Wednesday, September 26, 2007


Yesterday my wife's grandmother fell very ill and was taken to a local Toronto hospital.

My wife came back home between 8:30 pm and 9:00 pm. On her way home she said she drove past UCC (Upper Canada College) in Toronto and saw a flurry of police squad cars and officers.

She said the number of police cars were in the high teens.

Last night we looked for a news report indicating what the problem might be and found nothing.

This morning my aunt, who lives near UCC, said she saw on CP 24 that a car filled with guns was found on the UCC grounds.

I can find absolutely no information to verify this and a look at the CP 24 website has been fruitless.

I have tried searching the internet under various Toronto based websites and have found no indication of any activity whatsoever.

I believe that my wife and aunt saw a plethora of squad cars on the campus.

I have no way of verifying the newscast my aunt said she saw.

Does anyone know anything about this and if and why there were so many police squad cars on the UCC campus last night?

Wednesday, September 12, 2007


I know many people are talking today about the census report concerning the changing definitions of institutions. How the term family and marriage should be elastic so as to be inclusive for everyone.

Well, I tell you what, I am tired of fighting a battle no one wants to fight, so I'll pick a new one.

I want to be called a progressive!

Progressives are considered nice, happy shiny people who love everybody and want to save the planet. Not calling everyone a progressive is divisive. It implies that if you do not have progressive views you are evil, one dimensional and want to hurt the planet. I think that fosters hate between people.

I know I know;

I question man made global warming. I have a traditional marriage. I do not believe animals have equal rights to humans. I think Sarah Silverman is lame. I no longer listen to Pearl Jam and roll my eyes everytime I pass an organics store. I think Lulu Lemon is obnoxious, Michel Foucault was full of crap and Che is a communist butcher. I also get physically nauseous at the sight of Sean Penn and his cigarette stained face. I love to look at the aesthetics of women and never think of men in the same way.

But I wanna be a progressive because I like how they are treated.

And if you disagree with me you are a fascist, warthog, neanderthal pig with stale porridge coming out of your ears.

There, now I am a progressive.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007


Here is an obscure Coke commercial that the White Stripes recorded an original song for about a year ago.

It was rarely played and the fans were upset at Jack White for 'selling out' but I actually think it is one of the more creative and beautiful ads I have seen of late.

The song has a very pretty Beatles-esque sound and the visuals, while using CGI, have a great organic hook at the end.

Sorry this thing got buried. I would love to have this song as a single.

Monday, September 10, 2007


Mine, that is. I am pleasantly encouraged by this new Ipsos Poll in the National Post.

"The Liberal lead over the Progressive Conservatives has dipped to five points even as a majority of voters oppose John Tory's plan for faith-based funding, according to a new Ipsos Reid poll released as the Ontario election campaign officially begins today."

For the longest time I could not get behind John Tory. I debated if I would even vote in this election at all. I think many conservatives felt the same way.

Yet, when the Ontario Liberals decided to run another election based on demonizing people of religious beliefs, I realized I could not sit this one out. This new poll tells me a lot of people are starting to feel the same way.

Nobody can call me a Tory partisan. Even Warren Kinsella (thanks for the link in August) ran one of my blog posts criticizing Tory.

I stand by what I wrote and Tory is not perfect, but the McGuinty crew have pushed the education/religion issue a little bit too much. Even if you are opposed to faith based funding, most peope know there is something really wrong with our public educational system.

Today, Moira Macdonald has a critical look at McGuinty's real track record. Here, Michael Coren also has a wonderfully acerbic column about our public school system.

The Liberals are becoming vitriolic on this issue as a way to obscure the reality and truly divide us. I sense that is why the 905 region is starting to go for Tory. I also think that if last week didn't turf John Tory, then maybe he has a better chance than even I thought. Just like Harper dealt with the Same Sex Marriage issue at the beginning of his campaign, so is Tory dealing with the education issue.

And remember, Dalton McGuinty is horrible thinking on his feet in debates and John Tory is no Ernie Eves. That was as much a factor last election as any Mike Harris legacy, no matter what the media tells you.

