Mother Nature Will Decide

Damn Pacific Ocean not sticking to the script!

Mother Nature. What a bitch.

Scientific American

Dostoevsky As A Revolutionary Conservative

Tolstoy and Dostoevsky were two writers who rejected the new generation of social-liberal emerging in their day . That much becomes apparent reading their works. In fact, I get the distinct feeling they had little patience, if not respect, for liberals.

Liberalism went from defining liberty to adoring authority in a heartbeat.

While Western writers were riding on the liberal carousel in their novels, Russians were less enthused. In their minds, the conservative ones, socialists and liberals generally displayed (violent) traits opposite of their (peaceful) preachings. Moreover, it was liberalism that ultimately paved the way for the evils of communism.  

Touch the vanity of those innumerable friends of humanity and they will set fire to the four comers of the world from petty revenge, like all of us, and to be honest, like myself, vilest of all, for I will bring the fuel for the fire and then run.” Lebedev, The Idiot

Dostoevsky, like all great minds, was mercurial and mischaracterized.

Read more here.

'It' Belongs To The People

I kinda agree the President shouldn't be referring to any of the nation's institutions as "his" as in "my military."

Even for a gaffe machine artist he should be able to avoid this.

Quote Of The Day

"Tolerance is the Last Virtue of a dying Civilization" Aristotle

Obama Will Seek Congressional Approval On Syria

Score one for the people and the Constitution.

I don't know what Obama is up to but the bottom line is, aside from no real threat to national security, he had no real objective once strikes occurred. As much as I'd love it, the USA can't kill all the bad people in the world. They'd need to hire The Avengers and The Justice League to help out.

Heaven knows the evil Syrian regime (it takes a special type of evil to gas innocent children) deserves a good old American style bomb-whooping but is in the best interest of their nation?

The President can't win. By going to Congress, supporters of air strikes are already calling him a coward. I don't think worrying about whether they look weak carries much weight. By carrying out air strikes without boots on the ground is a half-assed measure. When Clinton bombed Kosovo, he bombed it into submission. Would Obama do the same?

The Romans had a saying (if memory serves me correct) that if you didn't go to war with the intention of being ruthless, then don't go to war because you will lose.

The President, nonetheless, is not in an easy spot largely of his own doing.And sure seems to have lost patience with the UN and has coyly mused about maybe by passing it altogether.


He goes in and it doesn't bring the desired results (whatever they may be) America will be blamed. If Turkey, Israel and France feel it's their duty to send Assad a message, then maybe they can lead on this one.

Moral of the story?

Never draw red lines on the sand, kids.

It can mess you up.

Maryland In Paranoidland

Still don't want to believe North America is not awash in excess on its way to being a police state?

Cameras to watch the cameras!


Ancient Chinese Secret


It can't be done!

I have to call my local bureaucrat to tell this is not true! Please tell me they lacked "common sense" and were "extremists!"

Libertarian/classical liberalism in Ancient China.

Sadly, the brilliant and poetic simplicity of voluntary action free of the avarice of state coercion did not prevail in China and the world. It's been an uphill battle ever since.

High five to Skeptical Eye.

Dereliction Of Responsibility Government Style

The city of Rosemere is a cess pool of excessive municipal interference. As parties prepare for the upcoming election in November, I inquired about a new party attempting to wrestle power from the current government.

During the discussion the story of one home and business owner caught my attention. The city has a bylaw whereby the beauty of the city must be upheld which means trees are part of the environment heritage.

No one disputes the majestic beauty of trees must be preserved but is there a limit?

Of course there is where public safety is concerned. You see, trees don't come without their dangers. Rain and snow storms wreak havoc in towns where trees are prevalent. The question becomes who should take precedence - trees or safety?

Enter the story of one family who was concerned about a tree that towered over their roof. One bad storm and the sucker can destroy their home. In Rosemere, a permit is required to cut a tree. In a rational society, the trade off is "I will submit the request under the premise a bureaucrat will NOT potentially damage my home and family."

In this case, the family was turned down!

Guess what. Two months later the tree crashed through the home. The insurance covered the costs but their premiums, naturally, went up.

When they sought compensation from the city they got what basically amounted to a "fuck you."

Two months later the permit was granted but by that point the damage was down and that little fucker bureaucrat still gets to make powerful decisions that DIRECTLY impact the lives of citizens.

No accountability is what degrades a civil society.

Nebraska Police: Heroes!


Heard on the radio someone say the police aren't social workers. True, but they shouldn't act like barbaric retards either. I don't think it takes a social worker to understand when you act uncivil.

I shouldn't get ahead of myself. The dash-cam has yet to be consulted.

Quote Of The Day

"So John Kerry opposed the Vietnam War despite North Vietnamese atrocities... (5,000 civilians rounded up and executed during the Battle of Hue City alone - millions dead when the South finally collapsed).
But! But! A chemical attack that killed approximately 1,000 possibly launched by Assad - definitely a case for war."

John Kerry?

Wait. That's John Kerry? I though it was Thurston Howell III.

Well, let's not forget that all the guys gung ho about Syria wanted to impeach Bush. All of a sudden blood tastes great when it's for the right cause and by the right people.


Everyone seems "terrified" now. 
As Obama attempts to build a coalition - and that's looking shaky at the moment - and says all the right things about international cooperation, the enduring myth about the 2003 Iraq War is that it was unilateral. No it wasn't. Four countries committed troops while 36 others were involved in various capacities. Not only that, 71% of the U.S. media and 64% supported the war as well as Democrats.

In fact, there was more popular support for Iraq than there is Syria.  

Quebec Largest Welfare Province

Interesting study titled More of the Same? The Position of the Four Largest Canadian Provinces in the World of Welfare Regimes with not all too surprising conclusions.

For example, Quebec clearly has the largest welfare apparatus whereas Alberta maintains a smaller one. Ontario and British Columbia are more balanced.

Quebec is more European in its outlook (a mix of Scandinavian and Southern European policies) while Alberta more "ultraliberal" along American lines. But all four provinces remain distinct in their realities of operating within a Canadian context.

For example, while Alberta shares similar attributes with, say, Texas it's still more to the "left." Which is why I always laugh whenever I hear that Alberta is "extreme."

Ontario (like B.C.) has a very interesting voting history straddling between Liberal, Conservative and NDP which basically left a legacy whereby no specific ideology or party dominates.

Worth the read.


About Quebec. It's often asserted that in the event of independence, we can kiss our welfare programs good-bye because with it we lose equalization payments. Nationalists think this is nonsense since we pay for our programs through income taxes (which rings hollow to me) pointing out that Quebec doesn't receive that much from Ottawa on a per capita basis (which again, is playing with the numbers a little - among the big provinces, Quebec receives the most and is rightly considered a have-not province).

As you can tell, I fall more in line with the 'where are we gonna get the money?' crowd.

If you're a socialist student protestor turned politician, there's no problem. You'll just angle to expropriate income through taxes to pay for it.

When Governance Is Paternalistic And Arrogant

Transparency is not exactly Canada's strong suit when it comes to disclosing information to the public. 

Witness the PCB story on the West Island when the PQ, in all their infinite wisdom, thought it proper to not tell the people since the situation wasn't serious. Of course it wasn't, PCB's are not a danger to the public but, hey, why miss a chance to sensationalize in the media?

Yet, despite the overblown situation it didn't prevent the government from giving all sorts of ultimatums to the company which were subsequently ignored. No kidding.



British Vote Nyet To Syria

"Prime Minister David Cameron said on Friday he regretted the failure of the British parliament to support military action in Syria but that he hoped President Barack Obama would understand the need to listen to the wishes of the people."


Obama hasn't really listened to Congress, paid much attention to the Constitution or the wished of the American people as President so they'll find out soon enough.


The unintended consequences of Obamacare are kicking in - and it hasn't even been fully implemented yet! Racked and corroded with all sorts of exemptions, implementation delays, and even anger, the discussion is surrounded by notions of defunding or repealing it.

Repealing the law seems far fetched to me since the American people (who have consistently polled anywhere between 66% and 75% as opposing the law while over 80% are happy with their coverage) had two cracks at it through SCOTUS who didn't have the courage to call the ACA out opting instead to call it a 'tax' on the American people (conservatives were correct all along that it was one and of course, about the death panels and potential for 'rationing' health care) and the election in 2012 where they re-elected President Obama.

To be fair, there were still many people who hadn't come in direct contact with the implications of the law. I suspect, as time moves forward and approaches the mid-terms in 2014, more people will do so and each time they do, they don't like the law.

