Topmost (in use)

Tag Archives | liberal lies

A media Hell bent on not reading things right

Last night the financial market elites (not individual folks) freaked out when they figured out their media got it all wrong, and Donald Trump was going to win. The cool kids were anti-Trump, because they watch CNN (or worse). The stock market futures markets were tanking. The liberal news media reported the crap out of it, feeding the fear and making it worse (which they constantly deny doing, but that’s another lie and a story for another article).

So financial channel CNBC chimed in this morning with this great investment advice:

They weren’t the only ones. Lots of media reported on the inevitable collapse of the markets — due to “Trump.” Based on nothing. I think they just hoped it was true, for purely political reasons. It’s a bandwagon effect in action, and at its worst. Here’s the state-owned CBC’s effort at left-splaining financial markets (always gives me a chuckle). Note the photo of the guy looking like he’s about to jump out the window — which is so stupid given the Liberals’ new assisted suicide endorsement:

So today it must have been much like a miserable dose of déjà vu — like watching the election results on MSNBC last night — as the market today opened steady, then rose, then went higher, then went higher, then broke the record high, and then finally closed way up.

The CBC account which tried to freak us out earlier in the day, never bothered to cover the rise in the markets — not even the rise in the Toronto market which was as great.

I feel sorry for the folks who freaked out, were concerned and mislead, or even lost their shirts simply because so many liberals chose to toe to the liberal propaganda line rather than appealing to common sense and reason, and facts, enabling them to offer good, sound advice.

UPDATE: A late addition to my observations:

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

Tags: , , ,

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

Morning in America

Good morning — or as one of the 8000 liberal media pundits put it, “When the Apocalypse came at midnight, I called my conservative brother to see what was going on.”

First, I’m impressed by the fact that when the apocalypse came (it didn’t), that particular liberal (yes of course, it’s a new York York Times columnist) relied on a conservative to help her sort it all out during the end of times (which never came). That tell us tons. So thanks for that.

Secondly, there’s no late word on where the “apocalypse” stands at this moment. Things seem fine, and nobody on CNN is doing any street-level “apocalypse-watch” reporting, holding crosses (as if). At least they’re not showing us any of those reports yet. So clearly that was really just more of the banal sort of bombast and nonsense that they constantly bashed Trump for uttering during the campaign.

Here in Canada, currently governed by liberal-leftists, the “news” reports also referred to the apocalypse. Yes that’s right, “news” reports using the hashtag #Trumpocalypse. Written by reporters. On their “News” Twitter feed. With a nasty picture to bolster it. Even boldly and utterly falsely claiming that the Trump-hate they obviously have — is actually Twitter-wide.

On their “News” channel, they are even worse. Their entire coverage is currently bathed in a sort of gloom, remorse, dread, anger, sadness — it’s a full grief-on over there. You’ll see more of this later in this article, but at one point, the CTV anchor Jennifer Burke, solemnly — really actually mournfully — interviewed a guest (donning a huge nose ring) who was an expert in clinical psychology, whom CTV deemed necessary to have on at this time of great crisis and catastrophe, in order to inquire as to how to “explain” that man Donald Trump being elected — to our children. 


Clearly that particular liberal “news” media outlet still doesn’t get it — what happened, or why, or that it’s at least partially their own failings as an institution which can no longer be trusted, at all — and they are either in complete denial or are simply too stupid to get it. Like so many liberals, they’re so liberal they don’t even know how liberal they are; so blinkered they think everybody in the room agrees with them. Yeah I’m going to go with “stupid.”

UPDATE: State-owned CBC joined the idiocy with this crap:

What? You think American media is smarter? Of course not. I already told you about that apocalypse thing but here’s one of countless dozens I could have chosen:

The writer, NYT’s Thoman L. Friedman, is not the least bit “homeless,” except in his ideological and rhetorical mind, He’s as obsessed an anti-Trumper as there is, and he writes anti-Trump op-ed after op-ed. This is hardly man-in-the-street sentiment being expressed here.

Think it’s just on the east coast? Think again:

Dear God. The better question might be how do we explain to our children a media so mucked-up in left-wing bias and hatred toward all non-liberal-left political opponents? I hope the LA Times editors were well prepared to explain to their children why the first woman in the Presidency, were she elected, was indicted by the FBI and facing criminal charges, were that plausible turn of events come to pass.

What about that other bastion of liberal-leftist sentiment, academia? Surely they’re more erudite in their stance on this election.

Apparently they don’t even know what erudite means.

So. Think it’s just the liberal-leftist adults? Think again:

Of course, have some sympathy — the young, tender naifs got that way because they’ve been brainwashed by the liberal-leftist academics whom their parents are paying copious sums of cash through taxes and their savings.

It seems the liberal insanity is pervasive across America. Which of course partially explains why they lost.



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

Tags: , , ,

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

Liberal-Left RUSH to import refugees: facts refute liberal ideology and their “evidence-based” twaddle

These Liberals are all about the science and the evidence, you see. They’re ever so erudite! And this newfangled evidence-based governing system was to be understood by you and me as a radical (no sorry, progressive) and ever so positive a change in Canada’s governance. So, or ipso facto if you will, rushing exactly 25,000 refugees to Canada within precisely five or six Liberals Evidently 4 Pinocciosweeks, or more specifically by exactly December 31 of 2015, from Islamist terrorist-riddled (sorry, those people of other values-riddled) Syria and other countries, was based on evidentiary, or dare we say scientific proof. Yessir.

Being all science-y and evidence-based is what a pedagogic Justin Trudeau and his loyal fawning acolytes (their backers in the mainstream media) kept insisting they were all about. Over and over. They wanted you to believe it so bad that they appointed two science ministers. See, the Liberals are not about the politics and ideology, you know, like those awful anti-science Conservative Party knuckle-draggers who uniformly believe in their christian fairy god and did stuff just to turn Canada into a christian Conservative theocratic dictatorship. Over to you, Peter Mansbridge. 

But actually, most Canadians, when asked both during and after the election, said that they didn’t think the Liberals should rush into importing all those Syrian refugees. Four PinocciosThere was no need to rush, and besides, we uneducated Canadian Neanderthals pointed out that there were grave and real Islamist terrorist security concerns involved with rushing the Left’s irrational plan. For which we were shamed and called “racists.” The refugees, we also said, need to be screened to ensure they weren’t just country-shopping. That was all an important chunk of the easily available evidence that the Trudeau Liberals (and all their media) chose to almost fully ignore, in favor of… politics. Their ideology.

