Our opinions of and advice to the world. Updated whenever we get around to it.
Comments and suggestions can be sent to:
Dana - email@example.com
Bob - firstname.lastname@example.org
Syndicate this site:
The Stink Over Undercover Cops - Dana
On Chinese Goods - Dana
Tweaking The Template - Dana
If I Posted... - Dana
On Automobiles - Dana
The Grim Endpoint Of Public Healthcare - Dana
My Idea: Club His Sorry Ass - Dana
Robbed Again - Dana
Nothing To See Here - Dana
Finally Got Backlinks Working - Dana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Martin Peretz discusses G.W. Bush's accomplishments and the reaction of liberals to them. He ends with:
It has been heartening, in recent months, to watch some Democratic senators searching for ways out of the politics of churlishness. Some liberals appear to have understood that history is moving swiftly and in a good direction, and that history has no time for their old and mistaken suspicion of American power in the service of American values. One does not have to admire a lot about George W. Bush to admire what he has so far wrought. One need only be a thoughtful American with an interest in proliferating liberalism around the world. And, if liberals are unwilling to proliferate liberalism, then conservatives will. Rarely has there been a sweeter irony.Indeed.
Go read the whole thing.
Now why couldn't our government implement a program like this:
The government – responding to a falling birth rate, looming labour-market shortage and shrinking tax base – had offered to give mothers $2,319 for each baby born after July 1 last year.Heck if the Aussie's can do it why can't we?
In announcing the payments in May, 2004, Treasurer Peter Costello told the country: “You go home and do your patriotic duty tonight.”
The father of three suggested that two children per couple was not enough to combat the effects of an aging population: “You should have ... one for your husband, one for your wife, and one for your country.”
I guess for Canadians it is just much easier, and more importantly much cheaper, to just pillage the intellectual capital of third world countries.
At least no one can say we aren't efficient.
Along the lines of this topic, have you ever noticed that those who want to make it easier for foreign professionals to immigrate to Canada are often the same people claiming we should increase the amount of foreign aid we provide?
If you are one of these people, have you ever considered that you are stealing the best and the brightest of the third world and all you are providing in return are a few token dollars? You get the doctor and they get $5 worth of medical supplies. Or alternatively, you get the entrepreneur while they get a microloan to start a business making sandals out of old tires.
Very gracious of us. Very gracious indeed.
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Have ever wondered how Nealenews finds articles like this?
Personally I suspect he runs a bunch of Google searches like this one every morning. I could be wrong but what are the odds of that?
Without further investigation I guess we'll just have to leave it as one of the great mysteries of the modern world.
How come environmentalists never protest or start boycotts to stop the yearly coyote cull, like they do the seal hunt?
I'm sure not being able to raise money through donations has anything to do with it. I mean nobody feels sorry for the poor coyote, so how is one supposed to raise money for that cause? Besides how much fun would it be if you didn't have the funds to buy ships or fly around in helicopters or hold a decent press conference anyway?
Environmentalists claim that the power of the almighty dollar is the reason the federal government allows the seal hunt to continue, but they fail to realize that the power of the almighty dollar has just as big a hold over their pathetic globetrotting asses as it does the government's, but that just my opinion.
Today the organizers of the Canadian seafood boycott have started a campaign of radio and print ads in the Atlantic region to try and stop the seal hunt, the ads, especially the radio ones, come across as arrogant and condescending. The organizers claim that their repeated warnings have gone unanswered, and that it is time for the people of the region to pay for not heeding their advice.
The organizers claim that the seafood boycott will cut the market for Canadian seafood in the United States and the European Union, Canada's two largest markets, anywhere from 25 to 50%. Here is a section of the print ad that appeared in my local newspaper,
"We urge fishermen, fishing industry executives, and responsible elected officials to make every effort to persuade the federal government to end the commercial seal hunt as quickly as possible in order to reduce the unnecessary and prolonged financial hardship the Canadian seafood boycott will inflict."In my opinion, most of the goals of the boycott are just wishful thinking on behalf of the organizers. But just to make sure, I urge all Canadians who resent outsiders meddling in our business to buy seafood marked with a Product of Canada label for supper this week as a show of solidarity and support for the Atlantic region. Bacon wrapped scallops anyone?
crossposted to The Shotgun
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
The stupidity of people is astounding sometimes. Detroit's city council has taken it upon themselves to create a 'black only' entrpreneurial zone in downtown Detroit:
"The idea is to build an 'AfricaTown,' similar to Little Italy and Chinatown," explained Charles Oliver in a recent issue of Reason magazine, referring to the vote by Detroit City Council to spend $30 million a year in public money to develop a blacks-only, race-based district of entrepreneurship in downtown Detroit.Now of course they don't intend to do this by making personal choices as to where to do their business. Oh no. That would be to easy. Instead, like every great idiot with a stupid idea they intend to use taxpayer dollars. $30 million to be exact.
"By a 7-2 vote," reported Oliver, "the council has decreed that only black businessmen and investors can qualify for the money." The concept of this black version of Little Italy originated in a $112,000 report commissioned by the council: "A Powernomics Economic Development Plan for Detroit's Under-Served Majority Population."
Detroit's population is poor, shrinking and overwhelmingly black. By official count, 26 percent of the populace is living below the poverty line and 83 percent of the city's population is black. It's this "under-served majority population," according to the "Powernomics" report, that is being passed up economically by a mixed bag of nonblack newcomers.
