Joined: 25 May 2006 Posts: 1120 Location: Vancouver
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:42 am Post subject:
I dunno, the later years gave us Six Gun Justice and the return of Fred Willard as Fred Winston. I think their weakest point was the Tony Rosato years, when John Candy left for a spell.
Yeah, the seasons were hard to tell apart after awhile, their syndication was chaos - it seemed like Tony Rosato and Robin Duke were on the last seasons, but that was recycled from earlier seasons I guess. Whatever - if Rosato and Duke were in it, it was unwatchable. That's the important thing. I have no idea what 22 Minutes is like now, but it was good early on.
One things for sure, their ratings are about to go through the roof for a bit. I bet they'll play this out over weeks and weeks.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 4564 Location: Hamilton
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:38 am Post subject:
i liked "Chip Monk: Roadie for the Defence" and "Cora's Crazy Crafts."
SCTV was embarrassingly homophobic. It was a part of the times, which i'm ashamed to say, i went right along with at the time. _________________ Man! I hate them fancy-lads!
More seriously, the mayor, assuming he did use that word, thereby acting both agressively and misogynistically, has picked a hell of a hell of a venue to engage in misogyny. Most of the women I have known, if they have had the unhappy circumstance to have called 911, have most often done so as a result of someone's hatred of women. And if they haven't, they sure as hell have a female friend, or relative, or five of them, who have had to. These dispatchers, when they're doing their harrowing job properly, are most often the ones who wind up helping women hold it together until help arrives.
_________________ This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 171 Location: still waiting for the bus
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:40 am Post subject:
For all his alpha male posturing and bellicosity, our mayor appears to suffer from a paucity of fortitude. I recall former mayor Mel Lastman's response to SARS, by dissing the World Health Organization ("Who are these WHO people? Where are they from? Geneva??") and I see the potential for our current mayor to embarrass us on the world stage in some way even more epic.
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:29 am Post subject:
At least with Mad Mel, his buffoonery seemed like honest idiocy whereas Ford is clearly a pathological liar. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Rob just eamiled to pretend he's not responsible for the upcoming TTC cuts, oh and that he's contracting out TTC janitorial.
My email response.
Quote:
Dear Rob.
Poor you. What an enormous f&*^%ng* mess you've got us all into. You must be so embarrassed.
I used to think you were going to turn Toronto into Detroit. I was wrong. I admit it. At this rate you're going to turn it into Mordor.
Here's what you can do to fix this. Pick up the phone right now, call a press conference, admit to the people of Toronto that you have lost their confidence, you're way out of your depth and then resign. Better for you. Better for Toronto. You know it in your heart. Everyone does. It's painful to watch you stagger around like a zombie.
Nobody will ever believe anything you say from now on. Your word is less than worthless, so it's over. The rest of your term is just stumbling from humiliation to humiliation. Remember how long that Santa Claus Parade route was, and how unfriendly the crowd seemed? That was before they got a load of your TTC service cuts - the ones you "guaranteed" would never happen just one short year ago. Every late subway, streetcar or bus is now, by default, your fault. You can moan and bitch about union this and that, but you decided to make the TTC shittier. All on your own. Gridlock? Your fault. I'm late for work? Your fault. Accident on the TTC? You did that.
Cut your losses and just get out now. Like right now. If you're still around by January when the fare increase you just promised wouldn't happen actually does happen - after all, you can't fire EVERYBODY at the TTC Rob -, your polls will be somewhere around absolute zero where even Mulroney's blood freezes. Stick around and by the summer you'll end up as Canada's most despised and ridiculed politician ever. By the end of your term you will be a political black hole. Any ray of hope or sunshine within a mile of you will automatically be sucked into your vortex of gloom and crushed.
Toronto residents will face a 2.5 per cent property tax increase in a draft budget unveiled Monday by Toronto Mayor Rob Ford that targets "out of control spending."
Ford, who was elected last year on a campaign platform to curtail city spending, said the draft budget cuts total city spending by $355 million in the next fiscal year.
“We’ve found ways to rebuild our crumbling fiscal foundation,” said Ford. “This is a budget that slams the door on out-of-control spending.”
