Sunday, January 31, 2010

I'm thinking that FotF Super Bowl ad could have had better timing.

To: James Dobson
Focus on the Family

Dear Jim:

I'm thinking that your upcoming Super Bowl ad lauding the courage of Pam Tebow in refusing to have an abortion and eventually giving birth to one Tim Tebow would have more impact if he didn't currently suck so much.

I'm just sayin'.

LuLu here: My stars, it looks like Mama Tebow's story has some rather large holes in it. Who would have ever thought that a bible-thumping member of FoTF's anti-choice, forced-pregnancy crowd would lie?

Saturday, January 30, 2010

The only news broadcast you'll ever need.

"In conclusion, how drastically will this affect the economy, the weather or whatever else you think it might affect? Only time will tell. Back to you, Sheila."

Unbusted! And here's where we juxtapose ...

There's their side:

Abortion doctor’s killer found guilty of murder
Shooter convicted of first-degree culpability in death of Kansas physician

WICHITA, Kan. - A man who said he killed prominent Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller in order to save the lives of unborn children was convicted Friday of murder.

The jury deliberated for just 37 minutes before finding Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, Mo., guilty of premeditated, first-degree murder in the May 31 shooting death.

And there's, well, our side (from back in 2008):

Felony assault charge dismissed

A Dauphin County district judge dismissed felony assault charges this morning against a Juniata County man who's accused of pushing an anti-abortion protester off his car Dec. 22 at the Hillcrest Women's Medical Center in Harrisburg.

Judge Barbara Pianka threw out the aggravated assault charge, but Nathan Richardson, 23, of Port Royal, still faces misdemeanor counts of simple assault and reckless endangerment.

According to Harrisburg police, protester Ed Snell was standing on a platform attached to the roof of his car--allowing him to see over an 8-foot fence--when he began speaking to Richardson and his girlfriend who were entering the clinic around 7 a.m.

Police said Richardson became enraged at Snell's comments, scaled the fence and pushed the 69-year-old Susquehanna Twp. resident off his car, causing him to hit his head on the pavement.

Snell was taken to Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, where he was treated for head trauma before being released a few days later, police said.

If you look closely, you'll notice the incredibly subtle difference between when they viciously, savagely, brutally attack someone who disagrees with them, and when we do -- they get to walk away afterwards.

I just thought that was worth pointing out.

THE CREEPY CREEPINESS: Disturbingly, Roeder still has his supporters:

"I don't condone what Scott Roeder did, but I cannot condemn the consistency of his logic," said Randall Terry, a founder of antiabortion group Operation Rescue. "George Tiller killed 60,000 innocent human beings in barbaric ways, and Scott felt the way to protect more babies from a grisly death was to kill Tiller."

Jan Holman, an elderly antiabortion activist, drove from Iowa for the trial. She came in a truck covered with photographs of aborted fetuses. "I support Scott Roeder," she said. "I guess you might say he's my hero."

At which point the rationalization descends into the utterly bizarre:

Advocates on both sides of the abortion divide found themselves squeezed uncomfortably together on the hard courtroom benches during the trial.

One spectator was Michael Bray, who spent nearly five years in prison for bombings in the 1980s related to his antiabortion views. He said he hoped Roeder would eventually be released and didn't think he'd kill again.

"There are bombers who have been released from jail who haven't bombed again," he said with a wide grin. "There is precedent."

"Sure," said Bray, "he murdered another human being point-blank in cold blood. But maybe he got it out of his system so we're good, right? Right?"


Friday, January 29, 2010

At the risk of repeating myself ...

First, there was 2008 (all emphasis tail-waggingly added):

... Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s minority Conservative Government, elected only a few weeks before in a general election, brought forward an economic update that so enraged the opposition parties in the federal Parliament that they formed a coalition of the Liberal and New Democratic Parties, supported by the separatist party from Quebec – the Bloc Quebecois. The items in the economic update that forged this coalition included a ban on public service strikes, a roll-back of pay equity and the removal of public funding for political parties. The funding cuts would have effectively neutered the opposition parties and epitomized an economic update that was more ideological than economic in nature, and was both partisan and mean spirited. It was also contrary to Prime Minister Harper’s pledge after his recent election victory to work together with the opposition parties to combat the looming economic problems facing the nation. Indeed, there was little in the economic update to address economic concerns...

The coalition parties served notice that they had lost confidence in the Harper-led Government, and would defeat him on a non-confidence motion at the earliest possible opportunity.

Prime Minister Harper delayed the non-confidence vote by one week within Parliamentary rules and then went to the formal head of state in a British style Parliamentary system – the Governor General, currently Michaelle Jean – seeking to prorogue Parliament, that is to end the current session. This historic meeting between the Prime Minister and the Governor General took place on December 4, 2008 and after a 2 ½ hour meeting, the Governor General granted the prorogation request accepting the advice of Prime Minister Harper to put Parliament on hold until January 26, 2009. This gave him time to prepare a budget through which he hopes to regain the confidence of the House of Commons and avoid the looming non-confidence vote.

So, having pissed his pants and run frantically to the G-G to save his sorry ass, Stephen Harper brings us to 2009, during which we learn from one of his most honourable and retarded lackeys:

For [Kelowna-Lake Country Conservative MP Ron Cannan], prorogation is an opportunity for the Conservative government to concentrate on the economy by implementing the next phase of its economic stimulus program and prepare a new budget.

If parliament was in session then the opposition parties could vote non-confidence and force an election before those tasks are complete.

“That’s what we don’t want,” said Cannan.

In short, two straight years of Stephen Harper being a pathetic coward and depriving the Opposition of their democratic right to pass judgment on his minority government and bring it down if they so chose. Which, of course, makes Tony Clement's bravado of whipping out his dick and slapping it down on the table so much more hysterical:

"If you don't agree with that, which is your right, then you can vote us out of office. With democracy, you have the ability to vote us out.”

Gosh, Tony, that would be terrific ... if you useless, gutless fuckers didn't keep buggering democracy senseless every time someone suggested it. But it's what's coming that should be entertaining, because with Stephen Harper having taunted everyone in sight, "You want to bring us down? Come on, bitch, let's see it. Bring it on, you pansies!", you know exactly what's coming.

What's coming is the resumption of Parliament in March, at which point Harper will sob pathetically about how we're in dangerous financial conditions and now would be a terrible time to change governments, and anyone who suggests it clearly doesn't have Canada's best interests at heart and how could the Opposition be so heartless and unsympathetic as to even consider such a thing?

Having, for years, contemptuously dared everyone to pull the plug on him and his crew of vile swine, Harper is suddenly going to be terribly, terribly concerned about the economy and stability, and proceed to warn everyone how unwise it would be to upset the apple cart right about now. He is suddenly going to be the diplomat, and will be all diplomatically conciliatory and ask everyone to play along.

Which suddenly makes you appreciate the definition of the word "diplomacy": "The art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can pick up a rock."

Remember, you read it here first.

You had to see this coming.

The inevitable consequence of a retarded U.S. Supreme Court.

Now that's amusing.

I'm sure PSA appreciates the shout out.

I think I just wet myself.

Over at Arnie "Bend Over, Sweetie" Lemaire's House of Shaidle, one holds one's nose and reads more of Barbara Kay's snivelling whinefest, until one reaches:

My comments about Antonia's writing are absolutely correct and I stand by them. She is an extremely banal writer - I should know - ...

And that's where I stopped reading and peed my pants. I'm sure you understand.

Oh, what a tangled web ...

Via JJ, Keith Olbermann demonstrates what happens when you start pulling on those loose threads.