I'm starting to believe the other conservative assertion - that the end game is single payer. They contend the Democrats know full well the collateral damage this will cause in the short-term but it's the price to pay for the final piece de resistance of single payer. If correct, then it was a brilliant Machiavellian move since they would have to known in advance businesses were going to balk by cutting down hours thus leaving them the opening to claim "see, private enterprise doesn't care. We tried. It's time for single payer."

Do I think Obama is capable of that? Absolutely. He's as cynical and calculating as any politician. His leadership is questionable but he's a clever politician in my view. 

All conjecture of course but that's what conservatives (and libertarians who absolutely loathe the law) are thinking at the moment from what I hear and read.


Taxpayer Sodomy Continues

So now taxpayers have to fund a thief in California.


It's depressing really.

More On Snowden

The bottom line is the Federal government of the United States of America is violating the 4th amendment in its pursuits. Edward Snowden simply exposed this. He didn't put America in danger. America puts itself in danger.

Onions Are From Mars; Quebec Nationalists From Pluto

Behold Quebec's future intellectuals.

I didn't want to do this because it's so silly but let's break it down since these people seem to live in a world filled with Unicorns, and Spaghetti Monsters.

"...We would keep the Canadian money simply to keep economic stability. There is certainly a risk in Quebec. We would have to take out loans. Investors are very interested in Quebec."

Different tooon from the CAQ's Legault take on economic things, eh?

Notice how it suddenly becomes Canada's problem to "stabilize" Quebec should they decide to separate. Canadians will have no say in a referendum AND whether Quebec gets to unilaterally keep the currency. I gather it would be the same for the passport.

Geez, with a wife like that.

Yes, that's all one of the most indebted jurisdiction on the continent needs, more loans! More interest to pay!

In any event, I heard investment in Quebec is down 60%. That is an extraordinary figure and one that's a serious matter. 

The economic situation in Quebec is extremely favourable. In terms of income per capita we are less indebted than other countries. 

Yup. With debt equating to 53% of its GDP we're the least indebted. Jesus me. Would love to see the source for his claim. Suddenly, it's the Bizarro world.

We have among the highest debt and unemployment, low productivity and savings rate and  high union participation rates. Quebec's economy is a laggard among productive economies.

Quebec’s capacity to innovate and transform from our geniuses here is great. Think Cirque de Soleil, think about Quebecers in Las Vegas, Bombardier, software - the creators here are numerous.

It's impressive but that's pigeonholing. Every major nation has a 'cirque' in some industry. A brand of sort. Bombardier survives on subsidies so let's leave this sterling success story aside.

I tend to agree Quebec has talent, I just don't think we have the right entrepreneurial policies in place nor do I think we're as free-enterprising as this guy paints.

The Anglophones are also Quebecers, what’s important is that they feel Quebecois. There are people that feel Canadian and that’s fine. I feel that many Anglophones are feeling less and less Canadian (tell me, what color are the unicorns in your world? Do they smoke weed?). We can’t force people to love Quebec. There’s a lot of Anglophone media that are using fear. They say an independent Quebec is racist, xenophobic and wants to exterminate the English. There are people that compare us to Nazis, but that’s completely false.

It astounds me how tone deaf they are to having lost the "branding" game. I have no idea where he pulled the "less and less Canadian" bit. Maybe out of his ass. It's not an insignificant reality that none of the major communities - be it Chinese, Natives, Italians, Greeks, Jews, Irish, Polish, Portuguese, Lebanese, Irish - most of which are net savers with substantial assets have no interest - nay, respect - in the nationalist game.

Maybe he should be privy to what we really think behind closed doors then maybe he'll rethink his media boogeyman. There are plenty of state aggression against private citizens NOT REPORTED.

Of all things spewed by nationalists, the anglo media thing upsets and irritates me most.

Laws like Bill 14 are rooted in xenophobia and anti-English all under the guise of protecting one community at the expense of another through punitive measures. I don't need a news report to tell me what's already obvious.

It's like The Enlightenment never reached Quebec.

I guess they missed the memo about guarding against the "tyranny of the majority."

When you look at the politics in Quebec and the people here, I think we’re just so different than the rest of Canada. You see the last federal elections the way that Quebec voted completely different than the rest of Canada and I think that’s a huge indicator of that.

An American leftist said this. Yeah well, so does California and I don't see it looking to break from the Union. This is such a stupid argument. We vote differently ergo we need to separate? What kind of logic is that especially since you can flip it and say, "Alberta votes differently so it too should break off?"


Well, she is from uber-leftist Maryland. So I'll let it slide.

"I think it’s a myth if people think that Anglos are going to massively leave the province. That’s more fear mongering than anything else. There will be some that choose to leave, but I don’t think it will be a mass majority of people."

Citation for your myth?

People who pimp out mythical stories shouldn't be talking about myths about others. I'm one of those people, and lemme tell ya sis I'm plugged in, and people will leave.

The degree of it is impossible to tell. It was massive in 1976 - even though nationalists pretend this never happened - but the numbers are not really the point. Even if it's 10% or 100 people  IT'S NOT GOOD FOR AN ECONOMY. The cost of losing business is immeasurable. Once it's gone; it's gone. You can't "get it back." The unintended consequences are incalculable.

And if they feel losing people based on a tribal issues is worth the cost, then don't be surprised people with real money stay away.

I think the main difference between now and let’s say thirty years ago is that people in Quebec are more proud of who they are, they have the conviction that we can do our things and be a powerful nation. Just to give you an example, if Quebec was a country we would be the 19th wealthiest OECD country out of 35 and we’d be the 27th largest nation according to GDP out of 235 countries and regions (money socialists like him would then plunder for free education and other "free shit."). We now have powerful corporations like CGI, like Cirque de Soleil, like Bombardier that work in nations across the world. And I think we have more conviction in ourselves.

This is my favorite part sold by a left-wing student protestor.

Never mind Canada itself isn't really a "powerhouse" so how Quebec would become one is a little far fetched for me to comprehend.

Proof that stats can be whatever you want it to mean.

On the gross side of things, yeah, Quebec looks good. And yes, if you pull out Quebec ALONE it's a top 30 "country."

But again, let's look at it from a jurisdictional perspective. Quebec likes to set the terms of its arguments but we don't have to here. In reality, Quebec is the 16th largest economic entity on the continent so in reality, we can argue it's the 43rd largest country in the world. Already 27th wasn't "powerhouse" territory" imagine how much less so 43rd is. Look around which countries are in the 30-43 range. Not that impressive.

Want more? Let's consider global subdivisions where Quebec's rank 40th.

Indeed, it's a big economy but he may want to rethink that "powerhouse" thing. For example, Quebec would rank ahead of South Korea but I don't think anyone would claim Quebec's economy is more efficient, innovative or productive. Or Beijing or Alberta both places awash in cash.

In this student's mind, he mistakes size for real wealth. Wealth he'd love to plunder for expanding generous welfare and social programs - like "free" university education.

That's the second guy to mention Cirque and Bombardier. I dunno if these people actually follow how stock markets, and economic indicators function but it will take a helluva lot more than just two or three companies to push a nation forward. Cirque is not a publicly traded company and Bombardier's stock stinks.

Let's be even more frank. It's a branch plant economy, just like the rest of Canada is, for the USA. It has no features needed to be taken serious: No passport, no military, no stock exchange, no cash, no currency, no nothing. Do these people realize the costs associated with such things? Never mind I'd reject a Quebecois passport.

And let's not talk about the Native issue. Oh, do nationalists love to pretend it doesn't exist! Same with the mumblings of Montreal considering separating from Quebec. I mean, if Quebec is different from Alberta, why stop there? Montreal is pretty damn different from Chicoutimi. No?


If Quebec has a weakness, it's business. It's not a business oriented society. It distrusts private enterprise.

Notice he fails to mention that Sweden, despite having a similar population has an economy 40% bigger than ours. That's because Quebec has high unemployment, high drop out rates, low productivity, high taxes, low savings rates - bah, I just went over this. To me, it was always a joke that a tiny country like Sweden had until recently TWO internationally respected car brands, while Canada had ZERO.

Yes, this is the way forward.


A few years ago people from Alberta even said that it was because of the equalization payments that Quebec pays for so many social services. That’s not exactly true because even wealthy provinces like Ontario receive equalization payments and there are six provinces that receive equalization payments. Ontario receives the least amount of equalization payments per citizen and after it’s Quebec as the second least.

This is true.

