June 30, 2007
Bollards play a key role in defeating terrorist attack in Glasgow, Scotland
The attack on Glasgow Airport in Scotland today was foiled in large part by bollards. Ever see a bollard in action? No? Then you've never seen a speeding transport truck ripped apart like so much tissue paper. It's quite the sight to see.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
05:38 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 740 words, total size 5 kb.
1
um hit the doors at 30 mph. made it to the doors, doesn't sound like the bollards you youtubed. Think about it; the Jeep Cherokee's airbag would've gone off and/or no airbag then they would've been probably incapacitated or dead, not running around afterward. Take some time and get the facts, not all the info is obviously out yet.
Posted by: Fergy at June 30, 2007 06:40 PM (XIBBi)
2
Also the report says "security barriers". I would hope they are bollards but I didn't see any in any pics I saw. Maybe faulty reporting, or officials trying to calm down the people.
Posted by: Fergy at June 30, 2007 06:44 PM (XIBBi)
3
okay my appolgies Steve there were Bollards. just apparently not enough. Me bad
Posted by: Fergy at June 30, 2007 07:12 PM (XIBBi)
4
Maybe we need a better bollard. I heard that many years ago the Islamists were raising a rukus and the man in charge fixed the problem very quickly. He took the dead bodies of the perpetraters and buried them in the same grave as a dead pig. He then made it well known that anyone caught acting in a similar manner would receive similar treatment. Terrorism came to an end very quickly.
Posted by: joe at June 30, 2007 08:12 PM (t07u5)
5
An even better bollard would be to take the dead bodies of the Islamist and burying the body with a dead pig and let it be known that any other dead terrorist will receive similar treatment.
Posted by: joe at June 30, 2007 08:15 PM (t07u5)
6
Most of the reports didn't give details. This one did quote an official who said bollards did keep the SUV from progressing further into the terminal. An explosion in the doorway where half the force goes (relatively) harmlessly outside is better than an explosion in the centre of the structure itself.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 30, 2007 09:08 PM (BqMT6)
7
The pictures I've seen show the SUV essentially outside of the building. Some reports say they drove through one security barrier. That might be true especially if that security barrier was an outer layer used for pedestrian control and not an anti-ram layer situated at the entrance where a ramming attempt is likely to be made.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 30, 2007 09:13 PM (BqMT6)
8
In a way, it's a good thing these things are happening. Perhaps, particularly with Brown in power, Britain will lead the way and start closing immigration to anyone from the Middle East or other Muslim regions. In addition, those already inside the country must be looked into very closely and, if necessary, deported (even if they face torture in their home country -- as Tony Blair wrote recently).
These times call for tough measures; no room for political correctness anymore.
Posted by: Werner Patels at June 30, 2007 10:35 PM (/V2m6)
9
I know this is totally politically incorrect to say, but if we continue to leave immigration open to everyone and anyone like Britain has...this could happen at Pearson in a couple years.
Posted by: Darren K at June 30, 2007 11:05 PM (u8kYn)
10
Details remain sketchy at best, but a few details have been cited repeatedly: one, that the area attacked should only have been accessible to taxicabs (presumably, this is the "first" level of security which was breached). Two, that the bollards did their job and prevented the vehicle from entering the terminal building (although it's not entirely clear whether the doors themselves were touched).
Less clear is the number of individuals in the vehicle: late reports suggested three. One apparently died in the car (apparently it was to access him that one of the men was seen trying to open the rear hatch), another was seriously burned (after having thrown punches at an approaching police officer trying to put out his flaming clothing), and a third was in police custody.
As for the security provided by the bollards, I worry about other similar barriers in use at certain Canadian installations, formed by a gate which rises to provide entry: I do hope they have been tested to ensure that a low vehicle cannot force them up on impact. Better are the barriers which are solid to the ground, and which must close by descending from the secure side of the barrier.
Posted by: Paul O at June 30, 2007 11:44 PM (9DVsr)
11
Darren K.: Mind you, Britain's immigration system has always been tighter than Canada's "free-for-all" system. It'll happen in Canada, but for our nitwit politicians (and that includes Harper, who wants to increase the annual quota of immigrants) to act and shut down immigration, I am afraid, we'll have to wait for a mushroom cloud over Toronto first.
Posted by: Werner Patels at June 30, 2007 11:59 PM (/V2m6)
12
Excuse me? Could happen here? You should have your memories de-erased.
Posted by: Dicky Duck at July 01, 2007 08:28 AM (nzxWe)
13
Hey...it WILL happen here, thanks you years of the Liberal Party cow-towing to every extremist group that has the numbers to get a Liberal elected. Dion's even worse....he specifically offered a deal to these groups to attain the leadership of his party. I suspect a terror attack here will happen sooner, rather than later. After all....it IS CANADA day....what better way for terrorists to send a message. If it happens...and people die...THANK A LIBERAL!!!
Posted by: JamesHalifax at July 01, 2007 10:51 AM (Hpefv)
14
Did anyone catch that great piece on CBC National about the Liberal Party's involvement with Sikh criminals and terrorists (particularly Dion!)? I was surprised to see such a candid and truthful report from the CBC, and it was spot on. They also interviewed Dosanjh, who said that his party (and Dion) was opportunistic for associating with these criminals.
Just watch for Dosanjh getting the boot from Dion for doing the CBC interview.
Posted by: Werner Patels at July 01, 2007 02:00 PM (/V2m6)
15
Dosanjh has been the target of Sikh terrorists , so his interest in admitting the truth is quite personal.
The Liberals have brought much danger to our Country, letting in all comers, including illegals and bogus refugees who stay on because of our ill thought out Charter. The worst have been allowed in from ME Tinderboxes where terrorism is spawned.
Don't know who'll get the boot in the Liberal party but
Dion is on shaky ground himself. It's also rumoured there are more defections planned, Comuzzi is the latest to join the Conservatives.
We not only have to start deporting we have to stop absolutely all immigration from Islamic ruled countries.
They are not a blend with our way of life.
We have the example of women going about shunning all around them by wearing full burkas with only eyes peeping out, that's not blending with our people, we cannot talk to a tent and we do not know what is actually under that tent.
We also risk Balkanizing our Country with our stupid Multicultural policies coupled with the Trudeau Charter, a recipe for our demise as a strong, cohesive society. We are at huge risk of losing our the country as we know it, forged through great hardship by our European Ancestors.
We think we have problems with the Separatists of Quebec or the Natives but at least we know who they are , we're dealing with known quantities.
Posted by: Libby at July 02, 2007 07:31 AM (s6enY)
16
RE: al-Qaeda using their "second-stringers"....
Shortly after World War 2 ended, a journalist asked Admiral William F. ("Bull") Halsey why the kamikazes were such an ineffective weapon. Halsey replied, "Simple. They never got any practice!"
(More recently, we've all probably seen the cartoon of the terrorist training camp where the instructor - dynamite wrapped around his torso - says, "Okay, pay attention. I'm only going to do this once!")
Posted by: Tom at July 02, 2007 09:14 AM (JW99v)
17
I'm just remembering Chretien's final UN speech where he blamed poverty as the root cause of terrorism.....as I watch the news and see 3 young doctors arrested as ringleader & suicide bombers in London & Glasgow.
Thank god that old goof is no longer in charge. In hindsight, his speech seems very puerile & banal.
Posted by: Levesque at July 02, 2007 12:39 PM (jQxJp)
18
I don't think I'd call Chretien as a goof, just someone who was totally clueless. I think he's still that way.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at July 02, 2007 02:08 PM (g7gYB)
19
I'm just remembering Chretien's final UN speech where he blamed poverty as the root cause of terrorism.....as I watch the news and see 3 young doctors arrested
The National Health system in Britain is a perfect example of how commie central planning runs berserk over people's right to life, right to their property, and the right to work. Anyone who is surprised that inmates of such a socialist system would, when exacerbated by religious and ethnic factors commit such an evil act just hasn't been paying attention.
Ever hear of the doc (a non-Muslim) working in the National Health system who murdered dozens and dozens of patients, just because he could? Have you any idea how many other doctors of death are slipping needles into people who don't know any better and who wouldn't have a choice in medical care anyways even if they suspected their government doc was not all there? Ever wonder how many tens of thousands of Brits die every year because of the crappy, rationed, non-healthcare they receive?
I will not excuse in any way the barbarous acts of terror these extremists are commiting, but you would have to let off a hell of a lot of car bombs before you would come anywhere near the body count that has been piled up by the UK's little experiment with socialist utopianism.
It's not gonna happen, but if they really want to end terrorism they'll have to dismantle the welfare state, un-ban guns, and cut taxes and regulations waaaaayyyyyyy back to the point where people - both native-born and immigrants - can actually work together productively and cooperatively in the free market. If smart young doctors can actually earn a living and raise their families in a free market without 100,000 goddamned government bureaucrats and 20 million goddamned parasites dragging them down then I doubt if you're going to see very many of them blow themselves up with gasoline.
Posted by: at July 02, 2007 03:41 PM (a0Sy/)
20
Werner Patels, et al., The 'hit' piece on the Sikhs on the CBC was likely the dirty work of a failed leadership candidate. If you watch closely, ask yourself who is attacked in that piece and who is promoted from the liberal party in Canada?
Irrespective of that, why shouldn't CANADIANS get involved in politics? isn't that part of citizenship? when did it become de rigeur to broadcast self-promoter's claims, innuendo and falsehood as truth?
who is the opportunist politician? a guy that starts out associating with Trotskyists, then joins a socialist (red, left wing) party, drives said political party into oblivion and then jumps ship at the first offer to rehabilitate himself by joining a party farther to the right. someone who accepts honours from a foreign government and goes on a self-promo tour in his 'homeland' on the taxpayer dime? he's the same guy that supported a leadership candidate that lost at that convention. ASK the NDP who the opportunist politicians are in that piece. last time I checked Dion didn't jump from one part of the political spectrum to the next, to the next, etc...
perhaps you need to examine who each of those politicians is and his motivations for speaking.
Posted by: KS at July 03, 2007 10:54 AM (4n0NT)
21
...i thought bollards were brought in because of the 'smash and grab' technique juvenile robbers were using.
Using a older Chev pickup (strongest front end) they'd smash into a store, then back out...rob the place and tear off in a Ford Mustang.
Posted by: tomax7 at July 03, 2007 07:40 PM (jHhd0)
June 29, 2007
Counterfeit toothpaste teeming with dangerous bacteria
The good news is that the counterfeit Colgate toothpaste I found in an "Everything for a Dollar" store in Guelph, the tube that became national news, did not register for diethylene glycol.
The bad news is that it contains high levels of dangerous bacteria.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:24 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 946 words, total size 8 kb.
1
The notion that these tubes may have been legit, but were stolen from a discarded batch may jive with this bacteria discovery.
Perhaps some legit Colgate factory threw away a batch of tooth paste after quality control discovered that they were contaminated?
Then, as the theory goes, somebody retrieved those discarded tubes, repackaged them and sold them to distributors?
Posted by: Cool Blue at June 29, 2007 09:05 PM (fN8F8)
2
I wouldn't worry too much about getting sick.
1. You would be sick by now if you were getting sick.
2. The stomach has strong acids so in all likelihood your system killed the bad bacterias (just like it does with all the other bad bacterias we ingest all the time without getting ill.)
I have no doubt your stomach is upset right now - it is just like my head itching every time I did lice patrol at my kids' school!
Posted by: CanadianKate at June 29, 2007 09:13 PM (tw/sx)
3
Rinse with vokda...repeat...swallow on 3rd time.
Well at least it will get rid of worries for a while 
Posted by: Zono at June 29, 2007 10:49 PM (iiaaU)
4
What does Dollar Store have to say about the source of this toothpaste?
Posted by: hoserjoe at June 30, 2007 12:04 AM (R5RR5)
5
News reports say that the owner of the chain saw a sample of the product, and that it had Canadian packaging. He bought the shipment, but what showed up in his stores was the South African stuff. The importer has not publicly identified his source of the product.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 30, 2007 10:43 AM (BqMT6)
6
"The importer has not publicly identified his source of the product."
why not?
what's he hiding?
*
Posted by: neo at June 30, 2007 11:25 AM (AyuFk)
7
The morals of the story: don't stop at dollar stores and don't buy anything from China. The latter may be onerous.
Posted by: Mike Lewin at June 30, 2007 01:59 PM (4Dc7D)
8
"what's he hiding?"
Probably his assets at the moment especially after playing 'bait and switch'
Posted by: Jaeger_CDN at June 30, 2007 02:02 PM (oFsrn)
9
I heard about your internet site last week and I have been checking it out often. You have a ton of excellent info on your blog and i also enjoy the particular type of the web page at the same time. Keep up the great work!
Posted by: outlet at December 19, 2012 03:24 AM (iBp95)
Shell Chemical plant struggling with substandard Chinese parts
I have a report from Shell Chemical detailing a shocking problem discovered in Holland. Chinese-made piping for a major chemical plant was discovered to have been deliberately reworked to hide serious flaws that engineers believe could have resulted in disastrous consequences.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
02:21 PM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 986 words, total size 7 kb.
1
That is pretty damn serious business especially noting that not everyone may have the QC in place that Shell does.
Posted by: Darcey at June 29, 2007 02:31 PM (BVJ3o)
2
Typical Chinese crap products. Those loosers will build 1000 bad parts to get 1 good one.
Guess who gets the 1000 bad parts.
Posted by: missing link at June 29, 2007 06:46 PM (A7RxN)
3
And that is what happens when you accept the lowest tender.
Posted by: Ron at June 29, 2007 09:52 PM (QbmBP)
4
What a surprise... and all for the bottom line.. and all of this when our North American manufacturing jobs are going to China. Keep producing in N. America to avoid safety hazards such as this. Didn't I read that Boeing is now buying certain aircraft parts from China now too???
Posted by: Vil at June 30, 2007 08:26 AM (skwLo)
5
I love the China-bashing. Everyone knows that when you go with an unknown supplier you take certain risks. Shell's QC picked up the shoddy work and issued a press release that will virtually kill the companies involved chances of getting any sizeable future contracts, likely putting them out of business. What more do you want?
I also got a good chuckle from your last line where you specualate that Chinese-authorities were involved in some sort of conspiracy or cover-up with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. I would think they have better stuff to do than get involved in a dispute between Shell and two domestic suppliers who obviously have a limited future in business.
Posted by: at June 30, 2007 04:42 PM (ucyrd)
6
This wasn't a press release.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 30, 2007 05:44 PM (BqMT6)
7
Sorry. I assumed when you said that Shell called them out that they had gone public with their complaint.
Posted by: at June 30, 2007 06:15 PM (ucyrd)
8
I blame Shell for this whole mess. It's well known that the Chinese will cut corners anyway they can. The only way to protect yourself with Chinese manufactured products is to have third-party inspection that cannot be compromised by bribery. Obviously Shell had no reliable factory inspection and just trusted the Chinese. I doubt they will bother attempting to recover their costs from these Chinese companies because that will be a waste of time and money. Shell engineers were stupid to have trusted the Chinese just because they got lower prices for the product.
