tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post8056994482939386355..comments2024-03-29T04:13:44.353-04:00Comments on BigCityLib Strikes Back: Young, Huffed, And Muslim...?bigcitylibhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-90322987652414457292008-05-31T16:47:00.000-04:002008-05-31T16:47:00.000-04:00He knows that. He's just pretending he doesn't.He'...He knows that. He's just pretending he doesn't.<BR/><BR/>He's not as stupid as I first thought. He's more manipulative and deceptive.<BR/><BR/>Examine these assertions:<BR/><BR/>Offensive is not nearly good enough to warrant censorship.<BR/><BR/>Offense is something that remains undefinable and is only resolved through mediation.<BR/><BR/>Canadian artists demand the right to be provocative and offensive and receive tax credits.<BR/><BR/>This is a lie. Industrial incentives are part of the operations of the state. Artists and other innovators are simply availing themselves of the incentives we have determined, collectively, are worth state support, for a variety of reasons.<BR/><BR/>If tax credits are good enough for layabout Canadian artists, it should be good enough for Macleans.<BR/><BR/>"Layabout Canadian artists." Such as Sarah Polley, Atom Egoyan, David Cronenberg, I imagine. Not to mention all those involved in the development of cultural products that "conservatives" approve of<BR/><BR/>If we are going to go down the petty and anal retentive road of spurious censorship, we might as well be consistent and hobble Canadian artists with censoring too.<BR/><BR/>This confuses censorship with withdrawal of support. And deliberately.<BR/><BR/>Paul S. will, of course, simply respond as if he knows nothing or that words have no meaning. That would be a charitable interpretation of what he writes.<BR/><BR/>But I've seen enough to conclude that he's simply a manipulative and disruptive liar, whether he realises that or not.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-34937387003405281332008-05-31T16:17:00.000-04:002008-05-31T16:17:00.000-04:00I seem to be hitting a nerve.= Offense is somethin...I seem to be hitting a nerve.<BR/><BR/><B>= Offense is something that remains undefinable and is only resolved through mediation. =</B><BR/><BR/>Merely being offensive is no business of the state. No mediation necessary.<BR/><BR/><B>= This is a lie. Industrial incentives are part of the operations of the state. =</B><BR/><BR/>Now you're simply playing wordgames ti-guy. Incentives or subsidies, both publishers and artists are recipients of taxpayer's money. <BR/><BR/>Only artists demand exemption from the rules applying to all other Canadians.<BR/><BR/><B>= This confuses censorship with withdrawal of support. And deliberately. =</B><BR/><BR/>Personally I just think you're confused ti-guy. Even BCL has made it is mission that if he can't get the matronly hall monitor Barbara Hall to do his censoring or hectoring, he wants postal subsidies withdrawn from Macleans.<BR/><BR/>Who's confused again?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-47608059732076510712008-05-31T10:21:00.000-04:002008-05-31T10:21:00.000-04:00He knows that. He's just pretending he doesn't.He...He knows that. He's just pretending he doesn't.<BR/><BR/>He's not as stupid as I first thought. He's more manipulative and deceptive.<BR/><BR/>Examine these assertions:<BR/><BR/><I>Offensive is not nearly good enough to warrant censorship.</I><BR/><BR/><I>Offense</I> is something that remains undefinable and is only resolved through mediation.<BR/><BR/><I>Canadian artists demand the right to be provocative and offensive and receive tax credits.</I><BR/><BR/>This is a lie. Industrial incentives are part of the operations of the state. Artists and other innovators are simply availing themselves of the incentives we have determined, collectively, are worth state support, for a variety of reasons.<BR/><BR/><I>If tax credits are good enough for layabout Canadian artists, it should be good enough for Macleans.</I><BR/><BR/>"Layabout Canadian artists." Such as Sarah Polley, Atom Egoyan, David Cronenberg, I imagine. Not to mention all those involved in the development of cultural products that "conservatives" approve of<BR/><BR/><I>If we are going to go down the petty and anal retentive road of spurious censorship, we might as well be consistent and hobble Canadian artists with censoring too.</I><BR/><BR/>This confuses censorship with withdrawal of support. And deliberately.<BR/><BR/>Paul S. will, of course, simply respond as if he knows nothing or that words have no meaning. That would be a charitable interpretation of what he writes.<BR/><BR/>But I've seen enough to conclude that he's simply a manipulative and disruptive liar, whether he realises that or not.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-11420416888452436622008-05-31T07:43:00.000-04:002008-05-31T07:43:00.000-04:00Paul,It is for PAP.Paul,<BR/><BR/>It is for PAP.bigcitylibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-57662298516895831722008-05-31T07:30:00.000-04:002008-05-31T07:30:00.000-04:00Paul S. is a liar.Paul S. is a liar.