SUPPORT PTBC
with this PTBC site-nourishing,
national pride-inducing purchase

Liberals can buy the pin too!

---

• Members:

---

• Help us fight
the good conservative fight!

PTBC totally relies on YOUR cash contributions.

---

• About PTBC

First: It's a question.

Other than that: A true conservative site that helps explain the difference between liberals and conservatives. We're:
Pro-life. Pro-freedom. Pro-USA. Pro-Christian. Pro-Israel. Pro-family. Pro-traditional marriage. Pro-free market capitalism. Pro-war-on-terror and war on Islamofascism and terror in Iraq and everywhere else. Pro-military. We're for smaller governments. For less taxes. Against socialism. Against state-owned or state-run media. Against asinine state controls on our legal gun ownership. Against the so-called "progressive", left-wing church of liberalism. Against idiocy generally. ...Read more...

---

• Worst Canadians

• An apparently typical state-owned CBC fan, on news of the death of a Canadian soldier in Afghanistan:
"THIS IS WHAT YOU DESERVE"
(Also see PTBC's CBC reader comments of hate category).

• As taxpayers bail out the auto companies in Canada, the head of the auto workers' union in Canada, Ken Lewenza, blames Canada's "right wing" (that's me) and "corporate agenda" (arguably also me) for the global financial collapse, in what I call (A) an outright lie, (B) yet another declaration of class warfare in Canada by the extreme left, and (C) overall abject stupidity. He also (D) sounds like a communist. Reference.

---

---

• Search PTBC

Advanced Search

• CBC -related blog entries
• CBC reader comments of hate

---

• Syndicate

• Blackberries, mobiles etc.:
  http://ptbc.mobi/
• RSS 2.0
• Atom

      ProudToBeCanadian

Your right.

PTBC J-Log

A conservative OPINION blog --with bite. OPINION by Joel Johannesen.

Friday, February 29, 2008

Michelle Obama: “Leave corporate America!”

I love Fox News Channel (especially while I’m sick and need healthy brain food!) because they’re on America’s side and they actually cover the news without worrying about how it might embarrass liberals and reveal liberals for who they are.  This is unlike any other news channel, or, God knows, any television network in Canada. 

While discussing Barack Hussein Obama’s wife Michelle Obama’s latest indefensible statement, covered on FNC’s Your World with Neil Cavuto today (as usual, done with a guest representing the right—a normal free-market guy—and one from the left—a Democratic Party strategist who literally laughed in the background as the “right-wing” guy spoke), I had my above-left screen capture from that show up on my computer screen.

Everyone should work for the state!  She almost sounds like a Canadian liberal—or a Cuban.

It reminded me a little of the irony surrounding my previous blog entry on the far-leftist Avi Lewis, who seems to hate America and certainly free-market America, and who just made the switch from the state-owned, state-run media in Canada to the privately owned Al Jazeera.  It’s a move replete with irony.  A move—to the private sector—about which he is quoted as saying will give him the resources to expose America for all its faults in a way that would be impossible at the dumb old CBC.  (National Post reports: ”...Mr. Lewis lashed out at the CBC and praised the resource-rich work environment of Al Jazeera…” ... Lewis explained that his audience will “far exceed anything I would have had on my little show on CBC Newsworld…”).

Huh. 

Neil Cavuto’s substitute host squeezed in a tidbit about the fact that the Obama’s latest tax filing (which the Clintons have so far refused to reveal of themselves) reported earnings in 2007 of approximately $900,000.  Once again, that’s $900,000.  Michelle Obama herself makes over $120,000 per year.

 

 

 

Avi Lewis, who sounds very much like a Communist to me, quits CBC, joins….

...CTV?  No.
Global TV?  No.
CNN?  No.
NBC News?  No.
ABC News? No.
CBS News?  No.
New York Times? No.
Toronto Star?  No. 
Fox News Channel?  Oh my.  Despite my persistent flu, my innate comedy, why she makes my tummy hurt with the laughter.  (And: no.)

The CBC’s now former mouthpiece Avi Lewis, whose left and far-left wing Canadian lineage I famously described here, is joining the anti-American, anti-Western culture nutwork ...Al Jazeera.  [National Post article]

This could thus be seen as a horizontal move.  The apparently anti-American, leftist mouthpiece can be expected to regurgitate much the same anti-American material, just from a slightly different network.  (Mercifully, Al Jazeera isn’t broadcast in Canada, though they have been authorized to.) 

