BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND TWITTER BACKGROUNDS

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Silver bells... silver bells... it's election time in Toronto!

Mayor of Toronto.  When people hear this, they think of a carrot-topped, morbidly obese, hard-working and hard-partying hulk of a man named Rob Ford.  And they're right.  Rob Ford has practically become a symbol, for better or worse, of Toronto.  Ford jokes have become nothing if not a fucking staple on late-night television, and the mere mention of Toronto is enough to get sniggers all round, with perhaps the odd question of, "What's happened to their crackhead Mayor?"

Yet an impartial panel of experts broken down by age and sex (i.e., me---because nobody is more broken down by age and sex than I) has determined that he is by far the most suitable candidate for the job.  As for the personality quirks, who doesn't like a Mayor that regularly eats pussy and is proud of it?

I know a lot of people hate Ford owing to his avoidance of the Toronto gay Pride parade.  I don't, and here's my reasoning.  I am philosophically opposed to any sort of Pride when it comes to sexual orientation, and this purely because what goes on in the bedroom should stay in the bedroom.  Although I disagree with homosexual practices, I don't believe it should be a criminal act---but neither do I believe it should be a public affair.  On balance, I don't think heterosexual practices should be a public affair neither.

If you're gay/straight/bi/whatever... keep the dancing and kissing and fucking in the clubs and at home.  Don't expose the rest of us to your public displays of affection.  And don't scream out, "I'm gay and proud to be so!", or, for that matter, "I'm bi/straight/anything with legs and proud to be so!"  Furthermore, the Pride parade is anything but family-friendly---like Ford, I find the nudity and the simulated sex acts inappropriate for a city-sponsored event.

If the Mayor should be tradition-bound to participate at a parade, it should be the Orange Order parade, or the Masonic parade.  The reason for this is that the history of Toronto is inseparable from that of the Orange Order: until the 1960's, every sitting Mayor of Toronto was a dues-paying member of that fine Protestant institution, and the tradition was a great one.  The Orange Order parade is one that is inoffensive to anyone but Irish republicans, obviously family-friendly, and also it is not an eyesore like Pride.

Ford, for all his flaws (and I would certainly not consider eating pussy a flaw), is nothing short of an expert when it comes to financial matters. If anyone hasn't noticed by now, Toronto is in a financial crisis.  Rob Ford is the only candidate with the skill to find out what needs cutting, and the balls to say, "Last stop for the gravy train."

He also is the only one with a sensible plan for the Toronto Underground.   When compared with other cities of comparable size and demographic in North America (CHICAGO!) and Europe (Vienna or Munich), Toronto has the worst damn Underground system I have ever seen in my life.  Even the station design is absolutely terrible.

Allow me to sustain my digression for a bit.  The original incarnation of the Toronto Underground system used a public-bathroom aesthetic.  This is NOT a bad thing---the tiled look and distinctive font is very pretty.  The problem came when the TTC (the commission in charge of the Underground) failed to establish an architecture department, or even an engineering department.  So the new stations are a hotch-potch of various designs, including a very kitschy Museum Station.

The only problem with Ford is that he is a walking Public Relations nightmare.  He drinks like a fish, eats far in excess of anything a man his size would need, speaks his mind even when the expedient thing would be to lie, and refuses to spend unnecessary cash even when this would be advisable.  For instance, Ford declines to use a chauffeur; this despite the fact that he is a busy man and his job description requires reading prior to actually beginning his work day.

This, along with the poll results, has made me fear that Ford will not be elected a second time, which would be a bloody shame.  The next-best man is one named John Tory.  In the main, he is a good Mayoral candidate as well, with a few important differences to Ford, but also substantially similar in many ways.

Tory, like Ford, is a conservative candidate.  This is a good thing.  Toronto needs conservatism.  The difference is that Rob Ford is the populist candidate, that is, one with a rhetoric appealing to the proletariat/the "working class"; while John Tory is the Establishment candidate, with rather upper-class speech patterns and a polished manner.  The content of their agenda, however, is substantially the same; they differ, more or less, in electability and in skill set.

Oh, yes, and in Underground opinion.  Ford is by far the best when it comes to the Underground.  For Tory, it's merely another campaign point, whereas it's the heart and soul of the race for Rob Ford.

Tory is far more electable among the general middle-to-upper class, over-50 bracket; these are the people that are most reliable and will turn up to elections for certain.  On the other hand, Ford has a fan club whose support for him can be characterised as nothing if not rabid.  These supporters, however, tend not to be university-educated and tend to be in the lower income brackets; the exception of course are the people from Ford's home town of Etobicoke.

 The worst option, and, sadly, a very popular one, is Olivia Chow.  Now, I don't say this because she is a woman or a born Hongkie---in fact, I have nothing but the utmost respect for women as well as for everyone from Hongkong (I do love that island!)  She represents the (very) liberal side at the campaign, and like most liberals, she is an absolute, total, and utter fool.  I loved her (now, sadly, deceased) husband Jack Layton, but Chow is, for better or worse (more worse than better), the Hilary Clinton of Canadian politics.  She exerted much backroom influence on Layton, and the majority of this influence was undue and malign.

