She is replacing Evan Solomon on the CBC's Politics show and is doing superbly.
While I miss Don Newman terribly, I think Evan has been great, and so has Rosemary, not just because she is cute (though she is).
I am barely listening to what anyone says but I sympathize overall with Brown, at the same time seeing clearly how Clegg and Cameron are just so much more attractive.
It seems it is clear it is time for a big change.
As Mr. Gillani testifies, there is a behind his head a nice pink outfit with seemingly nice breasts.
I have concluded they are Rosemary Barton's. Am I wrong?
UPDATE: Further evidence suggests I am right.
I am devastated to hear that Terry Goodenough has died. This is not a bad summary regarding him.
Terry was a great friend, and for a while a roommate; in fact he allowed my bike to be stolen! That is the surest sign of a roommate!
He took over Laurel Creek Track and Field when I decided I had no time for it anymore, and made it a true track club in a way I never could have.
He was a true friend and a delightful person to have known.
UPDATE: Other comments
I found I quite liked the guy, not having watched 'The Bachelor' at all. But I suspect his Vienna is happier he is not spending full days anymore with Chelsie Hightower. I think I would have found that stressful (as either he or she). Seems an utterly decent guy, and that is nice to see.
So now I cheer for Pamela Anderson to be ejected next week.
We shall see.
When I first saw the new GM ad with Ed Whitacre, I thought WTF? The claim that GM had paid back all its loans was, of course, literally true, but not true in any useful sense of the word, as Scott Johnson documents.
What really disgusted me is that the US government (and I expect the Canadian one, also a sleazy shareholder in this company) clearly approved this ad.
First, Whitacre omitted any mention of the remaining $50 billion or so that the government has sunk in the company's equity. Second, Whitacre omitted any mention of the source of the funds with which GM "repaid" the loan. According to TARP Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky, the source of the funds in whole or in substantial part was the United States government TARP program, not GM earnings. Shikka Dalmia has much more detail on the misrepresentations permeating Whitacre's public relations blitz in this Forbes column.
I agree with Scott on the disgusting priorities of the mental pygmy Carl Levin:
It was a fraud committed with the assistance if not the urging of the Obama administration. It was not, in short, the kind of fraud that Michigan Senator Carl Levin or his Democratic counterparts chairing other Senate committees will be holding hearings on any time soon.
Go read Scott's post.
UPDATE: Great reader comment (and I am opposed to Own the Podium):
When everyone was bashing Own the Podium, I kept thinking, OK, $11 million a year extra. That's 1000 years of the June 1 gift to GM. I know which one I think has greater social value. I drive a Honda.
I drive a GM pre-bailout car. Best car I have ever owned. But they are still liars.
The saddest thing in all this - as a software engineer most of my career, I am very prepared to believe that Toyota has a software problem; but I am now extremeley distrustful of a US Government persecuting Toyota. For obvious reasons.
Thanks, Tim - I did not Know how to Say It - Goldman Sachs Edition
Watching the Congressional hearings with Lloyd Blankfein as witness, I developed very sour feelings, but did not quite know how to articulate my problems with Goldman executives trying to explain the simplest financial risk management concepts to an intellectual pygmy like Carl Levin, but Tim Worstall hit it:
The very act of selling something to someone is a bet against that product.
If I were convinced that BP shares were worth more than £5 then I wouldn’t sell them to you at £5 would I? That I am willing to sell them to you at £5 means that I think £5 is worth more than a BP share.
I am, by the very fact that I’m undertaking a transaction with you, showing that I think you’ve over valued the item. This is as true of apples, houses, bales of hay and stocks, bonds and collateralised debt obligations as it is of anything else.
And hey, maybe one might play both sides of this at the same time, because, err, you don't know what is going to happen!
I was devastated by the latest episode, where the detectives finished last by far, and only recovered when Rondi pointed out to me something I knew intellectually but not emotionally, that it was a non-elimination round, so they survive to next week, albit with an additional task next week.
I like all the teams left, and this is unique in my experience with The Amazing Race. So each remaining elimination week is going to hurt.
By far I most like the cowboys, who are so casual and so effective. These guys are not drama queens, say like Dan and Jordan, whose silliness I have come to accept. But the cowboys are just such fun - the analogy of rope work to the work required to prepare Shanghai noodles was lovely.
As for the detectives, I simply do not understand the strategy for the jigsaw puzzle, nor the doggedness when it clearly was not working; is this what a stakeout is like? Just stick to your guns because you know someday things will work out?
What is nice to see is that every other team just flat out likes the detectives and has found very affectionate ways to work with and against them and describe them.
The next few weeks should be a lot of fun, and a lot of sadness.
Great moments this week: The utter delight everyone had in the dismissal of the lesbians, though Dan and Jordan are right about the tactics being at best imperfect.
And PingPing - sad to think he has died. He performed brilliantly for the show. This new open China is a wonder, and a delight.
And one other point - the quality of your cab driver has been showing up all this season. Take care!
Question: Has there been a season where all the final four teams have such mutual respect? This really makes the show attractive to me.
One last thought - the Chinese models in the fashion segment were just brilliantly stoic.
I think making fun of Muslim morons is a great idea and I am pleased a new constituency has been born. OTOH I have been working in the house and the backyard so missed the best fun,
I await the local earthquake that I am sure will come.
I am also hoping a byproduct will be a broader recognition of what clowns Muslims are (we are well into realizing this for Christians, Buddhists, etc.)
In writing about Texas' decision to change the content of its history curriculum, Steve Sailer takes an entertaining and depressing look at a current high school history textbook, Nation of Nations.
He starts with what strikes me as an accurate description of the current world of pedagogy:
For more than forty years, the teaching business has been completely dominated by the prejudices of the Sixties People, whose Gramscian "long march through the institutions" has left them in control of the schools.
