Topmost (in use)

Archive | Canada

Jail for man-buns, peeing in bushes, and assorted other crap for Friday, January 13, 2017

Since it’s Friday, here’s some assorted lighter stuff I found on the internet today:

1. Eureka. The only good use for man-buns has finally been found: jail.

Note that when we refer to “man-buns,” we use the term “man” very loosely.

2.  The liberals’ New York Times division continues the (seemingly coordinated amongst all the mainstream media) campaign against Donald Trump. A quick scan of their online page today gives you a clue:

… and on and on…

By the way, don’t you love how people who hate Trump (or any person in politics) derisively refer to him by his first name only? Way to go, “Paul.” You made your point, you hate President-elect Donald Trump. (Even more hateful and juvenile are those who contemptuously turn “Donald” into “Donny,” etc.)

3. Ready for a laugh? This. (Then they went on to discuss how and why Donald Trump is so awful.)

4. The greatest decision a government ever made:

Swiss town denies passport to Dutch vegan because she is ‘too annoying’

Nancy Holten, a Netherlands native who moved to Switzerland when she was 8 years old, has twice been denied a Swiss passport because locals don’t appreciate her animal rights campaigns, The Local reported.

… the residents didn’t want to grant the animal activist citizenship “if she annoys us and doesn’t respect our traditions.” …

And here we thought Europe was a lost cause.

5. We love Stacey Dash. And not just because she’s bright young conservative. Also because she’s conservative in Hollyweird, and proud of it. So you don’t see her being honored at the Golden Globes as much as the rest. Yeah. Ref sentence two and three. Also refer to your lectures from “liberals” about their great love of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

And given the above, the book she wrote is called “There Goes My Social Life: From Clueless to Conservative.” Conservatives get the joke. Liberals call her a bitch.

What caught our eye this morning was this headline: “EXCLUSIVE: Stacey Dash Says Transgender People Should Pee in Bushes, Claims Feminism Is Ruining Men

Watching the video of her saying that just about made me pee my pants. It’s replete with good quotes:

“Stop trying to be men. Let’s be women. And let’s let men be men.”

“I can look like I look and use all the tools in my toolbox, be a stay-at-home mother and a wife and be a feminist or be a CEO of a company and wear a dress and show my legs and whatever God gave me and be a feminist. I don’t have to dress like a man or try to beat a man or try and get a man’s job to be a feminist.”

You had us at “wear a dress and show my legs” and the yummy chaser, “whatever God gave me.”

In another article, headlined “Stacey Dash Regrets Voting For Obama ‘Because He Was Black’,” she says: “Obama had the opportunity to really unite this country in such a profound way, but instead he has done the opposite. We are so divided right now, everything has become about race, more than I’ve ever known in my lifetime.”  True.

In one of her own articles Dash chats about the recent Golden Globes and one starlet in particular, who preened down the red carpet adorned in a sexy dress with a classy button stuck on it which read “Fuck Paul Ryan.” Dash says, “In the name of feminism, she appeared with plenty of armpit hair to help accentuate her feelings toward Paul Ryan.” We saw it. It’s true. Aside from being a profane ass, the starlet (“An actress almost no one has heard of, Lola Kirke” — who is also totally unrecognizable to me) loaded up with armpit hair for the big occasion. In a previous Instagram post, that same feminist starlet, Lola Kirke, wore a tight white t-shirt emblazoned with: “pussy stronger than god.” (Caps are so uncool with the kool kid set).

6. Slightly related to #5: “Many children who are diagnosed as transgender may actually be autistic” and “Children who think they are transgender ‘could have autism’ and are ‘fixating’ on their sex, says expert.”  But good luck with all your social/sexual experiments on our kids, liberals.


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Meryl Streep Wins Annual Hollywood Leftist Politics Award Again

Yes the Snow Globes were on last night, and like most of the crap coming out of Hollywood, the results were totally self-serving, pedantic, banal and predictable. They hate Trump. And they think saying so is cutting edge and bold. Yeah.

“Powerful.” “Defiance.”

Or as @corrcomm said,

All the even more liberal/left and therefore sycophantic Canadian media thought the exact same as the liberal American media, which is also exactly as you’ve come to expect. So there’s literally nothing new here — let alone “newsworthy” (yet all the media are covering it like it were actually Tiananmen Square). To the Canadian media, Streep was not only front page news, she was “powerful” and “daring” and, as the Globe and Mail put it, she “raised the bar.”

What does a person have to do to lower the bar? I chimed in in amazement.

I’m so sure if, say, Sly Stallone or Vince Vaughn got up on stage and railed on and on about how good it was that America was finally over and done with Barack Obama, and listed some of his mistakes and failures, Hollywood and their sycophantic media would just charm all over them and how they’d “raised the bar.”


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Global News: left-wing biased or extremely lazy and misinformative. It’s one or the other.

I wrote a comment in an online “news” article written by Global News. Here’s what I wrote:

The journalist writes, “His comments prompted vitriol, and mockery, online:”

Hey Global News, did O’Reilly’s comments prompt any support, and compliments, online? Any at all? I ask because it’s important to show some semblance of journalistic balance, and tell the whole, true story.

Yes of course they did, as if I had to tell you. I saw dozens on Twitter alone. And they were from regular folks — not from the likes of one of your examples, whose twitter account bio reads: “African Descendant. Revolutionary Socialist.” Or another of your examples, a far-leftist who works for the huge far-left agitprop organization Media Matters for America, another Soros-funded anti-Fox News activist organization whose basic premise is that Fox News Channel is the very embodiment of evil, or something, and which spends most of its time and millions of dollars simply smearing Fox News. Another of your examples describes one of Trump’s advisors as a “Nazi” in one of his tweets, and calls the GOP “fascist” in another. In yet another, he wrote “Let those who have never thought ‘Wow, @realDonaldTrump really wants to f**k his daughter,’ cast the first stone.” (The asterisks are mine).

I also wonder why Global News didn’t include the whole O’Reilly talking points video instead of just their clipped version. The whole thing is only a few seconds longer and provides greater context. It’s at Bill O’Reilly’s web site and at Fox News for those of you who really want to be properly informed. Also worth noting that an extended conversation was had afterwards, with people from both sides of the political aisle.

