The Shotgun Blog
« December 9, 2007 - December 15, 2007 |Main| December 23, 2007 - December 29, 2007 »
Saturday, December 22, 2007
The Paul/Huckabee switcheroo
It happens. Especially to candidates who, at least a month ago, were considered candidates without hope of winning. "Third tier" candidates. This was prior to a surge in the "official" polls for one, and a surge in finances for the other.
Just now, it is the most emailed and most read article on the National Post's website. Did the mistake have something to do with it? Or are tech-savvy Canadians as interested in Ron Paul as Americans? And why aren't more media responding to market incentives (readers and viewers) by putting Ron Paul on the news more often?
Expecting them to fix the mistake, I quickly got a screen capture:
And here's what it looks like now:
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 22, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (41) | TrackBack
Syed Soharwardy will withdraw complaint from AHRCC
Date: December 21, 2007
Press Release
Western Standard Apologised to the Muslim Community
Syed Soharwardy will Withdraw Complaint from AHRCC
Today’s Protest at the City Hall Has Been Cancelled
Calgary - Yesterday, the National President of Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, Imam Syed Soharwardy received a phone call from Mr. Matthew Johnston, the new owner of the Western Standard. Mr. Johnston expressed his regrets and apologised to Imam Syed Soharwardy and the Muslim Community for allowing the hateful statements against Muslims on the Western Standard blog. Mr. Johnston followed up with an email. In his email Mr. Johnston wrote:
“……………… In short, we will not allow the high quality of our online discussions to be compromised by a few insensitive and offensive comments that do nothing to further the important debates that take place on our site. While we have independently determined that we must address the problems we inherited when we purchased the lively and un-moderated Western Standard blog, your recent human rights complaint has brought all of our existing concerns about the website into sharp focus – and we will act on our plan.
I apologize to you and the Calgary Muslims who took offence to the comments found on our website. I took offence to these comments as well, as did the vast majority of our readers. On January 15, 2008, the new Western Standard website will be launched. I invite you to judge our commitment to fostering respectful debate at that time. In the future, please contact us directly with any concerns you might have about our content. You’ll find us to be very responsive”.
In the spirit of Eid al Adh-ha and Christmas, Imam Syed Soharwardy has decided to withdraw his complaint from the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Commission in Ottawa. Moreover, ISCC has decided to cancel today’s protest in front of Calgary City Hall. However, ISCC requests Calgary Police to continue their investigation and find out who posted the hateful statements on Western Standard’s blog.
Imam Syed Soharwardy thanked Mr. Johnston for his courage and offered his cooperation to Western Standard. Imam Syed Soharwardy has also invited Mr. Matthew Johnston to visit Al Madinah Calgary Islamic Centre and talk to the Muslim community on any Friday. Mr. Johnston has accepted the invitation.
- 30 -
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 22, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Is 'Glorifying Terrorism' a Crime?
In Britain, it is--now. Canada's still taking stock
Jordan Michael Smith - May 7, 2007
Mizanur Rahman, a radical Muslim who led a protest in London, England, last February against Danish cartoons of Mohammed by holding up signs saying, "Behead those who insult Islam" and calling for a "9/11 all over Europe," has been convicted of promoting racial hatred.
At the same protest, Umran Javed shouted through a megaphone, "Denmark, you will pay with your blood," and warned non-Muslims to learn "the lessons of Theo Van Gogh," the Dutch filmmaker murdered in 2004 by an Islamic radical. Rahman was convicted in November, and Javed was convicted this January of inciting murder and racial hatred.
No charges similar to those faced by Javed and Rahman have been laid against any Canadian citizens, and not necessarily because Islamic radicals are absent here. "We don't have legislation as substantial as the U.K. has," says Craig Forcese, a lawyer at the University of Ottawa who is working on a book about Canada's national security policy.
Read the entire article here:
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2492&start=0
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 22, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (89) | TrackBack
Faceoff: Watch Your Mouth
Should freedom of speech extend to those who spread hatred?
Michael Coren and Karen Selick - September 17, 2007
From: Michael Coren
To: Karen Selick
Date: July 30, 2007 9:32 AM
Subject: Is hate speech still free speech?
Bobby James Wilkinson, the creator of the Canadian Nazi Party website, has been fined $4,000 by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and ordered to cease and desist spreading hateful messages. Seems about right to me.
Read the Coren vs Selick debate on freedom of speech here:
http://westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2690&start=0
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 22, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack
Friday, December 21, 2007
Political madness
Changes to Alberta’s Mental Health Act could endanger civil liberties
Matthew Johnston - December 21, 2007
Imagine a world in which, despite having committed no crime, the state can arrest and imprison you indefinitely without the benefit of legal council or a trial. In this nightmare world, agents of the state can even force you into psychological treatment and drug you against your will. Yet, this isn’t the plot outline for some dystopian novel like Brave New World where prenatal psychological conditioning and universal, state-sponsored psychotropic drug use are part of the scientifically engineered social order. It’s the real world power contained in Alberta’s Mental Health Act (MHA). And in the coming year, the MHA will become an even more powerful tool for the state and government healthcare workers.