Oh and then there’s this. It seems even the Syrian refugees agree. This according to the Liberals’ own National Post division, which never saw this coming, because they purposely didn’t look:

… Even then, only 3,049 [of 28,000 possible refugees contacted by cell phone] agreed to meet with UN officials for an interview. And of those, only 1,801 – or less than five per cent of those the UN initially tried to contact – said they wanted to come to Canada. Those refugees have since been referred to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada for screening.

Immigration officials said part of the reason for the seemingly lukewarm response was because many of the refugees were not prepared to move so quickly. They said such response rates are typical, and that applications had started to pick up as prospective refugees were given until the end of February to make the move.

De Angelis said there are several reasons many of those identified by the UN for possible resettlement would be unwilling or unable to leave for Canada at the drop of the hat. The first and most important factor, he said, is their family situation.

“Due to their culture and society, families are very bound together,” he said. “One family may be a father, mother and children, but they will not take such a drastic decision without consulting the larger family links. And this may take some time and may also need some more reflection in terms of the different options.”

Those options could involve seeing if the entire extended family can stay together or has a better chance of making a new life elsewhere. …

So evidently, not only are many of the refugees in no hurry (raising the additional question of just how refugee-y they are), but evidently, the potential refugees themselves seem to be admitting that they are in fact country-shopping, just as White_lab_coat_peace_signmany Canadians had warned. And country-shopping is also arguably un-refugee-ish, and it certainly speaks to the fact that there is no rush

But they aren’t country shopping! We went to university and discussed it! They’re desperate to come here! Now! They need to get here fast!  Yeah whatever. Evidence shmevidence.

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Liberals and all of their sycophants in the media, knowing they didn’t actually know the facts – the evidence; the science – insisted that they did know, and they made up what they pretended to know. This is known as an outright lie in any other country. It’s also insulting, and it’s disrespectful. And it’s largely premised in pure liberal politics and liberal ideology. Demagoguery. Not compassion, not common sense, not “it’s the Canadian thing to do,” just actually a lie.

And now nearly 400 of these ever so science-y liberals are in Paris – discussing amongst themselves the “man-made global warming,” and how the “science is settled.” A statement which is itself utterly anti-science.

Sunny ways. Vote Liberal.


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

Tags: , ,

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

QUACKS! Here come the race-baiters and their canards


As posted at


Let me get this out of the way just to help stymie the idiot race-baiters: Martin Luther King was an American and in fact a global hero, worthy of all the respect he receives; and a black man being elected as president is one of America’s greatest achievements, so far.

And by the way, nobody needed to tell me that. Least of all the race-baiting idiots and fascists.


Some of the speakers at this week’s MLK memorial (or what I call the August 28, 2013 edition of the near-daily public speaking series called “Race-Baiting Canards and Utter BS for Progressive Power and Democratic Party Votes”) have calculated that it is more politically expedient for them to regurgitate their victim card and their racial division card, and their income disparity card, and duck_canard_card_deck-4 other phony cards from their stacked deck of left-wing canards — than to speak the truth. And that goes for all of the race-baiting industry, like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, and most other Democrats and progressives — who were all in attendance.

Is it just me, or was that memorial almost identical to the last Democratic Party convention?

But at this actually important MLK event, the speakers (virtually all of whom were Democrats or progressives) missed the opportunity to become real heroes, once again. On purpose, in some cases.

On this historic 50th anniversary of MLK’s speech, the speakers could have used the opportunity to finally admit that the problems within the black community and the racial problems they incessantly caterwaul about are almost entirely of their own making — or at least that of their own making with the help of their brethren on the left — the progressive movement.

They could have used this historic occasion to become heroes to an entire nation (like MLK himself), rather than just heroes to the members of their well-nurtured and mollycoddled ministry (a word I used advisedly).

Instead of solidifying their status as annoying charlatans and shlubs according to most of right-thinking America (which I like to think is at least half of America), they could have made the historic announcement that they, and nearly everything they have stood for, have been an abject failure. They could have acknowledged their abject failure as leaders of the liberal or progressive politics that caused this, over the past half century.

But some of these people are just incapable of doing that — or they haven’t yet matured to the required level. Others purposely don’t do it.

For those “others,” this is business. It’s a race-baiting industrial complex of which they’re the captains. And as a part of their huge compensation packages, they’re taking home the same size piles of cash that the so-called “1%” — the real captains of real industry (who actually create jobs and GDP) that they so disrespect and despise, are earning.

As another part of their pay package, they continually have their egos stroked with the fawning, cheering accolades of the liberal white-guilt media, liberal Hollywood, liberal academia; and, alas, by what are ironically Obama-canard-speakthe modern day serfs — serfs of the government and of the myriad entitlements, which they helped create. These serfs are further beholden to these captains of the race-baiting industry.

The serfs have become reliant upon society, and moreover the left — the progressive — leaders within.

Progressives did this. And the captains perpetuate it.

The captains of the race-baiting industry don’t want this to end. They’re lying about wanting all the racial tensions and inequality to end. They need it to continue. They covet all this inequality and racial tension — they help build it, in fact. That’s why they’re called “race-baiters.” Sadly, they are so self-interested and greedy and scurrilous and nefarious that they seek only to continue this much ballyhooed racial animosity and disparity and inequality — to further their scornful careers.

This passage from Bernie Goldberg’s latest column revisiting some of the speeches, helps exemplify my rant.

… There was lots of talk about the progress that has been made over the years. And lots of talk about how the dream is still unrealized, how the struggle must continue. They talked a lot, too, about the great “wealth gap” between blacks and whites today. President Obama said, “The gap in wealth between races hasn’t lessened, it’s grown.” But neither he nor the other speakers talked about why, in Jesse Jackson’s words, “We’re freer [today] but less equal.”

And no one talked about what just may be the single most important explanation for poverty in America. A while back, William Galston, an advisor to President Bill Clinton, took a hard look at why some people are poor, and he came up with what appears to be a simple solution to avoid a life of poverty. Just do three things, he said: finish high school, marry before having a baby, and marry after the age of 20. Only 8 percent of families who do this are poor while 79 percent who don’t do these things are poor. …

Conservatives didn’t do this. We all know that. There is no argument. Democrats progressives caused people to become reliant upon and dependent upon the government. They taught people that there is no consequence to acting irresponsibly in their personal lives or within a family. In fact, they’ve so diminished the value of “family” that now, a huge number of people place no value whatsoever on the concept of or the institution of traditional marriage and family. It’s been cast as not fun, and not “cool” to them. Moreover, it’s not what their idols in the rap and R&B music industry do, or what the cool set in Hollywood do. Liberals actually see it as a badge of honor for women to have babies without fathers in the picture at all.

So they own this problem of 72% of black babies being born-out-of-wedlock, and the myriad social problems that naturally flow from that.

