Monday, August 17, 2009

All Successful Societies Have A Vigor!

That is a very true statement, one I agree with wholeheartedly. We need to ask how vigorous is Canada, Europe, or the US? I see two vigorous nations, the US and Australia. Australia for it's outright opposition to the green fanatics, and the US for it's lively debate on health care. Are we seeing any debate about health care or climate change in Canada? No, we are seeing lefty media telling us we should support both, without any facts to support their positions.

Who said that "all successful societies have a vigor"? Mark Steyn. If you have an hour to spare, listen to this.

Conversation with History!

I know it's from 2007, but it is still relevant.

It's time for Canada to show some vigor. We need to stop sleepwalking through life and get involved. Stop expecting the government to take your hand and guide you through life. Start using your brains and making your own way in life. Trust me, you will feel better about yourself and your life.

Start small. Plant a tomato plant. Harvest the rewards.

You know those homeless people and druggies? Give them a blue bag and get them cleaning our streets. Heartless? No, I bet they will feel useful for once.

When we were in Vancouver this summer, we went to the aquarium and then I told my boys how they would love to walk through Chinatown. I remembered it as a very dynamic, friendly and interesting place. Imagine our surprise when all we saw were druggies stumbling around at 11:00 in the morning. The place was a wasteland, all businesses were closed...permanently. We drove out of the area as fast as we could.

All successful societies have a vigor.....where has ours gone? Are we so happy being a little mini-European socialist society that we no longer care about our future? Talk to your grandparents, they knew what it meant to be pioneers, they knew what vigor was all about, it was about survival, and they made it, they survived.

What do immigrants expect now? What do they contribute to Canada? If they are the new pioneers, what are they building?


Bismark said...

Your world view is based on a extremely narrow perspective coupled with what can only be described as an exceedingly profound degree of ignorance.

For your information, Germany is the world's largest exporter. Did you know that? I'd say that is indicative of a lot of vigour... The productivity of many of the European countries you seem to loathe regularly exceed that of the USA. China regularly posts GDP growth rates of 13% (somewhat less just recently) compared to 2-3% for the USA during the same time period. Pretty "vigorous" I'd say.

Same could be said for India — not as you suggested a "third-world dictatorship" but in fact the world's largest democracy. Not to mention numerous other countries around the world.

And so on...

Why not educate yourself a little before spouting off such ridiculous, prejudicial nonsense?

By the way, Australia has a left-leaning Labour government now and all of the government run social programs you seem to despise here in Canada are very much in evidence in that country too.

Also, I think the innumerable business entrepreneurs, manufacturers, exporters, resource companies, software developers, etc., right here in Canada might beg to differ with you about our country lacking "vigour" (that's the way we Canadians spell the word, btw).

As for planting a tomato plant, it's a bit late in the year for that, no? In Edmonton, you have to start them in April (indoors) and then hope the frost doesn't get them before they come to fruition in late August/early September.

And didn't you just rant the other day about "No Pickles!!!" because of "global cooling"? A little consistency may be in order here.

Furthermore, the various businesses in Vancouver's Chinatown will doubtless be surprised to learn that they're all shuttered because of roaming drug addicts. Obviously, you never went near Keefer and Pender at night to experience the market there.

Please, please buy some clues before posting...

sor said...

Hunter- Of course we have vigor (tongue firmly planted in cheek). Look at how we vigorously debate whether to have yet another election.

BTW your mailbox is full and I am trying to send you a missive for Friday. Cheers.

Bismark said...

What a gutless wonder.

hunter said...

By the way Bismark, most people who frequent this blog know that I work during the day and do not respond or update comments until I get home.

But it shows who the ignorant one is now doesn't it?

And yes I used the American spelling, so sue me!

Anonymous said...

China and India have an endless supply of cheap labour. The surge of Chinese expansion of the last 5 years is an anomoly in the grand scheme of things, not unlike the oil boom we just came out of here in Alberta.

The government run welfare programs in Austrailia were in place long before their newly elected socialist government took over from the conservatives.

Seeing we have a new spelling and grammar czar (hall monitor) now, I think it's only fair to point out that 'regularly exceeds' is the correct grammar, not 'regularly exceed' in the above pro-communist screed.

Hunter, feel free to use American spellings to your heart's content. Now that the left has thier messiah in the white house, the anit-yank rants have tamed this side of the border considerably. The Americans are only evil when the Republicans are in power!

Bismark said...

I don’t frequent your blog very often. Maybe you should state something regarding your hours of operation in the comment box given that you “moderate” for whatever reason.

Bismark said...

Seeing we have a new spelling and grammar czar (hall monitor) now, I think it's only fair to point out that 'regularly exceeds' is the correct grammar, not 'regularly exceed' in the above pro-communist screed.

Actually, no. You’re incorrect.