Read the complete article here:
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2696
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 21, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBack
Dozed off?
Quebec has fallen off the screen in the West
Dr. Roger Gibbins - December 21, 2007
Last week I had the opportunity to participate in an Ottawa conference on the changing face of Canadian federalism. The event drove home the realization that the longstanding debate over the place of Quebec in Canada, a debate that is alive and well in Quebec, has died in the western part of the country.
Western Canadians have left the building.
Evidence for this conclusion appeared in last year’s indifference to the parliamentary recognition of the Québecois as a nation within Canada. In the past, even the hint of such recognition would have had western Canadians reaching under the bed for their muskets.
Read the entire editorial by Dr. Gibbins here:
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2695
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 21, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
www.ezralevant.com
For four years my personal website, www.ezralevant.com, has pointed to the Western Standard's website. Now that the Standard has ceased publishing its print edition, and Matthew Johnston and his energetic team have bought the Standard's online assets (including this blog), it makes sense for me to fire up my own site again.
I'm sure I'll still cross-post most of my items over here, too -- including news about my looming meeting with the Alberta human rights commission.
Even though the print magazine is deceased, and the name Western Standard and its websites are sold, the corporate entity that published the Western Standard with the Danish cartoons nearly two years ago still exists, and is still being "investigated" by the commission. I am still president of that company, and I intend to meet these complaints and beat them. Keep watching this page, or my own, for updates. My first hearing is scheduled for January 11th.
Posted by Ezra Levant on December 21, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack
Hide your money
With $403k in retirement savings stashed away in a safe in his home, a wife and son to protect, Luther Ricks Sr. naturally reached for his gun and fired at two would-be thieves who broke into his home in Lima Ohio over the Summer. He foiled the robbery then, killing one of the robbers in the process.
After an investigation cleared him of any wrongdoing, Ricks expected to get his safe full of retirement money back from the police who had taken it during the investigation after finding marijuana at Ricks house. But the Lima police department had shattering news for Ricks: The FBI had gone ahead and taken the safe for themselves.
Yes, for themselves. The FBI is refusing to return the safe until Ricks proves he earned it according to methods and means officially approved by the government.
Ricks has to take the FBI to court to get his life savings back. Lawyers cost money. Money is what Ricks had, in his safe.
There is little doubt that he won't get it back. The only question the article openly wonders about is whether the city will try to fight the FBI to get the money for their own purposes. Since they "found" it, after all.
What about Ricks? Well, my government-loving friends, there's always social security. (Hey! A new argument for gov-sponsored safety nets. Take note and repeat this question, "Just what will the poor do without a social safety net like social security after the feds come and pillage their life savings?")
Words cannot express my disgust at this story. And I have better things to do just now. So if you'll excuse me, I'll be busy burying my Ron Paul silver coins.
UPDATE: The Lima news has a brilliant editorial about this. They get it. Excerpt:
Ricks received no trial, but the government can just seize his money? Based on what? The belief he might be guilty of something. It’s up to Ricks to provide evidence the money in his possession was his. So much for being innocent until the government proves you’re guilty.
Never mind that the same Constitution’s Fifth Amendment states that no person “shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
Again, the government is depriving Ricks of both property and the liberty that money helps provide, based on a hunch it doesn’t even intend to attempt to prove.
This isn’t about legalizing drugs, even for medicinal purposes.. This is about whether the government should be able to take a hunch and turn a constitutional right on its head by making the accused prove he is innocent.
This is bad news for every one of us.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 21, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBack
Canada Praised
US President Bush and Secretary of State Rice both praised Canada's role in the ongoing struggle against terrorism in Afghanistan:
"I want to thank also the people of Canada for that extraordinary contribution," [...] "I want to say to the families of those who have given the ultimate sacrifice there that their sacrifice is not in vain. It is in the cause of freedom -- a noble cause."
The Foreign Affairs ministry web site has more on that.
Posted by Winston on December 21, 2007 in International Affairs, Military | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Hugh Hewitt takes up for Mark Steyn: Buy Maclean's, Boycott Canada?
Hugh Hewitt, a syndicated California-based talk radio host with a daily audience averaging over 300,000 coast-to-coast, had Mark Steyn on for a weekly chat yesterday, and they kicked off by discussing the Human Rights Jihad against Mark and Maclean's. A highly-entertaining listen, as Hugh moves off his boycott of Canada, and promotes Maclean's subscriptions to his U.S. listeners:
Hugh Hewitt and Mark Steyn on The Hugh Hewitt Show - December 20, 2007
Posted by Neil Flagg on December 21, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming Claims
The new report by the US Senate on Global Warming is getting zero coverage in big dinosaur media:
"Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore."
Posted by Winston on December 21, 2007 in Current Affairs, Science | Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBack
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Lakota Freedom?
The Lakota Sioux tribe is unilaterally seceding from the U.S.