More specifically, the report complains that entrepreneurial immigrants from Latin America and the Middle East are opening up too many stores and selling too much of everything to blacks. In doing so, it's alleged that these money-grubbing greenhorns are stealing jobs and business opportunities from blacks.
And the logic of the whole thing, let alone the racial offensiveness of it all, is that they intend to create an entrepreneurial zone by putting the entrepreneurs at a disadvantage. Brilliant!
I would like to make a quick point about something that was said in a conversation that Dana was having with an anonymous reader in the comments section of this post. Anonymous argued that the war in Iraq took vital troop numbers away from the war in Afghanistan, which allowed Bin Laden to escape into Pakistan.
"We used over 100,000 more troops for Iraq than Afghanistan. Had we used that many troops in Afghanistan we would have gotten Bin Laden."That is one of the biggest misconceptions about the war in Afghanistan to date, just because John Kerry said it doesn't mean its true. After reading several accounts of the actual special forces who were on the ground in the Toro Boro region, I learned that larger troop numbers would have hindered the hunt for Osama, instead of helped.
Given the rough topography of Toro Boro, conventional forces would not have been mobile enough to have been of any use. That's why smaller groups of special forces, that were used to operating in such conditions, were used. A large lumbering force would only have given Osama more time to make his escape.
That, plus very little was know about the region, that is main reason why the Afghans were used instead of American troops, they were fine scouts. The Afghans knew the area, although they were somewhat untrustworthy, the military had no other options at hand. As always, the special forces had to try and make the best of a less than perfect situation.
So for Anonymous to use the drain on troop strength in Afghanistan to support his or her case against the war in Iraq is just wrong. The shifting of resources from Afghanistan to Iraq had no effect on the outcome of the hunt for Bin Laden, but that's just the opinion of the people who were actually involved.
Monday, March 28, 2005
Given all of China's sabre-rattling concerning Taiwan lately why doesn't Taiwan just build a couple nukes? Surely they have the expertise.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
I have uncovered an evil plot by all of the world's photographers to make Canada's Prime Minister, Paul Martin look like an absolute idiot. At first I didn't believe it myself, but then I did a search of the web and found that in every picture taken of Paul Martin, he in fact does look like an absolute idiot.
This can't just be a coincidence, some people do take a bad picture from time to time, but it simple defies the odds that our beloved Prime Minister would look like a complete boob every time his picture is taken. All photographers must be in a some sort of plot to discredit our PM, throwing out the good pictures of him and only giving the worst ones to their editors for publication.
Only one question remains. Who could possibly behind such an evil plot?
Friday, March 25, 2005
Well I watched the American version of The Office last night and I must say it looks like it will be pretty good. I'm not sure if it will end up as good as the original British version but a good start is better than nothing. The British version seems to get funnier the more you know the characters and I suspect the American version will be the same.
I don't watch a lot of TV simply because there really isn't much worth watching aside from March Madness of course. Anyways, if you find yourself in front of the tube check out either of these shows.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
After Atlantic Canada has gotten rid of all our harp seals, the next species we are going to target in our grand plan to do away with nature, is the pigeons. Die pigeons die! Full story here
The next thing you're going to hear is that the environuts everywhere are going to boycott all of the regions pigeon based products. The economy will be devastated!
What kind of parents let their children go over to spend the night at Micheal Jackson's place in the first place?
Monday, March 21, 2005
Poor Paul. I often wonder if he even understands what the purpose of his job is. Getting ready to make some headlines, Paul is preparing to shake down BusHitler later this week:
Prime Minister Paul Martin will discuss Canada's opposition to drilling for oil in an Alaskan refuge during talks with U.S. President George W. Bush this week.Now it isn't that I find this pathetic, it is just that I suspect there is a huge number of Canadians out there that believe Paul is being tough on our southern neighbour. Now if we turn it the other way, I wonder how the average Canadian would react if an American president came here and told us what to do with our natural resources?
“The Prime Minister will use the time available to raise matters of bilateral concern, and that includes ANWAR [Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refugee],” a federal government official told reporters at a technical briefing Monday in Ottawa.
Just for spite I'ld love to see BusHitler give Martin grief about Canada's oil industries in Alberta or Newfoundland. Shut them down damnit and to hell with the consequences! At the least it would get that holier-than-thou look off of Martins face.
I wonder if Paul will sulk if BusHitler tells him to stuff it? Some tears maybe?
Anyways, I also got a kick out of this quote:
Last week, the U.S. Senate voted narrowly in favour of allowing oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWAR) — a move long opposed by the Canadian government because of its potential impact on the fragile northern environment. The U.S. President has been pushing to open up the area for drilling to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign crude imports.I'ld just like to know what exactly allows this region to qualify as a "fragile northern environment"? The author of the report doesn't seem to think it important to elaborate on. But still, how is a frozen landscape with a little bit of greenery considered fragile? Is it more fragile than the neighbourhood I live in?
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Democracy In Iraq gives us his thoughts two years after Saddam was removed from power:
Before March 20, 2003, we were in a dungeon. We did not see the light. Saddam Hussain was crushing Iraq's spirit slowly, we longed for his end, but knew we could not challenge him, or his diabolical seed who would no doubt follow him and continue his generation of hell on Earth.Wasn't all this about oil or something like that? He must be talking about a different Iraq.
