“Intolerance is now a vice of the left” – says a liberal media columnist

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

When it comes to catching up with the reality on the ground, and admitting their perfidy, it takes the liberal media approximately eight years to catch up. But let’s give credit where it’s due.

Margaret WenteMargaret Wente, the Globe and Mail’s putative “conservative” columnist, writes up one that is sure to get her petitioned, rebuked, trolled, and possibly banished for life from the liberal-left’s cocktail circuit, and certainly added to the the gay industry’s hit list.  And for that, we applaud her.

Intolerance is now a vice of the left

The Globe and Mail

What poses a bigger threat to Canada: A small Christian university that endorses traditional ideas about marriage? Or a large group of liberal activists who want to stomp all over them?

That’s easy. It’s the Christians. Progressive people across the land have been waging war against Trinity Western University and its plan to start a law school. Now that the school has been approved in B.C., they want to make sure the graduates are shunned, ostracized and never allowed to practise law anywhere in Canada.

They lost a big one last week, when the B.C. Law Society reluctantly voted to recognize the law school and its graduates. The West Coast Women’s Legal Education Action Fund expressed its disappointment, saying that “TWU’s discriminatory policy effectively excludes LGBTQ students from access to the benefits of a legal education at the university.”

Well, not really. The problem is the university’s conservative views on sex, which apply to everyone. It asks all students to sign a pledge saying they won’t have sex outside of marriage. And Christian tradition doesn’t recognize gay marriage. That’s it – it’s a conduct issue, not an issue of belief or identity. It doesn’t mean gay students aren’t welcome. Yet this simple request has been blown up into a case of monstrous discrimination against gay students. Never mind that if they don’t like the rules, there are umpteen other law schools they can apply to.

…read the rest  –  takes 90 seconds…


Hillary rides a Boeing, or Boeing rides a bought politician? Or both.

As published at BoldColors.net

Few things irk me more than fat-cat politicians using their positions, and huge corporations using their cash, working together for each other’s benefit. Nothing about it smells pleasant. A fat-cat politician using her position to get cash used to be called, well, any Enterprise-Boeing_747-HUMPnumber of nasty criminal things which would land you and me in a federal penitentiary; as did a huge company getting corporate advantages from government through special arrangements and political payoffs. What happened to those days? Is it “racist,” now, to accuse those in the Obama administration of this kind of activity?

Chris Stirewalt, Fox News, daily Buzz Cut:

WaPo shares how 2016 Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton’s cozy relationship with Boeing could be a boost in her campaign’s pocket: “On a trip to Moscow early in her tenure as secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton played the role of international saleswoman, pressing Russian government officials to sign a multibillion-dollar deal to buy dozens of aircraft from Boeing… A month later, Clinton was in China, where she jubilantly announced that the aerospace giant would be writing a generous check to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming World’s Fair. Boeing, she said, ‘has just agreed to double its contribution to $2 million.’ Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company… The November 2009 episode was an indicator of a mutually beneficial relationship between one of the world’s major corporations and a potential future president. Clinton functioned as a powerful ally for Boeing’s business interests at home and abroad, while Boeing has invested resources in causes beneficial to Clinton’s public and political image… In 2010, two months after Boeing won its $3.7 billion Russia deal, the company announced a $900,000 contribution to the William J. Clinton Foundation intended to rebuild schools in earthquake-ravaged Haiti… The company’s ties came into play again this month when its in-house lobbyist, former Bill Clinton aide Tim Keating, co-hosted a fundraiser for Ready for Hillary, the super PAC backing her potential presidential run. The Boeing relationship meshed well with efforts by Clinton to expand the State Department’s advocacy of U.S. economic interests abroad, part of a broader philosophy that has emphasized partnering government with businesses to solve problems. A potential side benefit for Clinton has been the chance to strengthen ties to the kind of powerful allies in the business community who could assist a possible presidential bid…”

Also see:
K Street loses a loyal ally in Kathleen Sebelius

Major Hillary accomplishment: Selling Boeing jets to Russia


Must-see video. Truth to Bunk: Sun News debunks bias of lib media and Elections Liberal, er Canada.