I actually think things just got very interesting and the Liberals will - not - get the majority even I thought they would a few weeks ago.

Things will get very interesting after the first debate.


When is a blatant, one sided political advertisement worthy of publishing as an editorial?

Here is a political ad by Dalton McGuinty to be the 'education premier' being published as an 'op-ed'.

Just more of the same blatant, hamfisted sloganeering that we have become used to from any politician running for election. He bashes the conservatives, uses rhetoric and makes a lot of generalizations that are so generic that they can not be proven true or false.

And all of that would be fine if it were a paid political ad. But it is not. It is being run as an editorial. Now, I know that John Tory will get his chance too and any paper would print these, but it just seems a bit off.

Why should any newspaper be printng an ad for any politician seeking re-election and publishing it as an editorial?

Is this free speech or does it actually hamper it?

It certainly devalues the newspaper that publishes it and I am not just saying this because it was written by Dalton McGuinty.

And does anyone actually think McGuinty wrote this? Or does it make more sense that one of his paid lackeys did and he gave it final approval? I have never thought McGuinty to be the brightest politico out there, but this is pretty trite.

It reads completely like a generic, re-used campaign slogan. All bland statements that ultimately mean nothing. I won't even compromise the integrity of my blog by re-printing a portion of it.

But I ask, when something this facile, this shoddy and poorly written can be published as 'editorial' by a major newspaper, what is the state of our media?

Sunday, September 09, 2007


I had the pleasure to attend the Genesis reunion concert at BMO Field in Toronto on Friday night.

Genesis has always been one of my favourite bands and I will even cop to liking the Phil Collins era better than the Peter Gabriel material. Collins knew how to take Gabriel's theatrical nature but make it mainstream and attract a larger audience. That audience was out at full force at BMO Field.

The stage design was by Mark Fisher Studios. You can see some samples of his work here. Chances are if you have seen some large shows in the past 15 years you have seen his work. He has designed concerts for U2 (Pop Mart, Zoo TV), The Rolling Stones (A Bigger Bang) and Pink Floyd (Division Bell) among many others. In other words, his shows are BIG.

Genesis was no exception. With a sprawling design that reminded me very much of Pop Mart, they utilized large video displays, arches, circular video monitors, fireworks and an overall motif that looked like a steel version of The Fortress of Solitude. Great stuff!

But none of that matters if the performers don't show up to play. And Genesis played indeed.

People forget what a fantastic consumate showman Phil Collins is. He is a true performer and ranged from comedic (I Can't Dance), dark (Home By The Sea, Mama), poignant (I Know What I Like, Ripples) and romantic (The Carpet Crawlers). He is also one of the rare performers that can go on for a long time talking to the audience and still be very entertaining.

His voice is in wonderful shape and all of the band members from Mike Rutherford and Tony Banks, to the touring band of Chester Thompson and Daryl Steurmer were in wonderful form.

The only time I held my breath, was when Land of Confusion began and I saw the fire coming on the video screens with the old Spitting Images heads. For a second I feared the worst. That my old and dear favourite musical friends from my teen years would use the opportunity to preach to me about war and Imperialism and George Bush and Iraq and...Well, not at all. They were there to entertain and not a political note was hit all night. Instead, they favoured true artistic forms like metaphor and the obscure imagery that was always their trademark.

This was one of the best rock shows I have ever seen and I can say, I have seen a lot. It was easily more dramatic than The Police reunion a month ago.

Only flaw was the venue. The acoustics at BMO Field were great but getting there was a nightmare. Coming from Avenue Rd on Friday night there were no buses due to some delay. After waiting 50 minutes I caught the express for double the fare. At Union station we had to catch a street car that let us off half way there, and then another shuttle bus that battled through traffic for 30 minutes to get to the venue. Horrible.

There is also no covering at BMO Field and it was supposed to rain. I brought an umbrella and they asked me to check it in. I did not, dodging a security check point instead to make my way onto the floor.