So which of those panic-stricken little turds will be the first to roll over on his sponsors? This should be entertaining.


Dear Barbara:

Over at the Dawg Pound, there is a brief moment when people suspect that the idiotic, moderately illiterate screed targeting Antonia Zerbisias and posted at Kathy "Five Feet of Arnie" Shaidle's wasn't really written by NP polemicist Barbara Kay, until Kay verifies that, yes, that was her.

But what a lost opportunity for Zerbisias, who could have Harlan Ellison'ed Kay along the lines of:

Dear Barb:

Atached please find a dismaying item I read at Kathy Shaidle's blog today. I felt you would want to see it. Clearly, some certifiably brain-damaged idiot is writing insufferably whiny and illiterate blog posts and signing your name to them. I thought you might want to know this so you could contact the appropriate authorities -- in an effort to stop this clown before your good name is further devalued.

All the best, hugs and kisses, Antonia.

Ah, the inevitable hilarity that would have resulted. Pity.

Hoback! Douchebag!

People who recognize genius when they read it:

Canadian Cynic is on to something

The gang at that blog (Canadian Cynic) is demanding that Conservative politicians, who said that they were so busy with work that Parliament had to be prorogued, account for their time off work. Well, one of them -- Randy Hoback (Prince Albert) -- should provide a report to his constituents and the House of Commons about the price of suntan oil in California during his vacation (Prince Albert Daily Herald). Lazy idiot.

But wait, you so petulantly whine. It's not fair to tear Hoback a new orifice over his suntanning ways because, after all, he was back in town on time so what's the problem? To which one can fairly respond -- how awesomely stupid are you?

Lest you forget, it was the Sun King Party of Canada who claimed that they had so incredibly much work to do that, by gosh, they desperately needed several extra weeks of non-stop, coffee and amphetamine-fueled, full-blown, gonzo, 24/7, frantic governating just to be ready for March. So when one of them is finally located lounging on the sand and sucking back a few Coronas, to defend him by saying that it's all based on what days he was down there is just really, really lameass.

Oh, and as for cutting someone some slack based on vacation days and when they were taken, need I remind you of one Stephen "Hang on, my liege needs his fluffing!" Taylor:

As Milewski remarked, and as CTV’s Roger Smith confirms below, Michael Ignatieff is on vacation in Europe while Jack Layton is snorkling [sic] in Belize.

In other words, howzabout you whiny wankers put a sock in it? It's just a suggestion.

BECAUSE I AM AN EVIL GENIUS, THAT'S WHY: From the above-linked piece in the Prince Albert Daily Herald, we have Hoback insisting that everything is just ducky:

Despite the rally, Prince Albert MP Randy Hoback said the government's decision to prorogue parliament until March hasn't caused a flood of emails or phone calls to his office.

So if you live in Hoback's riding and you're pissed, here's what you do. You send him an e-mail ( telling him what kind of useless, lazy douchebag he is, and you Cc: that email to Prince Albert Daily Herald journo Tessa Holloway ( Then the next time Hoback has the gall to suggest that everyone's on board with this whole prorogation thing, Holloway can point out that she's received 673 copies of enraged emails to his office and how the fuck does he explain that?

And that's why you read Canadian Cynic.

DEPRESSING UPDATE: If you follow that first link, the phrase "creepy stalker" should occur to you within seconds.

Thursday, January 28, 2010


How little self-esteem do you need to have to guest blog at Kathy Shaidle's?

P.S. Fuck you, Barb, and the worthless, piece-of-shit rag you write for.

(Wag of the tail to the Dawg.)

Please tell me that's not what you meant.

Excuse me?

For [Kelowna-Lake Country Conservative MP Ron Cannan], prorogation is an opportunity for the Conservative government to concentrate on the economy by implementing the next phase of its economic stimulus program and prepare a new budget.

If parliament was in session then the opposition parties could vote non-confidence and force an election before those tasks are complete.

“That’s what we don’t want,” said Cannan.

Yeah. Fucking democracy getting in the way and everything. Pain in the ass.

(Wag of the tail to BCL.)

AH, THE DELICIOUS IRONY: How about this?

“We have a government that is focused on the economy, focused on safer streets and focused on research and development,” [Industry Minister Tony] Clement said. “If you don’t agree with that, which is your right, then you can vote us out of office. That’s democracy.”

Well, we'd love to, Tony, but it's kind of tacky to throw down that kind of gauntlet after one of your own party members has admitted that prorogation was inflicted on us to deprive us of that very privilege.

Nice try, though.

The Adam Daifallah "Whinefest" Chronicles.

Stephen Harper Party of Canada water-carrier Adam Daifallah whines piteously, but both Adam and his commenters unleash some savagely unintentional hilarity, along the lines of (emphasis towel-snappingly added):

The party simply does not have a critical mass of extra-political organizations and individuals who will come to their aid in times like this. In contrast, in the U.S., the Republican Party has a cadre of like-minded groups and people willing to charge to its defence on a moment’s notice.

The Liberals, on the other hand, can still count on their constituent groups to help out. That old network came to life, as if on cue, in the past few weeks.

One such group is the mainstream media. The coverage of this virtual non-story has been breathtaking. Watching it, you’d think prorogation had never occurred before this year. And we can only guess how much more attention the story would have gotten had the massive tragedy in Haiti not occurred.

Ignoring Adam's hilarious admission that the National Post is not part of the "mainstream media," it occurs to me to suggest to Adam that after the Stephen Harper Party of Canada has relentlessly crapped on Canada's mainstream media for years -- sidelining them, marginalizing them, insulting them, denigrating them and openly stating that they're going to talk right over top of them to the people -- you can't really be surprised when they don't slavishly leap to your defense.

Do I really need to explain that last part again?

P.S. Props to The Jurist for the "whinefest" label.

AFTERSNARK: Adam weirdly gets this part right:

The proroguing controversy is not really a left-right issue.

That's right, Adam, it isn't. It's actually a democracy-fascism issue, where you have Canadians who value democracy, versus those who don't. And it's immensely revealing to see which side of the fence Adam hangs out on.


Chutzpah: Bragging about how you're going to help mothers and infants overseas, while treating Canada's aboriginal children like shit.

The five stages of douchebagitude.

JJ nails it. OK, so there's only four stages there. You're welcome to a 20% refund on what you paid to read it. Happy now?

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Just another blog to read.

If you ignore the creepy and unnerving similarity of the blog name to another one that some of you may remember, this is worth a perusal.

: Via those adorable scamps at LFR, we learn that the awesomely busy HarperCons will still somehow find the time to kick back a bit:

Politicians score seats for top events before public

The federal government is using its access to Olympic tickets to give priority to politicians, bureaucrats and others who will get some of the best seats in the house during the Winter Games next month.

Of the nearly 1,500 tickets that the government has received, more than half will go to MPs, senators and bureaucrats who were able to put in their own orders in advance of the public.

It's amusing, isn't it, particularly given Canada's wankers screeching interminably about the B.C. Liberals doing exactly the same thing. On this point, however, I suspect the silence is deafening. But let's give credit where credit is due. At least they managed to mitigate their greed:

At one point, the number was much higher. Ottawa was originally allocated more than 2,500 tickets to everything from the opening and closing ceremonies to medal events such as gold medal hockey, figure skating and speed skating.

But Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore said more than half of the $447,000 spent on the tickets will be recovered from MPs and senators who have to pay out of their own pocket.

Well, that's good to know, as long as you ignore that those MPs and senators apparently used their political clout to get the initial access to those precious tickets. And, besides, it's a work thing:

Both the federal and provincial governments insist taxpayers are only paying for tickets used to advance government agendas, not for anyone merely to have a good time.