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

Must-see video explains Canada’s revamped elections law. Debunks bias of lib media and Elections Liberal, er Canada.

This video exemplifies why Sun News is so vital, and state-owned CBC is so redundant and useless.

Mulcair blames Harper “regime” for computer virus. Reporters come to Mulcair’s aid.

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

Here’s a snippet from a revealing scrum with reporters today.

The socialist leader Tom Mulcair, NDP, went on a nonsensical verbal rampage, hitting every single aspect of the Harper/Conservative government that he could think of. And the reporters helped him along. If Stephen Harper had spoken like this, the media would be all over it like a Russian computer virus. The CBC would do a six-part series on “The Passionate Eye.”


Clearly unhinged, throughout the episode, Mulcair continuously referred to the Harper government as “the regime.”  This is something I do when I’m referring to a government I hate. Like North Korea’s. Or more jovially, Obama’s. But here’s a protip: a man who (fancifully) imagines himself as prime minister one day, would be well-advised to tone down the harsh, unstatesmanlike rhetoric directed toward the current prime minister.

The reporters kowtowed to Mulcair, and following his lead, referring to the Harper government as “the regime” in some of their questions. These reporters are what we refer to as “lemmings,” or “useful idiots.” And ironically, this is exactly how socialist or fascist authoritarian or totalitarian regimes are formed.

But I digress.

Reporter:  I understand what you’re saying, but is it their fault that they were hit by a virus?!  What can they do to fix it?

Mulcair:  In terms of public administration, Marie, the priority is service to the public. When there are cuts and Mulcair-pyramid-1(200px)rationalizations and things like that that have to be done, there’s a whole ‘pyramid’ of people [Mulcair makes shape of pyramid with hands] who are working for the public but ultimately you come to direct service to the public so that should be the important at best protected. That should be the most the highest priority but since the Conservatives don’t have any priorities, they cut there. And that’s not surprising. But certainly it’s their responsibility, and if they’ve introduced a system that isn’t well enough protected, yes it is their responsibility.

Mmmkay. What?

I mean I comprehend the Truman line “the buck stops here,” but that’s not really what Mulcair is saying. He’s implying that the virus happened because of the Harper/Conservatives. The Conservatives are responsible for a global computer/internet virus now?  And not knowing about any future virus like this, the “regime” is to blame for not protecting against it? What about the unionized government workers who run the system? Are they to blame too? Of course not. Don’t be such a regime. Or such a big old pyramid. Or something.

Then another reporter, whom you could credibly call a certified NDP booster, came up with this leading puffball question meant to suck up to dear leader Mulcair, instead of asking one appropriately slamming Mulcair for being so irresponsible in his previous answer:

Reporter/Supporter:  So what they should be doing is reassuring the public, is that what you’re saying?

Again: What?  I didn’t get anything like Mulcair saying that in his previous answer.  But anyway, here’s his “answer.”

Mulcair:  Well first of all they need to believe in public administration and make it a priority to give services to the public so that they can do that. And here it’s a service to the public because they have to send in their tax returns but it’s also a service to the government the government has to be able to collect taxes!

I “believe” in a lot of things  –  God, and so on. But I don’t really “believe” in public administration. It’s a necessary evil. But trust the socialists to “believe” in, and have an unending love for… the tax collecting department of government. Personally, I believe in a tax system so simple that we don’t even need the existing behemoth of a tax department. But potatoes, Marxists.

Different Reporter/Supporter (still love-baiting their man Mulcair):  So do you think they should be more proactive?

Mulcair: Well I think Conservatives are such poor managers that they’re not even capable of communicating. Uh, on an issue like that. Usually they just tell people to buzz off, and when something like that happens, they just don’t know what to do. But basically what they should have done was make that a priority previously, uh, working upstream instead of downstream!

Well that was an excellent communication. Uh, non-answer. If you like idiotic answers to stupid questions. And by the way, what’s “working upstream instead of downstream?”  Never mind, I don’t want to know. Still trying to figure out pyramids.

Then this answer to a question by another hack reporter who you’d think was Mulcair’s BFF:

Reporter: …It sounds like they’re only going to provide daily updates, it doesn’t sound like they really have this under control yet!

