has anyone ever witnessed this? apparently, two people shagged on the 351. do not lick translink furniture.
this is more interesting than anything going on in politics right now.
is it just me, or can every single party claim this may-dion collaboration as some kind of victory?
c-grit: I do tend to think the Liberals come out on top here, if only because it gives Dion's environmental platform an implicit vote of confidence and helps out the inevitable "vote Liberal to stop Harper" messaging we'll see the last weekend of the campaign.
yes, i do think it is pretty fun to post a pro-ndp soundbite from candace.
section 15: And what of that long-time tradition of new leaders running unopposed in by-elections? It's not always applied, but it's widely regarded that leaders of significant political parties (like the Greens, ahem!) should be allowed into Parliament. Now, it is true the Greens don't have an MP yet, which exempts May from that tradition, but with Green popular support being firm, and barely trailing the NDP, I think it's time.
conservatives: OMG KEVIN POTVIN THE LIBERALS ARE SOFT ON TERROR, and i have no idea who this "rob anders" you speak of was.
its not what i would have done, but i dont know much about the politics. im kind of surprised at all the people who suddenly care deeply about the central nova liberal constituency association. oh, its the principle, you claim. like i said - am i the only person here who can think of better indicators of canada's democratic health than a liberal candidate in every riding?
at worst, this alliance will make dumbass urbanite progressives (who rag on socons for voting single-issue yet can only process one or two black-and-white issues at a time themselves) think they dont have to do something scary like vote green since the liberals are totally about the environment.
at best, peter mackay is outta there. ok. everyone in central nova, get back to work. i can't freakin stand the guy. let's send him home crying like belinda stronach did!
some people think his column was the most morally reprehensible thing to happen since, say, 9/11. im not one to side with religious fundamentalists or violent revolutionaries - really, im too much of a pussy for either ideology. is he morally unfit to govern?
he claims he was applauding the aesthetic side of the attack, given the symbolic importance of the targets. too bad theyre full of people. yeah, even though theyre full of hawks and commerce majors, i still dont accept that killing them is laudable.
then, he made the lone decent point about the tv value of seeing 'people like us' suffering, and the callousness with which we receive foreign death tolls.
terrorism is then presented as the only feasible way to counter the military capabilities of the united states. do states have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force? well, it's certainly a cornerstone of liberal democracy. i dont accept that non-state actors are always less justified in using force. i dont think the usa is off the ethical hook as far as civilian deaths are concerned simply because they hire a lot of scientists and technicians to improve aiming devices. everyone who is this firmly committed to any ideology supports some kind of just war theory in which their values are worth a bunch of other people's lives.
how committed are you to liberal democracy? what the hell is someone who isnt doing running for office in a liberal democracy? is dissent important in the house of commons? these are all interesting questions that we will cover in east van marxists 101.
why am i defending him? because its been a while since ive been able to do something blatantly partisan, ok. this is a fucking politics blog, people. everyone in the green party is the awesomest person in the election!!! IN YOUR FACE, OTHER PARTIES!
personally, i wouldnt have picked someone from the republic as a candidate. the mainstream media just loves to chew marxists to bits, and im doubting the revolution is going to start on the house floor... but what are the damn odds of taking kingsway, anyway?
The criticism that a toad, a lizard, perhaps even a cricket or a millipede may die during the show's run makes a mockery of Vancouver's world-class pretensions.
It makes us look like a city of philistines.
yeah, the crux of the article is 'if you dont think a model panopticon full of ugly little creatures is the height of culture, youre a backwater hick.' fair enough, bro - nobody said my neck wasn't red.
i thought dada was meant to be unsettling. if you're an unfeeling knob, you might be disturbed in that "bentham's prison full of animals, oh, the irony is so grossly inappropriate!" sense. mulgrew fancies this is really what is grinding animal rights activists' gears. as compelling as the bentham-on-my-mind theory is, reactions are likely more visceral than that due to the fact prisons and creepy-crawlies are involved. if mulgrew is writing this sanctimonious cage-liner in order to stir us into a dadaist frenzy, this is actually brilliant journalism. somehow, i think he's approaching it from the "only a hick would care about spider rights" place.
i'm not giving him much credit, because he does a few things in the article that make him seem like a philistine or poseur. firstly, he claims artist huang yong ping's work is brilliant because it "resonates with insight into the current clash of civilizations, faiths and ideologies." anyone who uses the phrase 'clash of civilizations' is, at best, intellectually lazy and definitely too much of a philistine to go around calling others out on their lack of ze culture. secondly, he refers to foucault as a 'legal theorist' when anyone worth their weight in avant-garde intellectual street cred knows that we refer to these french people simply as 'theorists' (or social theorists, if you must) because disciplinary boundaries are just that fucking passé. ok, so this evaluation of him isnt exactly serious. i guess what i am hinting at is that vancouver is a hick city, and that by equally pretentious standards, ian mulgrew is also a hick who writes missives for the village news.
next time, avoid the 'it's good because i can bring up foucault in conjunction with it' and stick to something more moralizing and pedantic... like, say, the fact kierkegaard would agree with you, and want the vancouverites to make the jump from the moral to the aesthetic.
