Friday, July 31, 2015

Best. Supreme Court Judge. Ever.

Holy crap! This Supreme Court judge thinks just like me!

New Supreme Court appointee blogged on Khadr, called Trudeau 'unspeakably awful,' hoped for Harper majority.

Prime Minister’s Stephen Harper’s latest appointment to the Supreme Court was a prolific blogger who regularly offered opinions on Senate reform, the federal government’s role in health care, elections law, the Omar Khadr case and other matters that could now come before him in his new role on the bench.

Russell Brown, appointed to the top court last week, was an active contributor to a blog shared by faculty members at the University of Alberta law school.

The posts and comments were made under the name “Russ Brown” between 2007 and 2008. Brown’s political orientation and Libertarian perspective are clearly in evidence in many of them.

In one 2008 post, he says he hopes Harper wins a majority government and that he hopes Harper does, in fact, hold a “hidden agenda,” as some critics speculated.

In another post regarding successors to outgoing Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, Brown disses potential contender Justin Trudeau.

“As someone who hopes the Grits just fade away by the next election, I’m cheering for Justin Trudeau or Joe Volpe. Or have I missed a possible candidate who is as unspeakably awful?”

Brown, now 49, wrote the posts when he was an assistant professor with the Faculty of Law. The Conservative government first named him to the Alberta bench in 2013 and last year elevated him to the Alberta Court of Appeal and the appeal courts for the Northwest Territories and Nunavut.

In less than three years, he has risen from a job teaching law to a seat on the highest court in the land...

Apology to Woman

This is hilarious and creepy at the same time.

And it could be a one of the signs of the collapse of western civilization:

Will Ferrell did a take off of this at Funny or Die:

Iran deal skullduggery of a very interesting nature

It turns out that the best man at the 2009 wedding of US Secretary of State John Kerry's daughter was the son of Iran's Foreign Minister, with whom Kerry negotiated the disastrous nuclear arms pact.

And no one in the mainstream media wants to talk about it.

Man calls police to arrest his cat for eating his bacon

The call starts with the man being asked: "What's your emergency?"

" girlfriend has let the cat eat my bacon," the man states matter-of-factly.

The bewildered call operator asks him to repeat his claims before asking what he would like the police to do.

He simply replies: "I want to press charges."

Unbelievably, the call handler keeps her cool and professionally asks whether he wants them to arrest his girlfriend or the cat.

And when the man replies both, she firmly tells him: "Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. And we don't arrest cats."...

Thursday, July 30, 2015

Alberta Law Society's Crazy Shielding of the Crazy Alberta Human Rights Commission

The Law Society of Alberta has commenced disciplinary proceedings against Ezra Levant over his comments in a newspaper column about the Alberta Human Rights Commission and about another lawyer, Arman Chak.

In a 2014 column titled “Next stop, crazy town,” Mr. Levant wrote that Mr. Chak, a prosecutor with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, supports “a global, international Muslim super-state” known as the “ummah.” Mr. Levant quoted Mr. Chak as having allegedly diminished the gravity of the genocide and rape perpetrated in 1971 by the West Pakistan military, which killed between 300,000 and 3,000,000 people, and raped between 200,000 to 400,000 Bangladeshi women. Mr. Levant stated that Mr. Chak wrote in Pakistani Link magazine: “I look at the events in the context of the fundamentals of an Islamic State and its Muslim identity. Regardless of what West Pakistan did to East Pakistan, the latter’s alliance with India makes the creation of Bangladesh one of the worst examples of the dis-unification of the Muslim Ummah in contemporary history.”

If this quote was not accurate, Mr. Chak could have sued Mr. Levant for defamation. Instead, Mr. Chak filed a complaint with the law society, claiming that Mr. Levant’s comments were in violation of the lawyers’ Code of Conduct, as “inappropriate and unbecoming” for a lawyer...

The most important issue of our times: Vocal Fry


Wednesday, July 29, 2015

NDP parliamentarians with tongue piercings want Canadians to take it Greek style

Who doesn't love to have oral sex preformed on them?

That was, of course, a rhetorical question, since every adult human who ever lived loves having oral sex performed on them. History teaches us that receiving oral sex is so fantastic, it's worth risking the most powerful elected office in the world over.