Posted by: Bruce P.Eng. at June 30, 2007 06:24 PM (9WKM9)
9
Chinese intransigence and incompetence is enabled in large part because of a lack of transparency. Put it in the open, scare the general public silly with the truth of the products they are exposed to, and then Chinese manufacturing will change. Or whither and die. Either works for me.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 30, 2007 06:25 PM (BqMT6)
10
Turn the telescope around and look at the Netherlands and the EU, and not the Chinese. We know the Chinese government and all their cronies are a bunch of lying, thieving idiots. But what does that say about the people who have placed themselves in the position such that they have no other choice but to buy stuff from them?
The Netherlands are struggling with a substandard socialist political and economic system which has allowed a huge percentage of fit adults to screw the dog and live off the government for their entire lives. In order to pay for all this dog-fucking the government has joined a super-socialist organization called the EU. The entire purpose of the EU is to allow as many people as possible to do as little as possible for as long as possible, ignoring the laws of economics and the fundamental axioms of human behavior until the day when the whole thing collapses into the pyre of bankruptcy, civil war and genocide.
In the meantime, since everyone is so busy crafting the perfect welfare policy, the perfect rules for euthanizing the old and the sick, designing a set of regulations to make it all but impossible for anyone to create a new business in the free market, searching for the Goldilocks formula for destroying the currency at just the right rate that postpones for as long as possible the inevitable socialist implosion - as long as it's just too much damn trouble to actually build anything any more - the Dutch have decided to buy crappy, bogus goods from a country which is slightly less socialistic than themselves, and which has a little less conscience about trying to conceal their fraud, negligence and other crimes.
Posted by: at July 02, 2007 03:19 PM (a0Sy/)
11
To the person who blamed Shell engineers, I doubt the Shell corp engineers specified a Chinese mfg. It was likely some middle management layer that did so to save costs.
Didn't work out that way though. You wonder how many more shoddy products are in use now that weren't caught.
Posted by: jmcnamera at July 03, 2007 09:34 AM (nj9DI)
12
I fight this kind of garbage on a daily basis in the oil supply side. Its very simple; very few purchasing agents understand the difference between cost and expense.
Sure a valve may cost you 650 dollars, but when you have to replace it in six months time, what is the expense? Some purchasing agent has decided that a low priced equivalent at 650 dollars (say vs. 690 for the quality valve) is the way to go. Result? The purchasing agent looks like a hero. They saved the company a bunch of money.
Six - twelve months down the road, the replacement for this poor quality fitting is 5 times the original purchase price. That comes out of operations. But the purchasing guy is never implicated. Nor is the engineer who spec'd it, although both should be held accountable and their bonuses deducted accordingly.
Posted by: JimC at July 03, 2007 02:23 PM (fphwR)
13
...what's the problem with this? Supply and Demand. Sow and Reap.
If we'd all get our heads out of our arses, we'd see this law of economics being played before our eyes.
We want cheap, we get cheap.
What's the problem?
Posted by: tomax7 at July 03, 2007 07:57 PM (jHhd0)
14
...here's a good example of Supply and Demand.
My outside GFI wasn't working. Get one electrician friend to find this out. He says go to RONA and get one.
No problem. I see one for $13.95 and one for $16.50. Get the cheaper one.
Have it installed. Three months later get zapped. Call another electrician friend (first one busy). He says GFI is "made in China", guarentee's this is why it failed.
Tells me to get NA made one.
No problems since.
But this is just a small example of the problems we face out there. Sure one was more expensive, but both have the CSA stamp on them.
So they both are safe right?
Posted by: tomax7 at July 03, 2007 08:08 PM (jHhd0)
15
So the crap Chinese pipe fitting arrived on the job site and the inspectors detected the flaws. They went to the project engineers who confirmed the inspection and both rejected the Chinese piping. They sent their report to upper management who were probably engineers too.
It's inconceivable that specialized piping components built to spec were not properly inspected at the factory ... unless these components were found on the open market by purchasing dept and brought in on the cheap. What do you think hhappened???
Posted by: Bruce p.eng at July 03, 2007 09:06 PM (5oEWO)
16
should we consider the above mentioned two Chinese manufacturer is good manufacurer because Shell like to buy from them? In my experience, Shell is very strictly for choise their supplier. Give Chinese manufacturer some more potience, they can do better!
Posted by: thomas at July 05, 2007 12:36 AM (2f4lJ)
17
"Give Chinese manufacturer some more potience..."
...is that like Coigate?
;-)
hehe
Posted by: tomax7 at July 05, 2007 06:17 PM (jHhd0)
Canadian bloggers still having trouble getting credit for their contribution
I keep reminding myself that the most important thing is the Canadians are now learning that they might have dangerously defective tires on their minivans and SUVs. That's what matters. But as an aside, I have to say I feel a bit cheated that the work I did to reveal that this might be the case has not been credited.
I shouldn't be this thin-skinned, but then all bloggers are cheated when this happens, so it's not just about me.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
11:59 AM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 736 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Well Steve, just keep in mind, that as an engineer (don't know if you are a professional or not), we are all obligated to protect the public safety. Good job, and you are a credit to the profession.
However, if a story were to come out that did not involve the public safety, I would think the good folks at CTV would certainly not have their phone calls returned as quickly as the National Post would.
Or perhaps the next time CTV were to express interest in an article, you might just pick up the phone and ask someone at a paper that gives proper attribution and credit the opportunity to run with it.
The ethical thing to do would be for CTV and the Globe to attribute the work that went into this to you. I'm hardly surprised they don't do this. Space considerations my ass. The sentence in their article "He said the tires could be as dangerous as the defective Firestone models taken off the market in 2000.", could have easily been replaced by the sentence "Canadian blogger Steve Janke managed to track tires similar to the ones being recalled in the US, to distributors in Canada."
Posted by: mecheng at June 29, 2007 12:58 PM (qFcf9)
2
And some bloggers called me arrogant for the last line that I wrote on this post:
http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/000764.html
Posted by: Stephen Taylor at June 29, 2007 02:06 PM (Qu7aJ)
3
I noticed it on the toothpaste story. Every radio report I heard reported a "Cambridge man found ... in a dollar store in Guelph." No! Cambridge blogger, Steve Janke, found...
It's not like your some little guy either, your one of the big wheels in the blogging community.
By the way - how do you like Cambridge? I have been meaning to invite you and the family over, but it never gets done.
Posted by: Brian Gardiner at June 29, 2007 02:17 PM (LL1Bs)
4
Steve, you're always about 48 hours ahead of the waterheads in the mainstream.
It's a shame that those ghouls won't give you props. I guess they're too busy working on their fiction pieces..
Posted by: Levesque at June 29, 2007 02:30 PM (jQxJp)
5
This is a totally valid complaint. It is also not the first time that I have seen the MSM grab something from the blogosphere and run with it.
Bloggers, everywhere should hold this type of theft in contempt. Good on you for raising this.
Posted by: leftdog at June 29, 2007 03:00 PM (dcRmf)
6
Remember - the most important thing is that the story is out there.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 29, 2007 03:07 PM (eGtvb)
7
I just noticed this mentioned on Bourque. I am utterly disgusted.
Keep your chin up and hold your head high, Steve, you are doing important work on your blog and it DOES matter !!!!
(And props to Bourque for giving this issue the prominence it deserves.)
Posted by: Manny at June 29, 2007 03:24 PM (24LEN)
8
I admit I got caught up in the anti-Bourque uproar earlier this month. Hey, I'm a Liberal Kinsella Kool-Aid drinker
But somehow, he's redeemed himself by headlining Steve's slight. Shame on CTV.
I, for one, would demand a correction, Steve. Don't let those a**holes get you down.
But somehow, he's redeemed himself by headlining Steve's slight. Shame on CTV.
I, for one, would demand a correction, Steve. Don't let those a**holes get you down.
Posted by: lulu at June 29, 2007 03:53 PM (A7UPr)
9
Hey, don't get too chuffed. The guy is probably a Grad of
the Sudbury School of Journalism. Nuff said.
You earned him an "atta boy" from his boss, but the important thing is you helped save lives.
There was also another MONSTER story out of the U.S.
last week concerning the Chinese trade behemoth, and no Canadian journo spotted it. See if you
can find it, but don't give it to CTV.
Cheers Ron Jack in B.C.
Posted by: Ronald Jack at June 29, 2007 04:05 PM (0Yps+)
10
Its called professional misconduct if your article/reasearch was used without your permission, or is copywrite infridgement, or is it a mere reflection of how the mainstream media assumes they sit next to God.
I think somebody should ask CTV how often they steal from other bloggers? Surely the broadcast/journalist profession has a code of conduct or an ethics framework.
How 'bout this: Cdn bloggers band together and deny CTV personnel access to their blog. It sure would make a sweet banner ad at the top of everybody's blog for about a week.... hehe. A news story in itself
COPY: CTV personnel are banned!
If they aint going to be friendly why should you?
Posted by: Barley at June 29, 2007 04:26 PM (wHLkD)
11
Hey Steve,
Thank you for all you do. I check your site many times a day. I no longer read or rely on MSM in any form (print or TV). You may not get credit where credit is due, however, I want you to know how important people like you are to people like me
Posted by: at June 29, 2007 04:28 PM (pcZp4)
12
Barley, quit drinking your hops, you ding-a-ling. You've gone off the deep-end.
Posted by: Url at June 29, 2007 04:37 PM (A7UPr)
13
Reveal the coward who called you.
Posted by: ferrethouse at June 29, 2007 07:33 PM (N8BWX)
14
awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Posted by: J. Tee at June 29, 2007 07:53 PM (GJsDq)
15
Typical...the media, artistic and cultural establishment of Canada has become has so intellecutally stagnant, lazy, arrogant and parasitic that they have to resort to stealing the work from the decent people of Canada.
This degeneracy is a sad reflection upon the times we live in.
To Steve I say you should rat out the CTV jerkoff who punked your story as an example to the rest of the parasites in Canadian media.
Finally Steve godspeed to you for being a good citizen for getting this story out; you most likely saved alot of lives through this action.
Posted by: J Mo at June 29, 2007 08:53 PM (909Qv)
16
Remember, the Force will be with you, always.
Posted by: Phil at June 29, 2007 09:17 PM (Ltgo0)
17
It's high time the media did more to credit their sources, but it's a state of affairs of which most (including most bloggers) are at least occasionally at fault.
Even you have acknowledged from time to time that you have private sources for certain stories who have chosen to go unnamed. And acknowledging that a source is private is important.
But when a source is public, it would be appropriate for the media organizations (or bloggers who cite the facts) to properly acknowledge both their primary and their corroborating sources. Anything less bears the taint of plagiarism. If the story isn't that reporter's own, original (or properly accredited) work, there is little doubt but that it is plagiarism.
Posted by: Paul O at June 29, 2007 11:32 PM (9DVsr)
18
Bloggers -especially conservative bloggers- are a huge and painful thorn in the side of the mainstream media.
Those 'defenders of freedom' that we call the press, enjoyed complete control over what news we were allowed to hear -until bloggers came along and started pointing out obvious biases, highlighting stories that were buried, airing facts in some stories that were otherwise not reported and even on occasion exposing outright lies.
I know you go out of your way to be fair to the media, but given your constant digging into the news -far deeper than most of us do (or else we wouldn't bother coming here), does this really surprise you ? Not that I blame you for being annoyed. You have every right to be.
You will also never be considered for the office of the Governor General, any posh Ambassador posting, the Order of Canada, or a job with the CBC (stepping stone to all of the above).
But hey, we like you anyways :-)
Posted by: up north at June 30, 2007 10:45 AM (o7knR)
Suspect tires sold by the container-full in Canada
Even as an official recall of tires made by the Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Company is about to begin in the United States, here in Canada we are learning that potentially a large quantity of these suspect tires have been distributed across Canada. There are no plans for a recall, and the importer insists that the tires are "fine".
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:39 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 629 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Looks like pet food and other foodstuffs was just the beginning, now it's tires.
If they can't get us with poisonous foodstuffs they'll kill a few on the roads.
Now they've discovered some types of fish, shrimp and eel, from that filthy place are contaminated, what's next?
What's it going to take to stop dealing with China?
It may cost us more but what's our health and safety worth?
Wonder what Mo Strong and his cohorts have to say about this?
Posted by: Libby at June 29, 2007 09:45 AM (xxeWF)
2
Well done Steve, I unfortunately had to leave for work before the piece played on Canada AM. (Don't laugh at me, my wife had it on.)
And it's very interesting that I was discussing the quality of products from China with my boss the day you first brought the tire issue up. He came to work and asked me where I got my news, because he had just heard about this tire recall today. Hopefully another reader for you Angry.
Posted by: mecheng at June 29, 2007 09:50 AM (qFcf9)
3
One lone blogger exposing the all the dangers and hazards in exports from China and the MSM are picking up your stories for broadcast. They ought to be paying you for this.
Posted by: muttsrus at June 29, 2007 12:36 PM (JCh6t)
4
Many Canadians are too busy applying for jobs in the government, or angling to get contracts as fake native government suppliers, or applying for HRDC grants to do fake jobs in fake industries, to care where their tires come from. And the Canadians who are supposed to support all those government parasites in the lifestyle to which they wish to become accustomed are working way too hard for way too little after-tax salary, which is losing its value at way too fast a rate, for them to have any time, energy or money left to buy high-quality tires from responsible, profitable, domestic suppliers. Or God forbid to build, invest in, or work in a profitable and responsible domestic tire manufacting operation.
And it gets worse. Your fake conservative government is determined to crank the up price of fuel, food and other vital goods way higher with "green" tax scams designed to squeeze votes out of urban poofs and soccer moms (and enrich their friends), leaving us with significantly less money to buy high quality tires (or high quality toothpaste). So in the future we're going to be buying a lot more cheap, shoddy goods from dodgy foreign suppliers. We have no other choice.
Posted by: at July 02, 2007 04:09 PM (a0Sy/)
June 28, 2007
Mean-spirited vandalism in Toronto
A friend at the Toronto Police Service put my attention to this particularly nasty business. At Bloor and Dufferin, there is a mural dedicated to the victims of gun violence in Toronto. Well, guess what? Vandals have already defaced it, tagging it with their signatures and symbols, including obliterating the portion of the painting that listed the names of the young people in this city who have been killed. Victims like Jane Creba who were utterly innocent bystanders. To these people, Jane was like this mural, just something that got in the way of whatever pointless thing they decided to do at that moment.
A can of spray paint or a gun -- the same attitude drives these people to ignore everyone around them, regardless of the pain and misery that their behaviours might cause. I don't know if that attitude is because of organic damage to the brain, or because of poor upbringing by parents who probably aren't much better examples of humanity, but the result sure seems like a form of mental retardation in people who are old enough to know better.
Heck, maybe it's the rap and hip-hop that dulls their wits to the point that they operate at a level only slightly better than famyard animals.
