"They're all going to laugh at you!" Toronto's loony left goes full-on Carrie's mom

Five Feet of Fury's Kathy Shaidle has been saying for weeks now that the pathetic, insecure loony left in Toronto has been acting like Carrie's Mom. These of course are people who are pathologically obsessed with how other people think about them, and they believe their worst fear, that they are being laughed at, has come true.

The belief that Rob Ford's troubles reflect directly on them is something that would only go on within diseased minds.

Yesterday, at a sparsely attended anti-Ford rally at Toronto's City Hall, in which the media almost outnumbered the protesters, Kathy's Carrie's Mom comment was fully realized.

A protester named Linda Keigher furiously, bitterly seethed into a bullhorn in front of the two and a half dozen or so assembled malcontents that:

"The world is talking about us, they're laughing at us, and they're finding it to be very funny!"

Oh, the horror!

Actually, I'm finding it pretty funny too. It's something I can share a laugh about with friends who aren't from Toronto. When they ask, "so why is his popularity going up?" it's an easy answer. "Because of the other morons we'd have to choose from if we get rid of Ford."

A couple of weeks before things blew up with the latest Ford brouhaha, the Mayor went on an excursion to Austin, Texas to find ways of emulating their success as a live-music hub. Ford has accomplished something better now, making Toronto a global center of live comedy, and all his stupid opponents do is gripe!

Take a look at the idiotic, petulant, juvenile behavior of the rest of his Toronto City Council opponents when Ford spoke a couple of days ago. Like spoiled 8 year-olds, as a group, they decided to turn their back on him.

This is more disgraceful than any behavior I've seen from Ford in his role as a public official and it's completely typical of the half-wits we have sitting as Ward representatives in Toronto. Why would no other media show this picture that reveals the real face of Toronto's hateful, insecure, self-obsessed, would-be ruling class? Because if they did, they know they'd be laughed at even more.

For them, nothing could be worse than that.

Making their hate for Canada explicit: NDP and Public Service Union-supported rabble.ca's "Why I don't celebrate Canada Day and never have"

Judy Rebick is the founder of, and a regular columnist for the neo-Marxist website rabble.ca, which exists primarily from funds bestowed by public service unions and NDP-affiliated organizations like The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Its current publisher is Kim Elliott, the spouse of federal NDP Deputy Leader Libby Davies.

It's no secret the people on the radical left hate Canada and the enlightened western values that our country represents.

But rarely do they make it so explicit as Rebick did in her Canada Day column for rabble: Why I don't celebrate Canada Day and never have

It seems Rebick is determined to add "self-hating Canadian" (although she immigrated from the US, which she also despises) to a litany of reasons for her to be able to loathe herself.

And if that weren't enough, here's more anti-Canadian tripe rabble saved for Canada Day. Canadian Federation of Students' Nina Loreto's rabble piece in which she offers the following blather (and she does not mean these questions rhetorically):

Why give "Canada" the honour of being a symbol for anything and everything that is good?

Why buy into the national myth that upholds how great life is for many of us, while at the same time ignoring or erasing the strife, struggle or challenges that also come with living in "Canada?"

Former Canadian radical leftist leader accused of rape

The website Anti-Racist Canada is reporting that Michael David Rosenberg aka Mike Rza, a former leader of the "anti-Fascist" movement has been accused of being a serial rapist.

According to the website, the accusations surfaced in an online discussion group and included allegations of  rapes. Anti-Racist Canada also posted what is purported to be an online statement by Rosenberg which if true amounts to a confession of rape of a minor.

Part of this tragedy is the account the website relayed from one of the alleged victims, who wrote:I wish that I reported the rape sooner but I was scared of everyones' reactions towards me. I would of had more evidence to of convict him and then I wouldn't have to hear of another victim.

This sad situation may have in part been caused by a facet of socialist, far-left activist culture which discourages involving the police in sexual assault cases, as the authorities are viewed as "the enemy" and "agents of class oppression" by radical groups.

Fortunately, Anti-Racist Canada is behaving responsibly and encouraging anyone with pertinent information to contact police.

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford to leftie sore losers: "try to beat me at the ballot box"

Another miserable day at The Toronto Star - Mayor Rob Ford won’t be prosecuted for alleged election violations

Compliance Committee votes not to prosecute Toronto's Mayor for minor election spending rules violations.