Getting back was no better. Nevertheless, this was a show I had waited 20 years to see as I had never saw a Genesis tour before.

Rumour has it that they will come back for a second leg with Peter Gabriel and Steve Hackett. If that is true, I will cetainly be there.

Friday, September 07, 2007


I remember when my brother (the one still alive) first got to vote in an election back in '84. He was a rebellious teenager and wanted to upset my dad who, as the son of Italian immigrants was a die hard Liberal. My brother went out to vote and when my dad asked him who he voted for, my brother said, Brian Mulroney.

Now my brother is no conservative and has recently positioned himself somewhere to the left of Jack Layton.

But back in '84, his goal was to upset my dad...and it worked. My mother even voted Liberal up until a few years ago when I started explaining things to her.

Point is, even though Trudeau did not run in '84, that is who my dad was voting for when he went in the booth. Like many Italian immigrants...oh hell, most of 'em, they came to Canada with dreams and because of much white Protestant bigotry, found it difficult to assimilate.

I understand on the surface why Trudeau is loved by many immigrants and why they revere him.

But what I do not understand is the white-washing of history that turned him into a saint of the secular left. Much of that legacy is built on lies. Yes, Trudeau helped make Canada more tolerant to immigrants, but he also exploited them by making Canada a country that was tolerant to their skin colour, not their values. That exploitation is what remains in the Liberal Party today.

I am glad Brian Mulroney is trying to correct the record. Trudeau is often called a citizen of the world. That he was. He was a friend to everyone.

Communists, dictators, fascists...Trudeau saw them all as just different philosophies towards equality. He protested Canada's entry into WWII against The National Socialists and was a dear friend of Fidel Castro who was a pall-bearer at his funeral.

"Trudeau and Castro took to each other from their first meeting in Cuba in 1976, which broke Castro's isolation and ruffled U.S. feathers. The two leaders saw each other regularly until well after Trudeau had left politics.

Mark Entwistle, Canadian ambassador to Cuba between 1993 and 1997, remembered sitting at the dinner table with the two men as they talked the nights away -- "intellectual soul mates, definitely."

Trudeau's legacy is a legacy of lies. Trudeau's belief in 'equality' and 'The Charter' was actually based on his belief that communism was a viable system. He knew with America to our south, he could never make Canada a communist, atheist nation, so instead he gradually instilled a value system in us that drove us further and further left.

And it has worked. Like a charm.

Yet, Trudeau was not an evil man. He was just a greatly simplistic and facile one who could not understand the philosophical contradictions in communism. Like many of his generation, he did not understand the evil committed by the National Socialists. He could not comprehend the genocide of Stalin or the horrors of Mao.

How could he? They preached love and equality, did they not?

His legacy is one of relativism and bowing at the altar of secularism.

For this, his golden boy reputation should be tarnished. His current defenders do not like the truth getting out because it changes the landscape. Good on Mulroney for speaking it.

I hope to hear more of Trudeau. He was everything I do not like in a politician; vapid, shallow, amoral and simplistic.

I guess with a reputation like that, it makes sense he was Canada's first rock star.


No, not the Marxist sympathizer who didn't even want us to fight the National Socialists. The REAL Trudeau, y'know, the character that teams up with Bruce Willis to fight terrorists in Die Hard 2: Die Harder.

He immortalized the line "Stack 'em, pack 'em and rack 'em."

I have always enjoyed Fred Dalton Thompson as an actor, even though I do not watch L & O.

I agree with John Podhoretz though;

"He won't get the nomination by default, he has to win it - and that will require him to go at Giuliani directly. "

This match up will be much more entertaining than Hillary vs. Obama because we don't know how it will end.

What we need to know now, is if Thompson is the real deal. I hope he is.

Wednesday, September 05, 2007


I wish I could say I was shocked or stunned by the conservative bloggers saying they could no longer vote for John Tory over his comments saying creationism could be taught in religious schools.

First off; have you actually read his quote or did you let the all trusting, all knowing media interpret it for you?