In any case, the perpetrators of this particular crime have sullied a neighbourhood and the memories of the victims to which the painting was dedicated. Watch the video, and if by some wild chance you recognize anything that could help police track down those responsible, call 1-800-222-TIPS (8477), locally at 416-222-TIPS (8477), or leave information at www.222tips.com.
If you want to see what the mural looked like before it was obliterated, you can see photos and read the explanation of the panels at www.notogangs.org.
Posted by: Steve Janke at
01:52 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
1
*
The Red Star's Thomas Walkom would say your priorities are all screwed up
*
Posted by: neo at June 28, 2007 02:32 PM (HJWo4)
2
And the Lie-beral's are against mandatory minimum sentences, as are the rest of those suffering from Leftist Mental Disorder.
Posted by: Bruce Randall at June 28, 2007 03:30 PM (NuGVb)
3
Did I hear that correctly--they want to catch who did this so they can help clean it up? Why wouldn't these creeps be in jail? Or do they have rights to do damage like this. They have shown that nothing is sacred to them. These people were murdered and now they have been desecrated again. But that doesn't matter--criminals have rights and our Injustice System will protect them to the end. Disgusting but true.
Posted by: George at June 28, 2007 03:41 PM (4BmPi)
4
Makes you wonder at what point will the people of Toronto wake up and realize they need to elect people who are serious about cleaning up that place and putting an end to people living on the streets.
They could look to New York for an example.
Not much hope, the Lefties are well entrenched.
Next time someone gets shot, Miller will be howling for gun registration, or some other airy fairy idea that has no bearing on the problem.
Posted by: Libby at June 28, 2007 03:54 PM (UcdUt)
5
Socialists at City Hall recently passed a by-law requiring business owners to clean up grafitti on their property or be heavily fined for letting their neighbourhood go to pot.
By-law enforcement officers should be cracking down on whoever owns this mural property. If fines don't work on these law abiding citizens, surely Mayor Miller can threaten them with jail.
Posted by: philanthropist at June 28, 2007 04:20 PM (7pBiD)
6
Che guevera on a mural for victims of gun violence? Defacement is wrong, but C'mon.
Posted by: Fergy at June 28, 2007 05:02 PM (3D0+r)
7
This microcosym only reminds me the "painting over" of all the Dudley Georges in Qannaddian History.
Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at June 29, 2007 05:41 AM (GN3Xe)
8
I think you are projecting too much into this and credit the vandals too much forethought. Seems more like ignorant indifference to me--just another canvas to them.
Posted by: murray at June 29, 2007 07:26 AM (dw9A3)
9
A few weeks back, some people in my church went into the neighbourhood to help clean up some of the graffiti tags infecting Ottawa's downtown.
While in the process, one group was approached by a graffiti "artist" who wanted to know why they were destroying something so "beautiful." The answer, of course, is that apart from the "artists" themselves, people regard tags as an eyesore, and nobody really thinks these jerks should have the right to use the world as a personal scratch pad for their illegible scribbling.
Posted by: Scott McClare at June 29, 2007 07:01 PM (L2e8P)
10
Hey Feldwebel,
Here's an easy and interesting experiment for you:
Bring up a Google search page. Type in "Dudley George" and hit 'search'.
I just did, and got 67,700 entries.
Now type in "Marcel Lemay".
I got 1,890 hits for him.
Don't know who he is ? Don't feel bad -not too many people do.
He's the Quebec cop who was shot to death -by Indians- at Oka. We don't hear his name much (I had to dig to even find his name). But I'd be willing to bet he's every bit as dead as Mr. George.
Whaddaya figure there Mr. Feldwebel -does his family somehow grieve less than Mr. George's does ?
You see, we're going to hear all about Dudley George for the next hundred years. And pay for it.
Do you think we'll hear much about Corporal Lemay ?
Oh, by the way, of the first 10 entries on the "Marcel Lemay" page -only half of them were about the dead QPP officer. The rest were various American businessmen.
All 10 "Dudley George" entries were about the man shot by a "police sniper" (who was armed with a submachinegun -not a scoped rifle). Bah -just semantics, right ? I mean it's not like people watch movies and think of snipers as predatory people staring through rifle scopes at their quarry. Waiting for the kill. You know, as opposed to a man hiding in a bush in semi-darkness with a short-range weapon and bugger-all for information about who or what was in front of him. But all the media reports claim he was a sniper.
Semantics, I know...
Gotta hate that white-washing of Indian deaths in Canada though, eh ?
Posted by: up north at June 30, 2007 12:41 PM (o7knR)
11
...why do I get this insatiable feeling to take a shower each time I read about what is happening in Toronto?
Posted by: tomax7 at July 03, 2007 10:30 PM (jHhd0)
Transport Canada has been on the tire issue since Monday, but no recall yet
Word from the Globe and Mail today that Transport Canada has been looking at Chinese tire problem since Monday. But until the manufacturer tells Transport Canada that there is a problem, there is little Transport Canada can do, even as in the US, they are preparing to recall nearly half-a-million tires with a potentially deadly defect.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
06:09 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 728 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Don't they know about the wise old saw, err on the side of caution? Lives are at stake here. Whether you have them or others on the road have them, blowing a tire at high speed can take out a few people.
WHAT PART ABOUT UNSAFE TIRES DON'T THEY UNDERSTAND?
WHO ARE THEY PROTECTING, THE PEOPLE OF CANADA OR FREAKING CHINA?
Anyone else getting paranoid about ANYTHING from China?
C'mon Mr. Cannon, pull the lead out, get in gear.
Posted by: Libby at June 28, 2007 06:42 AM (WH9/9)
2
It looks like on both sides of the border, the law puts much of the responsibility on the manufacturer to get the ball rolling. Regulators have their hands tied.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 28, 2007 07:21 AM (BqMT6)
3
I think we have all been under the assumption that the gov't looks after us when it comes to consumer health and safety. Now we are learning that that's not really true. We all need to assume personal responsibilty for ourselves and our families and become informed and vigilant about what we buy.
I have often wondered how China can manufacture and ship an overwhelming variety of goods for such cheap prices. Now we are starting to find out and it's not pretty.
Posted by: muttsrus at June 28, 2007 09:30 AM (Ni8Ek)
4
If the governments have no control over safety and quality of goods entering the country as trade it high time they did.
Government signs trade deals with them.
Looks like we all better stop buying cheap crap from China or anywhere else, it looks like the only option.
Posted by: Libby at June 28, 2007 09:46 AM (6nsyj)
5
Many at TRANSPORT QANNADDA must be VERY UPSET at having their sleep disturbed like this, with citizens' requests for action.
Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at June 28, 2007 11:28 AM (GN3Xe)
6
...how far back will the recall go? I bought tires a couple of years ago, so probably not affected, but they are starting to look thin and I need to get new ones.
I always bought Goodyear, so hopefully they are still quality. How about Koyo?
Posted by: tomax7 at June 28, 2007 12:10 PM (jHhd0)
7
"I bought tires a couple of years ago, so probably not affected, but they are starting to look thin and I need to get new ones."
My understanding is that the US authorities are looking at tires going back to 2002.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 28, 2007 12:59 PM (eGtvb)
8
Notice how that while consumers may be blowing tires en masse on the highways, the manufacturer has to admit to a problem before any government action can occur.
I see the US FDA is now going after antibiotic laced fish imports from China. Health Canada must be waiting for people to show up at hospital with antibiotic resistant infections. Oh sorry. Hospitals are already filled with antibiotic resistant bacteria. My bad.
We can in part thank Jean Cretien and his Team Canada for opening up the floodgates to this crap.
There is probably lots of good quality product in China. What we have is a myriad of storefront "import-export" companies who only look at the bottom line with no concept of liability or quality, or even an understanding of the product they promote. Call it "Saturday night specials".
I put new tires on my truck last year. Purchased from a reputable local tire dealer. Turns out they were made in China. They are not manufactured by this Hangzhou company. I think wooden wagon wheels would be a softer ride.
Posted by: john at June 29, 2007 06:21 AM (lhVve)
June 27, 2007
Tire recall in the US will begin on Monday
The American importer of allegedly defective Chinese-made tires will initiate an official recall in the United States on Monday. The company expects that they will be able to replace 10% of the tires before being forced to declare bankruptcy. In the mean time, we'll wait to see if Canadians are driving on the same tires, and whether corrective action will be taken.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:33 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.
1
...what also bothers me, is where are all those recalled tires going to end up?
Posted by: tomax7 at June 27, 2007 10:46 PM (jHhd0)
2
Cheap Jerseys Outlet - Wholesale NFL Jerseys From China
Posted by: Ravens jersey Cheap at November 29, 2012 11:49 AM (wmdzq)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tells American consumers to switch tires
The NHTSA is telling American consumers who have bought tires manufactured by the Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber company of China, and sold in the US under the brand names Westlake, Telluride, YKS and Compass, to remove the tires immediately. I don't get that sense of urgency in Canada.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:38 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 442 words, total size 3 kb.
1
quote: "I don't want to do this twice in a week."
Oh I'm betting that you do, wouldn't want to wake the bureaucracy to awaken from its slumber too quickly.
Posted by: the bear at June 27, 2007 10:08 AM (NIATg)
2
Many of the trailer tire brands are made in China.
They are sold under assorted brand names in N. America.
Some brands have abysmal numbers of failure stories and class action law suits are in the works.
If you can avoid them, do so. You are well advised to check the info on the tire before you buy and look for "Made in China".
I have seen faulty tires & rims right in the stores with defects visible to the naked eye.
Tires in the 4.80x12 & 5.30x12 are notorious for self destructing even when towing well under the weight limit with correct tire pressure.
Good luck finding tires in those categories made anywhere BUT offshore.
I am in the market for new boat-trailer tires and just completed online searches for 'Carlisle trailer tires reviews'; and 'trailer tires reviews' as well as 'Marathon trailer tires reviews'. Very interesting.
Posted by: Rich at June 27, 2007 10:15 AM (PGEsg)
3
Damnit Jim. I'm a blogger, not a consumer safety investigator.
Posted by: Johnny Pockets at June 27, 2007 10:35 AM (DtoM7)
4
degree :-That is THE question in my mind and I have no idea who can/will answer that question.
I am not confident that our gov't has any sort of a handle on this whole situation.
In my opinion there is ample material to suggest that rigorous screening should have been done or at least should be started now.
Not to slight any part of our country, but imagine a blowout while towing a boat on hwy 401 through Toronto with 18 wheel gas tankers zooming by and the idiot drivers tailgating as usual. Or a passenger vehicle tire blowing on the front left while in the middle lane.
And who is to say it hasn't already happened in some cases? All the news would report is a trailer flipping or a vehicle losing control due to a blowout. I suspect no agency would investigate past that.
Posted by: Rich at June 27, 2007 12:49 PM (PGEsg)
5
How long is it going to take or more importantly, what's it going to take for the flipping Government to investigate and test every goddamed import from China?
It doesn't take a huge intellect to understand buying CHEAP can mean paying a HEAVY price.
If it's made in china, leave it on the shelf. We simply cannot trust what's coming out of Chink land under that Wack job Leader. Mo Strong and his Leftoids can enjoy the foodstuffs and baubles from that coal polluted place all they want.
Looks like their trying to kill us legally, our pets too!
Posted by: Libby at June 27, 2007 01:27 PM (8w/0n)
6
"...to remove the tires immediately. I don't get that sense of urgency in Canada."
Hey, this is Canada, we'll have a panel do a review, send in their recommendations and meet at Tim Hortons afterwards to figure out how to word this right so the Chinese are not offended.
Oh wait, we first got to find a panel. See you in the fall, Parliament is going on summer holidays.
Posted by: tomax7 at June 27, 2007 01:42 PM (jHhd0)
7
The media were all over the 'Firestone 500s' a few years back, the media couldn't bash Firestone hard enough over those tires. Where's the circus over Chinese tires?
Posted by: philanthropist at June 27, 2007 02:01 PM (7pBiD)
8
What happened to investigative journalism in this country?
Looks like all we have is a bunch of Lefty political hacks who are so busy manipulating the masses they don't know what the hell's going on.
Posted by: Libby at June 27, 2007 07:53 PM (kazlP)
9
Hey, it's just like the old days: crappy tires, leaking carburetors, dead batteries. The longest guarantee on anything was 30 days. I spent every Saturday at the local tire store. It was mandatory to read Consumer Reports before buying anything. How soon we forget how much things have improved!
Have you noticed how Chinese people in Canada don't buy Chinese tires?
Posted by: JJJoseph at June 28, 2007 05:04 PM (R5RR5)
June 26, 2007
Cheap Chinese tires are the subject of the latest recall
Two deaths are already being attributed to faulty Chinese tires. American authorities think over 450,000 faulty tires have been imported and might be on the road right now. Meanwhile, I had no problem finding a Canadian distributor of the suspect brands.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
11:39 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 707 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Hmm... Firestone anyone???
and as far as I recall that was like one and a half million tires and those were all manufactured in North America...
fact is a massive %age of goods are now manufactured in China, there's bound to be recalls and issues.. it was the same with Japanese goods in the 50's and US goods before that...
and you can't tell me that North American Manufactures havn't in the past put public safety at risk to save a buck....
way I see it nothing has changes... you tend to get what you pay for and buyer beware.
Posted by: Sierra at June 26, 2007 12:08 PM (CHE53)
2
Sierra...Domestic manufacturers are subject to accountability.
China is laughing at us!
Posted by: ZiLLa at June 26, 2007 01:16 PM (Y3PLl)
3
Sierra: "[the] way I see it nothing has changes[d]."
Well sadly the difference is:
1. Harder to tell where product is being manufactured
2. What or Which brand to avoid
3. Who's at fault or will admit fault
I hope to God lawsuits abound and the pendilum swings back to buying NA goods, and hopefully not at gouging prices.
You are correct however, NA manufactures have in the past put our safety at risk, but we have a recourse - the law and courts.
China on the other hand, is out of touch. Then again, like Japanese cars back then maybe China has to go through a shakeup and/or loose sales.
Difference again being, you KNEW back in 50's heck, even the 80's, you knew what was a JAP car and what was NA car.
Now, half of any car has parts made in Mexico, China, Philippines, India, and Lord knows where else, so you can't avoid the danger.
Posted by: tomax7 at June 26, 2007 02:13 PM (jHhd0)
4
10% of all tires sold in NAmerica are made in China ... according to the article posted. This means that everybody is at some risk should an SUV with these defective tires go out of control and smack into you .... Chinese will lie, cheat and steal ... and think nothing of it unless caught ... it's their way of life ... believe it ..!!!
Posted by: Bill at June 27, 2007 12:07 AM (vBxsy)
5
*
China responds to recalls of poisonous and counterfeit products, not with shame and apologies... but with a counter-attack.
*
Posted by: neo at June 27, 2007 12:11 AM (IzTQW)
6
Authentic 2012 cheap jerseys shop for sale NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL/NCAA jerseys
Posted by: Cheap Texans jerseys at November 29, 2012 11:49 AM (wmdzq)
This Newfoundlander needs to brush up on his history
One expatriate Newfoundlander is taking Prime Minister Stephen Harper to task in the budget fight Ottawa is having with Premier Danny Williams. This Newfoundlander living in Switzerland makes a point about how Newfoundland out to work towards becoming the self-sufficient nation it was prior to joining Canada, after which things went downhill.
