George Jonas Outdoes Himself

" ... What is the issue in this election? Why, the same as in all elections, my libertarian self exclaims. In the last 45 years, the only question has been whether the government implementing the NDP's policies will be Liberal or Conservative. ...

The NDP may do abysmally in federal elections, but the NDP's ideas flourish. ...

Canada is governed from the middle, yes, but the middle is on the left. The politicians who form our next government will be statist -- socialists in all but name -- because there are no other kinds running. Our statists may vary in degree, but not in kind. Since the 1960s, classical liberals or conservatives either haven't entered the arena or changed their policies afterwards. They wouldn't have had a chance otherwise.

Here's the irony, though: If socialists called themselves socialists, they wouldn't stand a chance either. Canadians are funny that way. They'll buy nothing but socialist policies and practices, but never from socialists. Calling things what they are isn't politically polite in Canada.

In the tradition of Orwell's Newspeak, in Canadian English the word "free" denotes a prohibition, as in "smoke-free environment." Canadians call laws and institutions that deny people fundamental freedoms of conscience, expression, and association "human rights" laws and commissions. In this eccentric world, going to the polls is like skeet-shooting in a stiff breeze: A vote for Stephen is a vote for Michael. ..."

http://www.georgejonas.ca/recent_writing.cfm?id=967

Hmmm, an empire pretending to be a federation, a quasi-pseudo-semi-elected dictatorship pretending its not ... yes, George, the Empire of the Canadians is quite the "eccentric world", where little or nothing is as advertized.

So, Trudeau Was Really Really Smart, Right?

It’s become as entrenched an element of Canadian mythology as “inventing hockey” and the undoubted sainthood of that shrill, self-satisfied little socialist scold, Commy Douglas (cue: choir).

As one who endured every excruciating moment of the great philosopher king’s seemingly interminable reign, I just never saw it. At the time, the LSM and his other acolytes and assorted lickspittles assured us their hero was a bloody intellectual giant. Very, very much like their successors’ treatment of Obamessiah, but I (similarly) never saw it.

Did he possess a certain animal cunning crucial for success in politics? Undoubtedly, and the record shows just that. Was he contemptuous in the extreme of those who disagreed with the fashionable left-wing notions he embraced? Oh, yeah.

But the brilliant mind, the soaring intellect that nowadays even Red Tories (ick) at least feel they must make obeisance to ?

I just never saw it.

But, now, here’s an idea: PET, as he was shorthanded, made no secret of his disdain for Canada and Canadians and set about remaking it all into his own idea of Utopia; indeed many term the result “Trudeaupia”. Lets ‘look upon his works’, shall we, and see how he did?

Let’s see now, in no particular order:

♫Imagine all the people sharing all the world♪ Ah, multiculturalism, the cult of multi culti - an unmitigated, ongoing catastrophe with total calamity in the forecast. At the risk of repeating myself - when even the French are catching on* …

♪Everybody’s beautiful in their own way♫ = Rehabilitation: yes, public safety: no. Every time you curse the so-called ‘criminal justice system’, don’t forget the guy who started the whole hug a mugger, coddle a killer approach. As far as I’m concerned, the blood of the three helpless, innocent Schoenborn children, and how many other victims that needn’t have been, can be charged to this man’s account.

At about the same time real crime began to be cultivated along that road to hell that’s paved with good intentions, the Orwellian Human Rights Commission and it’s associated rackets were spawned. How’s that workin' out, huh? Wait, be careful, think before you post. Know what I mean?

Dismantling the military, because ♫war is over if you want it♪, right? Smallish in the scheme of things no doubt, but I rather thought the Trudeaupian approach to the military was neatly summed up, when under PET’s disciple, troops were sent to a war in a desert with forest green camo.

Politicize and underfund the RCMP – another of the basic functions government should and doesn’t stick to. Another disaster. But hey, we don’t need cops anyway because we’ve eradicated crime with love and understanding, right?

Say, how about the file risibly labeled “national unity”. Aha ha aha ahahahahahaha ……!!!!!! This is a guy who was pm for most of two decades with exactly one mp from west of Ontario. “Screw the West, we’ll take the rest.” ‘Nuff said.

And of course, for a sort of ultimate flourish (not unlike his famous Salmon Arm salute, now I think of it) he bestowed upon us all that travesty known as the Charter (cue: choir), setting the whole hideous mess in stone for as long as the Empire of the Canadians shall endure (and be endured).

While, on the home front, he married a hippie chick (consider the brilliance of that for a sec) and of course of course they got a divorce (another FAIL, Pierre, tsk).

But still managed to bequeath unto posterity this prize specimen:

Wow. I'm so underwhelmed.

You see, back in the day, as he was doing all of this, I kept thinking, “This doesn’t seem like a smart thing to do. Why do they keep telling me this guy is so darn smart? I don’t see it.”

Something about it all just didn't seem to add up, because– oh, sorry, what was that, Gump?

