Wednesday, December 15, 2010

When the Incestuous, Christian Wife-beaters Speak, the CBC Listens

When the Incestuous, Christian Wife-beaters Speak, the CBC Listens

(It's been a while, hasn't it?)

Things had been running relatively (and surprisingly) smoothly with the comment posting at the CBC's website these past few months; but then, on Thursday, December the 9th, asked Canadians if Prime Minister Stephen Harper's (jaded) rock 'n' roll performance at the Conservatives' Christmas party had changed their opinion of him as leader. In response, I successfully posted the following comment:

The only people I know of who support the Harper Tories in this part of Newfoundland are semi-illiterates, brainwashed fundamentalist Christians, wife-beaters, and men who enjoy incestuously raping their daughters and stepdaughters (and jailing the daughters' older lovers when they report the incest to authorities). I think that's the general grassroots of the Conservative Party pretty much across the country. I found it frighteningly ironic yet hilariously appropriate a few years ago when one of the local mayors attempted to run as an MP for The Conservatives, and it turned out his son was the local repeat child molester, knicker pincher, and spouse abuser (including a future lover of mine). Yes, it appears as if these people are constantly covering their tracks or deflecting reality. Keyboards and classic rock numbers help their dubious cause.”

My comment remained posted for several hours, with readers and fellow commenters agreeing with me roughly 2 to 1. Then, around 10 PM Newfoundlandic Time, when the Conservatives' main fan base of Edmonton hicks and Lethbridge bumpkins would be getting off work and hitting their computers, my comment disappeared. My take on the matter? The arriving hardcore party members had to do immediate damage control, and squawk to the moderators about my ‘unfair’ assessment of them. And when the incestuous, Christian wife-beaters speak nowadays, the CBC must listen, apparently.

Still, Harper's little display of second-rate rock 'n' roll didn't exactly con the masses, at least. No major wave of Conservative converts resulted. Maybe at the next Christmas party the Harper Tories might instead do something a little more in keeping with grassroots tradition: like setting out a row of haystacks on stage and discovering what Conservative Party member can make his daughter reach orgasm the fastest.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

You're Not Invited to the Circle Jerk, Charlie Brown

You're Not Invited to the Circle Jerk, Charlie Brown

On August 5th, covered Prime Minister
Stephen Harper's speech to his colleagues at his Conservative government's annual summer caucus meeting. Among his claims, Harper stated that Canadians did not want an election anytime soon, and that such an election would be detrimental to Canada's economic recovery.

As of my writing this entry, there have been 879 comments posted regarding Harper's speech and the caucus meeting, including my own. (“I'm surprised Harper's nose hasn't grown enormously during his time in office. The ridiculous and despotic king's did over the years in Stoker & Hart's comic strip, The Wizard of Id.”) One of the earlier comments posted was the following, attributed to someone calling himself ‘lucidguy’ (i.e., ‘Lucid Guy’):

“Aw, why didn't I get invited to the circle jerk?”

Apparently, the moderator had no problems originally with posting this. However, a few minutes later and the comment had been removed. The moderator must have had second thoughts, a different moderator took over at that point, or—most likely—there was a complaint from an uptight nitpicker and/or Conservative supporter. This is another fundamental problem revolving around censorship at any comment one might post can be easily removed if a second person disagrees with one's opinion and enters a complaint. One can almost imagine the various political parties employing bloggers and the like to make complaints to the moderators whenever commenters strike a stinging satirical blow to their parties' policies.

This sexually oriented comment aimed at the Harper Conservatives brought to mind one of many similar comments I've made and had removed or rejected at Here's one of my favourites that I kept a copy of in my files:

“I really wish Harper had gotten laid more often when he was a teenager—I'm pretty sure that's where all this aggression and insanity began.” (circa Winter 2009-2010)

Come to think of it, the Harper Conservatives are incredibly insecure when it comes to their own perceptions of their masculinity. Ever notice how they take offence at almost anything ‘long’? They want to abolish the
long-gun registry; they want to abandon the long-form census; they want to diminish long waits for medical attention by promoting more private health clinics, thus compromising Medicare. Yes, they must consider their erect penises to be very, very short.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Lloyd Robertson: Too Old for a Senate Seat, Too Precious to be Roasted

