?

Log in

Now, to be honest, I feel as if I'm placing a label upon Conservatives. The family of my beloved is very conservative, where as in the past I was incredibly liberal. Their point of views, plus my own boyfriend's neutral ground, has been incredibly influential on me. However, I can't help but recall something that my boyfriend's brother said on a forum full of lesbians;

"I do not support gay marriage."

With all the finesse of an angry wolf, he rushed into the pit and claimed straight out that he didn't support it. Granted, his reasons, as he explained later, were different then what would be typically expected. Instead of saying the typical spew of "Gays are evil, God said 'Man shall not couple with man' bullcrap, he honestly said, and I quote this;

"Personally i don't understand why they can't just make civil union have the same rights as marriage"

So no. He was not anti-gay. He just said the equivalent of, why does the church have more authority over marriage then the state in the United States of America.

I am reminded of this because of yet another Conservative that I read about today. Megan McCain impressed me after I read an article dated March 29th, 2010, and then commented on change.org the following day.

http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/can_lgbt_rights_and_conservatives_mix

It seems that other Conservatives, such as Ted Olsen, Margaret Hoover, and others, who actually support same-sex marriage in America. I felt honest shock. After seeing nutcases such as the Westboro Baptist Church, I could not believe this. With the tea parties separating the country so much, to have sane voices from either the Democrats or the Republicans at the moment is incredible. There are severe left-wingers and severe right-wingers, and you can't trust either of them as far as you can throw them.

I like that others are standing up for rights as well in these times. Cyndi Lauper, Anna Paquin, Whoopi Goldberg (but really, who didn't see her coming?) and several more have been doing advertisments for a site called http://www.wegiveadamn.org/ . Give a Damn is an organization that talks about the issues that the LGBT community has to go through day by day. This is why I don't normally give my orientation (pansexual) to any people other then those who wouldn't put in the effort to find my identity or are my close family and friends. At least as a Canadian I've never had to worry about bringing a female date to my prom. But then again... as one gay man said on an article about the crazy prom season for the LGBT's...

"
I'm getting sick and tired of hearing about this prom crap. If that's the worst problem kids are having, then we've come a long way since the hell I went through in the seventies. I wasn't worried about the damned prom. I was worried about getting my ass kicked and harassed by teachers."

Kinda gotta agree with J.S. (his initials) there. Rights have come a long way. But rights also still have a long way to go. And as Cyndi Lauper said, "We give a damn. Do you?"

Apparently some Conservatives do. And that gives me hope that Democrats and Conservatives may be able to talk to each other in a civilized manner someday. For now though, I guess we watch the drama as it unfolds, and Americans get their green cards in another country if it gets too hot.

... wait. What?! Karzai?!

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/07/harper-karzai.html

Now read that and tell me if any American has heard about Karzai's accusations. Call me crazy, but I think that the US media would jump all over that. President Karzai of Afghanistan saying that he's going to quit politics and join the Taliban if the West continued to pressure him to enact reforms. This got so alarming that our own prime minister, Stephen Harper, the 'let's prorogue Parliment twice' wonder, is saying that it's completely unacceptable, and I don't blame him. I'm trying to find other sources for this information other then CBC, but it's proves to be difficult when all CNN can report on is Lin Yu Chun is Taiwan's Susan Boyle, J.K. Rowling MAY be writing another book and Prince William's future engagement to Kate Middleton.

Let's check Fox News. An act that I usually save until last, but I figure, if anything that makes President Obama and the war in Afghanistan look bad right now, it's that place right?

"Cheaper to Fly as other costs go Sky High"
"Dad: Textbook flaunts Anti-Bible Bias"
"Crews Prep for Mine Rescue"

Okay, so, nothing there either. Not that I'm saying that the mine incident isn't important, and it's incredibly unfortunate that it should happen taht way, but... An ally joining TALIBAN. Why is US stations not all over that like oil on a skillet?!

MSNBC next.

Miners and the fact that 9/11 rescuers are still suffering lung damage. Not that that isn't interesting/important either, and incredibly unfortunate.