What is striking to somebody like me, who grew up during the 1960s and 1970s, is the subsequent lack of generational rebellion. Kids these days tend toward intellectual conformism. They trust anyone over 30 who tells them what everybody else is telling them.
Why have the Sixties People proven so enduring in molding young people’s minds? My theory: The Sixties mindset—aggrieved, resentful, and unrealistic—is perfectly attuned to appeal permanently to the worst instincts of adolescents.
I think he is right on this last point, especially noting the centrality of resentment in the mentailty of what we call The Sixties.
And on a key point, which is deep in the culture:
And yet young people do have a finer side—their hunger for heroes—that history books once tried to fulfill rather than exploit...In our Age of Oprah, rather than Heroes of Accomplishment, we are addicted to Heroes of Suffering...This Heroes of Suffering fetish is exacerbated in modern history textbooks by the “diversity” imperative.
On to the textbook:
Even with a tome this immense, diversity awareness means that there isn’t room in all 1277 pages to mention…the Wright brothers.
WTF? We find out why as we go on.
Nation of Nations resembles an unfunny parody of Dave Barry’s 1997 parody of history textbooks, Dave Barry Slept Here:
"Educational Advisory Alert: A review committee consisting of education professionals with doctorate degrees and initials after their names has determined that, so far, this history book is not making enough of an effort to include the contributions of women and minority groups. "
Thereafter, Barry interjects every 10 or 15 pages: "Also around this time women and minority groups were making contributions."
Unlike Barry’s book, McGraw-Hill’s textbook checks off all the identity politics boxes so assiduously that after awhile you start to wonder who are the poor losers who didn’t make the cut, like … well, there must be somebody who doesn’t swing enough weight … uh … the Sikhs! Yeah, why does Nation of Nations discriminate against the crucial contributions of Sikh-Americans?
And, in fact, Sikh activists, such as Prof. Onkar S. Bindra, are indeed sore about the lack of Sikh Awareness in textbooks:
"California Sikhs have been unhappy over the fact that the K-8 textbooks for History-Social Science in current use have nothing about Sikh identity, culture, or history of their immigration. They consider this to be the leading reason for ignorance of the masses about the Sikhs."
You can’t make this stuff up.
I imagine Canadian textbooks might well mention the Sikhs; would they mention the Air India bombing?
After noting the desultory treatment of the Pacific War in the textbok, he notes, sensibly:
When I was growing up in Los Angeles, where so many veterans of the Pacific settled, the struggle with Japan loomed as a national epic. Since then, it’s largely disappeared from consciousness—especially compared to the war with the Nazis, which presents the more comfortable scenario of white Americans defeating white Europeans.
Poor Tom Hanks has been reduced to promoting his current HBO miniseries The Pacific, successor to his 2001 European theatre of operations miniseries Band of Brothers, as being about "a war of racism." (I seem to recall it had something to do with Pearl Harbor, but what do I know?)
And then on to how this will help minorities out:
Of course, leaving out so many annoying white male Heroes of Accomplishment from the textbook doesn’t mean that the historians have managed to dig up comparable diverse Heroes of Accomplishment.
Instead, the space mostly gets filled with Heroes of Suffering.
And who made them suffer?
Rhetorical question, of course.
After noting that the textbook index nowhere mentions Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, he discovers:
I did find, however:
Chanax, Juan, 1096—1098, 1103, 1124, 1125
Who, exactly, is Chanax and why does he appear on six pages when Chamberlain can’t be squeezed in anywhere?
It turns out Chanax is an illegal immigrant from Guatemala who works in a supermarket in Houston. This hero’s accomplishment is that he brought in 1,000 other illegal aliens from his home village.
The thinking, apparently: featuring an illegal alien so disproportionately will boost the self-esteem of the illegal alien students reading the book—which will then raise their test scores!
But how many are going to read all the way to p. 1096? And how many won’t find it patronizing and depressing that the biggest hero these industrious historians could dig up for their edification and emulation was Chanax?
Perhaps all these news media going hysterical over an Arizona law that simply asserts a federal law as state law has something to do with this orientation.
My favorite bit:
Today’s history textbook writers do have a problem: politically favored groups’ general lack of accomplishment. For instance, Nation of Nations gives much room to Mexican-Americans down through the ages, in accordance with their vast current numbers. But the authors struggle to make them seem all that interesting or important.
Consider that there are almost as many people of Mexican descent in the U.S. as there are blacks. Everybody can name famous blacks. But how many famous Mexicans can you remember?
Let’s see how many I can now recall after reading the book. There’s Cesar Chavez, and then there’s Sammy Sosa, who is cited on p. 1123 (interestingly enough, that is the same page on which Lawrence Auster appears as a bogeyman for writing The Path to National Suicide). But, he’s not Mexican, he’s Dominican. (Sammy, I mean, not Larry.)
That is the quality of fact-checking I would expect from what I had read up to here.
I think I agree with this conclusion:
I can’t really see how this kind of taxpayer-supported textbook is making my life better, or America’s. Can you?
The Texas School Board’s conservatives can’t do any worse.
Ed Whitacre claims in the most slippery way possible that Government Motors have repaid their loans. Of course it is in the interest of both the US and Canadian governments that this lie gets publicized. Like most lies it is literally true but leaves out everything important. It is still your money supposedly repaying your money.
As the owner of a GM car, bought before the bailout, I recommend buying Toyota!
Dancing with the Stars is not fair - it is clear that the professional performers have a big advantage and that Nicole Scherzinger is the class of the dancing field this year. So in a sense it is nice that there is a voting element to toss people off; but in the end I think it is the weakest dancers who have been tossed off so far.
This week's episode, before tonight's elimination, has been interesting. Chad Ocho Cinco is actually starting to dance, so I hope he lasts a week or two more. Erin Andrews keeps getting bashed by the judges, but she is my favorite, perhaps because I am the sort of person who likes ESPN (i.e. I am male). But it is also Erin who used that subject phrase "I was so geeked up", at least for me originating a new use of the word 'geek'.
