Archive for: June 2008

This is actually by a cartoonist named Igor Kodenko, from the Ukraine.  To be honest with you, I had NO idea that they knew anything at all about our HRCs over there.  Go figure…

Damn!

For those of you that don’t go there much, pop on over to the National Post’s Full Comment blog and get a good look at Tarek Fatah letting Machiavellian maggot Mohamed Elmasry — and “his political apprentice Khurrum Awan” — have it with both barrels. Fatah, for those of you that don’t know, is one of the few Muslims in Canadian media (Salim Mansur is the only other one that I know of) who has absolutely zero tolerance for Islamofascist bullshit.  His basic message: if you have some kind of problem with freedom of speech… don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

When Mohamed Elmasry declared a few years ago that there was more press freedom in Egypt than in Canada, it took me some time and effort to lift my jaw up from the floor. However, since then I have become accustomed to the outlandish statements and claims of the good science professor from Egypt.

Keep on reading here.

… what the odds are that we’re not allowed to have the first clue who these little bastards are? Not that people haven’t known for a long time what a farce the YCJA is…

Here we have a vid from Dartmouth, NS, showing how three of these little YCJA-shielded pricks ganged up on and robbed a lone kid. They’re always brave in packs, aren’t they? No doubt, the usual suspects will bleat away that they’re just misunderstood, they didn’t have a basketball court nearby, Mike Harris is to blame (even though this is NS, we’re talking about), the little dears shouldn’t have their lives ruined over this, blahblahblah… Tough.

After leaving the victim the three older attackers are joined by four more young boys, the smallest of whom appears to be younger than 10.

The group can be seen quite clearly, hanging out at the corner of Mountain Avenue and Lakeview Drive.

But police say without hearing from the victim, it’s hard to say exactly what happened. Halifax Regional Police spokesman Const. Jeff Carr said the call came in at 7:26 p.m. but the victim was gone from the scene when officers arrived.

“It’s not clear whether it was a robbery,” Const. Carr said. “It’s clearly an assault, but whether it resulted in injuries, you just can’t jump to conclusions.”

Of course you can’t. After all, it’s not like there’s any friggin’ EVIDENCE or anything now, is it? Well, the vid is out there, everybody knows who they are, and the genie’s not going back in the bottle. All the thug-huggers on the planet aren’t a match for a few folks with camcorders. Suck it up.

I don’t like Obambi. This fact is far from secret. So far, in fact, that it couldn’t get to secret if it took a nickel to go to China. The man — and I think I’m taking a dangerous liberty with that word here — is a buffoon. He makes speeches that vaguely promise the moon but he’d be lucky if he could figure out how to deliver green cheese. He hasn’t accomplished a damned thing in his time in the US Senate and his experience, were it expressed as a fraction, would be written as diddly over squat. And before any of the usual suspects start blabbing about “another inexperienced Senator from Illinois,” let me explain one very, very simple little thing to you:

Even on the best God damned day of his life, Barack still wouldn’t be a match for Abe if Lincoln was coming off a three day drunk. Period. The minute — hell, screw that; the SECOND — that the words “God damn America” came out of his sorry piehole, Lincoln would have fistf*cked Jeremiah Wrong right in the mouth! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is everything that you will ever need to know about Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln. Case closed (not that that’ll keep me from shooting my mouth off some more). Lincoln was a man of principles and integrity who stuck to his guns, even if they were pointed at him; Obambi is a smarmy fop with a messianic complex who twists in the wind of public opinion. Lincoln met adversity head-on; Obambi’s a deer in the headlights. Obama’s chumminess with seditious elements has shown him to be a two-faced little pretty boy; Lincoln (who, let’s be honest, was a less than hansom man) once quipped, in all seriousness, “if I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?” You get the idea.

And you know what? Nothing that I’ve written so far in this post means jack. Not a damned word of it. The reason why is simple: I’m Canadian. I don’t live in the U-S of A and I’m not going to be voting in their election, so whatever the hell I think about Obama or McCain or anyone else doesn’t add up to half a fart in a hurricane. My opinion just plain doesn’t matter.

So, what the hell am I shooting my mouth off for, then? Well, to be honest, I rather like the Yanks. There, I said it. Sure, they piss me off every now and then; the softwood lumber thing is a bit of a longtime burr under my saddle and Ann Coulter’s “lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent” crack made me want to bend her over and ram my Shutthef*ckup Stickâ„¢ up her narrow ass until her ears popped, but for the most part, all the Americans I’ve met have all been the nicest folks. And, contrary to popular belief, a hell of a lot more polite than a lot of Canucks I can think of.

So, I like the Yanks (it’s not as if I were the first, after all). I also understand how democracy works. It needs to be healthy and in order for that to be true, the people need to have faith in it. They need to be able to put some faith into their parties, even if that party is (ugh) the Democrats. That’s why I’m writing this: to help the Dems out. Not because I have any love for them, of course, but if they can improve themselves, then the Republicans will have no choice but to either improve in response or be banished to the political wilderness. The end result will be better for everybody, even for us up here in the Great White North®, seeing as how they’re our biggest trading partners and all.

