Rally organizers, the Campaign Life Coalition, could not be reached for comment.
Instead, my favorite SoCon Suzanne at Big Blue Wave (whose Youttube video of the march launched the whole controversy) pulls the scoop from 570 News:
However, Jim Hughes, head of Campaign Life Coalition, said the annual protest against abortion has never received federal funding and that the government was in no way involved in this year's event.
Hughes couldn't say how the Canada logo made its way onto the banner, likely created by a volunteer. But he said the banner has been used for the past five years without a problem.
...which last statement causes Suzanne to write:
Only now, with a Conservative government in power, did someone notice. What a coinkedink.
That last word is not a typo. I am assuming it is some kind of SoCon approved foul-language substitute. In any case, Suzanne, the fact that problems arose now is probably more a result of the fact that march attendees were encouraged to post youtube videos of their experience. Also, five years seems a long time for organizers to remain ignorant of what seems a pretty basic feature of Canadian copyright law.
Meanwhile, Mr. Hughes seems to have been partaking of the holy vodka bottle, because his estimates of the crowd size at last Thursday's March For Life are about double those of anyone else at the event. While Mr. Hughes produced a figure of 7,000, one police officer put the number at about half that, and CBC National News estimated a crowd of 1,500.
1,500? That means March for Life drew fewer souls than the "Save the Slime-Mold" protest I once attended, or the "Hop of the One-Legged Lesbians".
9 comments:
Suzanne would be incorrect in her assumption that this has to do with the Conservative government.
This pilfering has been noticed in other years also, in fact there is a babble thread on it from 2005.
"Coinkedink" is actually a variation on the word "coincidence" that I recall being popular in grade three. So either it's the language of children or the author is about 20 years out of date, or both.
The Globe and Mail has the article this morning with a comment from a pro life march organizer
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/0-0&fp=464a424037df0e28&ei=EfBKRsFyjrSgAvKH9L4H&url=http%3A//www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070516.ABORTION16/TPStory/National&cid=1116386368
OK the link is too long so either Google it or it's on my site.
Dan,
So its like Flander's "Okely Dokely"? (from the Simpsons)
Exactly, a most excellent comparison.
In any case, Suzanne, the fact that problems arose now is probably more a result of the fact that march attendees were encouraged to post youtube videos of their experience.
That's too empirical for the saintly SUZANNE; she prefers inferring dark and evil motivations from unseen enemies; it's all more biblical that way.
She has a rich imagination, if nothing else.
Do you htink any of those guys complained about the shocking infant mortality in Iraq or the genocide in Darfur? Did they weep at the mounting dead in Afghanistan?
Nope. Because the "sanctity of life" does not extend to adults, fully developed and born children who happen to be on the wrong side of their pet war.
Hypocrites. This was never about the sanctity of life, but about them having control of other peoples uteruses (uteri?).
re:genocide, etc. It's actually quite acceptable to choose choose one issue at a time to protest.
re: uterus/uteri. Do what you'd like to your uterus, but once someone is in residence please respect his space!
Post a Comment