As for Scherzinger last night, Carrie Ann's "I was looking for constructive criticism", followed by a reach said it all. On the other hand, Len's a "hotch potch of sexy moves" was also right.
We are getting into the interesting part of the season, as the judge's votes are diverging at last. Though there were many too many 7's last night - 7 seems to me a cop-out.
Personally, I would like to see Pamela Anderson eliminated next, though Bruno last night praised her for just what she deserves praise for - excellent performance skills. Also, it is sweet to see shots of what I take to be her mother in the audience.
As it was great to see Buzz and Donnie, too!
One of the truly outstanding characteristics of the Swedish film trilogy starting with "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" was the ubiquity of Apple computers. I assume this was a paid product placement, though I could be wrong. Please correct!
But if it was, it seems to me a very weird choice. One of the basic skills of Lisbeth Salander and her friend Plague is the ease with which they break into and take over other people's computers, all Apple computers! I had thought that one of Apple's key (and misleading) marketing points was the security of their machines!
It seems marketing messages are very nuanced in this world.
American German Crime Shows and Canadian American Ones
Sometime ago I wrote a post describing my interest in the difference between what I saw at the time as the crime show model in the US and the crime show model in the German-speaking world, by which I meant Germany and Austria, excluding Switzerland only because of my utter ignorance.
During some years when I was not much watching 'detective fiction' on US TV it turned into German Krimis. And more power to it! And wow did they do it well, in a glorious outgrowing of wonderfully diverse series.
It first struck me as I started watching episodes of CSI. This was the original Las Vegas version. And it was magnificent. It took the best of the German Krimi form, and improved it enormously by assigning roles, even though slightly fluid, to the many team members. It allowed each participant a personality, but also wonderfully mapped that role to other elements of the character's role, not something I recall much from Tatorts or der Altes. Moreover, CSI pumped up the size of the team, and allowed the team to split across a couple of investigations per episode! Major economy. And I am not joking - I think it has to do with our attention span - a team of six or so requires us to see them split across a couple of investigations.
Of course I had stumbled across CSI, only to realize shortly later that the whole damned panoply of US crime shows were in the German mold - and delightfully! Look at them all - the CSIs (very different, the original having lost a bit with Gil and Sarah, Miami being awful and close to unwatchable except for looking at Emily Proctor, CSI NY pretty good), Criminal Minds, Bones, NCIS, and even House MD (not a crime show but damned close).
Meanwhile, the irony is that Canada (!!!) has recreated the Rockford mold brilliantly. I do not know where anyone can watch 'The Republic of Doyle', but I sure hope for people in other countries they get the chance. This show has produced a perfect balance between the old Rockford Files model and the more group-oriented one in fashion now, and made it a lot of fun.
Twice a Year Day - Opera Atelier's Le Nozze di Figaro
OK they did it again - maybe I won't say this was the best of their operas I have ever seen but this Marriage of Figaro was an utter pleasure, and it made three hours feel like twenty minutes - I did not want it to end.
The director's idea to slant this one to Commedia del' Arte struck me, as I read the program, a tad surprising, but once things go going it seemed dead right. As usual for this company the opera was singing and dancing and dancing in the form of gestures, and these were fabulous.
Also as usual, the casting was superb. Carla Huhtanen, whom I have loved in roles here (she is the most wonderful Papagena I have ever seen) and in Toronto Operetta Theatre, finally got an utter leading role as Susanna with this company and carried it beautifully. Figaro is ultimately the story of Susanna and the Countess and Peggy Kriha Dye was a superb Countess, grounding the whole performance beautifully with Huhtanen. Her second Dove Sono was heartbreaking (well, so was the first but just a little less so).
Opera Atelier is also wonderful at finding new casting, and Phillip Addis was superb as the Count, acting brilliantly (a necessary condition for this company), singing excellently, and being hunky, according to my informants (also important).
Another find was the newbie Wallis Giunta as Cherubino who stole almost every scene she was in - I hope they can find excuses to cast her again! It is lovely how well this company finds new talent.
Some secondary roles, behind the Commedia del' Arte masks, escaped me but were fine - Curtis Sullivan, who usually plays a more prominent role, was almost invisible as Dr. Bartolo but effective, and Laura Pudwell's Marcellina was all that was needed.
At first I was troubled by Olivier Laquerre's Figaro - he seemed to be made up as if he were a simpleton, and performed as such. But as the opera moved along I realized, as I may not have before, that Figaro is indeed such; every scheme he puts in motion is an utter failure. It is Susanna and Rosina who finally drive the opera to its resolution despite all the men and their foolishness.
This performance was one of the few not featuring skin-tight costumes on the dancers, and I am sure some were disappointed, but I loved the Spanish costumes.
I just sent my subscription ticket orders in for next year (a Handel and a Mozart), the one remaining such indulgence I have refused to give up in retirement with no income.
If you can go see this go see it.
As another piece of the twice a year ritual, SillyWife and I toured the Eaton Centre. Judging from the shop windows, I can only say that we heterosexual males should have a very enjoyable summer! SillyWife told me some Fashion TV figure had said trends in fashion were gone, but those shop windows said something else and I love the current trend!
The CBC called it a news report, but it was pretty funny, largely because of its trembling adherence to the Galloway side of the story, as Galloway's lawyer bids today to have a Federal Court rule against Canadian Immigration's letter to him, apparently elicited by Galloway's staff, suggesting that as a terrorist supporter, he was likely ineligible for admission to Canada.
The buffonery starts with the assertion that he was turned back on an attempt to enter Canada. This is NOT what happened, as Terry Glavin points out over and over again, in particular here, where he corrects Christopher Hitchens, who credulously reads Canadian media.
