A couple of weeks ago we considered the nascent détente between the US and Venezuela and asked this question: is DW more captive to his populist nationalism than Chávez is to his populist socialism? http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/04/danny-chavez-reconsidered.html
We now have our answer: Yes.
Since that post, Obama and Chávez have met, shaken hands, and started the process of burying the hatchet: http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/04/odds-hatchets-nadirs.html
In a gesture of goodwill, Venezuela has returned an island to the US: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8013592.stm
Meanwhile, the ABC folly continues to cast a dark shadow in NL. Yesterday, the Tely editorial noted its effects on federal funding; today, it's being discussed as a block to negotiating a settlement for the laid-off workers in Grand Falls-Windsor.
In a Tely story by Moira Baird, "On Notice," which is not available online, the provincial representative for the Communications, Engery, and Paperworkers had this to say: "The federal government and the provincial government are going to have to bury the hatchet -- they need to do a forestry worker adjustment program similar to what's being contemplated in other sectors."
If DW is unwilling or unable to bury the hatchet, why doesn't he act boldly and autonomously, and announce a special provincial fund to assist the workers while the legal issues get sorted out?
Such a fund would cost a fraction of the multi-millions being poured into NALCO. In fact, it would cost less than setting up a new government bureaucracy: http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/health/0326n10.htm
If DW wanted to be really bold, Child, Youth and Family Services (CYFS) could be located in Grand Falls-Windsor, so that the $8.5 million (plus the $275,200 allocated for two new government lawyers) could be used for regional development to help a high unemployment area, rather than further inflate the economic bubble in St. John's.
For more questions on AbitibiBowater-gate, see http://labradore.blogspot.com/2009/04/international-autonomy-in-theory-and.html
AbitibiBowater-gate MIA Update:
Even VOCM has noticed that Dangovt is MIA: http://www.vocm.com/news-info.asp?id=35709
This is the best they can do update? http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/tcr/0424n02.htm
Missing Ministers P.S.:
Yesterday, Wiseman was in Clarenville (where the internet access is as good as Town), so he will have a hard time (even for him) saying he didn't know the latest news in health care when Jones asks him about it in the House: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2009/04/24/pain-doctors-stjohns-424.html
By the way, if Wiseman can find the time in his hectic schedule to give a speech to the Clarenville Area Chamber of Commerce and have lunch at the St. Jude Hotel, then surely he can find the time to keep up with developments in his own Department: http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/health/0423n02.htm
Another day, another serious health care problem in a have-province. Any idea of when no longer being a have-not province will actually produce better health care?
My guess is that this will begin to happen when the Minister of Health devotes more time to his own Department and less time to chatting up local Chambers of Commerce.
Showing posts with label 13 Degrees of Separation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 13 Degrees of Separation. Show all posts
Friday, April 24, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Anyone but Canada
It was only a matter of time before ABC morphed in the national media into "Anyone but Canada:" http://www.canada.com/Business/story.html?id=1373881
The National Post story is a retread the Rob Antle's story in the Tely:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=230092&sc=79
As I've pointed out in an earlier post, DW's European Adventure is full of contradictions and inconsistencies:
http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/02/dws-excellent-european-adventure.html
In this case, it would be understandable if DW's many groupies cried foul. They can point to numerous occasions when DW affirmed that he's a proud Canadian.
What they cannot do, however, is account for public statements like this:
"Canada just struck us over the head."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090206.wwilliams0207/BNStory/politics/home
or this:
"And we have been building up a war chest for when the feds come at us again, quite frankly."
http://labradore.blogspot.com/2009/02/hast-thou-entered-into-treasures-of.html
For more examples, see:
http://bondpapers.blogspot.com/2009/02/we-want-to-be-independent-and-self.html
The provincial politics of ABC and its impact on federal-provincial relations have received exhaustive coverage and debate. But its impact on how Canadians view NL has received little attention to date.
No one seems interested in discussing how fair-minded Canadians might feel about DW's outbursts. Perhaps few people in NL care about what Mainlanders think.
But plenty of people, especially in Dangovt, care a lot about Canadians' tourists dollars. The same Dangovt that loathes the Globe has an annoying pop-up ad embedded on the newspaper's homepage.
Given everything that DW has said since 2003, it's perhaps not surprising that today the Tely carried this letter to the editor:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=232993&sc=87
"Not visiting this year
We've been watching the pretty tourism ads for Newfoundland in the paper and on television. We were actually thinking that we might come down this summer.