Yes, Gump, that’s exactly right. You know, Gump, I’m beginning to think that Drill Sergeant was on to something, maybe you really are a g-d genius, Gump.

But that other guy, that Trudeau?

I still don’t see it.

*Update! - When even a Lefty Brit is catching on ...

Some Froot, Some Tree

"You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles?"

Matthew 7:16

Oh, Canerduh, such a sparkling array of potential rulers thou dost parade before us. *snort*

And such a diversity of policies and platforms too, a real representation of the populace (probably accounts for that enormous voter turnout every time, huh?);

There’s what we're pleased to call the “right”:

There's the "center":
And the "left":

If you’re less than impressed with the selection, you take comfort in knowing you’re not alone, but hang on - don’t just shy away at the gag reflex, think it all through a little further: this is a symptom, not the disease.

The travesty that is the canerdian system of government presenting this sorry collection for consideration is the real problem.

I mean, this isn't new, really, look back, where’s the Churchill, the Reagan, the … ?

Let’s see:

Drunken crook; can you say CP Rail, kids?

Oh, and by the way and just by co-inky-dink, how about this guy here in BC?
There's Christy herself peeking down at that aficionado of all things Hitlerian:
more like a three dollar bill, if you know what I mean.

Ottawa's answer to Charles Ponzi:

Pass the sick bag, Ethel.
Of course, who could ever forget (or forgive)?There aren't enuff words, really, are there?

Hey, how 'bout this guy?

Well, you get my drift. A pretty sorry collection indeed. And these are the heavy hitters of canerdian history. These are the guys they put on the money yet. Pitiful.

As a British Columbian, its almost a relief to know that my vote counts for squat in the imperial scheme of things (and I do mean scheme); if I mark the ballot with FREE BC! or write in Groucho Marx it matters not whatever, bu-u-u-t on the other hand, I don't have to try and sleep thinking I helped elect one of these.

We "out" here can only sit back and see what the real canadians come up with for us to pay for this time.

Oh, and if the Biblical quotation should "offend" anyone (Islamabad, I'm looking at you), kindly be advised that I don’t give a rip.

A Farewell to Kings?

Rex wins! Windsors unwind with a brisk game of ‘Mock the Pauper’.

Ever wonder where the politicians are calling for a republic, or at least a public discussion? Wouldn’t it be a vote winner? Why do the pandering panderers quit pandering when it comes to the status of that fun (though costly) family of parasitic life forms known as the Windsors?

Whichever way we slice it, either a majority or a preponderance of public opinion supports dumping the monarchy, even while many admit they’re not quite sure they understand the current arrangement all that clearly at all.

Well, if you’re a little unclear on it all, here it is:

Currently, we pretend the Cabinet, with the Prime Minister as the sort of straw boss, are all working away in the service of Her Britannic Majesty (ably represented by The Right Honorable Whatsisname) who, on behalf of us all, makes sure they stay on the straight and narrow.

This is of course, a pile of horsesh a polite fiction. In reality the Prime Minister enjoys a “friendly dictatorship” and can do whatever he likes, including re-writing the Constitution to his own liking.

Not surprisingly, the more people understand this, the more they favor getting rid of the monarchy and changing the arrangements.

So, what’s the problem?

Well, the current arrangement itself is the problem. Either a politician figures they have a shot at being all-powerful themselves (and what self-respecting control freak would turn that down?) or they know full well what would happen if they started making noises that could wreck things for the Big Dogs. Its called “party discipline”.

They're either a Big Dog or a trained seal barking and clapping on command; its an interesting menagerie we’re pleased to call the House of the Common People (Common People ‘cause, you know, its the house of thee and me. There’s others that are just cut of a better cloth. Nice, huh?)

The whole thing reeks and even mentioning the monarchy risks opening the whole can of worms.

No, this is one sure-fire poll booster that will continue to lay there untouched. We'll continue to await the semi-quasi-pseudo-election of a not-so-friendly dictator who figures everyone's so sick of what's basically a travesty of elections we'll never miss them.

And I’ll confidently predict right here and now that future archeologists will be unearthing plenty of these:

Making a Point of Missing the Point

"Under the Graves Strategy, it (Bill C232) would ensure that the West, the fastest-growing region in Canada, is shut out from yet another national institution. And any Westerner who objected could be called a bigot and a rube and "anti-French", to the delight of those more cosmopolitan ridings where Ignatieff might have a chance."

"In one of Graves' private briefings to the Liberals, that he later boasted about to the Globe and Mail, he outlined a strategy to demonize Western Canada …"

"… To Ignatieff, forced bilingualism (like Bill S220) is a tool to beat up anglophone westerners ... to the delight of Liberal voters in Montreal and Toronto."

"Sort of like Keith Davey's Liberal strategy that he articulated for Pierre Trudeau: "Screw the West, we'll take the rest.""

