Kerry Howley point towards this excellent New Yorker article. Check it out.
There’s also evidence to suggest that the religious people who live the longest are the ones who attend services most frequently rather than feel their beliefs most deeply. (It’s not faith that keeps them alive, in other words, but people.)
French President Nicolas Sarkozy voodoo dolls can still be sold by a publisher as long as they come with a warning that sticking pins in the toy is an affront to his dignity, a Paris court ruled today. [Bloomberg]
In doing some reading, I found this opening paragraph in an article defending the legacy of World War I flying ace, Billy Bishop:
In 1989, seven years after the debut of “The Kid Who Couldn’t Miss”, an article appeared in a publication called The Canadian Historical Review, Vol. LXX, No. 2, by Brereton Greenhous, of the Directorate of History, Department of National Defence. This article was titled, “The Sad Case of Billy Bishop, VC.” [Link]
It amuses me because of the way he states “in a publication called The Canadian Historical Review”.
The Canadian Historical Review is the flagship journal of Canadian history. To own the domain “billybishop.net” and attempt to rebut a professional historian should require at least having heard of the CHR.
Today on delibertate.com we are launching a new feature, the Commenter of the Month. This feature recognizes the best commenter over the last 30 days.
So please welcome Dana, the inaugural Commenter of the Month.
If Obama really did offer and Clinton did accept the position of Secretary of State, then Barack is dead to me.
Here is a brilliant discussion of multiculturalism and immigration.
Passchendaele is Canada’s attempt at a movie. It failed.
The movie centers on the story of Michael Dunne (Paul Gross), a member of the 10th Battalion of the Canadian Expeditionary Force. We are introduced to him as he murders a German soldier by sticking his bayonet through his skull and is then injured in Europe and transported back to a Canadian hospital. Here he is subsequently diagnosed with shell-shock and falls in love with his heavenly nurse, Sarah Mann, played by Caroline Dhavernas.
As luck would have it, Dunn also meets David Mann, Sarah’s brother. David is a weak, asthmatic boy, desperate to join the Army so that he can a) continue to fuck his girlfriend [yes there are nipples!] and b) avenge his father, who, inconveniently, joined the war on the wrong side! Dunne attempts to persuade the boy not to join the army while attempting to get in Sarah’s pants.
Through his attempt to sleep with Sarah, Dunne helps her detox from her random morphine addiction. Once cleared of the drug, there is a poignant scene were Sarah sits in the window seat of Dunne’s hotel room, basked in the sunlight. This makes her into angel that Dunne first sees waking up in the hospital.
To set up the final act, David uses his girlfriend’s father to allow him to join the Army. Upon hearing this Sarah flies into a rage, because she believes that Dunne allowed him to join up the army, even though he had not. In a ridiculous scene, Sarah bursts into David’s girlfriend’s house, accusing Dunne of signing her brother up. Instead of saying “I didn’t do that” he reenlists in the army so that he can protect David in battle.
So both David and Dunne are now in Belgium, near Ypres, awaiting battle. To make the plot even more ludicrous, while they wait Sarah shows up in France as a nurse. In a beautiful scene, Dunne and Sarah fuck in the open with bombs exploding in the background. Truly heartwarming.
In the concluding moments of the film, the most ludicrous scene in film history is shown. During the assault on the German lines, David becomes enraged and charges the enemy. He manages to reach the lines and falls into the trench and a kind German officer spares his life, but then a shell explodes tossing David’s body into the air. For some reason the body happens to end up on a cross like section of wood. (Through the movie there are constant references to the German’s having crucified a Canadian solider)
Noticing this, Dunne immediately runs towards David getting shot a couple of times. Seeing that he was unarmed, the kindly German officer instructs his men to ceasefire. Dunne then goes up to the cross and pulls it out of the ground. He then-wait for it-puts the cross on his back and carries the body back towards the Canadian lines. So yes, Gross wrote himself into the movie as Jesus.
Ultimately, David is saved and Dunne dies of his wounds in Sarah’s arms. This is where I was the only person in the theatre cheering.
In looking at the themes of this movie, it’s basically anti-war. There is no real glorification of the war. Yet the movie was still terrible. The symbolism was overwrought and transparent. At one point when there is an ominous scene, the camera quickly moves to show a flock of evil birds. In a happier moment (as described above) Sarah is made to be an angel.