In his letter, Orr noted that Galloway was not expected to make his Canadian appointments before March 30, and so he extended to Galloway the further courtesy of inviting him to make a submission to address his preliminary assessment of inadmissibility. The alternative would be that a Border Services Agency official might find himself obliged to make a final determination at some border crossing, informed only by the preliminary assessment, but without the benefit of a submission from Galloway himself. Orr also suggested an alternative to Galloway, to apply for a Temporary Resident Permit, but he also showed Galloway the further kindness of letting him know that it would be unlikely that such an application would succeed.
Instead of proceeding as he was so politely invited, Galloway had a Canadian law firm dash off a letter to Orr that included a citation from Galloway's Wikipedia entry, a denial that he was a member of Hamas, a complaint about Ottawa's affections for Israel, and several other subject-changing diversions. The letter did not deny (because it could not deny) what Galloway had openly boasted of doing.
Galloway hasn't even tried to enter Canada, remember. Instead, he has taken the opportunity to combine with his Canadian admirers to exploit the gullibility and general slovenliness of the press in order to tell a pack of lies, monger a lurid conspiracy theory about a secret plot hatched in Ottawa to silence critics of Canada’s engagements in Afghanistan, fabricate a free-speech controversy, and blame it all on the Jews.
Perish the thought that anyone report the actual story!
To add to the humor, the CBC 'News' called Galloway a peace activist, a description so ludicrous that only someone wilfully determined to side with Galloway could use it.
To further get me laughing, they cite Jason Kenney, and then make an assertion about the existence of some -mails, which assertion is implied to contradict Kenney but does nothing of the sort.
To really get me rolling they quote Galloway that his donation to Hamas was humanitarian aid. This is almost as silly as calling Galloway a 'peace activist', as I suspect to less gullible audiences Galloway provides more accurate self-descriptions. Glavin again:
Fiction, reported in the Globe and Mail: "I didn’t give any money to Hamas, I gave it to the ministry of health in Gaza to pay for the salaries of the doctors and nurses who hadn’t been paid. By the way, we’re talking about 20 odd thousand pounds, not millions. It’s a symbolic donation. I gave it to the ministry of health in Gaza and I’m proud to have done so."
Fact, by Galloway's own admission, broadcast on several Arab television stations: "I, now, here, on behalf of myself, my sister Yvonne Ridley, and the two Respect councillors – Muhammad Ishtiaq and Naim Khan – are giving three cars and 25,000 pounds in cash to Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Here is the money. This is not charity. This is politics." Not charity, but politics. Not to "doctors and nurses who hadn’t been paid," but to the Hamas gangster "Prime Minister" Ismail Haniyeh who, in fact, is not and was not the Prime Minister of Palestine.
I'm grateful for the CBC's determination to continue providing comedy shows on the radio, even if in a subtly masked form.
Now personally, I don't much care whether Galloway enters the country. He needs an audience, I expect, as I imagine only Islamists listen to him in the UK, and maybe not so much them even. Last time he was here he had Jack Layton and Olivia Chow watching, and studiously not repudiating the clown publicly (I asked my local NDP MPP to check this out). No doubt he'll have similarly silly people in his audience, lapping up his lies and bombast, and that makes for great entertainment. He'll just whip up the usual suspects, and they are able to whip themselves up without his help.
K'Naan (one of the reasons to enjoy Canadian diversity) chats with Jian Ghomeishi.
I really like 'Waving Flag' and the discussion is entertaining. It clearly comes from feelings that are more complicated than the song sounds.
"I realize how much I am not a producer by watching him."
"Everywhere there's bicycles."
Thanks K'Naan for settling here.
Thanks to Xeni Jardin of BoingBoing (and it is nice to see her, having read her for years).
They make the point that if the Western media had simply done their job back in the days of the Danish cartoons, none of this whining Muslim nonsense would be going on today. Mohammed's sorry minions would have got the simple message that nobody is sacred, which is as it should be, and sure is for the South Park guys.
Instead we have this pathetic spineless mess of a press.
They all seem dumb to me but the current winner starts with "Is".
Where did our civil courage go?
And let me join in with respect for the courage of the South Park guys in a world that is shrivelling into total cowardice against the infantile threats of an infantile religion. (it is afterall only about 1400 years old)
To be honest, I despise these Muslim hysterics.
I could not stand her when she first appeared on Toronto television; seems from Steve Paikin's show it was 17 years ago (though it seems longer).
But Holy Cow - on this long tedious and depressing discussion on 'racism' and 'racializing', she is far and away one of the most useful participants. Steve had to include the grievance-mongers, and I suppose this show exposed them as such so nicely in the course of the show.
Jonathan Kay makes some good points but calling Tiger Woods black! He is Thai. And calling Obama black? Sure the little twit self-identifies with his useless father, but he is President only because he was raised by his white family. Had he depended on the Kenyans, heaven knows where he would be. Ridiculous.
Chris Dillow discusses a book I want to read. Unfortunately the public library system here does not have the book. The topic is how well the Baby Boomers have exploited politics to benefit themselves at significant cost to following generations.
First, there’s the question: why aren’t the young more angry about all this? Is it because they are irrationally passive? Or is it because they are in other ways a more fortunate generation than us? They have much easier access to music than we did; mobile phones and Facebook allow them to stay in touch with friends more easily; and - thanks in part to increasing numbers of women at university - the sexes are much better integrated than in my day. Maybe their quietness is a sign that we haven’t left them so badly off.
And maybe we have given them such awful educations that they can no longer think critically. And not analyze as Chris does.
Ezra Levant has his problems, exactly my problems, with Ujal Dosanjih, but on one issue we are impressed by his courage and the basic good sense of his comments. With Toronto's Khalsa day parade coming up this weekend, it is a good point at which to hear him speak up against Sikh extremism, so far the only successful source of a major terrorist incident, not quite in Canada, but of Canada (not that somewhat less competent Muslims have not had ambitions).