Tory said that schools would have to meet the standards of the Ontario curriculum. There was no place where he said this would be taught in science classes.

In addition, for all of you secular, Hitchens lovin' 'intellectuals', who are now leaving Tory over this because you are 'personhoods of science';

Where are you when your kids are being taught Feminist Gender Theory which goes against science and says that there are - no - differences between the male and female of the human species when virtually every piece of modern scientific evidence we can amass says the exact opposite is true on both genetic and cognitive levels. We are equal to be sure, but definitely different.

Where are you when your kids are being taught Queer Theory (that's not me mocking it, that is what it is called) - which goes against science and says that we are all born pansexual and are only indoctrinated into heterosexuality. Of course one of Charles Darwin's major theories was that of Sexual Selection which believed in explicit gender differences and the purpose of human sexuality being for the propagation of the species. The transmission of male sperm to female egg.

Disagree with that? You just went against Darwin.

Much like love, truth hurts. But as personhoods of science, you wouldn't be offended by that. Would you?

It seems some of you like your Darwin when it is convenient but not when it is not.

I could ask where you are when An Inconvenient Truth is exposed to your children ad nauseum without any allowance for science based disagreement, but I think I've made my point.

I have been critical of John Tory here, but at least I have been consistant.

As with most things in this world, it's not the opinions themselves that bother me, it's the hypocrisy...the blasted hypocrisy.


That whole 'University of Zero' stuff is exactly why I could never vote for the Liberal Party and can't stand the mainstream media.

To call this a non-issue is to make too big a deal of it. But the Liberals, and progressives in general, excel at language parsing to take things out of context to create an image of a scenario that does not exist.

What the left has done over the past two decades with regards to parsing of linguistics and context I can only call the rape of the English language. There is no other term for it. I remember seeing James Carville in an interview a few months back and he repeated again and again that context did not matter to him.

For truth, context is everything, but that is a philosophical notion that most relativist progressives do not believe in.

The reasons why American conservatives have made some inroads in the past two decades is because people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh realize that progressives play for keeps and they hit back hard. Yes, Coulter may be crass and crude, but she realizes her opponents will not let up and will keep their jackboot on your throat until you can't breath.

Then they will press a little harder.

If I were John Tory during my first debate these are three things I would repeat again and again as a mantra.

1. Dalton, why do you insist on treating people of faith as second class citizens?

2. Dalton, do you not think it is racist to call working class Muslims and Jews who want faith based education segregationists?

3. Dalton, do you intent to keep your views consistent and dismantle the Catholic school system?


This is definitely a winner. For years I have been thinking that if we are to have a system where medical care is paid for by the government, then there is no logical reason why dental work should not be included.

I would argue that especially in the case of small children, where dental pain can be a very serious concern. My views on this issue are actually very NDP. I don't think this goes far enough.

I have no idea how many people would actually benefit from this, and the Star article reaks of bias, but if my tax dollars had to go towards anything paid for by the government, dental care would be at the top of the list.

I have been very critical of McGuinty on this blog but I have to give credit where credit is due. I am not a partisan. Love him or hate him, this move by team McGuinty is a stroke of genius. I also think it is a moral thing for a government to do.

With all of the policy pilfering by the Ontario Liberals of late, McGuinty's campaign is playing like a greatest hits of the opposition requests.

I eagerly await what John Tory's counter move will be.

Tuesday, September 04, 2007


Funny, I remember when it used to be called Sunday.

Last time I checked, weren't the Liberals at both the Federal and Provincial level dedicated to making sure the family was - not - the focal point of our culture?

Oh, right, now that they have redefined the 'family' in Ontario to mean everything from two cats and a dog named Froofy to a group of cottagers in one house on a drinking binge I guess it is alright.

And of course, if you are opposed to this crass exploitation, you must be opposed to 'family', right?

Question: If Family Day is supposed to be the new Sunday, which is now a day of work where we no longer think of families;

And Dalton McGuinty is the creator of Family Day;

Does that make Dalton McGuinty some sort of deity?