_________________ This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Councillor Doug Ford’s office has suggested Toronto schools look into a community service program backed by the violent mixed martial arts league, Ultimate Fighting Championship.
In an email obtained by the Star, Ford’s constituency assistant, Anna Vescio, asked a Toronto District School Board trustee to circulate a brochure touting an initiative called UFC Community Works.
According to the brochure, the program promotes “the development of discipline, respect, teamwork, honesty, time management and physical fitness” through mixed martial arts training and meetings with UFC fighters.
I tried to be open-minded about this, but, doing some research into UFC, nope, it doesn't seem like the kind of thing that schools should be promoting to their students. But one question...
Quote:
UFC has become notorious for its brutal, bloody, no-holds barred fighting. Mixed martial arts events were banned in Ontario until this year.
If it's so awful, and there was already a ban in place, why on Earth was the ban ever lifted? Charter challenge?
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:01 am Post subject:
No one really knows why McGuinty decided to lift it. I guess he didn't want the province missing out on the revenue it brings in. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Apparently in the US, sports are not regarded as a form of speech for First Amendment purposes. But the MMA people are trying to argue that their matches constitute performance.
I guess he didn't want the province missing out on the revenue it brings in.
That seems to have been the stated rationale.
Quote:
"Our government has been monitoring MMA for some time. We know that the sport has evolved and that Ontarians want to see it here," Aggelonitis said in a statement released Saturday.
"My goal is to make sure we have the tools to keep the competitors safe, and provide an economic boost to communities that want to host MMA events."
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:58 am Post subject:
Senor Magoo wrote:
Maybe someone said "show us how this is any more dangerous than auto racing".
Or you could go with the "modern societies shouldn't permit blood sports" approach. I don't object to MMA on the grounds that it is dangerous to the participants, people are entitled to assume that risk if they want to. I object to it because it's another step back toward the Roman arena, and death for the entertainment of the mob. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
I object to it because it's another step back toward the Roman arena, and death for the entertainment of the mob.
That seems like a pretty subjective criteria to work into law. On that rationale, you could ban violent comic books, action movies, about 90% of computer games, and heck, even the nastier variety of internet flame wars.
Granted, none of those things involve actual injury to anyone, but then, you've already stated that you don't care about harm to the participants.
I object to it because it's another step back toward the Roman arena, and death for the entertainment of the mob.
I see. So boxing is a legitimate sport, and karate is a legitimate sport and jiu-jitsu is a legitimate sport, but if you put them all together they become some kind of human cockfight?
MMA actually has the same rate of injury that boxing and other combatives sports do. How, if it's such a brutal and anachronistic bloodsport, does it not feature fighters losing an eye and such? _________________ ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,
A ban on mixed martial arts would be an infringement on the fundamental right of people to bloody and injure themselves, or to watch consenting adults do the same. But, even dressed up with an anti-bullying message, at a time when violence among youths is a widespread public concern, the promotion of sanctioned violence among school-age children would send an unwelcome and dangerous message
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1283 Location: Left . . . of the plate
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 7:05 pm Post subject:
Quote:
. . . at a time when violence among youths is a widespread public concern, the promotion of sanctioned violence among school-age children would send an unwelcome and dangerous message.
Natch, "sanctioned violence" makes people think of hockey. There's more than a few mentions in the comments. Here are two outreach programs, with the Leafs "helping" teachers meet the physical education requirement, and the Senators offering reading and math lessons, as well as "motivating" students to read with a chance to win a visit from a player or the mascot. Funny, the healthy skepticism about UFC Community Works ("an initiative that claims to engage “at-risk” youth") but I can't find anything that looks critically at the corporate hockey outreach programs. If UFC offered just the educational tutorials and visits from fighters to talk about bullying, how would it be different from what the Leafs and Senators are doing?