But Quebec wants to be a big boy sitting at the big boy table then compare itself to the big boys. We receive less than the poorest provinces. The richest provinces stand more on their own two feet than Quebec does. Nice try kid.

I'd respect their claims of separation being a "mature" movement if they'd refuse it. Alas, Quebec is in its rights to receive payments. Quebec does pay for its programs (mostly through a provincial income tax) but look at the cost: We earn less on a per capita basis. Ergo, less disposable income.

And the thing that’s really sad about it is we’re gonna lose. The people who speak French in Canada are a minority and faced to a language like English we will disappear. Immigrants who come here see it as being way more advantageous to learn English rather than French and you know what, they know that we will comply with them. We will eventually serve them in English, even though we pretend that we’re tough and we only want to speak French we eventually always fold.

Interesting comment...and a sad one if this is how they see things. It shouldn't be this way. What's remarkable about Canada is that the majority of its citizens accept Quebec's right to preserve its culture and language. Nobody worth their salt would argue against it and it's unfortunate this person sees enemies everywhere.

However, what we're objecting to is the punitive measures in order to protect the culture. This works against anything found in any major charter containing rights of man.

No wonder they need laws to protect who they are.


The difference today is that we’re still a minority, but the thing is, our will to fight has disappeared with the fact that some Francophones have integrated the bourgeoisie and they agree with the fact that (whether they try to lie or not) English is the international language and that personal human rights must be placed before group rights. For example, the right for parents to send their kids to an English school. Obviously if these kids go to an English school they won’t learn French as well as if they would go in a French school. And what’s going to happen is that it’s going to become the language that they’re going to use every day and they’re going to become Anglophones. In Rome, do as the Romans do and that’s exactly what I expect from people coming to Quebec. Just please try to learn the language. They don’t! They don’t try, they’re not passionate, they don’t care about it and then they act as victims when we try to put measures in place to defend our rights. It’s a n’importe quoi esti.

Finally, someone who trumps individual rights. He's on the right path and this I can respect. However, I need a citation about not wanting to learn English. Because I fear this is a precious, tiny few who refuse and really, does it matter that someone FREELY chooses not to?

Lemme be sympathetic here.

I agree with him. Learn French. It's good for you. It's a nice language. The predominant language here. It's beautiful to learn multiple languages. However, on the flip side, I'm not gonna go nuts because some people choose not to. In America, you have large pockets of people who can't speak English. Who knows why they don't but here's the thing: They lose in the long-run. It's not worth losing time and energy about little old Maude who is from another time and lives exclusively in Westmount "speaking white." If she's seen as a threat, then Quebec has bigger inner issues to resolve. 

And spare me the passionate bit. Since when is it a prerequisite for anyone to be fucking passionate about anything? Passion can impede rational thought anyway so let's not overplay this. Besides, who gets to choose how "passionate" someone is?

A common plea among nationalists in some form or another "Just show us you care!"has been changed to "they don't speak well enough." It's so bad hockey writers make fun of people from other parts of the country for their poor French. Assholes. Nothing is more annoying than watching pompous hillbillies make fun of people on TV.

Finally, he blows up his first assertion that individual rights must preserve by tolerating collective measures to "fix" the problem.

Pick a side buddy.

I stand on the rights of the individual.

One more thought directed at Mme. Dorion who says:

What Parizeau said was really sad, but it was true. But, it just means that some communities publically decided to say that they sided with the no side and they invited their communities to vote no. It’s not because of that that we exclude them. On the contrary, I even think that if we can convince more immigrants to come with us, it will help convince Quebecers that are not sure because Quebecers are so afraid to look like racist like people or not nice. We’re just so afraid to harm people; it’s a collective trait of Quebecers. 

My friend, a separatist driven by emotions rather than real date, at the time of Parizeau's sickening comment likely emboldened by alcohol said the same thing. "It's true but you can't say that!"

This passes as intellectualism in Quebec.

Then you have a lot work to do because you're lagging on this front.

Afraid to look racist? Which part? The ones where they tell people off for speaking English in public? Actually, it's the exact opposite in my experiences. Quebecers "tell things like it is as they seen them" and that often gets them in trouble. 

Quebec has much more to give I believe but I think we're pouring our energies in all the wrong areas to achieve this. The best way for Quebec to move forward is to clean up its corruption and debt matters first. Then it needs to rethink and rework its relationship with entrepreneurs and the free-enterprise system. Get the cardiovascular system going, if you will, by improving cash flow. It can do this by lowering taxes and stop expanding one of the largest welfare states in the West.

Once that's done, it can tackle the issues of poor education and mediocre access to health and the deteriorating quality of service.

Above all, it needs to shed its excessive fear of English. Leave people alone. Stop threatening fellow citizens with punitive measures for merely expressing who they are.

Quebec's ills are not Ottawa's fault. Nor are they the fault of other communities.


Quebec's fault lines lie within itself.

Time to grow up.

Obabush Circle Complete

There's NO EXCUSE for The New York Times running this op-ed. 


ESPECIALLY, in light of the Bush Derangement Syndrome largely rooted in his foreign policy. This did not occur 50 years ago. It recent enough to remain fresh in the minds of people who believed the invasion of Iraq A) was illegal and B) did not threaten vital American interests or national security. The lessons of Iraq are already being ignored by this professor.

Attacking Syria, in my view, is the same as Iraq and to argue "attacking even if it's illegal" is outrageous. I wonder what his position on Iraq was.

Furthermore, Obama seems ready to accept chemical weapons were used even though the UN hasn't concluded if true nor has the intelligence community.

Hm. Where have we seen this play out again?

Surgical strikes sound cool and all, but as military experts remind, can be limited in its results and may not even achieve the desired result of the objective.

Should Obama, who has already attacked a nation, decide to go forth, the circle will be complete. There is NOTHING in Obama's legacy that didn't match Bush or even surpass him. Those who bear a hatred of Bush and voted for Obama have very precious little to distinguish between the two.

I would add that perhaps Bush didn't help united the nation, Obama further deepened not only the partisan divide, but the racial one as well.

Thankfully, the readers are having none of what the prof is selling.

At the moment, the Democrats have no real, intelligent game plan for the Mid-East except to, well, be gung-ho busting up the place as Biden attempted to sell the other day. The very same things they vowed to impeach Bush over.


Pranks Asian Style

I don't know where this is from, I'm guessing Japan, so...man, they sure do have an evil sense of humor.

Fall Of The West Reason 994422293

Who runs Slate?

Because this is fucking retarded.
Is It Bigoted to Reject a White Sushi Chef?

No. Seriously. They felt this fit for intellectual reading.

Pissing On MLK

On the 50th anniversary of his momentous speech.

Minds lost.

Beautiful Pictures

Originally in black and white, now in color.

Einstein had, erm, nice taste in shoes. While Goebbels looked quite like the socio-pathic murderous maniac we've all come to love to loathe with all our loving hearts. Piece of shit.

Shut Up And Know Your Place

Man dies.

Waiting 34 hours in emergency.

Charter Schools Hitting Their Stride

"Private military contractors, private prisons and now private schools all run by CEOs as corporations.
This is NOT the answer for public schools that have been deliberately de-funded.
My sister taught at public schools and then a private company charter school and then quit the profession in disgust."

"It's a business, nothing more. Education for profit. Profit is the bottom line. Under pay the staff, carefully choose students who will be good PR. Dump the others. This is Republican vision of what will replace public schools. PROFI"

Shit, I guess this chick would hate my daycare and my aunt's private pre-school which the Quebec government is dying to put out of business. Bunch of left-wing ideologues they all are.

Well, Huffington commenters are always good for a chuckle. Yes, let's be sheep to ONE, gigantic state-run education curriculum.

These comments can only mean one thing.

Charter schools are working and getting results.


My tax dollars should not go to a private company that is not accountable to the taxpayers and doesn't have to play by the same rules as other public schools. Here's your choice: move, pay for private, or be an effective parent. That last option goes a long way.  

This person really needs to read exactly what a Charter school is. It took me all over five minutes to get the gist of it. They're not for "profit" nor are they not corporations. But that doesn't stop them from going off on all sorts of idiotic "teabaggers" ad hominen.

I really don't see a problem with it. Anything that challenges the status quo is fine by me. It makes no sense to remain loyal to a model in desperate need of innovation and ideas.

Anyway. Read for yourself just how far up the statist ass these people are.

It's sad how paranoid and ridiculously shrill they've become about private enterprise.

Montreal Alouettes: All-Time Head To Head Record

Since the CFL official website and other sports sites are too shficat (translation: Washtat*) to compile and publish all-time statistics, I'll do it here, sigh, on this terrible blog.