The problem is, things went downhill long before Newfoundland joined Confederation, and what many people might not realize is that at the time Newfoundland joined Confederation, Newfoundland had long since stopped being self-sufficient, and could hardly be called a nation as it was directly governed by an unappointed foreigner.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
10:28 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 838 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Steve, I somehow get the feeling that you history lesson will make little if no difference. Some people have their minds totally made up and do not want to be confused with facts.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at June 26, 2007 11:51 AM (g7gYB)
2
Really,one should Not get facts confused with pompous putdowns of a greater race.
Given Newfoundland's strategic location in the Battle of the Atlantic, the Allies (especially the United States) built many military bases there. Large numbers of unskilled men gained the first pay-cheques they had seen in years by working on construction and dockside crews. National income doubled overnight as an economic boom took place in the Avalon Peninsula and to a lesser degree in Gander, Botwood, and Stephenville. The United States became the main supplier, and American money and influence diffused rapidly from the military, naval, and air bases. Prosperity returned to the fishing industry by 1943. Government revenues, aided by inflation and new income, quadrupled, even though Newfoundland had tax-rates much lower than those in Canada, Britain, or the United States. To the astonishment of all, Newfoundland started financing loans to London. Wartime prosperity ended the long depression and reopened the question of political status.
The American Bases Act became law in Newfoundland on 11 June 1941. As Earle (199
finds, Newfoundland girls married American personnel by the thousands, "the Yanks' jaunty manner and easy social ways making an often stark contrast to the Canadian servicemen who at this time began to coin the epithet 'Newfie.'" The American connection worked so well that the Canadian government in Ottawa became alarmed. A new party was formed to support close ties with the U.S., the Economic Union Party, which Earle concludes "was a short-lived but lively movement for economic union with the United States." Advocates of union with Canada denounced it as republican, disloyal and anti-British; Britain refused to allow the people the option to vote on union with the U.S., and the U.S. state department, needing British and Canadian cooperation in the Cold War, decided not to press the issue. [1]
It remained a colony until acquiring dominion status on September 26, 1907[1] along with New Zealand. It successfully negotiated a trade agreement with the United States but the British government blocked this after Canada raised objections.
finds, Newfoundland girls married American personnel by the thousands, "the Yanks' jaunty manner and easy social ways making an often stark contrast to the Canadian servicemen who at this time began to coin the epithet 'Newfie.'" The American connection worked so well that the Canadian government in Ottawa became alarmed. A new party was formed to support close ties with the U.S., the Economic Union Party, which Earle concludes "was a short-lived but lively movement for economic union with the United States." Advocates of union with Canada denounced it as republican, disloyal and anti-British; Britain refused to allow the people the option to vote on union with the U.S., and the U.S. state department, needing British and Canadian cooperation in the Cold War, decided not to press the issue. [1]
It remained a colony until acquiring dominion status on September 26, 1907[1] along with New Zealand. It successfully negotiated a trade agreement with the United States but the British government blocked this after Canada raised objections.
Posted by: Brian in N.B at June 26, 2007 12:55 PM (srQxA)
3
The true fact of the matter is that the Atlantic Accord deal is a good deal more nebulous than either side wants to admit.
The maintainance of pre-accord levels of equalization while still benefiting from the accord seems to be implicit in the agreement. Is this proper under equalization? No. The increased revenue from off-shore oil and gas is supposed to affect the province's elligibility for equalization, as well as the amount of equalization it recieves.
Alberta isn't getting a special deal under equalization despite the poor condition of the lumber and cattle industries. Nor is Saskatchewan, despite the plight of grain farmers (or Lorne Calvert's made-up "promises").
Yet, I think we need to realize that the federal government isn't respecting the implicit terms of the Atlantic Accord.
Then again, would things be any different under Paul Martin or Stephane Dion?
Posted by: Patrick Ross at June 26, 2007 02:14 PM (994ae)
4
Hey I have a great idea. Let Newfoundland Labrador go on their own and see what happens. Since they made such a go of it last time I'm sure they would love to give up provincial welfare in exchange for their independence.
Posted by: joe at June 26, 2007 09:47 PM (t07u5)
5
...well the last I heard is Newfoundland was hoping Quebec would seperate first...
Would cut off 16 hours driving time to Toronto eh...
Posted by: tomax7 at June 27, 2007 12:53 AM (jHhd0)
6
Actually, Joe, NL would do quite well should they separate. This would give them the full benefit of the offshore petroleum reserves, full management over fisheries and the full benefit of Labrador hydro-electricity. The new revenue would far far exceed the paltry amount of equalization (less than $2 billion) they would receive over the next decade under the new, reduced formula for NL. Bill C-52 plainly violates the 1985 and 2005 Accords, which is plain to see to anyone who bothers to actually work their way through the byzantine drafting of C-52.
Posted by: murray at June 27, 2007 07:59 AM (dw9A3)
7
Newfoundland & Labrador should be cut off the teat immediately.
Back in the 1960's Canada changed Alberta's status from "have-not" to "have" because the per capita Alberta economy was around 92% that of Ontario's. Today, NL&L is at this same economic level. Time to turn off the taps. That goes for SK as well!
Posted by: Reid at June 27, 2007 03:48 PM (kSy1A)
Reciprocal agreement to aid law enforcement comes under attack from Liberals and NDP
Foreign law enforcement officials will find it easier to bring their weapons into Canada in the pursuit of their duties. Of course, the same goes for Canadian law enforcement pursuing criminals in other jurisdictions. Apparently this is a threat to Canada's sovereignty, or so says Liberal MP Dan McTeague, who brings up an incident in which unarmed Canadian border officials abandoned their posts in the face of armed American criminals and the US law enforcement giving chase. That's an odd example to bring up, because the truth is that until the Conservative government started arming our border guards, Canadian border officials depended on US law enforcement to use their weapons on our side of the border.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:48 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1120 words, total size 8 kb.
1
Figures the leftards would be against this, anything to do with practicality and common sense will always evade these types who are suffering from Leftist Mental Disorder.
Posted by: Bruce Randall at June 26, 2007 10:40 AM (NuGVb)
2
McTeague is always looking for something to snipe about now he's reaching back to 2005 for an incident when he and the Libranos were in power. They did squat about border issues.
Comartin and his Lefty peace brigade, time warped in the Peacenik era of pot smoking and free love, want to have unarmed Border guards risk their lives and the lives of others when they can't stop criminals.
Maybe it's time we ask Jack Layton and his bunch to have a little stint at some of the more remote border crossings,mouthy Dan McTeague too. Some of these Lefties need to be whacked before they see sense.
Posted by: Libby at June 26, 2007 11:45 AM (fEsqA)
3
Steve, you hit the nail on the head. The Liberals & NDP seem to feel that we must be different from (if not antagonistic to) the US in order to be "independent."
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at June 26, 2007 11:47 AM (g7gYB)
4
So McAsswipe and his sidekick Miller the wanker are correct. Guns were getting in from the US. What they don't say is that it was the Fiberals that wanted to allow these gun toting thugs in, then give them citizenship. They need to keep up their number of voters somehow.
No wonder they are pissed that Harper armed the Canadian border and custom officials
Posted by: at June 26, 2007 12:01 PM (bT1gN)
5
Typical leftist response to anything is "its a very complicated issue" which is a collorary to the idea that as its too complicated for you simple rubes to understand we who are so much more enlightened will instruct you on the proper response.
Obviously the rightside response is always from a commonsense perspective that works from the assumption that folks are smart enough (regardless of level of education) to think for themselves and come to their own conclusions.
I thought about this when I heard the so-called report on CTV this AM with the anti-american preamble to frame the story.
Posted by: gimbol at June 26, 2007 12:05 PM (OMazA)
6
oh come on... this is hard to believe?
they put so much effort in the "guns in our cities" campaign they can't possibly take a different position now without looking stupider.
Posted by: Sierra at June 26, 2007 12:13 PM (CHE53)
7
Why do you think these alleged criminals want to come to Canada in the first place. Why don't they head for Mexico hmmmm. They know what will happen then.
Posted by: Fergy at June 26, 2007 01:53 PM (3D0+r)
8
This better have been thought through to avoid any future abuse.
OIC's anyone? Ask firearms owners how OIC's have enhanced their lives.
I'm on the fence on this.
Posted by: Nightmare at June 27, 2007 12:52 AM (owbcz)
9
What future abuse ?
Anyone who's worked along the border in law enforcement or any emergency service, as well as anyone who's served in the military can tell you that the Americans are damned good neighbours. They are always there when a hand is needed and are generous to a fault when it comes to providing resources for training purposes.
I like and admire the Americans. Always have and always will. That doesn't make me less of a Canadian. It just means that I know enough about our own achievements that I can appreciate other peoples'.
Canada Day is just around the corner. How many of the opinion columns this Sunday will be based around the fact that "at least we're not Americans" ? If last year is any indication, most -if not all - of them will. To all liberals and far too many conservatives, that's the source of our national pride -at least we're not Americans. That's both wrong-headed and just plain sad. It's also rude -and we're not supposed to be like that, are we ? I think this knee-jerk, uninformed anti-Americanism is our national embarrassment.
Sorry to get preachy and off-topic. It's a big deal to me.
As to the matter at hand. I think closer cooperation with the Americans is just fine. It's not letting the camel's nose under our tent -the Yanks have enough problems of their own without trying to run this country as well. The Libs and the NDP are like a bunch of prissy little schoolgirls when it comes to anybody carrying a gun. And they want us all to be like that. If they ever achieve that goal, then you had better thank your various gods that we have the Americans as neighbours.
Posted by: up north at June 27, 2007 12:07 PM (tOPSI)
June 25, 2007
The fury of the outsider who wants in
The Anglican Church in Canada has voted not to perform blessings on same-sex marriages. The rage from atheists who have already succeeded at changing the civil definition of marriage is very revealing. Look beneath the anger and viciousness, and you see people who are desperate to belong to an institution they label as "irrelevant".
It's rather sad, really.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
09:56 AM
| Comments (29)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1004 words, total size 7 kb.
1
Um Steve. Glad I commented first, hope the rest are as civilized. ;?)
Posted by: Fergy at June 25, 2007 12:08 PM (3D0+r)
2
Strange, isn't it, that some people believe not one comma can be changed in the Canada Health Act, which received royal assent on April 1, 1984, yet the definition of traditional marriage, a centuries' old institution, can be discarded so cavalierly.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at June 25, 2007 12:31 PM (CBHIo)
3
I guess I was 14 years of age when the Anglican church announced they were removing the words "Father", "Him", and "He" from all Hymnal songs and scripture readings and replacing them with "God", "Creator", and "Divine Spirit".
Essentially, they neutered their faith...and they have been dying ever since.
Angry, you are absolutely correct; this minority wants to belong to something, anything.
I'll take it one step further; socialists/liberals want to use this group as their own hammer to smash any institution that puts God before government and any faith that asks people to consider their responsiblities before their own "rights".
Posted by: accidentwaitingtohappen at June 25, 2007 12:33 PM (CKSG2)
4
I haven't seen all this "fury" you talk about, but I do agree that this vote wasn't that big of a deal, but for rather different resaons than yours. It's not a big deal because it simply reaffirms that, generally, Anglicans in Canada don't think same-sex relationships are such a big deal, that they don't have a problem with them being blessed by the clergy of the Church, and that they think such blessings should just go ahead on an individual diocese's authority. According to the votes, only the bishops disagree... barely.
I'd say that the statement "the Anglican Church might very well change its position one day on this issue" is an understatement in the extreme. The "important" vote was on whether or not blessing same-sex unions violated the Church's core doctrine, and the clear winner on that question was "no, it doesn't". I'd say that alone was a pretty big step.
The second question was essentially, given that blessing same-sex unions does not violate the Church's core doctrine (based on the first vote) should individual diocese be allowed to start giving blessings on their own authority, or should the Church as a whole need to make that decision. The one and only reason the second vote didn't simply allow priests to start blessing (or continue blessing) these relationships right away on their own authority was that the vote needed a TRIPLE MAJORITY, not a simple majority to pass. One needed a majority of the laity, a majority of the clergy and a majority of the bishops to win the vote, and those in favour of the blessing only got 2 out of three (and as Meatloaf said...). On the simple vote, undivided, there was a clear 163-133 vote in FAVOUR of dioceses being allowed to simply start blessing unions on their own authority. The layity voted 79-59 in favour of allowing diocese to simply perform the blessings, and the clergy voted 63-53 in favour. The stopper was the bishops, who voted narrowly (21-19) against allowing diocese to simply move on their own authority.
Seems to me, that leaves the Church in the position of having affirmed that these types of blessings are not contrary to Church doctrine, having demonstrated that a majority of the laity, AND a majority of the clergy believe such blessings should simply be allowed to go ahead on the diocese's authority, and that the split amongst BISHOPS is just 52/48 against the dioceses doing this on their own. Personally, I was surprised this came down to essentially a veto by the bishops brought about by a SINGLE vote (one bishop changes his vote and it's 20-20... wouldn't THAT have been fun).
Now, bishops are BISHOPS, but it still seems to me that once a majority of your followers believe something, and a majority of your priests believe the same thing, it would inevitably be the BISHOPS who would eventually change their tune.
Any heated rhetoric against these votes (by those in favour of SSM, or these blessing of SS relationships) is kinda silly, given that the results were really overwhelmingly on their side of the argument. When the bishops of your Church need to veto a vote by the clergy and laity, and can only barely manage to do so by a single vote, it's not the bishop's who are likely to win the day in the long run, imho.
Posted by: Lord Kitchener's Own at June 25, 2007 12:58 PM (3aZl7)
5
accidentwaitingtohappen: 'good moniker for the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC)(!) of which, until recently, I was a cradle member.
You're quite right. In addition to Steve's theory that gays and lesbians desperately want to belong, and therefore are aggressively importuning Christian churches to let them in, they also have a wish to smash the Institution which stands in the way of their lifestyle being sanctioned and supported.
The vast majority of the Christian Church in the world does not and will not sanction the gay lifestyle, in the form of blessing same-sex unions, despite what North American Protestant Churches are doing. IMO, most activist gays want no part of the Christian Church, except to humiliate it and its believers, and to bring them to their knees.
Having said that, I am clear that there are sincere and loving individuals who regard blessing same-sex unions as "the loving thing to do," while leaving out the part of the Christian faith which calls upon its members to "sin no more."
That's the crux of the matter. Of course Jesus loves all individuals. What He doesn't love, however, is sin--a fact that the supporters of the Church's blessing same-sex unions cavalierly leave out of the equation.
Gay activists are, almost by definition, in a rage against anyone who doesn't sanction their lifestyle. In their narcissism, they would gladly destroy anyone or anything that stands in the way of their being "accepted." As the Christian Church, by and large, fits the definition of an institution which stands in the way of their aspirations, they would gladly see it ruined.
