The interesting thing is that he has no clue about the author or her philosophy, he was just fulfilling my Christmas wish. As he was paying for the books, the clerk made a point of telling him that she did not believe in Ayn Rand's philosophy. He told her he had no clue what she was talking about and was only buying the books for his wife, who wanted them. He found it quite strange that a clerk would disapprove of his book choice and mentioned it to me. I laughed and told him not to worry, Ayn Rand was not for everyone.
What bugged me was the fact that a clerk in a bookstore felt it was her duty to tell him her opinion of his book choices. Can you say, typical lefty brain dead moron? Seriously, what business was it of her's to tell my husband that she disapproved of his/my reading choice?
That made me think about internet comments. During the day, lefties rule the comments, but at night Conservatives post more comments. On the weekends, most newspapers and especially CTV close down the comments, but when they don't, Conservatives post more than lefties. A good example is this CTV comment section that got closed down really fast.
Read all the comments, it's worth your time. I also went over to the Globe and Mail today, briefly. Every time I go there it makes me think of Rabble.ca, a real leftist haven that kicks any conservative out after a post or two (you see NDP supporters don't like diversity). Makes me wonder if the Globe is supported financially by the Rabble founders. I don't care if they are, because the comments discourage any right minded person from ever buying that paper, which means they are loosing over 40% of Canadians by their biased reporting. I wonder if Soros and Tides Canada contribute any funding to the Globe and Mail? Here is an example of what I mean of the lefty vision of the Globe and Mail.Former UN StafferSo Paul Heinbecker is mad at the Tory govenrment? Too bad. Unlike the majority of the posters here, I have actually worked with this man. He is a prima dona, lost in his socialist dream channeled via the liberal party and a full member of the UN backroom club. A wheeler-dealer in the worst sense of the term, he is fully at home in the exclusive dining rooms where the deals are cut and payoffs are routine. I spent 2 years on the staff of the Canadian delegation (during the Chretien years) and saw more deals and payoffs made than I can count. I am proud that Canada is no longer playing that game and praise this government for taking action. I can only hope that there will be some criminal action taken soon against those who profited from this (a dim hope, but I hold it nonetheless).
said
U.S. to impose new emission rules on power plants, refineriesNotice how the article specifically mentions the oil-sands sector, and nothing about Ontario's polluting coal plants or Quebec's asbestos industry? Lefties are sooo predictable in their discrimination. Oil companies might face additional costs which will be passed on to the consumer, don't you lefties remember Obama, your saviour, telling you that energy costs for you were going to skyrocket? The US is already talking about $4 a gallon gas. Here is a sampling of the lefty comments:
The proposed regulations – to take effect at the end of 2012 – would be in addition to EPA rules that came into effect on Sunday that require all new plants or major expansions to get permits for emitting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs).
That permitting requirement has been in the works for several months. Federal Environment Minister John Baird has said Ottawa will not adopt similar measures, but will broadly match the U.S. regulatory approach.
Despite the movement south of the border, the Harper government has given no indication how it intends to regulate Canadian industry, including oil companies who could face significant additional costs for the rapidly expanding oil-sands sector if Ottawa follows the U.S. lead.
I bet the same lefties that post in Rabble pollute the Globe and Mail. It stinks really bad in there. Don't go if you don't have to.Curly Maple
Harper's policy: "Ignore the environment, it will go away."
And the conbots cheered and clapped on command.dirtyduck
that's not the way we do business up here. We sell out to foreign countries, and let them pollute our air, rivers, and land. They own the shares, so get the lion's share of the profits, and we tug our forelocks, and tip our caps, to our European, Oriental, and American masters. We pay 40% more for fuel 200 miles from it's source, and think ourselves lucky it's not 60%.
Please wait while we perform your request. 
8 comments:
Curly maple is professional commentor. She's got to say something about Harper in relation to every single article. She even admitted once to "working" while she is commenting. I still wonder where but I'm sure the taxpayer foots the bill somehow.
"Audrey's" is a great bookstore - in fact I built it in the 70's along with the reno's to the Maclean block it sits in - problem is, it often hires typical brain-dead lefties, who believe it is their right to give their unsolicited, censorious opinions on people's choices, - they should be fired for their smug, narrow-minded attitude
I believe I may have had the same idiot clerk, while searching for a Sarah Palin book
If it had been a comment for the right I gather you would say that the person was intellegent honest and should own the store.
Grow up and smell the roses the sun does not rise and set the right
or left wing, but on the health and welfare of the people.
Which at this time neither side cares about.
I laughed during QP yesterday when one of the not intelligent panel sort of snickered when saying that PMSH tried to blame iggy for the loss of the UN seat. (I believe it was his stupid remark, we don't deserve it)
If one examines our win for that seat in the past, there were only two countries up for the two seats available. Hard to lose in those cases.
Their choice of the top 10 stories of the year were really the top 10 attempts by the coalition/media to defeat PMSH, and they failed, big time.
A better title would have been, the top 10 stories that left egg on media faces.
Hey 'old one'... you're putting words in someone's mouth here - who said anything about "intelligent, honest... and should own the store" if they said something positive about the book?
Proper customer service in any store means you're pleasant to the customer, if you really want their business back, along with any of their friends and associates. The old adage "If you can't say something nice, say nothing at all" I think would apply here.
If I were manager/owner of that bookstore, I wouldn't allow employees to be argumentative or disagreeable with customers. It's like going to buy a green shirt and the cashier saying to you, "you know, I really don't like green shirts, I find they make people look fat... no offence"
Therefore, if the book is by Obama or Ignatieff, you either say something positive or nice about it to the customer OR just ring it through, same as you would about a book by Ayn Rand.
Tough to find conservative books in my little town and we are known as a "book town". Lots of used books here and a good selection of new releases but not the conservative ones unless you ask and order.
Got a KOBO for Christmas. Should be able to get around the problem very easily now - darn that wifi internet thingy.
Almost finished GW Bush's Decision Points and Sarah Palin is next up.
Named a daughter Ayn so you know my favorite author!!
Hunter, a couple of observations from one who, in his youth, once worked in a bookstore (and a video store and a record store).
1) All interesting places to work, by their natures they encourage discussion and exchanges of opinion. That said, salespeople should be mindful and sensative to others. Did this particular salesperson step over the line? Did she really say that she disapproved of your reading choice, or did she simply say that she didn't agree with Rand's philosophy (Objectivism)?
2) With all due respect, I think it a bit rash to describe a person as a "typical lefty brain dead moron" simply because they don't agree with Rand. I know people from the left, centre and right who disagree with the philosopher. Not surprising, really - after all Rand, an atheist, stood against religion (once describing Christianity as "the best kindergarten of communism possible"). She stood against military conscription and for legal abortion. Those who follow her philosophy are today fighting against the teaching of intelligent design and fighting for the removal of religious symbols from government buildings. As I say, not all who reject Objectivism are on the left.
I agree with Brian. I am a far right Christian who vehemently disagrees with Rand and what she stood for. I always put her writings in the category of "The best way to tell a lie is to tell part of the truth and then shut up". There is enough in her writings to make you believe she is onto something until you take it to its logical conclusion.
Post a Comment