The Why Files: School Bans Oh Canada

Every so often, I come across news stories regarding strange rules or behaviour and I just have to ask myself "why?" In the first of what I hope will be a continuing series, lets head over to New Brunswick and to Belleisle Elementary School where the principal has scrapped the daily tradition of singing Oh Canada before classes.

A principal's decision to eliminate the morning tradition of singing O Canada at a tiny New Brunswick school has sparked outrage among parents across the country and renewed a heated debate about the encroachment of political correctness in the classroom.

Principal Erik Millett of Belleisle Elementary School in Springfield, N.B., a small community about 90 kilometres southeast of Fredericton, scrapped the morning ritual in the summer of 2007, citing concerns from several parents. But the issue failed to gain much notice until this week, after a mother complained about the policy to local media.

The debate has since traveled to the upper echelons of government, drawing a sharp rebuke from federal Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson, who said publicly he views Mr. Millett's decision as an assault on a proud tradition.

For his part, Mr. Millett has stood firm behind his decision, offering a myriad of reasons for nixing the morning anthem - most notably the effort to accommodate parents who did not want their children taking part. Citing privacy reasons, he has not explained the source of the parents' objections, whether religious or otherwise.

"Is it right or is it fair for children who are not allowed to sing the anthem to be forced to?" Mr. Millett asked in an interview with the Telegraph-Journal newspaper. "Different families have different beliefs.... It's not up to me as a school administrator to subject kids to something their parents don't want them exposed to. I have to protect the minority rights as well as the majority rights." --National Post Thursday January 29th, 2009

Well, this is certainly odd as I cannot find anything possibly offensive about singing our national anthem. I do know that New Brunswick does have a sizable francophone population but I was unaware of any strong separatist movement existing there, so that rules out that as reasoning. Maybe it has to do with immigrants being offended by it, to which I ask "why are you even in this country if you don't like what it stands for." Most likely, it's political correctness run amok and creating victims of "offensive" content where none exist. For making a fool of himself for the tireless practise of trying to hard to be inoffensive, Erik Millet, you're being inducted into the Idiots Hall of Shame.

I'm also adding Google to the Idiots Hall of Shame because of the way Blogger handles bold and italics. Why is it I can't turn off italics after I've written something using it. I hit the button to turn it off, it shows it is unselected, yet it continues to write in italics. Could somebody please fix this?! Blogger has been a bit squirrely lately, which is why some of the text layout in my recent posts looks off.

read more...

Ex-NASA Boss Is Now AGW Sceptic

It's been a while since I've talked about climate change, or at least at length about it. Despite the green movement continuing to push forward, more and more high profile scientists are coming out and announcing that they have converted to climate scepticism. Ex-NASA boss Dr John Theon is one of them. He ran the agency and was responsible for the works of James Hansen, who had argued to congress the increasingly apocalyptic vision of climate change. Hansen is one of the top pro-AGW theory advocates.

According to Theon, “my own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.”

Hansen is in charge of GISS, which has been accused of fudging historic climate numbers to outright misrepresentation of data, such as the October Record High scandal that emerged late last year.

On Hansen's accusations of censorship by NASA, Theon noted “Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA's official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress."

Like David Suzuki, Hansen had once claimed he wished to see energy executives jailed for denying climate change. A lot of information is now beginning to emerge that is strongly suggesting that the climate numbers being made to form public policy were deliberately altered to conform with the theory. For a long time, I've been saying that this goes against scientific method, and Theon agrees with me. It's all about money and/or fulfilling some greater hidden agenda the left wing has. I always find it funny how liberals mock Christians for believing the disproven theory of intelligent design, yet they continue to strongly push the disproven theory of anthropogenic global warming.

read more...

Remember, These People Are Professionals...

