Over the years, we’ve heard a lot of highly inventive excuses why bloodthirsty right-wing war-hawks and hateful wankers cowardly refuse to put their money where their bellicose, incessantly gibbering mouths are, but surely this [Note: The “Raging Tory” seems to have burned down his site, so the link no longer works — ed.] is one of the most fabulously lame of all:
I believe Canada needs to grow up and become a republic. I am sick of the monarchy, and will not serve in Canada’s military because they swear an oath of allegiance to the crown, rather than our nation. This means that if the British were to invade Canada, our military would, by law, aid the British invasion. Whether or not they would do that as individuals, I don’t know.
The monumental stupidity of this craven, self-serving thesis defies description.
Red Tory v.3.0.3 
Or – any excuse not to join.
I can’t wait for Harper to get his kids to join…
CWTF — I don’t have ill-will towards the children of others. I’m an unabashed pacifist and would never conscience putting the offspring of others into harm’s way simply to prove a point. I understand the motive for perhaps wanting to do so, but that doesn’t necessarily make it right.
War should be a thing of the past…
What’s even funnier is that this craven chickenhawk is calling for war with Iran.
The British are invading? Whew, Remembrance Day is going to be a bit awkward for Prince Charles tomorrow.
Prince Charles already had observance at Christ Church here in Victoria on Sunday.
As for JH’s silly scenario, it’s beyond ridiculous. Logically speaking, it’s the notorious fallacy known as reductio ad absurdum, I believe.
By the way, I love that someone calling himself the “Raging Tory” is a staunch Republican. Speaking of divided loyalties!
“I’m young, I’m fit…”
So who’s the guy in the photo?
Robert — Good catch. These miserable asswipes are always quite readily eager to kill others with little regard for any death but their own.
So Winston Churchill was wrong and Neville Chamberlin was correct?
Your solution is appeasement?
Lenny — That would be the “Raging Tory” — young and corpulent Mr. Justin Hoffer.
CS (or should I call you Isabella?) — Thanks for showing up with a false dilemma! Are you “conservatives” all logically challenged in addition to being factually deficient?
Who said anything about “appeasement”?
RT you said
“I don’t have ill-will towards the children of others. I’m an unabashed pacifist and would never conscience putting the offspring of others into harm’s way simply to prove a point. I understand the motive for perhaps wanting to do so, but that doesn’t necessarily make it right.
War should be a thing of the past…”
Are those your words? My post asked you about an important historical debate between pacificists and us “chicken hawks”?
Could some of us be voting for the CPC as a lesser evil from the Liberals?
Just curious of what benefit did you find releasing that information collected? An insult or a threat?
Should I expect a stalker for my kids next?
Good call Naavy, ‘Raging Tory’ indeed is nothing more than a GOP groupie. If you wish to identify yourself as a Tory, steadfast loyalty to the crown is part of the deal. Yet another instance of populist rightwingnuts driving the conservative brand off the cliff.
CS – there are indeed times where a war is just and must be fought. However 99% of the time, they are not. The US or Israel starting something with Iran would definitely fall into the later. When the USA was signing treaties with the USSR, was that appeasement?
CS(I) — Are those your words? My post asked you about an important historical debate between pacificists and us “chicken hawks”?
What a remakably dumb question. Of course those are my words.
Your “post” seeing as you appear to have forgotten it was: “So Winston Churchill was wrong and Neville Chamberlin [sic] was correct? Your solution is appeasement?”
I really don’t know why you saw fit to attempt a re-framing of the discussion into a tiresome invocation of Chamberlain’s politically naïve “appeasement” at Munich prior to WWII.
Could some of us be voting for the CPC as a lesser evil from the Liberals?
Yes, perhaps. Frequently that is the awkward choice put before us. Who said otherwise?
Just curious of what benefit did you find releasing that information collected? An insult or a threat?
Oh, yawn me a river. More just amused by the fact that so many “conservative” bloggers are frightfully keen on “outing” their liberal counterparts with joyful righteousness, but alternatively themselves seem to have no problem whatsoever hiding behind pseudonyms, masking their identities and cowering like frightened little girls behind “moderation” and other such blinds to filter out dissent on their own sites. A bunch of weak-kneed, gutless fucking hypocrites, if you ask me.
