Kyoto: Who Really Understands?
...Not Canadians,
apparently.
I do wonder though, if a similar poll was done regarding the people who talk more about Kyoto than anyone else - the media. Have any of them read the accord, or are they just parroting what gets thrown around?
And is the Liberal party support borne out of an honest belief that it will actually work, or simply an attempt to save face? Afterall, didn't Martin basically say that Canada would sign the accord with the full knowledge that we could never implement it?
Hrmm.
Horrifying
Regardless of where you sit on the Iraq war,
this is somewhere between awful and disgusting.
The most pertinent tidbit:
In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked him: "Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber - if there were no other casualties - be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?"
Mr Galloway replied: "Yes, it would be morally justified. I am not calling for it - but if it happened it would be of a wholly different moral order to the events of 7/7. It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did."
One of the most ridiculous examples of "two wrongs somehow make a right" logic that I've ever heard.
Humiliating.
Here and There and Everywhere
A Few Thoughts:
1) Huh?
It smells like a joke. And the supporting comments all sound like exactly the same person.
Either that, or someone's really desparate.
2) Judging JudgesMaurice Vellacott goes down. Because he doesn't like comments like these from SCC CJ Bev McLach:
"The rule of law requires judges to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly enacted laws or hostile public opinion. There is certainly no guarantee or presumption that a given list of constitutional principles is complete, even assuming the good faith intention of the drafters to provide such a catalogue ... Judges have the duty to insist that legislative and executive branches of government conform to certain established and fundamental norms, even in times of trouble.''
See...the funny thing was, I always thought that "rule of law" implied that the law was supreme, not some judges' interpretation of "principles" that are found goodness-knows-where....yeah. I've already ranted on this so much that I better not do it again, but I did like how that editorial ended with: "...At least it would be, if our politicians truly believed in another Charter right -- free speech."
Hmm...then there are those cartoons...
3) Michael CorenIf true in the way that that story articulates it...sigh. I like Michael Coren, not agreeing with everything he says, but I like the guy, but regardless: stuff like that doesn't exactly encourage my opinion of the CBC, let's just put it that way.
Underway in the Bar Admissi....I Mean Licensing Process
Whenever you change the name of something (Bar Admission Course --> Licensing Process Course), it always causes problems. The instructor has really been struggling with that change for the last 2 days.
The course itself isn't bad, just a little slow. Not exactly riveting material, although it does appear very useful, and it's not difficult.
The reason for the 2 week gap between posts was due to the fact I just returned from a vacation in Williamsburg VA for 9 days. It was a great time to relax, visit the historical sites, play some golf, read a lot of books and watch a lot of TV.
I've been enjoying that the CPC has been steadily inching upwards in the polls over the last few weeks. The budget looks good, and I've been overall fairly impressed so far. They really have a lot of free reign, since it is clear that the Liberals have no interest in an election anytime soon.
And I promise updates will be more regular - now that I'm back, it's time to end the blog-rest and return with a vengeance.
