Stop Policies that Target our Traditions

By Charles Adler, QMI Agency

First posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 08:00 PM EDT

 

There is a trend underway that is scarier than the worst Halloween slasher flick. Canadian traditions are being slowly and methodically exterminated by politically correct monsters.

There is a trend underway that is scarier than the worst Halloween slasher flick. Canadian traditions are being slowly and methodically exterminated by politically correct monsters.

I’m talking about calculating bureaucrats who hunt for anything that causes offence, real or imagined. You and I need to put a stop to this before our society, our way of life, becomes completely lobotomized.

Many Canadian traditions have already been scrubbed from society. Christmas has been crucified. Christmas trees? They are now “holiday trees.” Many avoid wishing someone “Merry Christmas” out of induced fear.

Easter? Don’t you dare utter those words around a zombie bureaucrat. Easter eggs have turned into “spring spheres.”

Halloween was also under attack this week. That special day on every kid’s calendar. A time to dress up in costumes that spark their imagination. For kids, the holiday spells freedom.

To feel the liberation of walking the streets after dark, staying up past their bedtimes and eating lots of candy. But it also teaches kids to face fears through laughter and collective fun. To learn right from wrong and earn some much-needed independence. Sadly, this rite of passage is being ripped out of their lives.

“Halloween” — many schools across Canada are uncomfortable with what has become a derogatory word. “Black and orange day” is now the preferred term for the high priests and priestesses of political correctness.

Why? Official guidebooks claim it’s offensive to “Wiccans.” Wiccans! Never mind that the Wiccan high priest I had on my Sun News program this week scoffed at the very idea of being offended.

Several schools in Calgary converted this hallowed scaring day into “caring day.”

Banning masks and any kind of violent imagery. The usual Halloween events were replaced by “community friendly” activities. The kids must have been so excited!

Multiple schools in Ottawa and Hamilton banned costumes completely.

Administrators were concerned about the marginalization of poor kids who can’t afford fancy costumes. Worried that costumes will be offensive to new Canadians. Give me a break!

In Ohio, a student group launched a campaign against what they call racist costumes. Geisha costumes? Offensive to the Japanese. Sombreros? Offensive to Mexicans. Pocahontas? Offensive to First Nations. Do you know any Norwegians who are offended by Viking costumes?

This hyper sensitivity will spread unless it’s held in check. For the lucky kids who were actually permitted to wear actual costumes, I ask you, what can kids actually wear that won’t offend somebody, somehow?

Occasions that once defined the Canadian experience have been watered down to the point of being sanitized, safe for all celebrations of not much at all. Kids need to be kids! This is directly contributing to the death of personal responsibility. Teaching our children that big government will take care of them and do all their thinking for them.

Our society is becoming a politically correct dystopia. When the fun is taken from Halloween I worry about what our future is becoming.

We need to stand together against this attack on our traditions. To declare that mindless zombie bureaucrats and their ridiculous policies won’t be tolerated. It’s Canadian common sense.

Man up? What’s in it for us? – A Letter from Rob (UPDATED WITH AUDIO)

LISTEN TO CHARLES READ THE EMAIL:

Adler man up oct 20th

AND LISTEN TO THE 'MAN-TAGE' ON THE SUBJECT:

Adler man-tage oct 20th

From: Rob To: charles@charlesadler.com

 

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:09 PM

Subject: Re. "Manning Up"

 

I have just one question for those demanding that we 'man up':

"What's in it for us?"

We're hearing a hue and cry about how us Peter Pans are impoverishing (financially, socially, whatever) women, children and society as a whole. But it's always phrased as being a tragedy for others, not the men themselves. How DARE we not fall into line and play the role we have been assigned. How DARE we refuse to roll the boulder up the hill. How DARE we have fun, when we should be toiling to pay for someone else's fun. How DARE we look after our own rational best interests.

