The Shotgun Blog
« With friends like these | Main | Accidentally, On Purpose »
Monday, December 20, 2004
Bring on d'escapism, bring on da funk!
Who needs practical politics when you've got a naked, drug addled marionette passed out beside a toilet?
All part of my master plan to take as many of you with me as possible! Bwaaa haaaa haa!!
Posted by Kathy Shaidle on December 20, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22305/1563506
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bring on d'escapism, bring on da funk!:
Comments
Kathy
That's just terrific.
But Doug Saunders in today's Globe is a hell of a lot funnier and more intelligent.
Posted by: Norman Spector | 20-Dec-04 8:57:25 AM
Good point, Norm. Maybe you could pick up a few tips on being funny and intelligent from reading Doug's column, what?
Posted by: Kathy Shaidle | 20-Dec-04 9:20:59 AM
Everybody turn to page 666 of Matwood's surfacing where is contextualized she's rendition of springing whole from N. Frye's forehead. Cancontest for your delight.
Yes, Pieree, do you have a statement for the medias?
Posted by: gg | 20-Dec-04 9:25:25 AM
Norman never mind for the moment your personal antagonism with Kathy but to suggest that she is taking conservatives with her is an insult to people who believe they are above being labelled as sheep.
As for your personal attack on Kathy, for a man who is held in such high esteem across this country, and whom some people on this blog refer to as Mr. Spector, I find your behaviour and somewhat childish tone far beneath the level of respect you command.
Posted by: MikeP | 20-Dec-04 9:34:18 AM
Mike
Seems like I'm not the only one to have had the experience, according to one of my readers
http://www.theambler.com/apr16-30_04.htm#shaidle
In any case, I'm pleased that your head is in Canada and that your feet are solidly planted on the ground.
Posted by: Norman Spector | 20-Dec-04 10:51:25 AM
Getting fan mail from the likes of KMG is nothing to brag about. At least my admirers tend to have jobs and homes.
Posted by: Kathy Shaidle | 20-Dec-04 12:10:19 PM
He didn't send it; the reader who sent it wrote that you are a smear artist.
Posted by: Norman Spector | 20-Dec-04 12:47:20 PM
I don't get it.
The producer is off his rocker.
The skit is funny because Linbaugh is a hypocrite about drug addicts. When it's him it's ok. When it is someonelse it's lock em up and throw away the key.
Kinda like the hypocricy of the whole war on drugs. Rich people get treatment. Poor people get 25 to life.
Posted by: Nemisis | 20-Dec-04 1:53:06 PM
"Getting fan mail from the likes of KMG is nothing to brag about. At least my admirers tend to have jobs and homes."
Maybe KMG would not have lost his home and would have had less difficulty in finding a job if the So-Con crook Ted Byfield that ripped him and various other writers off ACTUALLY PAID THE MONEY THEY OWED and didn't screw up their unemployment forms. I just love the hypocricy of the So-Con Christian Conservatives, as well as their pretensions of superiority.
Posted by: MWW | 20-Dec-04 2:13:04 PM
Norman, I presume you started on this little crusade of yours in an attempt to improve the communication of conservative ideas. Now you've turned the Shotgun into a place of childish taunts and bolstered your attack on Kathy by calling in support from KMG. Are you sure this helps?
He writes stuff like: "Canadians have never been asked if they desire a non-white Canada. If asked, they would say: No." (http://www.vdare.com/misc/grace_breakthrough.htm )
And "Canada is governed as if whites were in the minority—they are oppressed by massive immigration, quotas and hate laws. No party speaks for them.
The Conservatives could—and should—be that party."
( http://www.vdare.com/misc/grace_canada.htm )
KMG is entitled to his opinions, but it doesn't strike me as the type of advice that will advance conservative causes.
Posted by: Kevin Jaeger | 20-Dec-04 3:51:55 PM
Kevin
As I think I made clear, I did not receive the note from Kevin Grace, whom I've never met or read, but from a reader.
Whatever his strengths and weaknesses, attacking him for not having a job or a home seems ad hominem to me.