Since then, we now have hope. Hope is not a tangible thing, but it is something, it is more than being blinded by darkness, by being stuck in a mental pit without any future.
Hope has been the greatest product of the last two years. No doubt, many have died, many have died by accident or due to crimes. But their sacrifices are not, and will not be for nothing. I refuse to let it be, and my countrymen stand with me.
Our cities are smoking, our graveyards full, and terrorists in our midst. But we are not defeated. We are not down, we are not regretful. We are not going to surrender. For all that the two years have brought, the greatest thign they have given us is a future, and a view of the finish line.
angry_in_t_o seems to have hit a nerve with one of his local CBC radio personalities.
You're got to love it when an American draft dodger tells a Canadian that they aren't "Canadian" enough and should move to the United States. I guess to some people, a person's political leanings are more important than their nationality.
Thursday, March 17, 2005
A recent survey conducted by COMPAS Inc., for the National Post, shows that the majority of Canadian's have political positions closer to the Conservative party's views, than they do to the Liberals. Full story here
In seven of the 10 statements, the voters positioned their views closer to the perceived Conservative position than the perceived Liberal position, which included preserving the traditional definition of marriage, tougher criminal sentencing laws and freedom of choice in health care.
Some of you may think that the survey is complete crap, but from my personnel experiences, I think that this survey is dead on target. I have a couple of close friends that fall into this category, that have voted Liberal their whole lives but when it comes to the issues, they are conservative at heart. They vote Liberal only because of their preconceived notions, not on party policy or facts.
[Via North Western Winds]
You scored 36% Cardinal, 30% Monk, 35% Lady, and 81% Knight!
You are the hero. Brave and bold. You are strong and utterly selfless.
You are also a pawn to your superiors and will be lucky if you live
very long. If you survive the Holy wars you are thrust into you will be
praised for your valor and opportunities both romantic and financial
will become available to you.
Link: The Who Would You Be in 1400 AD Test written by KnightlyKnave on Ok Cupid.
... but I do.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
The United Nations has been trying very hard to come up with a new slogan for the organization, here are a few of the ones that are being kicked around.
- If a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy can't solve it, then it's best left festering.
- Genocidal dictators, beware our harshly worded letters.
Those are just a couple of the many that are on display over at John Hawkins' blog, if you want to see the rest, check them out here.
I have heard on several occasions now, from a couple of former politicians, that the biggest problem with healthcare today in Canada is that people are overusing the system by seeking medical treatment for every single little problem they have, instead of just when it is absolutely necessary. Isn't that reassuring? Never mind the bloated government bureaucracy, just chalk up healthcare's woes to human nature, I'm sure that problem is fixable.
Go figure, people are abusing a "free" service provided by the government, never heard of that before. This explanation reminds me of the time when some guy from the Communist Party of Canada was trying to explain to me how communism was the ideal system of government, he said that communism just didn't work very well when it is applied to humans. Which to me is totally retarded, because who else are you going to apply it to?
Is that what those former politicians were trying to tell me, that our socialist healthcare system is very good in theory, it just preforms poorly when humans are involved? If so, how bad are things going to get before the system is reformed?
crossposted to The Shotgun
The stupidity of the average reader of The Globe And Mail (further refered to as the G&M) continues to astonish. Today's poll question asks:
Do you think that the U.S. 'war on terrorism' has actually strengthened radical groups such as al-Qaeda?And the results are: yes at 74% and no at 26%.
I always find it amusing that Canadians love to point out how uninformed Americans are. We're always told that Americans only elected G.W. because they didn't know any better and that they had been brainwashed by Foxnews.
Of course all these jabs imply that Canadians could never fall for such silly tricks. We're worldly, educated, wise beyond our years... blah, blah, blah.
So how well are Canadians, or at a minimum the twits who read the G&M, informed? From Time we have:
Al-Zarqawi's aide also revealed that his boss, after pondering the absence of attacks in the U.S. in recent years, concluded that a lack of "willing martyrs" was to blame.So we have Zarqawi whining about a lack of bombers and these fools think G.W. has made the world less safe? I see. Does the fact that the only time we see bin Laden these days is when he is telling us who he endorses for president mean anything? And how about the fact that there have been no other terror attacks in the U.S. since 9/11 (knock on wood)?
So given all this we have three possible explanations for the poll results which are: 1) that the average G&M reader is a total idiot, 2) the G&M is failing to inform it's readers, or 3) the average G&M reader spend their lives shivering in terror at the world outside their door and conclude that their cowardice must be George's fault.
Take your pick.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Vancouver based agency, The Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society has been hired to begin training Iraqi journalists in Lebanon as early as next month. The journalists will be trained to cover elections and conduct interviews, seeing as most Iraqis had no experience doing such things under Saddam Hussein's rule, this task will be an important step in helping democracy take a firm hold in the region. Full story here.
"Developing an independent and free media is, I think, a critical component of both creating a democratic society as well as creating civil society. Without that, Iraq's not going to make the transformation from an authoritarian state to a democratic one." - Karim Alrawi, director of international media programsI wish there were more stories in the daily news telling us of Canadian involvement in helping rebuild Iraq. But I guess I shouldn't complain too much, patience is a virtue after all, slowly more of these positive stories are coming to light as time goes by. Which is important, especially now that the tide has shifted in the favor of democracy and freedom, we should do all we can as a country to help make sure that it doesn't have a chance to reverse.