Dear God. The obsequiousness and leading aside, what utter tripe. But bask in this Mulcair gobbledeegook:

Mulcair:  No of course the Conservatives don’t have it under control they haven’t made it a priority, they can’t reassure Canadians about their private and personal information, and ya know these are huge issues because you have an obligation to provide all of that information to the government and there is a SECRET surrounding that that is always been maintained but since the Conservatives have never respected ANYTHING to do with personal information, they’ve against BOTH side of that. There’s an equation that says on one side you’ve got to protect peoples’ personal information and you have to render public what people are entitled to make that accessible! They’ve fought against both of those they don’t care about protecting private information and they don’t like to see things made public! THAT’s the Conservative method! This is just the ultimate example of that.

I kid you not. That’s exactly what he said. If you can make absolutely any  sense of it, I’ll vote for your “regime” Mulcair-regime(sq) in the next election, I mean if the current “regime” ever lets us have any more elections, that is.

They all  –  Mulcair and his fawning media  –  failed miserably, whatever their “priorities” were.

For what it’s worth, which isn’t much, miraculously, when asked, the Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, who is widely seen as vacuous, claims he will simply fully support the government in its effort to kill the nasty virus. It’s literally the only sensible thing Justin Trudeau has ever said, and in contrast to the buffoon Mulcair, he sounded almost statesmanlike.

Astonishing display today.


GREAT DAY: CBC cuts more staff; ends sports bidding. Alas, I call BS.

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

For years I’ve said it was egregious that a state-owned, taxpayer-funded media existed at all, in a modern, free country. A government is essentially competing against its own citizens. What a disgrace. How embarrassing. 

But using taxpayer cash to bid for the rights to NHL hockey and Olympics broadcasts, in competition against citizen-owned Sell the CBCbroadcasters was, to me, off side. It reeks of socialism, fascism, totalitarianism, and lots of other nasty isms.

Today the CBC announced that because of their loss of the NHL broadcast rights to Rogers this year, and the resulting decrease in ad revenues from that loss, they’re quitting the business of bidding for sports rights altogether. Finally.

“As of today, CBC and Radio Canada out of the business of competing with the private (broadcasters) for professional sports,” said Hubert Lacroix, in a corporate-wide town hall with employees.

But it’s not as if it’s a shocking newly found point of free-market or capitalist principle for them. Like they suddenly “got” freedom and free markets and democracy. Far from it. 


For example, if they think “competing with the private (broadcasters) for professional sports” is so bad, why not quit the news business for the same reasons? Why compete against CTV, Global, Sun News, local stations, and news web sites?  On what basis can they justify continuing to compete against citizens and private broadcasters in that realm, if it’s so wrong to “compete with the private (broadcasters) for professional sports?”

And what about the giant web site business the state-owned CBC operates? That’s a huge behemoth which competes against privately-owned web sites, not just for visitors, but for discussion, for their own advocacy (the CBC’s is left-wing), and for ad revenue. Competing with the private web site owners  –  many of which are individual Canadians, not corporations  –  is even more egregious than competing against privately-owned broadcast companies. Using my own tax dollars to compete again me? Yeah in what kind of country do they do that?

And manifestly, why doesn’t the CBC quit altogether?  The whole enterprise competes against the private sector, in every single media sector it barfs on. I mean if it’s based on the same principle as its competition for sports broadcasts, by logical extension it means they must quit altogether.

So clearly, it’s not a decision based on principle.  It’s based on getting their butt whacked and trying to get as much sympathetic attention as possible. Their new policy of not bidding on sports is more a troll move, than anything. And it’s not really forever, either. Don’t let them trick you into believing them. This policy, let me assure you, will last only until they get another liberal-left government elected  –  which is something they strive to do, every day, all day long.

For years I’ve said that state-owned media should be banned in this country, and stop competing against private citizens. My go-to lines are “What kind of government competes against its own citizens?” And “state-owned media should be banned in this country, and that notion enshrined in our constitution.”

 I still say it today. Nothing has really changed. 