It's been two years since I wrote a piece mocking academics for being out of touch with modern society. I think the York University strike by teaching assistants and contract staff has only reinforced my negative view point of academia. The Canadian Union of Public Employees has become Canada's second most powerful union. It is perhaps only superseded by the wealthy Ontario Teachers Federation. At one time, people only entered the public service out of a sense of duty, or that was the only job one could get. People never joined the public service to make money. Now, it seems that notion has done a complete 180. Today, public employees are some of the best paid workers in the country, have iron clad job security, and benefits even most can only dream of. Still, that's not enough for these people. It seems like every time their contracts go up, they go to the bargaining table, turn down lucrative new contracts, fain outrage, and go on strike. In the end, they're forced back to work by the legislature and end up getting their exorbitant demands. This is exactly what has been going on at York U, where striking staff refused a 9% pay increase when most of us will be lucky to see a raise at all. Of course you get the same pithy slogans about the strike not being about money and that they're fighting for something bigger, like more funding for post secondary institutions. Please. Is that the best they can do? The strikers at York U have effectively held students hostage. They have become the real victims in a fight about pure greed. It's extortion. The legislature is now debating back to work legislation, which CUPE has determined to fight since it would effectively end their scheme. Of course, we get another pithy slogan about that fight will protect all unions since any big corporation will just be able to get parliament to force striking workers back on the job.

Of course, all these slogans and actions we've seen and heard a million times. Today, CUPE's job action reached a new low. Today, four CUPE members during a march to Queens Park to protest the back to work legislation allegedly assaulted Toronto Police officers. Eye witness reports noted that police were trying to keep a lane free for emergency vehicles, which is standard proceedure in these situations. The strikers kept repeatedly moving into the lane when police moved in to corral them. An altercation broke out where witnesses said the strikers attacked first. Of course, CUPE is claiming police brutality and that they had done nothing wrong. I believe the union did this deliberately to make a political statement. This is a typical protest tactic that you see at G8 summits. However, there's a big difference here. These people are supposed to be professional academics. Does refusing orders to keep a lane free for safety reasons and assaulting police sound professional to you? Remember that these are the same people who are educating the next generation. This move will most certainly backfire on the union. York's reputation has already been severely tarnished by the strike and this is just another black eye. The university has already seen enrollment drop by 25% for the 2009/2010 school year. If enrollment and revenue declines, the university will have no choice but to lay off staff. In doing this, CUPE has effectively cut off its nose to spite their face. Though the allegations have not been proven in court, the university would be wise to fire the employees who were involved in the altercation.

The altercation is not simply a black eye on York or even CUPE alone but one on academia as a whole. Academics have always been radicals, or at least for the last fourty years. Take Bill Ayres for example. However, it is generally expected that professional people do not act in a violent manner towards other human beings, no matter who they are. On one hand you've always had academics proclaiming to be passificts, then you have them attacking police. These actions drag down the public perception of their entire profession. This is why I believe the government has to take swift action against CUPE and make an example out of them. This behaviour is not appropriate.

read more...

Message to York U Students: Sue CUPE

For the years I spent in university, the students' union complained to no end about high tuition fees. Indeed, education today is a vary expensive prospect no matter where you go to school. Now imagine you fork out $5000 or more in tuition and are suddenly forced out of class by TAs on an unjust labour strike. That would leave your blood boiling. Well, that's exactly what's happening at York University, where apparently the working conditions (in a fully heated and air conditioned building with comfy offices) border on being Dickensian. The TAs are fighting for better benefits and the university has already tabled a vary generous 9%+ raise over three years. During this recession, most of the real world will be lucky to get a raise at all over that period, let alone 9%. Of course you get the usual BS that it's not just about money but we all know it is. It just proves how decadent the public services unions have become that they have the gall to strike over such petty things when people are loosing their jobs left right and centre, with thousands more unable to find work at all. It just shows that they live in a total fantasy world.

The Ontario government tabled legislation today to force the striking workers back on the job. However, Howard Hampton has chosen to filibuster the bill, which is highly irresponsible. Ironically, students are one of the NDP's biggest constituencies, which Hampton has effectively alienated. Many students struggle to pay for education and now that money they paid for a service they didn't receive is gone forever. It is a breech of contract in my opinion between students and the university & instructors. The province has promised to increase student loans to the affected students. However, saddling them with even more debt is not a solution. It does not look like McGuinty is going to provide any real aid. My advice to York students would be to launch a class action law suit against the Canadian Union of Public Employees. CUPE has to be punished for stealing the education and money from hard working students. The union should pay back every penny owned to students for holding them hostage. A successful suit would set a powerful precedent, making unions think twice about going on frivolous strikes, which this one is.

read more...