But then we began to think about it a bit. Do we really want to spend our money there? This is the province that the rest of us have been shoveling money to since 1948. Not only have we never been thanked, but apparently we are actively disliked by a majority of you.
Why else would you overwhelmingly support a premier whose main platform seems to be antagonism to the rest of Canada? Up here, we don't like people of his sort - he makes his way by inciting anger between the citizens of this country.
He is the antithesis of what a good Canadian should be and his standing in your province, unfortunately, says a lot about Newfoundlanders in general.
Now, it's separation.
Now we are hearing calls for a separate Newfoundland. Please feel free.
We wonder how long you'd last without the transfer payments for which you apparently have such low regard. So we're not coming this summer ... sorry.
Rob Hammond
Brockville, Ont. "
---------------------
Maybe this is an exceptional, isolated case. Maybe Mainlanders will flock to see all the blond- and red-haired Celts prancing authentically under the NALCO transmission lines.
Maybe not. The letter writer might be an isolated jerk for all I know (the jab about "shoveling money" was nasty, unfair, and wrong), but perceptions are perceptions. And despite DW's superhero powers, even he cannot control how Mainlanders will respond to what he does and says about Canada.
Before the next DW meltdown, it might be worthwhile to pause for just a minute and consider how people outside Newfoundland may respond to anti-Canadian rhetoric, let alone acts such as pulling down their national flag. It might also be useful to think about how separatism affected financial investment in Quebec. The full consequences of the ABC folly are still unknown, but what we do know is that they will spill well beyond provincial borders and Ottawa knife-fights.
As I've maintained, DW's predictions about getting shafted have had a funny way of turning into self-fulfilling prophecies:
http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/03/paradoxes-and-polemics.html
Maybe that's been the plan all along.
The National Post story is a retread the Rob Antle's story in the Tely:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=230092&sc=79
As I've pointed out in an earlier post, DW's European Adventure is full of contradictions and inconsistencies:
http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/02/dws-excellent-european-adventure.html
In this case, it would be understandable if DW's many groupies cried foul. They can point to numerous occasions when DW affirmed that he's a proud Canadian.
What they cannot do, however, is account for public statements like this:
"Canada just struck us over the head."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090206.wwilliams0207/BNStory/politics/home
or this:
"And we have been building up a war chest for when the feds come at us again, quite frankly."
http://labradore.blogspot.com/2009/02/hast-thou-entered-into-treasures-of.html
For more examples, see:
http://bondpapers.blogspot.com/2009/02/we-want-to-be-independent-and-self.html
The provincial politics of ABC and its impact on federal-provincial relations have received exhaustive coverage and debate. But its impact on how Canadians view NL has received little attention to date.
No one seems interested in discussing how fair-minded Canadians might feel about DW's outbursts. Perhaps few people in NL care about what Mainlanders think.
But plenty of people, especially in Dangovt, care a lot about Canadians' tourists dollars. The same Dangovt that loathes the Globe has an annoying pop-up ad embedded on the newspaper's homepage.
Given everything that DW has said since 2003, it's perhaps not surprising that today the Tely carried this letter to the editor:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=232993&sc=87
"Not visiting this year
We've been watching the pretty tourism ads for Newfoundland in the paper and on television. We were actually thinking that we might come down this summer.
But then we began to think about it a bit. Do we really want to spend our money there? This is the province that the rest of us have been shoveling money to since 1948. Not only have we never been thanked, but apparently we are actively disliked by a majority of you.
Why else would you overwhelmingly support a premier whose main platform seems to be antagonism to the rest of Canada? Up here, we don't like people of his sort - he makes his way by inciting anger between the citizens of this country.
He is the antithesis of what a good Canadian should be and his standing in your province, unfortunately, says a lot about Newfoundlanders in general.
Now, it's separation.
Now we are hearing calls for a separate Newfoundland. Please feel free.
We wonder how long you'd last without the transfer payments for which you apparently have such low regard. So we're not coming this summer ... sorry.
Rob Hammond
Brockville, Ont. "
---------------------
Maybe this is an exceptional, isolated case. Maybe Mainlanders will flock to see all the blond- and red-haired Celts prancing authentically under the NALCO transmission lines.