The case was brought forward by Adam Chaleff-Freudenthaler, a failed candidate for Toronto District School Board Trustee who ran his campaign in tandem with leftist Ward 21 Councillor Joe "St. Clair streetcar fiasco king" Mihevc.

Mihevc has made no secret about his detesting Rob Ford.

Despite what you're hearing, leftists are losing the culture wars

When I was in university, oh so many years ago now, I noticed a consistent characteristic among my contemporaries who were immersed in political activism - they were all assholes.

There weren't that many of them. When we`re in our late teens and early twenties, most of us are wrapped up in trying get laid, have fun, get our assignments in on time, recover from hangovers, pass our courses and dream lofty, ambitious dreams of our future. There may have been an issue or two to get each of us temporarily riled up, but it took a special class of person to be continually devoted to aggressively ramming political and social issues down other people`s throats. Invariably, back then, everyone I knew who who fit that description was a leftist. There may have been young conservative activists, but if there were, they operated with exceptional stealth, because I never met any.

Most of the young activists I remember were socially maladroit, had bad relationships with their parents, and seemed to be acting out some inner turmoil. The worst part about such people is that, while far from shining examples of humanity, they want to dictate how other people should think and behave.

Therein lies the problem with most of our "social justice" zealots; the stylized social justice they promote is frequently self-serving, hypocritical and fatuous.

It is troublesome that the agenda pushed by the radical left has been overwhelmingly advocated by a sympathetic television, film and print media, hoping to impart values they want society as a whole to assimilate. But despite their self congratulation, indications are that common sense is winning out and the left isn't nearly as influential as they think they are.

For years now, the video game industry has been making more money than the film industry and commanding far more attention from makes under the age of 30. This is an age group that couldn't care less what Jon Stewart, George Strombolopolis, Bill Maher, Michael Moore and Chris Matthews have to say about anything, let alone politics. To be fair, Rush Limbaugh and Mark Steyn hold just as little if not less interest for teenage and young adult males.  But the latter may take some comfort in the entertainment they do flock to.

Daniel Tosh, who recently became the bane of humorless feminists because of a rape joke, has the highest rated television show for young male on any US cable network, followed closely by the libertarian, anti-hippie South Park. It's also worth noting that the hero of the most popular movie of the year is a rich, capitalist vigilante.

The Call of Duty series is the most popular video game series ever. In the last installment of its Black Ops game, the villains were Communists. In the newest installment, Call of Duty Black Ops 2, which looks set to be one of the most popular releases ever, in a move that has already infuriated leftists, the villain is a presumptive leader of the vapid Occupy Movement. The game's bad guy, Raul Menendez, is described at the "messiah for the 99%."

So while irrelevant aged radicals try to self promote and capitalize on the anti-capitalist Occupy Movement and delusionally claim the few scraggly malcontents it managed to conjure were representative of youth as a whole, reality is something very different. Ironically, it's virtual reality where the real attitudes of the up-and-coming generation are reflected, and they aren't interested in being part of the radical left, they play games where they pretend to kill them.  


Given the 100 million deaths in the real world that Communism has caused since its inception, a prevailing violent rejection and hostility to it in the world of gaming is a comforting cause for optimism about the future.

Guilt by Association: Why the totalitarian left is so offended by it (unless you happen to be asociated with a "right-winger")

All my adult life as a newspaperman I have been fighting, in defense of the Left and of a sane politics, against conspiracy theories of history, character assassination, guilt by association and demonology. I.F.Stone

A "new McCarthyism" is seen in the manner in which guilt by association has been pursued by the likes of Glenn Beck and "mainstream" GOP leadership (if there is such a thing). Katrina vanden Heuvel, The Nation

In the United States of America, we don’t practice guilt by association. And let’s remember that just as violence and extremism are not unique to any one faith, the responsibility to oppose ignorance and violence rests with us all. Jeremy Ben Ami, President, JStreet

This is the story of a late-twentieth century invention, namely the ostensible moral and intellectual sin of accusations of "guilt by association."

This trope, "guilt by association," or GbA, has a curious history and a curious present. It has the following characteristics:

1) The trope user is almost invariably a self-described person of the "Left," or, in somewhat more modern usage, a "progressive." The target is someone perceived as, or at least designated as someone opposed to the Left, a "right-winger."