Racism on the Left Part 1: Interracial Relationships

The left wing and racism. The left has traditionally portrayed themselves as the one anti-racist force in the world that buffers the inherently bigoted right. Is this true? Are conservatives really the only ones who are racially discriminatory, or is the left guilty of it as well? I've been wanting to do a series like this for some time but have held myself back due to the fact that the left does tend to label people as racists or crackpots should they ever call them out on their own hypocrisies. However, there are many topics I want to discuss that I feel need to be discussed. I argue that the left does not have the clean hands it pretends to have when it comes to racism. They are neither anti-racist nor non-discriminatory. This series is intended to make you question the values liberals hold, particularly now as they in the United States are about to present their first minority president to the world.

The Mulatto: From Cosmic Race to Shamed Mutt
The first topic I'd like to cover does involve Barack Obama since he is the product of it; interracial relationships. Human beings are a bit like dog breeders; they tend to value purebreds higher than they do the mutts. Take Obama for example. He is a mulatto: a person who is half black and half white. However, he and his supporters only identify him as black. It's as if he wants to hide or is ashamed of his European heritage. Of course, there are many tactical political reasons for doing so. Similarly goes with Tiger Woods, who is half black, half Asian. He does identify himself as such, unlike Obama, however, the mainstream media does not. During the colonial period in Latin America, interracial relationships were vary common and people of mixed ancestry were highly regarded in society. One Latino writer even called them the "Cosmic Race", believing that they were inherently superior, since they were a mix of the best of all other races. However, this celebration of racial mixing has hit a bit of a brick wall in the last decade. In the 80s and 90s, it was trendy to be involved in an interracial relationship, if you were a white woman. So what changed? Well, nothing did. The environment of our society requires people to make clean, black & white definitions of themselves. Mixed race people can only be one or the other, yet not both at the same time. They're like a square peg in a round hole.

The left has forced this view more than any other organization through their race relations policies. They pretend that mixed race people simply do not exist. Such people usually pick their minority side to identify themselves for a variety of reasons. I believe because this can open more doors to them, but also due to negative stereotypes of whites in society as well as pressure from the minority community. For their parents, the road can be equally difficult. For the sake of argument, we'll look at how white men and their partners in Asian-White relationships have been treated in recent years. Particularly given how controversial this paring has become.

Yellow Fever's Bitter Pill:
There is a stereotype that white men like Asian women. However, it doesn't exactly put a positive spin on this. There are a lot of misconceptions floating around. First off all, it is not as prevalent as some people think it is. There are roughly 504,000 Asian-White marriages in the United States as of the most recent census in 2000. This includes both white male/Asian female and Asian male/white female pairs. This is less than there are homosexual couples, with roughly 660,000 pairs according to the same census. Homosexuals account for 1% of the US population. 3.6% of the 2000 population were Asian and 75% were Caucasian. So instances of WM/AF marriages are rarer than claimed by opponents to such relationships. Secondly, the stereotype's reasoning for entering such relationships is what has really raised my ire over the years.

While I was in university, I took a course on how Western cultures portrayed the history of "the other". The "other" being foreign cultures such as those in Asia, India, and Africa. One particular reading for the course described a 19th century man's first encounter with a Japanese woman while on a trip to the country. He described her as being more beautiful and elegant than the European women of the time. While discussing the article, the class was led to come to the following conclusion. A white obsession with the exotic, the desire to dominate other cultures, and the desire to impose European culture on the Japanese were the reasons he found her so attractive.

The left in academia has created this image of the 19th century white man, and according to them, this way of thinking has persisted right into the 21st century. This point of view is racially discriminatory against whites, since it has been used to demonize white males who enter into such relationships. Of course, this form of racism is a two way street because it has been used to attack Asian women as well, deeming them to be too submissive. This is supposedly why white men "take" them. I have yet to meet one of these so called "submissive" Asian women. The left has basically said that a white man cannot love a woman of another race or culture in the same way as he would a white woman. If he marries a white woman, it is about love. If he marries an Asian woman, it is about dominance and control.

Why the Academic Left Has Done This:
The problem with this liberal academic view is that it is based on numerous old and outdated concepts, and they know this. It assumes that men are dominant and the only ones who can actively seek out a mate; that women do not ask men out. This concept has been dead as long as Sadie Hawkins dances have been in existence. So why are supposedly progressive academics still using it? Secondly, it attempts to take the broad concept of 19th century colonialism and cram it into modern interpersonal relationships. Thirdly, it assumes that all whites are racist and the only reason they enter these relationships is out of racist thinking. Their goal is to assimilate "savage" women and give them "superior" European values.