Maybe not. The letter writer might be an isolated jerk for all I know (the jab about "shoveling money" was nasty, unfair, and wrong), but perceptions are perceptions. And despite DW's superhero powers, even he cannot control how Mainlanders will respond to what he does and says about Canada.
Before the next DW meltdown, it might be worthwhile to pause for just a minute and consider how people outside Newfoundland may respond to anti-Canadian rhetoric, let alone acts such as pulling down their national flag. It might also be useful to think about how separatism affected financial investment in Quebec. The full consequences of the ABC folly are still unknown, but what we do know is that they will spill well beyond provincial borders and Ottawa knife-fights.
As I've maintained, DW's predictions about getting shafted have had a funny way of turning into self-fulfilling prophecies:
http://orwellianspin.blogspot.com/2009/03/paradoxes-and-polemics.html
Maybe that's been the plan all along.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
North Atlantic Blame Games
I didn't make it to the Breezeway, but last night I did develop a new appreciation for Té Bheag. After thinking about it again in the early morning fog, the last section of Parker's New Yorker article is worth quoting in extenso, with, if you'll pardon the intrusion, some gratuitous obiter dicta:
"In B5, the empty and fashionable bar, Hannes Gissurarson, the author of 'How can Iceland Become the Richest Country in the World,' had said, 'Ten to fifteen guys overreached themselves, they were out of control. But that is not the cause of the collapse.' The primary causes, in Gissurarson's opinion, were the international credit crunch, the treachery of Gordon Brown -- the 'schoolyard bully' [ed: someone should tell DW that there is another traitor out there] -- and the failure of the European Central Bank to show Iceland support.
He also said, as if the thought were occurring to him for the first time [ed: was Wiseman in Iceland recently?], that it may be that 'some of us are to blame indirectly, because we created a climate in which the entrepreneur was applauded. The businessman, the guy who takes over companies, asset-stripping [ed: expropriation, too?] -- he was a hero in Icelandic folklore that was created by some of us who strongly supported the free market.' He went on, 'Indirectly, I take some blame for it, but, if you think about it, it's not my fault [ed: sure sounds like Wiseman was there] . It's the fault of left-wing intellectuals, who should have been giving a counter-view!' [ed: Danlogic knows no borders]. He added, 'You can't blame people for their successes -- you have to blame those who fail. We were too successful with the free-market philosophy.'
As we spoke, a white stretch Hummer slid past the window. Since October, Gissurarson said, 'people at the university who think that I have been too successful at whispering into the ear of a prince, they are now trying to settle old scores with me. One shouted, 'Resign, you devil!' in the corridor. Extraordinary.' [ed: well, it would be extraordinary if anyone at MUN took a stand about anything that happens north of the Parkway].
Had it suited Iceland to be rich? 'Very much so,' Gissurarson said. 'It was a hell of a good ride. Yes it was.' [ed: and the Wingnuts missed it].
So you read it here first: it's intellectuals who are to blame. No doubt the 8th Floor doozer in charge of magazine clippings will bring this Icelandic fact to DW's attention.
"In B5, the empty and fashionable bar, Hannes Gissurarson, the author of 'How can Iceland Become the Richest Country in the World,' had said, 'Ten to fifteen guys overreached themselves, they were out of control. But that is not the cause of the collapse.' The primary causes, in Gissurarson's opinion, were the international credit crunch, the treachery of Gordon Brown -- the 'schoolyard bully' [ed: someone should tell DW that there is another traitor out there] -- and the failure of the European Central Bank to show Iceland support.
He also said, as if the thought were occurring to him for the first time [ed: was Wiseman in Iceland recently?], that it may be that 'some of us are to blame indirectly, because we created a climate in which the entrepreneur was applauded. The businessman, the guy who takes over companies, asset-stripping [ed: expropriation, too?] -- he was a hero in Icelandic folklore that was created by some of us who strongly supported the free market.' He went on, 'Indirectly, I take some blame for it, but, if you think about it, it's not my fault [ed: sure sounds like Wiseman was there] . It's the fault of left-wing intellectuals, who should have been giving a counter-view!' [ed: Danlogic knows no borders]. He added, 'You can't blame people for their successes -- you have to blame those who fail. We were too successful with the free-market philosophy.'
As we spoke, a white stretch Hummer slid past the window. Since October, Gissurarson said, 'people at the university who think that I have been too successful at whispering into the ear of a prince, they are now trying to settle old scores with me. One shouted, 'Resign, you devil!' in the corridor. Extraordinary.' [ed: well, it would be extraordinary if anyone at MUN took a stand about anything that happens north of the Parkway].
