Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Hey, Ho! Shapiro must go! | Main | Don't mess with Dianne Mitchell »

Friday, June 17, 2005

7 Things You Can't Say In Canada

Courtesy of Alder Nation comes the aforementioned article by Margaret Wente in Reader's Digest.

  1. Margaret Atwood writes some really awful books.
  2. Recycling is a waste of time and money.
  3. Only private enterprise can save public health care.
  4. David Suzuki is bad for the environment.
  5. A national daycare program won’t do a thing to help poor kids.
  6. Group of Seven artists are overexposed genre painters.
  7. The United States is the greatest force for good the world has ever known.

I disqualify myself from No. 1 and 6 'cause I am no artiste - I have never read an Atwood novel and can only name one of the Group of Seven and that is because he died in a canoe. I confess as well that I have never said No. 2, but I could do without it. No's 3, 4, 5 and 7? I am all over those ones. That is what is so great about blogging - it's not exactly polite company and I can say whatever I please. Caveat Videtor.

Cross-Posted to PoliticalStaples

Posted by Greg Staples on June 17, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d8347f496469e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 7 Things You Can't Say In Canada:

Comments

Ammend 7 to read "The United States is the greatest force the world has ever known."

Do that, and I believe there will be little disagreement on the phrase.

However, insert something about "for the good", and it all depends on the mindset of those you ask. Israeli? Iraqi? Australian? Japanese?

Or those nations wishing for US annihilation: Cuban, North Korean, Brazilian, Venezualian, French, Canadian?

Posted by: just another mike | 2005-06-17 2:31:09 PM


At least we can say the federal liberals gun registry is a costly ineffective waste and get the agreement of the majority of Canadians.

This is a simpole fact that Liberal myth spinning would have made inpossible to repeat in public 10 years ago without being publicly ostracized.

There are rays of light shining through the widening cracks in the myths of Trudeaupia.

Posted by: WLMackenzie redux | 2005-06-17 3:14:32 PM


Mikey I think you are confusing the attitudes of certain Marxist ideologues and envious blowhards who happen to control the government media in places like Cuba and "Venezualia", with the attitudes of "those nations" themselves. It would be very strange if "those nations" wished for the annihilation of the USA, since so many of their citizens either want to live in America, or live just like Americans, or make a living selling things to Americans.

In the future please consult with us before publicly stating what you presume to be our collective genocidal intentions.

Posted by: The Venezuelan Nation | 2005-06-17 3:23:10 PM


And the one that died in the canoe wasn't even technically a member of that overrated group of landscape artists.

Posted by: rick mcginnis | 2005-06-17 3:23:16 PM


Along with Marcus Gee, Margaret Wente is one of the few readable/sane writers at the Mop and Pail these days. The Comment section of that paper seems to consist mostly of Smug Old Farts (Hugh Winsor, Jeffrey Simpson), and intolerant lefties (Rick Salutin, Andre Picard, etc...)

Posted by: Grumpy Young Crank | 2005-06-17 3:26:59 PM


The 'Good' is something that can be measured by the net benefit/change they have in their sphere of influence.

It is, essentially, an Objective, not a Subjective concept (however much we may try to make it so). People, nations, and idealogues can try to redefine 'good', but some basic things remain:

Freedom of concience/religion/assembly (real, not on an unenforced document). Consent of the governed, property rights, citizenship rights, right to a free trial. I am deliberately NOT including the right 'not to be offended' in this list. Rights and freedoms there are based on what they are Able to Do and Risk, not what Risks and Consequences they are protected from.

Socialist countries (which we are quickly becoming ourselves) want to be protected FROM the consequences of risk, which they are given (Peace,Land,Bread... sound familiar?) and in so doing find their rights to take risk (and therefore have greater gain) being eroded down by draconian legislation.

I like Adler's comments, particularily the odd and even ones. =)

Posted by: republicanuk | 2005-06-17 3:33:58 PM


I've read a couple of Margaret Atwood, and yes she's overrated, but I count Bodily Harm as one of the best books I've read. The ending drove me nuts.