Now, I have all the time in the world for Alberta’s Ezra Levant, but he is a Federalist. That means that while he may fulminate against Count Iggy and Taliban Jack for 'beating us up' to win votes in Upper and Lower Canada, he’s not quite going to mention why that’s such a winning tactic, why it “delights” voters there. Its like he'll give you '2+2' but he's hoping you'll join him in skipping the '=4' bit.

But that’s okay, you have me to do that.

Ontario and Quebec like it when Ottawa 'beats you up' because those people do not regard you as their compatriot; they have no warm all-in-it-together feeling for you, nothing like that, in fact if they consider you at all, they dislike you.

Your purpose in life is to be their ATM, just dispense the cash. Quietly.

There ya go.

Had Enuff Yet?

Canada Sucks: Episode MMDCCLXI

Why not have a panel study whether we should be permitted to hear a song?

Ezra Levant Nails the Burka Ban Issue

Too bad Ezra is from Calgary, he'd make a helluva pm du canerduh

This is an absolute must-read

With Conservatives Like This ... ?

Yet more taxpayers' money for Own The Podium (aka circuses)
An increase in the tax advantage enjoyed by irresponsible breeders
No end to the Hitlerian "hate speech" laws and the Star Chambers that enforce them
And yet more impoverishment of the People and damage to the economy in the name of saving Gaia from Maurice Strong and Paul Ehrlich, er, I mean, the weather.

Perhaps when the Liberals finally dump Count Iggy they won't have to look too far for a replacement. This guy has "Natural Governing Party du Canerduh" written all over him.
In the end, he's just another guy from toronto.

Imagined Nation

from the archives of the Western Standard

Canada has become a phony country made up of diverse tribes who have no idea what they're doing together

David Warren - August 8, 2005

"Why do you think Canada is breaking up?" This perfectly straightforward question from a reader took me aback. What appears obvious to me, may not appear so to others; and vice versa.

The short answer is, because there is nothing left to hold it together. Anything that was particular about the country--not about regions but about the country as a whole--has been obviated by government legislation, or put quite purposely into disuse. We are no longer a Dominion; we have a Queen only on paper; our system of Crown-in-Parliament has been negated by the quasi-presidential rule of a succession of "federaste" prime ministers from Quebec. Our history is no longer taught in schools.

We are reduced to waving a Canadian flag--and that is itself an imposture. The current Canada is something that was invented from scratch, in Liberal party advertising agencies, and dates approximately from the invention of that flag, in 1964. But successive Liberal governments could think of nothing with which to replace the old symbols. Hence, a "new Canada," defined by a bunch of nothings.

Ask a Canadian who is waiting for a bus--or more likely for a CAT scan--what Canada means to him, and he will say something like "multiculturalism" or "tolerance" or "universal health care." These are nothings. There is nothing Canadian about any of them. Every postmodern country has all these things, and none of them are worth having.

But this is old news, dating back to Pearson. The late Pierre Trudeau made no secret of his contempt for Canada and Canadians as a national group, and instead put his faith in universal abstractions. We got what we deserved by repeatedly electing him.

Quebec has a linguistic identity. Alberta has a western identity--which by now appears to be shared with the B.C. Interior and much of Saskatchewan. (It is, in fact, what's left of the old English-Canadian identity.) Newfoundland has a Newfoundlandish identity. The Maritimes and Manitoba are resentful, mendicant districts; the North is a kind of environmental reservation; and Ontario exists by default.

I live in Ontario, and so far as I can make out, it is the ultimate zero. It eats, makes money and sleeps. It has no morals, no religion, no culture, no purpose beyond getting to work in the morning. No Ontarian can explain what he stands for, except with negatives. The only thing I see is a smug dislike for anything with a shape. Ontario hates the rest of the country, the West especially, for embodying positive qualities Ontario once had.

And it is Ontario that supports the Liberal party--together with the bought provinces, which live on Ontario's evaporating goodwill (plus money appropriated from the West). It will not vote Conservative for fear that the Conservatives have a "secret agenda," i.e., that they may harbour any opinions at all.

This is why Canada will break up. The Liberal party is absolutely despised by the great majority in Quebec and the West. Ontario will vote to keep it in power, in the full knowledge of the degree of its corruption, for the sake of "national unity." Yet that is the very thing to which another Liberal victory will give the coup de grace.

For Ontario does not even pretend the Liberals are not despised elsewhere. Ontario doesn't care. It doesn't think separatists are serious. It is not even sure the rest of the country exists. Well, it thinks Quebec exists, but that Quebec can be assuaged by saying, "We wuv you."

It is like a husband who doesn't know his wife hates him. Who will be utterly surprised when she sues for divorce.

European countries are still held together by common ethnicities. The United States is held together by a rich, common historical and constitutional heritage, inculcated in children from birth. Canada has become more like an African state, with diverse tribes, and no memory of what they are doing together. We, at least, were something once, but now that is gone. We have become a sleepwalk, a "gay marriage."