Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Out Elitist Infrastructure Needs Upgrades | Main | Paul Martin, foreign policy dunce »

Monday, February 21, 2005

...And the hunter home from the hill

A weblog called "The Shotgun" cannot fail to take somber note of the suicide of Hunter S. Thompson, a journalist universally admired for his astonishing palette and stylistic bravery by brethren of all political species.  I have some further thoughts, as do eminences of the weblog world ranging from Tim Blair to James Lileks to Ken Layne to Steve Sailer.

Posted by Colby Cosh on February 21, 2005 in Books | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ...And the hunter home from the hill:


I wonder what took him so long.

Posted by: Kathy | 2005-02-21 3:55:53 PM

An Imaginary Speech From A Political Hypocrite

By Stephen Gray

I stand before you today “in support of Bill C-38, the Civil Marriage Act.” My Bill has no clothes but I have clothed myself in the Charter. In the Charter is our refuse, oops, I mean refuge. In the Charter our liberal dreams are fulfilled. In the Charter is whatever liberals desire. In the Charter is our liberal destiny. In the Charter are the rules the people must obey. This, then, is the liberal Charter imposed on ALL the people without a free vote; that’s why we call it, “The Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” This is a Charter that has allowed our great country to be ruled by judges, and who are wiser than judges who used to be lawyers? The judiciary have imposed “same sex marriage,” oops, I mean “minority rights” and if we disguise these abnormal “rights” under the banner of “minority rights,” then we can win this battle of “rights,” even though they were “read in” to the Charter.

The Charter is a living tree and from its diseased branches came “same-sex marriage,” oops, I mean minority rights. We must protect sodomite rights, oops, I mean “minority rights” even though they are invented. For who are more inventive than judges who used to be lawyers? I was a lawyer myself at one time, and the law is one of the oldest professions. I was a member of this profession but I am also a family man, a “devout Catholic” and a man "of strong faith." Now some might ask the question: “How can I be a “devout Catholic” and a man “of strong faith” and support “same-sex marriage?” Oops, I mean, “minority rights!” The answer to that is easy, I am in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In fact, I am in violation of any rules of morality on this issue, but since when were today’s politics ever moral? The Charter is our “moral” guide today and our judges are its “moral” interpreters. Hypocrites do not practice morality and some say I am a hypocrite. Hypocrites don’t always tell the truth and that is why I use the words “minority rights” instead of this nonsense called “same-sex marriage.” Oh God, what is the matter with me, I was told to keep saying “minority rights” and I am saying “same-sex marriage” all the time. Oh God, I’ve mentioned God again. That was a mistake, I’m sure the liberal media won’t pick up on it, they only do that when people of faith speak, then they pillory those people who speak the truth. But bear with me, because my burden is heavy with hypocrisy and light on truth.

The truth is, we have a “democratic deficit” in this country. To those who say the cabinet must have a free vote on this issue, I say to them, I told you there was a “democratic deficit” in the country so I’m being consistent in denying my cabinet a free vote. There is NO democracy, only hypocrisy. As for those who want a referendum, how can you have a referendum when there is a “democratic deficit?” Dictators don’t allow free votes. Neither do they allow free speech. A newspaper reported that one of my cabinet ministers suggested that the Roman Catholic Church should keep its nose out of the government’s same-sex marriage legislation. Now there’s a true liberal showing “tolerance” and exposing himself on “marriage.” Gay marriage, oops, I mean “minority rights” should not be subject to a vote by ALL the people. Some say the people should be allowed to have their say and the latest poll states the people want a vote on this issue. Don’t these people realize we have a “democratic deficit?” How many times do I have to repeat those words “DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT?” Therefore, a vote on this new kind of nuptials called “queer marriage” is a non-starter. The people of the country never got to vote on the Charter so why should they be allowed to vote on an invented right called “same-sex marriage?“ Oh God, what is the matter with me, I was told by my advisers to keep saying “minority rights” and I am saying “same-sex marriage” all the time. Oh God, I’ve mentioned God again, that’s not allowed in our land of liberal hypocrisy.