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-21090957621547568092008-05-31T03:10:00.000-04:002008-05-31T03:10:00.000-04:00BCL, I read your post and you are still whacking a...BCL, I read your post and you are still whacking at a dead horse. "Offensive" is not nearly good enough to warrant censorship. <BR/><BR/>It is interesting that there is a parallel debate with C-10. Canadian artists demand the right to be provocative and offensive and receive tax credits.<BR/><BR/>If tax credits are good enough for layabout Canadian artists, it should be good enough for Macleans.<BR/><BR/>If we are going to go down the petty and anal retentive road of spurious censorship, we might as well be consistent and hobble Canadian artists with censoring too.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-71891790381805116622008-05-30T19:27:00.000-04:002008-05-30T19:27:00.000-04:00Terrence, Posted a long comment on WC re this. Di...Terrence, <BR/><BR/>Posted a long comment on WC re this. Didn;t even use profanity. Hopefully the debate shall be glorious.bigcitylibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-30786256161312646912008-05-30T18:51:00.000-04:002008-05-30T18:51:00.000-04:00...get on with it....DON'T READ IT....WRITE A LETT...<I>...get on with it.<BR/>...DON'T READ IT.<BR/>...WRITE A LETTER.<BR/>...DO SOMETHING USEFUL.</I><BR/><BR/>Ja<I>fucking</I>wohl!<BR/><BR/>Who do you think you are, Czarina Barbara Hall?<BR/><BR/>Use your your indoor voice, sweetie.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-49199813231929865572008-05-30T18:09:00.000-04:002008-05-30T18:09:00.000-04:00= Are you lonely, honey? =No, just bored. Had the ...<B>= Are you lonely, honey? =</B><BR/><BR/>No, just bored. Had the afternoon off and have already done my part to kill all the annuals and perennials I just put in so I'm wasting time until suppertime. Posting here is almost as enjoyable as taking a nap (almost). ;)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-37213660199093380272008-05-30T18:05:00.000-04:002008-05-30T18:05:00.000-04:00Oh please Terrence, would either you or BCL just g...Oh please Terrence, would either you or BCL just <I>get on with it.</I><BR/><BR/>If you don't like being offended by reading Macleans, DON'T READ IT.<BR/><BR/>If you don't like postal subsidies given out to ALL Canadian magazines, WRITE A LETTER.<BR/><BR/>BUT, forget about arbitrarily suppressing freedom of speech based on denying accused parties proper legal remedy as HRCs are wont to do.<BR/><BR/>So please, either you or BCL just DO SOMETHING USEFUL. Remember, you have been offended, and while you should be free to give offense as you please, this same right must not extend to others. Talk about consistency.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-78138998583539184822008-05-30T17:58:00.000-04:002008-05-30T17:58:00.000-04:00Paul S, if I need to hear anymore from you today, ...Paul S, if I need to hear anymore from you today, I'll go over to DeSmogBlog. Although I see no one's responding to you.<BR/><BR/>Are you lonely, honey?<BR/><BR/><I>The question is why freedom of speech should be determined by the likes of Barbara Hall.</I><BR/><BR/>Adorable. Simply adorable...Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-6640357965199896432008-05-30T17:02:00.000-04:002008-05-30T17:02:00.000-04:00In case the above link to my Shotgun post didn't c...In case the above link to my Shotgun post didn't come through, here it is <BR/><A HREF="http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2008/05/macleans-corpor.html" REL="nofollow">again.</A>Terrence C. Watsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07332306056519991646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-35856687350882604632008-05-30T16:57:00.000-04:002008-05-30T16:57:00.000-04:00I put a post on the Shotgun blog that links back h...I put a post on the Shotgun blog that links back here. Thanks for bringing the Maclean's subsidy to light. Hopefully, the discussion will be interesting.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>Terrence<BR/>http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2008/05/macleans-corpor.htmlTerrence C. Watsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07332306056519991646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-85543261809303082442008-05-30T15:48:00.000-04:002008-05-30T15:48:00.000-04:00= Art and other cultural products aren't real life...<B>= Art and other cultural products aren't real life as presented in news and current affairs media, sweetie. =</B><BR/><BR/>Right. When art is offensive, it isn't real, when art is hateful or racist or pornographic or paedophilic, that isn't real either. Sure.<BR/><BR/><B>= Why should cultural standards be determined by people like you? =</B><BR/><BR/>Nice try. The question is why freedom of speech should be determined by the likes of Barbara Hall.<BR/><BR/>But really ti-guy, you need some new lines. Your schtick is getting a bit tired.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-80027186476727662262008-05-30T08:59:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:59:00.000-04:00Pardon me ti-guy, it is the left who is squawking ...<I>Pardon me ti-guy, it is the left who is squawking incoherently on the topic of freedom of speech/expression and tax subsidies.