More organic Canadian humor cannot be found.  This is a gem.  Actually, it’s a joke that has been told before by me.  I blogged about another CBC “reporter” who left that network and made the horizontal move to…. Al Jazeera back in May 2006. 

I blogged about Lewis after an edition of another one of his failed CBC shows, “On the Map” (the map apparently referring to a region on Pluto), in which he interviewed the heroic Hirsi Ali.  The quiet, elegant Ali made an even bigger ass out of the evidently America-hating Lewis than I thought humanly possible.  In the interview, Lewis is persistent in his use of America-hating rhetoric, the degree to which is really quite astonishing, until you remember that you’re watching the state-owned, state-run CBC.  [Read my blog entry from back then.

|

Watch the YouTube video of the segment (it’s plain astonishing).]

The picture of Lewis at above right is captioned “The Root Of All Evil”, but inasmuch as it’s somewhat appropriate, it’s actually the CBC’s own somewhat ironic graphic, and it actually refers to a show he hosted on the state-owned, state-run media, about Christianity.  Thus, you see, the title “The Root Of All Evil”.  God love ‘em at the rabidly secular-progressive CBC. 

• Also read this blog entry regarding the hideous Avi Lewis

• And this one.

•  And this one.

•  SEE THIS DENNIS PRAGER** VIDEO IN WHICH HE SWATS LEWIS LIKE A BUG  | Part 2
(from Prager’s fantastic radio show)
** Please note that Dennis Prager—whom I consider one of my mentors, was a PTBC columnist for six months, before I decided I could no longer afford his column.  I would love to be able to afford his column again by way of folks supporting this site on a monthly basis.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Insurance experts: Can I get a $1-million life insurance policy while I’m on cancer death bed?

Insurance experts: Can I get a million dollar life insurance policy while I’m in the hospital facing death from cancer? 

Apparently the intrepid Canadian liberals’ news media is incapable of investigating this matter.

Thanks.

UPDATE
Now that all those lovely juicy allegations are out and have been thoroughly spread throughout the media, CTV Newsnet has managed—just this afternoon mind you—to report that an expert in the insurance industry says getting such an insurance policy is highly unlikely if not impossible. 

So glad they were able to contact someone in the insurance industry in such a timely manner.  I can’t figure out how they managed to get it so soon after writing and reporting the story all over the nation.

Apparently the CBC and other media are still working on contacting someone in the insurance industry. 

Obama warned Canadians: NAFTA attacks were merely “campaign rhetoric”?

Obama campaign implicated in pure bunkum play?  Playing Ohio voters for fools?  This should be the story of the presidential campaign month. 

Seems to me that if the CTV report is true, the fawning, adoring, beguiled Obama supporters the U.S. should snap out of their stupor.  They could add questions surrounding this, to the list of 8,000 that have purposely not been asked yet by the fawning, adoring beguiled liberal-left mainstream media, either there or here.

Hillary Clinton is implicated as well. 

Obama staffer gave warning of NAFTA rhetoric

Updated Wed. Feb. 27 2008 11:45 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Barack Obama has ratcheted up his attacks on NAFTA, but a senior member of his campaign team told a Canadian official not to take his criticisms seriously, CTV News has learned.

Both Obama and Hillary Clinton have been critical of the long-standing North American Free Trade Agreement over the course of the Democratic primaries, saying that the deal has cost U.S. workers’ jobs.

Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama’s campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada’s ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.

The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.

But Tuesday night in Ohio, where NAFTA is blamed for massive job losses, Obama said he would tell Canada and Mexico “that we will opt out unless we renegotiate the core labour and environmental standards.”

Late Wednesday, a spokesperson for the Obama campaign said the staff member’s warning to Wilson sounded implausible, but did not deny that contact had been made.

“Senator Obama does not make promises he doesn’t intend to keep,” the spokesperson said.

Where is the liberal media outrage?  For that matter, where in tarnation is the McCain campaign?  This could be the biggest hit in the campaign. 

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Budget 2008: conservatives might as well “pack up and go…” where?