Should I expect a stalker for my kids next?
Good grief, get over yourself already.
Do you see SEE why I haven’t been an official member of any “Conservative Party” in Canada since 1994?
The infiltration of the GOP, their operatives, and their mentality started in the 1980’s. I saw it happening, and by 1994, I was done with them.
The Tory Part(y or ies) in Canada had only one first principle from the very beginning: Loyalty to the King, Loyalty to the Crown.
Everything else sprouted from that root. This was the ONLY thing that was never debatable.
Such stupidity so close to Remembrance Day – the day we set-aside to remember the sacrifices made by Men and Women in the service of “King & Country.”
I need to go and take a rest.
ATY — I was actually thinking of you and SF (“Dred Tory”) when I wrote this post. 😉
It is indeed offensive to those of us who still adhere to the somewhat archaic governing principle of the monarchy for whatever reason…
I’ve taken the oath to the crown twice; once when I became a citizen and second when I was lowly civil servant back in the day. I’m happy to have done so and feel no regrets in that regard.
Chickenhawk: This means that if the British were to invade Canada, our military would, by law, aid the British invasion.
Red: It is indeed offensive…
But…but…the Redcoats are comin’! The Redcoats are comin’! How can you be so complacent about that, you dragoon-hugging, Earl-Grey-sipping, powdered-wig wearing…Tory!
Seriously, I can’t even work up any anger towards that pathetically deluded oaf. He’s so totally lost in his own internal wilderness that I actually find him endearing. I think he just needs a big hug, to be honest–not that I could expect my arm span to cover much of his Dreadnought-class bulk.
“Should I expect a stalker for my kids next?”
a stalker would likely be a welcome relief from their unbalanced parent.
KEvron
SF — Perish the thought! But yes… lost in some bizarre, utterly confounded delusion he must certainly be.
As for Justin being “endearing” I’m not inclined in the least bit to favour him in that way. He’s simply a repulsively unsympathetic turd, imho.
The gentleman describes himself as angry and loud.
That in a nutshell sums up the Reformers that support this government.
I have always been told never to make decisions while I am angry as my anger would cloud my good judgement.
What does that say about a government that seems to be angry all of the time?
Usually anger is a turn off to most people. I am wondering when Canadians are finally going to be turned off by these bozos enough to toss them to the curb where they belong.
Mind you it took the American 8 years to get rid of their angry government. Hopefully Canadians are smarter than the Americans, like most Canadians believe, and do not wait that long.
I might also add that since the party this guy supports is now the government and according to some pundits and his fellow Togging Blories the leader of the Party is the second coming, what would this guy be angry about?
“How can you be so complacent about that, you dragoon-hugging, Earl-Grey-sipping, powdered-wig wearing…Tory!
SF, I resemble your comments. 😉
Well though maybe not the second-last point, as I feel rather silly wearing powdered wigs and do not fancy those so much.
This explains a lot…
So there you go. Integrity and intellectual principle is irrelevant — it’s all about the juvenile objective of “making fun of liberals”…
…it’s all about the juvenile objective of “making fun of liberals”…
Well, you know how it is, Red . A young man with the best of intentions sets out to make fun of Liberals and merely succeeds in making fun of homo sapiens. It happens….
It believe it’s called an “own goal” back in Blighty. The guy’s his own panto.
Well, I still say the funniest excuse to try to avoid deployment is still very much stateside; the clients of Orly Taitz who won’t take the order to go to war because they don’t recognize the commander in chief.
However, this one is pretty funny too…
CWTF: I can’t wait for Harper to get his kids to join…
HA! Like that will ever happen! Steve would be the leading chicken hawk.
SF — These people weary me…
Although I am on Irish Catholic descent, I sometimes whimsically and possibly naively wish we should just bring the Family Compact back. Being descendants of the United Empire Loyalists, the Family Compact or perhaps even the the Chateau Clique would have thrown a fit by now and marshaled all of their resources to stemming whatever this current political phenomenon is, pan neo-conservatism?
JKG — Way over my head… 😉
This is a gem too…
“My beliefs are more in common with American conservatism than Canadian conservatism.”