*Italian dialect for, I guess it's rotten. The former word is my bastardization of a slang word.

In all seriousness, it's ridiculous head to head records are not found anywhere. I used this site as a reference.

I broke it up by decade since 1996 and then amalgamated the totals.

Als record from 1945-1986 (until Als folded)
Total: 283-341-20 (Playoffs: 26-28)

Head to head (45-86):

Argonauts 77-69-3 (3-1)
Rough Riders 71-95-4 (12-10)
Tiger Cats (Tigers and Wild Cats) 77-73-5 (8-11)
Eskimos 8-28-3 (1-6)
Blue Bombers 11-19-2
Stampeders 15-19-1 (2-0)
Roughriders 11-20-1 (Trivia: Lost first nine meetings against Saskatchewan)
Lions 13-18-1

Since return to CFL: 1996-99
Total: 52-26-1 (Playoffs 3-4)

Head to head (96-99):

Toronto Argonauts 6-8 (1-2)
Ottawa Rough Riders 2-1 (folded in 1990s)
Hamilton Tiger-Cats 10-6-1 (1-2)
Edmonton Eskimos 4-4
Winnipeg Blue Bombers 10-2
Calgary Stampeders 4-4
Saskatchewan Roughriders 8-0
British Columbia Lions 8-1 (1-0)

From 2000-2009
Total: 111-73 (Playoffs 9-9)

Argonauts 26-9 (4-1)
Renegades (formerly Rough Riders) 9-3
Tiger Cats 21-9 (0-1)
Eskimos 12-12 (2-2)
Blue Bombers 19-11 (1-1)
Stampeders 13-8 (0-1)
Roughriders 16-6 (2-0)
Lions 9-14 (1-2)


Argonauts 8-4 (1-1)
Tiger Cats 5-6 (0-1)
Eskimos 6-0
Blue Bombers 5-4
Stampeders 2-4
Roughriders 5-2 (1-0)
Lions 3-3

All-time: 1945-1986; 1996-2012:

W495-L466-T21 (playoffs 42-42)

To 1945-86; 1996-2009:

Toronto Argonauts 109-86-3 (8-4)
Ottawa Rough Riders (Renegades) 81-98-4 (12-10)
Hamilton Tigers Cats 107-88-6 (9-14)
Edmonton Eskimos 24-44-3 (3-8)
Winnipeg Blue Bombers 40-32-2 (1-1)
Calgary Stampeders 32-31-1 (2-1)
Saskatchewan Roughriders 35-26-1 (2-0)
British Columbia Lions 30-33-1 (2-2)

All-time through 1945-2012

Argonauts 117-90-3 (9-5)
Tiger Cats 114-94-6 (9-15)
Eskimos 30-44-3 (3-8)
Blue Bombers 45-36-2 (1-1)
Stampeders 34-35-2 (2-1)
Roughriders 40-28-1 (3-0)
Lions 33-36-1 (2-2)

Notes: Despite a winning record against the Ti-Cats the Als have a 9-15 record against them in the playoffs. Edmonton and Ottawa hold a net advantage in both regular ans post season play. Montreal has a winning record against Toronto in the regular season and playoffs.

Bernard Landry Is Fed Up

And he's not gonna take it anymore.

He won't stand for the anglo media beating his people up over the pending values charter. He reminds us is his party that elected the first black and Latino ministers.

Well, golly gee shucks!

So progressive we have a right to be xenophobic!

That guy is some piece of work.

Lemme tell ya the sort of gent this nationalist is. If you were to greet him cordially with sincere civility uttering "hello" he'd go batshit nuts demanding you "parle moi en francais."

That's where these reactionary lie on the civility scale.

Language above all us.

That's why if I were to ever come in contact with that guy at a Politburo celebration I wouldn't speak a lick of French out of spite. Oh, what I'd pay for the look on his face.

Respect is a two-way street.

Poor Bernie and his ilk. We don't need the media to expose what's already painfully obvious.

GM Labeling A Bad Idea

You'll have to pay for the whole article but Scientific American tackles GM labeling.

MSNBC Ratings Down

Oh, there's a shock.

The market is good at weeding stuff out.

Maddow, Sharpton, Matthews, O' Donnell, Harris-Perry is not a winning combo. The hiring of Al Sharpton in particular is one of the strangest on television.

MSNBC is taking a pasting on the comments board.

Just Shh 'Em


When you tweet vapid things and are called out, just shh 'em. It's a valid counter argument now.

Let's go easy on Aura Bogado. She's a Yale attendee.

"The same nation that couldn't even convict Zimmerman for the murder of an unarmed black child will now bomb Syria into justice. Ok."

Classic. It's like, they just refute as a means to an end.

Every time I see @MileyCyrus slap that black woman’s butt, I think about the way that enslaved blacks were whipped for white entertainment.

I see the standards at Yale have come down a tad.

Chemical Assad

Well. It sure is taking a lot of time to determine whether Syria used chemical weapons against its own people. I 'spose now is the right time to ask...

"What difference does it make at this point?"

Remember when Assad was a great guy according to Clinton, Kerry and Pelosi (after she met with him in 2007 against the administration's wishes?).


Does John Kerry plan to oppose military action after supporting it?

When Water And Oil Meet

I was talking to someone I know. A PQ voter who, in my opinion, doesn't fit the PQ profile at all. He even acknowledges the xenophobia of the PQ but he's always voted for them and never looked back.

It's a contradiction he can't explain.

When I tell you he doesn't fit the profile, lemme tell you he doesn't. He says he swings left but in my opinion he can fall on the libertarian side of the coin. He's too open, tolerant, intelligent, informed, classy and rational a guy to be wallowing in the nationalist nether-regions of the PQ.

Alas, what is politics without contradictions and, as we've seen too often, hypocrisy? Politics is human activity in the flesh.

We talked about the PQ's values charter (which he finds is absurd), and its on-going obsession against the English language, the state of the economy and how separatism is not such a "cool" idea anymore etc.

It was an honest and illuminating conversation I think for both sides but I think we already what each side thought because we're engaged people as a whole.

I asserted that in the case of the charter the sense I get, interestingly enough and if comments are accurate, Quebec is not without total support on this one. I've read many a "it's about time someone stands up for our values!" and "it's time they understand our ways!" comments spewed.

Alberta, of all places, seems to be on board.

Alberta has the oil, Quebec the water. Often they act as such but on this one, may as well be water and ice.

It's disgusting.

They argue of stupid things (like investment issues) but when it comes to protecting our cherished value of freedom of speech and religion, they conspire to spit on it.

He agreed.

We both understood the temptation to take this side is strong but if one truly and honestly ponders it, it's not the correct position to take. As my (apolitical) wife said, "if you solicit and claim to welcome immigrants only to regulate against their rights in the interest of the collective, why have immigration then?"

"You just can't do that to people."

Absolutely. It's called HUMAN RIGHTS.

If you're entire political thinking process is rooted in fear, then you have a serious problem and it ain't Little Punjab Harry the issue.

Same with language. How many times do you have to pile on to 22, 78, 101, 14 and so on before you just god damn outlaw a language? We're on that logical path. English doesn't threaten. They want to believe it does. If they can't survive without a law, how is it the problem of non-Francophones? Why punitive measures to enhance their own language?

It's like using coconut oil instead of olive oil to make a tomato sauce - the process is all wrong. Wrongheaded.

They've taken to claiming the fear-mongering is with the Anglo media which is a cop out. The Anglo media is too weak, the community to diverse to have any real impact. Our opinions are formed and borne of real life experiences. Rude STM workers and over-zealous Gestapo OLF inspectors are rooted in our folklore now because the majority of us have witnessed with our own two eyes the ugly under belly of nationalism.

The whole premise and raison d'etre of Quebec nationalism is based on fear so they will not set the terms of spinning this onto the other side.What they are in fact saying is, "why can't you just be quiet? You have it good!"

Thanks, Fidel.

As I've pointed out numerous times here. Nationalism is the antithesis of freedom. They CANNOT coexist. The collective will always prevail over the individual. Our darkest views of human nature will take precedent through tyranny of the majority over the noble and cherished ideals of human freedom.

It's a fact of history.

The only system of governance to EVER put down in writing that this is indeed the natural state of human politics (that is, tyranny), is the American Constitution. That's it. ONE document in the course of world history.