Posted by: ld | 2005-06-17 3:37:08 PM


hey Rick that was Tom thomson right?? I didnt know he wasnt a member yet he was the best of the lot wasnt he

Posted by: MikeP | 2005-06-17 3:45:54 PM


I'm not sure about what is meant by the first comment and the USA being a force for the good.

However, as one who spent more than half of my adult life in Japan, and am old enough to have been there when there was post-WWII was still a fressh memory I can say without hesitation that most Japanese I know look upon the USA as a force for good in the world.

When I was a student in Japan in the 60s, my surrogate father (Mr. Tojo) was a man who had fought in China as a conscript. He reminded me that most men in his regiment had been overjoyed that the USA had defeated the militarists who had taken their country from them. For them, there was no sadness when the war ended. Only great respect for the USA, which had helped Japan to create the wonderful democratic society that has persisted to this day.

When PM Koizumi offered to send troops to Iraq to help the USA establish peace in Iraq after Hussein had fallen, despite the strait jacket of Japan's peace constitution, it was because he recognizes the fact that the USA remains a beacon for good in the world.

Posted by: Two Cents | 2005-06-17 5:12:56 PM


MikeP -- I believe many of us (OK, me) learned that factoid from the Tragically Hip song that begins, "Tom Thompson came paddling past, I'm pretty sure it was him..."

Posted by: Evan Kirchhoff | 2005-06-17 6:24:54 PM


Brian- I'm beginning to suspect that you are NOT Irish, as you have claimed.

The above is not Chinese....one of your other posts has two Chinese characters, though the first one is a bit fuzzy..but they mean (hao de=good)..so that all that the sentence said was that " Sec. General 'Hu Jin-Tao is good"..But the above is Japanese.

What's your point? Why pretend to be Irish?

Posted by: ET | 2005-06-17 7:43:42 PM


Brian,

でも、今の日本の若者はそんな人じゃないと思います。= So, the current Japanese young person thinks that there is no such a
person.

Based on my translator, is that correct.

Posted by: rob | 2005-06-17 7:58:18 PM


wretchard said...

This is what the Great Game looks like from the trenches. And yes, it is possible to be a good guy, but Pollyannas need not apply. So when the New York Times goes on and on about Abu Ghraib and some dimwit from Amnesty International talks about Nazis, I am absolutely convinced, from a personal point of view, that he's blowing smoke out of his ass.

How do you fight evil? Not by being evil yourself, but you've got to be able to make them fear you, or at least think twice about crossing you when you meet up in a dark alley. Because your paths will cross. Most definitely cross.


fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Comments above are not to be published in can888.

Repeat: Do not read these comments. They are un_canadaian; against evil, even.

The censors will disappear this before this comment is finis

Posted by: maz2 | 2005-06-17 7:58:35 PM


Brian O'Neill,

Yes, your translation may be roughly accurate; but your comment remains shallow. It also doesn't prove you are wise as you appear to suggest. It just suggests that you are more likely a smart alec.

I disagree with you about your view that most young people in Japan today are naive and unrealistic. Yes, some are. So are many in Canada.

I have recently had a number of interesting conversations with my 22year old Japanese nephew on this topic. He is fairly typical in that he does not speak English and is more interested in music than politics. Nonetheless, his interest in the U.S. and what it stands for is just as intense as my fellow students were at Keio University many years ago. Pro-American attitudes among the youth in Japan are also as strong as ever.

Many people in Canada seem to be confused with the concept that being opposed to the Bush Administration's policies translates into being anti-American.

I do not deny that there are many people in Canada, and Japan, who oppose the Bush Administration policies (I'm not one of them.) But, this doesn't make the entire generation naive or even anti-American. In my day, we all opposed Nixon and the Viet Nam War.

And by the way, the depth of the opposition to Nixon and the Viet Nam War makes me realize that today's student protests barely register on the same scale of intensity.