Had it suited Iceland to be rich? 'Very much so,' Gissurarson said. 'It was a hell of a good ride. Yes it was.' [ed: and the Wingnuts missed it].
So you read it here first: it's intellectuals who are to blame. No doubt the 8th Floor doozer in charge of magazine clippings will bring this Icelandic fact to DW's attention.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
When the coffee kicks in
Now that the coffee has kicked in, and the reality of Curious George's Circus is sinking in, it might be useful to offer some observations about the politics:
1. Mr. Curious must really, really like Harper. In fact, DW and all the Wingnuts must, in their heart of heats, be secretly pulling for Harper to win a majority in the next federal election. With Duceppe too disciplined and too seasoned a politician to lob Harper any polling gifts, Harper must be extremely grateful to have DW and the Sunshine Band around. Stirring up the rancid pot of separatism (regardless of the fact that it's never going to actually happen) helps Harper solidify his base and extend his support with wavering voters (let's call them Harper Liberals, since they are like Reagan Democrats), who are patriotic and will respond strongly and genuinely to threats to break up with country. Not only that, but The Curious Circus will provide a shot in the arm to Harper's campaign to reform, if not abolish, the Senate.
2. Mr. Curious must really, really hate Iggy. He has placed him in the untenable situation of having to defend the indefensible. He has forced him, for the second time in the New Year, to walk an impossible line between opposing Harper and pursuing his party's interest in avoiding an election. The Curious Circus shows, at the worst possible time, the deep fractures and evident contradictions within the Liberal Party. It shows that it accepts well-paid hypocrites who trash-talk Canada without having to face actual voters to keep their jobs. It makes it appear that Iggy is a weak leader incapable of confronting the Wingnuts within his own party, let alone in the rest of the country.
3. Mr. Curious must really, really like Gilles Duceppe. He is beating the drums of separatism and generating, if only for one news cycle, national media coverage without having to be paid one Quebec dollar. Mr. Curious is doing what Gilles himself couldn't manage: showing the worst side of federal politics, exposing just how opportunistic and reckless Ottawa really is; showing how Ottawa doesn't work.
4. And, last but not least, The Curious Circus is a gift from the political gods for DW. In the short-term, it offers a convenient distraction from the real news of the Cameron Inquiry and the wave of popular anger over the fact that Wiseman remains in cabinet. In the medium-term, it offers an effective stalking horse for his favourite hobby horse, i.e., Newfoundland nationalism. Now DW can say, "No, it's not me -- it's George who wants out of Canada. I'm just organizing this anti-Canada rally and referendum because he has released the pent-up gasses of separatist angst." In the long-term, it will help DW continue to worm his way into the Liberal apple, steadily eating away at its commitment to federalism until everything has rotted away.
This brings us back to language and logic. One of the worst aspects of Wingtalk and Danspeak (usually they morph into the same thing, but they are distinct sub-species) is the way they abuse the English language. The bit in the Tely about the supposed distinction between predicting and promoting separatism would be funny if it wasn't so disturbing.
As I've commented on before, DW has a flair for conflating everyting from his haircut to his nationality; so, in light of the conflations that have been littering the media and blogs over the past 24 hours, let's point out some basic facts. Let's call it Reality 101:
1. Harper's regime ≠ (i.e., does not equal) Ottawa
2. Ottawa ≠ Canada
3. Canada ≠ Federal Funding
4. Newfoundland nationalists ≠ Majority (or even plurality) of people in NL.
5. Newfoundland ≠ Newfoundland and Labrador
6. Promoting separatism ≠ Actually holding a referendum in accordance with the Clarity Act
7. Noise and media attention ≠ Significant popular support for a referendum
8. Angering the rest of English Canada ≠ Bettering NL's position in Canada
9. Trashing Canada and the Canadian flag ≠ Supporting soldiers fighting under that flag.
10. Federal politics (dysfunctional) ≠ Canada (rated by numerous international agencies as one of the best countries, if not the best, in the world to live in).
Here is something to ponder: what the Wingnuts want, and what the Curious Circus is all about, is the bizarre notion of separating from one of the best countries on the entire planet, one of the few that is in a good position to weather the global financial storm, at the same time as other small independent nations, such as Iceland, are facing ruin.