Too bad the G&M editors don't think the corporate infiltration of schools sends an unwelcome and dangerous message. Well, I guess they can see it's undesirable when the UFC does it ("while at the same time getting the UFC brand in the faces of school-age children."), but since they don't comment on the corporate presence in schools in general, just this specific example of it, I'm going to assume it's not an issue for them. From this report on Ontario Catholic schools and the corporate sector:
Quote:
A Fairfield, Connecticut company, Lifetime Learning Systems (LLS), creates and markets corporate-sponsored educational material that has reached over 2 million teachers. A LLS advertisement states, “They’re ready to spend and we reach them!!” The company posits, “Kids spend 40% of each day in the classroom where traditional advertising can’t reach them. Now YOU CAN ENTER THE CLASSROOM through custom-made learning materials created with your specific marketing objectives in mind.”
One of my daughters' main pet peeves is the focus on pro athletes as "role models" and "heroes" in the classroom. Ms B was watching "Digging Britain" with me a few weeks ago and we both wondered why people like the host - a young woman archaeologist by the name of Alice Roberts - or like physicists Brian Cox or Michio Kaku weren't better role models overall.
You don't see anything like that in the curriculum. Instead, they'll be doing a social studies assignment on aspirational characters that will include suggestions mainly from team sports. Oh, and Terry Fox. Apparently he is the only Canadian hero who wasn't on a sports team.
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:59 am Post subject:
voice of the damned wrote:
Quote:
I object to it because it's another step back toward the Roman arena, and death for the entertainment of the mob.
That seems like a pretty subjective criteria to work into law. On that rationale, you could ban violent comic books, action movies, about 90% of computer games, and heck, even the nastier variety of internet flame wars.
Granted, none of those things involve actual injury to anyone, but then, you've already stated that you don't care about harm to the participants.
Oh, I didn't realize I was expected to state the reason I object to MMA in language that would hold up in court.
I care about harm to the participants that is for the purpose of watching people suffer harm.
Senor Magoo wrote:
Quote:
I object to it because it's another step back toward the Roman arena, and death for the entertainment of the mob.
I see. So boxing is a legitimate sport, and karate is a legitimate sport and jiu-jitsu is a legitimate sport, but if you put them all together they become some kind of human cockfight?
MMA actually has the same rate of injury that boxing and other combatives sports do. How, if it's such a brutal and anachronistic bloodsport, does it not feature fighters losing an eye and such?
And where did I say I approve of boxing as a spectator sport, or for that matter karate and jiu-jitsu? All of them have merit as private matters, for example self-defence training and fitness, but I don't really believe it is appropriate to have people fight for the prurient interest of spectators. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 6049 Location: A monistic vulgarity in which nobility and wisdom have been exchanged for a pale belief in progress
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:10 am Post subject:
Quote:
You don't see anything like that in the curriculum. Instead, they'll be doing a social studies assignment on aspirational characters that will include suggestions mainly from team sports. Oh, and Terry Fox. Apparently he is the only Canadian hero who wasn't on a sports team.
What about Laura Secord, Canada's greatest war hero?
Speaking of war and role models, doesn't the presence of military bands, etc., performing the national anthem at sporting events promote violence? _________________ "The purpose of government is to protect the weak from the powerful" Hammurabi
"We can't all be Sam the Sham; some of us have to be Pharoahs" Larry, brother of Darrel, and his other brother Daryl
Oh, I didn't realize I was expected to state the reason I object to MMA in language that would hold up in court.
Well, maybe not in court. But governments are usually expected to justify regulation of private activity on grounds of harm-prevention. I don't think saying that it reminds you too much of the more negative aspects of the Roman Empire really qualifies on that score.
You don't see anything like that in the curriculum. Instead, they'll be doing a social studies assignment on aspirational characters that will include suggestions mainly from team sports. Oh, and Terry Fox. Apparently he is the only Canadian hero who wasn't on a sports team.
What about Laura Secord, Canada's greatest war hero?
Never a suggestion. In fact, there are very few, if any, women suggested as role models in these exercises. Another facet of the pet peeve. They don't tend toward historical figures, either, focusing on contemporary people. I think another facet of the problem is a misguided attempt to "engage" the students by skewing toward what the stereotypical Canadian kid is supposed to relate to.