...Meanwhile, Mr. Dosanjh blamed what he described as Canada’s polite brand of multiculturalism for giving extremists the space to nurture old grudges brought from their homelands. At the same time, Canada has failed to instill its own values on new immigrants.
“I think what we are doing to this country is that this idea of multiculturalism has been completely distorted, turned on its head to essentially claim that anything anyone believes – no matter how ridiculous and outrageous it might be – is okay and acceptable in the name of diversity.
“Where we have gone wrong in this pursuit of multiculturalism is that there is no adherence to core values, the core Canadian values, which [are]: That you don’t threaten people who differ with you; you don’t go attack them personally; you don’t terrorize the populace.”
One of the great byproducts of living with over six billion other people is the constant delight of enjoying the fruits of their efforts. Sometimes that is simply eating some Chilean grapes, sometimes it is enjoying the wonderful new technologies, and often it is basking in the light of their amazing artistic talents.
Stunningly, there is this lovely series of YouTube videos that starts with this one:
I have now seen four episodes and really look forward to number five.
In this case the artistic skills are enabled in a big way by the new technologies. All I know is it is very entertaining!
Hat tip to my nieces in Oz! Thanks for pointing this out!
Packer held his ground manfully but neglected to mention that Ramadan’s grandfather had Mein Kampf translated into Arabic in the thirties and that the war against Israel in the hands of the Brotherhood and its offspring Hamas is a war against the Jews in precisely the sense that the Nazis conducted its precursor. In fact, the mufti — who is the George Washington of the Palestinian cause — was conducting a genocidal campaign against the Jews in the Twenties before Hitler got his going.
Actually as I recall, I felt I needed a shower after the lunch I attended with that little creep.
I am not an OREO - I am a very Agressive Assertive Professional Black Woman
Nothing tires me more than identity politics (hey wait - working out tires me more, but there I am trying to get tired). I loathe the idea that a person is an X person (lately X is, gay, black, Muslim, you name it).
Here is a bunch of people who just want to be people and dodge the identity crap. (I do not necessarily agree with them in general but I love their determination to be independent.)
There are great lines: "Uncle Tom was a heroic figure". It is easy to forget the Democrats were the pro-slavery party. I especially loved, "I'm afraid of the President because he's white."
Lady Antebellum were the revelation for me the evening of my privileged seats at the Keith Urban concert last year.
And wow last night at the Academy of Country Music Awards Show last night did they do well! I was delighted, and enjoyed watching an awards ceremony with a lot of irony, and not near the sickening self-absorption of the Oscars. But that is country culture. And they are not stupid! Though I think the elite culture is.
Omigod, it was the President, Allan Rock, who approved that stupid memo! To think he might have become Prime Minister; fortunately he is in a postion doing somewhat less damage as a university President.
h/t SteynLonline, in which Mark beautifully summarizes the sorry state of freedom in this country succinctly:
Boy, the world really missed out on an Allan Rock premiership. A collective view of free speech: That's your problem right there. In Canada, the "collective view of free speech" means that Ann Coulter can't make a camel joke but Muslim grievance groups get taxpayer subsidies to demand a new Holocaust.
All the major news networks are working hard to portray Tea Party rallies as primarily racist in character rather than primarily driven by a somewhat inconsistent objection to big government (I am sure it is true they mostly want to keep Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, so perhaps one could say bigger-than-that government, which Obama is certainly shoving down their throats).
So here is a real racist Tea Partier, confronted by NBC News looking for confirmation. Oh, Oopps.
Our Crackerjack Public Funding - Palestine House Edition
An outfit named Palestine House in Mississauga is funded by the state to carry out the follwing apparently self-defined mission:
Members of the Palestine House Board of Directors offer counselling on immigration, family problems, citizenship, legal matters and housing, in addition to referrals to specialized professionals and institutions. We also maintain lists of people looking to volunteer in community organizations and coordinate volunteer activities
Joanne Hill provides a nice description of how well integrated (at least with something) defenders of Palestine House were a while ago when the Jewish Defence League decided to protest a speaking engagement by a particularly lovely man (see later). Note that several of our major news outlets reported this story without these key details, video evidence of which is available easily on the internet. No doubt they are worried about the Islamophobic backlash that has a curious habit of never appearing.
On Palestine House property, in full view of Palestine House security and local police officers, grown men made obscene gestures, including unzipping their pants and pointing at their groins and uttered sexually aggressive threats.
• Called for genocide against Jews: “You guys need another Holocaust. You guys need another one. You f***ers need another Holocaust,” and, “You guys needs another Holocaust. You’d love it. I know you would love it.”
• Praised jihad: “We love jihad. We love killing you.... We love it. No, we love it. We love killing dogs...your bitches with you.... What do your women taste like?”
• Responded to a request to stop the rockets with a threat: “Get the f**k out of Palestine.
This land is not yours.... It’s not gonna stop until you f**kin’ get outta here.”
• Mimicked a monkey and calling protesters, “you monkeys!”
• Threw coins in the protesters’ direction.
• Said, “Bye Gypsies…bye, Jews.... Go steal something, go steal, you guys are all thieves.”
• Called protesters various insulting names and saying to specific protesters, “You’re not Canadian, you’re Indian, you’re brown. You’re Indian, you’re Indian.”
Protesters – between 75 and 100 – stood across the street from Palestine House waving Israeli, Canadian and American flags and holding signs with slogans: ‘Smash Islamic Terror,’ ‘No Tax Money for Liars and Cheaters,’ ‘Language Classes or Hate Classes,’ ‘Stop All Gov't Funding of Palestine House,’ ‘Suicide Bombers are not Born to Kill, They are Taught to Kill,’ ‘Cut the funding, stop the lies,’ ‘No more tax money for hate,’ and ‘Teach your children love, not hate.’
Two men among the JDL protesters reportedly shouted epithets and were reprimanded by members of the JDL.