That’s why I’ve decided to help out the donkeys; and I’m going go do it by explaining…

Why Obama Is Doomed To Lose

Dear Jackasses:

There are plenty of reasons not to vote for him; so many that I’m not even going to bother going into them all here. It doesn’t matter, anyway. None of them are the real reason why he’s going to lose. The real irony of it is, that he would lose anyway and it wouldn’t even be his fault. It would be yours, not his. The man could be the greatest political thinker of the generation and he’d still lose.

It’s because he’s a black Democrat.

There, I said it. It may not sound like a very nice thing to say but it’s still the truth and nothing you can do can escape that. Short of an untimely death (unlikely), John McCain is going to be the next President of the United States of America and there’s nothing that you or I or anyone else can do about it. You picked a losing horse.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you should have gone with Billary. She would have lost because she’s a woman Democrat. But I’m not talking about her, I’m talking about Obama, so let’s get on with it.

Borat Obambi’s going to lose because he’s a black Democrat. He’s not going to lose because he’s a Democrat; ya’ll were dumb enough to re-elect Billy-Bob, weren’t ya? I guess you think that it’s because he’s black, then?

WRONG!

Mark well my words on this one, because I’m speaking as someone who’s on the outside, looking in. I really don’t give a damn who you pick to run your country. I’d like you to be wise in your choices, but it’s really your mess to clean up if you blow it, not mine. In America, anyone can grow up to be President; it’s one of the risks you take. That being said, here’s my opinion, as a neutral party who considers himself a fairly keen observer of where American culture has been heading in my lifetime (and even a little bit before): Sometime in the next 20-24 years (five or six elections), if not sooner, the United States WILL have a President who is a woman… or black… or both. Yes, I have someone in mind and no, I’m not gonna tell you who, so shut the hell up.

You see, little Mr. Bananafanafofama isn’t going to lose because he’s black or because he’s a Democrat. He’s going to lose because he’s black AND a Democrat. That combination is political hemlock in the United States. For what it’s worth, to get back to Billary for a second (last time, I promise): being a woman AND a Democrat has the same effect. You boneheads could find yourselves a balck or female version of friggin’ Eisnehower and you still wouldn’t be able to get them elected.

YOU can’t get a black or a woman elected president. YOU. The only, and I mean ONLY, people that you can get elected are white males, and you’ve got no one but yourselves to blame for that. Not a soul. It’s ALL YOUR FAULT! You’ve been busting your asses for years to shackle yourselves to this anchor and now, you’ve got no God damned business acting surprised at your success. ‘Twas long and strong many elections ago, and you have laboured upon it since; ah, ’tis a ponderous chain, my little Ebenezers…

How did you do this to yourselves, you ask? Why can’t you get such a candidate elected? The answer is simple, and it’s going to make you sick: ANY Presidential candidate that you put forward who isn’t a white guy is going to have affirmative action emanating off of them like a stink that would knock flies off a shitwagon. It’s because you’ve been furiously bending yourselves over every barstool in the joint for decades in a frenzied rush to brand yourselves as The Party Of Affirmative Action®. Congratulations, you have succeeded. Now you’ve painted yourselves into a corner that will take you even longer to get out of than it took you to get into. Nice going.

The problem is that the American public thinks something about affirmative action. They think it and talk amongst themselves about it, but not around Leftbot moonbats (they don’t feel like listening to the bullshit). In their minds, it is a very simple yet factual equation:

[affirmative action] = [inferior quality]

They’ve all seen it. Two candidates apply for a job. One has a good education, fine marks, and years of experience in the field; the other did poorly in school, and has never been able to keep a job. Which one got hired? The one that wasn’t a healthy, white, Christian male, of course. It’s bad enough in the workplace, but do you really want some second-rate token (yeah, you heard me) running the country?? You might, but they sure as hell don’t. And that’s where you’re screwed.

Sure, you may have been able to browbeat Geraldine Ferraro quite soundly but her words should have sounded a warning for you. You were only able to get the result you desired because she could be ganged up on; that’s the only real tool you have. But when an American goes in to that booth to vote, they’re all alone with their conscience. There is NO ONE there to harangue them.

They look at that ballot and ask themselves, “is this the best candidate?” If they have to look at it and ask, “is this the best [insert adjective here] candidate?” … Well then, that’s one adjective too many and you’re screwed. They want the BEST candidate for the job, PERIOD, and they don’t give a damn if he/she’s a three-legged, post-menopausal, transsexual whose family tree can be traced back to when a freed slave ancestor married a Cherokee princess. 🙄 Just as long as that pesky adjective doesn’t get shoved in their faces, they’re fine.

You, on the other hand, have wedged that adjective in there so tightly that there’s no prying it loose. You’ve fastened that millstone around your necks and you’re actually stupid enough to be proud of it. Whether you want to admit it or not, Obumble’s been playing the race card all along… and so have you.  In perhaps trying to atone for your past sins, methinks thou dost protest too much.

Hoisted by your own petard.

I hope you enjoyed our little chat; really, I do. And I hope you walk away just a little bit wiser for it. You do your country no service by setting the bar so low for your competition. Good luck getting your act together.