Apparently impressed by Jean Chretien's grandstanding at the inquiry into the sponsorship scandal, Micheal Jackson, the King of Pop, is planning to produce his balls as evidence in his child molestation case.
All I can say is that we should all pray that the courtroom's sketch artist has the flu that day and a replacement can't be found. Considering how weird Jackson is, that story is almost strange enough to be true.
Dave Konig writes today on the Pinewood Derby that each Cub Scout troop holds every year. I remember my first derby and I figured I would send the story to Dave for his amusement.
Here is a modified version of what I sent him...
Growing up Bob and myself were best friends. We lived across the street from each other and we probably spent more time with each other than we did our own families. Regardless, like young boys do, we competed at everything. I mean everything. It was like we were caught in a life and death struggle for superiority.
Anyways, I spent a lot time at my grandparents and when it came time for the Pinewood Derby my grandfather was blessed (or cursed) with the opportunity to help me make my racer. My grandfather was pretty old by this time and when I showed him my block of wood and all the plans I had for it he probably thought I was half crazy. Regardless, he cut and glued and before you knew it I had a shiny red race car with a fancy plastic roof on it and a little lego man stuffed into the drivers compartment. It was certainly a piece of work. I thought so.
Off to the derby I went with Bob and his father. Bob's car was a classic racer. Dark green (if I remember correctly), contoured sides. The bugger always had the nicest stuff. Damn him!
I remember standing around kind of bummed out that everyone was there with their father except me. My parents divorced when I was young and so it kind of sucked that everyone was there with their fathers except me. Trust me, kids notice these things.
Anyways, they let us do a test run before the actual competition. The test run included me, Bob, and two other cars. Well lets just say that it didn't go to well for my racer. No graphite for my car. No oil either. The wheels on my car rattled like nothing you've ever seen. The other cars zoomed down the track, including Bob's, leaving mine behind. I can't remember exactly how long it took but it must have taken my car 15-20 seconds to get to the bottom.
I have no idea how old I was at the time but I was so embarrassed. As I said, Bob and I competed at everything and it was nearly to much to take. But Bob's father was always prepared and as I was carrying my car, along with my little broken heart, he pulled out a little can of oil and greased up the wheels of my racer.
Needless to say it really didn't get my spirits up. I was a kid and at that moment I was a loser. Not good at all.
To keep the story short, the competition went ahead and wouldn't you know that out of all the racers mine managed to finish in third place. I can't remember what place Bob finished but the bastard will probably reply to this saying that his racer finished in first or second place. Ah... screw him!
That would have be a decent end to the day if it had ended there but of course it didn't. They were giving out the little badges for the fastest cars and for a bunch of other categories. Nicest car and so on.
Well for some bizarre reason my racer won in the funniest looking category! What the bloody hell! I thought my car was awesome. I was baffled but with a serious face I went up and received my badge. The nerve of them! Don't you think they should have at least checked that I was trying to make a funny looking racer before giving me the award?
Anyways, all in all though it was a pretty good day. For me, it was one of those days that every once in a while seems to come back into focus. I have no idea if Bob or his father remembers any of it but I remember it all. Funny how that works eh?
I have no idea why I remember it but I do think about that day every once in a while. My grandfather died soon after that so maybe that explains it. Who knows?
My own father wasn't there but maybe I remember it because, in many ways, Bob's father was... well, my father as well.
Monday, March 14, 2005
Our ruling elites seem to believe that they have a foolproof means of covering their screwups:
The federal sponsorship inquiry, now under the shadow of a sweeping government lawsuit against key witnesses, heard Monday that a former ad executive blindly signed off on paperwork that led to massive commissions for his boss's firm.So if I understand this correctly our ruling elite can cover their rears by 'not remembering' what documents they signed? Interesting...
Former Lafleur Communication vice-president Stephane Guertin told the inquiry he doesn't remember closing a deal related to a television series on hockey great Maurice Richard — a deal that netted a $112,500 commission for the advertising company.
A report by the federal auditor-general last year found Lafleur Communication took the commission for simply delivering a $750,000 cheque to Via Rail in early 2000 related to the rail carrier's sponsorship of the series.
Mr. Guertin was confronted with his signature on documents that finalized the deal. But he couldn't remember signing the paperwork and said he didn't remember working on the Richard project — prompting an indignant interjection from presiding judge John Gomery.
I wonder what would happen if I sent in my taxes claiming that my net income for 2004 was eight dollars? Hey, if I get audited couldn't I just claim that I don't remember signing the forms?
We are all equal before the law aren't we?
crossposted to The Shotgun
Kyoto costs ballooning, ministers warned.
I'ld make some sort of dumbassed comment about this but it isn't really worth it anymore.
Sunday, March 13, 2005
If you think Sunday afternoon is a great time to sit around and take it easy, spend some down time to be along with your thoughts. Then do I ever have a thought for our male and lesbian readers to dwell on, check out this quote from Angelina Jolie. Full story here.
"I absolutely love women and find them incredibly sexy, I've loved women in the past and slept with them. I think if you love and want to pleasure a woman, particularly if you are a woman yourself, then you know how to do things a certain way."That's way more interesting than politics, especially to some of our daily readers from Australia, right Joe.
[ Via Neale News ]
Friday, March 11, 2005
Fred has a nice take on the difficulties of evolution theory. In short he equates people who believe in evolution with people who believe in creationism.