"This brouhaha over creepy-crawlies is bush league," he maintains, going on to discredit the normative claims of the protest as "the equivalent of condemning fishing because anglers use worms." well, dude, i have news for you - some vegan animal rights hippies would protest that. and because we dont live in the communist china you so touchingly invoke at the conclusion of the article, we let them go around and do so.
if the humane society tells people not to see the exhibit, then it just gets more press. if people are revolted, it recalls the halcyon days of dada.
yeah, vancouver does need awesome art exhibits, but it doesnt need hacks from the village news reminding us that we are hicks if we take issue with them. and fuck this 'world-class city' shit - didn't toronto copyright that phrase to help them feel better about themselves?
omg, sami and lucas are totally planning a green wedding. yeah, im posting this. truly, if this doesnt win the green party the election, i dont know what will. it's nice to see people give a rat's ass about environmental responsibility, but sustainability isnt necessarily summed up by buying ethical shit. sometimes, it's about buying less shit in the first place. oh no, i just outed myself as a total marxist for suggesting we buy too much crap.
id suggest watching the "vimy's physical and emotional remains" clip here if you are curious about the vimy ridge monument. haligonian (and acadian) guide mathieu craig, who has the misfortune of being a friend of mine, describes the symbolism and architecture behind the monument quite well. hes articulate, intelligent, and a hell of a lot more endearing and charming than ill ever be - arent you glad canada dispatched him to provide interpretation?
ok. so i ran in a student government election. the specifics arent important - i found out some positions were uncontested, and i decided to make a race of it and air some of my grievances with the arts undergraduate society. it turns out my desire to lace everything i post on the internet with profanity has rubbed some people the wrong way. also, it turns out my reluctance to act like it was a real debate with suits and little microphones with red lights was also slightly off-putting. let's address a few concerns of two people who had beef with me.
i was also the subject of this missive. yeah, it's way more well-written than the first, which i placed behind the cut for being way boring-er.
It truly amazes me how the power of hiding behind a glowing computer screen corrupts one’s decency and respect to one’s fellow person.
oh, the "you dont think human rights exist on the internet but they dooooo" defense. lovely. he will go on to call me immature, all the while sounding entirely like a high school debater. mr speaker, be it resolved that id much rather sound like a whiny bitch than a high school debater. motion carried?
I also believe it is cowardice that drives people to slip on a mask of “anonymity” and with a gleeful smile and a sense of over-inflated superiority to say something to, or about, people that you probably would not have the testicular fortitude to say to their face.
can everyone who knows me irl please confirm that i have absolutely zero qualms with saying anything i say on the internet to anyone's freakin face? yeah, im invoking the "bitch, you dont know my life" defense. and what.
You claim as your defense the irrelevance and futility of the internet, even though you have just used it as your primary means of expression regarding topics that are supposedly important to you. E-mail, Facebook, blogs, messaging, is a part, not apart, of the real world, and when the subject of your personal attacks and childish retorts is someone you can come face to face with tomorrow, it all takes on new meaning, which is something that can only be handled by a mature mind.
i had to paste this in its entirety for it made me lol. when i say im 'just an internet troll' i am referencing the fact im an aus outsider. i have absolutely no delusions re: the power of the internet. i did do much of my campaigning online, following this up with classroom announcements and face-to-face meetings in which i further encouraged people to visit my web real estate.
save your moralizing for church, bro. i dont try to pass myself off as mature, ever. i also dont find much wrong with this. ok, so it will affect me in 'the real world' ... but i have my ass firmly planted in the fake world. go undergrad!
Who isn’t tickled by the opportunity of calling someone else a dweeb or a dork, or perhaps something more inventive like asshat or slapnuts?
um, my mood can never be described as 'tickled' ... and who the fuck says 'slapnuts,' ever? for the record, i know WAY BETTER BURNS than that.
When has it become socially acceptable to tell people to “shut the fuck up” just because you’re not staring them straight in the eye?
im sorry, but my trashy friends and i use stfu all day, every day.
you dont have to be enrolled in those highfalutin' gender seminars where you go over kristeva and her insistence the harsh p consonant sounds in the word papa recall the act of anal penetration to know that in most cases, a drag queen ought to be addressed as 'she' or 'her' - not he/she, it, or whatever your mind came up with given the severe constraints imposed on it by not being able to think about anything besides that penis (!!!) under the sequins.
there are a few queens in this year's eurovision, and im sure youre all stunned by my decision to back the ukraine's verka serdyuchka. now i can get my drag prowess, eurotrash tunes, and soviet kitsch in one place.