2006/09/29
Heck of a job, Brownie!
The sooner toffee-nosed war criminal Tony Blair ignominiously abandons his office and steps into the pages of history, the sooner I can redirect my spite to where it belongs: Canadian politics.
To that end, I encourage all the theists out there to drop to their knees, wince sharply, then set about pleading with their deity or deities to put Tony Blair out of his misery: I don't care if the event is his resignation, his passing away from natural causes, or a tomahawk to the skull. Just make it happen.
Brownie might not be much, but at least he isn't Tony 'Toadie' Blair.
If you have the strength to witness something fairly gruesome, choose to experience this 2005 ad starring Tony and Gordon (I wonder if Canadian political ads seem as cheesy to foreigners as this seems to me):
2006/09/20
Russell Brand: wanker?
I was recently perusing the football section of of the Guardian Online when I came upon a fairly amusing opinion column by a fellow named Russell Brand. A quote:
At half-time I made the mistake of using the lavatory in the Dr Martens stand unaccompanied. Further autographs and photographs ensued. This caught the attention of a group of what I can only describe as lads. Or possibly yobs. As they queued to buy drinks, I became the focus of their good-natured chants beginning with: "Who the fucking hell are you?" Moving on to: "Brandy is a wanker." Followed by a burst of: "Sex case, sex case, 'ang 'im, 'ang 'im, 'ang 'im." Borrowed from the film McVicar. High jinks, yes, but unnerving none the less. And then: "Where were you when we were shit?"
Well frankly, I internally remarked, "we were shit in the first half, I was in my seat watching us being shit." But of course they meant where were you in previous, less successful seasons. To which I would like to rather belatedly respond. I was here but you didn't recognise me because I didn't have a famous hair-do. Obviously I didn't have the confidence to articulate that at the time because I was too busy maintaining control of both my frontal and rear sphincters. The tone of these taunts was essentially garrulous, ribald tormenting as opposed to an aggressive onslaught. Blessedly I was given a chance to redeem myself.
...
Many ran to congratulate and hug me. I was accepted. One, to show his acceptance (I don't know what manner of ritual this is), tipped some beer on my head. I've never felt more loved. Then, before I reached the lavatory, Zamora equalised, chaos erupted and I was swept off my feet. Embraced. More beer sloshed about on to my, retrospectively, ill-advised footwear - the flip-flop...
I have always been interested in the phenomenon of people that are celebrities in Britain, but not North America, so I did a search for Russell Brand on google.co.uk (I had no choice in this, because recently, at some step in a google free-app 'wizard', I indicated I preferred UK spelling rather than US spelling, which means I now bounce to google.co.uk, rather than google.ca regardless of my IP address) and it turns out Russell Brand is quite a celebrity as a comedian in the UK.
Being an enterprising sort (at least when it comes to searches, as opposed to actually doing anything physical) I found that Russell is the MC of Big Brother's Big Mouth, something that runs daily with Big Brother UK. I searched for "Big Brother's Big Mouth" on youtube.com and got more than I had expected: Russell Brand isn't the intellectual comic I had expected to see. He is a lisping, flaming, unfunny cunt, as Bob Geldof would say.
I must presume that he hides the sly humour exposed in his column because the lads prefer his pensées celebrating his 'ball bags'.
Sad. But I still love his way with words: "To which I would like to rather belatedly respond...".
That, my friends, is what is known as 'well-spoken'.
2006/09/08
My Canada doesn't include Alberta
Well, it was a long time coming, but finally King Ralph has abdicated his throne. Come to think of it, wasn't "King Ralph" a feature film, with John Goodman in the leading role?
In celebration of Ralph's many years of stout service to the good citizens of Alberta, please entertain this proposal: that Alberta separate from Canada.
Regard this proposal objectively: isn't the rest of Canada only holding Alberta back?
Think about it from the Albertan perspective: no more GST, equilisation payments, or the need to co-label everything in french. Plus, without the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they can make damn sure no Sikh will try wearing his turban in a Legion Hall again.
At the same time, think of the benefits to the rest of us: no more having to endure lectures on fiscal propriety from a province awash in oil revenue; a drastically lowered Canadian dollar that would stop the loss of manufacturing jobs in Ontario and Quebec; not having to hear GOD repeatedly mentioned by the Prime Minister in his speeches.
Albertans like to talk big, "We gonna separate if we can't decide fer everyone what's right 'n' wrong, y'all", but I don't think they have the huevos for it. I wish they did!
2006/09/06
Is it just me, or is the Globe & Mail trying a little too hard to push pro-occupation propaganda?
Articles from today's print edition include:
Nota Bene: The Toronto Star has a similar setup of pro/con columns in their editorial section, just like the G&M's. The difference with this G&M innovation is that it is a pro/pro discussion. Everyone wins! The G&M op-ed page debate: "Lewis, the Canadians are doing hard work." "Omar, I know it. Let freedom ring!"
And these 4 articles were all on the same 2 page spread!
When the G&M amasses this level of mental firepower on one subject in one edition, you know something big is going on. The only power player missing was Margaret Wente! (Maybe she was too busy pulling yet another hapless citizen out of a ditch with her SUV. Zing!)
To quote Diane from Cheers: "Methinks thou doth protest too much".
Well, "methinks they doth protest too much". They know the Canadian public is increasing turning against our involvement in the occupation of Afganistan, so the shadowy forces that inexplicably favour foreign interventions are growing increasingly desperate.
We can expect more displays of this sort.
Articles from today's print edition include:
"The Afghan mission is not a failure" by boring, boring windbag Lewis MacKenzie
"The Afghan mission is not a failure" by only slightly less boring windbag Afghan ambassador Omar Samad
Nota Bene: The Toronto Star has a similar setup of pro/con columns in their editorial section, just like the G&M's. The difference with this G&M innovation is that it is a pro/pro discussion. Everyone wins! The G&M op-ed page debate: "Lewis, the Canadians are doing hard work." "Omar, I know it. Let freedom ring!"
"Love the soldiers? Love the soldiering" by cop-meat, hockeyplayer-meat, now soldier-meat lover Christine 'dry doe' Blatchford
"Canada's valuable role in Afghanistan's fight" by a nameless editorial writer, presumably whoring White House stooge Marcus Gee
And these 4 articles were all on the same 2 page spread!
When the G&M amasses this level of mental firepower on one subject in one edition, you know something big is going on. The only power player missing was Margaret Wente! (Maybe she was too busy pulling yet another hapless citizen out of a ditch with her SUV. Zing!)
To quote Diane from Cheers: "Methinks thou doth protest too much".
Well, "methinks they doth protest too much". They know the Canadian public is increasing turning against our involvement in the occupation of Afganistan, so the shadowy forces that inexplicably favour foreign interventions are growing increasingly desperate.
We can expect more displays of this sort.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)