Yet, Quebec is set to do the exact opposite. I see nothing progressive in what the PQ does. On the contrary, it's more like a Dark Age mentality. No people of brilliance will be drafting the charter. It'll just be a piece of hyper-secularism that's sure to trample of civil liberties. You can't "balance" a liberty. Either you have it or you don't. If you think you can achieve it, then you deceive.

It's like...

It's like The Enlightenment never reached here.


Stand, Count And Account For Your Actions

When we were kids, we broke a neighbour's window while playing street hockey. After the shock, my friend who took the errant slap shot stood up straight and said in French, "well, I'll go ring the door bell."

There were only three of us and we decided to go to the door as a group.

It was a showcase in personal accountability. The old man was a nice guy and simply said "that's okay. Thanks for letting me know." I don't remember what happened afterwards whether my friend paid for it (I seem to recall his father going over) but it wouldn't surprised me it was worked out properly between "voisins."

Fast forward to now with a contrasting story.

We had dear close friends of ours over for dinner a month ago. Long story short, their eldest son ended up busing up one of our little lawn chairs my daughter uses and snapping of an ornament on a decorative bird feeder. A couple of weeks before that he had, for inexplicable reasons, smashed up a bag of my kid's candy. My daughter was present for each of these unsure of what to do.

When all the dust was settled I was profoundly disappointed that the parents did not come forward and offer a monetary resolution to make me "whole." I feel as though the child did not learn a lesson because he did no apologize to me. I heard the mother, a teacher no less who is always talking about other people not doing the right thing, tell the boy he was going to pay for it (which he scoffed at) but that was the last I heard of that. If anything, while the mother's got to the bottom of the story, I get the feeling was indirectly angling to try and implicate my daughter in some way. One of those "yeah, but she encouraged him" type of things - which is nonsense. She chose that bird feeder and the idea of her laying a seed of destruction is unlikely.

The bottom line is the final, non-coerced act was committed by him. I had noticed he was a little hyper that night but thought nothing of it. It wasn't until the next day my told me about the chair and that we both found out about the ornament.

As we speak, no one has spoken to me. Not even the father like my friend's dad had done three decades before. It's not about the money. Rather the acknowledgement. Had they come to me and said, "Hey, T.C. sorry, man. Kids, you know. Here's $30 for your troubles" I would have been satisfied. I probably wouldn't taken the money. I was looking for a lesson to be taught.

All the basic tenets of responsible behavior and accountability we're taught by parents, teachers, television and even fucking comic books seem to have been ignored here.

Naturally, it puts my wife in a bind because I told her he can't come around here anymore. If they won't pay for a little thing like a chair, what happens if he breaks something of greater value?

To her credit, she understands and was also surprised not more was forthcoming. However, she cautions that they're properly raised boys. I agree, they're good kids. It's just in this instance he got a little excited and busted private property and was not held to account is all I'm saying.

Today, parents seem to think protecting their kids under any circumstances is proper parenting.

I don't see how that helps anyone.

Sensible Bill Cosby

The African-American community, in my view, is loaded with exemplary individuals and natural leaders. I've been lucky enough to talk to Southern blacks in my life and honestly, I can't really put into words what I thought of those experiences. There was a sense of dignity even regal demeanor in their diction and understanding of life as they saw it.

Yet, all we see on the news it seems, are flamboyant and superficial figures who spew are more interested in furthering an agenda than offering a real helping hand to their community.

Bill Cosby is one of those successful individuals who is willing to offer an honest opinion of things. Of course, he's right. We make sure my daughter stays off the slang and keep on her proper course when it comes to speaking. How you speak determines a lot of what happens in your life. If you talk like you live in the gutter, then don't be surprised at the low quality job offers you get. Show like you care, and diction is a major example of this, and people will be respond in kind.

Same with writing. Lay off the lousy "text" spelling. You look like an idiot. When I read a bad text, it also lets me into how you may sound.


Even the writings of historians like W.E.B. Dubois always impressed me. It was one of those "this guy gets it" type of thing.

Or Booker T. Washington who said in 1911,

"There is (a) class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs -- partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. ... "

That goes for any culture slaves to a nationalist agenda - like here in Quebec. Without the perpetual fear of English and other grievances that must be kept alive, the Parti Quebecois would cease to exist. I see no difference with the "black power fist" as a metaphor to smashing and destroying and the under-sieged mentality of the 'Je me souviens' nationalist cult in the province. They "say" they're forward looking but they aren't. You can't be if you keep staring at the review mirror. Which, I guess, is why revisionism is so strong here. Always trying to find good in our bad past. Pretty soon Lionel-Groulx will have a Metro station named after him...wait a second. Never mind. Or a demagogue like Maurice Duplessis will get a street named after him. Damn. Never mind again.

All one has to do is read King, Dubois and Washington to see how far off the reservation people like Sharpton and even Obama are from these giants of African-American intellectualism and spirituality.

Obama could not muster the courage to stand above the Martin-Zimmerman case choosing instead to offer unwise words of projecting and fabricating a scenario of "if he had a son" and "that could have been me."

It was a profound disappointment for the leader of the free world to apt for this route. Instead of offering a voice of reason, he gave into his own private emotions and took a side - which is not hthe proper thing to do in my view as the President of an entire nation; of a people.

Anyway. Judge Joe Brown has a little thing he calls "Man up" or "protecting womanhood and promoting manhood."

A good reminder not just for African-Americans but all people of any race or creed.


Bixi Blocking A Business

Should we be surprised?

It's for the environment and the business is just, you know, in the way.

The arrogance. It's shocking.

Xavi: Honorary Capitalist Of The Day

"Tata Martino was correct in his comments about Bale, but the market decides the price,” Xavi said. “That is all there is to it.”

Seems even the great Spanish footballer Xavi is wise enough to be able to separate "what is and what ought to be.'

Liberal Bizarro World

Daily Beast Liberal defines "personal freedom":

There is a fine line between "liberal" and "libertarian" when it comes to personal freedom. Both are defenders of personal freedom and both are opposed to the right-wing. Yet liberals believe in equality, which means personal freedom can not take away the rights of other people. Libertarians believe they have superior rights and have no qualms about taking away other people rights.

What in the hell? Never, EVER, heard a libertarian argue in this way. Ever. They defend rights more consistently and more passionately than any conservative or liberal does. They bitch slap liberals when it comes to maintaining their beliefs and principals. Liberals are horrid in that they hate the very things the opposite side does until their guy does it then all is fine. 

The modern liberal/progressive doctrine is BUT about taking other people's rights away in an arbitrary manner. They support the nanny-state which in of itself takes away personal rights.

Gun-control, affirmative action programs, health care, anti-smoking crusades, free contraception, subsidies of various kinds etc.

These are all example of liberals supporting the collective OVER the individual.

Quebec is a prime example of the left-wing's take on "individual liberty." It's hideous.

Just like now they're claiming conservatives are "race obsessed" they now argue they are defenders of personal rights? I left the liberal camp BECAUSE of its position on big government. You have rights on condition in their world.

It's the bizarro world. Man, these people are special.


"...It means if you don't do what a liberal wants, like give the liberal free contraceptives or photograph her wedding ceremony you have denied the liberal her rights."

"...In the US Liberals (a noticeably different breed from liberals) are all about the Nanny state -- ban this, prohibit that, it's all for the common good, think of the chilllldren! To a Liberal, freedom is important until it gets in the way of whatever emotion-driven crusade they are on, then it imply HAS to go.

Libertarians are more like the liberals everywhere else on the planet. To a Libertarian, freedom s more important than anything else -- yours, mine, everyone's."


How To Cook A Ham

Add garlic and for God's sake don't forget a mirror and in this case the Crucifix!

NSA: You Don't Bring Me Flowers

I thought Obama wasn't interested in "ordinary lives."

In Quebec, we're justifying bigoted behavior under the guise of "cultural protection." In America, they give up personal privacy and liberty for national security.

We've lost our fucking minds.


World Cup To Move From Summer

Because it's just too damn hot in Qatar!

Which begs the question - didn't the idiots in FIFA already know that?

Of course they did, but they were too busy lining their pockets.

Sepp Blatter. Soccer's Bud Selig.

No Shame: Salon

Seriously, Salon are hilarious.

From where I sit, it's progressives/liberals obsessed with race.

The spin is so laughable, one but can just stare and wonder in wonderment.

ACA And Its Built-In Unintended Consequences

Some made a good point, I forget where but it was in a comments thread, about health care in America. If the point was to reduce costs brought forth by fraud and inefficiencies, then why not tackle those issues straight on? Why introduce Obamacare which apparently does none of those things?