Posted by: Norman Spector | 20-Dec-04 4:20:14 PM
How I miss the good old days of Windoze 95, when the BSOD could bring a flamewar to a dignified close.
Posted by: Kate | 20-Dec-04 5:29:41 PM
"attacking him for not having a job" --
Just to set the record straight. KMG does have a job now according to his blog. He also has the distinction of nearly a decade of gainful employment in journalism as an editor prior to this latest strech of poor fortune.
I find it pretty sick and telling that professed christians would try to mock Kevin's unfortunate circumstance to try and score points in a discussion. Just in time for Christmas as well! So much for "Charity", "Love thy Neighbor", peace and goodwill towards all men. It sets such a wonderful "christ-like" example.
Posted by: MWW | 20-Dec-04 5:36:25 PM
I wasn't going to post again, I swear, but realize I can't sign off without clearing something up.
Actually Norman, it wasn't at all clear to me that "a reader", not KMG, had sent you that link. I foolishly assumed that for some bizarre reason, KMG was attempting to start up an old fight we'd had regarding by sending you that link. That fight was patched up a while back and while I was baffled today as to why he'd want to re-start it, since he obviously has better things to do with his time and energy. I foolishly responded in haste and anger. That was deeply wrong of me and I apologize.
Thus far you have accused me of being "morally responsible for late term abortions", of undermining any chance the Conservative Party has of winning over Canadian hearts and minds, plus you have dismissed my personal and ideological interests as "escapism".
Being called a "smear artist" to top it all off is an irony even I cannot possibly top. So I shall bid you all adieu, to your no doubt considerable relief!
Posted by: Kathy | 20-Dec-04 6:45:09 PM
The reader not I suggested you were a smear artist; I didn't quite know how to respond.
But, as I mentioned to Kevin, it seems to me that attacking someone for being without a job or a home is ad hominem.
The points I have made are all subject to debate, and are not ad hominem.
Those who believe that any abortion equates to the killing of innocent persons bear some responsibility for the absence of any criminal law on abortion in Canada, and the consequences that have flowed therefrom.
I believe that those who took the position that it was better to have no abortion law than the law the PC government proposed in the late 1980s showed bad political judgement and that many still do. It's my understanding that, by now, some theologians have come around to the view that saving even one life is the moral thing to do.
I believe that those who consider Canada to be a half-assed country do considerable damage to the conservative cause in Canada. Showing contempt for people is not a good basis on which to try change their opinions.
I believe that anyone who's into saving souls and does not give a god-damn about elections is not likely to add anything of value to conservatism in Canada. At the end of the day, politics is about forming government and implementing your policies and improving your country.
I believe that Cheryl Gallant damaged the Conservatives in the last election. True, she wone her seat. But Paul Martin won more and he's on the Government benches. Anyone who does not understand this--or doesn't care because he or she does not care about god-damn elections and is into saving souls--is likely to cause damage in future elections.
Finally, I continue to believe that there's an excessive preoccupation with US issues on this site, particularly with US foreign policy. Continuing down that road will lead to an impasse if not a crash-up.
In my judgement, this excessive preoccupation is a form of escapism. It's understandable, given the difficulty of being a conservative in Canada. But it's regrettable and dysfunctional nevertheless.
Posted by: Norman Spector | 20-Dec-04 10:18:14 PM
So, it being Christmas and all...
Norm, having blogged, for and against Kathy for a while, calling her a smear artist is more than a little cheap. Passionate, provocative and barbed - you bet.
Kathy, KMG's ongoing plight does not diminish his capacity to be interestingly wrong or, more often, edgily right. The sad fact about Canadian journalism is that his all out position virtually ensures he is not going to be working full time anytime soon. this says more about the state of journalism in Canada than it does about KMG.
Norm does have a point about Canadian conservatives obsession with US politics: the polling numbers suggest that a majority of English Canadians and an huge majority of French Canadians are entirely disenchanted with America and her leadership.
One of the more fatal mistakes the CPC can make is to look to the US as a model. Canadians will not buy it nor should they. I am as pro-American as it is possible to be; but I recognize that Canada is a distinct and profoundly different country. Forgetting that will just lead to the loss of seats and the loss of foucus.