I next decided to go to a site that I thought I'd never go to. CTV News. I like their TV broadcasts but their website set-up irks me.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100407/karzai_100407/20100407?hub=TopStoriesV2

Karzai.

Am I just incredibly behind? The last I checked, Obama was having a happy surprise visit and shaking his finger at Karzai. Now Karzai has decided to join the Taliban? The Taliban... y'know, the ones who have been holding the country under house arrest for at least ten years? The ones who demanded that women not go to school, that they always be accompanied by a male, that they wear a covering from head to toe? Is Karzai forgetting the devastation of the Afghan Civil War?

And the United States press is standing by and saying, "Ohai... J.K. Rowling read for us! =D"

Yes, and there's reports on Kyrgyzstan. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8608440.stm

Yes, I've seen this all over, but this is a focus on the fact that the US is not saying anything about Karzai... and apparently neither are the British. But that doesn't surprise me. What does is that the Americans aren't talking about the last decade of effort that they've put in about to be thrown down the trash chute.

Well, no, that was Canada on behalf of the Americans. But I digress.

Oh wait. I just found it now. An article on CNN talking about how the Karzai government is saying the statements are riddiculous.

http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/07/u-s-afghanistan-downplay-political-rift/

Had to search but I found it.

... why do I not believe it?

Communism?

Well, just a quick post about why I'm not posting much today.

http://godsibb.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=865    <-- That's why. I'm Canada in that thread. I love British people. =D

Easter with Family, no matter who.

Well, welcome to Easter weekend, the holiday celebrated by many Christians across the world. I myself am agnostic; I don't believe in a specific name for any higher deity. Well, let me rephrase; I don't believe that humans should be so stuck-up as to name it for themselves. I understand the human need for a faith to believe in; believe me. I've had it as bad as anyone, especially in the year of 2009 that I am still personally recovering from. There were many times that I was almost willing to pray to God, Allah, Athena, Bast, Brigid, or any other protector within religious deities to protect myself and my family. I understand the need for faith in something, but I don't go as far as to think that a man died because of Jewish people to save us and help us out with our large amount of sins. Who knows, maybe Jesus did exist, and maybe Jesus was a great man in history. But to say to others that their religion is wrong because of what you believe? Well, that's just plain hateful, another spotlight that I have been underneath in my short time on this planet. But I respect other religions, and so I joined my cousins on Friday for a Good Friday dinner, and then proceeded to enjoy dinner with my grandmother, who just left my home not too long ago. Tomorrow, those same cousins are bringing their fourteen year old son to my house and I'm going to be a friend to him, not only for himself, but for the simple matter that he needs a friend in my town desperately.

Let me explain, as this blog entry seems to switch over to my young cousin, whom I'll refer to as Camulos, since I was on the subject of Gods a few seconds ago, and he happens to like World War Two shooters and wants to get into the RMC. Keeping in mind that this isn't his real name, but for my own personal reference, this should suit nicely, albeit if it is a bit geeky.

Camulos is a fourteen year old boy. He seems like any other teen boy; his parents are divorced, one lives in the big city while the other lives in a smaller city. Parent A would be my cousin, related to me through my father's side; a paralegal clerk, who is a charming and smart young person, even if said person is 16 years my senior. Parent A is currently married happily to an IT techie, who is a cute geek that loves hockey and is an awesome influence on anyone and is 14 years my senior. Both parents bring in a great income and create an environment that even I wish my parents had managed to afford that luxury (but granted, who wouldn't.).

Parent B is... well, I'm not sure. To be honest, it varies by the week whether she's employed or unemployed. She's a horrible influence on Camulos, and is arbitrarily blocking all that my hard-working cousin tries to do. I'm not being biased in this case; in fact, I can see faults in my cousin that my cousin often doesn't or won't see in themselves, and there's been often a time where I bite my tongue from snipping. However Parent B is very much a sour... person. I could call her something else. Let me give an example.