What's the end-game? Who knows at this point, given the recklessness of the politicians involved. But, as I've said before, the countdown is on to the April Fools.
Media links update (if you have a strong stomach):
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090304/senator_separatism_090304/20090304?hub=TopStories
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/596881
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1109592.html
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/03/04/don-martin-is-newfoundland-eyeing-sovereignty-role.aspx
http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/atlantique/2009/03/05/002-TNL-controversebaker_n.shtml
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090306.EBAKER06/TPStory/TPComment/Atlantic/
1. Mr. Curious must really, really like Harper. In fact, DW and all the Wingnuts must, in their heart of heats, be secretly pulling for Harper to win a majority in the next federal election. With Duceppe too disciplined and too seasoned a politician to lob Harper any polling gifts, Harper must be extremely grateful to have DW and the Sunshine Band around. Stirring up the rancid pot of separatism (regardless of the fact that it's never going to actually happen) helps Harper solidify his base and extend his support with wavering voters (let's call them Harper Liberals, since they are like Reagan Democrats), who are patriotic and will respond strongly and genuinely to threats to break up with country. Not only that, but The Curious Circus will provide a shot in the arm to Harper's campaign to reform, if not abolish, the Senate.
2. Mr. Curious must really, really hate Iggy. He has placed him in the untenable situation of having to defend the indefensible. He has forced him, for the second time in the New Year, to walk an impossible line between opposing Harper and pursuing his party's interest in avoiding an election. The Curious Circus shows, at the worst possible time, the deep fractures and evident contradictions within the Liberal Party. It shows that it accepts well-paid hypocrites who trash-talk Canada without having to face actual voters to keep their jobs. It makes it appear that Iggy is a weak leader incapable of confronting the Wingnuts within his own party, let alone in the rest of the country.
3. Mr. Curious must really, really like Gilles Duceppe. He is beating the drums of separatism and generating, if only for one news cycle, national media coverage without having to be paid one Quebec dollar. Mr. Curious is doing what Gilles himself couldn't manage: showing the worst side of federal politics, exposing just how opportunistic and reckless Ottawa really is; showing how Ottawa doesn't work.
4. And, last but not least, The Curious Circus is a gift from the political gods for DW. In the short-term, it offers a convenient distraction from the real news of the Cameron Inquiry and the wave of popular anger over the fact that Wiseman remains in cabinet. In the medium-term, it offers an effective stalking horse for his favourite hobby horse, i.e., Newfoundland nationalism. Now DW can say, "No, it's not me -- it's George who wants out of Canada. I'm just organizing this anti-Canada rally and referendum because he has released the pent-up gasses of separatist angst." In the long-term, it will help DW continue to worm his way into the Liberal apple, steadily eating away at its commitment to federalism until everything has rotted away.
This brings us back to language and logic. One of the worst aspects of Wingtalk and Danspeak (usually they morph into the same thing, but they are distinct sub-species) is the way they abuse the English language. The bit in the Tely about the supposed distinction between predicting and promoting separatism would be funny if it wasn't so disturbing.
As I've commented on before, DW has a flair for conflating everyting from his haircut to his nationality; so, in light of the conflations that have been littering the media and blogs over the past 24 hours, let's point out some basic facts. Let's call it Reality 101:
1. Harper's regime ≠ (i.e., does not equal) Ottawa
2. Ottawa ≠ Canada
3. Canada ≠ Federal Funding
4. Newfoundland nationalists ≠ Majority (or even plurality) of people in NL.
5. Newfoundland ≠ Newfoundland and Labrador
6. Promoting separatism ≠ Actually holding a referendum in accordance with the Clarity Act
7. Noise and media attention ≠ Significant popular support for a referendum
8. Angering the rest of English Canada ≠ Bettering NL's position in Canada
9. Trashing Canada and the Canadian flag ≠ Supporting soldiers fighting under that flag.
10. Federal politics (dysfunctional) ≠ Canada (rated by numerous international agencies as one of the best countries, if not the best, in the world to live in).
Here is something to ponder: what the Wingnuts want, and what the Curious Circus is all about, is the bizarre notion of separating from one of the best countries on the entire planet, one of the few that is in a good position to weather the global financial storm, at the same time as other small independent nations, such as Iceland, are facing ruin.
What's the end-game? Who knows at this point, given the recklessness of the politicians involved. But, as I've said before, the countdown is on to the April Fools.
