Pablo Rodriguez: I Was Unable To Blow To The Officer's Satisfaction

Cue the cheap gags now. Luckily, the universe remains in balance. And Pablo (left) has far better hair. Far better. Really extraordinary hair.

Politics, Boobies, And Hair

Last week WAPO fashion writer Robin Givhan sparked a mini-scandal when she wrote a column dedicated to the quick flash of cleavage Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton displayed during one of her speeches on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Now the issue has come up again, as Howard Kurtz discusses the fallout from the original article.

Weirdly enough, this is a case of life imitating art. As I reported almost a year ago, sculpture Danial Edwards has created a topless vision of Hillary, "A Presidential Bust", which the artist hopes will instigate "a discussion about sex, politics and celebrity". Furthermore the question of "Hillary's hotness" was raised even earlier by actress Sharon Stone, who claimed that Hillary might simply be "too sexxxy" for the Whitehouse.

Nor should Canadians be complacent, for our own politics are not above such trivial concerns. I have argued in the past, and indeed correctly, I think, that Gerard Kennedy was denied the Liberal Leadership, not over matters of policy, but because of his hair. He simply possessed too much of it, and it was too soft and too lustrous, for the Liberal Party establishment. They feared his hair, and what the effect might be were Gerard to go before the people of Canada with hair that was, on the whole, so much better than average. Would Canadians connect with a hair God, or would Gerard seem elitist and out of touch?
Sadly, and for the same reason, Quebec MP Pablo Rodriguez will never lead the Liberal Party. He is simply too hot, and his hair too extraordinary, for the position.

Too Sexxxy To Lead

C-288, A Triumph For The Opposition

I never thought that bill C-288 (The Kyoto Implementation Act) would turn out as badly as some progressives thought, and many Tories hoped. So when Harper caved last night and said he would "obey" the new measure, I felt quite vindicated.

Why did he do it? Well, it was clear from the Libs Senate Leader, Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette, that C-288 would not necessarily be fast-tracked through the upper-house, which meant that the timing of its passage would remain in Liberal hands. This would make it impossible for Harper to use the bill as a trigger for a March election call. And any other response (for example, doing nothing and waiting for lawsuits) would have looked like more Tory stalling.

So what is our situation now? As Antonio over at Fuddle Duddle notes, the opposition has just written the environmental law of the land:

Yesterday was already a non-confidence motion. The Liberals, BQ, and NDP already agree on enough things like Child Care, Kelowna, Status of Women Canada, etc., that they can pass legislating mandating the government to do something about it.

Technically, they cant spend any money, but they can get all kinds of bills through parliament and make the Conservative budget contradict parliament’s will.

I think this is hilarious and John McCallum should begin drafting a budget which should also be another Private Members’ Bill. I think we still have the old platform somewhere. The NDP and the Bloc have seen the poll numbers, neither wants an election. After seeing our numbers I wouldn’t want one either. Who needs an election anyway?

Well, exactly. I don't know why the three opposition parties don't just seize control of the Clean Air Act, for example, rewrite it with teeth, pass it over Conservative opposition and tell Stephen Harper to go squeal like a pig. Certainly, they can pass new regulations.

I might even suggest writing legislation proclaiming Same Sex Marriage compulsory in Alberta. Make the Tories beg for an election.

Also, I would just second Antonio's words to the effect that Pablo Rodriguez, the Liberal MP behind C-288, is an extraordinarily sexxxy guy.



In fact, Antonio himself is pretty damn sexxxy. Between these two fellas and Mitsou, is it any wonder that federal governments of all political stripes feel the need to give Quebec money whenever it pouts?