So this is a blatantly biased and unfair “news” article written by someone whose Global News bio includes this: “She enjoys digging in to issues that matter…”  I really don’t see how that’s true.


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

The NDP’s #FakeGrassroots

The you’ve got to be kidding party has got to get the word “grassroots” straight in their heads.

Or maybe they think astroturf is organic. Or maybe they’re just full of it.

I’d love to be a fly on the wall wherein the hired (so, paid) organizers set up (or “grow”) what is clearly a fake “movement,” created by political marketing hacks, about one fake narrative or another (whichever one polls the best), and see how they dupe Canadians and the media into believing all their fakery as if it’s actual news rather than fake news.

Then again they call themselves “progressives” instead of socialists.


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

CTV licks Trudeau’s face, gets 90% backlash

I figure out of the 56 replies to to CTV’s facelick tweet (complete with the now ubiquitous media glam shot of their dream boy in the nicest pose they could possibly find), about 6 replies were right on board with CTV. The rest, 50 or so, were mocking the tweet, Trudeau, and sometimes CTV too.  That’s nearly 90%. Which makes me think if an election were held today, our boy might be sent back to drama class. Where he belongs, some would — and did — say.

If you thought, “Yeah actually, I’m concerned about Trudeau, not Trump,” you’d be just like me. A lot of them were like that:

Yeah most were like that. Trump and Trudeau don’t go together — not even like poo and pee…

And back out of the bathroom…

And perhaps the most poignant (their Twitter handle notwithstanding):

But then maybe we’re all wasting our time…

I guess we weren’t quite done with the poo.

 


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Trudeau Foundation-Gate

By the way, why is it not called Trudeau Foundation-Gate? I remember when in 2008 I wrote about the Liberals’ CBC division calling something “NAFTA-Gate” — on that sound, scientific, evidence-based and ever-so journalistic basis of: “because that’s what it’s called” (Don Newman, CBC, actual words).

In fact that CBC host was joined by a (now) CTV host in calling that something — which was something comparatively quite banal — “NAFTA-Gate” (Don Martin, CTV, actual words). That press gallery pundit/columnist/host stated at the time that by golly he “hated” calling it that, but, like, he had no choice. Journalism. (Also known as Ass.) For their part, the Globe & Mail also called it NAFTA-Gate, “as the issue has been dubbed.” (Dubbed by them. They’re just reporting. On what they decided to call it.)

I don’t even remember what “NAFTA-Gate” was about — just that it was about nothing. It was another bit of mainstream (and taxpayer-funded) media B.S., designed only to kill Conservatives politically. This Media-Gate corruption continues today.

Today, the media is bending over backwards to protect their boy, Justin Trudeau, and the Liberals. If they weren’t, this would be a scandal at least as big as “Hidden Agenda” (remember that cute pile of liberal media lies that lasted for years and years?), or “Sweater-Vest-Gate” (oh that was ugly).

But now we are barely told, much to most people’s surprise (because it was never made an issue much less a “-Gate”), that among the many other things that stink today in the Trudeau government (and it is increasingly a very smelly place), the Trudeau Foundation is not really a Trudeau foundation at all. Normally, a charitable foundation in the name of someone is started by that someone’s own money, or at least money which they were responsible for raising in the private sector. Otherwise it’s just a branch of government. I know all about this as I have been involved in just such a process.  Also, I’m not a lying liar.

(I hate to confuse you, but this latest scandal should not be confused with the Liberal Party Foundation-Gate, circa 2005 — and the use of “-Gate” here is all mine – duh).

Federal taxpayer funding of the Trudeau Foundation, when it started in 2002, came in at $125 MILLION — from the ridiculous Industry Canada branch (which itself sounds like some sort of Soviet-era central-planning politburo). Industry Canada has no business donating our cash, on our behalf, to a charitable foundation started in the name of, and designed to please the ideological desires of, left-wing politicians. Especially when it’s staffed by and run by those left-wing politicians (named Trudeau, among others who are their friends). Of course taking our money and then giving it out — even as charity — is not charity at all — it’s theft. (See this excellent video explaining that concept). And when it’s Liberal governments giving our cash to Liberal foundations run by their Liberal friends, well that’s just corrupt. And that’s yet another tawdry aspect to this.

Wikipedia describes what was then known as Industry Canada as “the department of the Government of Canada with a mandate of fostering a growing, competitive, knowledge-based Canadian economy” and it supposedly “works with Canadians throughout the economy, and in all parts of the country, to improve conditions for investment, improve Canada’s innovation performance, increase Canada’s share of global trade and build an efficient and competitive marketplace.” (Clearly a Wiki entry written by Industry Canada).

Incongruity alert: “efficient and competitive marketplace” and the Alt-Left Trudeau Liberals do not exactly go together like a hammer and sickle. An “efficient and competitive marketplace” and the left are literally at odds with each other.

Even if the government massively failed in its pretend efforts to create this fancy capitalist marketplace back in 2002, and we all let them get away with it and continue to today, Justin Trudeau is today doubling-down on the perfidy and has clearly — obviously — violated his own ethics guidelines (much vaunted by the media). And this, by his own admission. This would be like Bill Clinton finally admitting he DID have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky, and then the media clapping for him. The National Post (reluctantly, I think, because they called that nothingburger “NAFTA-Gate” too, back in ’08, but there’s nary a “gate” to be found today) writes it up today:

…Whether or not the foundation violates conflict-of-interest laws, its operations represent another challenge to the high ethical standard Trudeau has established for his government. The Open and Accountable Government guide, codified after Trudeau became prime minister in October 2015, specifies that when fundraising or dealing with lobbyists, “Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict of interest and situations that have the potential to involve conflicts of interest.” …

… The National Post’s analysis confirms about 40 per cent of 108 donors, directors and members of the foundation since 2014 — or one in six, if academic institutions are excluded — have affiliations with organizations that currently lobby the government, which could indeed create the perception of a conflict.