2) The trope has a surface resemblance to accusations of established errors of reasoning -- fallacies -- but in fact it is the user of the trope who is illogical and irrational.

3) The accusation underlying the usage of the trope is as much moral as intellectual; the trope user combines a disdain for the ethics and morality of the target (the ostensible bad faith of so-called right-wing McCarthites, for example) with an accusation of intellectual incompetence (failure to understand elementary logic).

4) The trope enables its users, who are often devoted supporters of totalitarian and other hateful movements, to pose as moral and intellectual superiors.

The totalitarian Left decries "Guilt by association."  And yet, if you remember just a few months ago, after the mass murders committed in Norway by the crazed lone gunman Anders Breivik, they were the same people trying to associate his rampage with Christianity, Israel, and any writer who was critical of extremist Islam.  This is far from being the only example of western totalitarian leftist hypocrisy. In the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks, people like Noam Chomsky and George Galloway came out immediately blaming not the fanatical expression of a religion with which they have allied themselves, but the United States and the West for having angered the Islamists.

I would encourage everyone to read all of Professor Werner Cohn's fascinating essay HERE.

Violent, stupid McGill students demand apology for being called violent

This is priceless - a group of violent McGill University protesters who intimidated and abused female staff at McGill by occupying their office and confining them are demanding an apology for McGill's Provost because he referred to them as exactly what they are.

If it were I, this would by my apology to them.

Three reasons why Canada's radical leftists are so humourless

Those of us familiar with the radical left know they do some things very well, like sanctimony, hypocrisy, and emotional hysteria, but something they haven't mastered is having a sense of humour.

It's not that they aren't funny. They are frequently hilarious, such as instances when an obese leftist claimed that by being ignored in a hardware store, she was a victim of sexual oppression, or proto-activist Judy Rebick's insane claim that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's criticism of NDP House leader Libby Davies, when she effectively denied Israel's legitimacy, stemmed from his being a sexist.  But the problem is that when they say these comically outlandish things, they aren't trying to be funny; they mean them.

So in order to understand this strange phenomenon, this (pseudo) scientific analysis will examine the three main reasons why the Canadian far left is so pathologically incapable of having a sense of humour.


1.  They're afraid of offending anyone (and conversely, are offended by everything)

Of course by anyone, we aren't including Christians and white conservatives. They go to great effort to offend those groups. And they now have expanded to trying to offend Jews (which isn't that hard in some cases), whom they dislike, but being sensitive to charges of anti-Semitism, try to use the code word Zionist for Jew, although sometimes the veil does slip.

But getting back to their fear of offending, let's take this for example:

Q: Why did the Gay chicken cross the basketball court?

A: He heard the ref was blowing fowls on the other side.

The willingness to offend is central to humour, and really nothing should be off limits. Most leftists would be appalled at that joke. That joke isn't anti-Gay, it's pro-blow job. The reason the chicken has to be Gay in it is because all pro basketball referees are male. And the joke is a word play joke based on a homonym. OK,  I've made it totally unfunny by explaining and analyzing the joke, but you get the point. If you're anxious to find offense in everything and at the same time overly sensitive to the potential hurt feelings of everyone, you're lame.



2. They are mainly motivated by jealousy

Contemporary Canadians live in a time and place where we are better off then just about anyone else, anywhere, ever. Sure, there`s always room for more improvement, but we live in times where the average lower middle class person has more luxuries and privileges than an 18th Century European nobleman. We have free education, free health care, home computers and on-demand music and videos, and mobile personal communication devices with instant, global reach..

We live in a society where one of the cause celebres is childhood obesity.

That`s right, we live in a time and place where a lot of people are complaining because they eat too much! If  the average person three hundred years ago were to learn that overeating would be a major complaint in the future, they would think their descendants insane. And perhaps they would be right.

It's hard to be funny, avaricious and and bitter at the same time and jealousy is what is really the motivation behind Canada's radical leftists.They would never admit jealousy is what drives them. In fact, they probably don't even recognize that trait in themselves. 

But the way the radical left looks at things is not what they have, but what others have. They obsess that if someone else has something, then they too should be entitled to it. It doesn`t matter if people better off than them worked harder, are smarter, took risks to achieve their advantages, or just made better decisions. That`s not important. What`s important is that someone else has something that they want. And because they recognize that their own limited talents and the potential of their Equity Studies degrees limits them to a life not much better than the one they have now, rather then trying to improve their lives, they want to tear down the achievements of people more successful than they.

