Archive for the ‘Jacobian Piece of Impertinence’ Category

“I Have a File”

June 22nd, 2009

J. Edgar Hoover had a file too. Here’s a hard and fast rule of 1930-60’s America, don’t piss of J. Edgar or you’ll find yourself with a file. Fast forward to Canada, 2009, and discover another bureaucrat who keeps files: Canadian Human Rights commissioner Jennifer Lynch:

Please, please, look. We have experienced 16 months of invective hurled at us, and at any time when anybody has tried to speak up and correct misinformation, gross distortions, caricaturizations,[sic] then the very next day there’s been some full-frontal assault through the blogs, through mainstream media. I have a file. I’m sure I have 1,200, certainly several hundred of these things.

Twelve-hundred files. On whom? may we ask. Bloggers who speak ill of your institution? Ezra Levant? Mark Steyn? No doubt all of the above, but here’s a question for you Jennifer, do you have a file on Warren Kinsella, defender of the HRC’s? But of course, they’re her files, and she being a mere public servant, none of my business.

Of course, Ms. Lynch says so much more, including defending her job:

I’m a public servant responsible for giving effect to the principle that ‘individuals should have the right equal to others to make for themselves a life they are able and wish to have,’ and I’m going to do it.

I always like to pull out the old UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights which, when people like Jennifer Lynch want to debate these things always seems like a good place to start. Oh, and speaking of starting, here’s something from the second paragraph of the Preamble, you don’t get much more basic human rights than that which appears in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human rights:

…the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief

I searched in vain, by the way, for any reference to the “right equal to others to make for themselves a life they are able and wish to have,” whatever that actually means.

At the end of the day, that’s what this fight is about, everybody’s right to speak and think freely, without intimidation from some government lackey, whether in the form of hauling your sorry self before a tribunal, or just keeping a file on you.

free speech, freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy, human rights, Jacobian Piece of Impertinence, pimply minions of bureaucracy , , , , , , , , , ,

Losing the Fredom of Speech Fight

February 12th, 2009

We sit here and pontificate on the Human Rights Commissions in this country,  fighting the forces of censorship, of state controlled speech, and some days,it feels like progress is being made. Ezra Levant goes off the deep end on Michael Coren, and we cheer. Mark Steyn fights with high profile and a high margin of victory, and hooray! Baby steps forward. But it is clear, the fight against censorship is being lost,and lost badly.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission is calling for Parliament to force all Canadian magazines, newspapers and “media services” Web sites to join a national press council with the power to adjudicate breaches of professional standards and complaints of discrimination.

Barbara Hall, who claimed a lack of jurisdiction in the Steyn complaint last year and then pronounced on the complaint anyway, thinks all media, including blogs, should be subject to a national press council.

The implications for this are massive, and they affect every current event blogger. Doesn’t this mean that anonymous bloggers must register their blogs? Won’t they have to unanonymousize? What about reptilian kitten eaters? Must they register? Would a press council even allow us to call Gilligan that, or would we be forced to post, on our own blogs, paid for with real after tax day job dollars, an I’ve been a very naughty boy judgements against us?

No, we may be winning the debate, but we are losing the war. When the pimply minions of bureaucracy feel quite at liberty to make such suggestion, we not only aren’t making progress, we are going backwards.

And what Gilligan Kinsella and the rest of the apologists need to realize in a hurry is, either we all have free speech, or none of us do.

free speech, freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy, human rights, Jacobian Piece of Impertinence, pimply minions of bureaucracy

Select Company

January 26th, 2009
Comments Off on Select Company

A commenter on a piece on Gerry Nicholls’ blog wrote:

You are in select company Gerry.
Neither you or Jack Layton have seen the budget, but you are slagging our Prime Minister for it just in case it might contain something you dont like.
It is quite tiresome.

Add me to the company. Here’s what we do know about the budget: it will put Canada in a massive deficit position for the first time in ten years; it is based on the flawed theory that government can, as we Ontario conservatives laughed when Bob Rae did it, spend itself rich. The Bob Rae analogy, by the way, isn’t superfluous: stimulus of the kind we are dealing with here is exactly what Bob Rae did, and we mocked. We mocked because he was wrong and because it failed miserably.

If you are a conservative in philosophy, you cannot possibly support this budget because it is wrong headed and based on bad political philosophy. If you are a Conservative Party supporter, you should not support this budget because it could banish the party to the political wilderness, just as spending themselves rich did to the NDP in Ontario.

What Jack Layton has against the budget I can’t tell, it has all the makings of an NDP budget. But we know enough about what is coming, enough has been leaked that we know it is going to contain a lot that we don’t like.

Economic Fundamentalism, Gerry Nicholls, Jacobian Piece of Impertinence, Stephen Harper, taxpayers, The Layton world view, watergate - shawanigate - profligate

Stéphane Dion, classy guy

November 28th, 2008

Remember during the election all the stories, what an upstanding, honest, ethical guy Stéphane Dion is? So how come today he is negotiating to bring the traitorous Bloc Quebecois into the government of Canada and the story is, Stephen Harper blinked, as I heard it reported on three different newscasts this afternoon?

I’m still trying to imagine Stephen Harper negotiating to put Gilles Duceppe in cabinet, and not being called a traitor. Yet nobody is calling Stéphane Dion or Jack Layton a traitor (or hypocrite,, since they would be teh first to scream if Harper did this). I’m going to spend some time looking for it tonight, but wasn’t there once a picture of the two of them sitting together that ran as a “look how close they are” story?