Lose Firefox. But if you must keep it, don’t do web searches with it and they’ll go broke.

As published at BoldColors.net, and ProudToBeCanadian.ca

If you haven’t heard of the backlash against Mozilla, which is the owner of the Firefox browser brand, here are a few links to bring you up to Firefox_boycottspeed:

The best course of action if you’re interested in protecting freedom of speech, and conscience, and religion, and you abhor fascism and idiocy, is to stop using Firefox as your browser, and stop using Thunderbird as your email software.

But if you must, for some odd reason, stick with Firefox, at least don’t use it to do any internet searching. Mozilla is, at its core, a non-profit organization. So how does this not-for-profit make its money? Mozilla gets nearly all of its income from the various search engines, mostly Google, who pay Mozilla a royalty every time a user who uses Firefox searches the search engine. Yes, web sites including this one track what browser you’re using. Search engines use that capability to pay royalties to Mozilla/Firefox.

From Wikipedia:


The Mozilla Foundation is funded by donations and “search royalties”. Since 2005, the vast majority of funds have come from Google Inc.

Initial funding in 2003 came from AOL, who donated US$2 million, and from Mitch Kapor who donated US$300,000. The group has tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. tax code, though the Mozilla Corporation subsidiary is taxable.

In 2006, the Mozilla Foundation received US$66.8 million in revenues, of which US$61.5 million is attributed to “search royalties” from Google.[8]

The foundation has an ongoing deal with Google to make Google search the default in the Firefox browser search bar and hence send it search referrals; a Firefox themed Google search site has also been made the default home page of Firefox. The original contract expired in November 2006. However, Google renewed the contract until November 2008 and again through 2011.[9] On 20 December 2011 Mozilla announced that the contract was once again renewed for at least three years to November 2014, at three times the amount previously paid, or nearly US$300 million annually.[10][11] Approximately 85% of Mozilla’s revenue for 2006 was derived from this contract.

I’ve decided not to block Firefox users from accessing this site for now, but that will change if Mozilla refuses to embrace freedom and stop acting like a cabal of fascist idiots or the Gestapo. Here are instructions of you are a web site owner and want to block Firefox. Otherwise, instructions are also provided if you simply want to create a banner across the top of your site, warning users of the attack on freedom by Mozilla (watch the punctuation on their example — it’s not “it’s,” it’s its! You could just express your own personal outrage in your own words, which would be better anyway).

Here’s more about what you can do:
How you can push back against Mozilla/Firefox’s gay marriage thuggery

Here are a few alternative browsers.
Google Chrome | Apple Safari (works in Windows too) | Opera | Internet Explorer

This action by a cabal of zealots presents a very dangerous slippery slope. Don’t let them get away with it.


Canada’s jobs up, U.S. down. Media? Studiously ignoring the comparison.

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

Here’s something that won’t be played-up by the liberal mainstream media today like more Rob Ford jokes or the all-important David Letterman replacement pontification: Stephen Harper_at_swearing_in_2_AP_PHOTO_Tom Hanson_CPConservative/Harper-led Canada nearly doubled economists’ expectations and grew by 42,900 jobs in March. Obama looking like a goofballEconomists had projected just 22,000 new jobs. And it’s the biggest job growth in seven months.

Canada historically shadows the U.S., the ties to which are absolutely of vital importance in every respect.

In the liberal/Obama-led U.S., economists had projected 200,000 new jobs, but only 190,000 were created. The U.S. jobs picture remains stagnant and is getting stale. America remains in the unemployment and economic doldrums.

Using the old standby comparison of America being ten times that of Canada in terms of population, the U.S. would have to have grown around 400,000 new jobs.

Canada nearly doubled its economists’ expectations, while the U.S. didn’t even meet its economists’ expectations, much less match Canada’s job growth. There’s far more too.

So I’m glad you came to visit today, because you won’t see this comparison anywhere in Canada or the U.S. by the liberal mainstream media. You know why. It’s because Harper is Conservative, and Obama is a liberal Democrat. That’s why.


Liberal: “Blather!” Conservative: “Science! Facts!”