It's similar to a question I asked when Obamacare had yet to be law. If the goal is to get 50 million uninsured (and that figure was inflated - some studies pegged it realistically at 15-20 million) then why force everyone else into the same pot? Why not just design a new program for those uninsured? At which point, isn't that what's Medicare for?

A friend of mine is an American doctor. He treads carefully about Obamacare. While he understands what they're trying to accomplish and sees some pros to it, at this point, he feels this thing is going to spiral into a direction not meant to go into - and not necessarily for the better.

Insurance is funny. People won't buy it if they feel they don't need it. Young people in particular look at it that way. Why take on an extra cost like health insurance when A) they feel healthy and B)won't use have of what's offered anyway? It was a rational decision.

Alas, government has different plans for you. Like car insurance.

In any event, like anything the government claims will be "equal" or "fair" always ends up being anything but. Always. Obamacare is so full of exemptions at the moment - including politicians looking to get it - it's a laughable, hideous joke.

JAQing Off

Hm. I tend to do this from time to time (heck, I may even post without thinking sometimes).

I promise to stop.

Seriously, maintaining rational thought takes discipline and deep critical thinking.

It's always good to refresh one's mind with links like this.


Open Markets Always Wins

I saw a report last night on French language news about competition coming to the SAQ (Quebec's state-run liquor board). Specifically, allowing "depanneurs" (convenient outlets) to sell alcohol.

Gee, golly gee. How nice of them! What could consumers be thinking? Competition over a monopoly, I mean, come on!

My friend and I were discussing this over the phone. We're amateur "wine" enthusiasts. He tends to toe the state line with stuff like "they offer good selection" without recognizing the fact that it's not market oriented.

In defending the SAQ, he talked about how it carried, for example, "high-end grappas" whereas it's not necessarily the case in private boutiques.

Two things. The beauty of an open and free market without artificial (bureaucratic) barriers to entry is that businesses reflect market demands particular to their area or demographics. So one place may have "high end grappas" and another "low-end" each fulfilling market demands.

Instead, currently there exists a "one-way" (communistic) system in which one entity decides which grappa consumers get. And who knows how the greasing works in order for suppliers to get their products on the shelves.

The other thing is cost. The SAQ workforce is absurdly unionized. Guess who is paying for the inflated wages?

But I don't want to get into that.

I'd rather focus on something else which is the point about how this situation is not good for an economy.

Let's get back to the grappa scenario and the fact the system prevents people from getting into business for themselves. While my friend (wrongly I argue) assumes that because the SAQ offers "high end" it's proof somehow that they're doing a good job, he unwittingly discounts the potential  of someone else going in for business for themselves to offer, for example, "low-end grappas" as a means to fill a market niche.

Suddenly, the government has a new source entity to tax. If the individual is dedicated and successful their potential is limitless and there's no way of knowing what kind of a positive impact this would have on the economy. They can choose to remain a one-man operation (as my father did who decided rather than expand to invest in properties) or expand and hire more people thus creating new tax sources for the state.

That side of the coin is generally forgotten.

In other words, it's better to have numerous private boutiques each reflecting a more accurate market demand in a more efficient manner than to leave it in the hands of a monopoly.

It's nice there's some talk to fix this problem with allowing other businesses to sell alcohol. However, we have a long way to go.

As Ronald Reagan put it, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down these walls!

A Chacun Son Metier

To each his own trade is certainly, well seemingly anyway, a blurred line these days with everyone acting like an expert on TV, radio and the internet.

We're assaulted daily by opinions that too often come from the mouths of people who shouldn't do so. For example, Matt Yglesias about money matters. What exactly qualifies him to speak on such matters?

The answer is simple: Nothing. And his pontifications about money, finance and wealth amount to exactly that: Nothing.

Jesus, I'm more qualified but I don't think Salon would hire me.

Paul Krugman, to pull another example, talks about politics even though he's an economist.

Sure many people are able to cross disciplines and multi-task and some may even be good at it (channel your inner Buckminster Fuller) but more often than not, we're hearing self-described "experts" blow hards spew nonsense.

It's sort of one gigantic appeal to authority we accept.

Would you accept car advice from Oprah? I know I wouldn't but millions of people would because, you know, it's Oprah. She must know something more than me! Right?

It's no surprise, then, in our society bureaucrats and politicians with no practical experience in economics and business pass regulations and legislation on those matters all the time.

They have a nice fall back to justify their decisions: It's for the society.

That line is a juggernaut of a concept because even though the fallacy of 'one size fits all' may not apply to your circumstance you're made to feel something bigger than you is at play - a bigger picture so to speak.

There isn't.

That's what you're told - without much in-depth explanation in my view.

When it comes to a delicate, organic, almost inexplicable eco-system like the economy (we're good at viewing natural wonders like the Amazon as an abstract eco-system but not our own affairs in what is called a natural activity like economics), aren't the best decisions the ones left to the people  in each their own trade?

Ah. Enter a faulty, or at least mislead,  premise. Profits! Profits equals greed! Greed means people get left behind! Roads! Ergo, more regulations are needed!

You must legislate, tax and regulate and tax some more to reign in such a scourge!

Thus ends my opinion. 


Paul Getting Some Good Lovin'

It's not that surprising someone (Rand Paul) has 'outflanked Obama' (as Harper's put it) about the war on drugs.

Principles always outflanks cynicism.

Although I have no idea what they mean by "twice now this year, Rand Paul has flanked the Obama Administration from the left." If they mean 'left" meaning liberal, then it is to laugh. There's nothing about Rand Paul that's "left." And if this is the sly way now of trying to claim a politician, it ain't gonna work.

Paul comes from a classical liberal perspective and that ain't "left."

Politics Corner

Heard Obama say onz ze rahdio "the American people pay me to think."


When do they get a refund?




Justin Trudeau admitted to smoking a joint as an MP - which may in part explain some of his Shaggy-like comments in the past.

A lot of people are saying "it's no big deal" and that "he's honest" and that the conservatives are making too much of this.

There's probably some truth in all of these but it must be kept in mind A) it's still illegal and against the law and B) not all that wise to speak out in this way considering many people's lives are ruined as we speak for simple possession of grass.

Trudeau is playing straight from 'look at me I'm cool' book but until his party is elected and they actually do something about it, best to think that not everyone is a "beautiful person" like him.

His game risks faltering like it did in the U.S. One week A-G- Holder is talking about the insanity of the war on drugs and the next Obama is showing zero interest in legalizing marijuana or even embarking on that route.

Adding Insult To A Senseless Murder

Race huckster Jackson calls Aussie murder victim by wrong name; no news from the administration on which of the three murderers would look like Obama if he had a son.

At the moment, Australians are not impressed from what I read. At all.

Limbaugh OWNS Obama

That's right.

The more Obama babbles about him, the more Limbaugh proves he's in his head.

In sports, we call it trash talking in an effort to get your opponent of their game.

As been oft-repeated here, he's no natural leader or statesman. Not when you continuously alienate Americans in this manner. Nor does he display an ability to be wise on social issues.


Eye In The Sky

I dedicate this song to NSA.

(Cont'd on page 45)

A while ago I talked about my slow descent into "I don't give a fuck" madness telling the story of how I browse around grocery stores talking to myself. You might think "well, I silently talk to myself all the time what's so strange about that?"

Nothing unless you talk loud enough for others to hear.

I'll be all like "oh, look strawberries. Stra-barrah's" in a Timmy from South Park voice. Or I'll make up some incomprehensible song with words like "Strew-berry's are good pour me."

Now I tell the tales of reading articles. As much as I read, it's actually a struggle for me because, well, I can't sit still or stay focused for too long. I tend to power read or gloss over in firm believe of my abilities to "grasp" a story.

That's why articles that "continue" on another page completely throw me off. I'm all like reading and suddenly it asks me to go to page B14. No fucking way, man, am I getting sidetracked. It says I'm on A3 and I'll be damned if some left-wing pinko commie socialist Marxist hussy prevents me from going to A4. I gots rights dammit!

Sometimes I'll just flip through on my way to that destination looking over all sorts of other stories, articles and pictures so that by the time I reach "cont'd" I barely remember what the story is about.

Could be about marinated onions for all I know or care.

The President did what with vinegar beets?!

It kinda upsets me frankly. I'll be all like crumpling the newspaper and throwing it down the stairs hollering "cocksuckers!"

Sometimes magazines and publications do the same thing.

I'm not smart. Timmy is brighter so I'd like to know why the industry dicks me around like that.

