Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Daily Digest January 21, 2008


The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN'S to VICTORIA.
ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/

 BELOW(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)

        The few editorials not relating to the new president of the United States are included in the links below.

        There are 4,975 news articles for anyone choosing to immerse themselves in reactions to the inauguration.

        The Niagara Falls Review asks "WILL BE GOOD FOR CANADA? The Digest does too in that 'twould seem
        we're going to be having stronger ties.

        Oh, some articles relate to the upcoming Budget which will be the cause célèbre over the next week or so.

                  Joe
«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
===================================
STRATOS
===================================
MONTREAL GAZETTE -
What Obama means to us is still a mystery
http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/editorials/What+Obama+means+still+mystery/1190600/story.html
Journalism .. the ONLY profession where one can write 'We don't know nuthin', but I've got to fill in some column-inches so I'm writing about us not knowin nuthin''. Contrast THAT with reality in the world of the 'productive' private sector. ('We ain't got nuthin' to say, but my boss wants a detailed report so I'm writing a long one that contains nuthin' in it'.) Enjoy the irony ...
 
TORONTO STAR -
Obama embodies America's hopes
http://www.thestar.com/Opinion/article/572639
Yes, he IS pretty slim, isn't he?

LONDON FREE PRESS -
Big spending needs to go to right places
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Editorials/2009/01/17/8054036-sun.html
Well, yeah ... else it would go to 'wrong' places, which is pretty much the definition of 'bad spending'. The problem is in figuring out which places are 'right', and to what degree.
 
Tautology: one of the secrets to every mediocre politician's success. If you do something and a desired something happens, you've done the right thing right or the wrong thing wrong (in which case it didn't matter to start with and you can say that you were right anyway). If the something DOESN'T happen, you've done either the right thing wrong, the wrong thing right, or the wrong thing wrong.
 
Hence, modern democratic practice: advocate something, execute it, and hope that things work out. If they do, you did the right thing right, which earns you praise. If they don't, then blame wreckers and malingerers for doing the right thing wrong. If one's in opposition, it's the other way around: if things work out, then the wrong thing was done wrong, which means that the opposition politician was right in saying that what was done was either wrong or irrelevant. If things DON'T work out, the opposition politician can claim that it was the wrong thing to do and that it would never have worked whether done right or wrong.
 
Still following me? Figure out the paragraph above and join the ranks of 90% of successful politicians. :-) Mind you, by 'successful', I mean something along the lines of what some Pope (I believe it was the then-Pope) said after the death France's Cardinal Richelieu. When asked what he thought of the Cardinal's legacy (Cardinal Richelieu had supported German Protestants against the (Austrian-'German') Catholic Holy Roman Emperor in order to make France secure from attack), the Pope said: 'If there is a Heaven, he'll have much to answer for. If there isn't ... well, he's had a successful life'. One's 'success' doesn't always mean another's pleasure.

FEDERAL POLITICS -
Harper minister called 'egghead'
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2009/01/18/8060691-sun.html
Beats being a pimple-head. At the very least, eggheads don't burst under pressure, hahahahaha. Then again, if they're not properly braced and supported, they can crack instead. :-S Takes all kinds in politics, folks!

Directions of Obama green policies 'bode well for Canada'
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=1187192
Which is a nice way of saying the otherwise crass 'more green ($$$) for green means more green ($$$) for Canada'. And when you think about it more, more US red (ink) used to spend more green on green means more green for Canada so less red for it.
 
OK, now that we're all red-green colour-blind, let's concentrate on which of either Blue politicians or Red-Orange ones would best govern Canada, hopefully in a manner that will put it back fast in the black while not going too deep in the red between now and then. And if we're lucky, the Red, White, and Blue will soon take on a healthy hue so that we can see light at the end of the tunnel.
 
Economic thought: dazzling, ain't it? :-)
 
Le PLC nomme quatre présidents nationaux
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-canadienne/200901/18/01-818664-le-plc-nomme-quatre-presidents-nationaux.php
The Ploocs named four NATIONAL Presidents, instead of regional ones? Hhhmmm ... they'll either have mixed (and thus ineffective) authority ('the devil from Ontario made me do it!' passim Flip Wilson), or they'll represent four nations. OK, we've got the Quebecois for sure as one of them, but which are the other three? Would First Nations be considered to be a single one? Is BC distinct from the Prairie provinces?

Vote sur le budget : les libéraux se gardent toutes les portes ouvertes
http://info.branchez-vous.com/Nationales/090118/N011808AU.html

The Budget vote: the Liberals keep all doors open for themselves
Knowing them, they're also keeping all windows and ventilation ducts open. And, of course, sewers too.
 
No reason to choose sides
You can support Israel and still be outraged over Palestinian deaths -- if you understand the history
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/lorrie_goldstein/2009/01/18/8060521-sun.html
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN

At last: someone who's come around to my 'Let the sods ROT in HELL!' way of thought. I no longer feel alone, hahahaha.
===================================
From:Ray Strachan
Subject: Re Wpg FP Article Jan 17 DD

If the atheists can't speak freely, who can?

Let the sods ROT in ... uuuhhh ... oblivion?

===================================

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)