Friday, November 12, 2004

Follow-ups

First, pursuant to the last paragraph in my Wednesday post, apparently Mark Steyn's hiatus is not indefinite:
Post 25: "[Hugh] Hewitt just said that Mark Steyn is taking a one-month vacation during which he is eschewing participation in all media."

Good to know, even if doctor-ordered rest is the major impetus for this break.

Second, Colby Cosh was instalanched yesterday for this post absolutely destroying "retired CBS drivellist Eric Engberg". Apart from his solidly constructed I'm-rubber-and-you're-glue argument, he also presents a new analogy for TEH INTARWEB which is so clever and disgusting I have pasted it onto my masthead.

Lastly, Jay Jardine (in the comments) notes a couple of omissions from Mama McGuinty's legislative agenda for a better Ontario (including a "prediction" which took less than a day to bear out). So let's recap again. In barely a year in power (is that ever the appropriate word), the Ontario Liberals have imposed or are planning to impose increased restrictions on their citizens in the following areas:
  • Where and when you can smoke
  • What kind of dog you can own
  • What your kids can eat in school
  • When your minor children can drop out of high school
  • Who you can offer money to diagnose your health
  • What you have to wear while bicycling
  • What you can order in a Japanese restaurant
  • What ECE school buses have to be retrofitted with
  • What kind of dangerous wild animals you can shoot
  • How much you can pay to travel on a privately-operated highway
This is getting a bit redundant, but frankly, the point is best made in full list form. And two questions I am reluctant to consider carefully:
  • What would this list look like if Ontario didn't have a big deficit, electricity shortages, a struggling health care system, etc. (i.e. big and serious problems requiring government attention)?
  • If John Tory and the Conservatives came into power, how many of these things would they scrap outright?
The "one-way ratchet" is a popular political metaphor; that's probably because it's so perfectly appropriate.

UPDATE: Not to be out-nannied, Jack Layton steps up to the plate! ("Families want protection from dangerous trans fats," he said, "and the NDP is calling on all parties to provide it.") Bless you, sir.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home