In their own perverted egalitarian view of the world, liberals like to see all cultures as being inherently homogeneous and isolated. It's as if every society is an lone island in a vast sea. This belief asserts that everyone in a particular culture thinks the same, has the same tastes, and stays limited to within their own narrow, and unchanging cultural practises. Academics believe that notions of individualism and personal taste are a Western phenomenon and do not exist elsewhere. This is why so called "Western" culture has been demonized, despite it largely being a mishmash of different world views. They still see it from the 19th century view of western dominance and fetish for the exotic. To liberals, any sort of cultural mix is a no-no and threatens to pollute these "isolated" cultures of the other with decadent Westernism.

Anti-Interracial Backlash
The point of view projected by the Western left has become so persistent that there has been a great deal of backlash, especially among Asians, regarding these kinds of relationships. Asian men have accused whites of "stealing" their women and leaving no women left for them. Esther Ku on the 2008 season of Last Comic Standing pointed out in her act that Asian men were going to go extinct because of this. Her act was extremely controversial, though more because she joked about old Korean stereotypes.

Ku perpetrated numerous myths about interracial relationships in her act. However, no more fierce has this been said than in a controversial blog post by someone going by the screen name of "SomeKoreangirl", a post which reeked of anti-white racism that made the rounds on the Internet last year. She basically listed out why she would never date a white man, using the vary myths I've noted. That whites were out to control and dominate Asian women, and are taking them away from Asian men. If I had written something on here saying I wouldn't date black women because they're (to quote Don Imus) "nappy headed hoes", I'd have the Canadian Human Rights Commission breaking down my door. White men have also been accused of polluting the Asian race by having children with Asian women.

Once again, this assumes that men are dominant in seeking out mates, and that women do not have their own preferences. It goes against the ideals of women's liberation, a concept the left likes to claim as their own. There are Asian women who prefer and actively seek out white men, contrary to what the myth would have you believe.

It is ironic in a sense that I know more Asian man-White woman relationships that I do the other way around. This includes a close family friend of ours, who is originally from southern Europe. She has been married to a Japanese man for a number of years. Indeed, the stigma does not exist for these types of relationships, or at least is not as prevalent. An Asian man marrying a white woman is seen as empowering or at the vary least ignored, but a white man marrying an Asian woman is scandalized. This could also help partly explain why their children identify themselves as just Asian rather than mixed.

The notion of white men stealing Asian women is ludicrous. As noted earlier, there are less of these marriages than there are gay couples, despite Asians and whites making up a far higher proportion of the American population. It has been said that all stereotypes have some shred of truth but I was unable to find any statistics that back up these "stealing" claims. 1 million people in a nation of 300 million, or 0.33% of the population, is a rain drop in a deluge. The idea that a white man cannot love an Asian woman in the same way he would love a white woman is equally, if not more absurd. The Asian man has become what Ann Coulter has described as the liberals' false victim. They pretend like they're the ones under siege, which allows them to be openly racist against whites. The couple who are scandalized and their children who are forced to deny and be ashamed of their heritage are the real victims.

Conclusion
Liberals claim they are a progressive group despite frequently trying to adapt archaic ideas to modern society. No more has this been seen with interracial relationships. They have taken the broad concept of 19th century colonialism and have tried to apply it to a different time and society. Any competent historian will tell you that while cultures are not islands, history is. You cannot try to fit historical events in to events of a different time. History does not repeat itself. Yet the left still insists on claiming that it does.

The left has created a racially discriminatory atmosphere between white men and Asian women. The idea that white men are inherently controlling, obsessed with the exotic, and seek out submissive, naive "others" is just not true. He can love a woman of another race just as much as he can a woman of his own race. Those who try to claim otherwise are simply bigots. This belief hurts both partners who engage in such interracial relationships, as well as their children who are forced to be torn between two identities when they should celebrate both. In a society that supposedly proclaims racial blindness, no more has racial identity divided people. People should not be made to feel ashamed of their loved ones, or their heritage, simply because they do not match.

(Note: White some have tried to lump Indians, Bangladeshis, and Pakistanis into the mix, I define Asians as being from nations that border the Pacific or from the Indo-China subcontinent. ie Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, Filipino, etc.)

read more...

This Song Goes Out To Obama...

Being a fan of South Park, this song by Issac Hayes couldn't help but remind me of Obama and how the mainstream media treats him. Boom baby.

read more...