Well at least he fully admits he’s not a Tory, rather just your typical folksy-fascist, fiscally neo-liberal, populist windbag.
…the Family Compact or perhaps even the the Chateau Clique would have thrown a fit by now and marshaled all of their resources…
Oh, rest assured that the likes of Shaidle, Levant, McMillan, and the eponymous jackass would have kept an Upper Canadian hangman plenty busy, JKG.
Naturally, my humanitarian instincts would compel me to advocate for a blanket commutation to life sentences or exile–not too strenuously, of course. 😉
Exile? Where? To Botany Bay?
I like the Aussies too much to throw this lot onto their shores. Beside they have their own problems with American conservatism warping their politics.
Exile? Where? To Botany Bay?
In the old days–as any history of the 1837 rebellion will attest–we used to exile our miscreants to the United States.
We still do, actually. 😉
SF,
Sometimes I wonder just where did those proud descendants of the UEL go. It is almost a betrayal of their own venerated ancestry. The Canadian neo-conservatives have no problem appealing to historical tradition only to forsake it or worse, revise it to reconcile just how much they diverged from the likes of Sir John Beverly Robinson.
Speaking of exile, Louis Joseph Papineau couldn’t even muster support in the United States and from Martin Van Ruin . It was as if though our cousins down south didn’t really care much for French Canadians, well, at least after 1812. Funny you should mention that trend of neo-conservatives going south; even young Conservatives I have known are now going down south to “cut their teeth” whatever that means. It seems though they find a niche only to come back to bring news from the Promised Land. Alert would seem a better exile. I mean, just raise the spectre of the Red Scare masked as the Russian Federation, tie it in with Arctic Sovereignty, and Alert will turn into K-Street North.
Speaking of exile, Louis Joseph Papineau couldn’t even muster support in the United States…
The Americans had nothing but contempt for all of the misfits they used against us. Mackenzie, Papineau, the “Sons of Liberty”, the Fenians–they were all just useful idiots who the Americans knew could be easily manipulated, drilled and sent over the top. They were expendable proxies in America’s never-ending guerrilla war against British North America.
Likewise, the White House has nothing but contempt for the proxies it’s been using in its “War on Terror”. Let’s not waste time assuming that Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton actually give two fifths of a shit about Afghans or Iraqis. They’re expendable. What matters is the maintenance of America’s machstaat status.
From that pic there seems to be a lot of Conservative support from the town of Bedrock.
Red Tory, you have to be one of the funniest people I’ve ever met.
First, I’m going to get my Israeli citizenship next year. Shortly after that, I will be signing on with the Israeli military for three or four years before moving back to Canada.
Second, “chickenhawk” is a lame argument. Do you support fire fighters risking their lives to save people? If so, why aren’t you a fire fighter? You must be a hypocrite! That is the sum total of the chickenhawk argument applied to something else many of us should be able to relate to, but apparently, that simple logic is too difficult for you and your liberal friends to follow.
I stated that if Britain were to invade, our military would be under the control of the crown. I did not state they were invading, nor did I state I believed they would invade. The fact that you can make a connection like that where there is none shows just how delusional you and your readers are. I have an issue with our military swearing an oath to a monarch, because I believe in a fully independent Canada.
What’s most entertaining here is that none of you understand that the title of my blog is a joke against lefties, not truly representative of my beliefs. My beliefs are that of a borderline libertarian with American conservative leanings.
Oh, and if I’m such a fatty, tell me why at the age of 17 I threw 95 kilograms of weight above my head?
http://www.mbweightlifting.org/index.asp?eve=501&pid=3597&sec=4187&too=30
Really, you are all very entertaining. You are incapable of challenging my arguments, yet perfectly capable of ad hominem attacks against me. Sign of a mental weakling, I’m afraid.
Raging Jew Justin Hoffer:
“First, I’m going to get my Israeli citizenship next year. Shortly after that, I will be signing on with the Israeli military for three or four years before moving back to Canada.”
You’d be returning to Canada, Justin? Huh. Over at the Blogging Tories, they refer to people like you as “Canadians of Convenience,” don’t they?
RT, you said:
“CS (or should I call you Isabella?)”
