In Which We Assist Mr. Kramp.

What Mr. Kramp said the radio said:

What the radio said:

Kramp, as if to highlight the urban-rural divide, issued a statement on his Twitter account, saying he was feeling sorry for himself, since many of his friends are in hunting camps this week, his son-in-law had just bagged a bear, and he was in Ottawa [debating Bill C-391].

You stay classy, Daryl Kramp.

Probably The Sexxxiest Picture Of Stephen Harper That There Is

...because he's got that supermodel-on-the-cat-walk "I know you want me, I don't want you" look in his eyes.

If he's going to go around looking like this (though frankly he could still afford to lose a few lbs--is that his gut or is he smuggling fertilizer?) I don't know what the point of voting Lib could possibly be. We got nothing policy-wise. If we lose our edge in sexxxiness we're truly fucked.

Can we get a nude shot of Gerard Kennedy here, or Pablo Rodriguez, or at least Ruby Dhalla? I'm losing faith.

The Globe Gets Smaller

h/t

Just A Reminder Re That Hidden Agenda

Jim Flaherty at a Defend Marriage rally, probably in 2004 or 2005, bashing the concept of Same Sex Marriage.

Colby ("The Unshaven") Cosh Gone

I was going to write about Mr. Cosh's desperate need of a shave, but now I would probably feel bad about it. Good luck Mr. Cosh. Sorry for always spelling your name with an "a".

Source.

Discover Canada

Wow! The terrorists won't know what hit 'em! And all other new immigrants will suddenly want to vote Conservative! But wait! I've read through the history section twice. What about the Beothuk?

The Dysktra Affair

Did Dykstra disrespect our soldiers, or was he just live-blogging the event? And if you are live-blog a veteran's day ceremony, isn't that in itself disrespecting our soldiers?

Interesting as to when Dykstra's origonal blog post (which contains the picture he allegedly took with his blackberry) was written. He claims 11:38 AM on Remembrance Day, but Jane Taber writes:

Update The Liberals are disputing Mr. Dykstra’s version of events, pointing to an RSS feed that suggests the item was posted this morning at 11:06 a.m. - after the photo went out - and not on Remembrance Day at 11:38 a.m.

Here's a screen shot of the front page of his blog, retrieved from google cache:

Don't know how easy it is to see, but the time-stamp here reads 2:53 PM. Meanwhile, the most recent version of the page bears a time-stamp of 11:38 AM. Note also that the wording of the post suggests it was written yesterday afternoon. So it looks as though both sides are wrong, although it also looks like Mr. Dyskstra diddled with the timestamps on his RSS feed and blog for some reason or another. I demand his immediate resignation.

Don't know if that helps solve much, but I do love a mystery.

Tories Slide Away From Majority

Their numbers decline for the fourth week in a row:

The Tories remain on top, dropping slightly to 36.6 per cent support from 37.4 per cent a week ago. The Liberals stayed virtually the same at 26.6 per cent (compared with 26.8 per cent) while the NDP was up slightly at 16.8 per cent from 16.3 per cent.

The Green Party gained, up to 11.2 per cent from 10 per cent support, and the Bloc Québécois dipped to 8.8 per cent from 9.4 per cent.

Interesting though that the Libs. are still below their theoretical 30% floor, so it doesn't look like they're getting much benefit from the Tories slow decline. Where is the vote going? I hope its not to the NDP--that would be like Canadians rejecting steak for meat-loaf.

No internals, but I am sure Ms. O'Malley will be along shortly with those.

(PS. Interesting talk at last week's prog-blogs event about what happens to Green Party leader Lizzie May after the next federal election. It sounds like she'll pack it in if she doesn't win a seat, which would essentially kill the party as a credible political force. Hate to say it, but that's the best thing that might happen to the Libs. It seems to me the 2nd choice for most of those voters is LPoC not NDP.)

Text You Very Much

...Tory MP Rick Dykstra, seen here responding to incoming blackberry messages during a Remembrance Day Ceremony. Stay classy Rick!

(And is one or is one not allowed to text/twitter during the minute of silence? What's the appropriate etiquette?)

h/t

Welcome SDA Readers!

I just noticed the link in! I must say, the old girl doesn't pack the same punch as she used to, traffic-wise. Really, I'm doing her a favor.

Cheap Shots On Remembrance Day

A couple of days ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke at a ceremony to commemorate the fall of the Berlin Wall, that symbol of communist tyranny.