Lloyd Robertson: Too Old for a Senate Seat, Too Precious to be Roasted

A few days ago, the CBC reported that 76-year-old CTV anchorman Lloyd Robertson, a former newsman for the CBC, is set to retire in the latter half of 2011. (He's giving us ample time to celebrate, isn't he?) Given Prime Minister Stephen Harper's hypocritical history of naming news broadcasters to Canada's senate (he's supposedly in favour of an elected senate or an abolishment of the upper chamber altogether), I couldn't help but make the following snide remark in the story's comment box at

“Strange. I mean, he's too old for the senate. Unless, of course, Herr Harper is absolutely hellbent on breaking every last law on the books that he has so espoused or devised himself.

Now, maybe it was my referring to Harper as ‘Herr Harper’, thereby alluding to a comparison of our current Conservative prime minister with Adolf Hitler (a poem of mine that has found its way into circulation is entitled ‘Adolf Harper's Coming to Town’); but I think it was simply my roasting Lloyd Robertson, the great celebrated television newsman, that got their goat. To put it bluntly, the moderators didn't want me ridiculing such a respected co-worker in order to ‘score political points’ against hypocritical Harper. Resultingly, my comment was shot down in mid cyberspace.

This is not the first time has refused to post my comments regarding a former newsman of theirs and the senate: When Mike Duffy, while working for the Conservative-sympathetic CTV Newsnet (or whatever they're calling it nowadays), was named to the senate by our hypocritical Harper (read story here), I commented that Duffy “looked like someone who's late for the farting contest”. That had about as much chance of being posted as my being named to the senate!

They protect each other...even more so than politicians, seemingly....

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Sshh! You Just Might Help Us Find That Missing Child!

Sshh! You Just Might Help Us Find That Missing Child!

Here's another form of censorship which likes to dabble in: The disallowance of comments on certain stories involving child abduction, sexual assault, incest, etc. This story is closed to commenting,” is an all too common postscript found at the bottom of CBC blabspots. Furthermore, when one questions the moderators on such a practice, he or she is both met with silence and refused the posting of a related comment.

Case in point: Just yesterday, I responded to a story involving a female tourist being assaulted in a downtown alley in St. John's, Newfoundland:

Notice how the CBC will allow comments on this story, but not the one about publisher Clyde Rose allegedly sexually assaulting someone? Apparently, we can rattle on and on about the sad 'fate' of foreigners like the woman in question, but dare us not say anything that might embarrass our own at home. Nor would the CBC even allow comments on the story about the little girl out west being possibly abducted by her estranged violent father. Comments in that case could have even resulted in tips as to her whereabouts—Isn't that the whole purpose of one of these ‘Amber Alerts’ in the first place? Talk about defeating the purpose of a story.”

Needless to say, the cowardly excuse for a moderator refused to post my comment. Faceless arsehole.

If anyone has experienced something similar, in regards to this or any other CBC story, please feel free to post your comments at this blog. All accounts of the CBC's underhanded and questionable practices are welcome.

Friday, July 2, 2010

A Tender Spot for the Christian Far Right...?

A Tender Spot for the Christian Far Right...?

Now here's another classic example of censorship at This time, the censor, er, moderator in charge must have been sympathetic to the Far Right bunch, given the fact that I attempted to post this comment three times (as I noted in my infuriated third attempt). The comment in question came as a response to the CBC's report that Ron and Reynold Mainse, the sons of evangelist David Mainse, had been suspended as hosts of Canadian Christian television programme 100 Huntley Street while they were under investigation for their alleged involvement in a Ponzi scheme. (Read the story at Here's my thrice-rejected comment:

"First lessons in dealing with right-wing, conservative Christians:

"When they yak on and on about family values and the sin of adultery, they're pulling off lots of tail in the background with their latest fancy piece.

"When they foam at the mouth about the ‘evils’ of homosexuality and same-sex marriage, they're merely attempting to guiltily compensate for the sex they've been buying off their favourite gay hookers.

