Blue Like You

Well he was a fish out of water anyway.

Good luck, Ken Dryden.

Update: Confirmation received from the Star. (o.k. - Not the best source but it will have to do.)

Funny the difference a few days can make.

Mmm… I’m trying to imagine David Akin as a Global National reporter.

But as a National Post correspondent? I’m afraid that CTV environment may have contaminated him.

Well, we’ll see.

I think Wilson’s nailed it in Comments at Return of the Trust Tory:

…But it is fun to watch McGuinty racked over the hot coals.
If Dalton (and Kinsella) had his eye on replacing Dion, the CPC are getting their punches in early.
Double delicious is that McGuinty is trying to spend his way out of hard times, just like Bob Rae did. and the comparison is made at every opportunity the CPC gets (or creates).

And judging from the reaction at the blog of the Kicking-Ass Master himself, it’s having the desired effect.

As always, looking way ahead at the big picture…

The story of the so-called man who is pregnant got me to thinking…

What is the point of gender anyway? The “man” identifies as male because his breasts have been removed? A lot of woman have that done involuntarily and that doesn’t make them male. He also was taking male hormones, but ‘chose’ to retain his female reproductive parts. Why?

Margaret Somerville states:

“Where I would do a reversal on this is to say, ‘You’ve artificially made yourself a man. You’re not a man, you’re a woman and you’re having a baby and you’re actually having your own baby. Just because you put on a clown suit, doesn’t mean that you don’t still exist underneath.”

To take a little poetic licence with a well known phrase, it’s like putting a jock-strap on a sow.

Obviously the ‘man’ is still going to have female chromosomes.

Which leads me to the question, why bother with gender at all? Why have it on drivers’ licenses and other legal documents? If we can decide on a whim that we’ll a particular gender, then what’s the point?

And perhaps for “women” who are still oppressed in various parts of the world, that could very well be the best outcome possible.

I was looking for something ‘Easter-ish” to post today, and got sidetracked by all the woes of the world. However, I’ll put all that aside for tomorrow and focus on the word “Hope”, which is what Easter is to me.

Ian Hunter has written a beautiful piece about the essential differences between this realm and the next in Saturday’s National Post.

He also mentions Pope Benedict who has courageously baptized a well known Muslim this Easter. Steve Janke has the story here.

Hunter’s article contains one of my favourite quotes from scripture:

The essence of Christian hope was best summed up in a few words when Jesus said: “In this world, you will have tribulation. Be of good cheer. I have overcome the world.”

Be strong. Be brave. Have hope. Don’t give up.

Happy Easter.

Thanks again to SDA for the link today. Tony’s comment regarding this article seems to have piqued her interest as it did mine. Is “Sandy Smith” an alias for Brenda Martin? There certainly appears to be no end to the intrigue.

The Record surprised me today with a fairly level-headed editorial on the controversy - Harsh realities for jailed woman:

…Nonetheless, there appears to be little more the Canadian government can do. There have been more than 100 contacts between federal government representatives and either Martin or Mexican officials. Canadian officials at the highest levels — including Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier, and possibly even Harper himself, have spoken to their counterparts about her case, urging fair and swift treatment. Other Canadians, including former prime minister Paul Martin, and several MPs, have visited her and telephoned. There is no doubt that Mexican officials, from President Felipe Calderon on down, are intensely aware of her case

But as Harper himself points out, Mexico is a sovereign country, and this case is one for the courts, which must be free of political intervention. There would be an uproar, and swift resignations, were Harper, or any other politician, to step in if they disagreed with a judge’s rulings here.

We must remember, too, that unfortunately Martin’s case is hardly unique. According to the Department of Foreign Affairs, about 1,750 Canadians are today imprisoned in other countries and the Canadian government has the same responsibility to them that it has to Martin. The bulk of these prisoners are in the U.S., but others are in jails in countries as diverse as China, Australia, Thailand and Peru, mostly on drug, immigration or fraud charges.

Many doubtless are guilty as charged. Others have been dealt with in ways many Canadians will consider harsh. For example, Kitchener mother Loan Ngoc Bui is serving 40 years for drug trafficking after a police officer in Illinois stopped her car and found 3,710 ecstasy pills hidden in it. Her boyfriend, who was driving, says Bui knew nothing of the drugs.

But Americans take a different view of drugs than we do in Canada, and as a result, Bui is serving out a sentence harsher than a Canadian court would dole out even for a convicted murderer.

The federal government has lived up to its obligations to Martin, who has had the benefit of dozens of high-level interventions, something most Canadians imprisoned abroad never see. Ottawa must continue be vigilant, and ensure her case is dealt with swiftly and fairly, but beyond that, Martin’s fate lies in the hands of a Mexican judge.

(Just when I was determined to cancel my subscription… Oh well.)

After reading that editorial, a couple of thoughts came to mind. First of all, as the Record noted, the Mexican government would probably like nothing better than to have Brenda Martin ejected from Mexico forthwith. By now her notorious case is undoubtedly an embarrassment and a drag to their tourist industry. So how will putting pressure on either the Canadian or Mexican government change anything people????

As Harper was quoted by the Record, “Mexico is a sovereign country, and this case is one for the courts, which must be free of political intervention.”