And where did I say I approve of boxing as a spectator sport, or for that matter karate and jiu-jitsu? All of them have merit as private matters, for example self-defence training and fitness, but I don't really believe it is appropriate to have people fight for the prurient interest of spectators.
I've known a few people who've studied various martial arts. I'm not sure how they'd react to the idea that what they're doing is OK, so long as they don't let anyone watch.
What's your take on hockey? Doesn't seem like they can control themselves, fighting-wise, and it doesn't look like the fans are all that unhappy when the gloves come off.
Should hockey be played in private as well? _________________ ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 6049 Location: A monistic vulgarity in which nobility and wisdom have been exchanged for a pale belief in progress
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:09 pm Post subject:
Quote:
What's your take on hockey? Doesn't seem like they can control themselves, fighting-wise...
In a lot of the cases it's the opposite. A high proportion of the fights in junior and pro are orchestrated; they're a form of theatre. _________________ "The purpose of government is to protect the weak from the powerful" Hammurabi
"We can't all be Sam the Sham; some of us have to be Pharoahs" Larry, brother of Darrel, and his other brother Daryl
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1283 Location: Left . . . of the plate
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:39 pm Post subject:
Timebandit wrote:
In fact, there are very few, if any, women suggested as role models in these exercises.
A woman can't represent the category "people", so she would only be a role model for the girls. A man can be a role model for both boys and girls, so it's more efficient to have a man. [/sarcasm]
The Planet of the Guys
I've known a few people who've studied various martial arts. I'm not sure how they'd react to the idea that what they're doing is OK, so long as they don't let anyone watch.
Magoo, I've been studying Chinese martial arts for over 7 years. While I prefer the more formalized forms, especially weaponry (I'm good with a broadsword, and am currently working on my long sword technique), I have done sparring.
Most martial arts competitions are not bare-knuckle fights, which is largely what MMA fights are. Even boxing matches, which I think are very dangerous and shouldn't be permitted, have greater restrictions and use more protective gear.
Martial arts tournaments generally work on the basis of points sparring. Basically, we're taught not to hit full force and the intent is not to injure, just score your hit. We are expected to have control, an ability which is very much sought after in martial arts. I've sparred with people much, much larger than myself - like, outweighing me by 50 to 70 lbs (I'm pretty small). In a MMA style fight, I'd be toast at the first blow, but in points sparring, size is more a differential that factors into style. None of my kung fu compatriots has ever injured me beyond a little bruising on the arms, mainly from blocking a point.
Long story short, as a martial arts enthusiast, I'm all for points sparring - but bare-knuckle fights of any persuasion are just plain wrong.
Very well. But as I noted, the rate of injury isn't higher in MMA.
Is your objection to barehanded fighting made on the assumption that it would be?
Quote:
Even boxing matches, which I think are very dangerous and shouldn't be permitted, have greater restrictions and use more protective gear.
Wikipedia has a whole collector page for deaths due to boxing. And yet when you mention "boxing" ('The sweet science') people don't seem to react the same way as when you mention "Mixed Martial Arts" (the 'bloodsport'). Funny that the respectable one seems to be the one more likely to kill someone.
This isn't directed at you, but at anyone: is any of the objection to MMA on the grounds of the attitude (macho, take no prisoners) it seems to bring out in fans?
Because that seems to me to be the biggest difference, really. Other than that, mixed martial arts unsurprisingly involves the same risks and skills and discipline as the individual martial arts that comprise it.
Also, what's YOUR take on hockey? Is it time for hockey games to take place privately? Or to introduce some kind of points-based fighting to the game?
At least MMA makes no bones about the fact that it's fighting. The fighters in MMA fights aren't just hotheads and poor sports. _________________ ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,
I'm of the opinion that boxing should be shut down for good and all. And MMA bare-knuckle fights certainly do have more injury than points sparring.
I will admit that the attitude surrounding MMA bothers me - mainly because it is antithetical to what I consider the best part of Asian martial arts (Ch'an or Zen Buddhist philosophy). But the attitudes around boxing and Tae Kwan Do irritate me as well.