Is CS a woman? When checking their profile it says male & in marketing, etc. Sometimes it seems like there are 2 different people commenting. The one above & then another one, near the end of the day, whose sentences don’t sound complete & who seems like they have been hitting the bottle all day long.
Of course it’s easy to lie on profiles. How did you discover this person is female & can you provide a link, please? This person attacks me frequently when I comment & post at my blog as well so I’d like to know more.
following his blog, Justin lifted a huge boulder to demonstrate his strength then went to the beach to kick sand in weaklings faces.
Oh, and if I’m such a fatty, tell me why at the age of 17 I threw 95 kilograms of weight above my head?
http://www.mbweightlifting.org/index.asp?eve=501&pid=3597&sec=4187&too=30
For the win. Awesome. Just awesome.
Why am I seeing a collage of naked women when I run my cursor over Justin Hoffer’s name? A click takes me to his blog, but not before catching a glimpse of lean and tanned skin.
Let’s get this straight …
A Canadian national who adheres to American-style “conservatism”, is an advocate for a Canadian republic, wants to overthrow the Queen of Canada, and is enlisting in the Israeli Armed Forces claims to be a Canadian patriot ?!
And then Herr Hoffer claims we cannot pick holes in his iron-clad logic ?!
Beyond delusional. I would suggest developmentally-challenged is the marker.
Beyond delusional. I would suggest developmentally-challenged is the marker.
Blame it on American cultural exports from cradle to whatever he’s sleeping in now…probably a race-car bed.
“Blame it on American cultural exports”
keep passing that loonie.
KEvron
Does this mean the British Raj is coming to Canada? Oh goody.
I guess I am the last of the Canadian Young Tories who looked to London for both reference, and as my first sojourn outside of Canada as an adult. It was a given that you looked to England first, before claiming any sort of intellectual sophistication.
Steyn did some time in England with The Spectator prior to becoming a “bumboy” to Dubya. Marsden is beneath comtempt. Frum is purely an embarassment. Sad really …
And Ti-Guy wonders why I see no hope. I see no hope because people like Hoffer are hopeless. They are too stupid to realise that they are stupid. And worse, they are militant about their stupidity.
By the way, what exactly is it about the title “Raging Tory” that’s supposed to drive Liberals up the walls, aside from the ignorant misuse of the term?
“aside from the ignorant misuse of the term?”
no, he got the “rage” part correct. now, if only his doctor can get the dosage right.
KEvron
keep passing that loonie.
It’s not a condemnation of your culture so much as a condemnation of ours…or commerce, most likely. You notice I said cultural exports.
“It was a given that you looked to England first, before claiming any sort of intellectual sophistication.
Unfortunately ATY, Britain isn’t there anymore. Thanks to Thatcher, their Conservative party is just as fouled with American conservatism as our new CPC is, it just took them a bit longer to become fully infected. I felt Cameron was a refreshing leader, a true Tory, and his interviews and bios make him seem so. However the more I read about his MPs and party policies, the more I see they are all just as pro-EU/ anti-Britain, as our CPC is pro-US,/anti-Canadian. I still feel he is a better choice than new-Labour, though that bar is pretty low.
And Ti-Guy wonders why I see no hope.
No, I mostly wonder how long you’ve been in this state of hopelessness. You’re younger than I am, so I imagine you gave up rather early.
I only gave up in 2006.
“You notice I said cultural exports.”
what part of “keep passing that loonie” confounds you?
KEvron
I guess I am the last of the Canadian Young Tories who looked to London for both reference…
Whereas I’m from the demographic that looked to Montreal first…then to London/Paris, then to New York…then lastly, Toronto.. That would have been a better trajectory for the younger Tories, I think. By the time I came of age, London was on the skids.
TG:
I gave-up fairly early, it is true. FTA was the start. By the time Mexico was formalised into NAFTA, I abandoned almost all hope that Canadians cared about Canada.
London was an “ideal”, remember. I suspect that ideal was fading fast by 1963 – the year I was born.
But the ideal of London lived on for quite a while in the hearts of us born to older parents who remembered a Canada much different than the one conjured-up by the baby-boomers.
There were times I lamented the fact that my parents were older than the average for the times – now I realise that this was in fact, a gift. I am grateful for that gift now.
To have been a child of the horrid baby-boomers …. yecch!