Quite right, because there's no better place to advance a government agenda than the opening ceremonies. Or closing ceremonies. Or the short-track speedskating oval. You wouldn't believe how much agendas are advanced there. But it's not like anyone's using their political clout for unfair advantage or privilege:

Documents obtained under Access to Information by Vancouver freelance journalist Stanley Tromp show that before tickets were offered for sale to the public, Ottawa was permitted to put in orders for the 2,552 tickets the Vancouver Organizing Committee agreed to sell to them.

Under the terms of the multi-party agreement, governments, national Olympic committees, sport federations, corporate sponsors and other members of the loosely termed “Olympic Family” were given access to tickets before the public had a chance to buy any.

As part of the agreement, all MPs and senators are accredited to the Games by Vanoc. But in May 2008, as it was in the middle of its ticket request process, the government decided to give parliamentarians and “domestic dignitaries” special access to its ticket allocations. It said they could buy tickets to all prime and non-prime events for themselves and their spouses as long as the tickets — ranging from $25 to $1,100 — were available.

In the months following that decision, government officials received more than 3,400 requests for 2,552 tickets.

Again, credit where credit is due:

But last July, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper, facing a budget crunch, ordered that 1,000 of the tickets be returned, ...

OK, that's a good start. Whoops, hold on there ...

... most of the tickets the government threw back were to less desirable events. In fact, it kept the full allocations of the most popular sports, including figure skating, short and long track speed skating, as well as the opening and closing ceremonies. For ice hockey, where it was originally allocated 730 tickets, it kept 60 per cent — but most of those were for top draws, including the Canadian matches.

Not only did Ottawa receive 100 per cent of the 126 tickets it sought to the opening ceremony, but all but 10 of those were the best “A” section seats at $1,100 apiece.

But don't worry, they'll be working frantically the whole time. After all, that's what prorogation is for, right?

P.S. You know, I'm sure there's a word for people who, using their political clout and privilege, can step in front of the general public to scoop up the best of the best. Oh, yeah ... "elitist." Or something like that.

I better not see those Cons at a "gala" or anything.

AFTERSNARK: I'm waiting for the wankishly wanky argument that this is all perfectly fair since those Con pols are paying for their tickets. But why wouldn't they? After all, they'll be hanging out at the Olympics during the prorogation period, still drawing their full salary. And given what they make per day, I'm guessing that, after wining, dining and cheering, they'll actually come out of that with a profit.

Giving yourself a paid, two-month vacation, then kicking the taxpaying public who paid for it to the curb and stepping into line in front of them. Where can I get a gig like that?

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Yeah, about that whole ACORN thing ...


James O'Keefe charged in alleged plot to bug Senator Mary Landrieu's office

The conservative young filmmaker whose undercover sting damaged a liberal activist group last year faces federal criminal charges in an alleged plot to bug the New Orleans office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.).

James O'Keefe was among four men who created a ruse to enter the lawmaker's downtown office, saying they needed to repair her telephones, according to court records unsealed Tuesday. O'Keefe used his cellphone to take pictures of two men, Joseph Basel and Robert Flanagan, who are accused in an FBI agent's sworn affidavit of impersonating telephone company workers. Stanley Dai is accused of aiding the Jan. 25 plot.

All four were taken to a suburban New Orleans jail and charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony. If convicted, each man faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

And this is kind of embarrassing, too:

Flanagan, 24, is the son of William J. Flanagan, the acting U.S. attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, based in Shreveport. William Flanagan declined to comment through an office assistant.

"Hey, Bill, how you doing? What's that kid of yours up to these days?"
"Fuck off."

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's going to go down kinda like that.

AFTERSNARK: As JJ points out, the defense for one of those little weasels is getting all revved up:

“It was poor judgment,” Robert Flanagan’s lawyer, Garrison Jordan, said in a brief interview outside the courthouse. “I don’t think there was any intent or motive to commit a crime.”

"And, sure," continued Jordan, "my client held up a liquor store at gunpoint. But it's not like he meant to use that gun or anything. Kids will be kids, ya know? What's everybody getting all bent out of shape for? Geez, you'd think he broke the law or something."

It's geek time.

I don't just want an Android phone, I want this one:

Does that rock or what? (Pun totally intended.)

Dear stupid Liberals and NDP: Let me make a suggestion.

When Parliament finally reconvenes and one of you useless twits gets the chance to address the House, let me suggest an opening statement.

Given that the Stephen Harper Drooling Theocrat Party of Canada justified that latest prorogation because they needed all that time to prep for ... well, whatever the hell it is they claimed they needed the time for, it behooves to you have, ready to go, a detailed and comprehensive list of what all those Conservative MPs were doing on their prorogation vacation. That is, a point-by-point list of the name of a Con MP, and what days he or she was on vacation or hanging out at the Olympics and clearly not working on the budget or whatever. And stand up and read that list into the official record.

Here, let me help you get started. Do you think you disorganized dingbats can handle that?

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Have I got a fourth-year thesis for YOU!

(Part 1)

Dear Canadian political science students:

Let me suggest your fourth-year essay in contemporary Canadian politics (if you can talk your prof into it).

Over the last year or so, we've been lucky(?) to be witnesses to some unusual activity on the Canadian political landscape. I speak, specifically, of two ideologically contrasting events:

And here's where the fun starts since, given that these two events came from opposite ends of the political spectrum, wouldn't it be entertaining to do a rigourous and methodical analysis of the fundamental differences between those two movements? Because, really, when was the last time you had such similar activities occurring so close together, but coming from such wildly differing ideologies? Seriously, doesn't the phrase "compare and contrast" just leap to mind? Of course it does.

Now, despite some advice I was given when I was discussing this with a friend, I'm going to suggest a couple obvious differences that could be explored, but what you'd do with this is entirely up to you. Let's start by comparing the respective Facebook pages to see how their creators introduced the topic.

First off, there's CAPP -- Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament -- and its alleged mission, which we shall read carefully:

On December 30th, Prime Minister Stephen Harper prorogued parliament, effectively shutting down our democratic institutions for the sake of political expediency. The group started with a very simple idea: Canadians contacting their Members of Parliament and requesting that they return to Parliament Hill on January 25th when parliament was supposed to resume. What a difference we've made. Many MPs have listened and they will be returning to serve the interests of the Canadian people.

What do we do now? We need to keep the pressure on the Prime Minister and our MPs to recognize that there needs to be changes in Ottawa. First and foremost: prorogation. As it stands, the decision to call prorogation is at the sole discretion of the Prime Minister. While proroguing is typically done to signal the end of the parliamentary session, this most recent case has shown that the power can be abused.

So, what can we say about the above? Well, the first thing we can say is that it appears to be honest and accurate. Regardless of whether you support it or not, it's hard to deny that the group has a straightforward rationale. There are no hysterics. There is no screeching. There is no panty-yanking. There is no pitiful plea to emotion. And, most importantly, there is no claim that prorogation is illegal.

That last part is important, as the Facebook description openly admits that the right to prorogue Parliament "is at the sole discretion of the Prime Minister," which of course it is. No one is denying that. No one is claiming that prorogation is unconstitutional. One is simply claiming that its power is being abused, nothing more, and that democracy is suffering as a result.

Got all that? Good. Because here's where the "compare and contrast" comes in.

Let's check the description of the earlier Facebook Against a Liberal/NDP Coalition Government to see how well it holds up. The beginning of the description:

This group is for all Canadians against a Liberal/NDP Coalition propped up by the Bloc Quebecois.

