have quite a few of the benefits of classic liberal democracy in Canada, pace the ones we don't have, and I want to conserve the ones we do have. So am I a liberal, or a conservative; left, or right?

On the matter of having a view of the morality of others, I do generally agree with you Me No Dhimmi. I don't have a problem with people doing what they want, I have a problem with people trying to force me to do what they want. I'm anti-authoritarian. Of course, in practice, the devil is in the details.

Me No Dhimmi wrote, "The Charter: Being silent on propery rights -- the very wellspring of liberty -- makes it an unserious document which cannot bear much serious discussion."

I believe we're both anti-Charter. But I don't agree with your analysis. The Charter is serious business in this country. The following is a SHORT list: it rewards the irresponsible Canadian, not the responsible one; it removes rights and freedoms from the latter and lavishes them on the former; it often uses the tax dollars--LOTS of them--of working Canadians to reward those who wish to let the rest of us "do it for them"; and it has demolished democracy in Canada because appointed judges rule (oligarchy), not the elected parliaments.

All of this and MUCH MORE warrants lots of discussion. Maybe when they know how undemocratic and destructive the Charter is, Canadians will long for the notwithstanding clause or even a complete overhaul of this pernicious document.

Hayek, in his tract "Why I am not a conservative" mentioned that conservatives rightly eschew subsidies to industrial concerns, but favour them for farmers. He hated being called a conservative, favouring "old whig".

For years I've referred to myself as a conservative/libertarian. Now I prefer straight libertarian. "Classical liberal" is even more accurate but hopelessly confusing for people not up on this stuff and therefore bad marketing. Best avoid liberal like the plague.

Now here's a mind-bender: I once read an interview in which Noam Chomsky referred to himself as a "libertarian socialist" which seems an impossible contortion even for the virtuoso contortionist himself.

I also don't like "conservative" due to its association with the hugely disastrous "war on drugs" et al. And we have neo-cons, and paleocons many of whom are anti-semites and radical isolationists.

But of course "libertarian" is problematic too for people who associate it with licentiousness.

A pox on all labels I'm coming to feel. And don't get me going on "progressive" [read: policies guaranteed to yield regressive results].

Alas, Me No Dhimmi, "pox" is itself a label. Eventually one realizes it's not so much the individual songs that are so important, it's the overall mix. Just ask any D.J. (Oy, the disco version of the forest v. trees argument, sheesh.)

lookout:

Of course, you're entirely right in all respects. I should have said something like "unserious document vis a vis advancing true human rights". In fact, I discuss it interminably with other concerned friends of liberty. Well, one!

You're the teacher in the gulag, right! Impressive. I did it 1971-1979 and am only recently nightmare-free.

Vitruvius: As I age, I'm moving away from labels in favour of contextual comments like, "I'm believe we're more prosperous with more limited government [not less, no one want less!]" or "I believe the market economy [preferable to capitalism] makes us ALL richer (including the poor, always give the poor a plug if possible) or "regulation really favours entrenched interests, stifles competition, makes us all poorer (including, don't forget, the poor) and never actually does what it says it does.

Recall some of the very confused discussions here on "conservative" "fascist" "communist". Why even the very estimable and learned ET thought fascism should not be considered totalitarian (as I recall it).

And ... I fear I will eventually become a full-fledged anarchist (minarchist?) no longer believing the fable about government actually protecting us, which it seems the least interested in doing.

Again, lookout, I completely agree. The Charter is, in every sense of the word, a pernicious document.

I will say, that Harper is restoring power to the House. The Liberals had almost decimated the House as the legitimate power of Canada. But, the whole system of appointed authority AND the Charter, has to be revisited. It will take time, because Canadians are brainwashed, and have been for a generation, to think that the Charter provides the very infrastructure of freedom in Canada. It does the exact opposite.