The Logical Fallacy

We hear often, as a common tactic from the left, the assertion to whenever someone questions social programs, big government or taxes, "yeah well, you sure love your social security" and "free health!" and so on.

Here's the problem I have with this.

Those are all mandatory programs. People never really had a say in the matter. If a person joined or voted for such programs free of coercion and decided to get "freebies" then the objection is justified.

Alas, this is simply not the case.

You can't opt out of government programs. And besides, people paid into it so obviously it's their right to get it. So if that someone wonders if something like medicare or social security (in whatever forms they take in many nations) need to be reformed, it's valid.

Like I complained recently on my driver registration. Included in the price is an outrageous $30 fee for public transit. How public transit managed to get itself involved in my driving registration paper is beyond me to comprehend. I don't use it and never plan to. I can't opt out because, you know, fuck you we say so. And it's for the children. La societe.

Bunch of bunk.


Let's talk money.

They say it's a "revenue" problem when it comes to government shortfalls. Ergo, we need to tax!

But it's not really a revenue problem if you have cash flow.

Let me explain. The American and Canadian governments collect a lot of money through taxes. In the U.S., for example it's close to $3 trillion. That's a lot of dough to run a country. Yet, the national debt is $16 trillion or more than five times revenues.

So basically, what taxists want is to match $16 trillion. Or the entire GDP of the country.

See the illogical position of this?

No. It's a spending problem just like any household budget. A family that refuses to curb household expenditures will keep the game going by maxing any form of credit they can find - typically lines of credits, credit cards and remortgaging. But if you keep spending more than you have, you eventually get swamped by the interest charges on the money borrowed.

That's the problem with national governments.

Tax all you want. 'Soak the rich' but the wise among us know that's not the issue. There's not enough people to soak to keep the charade going.

So, politicians just play kick the can down the road while playing populist politics that divide people to distract.

Then - POOF! - default and bankruptcy. 

Canadian Medical Association Points Finger In Wrong Direction

It's easy to blame owners - for anything.

Nah. Me? I point it in another direction. Using a mirror. Parents and fans alike. Business owners, like any business, reflect the demand of customers.

Ever been to a minor league hockey game? Parents are barbaric.

But let's blame the owners.


And then there's the NHLPA. They have to be on board too and they haven't exactly shown much leadership on the concussion issue. Owners can't just make any decisions just like in any pro sports league in North America.

Sheesh. I don't expect dipshit fairweather sports fans to get this but if you're a sports fan and argue in such simplistic terms, then you're not paying attention.

Syrians Unleash Chemical Weapons

According to reports.

Which has led to all sorts of opinions.

One commenter said, "the world should be ashamed for having let this happened."

Perhaps, but I don't. Last I checked, Syria is an independent nation. There are limits to what nations can do. The UN doesn't exactly have a great track record when it comes to preventing this sort of stuff.

France is calling for force to be used if reports are accurate. When will they ask the Americans to lead?

As for the U.S., recall the administration sent weapons to the rebels. The very rebels (affiliated with terrorist groups) who committed the gas attack. As we wrote here, the decision to do so by the Americans was bound to backfire.

Speaking of U.S. foreign policy. Oh well, so much for the "blip" on the road to Egyptian democracy. Why does Obama seem to stick to his support for the Muslim Brotherhood who are wreaking all kinds of violent havoc from attacking and killing Copts to raiding and destroying museums. It's what they do best I reckon.


The Boston Globe Had Better Offer But Turned It Down

But turned it down and took less money.

"I'm just stunned," Lynch told the Boston Herald. "I thought this was a public company that had a fiduciary duty to get the most by its stockholders."

I wonder if this group was perhaps, I don't know, conservative?

If I were a stockholder I'd want some answers indeed.

Effecting Change Through Lies

Reenactment of Zimmerman-Martin.

That's not reenactment in as much as it's how they want to believe what happened.

Big difference.

Pack of fucking lying jackals.

I guess that Aussie ballplayer being killed "for kicks" by black guys is not a story. Is it open season on Aussie's now?

The hypocrisy, ignorance and race baiting is shocking (perhaps even evil)  in this case.

Britain's David Cameron: Meet Your New Tyrant


So when will Neil Young gather the band and record 'For what it's worth" again?

I mean, the silence from pop stars like him and Bruce Springsteen on government's attack on the press and privacy is stunningly deafening.

And let's be frank, this is an outright assault by the state on citizens.

It's a shame many of us remain apathetic and clueless. But, you know, they bank on our ignorance.


Partial Abortion

Warning: Graphic.

And utterly disturbing.

And sad.

Sad for life.

I'm pretty sure that child felt pain.

Unemployment Rates At A Glance

The U.S. unemployment rate since 2000 has been on a nice ride. 

Between 2000-2008 it basically stayed in the 5% range peaking through 6% for a short period in 2003. The rate shot up to past 10% around 2009 and there it stayed until recently and has been gradually descending with the latest data revealing the rate at 7.4% - which incidentally is roughly Canada's "perpetual" rate of unemployment.

G8 countries:

Canada: 7.2
UK: 7.2
Germany: 5.2
France: 10.8
Italy: 12.1
Japan: 3.9
Russia: 5.3

Other countries:

Spain: 26.26
Greece: 27.6
Australia: 5.7
South Korea: 3.2
Netherlands: 8.7
Sweden: 9.1
China: 4.1
Switzerland: 3
Norway: 3.4
Denmark: 4.3
Mexico: 5
Israel: 6.9
India: 3.8
Hong Kong 3.3
Singapore: 3.1

Of course, some of these must be taken with a grain of salt. For example, Cuba has a low unemployment rate but it hardly translates into any real wealth.

Another chart from the Department of Labour. The Bush presidency, since people keep harping on it, actually maintained lower rates of unemployment than President Obama. Predictably, people and pundits alike will offer their perspectives and rationalizations why this is so.


It's Not Terror!

What difference does it make now?

They sooo wanted Benghazi to have been about a movie and a spontaneous mob attack.

The reality is, brace yourselves, the prospect of a Hilary-Justin North American alliance is strong.

Title Of The Day

"The Delinquent Teenager Who WasMistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert."

Better Off On Welfare...?

From Cato:

While that might not sound overly generous, remember that welfare benefits aren’t taxed, while wages are. So someone in New York would have to earn more than $21 per hour to be better off than they would be on welfare. That’s more than the average statewide entry-level salary for a teacher.

Is it any wonder, then, that, despite the work requirements included in the 1996 welfare reform, only 27.6 percent of adult welfare recipients in New York are working in unsubsidized jobs? (Another 13 percent are involved in the more broadly defined “work participation,” which includes job search, training and other things.)

Welfare is slightly more generous in Connecticut, where benefits are worth $38,761; a person leaving welfare for work would have to earn $21.33 per hour to be better off. And in New Jersey, a worker would have to make $20.89 to beat welfare.

Nationwide, our study found that the wage-equivalent value of benefits for a mother and two children ranged from a high of $60,590 in Hawaii to a low of $11,150 in Idaho. In 33 states and the District of Columbia, welfare pays more than an $8-an-hour job. In 12 states and DC, the welfare package is more generous than a $15-an-hour job.

To be clear: There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. Indeed, surveys of them consistently show their desire for a job. But they’re also not stupid. If you pay them more not to work than they can earn by working, many will choose not to work.

No kidding. I think they call this "enabling." 

While this makes sense for them in the short term, it may actually hurt them over the long term. One of the most important steps toward avoiding or getting out of poverty is a job.Only 2.6 percent of full-time workers are poor, vs. 23.9 percent of adults who don’t work. And, while many anti-poverty activists decry low-wage jobs, even starting at a minimum-wage job can be a springboard out of poverty.
Thus, by providing such generous welfare payments, we may actually not be helping recipients.

Again. Enabling.

Progressive compassion goes from good intentions to evil in a heartbeat.

I'm pretty sure Massachusetts, Hawaii and California are among the top states doling out welfare cheques in a race to show who "cares" more.

Coward In Oshawa

I couldn't believe this story about an autistic kid in Oshawa who was on the ugly end of a letter from an anonymous person from the neighbourhood.

Piece of shit.

Brain Drain Anecdote

It's crazy how a day (or two) doesn't go by where I don't have a friend or acquaintance tell me they're planning a move out of Quebec.

Never heard this before. People are wanting more and are willing to vote with their feet looks like.

I know I am.

Hope it works out.

Toronto Police Officer Charged With 2nd Degree Murder

Finally, the cops will likely lose one.

This killing was outrageous.

