Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« November 25, 2007 - December 1, 2007 |Main| December 9, 2007 - December 15, 2007 »

Saturday, December 08, 2007

Suckered by Suzuki: NHL Players buy Carbon Credits

Apparently, they didn't learn their lesson with Eagleson or Goodenow. The NHL players , under their new leader, Massachussets lawyer Paul Kelly, are being fleeced again - this time, getting strongarmed into buying "carbon credits" - today's equivalent to the indulgences sold by the church in Medieval times that let hypocrites be hypocrites, and led to the great schism. From today's Toronto Star:

In a first for a major North American professional sports league, the National Hockey League Players Association is teaming up with the David Suzuki Foundation to promote action on climate change. And players are taking the lead by buying carbon credits to offset the environmental impact of their extensive travel during season play. "To have ... all these great heroes to Canadian kids taking a stand on one of the most important issues of our time is wonderful," Suzuki told reporters at a downtown hotel last night. "I can assure you, the traction you're going to get from this stand is far beyond anything environmentalists like I can get." The initiative, spearheaded by Boston Bruins defenceman Andrew Ference and promoted by former all-star Eric Lindros, has really caught fire, said Paul Kelly, executive director of the players' group. More than half of the league's 700-plus players have already signed the carbon neutral challenge, said Kelly, who expects more than 500 will eventually participate. "We players really want to show our fans and the kids who look up to us that action is louder than words and going carbon neutral is a big start for us," said Ference. The Suzuki Foundation calculates that NHL players generate an average of about 10 tonnes of carbon emissions every year flying to games, staying in hotels and driving to and from arenas. At a cost of $29 per tonne, players will pay $290 each to offset their emissions. The money will support wind energy in Madagascar, biomass energy in India and a hydroelectric project in Indonesia, the foundation says. These clean energy projects have been chosen by the foundation and meet the so-called gold standard for carbon offsets.

Could anything be more sad than our once-proud national heroes being tainted by falling for fad-inspired alarmists, who in turn are happily suckered by P.T. Barnum-inspired cads? I weep on my 1972 Summit Series Complete 8-DVD Set...

(Cross-Posted to Flaggman's Canada)

Posted by Neil Flagg on December 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (22) | TrackBack

All the non-news fit to print: The Globe tells us Conservatives appoint Conservatives

From today's Globe & Mail, via National Newswatch, "Tory connections lead to top jobs", by Campbell Clark, Globe & Mail, December 8, 2007:

OTTAWA — The Conservative government appointed a raft of Tories to federal boards, agencies and as citizenship judges yesterday.

At least seven of the 11 appointments yesterday to the National Film Board, Via Rail, the CDIC, two shipping agencies, and citizenship judgeships, went to people with Tory links. They include a former MP, a former Manitoba MLA who now works for a Conservative MP, a former Canadian Alliance candidate, and advisers to federal and provincial Tory ministers.

Two questions: who the hell does the Globe think they should have hired, Liberals? And who are those four non-Conservative appointments?

You can rest assured: the Liberals would never have appointed even a single non-politically-aligned person to a patronage appointment. If you want news, that's it.

The implication of the Globe is clear: the Conservatives are abusing their power by appointing Conservatives to patronage positions. A more absurd storyline, I've never heard - and yet, to a certain segment of the population, the narrative makes perfect sense. To the Globe and Mail, the Conservatives are only in government because the Liberals are on a time-out; that they have the temerity to actually govern, is beyond the pale.

So how do these numbers look to you, Globe?

2001 Monday-Friday Paid Circulation: 368,857

2007 Monday-Friday Paid Circulation: 329,099

(Cross-posted to Flaggman's Canada)

Posted by Neil Flagg on December 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (57) | TrackBack

What's for dessert?

Whipping up a little "gun hysteria" with the Toronto Sun.

"One of the firearms was a gold-coloured, .50-calibre Desert Eagle made of titanium -- a massive pistol considered by many experts to be among the most dangerous handguns ever made."