And they all know this, and they all hide it. They lie, obfuscate, and if you dare cross them, they of course call you a “racist,” which in the era of Obama, ironically, has become so overused and boring that it’s lost all meaning. Almost like the liberal-left version of marriage and family.

It it walks like a canard and quacks like a canard, it’s another canard.

See this video of Juan Williams and The Five discussing this issue almost exactly along the same lines as my rant here:


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

Tags: , , ,

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

Example of typical liberal media “news” report: “It’s even more bad news!!”

In today’s news across Canada, we find that there are sensible Canadians responding to the left-wing progressive-advocating media’s advocacy  —  in the papers’ own comments sections! It’s what makes Wednesdays tolerable for me. Well that and Bill O’Reilly & Dennis Miller’s segment on Fox News Channel’s O’Reilly Factor.

(My two examples of sanity will be separated into two blog entries, because I made a promise to myself to try to limit the word-count in my blog entries to something less than Biblical proportions. So here’s the other one.)

This is what makes the internet so pernicious to the Left. I can only imagine how annoying left-wing media must find this. I mean the Left, what with their mobs and their hysterically hypocritical betrayals of their supposed liberal-left “inclusiveness” and “tolerance” and their grand allusions to their “intelligence,” can and do shout down or physically block perfectly normal, good conservatives or “right-wingers” at events in confined communities, as they did Ann Coulter and Dick Cheney and others when they have visited Canada (and then not report any of it, at least not fairly).

But preventing sensible voices from presenting their good, common sense and not-at-all socialist values on the internet can be tricky for a supposedly fair and balanced and objective news organization. I mean stuff leaks out all over the place against their will, in places like blogs, and Twitter, and Facebook, and on TV like Sun News Network in Canada, Fox News Channel, and on Rush Limbaugh’s fantastic radio show (9 AM-noon PT). So they’re forced to allow open reader comments just to maintain their pretense of openness, and to keep up with the Joneses (or the Wall Street Journals), to increase business (damn that capitalism! Why can’t we all be like the state-owned CBC?!).

No fair! People wreck their whole narrative sometimes. Media-driven narratives are expensive, and Joe Blow being allowed to contradict them just willy-nilly can spell doom for them. We see this all over the liberal news media industrial complex (snarf!), wherein the jig is up, and the power of the liberal media over the electorate is failing. They have failed in doing their jobs, and so many of them are going out of business. Just to end any confusion: this is a good thing.

The "man-made global warming"-advocating photo of ubiquitous BS accompanies their "news report."

The “man-made global warming”-advocating photo of ubiquitous BS accompanies the Vancouver Sun’s “news report.” The picture’s caption reads, “Climate change has sparked fears about the survival of the polar bear, seen in Churchill, Man., in this file photo.”

So for my part in this destruction, here is a good example of narrative-busting. This is for those of you interested in helping regain control of the proper, fact-based narrative, and actually building our nation again instead of allowing it to sink deeper into the progressive morass.

First of all, let me set this up for folks in not-Vancouver: The Vancouver Sun’s coverage of the daily news, like most or all of the Canadian media’s, seems to start with the premise: “Let’s see what we can present today to advance political progressivism and socialism as a general matter.”

Then they carefully allow a tiny bit of space for just a couple of non-progressive voices and non-full-on socialists, to pretend they’re actually not progressives or full-on socialists, but really just fair-minded and ever so objective and balanced and so earnest and full of common sense. It’s sort of like they do on the Jon Stewart show, only it’s even less funny.

Oh hang on —  this article is in fact funnier than most Jon Stewart “news” items. Get a load of this tendentious, leading headline, which also serves as an indication that the Vancouver Sun thinks their readers are idiots:

Results signal more bad news for the planet

By William Marsden, Postmedia News August 6, 2013

WASHINGTON — The year 2012 signalled more bad news for the state of the Earth’s climate as global land and ocean temperatures continued to rise, accelerating the decline of Arctic summer sea ice, the melting of ice sheets and glaciers, and the raising of sea levels, according to a peer-reviewed scientific report…

…Karl said that over the past 50 years average global temperatures have been increasing consistently at a rate of about 1.5 C per decade…

Here’s a reader’s response:

So many errors in the first paragraph. Temperatures didn’t ‘continue’ to rise because they have indeed stagnated for 16-17 years. And don’t blame the El Nino in 1998 [which they did  —  see below.  — ed] because the IPCC’s models accounted for it, and still failed miserably. The decline of Arctic ice isn’t accelerating – it’s at its greatest extent since 2006, according to Denmark’s Center for Ocean and ICe ( Sea level has been increasing at the same pace since the end of the Little Ice Age centuries ago, paused for a few years recently, and upticked again in line with previous trend.

This one is especially laughable: “Karl said that over the past 50 years average global temperatures have been increasing consistently at a rate of about 1.5 C per decade.”

Really? A 7.5 degree C increase in five decades! Amazing. You should headline with this.

The Sun’s coverage of this issue is truly horrible.

Yes it is, sane Canadian. Yes it is. And you just cost them a zillion dollars in lost, failed, narrative-building. Drinks are on me.

On the Left’s “climate change” meme itself, I always love how progressive, left-wing media like the Vancouver Sun purposely misstate or confuse or obfuscate the facts to suit their worldview, and not just with regard to the stats or the science in general. For example, this “skeptics of climate change” line they always churn out, as used in this paragraph:

“Skeptics of climate change often point out that since a record high global temperature was reached in 1998, temperatures at first decreased, then did not rise as quickly over the next 15 years despite increased greenhouse gas emissions. Scientists note that in 1998 there was a fairly intensive warming from the natural El Nino cycle, followed by a natural La Nina cooling cycle.

For one thing, they present this contra position for the sole purpose of refuting it. But moreover, calling people who aren’t buying their crap “skeptics of climate change” is sort of like calling pro-life people “anti-choice,” or calling them “foes of women’s ‘reproductive health choices'” or “enemies of ‘reproductive rights’,” or accusing them of engaging in a “war on women.” And it’s like branding people who think traditional marriage was just fine the way it was, as “homophobes.” And as we know, if you don’t dig Barack Obama, it’s because you’re a “racist.”

See, there are “skeptics of climate change,” and that includes plenty of scientists, and then there are also skeptics of the larger left-wing meme, which if you remember correctly, the Left started out calling “man-made global warming.” And there are people  —  including thousands of scientists, who are simply “skeptical” that global warming is in fact “mad-made”  —  at least to any great extent. It’s a moving scale  — there exists no simple line of demarcation between “believers” and “non-believers.” (This is what elitist liberal-left “thinkers” used to call the smart-set’s far more advanced “nuanced thinking,” which, you see, conservatives could never grasp, on account of their being “idiots” and “Neanderthals,” which was their way of showing their great respect for “celebrating the differences” and their love of engaging in “a conversation.”)

