I don't normally watch Larry King that much, but not because of Larry. I just don't watch because he usually has guests on there I don't have much interest in. But last night was different, he had one of my favorite guests on: Bill Maher. Only last night was different, last night Larry announced he's ending Larry King Live sometime this fall. He's still going to be with CNN, doing specials, but the nightly show will end.
I'm saddened by this, Larry interviewing Bill Maher or Michael Moore, or any number of other great guests was always a treat for me. Like I said I didn't watch often, but when he had a guest on I really liked it was must see TV for me.
I hope that CNN picks a worthy successor. Someone who isn't overly partisan. I enjoy commentary, but for it I go to MSNBC. I go to CNN for unbiased reporting and to see my favorites interviewed by someone without a political agenda.
In any event best of luck Larry, we'll miss ya!
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
The "Black Bloc" Idiots
I'd really love to see these morons shipped off to Iran or China or North Korea and see how long they complain about the way things are in Canada then. And I want to make it clear (not that it will matter to the idiots who support them) but I'm only referring to the dumbasses who smashed windows, set cop cars on fire, brought weapons into the protest area, and oh yeah lets not forget wore masks because they're too chicken shit to actually stand up for what they say they believe in, instead they have to hide their identity because they're a fucking coward.
The actual, legitimate protesters who were peaceful and obeyed the law: kudos to you. I have no problem with anyone protesting anything as long as they obey the law and they don't interfere with normal people just trying to go about their day. My first introduction to "protesting" was years ago when idiots from the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) blocked traffic in a major artery during morning and evening rush hour traffic here in Halifax. (Barrington St right under the MacDonald Bridge) I was amazed how they were continually allowed to do this and fuck over normal, everyday people who were just trying to get to work to provide for themselves and their families. I felt that every single one of them should have been arrested or at the very least been made to get off the road. I mean, if you want to protest the government actually go to where the decision makers work and fuck with them. Don't fuck with John Doe here who's just trying to get to work so he can put food on his table.
And another thing, I've seen that video of the Police allegedly rushing the protesters who were singing O Canada. And at first blush it looks really bad. But did anyone notice how when the police make their rush the camera is turned away from the main crowd, and thus you can't see what they're doing? Everyone is leaping to the conclusion that the cops just decided they wanted to get their rocks off by cracking some skulls, and attacked for no reason. But who knows what the protesters were doing behind the camera's back? For all we know they could have been rolling out a nuke or pointing AK47s at the cops. I'm not saying they were, all I'm saying is that video doesn't show us the whole story. If the cops did attack them for no reason, so be it they should be punished. But lets actually take the time to examine the possibilities before you jump to conclusions.
The actual, legitimate protesters who were peaceful and obeyed the law: kudos to you. I have no problem with anyone protesting anything as long as they obey the law and they don't interfere with normal people just trying to go about their day. My first introduction to "protesting" was years ago when idiots from the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) blocked traffic in a major artery during morning and evening rush hour traffic here in Halifax. (Barrington St right under the MacDonald Bridge) I was amazed how they were continually allowed to do this and fuck over normal, everyday people who were just trying to get to work to provide for themselves and their families. I felt that every single one of them should have been arrested or at the very least been made to get off the road. I mean, if you want to protest the government actually go to where the decision makers work and fuck with them. Don't fuck with John Doe here who's just trying to get to work so he can put food on his table.
And another thing, I've seen that video of the Police allegedly rushing the protesters who were singing O Canada. And at first blush it looks really bad. But did anyone notice how when the police make their rush the camera is turned away from the main crowd, and thus you can't see what they're doing? Everyone is leaping to the conclusion that the cops just decided they wanted to get their rocks off by cracking some skulls, and attacked for no reason. But who knows what the protesters were doing behind the camera's back? For all we know they could have been rolling out a nuke or pointing AK47s at the cops. I'm not saying they were, all I'm saying is that video doesn't show us the whole story. If the cops did attack them for no reason, so be it they should be punished. But lets actually take the time to examine the possibilities before you jump to conclusions.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Nice to see the UK consider a method of Electoral Reform that doesn't suck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
I wish our politicians would follow suit. Now I've gone on and on about the lack of merit some of the proposed PR systems have but my one main argument has always been it gives small fringe parties too much power. IRV doesn't do that, it allows us to substantially marginalize strategic voting as well as giving us the opportunity to still vote directly for our MP. That's important to a lot of people including me.
As I've said before the vast majority of PR proponents only want PR because it will help their party gain more power. They may trot out a bunch of BS about fairness and all that but in reality it's about one thing: Power.
Now as a Liberal I of course am threatened by PR because it substantially lowers my party's chance of obtaining a majority. I freely admit that, but at the same time I can look past that and see that there are flaws in our electoral system. Strategic voting is a problem. People should vote for who they want to vote for and not have to support some candidate they don't like as much because they fear a worse candidate might win. IRV doesn't solve that problem, in fact in researching forms of proportional representation I've found that the only system that truly eliminates all strategic voting is random voting by a computer which of course isn't preferable (unless you live in Florida)
IRV is the right way to go with our current Parliamentary system, to institute true PR even with a threshold with our current system of Parliament would elevate parties that should have little influence (because the vast majority of the country voted against them) to potentially having all of the power and holding Parliament hostage.
Now PR supporters will say that the other parties can simply band together and stop this from happening. And that does sound great, except I live in the real world where my Party hates your party and vice versa.
I wish our politicians would follow suit. Now I've gone on and on about the lack of merit some of the proposed PR systems have but my one main argument has always been it gives small fringe parties too much power. IRV doesn't do that, it allows us to substantially marginalize strategic voting as well as giving us the opportunity to still vote directly for our MP. That's important to a lot of people including me.
As I've said before the vast majority of PR proponents only want PR because it will help their party gain more power. They may trot out a bunch of BS about fairness and all that but in reality it's about one thing: Power.
Now as a Liberal I of course am threatened by PR because it substantially lowers my party's chance of obtaining a majority. I freely admit that, but at the same time I can look past that and see that there are flaws in our electoral system. Strategic voting is a problem. People should vote for who they want to vote for and not have to support some candidate they don't like as much because they fear a worse candidate might win. IRV doesn't solve that problem, in fact in researching forms of proportional representation I've found that the only system that truly eliminates all strategic voting is random voting by a computer which of course isn't preferable (unless you live in Florida)
IRV is the right way to go with our current Parliamentary system, to institute true PR even with a threshold with our current system of Parliament would elevate parties that should have little influence (because the vast majority of the country voted against them) to potentially having all of the power and holding Parliament hostage.
Now PR supporters will say that the other parties can simply band together and stop this from happening. And that does sound great, except I live in the real world where my Party hates your party and vice versa.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