Sadly, in the case of the UCC (United Church of Canada) and the ACC, they may just be successful, especially ironic as these are the two churches that have capitulated to most of the gay activists' demands.
Posted by: 'been around the block at June 25, 2007 04:21 PM (+7B3R)
6
The Anglicans have succumbed. Same sex marriage/blessing will be done at the discretion of the Priest in any given Parish, watch for it. The vote concluded nothing.
The homosexual people are getting everything they want. They managed to have our government change the definition of marriage, an absolute outrageous spectacle in itself. Now they've moved on to take on the churches, not happy with civil arrangements, they want blessings.
If the churches have given up on the teachings of the Christian bible,how can they profess to be followers of the faith and pick and choose what parts they wish to follow?
They're becoming nothing but shams.
What's next in the gay activist romp? They've taken the word "gay" from our English language and claimed it as their own, they've taken the rainbow as a symbol, they've made a mockery of the institution of marriage, rendering it a farce, now they wish to tear down the doctrine of the Christian Churches.
This is not about religion, it's about notoriety.
Anyone who thinks it's not about notoriety hasn't seen a "Gay Pride" parade. No straight people would be allowed to carry on like that.
Homosexual people have the same rights in law as all other law abiding people. They can live together and have civil, legal arrangements, share whatever. What more do they need?
Posted by: Libby at June 25, 2007 07:46 PM (V5SHj)
7
Libby, that about covers all the bases. Well said!!
History documents quite well that all the Christian Churches of today are the result of disagreement with existing doctrine. The Church of England (Anglican) did not try to force divorce on the Catholic Church of the day...a new Church was formed. The same during the Reformation when Martin Luther started a new movement...they did not try to change the existing Churches.
If having a Church that condoned homsexual relationships is so important to them, I have no quarrel whatsoever with those people starting their own sect, and leave the others alone.
Posted by: Conrad at June 25, 2007 09:06 PM (QS+hA)
8
On the other hand, I and my mates are stuck inside our United Church, trying to fend off fruity edicts from the Ontario head-office high-ups. Now the UCC is trying to jam their new, gay "Song of Faith" statement into its reluctant congregations, and we on the periphery are trying to resist. We don't want to leave because all our friends are here, but we can't accept a weak, effeminate theology as decreed by the elected gay commies in our head office. So we're revolting - quietly, of course, by encouraging the revolutionaries at The Alliance of Covenenting Concregations. Naturally, we don't want our pastor to be fired for participating in a revolutionary movement, so we're all skulking around Tim Horton's on Sundays. So many have left the UCC that we're just a few remaining old farts manning the parapets. That we're still here doesn't mean that we accept the present state of affairs. We're just hanging on, muttering about the perils of gay leaders, hoping for a miracle.
Posted by: JJJoseph at June 25, 2007 10:09 PM (R5RR5)
9
I'm still waiting for one of these activist to show up at a mosque or a sikh temple and get them to except gay unions. I don't think we should hold our breath.
Did anyone catch how excited Mayor Miller was at the Gay Pride parade. Do you think he would be jumping around and hugging people at a MILATARY PRIDE PARADE?
Posted by: rod at June 25, 2007 10:33 PM (nBhM7)
10
MILITARY not MILATARY.
Posted by: rod at June 25, 2007 10:39 PM (nBhM7)
11
I left the UCC when it became gay friendly and did not cross over the ACC because it lacked a firm foundation with which it could repell the attacks of those who seek to destroy the authority of the church. While I think that a few gays want to belong to the church I also believe that most want to destroy the church because they think the church stands against their chosen life style.
Posted by: joe at June 25, 2007 11:30 PM (t07u5)
12
Angry;
Twice in your post you refer to the people who are angry over at Bable as atheists. Did they declare themselves as atheists or are you just making an assumption. I ask because I get the feeling from your post that you think all homosexuals are atheists. I am neither homosexual nor atheist, just curious about what you're thinking.
Posted by: Iron Oxide at June 26, 2007 08:23 AM (h3RCj)
13
Homosexuals will never go near a Mosque, that is one religion absolutely intolerant of such a lifestyle. In the Muslim ruled countries they'd lose their heads and that's the end of their story.
David Miller is true to his socialist base.
Armies are for clearing snow and sand bagging against floods.
He could barely speak when he was forced by public opinion to say he supported the troops. He had the gall to say he changed his mind on the support the troops logos on public
vehicles because three more soldiers were killed.
There's something askew when a public figure can get all excited about the likes of a Gay Pride parade with people in varying states of undress, not allowed in our civil society for straight people.
If it weren't for the Armies of brave men in two world wars
the Lefties and all manner of Socialist creeps would not be enjoying their freedoms.
They just don't get the concept of sometimes having to fight to protect our Country and all she was built on and stands for. One thing for certain, with their attitudes, they are not worth fighting for.
Posted by: Libby at June 26, 2007 08:32 AM (bV74I)
14
BATB,
You say that "until recently" you were a member of the ACC. The mindless drift of our Church began more than a generation ago and proceeded lockstep with the evolution of Trudeaupia. What finally pushed you to your decision?
The bowdlerizing of the Book of Common Prayer (described by Melanie Phillips as having occurred under the aegis of a committee "composed of Karl Marx, Tony Blair and Noddy") drove many of us away, some of whom have moved to Rome. We are hoping that Rome will remain steadfast.
I still love the old Anglican hymns though; I don't think I'll ever be able to stop singing them.
Posted by: felis corpulentis at June 26, 2007 09:31 AM (edu1y)
15
'Am not at liberty, felis corpulentis, to tell you my story at this time. Suffice it to say that had it not been for an extenuating circumstance I would have left the Anglican Church of Canada long ago: God knows. As it was, I fought the good fight for a very long time, it seems to no avail.
'Two interesting faux pas on the part of the retiring Primate on Sunday, while the vote was being held to allow same-sex blessings in the ACC: At one point he said "the revolution," referring to "the resolution" before Synod and when the count was in for the "Yes" votes in the order of clergy, he moved on before asking those NOT in favour of the resolution to stand. He caught his mistake, but it spoke volumes about his regard for Anglican clergy who are not in favour of the ACC blessing s-s unions.
As for juxtaposing "revolution" with "resolution": This vote is nothing short of a revolution in the ACC. Primate Andrew Hutchison laughed when he realized his Freudian slip. Sadly, this is no laughing matter.
Posted by: 'been around the block at June 26, 2007 10:23 AM (+7B3R)
16
...Hmmm, I seem to remember reading some sort of science fiction book about the last days on earth being one of chaos. Wonder if anyone remembers the name of it. They used to read this in schools and in community buildings.
Society values, greed, confusion, changing amongst the masses. Something about calling evil good, and good evil, and just outright weird how to love someone.
Dang if I can remember the name or where I read that, must have been in that archive I stumbled across in the library basement - guess the Firemen from 51 Precinct (Fahrenheit) didn't get to them yet, hope I don't get in trouble posting it on here...
...ah here it is, just a sec as I dust off the pages.
Right -
------------
Isaiah 5:20
"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"
----------
Naw, what did this Isaiah guy know what would happen some 2500 years later?
Oh wait, here's another interesting chap...Timothy. Wonder if it is the same guy who started Tim Hortons coffee shops?
---------------
2 Timothy 3:1-5
v1: "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come
v2: "For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
v3: "Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
v4: "Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
v5:Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
----------
Wow, those are heavy words, no wonder the government banned this book. So dividing and non-loving, don't these guys know to go with the flow?
Oh wait here is something else from the gladiator times or something like that I guess...
---------------
Romans 1:27-28
22: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23: "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.
24: "Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25: "Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature
v27: "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
v28: "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
v29: "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers
v30: "Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
v31: "Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
v32: "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
-------
Holy Moly! Dunno, but here's something else:
Galatians 6:7 - "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."
-----------------------
Time to repent folks and cry out for God's mercy for our children's and grand children's sake,
What kind of future do we leave them?
Perverted Tolerance?
Yep. Like that frog in lukewarm water.
Posted by: tomax7 at June 26, 2007 11:00 AM (jHhd0)
17
Most people don't ask to be part of a religion; they are forced to be part of it by their parents and schooling. The fact that they're gay is not really considered when they are infants being baptized, I imagine. If they or any religion wants to keep out teh gays, maybe they should stop indoctrinating people before they've reached the point of sexual (and intellectual) maturity.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap, or words to that effect. Tomax Number Seven might know where that's from.
Posted by: M@ at June 26, 2007 11:30 AM (K0+MZ)
18
BATB,
I hope my question was not too importunous; I'm sorry if it was.
You mentioned the retiring Primate, Andrew Hutchison, and his giveaways. Until reading his name in your last post, I did not know who was the Primate. In light of your description, it's just as well.
In fact, I have to go back pretty far to locate a Primate whose name I do remember. There were Walter Barfoot, then Howard Clark (who confirmed me) and Ted Scott, whose primacy drove me out. After that, I'd have to google "Primate" to see who they were.
I agree it is no laughing matter for those who want to remain faithful. This includes several members of my family.
Posted by: felis corpulentis at June 26, 2007 01:54 PM (edu1y)
19
As an atheist, I am disturbed by the comments of other atheists...namely that the church should do whatever is fashionable at the time (essentially).
I do not believe this, the church should be allowed to do whatever it wants (within the law of course)...if you don't like it, go elsewhere. Why should the church be forced to change for the sake of the minority, not only change but turn their backs on their core beliefs. Strange.
Really if you don't like it, don't go...or start your own "church". Tradition should not necessarily be at the whim of popular opinion.
By the way Steve:
Churches are not supported by tax dollars, ...
[By the way, not being taxed is not the same as being supported. A tax is a punishment -- not being taxed should be the natural, default state, and not something special.]
I think this is flawed logic...exclusion of taxation is a form of support...I mean taxes on cigarettes are high to curb smoking, correct? Taxation is recognized as a means of government regulation, so therefor not taxing something is akin to promotion. Further, donations to the church are tax deductible, correct? Thus encouraging people to donate to the church, which is in fact support.
Please correct me if I am wrong anyone.
Cheers,
BIG S
Posted by: at June 26, 2007 06:38 PM (Lx0Z8)
20
...BIG S you gotta look at the big picture. Circle logic doesn't always work.
Churches support a lot of volunteer organizations and fill a lot of the gaps that big government or local institutions miss.
So, revenue neutral I'd say in giving them a tax break on the land.
You also get tax receipts for helping the Cancer Society, and while this encourages giving, you are stretching the point in saying by doing so, then a church is government supported institution per se.
It is voluntary. Don't give to the church then. Give to AA. Atheists Anonymous?
Or Agnostics who stay up all night wondering if there is a Dog.
Posted by: tomax7 at June 26, 2007 07:50 PM (jHhd0)
21
felis corpulentis: No need to apologize for your question. It's a good one! I wish I could tell my story because it's full of adventures and misadventures and having to try to be patient and loving in spite of watching one's church go first up then down in flames.
I think that Howard Clark was a saint, or at least, a very fine priest and Primate. Ted Scott was an entirely different matter, as was Michael Peers, and now, Andrew Hutchison. All liberals, all privileged, and all bearing the white man's burden of guilt, which is one of the reasons why so much of their reasoning, or what passes for reasoning, is so skewed and out in left field.
The social gospel seems about all they can muster in the Gospel department and Jesus Christ and His tenets seem to be remnants from a murky past, which they seem not to deign to remember.
When Church leaders (sic) are embarrassed by their faith and spend most of their time apologizing for it, you know you're in deep trouble. The Anglican Church of Canada is in deep trouble and has been for a very long time.
Pax, felis corpulentis!
I'm fully sympathetic to where you're coming from.
Posted by: 'been around the block at June 26, 2007 08:53 PM (+7B3R)
22
BTW, tomax7: Thanks for the stroll through the Judeo-Christian Scriptures! Well-said--or, at least, well presented!
And, you're right about all the good that the churches do, and which the average Canadian has no idea of. If churches were taxed, people would be reeling because of all of the small and big charitable outreach that WOULDN'T be happening. Churches can, and do, provide services to the public, especially the most needy, at far less expense than government programs and churches have been providing these services for far longer than any government agency: how about for centuries?
What galls me, is the number of people who are critical of the Christian Church but who, really, have no idea what so many Christian churches actually do. There are a lot of negative urban myths, many perpetrated by the very secular humanist MSM, which are just plain inaccurate and mean-spirited.
Posted by: 'been around the block at June 26, 2007 09:00 PM (+7B3R)
23
BATB: "Ted Scott was an entirely different matter, as was Michael Peers, and now, Andrew Hutchison. All liberals, all privileged, and all bearing the white man's burden of guilt, which is one of the reasons why so much of their reasoning, or what passes for reasoning, is so skewed and out in left field."
And this new guy, Hiltz, seems to be, from what I can find out, also cut from the liberal cloth. While I was googling for Primates, I discovered some other material about the way of the ACC since I moved on. It seems like someone (you would probably be familiar with this person) did a study that demonstrated an average decline of 2% per year in ACC membership over the last 40 years. Also that there are 11 Canadian parishes overseen by the episcopacy in Rwanda. I hadn't realized that the reverse African missionary work had proceeded that far.
When I was a youngster in the choir in St, John's Cathedral, the place was full a lot of the time. I guess it rarely is now.
Guilt: it seems to be the currency of the left. Instead of social engineering, they should be taking a page from our mediaeval past and doing penance and self-flagellation. Do you think self-flagellation would have looked good on Andrew Hutchison? A little fasting and prayer wouldn't hurt either.
Thanks for the kind words. Maybe some day you will be able to tell your interesting story.
Posted by: felis corpulentis at June 26, 2007 10:45 PM (OeB8q)
24
batb: "...well presented! And, you're right..."
Gawrsh, danks!
Cheque's in the mail eh...
Posted by: tomax7 at June 27, 2007 01:46 PM (jHhd0)
25
...gee, and here I was beginning to miss spammers...
Posted by: tomax7 at June 27, 2007 10:48 PM (jHhd0)
26
BIGS said"...Further, donations to the church are tax deductible, correct?"
Actually, donations to a church are not automatically deductible. What's deductible are donations to CHARITY. "Charity" is helping someone in need with no expectation of any return. To gain tax deductibility, an organization such as a church, must be registered as a charity with Canada Revenue, and prove that it does charitable works for the community in its annual audit. It's not possible to collect charitable donations and buy real estate, for instance. You'll just irritate Canada Revenue and get yourself into deep doodoo with the usual Canada Revenue consequences.
Posted by: JJJoseph at June 28, 2007 02:22 AM (R5RR5)
27
Freedom of religion seems to apply only to Islam. While not able to suspend sufficient disbelief to adhere to any religion, I hold a hearty respect for those who do. That belief is the foundation of our country and is the basis for Western Culture in general, my favorite hands down. When one notes intellectuals such as George F. Will and William F. Buckley that do believe, it's impossible to be so arrogant as to suppress it's expression.