</I><BR/><BR/>Look further up, sweetie, and you'll see that I <I>support</I> tax incentives and grants for cultural products that may not have enough mass market appeal to be profitable (or even workable 'at cost'). Does that really apply to media empire's like <I>Rogers</I> and their products?<BR/><BR/>What is incoherent is that "conservatives" are generally opposed to the state funding anything (except tar sands research, guns and other military toys for boys and whatever they, personally, can milk from the state), so you reveal that you are unprincipled if you don't think this reason is good enough to remove PAP funding from <I>Rogers</I> (currently, close to 9 million dollars a year), regardless of the content it features.<BR/><BR/><I>Artists are asking for, no, demanding access to tax subsidies and unfettered freedom of expression.</I><BR/><BR/>Art and other cultural products aren't real life as presented in news and current affairs media, sweetie. I'd support, <I>wholeheartedly</I>, funding for a documentary to examine Canada's neo-nazis, bigots, racists, <I>FreeDominion</I>, <I>Blogging Tories</I>, and *conservatives*, for example. It's where I very often differ with other liberals/lefties, though not many, since they're usually smart enough to understand the difference between art and real life, unlike "conservatives."<BR/><BR/><I>If unsupported suppression of "offensive" speech is good enough for all of us there is no reason it shouldn't be welcomed by Canadian artists also.</I><BR/><BR/>Why should cultural standards be determined by people like you? You don't even pay taxes; you're only <I>9</I>, after all. Re-read that bit above about art and real life again as well.<BR/><BR/><I>Ooooh. Such a zinger ti-guy. Honestly, your retorts are slipping badly.</I><BR/><BR/>Lighten up, honey. It was obviously a lie and a joke. Your mother didn't start binge drinking until after you were born; about the time you started talking, as I recall.<BR/><BR/>Now go out and play or go bother the people at <I>DeSmogBlog</I> again for a bit. Daddy's had enough of your chatter for a while.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-60316314276618012752008-05-30T01:51:00.000-04:002008-05-30T01:51:00.000-04:00Pardon me ti-guy, it is the left who is squawking ...Pardon me ti-guy, it is the left who is squawking incoherently on the topic of freedom of speech/expression and tax subsidies.<BR/><BR/>Artists are asking for, no, <I>demanding</I> access to tax subsidies <I>and</I> unfettered freedom of expression.<BR/><BR/>You think BCL is upset about that? Nope. Fat chance. <BR/><BR/>If unsupported suppression of "offensive" speech is good enough for all of us there is no reason it shouldn't be welcomed by Canadian artists also.<BR/><BR/><B>= Your mother shouldn't have binged so much during the first trimester, Paul S. =</B><BR/><BR/>Ooooh. Such a zinger ti-guy. Honestly, your retorts are slipping badly.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-71064328744020349382008-05-29T21:51:00.000-04:002008-05-29T21:51:00.000-04:00Man, you can't even count on the twatty Rightwinge...Man, you can't even count on the twatty Rightwingers to stay coherent on the point of using <I>tax dollars</I> to fund cultural products.<BR/><BR/>Your mother shouldn't have binged so much during the first trimester, Paul S.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-85652127509801523592008-05-29T20:38:00.000-04:002008-05-29T20:38:00.000-04:00= . . .we can certainly, all of us, Conservative o...<B>= . . .we can certainly, all of us, Conservative or Liberal, agree that publications spreading general offensiveness ought to be forking out for their own postage.=</B><BR/><BR/>Well count this righty out. <BR/><BR/>If "offensiveness" is the operative word here, and I believe it truly is, then tax dollars must be withheld from a myriad of publications. <BR/><BR/>But the issue here is <I>you</I> and your pet beliefs have been offended. For the left, offending others is a right while being offended is a crime. <BR/><BR/>Just get it over with BCL. File the complaint. Pray that Barbara Hall will use her matronly magical powers to turn Steyn into stone. In other words what I'm saying is: give up.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640844117742326726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-11343396564958014872008-05-29T12:19:00.000-04:002008-05-29T12:19:00.000-04:00Retire that young Awan fellow too(aka sock puppet ...Retire that young Awan fellow too(aka sock puppet #1). Hes a pretty bad spokesman for "human rights" after his trip to Parliament hill to speak out against same sex marriage.KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-1522161737562872082008-05-29T08:57:00.000-04:002008-05-29T08:57:00.000-04:00I've long thought about lodging a complaint of tha...I've long thought about lodging a complaint of that nature against <I>The Interim</I>, <I>LifeShite's</I> print rag that is toxically screechy and hate-filled most of time.<BR/><BR/>Thing is, I support small publications that have no hope of being profitable. That's a different issue with <I>Rogers</I> publications and general interest news/current events magazines like <I>Macleans</I>, especially as it concerns the care and upkeep of that Wingnut Welfare Queen, Mark Steyn.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.com