As for morality, I disagree with both Me No Dhimmi AND Vitruvius. My apologies. I agree with Vitruvius; I also have a probelm with people trying to get me to do what they want. But, I think I will continue to evaluate the behaviour of others. So, to take an extreme example, if people in A-Group think that it's just fine to stone a woman because she was raped - I'm going to evaluate their morality and conclude that it is not moral.

To take a less extreme example, I have a problem with the morality of people who consider that they have every right to live off welfare; I have a problem with those 'convenient citizens' of Lebanon and elsewhere. Etc. Multiculturalism insists that we don't evaluate other 'cultures'. I think that we must.

Vitruvius - I am certainly not going to offer my semiotic analysis on a blog that doesn't deal with those issues. But, I'll say that 'spontaneous' symmetry breaking will arise when the external (i.e., classical, actual rather than potential) normative system loses the inhibitory strength afforded to it by operating as a Bell Curve (ie operating within a statistical average)...when there are many sub-systems..all vying for power. The tension that emerges with the free energy not constrained by that statistical majority normative habits..will activate the 'search engine tactic'..to come up with a 'better solution'.

Now- all the above is jargon, unintelligible to most, except possibly, just possibly, Vitruvius, who has seen some of my papers. So, I apologize to the blog, and lay the ENTIRE fault and blame on Vitruvius.

Well said, Me No Dhimmi, I do agree that the hidden double negative can be an effective rhetorical technique. By the way, you can get more information on the denotative sense of minarchist at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchist

ET, your counterexample of the unjustifiably stoned (and one can wonder whether such form of punishment is ever justified) is, I think, well taken. Not so much that my original take on the metaphysical condition is necessarily incorrect, but rather as you point out, that alone it is inadequate to handle the ethical considerations that do arise. Ahh, axiology, what would we do without it?

And, on the semiotics of the ergodic hypothesis, again, ET, your point is well taken, thanks for the at least minimalist explanation, I'm thinking about it. Sorry for getting carried away, everyone, it's just that I do think that the folks working in that field have a good chance of being on what history turns out to judge as the leading edge of philosophy at this time, when it looks back on us.

I got back from fishing just in time...

ET, surely I must accept some of the blame as well? Particularly as I take issue with the fact that the symmetry-breaking in (presumably) social systems is spontaneous. It is manifestly the opposite! Consider also the scaling behavior...

And by ergodic in the above context, I was implying that averaging over independent populations is equivalent to averaging over uncorrelated periods of time (snapshot of the world now is representative of peoples' behaviour over time).

ET, can I impose upon you to send me some of your papers, and to direct me to the appropriate sites?

If you're going to take this off-blog, ET & Henry, which is probably at least arguably a good idea at this juncture ;-) please include me in the discussion, via vitruvius2@gmail.com

lookout :

You said it all. Well said sir or ma'am .

You forgot though they almost broke up this Federation. To this day out East they have no Idea how Close Alberta was to leaving. Alberta is no Quebec.

The Left persists in this insane belief that some will not fight for there culture or civil rights. That many would rather die, than be slaves.

This is why the delusional reaction of the MSM. when All you see runs counter to reality. Than rationalize & retreat into fantasy. Compartmentalize into cadres or pods of information. All one see's or hears. Never cross reference data. Only focus on one aspect out of all the events out of context & time.

Its why Socialism is a pathology. A kin to religious complex melded to the mental virus of Utopianism, set in millennial worship of the superman. Just my opinion.

vitruvius - Naturally, I agree; we in this semiotics field are indeed on a cutting edge - dealing in biological information processes and artificial intelligence (robotics etc)...

Henry, you'll have to send me your email to:
taborsky@primus.ca

Me No Dhimmi - Thanks for your note. It rings absolutely true to your previous, but one (!) posts. So, as I thought, we really are on the same wavelength.

Yes ;-), I'm the teacher in the gulag. It's even worse than nightmares now: How about daymares!?