We who are among that latter group of “skeptics” note that the climate change alarmists like the Vancouver Sun and its “reporters” on the subject, actually changed the terminology they started with, from “mad-made global warming,” to “climate change,” ever since it became obvious that the science behind their BS theory wasn’t behaving properly, and the “man-made global warming” “scientists” were actually advocating a scam; and when the curtain was pulled back, they were revealed in little-reported news to be scarcely more than socialist political scientists, like the multi-gazzillionaire jet-setting Al Gore and his li’l Canadian sidekick David Suzuki.

But enough of that tangent. The job has been done wrecking that idiotic narrative. I also want to edify you with this bit of sanity from another Joe Blow reader, from another source. This one is written-up in the Globe & Mail, which is no different really  —  they’re both progressive-advocating liberal media sources. At least this headline isn’t as insulting to its readers (although I’m quite sure if they sided with IKEA with regard to its offer to its unionized employees, like they side with the “man-made global warming” “scientists,” they’d have left out the “company says” part, thereby instructing us as to their version of “facts,” just as the Vancouver Sun tried to do):  “Rejected IKEA offer spoke to inefficiencies, company says”.

Sure, the “company says” that. But it’s also irrefutably true! So why include that, as if to imply it’s debatable?

For more on that one, read this other blog entry.


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

Tags: , , ,

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

Conservatives raised more than the Libs & the even more socialist NDP, last quarter.

Once again, figures just released yesterday show that the Conservative Party of Canada has outdone their (even more) progressive opposition in second-quarter fundraising. And once again, they’ve beaten the competition, combined (“combined” is just a fun word I add to the end of a sentence when I’m glad it’s true, as I am).

The Conservatives raised nearly $5 million from over 30,000 donors, compared to nearly $3 million from 38,000 Liberal donors, and nearly $1.4 million from a mere 19,000 of Canada’s full-on socialist NDP donors.

The NDP frames it up in their latest of their insatiable money-seeking emails to me and what they presume to all be their other fans, whom they address as “friends,” but which in reality I, for one, am obviously not, because I don’t give them money.

Today’s email was benign.


The official fundraising numbers for our second quarter are in – here’s what you should know:

  • Between April 1st and June 30th, 18,846 people donated to Canada’s New Democrats – that’s incredible. Thank you for making this quarter such a great success.
  • Supporters like you made more than 35,000 total donations in only 12 weeks.
  • We are focused on building the most effective ground game in our Party’s history. We set big goals – and we’ll need to meet them in every quarter between now and the next election. This quarter, we beat our goal and raised over $1.4 million toward our grassroots campaign.

That’s the good news.

The bad news is – we were outdone by Stephen Harper’s Conservatives. They outraised us, banking just under $5 million in the second quarter alone.

This isn’t a huge surprise, but it’s still tough to take – and we have to work every day to close the gap before the Conservatives pull too far ahead. […]

But as judged by the tone they use about the likes of me in other emails, I am actually the opposite of a “friend” to them. In fact I am an enemy. Now, in fairness, they are the political enemy to me, but I’m not running for office, see? To them, and they are running, I’m apparently fit to be cleansed of my Canadian-ness  —   divided-off  —  Canadian tho I am  —  and I am summarily seen by them as some sort of a pariah. “Deep-pocketed,” and somehow dirty. (I actually laugh at them  —  I’m not as insulted as they hope, and by behaving this way, they’re only dividing themselves from Canada and regular Canadians, in reality).

In today’s email, at least they didn’t imply, as they did recently, that they were the only party who raised money from “individual Canadians,” which was a dishonest assertion, on every level  —  an outright lie, actually. I still don’t know if what they’re saying is that it’s not individuals who donate to the Conservatives, or that if they do, they’re not “Canadians,” and moreover, “like you.” Here’s a bit from my recent post about their previous emails:

NDP-1C“Unlike the Conservatives, our support comes from individual Canadians like you.”

“Unlike the Conservatives?” Really?

The truth  —  the facts  —  the science  —  is actually that far, far more “individual Canadians” gave money to the Conservatives than the NDP. Like 50% more “individual Canadians.” So yeah, I guess in that way, they’re “unlike the Conservatives.” But not in a good way  —  at least to them.

But the sneering at fellow Canadians doesn’t start or stop there. You can actually hear it every day via their CBC media division, but here’s some other examples from my previous post about their emails:

NDP-1C“With the help of well-connected insiders and big corporate donors, the Conservatives don’t have trouble raising a lot of money.”

Here’s some other language used in emails to me in the past few days:

NDP-1C“New Democrats do things differently. We rely on the support of hard-working Canadians – one grassroots donation at a time.

Corporate donations are illegal. So, care to elaborate, NDP? Didn’t think so. You certainly don’t want to pull on that thread, hello public sector unions and your various and sundry “sponsorships” and “supports” for the NDP.

They also refer to Conservatives as a bunch of “deep-pocketed” folks. And by the way, only to a bunch of socialists does the term “deep pockets” mean something so negative. Except in the context of public-sector union workers and their sumptuous fur-lined, deep pockets.

And stating that “Conservatives don’t have trouble raising a lot of money” is (a) BS, and (b) cast by them as being somehow nefarious  —  like it’s (a) a bad thing and (b) due to some kind of dumb-ass luck, or something. But it actually just points to the Conservatives’ smart, hard work, and sorry NDP, but to their popularity. (And actually, no, I’m not sorry. I take that back.) Granted, this is not good news for the NDP and its political ambitions, but these folks (Conservatives) are Canadians too, the last time I checked. So why castigate them and cast aspersions on them like that? There goes any conversion! Maybe I should be glad they’re so ridiculous.

Their whole m.o. seems to be divisive and condescending and nearly insulting, unless you’re one of them. They need to remember that they’re running for public office, to represent not just their supporters but all Canadians, and to lead our entire country. They aught to show their greatest respect to all Canadians. Thery need to remember that, in other words, they should not be at all like their hero Barack Obama, whom they so often seem to try to replicate (even stealing their hero’s “war on women” B.S., his class warfare, his phoney and insulting catcalls of “racist” and “homophobe,” and other divisive canards).

And by the way, during just this latest quarter, I hung up on the Conservative Party (politely) at least once, and didn’t answer their phone calls to me a thousand other times, as I’m sure thousands of other actual conservatives did, and didn’t. So it was hardly “no trouble” for the Conservatives to raise cash. Especially from actual conservatives. They’re just better, smarter, more popular than the NDP. So own it, NDP.

All in all, what a load of dishonest crap from the NDP  —  “official opposition.”