Until then, I’ll be relaxing up here amongst the beavers and igloos and, a few years from now, when it comes on the television, I’ll kick back and crack a cold Canadian beer (that’s “moonshine” to you) and watch the swearing in of the first black/female President of the United States. Another Republican in the White House, because then they win their party’s nomination, nobody at all will wonder if they deserve it or not.

They won’t have to.

I require a good guffaw. You likely could use one, too. Luckily for the both of us, I managed to find one.

All the squawking sheepleoids on the Loopy Left® love to bleat on and on about how c/Conservatives take everything too seriously and have no sense of humour whatsoever. To listen to them, you’d think we were a bunch of stone-faced golems without a funny bone in our bodies. Not so.

As you might know by now, the Tories have decided to respond to Dion’s carbon tax-and-grab in the only way that it really deserves to be responded to: with one hell of a good belly laugh. So get your tail on over to the website at willyoubetricked.ca, and don’t forget to play Tax Tag while you’re there…

(h/t to Reid over at Right from Alberta for the screenshot)

… and get yourself comfy, because this one’s gonna take some time of your day.

First things first: a quick tip o’ the lid to Kate over at SDA for putting something up on this first. It’s a series of posts by Mencius Moldbug over at Unqualified Reservations and it’s not exactly something that you’re likely to file under “light reads” — and you’re sure as hell not going to agree with all of it; I know I don’t — but, as usual, it’s usually the stuff that you have to plough through that gives you the most to think about.

The posts are written as something of an open letter to all those Progressives® out there who have been buggering things up for so long. And no, I haven’t had anywhere near the time to get through all of them yet. Here’s a few excerpts to wet yer whistles, though…

An open letter to open-minded progressives (part 1)

If you are an open-minded progressive, you are probably not a Catholic. (If you are, you probably don’t take the Pope too seriously.) Imagine writing an open letter to Catholics, suggesting ways for them to free their minds from the insidious grip of Rome. That sort of thing is quite out of style these days – and in any case, how would you start? But here at UR, we are never afraid of being out of style. And as for starting, we already have.

Open letter pt. 2: more historical anomalies

Let’s take a look at this independence thing. What exactly is a multilateral declaration of independence? Since it’s not this?

Well, on the sweet and good and true side, MDI seems to involve a change in the ethnicity of government officials. Foreign officials are replaced by native-born officials. Clearly, for example, it would be an outrage for true-born Americans to be governed by a dirty no-good Mex – oh, wait. We’re progressives. We’re not racists. Ethnicity means nothing to us.

OL3: the Jacobite history of the world

“Too weird.” Indeed, weirdness is the mother of doubt. Is it not slightly weird that a twenty-year member of the Church of Hate Whitey could become not only the leading candidate for the Presidency, but the candidate who stands for racial harmony? Is it more weird, or less weird, than the fact that Robert Mugabe had no interest in T.S. Eliot?

The thing is: these things don’t seem weird to me. In the progressive story of the world, they are mysteries. They can be explained, but they need to be explained. In the reactionary story of the world, however, they are firmly in dog-bites-man territory.

OL4: Dr. Johnson’s hypothesis

The proposition is neither new nor mysterious. We’ll call it Dr. Johnson’s hypothesis – from this quip by the great Doctor. Of course this is not a hypothesis in the scientific sense of the word – we cannot prove it, nor will we try. It is just a phrase you can agree with, or not.

The great advantage of Dr. Johnson’s formulation is that it has a pleasant boolean quality. You can agree or disagree. It is pretty hard to be indifferent. Let’s take it for granted that, as a progressive, you disagree, and we’ll try to figure out what might change your mind.

OL5: the shortest way to world peace

So here is my claim about government: as a progressive, your theory of government – its history, its principles, even its present-day structure and operation – is nonsense.

OL6: the lost theory of government

Here are the basics: a government should be secure, effective, and responsible. None of this is rocket science. The only secret is that there is no secret.

Let’s define and analyze these qualities individually, assuming the others in each. When we explain how to make a government responsible, we’ll assume it is secure and effective. When we explain how to make it secure, we’ll assume it is effective and responsible. Etc.

OL7: the ugly truth about government

In fact, dear progressive, you fear and loathe democracy. Moreover, you are right to do so. Representative democracy is a thoroughly despicable system of government. It is dangerous and impractical at best, criminal at worst. And you hate it like the poison it is.

OL8: a reset is not a revolution

But first, let’s nail down our terms. The great power center of 2008 is the Cathedral. The Cathedral has two parts: the accredited universities and the established press. The universities formulate public policy. The press guides public opinion. In other words, the universities make decisions, for which the press manufactures consent. It’s as simple as a punch in the mouth.

The Cathedral operates as the brain of a broader power structure, the Polygon or Apparat – the permanent civil service. The Apparat is the civil service proper (all nonmilitary officials whose positions are immune to partisan politics, also known as “democracy”), plus all those formally outside government whose goal is to influence or implement public policy – ie, NGOs. (There’s a reason NGOs have to remind themselves that they’re “non-governmental.”)

Like I said, it’s long as hell and some of it will likely piss you right off.  But it’ll make you think…