The fact that this gun would be more useful for hammering  nails than shooting at (well, more to the point... actually hitting anything)  has apparently gone right over this reporters head.

*

Posted by Neo Conservative on December 8, 2007 in Media | Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBack

What’s Wrong With a Little Diversion?

Canadian media and blogs have been filled with comments and opinions on the Irene Mathyssen-James Moore story, as well as follow-up columns on Irene’s less-than-sincere apology to Mr. Moore.

With most of the facts now revealed, the story is winding down.  James Moore did nothing wrong and Irene Mathyssen made a false accusation.  However, I still continue to read comments from some of the Irene Mathyssen apologists that I must take exception to.  For example, I have read the following questions posed a number of times:

- Why is Mr. Moore entertaining himself with non-business matters during business hours in a place of business while business was taking place?

- Why does Mr. Moore have personal vacation photos on his business computer?

Anybody who truly thinks this is a problem, needs to get both a life and a serious reality check.  They need to lose the arrogant holier-than-thou attitude.

How many of us have ever done one of more of the following activities?

OK.  Hands up!  Admit it!  How many are guilty of any of the above offences?

To those of you saying you’ve never done anything like that…  you’re either a bunch of liars or you work in a terribly rigid and unhealthy environment!  Either way, I advise you to seek help immediately.

The workplace is a place to get things done for our employers; however, it’s not supposed to be a prison either.  Certainly, it’s not appropriate to spend several hours a day on personal activities around the workplace, but short diversions in a stressful day are necessary to maintaining our sanity and productivity.  We’re humans, not machines.

I have some personal vacation photos that I use as desktop backgrounds on my office computer.  I have a digital picture frame on the back of my desk that cycles through some family photos.  I have some wonderful drawings by my grandfather, framed and hung on my office wall.

Occasionally, I like to sit back and admire these personal items.  I’ve had compliments on these items, as well as the occasional office conversation about them.  There is nothing wrong with that!

If an MP like James Moore wants to show a vacation photo of his dog and girlfriend to a fellow MP, there should be nothing wrong with that either.

Cross-posted at www.exactlyright.ca.

Posted by Dave Hodson on December 8, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack

Friday, December 07, 2007

The most important lesson...

Any parent can ever impress upon their wayward child... ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES .

"Parents don't often tell their children what they can expect to get for Christmas, but thanks to some creative parenting, one Toronto-area teen knows exactly what he won't be getting."

*

Posted by Neo Conservative on December 7, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack

Look, up in the sky! It's... Ron Paul?

[UPDATE: Diana, a commenter, writes that they have the $200,000. I checked. She's right. Here's the press release.
UPDATE2: A fact checker in the comments thought it important that I mention that their ultimate goal of $400,000 has not yet been met. As of this update, they are up to $228,000.]

Call it crazy, call it maverick, call it quirky, call it quixotic, call it whatever you'd like. One thing no one can deny is that it's kind of, well, awesome.

Ron Paul's presidential campaign is all of those things. But the critics of Ron Paul now have one more joke to throw in his direction: The Paul campaign is full of hot air. Well, maybe not the campaign, but the blimp. What? I said blimp.

Ron Paul's grassroots--more active and more committed than any other candidate in either party--have begun organizing a blimp advertising campaign. The blimp is to get off the ground by the 10th of December, flying over New Hampshire, Iowa, and then to Boston for the planned December 16th "money bomb" in honour of the Boston Tea Party (with stops in-between). On one side of the blimp will be written "Who is Ron Paul?" and "Google Ron Paul," while the other will sport "Ron Paul R3VO7ution" (that's "revolution" with "EVOL" in inverted letters to spell out "LOVE").

The blimp may not fly. Trevor Lyman, the guy who organized the Nov. 5th fundraising event raising a Republican one-day record 4.3 million dollars from 38,000 donors, has sunk his life's savings into Paul's campaign, and the blimp is still stuck without enough money.