And I wasn’t pointing out the difference in spelling just to be a “grammar czar” or “hall monitor” as you so wittily characterized it — I use American spelling all the time when it suits my preference, but I do think there are some words that should remain Canadian (or British, to be precise) for the sake of distinction. That said, I’ll concede that I was being needlessly petty in nitpicking over that.

As for the rest of your comment, it’s a load of tripe. How is it “pro-communist” in any way? Other than the fact that I don’t reflexively trash the Chinese, I mean. I’m very much a capitalist and have no time for communist ideology. Didn’t I praise the entrepreneurial, free-market sector of our economy as an example of home-grown “vigor”? (A: Yes, I did.)

The surge of Chinese expansion of the last 5 years is an anomoly in the grand scheme of things, not unlike the oil boom we just came out of here in Alberta.

Rubbish. The two things could not be dissimilar. Regarding it being an “anomaly” — says who? China’s meteoric growth in productivity is the logical outgrowth of globalization (aka “the grand scheme of things” economically speaking) amongst other things. To simply dismiss it as a freakish “anomaly” is laughably absurd.

The government run welfare programs in Austrailia [sic] were in place long before their newly elected socialist government took over from the conservatives.

Yes, and your point would be… what? I never suggested they were recent innovations of the relatively new Labour government. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Also, the Labour government isn’t “socialist” and things like universal healthcare aren’t “welfare programs” — at least not in the pejorative sense you probably intend that expression.

The Americans are only evil when the Republicans are in power!

More crap. First of all, Americans are not evil, but their governments sometimes are. When Obama launches a discretionary war based on completely specious intelligence for highly dubious motives I’ll be more than happy to condemn him and his administration.

Any other completely bogus, fictional canards you’d like to trot out there, Eski?

Anonymous said...

Uh oh - we have a new troll. Hunter - do not tolerate personal criticism. Bismark - your crack about profound ignorance is rude and unwarranted. I suggest that the childhood maxim holds true - takes one to know one. We are permitted to have our own views and it is not your or anybody else's place to call somebody down for his or her view. This is not your blog - if you have your own blog, then express yourself and your views there. Vigor can be spelled either way. I prefer the Canadian way but...if you're going to pick on somebody's spelling, you're showing yourself to be SQ under a new name.

Anonymous said...

Bismark - this is Hunter's blog and if she wants or does not want to post hours of operation, then so be it. This is not your blog. You display the ignorance of SQ and the arrogance of our friend G.

All in favour of blocking Bismark's comments raise your hands and say 'aye'.


Anonymous said...

Eskimo - SQ, Stereo and LS are alive and well. Funny - Bismark says he doesn't frequent this blog but he sure has made a lot of ignorant comments. I have the feeling that Bismark is one of our banned trolls.

Hunter, how long will you allow this troll to insult you? You deserve some respect and if you don't receive it, cut the troll off at the legs and send him back under that bridge.

Bismark said...

EoE — Fine. I know that’s how things work on most “conservative” blogs. You express criticism or disapproval and you’re branded a “troll” and are then told to STFU and go away because this is the blogger’s own personal, private domain; presumably, for the expression of nonsense and exclusive approval of opinions and not for the purpose of open discussion, discovery or debate. This from the same people who vaunt “free speech” and “liberty”… “freedom” and all that libertarian stuff.

I’ll give “Hunter” much credit for posting my comments rather than “moderating” them out of existence and will simply note that no substantive counter-argument has been provided other than for some to label me as “pro-Communist,” a “grammar czar” and, quite predictably, a “troll” — not, of course, that “conservatives” engage in name-calling, because that would be, um, like… massively hypocritical.

My point was simply that Hunter’s assertion was misplaced and seemed to be founded on a great deal of ignorance more than anything else — or to put it more diplomatically, a lack of awareness. For example, please explain how Germany is the world’s largest exporter and yet tends to have kind of a lefty government with all of the universal social programs that you “conservatives” despise with a passion… And how can you dismiss whole other countries as not being “vigorous” in nature with sweeping, stereotypical generalizations that simply don’t stand up to factual scrutiny?

Anonymous said...

Obama doesn't have to launch a war. He already owns two of them. Iraq and Afghanistan are now Obama's wars. Gitmo is now Obama's jail. All the Canadian fan clubs of 'baby' Khadr must now protest and demean Obama until the poor slip of a child is released from his torturous confines. Every day that US forces are in a war situation, that is one more day Obama is a hypocrite. Not one word of his so called 'exit strategy' since the fraud was inaugerated under the promise of ending both wars and closing the Club Med all inclusive prison.

The double standard is rearing its ugly head again. If history can twist the Vietnam war into 'Nixon's war' (read: started by democrat Kennedy, massively expanded by democrat Johnson, INHERITED and subsequently wound down by Republicans Nixon and Ford) then Iraq, Afghanistan and Gitmo are now Obama's millstones and if we want to play fair, his problem. Bush is old news now. Obama will soon realize and the public will soon tire of the scapegoating.