From their press release:
Washington D.C. – Lakota Sioux Indian representatives declared sovereign nation status today in Washington D.C. following Monday’s withdrawal from all previously signed treaties with the United States Government. The withdrawal, hand delivered to Daniel Turner, Deputy Director of Public Liaison at the State Department, immediately and irrevocably ends all agreements between the Lakota Sioux Nation of Indians and the United States Government outlined in the 1851 and 1868 Treaties at Fort Laramie Wyoming.
“This is an historic day for our Lakota people,” declared Russell Means, Itacan of Lakota. “United States colonial rule is at its end!”
“Today is a historic day and our forefathers speak through us. Our Forefathers made the treaties in good faith with the sacred Canupa and with the knowledge of the Great Spirit,” shared Garry Rowland from Wounded Knee. “They never honored the treaties, that’s the reason we are here today.”
It's making all the news just now.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 20, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack
Italian Imam Guilty of Terrorism Links
An Islamic cleric who preaches hate at his mosque in Milan has been found convicted on terror charges by an Italian court:
"Abu Imad was found guilty - along with 10 other men - of being part of a group that encouraged jihad and sought to recruit potential suicide bombers."
This type of punishment can happen when Imams preach hatred and encourage the muslims to go on Jihad in free western countries.
Posted by Winston on December 20, 2007 in Current Affairs, Religion | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBack
Ouch
In news that will gladden the heart of every member of Gen X and Y, the C.D. Howe Institute reported today that Canadian governments are unprepared for $1.4 trillion in extra spending related to the aging of Baby Boomers.
Further, the young ones that one day Boomers will be shouting at to get off their lawn will face taxes the kind of which have never been seen by Canadians in the past. Whenever I tell my mother how bad it will be for future generations forced to pay for her cohort's retirement she laughs and says that it won't be that bad. No, not for her. Ain't a generational ponzi scheme a great thing?
Read on. (PDF)
Posted by Steve Martinovich on December 20, 2007 in Canadian Politics | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack
Another nine miles
Rachel Marsden is back in the news again--National Post: Conservative pundit's latest controversy. Another bad break-up. How bad? Involving the RCMP and national secrets and naked pictures and… what else? Oh, yeah, a pile of personal emails released to the public on her website. In 2005, I wrote a story about Ms. Marsden after she was hired by the National Post. In that piece I quoted Sun chain co-founder Peter Worthington--before the Sun hired her--as saying; "She's good-looking, she's articulate, but she's nine miles of bad road," he says. "You might want to live dangerously, and they seem to have decided they want to do that."
Posted by Kevin Steel on December 20, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Featured on Reuters
This is mostly a shameless self-promotion of my recent post on the Iranian regime incursion in Latin America that has been featured by the Reuters news agency web site.
Posted by Winston on December 20, 2007 in Current Affairs, Media, Weblogs | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Glimmer of hope
Here's today's Calgary Herald story about the latest human rights complaint against the website. I see a glimmer of hope in it:
Civil liberties lawyer Stephen Jenuth said pitting freedom of speech against hate crimes can be uncomfortable.
"It's a matter of where do you draw the line," said Jenuth. "As a society, we have to protect ourselves against such things as people advocating genocide. But our society also has to be strong enough to accept that freedom of speech requires us to hear things we might not want to hear."
Jenuth is a leftist lawyer, a Liberal party riding president usually quoted as a pro-criminal and pro-accused voice in law and order issues. But he's also the president of Alberta's Civil Liberties association. His comment, above, is a glimmer of hope that there are still some true, classical liberals out there who understand that freedom of speech includes speech that we sometimes don't like to hear. He's not as full-throated about it as his B.C. and federal counterparts, but it's a start.
Posted by Ezra Levant on December 20, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (41) | TrackBack
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Bringing Saudi values to Canada, one human rights complaint at a time
Syed Soharwardy, the Saudi-trained imam now preaching in Calgary, is at it again.
Back in 2006, Soharwardy filed a complaint with the Alberta human rights commission because the Western Standard published the Danish cartoons of Mohammed. You simply have to read his hand-scrawled complaint -- my favourite part was that those cartoons violated his rights because he was a direct descendant of Mohammed. Uh, I'm not sure if that's considered a legal cause of action back in Saudi Arabia, let alone in Canada. You really have to check it out, here. Our response is here; though I was tempted to make the compelling legal argument that I am a descendant of Moses, I refrained. (I also used a spell-check.)
Soharwardy's first stop was the Calgary Police Service, who gently reminded him that he wasn't back in Saudi anymore, and that police don't settle political differences over here. So he went to the AHRCC, who are much less liberal than gun-toting cops.
Now Soharwardy is mad again -- this time because of some public comments posted to the Western Standard blog on December 2nd, ironically in response to a post by me about radical Muslims using human rights commissions as censors.
Soharwardy says he felt scared by those public comments -- but not scared enough to, say, contact the Western Standard to even ask for them to be taken down. As usual, his first stop was the police who, as usual, turned him away. So off to the human rights commission he goes. Soharwardy's press conference today? Well, we all know that's what genuinely scared people do.
