Logo - White "Y" cut into red background

WWW http://yayacanada.com
Commentary Blogging from Ottawa, Canada
Saying NO to corporate rule, war, occupation, racism, secret trials, gov't/media lies

READER COMMENTS
*Guestbook*
Have your say!
Read what others are saying.

Archives
HOME PAGE
Friday May 30, 2008

Evil twins
Born from the same seed, one overtly good and the other overtly evil, the roles of evil twins eventually blur, making it difficult to be certain where the good one leaves off and the evil one begins.
"I Wish I Had an Evil Twin" Song Lyrics

Examples in recent news:

Dunkin' Donuts Pulls Rachael Ray Ad Over 'Terror' Symbolism (FOX)
Malkin, in a posting following up on last week's column, said of Dunkin's decision to pull the ad, "It's refreshing to see an American company show sensitivity to the concerns of Americans opposed to Islamic jihad and its apologists."

Sensivity, my great aunt Fanny's fanny!  The Dunky folk were worried about losing business.  If you think they shouldn't have pulled the ad, then the way to remind them that expediency is not the same as morality is to write to them at their head office in the US and tell them you're going to stop stuffing your face with their aorta cloggers.

The Dunky's evil twin is Tim Hortons, who are so saintly they have set up shop in Afghanistan, and are known to fire employees at the drop of a donut hole.  These are not typical evil twins because they both look and smell good on the surface, but they kill people with fat, they support the killing of people with guns, and they fire the soft-hearted.

Malkin and FOX are true evil twins.  She responds irrationally and aggressively not only to symbols she perceives to be threatening, but also to anything she decides resembles those symbols, with the advantage that she can express her psychosis in a widely-read news publication and thereby create enough pressure to get that symbol of a symbol obliterated.

Meanwhile, that same news outlet quietly exploits Malkin's pathology in order to sell copy, but tries to appear reasonable and, more importantly, to fend off criticism of itself by tossing a bone to the historical legitimacy of the keffiyeh (Wikipedia) - that Ray wasn't even wearing!

Here in the 51st State, Daniel Goldbloom points out the total illogic of Malkin's bile by comparing the similarities between the Cuban and American flags:
Malkin et al. pulled the fashion equivalent of confusing the American flag with the Cuban one. True, they both have red and white stripes with at least one blue-ensconced white star, but no one is accusing hyper-patriotic Americans of supporting the Castro regime. (National Post)
Goldbloom works for the right wing rag that broke the shocking Jewish badge story about Iran, and then when exposed as liars, deleted the original article and published one that didn't say sorry we were wrong, but only that "experts" had said the story wasn't true.

That second article displayed a photo of a Nazi yellow star badge without any accompanying caption to say it was not the proposed Iranian badge, thereby deliberately creating both a visual reminder of the holocaust to offset Iran's outrage at Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, as well as a direct mental image of what Iran might do to its own Jews - and to Israel if the opportunity arose.

And then we have ex-cabinet minister Maxime Bernier and his ex-girlfriend Julie Couillard:
Couillard says she continued to 'play-act' after breaking up with Bernier at Christmas(Star) Couillard describes a relationship that was more transactional than romantic – at one point in the interview she describes it as a "business deal" – and says she broke it off at Christmas but continued to appear with Bernier to fulfill her promise to spend a year as his "official" girlfriend.

So she admits to playacting - but she's not a mole?  I think she might well be one, and some folks at the RCMP might now have themselves some leverage with the current federal government.  This is an extremely serious turn of events, and not just a gossip event.

How does a nice girl end up being everybody's call girl and still say she's not ashamed of her past?  If either of her conflicting statements: "I fell in love with a dream" and that it was a "business deal" are true, Couillard has deep psychological problems.

But Bernier is either a closet gay desperately trying to look otherwise to keep the good will of his "Christian" Reformist pals, or else he's such a loser that the only dates he can get are with "business" women.  Either way, he was ripe for a setup.

He and Harper can go on all they want about how the private parts of his life are nobody's business, but when his private parts become part of a "business deal" ... well, it becomes a good object lesson in how a government can be got at from below, and end up controlled by the very forces the government itself should be controlling.

At the very least, it shows Bernier up as a weak-egoed, amoral sleaze, which should not surprise anyone since the whole Harper lot has proven its sleazy amorality by fast-tracking the process begun by the Liberals of selling Canada into the service of US state terrorism.

Couillard may try to come off as the good twin in this case, the well-meaning used and abused, but no good can come of falling "in love with a dream" slash "business deal".

I wish the Toronto Star would stop being so coy about how Bernier and Couillard first met.  Earlier they said it's "unclear" how they met, and now they appear to be quoting Couillard saying they met at a dinner party.  What kind of mutual acquaintance could (should) a Canadian MP have with a "business" woman associated with the drug culture? And was there any food served at this "dinner"?

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

DVD suggestion:  "An Unreasonable Man".  It's the fascinating story of Ralph Nader, one of the very few Americans who understand what democracy is all about.  Even Michael Moore showed himself to be very confused on that point.  Gawd knows why he supported Nader the first time he ran for president; he certainly came nastily out against him the second time, and slavishly for Democrat Kerry.  Why?  Because Nader got accused the first time of taking votes away from Al Gore and helping Bush get elected.

Does that give you any clue as to for whom Michael Moore really works?  It would appear that he worked with Nader in the beginning thinking it would take votes away from Bush.  But now he wants Nader not to run so that his voter support base can top up that of the Democrats'. 
And of course, Moore has come out hopeful in support of Obama.

Okay, now that reminds me of the movie "The Candidate" starring Robert Redford.  A typical story of a presidential candidate who wasn't meant to win, only to make it look like there was a contest.  Reford's final line, when his character won, was "What do I do now?"

But Nader had seen through Gore and had been stung by the Democrats' right turn, and he offered a truly citizen-focused alternative. Americans are so brainwashed, however, into thinking they can only vote Democrat or Republican that they didn't jump at their big opportunity to save their country.

When you hear ad nauseum how our soldiers died to preserve our "freedoms" and you see how any of the protections and freedoms that civil society has ever won were brought about by the singlemindedness and courage of "unreasonable" people like Ralph Nader, you'll
understand how we've been hoodwinked time and again into wars for profits and nothing but profits.

Ralph Nader did not lose the election for the Democrats.  If the Democrats cared about the people, and Al Gore and George W. weren't such evil twins, Ralph Nader wouldn't have felt called upon to run.  And if the people were awake at all, and if they had any clue about who brought so many improvements to their lives. They would have voted en masse for Nader.  Well, they still have a chance to, but will they take it?  Draft Nader - 2008

You watch the news and see what the two big parties do to him.  They've viciously tried to marginalize him by cutting him out of the public debates before, but if he gains momentum this time, he'd better have good bodyguards.

Here is wisdom: If you feel you must vote "strategically" rather than with your gut or your feet - settling for the lesser of two evils - that alone ought to wake you up to the fact that you are not free and you don't live in a democracy!

And you'd better think about throwing your support behind an independent who, like Ralph Nader, resonates with the citizenry and not with the military/industrial complex that seeks to control the whole world right down to the size of its brand name drawers.

yayacanada