A person within our family is a gun enthusiast. He takes good care of his guns in addition; he follows all regulations within the province of Ontario, he locks his guns, he is very secure and very responsible. My cousin Camulos is an enthusiast about war and video games and hunting, even going so far as to identify guns for me when we play Left For Dead together and what effectiveness they'll have in what situation. The gun enthusiast and Parent A decided that in order for Camulos to learn that guns weren't a toy and nor was war, gun enthusiast would take Camulos to the range with him and teach him to shoot. He accompanied the gun enthusiast, was taught all the safety regulations, how to load and unload the rifle (a .22 to start) safely, and what to do when. Camulos had the time of his life and even got pretty good as time went by, shooting closer to the targets, and walked out of it with a new respect for weapons. (The boy then proceeded in the following hours to howl with laughter when I threw a Molotov at the same spot my teammates were to stop a zombie hoarde because I finally got sick of the AI putting them in the way... but hey, he learned that in real life, that shit's not funny.) He took the targets from the range shoot home to Parent B.

Parent B apparently threw a fit, and has forbidden Parent A to take Camulos with her to Halifax in early August because of the irresponsibility that Parent A has demonstrated in looking after her child. Did I mention that Parent B is also the type to neglect her child, leaving Camulos with his grandparents of whom the grandfather is currently sick while Parent B fucks around, neglects to buy him clothes and instead forces Parent A to do it for her, has not held down a reliable job in the time Parent A has known Parent B and has been installing buttons in Camulos along the lines of "Mummy won't love you if you go live with Parent A."?

Neglectful behaviour from Parent B has brought Camulos in custody battles several times. The judge and jury all agree that Camulos has to leave Parent B, and should be with Parent A. However, there is one little problem.

Parent A is female. Parent B is female. Camulos was born in 1995, before gay rights were installed.

Parent A, my cousin, the woman who Camulos calls Mom, is a 'person of interest' and not an actual parent in the eyes of the law. She is quickly trying to get this changed. And by quickly I mean that she has been fighting for this since she separated from her partner, when Camulos was incredibly young.

Camulos is a normal boy with separated parents and one abusive parent, of whom her abuse I do not feel comfortable with scribing. But Camulos has lesbian parents, so guess what Camulos gets to be stuck with?

Camulos now has a choice to go with Parent A or Parent B, but when he likes his grandparents from Parent B, and he knows that no matter what, Parent A will always love him no matter what choice he makes, who does he stay with? No matter how much of a bitch Parent B is, she's still Camulos' mother. Until the situation is dangerous, which because of Camulos' grandparents it isn't, what does he choose? Does he choose Parent A and her wife, along with Parent A's cousins and aunt (my grandmother), or does he choose the family he knows and the family that raised him?

In the eyes of the law, were my cousin male, it wouldn't be a question. My cousin and her wife would have complete custody.

Yes, gay rights have come a long way. Now my cousins can get married in Canada, a country-wide right. It's an enormous step for gay rights. However a few years after this bill, I still hear stories of the next city over, where a lesbian couple unrelated to me got assaulted as they picked up their seven year old son from school. I still hear stories from the US where a lesbian can't take her girlfriend to her prom. I hear about a couple (one from England, the other from America) who both immigrated to Canada just to have the right to be married and have it recognized.

And now I ask... is gay marriage so wrong? And why is the church so related to the state that it has become wrong?

Why is a church, that can bring families together during a time called Easter, even when some of that family isn't religious, is suddenly turning around and dictating what kind of families can exist in this world?

Why can't Camulos be in that happy, healthy home?

Because let's face it. You're a minority in this world, whether it be colourful, gay, an Independent, under the poverty line (although that's become less of a minority), you're shunned. We don't want you.

No one wants you except for those who are exactly like you.

And maybe that's what we need to do. Minorities got to stick together, and become a majority that says "F-you 'normal people'. We're here. We're queer/black/Jew/Muslim."

Get used to it.

Salon Taxes are Racist? What?

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/21896 (Again, this is a case where I can't link the entire URL.)

Well, I was going to say a lot on this. Then I decided that the entire thing was too ridiculous for acknowledgement. Mr. Beck, racism lives in tanning salons because Obama has it out for those damn white people trying to make their skin darker.

............... I hope you just realize the incredible stupidity of what you've just said. Granted, you don't. But that's not my problem.

As the guy said in the article.

"By the way, tanning salon use has been linked to the deadliest form of skin cancer."

... yeah I think that pretty much summarizes it all up.

Sorry for the small post, but holy crap...

EDIT: Oh no, sorry, I should've read clearer. Doc Thompson said that while filling in for Glenn Beck.

.... it's still incredibly dull.

Photo Ops, History, Terrorists, OH MY!

www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/28/obama.afghanistan/index.html

Well Mr. President, I have to say this. You're certainly a sneaky one. This is your second unexpected and unannounced visit to Afghanistan since you became a blip on the political radar and I must say you've done this one smashingly. Not even a week after you've signed a health care bill that has raised general mayhem in America you're off to visit dear old President Karzai, and for the first time since you've gotten elected no less! Was America just a bit too hot at the moment? But I digress- President Obama is in Afghanistan currently sending out a strong message that the partnership between Afghanistan and America will indeed continue.

Translation: "Yes guys, we're still in this country, although the last guy in office made us run to Iraq, and we're still here although we're in trillions of dollars of debt."

Lovely message there. "We can still be the world's policemen when our budget is under severe cuts."

Though to give the man a speck of credit, what else can he really do? Mr. Bush was the one who threw him into the whole mess, threw the economy into a deficit, and the last two presidents have had to deal with chaotic first years- Mr. Bush with 9/11, which anyone above the age of 13 remembers vividly, and President Obama with a crippling recession right after he took office.

He's not a god, he's a politician. Be thankful that he hasn't pulled a Brian Mulroney (and for anyone who happens to be reading this, I'll let you look up that little tidbit of Canadian history). Could you do better? Could you really do better? Now answer me this; could you do better with his amount of education?

Personally, I think not. There's still that 45% or so that disagreed with Obama and thought that he was nothing more then a dolt who didn't know what he was talking about. I'm not saying that I think that in the least however I'm only stating fact.

Again I digress from the point, and the point that I'm trying to make is that this visit stinks of photo op to me. One could call me crazy (I would call me crazy if I had to live with me... oh wait) but as I read that article today, all I could think about was a rant done by Rick Mercer on a show up here in Canada called the Rick Mercer Report.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjhwdvubJLw (Unfortunately I apparently can't URL that.)

Up here in Canada, to have a political figure go to Afghanistan basically means that they're going to 'up troops morale'- oh no, wait, they're going to look good. Obama's latest visit stinks of this. "I'm going to go over to Afghanistan and visit a president that I haven't visited since my election, lecture him on his corrupt government and the scandal around him, talk to some troops, get some photos and good publicity after my party have been getting violent threats all week over a bill I signed, oh, and did I mention that I'm going to brush off Indonesia and Australia by saying health care and Afghanistan are more important?"

That may not be what he's saying, but that certainly is the image the man is giving off. No matter what he seems to have people pissed off at him wherever he goes. This is why I would never want to run for politics; the disapproval ratings and the boos would drive me up the wall on a world scale.

Some Republicans are saying that it's laughable; "This, from the most corrupt American president in history. Beyond laughable." Oh, so sorry my mistake, BEYOND laughable.

Did you miss his job description? Again, refer to Brian Mulroney, compare him to other politicians. Yes politicians are scum, or at least are considered so by most of the general populace, but who isn't? They just get to be scummy for a camera. It's a challenge to find a non-corrupt politician within the last fifty years, Canadian or American; remember, it was Pierre Trudeau who enacted the War Measures Act during the year of 1970 when the FLQ kidnapped two government officials (one British, one Canadian) and murdered one of them. He actually enacted this act to give the government the right of arrest and detention without trial during this span of emergency. He took away our rights for a fair trial. Were Obama to do that, he would be shot, make no mistake of it. Trudeau went on to make the Constitution Act in 1982 (effectively making it an independent nation from Britain in name and policies), made both English and French the official languages of Canada, and you want to know what he said as he activated his state of emergency to protect the people against terrorists?

"Just watch me." - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_watch_me

Another situation of where if Obama did the right thing and then used that phrase, he would be shot.

And that's yet another point. Obama is America's Trudeau; he is making changes (as he promised, after all, his whole freakin' campaign was about change). Yes you're allowed to cry if you didn't vote for him but at the same time, if you threw away your vote or you voted for him and then you're crying?

No. You're not allowed. You didn't vote/voted for him/voted for the other guy just because you didn't agree with him. You have no right to complain.

I'll admit it; during the 2008 campaign, I knew many 18-23 year olds who did not know where to place their vote, and I joked with them that they should vote for Obama, because America could do with some changing. I don't necessarily think that this is the appropriate time to put in a major health-care bill persay, but some change after America is stabilized is desperately in order.

For instance, give a start with no violence against those that disagree with you. Don't try to tell me that "it's the American way". The FLQ disagreed with our government and some still to this day want separation. We don't refer to them as 'the Canadian way'. We refer to them as terrorists. We refer to those who would strike at our politicians as terrorists. Even if they are our own countrymen, they are still causing terror.

That's the thing that infuriates me the most. Up here when democracy is threatened by our own, they are called terrorists and they are dealt with (in extreme circumstances of course). In America, that just seems to be the daily cup of Starbucks coffee to have death threats when you disagree with someone.

But, when in Rome, do as Romans do. If I have the gall to ask Ann Coulter (along with about 90% of my countrymen) to not spout hate speech because it breaks our laws, then I guess that as the good little Canadian I am, I have to sit down and shut up while a guy I haven't even heard of that voted for the bill gets a rock thrown through his window.

So that's the basic summary of the week. Obama goes to Afghanistan at the outrage of several critics (what else is new), I think back to Trudeau and Mulroney (shocker) and then I reference on how the extreme acts of those against the health-care bill seem like borderline terrorism.

Let's just hope to whatever deity we believe in that the angry people don't become organized.

But hey... at least the press are keeping busy on the American side.

Oh wow, News Update

Well, I don't see anything incredibly interesting within the news today. CBC has more articles on Earth Hour then anything. CNN has decided that Palin's statement of "we will not shut up" is far more interesting then anything else. MSNBC has decided that again, Palin saying to dump the Democrats is more important. On Fox News, it's Palin again, and the interesting thing that I've seen no where else about Obama filling fifteen posts without Senate confirmation. BBC is talking about the Iraqi elections. The American Associated Press is talking about the Tea Party and Palin, as well as the amount of US deaths in Afghanistan.

All in all, it's a normal day in the sandbox. US media talks about people who are rising against the government's ideals, Canada talks about happy world peace and conserving energy and the UK has decided that maybe talking about another country that's not in the spotlight is a good mix-up.

Now here's my point that I'm trying to get at. All of these newspapers are all trying to take on their own perspective. A story can be dissected by a news company and then reconstructed to be whatever their watchers want to see. CTV has a small update on South Korea and a ship that sunk, but otherwise is mostly talking about Earth Hour. But I digress. The point of this is that in America, I see a lot of different viewpoints.

In Canada, it's this simple; CBC is funded by the government, however CBC will also critique the hand that feeds them should the need arise. CTV, although last I checked was not funded by the government, takes the same viewpoint as the general populace. Global News has always been a bit dodgy in my opinion, but they cover more of the world at large then anything, yet they still present the facts as they are, a lot like CBC and CTV. Following the same consensus.

However, in America, through my observations, (and I have the privelege of seeing an insight into the country through the eyes of my boyfriend and future fiancee), the media takes on different shades of the truth. One will take on a Democrat's ideals, another a Republican's, and the rest will just jump on the bandwagon of whatever the public wants. I can rarely find a neutral party in this. If anyone were to read this, I would want it to be explained to me once again, but as it stands, probably no one will read this.

But yes, a quick entry because I have a D&D game to go to in about fifteen minutes. I just figured I would make a point to do it everyday, and everyday I shall make an entry.

"When the votes are tallied..."

www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2010/03/26/sot.palin.mccain.rally.cnn

You may just be right on that one Ms. Palin.

Sarah Palin, for those of us who don't know her, ran as the vice-presidential candidate for the Rupublican party within America in 2008. She also ran as the Governor of Alaska until her resignation in 2009, and had the pleasure (I'm sure) of being the first woman within that particular office. This woman has a lot of firsts; first Alaskan to run on the vice-presidential ballot, and the first Republican woman to run on the vice-presidential ballot. Sarah Palin is also a pagent princess and ran for Miss Wasillia and Miss Alaska, and is a mother and a family woman.

Many do not respect Ms. Palin, however somehow I have an inkling of respect for her. She is uneducated in the ways of the world, to be sure. When she started as the vice-presidential candidate, she was a laughing stock. A pretty face to accent the old wizened one that was Senator John McCain. She was, and still isn't, vice-presidential material, and though I am Canadian I shudder to think of what it might be like if McCain had been elected and had died while in office. That would've been a nightmare. But as a person, I still have respect for Palin, only for the simple line of
"if I believe that that is the right thing to do for our country and for the Palin family."

This was said in response to whether or not Ms. Palin would be in running for the vice-presidential position in 2012. Personally speaking I have to say that I'm impressed with her conduct. Her and her family have suffered riddicule this year; everything from Ms. Palin's own lack of qualifications for the position to Bristol Palin's teen pregnancy. Ms. Palin's own youngest son is inflicted with Down syndrome and her eldest is currently serving for his country, with no knowledge of when he will be deployed again. The woman has a lot on her plate. It's good that she's thinking of her family before she puts herself through more riddicule.

I also think that Ms. Palin has a point. She says in a confrence for McCain's senate race that "when the votes are tallied..." McCain's going to win. I agree 100%, not because of any amazing credit to McCain, but because of the simple fact that America's faith in Democrats fade with each passing day. If Obama does nothing, then he must do something; but when he does something, the government officials are threatened. Obama is doing all the right things at the wrong times- he is trying to make an impact on history more then he already has.

Face it Barack. You're the first black president in the history of America. You are the C-C-C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! of the political world. Because of you, we can no longer joke that the White House is white because it is filled only with old Anglo-Saxon farts.

Now just work on maintaining the country, getting it out of the trillions of debt that it's in, and maybe there'll be a black person elected after you. Because goodness knows, everyone of the same colour is exactly the same and can't break from their stereotype, am I right?

Now imagine if McCain were to run again. Would the American public give him the chance that was stolen from him by Obama? I'm not Republican (Conservative), nor am I Democratic (Liberal) but I say steal because that's all I can see the Republican people saying; Obama managed to steal it. But of course, I'm being stereotypical; not all Republicans are alike.

But when the votes are tallied, I can foresee McCain not only being Senator, but when he next runs for President, being the President of the United States as well. And I wonder; will McCain get rid of the new health care bill? Will he abolish gay rights? Or will he be just the thing America needs to pull themselves out of the sewage?

If Ms. Palin runs as his vice-president, she may want to think of her family and not run if that's the garbage she'll have to climb through.

Ignorant Political Commentators

Oh dear sweet chaos how I hate them.

Well, that's harsh. To say that I hate ignorance is rather cruel of me. They can't help their ignorance. They can't help that their image is being shattered in the eyes of the American, nay, the international community. No, I just rather hate that they are ignorant. I am sure that once upon a time, when they were children, they were darling, sweet little angels, even if one had to trace this back to before they figured out how to say "MOMMY GIMME A COOKIE NOOOOOWW!!!" I'm sure at birth they were considered cute. Now they are quite riddiculous.

I suppose that the fuel for my fire goes to Ms. Ann Coulter. For those of you who don't know of her, our dear Ms. Coulter is a right-wing political commentator who was born in the Big Apple, also known as New York City. She obtained her Bachelor of Arts from Cornell University, and then proceeded to move on to get her Juris Doctor (further studies in law) from the University of Michigan. This would normally indicate that she would have the wisdom to realize that many countries have different laws, am I right?

Well, unfortunately, I am not. Call me an ignorant child if you wish (for I only recently turned eighteen), but I can still spot what irritates me. Quite a lot of things irritate me about this woman.

Let me explain.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2010/03/25/calgary-coulter-speech-university-.html

It started out today as I read the updates on that article on the CBC website. Seeing as I'm Canadian and I don't hold much love for the CTV website (although I watch them) nor Global, I use that to get my news. Lo and behold, I see this article about Ann Coulter about to appeal to the Canadian Human Rights Committee about... what was it?

Hinderance of free speech?

Ms. Coulter is currently on a tour, talking at three universities in Canada. Before her arrival at the University of Ottawa, the provost Francois Houle sent her a message reminding her to tone down her speech, so to say, due to Canada's laws on hate speech.

"In Canada, advocating genocide or inciting hatred against any 'identifiable group' is an indictable offence under the Criminal Code of Canada with maximum terms of two to fourteen years. An 'identifiable group' is defined as 'any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.' It makes exceptions for cases of statements of truth, and subjects of public debate and religious doctrine."

Those who know of Ann Coulter know that this woman is known for making hate speech against Muslims, gays... I'll just say anyone who isn't white and conservative. So to say this to her was just. However, this is where it all unraveled; the message was somehow leaked to the general public. Thus, a protest insued that nearly borderlined a riot, and the result was Ms. Coulter was sent with her money for her speech on her way to Calgary.

Ms. Coulter has decided that Mr. Houle is now guilty of hate speech against her because "his missive sparked the demonstration that lead to her speech being cancelled."

Discrimination against Muslims, liberals and gays........... vs telling a woman who is allowed to proclaim hate speech in AMERICA not to do so in Canada.

Ms. Coulter I believe misses the point of hate speech laws.

Oh, but the indignant Ms. Coulter does not stop there. No, as she says to CBC correspondant Evan Soloman (who I've truly come to pity for having to take this interview), she's determined to save the good people of Calgary and everyone west from the crazy Liberals.

Excuse me Ms. Coulter, I do not remember http://www.liberal.ca/en/michael-ignatieff - Michael Ignatieff taking back over, seeing as I am now permitted to vote and when I was not permitted to vote, www.conservative.ca/EN/1002/ - Stephen Harper was elected along with his CONSERVATIVE party the head honchos that run Canada.

This situation gets even more delightful, and this is because of Ann Coulter's website, www.anncoulter.com/ and her post "Oh Canada!".

"Ottawa": Indian for "Land of the Bed-Wetters."
"And it was committed by Francois A. Houle (French for "Frank A. Hole")."
"Want to hear my favorite Canadian joke? OK, here goes: Francois Houle! I never get tired of that one."
"At the risk of violating anyone's positive space, what happened to Canada? How did the country that gave us Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Martin Short, Dan Aykroyd and Catherine O'Hara suddenly become a bunch of whining crybabies?"


Thank you, Ms. Coulter, for your brilliant representation of America while you stay in Canada. I've heard that not many Americans, even the Conservative ones, listen to you, but clearly some do or you would not be important enough to come to our country and educate us with such interesting phrases as;
'It's a lovely little country. I do recommend that you get free speech. It's a lot of fun."
and
"I'm more determined than ever to turn pretty much from Calgary through the west into the 51st state now. We got to save the good Canadians."

Thank you for your enlightening words Ms. Coulter. We shall go into your bosom and receive your wisdom- right after we watch our hockey game and have our designated time of free speech from the opening faceoff to the last buzzer.

Latest Month

October 2010
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Akiko Kurono