As published at BoldColors.net


Loved this Twitter exchange from last night between Townhall.com’s Katie Pavlich, who is indomitable, and the failed CNN host Piers Morgan, rabid and apparently ignorant anti-gun zealot. The back-and-forth actually went on for a while, but this one hits the target:

Piers Morgan’s anti-gun crusade ultimately cost him his job at CNN, where viewers grew weary of his constant, irrational, anti-Second Amendment bromides.

Dems and their media division demand GOP list their Obamacare fixes; while Dems have none

The Democrats are still hammering (and possible sickle-ing) out their “smart” strategy to deal with the growing Obamacare failure, in time for the 2014 mid-term campaign, but “Fix Obamacare, don’t repeal it!” seems to be the nut. NBC’s Chuck Todd thought it might be fun to ask the head of the Democrats exactly what fixes they had in mind. That’s fair, since the Dems have been pretending the GOP don’t have any, and demanding they list them if they do have them, ever since Obamacare started failing and Republicans dared to point that out.

Here’s how that went:

Since the 2008 election, Republicans have been offering detail after detail on what they’d do to fix America’s health care system: tort reform, cross-state competition, tax adjustments, to name just three biggies. It’s almost a Googlesque problem at this point — there are so many specific ideas that it’s difficult to list them all. But Debbie Wasserman Shultz couldn’t think of one single thing to fix Obamacare, which has made American’s health care system worse, even while acknowledging there are new problems.

Help fund new TV movie about serial late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell

The movie-makers behind the excellent documentary “FrackNation” are launching a unique crowd-sourcing effort to fund a new TV movie about the late-term abortionist and baby killer Kermit Gosnell. Click here to help fund this important TV film, since liberal Hollywood and the mainstream media won’t do it.

Grand display of decorum and respect: Liberal Justin Trudeau drops F-bomb at cancer charity event.

As published at ProudToBeCanadian.ca

Real nice. A grand display of good judgement, huh? What a class act. What leadership quality. How proud I would be to have this F-ing darling as my Justin_Trudea_F-bomb-markednation’s leader.

While I try to avoid the F-bomb even at home in front of the dog (she’s a lady), Justin Trudeau, according to himself, is super special. He doesn’t even hesitate to go full potty-mouth in front of a large gathering of nice people supporting a cancer charity event — and he said it emphatically. I mean he really hung on to the word and it spewed out slowly and with purpose. This was no slip of the tongue — not that he’d be excused if it was.

His F-bomb and the weird preceding remarks start at the 1:30 mark. He actually sounds like he might be, well, you know, a little “off on something.”

Does he even care anymore? Is this him just flipping Canada off? Is he so arrogant as to think that nothing he says or does matters, and the media’s got his back, and that Canadian people outside of Quebec are so stupid they’ll vote for him anyway? Are people really that stupid? Do I have to reassess my judgement of Canadians?

Imagine the wall-to-wall sneering and caterwauling by the mainstream media and the other liberal-left punditry that would ensue if a Conservative had made this enormous career-ending gaffe. How is this not being absolutely torn apart by the liberal-left’s mainstream media division? (Oh I just answered that.)

NDP MP links 9/11 truthers with the supposed shameful “climate deniers,” and “anti-choicers”

You know how they say it’s the coverup, rather than the crime, that get politicians into trouble? Here’s a twist on that.

NDP MP Megan Leslie allowed her official NDP web page’s events calendar to be used for a promotion for a 9/11 truther event. If you can stomach it, cast aside the repugnance of the 9/11 truther conspiracy idiocy, and even the fact that a sitting MP would allow that kind of promotion on her official NDP web site. And even try to tolerate the fact that she has decided to keep that promotion in place, even after she’s been made aware of it. Try to forget all the 9/11 victims and their families, and all the soldiers who fought terrorists in Afghanistan and were killed or maimed (and to that last point, I still wear red on Fridays).

Megan_Leslie MP NDP 2014-03-28_event-detail

In this case, it’s not the crime — I don’t have a clue if Megan Leslie is a 9/11 truther or not — nor her making the patently stupid mistake of allowing 9/11 truthers to promote that disgracefully insulting and insensitive nonsense on her official NDP web site; and then leaving it there seemingly to prove her arrogance and stupidity. It’s her response that irks me.