Anonymous said...

Bismark - the way Conservative blogs work is that we prefer politeness. Your first comment to Hunter was ignorant and offensive and you know it. Do not attempt to shift the blame to us by implying that we won't tolerate dissent because you know that's a crock.

You can disagree with Hunter or any of us but cracks like "profound degree of ignorance" or "please buy some clues before posting" are just plain ignorant, not to mention not necessary.

So, you can post a polar opposite POV without the insults. And, how about "Why not educate yourself a little before spouting off such ridiculous, prejudicial nonsense?" - ignorant crack.

So, Bismark, the fault lies with you and not us.

Anonymous said...

"This from the same people who vaunt “free speech” and “liberty”… “freedom” and all that libertarian stuff."

Bismark - we do stand for those ideals. We do not stand for ignorance as you obviously do.

Bismark said...

EoE — Okay. Got it. Perfectly fine to call me ignorant (several times over), but not acceptable for me to call out Hunter for what seems to be the apparent ignorance underlying her post.

Got it.

No double-standard or hypocrisy there.

Bottom line is you don't like any dissenting opinion (which you brand as "ignorant")and just want to enjoy the peace and quiet of your self-reinforcing echo chamber.

Good luck with that.

hunter said...

Bismark, come on and meet me in person and we will discuss my "exceedingly profound degree of ignorance", "ridiculous, prejudicial nonsense", and my being a "gutless wonder". Bring your mother, I would except her to grab you by the ear and make you apologize for your lack of manners in MY HOUSE!

Do not expect any of your posts to make it through moderation if you do no stop insulting me.

Bismark said...

I have no interest whatsoever in ever posting here again, so no worries on that score.

Oh, an my mother died of cancer several years ago, by the way.

Have a nice day.

Anonymous said...

Bismark - to quote somebody from your peer group: you did it first. The moment one of you trolls gets ignorant, all semblance of politesse goes out the window. You call down the host and I'll use your own words back at you. No hypocrisy there, Bismark. Had I started it and then called you down for responding in kind, then I would have been hypocritical is you who is the hypocrite and, might I add, a crybaby because the moment I dish back to you what you dished to Hunter, you get all whiny. Typical of Lib trolls. You love to dish it but when it comes back your way, you fall to pieces and degenerate into little whiny gits.

Anonymous said...

"I have no interest whatsoever in ever posting here again, so no worries on that score."

Yeah, right. You'll be back either as Bismark or a different handle. You trolls never leave.

Bismark said...

EoE — I’ll break my own vow, but just to respond to your insults.

Yes, I did “start it first” — for the simple reason that “Hunter” IS profoundly ignorant about many things, in my opinion. Most people are — myself included. I couldn’t explain quantum physics if my life depended on it.

I’ve yet to see any legitimate counterargument to the points raised, other than bitterly slagging me personally.

Also, I’m not “whining” nor am I a “crybaby” for indicating that I’ve got no interest in engaging in discussion with clueless, partisan idiots like yourself. Anyone you disagree with is automatically branded a “troll” and you focus all of your attention on personal attacks rather than having anything substantive to say whatsoever.

An no, I will not bother posting here under different names or “trolling” Hunter’s dismal weblog in future. There’s plenty of idiocy in the world without having to actively seek it out in hateful places like this.

So, now you can crow triumphantly with a cry of “Victory is mine!!!” and slag me some more. I won’t bother responding because, quite simply, you’re not worth the effort.

Anonymous said...

Bismark - please don't insult my intelligence by trying to focus the blame back on me.

I refuse to debate any point with somebody who shows disrespect to a blog host. Period. Whatever points you raised in your first comment were completely negated by your own personal attack on Hunter - for which I did not yet see an apology or retraction.

I'll repeat what I said: opposing views do not a troll make. Disrespect does, however, a troll make. Get that distinction clear in your head and stop with the old "dissenting views are not accepted and render one a troll" theme. It won't fly because it is totally incorrect.

No, I will not add anything substantive to an argument for an unrepentent troll - a troll being one who insults the blog host as you did.

Hunter is not "ignorant" as you say. She expresses her view as she sees it and that is her right. We are all "ignorant" in one way or another but it is not necessary to attach that label to anybody.

Rather than call somebody ignorant, I suggest something along the lines of: "I do not agree with your view point because, according to..., this is how I see it"...something polite like that. But to call somebody ignorant puts the brakes on any discussion and gets the old troll warnings going.

So, Bismark, I will debate points with you if and only if there is no name-calling or disrespect. Opposing or dissenting views are fine - we all learn by that process. We do not learn by subjecting ourselves to disrespect.

Anonymous said...

PS - I knew Bismark would break his promise - trolls always do. They are just built that way.