Fair enough. It would be pretty hard to argue that MMA is steeped in philosophy, or represents an attempt at mind/body/spirit balance.
I still get the sense that it's a "trigger" of some sort for some people (assuming, as I do, that most people aren't offended that it's not grounded in an Asian philosophy or tradition). I wonder if most people who think it's barbarism in spandex are just assuming it must be more dangerous than the very respectable boxing, or whether there's something else.
Just for the record, I'm only talking about the sport. I don't think we need MMA fighters mentoring children. _________________ ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,
Kickboxing or whatever the hell it's called is a business looking for free advertising in our schools. Unsurprisingly, Doug Ford is looking for ways to help them - he is a big proponent of letting advertisers have unfettered access to our kids in schools.. He probably expects a financial reward for helping out.
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:45 am Post subject:
Senor Magoo wrote:
Quote:
And where did I say I approve of boxing as a spectator sport, or for that matter karate and jiu-jitsu? All of them have merit as private matters, for example self-defence training and fitness, but I don't really believe it is appropriate to have people fight for the prurient interest of spectators.
I've known a few people who've studied various martial arts. I'm not sure how they'd react to the idea that what they're doing is OK, so long as they don't let anyone watch.
I've been trying to debate with you in good faith. Kind of you to return to the favour. Perhaps you'd like to move away from the absurdist arguments?
Senor Magoo wrote:
What's your take on hockey? Doesn't seem like they can control themselves, fighting-wise, and it doesn't look like the fans are all that unhappy when the gloves come off.
Should hockey be played in private as well?
The purpose of hockey is not to hurt the other person the way it is in MMA, boxing or competitive martial arts. I'm not a supporter of fighting in hockey, and I think the game would be better off the rule in other major league sports (fighting means ejection from the game) were applied. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Perhaps you'd like to move away from the absurdist arguments?
I'm not sure I'm all that far from what you said. You seem to be saying that it's OK to, let's say, practice boxing, but that it shouldn't be for exhibition. Thing is, I think most people that practice a sport will, at some time, want to demonstrate what they've practiced in front of an audience.
Are you just saying that it shouldn't be a large, public spectacle?
Quote:
The purpose of hockey is not to hurt the other person the way it is in MMA, boxing or competitive martial arts.
But the purpose of fighting in hockey is.
I'll phrase the question differently: if hockey does not put an end to its own violence -- and a bunch of insincere lipservice notwithstanding, it really doesn't look like they're going to -- should hockey continue to be a televised spectacle?
Basically, it sounds to me like maybe you'd have been OK with a ban on MMA in Ontario. Would you also be OK with a ban on hockey if the fighting doesn't stop? _________________ ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,
Joined: 11 Apr 2006 Posts: 14585 Location: Toronto, ON
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:03 pm Post subject:
If you want to show your family or your friends some moves that you learned at your Judo class, then by all means go ahead. What I object to is making doing harm to others a spectator event. I would be perfectly okay with a legislative ban on hockey fighting and regulatory action being taken to end fighting in hockey. The problem with your idea of banning hockey is that it would also ban levels of hockey where there is less/no fighting. I've been to a number of kids' house league games and never once saw a fight there. _________________ "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
The problem with your idea of banning hockey is that it would also ban levels of hockey where there is less/no fighting. I've been to a number of kids' house league games and never once saw a fight there.
Actually, Magoo didn't suggest banning hockey in general...
Quote:
if hockey does not put an end to its own violence -- and a bunch of insincere lipservice notwithstanding, it really doesn't look like they're going to -- should hockey continue to be a televised spectacle?
So. The CRTC sends a letter to Gary Bettman saying "Stop fighting in hockey, or we'll ban you from the airwaves!!" Bettman sends a letter back: "Kiss my bony New York ass, you twerps".
I think that's the sort of scenario Magoo has in mind(minus my poetic embellishments).
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 6049 Location: A monistic vulgarity in which nobility and wisdom have been exchanged for a pale belief in progress
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:25 am Post subject:
Quote:
The purpose of hockey is not to hurt the other person the way it is in MMA, boxing or competitive martial arts.
But the purpose of fighting in hockey is.