Here's Matthew Johnston's official response on behalf of the new Western Standard.
Rob Breakenridge has a good question: if Soharwardy's own website contains the scary, hateful words that he is complaining to the human rights commission about, is he not "promoting hatred" against Muslims himself? Soharwardy might argue -- if Soharwardy deigned to argue -- that he repeated those bad words only to rebut them. But that's exactly what happened on the Western Standard site -- they were promptly rebutted by another public commenter.
Soharwardy is a lot like Mohamed Elmasry. They each claim to represent enormous numbers of people -- Soharwardy has the "Islamic Supreme Council" and Elmasry has the "Canadian Islamic Congress". But both are actually part-timers (Soharwardy works for IBM; Elmasry is a professor at Waterloo) who have never shown more than a handful of followers -- not that that's ever stopped the media from quoting them obsequiously.
Elmasry and Soharwardy have both said bone-headed, even bigoted, things in the press. Elmasry said any Jew 18 or older in Israel is fair game for a terrorist attack. Soharwardy -- an advocate for bringing sharia law to Canada -- is just plain nutty:
I blame... the media. Seriously: I blame them for the soft bigotry of low expectations. If Soharwardy and Elmasry were WASPs, the media would ridicule them for their thin skin, and would attack their views as the reactionary fascism that it is. But because they're foreign-born, dark-skinned Muslims who speak with an accent, the media shut off their natural skepticism and forget all of their ideals about free speech -- and their judgment -- because they want to be gentle.
They're not doing Muslims any favours. The media -- and all polite society -- should marginalize the fascists and the radicals, and build up the moderates, like Toronto's outstanding Tarek Fatah, or others like Irshad Manji and Salim Mansur.
Elmasry and Soharwardy actual retard the integration and progress of any Muslims who follow them -- thankfully, a small number. For, instead of teaching them true civics -- such as how to participate in the cut-and-thrust of democratic debate without running to the government -- they teach them to be professional complainers and think of themselves as victims.
Thought experiment: Do you think that Canadian attitudes towards Muslims are enhanced or damaged by the Elmasry-Soharwardy recipe of two parts whining and one part bullying? You don't have to guess -- this Nanos poll has the answer.
Elmasry and Soharwardy are media-hungry radicals -- which is why only the human rights commissions of the world (and doe-eyed journalists) will give them any credit. Constructive Muslim leaders would teach their flock the essence of Western liberal civics -- how to debate and participate, not how to whine, censor and bully. In other words, they should teach Canadian values, and leave the Saudi values behind.
UPDATE: Here's a short video clip from CTV. h/t ZP
Posted by Ezra Levant on December 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (98) | TrackBack
Huck gets Rick-rolld
Mike Huckabee has been surging in the polls as of late. If he loses, will Rick Mercer be the man to take him down?
A different question might be: Is this video more proof of Huckabee's foreign policy, uhm, ignorance?
Yeah, Huck. Igloo. Sheesh.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Media Announcement
Western Standard responds to new human rights complaint
Today Syed Soharwardy, the Saudi trained Imam, announced his intention to take the Western Standard, once again, to the human rights commission. Last time it was because Soharwardy didn't like that the Western Standard published cartoons of the Muslim prophet Mohammed. This time it's because Soharwardy thinks some of the public comments on the Western Standard's website are in poor taste.
That's the nature of free speech: there are going to be occasional offensive comments. The proper Canadian response is to engage in debate, which is exactly what happened on the Western Standard website. On December 2nd, when commenter "obc" wrote something offensive about Muslims, commenter "holographic" quickly refuted him, calling "obc" an extremist and denouncing his comments.
That's how things work in a free country like Canada. Every time our feelings are hurt, we don't call the police and we don't go running to government censors.
When we purchased the Western Standard name and websites last month, we inherited a very lively and un-moderated discussion forum that we intend to improve. We have hired a full-time online editor, and expect a relaunch of our site by January 15, 2008.
These improvements will include restricting gratuitously rude and insensitive comments, including profanity, and restricting anonymous postings -- a higher standard of editing than is used on comment threads at the Globe and Mail and the National Post. These changes will not limit the range of topics discussed on the blog, nor will they limit the points of view that can be expressed on those topics. The changes will simply bring in a new standard of netiquette -- not a standard of political correctness.
Our editorial commitment is to the classical liberal values of personal freedom, economic cooperation and peace. What we choose to publish will be decided by us -- not by special interest groups or human rights commissions.
Posted by Western Standard on December 19, 2007 in Media | Permalink | Comments (49) | TrackBack
British Couple Forced to Take in Criminal
This is government at it's finest.
In summary, a British couple - both of whom have "learning disabilities" and are under the care of social workers - have been forced to take a criminal into their home upon the order of a court because, when he was given house arrest, he wrote down their address as his own (allegedly because he had the permission of the couple's sixteen year-old daughter to do so). Neither they, nor the police, can get rid of him, because he's been confined to these people's house by the court.