Initially, he posted up a pledge site. Over $400,000 was pledged on that site. Now that the site is up as an actual contribution site, those pledges are not being fulfilled. Today is the last day before the blimp gets punctured, and they are still short roughly 30,000 from the initial $200,000 needed to get the blimp off the ground by the 10th of December.

The blimp is already getting some media attention. If it were to fly, it might generate a heap more. (Do I think it will fly? Oh, I do, I do. I've learned not to doubt the Paulites. Or Paulinistas, Paulbots, Paulunteers, or whatever else you'd like to call them.) Here's a video:

(Okay, I had a good laugh: A Ron Paul Tank?)

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 7, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (82) | TrackBack

Thursday, December 06, 2007

Will Pickton Be Acquitted?

This latest development in the Robert Pickton trial is... somewhat concerning.

Here's the short version.  Today, the Jury sent a question to the judge asking, "Are we able to say 'yes', if we infer that the accused acted indirectly?"

To translate that into English, their question was whether they kind find Pickton guilty if they cannot say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Pickton killed the women - but are certian that he played a role in their deaths.

In response to this, the Judge issued a modified instruction to the Jury:

"If you find that Mr. Pickton shot Ms. Wilson or was otherwise and active participant in her killing you should find that the Crown has proven this element.

"On the other hand, if you have a reasonable doubt about whether or not he was an active participant in her killing you must return a verdict of not guilty.

Frankly, while I believe that this instruction is correct, it still concerns me gravely - as this whole matter does.  I've predicted for a good while that Pickton would be acquitted.  Don't get me wrong - I don't think that he's innocent - but I think that there's been something gravely wrong with how this case has been handled from end to end.

I have more thoughts on this, but I'm going to reserve them for a little but later.

Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on December 6, 2007 in Crime | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack

All holy things considered

For those of you who might have missed it, here's Mitt Romney's speech about his religion. Romney is a Mormon.

Speaking of all things sacred and holy, some U.S. presidential candidates are besmirching the aura of goodness that ought, if (social) justice be done, attach to the term "socialized medicine." Listen for yourself.

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 6, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBack

UN Climate Summit

All of those climate summits and meetings are super important. So super important, for the planet, that we can ignore the rampant irony-deficiency amongst the participants.

What's so ironic? According to this Bloomberg story, all those environmentally conscious activists and bureaucrats flying in to Bali, Indonesia for the most recent round of UN handwringing over the state of the environment, will generate as many emissions as 20,000 cars.

Said Artur Runge-Metzger, head of climate strategy for the European Commission: "It's very hard for the public to understand that you come together with so many people to a very distant place and cause a lot of emissions, and at the same time talk about emission reductions.'' Of course, he mentions that he had offset his own emissions.

Hard to understand for the public? No, we understand. It's about echelons. All the envirocrats are above the rest of us, you see. It's you and I, fellow enviro-prole, who have to reduce our emissions, and hide our contraband incandescent light bulbs, and recycle, and ride bicycles in the snow, and so on. The enviroisie, meanwhile, is exempt because they mean well. They have good intentions. They really, really care.

Like Al Gore. He gets to have a swell mansion that consumes as much electricity in one month as an average American home consumes in a whole year. And he gets to put out a movie that tells the rest of us to consume less electricity and drive around less and not have a private jet. Like Gore's jet. Echelons.

What can people like you and I do? We might buy some carbon credits for the bureaucrats at the Climate Summit. You might also want to buy some credits for Nobel Prize winner Al Gore while you're at it. (I needn't mention this, of course, but he did not receive the prize for economics.)

Then again, maybe you'd prefer buying some carbon debits. Yes, you read that right: debits. Irked by Gore? Pay a company to chop down some trees (or do it yourself. See N.B.). In their own words:

"We are on a mission to take away every one of Al Gore's meaningless carbon credits by simply providing carbon debits. Help us make this dream a reality by purchasing one of the packages below. Don't let Al Gore assuage his guilt with meaningless penance, heap it back on with carbon debits – every one of which we will let him know about."