And already we see a bit of bias creeping in -- "propped up by the Bloc Quebecois." Oh, no ... apparently, we should be suspicious that the Bloc is involved because, um, they're French? No, wait, they're from Quebec! Oh, I know, they're separatists. Ignore, of course, that they're Canadians and were duly and honestly elected like everyone else. It's important to open your case with a quick smear job. On we go:

In the last federal election, Liberal leader Stephane Dion said he wouldn't form a coalition with the NDP because they had "bad economics" that weren't in the best interest of our country. What does Mr. Dion do a few weeks later?

He signs a coalition government with the NDP. Also in the agreement was the separatist Bloc Quebecois.

ZOMG, NO!!! Stephane Dion broke his word! How ... awful! And I should point out, how irrelevant, particularly since I suspect Dion would have kept his word if Harper hadn't tried to gut public financing as his first official act. In any event, whether or not Dion flip-flopped or not is quite irrelevant to the discussion since it's entirely within his right to propose a coalition government if the current one falls. But the subtle smears continue:

How low has the Liberal Party and NDP gone when they sign an agreement that gives so much power to a party devoted to the destruction of Canada? There is only one winner in this coalition accord. Unfortunately, that winner, is the Bloc Quebecois.

Yap yap yappity yap they're all horrible people and never forget that the Bloc aren't real Canadians. The word "destruction" is a nice touch, too. Then the madness kicks in:

This move by the opposition parties is unethical and not in the spirit of democracy. Yes, it's completely within the bounds of our constitutional framework. However, it's unethical for these parties to deny a coalition in an election and form an agreement after an election.

It's unethical! They have every right to do it! But it's still unethical! Smear smear smear. And then the batshit crazy bubbles to the surface:

Canadians might have voted 62% combined popular vote for the opposition parties, but there is no majority who voted for a coalition.

Yes, and there's a reason for that -- the word "coalition" did not appear anywhere on the voting ballot so pointing out that no one "voted for a coalition" doesn't really mean a whole lot, does it? But honestly, it gets so much funnier:

To form a coalition this accord should have to face the Canadian people in the form of a federal election. Put it to the people, let them decide, after being made aware of this agreement, whether or not they want a Conservative Government or Liberal-NDP, Bloc supported coalition government.

The opposition parties don't want an election, because they know they would be brutally defeated.

A more egregious rewriting of history would be hard to find since, if memory serves, the Opposition was so ready to bring it on, which is what inspired Stephen Harper to piss his pants and frantically call for prorogation -- to avoid getting his ass handed to him on a plate.

I could go on, but I assume you see where I'm going with this. The whole "compare and contrast" is enlightening, is it not? The recent CAPP facebook page was clear and to the point, and described nothing more than what its organizers felt was the fundamental issue that was an abuse of Prime Ministerial power. The earlier anti-coalition page was, on the other hand, total crap, laden with emotional blackmail and outright historical revisionism. And that's only Chapter 1. Are you starting to see an undergrad thesis in this somewhere?

More coming ...

Oh, those wacky Europeans.

"Don't worry, we've called for the rescue vehicle, it should be here any minute. And here it comes now ..."

"OK, that didn't work as well as I had hoped."

The news from Owen Sound.

Go. Read.

... and you don't fuck with Kady O'Malley.

Over in the CBC comments section (sorry, no link), someone whines about how all those other people prorogued Parliament so, like, what's the big deal?:

Idiot commenter JoeGopher: "Livelier than the previous 104 times it's been done federally, not to mention how many times it was done provincially?"

: "Joe Gopher: Oh please don't make me explain why that's a ludicrous metric again. Extremely short version: Until 1940, prorogation was *the only way to end a session* for longer than a weekend, even to rise for statutory holidays. In 1940, the Standing Orders were amended to allow for designated breaks - Christmas, Easter, that sort of thing - but extended adjournment still required consent. In 1982, the Commons adopted a fixed calendar, which included the winter and summer adjournments. Since then, prorogation has been used far more sparingly. I've posted about this in the past, and I'm sorry for the repetition, but of all the idiotic talking points that should be consigned to a fiery pit of oblivion, that may be the one that drives me the craziest."

Good girl, Kady. And a complete waste of time. You are lecturing to retards. You'll have to trust me on that one.

(Wag of the tail to e-mailer GH.)

Protecting whistleblowers: It seemed like a good idea at the time.

It was only a few years ago (emphasis tail-waggingly added):

Harper Promises Stronger Whistleblower Legislation

Feb 1st, 2006

In a press conference following release of the Gomery Report Part 2, Stephen Harper reiterated his promise to enact an Accountability Act, as set out during his election campaign.

The Accountability Act promises to:

* Give the Public Service Integrity Commissioner the power to enforce compliance with the Act.
* Ensure that all Canadians who report government wrongdoing are protected, not just public servants.
* Remove the government’s ability to exempt Crown corporations and other bodies from the Act.
* Require the prompt public disclosure of information revealed by whistleblowers, except where national security or the security of individuals is affected.
* Ensure that whistleblowers have access to the courts and that they are provided with adequate legal counsel.
* Establish monetary rewards for whistleblowers who expose wrongdoing or save taxpayers dollars.

These are sensible and necessary measures, and exactly the kind of action required to make it harder for wrongdoers to suppress the truth.

So how's that working out these days? Oh:

Diplomat-whistleblower says he faces government reprisal

OTTAWA—Richard Colvin, the whistleblower-diplomat in the Afghan detainee issue, says he believes the Conservative government is retaliating for his damaging torture testimony late last year.

In a letter Monday to the Military Police Complaints Commission, Owen Rees, Colvin's Toronto lawyer, says his client has “a reasonable belief” that the government's refusal to pay his legal bills is a reprisal.

Rees says the government has essentially stopped paying Colvin's legal fees since November, when the diplomat told a House of Commons committee that several senior government officials were aware that Canadian Forces in Afghanistan were handing over detainees to be tortured by Afghan authorities in 2005 and 2006...

Colvin is entitled to legal representations as a federal civil servant who was summoned to testify about his work in Afghanistan.

The Stephen Harper Party of Canada: Destroying the careers and lives of Canadians, one troublesome public servant at a time.

(Wag of the tail.)

Monday, January 25, 2010


Over at "Slap Upside the Head," Slap documents the appalling persecution of Canada's Christians:

The Kings Glory Fellowship, a Protestant church in Calgary, Alberta, has lost their tax exempt status because they spent too much time involved in political activities outside the church, including actively campaigning against gay rights.

Religious officials are pretty miffed, including Calgary’s Bishop Fred Henry, who said this incident was “clearly meant to muzzle religious leaders.”

The reality is, of course, much more mundane:

Tax exemptions, you see, are only available for charitable causes, not political ones. If a church wishes to actively affect policy for those that have nothing to do with its religion or beliefs, it becomes part of the public sphere and must contribute to it with income and property taxes. Once they do, they’re free to go outside of their congregations to lecture, publish, organize, put on charming foil hats, bang on pots and pans for effect, terrorize minority groups with neon signs, and do all the other things that wacky, anti-gay lobby and activist groups do. No leather jaw restraints required.

If a church doesn’t want to contribute to the public realm with taxes, then they can abide by their own decision and limit their political influence to inside their private congregations.

A better explanation would be hard to come by. Canadian churches have the luxury of being tax-exempt as long as they confine their activities to religion. Once they get heavily involved in politics, they lose their tax exemption. No one is trying to "muzzle" anyone. All that's happening is that, if a church decides it wants to be overtly political, it has no right to expect the Canadian taxpayer to subsidize it.