A simple look at the agenda of these three politicians tells a lot.  Ford and Tory share much of the same sane and sober agenda, although they do tend to phrase certain things differently.  Ford tells it like it is, while Tory tends to waffle a bit before giving a somewhat wishy-washy reply.  Of course, speech patterns matter jack shit; the more important thing is the content.

For instance, Ford is willing to support the (very partial---not more than ten percent) privatisation of the Toronto Hydroelectric Corporation.  Tory has reservations about "fire sales" but won't rule anything out.  Chow, on the other hand, will not budge an inch and refuses to sell even a single share of Toronto Hydro.

Ford and Tory agree on the extension of the Scarborough Rapid Transit (essentially, a customised Underground) for three more stops.  This plan has been approved and fully funded by City Council (in American terms, the Board of Supervisors).  They also agree on privatising rubbish collection east of Yonge Street, as was done west of Yonge Street by Ford.  Finally, Ford and Tory both want to create a big music festival for Toronto.

Here's where they differ: Ford wants to cut the land transfer tax (good on ya, Rob!) and Tory seems to be a bit wishy-washy as per his usual style, but open to the discussion regardless.  Tory and Ford both want to keep property taxes from increasing too much, but the mechanics of their respective plans are somewhat different.  Ford wants to expand the Toronto Island airport, whereas Tory still has questions but is open to discussion, as usual. 

Chow goes against all of this.  She must be mad.  First of all, she wishes to scrap the fully-funded and fully-approved Scarborough Rapid Transit extension, and build the cheaper and much less convenient surface rail track in its place, as originally envisioned.  Second, she refuses to privatise rubbish collection just yet; this, in Chow speak, means she refuses to privatise it at all.  Furthermore, instead of making Toronto better with a music festival like Ford and Tory want to do, she wants to make Toronto worse by pedestrianising a few very busy streets.  Chow is firmly for retaining the land transfer tax and property tax as is, and against expanding the Island airport. 

In short, Chow wants to return to the Miller days, when City Hall was run by the unions and when the gravy train was just chugging along.  We can't have that.  Especially not in these days of financial crisis.  Please, please, if you're a Torontonian and hate Ford, consider voting Tory.  He's a good man and will keep the city running.

The year in review

Alright, so, fuck it.  I've decided to start blogging again, and since a lot has happened in the Kafkaesque goatfuck that is modern Anglo-Canadian politics, I guess I'll take it one step at a motherfucking time.

First off, the Ontario election.  I liked Hudak.  I hoped that he'd win.  I mean, I know he looks like a weasel but he had a budget plan that involved actually saving money, something that the province of Ontario so desperately needs.  The other serious contender was a bull dyke named Kathleen Wynne, whose idea of budgeting was "spend money to save money".  I see no problem with that idea, except for EVERY FUCKING WORD OF IT!  You can NOT spend money left and right, money that you don't fucking have, and expect any sort of profit on this borrowed dosh to overshadow the inevitable fucking INTEREST that borrowing generates!

Like, look.  Two men lose their jobs and need money.  They have to make money to survive.  One man gets an even more high-paying job, and tightens his belt so this doesn't happen in future.  The other man goes to a cash point, withdraws $250 from his Barclaycard, and then says, "Hey, look, I've made money." NO YOU HAVEN'T.

Wynne didn't even spend money where it counts.  What she should have spent it on was a tube system for Toronto to rival London's or Manhattan's.  Instead, she spent it on giving happy-ending massages to teachers, government sector workers, and the unemployable poor.  The majority of this province DOES NOT work for the government... and sinking money into the public school system is never a good idea, since it tends to disappear very quickly.

Oh, yes, and she cancelled two gas plants Ontario desperately needed to save two of her party bootlickers' arses.  This had the end phenomenon of a 150% hike in gas prices... because the winter in Ontario was precisely the same as the one that helped defeat Hitler's forces in Russia.

Of course, this useless cunt of a candidate won.  Now, I know Ontario voters are a perverse bunch.  Never in the history of Ontario has a provincial Prime Minister been of the same party as the national Prime Minister, but for once, couldn't Ontario voters vote with their brains rather than their cocks?  They should at least have balanced themselves out so that there was a hung parliament... now she and her gang of knuckleheads can put any bill, even a hare-brained one like the provincial budget, forward and it'll get passed come hell or high water.

Then the whole business with Russia/the Ukraine.  Another complete clusterfuck.  Now, I understand that Crimea was a gift to Ukraine by Khrushchev, with terms and conditions attached.  Ukraine violated those terms and conditions.  So I believe that the annexation of Crimea by Russia, especially following a popular fucking referendum, was legal and justified.  But the goatfuck currently taking place in eastern Ukraine, Donbass, etc---there is no way that could even be described in the same fucking book as legal.

Now, people's rebellions are commonplace and understandable.  Especially following Tymoshenko's machinations.  Now, I know the old girl wasn't guilty of price-fixing all on her own, and I do know that the Russian colonial government put her in prison to the exclusion Putin supporters.  This is a totalitarian tactic and one that is in opposition to everything that the word "democracy" stands for, but the fact is, that Yulia Tymoshenko is guilty of offences that would warrant the same punishment anywhere in the civilised world.