I'm sorry you only have one person to discuss the idea of freedom and liberty with. However, I don't have many more--thank God for sda!--as, indeed, Canadians have been brainwashed. (I know you won't be surprisd to learn that there are almost NO teachers with whom I discuss these matters. Actually, my views would be in contravention of board "equity and diversity" policies. If I wrote my views openly, I'd likely be disciplined and possibly fired: How's that for rights and freedom?) Most Canadians actually believe that "rights and freedoms" are what the Charter delivers, when, in fact, it delivers the exact opposite. As we all know, one has to be very circumspect when pointing out to people that their views are altogether wrong because they've been duped: not a good way to win friends or influence people--too bad!

ET, nice to hear from you too. We're altogether in agreement on a great many things, including that the Charter is a huge con, foisted on the citizens of Canada.

Revnant Dream. Thanks. I hear you: There ARE things worth dying--or separating--for. I'm altogether sympathetic to the aspirations of the West, which has been put down and provoked over and over by the tyrannical elites of the East.

I'm so grateful that I CAN discuss these matters with intelligent, knowledgeable people on this blog:-) A very good night to all of you!

Hmm, I did say a good chance, ET, don't expect me to suddenly become a-skeptical. Fortunately, at least I'm never a cynic. Bloody pessimists are more trouble than they're worth.

My apologies to ET for misquoting. It was indeed Henry who made the remarks re. innate goodness. With regard to ET's interesting response:

"My own view is that the notion of 'goodness', as a Universal is unattainable within the Particular. So, pure 'goodness' (or even pure 'badness') doesn't exist in the material finiteness of the Particular. We are a mixture."

Well put, ET. I agree in large measure. To put it another way (Augustinian and Thomistic, I grant you) - grace perfects nature. Sadly, as you point out, this does not happen (or often happen) in this particular vale of tears, no matter how close one stays to the Libertarian fan, living well and drinking gin and tonic. We will, I suppose, have to take that up with the millions who were done away with by the secular regimes which promised liberty in the last benighted century.

Which leads of course to the topic of the "intermediate state" for those of us who dare to believe in the hereafter (Purgatory -- dare one say the word in these PC days). However, before anyone gets into a great lather on that one, let us stay with the topic of goodness in this world, which, as ET wisely observes, lies beyond mere human nature or the grasp of any regime or empire.

I thank you ET for your gracious thoughts and may the eternal goodness work in us in this Particular, leading us to a better state… eventually.

I do agree, Ignatius, with the notion that, as you put it, "grace perfects nature". At least so it seems to me to be the case for humans, and even then I only know one of them as well as I know me, but it does less than impress me the simple lack of common good grace exhibited by so many members of my putative species (at least, when I'm not pretending to be Vulcan). Alas, the old Gaussian distribution raises its normative head. What can one do, I suppose, except try to set a good example?

Well, I've got to horn in on the ET/Henry/Vitri/Iggy debate.

I'm a libertarian, but I'm also Christian. Just because Rand was an atheist doesn't mean I have to be! I'm also an engineer, and everything in evolution theory is directly contradictory to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Systems do not normally spontaneously move from lower to higher order.

I was raised in the United Church, which to me has become a poor parody of Flip Wilson's "Church of What's Happening Now, Baby". My wife is Catholic, and we are raising our two girls in that faith.

I'm immensely happy we've done so. Our girls go to Catholic schools, where they are taught (less than one hour a week, BTW) that there is a right and a wrong, that there are moral standards, that faith, hope, and charity are not words to be ridiculed, and that there is a loving God who wants (but doesn't guarantee) them to be happy.

Do I have proof God exists? Nope. Do I hope he does? Yes. And, while I don't agree with all the tenets of the Catholic church (their fetishism against female priests, and celibacy for male priests seems extreme, and the cause of most their problems, but it's their party...) I find on balance that I agree with most of their positions, just as I agree with most, but not all, positions of the CPC. I'm very happy to have my girls learn they choose to be good or bad, and there are rules and standards against which they will be judged. They are actually pretty terrific kids, and I think the positive values of Catholic schools, as specifically opposed to the value-free education at secular schools, have played an important role in that.