But in the same way that everyone likes to eat, but not everyone likes to cook, there are (so I'm told) some people who don't enjoy performing oral sex.  That's why it's always thrilling to meet someone with a tongue stud. A tongue stud enhances the pleasure of oral sex for the recipient. It doesn't discriminate on the basis of gender, improving the experience of both men and women on the receiving end of a tongue stud lashing. Having a tongue stud demonstrates a commitment to performing oral sex to the extent of willingness to be painfully mutilated in service of the cause.

NDP Deputy Leader Megan Leslie
Going to that sort of extreme could be seen as an act of altruism. Or insanity.

To decide which, try gently jabbing your tongue with a sharp, thick needle. If that sounds crazy, just imagine puncturing your tongue all the way through, then having a piece of metal permanently lodged in the hole you created. That piece of metal will damage your teeth over time and will be the cause of continual infection risks.

Megan Leslie, the NDP Member of Parliament for Halifax, Thomas Mulcair's hand-picked Deputy Leader, has a tongue stud. The same Megan Leslie whose last notable achievement for the NDP was to bring them in to disrepute for using her website to promote a meeting of nutty 9-11 conspiracy theorists.

Encouragingly, Leslie isn't the only NDP MP with a pierced tongue. Laurin Liu, the MP for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, also has one.

Despite all this, fears of an NDP caucus impeded by disfigured tongues are unfounded. What should be of real worry is that while distracting us with tongue studs and promises of creating a nation able to lay back and enjoy itself,  the actual aim of NDP policy is for Canadians to assume the Greek position, economically, as a bottom.

The NDP has adopted anti-austerity positions that are virtually identical to those that caused the Greek economic disaster. The NDP has told us that in no uncertain terms. Not spending more money than you can afford to is a basic concept that has eluded the NDP's brain trust. If elected, the NDP will rely on crackpots and halfwits at their party-linked think tanks, The Broadbent Institute and The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, to create an environment which will brutally ravage Canada's economy and taxpayers.

Thomas Mulcair is a smart politician. But the Megan Leslies, Charlie Anguses, Niki Ashtons and similar NDP parliamentarians he has placed in senior positions are indicative of what Mulcair has to choose from among his caucus. Remember in the Austin Powers movies, when Dr. Evil presided over his minions musing, "why must I be surrounded by frickin' idiots?"  That's what Tom Mulcair's Cabinet meetings will look like in the event of an NDP election win.

Beyond that, the NDP remains thoroughly dominated by union bosses and radical special interest groups. Between them, if they get to remake legislation to suit their greedy aims, it will be a money shot so disastrously messy, our great-grandchildren will still have to clean it up.

I'm sure Megan Leslie and Laurin Liu and most of the other NDP MPs who think self-mutilation is a good idea are perfectly nice people. They're probably very lovely to have at barbecues and cocktail parties, and have generally pleasant dispositions. But that's no qualification for managing the Canadian economy.

The NDP will try to entice you in all sorts of ways, but be prepared to be left painfully unsatisfied by them. Despite the illusions, distractions and promises, it's their own self-fulfillment that they care about most.

Moin A. Yahya: Harper’s Judges under attack

The timing couldn’t have been more perfect: The Globe & Mail published an article decrying how Stephen Harper had been remaking the judiciary over the past many years, and then yesterday the Prime Minister announced the elevation of Justice Russ Brown of the Alberta Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. (I should disclose that Justice Brown is a good friend of mine and a former colleague at the University of Alberta’s Faculty of Law.)

Over the next few days and then over the many coming years, undoubtedly Justice Brown will come under academic and journalistic scrutiny to see if his appointment fits a narrative that many on the left of academia and journalism like to paint.

The Globe article suggests a vast right-wing conspiracy whereby conservative operatives are spread all over the country hunting for the great judicial-conservative hope. Indeed, another article two days later was full of interviews with critics who wanted to change the judicial appointment system so that the (Conservative) government would have less discretion in the appointment of judges.

Of course, as long as the Liberal government, and for that matter the Mulroney PC government before that, were appointing left-wing liberals, these critics praised the amazing meritorious appointments that were being made to our nation’s courts.  But once the nature of appointments started to become more conservative, all of a sudden the appointments were characterized as ideological and conspiratorial.