Does seem that Palestine House is doing a fine job of integrating immigrants into our comunity; after all there are a goodly number of native-born Canadians whose behavior is not far off this standard of civility and respect for other minority groups.
As for the speaker.
The day after this public display, Abdul Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper, was the special guest speaker at Palestine House’s ‘Land Day’ event. Atwan openly stated on Lebanese television last year: “If the Iranian missiles strike Israel – by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square, and dance with delight if the Iranian missiles strike Israel.”
Well, they danced in the streets after 9/11, so I expect he WILL dance in the streets when the time comes.
It is fortunate that Ann Coulter was prevented from preaching hate at Ottawa U, while this lovely man no likely encouraged peaceful co-existence in his speech and helped Palestine House continue its excellent job of helping to build a peaceful multicultural Canada.
A thaw of Iceland’s ice caps in coming decades caused by climate change may trigger more volcanic eruptions by removing a vast weight and freeing magma from deep below ground, scientists said on Friday.
What follows is pretty much all bafflegab and speculation, which seems to becoming more and more the style of these claims. I think Rick Sanchez could construct as solid an argument at this point: global warming will make Iceland warmer, and therefore there it will be more likely to find volcanoes there.
Steven Goddard analyzes and concludes (with some interesting challenges in the comments):
In short, the loss of all ice in Iceland would make the volcanoes less destructive.
I've been aware for some time now of the suspension and departure from Amnesty International of Gita Sahgal. The problem arose because Amnesty has decided to partner with the distasteful Moazzam Begg and the equally distasteful Cagedprisoners.
Oliver Kamm has a good summary of the key points.
He cites a Times editorial:
Gita Sahgal, the head of the gender unit of Amnesty’s international secretariat, has drawn attention to the cynicism of this association. Amnesty stands for a disinterested defence of human rights. Islamism is an ideology of theocratic and sexual repression. Having stated her concerns to Amnesty, Ms Sahgal went public with them this week. Within hours, she found herself suspended from her post. In an extraordinary inversion of its traditional role, Amnesty has stifled its own still small voice of conscience.
And then cites Sahgal's statement on her departure from the organization. Here is a part of that.
I was hired as the Head of the Gender Unit as the organization began to develop its Stop Violence Against Women campaign. I leave with great sadness as the campaign is closed. Thousands of activists of Amnesty International enthusiastically joined the campaign. Many hoped that it would induce respect for women’s human rights in every aspect of the work. Today, there is little ground for optimism.
The senior leadership of Amnesty International chose to answer the questions I posed about Amnesty International’s relationship with Moazzam Begg by affirming their links with him. Now they have also confirmed that the views of Begg, his associates and his organisation Cageprisoners, do not trouble them. They have stated that the idea of jihad in self defence is not antithetical to human rights; and have explained that they meant only the specific form of violent jihad that Moazzam Begg and others in Cageprisoners assert is the individual obligation of every Muslim.
I thank the senior leadership for these admissions and for their further clarification that concerns around the legitimization of Begg were of very long standing and that there was strong opposition from Head of the Asia programme to a partnership with him. When disagreements are profound, it is best that disputes over matters of fact, are reduced.
Unfortunately, their stance has laid waste every achievement on women’s equality and made a mockery of the universality of rights. In fact, the leadership has effectively rejected a belief in universality as an essential basis for partnership.
Her emphasis on universality is the key point, and she puts it all very well. As the slippery Tariq Ramadan said at a lunch I once attended, "If they are Western valuess, how can they be universal?", emphasizing the problem in another way; this purportedly moderate Muslim indicated exactly his lack of adherence to the principles in question, of course while trying not to indicate it clearly.
Amnesty International has sacrificed its soul to suck up to jihadists. Who, of the organizations I once respected, and in this case, even contributed to, is next?
This actually affected me yesterday watching yet anothere debate on the foofraw at the Canadian Rights and Democracy organization, as the CBC cited a statement by Amnesty International, question the appointment of its new president. What an interesting butt of timing as that kerfuffle to some degree arose from a perception of it sucking up to jihadists. As a result, a statement I once might have paid some attention to I simply dismissed with justificattion.
While he is not unique among CNN TV-faces, Ruck Sanchez has always seemed to me to be particularly dim and devoid of analytical skills or basic education. Kate McMillan finds a doozie:
SANCHEZ: I was just asking Chad, how can you get a volcano in Iceland? [Myers laughs]. Isn't it too- when you think of a volcano, you think of Hawaii and long words like that. You don't think of Iceland.
SANCHEZ: You think it's too cold to have a volcano there. But no! There it is.
I think by the time I was in Grade 3 I had lost this rather deep insight, that might seem natural to a very small child. Apparently he is also unaware of Iceland's geothermal energy exploitation, and yet this is relatively 'green', so I'd expect CNNers to be all over it.
At least, in his defence, he is not being cited for attributing the volcano to greenhouse gase emissions. No doubt some other news anchor somewhere has.
When I vote, I vote to protect. But were I to vote to expel, I, like the people who did vote, would have expelled Aiden. It's a funny choiuce as he seems utterly likeable and was reasonably competent.
Kate Gosselin, by contrast, seems utterly self-absorbed, and generally unpleasant, and a really bad dancer. But she is not bland. I am happy she is around for another week; I think we could get something interesting out of her, and I had lost the belief in that from Aiden when he was unwilling to feel Edyta up properly during rehearsal.
Also, I admit, as a male, I lean to keeping the female 'celebrities' around longer.
I think the judges really meant it with Kate Gosselin; she was still pretty bad but a lot better and they wanted her encouraged. They were not damning.
I failed to vote this week. It is not clear to me who I want to be dismissed.
I love Jake's earnestness, so maybe I would vote Aiden down. We will see in a few hours.