And now, we wait for the inevitable deluge of Blogging Tories screaming, howling and screeching about religious persecution. Wait for it ... you know it's coming.

Leave links below.

Let the cognitive dissonance begin.

At the risk of sounding unsympathetic, I can't wait to see what Canada's Blogging Tories do with this:

On Christmas Eve, 2009, four construction workers were killed in Toronto, when the scaffolding they were standing on collapsed. A fifth worker survived with very serious injuries. All five were migrant workers and their working conditions were unsafe.

Bad enough, eh? No, it gets much, much worse.

The family of one of the four deceased workers are refugee claimants from Israel. They are Orthodox Christians, and came to Canada so their two daughters would not be forced to serve in the Israeli "Defense" Forces. The girls are 7 and 14 years old.

Now the family may be deported. They have a refugee hearing next month, and they cannot afford a lawyer.

I can see the minimally intellectual Blogging Tory grappling now:

"Useless, illegal refugee claimants, it's time to send those parasites back where they come from. Wait, they're Orthodox Christians? From Israel? Obviously, we need to help them, how dare we even consider abandoning them, the poor souls. Hang on, they want to stay so the daughters can avoid their mandatory military service? Fuck that, bunch of gutless draft dodgers, put them on the next boat back there!"

Who will be the first of Stephen Taylor's BTs to go all split-brain and try to come up with a coherent argument here? Really, I see immense entertainment value just around the corner.

The collective douchebagitude of the Right.

Over at Kate McMillan's Mocking Dead Jews Roadhouse and Tattoo Parlor (link if you're feeling brave) where Kate is unsurprisingly suckered by bogus rudeness, commenter "LC Bennett" proves that he (she?) is massively out of touch with anything resembling reality:

I have to give the MSM some credit. After a month of relentless focus on a procedural issue that has zero impact on our day to day lives, they have managed to get 290,000 to sign a Facebook page and approx 10,000 (4%) to physically show up at protests. All behold the power of the MSM. Too bad they will never direct any of that energy into researching the internal workings of the IPCC.

Pause for just a minute to appreciate how awesomely either stupid, ignorant or dishonest someone must be to have written the above.

First, given the constant coverage of the increasing membership of the CAPP Facebook group, you'd have to have spent the last two weeks on Mars to not have known that the final(?) size of that group was around 215,000, not 290,000.

And you'd have to be equally stupid/ignorant/dishonest to have completely missed the news coverage where the nationwide total for protesters was estimated to be around 25,000, not merely 10,000.

But it's not the depressing stupidity/ignorance/dishonesty that's so appalling, it's that it's positively collective. The comment above was left at 12:16 PM on Sunday and, in the numerous comments that follow, not a single commenter bothers to correct those values, even when one of them is trivially correctable.

Not one.

The only indication that someone has different numbers in mind occurs several hours later at 8:34 PM:

Hilarious ... 220,000 people can hit a button on facebook and it's a movement ... I wonder how many of then actually voted in the last election. In reality three people who can't spell turn up at Winnipeg ... My newspaper said 1000's accross the country ... but the TV the images were laughably spartan ... I can say with certainty about 5000-7000 people showed up at Olympic plaza for the torch last Monday night less than 10% of that turned up at the Prostest in Calgary ... We know what more important. Go CANADA Go.

Hilarious, indeed, since commenter "Sheila" still can't get the number correct, and hopelessly underestimates the actual attendance.

It's not that members of Canada's Idiot-sphere are that intellectually crippled, but that it's clearly a collective intellectual crippling, where anyone is allowed to say absolutely anything, no matter how idiotic, and everyone else just lets it slide.

The Canadian Idiot-sphere is the very ideal of the non-correcting, hermetically-sealed echo chamber. Incredible stupid goes in ... and it just stays there. The concept of converging on something even remotely resembling reality is simply not a part of their thinking processes.

Oh, wait ... you already knew that. Carry on, then.

The suckitude of today's youth.

From what I've read, many of this weekend's CAPP rallies can be dismissed since they were full of all those useless kids, and who gives a crap what kids think, right?

Huh ... how odd (emphasis tail-waggingly added):

Canadian National Pro-Life Organization Details Great Success of March for Life

May 31, 2009 ( – Campaign Life Coalition in its June Newsletter reports that the 2009 National March for Life in Ottawa marking 40 years of legalized abortion in Canada was a resounding success with record-breaking attendance. The organization went on to provide many details about the various March for Life events that have not been reported in the secular media...

More than half of those in attendance were youth - high school and university students - many who were proud to display their school banners or pro-life signs reports Campaign Life Coalition. Many wore pro-life t-shirts, signaling their deep commitment to the cause. Jim Hughes, the National President of CLC, said that "the growing number of young people" is a "tremendous blessing" to both the March and to the movement. "This is going to make a difference."

Can you spot the hypocrisy and double standards? Give it time, it'll come to you.

In which Vancouver's democracy rally clearly murdered people.

Oh, for the love of mutt, Iceman! Blogging Tory "Iceman", having embarrassed himself before God and country, now casts frantically about for other reasons to dismiss Vancouver's "No Prorogue" rally.

Here's Iceman:

Every weekend when the Vancouver Canucks host a hockey game, tens of thousands of Vancouver sports fans descend on the downtown core to watch the game, be it attending in person or watching at a Sports Pub. Many go early and explore downtown and several hundred commute from the North Shore via public transportation (alcohol consumption is often part of the hockey experience). On Saturday, somebody decided to host a protest at a venue directly in between the Sea Bus terminal and GM Place. They were attempting to draw a crowd on a migratory path of hundreds of Canucks fans, and guess what, they brought food! Makes you wonder what percentage of the alleged "several thousand protestors" (as reported in today's Province) were just Canuck fans walking by?

Gosh, Iceman, I don't know, but since the rally was from 1-3 p.m. and the Canucks' home game wasn't until 7 p.m., we might never know. But don't let that stop you from assuming whatever you want, in the absence of actual evidence.

Oh, wait, Iceman's not done:

Did Protests Cause Traffic Accidents?

I would like to ask the question, were there any serious traffic accidents while these many thousands of people were marching in solidarity through the streets of Canada? I know of at least one, because I saw it. At 1pm "several thousand people" met at the Vancouver Art Gallery and marched through the streets to some undisclosed location. People who were there admit that they blocked traffic. Not long after they began to block traffic on Georgia street (which doubles as a highway), there was a deadly accident south bound in the Stanley Park causeway heading towards Georgia. Stanley Park empties onto Georgia Street. I would encourage any survivors of this devastating traffic wreck to direct your attention to the Canadians Against Prorogation Facebook page for your pending lawsuits.

I guess the kid that planned this party did not consider the possibility that his negligent planning may have killed people. Rather than just meet at one place and stay there, they insisted on making it a traffic blocking street protest. Next time you want to organize a rally to protest a standard Parliamentary procedure, stop for a minute to consider the consequences.

Yes, all you CAPP protesters. You killed those people. You! Or maybe the Vancouver Canucks killed them, but let's not go there because that's not the conclusion Iceman would like to draw.

Stephen Taylor must be so proud.

AFTERSNARK: Iceman's first commenter on that latter post gives him a proper dressing down:

Anonymous said...

So there was no rally as per your post yesterday or there was a rally as per this post?

You make no sense.

I believe "Anonymous" has pegged Iceman nicely, wouldn't you say?

Sunday, January 24, 2010


Harper = Hitler? More to this than meets the eye. But make sure you understand just how self-destructive that prank was.