Garth Eating Some Humble Pie

The soapbox for the self-obsessed windbag Garth Turner has finally been put out in the recycling bin. Turner wrote the last entry in his blog, announcing that he was shutting it down. Good riddance is all I have to say. While Turner is perfectly entitled to his opinions as much as I am, his blog was basically a bull horn for his self love and crackpot conspiracy theories. As readers will know, Turner's blog got him into a lot of hot water while he was both a Conservative and a Fiberal. Most famous being his double whammy insult to Alberta and Quebec over the summer. After his landslide defeat to Conservative Lisa Raitt in October '08, I guess he's been forced to eat some humble pie over the last couple of months. No more will we have to hear Garth talk about how great Garth is. It's a shame really. It gives me one less thing to mock and ridicule.

Source: National Post

read more...

Jesus Lives! ... In Honolulu?

"Obama, he going to pay my mortgage!" The now famous words that were uttered by a woman during the US election campaign that might have well been uttered by Mammy in some racist 1930s movie. Yes, we are now one week away from when Barack Obama will be inaugurated President of the United States. It is historical, from a certain point of view, that Obama will be America's first white raised mulatto president. What he is really does not effect how he can preform in his job, which is all that should matter. However, the American media has carefully crafted him as being some sort of Jesus-like figure; a black messiah. It's obvious that this tactic has worked. The lady who said that Obama would pay her mortgage honestly believes he will, as do many other African Americans, but more importantly most white liberals. It has affected Canadians on this side of the border as well, with travel agencies arranging road trips to see his "historic" inauguration, as if they were going to see Moses giving the Sermon on the Mound. It is really hard to grip my feeble mind around the lunacy that is "Obamania". Here is a man who's whole campaign was constructed around lies, dodges, and passing the buck. Obama is the proverbial person who can jump into the manure pile and still end up smelling like roses. Whether it be the Reverend Wright incident, or Ayres, or the scandal over his vacant senate seat, or his total lack of executive experience. Let us not forget the fact that liberals have touted his African American victim heritage despite the fact that he is half white, half Kenyan, raised white, by a well off middle class family living in a tropical paradise. Obama is certainly no Eva Peron, as his backers try to make him out to be. As my mother used to say "bullshit baffles brains", and the liberals have been doing that exceptionally well during the whole process from the primaries up to inauguration. Of course, you can make the same accusations of any politician. However, that certainly doesn't excuse him from these issues. The fact that people believe he's going to radically change the world are pure loonies.

I can't help but wonder whether the if messiah status will ultimately hurt Obama, particularly if he chooses a second run at office. The liberal media build up has put an exceptionally high level of expectations on the man, both in the minds of Americans and the global community at large. The real question now is whether he's going to be another FDR, or another LBJ. Right now, America is facing tough economic times and there simply isn't the money or logistics to implement some of the programs he touted, such as socialized medicine. Given how many resources these programs consume here in Canada, it's just not practical. America already has an unprecedented level of debt, amounting to $10.6 trillion at the time of writing, and increasing by $3.4 billion per day. An immediate end to US foreign intervention and the Iraq war is also highly unlikely. The liberal media has already used the recession as a scapegoat to try and force more realistic expectations of Obama. However, Barack Hussain Obama as the messiah figure has been deeply ingrained into the psyche of the American left, and it will take an awful lot of media backpedaling to bring their heads out of the clouds. It's almost like a drug high. There's the euphoria, but then they're going to come down hard when they see Obama as just being another silver tounged populist who doesn't know jack about what he's doing. Especially that lady when she finds out she still has to pay her mortgage bill for the dilapidated house in Chicago that she bought knowing she couldn't afford it. The liberals of course will hang onto the myth, just as they have here over Pierre Trudeau. However, the real deal breaker is whether he can keep the likes of Joe the Plumber happy. With the amount of unrealistic promises he's made, I can confidently say Obama is going to be Americans first black one term president, provided of course the Republicans can push a viable candidate in 2012.

read more...