The NatPo calls Trudeau’s guidelines a “high ethical standard.” This is what the rest of us call “we’d be sentenced to a jail term in about 10 minutes if it were us.” The fact that Justin Trudeau has actually admitted — after first denying — to violating his guidelines (he DID have sex), should help you decide if there’s corruption here. In a separate article, columnist John Ivison says this about that:

During the press conference, he was asked if he had ever been approached about government policy at Liberal fundraisers.

He admitted he is lobbied at private cash-for-access events, but said that donors have no more influence or special access than other Canadians.

So like, I did have sex, but I did not have an orgasm. Or perhaps inserting a cigar in there is not sex. 

Liberal Party spokespeople have argued for weeks that no such lobbying takes place at these extremely lucrative fundraisers but they have now been contradicted by their own leader.

The matter might even veer into a breach of the criminal code, if the lobbying was not reported.

A blowjob is sex. And a “contradiction” in this case is lies and corruption; corporate elites and political elitists all working together with Liberals and Liberal governments — all to their own benefit, and lying about it. “Sunny ways” is apparently a euphemism for Liberals are in power, suckas.

The fact that this all sounds almost identical to the ongoing (and still under FBI criminal investigation — hint!) Hillary and Bill Clinton Foundation scandal — and how the American and Canadian media dealt (didn’t) with that — should get your attention.

There are so many “gates” here.

No wonder Trump won. A Trump should win here too.


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

“Those who dare to teach, must never cease to learn”

Socrates wrote my headline and I dared to use it because others could learn from it.

I mentioned in another article that the op-ed writers Derek H. Burney and Fen Osler Hampson were about to be on the receiving end of my latest didactic — simply on the basis that it was written by what I presumed (wrongly as it turned out) were more of those “Trump will never win” herd members. My prescription in that article was to fire all those hacks, simply because they obviously have utterly no idea what they’re talking about.

As I mentioned in the other article, I let these two off the hook, a little, because they were among the 14 other people in the world who cast aside all the mocking and pointing and laughter from their ever so learned associates, and predicted a Trump win — back in May 2016. “Brace yourselves: Trump is going to win” was their Globe & Mail op-ed headline. Amazing. Congrats. To be a Hillary Clinton “denier” at that newspaper is quite a heroic venture.

But with those niceties out of the way, let me go at ’em, if gently. Their Dec 8 2016 op-ed included this line:

Mr. Kissinger, a long-standing friend of the president-elect, met with Mr. Trump shortly after the Nov. 8 election. This speaks volumes about the new direction U.S. foreign policy will take.

There’s a good chance their previously demonstrated prescience could still be intact. But I think they lost it.

It’s like they were skipping class and not watching the media’s weeks-long, post-election Trump Tower Elevator-Cam, in which the CNN and MSNBC reporters and “experts” presumed to educate us, lecture us, and chin-wag about the various players entering and exiting the elevators, and then professorially pronouncing their smug prognostications — despite having proven themselves to be ill-equipped to prognosticate about Donald Trump or politics generally. Those media hacks didn’t learn their lesson at all whatsoever. But at least we could watch and learn with the volume turned down.

Kissinger’s visit “speaks volumes about the new direction” in much the same way that Trump meeting, as he did, with his opposite, Mitt Romney, speaks volumes. Or how meeting, as he did, with leftist man-made global warming zealot Al Gore speaks volumes; Also riding up the elevator just today was Hollywood leftist star and uber-hypocrite Leo DiCaprio, with whom Trump must have spoken very slowly — it speaks volumes about the direction Trump will take with the EPA (yeah, oops). Or meeting, as he did, with left-winger and failed Chicago mayor Rahm (sanctuary city) Emanuel speaks volumes about the direction Trump will take on criminal illegal aliens and sanctuary cities.

So they missed all that? That’s lousy research! They also wrote their assignment with faulty reasoning to back it up:

Mr. Trump clearly does not understand the importance of calibrating economic diplomacy with the United States’ broader strategic and security interests.

I think he understands all of that just fine, and what he has done so far proves that more than disproves it. But it kind of depends on your view and whether you’re willing to learn new ways of doing things. I got over the “new math,” and I’m sure other people can too. (Certainly not the Common Core math of the new progressive-age idiocy though).

But they seem to be stuck on their math, poorly conceived as it was:

Mr. Kissinger’s new student clearly still has much to learn about the finer points of realpolitik and the importance of deft, not unconventional, diplomacy.

But that’s illogical if not plain silly. “[T]he finer points of realpolitik and the importance of deft … diplomacy” is not incongruous with “unconventional.”  “Conventional” is what got us here. And “here” is this dreadful mess — all over the world and at home. Trump didn’t create this mess. Clinton and Obama and “conventional” did.

Not talking to the Taiwanese president on the ever-so sound scientific (but “conventional”) basis of “because that’s not what we do” — is what got us here. Signing crazy trade deals and even worse deals literally allowing Iran to build nuclear bombs, and paying them billions in unmarked bills to do it; and ignoring nuclear weapons currently being built by the socialist nutbars ruling over North Korea, etc. — is what got us here. If that’s “conventional,” I want none of it.

Or is it that Clinton and Obama knew just what they were doing, and we’re exactly where we want to be now? And that the 709th murder this year in Chicago– up almost 50% this year — and now more than in Iraq or Afghanistan — is exactly what the finer point or smart-take is these days?

Do we need to invoke the truly erudite Einstein quote about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

It’s Al Gore and Rahm Emanuel and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and most every Democrat and virtually every single person in the liberal mainstream media who are the students needing to learn a thing or two — from Donald Trump.

I think that’s the more reasonable, prescient view.

C-

 


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: ,

Posted under the categories(s): America, Canada, Joel Johannesen, World Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Coulter the laughing hyenas.

I keep reading all these mainstream media articles written by reporters and “experts” who all presume to know what will now happen in a Trump presidency. But I don’t understand why they’re even printed. They’re written by people who simply couldn’t be more wrong about these things — demonstrably so.

Why even keep them on staff? Why not fire them? I would. The media should try to retain some credibility. They won’t this way.

