Sunday, January 13, 2008

Ooopsie.


In one of his latest David and Goliath-esque screeds, better-than-Ezra states in no uncertain terms that he “doesn’t answer to the state”. But, strangely enough, his vaunted nobility doesn’t stop him from taking cash from that same "state" to fund his rag.

According to the Publications Assistance Program, the Western Standard received $132,063.00 in government funding from “the Department of Canadian Heritage and The Canada Post Corporation” for the period of 2006-2007.

Ezra, Ezra, Ezra ... here’s a piece of friendly advice, and it’s probably the only one you’ll ever get from this girl. When someone like you feels the need to climb up on such an impossibly high horse, don’t be surprised when someone like me takes such great delight in knocking your ass off it.

Thanks to Ti-Guy for pointing this out in the comments at JJ’s joint.

Are you kidding me? Funny how the word “Liberal” is no longer considered verboten by a BT when it’s used to illustrate their point. Nobody tell Poppa Junk – he’ll be soooooooo disappointed.

Officer McGovern asked if I thought there should be any limits to free speech under our constitution. Of course there should be, and I listed a half-dozen examples. But I drew a distinction between criminal or tortious speech and political speech. I also pointed out that free political speech isn't just protected in a liberal democracy -- it protects a liberal democracy. That's because it acts as a "safety valve" for people who want to change society. They don't have to resort to arms.

13 comments:

fergusrush said...

"...better-than-Ezra states in no uncertain terms that he “doesn’t answer to the state”. But, strangely enough, his vaunted nobility doesn’t stop him from taking cash from that same "state" to fund his rag."

So what? The two things are unrelated, unless you believe that anyone who receives money from the government loses their rights to dissent and freedom of action.

Ti-Guy said...

It's just so incredible. The PAP is a programme I support enthusiastically, even if I find some of the publications horrid. I can think of no greater commitment to freedom of expression than providing the means for people to actually express something in a meaningful way.

And yet, "anti-collectivists" (*snort*) take your money and then turn around and spit in your face the first chance they get.

Fucking, money-sucking hypocrites.

Ti-Guy said...

The two things are unrelated, unless you believe that anyone who receives money from the government loses their rights to dissent and freedom of action.

Well, that's what Conservatives believe. Worse...they think anyone who avails him- or herself of any State mechanism is a Stalinist.

Honestly, you can't be that stupid, Fergus, or you just don't understand coherence and principle.

Prole said...

When it's his government entitlement, it's different.

fergusrush said...

Coherence and principle? Explain to me then, Tiggy, what you feel I've missed here. I see Lulu, who has a burr up her ass for Levant, making a non-sequitur poke at him: he says he's not the servant of the state, and she says, "Oh yeah, well you took their cash", which only qualifies as a snappy rejoinder if one believes that taking government cash makes you answerable to them in all things. Does she believe this? If she does, then the remark is snappy, at least to her.

Ti-Guy said...

What's the non sequitur here? I know you've claimed it, but you've yet to argue it compellingly.

fergusrush said...

Do you believe, Ti-guy, that anyone who receives a government grant is then a servant of the state, that the state is now their "master"? If you do, there is no non-sequitur. I do not believe it, so for me the two things are not linked, hence the non-sequitur.

Sheena said...

I thought it was pretty funny when all the Western Standards magically and suddenly disappeared overnight from the Air Canada Maple Leaf Lounges when the cartoonz issue hit the stands. Maybe the AC was scared of alienating its international bidniz class clientele with the local rubes.

Ti-Guy said...

I find Levant's stirring defense of the role of free speech in protecting liberal democracy hard to credit, as anyone who's had their comments "disappeared" from The Shotgun would as well, I imagine.

Fergus...non sequitur doesn't take a hyphen. It's Latin.

/spelling flame!

fergusrush said...

Thanks, Ti-guy. I know that it's Latin, what I don't know is why I spelled it like that. Brain fart or old age, I imagine.

As for "disappeared" comments, perhaps Levant uses CC's guidelines to determine which comments are allowed to remain. Proprietor's rules, as it were.

Ti-Guy said...

No, that wasn't the reason. "Fwee speach!!!" bastion The Shotgun quite often deleted comments simply because the commenter dissented.

I actually don't disagree with their right to do that...I just think it's hypocritical to then turn around present yourself to the World as a defender of freedom of expression.

KEvron said...

"perhaps Levant uses CC's guidelines to determine which comments are allowed to remain."

perhaps monkeys fly outta ezra's flabby butt. not likely though, huh?

KEvron

fergusrush said...

"I just think it's hypocritical to then turn around present yourself to the World as a defender of freedom of expression."

I agree.