Tried to post it on that Vine thing. Didn’t work. So imagine this on a perpetual loop.

Comments (2)

Yes, you read that right.

I am never, ever shocked.  Honestly, nothing shocks me.  But this shocked me.

Back story: a few days ago, my pal Nadwuar got in touch with me via Twitter.  Wanted my email.  Sent it to him.  Didn’t hear anything else.

Then Simon at Ugly Pop sends me this, this aft, about the Palma Violets – one my fave new combos, to whom I was introduced by Jian Gomeshi.

 

Holy crap. I literally watched that vid with my mouth hanging open. And it was true, too – they cover the Nasties, here, and it has been written about in places like the Washington Post, here.

And so, you might ask, how did I not know this, given that the Palma Violets were in town a few days ago? ‘Cause we were pooped, and we decided not to go. So I missed it.  I MISSED IT.

Not again. Next time they are near Canada, we’re goin’.

Wait’ll I tell SFH about this tonight. Maybe now Rolf will agree to cover Nasties’ tunes.

Comments (6)

This is starting to look like a ritual humiliation of a veteran reporter who doesn’t deserve it, at all.

Oh, and the “award-winning” guy giving everyone civics lessons?  His M.O. is to call at the last minute, and to be as general as possible.

Everyone makes mistakes.  Admit ’em, apologize, learn, and move on.  This kind of public shaming isn’t necessary, or wanted.

Comments (2)

I still love the Menzingers, but me (and my kids) love these guys the most.  The are the best-est.  They are godlike geniuses. Buy all of their records, now.

Comments (1)

You can be book-smart, but that doesn’t actually mean you are smart.

Comments (13)

A: If you’re a regular at this web site, you already know the answer.

(Justin Trudeau, are you paying attention? Hope so.)

Comments (12)

Quote:

“…although the proportion of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs is on the rise in Canada, the marked demographic trend is the increasing number of people who claim no religious affiliation at all. The new survey suggests that nearly 24 per cent of the people living in this country do not belong to any particular religion. That is up from 16.5 per cent in 2001 and 12.6 per cent in 1991.

In other words, the percentage of people who do not feel aligned with an organized belief has nearly doubled over the past two decades.

Christianity remains the dominant religion in Canada, but all of the Christian faiths, with the possible exception of Orthodox Christianity, are experiencing a decline.

I react to these statistics in different ways.

As a student of politics, it suggests to me that the strategy the Harper Conservatives have pursued – championing Christian Right causes, demonizing Muslims – is not very smart. Demographically, they are effectively putting themselves out of business.

As a church-going Irish Catholic guy, it makes me sort of sad. I’m no missionary – I consider religion to be an entirely personal affair, and detest those who are always lecturing and hectoring others about it – but I know I draw considerable comfort from my faith. It gives a measure of hope to me and, I believe, others. So how do the growing number of non-religious folks get by without hope? I’d find that pretty hard to do.

Finally, as a citizen, these statistics make me pretty happy. We are a peaceful diverse society, and growing more so. We are the envy of the world for this. It’s good.

Anyway, those were my reactions, from different perspectives. Surprise, a bit sad, happy.

What do you guys think?

Comments (29)

I apologize for upsetting anyone in posting this. But it is so powerful. And such an indictment of Loblaws et al., as well. Link here.

Comments (22)

Just watched NDP leader Andrea Horwath’s presser. Here’s what I think is going on:

1. Andrea Horwath is playing the role of a Liberal;

2. Kathleen Wynne is playing the role of a New Democrat; and

3. Tim Hudak is playing himself – that is, a Reform Party member.

Make sense to you? Me, neither.

Comments (13)

I’m on Sun News a couple times today, and the producers (who are among the best I have ever dealt with, by the by) have asked me to talk about Al Gore and Syria.  Which presents a dilemma for me, The House Communist.  Here’s why:

• Al Gore:  I think the world have been a better place if he had become President in 2000.  Then again, if he had become President, I very much doubt Gore would have been in Toronto this week, suggesting that Canada had a “resource curse,” was an environmental “open sewer,” and that we needed to get on “a better path.” I found that sort of talk over-the-top, and not particularly helpful.  I also note (a) Obama hasn’t exactly blazed a green trail since 2008, but Gore hasn’t been nearly as critical about that, and (b) the gazillionaire ex-Veep didn’t ride a bicycle to get here.
• Syria:  John Baird really surprised me in the emergency debate on Syria, this week.  He was not nearly as bellicose as he has been in the past, for starters.  Moreover, he strenuously opposed military intervention, and he even lauded the United Nations.  Given Israel’s (defensible) anti-Hezbollah attacks on the weekend, and given the UN’s suggestion that Syrian rebels may be using chemical weapons – and not al-Assad – I found myself worrying that Baird had been captured by body snatchers.

Anyway, what do you think, O Learned Readers of wk.com?  The Sun New Network probably wants me to defend Gore, but I’m reluctant to do so.  And they likely expect me to oppose Syrian military intervention, but John Baird has already staked out that territory.

What would you do, in my liberal shoes?

Comments (33)