Here’s a pro tip to the socialists at the NDP fundraising HQ: I think if you want to be a successful party and lead a successful campaign where you convert voters to your cause, and ultimately lead a successful, united country  —  which is my country as much as yours  —  you better start from a place of honesty and integrity, and not just with your own support base but all Canadians. Stop creating false Obama-like divisions, Obama-like animosity between Canadians, and Obama-like hatred toward what we all recognize as success. And stop disrespecting and insulting and being so condescending toward half of Canada. Stop being hypocrites. Practice what you preach: be “tolerant” and “inclusive” of your countrymen.

Oh I’ll still see you and treat you like the enemy. Because you are. But you shouldn’t do that. So at least fake it. You do know how to fake it.

You’re welcome.

Figures are from


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

“5…4…3…2…1…BANG, you’re dead!”

Something about gardening and getting right down there in the dirt with your bare hands makes clear things that might otherwise be convoluted. For example, this happened:

“Five… four… three… two… one… BANG, you’re DEAD!”

toy_gunThat’s what the kid yelled.

And that’s what me and my wife heard last weekend while we were innocently working away out in the garden amongst our tulips and daffodils in our quiet little white picket fence suburban neighborhood. (Our house literally has a white picket fence, so there.)

The pseudo-auspicious warning  —  or play-by play commentary  —  wasn’t directed at us, luckily, and I’m happy to report we’re still alive  —  but rather at a group of other kids and/or adults a couple of doors down.  And it was just a bunch of kids playing on the street, like kids do. Playing “guns.”

I wouldn’t have given it another thought, but I love to jump down liberals’ throats and expose their sundry sophistry and logical fallacies whenever I can.

In the context of today’s bombastic and always idiotic gun control rhetoric coming out of liberal/left America as led by the sophists-in-chief Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, foot-in-mouth numbskull VP Joe Biden, et al, post-Newtown shooting; and out of the even more idiotic (at least on this subject) Smith_and_Wesson_640_hand_gunCanada’s liberal left, my mental meandering has the added value of being at least a little apropos of something, unlike 90% of liberal-leftist blather on any pet subject.

Here’s what stuck: that kid didn’t learn what today’s liberals would deride as horrible, red-neck, right-wing, conservative whackjob-style, pro-gun rhetoric from the NRA, as liberal leftists the continent over would love you to falsely believe. No, rather, he almost certainly learned it from today’s liberals in Hollywood. Yes, liberals from the blathering liberal-left anti-gun, anti-conservative, anti-NRA set in notoriously liberal-left, Obama-supporting Hollywood (or “Hollywood North”  —  Vancouver, or Toronto  —  which is the exact same class of weapon). He got it from a TV show, movie, rap or hip-hop “song”, or video game from liberals in what we all know to be that hypocritical-on-nearly-every-issue, holier-than-thou, liberal Hollywood and their liberal-left media industrial complex.

The NRA doesn’t teach “5… 4… 3… 2… 1… BANG, you’re DEAD!” or anything like that kind of theatrics. They don’t advocate for alarming, penultimate warnings to the end of innocent life at the hand of kids role-playing an awesome man with cool, fearsome weaponry. Hollywood does. Liberals do.

So own it, Hollywood. And moreover liberals. Own what you created. Hey maybe liberals should be registered, or banned, since they cause gun violence! And by the way, actually, I’m kidding. I say that because some liberals are so dumb they may take me seriously and actually volunteer, much as they do with regard to paying higher taxes.

A couple more notes on this subject: It brought back a “discussion” around the Christmas turkey dinner table (I’m itching to claim the turkey was picked-off by a well-placed shotgun blast, but it probably wasn’t) with family (where I’m surrounded by liberals and outright socialists  —  yeah, real fun). An in-law, truly aghast at the audacity of the NRA to defend gun ownership after that Newtown elementary school shooting, said (in that liberal way  —  wherein they speak as though it is assumed everyone in the room agrees with them, which in this case nearly everyone did) that the NRA keeps making these totally “idiotic” claims about guns being a “constitutional right” (said using excessive eye-rolls and air quotes), “and junk like that”  —  or at least words to that dismissive, pejorative effect.

I quietly reminded her that it was, in fact, a constitutional right, in America, for citizens to have guns. “Well they should change their constitution then!” she shot back.

Of course my brain comes fully loaded with a magazine full of real science and information and actual facts and objective truths rather than knee-jerk emotional responses based on sophomoric rhetoric, so I quietly reminded her that they had, in fact, changed their constitution. “It’s called The Second Amendment,” I said. If I’d had a mic I’d have dropped it.

This is where liberals usually take to calling me an idiot, or something I find even funnier (Hitler, a Nazi, racist, homophobe, a swear-word, or whatever), then do an adroit about-face and storm off, but alas, it was at the very start of Christmas dinner and we were too crammed in there for her to get up and storm off. Suffice it to say she won’t be sending me any Christmas cards (or even “festivus” or “happy tree” or “highly regarded seasonal values and greetings!” cards) in the future.

gun-Beretta_92FS_S_maxi250-202x140Another point: It’s actually the right of Canadians, too, to defend themselves, regardless of what liberals tell you to the contrary. I’ve been a member of the NRA for years. (And by the way, I’m not a hunter. Or a “Hitler.”)  This past month or so, I also joined the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, and donated to the National Firearms Association.

I’m loath to remind my readers (oh who am I kidding, I love it) that when I took the Canadian Firearms courses and got my license to acquire and possess guns in Canada (including semi-automatic rifles and handguns), I nearly failed one of the tests when I was told to unload the magazine from the Beretta semi-auto I was being tested on (exactly as pictured, above right), and I accidentally turned the muzzle downward, toward my left toe, instead of keeping it pointed down range. While I got nearly perfect and perfect scores on the written tests and the other practicals, I had to go back and take the handgun practical test over again. My wife passed all the tests with flying colors. Shut up.

So I’m not perfect, but at least I know all about guns, and what, for example, a “military-style” “assault” weapon is, unlike another in-law who blasted off several rounds of liberal-left talking points total BS last Christmas about the supposed need to ban those guns… but don’t get me started again.

Which is why everyone should work in the garden.

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

Tags: , ,

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

Carbon Tax is Pointless and Inflationary

Climate alarmists hope that Hurricane Sandy and President Obama’s re-election will coerce panicky congressional Republicans into a “carbon tax” deal in 2013. But simple math shows the tax would have no effect other than an inflationary one.

A carbon tax would operate as a new sales tax on goods and services that are produced through or otherwise involve the burning of fossil fuels. You might pay the tax in your electric bill, at the gas pump or in the form of higher prices for other good and services.

The purpose of a carbon tax would be to penalize fossil fuel use in hopes of reducing carbon dioxide emissions, which have been hypothesized to cause global cooling (1970s), global warming (1980s-1990s), climate change (2000s) and extreme weather (2010s).