Vancouver Sun columnist Harvey Enchin wins my award for the best lines of the 2008 federal budget analysis festival: 

“Mercifully, Flaherty further inoculated the country against the lunacy of the climate change zealots, led by the Suzuki Foundation, who demanded the government extract $50 billion to $100 billion a year from the economy to spend on—well, nothing. Prime Minister Stephen Harper may be one of the few politicians who realizes much of the climate change agenda is a disguised effort to subvert capitalist economies.”

Now, I’m not entirely sure that Prime Minister Harper has in fact been properly immunized from the (he described it spot-on) “disguised effort to subvert capitalist economies”, if his minister John (“Captain Climate”) Baird is any indication.  Baird’s incessant, breathless blathering about the evils of climate change (and he is one who seems as firmly entrenched in the hysterical “man made global warming” religious cult as any other environut) being the most important thing ever in our lives, ever ever ever, would be risible if not downright scary and so very appeasing to the far-left.  Nonetheless, this budget might have been the one, if ever there was to be one, which would have proven whether or not they’d all drank the Kool Aid over there at Conservative Party HQ.  And it appears they haven’t all.  (I still say they’re mixing it in with their beer and sipping it slowly…) 

And Mr. Enchin wins again, this time for this terse, pointed statement, which in fact seems to point me to the “exit” and directs me to go though it, as so often happens to us conservatives. 

“Proponents of smaller, simpler government may as well pack up and go home.”

As on much of the social side, even on the fiscal side we can see where this “conservative” government fails to make the grade insofar as being an actual conservative government.  With the rise in spending (yes, rise) still outstripping GDP and inflation (even after the previous two budgets already did so, and even more egregiously), this budget means still bigger government.  That’s right, to them, government still isn’t big enough yet.  They want more government.  They want it to be still more strident in its reach and its meddling in our lives.  It’s already in every facet of our homes and businesses.  But it’s not enough yet. 

And that is NOT a conservative ideal, policy, or platform.  It is purely liberal-left.  And yet I should pack up? 

I’m told all the time by liberals who email me that me and my ilk—conservative-thinking folks—have no place here in Canada—my home— and that I should pack up and move to Texas if I want to be a conservative and speak up about the value of being conservative.  (Or else just shut up, presumably, since free speech is reserved for “the right message”, apparently). 

And now I find that according to Mr. Enchin (who, by the way, is right at least in his assessment), if I want a properly fiscally conservative government, I should pack up and, well, “go home” (to I’m not sure where, but apparently I’m to accept that this isn’t my home anymore, as the state needs to spread its fat ugly naked body all over it).  That defeatist attitude isn’t for me, and I’ll just politely thank him and pass on it. 

People should stop telling me to pack up and leave.  I’m bored of it.  By the way it’s outright bigotry on the part of those pompously “tolerant” liberals who seem to actually want to invoke a sort of twist on ethnic cleansing of conservatives to take place in “their” country.  But I don’t really care what they think. 

I know how “politeness” is supposed to be such a grand and precious “Canadian Value”, but worse, simply being obedient and complacent and walking away or otherwise taking it, and obediently falling into the Fabian socialist trance successfully imposed on us by the liberal-left media, academia, the political elite, and through the thoroughly leftist-ensconced news and entertainment industry (which in Canada is partially state-owned and state-run),  is in fact, sadly, another “Canadian Value”.  But here’s an idea:  both of those values can pack-up and leave.  I’m not going anywhere.  The Fabian socialist model is not, in fact, what made Canada and the United States and other capitalist countries rich and powerful and great—it was and is in fact the exact opposite.  So it can pack-up and hop aboard the slow boat to China, Cuba or North Korea, or Hell, where it already resides.

Here’s what you can take home with you:  “Proponents of smaller, simpler government may as well pack up and go home.”  No no no.  I’m home.  Who invited the damn government into my home?  It can leave.  I’m staying.  This is my damn home. I’m the one who’s home.

Monday, February 25, 2008

Still sick—sick of blogging too….

I can’t shake this cold I’ve got, and even though I’ve been blogging a little in the past week, I can’t really do it right and I’m sick of trying. So instead of forcing myself to write coherent sentences in this blog, I’m going to look after myself until I’m better. 

I’ll write during the brief moments during the day and night when I feel OK.

Hey what are you looking for?

Lower taxes? Correct! 