To those people who say we are mostly hypocrites on this side of the House, I say hypocrisy rules. Sure, I voted a few short years ago to retain the traditional definition of marriage, but that was then and this is now. Hypocrites have rights too and that’s a Charter fact, and this hypocrite now supports “same-sex marriage.” I am surrounded mostly by hypocrites in this House, there is a sense of solidarity amongst us. Some of those of different political stripe are marching with us under the banner of hypocrisy. The law is made by hypocrites. The law is “read in” by hypocrites. For example, we cannot pass a decent law on child porn but we will pass a law on “same-sex marriage.” Of course, innocent children will be confused about this aberration called “same-sex marriage,” but with a new government funded daycare system they can be taught this is all about “minority rights” in the Charter.

In closing let me say this: I will fight for the Charter. I will fight for “same-sex marriage, oops, I mean “minority rights.” I will fight to make sure a minority CAN impose its will on the majority. I will fight to make sure there is NO referendum by the people of this country on “same-sex marriage.” I will fight to keep our “democratic deficit.” I will fight to make sure the not withstanding clause is NEVER used. I will fight for rights still not discovered and to be “read in,” when they are found, for “rights are rights are rights.” I will keep right on fighting for rights even if they are wrong. I will fight for all those groups and trade unions who receive government grants and who come to our rescue whenever liberals are attacked. These people do not bite the hands that feed them for they are companions in hypocrisy. I will fight for the 134 tenured professors who are “intimately familiar” with the Charter and are always good for a supportive dissertation. I will fight and be the deliverer for I am not a ditherer. I will fight to move this country forward, for “if we do not step forward, then we step back.” And who wants to go back to sanity? I will fight to keep the “Hate Crimes Bill,” for this ensures any discussion or information on an unnatural and disease ridden behavior will be suppressed. I will fight to keep the Court challenges program, for this ensured that the taxpayers financed our journey towards this historic Bill of “same-sex marriage.” I will fight for this “marriage” Bill, then all the elites who are still in the closet and who are pushing this issue will be able to come out and declare: “We’re out at last, out at last, thank the Charter, We’re out and respectable at last.” Therefore, I will fight, yes I will fight, for I am a hypocrite and have clothed myself in the hypocrisy of the Charter.

Note: A standing ovation ensued at the finish and the political animal farm was a bedlam of grunts, snorts, squawks and screams in appreciation of their master’s speech. They were a sight to behold wallowing in their own Charter manure and screaming: “Rights are rights are rights.”

Stephen Gray

Feb. 21, 2005.

[email protected] website: http://www.geocities.com/graysinfo

Some info on the Author: Stephen Gray is a writer and researcher on various topics. He published a newsletter for 11 years exposing the misuse of trade union time and money.

Posted by: Stephen Gray | 2005-02-21 3:58:36 PM


Posted by: rick mcginnis | 2005-02-21 4:21:25 PM

Jaysus, Stephen if Hunter S. Thompson caused all that trouble, I am glad the sumbitch is dead.

Posted by: MikeP | 2005-02-21 6:39:34 PM

Hunter S. Thompson ... "universally admired"? Not of late, certainly not by this guy.

As a gonzo enthusiast myself I'm half way there ... but poor old Hunter was out of step and out of time. A Kerry backer who declared that 9/11 allowed Bush to "loot the country and savage American democracy".

I liked his balls and irreverence, but Hunter lost my respect by showing himself incapable taking "gonzo" onto another level. The decades that made him who he was, exerted a gonzo hold on his psyche and the bullet to the head was probably the most honorable way out.

RIP Hunter.

Posted by: raskolnikov | 2005-02-21 8:59:47 PM

I think Hunter S. Thompson is most closely comparable to the late Charles Bukowski.

Our culture seems to be willing to overlook destructive and self-destructive behavior if the person has fame, talent, or money. Or all three.

I've occastionally wondered what happens when a wild young man gains renown by being crazy. Some get old enough to know better and keep on trying to play an impersonation of themselves when they were younger.

One could say a lot of things about it, but one thing is certain. It's sad and stupid, and painful to watch.

Posted by: Greg outside Dallas | 2005-02-21 9:25:10 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.