From the first shots of the movie, the tone is just off. You can immediately tell that the production values are limited. It just feels amateurish the shots are clunky and unrefined. At one point there is a shot where David is using a telescope, but the focus of the shot leaves it blurry and filling the entire screen. The acting of Paul Gross is laughable, and the even worse by the actor who played David. Dhavernas is better, but by no means convincing.
At the beginning I thought the movie could be a plausible, low-budget Canadian war film. By the end it was clear it was a low-budget, pandering, plodding love story, written by an inexperienced writer, directed by a man with no sense of the physical space and acted by an actor who doesn’t understand drama. F-
Addendum:
I forgot to mention that Passchendaele uses much from the Saving Private Ryan playbook. From the shot of the soliders walking past water to the injured soldier yelling “momma” it’s all there. It’s just done really poorly.
I am continuing my boycott of Utah.
In today’s Leader-Post,
I would like to contest the inane protests by the writers of the letters “Feist review makes her feisty” (Leader-Post, Oct. 28) and “Criticism not OK,” Leader-Post, Oct. 30) in regards to the Leader-Post’s criticism.
Both seem to completely misunderstand the purpose and meaning of criticism. “Criticism”, by definition, is a critical evaluation of a work or event.
Contrastingly, the writers appear to be under the misconception the Leader-Post’s criticism should ignore any evaluation and instead consist of merely of kind words and cheerleading.
The fact Leslie Feist was a “onetime resident of Regina” is inconsequential to the substance of the review. Geography does not dictate quality.
More concerning is the assertion that “local artists and Canadian talent” including films like Passchendaele, should get a free ride and not be critiqued simply because the creators were born in a certain geographical area.
These types of ideas are the exemplars of an uncritical nationalism that pervades a large subsection of the Canadian population.
Perhaps the reason why Canadian talent is perceived to be poorly reviewed is because it is coddled and prevented from competing on an even playing field with the international community.
Robert S. Porter
Regina
Seeing as how my prediction for the Canadian election was pretty far off, I figured I’d give the American election a shot.
Obama: 349 - McCain: 189
Obama: 53% - McCain: 46%
They’re pretty much randomly chosen, though delibertately lower than many other predictions.
See here for Daniel Drezner’s prediction post.
There is one thing that Radley Balko loses his logic over: football. Whenever his beloved Colts play he loses his head. In particular, he is unreasonably biased when talking about the Patriots. Like those in the baseball world who turn stupid with their hatred of the Yankees, Balko sees nothing but evil oozing from Bill Belichick’s pores.
However, one more thing can be added to the list of Radley’s foibles: Strong Bad.
On Sunday, Radley posted pictures of his Halloween costume, which was a homemade Strong Bad outfit. Predictably the first few comments were complimentary. Will Grigg commented that it was a “Sweet costume!” and Lucy explained that Balko “just became even cooler”.
Having read his comments, I knew I had to counter the spate pro-Strong Bad sentiment. Homestar Runner, in my opinion, is patently unfunny. Since the first instance that I heard that gravelly voice I absolutely abhorred it. My friends will backup my Strong Bad hatred.
As such, in the 9th comment I said “I’ll probably be the only one and I’ll probably get a negative rating, but this actually takes Radley down a notch in my book.” Now obviously this comment doesn’t articulate a whole lot, but, to my mind, it is clearly explains that I’m attempting to be contrary to the comments. This is why I prefaced it, noting the negative rating I would receive. I fully expected that people would disagree.
Later when someone asked who the character was supposed to be I explained “It’s Strong Bad of Homestar Runner, one the…least funny schticks in the history of the internet.” Again, this is a pretty simple statement. As you see, however, there is nothing personal about my comment. No attack on Radley. I simply stated that I don’t find the character funny, at all.
In response Radley called me out for saying I made “two needlessly nasty comments” which “had no real-world value whatsoever”. Additionally he called my comments “bitchy”.
I’m not sure why my comments angered him so much. I recognized this post ”was meant to be in fun” thus my comments were “in fun”. By his logic he should delete his own post. Also, if those comments are “nasty” then he must be extremely thin skinned. But, in my opinion, this reflects negatively on him. Had I made a person attack on him or called him names, then I might expect such a response. But to get upset because I took a couple seconds to disagree with him is very odd.
But just to take the high road, I’ll point out the things I didn’t say, but was thinking at the time:
Oh well, I’ll just reevaluate ever donating to Balko again. This doesn’t negate the amazing work he has done, but I think give my money directly to the organizations completing the work instead of the oversensitive journalist behind the black paint.
Drudge is today reporting that John McCain has the NASCAR vote.
We’re fucked!