What has happened to Montreal since 1976 is a tragedy. Have you seen this week’s Macleans?
what part of “keep passing that loonie” confounds you?
I’m not passing anything. I’m trying to explain it. If it offends you, don’t read it.
I’ll agree on one minor point with Stephen Harper…a lot of Canadians don’t know anything about the US despite claiming great affinity with Americans. What I find laughable is that it’s Canadians like Conservatives and Stephen Harper himself, whose only exposure to the US is export culture, Texan expats and trips to Las Vegas.
So I find it risible that Hoffer here claims he’s more like an American Republican because it’s guaranteed he probably knows very little about the place.
What has happened to Montreal since 1976 is a tragedy. Have you seen this week’s Macleans?
Montreal always gets accused of irreversible decline every 10 years or so. The culture of the city is, however, rooted in decline, bohemianism, creative destruction, etc. etc.
People have been complaining about its crappy infrastructure for years…long before all the English money pulled out in a panic in 1976.
Of course, this time, decline, not just in Montreal but everywhere, may be irreversible.
Fair Enough. Toronto right now is kind of like NYC in 1976, in my opinion …
So, anyone planning on actually have a civil discussion? No? OK, have fun.
When was the last time you were there? It’s really not that bad. The culture itself is the most civil I’ve known it to be in my entire life.
Justin:
Not with morons. No. Not ever. You can’t get your arse to Israel fast enough for me. Not that you will actually go there, you traitor.
Ti-Guy:
Call me a “game-changer” if you will.
So, anyone planning on actually have a civil discussion?
I don’t think anyone’s interested in exposing themselves to temper tantrums from teenagers about how disappointing Canada is after their long experience of it.
Call me a “game-changer” if you will.
I don’t get that. How are you changing the game?
Justin:
Defend your logic then …
“A Canadian national who adheres to American-style “conservatism”, is an advocate for a Canadian republic, wants to overthrow the Queen of Canada, and is enlisting in the Israeli Armed Forces claims to be a Canadian patriot ?!”
I refuse to be civil with idiots like Hoffer.
“So, anyone planning on actually have a civil discussion?”
not even your shrink, i’m willing to wager.
KEvron
“If it offends you, don’t read it.”
if it confounds you….
sheesh.
KEvron
What do I look like, Patrick Ross’s sister? Cause I don’t. Justin, on the other hand…
Justin – is just getting a little attention, he’s going to ride that bitch as long as possible.
Sweet Jesus. 70+ posts of bright, articulate commentors engaging the post-literate (and post-glandular) Quisling Justin, barely forty-eight hours after expending 100+ posts engaging the pre-literate slackjaw Gazzuntite.
What was that about the futility of “educating the ineducable” again?
Justin,
Over our entire history, there has been a series of gradual changes that have appropriated suitable powers here in Canada in order to balance the rise of republicanism against our venerated history of being loyal to the Crown. In fact, we do have a Canadian Crown so much so that it is even technically true that we have a Canadian Royal Family, it just so happens that is the British Royal Family as well. So, we are, in fact, swearing our allegiance to the Queen of Canada whose powers are constitutionally limited and the majority of which are delegated to the Governour General.
Further, it is rather a trivial objection to think we did not view your statement as nothing more than a hypothetical thought experiment to demonstrate the legal and institutional relationships of our system. Your hypothetical about the British invasion is not a suitable nor relevant thought experiment as it ignores some landmark events of how the institution of the Crown and our relationship with Britain has changed over the years. For example you write:
This means that if the British were to invade Canada, our military would, by law, aid the British invasion
This is not true at all, ever since the Statute of Westminster, and to make even further clear, succeeding events like the Letters Patent have given Canada legal autonomy that does not make exceptions. Just because it is Canada, a member of the Commonwealth, it does not follow that legally speaking, Canada forfeits the right of autonomy with respect to military deployment. This autonomy has been respected as early as World War II in which we declared war independently of Britain. In fact, Britain was so grateful that the bright chandelier you see in the Ballroom at Rideau Hall was a gift from them due to our voluntarily entering that war.