Theses people uniformly dismissed a Donald Trump win — out of hand. They laughed at it. Sneerred at it. Summarily abandoned or ignored even the possibility — first of him actually even entering the race, then under the Republican banner instead of Democrat, then winning that Republican race, then winning enough electoral college votes to win the presidency. “There’s no path to victory for Donald Trump” was the universal cry of all these geniuses — mostly with the sneering suffix “–Thank God” attached either literally or under their breath (as if these liberals suddenly revered God).

They wholly misunderstood the entire American electorate. Got it all wrong. Completely. So now we’re supposed to listen to them as they pontificate about the future Trump presidency?

You have to hand it to those who (yeah, like me), did not dismiss the possibility of a Trump presidency. Luckily, I only have to “hand it to” approximately 14 people aside from his earliest and bravest supporter, Ann Coulter (whose brilliant column I will never cease to mention was featured here for nine years).

I was about to totally lay into one Globe & Mail op-ed writer until I researched and found he and his writing partner were actually early Trump-winning advocates. So I decided to go ahead and hand it to them, and get that out of the way before I more gently lay into them (which I did separately, here).

Canadians and their government should nevertheless ready themselves for the possibility of a Trump presidency.

That was May 16, 2016, well before the Republican primary was even won, in a Globe and Mail column titled, “Brace yourselves: Trump is going to win.” It was written by co-op/ed writers Derek H. Burney and Fen Osler Hampson.  Note that the column was not supportive of a Trump win by any means. Quite the opposite. But still.

Including them, there were as I said 14 others who joined these two in predicting (or, as in their case, “warning”) that Trump might win. One web site from New Zealand attempted to list them — they got to ten — and included Derek H Burney but then called it a day without naming Ann Coulter, which renders that list stupid. I’ll give them credit for calling Michael Moore (yes, that one) “left-wing.” Here, they would maybe call him “progressive,” but more likely the anodyne “filmmaker.”

I want to make special mention of Ann Coulter, and not just because her column appeared here for nine years (did I mention that?) and I’m among her biggest fans (and she of mine, in my wildest dreams). The best example of the wrong-headed smugness with which liberals generally and #neverTrump-ers — but more importantly, mainstream media “experts” — can behave, is captured in this video from June 2015. In it, left-wing host Bill Maher, all his other panelists, and his left-wing audience, all laughed like hyenas at Ann as she predicted that Trump would — remember this is June 2015 — win the November 2016 election and become president.

That clip should be required watching for all mainstream media employees. All of them. And journalism students.

A few Democrats would profit from it as well, and certainly all the hideously smug Canadians — Conservatives included — would benefit enormously.

I think there should be a new word for the firing of these clearly wrong-about-everything hyenas. I’d like to suggest “Coultering.”


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , ,

Posted under the categories(s): America, Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Liberals staying in Big Gov Resort: so much government, so many regs, we need a “concierge”

It actually made me laugh. The big government stupidity, the big government solution, the glib nature of the big government presenting the supposed solution to it — all of it.

Even the media’s delivery of this news — in the National Post’s Financial Post section (ostensibly its business section) struck me as funny because it’s really a story about extreme government run amok — it’s not really about business. But cut them a break — they have no “Socialist Post” section.

“Ottawa to create one-stop hub for
international investment with $218 million price tag”

…During the Liberal government’s first year in office, Freeland [Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland, who also makes me laugh on her best days] said several investors have complained that it is too difficult to deal with multiple levels of government on different points of regulation or policy….

So there’s now so much government; so many levels and layers and so much regulation and policy nonsense, that the government needs another layer — another bureaucracy — a freaking “concierge” — just to help business people from abroad to sort through the muck that already exists? THAT’S the solution?

I suspect they’re only too well aware of the future they imagine, and are paving the way for even more layers of government, more regulations, more government writ large. They’re liberals.

Note that we the taxpayers will of course pay the (so-called) $218 MILLION price tag — which I guarantee you will rise to $650 MILLION in no time flat.

“What they have told us, is that it is quite hard to navigate the spaghetti of different federal government ministries, of what provinces and territories are doing, and what cities are doing,” Freeland said.

So the “concierge” is a spaghetti-eater or something. But comparing the myriad regulations and layers of government to “spaghetti” is like comparing horse shit to thin mints.

“What companies were looking for is a single-window approach. When I say concierge services, I mean someone who could guide them through all the things that are attractive about investing in Canada.”

Now it’s a “single window,” through which will be the bright shiny face of a handy spaghetti-eating “concierge.” But if mixed metaphors are the way to talk about this, then let’s just call it what it is: this idea is actually like “horse shit.”

The government wants to hire a CEO and to have the new federal agency up and running within one year. Besides hiring staff, the government still needs to work out how the new agency will work alongside existing foreign investment promotion operations set up by provinces and municipalities.

A CEO, and obviously other officers, staff — tons of staff — offices, pension plans, and all those other things that go with another layer of government; another bureaucracy; another expansion of government; another taxpayer bill to be paid.

And the story goes on, reading every bit like something in Pravda out of the old Soviet Union.

How about just reducing the complexity of this country for businesses, such that they don’t need a “concierge” just to sort through the crap? What? That’s too obvious? Too cost-effective? Too government-reducing? Too regulation-reducing? Too conservative? Yeah. Too bad. Because now we all have to pay another $218 MILLION (or more like $650 MILLION) to get them out of their crap pile.

It’s because they’re liberals, and it’s liberals’ ideology to grow government instead of reducing it. Growing government is obviously at least as important to them as growing business. And businesses will check out of that resort right quick.


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Canadian TV’s All-American Ratings for Dec 1 2016: Where’s the State-Owned CBC?

I used to present these charts or lists all the time, but I haven’t for a long time. It’s English Canada’s TV viewing habits in a snapshot.