If it can be established beyond any reasonable doubt that those were truly Tory plants out to make pro-democracy protesters look bad, they've done immeasurable damage to their cause since, from now on, every time someone compares Harper to Hitler and the whingers get their panties in a bunch over it, we can quietly and calmly respond that chances are it's one of their own so they can stop whining about it.

So unless it's obviously a "progressive" making such a comparison, all we need to do is suggest it's one of theirs because they have a habit of doing this sort of thing.

They have well and truly fucked themselves.

P.S. Dawg has already identified a couple of Canada's Dumbest Bloggers who are yanking their panties in fury over this apparent fraud. If you notice any more, leave a comment at Dawg's and we can start a list of the inappropriately outraged and see if a sheepish retraction is on the menu any time soon.

And, yes, this really is MSM-worthy.

How does it feel being played for a sucker?

As much as I have way better things to blog about, let me refresh your memory. And the fallout?

Robert McClelland gets it. Section 15's Mark Francis is a bit miffed in being taken advantage of. And what's particularly grating about those two is that they are named specifically in a recent post by Mr. Ross as progressive bloggers who told me to take a hike regarding my "ultimatum." How ... dishonest.

I'm dead serious about my new policy. Whether or not you choose to publish Patrick Ross is entirely your decision, but if you do, you'll do it with no further linky love from me. But while you're at it, you might want to drop by Patrick's and check out his recent post where he enumerates all those progressive bloggers who allegedly support him -- in particular, the ones he lists as supporters who might not have a clue as to what's going on. Then you can decide how you feel about your name being taken in vain.

Got a few minutes?

Have fun.

Just hanging out with my peeps at the Times.

One of these things is not like the others ...

That's it, Stephen, cry for me. Your tears sustain me.

You can smell the respect from here.

Over at Dr. Dawg's, Conservative blogger and putrid, bottom dweller Jay Currie is not impressed:

Look like a bunch of angry white people to me...pick-up truck drivers (I'm hearing dog whistles), public service union members and Liberal party hacks.

Call it a latte party.

I'm sure Jay was just about to continue with "immigrants", "darkies" and "ragheads" but a grown-up managed to wrest the keyboard away from him just in the nick of time.

The stupid keeps on stupiding.

Yes, it's cruel, but the crippling intellectual deficiency over at Blogging Tory Iceman's just keeps on rolling. Here's the latest commenter, having a wildly inappropriate "Aha!" moment:

Anonymous said...

Loved the article in today's Ottawa Sun re protest on the Hill.
Reporter says about 3500 showed up, but with people coming and going all the time, that raised the number to about 5000.

Yes, gosh darn those leftard Ottawa Sun journalists, putting their nefarious liberal slant on everything. How appallingly dishonest to admit that only 3,500 people showed up, but arbitrarily bumping that number to 5,000.

Unless ... that's not what reporter Doug Hempstead actually wrote:

About 3,500 turned out for the rally at 1 p.m., but some came and went during the two-hour event — boosting total estimates to about 5,000.

Huh. You know, when I read the actual words -- you know, the way reporter Doug Hempstead wrote them -- the impression I get is that there were 3,500 people there at 1 p.m., but given the coming and going over the two hours that followed, they figure that 5,000 people in total showed up at some point.

Admittedly, that's just a guess on my part, but I think it's more feasible than some reporter sitting down and thinking, "There were 3,500 that went, oh hell, I'll just boost that to say, 5,000, then admit to my readers that I'm making shit up and hope no one notices."

Yeah, I think my scenario is more feasible. And I think Iceman's comments section is, at the moment, the biggest retard magnet in the Canadian blogosphere. But that's just a guess, too.

K-W rally for democracy, and the inevitable whining.

Over at Yappa Ding Ding, Ruth gives us the lowdown on yesterday's Rally for Democracy and elected MPs actually doing what they're paid for. Ruth links to the Record newspaper, which estimated the crowd at about 500, which makes way more sense than the ridiculously lowball figure of about 200 that I read elsewhere yesterday. (I was there just before the official start of 11 a.m., and I could tell there were already around 400 people.)

Unsurprisingly, Canada's panty-yanking whiners show up in Ruth's comments section as "Mike" stops by to redefine the concept of "success":

How many people in Waterloo? Almost a 100 thousand or so?

And only a few hundred showed up?

And you call this successful?

Based on Mike's childish and snotty attitude, a straw poll showed that, of the 50,000 women in Waterloo, only 3 would have sex with Mike. Loser.

Let the dumbass, retarded wankitude begin.

Here's Canwest -- no major fan of liberalism or progressivism:

Thousands turn out for Vancouver rally to protest PM Harper's decision to prorogue Parliament

VANCOUVER — Several thousand protesters in Vancouver urged Prime Minister Stephen Harper to get back to work.

A large throng marched Saturday afternoon to a rally in Vancouver's Victory Square to vent against the Harper government's decision to prorogue Parliament. The rally was one of a number in B.C. and dozens across Canada.

And there's the inevitable asinine, dumbshit, asswipe, pig ignorance we've come to expect from Stephen Taylor's uneducated coterie of drooling fluffers.

I believe I've made my point.

: Oh, my ... over the last several minutes, commenters have started showing up at Iceman's, politely correcting the record, and he is not taking it well. I've got screenshots in case Iceman, in a fit of snotty infantilism, begins deleting ugly, offensive, savage, deranged, leftard comments like:

Chris said...

Interesting banter. I was at the Art Gallery. We left there shortly after 1 pm and there were definitely more than a thousand in the walk to Victory Square. I have seen lots of photos and it was here not copied from some other location. I'm in them. It was well attended and organized.
Excellent in fact!


Anonymous said...

You missed the action - first at the Art Gallery, then as a couple thousand people walked north, then east along Hastings, then on Pender, to rally in Victory Square. I was a block away, saw it and joined in. I'm glad you had a good experience walking the streets, we do have a beautiful city:)

Uesless, leftard trolls. I'm sure Iceman will ban their sorry asses in short order. Show up at his place with their facts and knowledge and stuff, will they? I don't fucking think so.

: WTF?

langmann said...

Anonymous, do you have any proof, ie: photographs, that there was an actual protest? SO far I have seen no proof. Other people I have asked in Vancouver saw nothing as well.

I repeat, WTF? What possible response is there to something so delusional? Ladies and gentlemen, your Canadian Conservative Party supporter. Isn't he something?

Oh, Christ, I just pissed myself:

The_Iceman said...

To be fair Langmann, I have deleted over a dozen "link dumps" with the lefties trying to draw traffic to their supporting sites.

So, if I read this correctly, Iceman admits he is delayed and shows up at the Vancouver rally site an hour late after the marchers had already left, then complains there is no evidence of a rally. Commenters apparently show up to try to educate him that, yes, there was a rally, some of who link back to their own sites to reasonably provide graphic evidence of said rally. Iceman deletes all those useful, corroborating links because he hates giving those stupid leftards any traffic. And now, when total imbeciles like "langmann" show up yapping on about no proof that a rally ever existed, Iceman has to sheepishly admit that there is proof, but he childishly deleted all of it.

Could this possibly get any funnier? Let's watch.

Stephen Taylor must be awesomely proud.

: It's childishly easy to mock Iceman, but there's one more observation to be made. In the comments section, Iceman is clearly pleased with all this extra traffic, writing:

I feel honoured to have drawn the ire of such a distinguished group. Getting paid for page impressions is also a nice...

So Iceman has no problem with all the incoming traffic, yet he defends deleting a dozen comments with:

... I have deleted over a dozen "link dumps" with the lefties trying to draw traffic to their supporting sites.