There are plenty of churches who welcome gays. That's where they should head.
Posted by: iowavette at June 28, 2007 11:02 AM (0p4xh)
28
Tolerance is no longer good enough. They want endorsement now.
Posted by: Peter Jay at June 29, 2007 05:57 PM (qAufv)
29
...hmmm, was thinking of buying a Seiko watch, thanks!
nar nar.
Posted by: tomax7 at July 03, 2007 08:57 PM (jHhd0)
June 24, 2007
I would be proud to be associated with NASCAR
Should Canadians be embarrassed because the Conservative Party has decided to advertise by sponsoring a NASCAR team? Despite the foam-flecked rantings of Canada's left, NASCAR seems to be a sport that demands good character of its participants.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
05:48 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 777 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Attempting to link the Conservatives to G.W.Bush any time they can, seems to be the new sport of the Canadian left.
Posted by: Paul M at June 24, 2007 07:41 PM (RGTDd)
2
Ugh.
And I'm actually a long time race fan.
http://sheenavision.blogspot.com/2007/06/dourquey-nascar-sponsorship.html
Posted by: Sheena at June 24, 2007 07:48 PM (aBtgw)
3
If the CPC want to sponsor a car. Fine with me.
Personally I'm not a fan of NASCAR. But, there's other potential voters/fence sitters out there who are.
The Libs are probably annoyed with the fact they didn't think of it first. But money used for that usually has receipts attached to the expenses. 
Posted by: Nightmare at June 24, 2007 08:00 PM (mmErF)
4
If the CPC wants to sponsor Pierre Bouerque's car, I say fine. But to pretend that going after NASCAR fans was not a warmed over Republican strategy, that's just intellectual dishonesty Steve. Don't believe me? You don't have to. Read this.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061204/lipsyte
If the Conservatives had an original bone in their bodies I'd be worried, but as long as they ape the Republicans, I will sleep soundly.
Posted by: Greg at June 24, 2007 09:56 PM (nP3U/)
5
The liberal pundits are already laughing at the NASCAR move. Just go watch the last edition of Don Newman's Politics available at http://www.cbc.ca/politics/ and listen to their amusement when Susan Delacourt brings it up (at about the 32:45 mark and beyond after the commercial break).
In the same broadcast, Greg Weston implies that the car was "sponsored by the Government of Canada."
But ... why is anyone surprised at the reactions from opponents of the Conservatives?
If PM Harper were to end world hunger, he'd probably be blamed for encouraging obesity.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at June 24, 2007 10:17 PM (CBHIo)
6
Sorry - forgot to mention that you have to click on Friday's broadcast if you want to check out the link I provided.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at June 24, 2007 10:21 PM (CBHIo)
7
Steve,
So how much did you know about NASCAR in general, or the Busch East Series in particular, before this issue broke out?
(And good luck hoping for a Bourque win, but FWIW he races on the 29th)
Posted by: bigcitylib at June 25, 2007 06:33 AM (RPJuF)
8
Weston, Travers, Delacourt, Newman, what a bunch of tired old hacks, droning on and on in desperation.
Weston must think we all fell off a turnip truck saying Bourque was sponsored by the Government of Canada. Now that's desperation, VILE desperation.
It's become a real spectacle to look at those tools on Newman, sitting all smug and ready to trash Harper and the Conservatives with sneers and snickers. They don't even realize the public are onto them. Don't look to them for serious journalism, they're on a mission to get their Liberals back in power.
Trying to tie the Harper Conservatives to Bush at every little opportunity has absolutely no clout. That old tune has been drummed to death.
Let them all go off for the summer and watch Dion eating his hot dogs with a knife and fork.
Posted by: Libby at June 25, 2007 07:07 AM (LXs7L)
9
Um... racism?
Posted by: Brian Jello at June 25, 2007 08:30 AM (eGtvb)
10
"Should Canadians be embarrassed because the Conservative Party has decided to advertise by sponsoring a NASCAR team?"
No, but your readers should be embarrassed by your obsessive compulsive behaviour on something that was nothing more than a momentary, humourous distraction on a slow news day.
"Attempting to link the Conservatives to G.W.Bush any time they can, seems to be the new sport of the Canadian left."
Actually I'm trying to introduce a new sport where the left links the Conservatives to Chavez any time they can.
Is Chavez Stealing Harper's Ideas
Posted by: Robert McClelland at June 25, 2007 08:36 AM (LGMUg)
11
OOOOOOHHH...NASCAR! I just love the foreskin-like front bumpers, and the perky, Jennifer Lopez-like rear ends on those sexy racecars...
Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at June 25, 2007 09:16 AM (7PFIn)
12
Speaking of slow news days, what's new with the Liberals these days?
Is Dion learning how to eat a hot dog? Is that on his agenda for the summer BBQ circuit?
How about talking about another defection to the Conservatives? Nah, that's not newsworthy.
Posted by: Libby at June 25, 2007 10:05 AM (AtZUs)
13
Pervert.
Posted by: iowavette at June 25, 2007 01:13 PM (0p4xh)
14
Libby, ho-ho, what a bullseye. Yeouch !!!!
Posted by: Gary at June 25, 2007 04:14 PM (24LEN)
15
Maybe the Tories will pay your legal fees.
Posted by: Anon at June 25, 2007 08:48 PM (Ld2qe)
June 23, 2007
Is NASCAR going to be a target for Canada's liberal press?
I don't subscribe to the theory that Canada's media as a whole cannot be trusted to report the news in an even-handed and fair manner. But I'm not so naive as to believe either that there a not pockets within the media that do use the media as a way to promote a partisan agenda under the guise of news.
With the Conservatives sponsoring Pierre Bourque's NASCAR efforts, I wonder if NASCAR will become the target of media trickery in order to embarrass the Conservatives. It has happened before.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:09 PM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 714 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Of course the MSM is going to ridicule NASCAR and anything else it views, in its sophisticated urbanite myopia, as being rural (redneck) or worse (real redneck) rural American. However there is a glimmer of hope in that the weaknesses of the MSM are beginning to show. People are beginning to define for themselves what life is all about because they realize what is published as "news" is not news its opinion. Opinion mouthed by an ignorant bunch of pseudo intellectuals who took a mickey mouse course at a third rate college and are now, under the direction of editors and publishers, parroting the party line of the power elite of Upper Canada. Proof of this is the drop in readership/viewership of the MSM.
Posted by: joe at June 23, 2007 10:56 PM (t07u5)
2
Canadian MSM is Toronto-centric and they cater to that Liberal audience to hold on to their readership. Typically the CBC is thoroughly Toronto-centric and is filled with feminists, multicultis, gays and lesbians and of course those who gained through Liberal nepotism.
The worst offenders seems to be the Canadian Press (CP) who are blatantly anti-Harper, anti-Conservative. I don't understand the organization of the CP and why it would be so overt in their outright propaganda. Any guesses here ..???
Posted by: Allan at June 23, 2007 11:31 PM (Zrc6R)
3
I was kind of wondering the same thing when I heard about this. Already some of the pundits have written editorials condeming the Conservatives for picking green house gas consuming cars to sponsor. The hacks that pose as unbiased reporters will soon figure out a way to paint this in a bad light.
At the end of the day, NASCAR is going to wish it never heard of the Conservative Party of Canada...
Posted by: langmann at June 23, 2007 11:32 PM (nDN9z)
4
Really who cares wnat the MSM do? The MSM is in a death spiral. Keep twisting faster and faster towards oblivion boys.
With all the recent lay-offs by the major MSM players you would think they would learn something.
Posted by: missing link at June 23, 2007 11:35 PM (TPOpb)
5
Canadian Press ?
http://www.cp.org/home.aspx?id=60&
Scroll down to see that their "owners/members" include:
CTV/BELL
TORSTAR
hmmm...
Posted by: James Walker at June 23, 2007 11:43 PM (U5GvN)
6
We should care what the likes of Straw-head Delacourt or Blondie Fife have to say anymore?
The Conservatives have the money to sponsor, that is the sore point for the Liberals and their fifth column MSM.
What exactly can they criticize here, DIDN'T THEY SPONSOR SOMETHING CALLED ADSCAM?
It's a sad day when one cannot read or listen to news and wonder where the truth lies in this Democratic country.
We are living Banana Republic style with the vindictive, childish MSM.
Posted by: Libby at June 24, 2007 08:17 AM (qO3a9)
7
Hey Libby, but the Lie-beral's never use their own money, always someone else's. What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine, eh?
Posted by: Bruce Randall at June 24, 2007 09:39 AM (NuGVb)
8
*
Funny, CTV completely missed this
They went instead, with the video closeups of soldiers grieving family members slumped over their loved one's caskets.
*
Posted by: neo at June 24, 2007 09:51 AM (v3W1I)
9
True Bruce, but it's all our money one way or another!
Posted by: Libby at June 24, 2007 10:39 AM (OXS/O)
10
Pierre Bourque's Conservative sponsored car #29 started 22nd and finished 13th in todays Dickies 200. Not a bad result at all.
Posted by: Bruce Randall at June 24, 2007 12:04 PM (5YeD+)
11
I was at the race, we live in Oshawa. I was blown away when I saw the big "C" on the guy's hood. I said "awsome". I mean, really, does the world need more newspaper and tv ads ? Congratulations to the Conservatives for thinking outside of the box on this one.
Did I vote for Harper last time ? No.
Will I vote for Harper next time ? Maybe.
I'll tell you this, my days of voting NDP are over. Bye bye, Mr Layton, you friggin hipocryte.
Posted by: Eddie at June 24, 2007 12:33 PM (57TwP)
12
There are two contradictory themes that the likes of Delacourt, Weston, Travers and Riley like to draw on when they criticize CPC actions. One is that the CPC is appealing too much to their base, and needs to reach out to other groups. The other is that they are ignoring their base, and behaving too much like Liberals. Needless to say, this allows them to churn out endless, mediocre, un-insightful columns on whatever the CPC does. Another reporter has already confirmed, from speaking to a CPC insider, that the anti-Senate ads generated so many doantions from the CPC base, that the ads paid for themselves.
Of course Delacourt wouldn't be aware of that, since she is out of the CPC insider's loop, and has to draw on her "insights" regarding CPC strategy. I think Delacourt is trying to regain her huge loss in credibility after wrting the book on Paul Martin Juggernaut. Perhaps if she writes a new Paul Martin book called Jugger-NOT, she might be taken more seriously.
Posted by: at June 24, 2007 01:06 PM (g7gYB)
13
There are two contradictory themes that the likes of Delacourt, Weston, Travers and Riley like to draw on when they criticize CPC actions. One is that the CPC is appealing too much to their base, and needs to reach out to other groups. The other is that they are ignoring their base, and behaving too much like Liberals. Needless to say, this allows them to churn out endless, mediocre, un-insightful columns on whatever the CPC does. Another reporter has already confirmed, from speaking to a CPC insider, that the anti-Senate ads generated so many doantions from the CPC base, that the ads paid for themselves.
Of course Delacourt wouldn't be aware of that, since she is out of the CPC insider's loop, and has to draw on her "insights" regarding CPC strategy. I think Delacourt is trying to regain her huge loss in credibility after wrting the book on Paul Martin Juggernaut. Perhaps if she writes a new Paul Martin book called Jugger-NOT, she might be taken more seriously.
Posted by: Calgary Junkie at June 24, 2007 01:06 PM (g7gYB)
14
I don't understand the organization of the CP and why it would be so overt in their outright propaganda. Any guesses here..???
Allan,
Perhaps the CP is watching jealously as CBC reporter after CBC reporter winds up in the Governor General's office (with its lavish budget).
Oh yes, and because reporters in general and liberals in particular are just plain vile.
Posted by: up north at June 24, 2007 11:07 PM (/F0Y3)
15
Right "up north", "reporters in general and liberals in particular are just plain vile". They are vacuous, vitriolic, and vicious spinners of facts to manipulate opinion.
Their vacuity has been their undoing.
Their game is quite obvious to all paying attention and the jig is up for the boneheads.
The Liberals are so badly broke they are having a tough time spreading their lies. They're relying on the MSM as usual.
Propaganda is the stock and trade of the Liberal Party,it's worked for them for years.
Posted by: Libby at June 25, 2007 11:33 AM (LEX/L)
16
Did you see the survey MSNBC, not a particularly balanced institution on it's best days, performed re political affiliation of major media reporters. Not a pretty story but certainly no surprise, by a very wide margin 80-something to 17 donations were made to Democrats here. Thankfully, NASCAR fans don't give a damn what some left or right coast liberal shill thinks of them or the sport.
Posted by: iowavette at June 25, 2007 01:08 PM (0p4xh)
Art and business duke it out at Disney
The only-beauty-matters artistic element at Disney has won a major battle over the bottom-line-is-king business faction with the announcement that direct-to-DVD sequels of animated theatrical releases will no longer be produced. I'm curious to see if Disney can find a way to make both sides happy.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:35 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 787 words, total size 5 kb.
1
"I expect a lot more computer-generated toons (either 3D or computer-generated analog to traditional cel animation) instead of labour intensive traditional cel animations."
Um, Steve? They haven't had "cel animation" for nearly a decade now. While they continue to have hand-drawn animation (the direct-to-DVD productions are based on home-generated pose drawings with in-betweeens mostly farmed out to production houses in Korea and Taiwan), it's mostly done with computers now.
Also, Lassetter is on record as saying he wants to revive hand-drawn feature animation as a Disney staple. So while 3-D animation is important (and where Lassetter earned his fame and reputation), I don't think we'll be seeing an explosion of product here.
I suspect the direct-to-DVD products may use, instead of the animation features, the TV franchises such as Recess, House of Mouse, and Kim Possible. I also suspect we'll be seeing more Disney product using Flash animation.
Posted by: Phantom_Observer at June 23, 2007 10:30 PM (JK9La)
2
ha! the surest sign that a sequel will suck... they have to use "2" in the title.
the Disney direct to DVD crowd are one of the worst offenders of the crappy sequel, only the horror genre is worse... (well I suspect the porn industry is the worst but then I don't really know anything about them so I can't offer judgement)
While I don't really object to much to Disney fooling around with the newer releases, the cheap attempts to cash in on the classics is pretty sad.
besides if the marketing guru's can't be bothered to think up an origional title then I can't be bothered to spend money on it.
Posted by: Sierra at June 25, 2007 11:55 AM (CHE53)
June 22, 2007
Is the Colgate South Africa website a fake?
A reporter for the Brooklyn Daily Eagle wonders if the Colgate website listed on the counterfeit toothpaste boxes is itself legitimate. It might not be a great website, but the registration information seems legitimate. And I can't see how the aliasing could have been faked.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
12:17 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 687 words, total size 6 kb.
1
They are poisoning us.
Posted by: ZiLLa at June 22, 2007 04:01 PM (vMLDo)
2
Frig the squirrel chase...shut the boarder to this Chinese crap until they are acountable and liable for bad products....a citizen's/consumer's life may be cheap in their commie cess pool but not here...not yet.