He basically begins with a few questions:
(1) Life was said to have begun by chemical inadvertence in the early seas. Did we, I wondered, really know of what those early seas consisted? Know, not suspect, hope, theorize, divine, speculate, or really, really wish.He also points out what distinguishes evolution from other sciences:
The answer was, and is, “no.” We have no dried residue, no remaining pools, and the science of planetogenesis isn’t nearly good enough to provide a quantitative analysis.
(2) Had the creation of a living cell been replicated in the laboratory? No, it hadn’t, and hasn’t.
(3) Did we know what conditions were necessary for a cell to come about? No, we didn’t, and don’t.
(4) Could it be shown to be mathematically probable that a cell would form, given any soup whatever? No, it couldn’t, and can’t. (At least not without cooking the assumptions.)
Early on, I noticed three things about evolution that differentiated it from other sciences (or, I could almost say, from science). First, plausibility was accepted as being equivalent to evidence. (And of course the less you know, the greater the number of things that are plausible, because there are fewer facts to get in the way.) Again and again evolutionists assumed that suggesting how something might have happened was equivalent to establishing how it had happened. Asking them for evidence usually aroused annoyance and sometimes, if persisted in, hostility.The article is a bit long but it is definitely worth the read as he points out the problems with both creationism and evolution.
As an example, it seems plausible to evolutionists that life arose by chemical misadventure. By this they mean (I think) that they cannot imagine how else it might have come about. (Neither can I. Does one accept a poor explanation because unable to think of a good one?) This accidental-life theory, being somewhat plausible, is therefore accepted without the usual standards of science, such as reproducibility or rigorous demonstration of mathematical feasibility. Putting it otherwise, evolutionists are too attached to their ideas to be able to question them.
Consequently, discussion often turns to vague and murky assertion. Starlings are said to have evolved to be the color of dirt so that hawks can’t see them to eat them. This is plausible. But guacamayos and cockatoos are gaudy enough to be seen from low-earth orbit. Is there a contradiction here? No, say evolutionists. Guacamayos are gaudy so they can find each other to mate. Always there is the pat explanation. But starlings seem to mate with great success, though invisible. If you have heard a guacamayo shriek, you can hardly doubt that another one could easily find it. Enthusiasts of evolution then told me that guacamayos were at the top of their food chain, and didn’t have predators. Or else that the predators were colorblind. On and on it goes. But…is any of this established?
I've always had problems with evolution for the simple reasons that I couldn't make the numerous leaps of faith that the theory requires.
At the moment my thoughts on the matter probably fall more under the intelligent design system. I don't say that because intelligent design theory is more scientifically reliable or exact because it certainly isn't. I guess on the whole intelligent design basically acknowledges what we don't know and doesn't attempt to guess at the answers unlike evolution theory does.
Anyways, it's good reading. Check it out.
Thursday, March 10, 2005
This whole reality television thing has gotten out of hand, Iraqis now even have their own version of it. The show is called, Terror in the Grip of Justice, and it features insurgents being filmed admitting to crimes that they have committed against Iraqis. These confessions usually take place during interrogation, which some believe may or may not be scripted. Full story here.
[ Via Neale News ]
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
Not only do I hate The Globe And Mail but I've also come to hate their readership.
Today's poll question is:
Do you think the Bush administration's aggressive Middle East policies have had a net positive effect on the entire region?The results so far are 34% saying yes with 66% saying no.
Are these people so blinded by their hatred of G.W. Bush and the United States that they would rather have the people of the Middle East live according to the whims of their local dictator?
They should be ashamed of themselves.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
I have always suspected that celebrities who support anti-seal hunt organizations were most likely a little uniformed when it came to knowing all the facts about why steps are taken to control the seal population here in the Maritimes. After reading about Richard Dean Anderson, better and probably only known as TV's MacGyver, I am convinced that my suspicions are right on the mark.
While Anderson was in Charlottetown yesterday, he held a press conference in support of anti-seal hunt group, the Sea Sheperd Conversation Society, and practically admitted that he knew very little or nothing at all about the seal hunt. Here are a couple of his quotes,
"I'm at the launching point for my education of the issues,"
"I haven't seen it up close and personal yet, I'm looking to get a feeling of what it is all about."So at this point, it sounds like all Anderson seems to know is that seals are cute and are being killed by humans for no reason other than sport. A little off the mark, but that is apparently enough to make you a director and a public spokesman for a anti-seal hunt organization such as the Sea Sheperd Conversation Society.
I guess its not all that important to get all the facts straight before you support a cause, because it really doesn't matter that seals are very much the same as locusts when their population gets out of control. They tend to overwhelm their surroundings and make life difficult for humans by devouring other major marine species that we depend on for food and income.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that every seal needs to be killed, that's just foolish, the seal hunt is only about controlling the population, not eliminating it. But it rubs me the wrong way when some high minded celebrity seems to care more about seals than the well being and economic sustainability of an entire region of humans. Call me crazy, but the well being of seals comes after humans in my book.
crossposted to The Shotgun
We are slowly starting to see the gears of liberals and progressives trying to turn the tragedy in Mayerthorpe into a legislative opportunity.
As Bob said a few days ago we had a former Liberal telling us that if marijuana was legalized that the four officers may still be alive. And today we have Thomas S. Axworthy telling us what a great job the gun registry did in preventing this crime.