No it isn't.
When they aren't orchestrated events intended to pump up the team and the fans, and perhaps intimidate the opponents (which rarely happens), usually they are just two guys who are mad at each other and want to blow off steam without much thought about consequences.
Now spearing a guy in the guts or elbowing him in the head, those acts are intended to hurt someone. _________________ "The purpose of government is to protect the weak from the powerful" Hammurabi
"We can't all be Sam the Sham; some of us have to be Pharoahs" Larry, brother of Darrel, and his other brother Daryl
When a person tweeted his complaint about Canadian UFC fighter Georges St-Pierre being injured and unable to fight, White [the President of UFC] responded Wednesday on a Twitter public feed: “I hope you get kicked in the nuts twice today.’’
Next up: Doug invites the creators of Grand Theft Auto into public schools to talk automobile safety, and then Bob Guccione will come in to teach sex-ed.
Cute as that is, al Q (and it is very, very cute), my Sifu would not allow children that young to spar. Or even somewhat older than that - not until into their teen years and only after attaining a certain level of training. They aren't able to use the kind of control that would prevent injury to a great enough degree, padded or not.
Doug has come out from the shadow of his younger sibling to steal the show at City Hall. The spotlight loves him. Unexpectedly but spectacularly, he has established himself as one of those characters every city loves to have around, someone who speaks and acts with utter unselfconsciousness.
Doug is equal parts Harold Ballard and Homer Simpson, with a little Beverly Hillbillies thrown in for added appeal. Beneath that worldly exterior and ample girth lurks a true innocent, a naïf, a guileless fool. He’s one of those rare individuals who lack any awareness of their own lack of awareness.
The most memorable example was his revelation that he’d never heard of Margaret Atwood. In this plugged-in age, that sort of ignorance is hard to find, even on City Council.
That, “liberry” closures, Port Lands Ferris wheels, NFL stadiums in Lake Ontario, Ultimate Fighting Championship anti-bullying campaigns and his daughter’s Lingerie League make it clear that Doug never learned shame.
Citizens have also gotten involved in City Hall’s new theatricality; once Rob Ford turned the public consultation process into Toronto’s Got Talent, deputants responded enthusiastically with poetry, polemics and heartfelt testimonials. They laughed. They cried. They begged and pleaded, threatened and cajoled — with very little prompting and at all hours of the day and night.
No one enjoyed the spectacle more than Doug. Last week, one particularly poignant presentation managed to inspire him to reach into those deep pockets of his and write a cheque on the spot for $1,000. That’s the equivalent of winning the grand prize, a ticket to stardom, or in this case, survival.
Even when Doug feels charitable, he remains utterly oblivious of the larger point, but in a way so obviously well-intentioned that many confused his donation with generosity. There aren’t many public figures who can get away with such behaviour on the basis of nothing more than their own ignorance.
This is no mean feat; it makes Doug a compelling figure on the civic stage. Unlike, say, his brother, whose ratings have been in freefall almost since the beginning, Doug only appears to be his own worst enemy. In fact, he’s his own best friend.
The problem with Rob is that he’s actually deadly dull and has little to say. If he dreams at all, it is in low-def. When he does speak, it’s only to repeat the same lines, all of them ending with the word gravy.
Doug is the dreamer of the family, an unabashed big thinker blissfully unfettered by fear of embarrassment or inadequacy. Everything Rob does — whether walking or talking — feels laboured and painful. We wince when he talks. We rush to finish his sentences, if not his thoughts.
But when Doug speaks, we listen with interest, even excitement, never knowing what will come next. He keeps us on the edge of our seats, hoping the curtain will never come down.
While I agree that Doug Ford is both a fool and certainly entertaining (though a lot of it is probably unintentional comedy on his part). I have to take issue with Hume's somewhat lighthearted tone in this article. Sure Doug reminds people of Homer Simpson or Ballard. But one only fucked up a hockey team and the other is a fictional cartoon character. Doug OTOH, along with his brother are fucking up the largest city in this country. I don't think that's too funny, and unlike Hume, I can't wait for that curtain to come down. _________________ I can't support bike lanes. Roads are built for buses, cars, and trucks. My heart bleeds when someone gets killed, but it's their own fault at the end of the day. - Assclown Rob Ford
I have to take issue with Hume's somewhat lighthearted tone in this article. Sure Doug reminds people of Homer Simpson or Ballard
Yeah, I read Hume's recent defense of Occupy Toronto as nothing more than "we want one of what New York has - let's keep these tents!" Lighthearted is putting it politely.