As a side note, for a couple under state care, they seem to have a fairly nice TV.
Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on December 19, 2007 in Crime | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
John Edwards' Love Child?
While, obviously, we can't take everything we read in supermarket tabloids at face value, this report from the National Enquirer seems to be pretty thoroughly done.
When ENQUIRER reporters contacted Young in person at his home on Dec. 12, he became furious — and denied he was Andrew Young.
He also denied knowing "any Rielle Hunter," yelling at the top of his voice: "You don't even know who I am!" But when his wife called him "Andrew," he shot her a dirty look.
An enraged Young called police, demanding our reporters be arrested for trespassing. Officers from the Chatham County (N.C.) Sheriff's Department responded, questioned everyone and made no arrests.
Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on December 19, 2007 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack
The State of Play (Part Two)
This continues to be the closest and most interesting Presidential race in living memory.
What's the state of play today? Well, looking at the reports, we see the following trends.
1) Huckabee's Support is Peaking.
Rasmussen has him in the lead nationally - at 22%. These numbers are likely to be reflected elsewhere. This may well place him in first, nationally, but it doesn't seem likely that he's going to pick up much more support beyond that. Indeed, most reports show his negatives going up.
Huckabee is a charming guy and a brilliant campaigner - but, the more Republicans learn about his economic and foreign policies, the less traction he's going to get. I just don't see a path for Huckabee to win the nomination.
2) Mitt Romney is in Trouble.
Romney's path to the nomination depended heavily upon the well-trod path of previous years. Win Iowa, win New Hampshire, and then take the nomination from there. But, as of today, he's behind in Iowa and bleeding in New Hampshire. Romney's biggest problem is that his appeal, really, is as a choice acceptable to pretty much all factions in the Republican Party without any real downside and with a clear path to the nomination, but...
3) John McCain Has a Clear Path to the Nomination:
It would seem that John McCain is pretty much everyone's second or third choice - and perhaps more (in the interest of full disclosure, as my Facebook friends already know, I've endorsed McCain). With Rasmussen showing him - without organization or ads - in a strong third in Iowa, that path is becoming all-the-more-clear.
McCain overperforms in Iowa, while Huckabee wins. McCain wins New Hampshire. That knocks Romney out of the race. Thompson drops and endorses McCain. That leaves, heading into February 5th, McCain, Huckabee, and Giuliani still standing - of those three, there's only one who doesn't threaten to tear the GOP coalition apart.
4) Giuliani is in Trouble:
As Rich Lowry said the other day - he needs a miracle. In retrospect, the problem of the Giuliani candidacy is that it asks too much of supporters - it asks that not only they have faith that a social liberal can win the GOP nomination, but that they sit and wait for a month while that same liberal loses primaries, keeping faith that they'll win the big Republican primaries.
Indeed, that's not even all that solid an arguement. How liberal is the GOP Primary electorate in, say, California? After all, they prefered Bill Simon to Dick Riordan for Governor in 2002.
5) Hillary Clinton's Chances are Fading:
The problem may well be that, in all reality, the Clintons haven't had to face a tough campaign since 1992. After all - with Dole in 1996, the Republicans pretty much gave the election away. The media has been absolutely on their side throughout the years. All she's faced since then are two Senate races - in New York - one of which was a gimmie anyways.
The problem with Clinton is, as I've said before, that for all of the money and organization and marketing - in the end, the Dogs just don't like the food. People don't like her - and they don't want her to be Presdent. Further, it seems that the inner circle of Clinton advisors is as thoroughly dysfunctional as the Clinton marriage.
6) Obama is George McGovern:
Let's get real, folks - the American people aren't going to elect a black ultra-liberal named Barak Hussein Obama as the President of the United States. This is a truth so obvious that it will seem self-evident even to the left, in retrospect. Indeed, for many liberals it's probably a secret source of psychological comfort - when they lose, they can blame it on racism rather than liberalism.
Obama is a candidate without experience. He has an ultra-liberal record. He has an interesting past - including his youthful Islamic education and possible faith - which will be fully explored during a general election campaign. He won't win - and I'm sure that the Democratic brass knows it. But, as in 1972, they might be forced into a disasterous choice by the unhinged faithful.
Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on December 19, 2007 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Over/Under-reported 2007
Presser: Influence Communication releases a summary of the most important news stories of 2007
"Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq dominate the news in Canada in 2007
Montreal, December 19, 2007 - Influence Communication today released its overview of the news in Canada in 2007.
Review of Canadian News (2207) recalls and ranks in order of media predominance the news stories and events that made their way in broadcast, print and internet news over the last 12-month period.
Over the course of 2007, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq topped the list of the most important news stories in Canadian media. For the most part, news reporting centered around politicians and government officials touring war zones and Canadian casualties.
The report also takes a look back at media predominance of federal politicians, key environmental issues, provincial party leaders (outside their own province) and major Canadian companies.