While higher prices for goods and services aren’t inherently evil, their merits must be judged by what consumers and society get in return. So let’s consider a carbon tax from a climatic perspective.

To give a carbon tax the maximum advantage in our analysis, we’ll assume that it would be totally successful in reducing U.S. Big government: big failurecarbon emissions — i.e., the U.S. emits no carbon dioxide whatsoever from fossil fuels. And let’s also imagine that this public policy wonder has this magical effect as of Jan. 1, 2013.

So what would be the climatic effect of immediately shutting down the fossil fuel-based U.S. economy?

Let’s assume that U.S. fossil fuel use results in 6 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere annually and that, of this amount, about 40% (2.4 billion tons) stays and accumulates in the atmosphere annually.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is measured in parts per million and one part per million of carbon dioxide weighs approximately 7.81 billion metric tons. Simple division, then, shows that the U.S. might be adding at most approximately 0.31 parts per million to the atmosphere every year.

If the carbon tax could magically stop U.S. emissions entirely as of 2013, then by the year 2100, we would have avoided adding about 27 parts per million (0.31 x 87) of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

That may sound like a lot, but consider that the current level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is about 391 parts per million. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in the year 2100 could range from 450 parts per million (absolute global clampdown on greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century) to 950+ parts per million (no clampdown).

Either way, it’s plain to see that a savings of 27 parts per million over 87 years is trivial, particularly in comparison to its cost (shutting down the entire economy) and would make no meaningful climatic difference even if atmospheric carbon dioxide was the driver of global climate that the alarmists claim it is.

For further perspective, consider that 27 parts per million ago (i.e., 364 parts per million) was, temporally speaking, 1997 — since which time there has been no significant global warming, even according to the alarmists.

But remember we here have been fantasizing wildly about the effect of a carbon tax. No carbon tax enacted into law — even by an Obama-fearing 113th Congress — would come any where close to significantly reducing, much less stopping fossil fuel use in the U.S. anytime soon.

In reality, goods and services would simply be made to cost more. The atmosphere and climate would not be affected in any significant way. Consumer dollars would have less purchasing power — a phenomenon called inflation.

Sadly, some prominent conservative economists support a carbon tax.

Reagan economist Arthur Laffer would support a tax in exchange for a reduction in payroll or income taxes. Bush 43 economist Greg Mankiw supports a global tax. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, senior adviser to John McCain in 2008, wants a tax to provide the energy industry with regulatory “certainty.”

As smart as these guys may be, none of them has apparently done the simple math that shows a carbon tax is a policy futility that buys less than nothing.

Hurricane Sandy shows what life is like without fossil fuels; it’s not a reason to do away with them. President Obama doesn’t care about the realities of climate; for him and his kind, global warming is an excuse to seize greater control of the economy. As to congressional Republicans, don’t panic; do the (simple) math.

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

Tags: , , , ,

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

Ontario Liberal premier quits amid contempt charge(s), doubling of debt, failure to lead

The super-liberal Canadian mainstream media is twisting like fat-free, no-trans-fats pretzels today (in deference to McGuinty’s daddy-state Ontario food consumption laws and regulations), trying to whitewash failed Ontario Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty’s resignation as (for example) merely a “personal” decision. This is exactly as he risibly claimed yesterday. After all, the excuse has been poll-tested by the wind-powered Liberal machine, and by gum, these are winning words! Trust them! They’re the (liberal) gov’ment!

This is as per the liberal media guidebook, in which they are instructed to simply regurgitate exactly what any liberal politician commands them to say. Had it been a conservative premier quitting at a time of abject failure amidst charges of corruption and debt-doubling (or for purely altruistic reasons), trust me, they’d be pulling their full Sarah Palin. That’s when they suddenly become ever so earnest news hounds, digging and finding “journalistic” reasons to question everything, and somehow then finding supposed nation-saving, truth-based reasons to assassinate the personal (and family!) character of a politician, and engage in the conservative-career-bashing techniques taught to them at the state universities and colleges under the rubric of “investigative journalism.”

The even more smarmy among the mainstream media are wagging their fingers at us conservatives, admonishing us that today is not the day to be all negative and political (read truthful), but rather it is a day to openly embrace his daddyship’s super-duper career. Laud his supposed benevolence and longtime “public service” and his supposed personal sacrifice. Some Liberal Dalton McGuintyare even attempting to advance McGuinty’s political career today, by seriously suggesting that after failing Ontario, he might possibly be a good contender for an even bigger train wreck  —  that of Liberal Party Of Canada leader. And do even more damage ( — my words, like I had to tell you!).

It’s hideous. And it doesn’t speak well for Canadians that so many apparently continue to buy into the narrative being spewed by nearly all of the liberal news media.

Luckily, I don’t like pretzels and don’t consume them. I mean unless they’re fried in bacon fat and covered in milk chocolate. So I have little more than another disdainful head-shake about McGuinty’s latest news.

In a nutshell, by which I mean McGuinty’s party and his premiership was a nutshell within which he was the nut-in-chief, it’s good news for Ontario. Maybe now Ontarians will take a breath and take another look at the huge mistake they made in the last election, which you’ll remember was only a year ago. And take another look at their media and how they advocate for liberals and liberalism, rather than for the right politicians. Not that I’m holding my breath.

Start by asking why he even ran in the last election since incredibly, only a year after the last election, he said yesterday that by golly, one of the reasons he’s quitting  is because now “it’s time for renewal, it’s time for the next Liberal premier”. Maybe my brain cells are all clogged from all the trans fats, but it seems to me it’s pretty obvious that last year was the “time for renewal.”

As it is, they’re still going to be stuck with a Liberal Party government at least until the next election, which, due to “time for renewal,” might be a few weeks from when the next Liberal Party leader is chosen.

Paper shredders aren’t subsidized by government “investment” wizard Barack Obama or Dalton McGuinty or any other progressive governments, yet, are they? As long as they’re “investing” for purely political or left-wing ideological reasons, and then (allegedly or otherwise) covering-up when they prove to be abject failures or saturated in crony capitalism or politics, that “investment” would have at least paid-off far better for liberals and the citizens, whose money they’re “investing.” Alas they mostly pick losers.

So today, for my part, and as long as they’re not government subsidized, I’m looking at investing in the companies that make paper shredders. Between Obama’s Benghazi-gate and that associated ongoing media-aided cover-up, the Liberal Party of Canada’s sponsorship-gate (which is still paying dividends), the recent Quebec Liberal government’s alleged corruption, and now Ontario’s Liberal mess, and that of other liberal administrations across North America and Europe, I think that’s a winner for the rest of us.