I hope it starts a sweeping change on how the police are investigated on the continent when they unjustly shoot people (and animals) down.

All For The State Even If You Don't Know Or Like It.

From Classical Liberal some (poorly edited on my part) excerpts:

A popular slogan of the Italian Fascists under Mussolini was, “Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato” (everything for the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state).
What of any consequence remains beyond the state’s reach in the United States today? Not wages, working conditions, or labor-management relations; not health care; not money, banking, or financial services; not personal privacy; not transportation or communication; not education or scientific research; not farming or food supply; not nutrition or food quality; not marriage or divorce; not child care; not provision for retirement; not recreation; not insurance of any kind; not smoking or drinking; not gambling; not political campaign funding or publicity; not real estate development, house construction, or housing finance; not international travel, trade, or finance; not a thousand other areas and aspects of social life.
Besides, isn’t statism itself a religion for most Americans? Do they not honor the state above all else, above even the commandments of a conventional religion they may embrace?
Moreover, in every form of adversity, Americans look to the state for their personal salvation, just as before the twentieth century their ancestors looked to Divine Providence.
As the nationalized "Healthcare" debacle nears its end game, the people of America are increasingly shocked and disgusted by the raw ugliness of the Obama "governing" philosophy. Those platitudes of "hope and change" are gone, and in their place a thoroughly regretful American populace now witnesses, to its horror, the total desecration of this once triumphal constitutional republic.
At last, the stark reality of liberalism is unmasked in its undiluted form. What cannot be discussed honestly and succinctly is couched in lies and fraud, and then sold to the public as benevolence and compassion. Those in Congress who cannot be convinced, based on the merits of the effort, to participate and support it are coerced or bought off.
In a saner time, decorum and respect by the government for the will of the people would have necessitated that the effort be dropped, and the socio-economic fabric of the country be allowed to remain intact.

GDP By City

List of cities by GDP.

Quick notes:

1) There are 205 cities.
2) China leads the list with 27 cities. The USA is next at 24, UK with 17.
3) Other economic powers: France, South Korea and Canada 5, Japan, Germany and Italy 4.
4) Top Canadian city is Toronto at 38th. Montreal is 79th.
5) Detroit ranks ahead of Montreal at 52nd. 10 U.S. cities rank ahead of Toronto and 18 ahead of Montreal.
6) Tokyo, New York and Los Angeles round out the top three. Three U.S. cities made the top 10, two from Japan, one from China. Six U.S. make the top 20 and three from China and Japan.
7) Buenos Aires and Sao Paolo are the South American representatives in the top 20.

Note: Montreal seems to lag cities of similar size (3.5 to 4 million including suburbs) in terms of economic output.

Gun-Free Seattle

I'm always astounded at leaders who cling on to "feel good" ideas as if they're practical and rational.

This is just being illogical for the sake of being illogical. 

It has nothing to do with pro or anti-gun control, left or right. It's just a childish idea and looks like citizens of Seattle are having none of what Mayor McGinn is talking about.

Again, how does one square the fact that death by guns has been on the down tick since the 60s with gun-control legislation?

If the data supported it, then by all means, politicians and advocates would be justified in exploring this option.


Bring On Competition

Whose side am I on?

Fuck, the side that won't rape me. Bell, Rogers, Telus (shit, even shitty Videotron and their shitty HD lineup) can all kiss my ass as soon as the monopoly (and all the rigged price fixing) is smashed in Canada. The arrival of American carriers would be nothing but a PLUS FOR CONSUMERS.

I'd like to see Canadian carriers against the big players on the global stage. Enough of this myopic, parochial attitude.

God damn Canada and it's anti-competitive behavior. Bell's contracts are designed to keep you in fucking servitude.

While we're at it, do the same in the banking industry. I have six banks to choose from each, mysteriously, offering the same stuff. It's just one bank with subtle differences. Just the names change.

It really is laughable at how much Canadians tolerate bull shit.

Now, granted, with all this NSA crap going on, it may pose a problem but then again, it wouldn't surprise me if it's already happening here anyway, what, with CSIS being a junior player in the global intelligence community.

Sunday Science

Piece cautioning against fracking in B.C.'s The Tyee.


Speaking of science, I shamelessly pull this out of a thread:

"And wouldn't you know it, he (Al Gore) is against nuclear power. Really, he is just for renewable energy that he can personally profit off of. And anybody who looks critically at renewable energy (solar/wind) you will find that anywhere it is installed doesn't cause for the reduction of fossil fuel use or CO2 emissions. It usually has the opposite effect due to the unreliable nature requiring constant spinning backup systems. These systems run in incredibly inefficient states so as to be always ready to backup the unreliable nature of wind and solar."


"It is really physically impossible for windmills to get much more efficient, if one obeys the laws of thermodynamics. If someone wants to build them on their own dime, go for it, but they will only cause more problems than solve, while increasing the cost of electricity to rate payers.
Solar really doesn't have much left either. And they will never work at night or during cloudy days. We have a relatively inexhaustible supply of heavy metals which want to fission. We have reached about the highest efficiency we can get out of the combustion cycle, we haven't even begun to truly tap the efficiency of the fission process.

The fission of U-235 provides an energy density of 83,140,000 MJ/kg. Coal provides us with 24 MJ/kg. That is why the fuel core of a Navy submarine, smaller than the size of an oil barrel, can power the entire submarine for decades. You could hold in your hand the amount of U-235 (golf ball size sphere) you would need to power every part of your life, when fissioned efficiently."


Nuclear waste isn't waste at all. It still contains over 90% of the accessible energy (plus other useful isotopes). Even ignoring that, the waste is solid ceramic rods sealed in zirconium tubes. After being in reactor and than cooling in cooling pools, they are sealed in steel/cement casks what are virtually indistructible. Not to mention the relatively small amount of waste that a reactor produces. All of the U.S.'s nuclear waste could be piled up end-to-end in a football field at a depth of 7 yards. That is a very small amount. Fast reactors can burn that waste to get much more energy from it.

The terrorist threat doesn't really make sense to me. What is the threat? Used fuel is very radioactive and does not contain bomb suitable material.. unless you are thinking dirty bomb. A terrorist would be better off just using conventional weapons than trying to make a dirty bomb from spent fuel. The plutonium in reactor spent fuel is littered with Pu isotopes that ruin the bomb.

I'm too ignorant to know what's up here, but it sure strikes me as, you know, correct.

Fall Of The West Reason 485868666: Progressives And Violence

"I can't wait to write a defense of the drone strike that takes out Julian Assange."

Lord, these people are shameless.

No, not Muslim terrorists.

Big government progressives like Time's Michael Grunwald.

"Fair point. I'll delete. @rober1236Jua my main problem with this is it gives Assange supporters a nice safe persecution complex to hide in."

HE alone advocated the MURDER of someone and somehow he makes himself the victim? Cla-ssic. 

He later apologized. 


Never heard of the guy until I spent some time reading up on him. Along the way, I came across this priceless gem:

"There’s dangerous stuff out there, and while it’s probably fun to stand with Rand, I’m more inclined to stand with the public servants keeping us safe, even when the al-Qaeda operative they ice in Yemen is an American citizen, even when they shut down an entire city to hunt for a single teenager, and yes, even when they try to regulate coal plants and oil rigs and Wall Street casinos that would greatly prefer to be left alone. That’s why I pay my taxes, and that’s why I don’t feel like I’m being tyrannized when I pay them."

Putz. And not cute in a Potsie or Ralph Malph kinda way.

And Limbaugh is apparently the nut job.

Notice how he goes right past due process and the rule of law as long as the "gov'mint gets their guy" because he "pays taxes" to do that.

America was born from resistance to tyranny, and our skepticism of authority is a healthy tradition. But we’re pretty free. And the “don’t tread on me” slippery-slopers on both ends of the political spectrum tend to forget that Big Government helps protect other important rights. Like the right of a child to watch a marathon or attend first grade without getting killed — or, for that matter, the right to live near a fertilizer factory without it blowing up your house.

Did I say putz? Silly me. More like turd. Notice he uses examples where the government failed to protect citizens.

Just for kicks, apparently he defended the Solyndra disaster.

Anyway. /sigh.

Time spoke out against Grunwald's tweet but as of yet he still has his job. And some food girl loses her job for saying "niggar" decades ago.

I guess hoping for someone to be killed is less outrageous than saying a taboo word these days on the left side of the equation.

Note: When people call for the death - or at least look forward to writing about the death of - other people to push an agenda, it merits being put under my 'Fall of the West' category.