Posted by: Jay Currie | 22-Dec-04 7:03:33 PM
As much as I have secretly revelled in my reputation as the Keyser Söze of the Canadian Right, I must admit that it is unwarranted.
I do not propose, in this space, to respond to the dementia pugilistica manifested by Kathy Shaidle, surely the Jerry Quarry of the Canadian Right. Instead, I will respond to the question begging manifested by Kevin Jaeger.
Jaeger writes that KMG (a fellow so terrible he must be described by a trigrammaton) is “entitled to his opinions.” This is an old rhetorical trick. What he means is that my opinions are rightly regarded by bien pensants as beyond the pale. This he proves by quoting me. He does not dispute my contentions, as he believes their untruth to be self-evident—proving that the name of his blog, Trudeaupia, is truer than he knows.
But are my contentions false? Let’s consider them one at a time.
“Canadians have never been asked if they desire a non-white Canada.” Immigration policy has never been allowed to become an election issue in my lifetime (b. 1955). This is due partly to the hegemony of Canada’s liberal elite but also to the post-1968 dominance of Canada’s right-of-centre political parties by bien pensants like Jaeger (which amounts to the same thing).
“If asked, they would say: No." If this statement were false, the previous statement would of necessity be false as well. Unless, of course, it could be demonstrated that a consensus existed in favour of making Canada a non-white country. In June 1987, however, when Gallup asked Canadians whether they thought “the size and content of immigration should be permitted to change our ethnic and cultural balance poll,” 77.6% answered No.
One seriously doubts that Gallup (or Ipsos-Reid, et al.) would today have the courage to ask what Gallup asked in 1987. Nevertheless, polls continue to demonstrate that at least as many Canadians as not oppose Canada’s post-1967 immigration policy. For example, a March 2002 Leger Marketing poll revealed that 54% of Canadians believed “that Canada accepts too many immigrants.” The same poll also revealed a decided Canadian preference for immigrants from white countries. These results are all the more impressive given the liberal takeover of the conservative parties noted above and the almost total media prohibition of anti-immigration sentiment.
“Canada is governed as if whites were in the minority—they are oppressed by massive immigration, quotas and hate laws.” Now, massive immigration, quotas and hate laws all exist. Quotas and hate laws are, by definition, instruments by which minorities oppress the majority, and, as of 2001, Canada was 86.6% white. Massive immigration transforms native Canadians into foreigners in their own country (particularly in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal), cheats high-class Canadians of government (and government-regulated) jobs and placements in the professions. It not only cheats lower-class Canadians of jobs but also dramatically lowers the wages paid by those jobs still available to them. Massive immigration has transformed Canada into a linguistic Babel, corrupted our politics, introduced terrorist enclaves into this formerly peaceful land and engendered a Canada where it is perfectly acceptable, even praiseworthy, to hate white people for the colour of our skin.
Perhaps Kevin Jaeger doesn’t find any of this oppressive; perhaps he finds it liberating. If so, I’m inclined to say I couldn’t give a toss. I’m interested in what normal people think. Perhaps Jaeger has eyes to see and ears to hear but prefers not to let the truth pass his lips. If so, he should give up politics and so something useful instead, like raising peacocks.
“No party speaks for them.” QED.
“The Conservatives could—and should—be that party.” This is merely an opinion, based on two assumptions: 1. The Conservatives desire to defend Canada and 2. The Conservatives desire to win elections. I must admit that these assumptions are probably unwarranted and will continue to remain so.
But who knows? While there is breath, there is hope, and given the season, I’m especially inclined to be hopeful. So a Happy Christmas to all the editors, writers, bloggers and readers of the Western Standard.
Posted by: Kevin Michael Grace | 24-Dec-04 3:13:33 PM
"As much as I have secretly revelled in my reputation as the Keyser Söze of the Canadian Right, I must admit that it is unwarranted."
As I have never heard of either Keyser Söze or you, I say you are being far too humble, Mr. Grace.
Posted by: Kate | 24-Dec-04 4:38:00 PM
Post a comment