If it sounds confusing well it is. Axworthy first tells us:
Gun-related violence stalks the land. Last Thursday, four Mounties were killed in central Alberta, the force's biggest loss of life in 120 years.Without missing a beat he gradually works his way to:
Initiated by Allan Rock and implemented by Anne McLellan, the registry has been a stunning success, yet it has been given terrible press. Liberals have allowed the Conservatives to define the debate and it is time to retake the high ground.I know that we are on the topic of marijuana here but does Axworthy have to smoke the stuff before he writes this blather?
First off we have had the "forces biggest loss of life in 120 years". Fine. If the gun registry was such a bleeding success why did this happen now? Shouldn't the gun registry have prevented this? Axworthy apparently doesn't care to tell us.
I also love how Axworthy is all worked up that the gun registry have been given "terrible press". Are events like those in Mayerthorpe the "terrible press" he is talking about?
I honestly can't believe that people like Axworthy get paid to write this foolishness.
Anyways, for a complete fisking check out Let It Bleed.
Monday, March 07, 2005
Joseph Braude writes (free registration required) on how the Internet is changing politics in Arab countries:
The growing phenomenon of Arabic-language blogging makes this awkward truce between citizens and their governments untenable. Blogs, by their very nature, blur the line between private and public expression; bloggers are free to publish their most strident personal views anonymously for all to read--and from the privacy of their own homes. In some Arab countries, like Egypt, because of the dispersed way Internet connections are distributed, it is virtually impossible to curb the continued distribution of this content short of shutting down the country's fixed communications infrastructure altogether. And some of those countries' bloggers seem to know it. One blog went so far as to post a poem in Egyptian vernacular called "We'd like you dead, o President" alongside a photo of Hosni Mubarak on February 11. The first of thirteen posted comments reads, in formal Arabic: "We in the secret police have determined from which site this threat against the person of his Excellency the President originated. We will take the necessary measures to punish whoever carries this out. Wait for us." Rather than cow the bloggers concerned, who perhaps believed the note to be a fake, this seems only to have egged them on. The comment that follows, posted in English, reads, "Oh look, I'm shaking in my little space boots." The comment after that begins with the well-known cyber-acronym "lol" (short for "laughing out loud").Braude's thoughts on how Arab rulers used to exile their opponents are very interesting. As he says, is it wise to exile a dissident if he/she can cause more trouble from another country due to the power of modern technology?
I don't have much to say on this:
Eleven of 13 cars involved in new side-impact crash tests performed by an independent, nonprofit organization earned a “poor,” the lowest of four ratings, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said.I myself drive a small car, a Saturn SC1 to be exact. Yeah I know, it isn't very flashy but at least it gets me to where I need to go.
The Chevrolet Cobalt and the Toyota Corolla earned the second-highest rating of “acceptable” when tested with their optional side air bags. Without them, they earned “poor” ratings.
The vehicles that earned a “poor” rating were the Dodge Neon, Ford Focus and Volkswagen's New Beetle, Hyundai Elantra, Kia Spectra, Mazda 3, Mitsubishi Lancer, Nissan Sentra, Saturn Ion, Suzuki Forenza and Suzuki Aerio. The results were released Sunday.
The institute's test simulates a severe crash. A barrier designed to resemble the front of a pickup or sport utility vehicle hits the side of the vehicle at 50 kilometres an hour. A “poor” rating means a high chance of serious injury in a similar crash.
Anyways, what lesson will the enviro-nuts take from this:
1) Small cars are dangerous and are liable to get you killed.
2) Pickups and SUVs put small car drivers at risk.
I suspect they will go with #2.
With so many idiot blogs still claiming that the invasion of Iraq has been a disaster and that all of the other changes occuring in the Middle East have had nothing to do with the policies of George W. Bush, I figure that I should link to this (free registration required):
In Martyrs' Square here, the scene of many demonstrations in recent weeks, thousands of protesters came Saturday morning to watch a broadcast of Mr. Assad's speech on projection screens, at times booing and jeering, or calling "Liar!" and "Bush sends his greetings!"It seems the Lebanese get it.
To bad our own lefty rejects can't figure it out.
[Via The Corner]
Friday, March 04, 2005
The Premier of Quebec, Jean Charest is calling for a bigger role for his province on the international stage, he wants Canada's federal government to give Quebec exclusive rights over foreign and trade policy. Full story here.
Which is sort of funny, seeing as just the other day I was thinking that Canada should give Dana and I a bigger role in deciding Canada's foreign policy. I don't see any reason for the federal government not to consider it. If Charest wants a bigger say, why not us too?
Nick Taylor, a former senator and onetime leader of the Liberals in Alberta has weighed in on the tragic deaths of four RCMP officers that were gunned down while investigating a marijuana grow operation in the province yesterday, he thinks the officers could possibly still be alive today.
"I'm not saying that the four men would be alive if we had legalized marijuana, but I suspect they might be."That's just plain stupid, RCMP officers have been killed in the line of duty investigating more than just crimes involving marijuana, does that mean they should give up trying to prosecute any criminals at all if there is danger involved?
Maybe Canada should legalize crack cocaine too, or maybe they should stop arresting murders or rapists the next time an RCMP officer gets killed trying to bring someone to justice. Wouldn't the scumbag criminals like that, kill a cop and the government will legalize the activity they were participating in? That would teach em to obey the law.
[Via Neale News ]
... Mark Steyn! I know, I know. I should be sending him a cheque every month. Sorry Mark, but revenue situation here atcanadiancomment doesn't look all that great.