This is the Canadian (english-language) viewership ranked from number 1 to 30 for the week of November 14 to November 20, 2016.*

1 BIG BANG THEORY – CTV
2 BULL – Global
3 NCIS – Global
4 SURV:MILLEN VS GEN X – Global
4 DESIGNATED SURVIVOR – CTV
6 CRIMINAL MINDS – CTV
7 LUCIFER – CTV
8 GREY’S ANATOMY – CTV
9 HAWAII FIVE-O – Global
10 HNIC PRIME EAST – CBC
11 NCIS: LOS ANGELES – Global
12 THIS IS US – CTV
13 CTV EVENING NEWS – CTV
14 MACGYVER – Global
15 AMER. MUSIC AWARDS – CTV
16 BLUE BLOODS – CTV
17 MURDOCH MYSTERIES – CBC
18 CHICAGO PD – Global
19 THE FLASH – CTV
20 CHICAGO FIRE – Global
21 MADAM SECRETARY – Global
22 BLINDSPOT – CTV
23 CONVICTION – CTV
24 TIMELESS – Global
25 HOW TO GET AWAY/MURD – CTV
26 CTV EVENING NEWS WKD – CTV
27 GOTHAM – CTV
28 BIG BANG THEORY(RERUNS) – CTV
29 DAVID BLAINE – CTV
30 CFL PLAYOFFS – TSN+

As you can see, the state-owned media is almost utterly ignored by most Canadians. Just why it is that so many Canadians insist on paying for it anyway — is beyond me. Logic flies out the window on this one.

The CBC pops up on line number 10 but it’s a hockey game. You can make your own mind up as to whether we need to provide $1.5 BILLION per year to the state-owned CBC in order to broadcast hockey games. Others can do it just as well or better I think.

If there were no hockey game, the CBC would have to wait until you got down to line 17 with MURDOCH MYSTERIES. That’s a show which started on Rogers’ CITY channels, and was later picked up by the state-owned CBC to run in competition against citizen-owned CTV, Global and the others. The CBC did not create this show, they merely pay for the right to broadcast it, just as the other Canadian channels all routinely do — and did — to get onto this ranking list. But of course the private companies did it with their own money rather than with taxpayer cash.

So also note that almost every single show on the list is an American-based and American-created show, which Canadian channels buy. Canadian news does rank in the top 30, and the CFL playoffs sneaked in at number 30. Apparently I was right when at age 14 I figured out that the state cannot social-engineer a state-sanctioned “Canadian culture,” and that it’s actually something that evolves organically — and among the people individually, rather than from the government down to the masses.

It’s not that there aren’t Canadian shows out there. There are. It’s just that nobody watches them. Here’s a personal anecdotal tidbit: Corner Gas (CTV) was a good show until the star, Brent Butt, who I used to think was funny, started seriously slamming religion — all religion generally — on Twitter, in light of the radical Islamist jihadist terrorist attacks in Kenya. He used the hashtag “#yayreligion”. Brent Butt tars Christians with the exact same brush as radical Islamic terrorists, so I stopped watching his show. His show is cancelled now but is in reruns still. I won’t watch it. I watched Corner Gas and those sorts of shows — like NFL football (Go Seahawks!… unless you go all “Black Lives Matter” on me before every game), to get away from left-wing politics. I think a lot of people do, which might help explain the CBC’s dismal ratings.

Finally, note that the CBC News is not on the list. Canadians prefer the privately-owned CTV News by a huge margin. I call CTV “Liberalvision.” The CBC is even further left. I think I’ll call them “Alt-Left.” I think that may be why nobody watches CBC News. I’m surprised Global doesn’t show any news presence here. Global might want to try a conservative-tolerant model, which seems to appeal to Americans — if Fox News Channel’s #1 ratings are any indication and I think it is. For years, FNC almost constantly beats CNN and the far-left MSNBC by double their numbers – combined. Sometimes, they have ranked as the number one cable channel period — not just cable news, all of cable.

The list goes as far as 30 and CBC News is obviously somewhere below that rank. It could be number 31 or 81 — I don’t know. But if they can’t ever crack the top 30, it seems quitting the news business might be the best option for the state-owned media, strictly from a financial standpoint, as the network news business is extremely expensive, and they’ve obviously utterly failed after all these many years and countless billions in taxpayer dollars. I guess you could and should say the same for the rest of their network. They’ve clearly failed. And there are other reasons aside from the purely financial for the state to remove itself from news and politics and entertainment which always skew left or far left — “Alt-Left” as I now call it. For example, the state shouldn’t compete against its own citizens in business for profit and their livelihood and that of their family. There are other examples.

* Information courtesy of Numeris


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, CBC, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

The CBC explained, for you wretches and cranks.

So much CBC nuttery.

The Globe & Mail’s guy who sits on the couch all day and watches TV — mostly CBC, if we are to take him at his word about the importance of it to humankind, preaches the same old CBC line. Yes it’s a repeat.

It’s time for another episode of  “Canadians Are Rightly Questioning Having a State-Owned Taxpayer-Funded Media Behemoth Like the CBC, and are Getting Slammed as Wretched Cranks in the National Media for Doing So.”  It’s a sitcom in the North Korean genre.

The ideas about the CBC being put forth by Conservative leadership candidates Kellie Leitch (whose model I agree with) and Maxime Bernier, are summarily deemed by the Globe & Mail’s official expert to be “horse manure” — insulting and yet queerly anodyne language he might have picked up on CBC TV in the late 1950s.

But to Doyle, it’s “horse manure,” in exactly the same way as “the screening-immigrants thing” is. Which pretty much proves he’s a CBC watcher. His whole column mixes his alt-left politics and his loved for the state-owned media. Just like the CBC does! No wonder he loves it.

Alt-left aside for a moment, why such language restraint? On the hipster state-owned CBC they go right ahead and say “shit” anytime they want. Does Doyle not get that their sitcom “Schitt’s Creek” is an ever-so folksy play on the word Shit? And the libertine envelope-pushing goes on and on at the CBC all day long: they don’t shy away from showing full frontal nudity and showing videos about waxing one’s balls (yeah I mean young men’s testicles) and pickles coming out of a girl’s ass. Talk about shit!

All of that CBC fare on the state-owned media is just fine with Doyle — it’s Leitch’s position on the CBC that he finds “shameful and an embarrassment” — missing the irony completely, possibly because he’s clueless.

Leitch and Bernier are clueless. Television is the most important, influential storytelling medium of our time.

Huh? I don’t think Leitch or Bernier want to cancel television. This is like trying to argue the importance of toe jam by stating as your opening premise the ever so controversial argument that the human body is the most important and influential toe jam medium of our existence. We don’t want to eliminate human bodies. It’s the confounded toe jam that concerns us. Nobody likes it.