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

Tags: , ,

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

Liberal media at work: They tendentiously ask what you think, then instruct you how to think.


First, they tweet asking this rather tendentious question, suggesting the answer is “yes”  —  or at least they accomplish what I think is their actual goal, which is to conflate the words “all talk” with Harper’s far-north outreach (link):

Then moments later, they tweet again, ever-so-subtly instructing us as to how we should think, and how we should approach the question. Let’s see if we can figure out how we are supposed to think! (link):

The linked article is actually headlined “White Lies,” lest there be any doubt as to the motive to start with.

It buries the lede. To the extent that they even bother to mention the most important point of Harper’s yearly trips to the far north in the opening paragraph, which is that he actually bothers to go up north every year unlike previous ever-so-Canadian leaders, they twist themselves into a knot to use that most important point against him. Take this part of the smug, sneering opening paragraph:

Harper has made it a point to swing through the three territories each year seeing the sights, tasting the local seal and delivering promises of new infrastructure and ships. Critics, both northern and southern, have dismissed the yearly ritual as “all talk.”

Golly. “Swing through.” I didn’t know you could travel countless thousands of miles and “swing through” the far north of Canada, just wistfully “seeing the sights,” and “tasting the local seal.” And oh how jejune of the prime minister of Canada to do that. It’s not at all as important as politicians marching in all those fantastic gay pride parades!

And hey, I wonder if any non-critics have not dismissed anything remotely pro-conservative today! Ah, but who gives a sealshit about that, when there’s incredibly stupid, contrived criticism to get on with, using at least a third of page four of their “National” paper to do it?

And by the way, no, it turns out no non-critics were available in Canada today. Just critics. That’s because it’s mostly another liberal media hit piece. It virtually skips over possibly the most important attribute of Harper’s yearly sojourns to the far north  —  the thing which is at the actual heart of the prime minister traveling to the far north every year  —  which is the simple fact that he promised he would, and he does.

All the ubiquitous, incessant, left-wing media blather about their prescribed need to make the country “inclusive,” and make groups of people feel (barf) “empowered,” and other such left-wing claptrap (like creating giant national parks out of land which is crown-owned anyway), fly out the igloo window when even a pseudo-conservative is making an effort to help far-northerners feel “included” and “empowered” by the other Canadian folks down south, most of whom have no clue about the far north. (One need only look at the liberals/socialists/progressives down south who all want to ban all guns, to figure out their vast understanding of Canada.)

The article lists six “promises” that this politician has dared to make, which are behind schedule (Wait. What? Government projects behind schedule?! No way!), or which in any case have not yet been accomplished. And it might all be true, but it is not necessarily the PM’s fault, or at least not his alone. And it’s certainly not something I’d classify as “lies,” whether “white” or not.

As a general matter, the PM’s opposition  —  Liberals, the socialist NDP, the media  —  have all worked almost as hard as Stephen Harper. But they’ve worked hard to make sure some actual progress that the Harper Conservatives (keyword: conservatives) want to make in Canada is shouted-down, slammed as unreasonable, or racist, homophobic, un-inclusive, anti-women, environmentally unsound… and then summarily shut-down, pending another royal commission, judicial inquiry, 10-year-long environmental assessment, or yet another election. Or at least delayed to the greatest extent possible, at the hand of the government bureaucracies which are stacked from top to bottom with liberals and sundry leftist, progressive ideologues that they’ve appointed over the decades. (Yes, the progressives did build that, pace Mr. Obama). Or they did it by outright political lies and misinformation and omission of information and/or pure maliciousness. Their motives are far more suspect and slimy than Harper’s, in this regard. Write an article about that! (Nah, just kidding. As if!)

Harper trip so-called 'marred'

The whole damned thing was a waste of time anyway, on account of it being ‘marred,’ apparently.

And they fail to mention the latest big thing, which is the creation of that big, new, national park. Why didn’t they mention that in this laughingly and purposely incomplete list?

Maybe they just had to make room for the article right beside it, wherein they report that a few northerners complained that the Harpers used ATVs on what “used to be pristine” trails, but thanks to the likes of the stupid evil Harpers and this year’s “yearly ritual,” are no longer pristine. For its part, the editors at the National Post toss out the whole baby seal with the bath water: “PM’s Arctic trip marred by ATV quarrel.” The whole trip! Marred! Damn those Harpers and their promises to build the north!

The National Post can’t claim to not know about the park, as their partners at the state-owned CBC might do, since they even reported on it, just yesterday:

… On the second full day of his annual northern tour, he visited the site of a new national park reserve in Norman Wells, a small community about 680 kilometres northwest of Yellowknife.

Negotiations to create the NDaDats’ihch’oh (pronounced nats-each-choh) reserve have been underway for years and involved the federal government working with local First Nations groups to make the deal happen. …

They can’t write that it’s all about Harper just doing it for votes, since there are roughly 800 far-north votes. And they can’t write about it being to secure all the campaign cash those northerners could contribute to Conservatives. No, the problem is that it could just possibly be that Harper actually cares about his job, and he cares about Canada. And all this time you’ve been instructed by the Left and its media division that only the sacred socialist Jack Layton cared!

So maybe the politics of it are just largely not helpful to progressives, and are too largely pro-conservative. Which is a little like lying through omission. Or largely like that.

Maybe writing fully informative news articles  —  not omitting things to advance a point of view  —  and not writing just another lousy hit piece, is too big for the National Post. But God knows the National Post is beyond any reproach, and it’s never “all talk.” And it never writes any “white lies.”

Not white ones.


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

Tags: ,

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

Fact-Check On Left-Wing Lies: The left’s BS “rich getting richer and poor getting poorer” meme.

Oh no! More of that annoying-to-liberals conservatives speaking the truth in bold colors, thing? Oh yes. Thomas Sowell’s column is out. Correcting the BS claims made by liberals again? Yes, yes. And I’m not sorry, progressives. The truth is good. It’s liars who are bad for spreading lies, and forcing us to engage in this embarrassing remedial action. That means you, non-Sun News Network media and NDP and Liberal socialists and sundry other progressives.

Liberals and all progressives are against this sort of thing  —  postings like this. Lies don’t bother them. It’s the truth that makes them so spitting mad.

Big Lies in Politics

It was either Adolf Hitler or his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, who said that the people will believe any lie, if it is big enough and told often enough, loud enough. Although the Nazis were defeated in World War II, Thomas Sowellthis part of their philosophy survives triumphantly to this day among politicians, and nowhere more so than during election years.

Perhaps the biggest lie of this election year, and the one likely to be repeated the most often, is that the income of “the rich” is going up, while other people’s incomes are going down. If you listen to Barack Obama, you are bound to hear this lie repeatedly.