Posted by: Two Cents | 2005-06-17 10:16:17 PM


Just out of curiosity, what year did the Vietnam war start? If my recall of history is accurate, it would have been during JFK's tenure. Trying to dump that on Nixon is pretty weak. I mean the guy had some flaws, but starting Vietnam wasn't one of them.

Posted by: Shawn | 2005-06-17 11:40:13 PM


I thought the thread was "7 Things You Can't Say In Canada". Whaaa?

Posted by: Kwaa? | 2005-06-18 12:52:21 AM


I'm a big Brian O'Neill fan.

Posted by: Briana O'Neill | 2005-06-18 12:56:08 AM


How about this:

Brian Mulroney was a better Prime Minister than Pierre Trudeau.

In Ontario, which profits handsomely from the things Mulroney implemented, you could wind up in the insane asylum for saying that.

In Alberta, they say "Well ANYONE was better than Pierre the Terrible, may he burn in hell."


Posted by: Scott | 2005-06-18 1:19:17 AM


Other things you can't say:

-English-Canadian movies suck
-Canadian government foreign policy is irrelevant internationally
-Third-word immigration is radically altering Canadian society (note I am not saying for good or ill)
-There are two Canadas (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver) and the rest
-The senior federal public service has no political independence or backbone
-Canadian industry makes no consumer products that are widely recognized internationally
-Canadian businesses that operate internationally conciously have names that conceal any obvious association with Canada (Nortel, Bombardier, all the big banks whose name are now just alphabet soup, BCE)
-Canada has no reputation internationally as a country that is technologically or industrially advanced (compare with say, Sweden or Switzerland)--in fact most people abroad could not name one such large Canadian company
-If Canada had a separate foreign intelligence service (as opposed to CSIS operating abroad to collect security intelligence, or military intelligence operating in foreign theatres)it would be a complete waste of money since the government would have neither the power nor the inclination to do anything substantive with the information gathered
-Canada has no heroes who were entrepreneurs or industrialists
-Conrad Black is the perfect exemplar of Canada: a brilliant start but ulitimate failure

One could go on.

Mark
Ottawa

Posted by: Mark Collins | 2005-06-18 8:56:17 AM


8. The very policies which many Canadians think are proof that their country is great - health care, equalization, peacekeeping, multiculturism, cultural protectionism, etc. - are actually the worst things about Canada, and ultimately the nation will fail because of our elites' obsession with these non-virtues.

Posted by: Justzumgai | 2005-06-18 9:10:22 AM


What the hell...

Canadians love to bitch and moan.

Posted by: Gareth Igloliorte | 2005-06-18 12:16:09 PM


"English-Canadian movies suck"

What about 'Waydowntown'?

Shot in Calgary, by an Albertan.

Or 'Fubar'?

Hilarious.

Another made and concieved in Alberta feature that makes filmakers in the rest Canada jealous.

Maybe you don't watch very many Canadian movies. So you don't know what good is out there.

Posted by: . | 2005-06-18 1:25:21 PM


Margaret atwood sucks.

Posted by: shawn | 2005-06-18 3:42:46 PM


things you can't say in Canada,

Tommie douglas is a commie asswipe.

powerful pierre, slackjaw and the martian are elitist commie asswipes.

pomoliberalism is a dead idealogie.

moe is a fucking UN-poseur for commie takeover of the western world--as retarded as that sounds.

ontario is the source of all problems in Canada.

the yankees will be storming across the border, pitchforks n'all, if canucks choose what they think.

Posted by: off the beaten track | 2005-06-18 7:06:35 PM


"English-Canadian movies suck"

Agreed. Most are instantly recognizable as Canadian by their lousy writing, retarded sound-engineering and crappy cinematography.

"What about 'Waydowntown'?" Well, what follows is some critical 'acclaim':

"Four silly Canadians make the most ludicrous bet imaginable: taking advantage of the interconnected world of downtown Calgary"

"...not much of a film. Writer/director Gary Burns offers a suffocating experience which is too boring to be accepted as a satire, too lame to be accepted as a farce, and too infantile to be accepted as a drama."

