26 March 2010

Another fuzzy-bunny, dead tree media...

..."let's crap on the military" poll... goes horribly wrong...

-- "Do you support a scholarship program for children of dead Canadian soldiers?" --
If we can pay for Karla Homolka to get a degree... gawd... I can't even finish that sentence....

Do your part.

**********

UPDATE: The G&M poll is now closed...

...and curiously it does not show up under the Globe's listing of recent polls. Funny how that works, huh?

I guess they were a little embarrassed by the 81% yes vote. Fortunately, it was linked to another article and can still be seen here.


10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nearly one in five said "no." Appalling

Neo Conservative said...

*
yup... gotta wonder who... i mean, besides the uber-socialist profs at our universities... is getting behind this nonsense.

*

oxygentax said...

The number that agree are roughly equal to the left half of the NDP, Greens and Bloc combined. Need we say more?

Neo Conservative said...

*
"oxygentax says... roughly equal to the left half of the NDP, Greens and Bloc"

well... that wouldn't be a big surprise now... given the positions some folks have taken.

*

Anon1152 said...

How exactly is it a "let's crap on the military" poll? And how exactly did it "go wrong"?

The article repeats the position of both sides without (as far as I can tell) taking a side itself. The poll asks a question about this controversial subject. Opinions expressed in the Poll seem consistent with the balance of opinions noted in the article: a hand full of people expressed concern/disagreement with the scholarship... and nearly everyone else disagreed with them.

Anon1152 said...

Also: You refer to "the uber-socialist profs at our universities... ". Are they all uber-socialist? The letter in question is from 16 professors. Out of (I think) over 1000 instructors...

Neo Conservative said...

*
rarin' fer a tilt, huh '52? sounds like somebody got up on the wrong side of the futon.

sorry dude... long day, i'm tired... but, hey... you could try looking up hyperbole & pundit in the dictionary.

if you really feel like scrappin'... just head on down to pub nite... there's always somebody (political leanings be damned) who'll oblige.

*

Anon1152 said...

Neo says: "...somebody got up on the wrong side of the futon".

Ok. I must concede: that was funny. I think I did "laugh out loud" after reading it. Perhaps this is where I should us the acronym "lol"... but I'd rather not.

I almost shed a tear for my late Futon. (I don't get up on a Futon anymore... and I miss that thing. God knows where it is now. It's a long story. But I'll say no more. I'm saving it for the therapist I'll no doubt need in the near future).

I thought that if anyone woke up on the wrong side of somethingorother, it would be you.

I wasn't angry when I wrote my earlier comment. I'm not angry now. I'm not angry during pub nites. In fact, I regularly hold my own personal (private?) "pub nights" at home. I realize there's a contradiction in terms there somewhere. Maybe I should just be honest and say: "I generally drink alone." [So don't call me a socialist. In highschool--a school near you, I think, given your periodic references to the Belleville Intelligencer--I was once called an "anti-socialist." But I digress...

My point is that I thought that you were the angry (or angrier?) one, insofar as you seemed angry at the Globe and Mail for reasons that seem (to me) to... not exist.

*

hyperbole |hīˈpərbəlē|
noun
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

pundit |ˈpəndit| |ˈpəndət| |ˈpʌndɪt|
noun
1 an expert in a particular subject or field who is frequently called on to give opinions about it to the public : a globe-trotting financial pundit.
2 variant spelling of pandit .
DERIVATIVES
punditry |-trē| |ˈpəndətri| noun (in sense 1) .
ORIGIN from Sanskrit paṇḍita ‘learned.’

***

On a daily basis, I look up words in the dictionary; words I shouldn't need to look up. I always like to double check, though, and often learn new things.

In this case... I [metaphorically] stand by my original comment/question/series of words.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"anon1152 says... I thought that you were the angry (or angrier?) one, insofar as you seemed angry at the Globe and Mail"

okay... i've had my morning coffee & got g-dad settled in front of the fire... (mrs neo is off on a literary adventure).

now, where were we?

so, i'm angry? not sure where you got that. do i smell a little sanctimony there... or maybe just a whiff of kelowna?

let me tell you though, i do object to the current all-encompassing trend towards info-tainment, as opposed to simply providing people with actual news. and please don't tell me you aren't aware of it... it's everywhere... from media talking heads talking about ann coulter "baring her fangs" to cbc showcasing amanda lang's legs through their new clear acrylic furniture.

i guess you sell more papers when you sex stuff up.

as for professors, in the main, being unabashed socialists... i'd say that's a fairly uncontroversial observation... much like pointing out that cops, in general... are not huge supporters of crack pipe distribution programs.

methinks you're just spoiling for a tilt here. and if i took up the cudgel each & every time someone came after me, i'd spend all my time arguing stuff like this.

you are, undeniably, more courteous than my average nemesis... and mrs n likes your style... (perhaps it's a grad school thing)... so i hope that helps, '52... in truth, i just haven't got time for the pain.

*

Neo Conservative said...

a postscript... for the ever-curious anon1152.

fwiw, this blurb is exactly the sort of thing that informs my personal philosophy...

"Kiteley’s pretense of “alarm” leads me to believe that it isn’t ME he is worried about; rather, he seems alarmed by the possibility of some of his fellow travelers seeing his name on my site and not being able to make important intellectual distinctions."

"And he wouldn’t want them questioning his ideological bona fides and purity."


enjoy, my friend, enjoy...

*