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at June 23, 2007 09:52 AM (INHn8)
3
...amazing how fast BSE shut doors to our beef...
Posted by: tomax7 at June 23, 2007 05:57 PM (jHhd0)
4
Calgary Sun TAB cartoonist has a good one:
http://www.cagle.com/caglecards/main.asp?image=http://www.cagle.com/working/070622/tab.jpg
Posted by: tomax7 at June 25, 2007 01:37 PM (jHhd0)
5
I like it very much!sd5f46s5df465sd4f
Posted by: Nike Mercurial Vapor VIII AG at December 02, 2012 01:35 PM (MncsW)
6
i need to download transformers- the game full version. do you know any website to free full transformers game. free full version im asking. Thanks before
Posted by: outlet at December 19, 2012 05:02 PM (5gAA/)
Supersmart dolphins chomping down on stupid humans
A diverting bit of news of humans being attacked by dolphins.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:44 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 439 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Stupid humans is right. Between Disney humanizing animals and water parks making dolphins LOOKING like pets, no wonder people get bit. Just think, a couple more Nemo movies and people will think Bruce, the great white shark is pet material.
Posted by: Dave at June 22, 2007 09:58 AM (nEzv9)
2
...oh no! You mean I gotta throw out my pet Great White?
Well he is getting too big for the toilet bowl anyway...
Posted by: tomax7 at June 22, 2007 11:25 AM (jHhd0)
3
Some folks just love hanging out with wild animals. They don't believe it when we tell them that the anmials are actually really WILD and dangerous. Every year, hordes of Germans and other well-meaning simpletons come to visit with the bears. They even make movies about what happens:
http://www.blogto.com/film/2005/10/grizzly_man_herzogs_predatorprey/
Posted by: Layon de Lumber at June 22, 2007 01:01 PM (R5RR5)
4
Things like this always blows my mind, no matter how many times I hear it. People just love to humanize animals.
The relationship of dolphins to sharks is like lions to hyenas. They go out of their way to kill each others. Unlike lions and hyenas, though, it's not as level a playing field. Sharks loose to dolphins pretty much every time, since sharks tend to be loners. If a pod of dolphins find a shark, they hunt it down and tear it to shreds.
Yeah, that's Flipper all right.
Posted by: Kunoichi at June 22, 2007 01:46 PM (GC+CP)
5
Personally, I think the dolphins figured out that we've gotten soft (and hence a potential food source) ever since the "dolphin friendly Tuna" craze. 
Posted by: Paul M at June 22, 2007 03:09 PM (HqWMn)
6
Must be the global warmin'!
Posted by: at June 22, 2007 03:34 PM (0Gdlb)
7
...let's start a "Save Bruce" campaign!
Where do I go for funding?
Posted by: tomax7 at June 22, 2007 05:18 PM (jHhd0)
8
Dolphins biting people? I went to a Miami Dolphins game a couple years back. I could have sworn I saw Jason Taylor bite Patriot's QB Tom Brady, but that could have been my glasses being fogged up from the heat.
Anyway, I would consider it an honor and a privilege if you would add my blog "The Tygrrrr Express" www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com to your list of linked sites if you feel the quality is high. I read your blog after clicking on Michelle Malkin's site, since I enjoy her writing.
Happy Summer, and forgive me in advance if my request was redundant.
eric
Posted by: eric at June 22, 2007 07:38 PM (2Q6Ib)
9
...eric
- pay the man.
Posted by: tomax7 at June 22, 2007 07:41 PM (jHhd0)
10
When I worked in the B.C. Forest Service back in the 70's and 80's, we were constantly running into hikers, from big cities here, the US, and Europe, who KNEW that bears were no trouble at all, as long as they could hear you walking. Many carried a cowbell attached to their backpacks.
I spent about 25 years living and working in the forests of Canada, and my advice was always ignored, after all, what did I know that some "expert" who visited occasionally, didn't.
One expert I ran into, in the bush near Prince George, carrying the required cowbell, was studying the spawning salmon in the nearby streams. He scoffed at us, F.S.Timber cruisers, because one guy in the party always carried a high powered rifle. He said that a bear would never attack if he had warning you were coming.
When I related this story to an old Native guide in the area, he laughed and said, " it's a good idea carrying that bell. Makes it easier for the bear to find him".
Posted by: dmorris at June 23, 2007 05:11 PM (BireE)
11
dmorris,
That's how you can tell grizzly bear scat from black bear scat:
Grizzly scat has little bells in it...
Picture two obviously well-fed grizzlies sitting around laughing:
"And then he screams 'But I'm a vegetarian !" ...like we care..."
Posted by: up north at June 24, 2007 10:51 PM (/F0Y3)
June 21, 2007
Official statement from Health Canada with regards to the toothpaste scare
Health Canada has released an expanded statement with regards to toothpaste safety in this country. It is interesting. For one thing, Chinese toothpaste is out!
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:11 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 548 words, total size 5 kb.
1
A big list of departments under the control of Health Canada and yet they have done nothing concrete to protect the citizens of Canada. Spin is the order of the day.
You are so right--the toothpaste report was from SAfrica--and yet HC is stuck on China--something that the FDA has been studying for the past three plus weeks. I guess they have to wait until someone competent tells them what to do?
They are already subtly blaming the consumer who 'may have bought toothpaste abroad' or 'imported toothpaste for their own use'. What a bunch of useless incompetents.
Posted by: George at June 21, 2007 08:01 PM (GvymP)
2
"Health Canada is monitoring these recall notices and the actions of other regulators, and is taking steps to ascertain..."
...is it me, or is the smell thick in here?
Posted by: tomax7 at June 21, 2007 11:24 PM (jHhd0)
3
I like it very much.564651321348545 http://www.lebrongalaxy9.com
Posted by: galaxy shoes at December 03, 2012 05:22 PM (7jPQw)
4
I like it very much.564651321348545 http://www.newf50adizeromicoach.com
Posted by: elite lebron james 9 galaxy at December 03, 2012 05:23 PM (Gr9mq)
NASCAR is part of the long tail of success
The Liberals and the NDP are taking turns criticizing the Conservatives for sponsoring Pierre Bourque's NASCAR efforts, and then laughing at the Conservatives for targeting this small demographic.
Maybe people laughed at Google once. Not anymore.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
10:48 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1173 words, total size 8 kb.
1
I don't know about the NDP or Greens, but I bet the Liberals are just jealous that they didn't think of this first.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at June 21, 2007 11:48 AM (g7gYB)
2
Well, the reason why I have problems with this NASCAR sponsor is because how much of our tax money is going to this partisan sponsoring? Is the Conservative party using their money or is that money coming from our pockets?
If it was the Liberals in power who did that, then the Conservatives would demand a public inquiry, as I would do too.
Posted by: Crazy Dan at June 21, 2007 12:08 PM (fkjBD)
3
This is Conservative Party money. Parties pay for party advertising out of their own pocket.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 21, 2007 12:32 PM (eGtvb)
4
I was at the race, and whenthey announced Pierre Bourque driving the Conservative Party of Canada car, I did a double take and asked my friend if he heard what I did. My friend thought it was a joke at first. I thought it was interesting considering the sport is so sponsor driven. I wondered if it was government money or CPC money. I believe it was CPC money. I also thought it was interesting because Pierre Bourque runs bourque.org and this can be seen perhaps as a way to ensure favorable representation for the CPC on his Newswatch site. At the end of the day though it was just another exciting race where CPC was just one of hundreds of sponsors represented there.
Posted by: Keith at June 21, 2007 12:49 PM (qPx6o)
5
I just took a look at the NASCAR Canadian Tire Schedule of 12 races. And I see there's a race at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve in Montreal on Aug 3-4. This would be an excellent opportunity for Harper to show up, maybe with the CPC candidate for Outremont, give the event a higher profile, attract more fans, plug Bourque's car, get interviewed on TSN, etc.
There's all kind of leveraging opportunities out of this. Harper goes to hockey games in the winter, and can now go to racing events in the summer. And of course Bourque can be counted on to be even more partisan in highlighting negative Liberal stories. Especially when guys like Coderre make this dumb environmental connection to the sport.
Posted by: Calgary Junkie at June 21, 2007 01:23 PM (g7gYB)
6
This is like rink board advertising for your local Junior D team - its nice to show support and help a minor league raise some funds but to compare this series with the juggernaut that is NASCAR in the states is a joke. This is so low on the totem poll it makes winter league baseball seem like World Series ball.
This is about the Tories supporting someone who purports to be a journalist - who gives them favorable headlines for money. It is not about a demographic - it is about Pierre Bourque being nice to the Tories.
And Janke is right, it does not target the green demographic but it sure as hell is being noticed by it and they don't like it.
I personally can't wait for Pierre to run into a wall with this thing and we can all see wonderful photos of the wreckage that is the Conservative Party.
Posted by: anon at June 21, 2007 01:31 PM (ODTq3)
7
I would never hope for a crash at a race. Not if the car was covered in Liberal red and NDP orange. Maybe I just don't take politics seriously enough.
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 21, 2007 01:35 PM (eGtvb)
8
First of all, auto racing gives many towns/cities/ provinces dollars in their coffers from race fans attending races.
Guess no one seems fit to mention that the Liberals under adscam paid taxpayer dollars for Canadain flags at the F! race in Quebec, not to mention attending themselves with free? tickets from ad execs.
And this series was formerly CASCAR. Nascar thought there to be enough interest in Canada to take over and support the series, which does provide excelleant racing.
Now how about all you LIB/NDP/GREEN start bashing all the other sponsors of this racing. GM,Ford,Toyota,Dodge,Canadian Tire,Home Hardware,Tim Hortons,etc.
Lets see you criticise them for supporting something you say is enviro-unfreindly, just to be fair.
And by the way, Nascar uses fuel containing ethanol.
Posted by: paulsstuff at June 21, 2007 01:57 PM (33FGM)
9
The reason why the Liberals hate it is because they are so elite they despise the working stiffs that like to watch NASCAR.
Posted by: Victor Ward at June 21, 2007 02:20 PM (/17Up)
10
This is a brilliant move by the Conservative Party and I'm sure the Liberals are kicking themselves for not thinking of it. Just look at how much everyone is talking about this. Plus, the MSM will be showing snippets of this car just because. It's not only the NASCAR viewers in Canada who will see this.
Now I think the Conservatives should take this idea and expand upon it. I think they should bid on tarps (too late for Stampede) for the Chuckwagon racing circuit this summer. A million people go to Calgary Stampede. Add in the spectators of all the other rodeos this summer. Alot of people would be looking at that Conservative logo in alot of places around Canada.
Posted by: Reid at June 21, 2007 02:28 PM (/5CAv)
11
Great article, Steve. I want to point something out. Something you won't find Susan Smith whispering.out loud about to Don Newman. Those Libs in Ottawa are all Bourque pals. They love the guy. Dion's people, Ignatieff's people, Kennedy's people, Chretien's people, even Martin's people. And some of them are kicking themselves left right and centre for having not seen the opportunity to sponsor him. Well, almost everyone. Because one of Bourque's sponsors is Pollara, the official Liberal Party pollster. See http://www.pierrebourque.com. And that's exactly why only the bit players like Kinsella and Coderre have been voicing their mock outrage.
Posted by: Murray at June 21, 2007 02:43 PM (A7UPr)
12
To Anon - shame on you. I hope you run into a wall head first.
You are a very jealous liberal who can't do anything right but know how to brag plus some other things like ---------------.
md
Posted by: .m.j.deVille at June 21, 2007 02:58 PM (XWBBP)
13
I don't know about Canada but in the U. S., the NASCAR demographic is surprising. It is certainly working class and heavily of Scots-Irish descent, but many are actually entrepreneurs making the long green on their own B, S & T. They drive great cars, have big homes and support their local economy. Getting to the tracks in the South [the holy land] are a logistical nightmare. Best Westerns charge upwards of $200 a night with lodging booked for a hundred miles around. My last trip to Bristol involved a puddle-jumper flight to Nashville, a 200-mile drive to our hotel outside Knoxville followed by an 100+ mile drive to Bristol. THEN, you have to walk a couple of miles to get to the track and climb several stories to get to the best seats. The Holy Grail, Talladega, is even more daunting - truly a pilgrimage. And, if you're a believer, it's worth it. If NASCAR actually caught on in Canada, I'd be amazed and impressed. You probably won't be surprised to know that Canada's kindred state, Washington, has a politician who indicated that they didn't want a NASCAR track because they didn't want to attract tourists they wouldn't like as neighbors. There's that liberal arrogance again. You can be a socialist assassin and pass muster but if you're caucasion and conservative, they'd just as soon kill you as look at you. Interestingly, two of the better drivers are from Washington State, Kahne - not doing well this year - and Greg Biffle, also lackluster. They're talented nonetheless.
Posted by: iowavette at June 21, 2007 03:00 PM (0p4xh)
14
That Crazy Dan lives up to his name.My guess is he works in a radio station advertising department, or maybe a community newspaper out in Armpit Ontario and he'd rather see all political advertising restricted to radio, newspapers, and TV. Wake up, Dan, you crazy git, the Twentieth Century is long gone.
I like the chuckwagon idea. Why not a dragon boat for the big races in Vancouver too ?
Or how about a boat in the Lake Winnipeg bass derby ?
Posted by: larry at June 21, 2007 03:01 PM (BjOjj)
15
It sure beats the old liberal way of advertising... The old brown bag stuffed full of tainted money.
Props to the conservatives for imaginative ways of thinking. Liberal waterheads just can't think outside the box.
Posted by: levesque at June 21, 2007 03:02 PM (jQxJp)
16
I would never wish injury on anyone, but a big part of stock car racing's popularity is the close contact between cars and crashes. Why do you think they show a replay of a crash from 6 different angles?
I'm a huge NASCAR fan but I just don't think the Conservative Party sponsoring a wanna be jouranlist is going to win over votes.
Posted by: anon at June 21, 2007 03:23 PM (ODTq3)
17
larry, oh grow up! I'm a Conservative voter, but I was just concerned about if the government money or the party money was used in this sponsoring stuff. I don't know when it is a blasphermy to ask something about how money is spent. Plus, I don't work in the MSM, so your jab is pointless. Next time you want to reply, find something original instead of calling me a leftist. I'm even from Calgary!
Steve Janke, thank you for answering my question about the money. How much would it cost to sponsor a NASCAR car?
Posted by: Crazy Dan at June 21, 2007 03:24 PM (ITPND)
18
Larry:
For Vancouver, instead of a Dragon boat, how about:
"The Conservative Party of Canada's Symphony of Fire"
I like that.
Posted by: Reid at June 21, 2007 03:51 PM (/5CAv)
19
Reid, I mentioned the dragon boat race because of the overwhelming asian influence in our city. Symphonies are nice too, I guess.
Dan, you crazy git, you are no more Conservative than I am NDP.
Besides, I read Greg Weston's column today while I was on the toilet at the Burger King and he says the Liberals are the biggest wasters of our tax dollars. He's dead on.