One suspects that what Iceman deleted wasn't tacky "link dumps," but simply commenters trying to refute his idiotic claims with a simple link back to their sites where one would find unimpeachable graphic or video evidence of the Vancouver rally. But Iceman is having none of this! How dare those leftards try to boost their hit count by leaving links to stuff like proof and evidence!!

Shorter Iceman: "Thanks for all the traffic, haha! Now piss off as I refuse to return the favour!!"

Honestly, he has to be eight years old. Nine tops.

THE FUN NEVER ENDS: Yes, yes, now I'm just being cruel, but check this out, as Iceman searches desperately for the rally:

On my way home I decided to stop by Stanley Park, near the giant Olympic rings at Cole Harbour. If there was a great place for these thousands of angry Canadians to congregate at the end of their long march, this must be the place...

Unfortunately there were no protestors at the end of that rainbow. I was very disappointed. I was hoping to see real live protestors frolicking about in their natural environment, but alas all I found were empty streets.

And there's a reason for that (emphasis nad-whompingly added):

A large throng marched Saturday afternoon to a rally in Vancouver's Victory Square to vent against the Harper government's decision to prorogue Parliament.

Pause to savour what happened here. Iceman wants to go to the CAPP rally to mock people who actually value the idea of a real democracy. He does not bother to actually check any of the countless online sources of information to find out where that rally is marching to. Instead, he shows up an hour late, takes a wild guess as to where all those people went ... and guesses wrong. He therefore concludes there was no rally, and goes home.

If a four-year-old did something like that, I would consider them retarded.

PLACE YOUR BETS: At this point, I'm willing to give odds that Iceman is about to disappear that entire post out of sheer embarrassment. Even someone as thigh-suckingly unaware as Iceman must, at this point, realize just how monstrously he's humiliated himself in front of the entire bloggysphere.

I'd take a screenshot but, really, I just don't care that much.

Stephen Harper: Walking and chewing gum not an option.

Huh. Here's an interesting (and undoubtedly unintentional) admission:

Harper appeared unmoved by the rallies Saturday. He was asked several times about the rallies during a morning news conference.

His repeated answer was basically that the government was busy. He did not refer to the rallies in his replies.

"Let me just say the government is extremely occupied these days," he said.

"The government has a lot of work to do to get ourselves prepared for the upcoming agenda of Parliament," he said.

If that last claim is true, then one would naturally conclude that the Harper government is just too gosh-darned busy to, say, attend the Olympics. If one hangs their defense on being, like, totally, totally swamped with prep, it's kind of awkward to explain how you can still take time off to hang out in Vancouver for several days, don't you think?

The whining, dear God, the whining.

It's an interesting and depressing experiment to hold one's nose and do a quick tour through the Canadian ColostomyBag-o-Sphere, where one finds nothing but ignorant, dismissive contempt for the just-completed CAPP rallies held across Canada.

For example, here's useless hack and Kate McMillan groupie Monte Solberg, taking reality out back and rogering it with a falafel:

Despite being shamelessley promoted by big newspapers, TV outlets and the opposition parties, a grand total of 3,000 showed up on Parliament Hill to protest the alleged end of democracy in Canada.

There are six or seven rallies every year on Parliament Hill that attracts more people, and with none of the media hype.

One is tempted to explain to Monte that the reason other Hill rallies might be bigger is that they occurred only on the Hill and that people came from near and far to attend, as opposed to CAPP rallies, which occurred across the country.

Or one might be tempted to explain that to Monte, if one didn't already realize that he's dumber than the clumps I scoop out of my cat's litter box on a daily basis. But feel free to give it a try. Let me know how that turns out.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

And now, it's Huether time.

Upstairs at the Huether, working on my first Honey Brown, laptopping away and waiting for a decent college basketball game. If you spot me, you can buy the next one.

AFTERSNARK: Since I had only my crappy cell phone with built-in camera with me, feel free to send me pics of the K-W rally and I will ... yes, ma'am, another Honey Brown will be fine. And now that there's two of us, the large pulled pork pizza sounds divine. If you show up while there's still pizza, you're welcome to some of it.

DOUBLE SNARK: I'm currently sucking back beer with this guy.


Oh, geez:

That's amusing, considering what it actually links to. I am a bad person.

Ezratude alert!

There will be new and exciting Ezratude later today, so check back this evening. Until then, amuse yourself.

Why today's "No Prorogue" rallies don't matter.

You already know that, regardless of how successful today's anti-prorogation rallies are, they will be dismissed for one reason or another by Canada's Twatwaffle-o-sphere, so here's your chance to predict the inevitable lameass rationales.

Personally, I'm betting on reading, "Well, the weather was so much better than when we had our anti-coalition rallies so it doesn't count," but I'm willing to be convinced that the excuses will be even stupider. You can never go wrong putting a limit on just how moronic and whiny Canada's wankers can be.

Whiny, whiny, whiny, ...

... whiny.

Important anti-prorogation rally information!


(Inspired by this.)

Friday, January 22, 2010

This is your last warning.

And when it's over, I'm going to the Huether. Because the Huether has beer. And wings.

Mostly beer.

And America says goodbye to democracy.

It was fun while it existed. Sort of.

Some amusing people over there.

As always, one good link deserves another.

People against prorogation are losers.

It seems like only yesterday that Stephen Taylor had 127,000 people against a Canadian coalition government, and that mass of humanity clearly demonstrated the power of the grassroots, the undying love of Canadians for Stephen Harper and a bedrock principle of democracy that normal people could make a difference.

These days, when it's people with a different point of view, eh, not so much:

... I can tell you that I know of a group on facebook that has a thousand members or so who joined because they support their Prime Minister.

We are just a small number, yes. We do not have the axes to grind that all the NO people do. We are not opportunists like they are. You can be sure that there are many more out there Mr. Prime Minister. For instance, many bloggers write supportive articles and discuss the issues. All of us are your foot soldiers giving out information as we understand it.

Apparently, anti-coalition and pro-prorogation Facebook folks are, like, Teh Awesome while all those anti-prorogation Facebook losers simply have "axes to grind" and are disgusting "opportunists" who can be safely ignored. Because, well, just because shut up, OK?

P.S. When a Blogging Tory qualifies their opinion as being how they "understand" something, that's typically a warning sign that massive stupidity is about to follow. Call that a maxim to live by. It's served me well so far.

HARD TO BELIEVE. Seriously, it's hard to believe that anyone could write the following:

I support [Stephen Harper] because he can make the tough decisions that do not always win favour with his base, but are necessary for the country ... as a whole.

At this point, the one thing you can say about Stephen Harper is that every single thing he's done has representing precisely pandering to his base -- the racist, fascist, scientifically illiterate, uneducated lot of them.

That claim above is so stunningly detached from reality that it purely takes your breath away.

You're welcome.

Always happy to help. Awesome.

AFTERSNARK: The CBC curiously does a story on the cost of prorogation. Mr. Ross calls them on it.

BY THE WAY, the idea to estimate the actual cost of prorogation to the Canadian taxpayer? Sheer genius. Who came up with that idea? Oh ...

Thursday, January 21, 2010

When really stupid dishonest Blogging Tories blog.

Blogging Tory "BC Blue" wets himself over the pathetic anti-prorogation protest in Toronto:

Toronto Facebook prorogation protest numbers: “about 35″

After weeks of the media telling us how this internet movement is taking hold across Canada we get the true sense of how committed these protesters really are. In a city of 5.5 million, they managed to get out 35 people ...

Yup, that's pathetic and embarrassing, all right. It's also a little weird since the official anti-prorogation rallies aren't until Saturday, so one wonders what "BC Blue" is yapping on about. Oh:

Anti-prorogation protesters gather outside the C.D. Howe Institute in Toronto, where Prime Minister Harper attended a roundtable meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2010.