(N.B. I'm not encouraging anyone to purchase carbon debits. Especially not the US$4,995.95 "Premium Carbon Debit Vacation Package" which will net you airfare to Arizona from anywhere in the continental U.S., a whole day of carbon debiting using some sort of monster machine that converts trees into chips at a rate of 100 trees per day, an "I took away your carbon credits" plaque mailed to Al Gore, a t-shirt, and some other perks. Like wood chips for your hamster cage, I'm sure. Because that would be heresy to Gaia.)

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 6, 2007 in Travel | Permalink | Comments (59) | TrackBack

Guest Host Mark Steyn

Our very own Mark Steyn will be guest-hosting Hugh Hewitt's show today and Canadian or other non-American listeners can listen to the show on the popular California based KRLA870 station from 3pm-6pm PST (6pm-9pm EST). Hope you enjoy the show!

Posted by Winston on December 6, 2007 in Media | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack

24 Hours star gets 48 days

Kiefer Sutherland: Taking it like a man.

Posted by Terry O'Neill on December 6, 2007 in Crime | Permalink | Comments (26) | TrackBack

Iran's NIE Report

I have been busy with exams and didn't have time to add much to what other pundits have said about this latest NIE report on Iran's nuclear weapon program but it really doesn't matter much what the entire world, especially anti-Bush/America individuals, say/claim with respect to the new NIE report. What matters to most of us here and inside of Iran is the recent statement by President Bush on Tuesday saying:

Israeli and French governments haven't changed their stance on the Iranian issue yet and moreover this report made by the Washington based bureaucrats makes no sense and given the history of what rogue elements within CIA and the US State Dept have been doing in the past few years to undermine President Bush administration, I am not surprised to hear this nonsense at all. This new NIE report was co-sponsored by the Democrats in the US House of Representatives that are so eager to see Bush and America defeated and humiliated on the world stage that they've no shame to go this far to falsify reports or make Bush look bad. Any how, here are great articles on this latest findings which raise many good questions with regards to the credibility of this NIE report: Michael Rubin, Max Boot, and Gabriel Schoenfeld, Norman Podhoretz and Michael Ledeen.

Update: Fmr. Ambassador John Bolton has more

Posted by Winston on December 6, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack

Going green by going so-con

Back in the days of B.C. Report (link here to the remnants of the old website), I assigned a story about an environmental activist who was on a crusade to persuade people to grow their own food, make their own clothes, do all their own baking, never buy packaged food, etc, etc.

It struck me that what the woman was describing was also a typical workday for a homemaker (aka housewife) of a few generations ago.

So, we asked the crusader about this overlap and about how her recipe for going green necessitated having a full-time homemaker in a family--something which our magazine, as proponent of "traditional family values" (and when was the last time you heard that phrase, eh?) found quite appealing. As I recall, the crusader didn't like our insight, but couldn't rebut it.

I was reminded of this story upon reading an honest and insightful column by Craig McInnes in today's Vancouver Sun. McInnes, writing from personal experience, says divorce causes more than just emotional hardship; it also wreaks environmental havoc by way of the fact that what was once one household now must become two, and two homes have a much larger environmental footprint than one.

So, once again, we have an environmental argument lining up with a social conservative position: just as it is "greener" for a family to have a stay-at-home parent, it's also "greener" for a couple to stay married than to divorce. Interesting stuff, I'd say.

Posted by Terry O'Neill on December 6, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

A limit on government's ultimate power

I'm all for the Conservative government's law-and-order campaign, including the move to impose mandatory minimum sentences on certain criminals -- a move that has infuriated the legal establishment because it would remove some judicial discretion.

But, as an opponent of capital punishment, I'm also saddened by the government's decision not to seek clemency for Canadians facing the death penalty abroad. As I explain in my most recent Face-to-Face column in The Tri-City News, I believe in limited government--a concept that I think should also extend to the limiting of punishment that a government can impose on its citizens.