O.K. I know that the Mexican legal system is reported to be corrupt, and there is a presumption of guilt until innocence is proven, but it is still a sovereign country. Brenda Martin left Canada and went there of her own volition to work. And yes, she has been in prison already for two years awaiting charges (which have now been laid) and trial, which has its own quaint little idiosyncrasies in the Mexican system. And yes, she has been imprisoned with already-convicted women.

However according to many sources, she has received special treatment in this high-profile case - certainly much better than many other Canadians in the same plight.

Which brings me to point number two. Isn’t it interesting that anyone committing a crime seems to want to either return to Canada or stay in Canada when it comes time to pay the piper? I’m thinking about Schreiber, several Canadian pedophiles, and countless others who know that Canada is an easy mark when it comes to serving sentences and the comfort of that environment. And the Lefties were in shock that our Charter Rights didn’t extend to Afghan detainees!

Could it be that our Canadian system is so lax to the point of creating a mentality of rights-entitlement that has undercut the fundamental need to be held accountable for our actions?

Just go where you want, do what you want and Canada will bail you out afterwards if you embarrass the government enough.

There must be a middle ground somewhere.

Since this is Good Friday (thank you Dr. Roy), I don’t want to focus too much on political issues today but a few things need to be said.

On a personal note, thank you SDA for helping me shatter my previous one-day hit record of about 1600 with an impressive 2 K+. As a blogger, it’s fun to keep track of such things.

Secondly, my assessment of yesterday’s events both here and at SDA has led me to the conclusion that Brenda Martin is the author of her own misfortune. Her accomplices and enablers include the gleeful LPC, sanctimonious MSM, and Martin’s scornful family and friends that have been so vocal, ungrateful and vicious as to actually alienate not only Canadian supporters such as myself, but also the Mexican government which now seems to be indignantly digging in its heels over the political interference of its own legal jurisdiction.

Yesterday, the Mexican Embassy issued the following statement (Globe):

“Brenda Kim Martin is detained, pursuant to the order of the competent Mexican Federal court,” the release said, adding that she has been seen by doctors and Canadian diplomats in the two years she has been held. It said Ms. Martin’s decisions to change lawyers and launch constitutional challenges have “significantly contributed to the delay in her trial.” The statement concluded that, should Ms. Martin be convicted, treaties could allow her to serve her sentence in a Canadian prison…

Christina Spencer notes that the continued antagonistic effort of the media and Mrs. Martin’s supporters could have negative consequences:

...But often, the louder the diplomacy, the harder it is to find a happy ending. Too much public pressure on another government can backfire, drawing out a crisis for years, seasoned diplomats warn. “The Mexicans are probably saying ‘bugger you’ — it’s gotten to the point now where it’s having a negative effect on the people involved,” says Gar Pardy, former director general of the consular affairs bureau at the department of foreign affairs. The principle is simple: Governments don’t like to be embarrassed by other governments who criticize them. “They’re less willing to move the paper than otherwise would be the case.”

Spencer goes on to list several incidents in the past where aggressive Canadian political intervention has gone badly.

She finishes up with this:

…When a Canadian is arrested abroad — and in early 2008 there were 21 Canadians in jail in Mexico — diplomats try to work quietly and informally to win their release or improve conditions. The Canadian government, for instance, says there have been about 100 consular contacts with Brenda Martin since her arrest.
Of course, that quiet action hasn’t won her freedom. But “the Mexicans have responded to her personal care in terms of the concerns that have been expressed about her mental health. In terms of some of the cases you deal with, to have that level of attention and care is very rare,” Pardy says.

So the Mexican justice system is doing the best it can under the circumstances. And guess what? Martin may actually be guilty. That hasn’t been determined yet. At the very least, there is more to this story than meets the eye.

We need to ensure that emotional performances don’t overshadow the need for reason and due process.

If the determination of guilt or innocence hinged only on an Oscar-winning show of tears and venom, Brenda Martin would be a free woman today.

Remember a while back when we Conservative ladies were sitting around complaining about how MSM is trying to tell us that women don’t like Harper?

Well, one of my readers contacted a friend who makes T-shirts and she has come up with this method to counteract the propaganda. She also has one available in light blue with dark blue lettering.

Anyone interested in ordering one can contact Shirley at shirstit@shockware.com

This must be the article that James Moore referenced in Question Period today - No inducements to change vote, Cadman’s politicial advisor says:

…Raymond Mol, who served as Mr. Cadman’s co-campaign manager in 2004, said he asked Mr. Cadman specifically about possible offers shortly after he voted to keep the Liberal government in power.

After the vote, Mr. Mol says he met with Mr. Cadman when he arrived at the Vancouver Airport after his flight from Ottawa, and later went with him to his constituency office in Surrey.

“We definitely chatted about it. I have a fairly clear recollection of that time,” Mr. Mol told the Citizen.

He says he first asked his friend about possible incentives offered by then-Prime Minister Paul Martin’s Liberals.

“I said, “Did the Liberals offer you a spot?’ And he said, ‘They know better than that.”

Mr. Mol then asked about Conservative offers.

“He said, ‘They offered me the same support they offered me before,’” Mr. Mol recalled. “But, no, he said, ‘They didn’t offer me anything specific and I didn’t ask for anything.’”

Later in the article, Mr. Mol gives a possible explanation for the seeming contradiction in various versions of the story.

Dalton McGuinty announces that the Ontario government will ban smoking in cars with children present, in his ‘next logical step’ against smoking. Good plan.

And I hope that includes unborn children too, Dalton. Will anyone smoking in a car with a pregnant woman be fined as well?