...and then incorrect.  “Environmental initiatives”, which would in fact cause taxes to sky-rocket, are in any case not more important than “business incentives” (which again means lower taxes).  This second and third choice answer is an example of the compliant public obediently answering a question in the way they think they’re “supposed to” and as instructed by the liberal-left media and as informed by the current pop culture and the pop scientists like Suzuki, who together form a cabal of anti-capitalist and thoroughly misinformed and misinforming sycophants.  Thank you. 

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/ poll today

Saturday, February 23, 2008

PTBC adds Canadian abortion counter

People so enjoy my PTBC visitor-o-meter (it’s in the upper left) which displays in real time how many people have landed here at PTBC within the previous 10 minutes.  Well actually by “enjoy” I mean people who aren’t liberals enjoy it of course, since liberals are against that counter, largely on the basis that it always has such a remarkably high number. 

Therefore I’ve just added a real time abortion counter to the PTBC site right under the Dow Jones and Toronto stock market charts. 

Liberals will be against that too. But you see?  They’re against THAT.  And not abortion.  It’s hard being a liberal.

The socialists in Layton’s media-supported you’ve got to be kidding party will be against both the stock market charts and the abortion counter.  Well, those things and manifestly this entire web site.  So I guess they won’t be sending me any money to support this site.

The counter, which I had to hold myself back from calling “the Killometer” (based on another liberal program—the metric system)  counts up the number of abortions, minute by minute, since the beginning of the year.  I calculated it by dividing the number of abortions per year in Canada (I rounded it off to 100,000 but actually it’s more than that) by 365 days in the year (since I could find no reason why “healers” who “perform” abortions would care if they did them on Sundays, Christmas Day, Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, or Family Day, or any other day of the year).  And then divided that number (274) by the minutes per 24-hour day.  I applied those numbers to some PHP and JavaScript code and… Bob’s your uncle. 

Have a great day.

Artist kills herself after aborting her twins

It’s a story today in The Telegraph (London, U.K.) so sad that apparently no media outlet could bring themselves to pick the story up here.  The media here are very selective about what they cover, because they have only your interests at heart.  They know what you should know and what you shouldn’t. 

An artist killed herself after aborting her twins when she was eight weeks pregnant, leaving a note saying: “I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum.”

Emma Beck was found hanging at her home in Helston, Cornwall, on Feb 1 2007. She was declared dead early the following day - her 31st birthday.

Her suicide note read: “I told everyone I didn’t want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies: they need me, no-one else does.”...

Since this is day 54 of the year 2008, by day’s end, in Canada so far this year, 14,796 babies (that’s fourteen thousand seven hundred and ninety six) will have been aborted in Canada.  It goes on a a rate of 274 babies per day, every day.  That’s of course because liberals in Canada have decided—on your behalf—that free taxpayer-paid, unlimited abortions in our “health care” facilities, at any time in any pregnancy, for any reason or no reason at all, is a “Canadian Value”.  Once again that’s “Canadian Value”.  All the main political parties in Canada agree. 

As we in the sensible set all know, abortion is the most disgusting, most egregious thing ever thought of by humans.

Another great reason to buy American GM cars and trucks and SUVs

Finally a corporate leader who won’t cave and back down from his blasphemous anti-“man-made global warming” heresy? 

Buy GM! 

GM exec stands by calling global warming a “crock”

DETROIT (Reuters) - General Motors Corp Vice Chairman Bob Lutz has defended remarks he made dismissing global warming as a “total crock of s—-,” saying his views had no bearing on GM’s commitment to build environmentally friendly vehicles.

Lutz, GM’s outspoken product development chief, has been under fire from Internet bloggers since last month when he was quoted as making the remark to reporters in Texas.

I think they should name a car line after him.  Possible names:  the Lutz Realist GT, or Lutz Synapse A-OK, or the Lutz Precocity 4x4 wagon, the Lutz Acuity, or perhaps the sporty new Lutza Fortitude SUV. 

“My thoughts on what has or hasn’t been the cause of climate change have nothing to do with the decisions I make to advance the cause of General Motors,” he wrote.

Lutz said GM was continuing development of the battery-powered, plug-in Chevy Volt and other alternatives to traditional internal combustion engines.

GM is racing against Toyota Motor Corp to be first to market a plug-in hybrid car that can be recharged at a standard electric outlet.