And that makes me wonder why tomorrow, some Conservative MPs will be at another ceremony commemorating a man who fought for communist tyranny.

"The man" is, of course, Norman Bethune. Stay classy, Gerry Nicholls.

Lady Wrestlers

That is all. But it is enough.

More On Now Infamous B'nai Brith Ad!

From Dawg's comments forgot to buy tinfoil writes:

This ad annoys me, too, but for different reasons: the typography, the images, the colour scheme. It's hard to discuss anything reasonably when the fires of Hell are burning in the lower right corner. This is not an appeal to reason. If you like demagoguery, you'll love this ad.

Exactly. And I am not sure what the trigger is supposed to be. What (recent?) historical event brought this ad about? Nor am I sure what specific political outcome it sets out to achieve, beyond lowering the discourse. BB has always been a bit too right for me on several issues, but I've always assumed they were a class act.

Its also butt ugly, like somebody puked on the page. I sincerely hope the ad agency of my good friend Harry Abrams wasn't behind it.

Finally, the argument that its about radical Muslim groups and not Muslims is like the argument that its about Zionists/Israel and not Jews. Both are valid in theory, but can be abused in practice. This ad says nothing concrete or useful about a Canadian response to domestic terrorism (or anything else). It looks like its saying that they (Muslim radicals) are everywhere, so be afraid.

See infamous BB ad here.

Stay Classy B'nai Brith

From, believe it or not, the Nov. 9 paper edition of the National Post:

Two things. 1) National Post wants, no needs your money, and will run anything, anything that you want to stick in those vast stretches of unpurchased ad space within its pages. 2) I have no idea what BB is trying to accomplish with this other than to spend alot of money creating some really poorly designed adverts throwing insults at our local Muslim population. Are they still pissed over that thing with the Higgins Counterterrorism Research Centre and the Manitoba Human Rights Commission? I mean seriously: is this supposed to stiffen somebody's spine re the Afgh. mission? I have no idea.

Larger version here.

A special greeting for SDA readers here.

Gun Problems In Milton (And Other Rural Areas)

Still a bit sick and too low on energy to write much myself, so here's a nice bit from Jennifer Smith's post on the long-gun registry:

...here in Milton, we just don't have a lot of gang-bangers or drug dealers or bikers or Mafia-types, or any of the sorts of scary career criminals you see on American TV (well, we do, but most of them are locked up in Maplehurst up the road).

What we do have in this quiet little town are drunks, abusive spouses and bored teenagers. Some of them have access to firearms. Most of them are upright, law-abiding citizens - right up until they're not. So for me as well as for all those other people trying to defend their 'rural lifestyle', the odds of getting shot by a previously law-abiding spouse, or a drunken neighbour, or some kid showing off his dad's .22 to his friends are much, much higher than the chances of getting shot by a gang member with an illegal handgun.

In other words, the people who tend to be the most vocal against the long gun registry are also the ones who potentially benefit the most from it.

Jen's post also takes aim at a number of gun-registry myths. All good ammo (as it were) in the on-going debate.

Duffy Does Sums

"On an annual basis he spends 128.000 and I spend $132,000," said Duffy. "We're within $4,000 of each other and he's attacking me for lavish spending. It's a stunt."

Sharon, from my comments:

Duffy was reported to spend $44,000 in three months... that breaks down to $176,000 per year not $132,000. He appears to be making the mistake of assuming 3 months is a 1/3 of a year instead of 1/4th.... I can't believe this guy made his living in journalism.

Duffy Strikes Back

From the Amherst Daily, on Peter Stoffer:

"On an annual basis he spends 128.000 and I spend $132,000," said Duffy. "We're within $4,000 of each other and he's attacking me for lavish spending. It's a stunt."

On Holland College:

"You look at Holland College in P.E.I., they got $8.5 million this year," said Duffy. "People say why do you travel? It's because you need cards to play and chips to use."

[...]

"So I'm going to ask the minister of science Gary Goodyear to look favourably upon Holland College. He has a zillion applications and I say, 'gee Gary, would you take a personal interest. I think it has merit. Will you look at that and see what you can do," said Duffy. "So when Holland College comes up they get $8.5 million. They're going to build some new buildings, take down some substandard housing and rearrange things and do it in a way that will substantially change your impression of Charlottetown.