I'm sure the Occupiers were glad for the support, but behind his back they probably snicker at Hume's inability to see the movement in anything but aesthetic terms.
But maybe that's what they pay him for. I mean, he's the Star's architecture critic, right?
My councillor - the wretched Frances Nunziata - recieved an A from the Toronto Taxpayers Coalition. She was so proud of this, she included it in her e-newsletter.
I felt congratulations were in order, so i sent her a note in return...
Quote:
Dear Councillor,
The Toronto Taxpayers Association gave you an A? What a coincidence! So does the Committee to Turn Toronto Into Detroit!
The rest of us, not so much. More of an F really. No big shock, but it turns out that a vote for you and Rob Ford was a vote for:
Cuts to service on TTC routes including St Clair, Eglinton, Weston, Keele, Jane and every other major route in your ward.
The closure of three childcare centres and an increased cost to childcare by upwards of 10% across the city.
The closure of five wading pools.
The closure of two outdoor pools, including the permanent closure of the Stanley Park outdoor pool despite the City investing $592,000 last year in renovating the pool building.
The elimination of swimming and recreation programs at 18 schools across the city.
A hiring freeze for Toronto Fire and Paramedics, creating a shortage of dozens of firefighters and increased emergency response wait times.
The closure of three shelters and the elimination of 11,000 nights of shelter beds.
The elimination of 19,000 hours of library service.
Increases in user fees at community centres, including a 10% increase for instructional programs mostly used by children and youth.
The elimination of youth outreach activities for over 16,000 youth.
The elimination of funding for 58 student nutrition programs in Toronto schools.
A reduction in frequency of street cleaning.
The elimination of the hardship fund, which helps those who cannot afford it purchase surgical supplies, mobility aids such as crutches, diabetic supplies, hearing aids and more.
A 10 % funding cut to local arts.
A 10% funding cut to community groups, organizations, and business associations across the city which make our city safer, support sexual education, harm reduction, community food programs, farmers markets, mental health services, recreation programs for seniors, festivals, tax clinics, summer and march break camps, affordable access to community spaces and housing placement supports for women freeing violence, resources for BIAs and newcomer and employment supports.
The closure of arenas across the City during day time hours Monday through Friday.
The elimination of Wheel Trans service for dialysis patients.
Cuts to the Toronto Environment Office and the Sustainable Energy Plan.
The closure of visitor cafeterias in long term care homes.
The end of free recreation programs for low income children and youth in priority centres across the City.
You must be so very proud of how quickly you've managed to exact your revenge on Toronto! I am sure the people in your ward, who are after all, so very very wealthy, will be appreciative of all your hard work on behalf of the people of Etobicoke and other outlying areas. I, for one,will work tirelessly to remind all of my neighbours of the work you do!
Good one. Doubt she'll ever respond, unless (like Doug Ford), she's dim enough to think it's a *compliment*. In which case you might get a "thank you" note. _________________ I can't support bike lanes. Roads are built for buses, cars, and trucks. My heart bleeds when someone gets killed, but it's their own fault at the end of the day. - Assclown Rob Ford
Good one. Doubt she'll ever respond, unless (like Doug Ford), she's dim enough to think it's a *compliment*. In which case you might get a "thank you" note.
Heh, I once got one of those from Dick Cheney. Auto response about how much he appreciates receiving input from American voters or something like that. _________________ “If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a tractor.”
The report says the mayor's mother-in-law placed the call, claiming that the mayor had been drinking and was taking his children to Florida against his wife's wishes. Toronto police are investigating the event, the report said.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Voting Centre
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Front Page
Links
Acceptable Use Policy
Donate
Today's Active Topics