For my part, I’ll never buy a Suzuki, just because the name has become a symbol of liberal-left fascist stupidity. 

The National Post’s Daily Hillarack for Saturday, February 23 2008

As you know I’ve been sick this past week, so I’ve missed some of the National Post’s Daily Hillaracks, but here’s some of today’s. 

The front page of the weekend National Post (at left) “defines” their The Great Obama with a headline reading, helpfully, “Defining Obama”. 

If my math is correct, this is the 847^th time they’ve “defined” Obama—each time as a modern man of impeccable clarity of thought and icon of change, and with an outstanding ability to stir up a crowd and attract the youth vote such that they all miraculously start to “believe” wherein they never done did that before and cause them to all obtain some ‘o that “hope” that their parents were incapable of instilling in them before… before The Great Obama stirred it up in them, God bless him, have a nice day. 

In juxtaposition, nobody in Canada ever knew who in tarnation that Mitt Romney fella from Massachusetts was, except that he was a Republican and Mormon.  (No not “moron”—that’s what they call Bush, silly!)

At left, inside their pages, a haYUGE picture of their Hillary The Magnificent, looking fabulous and, as usual, ever so excited and clappy, over the headline “Hillary has a Point”! (And hey look Betty, there’s The great Obama in the background!). 

Over to the right, the ubiquitous picture of The Great Obama looking awesome—what with those awesome lights behind him and shot from down at His feet in order to make him look like a towering figure of leadership and strength (even though he’s more a 139-pound womanly structure).  “Glare of the spotlight”!  Ooh!  I’m so damn excited.

And note that today, there is actually one photo and mention of Republican John McCain, for once, but it’s a teeny tiny one that I had to zoom-in on to actually identify, and note also that it’s an accompaniment to a little advisory headlined “YOUNG MAN’s GAME: McCain looking to defy trend and be oldest to take the Oval Office”.  Well then.  (Liberals care so much about “trends”.) 

 

By the way I enjoyed this daily Hillarack example from the National Post’s Wednesday edition, in which they featured their Hillary The Magnificent over their “WORLD” banner, looking like she’s spreading social programs in much the same way that a farmer spreads feed to his chickens. 

Friday, February 22, 2008

“Give it up for” Obama

Actually I’ve concluded that it’s more important that America and the swooning Canadian liberal set give up on Obama.

I’ve tried my hardest to get mesmerized by Barrack Hussein Obama and his speeches, as the liberals’ Canadian and American media is instructing me to do.  But actually the more I listen to him, the stupider I feel.  I don’t get inspired, I get repulsed.  I don’t feel “hope”—in fact I’m totally against “hope” now.  I don’t “believe in change”—if it means changing to his style of change.  I can’t stand his delivery.  It makes me cringe. 

He sounds like he’s trying to sound like an elixir of Martin Luther King Junior, a preacher at a southern black church, and Johnnie Cochran, only he says pretty much the exact same thing every single time.  As I listen, Cochran’s phrase “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” keeps running through my head.  I can’t shake it.

And the more I listen, trying my hardest to get past all that, the more ridiculous I realize he and his vacuous message are.  This whole Barrack Obama thang is working out about as well as that phony New York Times hit-job smear piece on John McCain story is for them and what’s left of their scant credibility. 

But the other day, while regurgitating his well-worn speech after his win in Wisconsin, he took the cake.  He started by recognizing some of the key people and groups who were in attendance at the big rally, and after listing them, requested that the crowd… and I quote… “give it up for them”. 

Again, that’s ”give it up for them”.

Yes sir, Mr. President!  Hey is that what he’s going to tell the American troops just before he pulls them out of Iraq?  OK troops, give it up for—and to—Osama, this be Prez Obama talkin’! What up?!

Just today, the swooning media played a clip of Obama groovin’ with the cats in a band at a concert at a Texas rally last night.  He dances like an old lady.  You know what that’s like—it’s pretty much just embarrassing to watch.  After groovin’ with them on stage, he exited the stage flashing the ever so cool El Diablo sign that all the cool cats (who are aged 14 through 21) do.  Actually, it was a double El Diablo—both hands—which makes him super dooper cool if I understand the kids correctly.

Another clip features him giving the cool knuckle bump to one of his peeps in the crowd.  He’s ever so groovy. 