The annual compilation includes the results of a brief comparative analysis of the referencing of major national media (newspapers and television networks) by other media across Canada.
The report also presents a ranking of the top Canadian news stories that caught the attention of international media over the past 12-month period. Within this category, Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan, the Pickton trial and the Alberta oil sands occupied the first three (3) positions.
The report features a list of the top international news stories of 2007. International news was dominated by the war in Iraq (1st place) and the upcoming U.S. elections (2nd place). Among the 15 biggest news stories in the world in 2007 were the release of the final instalment in the Harry Potter series, the launch of the iPhone, the incarceration of Paris Hilton and Madonna’s challenges in adopting a child."
You can find the full report here:
What do Western Standard readers think are the important stories that didn’t get widespread media coverage in 2007?
In my opinion, there was no bigger story in 2007 than the human rights commission complaints against the Western Standard, Maclean's magazine and Mark Steyn. A primary pillar of a free society--freedom of the press--is at risk. It’s hard to overstate the importance of that.
--Matthew Johnston
Posted by Western Standard on December 19, 2007 in Media | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Benevolent Saudis Pardon Rape Victim
We all remember this story. A Saudi Woman and her male companion were kidnapped by seven men and the woman was raped. If that wasn't bad enough, the Saudi "justice" system sentenced the woman to 200 lashings and six months in prison for appearing in public with a man she wasn't related too.
Well today King Abdullah pardoned the woman and the man she was with stating that, "the woman and the man in her company have experienced enough torture which should be enough punishment for them and a lesson to learn from."
From CNN
Posted by Leah Dowe on December 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Political Animals
We're on from 2 to 4 p.m. EST (30 minutes from this post).
Click here for the live feed.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Uh, Winston, let's NOT defend Mike Huckabee please?
Normally, I wouldn't respond to a post with another post (in fact, I don't think I'm supposed to do so), but I feel I have to do it because Winston's post has repercussions I don't even think he anticipates.
Winston obviously has a problem with Dr. Paul, in no small part because Dr. Paul doesn't believe the Iranian people's struggle against tyranny is any business of the Western world. Personally, I'm with Winston on that one; Dr. Paul is terribly wrong. However, Winston is very wrong in assuming that Paul was slamming all Christians as fascists. Perhaps some context might help here (Jim Geraghty at National Review Online):
Ron Paul Charges Huck Implies He's The Only Christian
Hot Air has the video; here's the transcript, of Ron Paul's reaction to Mike Huckabee's Christmas ad, given a short while ago on Fox News:
STEVE DOOCY: Mike Huckabee has started running an ad in Iowa, where you're at right now, also in New Hampshire and South Carolina, and in the back, it's a windowpane but it also looks a lot like a cross. And, and, we had a guest a little while ago who said it was inappropriate to be using religion for political purposes. Congressman, I'm just curious what you think?
RON PAUL: Well, I haven't thought about it completely, but you know, it reminds me of what Sinclair, uh, Lewis once said, he said 'when Fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.' I don't know whether that's a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross like he is the only Christian, or implying that subtly. So, uh, I don't think I would ever use anything like that.
It's abundantly clear that Paul's beef (and note: he did not apply the fascist label to anyone, he just dropped the Sinclair quote) is with Mike Huckabee, not Christians in general.
Why do I think that is important enough for a post? Because IMHO, every single person who blogs in this space should have a problem with Mike Huckabee (apologies to Yoshi, who seems to know this already). He is every limited-government conservative's worst nightmare. Again, Jim Geraghty says it best:
What it is enormously frustrating to the true anti-Huck folks like Ace of Spades and Dan Riehl is that the evangelicals will vote for, as Fred Thompson put it, a "pro-life liberal." These guys look at Huckabee and see conservatism on one area - social issues - and see not much elsewhere: populism on economics, a thin resume on foreign policy, some squishiness on crime, and an open-hearted view toward illegal immigrants that they conclude amounts to amnesty.
Now, I'll admit, I've dedicated an entire website to exposing this guy for what he is (and "pro-life liberal" is about as precise a description as they come). So perhaps I'm a little oversensitive here, but I do not want anyone north of the 49th thinking Huckabee is some conventional Republican that Paul just decided to put in his crosshairs today. Huckabee (or as we call him, Mike Dukakabee) is a real problem.
Oh, and Winston, here's Dukakabee's view on Iran (Townhall):
Before we put boots on the ground in the future, we’d better have a few wingtips there first. And when President Bush included Iran in the axis of evil, everything went downhill pretty fast. As the only presidential candidate with a theology degree, along with several years of political experience, I know that theology is black and white, politics is not. My enemy today on one issue may be my friend tomorrow on another. Bottom line is this, Iran is a regional threat to the balance of power in the middle and near East. Al Qaeda is an existential threat to the United States. I know that we cannot live with al Qaeda, but there is a chance we can live with a domesticated Iran.
Here was Michael Rubin's response: "I would put him in the Jimmy Carter school of foreign policy."
Posted by D.J. McGuire on December 19, 2007 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack
Now let me introduce to you...