During his post-U.S. election hangover, Doyle reported on November 9 that nobody was watching the CBC:

Meanwhile, over on CBC, Peter Mansbridge was dozily complimenting Adrienne Arsenault on the trees near the White House that acted as a backdrop to her report. Not that anyone cared about CBC coverage.

It may also be worth mentioning that the CBC isn’t just the toe jam of television — it’s also all over the radio, satellite radio, and all over the internet.

Doyle seems to suddenly remember we’re only talking about cutting the CBC and not all of television, and then becomes unhinged (my bolding):

The idea that CBC television and radio is a frivolity, sucking up vast amounts of money to make bad TV and irrelevant radio, is the position of a small number of well-off cranks in Toronto and Montreal, aided by a number of other cranks who, one imagines, stave off personal wretchedness by ceaselessly pointing out that the CBC gets funding to make TV and radio, while they don’t.

Well that turned ugly quickly. So guess what, we’re all just a goddamn basket of… cranks, who are all trying to “stave off [our] personal wretchedness.” There goes his language restraint. Let me be an “important storytelling medium” for you:

wretchedness

wretch·ed (rĕch′ĭd)

adj. wretch·ed·er, wretch·ed·est
1. In a deplorable state of distress or misfortune; miserable: “the wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages” (George Orwell).
2. Characterized by or attended with misery or woe: a wretched life.
3. Of a poor or mean character; dismal: a wretched building.
4. Contemptible; despicable: wretched treatment of the patients.
5. Of very inferior quality: wretched prose.

[Middle English wrecched, from wrecche, wretch; see wretch.]

wretch′ed·ly adv.
wretch′ed·ness n.

Move over Hillary Clinton, you’ve been trumped — pun intended — by an even bigger, more insulting, more out of touch, elitist, bigoted ass than you. And like you, he’s the opposite of Donald Trump. Hilariously, it’s John Doyle, in his other capacity as a smug, condescending left-wing political guru, who advises — as if in Bizarro World — to all the misguided, unlike him:

If they’d all paid attention to the reality-TV dynamic used by Donald Trump to win an election, they might not have woken up one recent morning in puzzlement about how and why Trump was the president-elect.

Right back atcha. I wasn’t in puzzlement, I was still drunk with happiness. But then I don’t watch the CBC if at all possible, and I do watch Fox News Channel, so that might explain that.

The John Doyles of the world are people in a liberal-left bubble so tight they have no idea that this following bit makes no sense to most Canadians:

Understanding it and why it has impact is rather necessary information to have, prior to denouncing any area of it. In the specific matter of CBC TV, to cite one example, Kim’s Convenience is not forgettable, irrelevant, or badly made; nor is it, in Bernier’s phrase, an example of “bad Canadian copies of popular American shows.”

What’s “Kim’s Convenience?” The basic proposition about being “forgettable” is that you know what the thing is in the first place.

I had to look it up. Kim’s Convenience is a CBC TV show (also on the state’s YouTube Channel). It’s another vital sitcom. (Thank you benevolent government for the vital state laughs!)  It’s the story of the Kims, a Korean-Canadian family, running a convenience store in downtown Toronto.

Episode #1: entitled “Gay Discount.”
Description: “after being accused of homophobia, Appa decides to offer a store discount to gay customers during Toronto Pride Week.”

[Fake shockface]

Of course you deplorables hicks in the small towns outside of the enlightened Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal is who this is really for. And you love it so, so much. To wit:

Outside of Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal, the CBC is a vital presence, providing local coverage and Canadian content, which, though diminished, is vastly appreciated by residents of cities big and small and in rural areas.

Except that it isn’t. Reason number 146 for nixing the state-owned CBC is: “Nobody watches the CBC.” (146-B: “Root cause: Because it’s horse manure”).

Doyle’s bottom line:

Dismantle it or reduce it to the begging-bowl status of PBS and all of that is gone.

All of what?

But Doyle explains it so well here:

You have to live in the bubble of the well-off establishment to be blind to the CBC’s importance.

So I’m part of the well-off establishment. I did not know that. Actually, it’s struggling taxpayers who fail to see why we should fund something so irrelevant. I’d say nice try, but it wasn’t even.

Doyle’s own bottom line about the CBC came directly out of his bottom. By which I mean it’s full of shit. Human shit. This I learned by watching other channels and having a clue.

 

State-owned media — and all state-owned business in which the state competes against its own citizens — should be banned in this country, and that notion should be enshrined in the constitution. 


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, CBC, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Globe & Mail columnist suddenly realizes that CBC is an existential threat to his employer… and him. Then goes back to sleep.

Hey remember that state-owned, socialism-reliant CBC that I’ve been writing negatively about for a decade and a half, here? And remember how I repeatedly write that the CBC is literally the state competing against its own citizens?

Well don’t worry, the Globe & Mail’s on the case today. After 65 years. They should call themselves an oldnewspaper.

Actually it’s not even the Globe & Mail itself that has awoken from its CBC-luvin’ stupor, but at least they allowed a columnist to go off the reservation for five minutes. Today Konrad Yakabuski chimes in on the socialist lunacy that is the state-owned CBC (he calls it neither socialist nor lunacy nor even state-owned, of course, proving he’s got a mile to go yet). Here’s his big breaking news (by which we mean news to him):

… Ottawa is pumping an additional $675-million into the CBC at the very moment the country’s leading private media outlets are struggling to stay afloat amid fragmenting audiences and advertising dollars. Something about this picture just isn’t right. …

You don’t say. And actually, you all didn’t say anything, for 65 years. In fact quite the contrary.  Here’s what Yakabuski wrote exactly a year ago, regarding how the appointment of Mélanie Joly as the new Liberal government’s minister in charge of the CBC felt, to him:

It also felt like glasnost at a public broadcaster that had spent a decade under the thumb of an oppressive Conservative gulag.

The irony (to say nothing of the insult) of referring to glasnost and “gulag” in connection with Conservatives and the state-owned media — seems lost on Yakabuski. The Gulag was the former Soviet Union’s agency that managed forced labour camps during the reign of the socialist/communist mass murderer and dictator Joseph Stalin, until the 1950s. Stalin also ran the state media. He wasn’t really known to be that fiscally conservative actually, and didn’t fancy capitalism and private enterprise much at all. He’d have loved the CBC as much as today’s Liberals do, although he’d likely have hacked their idiotic budget way back.