How long before a President of the United States has a nipple piercing and a pierced eye brow? 

EXTRA:
The other day I mentioned how at just about every speech, it seems like a young girl situated in exactly row 6 of the crowded forum feints and Obama takes control, like only a strong Commander In Chief could.  I should have guessed that somebody else noticed that and made a video.  (I noticed he also says “Give it up for…” someone in that video:

 

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Nice anti-Italian(?) slam by “tolerant, multi-culti” Liberal MP

What’s with the Liberal MP’s slur (?) against a Canadian with an Italian name?  PTBC reader Lorna spotted this Canadian Press story yesterday, and says it stinks like a slur to her. 

Heritage Minister Josee Verner announced his appointment [Marc Patrone] as a full-time member of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission on Tuesday in a news release.

[...]

The Liberals immediately slammed the appointment.

“Is Patrone Italian for patronage?” said [Liberal Party MP] Michael Savage, who was slated to run against Patrone in 2005…

I wonder: if Patrone was gay, or Muslim, would the Liberal MP Savage ask whether Patrone was “gay for patronage”?  Or “Muslim for patronage”?

AND BY THE WAY: As I’ve said over and over, the idea that a Liberal would badger the Conservatives for “patronage appointments”, after having spent decades stacking the entire Canadians landscape with liberals and sundry leftists —from top to bottom, sea to sea, down our throats and up our butts—is absolutely hideous.  The story’s author doesn’t even inform us that Michael Savage is a Liberal Party MP, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that he wouldn’t bother to point out the fact that we’re now fully ensconced with patronage-appointed liberals in this country, in every facet of our lives.

Conservatives should firmly and publicly commit to hiring only conservatives to all federal positions including our courts, for approximately the next 20 years.  After that is accomplished, there will be somewhat of a balance between liberals and conservatives in the public service.  This would be a good, positive service to our nation. 

UPDATE: Apparently the Liberal MP Savage has already offered to apologize for making this remark, and the Conservative Party already took him to task for this—so I’m probably the 800th blogger to blog about this, and for that I sincerely apologize because that’s the last thing I want to do.  I’m still sick and haven’t had the time to devote to my blog as I should. 

...Dartmouth MP Mike Savage said Wednesday that he’s ready to apologize if he offended Italians with a comment he made about Marc Patrone on Tuesday. ... “Clearly there was no attempt to offend any community,” he said, “but on the other hand, if it did, then I would apologize unreservedly.”

—Halifax Chronicle Herald

(I note that the Chronicle Herald story repeats the interesting lack of information about Savage being a Liberal Party MP by simply omitting that information and describing only as “Dartmouth MP Mike Savage”.) 

 

“End Date” Idiocy

With the release today of the latest political “compromise” regarding the war in Afghanistan, it seems that alas, the Harper Conservatives have drank the Kool-Aid.  They’ve largely caved to liberal Canada and particularly to Liberal Frenchman Stephane Dion, and his Liberals, at least insofar as the main principles of that war and war in general. The plan now calls for our troops to withdraw from Kandahar in July 2011. 

We already know from our current experience that no other county is prepared to take our place when we leave the Kandahar war zone.  So what we’re actually saying is, We’re giving up.  Surrendering. Oh and just to be helpful, here’s the exact date.

Didja hear that, Taliban terrorists?  Al-Qaeda—you tuned in?  Despots and tin-pot dictators the world over, you watching CBC International?  Great.  OK.  (Sorry I couldn’t write this in Arabic!)

I’ve always said that the right way to go is to establish the “end date” as the date that the savage Islamofascist Taliban terrorists are completely crushed, and they surrender to us, and then an extra week later just to make our point.  Then leave with a huge flypast of about 60 brand new F-22 or F-35 fighter jets (we’ll have to borrow some from other nations as usual).  That’s the perfect date. 

You’ll notice, for example, that the Islamofascists have much the same date in mind—no end date per se.  “Death to America” is their “end date”.  (That’s supposed to be a clue, oh noble defenders of Canada and your trusty pollsters!)

Naturally, a war can’t be fought using phony arbitrary “deadlines” and “end dates”.  That’s something only idiots and modern liberal pantywaists do.  And yet here they are. 

Harper said it reflects the feeling of most Canadians that the military effort in Kandahar is “not open-ended.” 