Media links update (if you have a strong stomach):
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090304/senator_separatism_090304/20090304?hub=TopStories
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/596881
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1109592.html
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/03/04/don-martin-is-newfoundland-eyeing-sovereignty-role.aspx
http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/atlantique/2009/03/05/002-TNL-controversebaker_n.shtml
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090306.EBAKER06/TPStory/TPComment/Atlantic/
Sunday, February 8, 2009
13 Degrees of Separation
Here are the links in the chain of Danlogic, as reported in MacGregor's story in the Glib:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090206.wwilliams0207/BNStory/politics/home
1. Absolutely every other premier is a coward. He alone (with sidekick Ghiz) has the guts and the virtue to challenge Harpoid.
2. Because of the premiers' cowardly inability to act like Him, the country is fracturing.
3. To save the country, He mounted the noble ABC campaign.
4. ABC was a significant factor in denying Harpoid his majority. This was, in Danspeak, an "elbow."
5. Because of His bravery in confronting Harpoid, He alone was singled out for punishment.
6. Punishment came in the form of changes to the Atlantic Accord that deliberately singled out Him. This was, in Danspeak, a "sledgehammer."
7. Up until this dastardly deed, Everything was going perfectly in Danland. "We've done all the right things fiscally," He says, "and then in one fell swoop 'bang' we're pretty well back where we started."
8. Thus Harpoid alone is responsible for preventing NL from entering the promised land.
9. Thus Harpoid alone is responsible for "kindling" separatism in NL.
10. Because DW doesn't want to separate, he must talk about it, publicly, repeatedly, ominously. He alone among the party leaders (even the Bloc is usually careful to use the term sovereignty) muses openly about separatism. "But that's not where I'm coming from. Separation is not something that is on my agenda under any circumstances."
11. The next elbow in the crusade against Harpoid will be a protest to mark the upcoming 60th anniversary of Confederation. Dangovt will announce changes to the officially-sanction celebrations.
12. The rationale for such a move: "Here we are coming up to that anniversary," Williams says, "and here's what Ottawa has done to us. We have to really, really be careful with that. I don't want that to become a focal point for separation, because that's not what it was intended to be."
13. Therefore, because He does not want this anniversary to turn into a nationalist protest, he is announcing publicly, in Canada`s national newspaper, that it could become a focal point for separation.
Thus the Wingnuts have their marching orders. The countdown is on to April Fools. If separatist wingnuts spoil the celebration, it will not be His fault. Nothing could be further from the truth.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090206.wwilliams0207/BNStory/politics/home
1. Absolutely every other premier is a coward. He alone (with sidekick Ghiz) has the guts and the virtue to challenge Harpoid.
2. Because of the premiers' cowardly inability to act like Him, the country is fracturing.
3. To save the country, He mounted the noble ABC campaign.
4. ABC was a significant factor in denying Harpoid his majority. This was, in Danspeak, an "elbow."
5. Because of His bravery in confronting Harpoid, He alone was singled out for punishment.
6. Punishment came in the form of changes to the Atlantic Accord that deliberately singled out Him. This was, in Danspeak, a "sledgehammer."
7. Up until this dastardly deed, Everything was going perfectly in Danland. "We've done all the right things fiscally," He says, "and then in one fell swoop 'bang' we're pretty well back where we started."
8. Thus Harpoid alone is responsible for preventing NL from entering the promised land.
9. Thus Harpoid alone is responsible for "kindling" separatism in NL.
10. Because DW doesn't want to separate, he must talk about it, publicly, repeatedly, ominously. He alone among the party leaders (even the Bloc is usually careful to use the term sovereignty) muses openly about separatism. "But that's not where I'm coming from. Separation is not something that is on my agenda under any circumstances."
11. The next elbow in the crusade against Harpoid will be a protest to mark the upcoming 60th anniversary of Confederation. Dangovt will announce changes to the officially-sanction celebrations.
12. The rationale for such a move: "Here we are coming up to that anniversary," Williams says, "and here's what Ottawa has done to us. We have to really, really be careful with that. I don't want that to become a focal point for separation, because that's not what it was intended to be."
13. Therefore, because He does not want this anniversary to turn into a nationalist protest, he is announcing publicly, in Canada`s national newspaper, that it could become a focal point for separation.
Thus the Wingnuts have their marching orders. The countdown is on to April Fools. If separatist wingnuts spoil the celebration, it will not be His fault. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