Spring 2006 CBC - 66 - Harper - Heil

The CBC broadcast this bumper image during its pre-2006 election newscast, causing an uproar, later writing to a concerned citizen that all the uproar was caused merely “by the website ProudToBeCanadian”

But you know, with these people, the “oppressive” conservatives are either running a gulag, or we’re Nazis.

But the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its gulags and state-owned media having been mercifully rendered a shitstain on world history, let’s go back to today’s Yakabuski column:

“We don’t think that we compete,” CBC/Radio-Canada president Hubert Lacroix insisted, incredulously, before the House of Commons Heritage committee last month. “There is nothing in the [Broadcasting Act] or in our mandate that prevents us from delivering these services to Canadians in the most effective way – on the contrary.”

So change the mandate. The latter currently does not explicitly prevent the CBC from competing with private media. It should.

So change the mandate you say? Stop it from competing with private media? That’s hilarious. Why now, suddenly, comrade?

… Canadians do not watch them, forcing an already bloated CBC to seek advertising revenue elsewhere.

Hence, the CBC’s push into digital opinion content. Compared to dramatic programming, this is a low-cost venture that might actually turn a profit – and kill off a few already dying newspapers in the process.

Well now they’ve gone too far! Get me one o’ them “neo-cons” on the horn! 

Yakabuski seems to have suddenly realized that the ever-growing, socialism-reliant CBC is just being progressive — and thus the creeping socialist giant is now threatening him personally, or professionally, more and more. This is as it is supposed to be. Yakabuski is starting to “feel the Bern!” from a state-owned “business” competing against him and his livelihood — much as we’ve warned for nearly 20 years — and he doesn’t like it. Boo hoo.

He’s all about reigning in that CBC now.

Instead of using the cash infusion from taxpayers to improve core services, particularly regional news operations, the CBC is using some of the money to expand its digital footprint into yet more areas where it competes directly with private media for the same advertising dollars.

Oh I’m in tears for him. Tears of laughter.

CBC ad in National Post

The CBC advertises a lot. They really want to get their messaging out.

Forget ad revenue. Yakabuski doesn’t mention the CBC also competing for attention to its left-wing messaging, as the CBC spends money (ours) and advertises itself all over every type of media simply to try to get you to pay attention to them instead of any of the competition. That is another another missed clue.

I’ll give Yakabuski some credit: Today he is all concerned ‘n stuff, because of the public interest, see.

But if a bigger, more predatory CBC only kills off private competitors, how does that serve the public interest?

Yeah. Exactly the point we’ve been making — but you haven’t — for like 20 years. Too bad you didn’t spend more time reading ProudToBeCanadian.ca instead of watching inane CBC “comedy” fare and giving the CBC a pass (or worse) all these years. Forgive us if we don’t think you really give a hoot about “The public interest” vis-a-vis the CBC.

Purolator-state-ownedHey here’s some more breaking public interest news: For the past 24 years, the state-owned Canada Post has owned one of Canada’s largest courier companies, Purolator Couriers, which competes directly against all the private citizen-owned companies. As we’ve been telling you. You could use all of the same arguments about that abomination as you could for the CBC abomination — even invoking your grand “public interest” canard.

So break your own apparent mandate. Write-up a breaking news column decrying the state-owned Canada Post owning Purolator. Include your laments about all the dozens of other market and career and business-wrecking state-owned “businesses”.  Yeah we know they don’t affect your livelihood directly like the CBC does, so do it because that would actually be in the public interest.

Yakabuski’s column, entitled “The CBC has lost its way,” is ironic if nothing else. The CBC is growing exactly as it has been for 65 years. The only people who are lost are those who are just now realizing the damage that has been done and is continuing to be done –when the state competes against its own citizens.

UPDATE:

 


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, CBC, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

Fidel Castro is dead! Trump/Trudeau: a contrast between the Real, and the Farce.

First let me express my deep delight that the evil, murderous, socialist dictator Fidel Castro is dead. Most sensible people feel the same way — all around the world.

Not here at home though. Our leader, the Liberal-leftist Justin Trudeau, has made a mockery of us. Rather that deep delight, he feels “deep sorrow.”

“It is with deep sorrow that I learned today of the death of Cuba’s longest serving President.”

Longest serving. Sheesh. Castro made political opposition parties illegal, genius. Or as I tweeted this morning:

My favorite tweet of the day so far comes from Donald Trump, who has a better, clearer, less adoring take on the death of the evil murderous communist dictator:

He actually followed that up with a statement which was far more wordy and statesmanlike, while also being real. 

He feels no “deep sorrow” because he’s not actually a farce. Obama, meanwhile, was more in the Trudeau style, deeply saddened by the passing of that communist ass, but not nearly as loving, and sickeningly anodyne.

Americans chimed in on Trudeau’s idiocy as well:

But Castro’s fellow socialists in Canada are in deep despair. Take this NDP MP from Vancouver — and this is not a parody Twitter account:

“Justice.” For goodness sake. “Monumental vision.” “Courage.”

That man must be a communist.

ProudToBeCanadian?


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , , ,

Posted under the categories(s): America, Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

There’s “fake news” and there’s this: liberal media takes a poll for fake reasons.

I’ve said this roughly 8,000 times, but like liberals everywhere in Canada, the very liberal Liberal government in Victoria BC loves state-owned, state-run “businesses.” They won’t pay attention to this media poll or any poll that tells them the people think differently.ckwx-news-1130-icbc-poll-2016-11-25_135546

The news radio station is asking because there’s reports of the state-owned car insurer, ICBC, seemingly in a death spiral not unlike Obamacare, and of its need for huge rate increases (also not unlike Obamacare) — and even getting out of insuring ultra-expensive cars because they’re too expensive to fix (sort of a death panel for cars — honk honk!).