But the government’s own Congressional Budget Office has just published a report whose statistics flatly contradict this claim. The CBO report shows that, while the average household income fell 12 percent between 2007 and 2009, the average for the lower four-fifths fell by 5 percent or less, while the average income for households in the top fifth fell 18 percent. For households in the “top one percent” that seems to fascinate so many people, income fell by 36 percent in those same years.

[…Read the whole thing…]

Life would be so much easier and more productive if progressives just didn’t lie so much.

And here’s a gratuitous picture of Tom Mulcair! With bonus Libby Davies in background!

Tom Mulcair with Libby Davies

And here’s one of Barack Obama!

Yes, Obama lies

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

Tags: , ,

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

The socialist NDP rats hit bottom, keep digging.

This is the party that purports to be one of “caring” … and of intelligence and good ideas? What a bunch of attention-seeking alarmists Malcolm Allen, NDP meat and vegetable criticand fear-mongers. And political dumb-dumbs.

Here’s a news release just posted on their web site:

Conservative changes will allow roadkill on your table: NDP

May 15, 2012

OTTAWA – Proposed changes to Meat Inspection Regulations (MIR) will leave Canadians wondering if the meat they buy is actually safe, because of the Conservatives’ reckless cutting spree.  Private inspectors, who may not be qualified, will now be able to inspect meat.  Worse, these changes to meat inspection rules also change what meat is acceptable – meaning already-dead meat and crippled animals’ meat will be okay for processing for Canadians’ tables.

“First the Conservatives will let private inspectors monitor meat, and now they’re essentially allowing road kill-ready meat into the food supply,” said Malcolm Allen, NDP Critic for Agriculture and Agri-Food. “Even scarier is the fact that we won’t know how long animals have been dead before processing – or even that the meat will be inspected at all.”

I wonder if they feel “private” car manufacturing workers, home builders, food service workers, pharmaceutical and medical workers, and all other workers are also inherently inept (or shall I say “may not be qualified”?) on account of them not being state employees at a state-owned facility and members of one of Canada’s far-left political public service labor unions. Because apparently only state workers are acceptable to the NDP.

Anyway, Sun Media’s report about it used the word “overkill” in their report, earning it a mention here:

Expect roadkill to reach dinner table: NDP

By Mark Dunn, QMI Agency

OTTAWA – The NDP ratcheted up its overkill on government cuts Tuesday, suggesting changes to meat inspection mean Canadians can expect splattered squirrel, groundhogs and other crunched critters for dinner.

“First the Conservatives will let private inspectors monitor meat, and now they’re essentially allowing roadkill ready meat into the food supply,” said Malcolm Allen, the party’s meat and vegetable critic.

The NDP is concerned about what happens to animals on farms before the carcass is shipped to a federally inspected slaughter house. …

… “Only the NDP would stoop so low as to mislead Canadian families with hopes of gaining media attention,” [Agriculture Minister Gerry ] Ritz said.

People who put out this sort of lie  —  this tactic which is nefariously designed by jerks in the backroom (and then approved by its leader) to do nothing but scare the crap out of people in order to gain power  —  should be summarily ignored and treated by Canadians as, well, roadkill. These people show nothing but an utter contempt for the very people they purport to “care” about. They treat them Canadians as stupid. Naive. Gullible. Idiots. They treat us as roadkill on their precious highway to power.

Strident? Maybe, but I think these power-hungry jerks politicians who will do or say anything  —  including lying and fear-mongering and anything else at any cost to simply win political power… have by default relinquished their moral authority to ever win seats in elections. And to be taken seriously by anyone, including their enablers in the Canadian news media, who are ultimately responsible for anyone in this country even knowing who the hell the NDP are in the first place.

And I have even less respect for all these people than I did before. As you should.

And what’s with the folksy name-change for the NDP leader, socialist Frenchman Thomas Mulcair? It’s “Tom” now, is it? If the above is what you think of Canada’s citizens  —  that is, gullible, naive, idiots  —  I think your last name should be Tom Don’tcare. “Fighting for you” my butt roast.

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

Liberal calls this a “Conservative recession”; CTV’s Dan Matheson calls him on it

image  Reminiscent of when the CTV’s Kate Wheeler actually called the New York Times “left-leaning”, thereby astounding me out of my shorts…

Just now, while interviewing a Liberal automaton today on CTV’s Newsnet, anchor Dan Matheson called out Liberal “strategist” Steve MacKinnon for calling this a “Conservative recession”.

Actual transcript from my recording:


Steven MacKinnon, Liberal Party strategist:  … but also, um, on this economy, and what we’ve seen from these Conservatives in, in these, uh, in this conservative recession, is a very very tough thing!  Umm, Mr. Ignatieff is coming up with ideas whether it be early childhood education, new investments in green technologies, uh new jobs, infrastructure projects, employment insurance, that, uh, I think are going to intrigue Canadians, and are going to create a more “just society”, but also create these new jobs that we need in the 21st century!

CTV anchor Dan Matheson:  Uh, sir, did you call it the “Conservative recession”?

Steven MacKinnon, Liberal Party strategist: HA HA HA!!!!

CTV anchor Dan Matheson:  Is that what slipped out there?  OK never mind.  [Then carries on with new question…]

Steven MacKinnon, Liberal Party strategist:  Tory time ‘r tough times, Dan, just on that earlier uh point, uh, I don’t know if that’s been said before [chuckles as Matheson doesn’t]…


OK well maybe my contention that Matheson “called him out” is a little strong, inasmuch as Matheson totally wimped-out and caved-in to his liberal better, and dropped it (“OK never mind!”), and chose to accept the blatant promulgation of pure, unadulterated bullcrap, on national television, on a hard news program, instead of perusing it and ensuring that truth is what gets reported on national television news, instead or pure, unadulterated bullcrap.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:  any politician and the party he speaks for who blames this global economic turmoil on “Conservatives” (or even more so, small-c “conservatives” —or as the CAW’s radical left-wing socialist extremist Ken Lewenza does, on “right-wingers”), is worthy of nothing more than being viewed as completely dishonest, vacuous BS-ers, bereft of any thoughtful ideas, and obviously incapable of being even remotely intellectually honest with the Canadian people.  They are literally trying—TRYING!—to mislead Canadians—to fool them.  That’s how little they think of Canadians—how they condescend to them (think of another Liberal “strategist”, Scott Reid, and his idiotic, elitist “beer and popcorn” remark).  And so they should be held in utter contempt by the Canadian people, and all voters should literally laugh at and ridicule them at every opportunity, and should certainly never vote for them, ever.

And they should be roundly called-out as the BS-spewing louts that they in fact are, by the supposedly truth-seeking news media.

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


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

It's a question.