But even in a series of highly improbable events that Her Majesty rescinds the 1947 Letters of Patent and modifies the Crown in Canada, the Privy Council would most likely intervene, even if they have to stretch some of the constitutional interpretation, but they would never have to as the institutional history of the Canadian Crown provides enough legal evidence and precedence that our nation’s forces should technically aid Britain’s is not a necessary condition for swearing allegiance to the Crown that is shared with another nation (as that is the current situation now). People may split hairs all they like, this scenario is simply impossible even in the technical, legal, and hypothetical spectrum. Mackenzie King via the Imperial Conferences and the Balfour Declaration of 1926 made absolutely sure there was no room for interpretation. Read the Declaration, it is pretty unequivocal.
This is how I understand our history with the Crown. I invite others to correct me, but I am being charitable here in recognizing the undercurrent of Republicanism that forced some these changes, even against my own personal bias.
cont’d
It is tight rope to walk for the now restored Queen’s Representative in Canada, and it is getting tiresome that no matter what, there is always a series of endless complaints coming in about the Crown and the GG. The worrisome trend is that partisans in Canada have split into either republicans or “Monarchists of Convenience.” The creeping concentration of power in the Executive, a power that can practically override the constitutionally reserved powers of the GG (remember it is alway on the “advice of the PM,” except for “extreme cases”) for almost a century seems to be of no issue, but by golly, the invocation of “God Save Queen” cannot come any sooner when the GG screws up a speech.
The only people, I think, who really give serious thoughts to this are Tories, but since they have real political representation on par the Monarchist League, the issue of the Monarchy has been nothing more than a crutch to advance political ideology as opposed to posing the question in a historical and cultural context and not focusing on minutiae.
* the GG screws up a series of speeches (I fully recognize she did it more than once, but I am amused that the same people dismissed “Wafergate” as a faux scandal as it should only to scream treason at this)
Again, I must apologize for the length, discussing institutional history of the Canadian Crown is very difficult and mindnumbing, and I am pretty sure my summary did it very little justice.
JKG:
Jesus H. What a superbly articulated post.
It is now my happy duty to inform you that the title (with all honours, styles, and accoutrements flowing therefrom) of “Chronic Red-Tory Commenter With Most Indulgent Attitude Toward Neocon Hunter-Gatherers Who Not Only Deserve No Expenditure of Intellectual Energy or Minutes of Our Lives We Shall Never Get Back But Who May Very Well Deserve To Be Threaded Through An Industrial Sized Meat Grinder And Rendered Into Sausage” has been passed from me to you.
This is just an informal announcement of the fact. Your honour shall become actual as soon as Ti-Guy performs the ceremony.
Finally–just a quibble: Borden’s influence, especially during the various conferences immediately after the end of the First World War, had an enormous amount do to with Canada’s movement towards full executive independence from Great Britain–an independence which had been de facto for generations by that time in any case.
SF,
I am humbled by your compliment and honour given that your prose, styling, and insight are envious.
I am naively, at heart, a centrist of sorts, believing that engaging people perhaps would result in fruitful discourse and new conclusions thereby revising even my own opinions (I am trained in biological research so my inclination to revise and self-correct are fairly strong). I suppose that is what makes me a “leftist,” a term that my old English professor would call a “plastic word.” Centrism seems to get a bad reputation these days because it is composed of people who have a combination of beliefs that vary from one person to the next. I suppose that diversity just sickens Conservative partisans who would gladly bask in the self-aggrandizing glow of essentialism and reductionism. My grandfather was a long standing Liberal for the same reason I will cast my lot with the centre or centre-left: He was notoriously anti-establishment, always questioning and formulating new ideas while respecting tradition not out of cynicism but out of the general optimism that humanity can surpasses its boundaries and ghost of its legacy of failures all the while preserving humanity’s traditions that enable growth and evolution to occur.
In any event, I will continue to chime in here and there, but rest assured, my misanthropy might best me. Thus, in some cases, I will save my sanity and simply let the delusions persist without my dense treatises :).
Thank you again for the vote of confidence and added information.
JKG:
The Liberal Party is THE party of the establishment in Canada, and has been so since the 1920’s.
I always get a chuckle when Liberals claim to be anti-establishment. That is merely an American affectation.
Penlan — I really have no idea. To be honest, I was just taking a shot in the dark, going by the name of his/her Sitemeter account.