I know I shouldn't pull quotes from one person so often but in a sense this blog is just a means for me to record my thoughts on the world. Twenty years from now I'll be able to check out canadiancomment and say 'Yes sir, those people were as just as idiotic as I remember them'.
Anyways, on to his latest piece (free registration required). Mark lines up the 'Not In Our Name' folks and knocks them all down.
He first takes a piece out of Dominique de Villepin:
A couple of years back, I went to hear Paul Wolfowitz. I knew him only by reputation — the most sinister of all the neocons, the big bad Wolfowitz, the man whose name started with a scary animal and ended Jewishly. In fact, he was a very soft-spoken chap, who compared the challenges of the Middle East with America’s experiments in democracy-spreading after the second world war. He said he thought it would take less time than Japan, and maybe something closer to the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe. I would have scoffed, but he knew so many Iraqis by name — not just Ahmed Chalabi, but a ton of others.Does this not remind you of anyone? I'll give you a hint... he has a home in Ottawa. Doesn't help?
Around the same time, I bumped into Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister and man of letters. He was just back from Egypt, where he’d been profoundly moved when he’d been asked to convey the gratitude of the Arab people to President Chirac for working so tirelessly to prevent a tragic war between Christianity and Islam. You don’t say, I said. And, just as a matter of interest, who asked you to convey that? He hemmed and hawed and eventually said it was President Mubarak. Being a polite sort, I rolled my eyes only metaphorically, but decided as a long-term proposition I’d bet Wolfowitz’s address book of real people against Villepin’s hotline to over-the-hill dictators. The lesson of these last weeks is that it turns out Washington’s Zionists know the Arab people a lot better than Europe’s Arabists.
Ah screw it, Paul Martin isn't worth wasting the electrons on. Spending one's time sucking up to the dictators of China or whoever happens to have a few dollars lying around must be exhausting work. Someone has to do it. It might as well be our Prime Minister.
Sorry I got off track.
Before Mark calls it a day, he also smacks around the 'peace brigade' for a while:
The other day I found myself, for the umpteenth time, driving in Vermont behind a Kerry/Edwards supporter whose vehicle also bore the slogan ‘FREE TIBET’. It must be great to be the guy with the printing contract for the ‘FREE TIBET’ stickers. Not so good to be the guy back in Tibet wondering when the freeing thereof will actually get under way. For a while, my otherwise not terribly political wife got extremely irritated by these stickers, demanding to know at a pancake breakfast at the local church what precisely some harmless hippy-dippy old neighbour of ours meant by the slogan he’d been proudly displaying decade in, decade out: ‘But what exactly are you doing to free Tibet?’ she demanded. ‘You’re not doing anything, are you?’ ‘Give the guy a break,’ I said back home. ‘He’s advertising his moral virtue, not calling for action. If Rumsfeld were to say, “Free Tibet? Jiminy, what a swell idea! The Third Infantry Division go in on Thursday”, the bumper-sticker crowd would be aghast.’Indeed.
But for those of us on the arrogant unilateralist side of things, that’s not how it works. ‘FREE AFGHANISTAN’. Done. ‘FREE IRAQ’. Done. Given the paintwork I pull off every time I have to change the sticker, it might be easier for the remainder of the Bush presidency just to go around with ‘FREE [INSERT YOUR FETID TOTALITARIAN BASKET-CASE HERE]’. Not in your name? Don’t worry, it’s not.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
A lot of media sources in Canada would like the population to believe that the United States is the only country in the world that is interested in ballistic missile defense, and that they are going to have to go it alone now that Paul Martin has declined their request to participate in the program.
Well that's simply not the case, to date Britain, Australia, Russia, Japan, South Korea and Denmark have agreed to join the scheme or are in discussions with Washington about full cooperation in the project. Makes you wonder why the Liberals and a lot of the misinformed population think its a great idea to be standing on the outside looking in. I guess we can always count on the French to save us if anything bad ever happens to us.
It's no sercet that Yasser Arafat and his cronies in the Palestinian Authority tended to wast and/or steal large portions of aid money that was donated to them by the international community, but I always found it hard to put into perspective just how big of an opportunity the Palestinian people were missing out on because of the PA's leadership. That is until I found out how much aid money, per capita, the Palestinians were actually receiving from the international community compared to some other countries that were given much less aid over the years and turned out just fine.
The amounts to say the least were startling, the PA's share of aid to be spent in the territories reached or exceeded $200 per capita a year, compare that to the amounts received by Taiwan and South Korea, which received between $50 to $75 per capita a year and you get to see a little more clearly how much money Arafat and his cronies actually stole or wasted. Even go back a little further in history to the Marshall Plan, where countries such as Germany and Japan received just over $100 per capita per year in aid money.
So Arafat received twice as much aid money as Japan, Germany, Taiwan and South Korea did to rebuild or built their states, and what do the Palestinians have to show for it?
I've been on the topic of American law a bit lately and since it's a pretty dry subject I thought I could liven it up with a bit of satire. Funnies... begin:
In a far-reaching decision that will likely create complicated consequences for the American livestock and wedding-planning industries, the Supreme Court this morning ruled 5-4 that all US marriage dowries "must include three non-diseased oxen."Other highlights include:
Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy cited "the weight of the expansive penumbra surrounding the historically emerging and prevailing opinions of tribal shamans from Lesotho to Myanamar" in issuing the historic ruling in American Cattleman Association vs. Modern Bride, Helverson, et al.