Oh I see.  So Canadians (maybe) want to fight wars for a while, and even that is questionable, and then no matter if we’re winning or not, give up, and then come what may.  We’ll accept the consequences.  Communism, Islamofascist terrorism, radical fascist dictatorships, Sharia law, whatever.  Hey North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, and al-Qaeda, take notes!  We’ll only fight for a while, then quit.  It’s a “Canadian Value”. 

Apparently that “Canadian Value” is best described as we don’t much know or care what our “values” are, so it’ll be easy to switch to yours when you move in. 

The job of our nation’s leaders—all of them—and our media and academia and so on— is to explain to uninformed and ignorant Canadians that actually, in fact, our military effort in any war that we need to fight is exactly “open ended” by necessity.  We fight until we win.  Have a nice day. Add one ‘o them “eh”s at the end for that Canuck-y feel if you really have to. 

I don’t accept that Canadians are prepared to accept defeat.

Prime Minister Harper always rightly ends his speeches with “God Bless Canada”.  But just to get you used to the “open-ended” possibilities of this kind of arbitrary and symbolic surrender decision, let me end by saying “Allah Akbar!”

Politics genius Alec Baldwin endorses Obama

The far-left liberals can’t stop looking back, despite the millions they and their sugar daddy George Soros have invested in their MoveOn.org web site (and Media Matters and other online outposts) and despite that whole “progressive” moniker. 

Today, Alec Baldwin, terrible actor and Bush-hating liberal who fancies himself an astute political adviser of sorts (and apparently liberals all cling to every word on the basis that he’s an experienced Hollywood actor), once again writes in the far-left Huffington Post blog.  For reference, this is where the state-owned CBC seems to get so many of their guest “experts” (they get some of the rest from the even more radically left-wing Daily Kos). 

It’s another stellar endorsement for Barrack Hussein Obama instead of Hillary (Clinton—not Duff), but Baldwin can’t let go of the past while he’s at it:

Still not over 2000.  Huh.  That’s forward-looking.  Didn’t Baldwin get the “Change” memo?  And he does know that Bush isn’t running, yes?

I wouldn’t personally base my endorsement on Obama’s “foreign policy experience”, when his most famous foreign policy initiative so far has been to promise to unilaterally bomb Pakistan (for a “change”!) in order to kick al-Qaeda butt. 

On the other hand he also doesn’t bother to question what in tarnation Obama is talking about generally, in all those grandiose rhythmic speeches in which one young women faints exactly 6 rows dead-center in front of Obama nearly every time. Come to think of it, Obama’s speeches have much in common with Hollywood props and stage sets (and the all those stars themselves), so maybe it’s a feeling of familiarity that he’s looking for.  Hillary’s “tears” just weren’t up to his performance standard, which is saying a lot about those tears. 

For review, Baldwin is the tolerant, compassionate, nuanced liberal who once wrote (in that same Huffington Post blog that the CBC seems to love): 

• “Cheney is a terrorist. He terrorizes our enemies abroad and innocent citizens here at home indiscriminately.” 

(Notice how liberals are loathe to call actual terrorists “terrorists”, but have no problem calling President Bush or Dick Cheney a “terrorist”?  Similarly, the state-owned CBC calls the war on terror the “so-called war on terror”, but maybe they’re just making the point that it’s the wrong war —and we’re just fighting the wrong enemy!) 

He also said or wrote:

• (Eight days before President Bill Clinton was to be impeached, on national television, then later apologized): ”...if we were in another country… we would stone [Republican] Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families…” (—via Wikipedia)

• Called Sean Hannity (one of the most successful talk-radio hosts in decades and co-host of one of the most popular political discussion shows on cable news, and of course a conservative)... “a no-talent whore.”

• Screamed at his 12-year-old daughter on a cell phone for minutes on end, calling her a “rude, thoughtless little pig.”

...and so much more.  So that Obama has some solid support. 

I expect to see Alec Baldwin as a guest expert very soon on CBC Newsworld.  He’ll be asked to discuss John McCain of course, and perhaps about our liberal-left’s plans for state-run national daycare (and “early learning” —wink!) program. 

• Home
• J-Log
• Columnists
• PTBC Amazon Store
• PTBC Stuff
• About
• Contact
• Cashier