Oh, and one last request for the media, can we please stop calling it a stimulus package and call it what it is? A spending package! This is nothing more than Bob Rae, spend your self rich stupidity that the Liberals Bloc and NDP are screaming for, and it’s bad public policy. Last week you were yelling deficit, he’s put us in deficit, this week your yelling spend! Spend!! SPEND!!! And shame on the media for letting you get away with it.

Want to overthrow the legally, elected, constitutionally legal government? Then what is your plan. Let Canadians know exactly what you mean by stimulus.

Update: From the comments:

*“We would see him [Stephen Harper] and (Bloc Québécois Leader) Gilles Duceppe, if they get enough seats, working together to dismantle this country that all of us are so proud of.” (Paul Martin, Toronto Star, December 3, 2005)
* Martin questioned how the Tory leader can explain “his common agenda with the separatists.” (Ottawa Citizen, June 3, 2005)
* “Stephen Harper has made it so clear that he is prepared to do the Bloc’s bidding in Parliament, which I find incomprehensible…” (Paul Martin, Ottawa Citizen, April 28, 2005)
* “Let me tell you, Stephen Harper, you made an alliance with the Bloc, not me. The Bloc wants only one thing: a referendum to divide us and break up our country.” (Paul Martin, Globe and Mail, November 29, 2005)
* “The Conservative Party and the separatists … want this Parliament to fail because the Bloc wants Canada to fail.” (Public Works Minister Scott Brison, Hansard, May 2, 2005)
* “…it is impossible to understand why the Conservative Party supports the Bloc” (Scott Brison, Hansard, April 5, 2005)
* “It has become clear that the Conservative-Bloc alliance is alive and well, despite the Leader of the Opposition’s claims to the contrary.” (Susan Kadis, Hansard, May 17, 2005)
* “It is an unholy alliance [Between Conservatives and the Bloc] and Canadians need to know all about it. I take great exception to the hypocrisy of saying that they are not in bed with the Bloc and the separatists because they are.” (Roy Cullen, Hansard, April 14, 2005)

bad journalism, Economic Fundamentalism, Jacobian Piece of Impertinence, Parliament, pimply minions of bureaucracy

Now Joe Clark Knows…

May 27th, 2008
Comments Off on Now Joe Clark Knows…

how I felt all those years:

Clark said that he does not have a political affinity for any of the current federal parties, noting that he was a “political orphan.”

When Joe Clark is running the Conservative party, a conservative guy like me was pretty much an orphan.

Now will the press please stop treating this guy like he has an ounce of credibility?

Jacobian Piece of Impertinence, pimply minions of bureaucracy, Silly Politicians

Now Elizabeth May Thinks the NDP Should Roll Over For Her

March 24th, 2008

The NDPs job, according to Elizabeth May, is to defeat Stephen Harper – period. Thus, they should join forces with the Greens to eliminate Stephen Harper’s Conservative government:

I have people coming over and saying, ‘I’m going to vote Green because I think the NDP is more interested in eliminating the Liberal party than in restoring to power a government that actually cares about issues I care about.’ My advice to (NDP Leader Jack) Layton which is open and really in the spirit of co-operation — rethink the policy of constantly denigrating the Greens and acting hostile towards us.

Which makes you wonder, what is it about politics that Elizabeth May doesn’t get? Let me guess what this co-operation would look like – the NDP wouldn’t run a candidate in Central Nova, the Green’s don’t run in Toronto-Danforth and maybe Trinity-Spadina. Because the best way to eliminate Stephen Harper is to elect Elizabeth May. (Of course, Toronto-Danforth and Trinity-Spadina are pretty safe NDP seats, so what’s in it for Jack Layton?)

Back when May made her deal with Stephane Dion, I made the following comment:

If Elizabeth May is only interested in knocking off Conservatives, if she doesn’t want to unseat a Liberal or New Democrat, what’s the point of the Green Party? Why doesn’t she just join one of those two parties?

It still stands. It is not the NDP that is in the way of the Greens unseating the Conservatives, and it’s a Jacobian Piece of Impertinence to suggest it is, it is the Greens syphoning votes away from the Liberals and NDP. And don’t tell me, as May suggests, that the Green Party “draws (support) from all the traditional parties.” If you’re reason for being is that “we cannot afford more than one term of this (Stephen Harper’s Conservative) government,” you aren’t going to draw support from the Conservative party.

If defeating Stephen Harper is your only reason for being, Elizabeth May, fold up the Green Party and stop syphoning votes from the parties that could defeat them.

One last thing. May talks about a positive campaign:

I believe that if we have an election that focuses on issues and not spin and attack ads, the voters will exercise their wisdom.

But isn’t the following, by nature, negative?

Not just specific trades in different ridings, but an effort to be more collaborative so that we can figure out — in a first-past-the-post system — can we work together to ensure that (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper enjoys a one-term period as prime minister.

We cannot afford more than one term of this government.

If all you want is to defeat the other guy, that is the very definition of negative campaigning. But that is not really what Elizabeth May wants: Elizabeth May wants a seat for herself, regardless of the costs to everyone else.

Elizabeth May, Jacobian Piece of Impertinence