Here’s a Canadian NDP MP’s defense of herself after allowing her taxpayer-subsidized NDP web site’s events calendar be used to drum-up support for a 9/11 truther event, and being called on it (with my highlighting):

Megan Leslie
meganleslie_webHi Facebook friends,

Yesterday I got attacked by a Conservative MP for my events calendar on my website. If you’ve seen it, you’ll know that it is full of all kinds of events from the community. This MP raised the fact that there is a 9/11 Truther event on the site. Partisan trolls on Twitter got all excited, and all of a sudden, it was a story.

I keep this aspect of my site as a service to the community. I’m proud of how many people use it, and the way it supports our community. I won’t post anything that is illegal, and I won’t post events about hate, but otherwise, I don’t judge what goes up. If there were a climate denier rally or an anti-choice talk, I would post them. I have a process for dealing with complaints from the community. There is also a disclaimer on the site saying they events may not reflect my views or the views of the NDP.

What do you think? Where is the line? I’ve been accused of showing poor judgement, and damaging my good name by associating with groups like this. But I don’t just represent people I agree with. Would you judge the posts? Would you not post at all? I’d be interested in hearing what you would do.

Condescending much?

First, if you are concerned by this and call her on it, you’re “attacking” her and you are a “partisan troll.” But you gotta love how Megan Leslie, MP, puts “climate deniers” and “anti-choice” people (using purposely derogatory terms) in with the same lot as megan leslie_partisan-trolls9/11 truthers. She will now also put me in the “attacker” camp along with the other “trolls,” as she calls people who criticize her, in addition to the “climate denier” camp, and the “anti-choice” slot.

But don’t worry, she’s not “partisan.” And she doesn’t “judge.”

She has quite the mentality for a Member of Parliament. People who don’t agree with her free abortion stance, and her “man-made global megan leslie_i-dont-judgewarming” theories, are cast as the ills of society akin to the disgraceful 9/11 truthers, and marked by her with her derogatory, bromidic labels. Yet she “represents” you and all, she says.

You and all definitely pay her salary. This is a Canadian MP calling other Canadians who pay her exorbitant $160,200.00++ salary, “trolls,” and who attempts to reduce earnest ideological opponents into tendentious categories of supposed shame: “climate deniers,” and “anti-choice.”

She makes the passive-aggressive claim that in order to be absolutely fair, and balanced, and open, and “I don’t judge,” she allows event postings by radicals like 9/11 truthers — because she also represents people she doesn’t agree with. Like “deniers” and those “anti-choice” dictators, I presume.

This is all emblematic of the inconsistent application of principles, and the peculiar hypocritical style of “tolerance” that is the left and far-left, particularly the far-left NDP.

She as an MP thinks a 9/11 truther event is a “service to the community?” Apparently she’s utterly tone-deaf and incapable of perspective. Or she really advocates it. I cannot begin to explain how someone who pretends to be full of compassion has absolutely no comprehension of how insulting and disrespectful that kind of thing is, to so many people, particularly those involved — which include many Canadians. And there is no rationalizing how she thinks it is appropriate to lump those 9/11 truthers in with good, honest people who have studied the climate science and simply don’t agree with the failing theories of “man-made global warming;” and lump those 9/11 nutters in with those who are simply pro-life and against free, limitless abortions.

Yeah. And yet, we’re the “trolls.”

Since when does a mortgage rate war “loom,” and concern government?

The news media is weird. But anyway, here’s some real news.

all-eyes-on-gov-to-hold-peoples-handsTheir tease on their front page — in this case the National Post, but it doesn’t matter — tells you BMO is lowering its five-year fixed mortgage rates to below 3%.

That is fantastic news for people and families. All eyes will be on saving money and living the Canadian dream. Right?

Wrong! The news editors think it’s all about the government. “All eyes on [finance minister] Joe Oliver as BMO signals start of new mortgage rate war by cutting 5-year below 3%.”