A heads up: The Political Animals radio show is on today from 2-4 p.m. EST. Check back here for the links and a preview in a couple of hours. If you haven't tuned in before you should because it's a hoot. (Last week they culled from the news some great items on the War on Santa and adult warning labels on Sesame Street videos, which I found particularly amusing.)
The hosts, all living in and broadcasting from Ohio, represent a nice mix of conservative and libertarian views. Here’s a quick introduction;
Jay Lafayette is a Christian. A philosophy teacher with a theology degree, he's married and recently became a father of a bouncing baby boy.
Peter "Jaws" Jaworski is a libertarian. From Canada, Peter's a philosophy student working on his Ph.D at Bowling Green State University. (He's an alumnus of the Western Standard and has the distinction of being its first prize winner, receiving the 2004/2005 Felix Morley Award for his Oct. 11, 2004 cover story on Dr. Jacques Chaoulli.)
In the middle of the mix is Terrence C. Watson. From his blog we see he's also "a graduate student in philosophy at Bowling Green State University, former Koch fellow, and sometimes reluctant libertarian."
P.S. Thanks, guys, for plugging the Western Standard on your show. I don't know how many readers we have in Ohio, and even though you're not in the West and not in Canada... oh whatever! We like it.
Posted by Kevin Steel on December 19, 2007 in Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Christmas gifts for troops
Christmas is a week away and gifts are flooding the Canadian military bases in Afghanistan.
One thing that soldiers always love is to get a pack or a letter from the home front. Canada Post is now delivering packs and letters to the troops for free until January 11th, 2008. Why not sending our brave men and women in uniform some care packages? If you know one, please send him/her care packs or a suitable gift. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.
Posted by Winston on December 19, 2007 in Canadian Politics, Current Affairs, Military | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Ron Paul: Christians are Fascists
(h/t Craig @ Blogging Tories)
Can this presidential candidate get any more weird?
Posted by Winston on December 18, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack
If it's tax protest day at the Shotgun
Then we need to select our protest song.
My humble suggestion: "Taxman" by The Beatles
Quoting George Harrison, writer of the song: "Taxman was when I first realized that even though we had started earning money, we were actually giving most of it away in taxes."
Feel free to post your own suggestions in the comments.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 18, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBack
The good fight
Up here on the north side of the 49th, the National Post's Lorne Gunter is one of three recipients of the 2007 Taxfighter Award, given out by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to “individuals who have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the cause of taxpayer emancipation.” Here's a [pdf] CTF backgrounder with bios of the three winners. The bit about Lorne doesn't mention that he was a guest on the last Western Standard cruise but, in the public interest of promoting ourselves, we take this opportunity to remind you (so we can surf on his glory). Winnipeg Sun columnist Tom Brodbeck and ragin' senior Patricia Ehli are co-recipients.
Posted by Kevin Steel on December 18, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Taxman and the two-income family
Down here on the south side of the 49th, social conservative is a much larger political force. For that reason, I'm not all that surprised that social issues aren't discussed much here, but I am curious as to the reaction up there to a hypothesis I have long held about the great danger we face here in the 21st century: the atomization of the family.
I'm sure most of you have seen and heard the same back and forth we have about it: the right focuses on emphasizing moral values so society can, in effect, fill in for parents unable or unwilling to impart such values on their children; while the left emphasizes child-care programs and other communal things outside of values that would "give parents a hand." I'm also guessing the argument from the right is far more muted in part because social conservatives are far fewer in Canada.
I mention all this because, in truth, I think everyone is missing the point.
Here in America, for example, the biggest problem facing parents today is that, for the most part, neither one of them can be home. The dual-income family is not only the norm in large parts of my country, it's practically a necessity. Why is that? Over the last 50 years, only one major piece of the cost of living has risen dramatically without market fluctuation: the cost of government.
Today, the average American couple pays $14,000 more in taxes than their grandparents did (Americans for Tax Reform). This has made it almost impossible for American couples to feed their children and their governments on one income. As a consequence, not only are American children deprived of time with their parents, but single-parent households are practically doomed to become wards of the state - whether the parent wants it or not.
I go into greater detail about this here and here (note: both are framed in the context of my current Governor's proposed budget), but what I'd like to know is this: does this sound familiar to you folks up there? Do you find the average Canadian family suffers the same reality as the American one, summed up by Bob Dole eleven years ago?
Dole's words were these: "one spouse works full time to support the family, while the other works full time to support the Government." Is that the reality in Canada, too?
Posted by D.J. McGuire on December 18, 2007 in Canadian Conservative Politics, Canadian Politics, International Politics | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack
The Drug Situation Report
The RCMP just released its annual report on Canada’s drug situation in 2006.
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/drugs/drugs_2006_e.htm#foreword
The report shows that marijuana demand remains high while the supply from grow-ops is in decline. That decline to due to successful law enforcement and a brain drain of technical marijuana growing expertise to the US. Increased border security means it’s now safer to grow and sell marijuana in the US than it is trying to smuggle it across the Canada-US border.