Posted by: Larry at June 21, 2007 04:07 PM (BjOjj)
20
Larry:
Do you know what the Symphony of Fire is (or was)? Although I see it's name has changed to "The Celebration of Light" now that Bensen & Hedges tobacco can no longer sponsor it. It's the annual fireworks display in Vancouver that over 100,000 people view each night it's on and has been happening for like 15 years or so.
So I suggested it, over the dragon boat, because of exposure (and I was trying to be a smartass). I guess that just went over your head.
So now it should be "The Conservative Party of Canada's Celebration of Light."
Posted by: Reid at June 21, 2007 04:52 PM (/5CAv)
21
Cost to sponsor? $25,000
Posted by: Steve Janke at June 21, 2007 04:57 PM (osqix)
22
Larry, you are welcome to believe about if I'm a Liberal or Conservative. You have your own self delusions. But yeah, I voted against the Liberals in 2006 because the waste of air people stole my frigging tax money to waste on a waste of space, Quebec. Do I need to say any more about why I'm concerned about the taxes?
Posted by: Crazy Dan at June 21, 2007 05:58 PM (KqXMA)
23
Dan, you're not only a crazy git, but you're also a racist bigot.
Posted by: Larry at June 21, 2007 06:24 PM (BjOjj)
24
Well, I will restrict my thoughts to the topic at hand, not whether Dan is nuts or not.
Pierre Bourque is a Libreal who happens to like racing. He is a journalist/blogger as well, and wanted to combine his two passions. Racing, and his site. He uses the racing to promote his site by running in the NASCAR Canadian Tire Series, and he wants to maybe pay the bills with someone elses money. So who ponies up? The Conservatives. Says a lot about Pierre that he took the money, and it says volumes about the Libs for not sponsoring one of their own with a passion. This sponsorship is peanuts and is for the Montreal race only is it not? In any case, I think what it really says is two things:
1) The CPC knows about that long tail theory and they know the NASCAR/racing crowd will be more to their base than a bunch of poetry festivals in Vancouver would be and 2)The Conservatives HAVE the money to do things like this. The Libs are broke, the NDP REALLY Broke, and the BQ...well lets just say they wouldn't know a good idea if it hit them in the head. The dirty little secret is under the new rules of financing for the parties that Chretien brought in has CRIPPLED all the parties but the CPC. Why? Simple. Personal donations are the only money left after the buck or so a vote is given based on the previous election. The CPC are the only party really able to mine their membership for funds because they are the only party actually supported by people who pay taxes and actually give a damn on how it is spent. The fact they could do this little foray into racing is telling....very telling and it says good things about Conservatives...
Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at June 21, 2007 06:41 PM (MrVu6)
25
I wonder who is underestimating the NASCAR fan. Political parties in sports advertising is typically in bad taste. In the case of direct relevance, perhaps the Green Party sponsoring a solar powered auto race, exceptions are possible.
The direct relevance between NASCAR and the CPoC seems as obvious as it is distasteful. Not only can NASCAR fans see this, but even political dweebs, pundits and the like.
Cue the apologist and a host of discredited theories....
Posted by: S McPolin at June 21, 2007 07:01 PM (f63Qb)
26
Interesting to me that nothing in the article makes any mention whatsoever about policies, programs or otherwise reasons to support the Conservative party. Apparently, according to Janke, Nascar fans are so stupid as to not care about any of those things or any other issues, but will be magically hypnotized by a Conservative party logo that will make them support them.
This incredibly simplistic approach also, sadly, appears to be the norm for this crew - don't give anyone, anywhere any credit for being more intelligent than your average park bench; show them symbols, spew key message words, attack outrageously, unfairly and often, and question the love of country of anyone who disagrees.
If it works, then it is all of our faults.
Also, Bourque as an impartial news aggregator? He has been bought and paid for for a long time now. It's almost cute that there are people who til think otherwise.
Posted by: canadian at June 21, 2007 07:30 PM (Ytw6G)
27
Just one thought - It has been known for decades that NASCAR fans are very loyal to those who sponsor their sport. Whether that holds true to any degree in Canada remains to be seen.
Posted by: Bill in Calgary at June 21, 2007 09:06 PM (3TFPr)
28
It's all about brand recognition ... and once the race is over, all those people will know about the Conservative party and that PM Harper is their kind of guy. Not only that, those who attend the races will tell their friends about the Big C car and how nice it was for the Harper Conservatives to sponsor it.
Also, Canadian Tire sponsors Bourque's car, so if they place pictures of that car in any company flyers many more people will see it and the Big C logo. Come the election the recognition factor will kick in.
Of course, the Liberals and NDP will not even finish last because they are not even in the race..LOL
Posted by: Observer at June 21, 2007 11:12 PM (94wk5)
29
Cons say this is their own money. And where do you get your own money? From the taxpayer!!! Every conservative vote is worth $1.75 and that is paid from tax money. All the donations are tax credits and that is tax money.
So why is Steve's party pork barreling with taxpayers money? First he sets up a humongous campaign headquarters that musta cost millions for an election that never happened, then millions more are spent on election style advertisements for an election that never happened and now it's taxpayers money to sponsor a gas guzzler that goes in circles. Just like Steve.
Posted by: hiti at June 22, 2007 03:19 AM (jFrn0)
30
Hiti, for the love of Christ, you should stop spewing your ridiculous lame-brainers on the net after an intoxicating night of vodka guzzling.
Posted by: Quebec Guy at June 22, 2007 04:40 AM (BjOjj)
31
Maybe they can pay your legal fees.
Posted by: Anon at June 22, 2007 06:32 AM (PTOv7)
32
NASCAR fans are less wealthy??? Mr. Simpson has never been to a race, has he? A dollar for every RV that shows up, he would be wealthy. You think the toy car business is dumb?
Yes, it is very white, but mostly suburban/rural, faith and family oriented, and conservative. Conservative?
And it is a lifestyle thing. My weekends are driven by NASCAR coverage. I have lots of things to do, but the wife leads. I print out the NASCAR TV schedule on Thursdays so she doesn't miss practice and qualifying. You think I carry Sirius radio for Howard?
Loyalty? Next time you are driving to work keep an eye out for a the cars with #3, #8, #24 in the back window.
One might ask Mr. Simpson why the Lillydale Chef shows up on Canadian polls as one of the most recognized media personalities. He did not get there from appearances on CFTO News. As for TSN coverage, they still live in Toronto. Nuff said. Last year they shared taped delayed Busch with Sportsnet. Not this year.
Lets see, tonight is the Truck race, and laundry. Tommorrow, the family is coming over, but the Busch race is on Sirius. On Sunday, golf in the morning but home in time for the Cup.
I can see what CPC sees, and the Liberals know it as well.
Posted by: john at June 22, 2007 07:08 AM (ZNAq7)
33
Yes, NASCAR is popular - but that's Nextel Cup NASCAR. Ratings drop off a great deal for Busch Series, Truck series and then the regional stock car racing that acts as the developmental leagues. Below that is what used to be CASCAR. It is very small and no one watches - and Pierre Bourque is a lousy driver. TSN carries taped coverage. The CPC would have been better off sponsoring a player at the World Series of Poker as it gets major tv time.
Posted by: anon at June 22, 2007 07:15 AM (ODTq3)
34
The reasons offered by the environmentalists, Liberals and NDP for why the Bourque / CPC sponsorship are a joke.
NASCAR stock cars are powered by the most finely-tuned (i.e. non-polluting) motors you will find anywhere. An inefficient engine means you will lose the race.
Maybe these genius reporters would like to compare racing to the environmental impact of baseball, hockey, basketball and football whose teams fly all over North America to their games in ageing, inefficient, half-empty charter planes?
Any single one of these flights is 'dirtier' than what comes out of the tailpipes at a season full of NASCAR Canadian Tire Series races.
Further, once the 'stick and ball' teams emerge from their dirty, old planes, they compete in air-conditioned 50,000-seat domes and arenas. And the outdoor stadiums have enough high-powered lighting that they can be seen from space.
The Liberals: Them screaming about this sponsorship being proof that Stephen Harper can't be trusted (http://www.liberal.ca/story_12917_e.aspx) is akin to Paul Bernardo calling a Girl Scout "a murderer." All of the sudden, the Liberals are against motorsports? Riiiiiiight.
The Liberals replaced the tobacco money sponsorship of the F1 race in Montreal WITH TAX DOLLARS. And then they promptly set up schemes with their ad agency buddies so that the money was used to pay their election debts and buy boxes of $4,000/bottle Petrus wine.
And we still don't know how much of this money made it into their pockets via those little brown bags. Harper should bring this up every time some Adscam Liberal makes a peep about the CPC's sponsorship of Bourque.
The NDP: If I was a Canadian Auto Worker, I would be livid. The cars that are showcased in the Canadian Tire Series are Dodge Chargers & Avengers. They're Ford Fusions and Tauruses (Tauri?). They're Chevrolet Monte Carlos and Pontiac Grand Prix. 10s of thousands of Canadian jobs depend on the existence of these cars and the parts that go into them.
Seeing the NDP make fun of NASCAR racing on a Canadian racetrack would be the final straw for me if I worked at a parts or assembly plant in Oshawa, Brampton, Oakville or Windsor... watching part of my union dues going to the NDP.
How stupid is Jack Layton (rhetorical question) that he's openly cutting the throats of Canadian Auto Workers by denoucing these races, cars and drivers as environmentally incorrect and "American"... when it's a very clean sport relative to most others... and any way you look at it, the drivers, cars, teams, sponsors, fans, etc.... are all 100% Canadian.
What Layton and his sidekicks are doing is particularly cynical, dusgusting and damaging considering the fragile state of the Canadian auto industry.
In the U.S., the United Auto Workers sponsor several events. They're smart enough to know where their bread is buttered. Racing sells cars. By doing what he's doing, Jack Layton is saying he's at war with every Canadian auto worker.
Finally, the hypocrites in the media. Every outlet has had a columnist spout off on this "environmentally dirty," "American-style", sponsorship of a "redneck" sport.
Meanwhile, they all survive on car ads from 'The Big 3' and Canadian Tire. The Toronto Sun's Greg Weston was making fun of how dirty the racing is the other day... if you could find his column sandwiched in between all of the Sun's NASCAR and Steelback Grand Prix ads.
Apparently, Sun Media is a big sponsor of both. Talk about the pot calling the kettle 'black'.
The bottom line is that this entire furor over the CPC/Bourque sponsorship is nothing more than the Liberals, NDP and the liberal media (redundant) taking a run at their enemy in any way they can.
They all hate Harper so much that they don't care about how many Canadians they crush during their crusade.
Posted by: gwgm at June 22, 2007 08:27 AM (b6MYK)
35
1st para. fix:
"The reasons offered by the environmentalists, Liberals and NDP for why the Bourque / CPC sponsorship is a bad thing are ignorant, disingenuous and cynical. The end result is a direct attack on Canadian racers, fans and the Canadian auto industry."
... see above for why.
Have a great weekend.
Have a great weekend.Posted by: gwgm at June 22, 2007 08:48 AM (b6MYK)
36
I listened to some psychotic, shrill, tripple hyphenated PMSed out woman from the dippers trying to make political points on the CPC sponsoring NASCAR...it was really laughable ( where is chuck barris and his gong?).
We were all lectured on "what is an acceptable sports interest for Canadians" and obviously NASCAR is not an official Dipper-sanctioned "Canadian sport"...it is, in fact, atributed to the evil motor culture to the south...it is earth unfriendly and just plain "mean". As I listened to this scolding being handed out to everyone who ever drove a sports car or had interest in the motoe sports, I was struck by how morbidly narrow minded the left has become.
This crazy rant was on a national radio show and all it really accomplished was revealing the Dips as a bunch of PMSed nagging harpies with no connection to the fabric of Canadian society outside the narrow attitudes displayed by aprtment dwelling, metropolitan PMSed women who wet-nurse cats and house plants.
Someone send the Dips a supply of light days!
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at June 22, 2007 08:56 AM (INHn8)
37
Angry, unbelievable overview. Bang on. Except I will suggest that the
end result is that Bourque has this week become the most well-known auto racer in Canada. It has also given his sponsor countless free publicity all favourable to the Tory support base.
While we're at it, I want to know what Coderre's relationship was with Claude Boulay, the Adscam fraudster who was instrumental in all those government millions flowing to the Canadian F1 in Montreal.
I'd also like to know what Kinsella suckled off the provincial teat in my province for his disastrous Lottogate PR advice.
Posted by: Bob at June 22, 2007 09:00 AM (A7UPr)
38
Ouch, Bob, well said !
Posted by: anon at June 22, 2007 09:38 AM (BjOjj)
39
This is not about attracting voters through NASCAR, it's about paying money to influence Bourque in a legal way without having to declare it on his website.
If the Conservatives win over a few NASCAR fans, then great. The real goal is to win many more people over from his website.
Posted by: Justin Tetreault at June 22, 2007 12:39 PM (pX18t)
40
Justin, a fool and his whack-job conspiracies are hard to separate, as you well prove.
Crazy Dan, your intellectual equal has just appeared.
Posted by: Larry at June 22, 2007 02:50 PM (57TwP)
41
Arrogance and Liberals?
In Ontario the McGuinty government just announced that cars that look like they could be used for street racing will be seized, and destroyed.
This is the solution offered to counter street racing.
Seems that Liberals seem more interested in finding solutions that don't work, and telling the sheep they think Canadians are that it will work.
On the anti-Nascar rants by politicians, the simple truth is that there are more than one way to skin a cat.
That the Liberals don't see that or understand that speaks to danger for Canadians.
Gus
Posted by: BlackKnightGus at June 22, 2007 11:06 PM (bSHWs)
42
Speaking of Kinsella, he's eerily quiet. Should we wonder what he's up to or should we assume there's nothing happening he can proudly rave on about?
For the Conservatives, who have money, BECAUSE PEOPLE SUPPORT THEM, putting their brand on NASCAR beats talking to assholes like Blondie Fife or Me Jane Taber et al.
Posted by: Libby at June 23, 2007 07:14 AM (W8msx)
43
Kinsella's having some kind of mid-life meltdown.
He worries about the state of the global environment while driving around Toronto in his noxious exhaust-spewing leaded gas circa 1968 Volkswagen Beetle.
He complains about being ungodly tired, then goes out all night with other middle-aged head-bangers, content to slide through life lamenting the good old days when Johnny Rotten was king and 8-track players were all the rage.
What a bonehead.
Posted by: Aunt Beryl at June 23, 2007 08:26 AM (Zra09)
44
One of the best drivers on the face of the planet is a Canuck, Ron Fellows. He drives some NASCAR and Busch but rules the American Lemans Series driving Corvettes for Chevrolet. He's looking to retire while he's younger than I, the dog. I'll light a candle, however. He is one in a million.
Posted by: iowavette at June 25, 2007 12:38 PM (0p4xh)
<< Page 1 of 3 >>
214kb generated in CPU 0.068, elapsed 0.15 seconds.
113 queries taking 0.1014 seconds, 511 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
113 queries taking 0.1014 seconds, 511 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