"When they join sleazy lobby groups and rattle on to politicians about ‘ped-dophilia’, child porn, the so-called ‘age of consent’, etc., they're actually trying to prevent the local older boys from discovering the nasty things they've been doing with their daughters' backsides on a nightly basis.

"When they rant and weep about the “millions of babies murdered by abortion”, they're secretly donating to doctor-killing creeps and politicians who would bomb Muslim nations completely off the map.

"And, above all, when they shoot off their mouths about the “sin of greed” and the love of money being the root of all evil’, one can rest assured that they've been cheating on their taxes, have their fingers in the till, or have invested in a ‘get even richer’ scheme like the one in question.

"This is the third time I've posted this comment without seeing it into print. It's no problem to see comments posted about Newfoundland “having the laziest and least intelligent citizens”, however. Post my comment or prepare for a lawsuit—I'm not one to toy with when it comes to free speech. At the moment, I'm preparing an op ed for the New York Times condemning Google's practices. If there's one thing I detest, it's pointless and unfair censorship."

Apparently, one cannot fight the right-wing financial Jesus--even in the CBC's boxing ring.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Canada-Day Coverage, 2009: A Good Place To Start...

Canada-Day Coverage, 2009: A Good Place To Start...

Okay, let's kick off yet another pointless, contrived Canada Day with a new blog; this one dedicated primarily to the nonsensical and questionable censorship which is practised at, the website of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), a.k.a. ‘Canada's Public Broadcaster’. Each entry will focus on a news story covered by the CBC, and feature a comment or comments made by Yours Truly which have been rejected or removed by the CBC's illogically biased ‘moderators’—i.e., censors—at their website. Other issues might arise....

Let's get started by winding back the clock to Canada Day, 2009. Here's a comment I tried posting regarding the CBC's general Canada Day coverage on this day last year. Needless to say, I had to remove any personal accounts of child freedom and independence 30 to 35 years ago before the site's censorious shitheads would post it. Here's the original:

“Does anybody remember the 1970s, when there was still a free Canada worth celebrating? It was a wonderful period, when we had transcended the antiquated right-wing Christian conservatism of the 1950s and early '60s, and before the political correctness and nanny-state nonsense had begun to set in. Since then, the country has been sold out to a minority of dogmatic far-left and far-right numbskulls who probably represent less than 5 percent of the country's population.

“Give me back the good ol' days of stubby beer bottles; ‘universal’ smoking; fondue parties; helmetless hockey with bountiful brawls; sex without rules; Stompin' Tom, The Stampeders and BTO on the radio; Rough Trade on Canada After Dark; The Beachcombers, The King of Kensington and Peanuts and Popcorn on television. (Does anyone remember those Saturday-morning adverts on the CBC? Brnnnngggg!!! “Hello...Better Business Bureau....”)

“And how great it was to be a child in the '70s!—after the Church had lost its grasp on us and before the far-left lobbyists began to smother us. I remember what seem like endless summers of hiking, bicycling, streaking and skinny-dipping. We were allowed to read, watch and listen to pretty much anything we wanted—and youth-oriented media were so much more intelligent and thought-provoking in those years. I remember my parents even allowing a cousin and I to play with cigarettes during our make-believe play. Children and teens were so much tougher back then—and without the mindless violence! When a couple of creeps attempted to abduct a friend and I when we were 10 years old, we fought back, got the hell out of the car and legged it! At the end of the day, we never even bothered to tell our parents—it was none of their damn business, we felt. We were growing up on punk rock, MAD Magazine and Jodie Foster films, remember—we were learning to etch out our own morality and fight our own battles. How ignorant, pampered and pathetic the youth of today look by comparison—my first cousins-once-removed appear as if they're about to melt into the ground at any second.

“Fast-forward 30+ years to Canada today, with its nanny-state nonsense from the Far Left and imposed sexual ‘morality’ from the Far Right. Just toe the line and pretend you're having fun, people....”

Advocating freedom? Above all, advocating freedom for children?!! I'm afraid that's a no-no at the CBC, people. The first thing that one has to learn when dealing with the CBC is that freedom is off limits; the people who monitor their website—like those who tailor their news stories—advocate restrictivist dogmas first and foremost, regardless of whether such dogmas are of left-wing origin or right-wing origin.