Man up and marry a woman? Why? No, seriously, why? Modern marriage holds zero benefits for the groom. We can be divorced on a whim and converted to an indentured servant for years. A man who wants to provide the best environment for his children will favour a stable, two-parent household, but that decision is ultimately not ours to make. Social conservatives and others trying to save the institute of marriage will point to statistics about how married men are healthier and happier, but they get very tetchy when asked how signing a one-sided legal contract accomplishes this, as opposed to a long term girlfriend. We are constantly told that men are afraid of commitment, yet the bulk of divorces are initiated by the woman. Funny how that works. I used to believe in starting a family; I was even lucky enough to grow up in a two-parent household, so I can't even claim I was personally scarred somehow. But I've seen enough carnage amongst my friends and coworkers. I've no intention of being someone's walking ATM and sperm-donor, or a prop in their 'starter marriage.'

Man up and be a father? This line of arguement is a crock. With divorce rampant there's a good chance we will be shut out from much of our children's life, even if we're willing to move heaven and earth to be there for them. The standard line is to start talking about deadbeat dads. But what about mothers who use the kids as hostages in divorce? Even if our ex-wife is a saint, we're still going to be a casual presence at best. And if she's even slightly vindictive, all bets are off in the family court system. Me, I like kids, and think I could do a damn good job as a father. Even thought about adopting once, but considering that the official party line is that males (and fathers) are both superfluous and evil, they'd probably drop me on the sex offender registry just for inquiring.

Man up and be a role model? What's that? Oh, you mean old/dead white men. Why would anyone want us to emulate history's greatest villains? Men (boys and adults alike) are bombarded with constant degradation, told we are inferior, worthless, stupid, evil, incompetent, untrustworthy subhumans. This is echoed 24/7 by our teachers, the media, the courts and our legislatures. It is even echoed by some of our own parents, who been wholly brainwashed by the constant misandrist drumbeat. In many jurisdictions and proceedings, we have been stripped of "innocent until proven guilty" (usually just customarily, but occasionally it's explicitly enshrined in law) . I suppose a 'real man' would spend his days crusading against this, but I despise arguing with tittering fools and don't need the aggravation. Besides, we can accomplish a great deal (and have, and will) simply by withdrawing our participation and our consent.

Man up and work hard? Sure. But for who? Work overtime to provide a comfortable life for your wife and kids? Who then leave because 'you're never there'? Work overtime to be an economic engine for the cash-strapped welfare and social security systems? Why should I feel compelled to contribute to a ponzi scheme that I'll never collect on in my own retirement? My career is proceeding quite well, thank you very much, and I am pursuing it because it enriches (financially and emotionally) ME, not someone else.

Man up and conform to societal expectations? Half the economic woes of these past few years can be traced to the institutionalization of keeping up with the Jones. Buy the huge house, buy the yard toys, buy the RV, take that vacation abroad, be seen at the trendy new spot, buy the latest Apple gadget… Socially and economically, we have no interest in keeping up appearances. I can live very comfortably and fund my interests on as little as $20k a year. I have plenty of leisure time to enjoy my life, friends and hobbies without working myself into an early grave or stressing about where the next loan payment for my status symbol is going to come from.

The constant haranging to 'man up' conjures up the image of a jolly WWI general, shouting "Fix bayonets and over the top lads! The machine guns can't get you all!" Forget it, we're done being sacrificial lambs for someone else. Men aren't manning up, but we ARE waking up. It's a rigged game that we refuse to play, and no amount of shaming language is going to get us off the bench. Want more metaphors? You may have heard the term 'marriage strike,' but it goes beyond that. We're not failing to 'man up,' we're just working to rule. Work slowdowns will continue until management chooses to negotiate fairly and transparently; too bad they've got nothing to bring to the table.

Yes, we're a bunch of losers. THE losers. We lost. Feminists, welfare-statists, the rest… You won. We concede defeat. You got everything you wanted. You've been saying for years that you don't need us, and we'll gladly oblige. We're MGTOWs, Men Going Their Own Way. We don't want to fight you. We don't NEED to fight you. If anything, we should be thanking you. We're free of being beasts of others burdens. We've realized there is no lock on the cell door. We've taken the Red Pill. You can't hurt us, and you have nothing we want.

Now, go away and leave us alone.