What a mischievous collection of tasks - learning a drumming routine, selling ice cream sandwiches, and counting to 521 in an environment full of distractions! I was surprised that everyone did the counting successfully, as a counting exercise last season proved to be brutal.
There was something delicious in seeing Carol and Brandy eliminated by Caite's applying a U-turn to them; they continued ranting, failing to recognize Caite's obvious motivation; they were just plain mean to her, from the initial tiara comment onwards. A comeuppance indeed. They seemed to believe that because they were not very competent they should not have been eliminated!
I've come to like all the remaining teams, with Dan and Jordan finally winning me over with that horrific fast forward task. The rest of the season will be fun.
... is one tough fictional character.
And my TV is lately full of ads announcing a movie version of 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo'.
So what will be turning up in theatres next week?
Is it this Swedish film? That would be excellent - it is a great, and wrenching, movie, and the Lisbeth Salander in that movie fits reasonably well with the one I know from the one Stieg Larsson novel I read. I hope it is not some godawful Hollywood remake.
Ms. Salander is one tough cookie and her Hollywoodization would be a tragedy.
UPDATE: Am now almost through the last of the Millenium trilogy of films done in Sweden. I cannot for the life of me see how an American remake would be an improvement. Michael Nyquist and Noomi Rapace are wonderful. They are three of the best action/mystery movies I have ever seen. So sad that the planned ten episodes will not go beyonmd this wonderful three.
One magic byproduct of my busines meetings in the last years allowed me to see a show featuring Merle Haggard (as well as other superstars in my pantheon, Ray Price, Willie Nelson, and Asleep at the Wheel).
But this is a great post devoted rightly to the superb Haggard.
And I make my choice of great songs:
It was always simply a matter of when - Buzz Aldrin was this year`s Steve Wosniak. Kate Gosselin will soon be on the chopping block, especially because I can find no concept of what fan base she might have.
At that point we are down to performers - people whose living depends on how they show themselves. And they have a great advantage in this contest.
...after having got one VERY wrong - threats of violence promulgated on their resources against those who might disagree with them.
And more power to them, they do not simply try to erase history:
They cite the appalling line on their website:
We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work. And we be many, but you be few.
Of course they waffle and pretend those lines mean other than what they clearly mean.
We got this one wrong, no doubt about it. I’m holding up my hands on behalf of the organisation and saying sorry for that. Peaceful action is at the very core of what we do, so any language that even comes close to suggesting that’s not the case is something we cannot support.
For all the waffling they recognize this was deeply wrong. So more power to them. Lots of groups would never step back as they ought to from crap like this.
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks.
I have NEVER understood those who argue for most forms of 'net neutrality'. As a broadband customer, the only outcome I could see of forcing such a thing on providers is a lot less provision.
That is NOT in my interest.
First, the outcome; Steve and Allie are gone, and, from their behavior in this leg, rightly. They paniocked a coule of times, losing a lot of time by leaving their taxi, ands Allie melted down on the first roadblock when they finally got to it after the panic. Given that they had left their backpacks behind last week, and despite the fact that other teams offered them compensatory help (most of the teams are showing a great deal of mutual respect and support), I figured this doomed them, so in a way it is good to be rid of this effectively lame duck team.
The theme of the episode - be careful when taxing taxis in Malaysia. The drivers showed themselves to be all too willing to race one another, and were somewhat whimsically unpredictable in their waiting behavior; one simply drove off, and one other showed himself quite loyal awaiting his team.
The first roadblock presented a stark and interesting choice; brute force and endurance, lugging heavy objects up steep stairs in hot weather, versus physical skill, balancing a flag on top of the head and advancing a fixed distance without dropping it. Only the cowboys and Steve and Allie decided for the balance exercise, but Steve and Allie changed their minds when they saw the detectives go for endurance. BAD CALL! Well, actually, maybe not, as they tried the other and failed totally.
The cowboys gambled for some reason on balancing - well - my guess is they deal with physical balance often on the back of bulls. They both were naturals handling a problem I would have found hopeless. And it bought them so much time they could even handle their detour.
Meanwhile the detectives chose the endurance activity and paid for it, but remained really nice through it all.
The models were not bitching at one another through this episode and did pretty well, avoiding major mistakes.
As for the nasty lesbians, well they had no need to be nasty, and did a pretty steady job. I so much look forward to next week.
Wow! That was not the same deer in the headlights as in the idiotically scripted 'apology' he delivered a while ago.
This utterly vindicates Donald Trump's suggestion that he should have got right back into golf, as expressed wonderfully candidly on a Larry King show a while ago. Of course Trump was also, I thought, recommending not bothering with all his therapy and more honestly putting his family second. I still suspect Trump is right but we will see.
He could have done this press conference a long time ago?! Maybe not - he says he is not feeling nervous right now in this fairly open press conference, but he sure was in his scripted nonsense. I wish he had. There has been a long waste of time, except perhaps for his kids, and if that is what has driven him, then more power to him!
On drugs: Apparently dead candid and, to me, believable.
On character: He looks to me a lot better person, after his claimed rehab, and he seems very cool. I like this Tiger more than I have liked any other Tiger.
What a great answer!! A reporter throws a total softball - might you have played better had you been less of a rake? (not in those words). He answers brilliantly - "I would like to think that." (In short form - no.)
Great question - during your stupid statement in February did you plan to play soon? Answer. Rambling, but roughly No - now is right, and family supports it.
Wow!! He makes a point of missing his son's first birthday and it sounds right.
Question: Is Elin coming. No
Question: "Did you want to get caught?" I think it is a good question. His answer - "I don't know". That is right.
Question: "How did you fool so many people?" "I don't know - I fooled myself too."
This was quite believable.
No more details; all I can say is that this guy is articulate in so many ways. Why did he or his handlers play this stupid game for so long? I grant you billions were at stake but still.
In the end, there lurks in me the idea that Donald Trump knows better.