They post this poll, but the media — especially the state-owned CBC — certainly doesn’t dislike any state-owned “businesses.” They’d vote “no” in their poll. They do a poll like this as a newsy item, and then summarily drop the subject — especially if the results are like this one. For example, there’s no follow-up article about their poll results at the time of this writing.

Even if their audience does, as we can see here, the media virtually never question the validity of any of the growing list of the liberals’ beloved state-owned “businesses”: media (CBC), car insurance (ICBC — with its optional towing package!), a huge lottery and gambling racket (BC Lottery Corporation, and the website PlayNow.com, where you can literally bet against Donald Trump winning the election, for example), a nautical Ferry service (BC Ferries, which also operates vacation cruises for tourists), utility businesses (BC Hydro, etc), housing (yup), Soviet-style liquor stores with all the inventory decisions made at state level by government apparatchiks, state-owned and operated health care; and as you all know, much, much more — and all this in a supposedly free and democratic society.

The media refers to these state-owned businesses in exactly the same way they refer to, say, Walmart — like just another “corporation.” Except they love the state-owned ones and hate Walmart. (See my “Media join progressive gov in faking-out citizens; call state agencies “corporations”“).

So yeah, polling like this is clickbait. This is pablum. A sop. A joke on us, really.

 How does this farce happen?

There isn’t one conservative or even a conservative-tolerant mainstream media outlet in BC, so 99% of the people have no idea what it is to be conservative, or what conservative ideology is. People in BC watch CNN and MSNBC in addition to the state-owned CBC news channels. They think the “corporate” media — as opposed to state-owned media — is right-wing. They think Fox News Channel is anchored by Nazis.

People in BC (as in much of Canada) think Liberals are right-wing, and the socialist NDP is merely “center, or maybe left of center” (or “centre” as they usually spell it — Euro-style). They automatically then refer to Conservatives as “extreme” right wing.

Academia is now totally ensconced by liberals and leftists from top to bottom, and the education system is virtually run by and for the extreme left-wing — possibly Marxist — BC teachers’ union. The taxpayers only fund it.

Show people in BC — especially the millennials — a photo of an Islamist terrorist and one of George Bush, and ask them who the terrorist is, and they’ll point to George Bush. They think Donald Trump is worse than Hitler (they also think that about George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney, and most every Republican). You’re ridiculed in BC if you vote conservative — or favor a Republican candidate.

The only reason people in BC (sometimes) vote for the Liberals instead of the even more socialist NDP is because there may be slightly less socialism under the Liberals (but not much less), and while the progressive sheeple of BC certainly don’t want freedom or free enterprise or capitalism, they do want just slightly less socialism than the NDP would foist on us. At least that’s how it is right now. There’s an election next year and the NDP is high in the polls. Progressive is what progressives are all about, so in a few years, it is possible for BC to be a full-on socialist enclave (or “democratic” as the progressives call it with a straight face.)

Given the circumstances for which they are partly to blame, it’s virtually impossible for the BC Conservative Party to get anything like a foothold in BC at this time.

So it’s easy to see why the sheeple of BC all vote left. Despite polls like this.

 


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone ** Posted under the categories(s): BC, Canada, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

State-owned CBC NEWS tips readers to virulently anti-Trump OPINION piece — at their NEWS site. (Again).

 

CBC News (@CBCNewsBC) tweeted this out, this morning:

Note that it was CBC News (@CBCnewsBC) that tweeted the link to their article. The article began like this:

Donald Trump’s victory was the most dramatic demonstration yet that liars can win elections. All he had to do was demonize reason and fact as the province of hated “elites.”

This is scary, for all countries and for reasons beyond the frightening contents of the Trump platform itself.

It’s an opinion piece. It’s not a news story. But I do understand your confusion given it’s from the CBC News. So do they. They know exactly what they’re doing. They were trying to confuse you. Have you heard the term “Rick-rolled?” It’s a lie, really, but in this case an especially egregious one because it’s the state-owned media who’s doing it to its citizens. It’s either that or they’re all utterly bereft of any understanding about what real fair and balanced and honest journalism is, which after all the money we’ve given up to them, they should better understand by now, don’t you think?

For all the writer’s haughty talk of Trump’s “lies,” it’s a tad ironic isn’t it?

Oh and why does state-owned media even have political opinion pieces — especially when they’re almost universally left-wing opinions? Who knows?! That’s the only thing I find “scary” and “frightening,” to use the writer’s own words about Trump.

Anyway, it’s written by someone (Kate Heartfield — “for CBC News,” mind you) who is apparently (to me, anyway) a Trump hater. Read on, and you’ll find she’s just as suspicious of Canadian Conservatives too, warning them and all of us, thusly:

Perhaps there’s a way for the Conservatives to honour both head and heart – to appeal to values without abandoning reason and embracing bigotry. The Conservatives can say “no” to a lazy dependence on slogans, on the nearest convenient enemy – a dependence they know full well encourages racism, sexism, anti-Semitism and homophobia. They can try to come up with a less destructive appeal to “common sense.”

Sounds like the “Basket of Deplorables” crap all over again. I’m quite sure the state-owned CBC would adore the moniker “Basket of Deplorables – North.”

But back to the bigger point, which is that the deplorable CBC and its left-wing opinion contributors might want to summon-up a modicum of honesty and at least take a cue from their bible, the New York Times, who, even though they likewise lie all day long in their reporting and columns and op-eds, do try to sometimes differentiate their opinion pieces from the news with a separate Twitter OPINION account.  Here’s an example wherein they smear Trump, as usual, because that’s all they do, but at least they’re not trying to fake you out like the CBC:

With that, we have no trouble understanding it’s more anti-Trump whiney-crap bloviating — and go ahead and avoid it. Again I do understand your confusion when reading anything from the left-wing media today, inasmuch as it’s mostly lies and left-wing bias whether contained within their “news” stories or opinions.

State-owned media should be banned in this country, and that notion should be enshrined in our constitution. That’s truth.

cbc-opinion-posing-as-news-2016-11-25_125219


Contact the Editor: Joel Johannesen
**Link to this article alone **

Tags: , ,

Posted under the categories(s): Canada, CBC, Joel Johannesen Joel Johannesen on TwitterFollow Joel Johannesen on Twitter

"ProudToBeCanadian."
It's a question.