BC’s competitive advantage in the marijuana trade – liberal drug laws and until recently a low dollar – can’t seem to overcome the cost and risk associated with struggling pot across the border.
The report also shows that marijuana THC concentrations are increasing, which is a predictable consequence of drug prohibition. The shift from milder drugs to more potent ones -- cocaine to crack, raw opium to the more potent heroin, and low-grade home-grown weed to more potent designer strains -- makes high-risk smuggling easier and more profitable because you get more drug per volume. Increase the potency, decrease the volume, lower the risk and increase the profit – it makes good economic sense, except that your customers are more likely to die from overdose.
I wonder if the 2007 report will show marijuana crop yields in decline due to the closure of Marc Emery Seeds in Vancouver by the US DEA. Marc Emery Seeds was to marijuana and grow-ops what Monsanto is to wheat and grain farms.
http://www.dea.gov/pubs/states/newsrel/seattle072905.html
With grow-op numbers down, Marc Emery out of business, the dollar at parity, and the Tory’s talking tough on crime, one of BC’s largest export industries could be going South.
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 18, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (29) | TrackBack
$300 million in aid to Palestinians
Since the issue of foreign aid is being discussed on The Shotgun Blog, I thought this press release from the Canadian Coalition for Democracies might be of interest:
Canadian aid to Palestinians must no longer perpetuate hatred, dependency & corruption
For Immediate Release
Monday December 17, 2007
Ottawa, Canada - Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier said today that Canada would commit $300 million over the next five years in foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA). This commitment is on top of the nearly 500 million Canadian tax dollars that have already been given to the Palestinians.
"Our funding is not unconditional," Minister Bernier said in a media release. "We will need to see … a viable Palestinian state that is democratic, accountable, and living in peace and security as a neighbour to Israel.”
“Many Canadians have welcomed the more principled foreign policy of the current government,” said Alastair Gordon, president, Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD). “Hopefully, Minister Bernier’s funding conditions will assure that our tax dollars no longer go to a regime whose governing charter calls for the destruction of a neighbouring democratic state and its people.”
You can find the full press release here:
http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/27349.shtml
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 18, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (34) | TrackBack
Monday, December 17, 2007
Property lunacy
With property rights not exactly protected as well as they could be here on planet Earth, some enterprising individuals are already making plans to own acres on... the moon.
The Germans, Swedes and Poles appear to be in the lead in purchasing coveted acreage which has seen an increase in lunar land prices of late. Of course, governments are precluded from owning any part of the moon. And a good thing too!
You might consider the Bay of Rainbows at $32/acre, or the gorgeous Lake of Dreams at the low-low price of only $34.25/acre. If those are a bit steep for your budget, you might consider the thrifty $18.25/acre Sea of Vapors location. You can get them all here. Don't worry too much about neighbours spoiling the serenity or the view. At least not for the next, say, 50 years or so.
If Harper and co. don't manage to overcome big hurdles to put property rights into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (trample greenbelt and kill gun ban? Is this a "hidden agenda" or something to trumpet to the, uhm, moon...), there is always the moon to look forward to as a place where your home just might really be your castle.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 17, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack
WSers in the News
Ezra Levant's column appears in the "Full Comment" section of the National Post. Take a look, and see if you don't agree with his stance against the Human Rights Commission, and the "rights violations" levied against Maclean's, Mark Steyn, and the good ship Standard:
"That’s why human-rights commissions are the perfect instrument for the CIC [Canadian Islamic Congress]. The CIC doesn’t even have to hire a lawyer: Once the complaint has been accepted by the commissions, taxpayers’ dollars and government lawyers are used to pursue the matter. Maclean’s, on the other hand, will have to hire their own lawyers with their own money. Rules of court don’t apply. Normal rules of evidence don’t apply. The commissions are not neutral; they’re filled with activists, many of whom aren’t even lawyers and do not understand the free-speech safeguards contained in our constitution."
Karen Selick, meanwhile, also appears in the same section of the National Post to criticize the Liberal Women's Caucus proposals to alter the Divorce Act last Friday:
"The Liberal Women's Caucus — the 21 female Liberal MPs headed by Belinda Stronach — is attempting to woo women voters with its recently released Pink Book, Volume II. The biggest head-line-grabber of its many policy prescriptions was that the Divorce Act should be amended. This suggestion may make the Liberals lose as many male votes as they gain female votes. In fact, when the ramifications are explained to Canadian women, they too may find the proposals repugnant enough to reject."
(Yes, the Shotgun keeps tabs...)
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on December 17, 2007 in Western Standard | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Latino-Islamic Terrorism
Iranian regime is making a new front against the US in Latin America via Nicaragua. They have had a good relation with the dictator of Venezuela, Chavez and they've been in good contact with the Bolivian government of Morales. Needless to say wherever the regime has gone, from Balkans to South America, terrorism has followed suit....
Posted by Winston on December 17, 2007 in International Affairs | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack