12.15.2006

More Bboyism!



Killafornia's on the left, Def Dogs from France are on the right. This is a sick battle with high energy and a nice mix of style and power.

12.11.2006

A Nation of Who?

For a long time it has weirded me out that the media reports on politics as though it were a sport rather than the actual governance of our country. We here about polls and speeches and tactics, but very little about the actual bills being passed or the thinking behind them. We hear about budgets in terms of who will be pleased and what they will mean in different regions. It seems, as of late, that politicians have gotten the message and given up on actually governing. The US congress has been reduced to a bizzarre contest to see who can sneak the most pork for their own constituents into utterly unrelated bills and things aren't much better in Canada. Perhaps the most disgusting example of politicking before governance came in Harper's recent recognition of Quebec as a nation.

First, having been out of the country for year's, Ignatieff brought up the idea as a way to score points in Quebec for his bid for the Liberal leadership, without caring too much if he was stirring up seperatists who had finally fallen quiet. Next the Bloc Quebecois picked up the idea and ran with it too the House of Commons, so as not to be outplayed by the liberals, and then Stephen Harper, who is more willing than anyone else to give massive handouts in order to retain power, decided that his government would write the bill themselves. Everyone was so quick to try to win votes in Quebec that they didn't even bother to define Quebecois before passing the motion.

The Globe and Mail observed, "that motion, which recognized the “Québécois” as a nation, was passed with a heavy majority in the Commons. Since then, however, politicians of all stripes have been weighing in on what they think it means."

The idea that you could pass a bill, without anyone bothering to define the most important terms within it is mind-boggling. It is really beginning to seem as though politicians have forgotten that their actions have consequences not only in the media, but in reality as well. They have become so obsessed with watching their reflection on television and in the newspapers that they have forgotten that the exist bodily as well.

As an aside, I would like to say that I was offended by how quickly and thoughtlessly this motion was ratified. It is opposed by a majority of Canadians. It is even opposed by the majority of francophones living outside of Quebec. Perhaps there are definitions of nation which would include the Quebecois. I am more than willing to accept that. But I cannot see how it is possible that the Quebecois are a nation but aboriginal tribes are not. They also have their own languages and cultures and goals. There own governance and geographical locations. And more than that they were nations before we came and created Canada. (The same is true of Quebec in a way, although they were a colony of France rather than an independent and indigenous nation.) If the Quebecois are a nation so are the Inuit and the Cree and the Ojibway and the Haida, and probably Chinese-Canadians as well, and people from Woodbridge, Hip-Hop Heads, bicycle couriers, leaf fans, snowboarders, swingers, trekkies, Hindus, Tamils, Jews, goths and people who still drive SUVs.

12.07.2006

Bush Actually Read Something

This is from the press conference that Bush and Blair held today to discuss the Iraq Study Group.

A reporter asked Bush if he was willing to take the report seriously.

His answer was bad news for John Stewart, because in all honesty, I think it's pretty much exactly what John would say in his shruggy-beady-eyed Bush impression.

I'm not shitting you. I'm not making this up and I'm not taking it out of context, when presented with this question the President of the United States said: "To show you how important this one is, I read it."

You can read the rest of his comments to see how little he managed to say in 30 seconds of circular vapid blubbering -- in which he appears to be surprised that the members of the commission didn't have something better to do in their "busy lives" than try to solve the problem of Iraq.

Q Mr. President, you have said that you have the Baker-Hamilton report, you also have the -- you're waiting to hear from the Pentagon, you're waiting to hear from the State Department. This report was prepared by a bipartisan group, the only one you'll get. Secretary Baker has a special relationship with the family. Should this report not get extra consideration? Does it not carry more weight than any of the others?

PRESIDENT BUSH: That's an interesting question. It's certainly an important part of our deliberations, and it was certainly an important part of our discussions this morning. Some reports are issued and just gather dust. And truth of the matter is, a lot of reports in Washington are never read by anybody.

To show you how important this one is, I read it, and our guest read it. The Prime Minister read -- read a report prepared by a commission. And this is important. And there are some -- I don't think Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton expect us to accept every recommendation. I expect them -- I think -- I know they expect us to consider every recommendation, Jim. We ought to pay close attention to what they advise. And I told them yesterday at our meeting that we would pay close attention, and would seriously consider every recommendation. We've discussed some of their recommendations here at this press conference. And we are -- we will spend a lot of time on it.

And I -- and so you ask its relative importance. I'd call it a very important report, and a very important part of our working to a new approach, a new way forward in Iraq.

And I can't -- I really do thank those citizens for taking time out of busy lives to spend time helping us look at different options. These are distinguished souls; they got plenty to do. They're busy people, and yet they took nine months out and they talked to a lot of people. They went to Iraq, they thought about it a lot, and it was a very considerate, important report. And I will take the recommendations very seriously.

12.04.2006

A Joke

I, the Right-Right-Left-Up-Down-Select-Start-Honourable Col. Matteus Von Mustard Esquire, have decided that today I shall present you with a joke instead of the usual apocalyptical nay-saying.

Q: How many Bush Administration officials does it take to change a light bulb?

A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its condition is improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are illusional spin from the liberal media. Illuminating rooms is hard work. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?


Ha ha ha! We're so doomed.

12.01.2006

God Toying with Innocent People's Lives

What other explanation could there possibly be for this newscaster's unlucky existence. An article in a Cleveland newspaper is reporting that "It wasn't funny being a real TV reporter from Kazakhstan trying to cover Ohio's recent elections."

Fair enough, that would be difficult, but it doesn't, in itself, incontrovertibly demonstrate the existence of a divine being with a malignant sense of humour.

The newspaper continues -- "it didn't help that the Kazakh cameraman's first name was "Bolat."

I rest my case. We're all doomed, but it's gonna be goddamn funny.