Sunday, March 23, 2008

Brenda Martin must die! (Sunday pre-church edition.)

Oh, my, but the hermetically-sealed, Canadian Dumbfuck-o-sphere circle jerk and echo chamber is in full-throated, bloodlust-enraged howl, tearing into Brenda Martin's past to see what they can dig up to smear her. And if I look in my magic mirror, I can see Kate, and JoJo, and JR, and Tony, all pawing through assorted old newspapers and garbage cans for that smoking gun. But here's the fly in the ointment, and I'm going to break with tradition and bold it to make sure you get it:

Anything these cretinous fuckwits turn up regarding Martin will in no way excuse the fact that none of these people gave a crap about her for two years. Now that all these vindictive gomers have been exposed as uncaring yobs, they are desperate, frantically looking for something to justify those two years of callous indifference. But it doesn't work that way.

This kind of character assassination doesn't work retroactively. You don't get to use information you just learned last week to defend your mean-spirited, dismissive contempt of two years. Do you understand that? Seriously, do you understand that?

Are we done here? Yeah, I think we're done here. For now.


MgS said...

Two simple points:

1) She deserves a timely trial and verdict (which she clearly isn't getting)

2) The HarperCon$ have ignored the file since the day they came to office.

'nuff said.

Patrick Ross said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
CC said...

Go away, Twatrick ... grownups talking.

Patrick Ross said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
CC said...

Dear Twatrick: See above.

LuLu said...

Fuck off Patrick - as usual, you're just sucking the intelligence out of the room with your kindergarten-esque trolling.

Why don't you have this oh-so-serious discussion with your commenters? Oh that's right ... you don't have any. Oops, my bad.

Patrick Ross said...

Nope, I don't think so. I'm doing the Marv thing again -- pointing out the truth and laughing at how many times you try to delete it.

What was the truth, again?

Canadian Cynic spent two years not blogging about Brenda Martin before it became such a hot-ticket media item.

Canadian Cynic didn't give a fuck about Brenda Martin until he could use it to tar his political opponents.

Canadian Cynic either doesn't really give a fuck about Brenda Martin, or really doesn't give a fuck about Brenda Martin.

CC said...

*Sigh*. Would someone like to explain to Twatrick why he's such a Twatrick, or should I?

Patrick Ross said...

Hey, Cynic. These are the standards you yourself set.

If a lack of care for Martin on Kate, JoJo, Jr and Tony's part over the last two years is "callous indifference", then what about yours?

Are you actually going to try to plead ignorance? Better be careful -- that would likely also apply to the people you're so desperate to tar with this particular matter.

Just a bit of honesty, big guy -- that's all we want. You do remember what honesty is, right?

Do you?

LuLu said...

And how many posts on Brenda Martin do you have, Patsy? Why a grand total of two - the first one dated yesterday.

Hypocrisy, Patsy. Patsy, hypocrisy. You two must have soooo much in common.

Patrick Ross said...

Here's a crazy idea for you Lulu -- and given that you have the monopoly on crazy around these parts -- some of us aren't trying to politicize Brenda Martin's plight.

Unfortunately, my disgust with both factions on the blogosphere has finally reached such a point where it eclipsed my will to try and stay out of the whole thing.

I'm not the one who's trying to claim that two years of silence on the matter during a period of time in which somebody probably didn't even know about the issue constitutes "callous indifference". I'm just holding you clowns to it.

LuLu said...

Patrick, I'm going to attempt to explain this to you in words that even your tiny, mullet-sporting brain can understand. It's not the issue of whether or not the Right or the Left have blogged incessantly about Brenda Martin's sad story.

It's the issue of the BTs going into full-metal, character assassination, smear campaign mode now that this is looking bad for the Harper government. Because the last thing they can stand is for someone to point out the fact that Harper’s conservatism is severely lacking in compassion. Can you possibly grasp that or should I try again using words of 2 syllables or less?

Patrick Ross said...

First off, Lulu, you need to get yourself in touch with a proper definition of conservatism. Abandoning our citizens abroad to the tender mercies of some of the most corrupt judicial systems in the world is not conservative.

What would be conservative would be defending the sanctity of a Canadian citizenship by standing up for Canadians abroad.

That being said, you're the one who just doesn't get it. If Cynic wants to accuse his political opponents of not caring about Brenda Martin because of their two years of silence, then he himself has to account for his two years of silence.

If he wants to plead ignorance of the matter as a defense, he automatically cedes that defense to his opponents as well.

This isn't all that hard to understand, provided that you aren't a crazed twit (which actually makes it make sense that you don't seem to get this).

LuLu said...

Congratulations on ignoring the entire point of what I said in order to reinforce your completely unrelated, sanctimonious, more-Patrick-than-thou world view. Colour me so not surprised, you ignorant prat.

Now be a dear and go shift the goalposts on your own blog.

Patrick Ross said...

Lulu, you really believe this crap when comes out of your mouth, don't you? (That's not a good sign, by the way.)

As a matter of fact, I recall seeing a post around these parts not too long ago lambasting the Blogging Tories for not blogging about Brenda Martin.

But suddenly Cynic's issue with the blogging Tories isn't that they aren't blogging about her enough, but rather that they're "assassinating Martin's character?"

Well, first off, a lecture in character assassination from someone who specializes in it is as pretty close to "sanctimonious" as one is ever likely to get.

But let's cut through all the evasive bullshit here and remind you of what this post was about in the first place: the so-called two years of "callous indifference" Cynic was complaining about in this very post.

So what's it really about, Lulu? Is it about:

-The character assassination of Brenda Martin?

-The aforementioned silence on the topic of Brenda Martin?

-Or scoring cheap political points on the back of someone being injudiciously detained in a foreign country?

It seems to me that someone here is trying to move the goalposts. But it most certainly is not myself.

Frank Frink said...

Why should I feel limited to only one of your options Twatsy? Or is it that you are only capable of holding one thought or notion at a time?

Now run along and be a good little 'conservative' and stand up for the 'sanctity of a Canadian citizenship by standing up for Canadians abroad' instead of making up excuses, justifications and sad defenses of your moronic Blogging Whorie asshole-buddies.

Patrick Ross said...

I've already taken them on, Frank.

I'll leave the sad, slavish defenses to you.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe what the Mexican goverment is doing to people like Brenda Martin. In Mexico its common for parents on vacation to be murdered in there hotel room, having your wife raped, being murdered for a few dollars. What happens when you go to the authorities and find that they are just as corrupt as the criminals. I for one am boycotting Mexico until the goverment trys to resolve their internal corruption. I found a petition that may help put pressure on the Mexican goverment to change.