The government shouldn’t have the slightest thing to do with this, since it’s none of their damn business; and also, this isn’t the Soviet Union.

I do understand that the story reflects one not long ago wherein then-finance minister Flaherty wagged a finger from his big-government bully pulpit at banks who dared to lower rates (and convinced them not to!), at a time when the big nanny-state wanted to calm (actually, control, full-stop) the housing market. But oh hey, by the way, what the hell was the government doing trying to control the free market anyway? Don’t they control enough? They want more control over us and our personal and business decisions? Why yes they do. Thanks for asking.

They should get out of the mortgage business entirely, as they have no business being in business of any kind. Not the CBC, not insuring mortgages, and not controlling banks.

Bear in mind the big nanny-state government we’re talking about is not the socialist NDP or the slightly less socialist Liberal Party — but imagine if it were… and now please stop torturing yourself with that dreadful thought looming over you like a big Russian bear. We’re talking about a so-called Conservative government. Alas Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would laugh at this one, even if you won’t. I merely freak out.

Joe_Oliver“Finance Minister Joe Oliver again warned Thursday that he is monitoring the mortgage market closely.”
– Financial Post

That Oliver remark is supposed to provide comfort? Sounds more like Ronald Reagan’s line,

Ronald_Reagan“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”
–Ronald Reagan

So yeah, no, Joe Oliver is not where my eyes are at all, with regard to this news, except to make sure he stays out of my business. Most eyes — I won’t even venture “all,” but pretty much all — are actually on their own mortgage, where people are paying more than 3%, and would benefit by refinancing now. And many Canadians could now buy their first home… unless the government stops them, seeing as they think they know better that you about, well, you.

Their eyes — the media’s and all progressives’ eyes alone — are on the government, looking for their wisdom and guidance and motherly protection, as a reflex reaction. Because everything in life revolves around the government, to progressives.

As a secondary matter, why does the Financial Post see a mortgage rate war — something which benefits all normal, responsible consumers — as something that “looms?”




What brooding has inspired this sullen headline? Only someone tainted with the stink of the anti-free-market set, and progressives, and full-on socialists, would view a mortgage rate drop and competition for the lowest rate, as a war that “looms” over us.

I’m sure it wasn’t a brooding author, who’s bio begins “Garry Marr’s cheapness dates back to as early as age seven, when he swallowed a dime and demanded the folks at the Hospital For Sick Children return it.” Maybe one of the paper’s editor learned to brood over free market competition at their journalism schooling, and become obsessed with a big-government reaction to a free-market activity. My wary eyes are often cast at those institutions of left-wing propaganda. True story: I swallowed a penny, and demanded the Lion’s Gate Hospital return it, never went to journalism school, and I love mortgage rate wars, and I am inclined to advocate for small government, and free enterprise.

It isn’t a mortgage rate war that “looms” over us, it’s government which looms over us. So let’s get that straight, even if the progressives now dominating the media, can’t.


Harry Reid caught in hideous lie to Congress. Media ignores.

Yeah. A post where I don’t have to say a word. Just watch this short clip.

What’s Zulu for “complete government bullcrap?”

OK watch out for an air-quote festival, I’m addressing another government waste-a-thon. So you understand.

Without even fully delving into the obvious, gross misuse of taxpayer funds that is self-important government “officials” taking their spouses on “business” trips, why did government “officials” even have to go to a “parliamentary” conference in South Africa at all, last year? Why go to almost any of these elaborate conferences, for that matter, which are held in exotic places on exactly the opposite end of the world, with amazing regularity?

They are absolutely a waste of time and money. Some more than others. This one belongs in the “more,” or even “most” category.Parliamentary_Conference-03

Naturally (a word I use advisedly), the annual prize goes to those so-called “environmental” conferences, wherein politicians from all over the globe travel first by limousine, to their various global airports (mostly named after politicians), then by jet aircraft, first class, or even by national military aircraft which are designed for national security, to exotic locations on the other side of the planet. Then into another limo, to a luxury resort hotel. And various outings and dinners and shows and cocktail parties, to which they are shuttled by luxurious limos or coaches, not bikes. In the exquisite conference halls, they meet other big government “officials” (and some of their spouses), all dressed to the nines, in luxurious surroundings over cocktails and fine wine and shrimp foo-foos (but don’t worry, they’re “organic!”). There, they yap with each other, through multiple translations, about their plans to impose their big-government “green” laws, and restrictions and new taxes supposedly designed to reduce “carbon emissions,” and more programs to further re-social-engineer and re-regulate to control the bad behavior of… evil and very misbehaved and utterly stupid non-government minion citizens, and the little useful idiots people, whom they think of as their “subjects,” back home.