The comment about "taking it off blog" is appropriate here.

As much as I know you folks enjoy using SDA as a debating forum, it is not. A few of you may have noticed there were commenting problems a few days ago - the reason? The disk space had run out again. I had to upgrade my account, yet again.

Keep that in mind the next time you're about to post your 10th comment to a thread. I'm the one paying for the bandwidth, and the disk space.

Roger that, Kate. Thanks for herding us, and for gently keeping us within your terms of use.

...would it be inappropriate to suggest all the regulars on here "donate" say $5-10 via PayPal or something to Kate's SDA?

I'm willing to start the ball rolling on this.

Akin to putting one's money where one's mouth is.

cheers
tom

"[T]he Canadian government (and those who subsidize it) have no obligation whatsoever to come to the assistance of citizens in foreign parts."

Then what's the point of Canadian citizenship?

tomax:

here here !!

Ms Kate:

I will periodically click on my paypal acct if you were to set up a means to do so.

I admire and congratulate you on the durability of your blog and wish to see it maintained.

it is currently one of only 3 in my bookmarks, the other 2 being stumbled upon via yours.

kevinb:

your thoughts on why photons instantaneously reach speed of light and equally instantaneously stop any 'acceleration' apparently in less than the radius of an atom, and how this is evidence of the means whereby God accomplished the staggering immensity of creation?

I have a theory.

I also have a theory on how electrical energy is propagated across insulators a.k.a. induction and especially precisely how voltage changes depending on ratio of coils. hint: has to do with the number of times an electron is 'hit' in the other coil. (hit with what ?)

the mathematics of calculating end result disinterests and in fact bores me because it is second nature. the *how* part of what is going on with individual electrons trillions of 'diameters' distant from each other is most intriguing.

am I off topic again?

I encourage all to send your kids to catholic school; mine got an ontario scholarship which pd for her 1st year, the resp I took out when she was 14 pd 2nd year, and her mother paid for her 3rd yr out of pocket.

be aware of the dichotomies folks !!!

aaaaaaall them grey areas.

alas overwhelming at election time sometimes.

the 2nd previous was one where I failed to muster sufficient excuse to mark the X beside any name.

such is the political beast.

Kate: have you set up the paypal button yet ?

Paypal button = "click"

I'm unable to use Paypal - a previous attempt at setting up an account has left me unable to access it, verify it, cancel it or start a new one.

That said, that wasn't the reason for my comment. Aside from the bandwidth and disk space, these threads almost invariably stray off topic, and are of interest only to the two or three people participating in them. They discourage others from reading, much less adding their own comments.

With all those seagulls it must be BODEGA BAY i hear that when your there the seagull when you feed them will eat off your hand

Ideas?:

Comment SIZE limitation window. Comment NUMBER limitation per nom de blog per thread. Annual membership with fee - login for posting commentary (will end the disingenuous trollish drive-by shootings) while non members may VIEW comments only. I'd join in a flash. Prominent display on site for payee and address for old-fashioned cheque. I'd send a cheque in a flash.

Bad spelling tax!!!

Economic principle: You get MORE of what you subsidize LESS of what you tax.

Commenters here are actually being provided a very VALUABLE form of entertainment and education from some of the more learned contributors like ET.

...while I don't speak for Kate, charging a 'membership fee' would not benefit the site.

For starters, there's that nasty thing called Income Tax, GST, and keeping track of accounts, basically that four letter word: work.

We just need to control ourselves, but I thought it would be a fitting jesture to back up our rants with money.

At the same time we should allow people the freedom to speak their minds (within reason) free from berating of other's who 'have arrived'.

;-)

"Bad speling tacks" !!, are you crazed ?

Like in VALIANT there are PIGIONS,A SEAGULL SOMES DOVES AND FALCONS VERYWHERE AAHHH FALCON FALCON SOUND THE ALARM