- Rob

Inconvenient truths

Time for Gore to apologize to taxpayers, the sheep he's been fleecing

By Charles Adler, QMI Agency

Friday, September 16, 2011 

 

There’s nothing better than a great story. Add a great storyteller to capture the imagination of thousands, even millions of people. People who want to feel, to be entertained, to be a part of something. Converting that story into a religious experience.

Remember the power of televangelist Jimmy Swaggart? Swaggart’s swagger is but a distant echo now. But there’s a new preacher at the pulpit. A man with a vision. And the gumption to turn that vision into a multi-billion dollar mega-church. A new faith has been born.

Testify to the gospel of Gore. Here to bring us back to salvation, to pull us from the inferno of global warming. To be the levee that holds back the flood waters. To wring out the rain water from the heavens. To deliver us from drought. To hold back the hurricanes. And tear down the tornadoes. And destroy the demons who run evil oil and gas industries.

What about people with doubts? Who might have hard questions about the movement? Gore compares doubters to Holocaust deniers and more recently, to racists from the southern U.S.

But Gore has some nasty speed bumps on the road to sainthood. Prophesying doomsday caught our attention, but his story is rich in sensationalism — and short on details. The shepherd’s shotgun rhetoric has thinned the herd.

In 2007, 71% of Americans believed his story on man-made global warming. That number is down to 44% today and falling fast. In a desperate bid to regain momentum, the mega-church of Gore is launching the Climate Reality Project, a 24-hour telethon in 24 time zones. To spread the word and remove doubt. Gore says it’s time to “reveal the deniers.” Sounds kind of like the Inquisition, doesn’t it?

Follow the money: The global warming movement is big business. When you consider all the government support for green energy projects and useless carbon reduction initiatives, we’re talking many billions of dollars.

Many predict Gore will become the first carbon billionaire. Try to remember that when you consider forking over $289 per ticket at his speech in Canada next month.Here are some of the inconvenient truths Al Swaggart Gore won’t be offering:

1) Climate changes, always has, always will.

2) Global temperatures haven’t gone up in 15 years.

3) Real scientists are speaking up — 1,000 of them united in a paper presented in Cancun refuting Gore’s gospel.

4) NASA now predicts

30 years of global cooling.

5) The East Antarctic ice cap, which holds 90% of the world’s ice, is expanding.

6) CERN, in Geneva, now endorses the latest research that the sun is responsible for climate change, not your car.

A story can only take you so far. An orator can only keep a balloon inflated with his hot air for so long before it deflates. And confront the truth. Swaggart famously fell on his sword and offered a tearful apology after he was caught with his pants around his ankles. There is not much doubt that Gore’s pants have dropped well below the waist.

It’s time for him to offer tears and apologies to the taxpayers. They are the sheep he has been fleecing, forced to sacrifice their earnings to build his mega-church of half-baked truths and Swaggart science.

Dear Jack…

listen to Charles read the letter here:

290811.cadler.part1

Dear Jack,

We've been friends for a long time and friends really ought to tell friends the truth. So since nobody else has told you, I think it's time for me to step up and get it done. Those were the same first words I used to to talk back to the rhetoric you were using a few years ago when Canadian democracy wasn't working quite the way you wanted it to do and you tried cooking up some sort of coalition omelette with the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois. It wasn't your ideal coalition. Ideally, you'd be the Prime Minister, driving the bus, and the Libs and the Separatists would just be your tail pipe. Anyway, it didn't work out because the team which got the most votes and did form government was not going to fold their tent just because you and Bob Rae and some professors were going around the country lecturing Canadians about how the coalition was the way to go because this is the kind of thing that Europeans favoured. It was the standard line from the Progressives. Since this is something the Europeans do and the Europeans are so superior to us, having elected socialists often and enthusiastically, Canadians ought to get with with the program. And riding shotgun in that coach of course is the unspoken but heartfelt feeling by progressives everywhere which goes something like this. Since the Americans, excuse me, let me say it little smugly, a little more NDP. Since the Ammeri-kans would never consider a coalition in the executive branch of government. Only one president at one time. No three headed Presidents in the Oval Office. Since the Americans would never do something so sophisicated, and nuanced….Since the Americans can't even spell coalition, it must be a very progressive idea and a Canadian ideal, something the social conscience of Canada, the NDP should be pushing. Remember the fall of 2008 Jack, when you launched the attempt at Coalition, you kept making the case that the Harper Conservatives didn't really command the support of the country because they got less than 40% of the votes. More than sixty percent went to the other parties. And then I chose to count the votes in your own riding of Danforth, and as it turned out you got less than 40% of the votes and so I thought well maybe, by your own standards you weren't legit either. The Liberals and Tories combined got more votes than you did. Why were you picking up the six figured paycheck and the seven figured money for travel expenses every year and all the other perks associated with working the system so close to the throne, so close to the vault you can practically smell the free money. So I'd say based on the reaction of Canadians to my simple arithmetic, it was clear to them that your own fish hook ended up getting in your own eye or to use the language you prerfer among your academic Beaujolais drinking buddies, you got hoisted by your petard. A little French goes a long way in a progressive discussion. Speaking of French I don't suppose the Orange Crush you pulled off recently in Quebec could have happened if all those winning NDP candidates would have had to clear the 50% plus hurdle in their ridings. I did another one of those nasty arithmetic jobs. And it seems the Conservatives, Liberals and the Bloc did score better than 60% and I can't recall anyone of my buds on the right saying Jack had nothing to crow about because more than 60% of the voters voted against Jack Layton's NDP. No they'd be laughed at. When you and Thomas Mulcair and other members of the left were saying more than 60% voted against the Conservatives, we were told not to laugh at this line because the social conscience of Canada was saying so. If a right of centre person says something it must always be in the interests of some greedy corporation, but if a left winger spouts like a whale it's in the interests of the Canadian people, especially those at the bottom of the social ladder. Bottom of ladder has higher moral authority. You might be at the bottom, because you haven't worked a day in your life and your life consists of working the system to make sure you get free housing, free food, free crack pipes, and free heroin needles. But hey if you're at the bottom, you have far more social conscience free flyer points than some sap in a suit trying to feed his family by working for the man.

 

 

Jack, I'm not going to spend much time dwelling on the acolades offered to you in death. I actually think everyone's entitled to have their friends and followers put a little fertilizer on the bun after someone they care for passes. I don't want to get into that. You and I had some great chats over the years. And one of our little rules of the road was you didn't bore me to death with the NDP talking points and I didn't spend any of our private time knocking them down. You knew that I was a working class kid, son of a couple of heart and soulers who worked on the factory floor to pay the rent. You knew that I would never buy into how you saw the working class from your vantage point in the upscale tony neighborhood you grew up in far far removed from the blood, and sweat and fears on our side of the tracks. You knew that our path to middle class was saving some dough, buying a little store and working our tail bones off so we could buy our own house and eventually maybe another one to rent out and save some up some dough. That's what we hard working immigrants did. And over the years I saw people from various parts of the world coming to our country doing it the same way. Work hard, buy a little property and then maybe another, get your kids to apply a strong work ethic to school and becoming professionals at something. Anyway you knew enough about my life, to know I wasn't buying what your party was selling about surviving in Canada only through social assistance, or unions, or government jobs, all areas that were feeding troughs for your organizers, your activists, your fund raisers. In our private conversations, you never tried to push the progressive package at me. I wasn't a motivated customer. My family did the middle class the old fashioned way. We didn't work the system. We worked our tailbone.

 

 

And so Jack when we had a couple of pops and some good chat, we'd talk just like guys do, just like old friends do, a little sports, a little business, a little family. It was warm and friendly and I considered you a friend. But once again friends tell friends the truth and there's just one thing I want to say about what's happened since you passed, that really bugs the hell out of me.