That type of bitterness just isn`t funny.


3. They're stupid

A sense of humour is a sign of intelligence and the radical left is not comprised of particularly intelligent people. If there was ever any question about their utter intellectual incompetence, the Occupy Movement put a stake through the heart of any remaining doubt.. These are people who hate the government and saw the solution to their problems being a bigger government with expanded powers. The imbeciles thought that squatting in public parks was a profound way of addressing income inequity. Their notion of economics consisted of imagery of the tuxedoed Monopoly man or Scrooge McDuck sitting atop a pyramid of gold coins. The money that they are complaining about is for the most part used to create new jobs, finance ventures which improve society, and serve as security for funding that is used to build new businesses. That's aside from the fact that the top 1% of income earners they sought to vilify contribute over 30% of tax revenue. And that figure doesn't include the billions for targetted philanthropic efforts, such as Bill Gates' campaign to eradicate Malaria.

Gates' effort has led to thousands of saved lives, whereas the entire Occupy Movement combined has saved zero lives but is responsible for at least 3 deaths, a dozen rapes and countless physical assaults. Say what you will about the Tea Party, they tend not to rape and murder each other at their demonstrations.

All the Occupy Movement managed to conclusively accomplish is to prove that the radical left is made up of idiots. They have enablers, like Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, Naomi Klein and others who tried to project their own issues into Occupy Whatever, but the movement was too disorganized to come up with any coherent message despite the prodding.

Aside from their lack of comprehension of basic economics, they are too stupid to recognize their own hypocrisy and racism. These are people who will rush to condemn the slightest perceived insult or offense to the feelings of one of their myriad categories of oppressed peoples, but at the same time will excuse the most depraved barbarity from radical Muslims or if it is perpetrated by a what they call racialized minorities. Why? Becuase the radical left who purport to be anti-racists are really racists of the worst kind. They clearly view their so-called oppressed brothers and sisters as barbarians too primitive to be held up to the standards of the Great White West.

The Can Rad Left's stupidity,sanctimony and hypocrisy requires them to view the world in a bigoted way suggesting such a lack of personal insight as to disqualify the possibility of any sense of humour in them.



Still, the left's absence of humour doesn't mean they aren't good for laughs; but as the old saying goes, it's laughing at and not with them.

One of the leaders of Canada's radical left acknowledges they are acting out from emotional damage

Anyone who has interacted with radical leftists will notice certain consistent attributes among them.

They are highly emotional and irrational. Their conclusions are not based on logical assessments of a situation, but on their personal identification with one party and the projection of their own emotional damage into incommensurable issues.

One can easily observe this phenomenon repeated over and over. It is evident in the histrionic behavior of Code Pink activist Sandra Ruch and the rest of her crew during their failed effort to sail The Sea Hitler to Gaza to try to break an embargo against the terrorist group Hamas. It's evident in the unbalanced behaviour of OCAP activists who disrupted a Toronto City Council meeting a few months ago. It's evident among radical university professors who are mired in marginal areas of study, such as "Critical Race Theory" "Gender Studies" and others permeated with self-absorbed nonsense that bears little relevance to the rest of the world.

While people not directly involved with radical, anti-capitalist politics recognize the absurdities of that movement, it is interesting to note that some rare self-insight has been exhibited by the Godmother of Canadian radicalism, Judy Rebick.

In an article at rabble.ca, the radical leftist website she founded, Rebick wrote:

In addition to the sadness about the state of society and of nature, almost all of us whatever oppression we might have experienced for social or economic reasons suffer from some kind of deep personal wounds. And if we don't face that sadness, that pain, we will inflict it on ourselves and others in a way that is hurtful. Much of the dysfunction on the Left comes not from political differences which can be creative and productive but from people acting out this pain. We become part of the problem instead of the part of the solution.

I was in therapy at the time when I was most busy and most recognized as an activist. I went through a lot of change both from the activism and from the therapy but I kept the therapy private. Only a few close friends knew what I was going through. We have privatized our emotional problems.