The arrogance and hypocrisy is almost as breathtaking as the asininity of people like us allowing them to get away with this elitist idiocy.

The conference in South Africa, of all places, that Liberal Speaker Linda Reid now infamously attended with her husband, as well as assistant deputy Speaker NDP MLA Raj Chouhan and his wife, was the Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference. Try as I might, I cannot determine what, exactly, the point of it was. Besides wasting time and money.

Here’s the pitch from their website:

“Global political issues and developments in the parliamentary system are analyzed in conference debates among leading Parliamentarians representing Parliaments and Legislatures throughout the Commonwealth.”

Wow. Sounds official. Also, it sounds like complete bullcrap. Good thing nobody has to attend, because…

“A summary of the main views expressed in conference debates is sent to Members, Commonwealth governments and international agencies.”

So in other words, “we’ll email ya, so you really don’t need to be here. And if you came, well shit, we sure got you good — well you and the people who pay you, sucka.”

I watched a YouTube video to try to garner more understanding of its worthiness. I came away knowing only that it sounded like the biggest waste of time and money I can remember, at least since the advent of Obamacare or “man-made global warming” or “stimulus spending.” So I watched another and another. It just got worse. Confirmed it.

I’ve never heard of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, which suckers taxpayers into sending self-important government “officials” to their annual chin-wag. You’d think with all the big-government self-anointed poo-bahs in attendance every year, at least one tiny bit of news would come of it. But no. Nothing. Do any media even attend? I bet not. I gave up searching for just one news media report after page four of my Google search.

I’m actually quite sure it’s about as close to a scam as you can get without actually calling it that.

It’s quite telling that the official web site of the “CPA” indicates that the next conference will be held in Kenya. Yeah but that’s in 2010. I’m not making this up. If I were to shop around online for something or someplace to travel and I saw this…

(“The conference will be held in Kenya in 2010.”)

…I’d keep shopping. So perhaps the conference is more than mere complete bullcrap — it’s actually more like well-composted manure at this point three or four years later — a product which would actually be more useful to taxpayers.

Raj Chouhan-NDP

Raj Chouhan-NDP

I’d like to see a lengthy written summary, from BC Liberal Speaker Linda Reid and the assistant deputy Speaker NDP MLA Raj Chouhan. Report back to us about exactly how taxpayers were served by their all being there, and why it was even remotely a good use of thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ funds, and the loss of work time for which we simultaneously pay them exorbitantly. Reid gets $152,788.50 plus expenses and a Cadillac benefits plan and pension plan…; Chouhan gets $137,509.65 ++. And of course we have to pay for their spouses to go on elaborate trips with them whenever they want. We’ll read the report and decide if they should be fired. My reflex reaction is Trump-like. “You’re fired.”

Linda Reid-BC Liberal Speaker of the House

Linda Reid-BC Liberal Speaker of the House

And moving forward, if I were premier, I’d ban all further travel to any conference at all, ever again.

Actually, I’m more powerful than them. I’m a citizen and a taxpayer. Those people are servants of the people and work for me and us. So I ban it. I demand an end to this disgraceful and immoral waste of my taxpayer cash, and the ripping off of taxpayers. You should too. I know you understand the parliamentary system of democracies, even without a fancy elitist conference.

I’ll bet neither Speaker Reid nor assistant deputy Speaker Chouhan learned how to speak the phrase “complete government bullcrap” in Zulu — or in any other language, including English. I, at least, did some semi-useful work: the translation from “complete government manure” to Zulu is “kuqediwe kahulumeni umquba,” according to a translator. My report would thus be more worthwhile reading.