 

 

And it's not about your passing being turned into a huge political fundraiser. I told my buds who knew we liked each other and they were asking me about this last week. I told them Jack was always a ham, but I never thought of him as a pig. And the pigging out on public dollars to be sent directly to the NDP in lieu of flowers or in lieu donations which might have been made for cancer research or any of the many causes that you supported, soup kitchens just to name one…nope if people wanted to send some coin to honour your memory they were instructed to send it to the Broadbent think tank which only exists on a cocktail napkin and even if it ever gets built it’s simply a wholly owned NDP collection plate. But that's not what I waned to bring up Jack. It's that line in the eulogy Stephen Lewis offered up and it's that same old, same old pitch that professional moochers have always used, and you know what I think of moochers Jack. Every family has one. Someone who just keeps working you for more, more, more and it's never enough and on top of all the take, take, take they do, they then add insult to injury by carping about how you haven't been generous enough with them, You owe them more. They're entitled to more. I can't stand Moochers Jack. You know that. And so there's Stephen Lewis, who needs no gps to find government grant money. And there he is delivering your eulogy, singing your praises, calling the deathbed letter you and Olivia and Brian put together, a social manifesto etc etc. All the violins have been cued. The crowd is giving up more precipitation than Hurricane Irene and then he says these words …"He wanted, in the simplest and most visceral terms a more generous Canada.”

 

 

Jack he was speaking for you. Now in all the chats we have had, you never gave me the impression that this country wasn't generous. It was certainly generous to you and your buds. The best example in a long list of examples is what went down on Saturday. This country, Jack, threw your party a multi-million dollar funeral. A state funeral Jack. That's a lot of glue. A lot of people were flown in. Lots of well dressed cops including those Mounties in their telegenic scarlet. A whole fleet of carbon spewing Cadillacs. Not just the hearse you rode in Jack. But the one Cadillac the eulogy giver rode in on as well and many others. Your colleagues were treated like royalty, Jack. I know you were up there smilin' that great Jack smile. And you didn't have to wave that great cane around like a prop. I figure that cane was worth at least fifty seats in Quebec. That was your sugar cane and I give you full marks for using the full tool kit. But about the generosity business. Jack, do you think if I introduced the eulogy giver to a family of Canadians who were once known as boat people from Vietnam, people who were tortured, and butchered and left for dead by their own people, people who got what little they had on a boat hoping that someone would pick 'em up and our country very generously did exactly that. Do you think the eulogy giver could look a mother who rescued her children on a boat and were eventually rescued by the most generous country in the world, Canada, do you think the eulogy giver could look her in the eye and complain to her about Canada not being a generous country? There are millions of people who have been taken in by this country and out of the millions there have been thousands who have ripped this country off and have been allowed to stay here, working the system accessing lawyers paid for by the generous people of this country. How come Omar Khadr's mother is in Canada instead of Pakistan? It's not because she's a Canadian patriot, Jack. She came here for the free health care and much of it was needed for her son who was part of a family dedicated to killing as many of our American neighbors as possible. The Khadr family is here precisely because the country is generous. The eulogy giver wants the country to be more generous. I want the country to be less generous to the moocher and less expensive for the honest hard working folks who the moochers have been enjoying a one-sided parasitic relationship with. Since the eulogy giver used the terms simple and visceral, and since those are the neighborhoods I play in let me put it in simple visceral terms. We are sick and tired of being generous with people who don't even like our country. We are sick and tired of being told by the professional not-for-profit moochers that this country isn't good enough. We are sick and tired of delivering free food, free housing, free cab rides, free motel rooms, free crack pipes, free heroin needles and free cadillac rides to free riders and freeloaders and moochers. Now Jack I can't make it any simpler or more visceral than that. I don't claim to speak for every working man and woman in Canada the way the eulogy giver does. But I am on solid freshly zambonied ice telling you I speak for most.

 

 

Thanks for giving me the opportunity Jack to vent a little bit. It was a tough week. I felt sad to see you go so soon, and as you can tell I felt sad for my fellow Canadians to see your memory being turned into a fundraiser for NDP sugar daddies and a condescending, ungrateful, ungenerous portrayal of the country that you and I both love.

 

 

Happy Trails Jack. I'll be seeing you some day and we'll be having some more pops and more laughs.

 

 

Rest in Peace my old friend.