When psychiatrists assess people with mental illness, one of the considerations in the diagnosis that is a predictor of an individual's capability to respond to treatment is their insight into their condition. Rebick frequently makes statements that suggest that she is detached from reality, but she is not unintelligent.  Most of her cohorts in the radical left lack her intellect, such as it is, but have an even lesser degree of understanding of their own issues, to say nothing of the political postures they uncomprehendingly assume.

Whether or not the radical anti-capitalist movement can recognize that a great deal of what they do is an unfortunate outgrowth of their tainted psyches, Rebick's admission contributes the basis for understanding what really drives the Far Left.

Explicit calls for political violence come from the radical left in Canada

Any mass murder in North America has ramifications beyond the transparent tragedy that accompanies the death of innocents in a society that is comparatively among the safest in the world.

In trying to make sense of the incomprehensible, there are some who will try to find a culprit beyond the obvious, sometimes without any rational basis. The atrocity perpetrated by demented killer Jared Loughner over the weekend in which six innocent people were murdered and Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was critically wounded has, what seems to be, an obvious explanation. The perpetrator, whose public pronouncements suggest an incoherent, unbalanced madman, was mentally ill and acted out out of psychosis.

But one of the tragedies in this case, that compounds the original one, is that there are no shortage of people who are happy to exploit these deaths for political and ideological motives.

Because the central victim in is a Democratic legislator whose district was identified by Sarah Palin as a "target" for  Republicans to take, Democrats and others on the left, both in the US and in Canada, have ebulliently grasped the opportunity to lay blame on the former Republican Vice Presidential candidate,the Republican party and "right wingers" in general for allegedly creating a climate filled with violent rhetoric that supposedly created these events.

Nothing could be more absurd.

From The Democratic Leadership Council website

Despite preposterous suggestions from people like Paul Krugman in The New York Times, there is no evidence whatsoever establishing that anything Sarah Palin, or Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh said that played any role in Loughner's deranged violence. Sarah Palin may be a bit of a buffoon more famous for celebrity itself than for political adroitness, but her use of political rhetoric never called for violence of any kind and it falls within the scope of discourse that typifies much of American politics.

Responsible conservatives are as opposed to violence as much as responsible liberals. We live in a democratic society where change can be achieved through persuasion and elections.


Sane people are appalled by and reject the idea of initiating transition by terror.

But what may be shocking to some is that in Canada, explicit calls for violence to achieve political ends are coming from none other than the radical left.

Or perhaps not so shocking. The most recent acts of publicized political violence in Canada came from The Black Bloc during Toronto's G20 conference. It was radical leftists who rioted and caused millions of dollars in damage to make a political statement.

But it doesn't end there. Prominent Canadian leftist Judy Rebick founded a Marxist-leaning website called rabble.ca. It's now published by the spouse of the NDP's Deputy Leader, Libby Davies and is mainly funded by Canadian unions like CUPW and CUPE. That site's discussion forum recently hosted a thread entitled, "When is the time for violent revolution?" in which its contributors made comments like:

"I was wondering when it would be ok to overthrow a government, violently if need be."

"Perhaps the reason the ballot box isn't working is because the ballot box isn't the way to the solution."

"I think 9/11 was just a test run. The people failed with flying colours. And I think it's an example of what's in store for the future if fascists back themselves into another corner."

"How many more decades should we wait? It appears that Canadians arent catching on, so should we suffer in silence for 30 more years? maybe a generation or three? Dont the better people of our society have a responsibility to the stupid?"

and worse.

Beyond that,  CUPE, CUPW, Independent Jewish Voices (an anti-Israel group) and the NDP's Socialist Caucus were all endorsers of a recent rally where one of the speakers called for violent revolution in Canada.

At a Toronto rally in support of convicted American cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamar, one of the speakers was an organizer from the Communist newsletter BASICS. Following a rambling speech about conspiracies and praising violent revolutionaries, he said "we haven't had any threat of insurrection or any, you know, revolutionary uprisings in Canada quite for, for quite some time, right? But that that doesn't mean that operation is not still in play."

This suggests that the Canadian radical left is not only advocating violence, but planning it.

This type of organized insurrection against democracy is far more dangerous than a lone madman. Violence for political means is deplorable, and no ideology or political movement has a monopoly on it. But its strongest proponents these days are not the "right-wingers" and "neo-Cons" but their opponents.