Group gets jump start on weekend rallies by sending vanguard to greet Stephen Harper in Toronto

Let's all check back with "BC Blue" on Sunday and see if he corrects the record. Won't that be entertaining?

HEH. Commenter :Ordinary Fed Up Joe" brings the reality:

It was more like 60 or so.

With about 3 hours notice, in the middle of a work day, way downtown off the subway line.

Not bad.

At the rally meeting for Toronto last Friday there must have been 200 volunteering just to organize and paint signs, etc.

You snobs and your elitist leaders can dismiss us as “elites” and say “Canadians don’t care” about democracy all you want, but the polls and reality are showing a different story entirely.

Unsurprisingly, "Joe" is dismissed as a whiny, little turd with his knowledge and facts and everything.

On the other hand ...

Uh huh:

“I think we should have done it [started charging for frequent New York Times readers] years ago,” said David Firestone, a deputy national news editor. “As painful as it will be at the beginning, we have to get rid of the notion that high-quality news comes free.”

Complete crap, on the other hand, would be considerably less expensive.

Oh, look ... bright, shiny Olympics thing!

It sounded so promising at the time:

MacKay touts $5-billion vehicle upgrade

Published on Wednesday, Jul. 08, 2009 5:31PM EDT
Last updated on Monday, Aug. 10, 2009 12:29PM EDT

The federal government is spending more than $5-billion to upgrade the Canadian army's combat vehicles, including improvements for its existing light armoured vehicle fleet.

At an announcement Wednesday at CFB Gagetown, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said about $1-billion will be spent to upgrade the LAV-3s that are now in service in Afghanistan.

The government is also buying close combat vehicles, tactical armoured patrol vehicles and force mobility enhancement vehicles.

“Our government is committed to providing the army with the modern robust equipment it needs to fulfil its missions in today's dangerous operating environment,” Mr. MacKay said.

“Wherever in the world Canadian soldiers find themselves, we owe it to them to give them the protective equipment that they need to do the job we've asked them to do.”

Fuckin' A! Support the troops! Hang on ... what's this?

Purchase of new armoured army vehicles on hold

January 20, 2010

With the Defence Department already looking to reduce spending, the Harper government has quietly put on hold a multi-billion-dollar purchase of new armoured vehicles for the army, according to a document leaked to the Ottawa Citizen.

Dear Canadian troops:

Get used to those IEDs. Life's a bitch.

Yours truly,
Stephen Harper

P.S. Dear troops: Prorogation is awesome. You should try it sometime.

Must-read Thursday.

Oh, man, this is adorable:

A month ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time Peter MacKay , and Minister of Defence at the time Gordon O'Connor all denied ever seeing any of the 16 reports "circulated widely throughout the Foreign Affairs and Defence departments and also shared with senior military commanders in Ottawa and Afghanistan" warning that Afghan authorities were abusing detainees handed over by Canadian forces.

How did they all manage to miss all those reports from Richard Colvin, the second in command of Afghan reconstruction at the time? we asked ourselves, somewhat rhetorically.

As Alison points out, CP's Murray Brewster provides the answer:

Canadian diplomats in Afghanistan were ordered in 2007 to hold back information in their reports to Ottawa about the handling of the prisoners, say defence and foreign affairs sources.

The instruction — issued soon after allegations of torture by Afghan authorities began appearing in public — was aimed at defusing the explosive human-rights controversy, said sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

There was a fear that graphic reports, even in censored form, could be uncovered by opposition parties and the media through access-to-information laws, leading to revelations that would further erode already-tenuous public support.

Here, let me tighten that up for you: The Harperites ordered people not to send them any reports about the abuse of Afghan detainees, then subsequently claimed -- in all honesty -- that they've never seen any reports about the abuse of Afghan detainees.

That's just precious.

Five feet of strap-on gets her strap-on on.

From the CC HQ mailbag, a reader gives us a heads-up:

Join us for a Solidarity Rally for Geert Wilders

The film Fitna will be shown and a diverse coalition of community leaders will speak, including Rabbi Jon Hausman from Boston, a close associate of Geert Wilders. On Wednesday, January 20, 7:30 - 9:30 pm, Toronto Zionist Centre, 788 Marlee Ave.


Speakers Kathy Shaidle : Five Feet of Fury
Rabbi Jon Hausman - Ahavath Torah, Boston
Ron Banerjee - Canadian Hindu Advocacy
Bjorn Larsen : Geert Wilder Supporter
Meir Weinstein : Jewish Defence League of Canada

Wednesday, January 20
7:30 pm - 9:30 pm
Toronto Zionist Centre, 788 Marlee Avenue
Jewish Defence League of Canada
416 736 7000

It's nice to see that Kathy Shaidle can still get work, as long as it doesn't involve working with sane people.

AFTERSNARK: According to aforementioned e-mailer, the movie "Fitna" is "classic hate propaganda, meeting almost all the indicia of hate propaganda laid out by Karen Jensen in the CHRT's decision in Warman v. Kouba." But I'm told that anti-Semitism is very, very bad.

Bigotry can be so context-dependent, don't you think?

AH, THE PRESCIENCE: Credit where credit is due -- it's nice to see that Kathy Shaidle at least recognizes that she is utterly unemployable:

Mark Steyn:

"This is a brilliant piece. Kathy Shaidle should turn it into a book."

Especially since said post will likely prevent me from ever being hired by a real company should I find myself unemployed in the near future.

And that's why you'll only find Kathy pimping herself out at JDL functions and writing for World Net Daily. It must suck when even the worst of the worst of Canadian conservative media doesn't want to touch you with Ann Coulter's dick.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Ask and ye shall receive, Ezra-style.

Once upon a time, I suggested:

Can someone sue Ezra Levant?


P.S. Any bets as to when Ezra puts up a Paypal button to help with his legal defense?

AFTERSNARK: I was, of course, being flippant when I snickered about Ezra and a Paypal button since he's had one for the longest time, and it's just as dishonest as Kathy Shaidle's.

Ezra's Paypal button has the caption, "Donate to fight the HRC," but I'm guessing that he's more than happy to take that cash to defend himself against libel suits, which has nothing whatever to do with the HRC.

I could be wrong, but if Ezra is using donations to defend against non-HRC-related libel and defamation suits, he might make that a little clearer on his web page. Otherwise, that's kind of like fraud. I'm just sayin'.

Apparently, the free market isn't all that free.

Blogging Tory Jabba the Roy is terribly, terribly concerned about the fate of the National Post:

A group that includes Ray Heard, Senator Grafstein and Beryl Wajsman (among others) want to buy the National Post, Montreal Gazette and Ottawa Citizen. Wajsman was on Tommy Schnurmacher's show yesterday. I asked him about 3 grits owning the conservative NP. He assured me that these were atypical, conservative? grits. Wajsman insists the character of the Post will notchamge. I certainly hope not.

Apparently, the fact that you purchase something doesn't mean you then have the right to, you know, do with it what you want or anything. Because even if some Liberals buy the Post, they really have a moral obligation to allow it to continue to be a festering, right-wing sinkhole because, well, Canada's conservatives would be heartbroken if it wasn't.

I had no idea that it was the Liberals' responsibility to subsidize Canadian conservatism. When did that happen?

BY THE WAY, for someone who seems awfully heartbroken over losing the voice of Canadian right-wing batshit craziness and useless hack journalism, Jabba always seems perky when it's an allegedly left-wing media outlet that's having problems.

Go figure.