Read my full column here. And read the response of Mary Woo Sims here.

Posted by Terry O'Neill on December 4, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (52) | TrackBack

Monday, December 03, 2007

Canadian ambassador to Iran expelled

Breaking right now: Canadian ambassador to Iran was expelled by the Iranian regime.

Posted by Winston on December 3, 2007 in International Affairs | Permalink | Comments (88) | TrackBack

Vote for Schreibergelder! (but only if you really want to)

My recommendation – “Schreibergelder” – is in the running at Andrew Coyne’s “Name That Scandal” vote. The final four:

Airbust

Schreibergelder

Airbucks

Schreiberbriber

Frankly, I’m surprised "Schreibergelder" made it this far, as I got little support at the original post. But hey, I’ll take it! Vote here.

Posted by joantintor on December 3, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack

Sunday, December 02, 2007

A new phase in my political life

Some of you may have noticed that yours truly hasn't been very prolific in posting here.  I hope and expect that will change, now that I have just been elected Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia, an organization dedicated to ensuring the GOP remains the party of limited government and individual freedom.

With any luck, my running commentary of Virginia and national politics will give the readers north of the 49th some more insight into American politics (which was one of the reasons I sold the powers that be on letting me post here in the first place).

Posted by D.J. McGuire on December 2, 2007 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (48) | TrackBack

Elmasry vs. Steyn

As Adam mentioned below, Mark Steyn and Maclean's have been taken to at least a couple of human rights commissions by the Canadian Islamic Congress.

I'm familiar with the CIC and their propaganda campaigns. (Funny enough, the news story on Maclean's website is itself CIC baloney -- they are in no way Canada's "largest" Muslim organization, despite their pretenses. Wikipedia has a quick bio of Mohamed Elmasry, their president-for-life.)

Here's a column I wrote about them after an encounter I had with Elmasry at a journalism conference last year. We were on a panel together, and he railed on about how the "zhoos" controlled the media. He received more than a polite response from the crowd of reporters, and a vigorous defence from a particular CBC radio producer in the crowd. Substitute a Louisiana accent for his Egyptian accent, and Elmasry's speech could have been given by David Duke. How he continues to get kid-glove treatment -- even on the Maclean's website! -- is amazing. Surely his public support for killing Israelis warrants some mention whenever he's quoted in the press.

After the National Post ran my column, the CIC served us with notice under the defamation laws. Of course, they had no case -- we had the defences of truth, fair comment, etc. -- so the CIC had to settle for a letter to the editor almost a year later.

But the CIC learned their lesson: there's no point suing in defamation law, where the CIC would have to pay for their own lawyers, and our lawyers if we won, and where silly things like the rule of law apply. Better to go to the human rights commissions where the taxpayer pays for the prosecution, traditional rules of evidence and procedure don't apply, and free speech is not protected. It still has all of the down-sides for the defendant -- the hassle, the cost, and a lower bar for a "conviction" -- but none of the cost for the complainants.

Speaking of which, the Western Standard's own human rights hearing is finally coming up, nearly two years after we published the Danish cartoons and were first hit with the complaints. We don't have an exact date yet, but the formal "investigation" meeting will be in January. Though we ceased publishing the magazine, we are still a corporate entity, and it's important to me that we see this human rights challenge through.

For your info, here's the hand-scratched complaint against us, and here's our reply. The whole thing feels like justice on the streets of Sudan or Saudi Arabia, more than Canada. I'm sure liberals who fight for the separation of church and state will be speaking out about this human rights complaint any moment now, as vociferously as if the Bishop of Toronto had taken a gay rights magazine to court.

I hope Maclean's fights their complaint hard -- if I know Ken Whyte and Mark Steyn, I'm sure they will. I just hope that the choice is theirs.

I wonder how long before the rest of the surrenderist press corps, the types who applauded Elmasry at that journalism conference, realize that this is their fight, too.

Posted by Ezra Levant on December 2, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (128) | TrackBack