Tim Hudak, still a dirty rotten traitor

Tim Hudak is back trying to be a good old boy this morning, chirping away about the Bills-Patriots.  (I personally think he, and we, would be a lot happier if he was at TSN instead of QP.)

I just want everyone to remember the extent of his disloyalty.  No wonder Benedict Baldy is one of his (losing) candidates! Shame!


Appropos of nothing, here is my new look (updated)

Comments are welcome.

UPDATE: For the literally thousands of commenters who have contacted me about this important posting, here are the key fashion facts about the above photo:

  • It was taken on Mother’s Beach in Kennebunk, Maine, just before Hurricane Irene hit
  • The patch is His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie, purchased in Jamaica
  • The hat is from the only and only golf club I ever belonged to, Larrimac in Chelsea, P.Q.
  • The T-shirt is a Pennywise tour shirt
  • The jean jacket was purchased many decades ago, and is hated by every woman I have ever known, and which I will therefore be buried in
  • The edgy new glasses are actually 3D glasses – lenses popped out by my son – purchased at a showing of Captain America, which totally sucked
  • The scar on my lip is from a long-ago bar fight in Calgary, which I lost
  • You’re welcome

 


In today’s Sun: not very charitable

It’s not very charitable, you might say. Not at all.

The way in which the federal government deals with charities, that is.

And if you believe in the work that charities do — or if you even cling to the notion that freedom of speech should be applicable to non-governmental organizations, too — then you should be concerned about what is quietly going on behind bureaucratic curtains up in Ottawa these days.

Federal bean-counters define a charity as a corporation or a trust that carries on, what else, “charitable purposes” — meaning, an enterprise set up “for the benefit of the public,” or a “sufficient segment” of the public.

The leading case on charities goes back to the 19th century. There, no less than the House of Lords ruled a legitimate charity could be involved in the relief of poverty, or advancement of education or religion, or “other purposes beneficial to the community in a way the law regards as charitable.”

If that all sounds to you that a faceless bureaucrat (or a vengeful politician) can bend the word “charity” to fit whatever subjective criteria they’d like, you’d be right. The rules governing charities in Canada have always been pretty loosey-goosey.

And therein lies the problem.


“Populist promises and pandering politicians”

Populist promises and pandering politicians
Windsor Star 
Sat Sep 24 2011 
Page: A8 

By Gord Henderson 

I hoped for something different from Conservative leader Tim Hudak, some inspirational picture of where he wants to take this province.

Instead we get chain gangs (not that I have anything against putting inmates to work), a crusade against smart meters and an inflexible insistence that he’ll break a signed contract with one of the world’s most advanced corporations, Samsung, no matter what it costs taxpayers and no matter how damaging it is to the province’s reputation as a place to invest.

His vow to begin dismantling Ontario’s fledgling green energy industry, killing hundreds of new Windsor area jobs in the process, was a deal killer for me. How the hell can I vote for a guy who hasn’t the foresight to see this sector’s potential?

How can Hudak not see what the Chinese – who are eating our lunch in just about every sector – have recognized in becoming the world’s largest wind energy provider in just a few years and with mind-boggling plans for expansion?