In a scathing and sometimes caustic dissent, Judge Antonin Scalia wrote "Holy. Freakin'. Sh*t."
-- Citing EU and Belgian case law, the Court declared that signage on U.S. Interstate Highways must be translated to both French and Flemish by 2007.[Via Right Wing News]
-- The ruling overturned a 7th Circuit decision by declaring "The First Rule of Fight Club" unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds.
-- By a 5-4 margin, it reversed death sentences for prisoners convicted of crimes committed while juveniles; however, the Court ruled that states may voluntarily terminate prisoners as "extremely late-term abortions" under Roe v. Wade.
-- In a surprise finding, the Court ruled itself unconstitional; but, citing the tradition of international courts ignoring US court rulings, said that this ruling itself was unconstitutional.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
I just finished watching the Dennis Miller Show and his panel discussion was on the current hearings on the 'separation of church and state' in the US Supreme Court.
I'm certainly not an expert on American law, I'm not even an expert on Canadian law, but I have a few beefs with the debate and the positions being taken. Now I've got no beefs with people who think the United States is essentially a secular country and that it should not have any references to God on government property. That is a straight forward position and one that can be argued based on it's merits.
My beef is with the people who claim that the entire 'separation of church and state' clause forbids any and all such references. These people have to get a grip. There is no such clause. The constitution clearly forbids the federal government from instituting a national religion but that is it. Now once again, you can argue the semantics of the actual wording but that can only get a person so far.
The simple fact is that the people who wrote the constitution did not have the same idea of 'separation of church and state' that is presently promoted. The people who wrote the constitution were members of the American government for 30 or 40 years. These are the same men who commissioned and built the majority of the legal precedents, monuments, buildings, and institutions, in America.
Simply put, how did all of the references to God become a part of American law if it violated what the writers of the constitution intended? Or put another way, why is the interpretation of a legal scholar today more authoritative than that of the actual individuals who wrote the legal principles in dispute?
If the dispute is about what kind of country American is going to be in the future then that is fine and should be debated. But to frame the debate in a manner that assumes the American founders intended that the government never refer to God, is not only denying history but is also debating in very bad faith. No pun intended.
Andrew Coyne discusses Canada's position on ballistic missle defence and sums it all up very nicely:
Then, as now, the Prime Minister had no real objection to Canadian participation. Then, as now, Canada did not take a principled stand, but waffled and fudged until the last possible minute. Then, as now, we were not being asked for much more than moral support, and then, as now, the matter was finally decided on the basis of internal Liberal politics and the latest poll out of Quebec.Indeed.
So the damage will be redoubled, the more so for the hopes that had been invested in Mr. Martin. We could have taken our place beside the United States, Great Britain and Australia, the great alliance that fought and won two world wars and to whom literally dozens of countries owe their freedom. Instead, who are our new best friends? The Chinese, the Russians, the Germans and the French, who between them have never liberated a single country, including their own. How very sad. How unspeakably silly.
According to Jane Tabor, the Liberals are planning to concentrate on 'the economy, the environment and global issues' in order to win a majority when the next election is called. According to Tabor:
The Prime Minister will attempt to concentrate on governing in just three major areas -- the economy, the environment and global issues, according to a senior government source.I'm just curious to know how likely is it that the Liberals could win a majority? Given the current alignment in Canadian politics I find it very unlikely that Canada will see a majority party in the next couple of years.
This new and focused approach would attempt to answer critics who have called Mr. Martin indecisive and labelled him "Mr. Dithers." It would allow him to deliver in the three areas, "global, green and the economy . . . where he is comfortable and Canadians are comfortable with him," the source said.
Liberals believe Finance Minister Ralph Goodale's budget, and Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's support of it, have bought them a full year of governing.
This would give them time to craft a tax-cut budget that could help them win a majority at the polls in the spring of 2006, according to a senior Liberal.
Perhaps the Bloc could implode but I find that unlikely. I suspect they will lose seats the next time around but not enough to grant the Liberals a majority. And I suppose the Conservatives could implode as well but once again I think the odds of that are pretty slim.
If I was a betting man, which I'm not, I'ld bet that the results of any election called within a year won't be much different than the 2004 results.
[Via NORMAN'S SPECTATOR]
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
We're all going to die of cancer! The environment! Obesity! Your drinking water is killing you! Second hand smoke is killing you!
OK, maybe not (free registration required):
Americans are living longer than ever before — for an average of 77.6 years — and the life expectancy of men is drawing closer to that of women, according to government statistics released Monday.I wonder, when was the last time average life expectancy declined over a five year period? I suspect not since WWII or the influenza outbreak of 1918.
Death rates from conditions such as heart disease and cancer appear to be declining, while those from others, such as Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease, have risen slightly.
The report, released by the government's National Center for Health Statistics, is based on more than 2.4 million death certificates issued in 2003, the latest year for which figures are available. The number represents about 93% of all certificates.
The statistics revealed that life expectancy had increased by nearly four months from the 2002 figure of 77.3 years.
So why is it that the nightly news always insists on telling me that my life is hanging by a thread?
From Kate we have the Iraqi Truth Project. Check out the movie trailer linked at the top of the page.
As I've always thought, and the trailer shows, anyone who opposed this war for political gain and/or lefti 'peace and justice' reasons are worthless maggots.