A Culture of Victimization

I was listening to Opie & Anthony yesterday and the shock jock duo had Ann Coulter on. (Those familiar with the show will know that they do discus serious topics on American politics and current events aside from the usual comedy.) Coulter was on discussing her latest book, titled "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America." Ann Coulter is a controversial figure in US politics. She has been labelled a brainless bimbo and a crackpot. She takes a hard right approach to politics and I do not agree with everything she says, given that I'm more centre right. Still, she is one of the few people in America who is not afraid to stand up and speak her mind, and she can more than hold her own in any debate. You have to respect her for her resolution, or else get chewed out in the process. Our society fears these people because they stir the proverbial pot. The left especially dislikes any sort of opposing views and will often refuse to debate or question their own. The left considers themselves to be enlightened. Their point of view is the only correct point of view and anyone who disagrees should be ignored and silenced. Are there people on the right who are like this? Of course, however, they don't fill the ranks of political power and are often labelled as "right wing nutjobs". The right also lacks the massive propaganda machine the left has amassed through the mainstream media. Canada has largely the same issues regarding lack of debate and elitism on the left, as noted especially with their contempt for the democratic process with the widely unpopular coalition.

Coulter's new book, which I have not read yet, looks at the culture of victimization within the United States. That is, how people make themselves look like a victim to gain power. People believe that if they are being wronged, or have been wronged in the past, that entitles them to special treatment. To automatically pass Go, collect $2 million. In the United States, the most frequent example of this that crops up is African Americans and slavery. Due to rampant racism against them, they should receive special treatment and should be free from criticism. Take a look at how the liberal media has handled Barack Obama. During his entire campaign, he received almost no criticism while McCain, Palin, and Clinton were hammered by the media. Obama on the other hand has been treated with kid gloves as was pointed out by Coulter. What she is essentially saying is because of his race, Obama has been made impervious to criticism. Despite him being mulatto (his mother is white) who's father was from Kenya, he is still identified with the slave ancestors of the majority of African Americans living in the US. Those familiar with history will know that slavery was primarily west African so a Kenyan ancestor will not have shared the same experiences. However, Obama is still portrayed as being a victim of racism in America.

The way liberals treat minorities is the same way one would treat a retarded child who you are playing a game with. You let them win because they are "suffering" and you feel sorry for them. White people are mostly guilty of this since they feel bad that their ancestors participated in slavery. It has been jokingly called "the white man's guilt", a play on the "white man's burden". White people feel guilty for what other white people did so they feel the need to give special treatment to minorities simply because of that. Of course, minority groups have learned how to exploit this, and you cannot really blame them for doing so. They portray themselves as victims some sort of crime that has befallen on their chosen identity group in order to extort power or money out of guilty liberals. In turn, those liberals feel good about themselves for helping the "disadvantaged". The left wingers may have good intentions but ultimately, this thought process is counter productive. Originally, we sought to build a society that was blind to sex, race, religion, etc. In the process of doing so, we've managed to create the exact opposite. Now anyone can claim themselves to be a victim of some past or present injustice, real or perceived, and they use it to get their way. This has worked to create a society that is becoming increasingly divisive, and the left wing is openly encouraging it. Those who wish to constructively criticize the methods of the so called "victims" are called racist, sexist, etc., which ultimately stiffles debate.
This is not to say that true victims of racism do not exist in the United States. However, there is no more of it there than any other given country. Those who try to tell you that America is the most racist country on Earth obviously didn't pay attention in their history classes. The liberals are fostering a society that believes this to be true. None of this rhetoric is of any benefit to our society. Obama and any other minority in power should be held to the same critical standards as their predecessors have been. Americans owe it to themselves to do so. If all men are created equally, they should all be held to the same standards regardless or race, colour, or creed. It is not racist to criticise the president elect, however, it is racist not to.

Ah, but what about Canada? The culture of victimization is probably stronger here than it is anywhere else in the world. Oddly enough, it is Steven Harper fueling it rather than the left wing, thanks mostly to his reparation payments and appologies to "victims" of head taxes, residential schools, etc. Perhaps the biggest exploiters of victimization are Canada's Aboriginal population. The way the government handles them as victims has allowed them to live in a time warp, separated from the rest of the world. Millions of dollars have been spent on native reparations, which has ultimately done nothing to improve their lot. Yet, they still weild a tremendous amount of influence over the government. The whole victimization notion protects them from criticism, even when "protestes" become violent when they don't get their way. Indeed, the American case study with Obama should force us to look at how we handle similar situations in our own country. Simply put, treating people as victims is wrong and does not empower people. It is holding our society back from acheiving the goal we had originally sought out.

read more...