Even assuming that the federal Conservatives have been trawling the bottoms of the ideological oceans looking for the most conservative judicial candidate they could find, the question remains: Why hasn’t it made a difference in our legal culture? After all, seven of the nine Supreme Court justices have been appointed by this government, and yet much of this government’s contentious legislation has been struck down...

Obama administration relies on celebrity airheads to sell horrendously flawed Iran nuke deal

Because if Jack Black supports a devastatingly bad nuclear arrangement with the world's leading sponsor of terrorism,even one with secret side deals and ridiculous enforcement mechanisms, it must be good..right?

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

South Park Stick Of Truth

The weirdest thing you'll see today. And lots of fun...

Obama's secret deal with Iran gives away more than Chamberlain's deal with Hitler

At least Britain's Parliament was told all of what was in The Munich Pact of 1938. Obama's deal with Iran contains secrets. And what we do know of those those secrets shows they are very, very bad for America and the west.

From The Washington Post:
President Obama promised that his nuclear deal with Iran would not be “based on trust” but rather “unprecedented verification.” Now it turns out Obama’s verification regime is based on trust after all — trust in two secret side agreements negotiated exclusively between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that apparently no one (including the Obama administration) has seen.

Worse, Obama didn’t even reveal the existence of these secret side deals to Congress when he transmitted the nuclear accord to Capitol Hill. The agreements were uncovered, completely by chance, by two members of Congress — Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) — who were in Vienna meeting with the U.N.-releated agency.

In an interview, Pompeo told me that he and Cotton were meeting with the deputy director of the IAEA and the agency’s two top Iran negotiators just days after the nuclear accord was announced, when they asked how the agency will carry out verification at the Iranian military complex at Parchin. IAEA officials told them, quite casually, that the details were all covered in agreements negotiated between the IAEA and the Iranian government. It was the first they had heard of the side deals.

Pompeo says they asked whether they could see those agreements. He says IAEA officials replied, “ ‘Oh no, of course not, no, you’re not going to get to see those.’ And so everybody on our side of the table asked, ‘Has Secretary Kerry seen these?’ ‘No, Secretary Kerry hasn’t seen them. No American is ever going to get to see them.’ ”

It turns out that only the two parties — the IAEA and Iran — get to see the actual agreements...

See also: New York Senator Chuck Schumer dodges questions about Iran deal.

After seeing this, I've finally come to believe in love at first sight

I've never felt pity and arousal simultaneously before...

Monday, July 27, 2015

It's Bugs Bunny's 75th Birthday Today!

Bugs first appeared on July 27, 1940 in A Wild Hare:

Merrie Melodies - A Wild Hare (1940) by Cartoonzof2006

Leon Wieseltier demolishes Obama's "no alternative to this Iran deal" claim

“The president said many times he’s willing to step out of the rut of history.” In this way Ben Rhodes of the White House, who over the years has broken new ground in the grandiosity of presidential apologetics, described the courage of Barack Obama in concluding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the Islamic Republic of Iran, otherwise known as the Iran deal. Once again Rhodes has, perhaps inadvertently, exposed the president’s premises more clearly than the president likes to do. The rut of history: It is a phrase worth pondering. It expresses a deep scorn for the past, a zeal for newness and rupture, an arrogance about old struggles and old accomplishments, a hastiness with inherited precedents and circumstances, a superstition about the magical powers of the present. It expresses also a generational view of history, which, like the view of history in terms of decades and centuries, is one of the shallowest views of all.

This is nothing other than the mentality of disruption applied to foreign policy. In the realm of technology, innovation justifies itself; but in the realm of diplomacy and security, innovation must be justified, and it cannot be justified merely by an appetite for change...

Wording of Iran deal question influences public response. Pew survey shows most Americans aware of the deal disapprove

...The different findings on public views of the Iran nuclear agreement in the Washington Post/ABC News and Pew Research Center surveys highlight how question wording – and the information provided in a question – can impact public opinion, particularly on issues where public views are still being shaped and information levels are relatively low. The Pew Research question, which does not describe the agreement, finds lower levels of support than the Post/ABC News question, which details the intention to monitor Iran’s facilities and raises the possibility of re-imposition of sanctions if Iran does not comply.

In other questions, both the Washington Post/ABC survey and the Pew Research Center survey find substantial public skepticism about the agreement...