I had no idea that Stephane Dion was going to visit Afghanistan and that CPC cabinet minister Helena Guergis was telling the Taliban where he was going to be visiting!
I had no idea that the NDP was having some sort of policy summit, and, so obviously, I don't really know what's in it.
I'm out-of-the-loop because the best sites that I've found for comprehensive analysis from a left perspective are generally US-based, (commondreams, counterpunch, znet, crooksandliars, etc.) with rabble.ca being the only place with a bit of a round-up of Canadian opinion. I suppose that I could hang-out at The Tyee more often as well. But I don't read Canadian newspapers all that much as so many of their editorial and opinion writers suck shit, and I'm certainly not going to get info from the right-wing airheads and goons on television or radio. Perhaps that "progressivebloggers" thing on my homepage could be my source for news on Canadian politics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
While I won't pretend to follow anything canadian, I did run into this, on McHale's ban from Caledonia.
Do I win a prize or sumpin'?
That'd be "or sumpin'." Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Joanne is someone who I've heard mocked in the left-blog-o-sphere before.
She's sympathetic to McHale, as was some dim bulb who said at least McHale was putting pressure on all sides to come to an agreement, when, in reality (and for the 6,000th time for all the liars and hypocrites out there) all he's doing is stirring up racist resentment against First Nations.
Regarding blogging about Canadian stuff, ... I'd like to do that and follow my own system more closely, but I'd really like to deal with fundamental human-rights issues. World-wide stuff.
McHale's bail conditions are about as onerous as those restrictions they place on stalkers, ... restraining orders, that's it ... and McHale needs it. His defenders (racist stooges and mewling hypocrites) who want to go to bat for his right to freedom of movement are more than welcome to do so, but I won't defend him because I don't agree with his cause.
Not only do I not agree with him, I think that he's a destructive influence, stirring up trouble to no good effect, ... in fact, to a bad effect.
Post a Comment