"...a tiresome talkathon where a collection of obnoxious characters trade insults, whine endlessly on matters of no real importance, and set back the course of Canadian cinema a good 20 years." [If that's possible - it was already a century behind]

"Pity the cinematographer remembered to remove the lens cap."

Posted by: JR | 2005-06-19 1:09:01 PM


8) Anne Murray is corny.
9) All french Canadian child stars suck.
10) Our country is run by the sapranos and the MSM is a gutless choir aiding and abedding the thugs and can't explain why.
11) The canadian electorate are Oprahslurping lefty morons.
12) Americans are a lot nicer than Canadians.
13) The last election was bought with some of our stolen money and we are don't care.

Posted by: richfisher | 2005-06-21 11:05:10 AM


Canada has all these problems (separatism, alienation, corruption, waste, cronyism..>) simply because it is not a real democracy. The democratic deficit is not a deficit- it is the denial of a functioning modern democracy where the PM elected by a party , not the country, ends up appointing everything and controlling his MP's representing a 'majority' house elected by 25 % of actual potential voters.

That is to say, what you can't say in Canada is: "Canada is not one of the democratic nations of the world."

Posted by: edwardmills | 2005-06-22 12:09:47 AM


Not two Canada's. There are four Canada's, that is, four distinct regions: The West, Ontario, Quebec and the smaller disproportionately represented Maritimes. Ontario and the Ottawa- dependent Maritimes join to hold the seats that run 'Canada', now that Quebec has bowed out.

That is to say, what you can't say about Canada is that: "There are not ten real provinces, there are only three and a half regions."

Posted by: edwardmills | 2005-06-22 12:20:35 AM


What you can't say about canada is that canada is one of the last die-hard totally apartheid regimes in the world under the 19thC Indian Act replete with its racial purity laws and bantustans called insultingly 'reserves' and a 'traditional' caste of apartheid-paid and dependent 'tribal leaders'.

Posted by: edwardmills | 2005-06-22 12:26:03 AM


Now that we are well beyond 7 things, lets collate all these things "you are not allowed to say about Canada" and with a list that long, and growing where ever it is open for additional comment, will make poignant evidense that a country with so much you can't say, but know is true, is indeed a country in deep trouble.

This theme has the potential to turn into a movement!

Posted by: edwardmills | 2005-06-22 12:31:12 AM


Hey I used to recycle in Winnipeg when you got paid for it. Our garbage made the biggest hills in town.


How about homosexual marriages are not the future until we have better cloning methodology.

Posted by: ghollingshead | 2005-06-22 7:40:15 AM


I love the Margaret Wente seven things, I have lived here for fifty years and I would say is that all of them are true, as an arty person I have to confess I love Franklin Carmichael and Casson abd Lismer but they are not the ones who are reproduced and that Ms Atwood wrote some interesting books way back in the sixties, the truth is that CANADA and its identity and its horrid flag are now an industry and an icon and it is now HERESY not to grovel before them. I am waiting for the re-education camps [hint:gulags] to open, I already know many people who will be in charge, alas, so thanks for the last laugh, Ms Wente .

Posted by: Jeannie L'Esperance | 2005-07-24 11:29:52 AM


http://alldatafree.info/93/index.html http://alldatafree.info/125/index.html http://alldatafree.info/280/index.html http://alldatafree.info/186/index.html http://alldatafree.info/216/index.html
Feaspwesk

Posted by: Feaspwesk | 2007-06-22 1:18:12 PM


WLMacKenzie redux,

Libby-Dippy-Doo-Doos are like little children, who, when they first experience washing dishes, do the dish washing, not to get dishes clean, but to play with the suds. In the end, the dishes have not been cleaned, a few plates are broken, and there is water and suds all over the floor.

The Libby-Dippy-Doo-Doos are good at one thing, and one thing only, and that is inventing things for the sake of increasing the numbers of people, in government, who sit around doodling and spinning their wheels, like rodents in an exercise wheel. In the end, the wheel has been spun hundreds and thousands of times, and the rodent is still in its cage.

Posted by: Lady | 2007-06-22 1:41:58 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.