Worse was to come. While the abominable Coulter grabbed the headlines by saying nothing – how Canada's political ragbag would love to do that – a second-year sociology and women's studies student, Rita Valerino, was widely – and rightly – quoted for the following jargon-based nonsense. "I was just worried that things were going to be said about certain groups of people that were going to make them feel very unsafe and very uncomfortable and we promise our students here at the University of Ottawa a safe, positive space."
Aaaaagh! Talk about an anthropological pit, this was as twee as you could get. "Certain groups", eh? Muslims, perhaps? So why not say so? "Unsafe"? "Uncomfortable"? You mean that Muslims can't stand up for themselves? And then there is the clincher: "a safe, positive space". Yes, we all want to live in a "positive space", don't we? Time and space. Private space. Political space. I read this twaddle over and over again. And when I hear the word '"space", I put my medium bomber squadron on alert to defend the English language – just as I do when academics "posit" ideas.
Well, glory be! The man makes complete sense. I love that he notes that the student is effectively in a content-free 'educational' program, training no doubt to be a community organizer and live off public funding.
He goes on, in Robert Fisk style, to describe some minor contretemps accompanying a speaking engagement of his at Concordia some time ago (with no screaming raving students threatening his safety, in the end). Still it is interesting to me that the two universities here are Ottawa and Concordia, hardly top universities in Canada.
h/t Mark Steyn, who adds:
When even Robert Fisk thinks you're a joke, maybe it's time to wise up. But the Canadian left still doesn't get it. The same day Mister Robert opens up on M Houle's nancy-boy totalitarianism, Haroon Siddiqui in The Toronto Star flies into a lather about the Quebec government's hostility to the niqab, even if it is "a symbol of oppression" forced on Muslim women by their menfolk:
Let's assume that it is. Whose business is it to end the practice – that of the state?
Not surprisingly, Scaramouche fell around laughing at this point. This is the same Haroon Siddiqui who's spent the last two years arguing that it's certainly the business of the state to end the practice of Maclean's carrying Mark Steyn columns. Even by the standards of Toronto Star columnists, Siddiqui seems particularly obtuse as to where the logic of his entire oeuvre leads: If the state has the right to tell you what you can write and say and think, it certainly has the right to tell you what you can wear.
And even Robert Fisk recognizes that a land designed by the likes of Mr Siddiqui, M Houle, Chief Commissar Jennifer Lynch, QC, Commissar Barbara Hall and Commissar Heather MacNaughton is not one any sentient being could stomach f
It took them only over a year to figure out that the great orator without TOTUS is the great fumblebum.
Toward the end of a question-and-answer session with workers at an advanced battery technology manufacturer, a woman named Doris stood to ask the president whether it was a "wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care" package.
"We are over-taxed as it is," Doris said bluntly.
Obama started out feisty. "Well, let's talk about that, because this is an area where there's been just a whole lot of misinformation, and I'm going to have to work hard over the next several months to clean up a lot of the misapprehensions that people have," the president said.
He then spent the next 17 minutes and 12 seconds lulling the crowd into a daze. His discursive answer - more than 2,500 words long -- wandered from topic to topic, including commentary on the deficit, pay-as-you-go rules passed by Congress, Congressional Budget Office reports on Medicare waste, COBRA coverage, the Recovery Act and Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (he referred to this last item by its inside-the-Beltway name, "F-Map"). He talked about the notion of eliminating foreign aid (not worth it, he said). He invoked Warren Buffett, earmarks and the payroll tax that funds Medicare (referring to it, in fluent Washington lingo, as "FICA").
It goes on, and I am impressed that the reporter held out to the end and tried to describe the whole mess.
WHat could be next - the New York Times wondering whether the medical cost curve might actually not be so easy to bend?
There is some controversy in Quebec as they there enact a bill limiting total face-covering in certain claims for government services.
It's like a major bonus that hubby steps in with his views.
They always teach us that eye contact is important in giving a speech, no one told that face is a part. A lot of people communicate by phone, through chat, as long as they hear each other it could happen, even by just hand movement it could be done.
Err, no, 'they' also like to see the muscles around the mouth, and around the eyes hidden by veils. You are a dimwit.
So are you suggesting that men should also feel free to wander around in those stupid outfits, all covered up. I suspect our society might struggle with that puppy.
I actually am inclined to allow anyone to dress any idiotic way they want to, but I can sure see concerns. And dorks like you will provoke legislation that I might initially oppose to allow you to prepare to rob banks and convenience stores with impunity.
My final word is that when you give the government the right to limit the freedom of choice in any issue, one day it will come against you, and they will limit your freedom.
Wow you sound like John Stuart Mill, who is a hero of mine. Fucking goverment will make me and my wife wake up in the morning and dress exactly as we would have with no laws in place.
And you, well, your wife, my clown?
The Obamacare bill includes a clause requiring that restaurant menus of 'chains' prominently display calorie content of offerings.
What is the likely outcome of this rather brain-dead regulation?
Ed Morrissey tells us here with a simple example, pointing out along the way how dim this new mandate is.
I am not convinced anyone really knows in a reliable way what the calorie content of any foodstuff is - should they not also be posting confidence intervals? Not all tomatoes are the same.
The implementation of the nanny-state impulses of this administration show both its thuggishness and brute stupdity.
The thing is, if I as a customer WANTED this information, I have an easy way to let the restaurant know - explain I have no wish to be their customer without this information; but Pelosi/Reid/Obama know better than you and I as customers, and better than the restaurants.
Dear God please do not let the folly of our southern neighbor bleed across the border.
Oh and unintended consequences - seems likely the pizza guy in this video is going to close 2 outlets, killing off those jobs, because the regulation effectively forces him to by having the mandate kick in at 20 outlets. I bet in five years the number of restaurant chains with 19 outlets is going to be an interesting statistic to look at.
h/t Hot Air