It’s been suggested by some media pundits that Dick and Liz Cheney abruptly cancelling their appearance at an upcoming speaking engagement in Toronto due to “security concerns” the other day was nothing more than a publicity stunt to rollover existing ticket holders and hype the “Steynemite!” event featuring controversial author Mark Steyn and another loopy English ex-pat, Michael Coren. Certainly not a theory beyond the realm of plausibility…
Somewhat aside from that, it’s amusing that both Steyn and Coren vehemently promote themselves as champions of free speech – as do their legion of so-called “conservative” supporters, such as SDAMatt2a, the “owner” of the above-noted video. But in reality, do these folks actually “walk the walk” when it comes to the matter of free speech? In my experience, they most certainly do not:
That’s just one glaring example, but I could produce countless more where these phony advocates for free speech don’t practice what they preach.
By the way, I’m not sure why I got “blocked” by this particular individual. I think I made a couple of comments that took issue with remarks made by others, but it was nothing terribly heinous – certainly not of the calibre that would warrant being “blocked” from his channel. Some people, it seems, just can’t tolerate dissenting opinions. Apparently, their idea of “free speech” is limited to that which aligns with their own point of view.
Sun TV’s Michael Coren lambastes the “Occupy” protesters for being “spoiled children of privilege” that are needy, self-indulgent whiners and so on…
I have to admit to experiencing a considerable amount of cognitive dissonance being largely in agreement with his withering assessment of the protesters involved in the Canadian version of this movement.
Michael Coren and Sun TV host Theo Caldwell plumb phenomenal new depths of extreme pettiness to relentlessly savage Barack Obama.
In Wingnuttia, no perceived or imagined slight, no absurdly trivial misstep of protocol it seems can be considered otherwise than as revelatory of the deep character flaws and shortcomings of this uppity radical heathen.
Filed under Obama, Wingnuts
A Harris/Decima poll back at the beginning of May showed that most Canadians thought Stéphane Dion was “weak, uninspiring and unintelligible.” Not exactly a winning combination of attributes for a man aspiring to become the next leader of the country. The bright side, if one can call it that, for Liberals in any case, was that for all of those apparent flaws, people generally found him more “likable” than Stephen Harper. Forty-seven per cent said there was something or other about Dion they didn’t like, compared to 55 per cent who said the same thing about Harper.
That generally lukewarm assessment came to mind when reading Michael Coren’s somewhat conflicted opinion of Dion in this morning’s National Post based on a recent appearance the Liberal leader made on his TV program. By way of damning him with faint praise, Dion is “a profoundly decent man who is a perhaps the most honest leader of his party in living memory,” according to Coren. At the same time however, Dion lacks the required “steel and guile” to be PM. He’s “naïve” and “vulnerable to critique” Coren says — callowness, in his opinion, that he claims is the “product of inexperience.” Apparently, it’s simply beyond belief to someone a profoundly cynical as Coren that a politician might actually be ingenuous rather than, as he seems not only to expect, but to want: a steely, tough-talking, obfuscating liar.
Speaking of which, I wonder when Mr. Harper will be appearing on the program. Perhaps if he does, then we can find more out about his God. Presumably, it’s one that conforms more closely to Coren’s template “of strength, love, judgment and mercy who is the eternal alpha and the omega” rather than the “postmodern godhead of secular niceness” that Dion conjured up in a hapless attempt to make his message more appealing, or perhaps just more comprehensible to the faithful viewers of Coren’s show.