But price-fixing and collusion with illegal monopolies does not excuse the Russian government, under the despotic and iron-fisted rule of Vladimir Putin, rendering significant and material aid to rebels.  But for the illegal interventions of the Putin regime, the situation in the East might well be over.  Since Putin insists on goofing the floof in this area, though, we are saddled with the possibility of a Third World War.  Putin's actions of fomenting unrest in the Ukraine mirror certain aspects of the actions of a particular Austrian corporal (yes, the same one Prince Charles compared him to).

Furthermore, he has not sent people who simply agree with the "ideals" (if you could call them that) behind the Anti-Maidan movement.  Instead, the "potato bugs" (the pro-Russian ribbons they wear look like the elytrae of potato bugs) causing disturbances in Eastern Ukraine are mercenaries who have been paid on the order of $500 a week specifically to, as I said earlier, goof the floof.  So not only is it an illegal ploy, but it is the work of a sociopath, with no ideals except cold, hard cash behind it.

One more thing that has happened is the separation referendum in Scotland.  Scotchmen want to separate from the United Kingdom; on this, I hold no fixed opinion aside from a very weak "no".  I am entirely willing to debate the benefits and the costs of separating, as I really and truly hold no major opinion.  Yes, I'd like the Kingdom to remain United till the stars fall from the sky, but it is simply an ideal, rather than some deep-seated fucking conviction or something.

On the other hand, though, there have been some extremely dirty tactics from proponents on both sides.  I use Twitter to express my dissatisfaction with certain elements of the "Yes" cause.  These include the First Minister of Scotland, Alexander Salmond (whom I refer to as Fish) and his deputy, Nicola Sturgeon (whom I refer to as Fish Number Two).  If I choose to air my dissatisfaction with these two individuals, my tweet is almost instantly picked up by the "Britnat Abuse Bot", a COMPUTER PROGRAM rebroadcasting "abuse" of anyone connected in the least with the Yes movement.  This exposes me to enormous quantities of vitriol and hate-mail in spite of the fact that I HAVE NO FUCKING OPINION ABOUT YES OR NO!!!

First of all, Salmond and his party (the SNP) have a political platform and a style of rhetoric that is xenophobic, nationalistic, hateful, and specifically anti-English.  Salmond has made it absolutely and perfectly clear that, should Scotland become independent, university will remain free of charge for members of the European Union, with the single exception of England.   His currency plans are unworkable and smack of a petulant toddler throwing a tantrum.  He has demanded that the British government establish a pound-sterling currency union; as he was roundly shot down by damn near everyone who fucking mattered more than a rabbit's fart in the Grand Scheme of Things, he simply said that he'll use the pound anyway, drag England (for it will be the United Kingdom no more) into a currency quagmire that it wants no part of and would have absolutely no control over, and essentially told the British government to kiss his morbidly obese arse.

And then comes the kicker.  It was widely reported that Salmond and his SNP cronies personally "discouraged" certain powerful financial corporations from delivering an official, published opinion on Scotch independence.  Reportedly, Salmond's telephone call was "forceful" and designed to "discourage... from saying anything".  In plain English, what this means is that Salmond PERSONALLY EXTORTED LARGE BANKS INTO SHUTTING UP.  He called them and most likely screamed unprintable obscenities and threats at a nominally independent coalition of banks.  Heads of free and democratic countries DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS!!!  Of course, the wonderful and magical SNP put a great spin on this: one of their mouthpieces said, basically, that Fish had been making sure that anything published was neutral and properly balanced.  Well, then, I pray that God does not choose to become neutral.

What happened was extortion, pure and simple.  If it had been Labour doing this, or Conservatives, or even fucking UKIP, they would be locked up and the key eaten (not merely thrown away) at the behest of the SNP.  But because Saint Fish is doing this, nothing will ever come of it.

And all this has devolved into a culture of intimidation and hate.  I remarked on Twitter that automatic accession of a separate Scotland to the European Union would be impossible.  Two European presidents (as in heads of the European Union as a whole) had agreed with me: first Barroso and then Juncker.  I was bombarded with a torrent of questions and hate mail.  The first was rather easily dealt with.  I don't mind answering questions.  Many of them asked me to point to a specific EU law that agreed with me.  I couldn't, I'll be the first to say, and that is because European law is such a complete and utter clusterfuck that it requires a degree so far beyond your regular Cambridge BA and that it is offered only at one tiny institution in Europe.  This is why we have specialised civil servants such as Mr Barroso and Mr Juncker.

But when I was honest and up-front with this fact, and the fact that every major newspaper and the majority of government documentation on this issue seemed either to agree with me or simply not to disagree with me, I was labelled an "Anglo Canuck" (don't mind that, I'm proud to be an Anglo Canuck!) and a "member of the Village Idiot Club" (I am neither from a village, nor am I an idiot, so fuck you, fucking cunt.)

I'm just sick and tired of this shit.  Debate intelligently or just why don't you SHUT THE FUCK UP.