I doubt that the NHL, or the CBC, really care why there are fewer people watching NHL hockey, but unless they missed it, here's a BIG reason: the chatters, the "analysts," the talking heads.
Don Cherry is one person that television can do without, but commentators like MIKE MILBURY are another. In the context of less violence in hockey, he referred to the "pansification" of the game.
This sort of macho drivel is not acceptable today, and never will be. Even when this word was more commonly used, anyone with a sense of respect for others, didn't use it. In fact, they shunned it.
Language definitely evolves; we agree to that. So, if the word has evolved, just what does he think it meant before, and what does it mean NOW?
Come on, Milbury, let's hear your explanation.
This macho, "it's-just-the-boys"-being-themselves stuff must stop. That is just an excuse for poor, disrespectful, thoughtless, self-serving bad behaviour.
My letter to the CBC is on its way. Send yours. Today.
----------------------
Gay rights group outraged by CBC's use of 'pansification'
WILLIAM HOUSTON
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
January 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM EST
A gay rights group has complained to the CBC about the use of the term "pansification" by Hockey Night in Canada commentators.
Hockey Night commentator Mike Milbury coined the expression to describe how the NHL would be softened should the league heed calls to ban fighting. He has used "pansification" at least twice on Hockey Night this season, in November and again on Jan. 17. His colleague, Don Cherry, has also made reference to it.
Egale Canada, a gay advocacy organization, protested last week. But Scott Moore, the head of CBC Sports, said through a network spokesman yesterday that commentators are free to make their own decisions whether to use the expression.
"That's ridiculous," said Helen Kennedy, the executive director of Egale Canada. "So it's okay for people to go around using these slurs — derogatory, stereotypical terms against a group in society? That's outrageous."
Network spokesman Jeff Keay said neither Milbury nor Cherry intended to offend homosexuals by using "pansification," a derivative of the word pansy.
"The point is, it was no way intended to be a reflection on or offensive to gay people," Keay said. "I think the colloquial use of the term was something they didn't associate with gay people. The way the language evolves over time, 20 or 30 years ago it would have been seen, reasonably enough, as a direct slur against gay people.
"But I think with usage now, I'm not sure the association is so immediate."
Kennedy wasn't buying the explanation.
"Words like pansification just further the stereotype and perpetuate the homophobic stereotype in our society," she said yesterday.
Milbury joined the CBC last summer after working as a hockey commentator for TSN. A former NHL player, coach and general manager, he is also a commentator for NBC, where he talked about the "pansification" of hockey on the Jan. 18 NHL telecast.
A Harris-Decima poll found that 54 per cent of Canadians believe the NHL should ban fighting, while 40 per cent favoured continuing to penalize it with five-minute major penalties.
Egale Canada does not have a position on fighting in the NHL. Egale is an acronym for Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere. The Ottawa-based organization was founded in 1986 and reports a membership of more than 4,000.
Kennedy complained by telephone to network ombudsman Vince Carlin last week and said she followed up in writing. However, the ombudsman's office referred her to Moore's office.
"Programs always have the right to respond first," Carlin said. "And if the person is not happy with it, then they can ask for me to make an independent review."
Carlin said he isn't sure that he will address the issue. "To tell you the truth, it's on the margin," he said. "I generally handle journalism and tend not to handle sports. But there have been occasions where it is indeed journalism or something's been done. … To be honest, I haven't decided whether this is in my wheelhouse or not."
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Nearly Right......
Here's how Obama can raise Harper's game
by Lawrence Martin, the Globe and Mail, January 15, 2008.
Stephen Harper has about as little in common with Barack Obama as John Diefenbaker had with John Kennedy.
It's not just that one is liberal and the other conservative. They clash on myriad levels. One's a visionary, the other more of a plodder. One's a renowned communicator, the other spent almost his first term trying not to communicate.
The Obama approach is that of a consensus builder. The Harper approach is divide and conquer. The Obama world view is of one family. Mr. Harper inclines more toward the "clash of civilizations" template. The new president is about to shut down Guantanamo; the Prime Minister didn't have much of a problem with it. The new president is soon to shut down the Iraq war; Mr. Harper didn't have much of a problem with it.
In style, Mr. Obama is GQ, Mr. Harper Rotary Club. Mr. Obama is a fine wine, Mr. Harper lime juice. Mr. Obama is relaxed, Mr. Harper suspicious. One is inspirational, the other isn't. One makes Americans feel proud. The other makes Canadians - except when he's almost overthrowing his own government - feel indifferent.
Related Articles
Mr. Harper and other leaders suffer unfairly in comparison to Mr. Obama. The new president's gaining all these glorious notices without even having served a day on the job.
But what's striking about the incoming American leader is that he's probably closer to the Canadian mainstream than the Canadian leader, who's closer to the Calgary or Texas mainstream.
As might be expected, Mr. Obama has more similarities to Michael Ignatieff. From his years at Harvard and elsewhere, the Liberal Leader has several close contacts in the Obama camp and will no doubt, with time, be cultivating them.
Put it all together and you might get the impression that Mr. Harper is dreading the advent of Mr. Obama. But you could be wrong. Mr. Obama's arrival has Canadian Conservatives optimistic. In contrast to George W. Bush, who was a barnacle, the Democrat presents Mr. Harper with a big opportunity.
If the PM plays it properly, he can share in Mr. Obama's winds of change. By building rapport with the new president, he can establish for himself a more moderate, modern and attractive leadership personality.
Economic conditions are already forcing a commonality of approach from the two leaders. Deficit spending, stimulus spending and tax cuts are the way each is going. Mr. Harper's outlays will be more along the lines of a dime-store New Deal than Mr. Obama's, but that's because we don't need as much of an overhaul.
On the environment, each favours a cap-and-trade system to combat global warming. The PM has moved slowly on this issue, but Mr. Obama's arrival prompted him to quickly propose a mutual accord on the environment. If he can be seen to be at one with Mr. Obama on this issue, it will help Canadians forget his three years of foot-dragging.
On border barriers, a problem Mr. Harper unsuccessfully raised with Mr. Bush, he should be able to make more headway with the new president. Mr. Obama campaigned against Republican politics of fear, which has led to America's putting up walls around the wall, including along the Canadian border.
Mr. Obama has a vested interest in quickly building rapport with the Harper government. One of his priorities is getting Americans off their dependence on foreign oil from unstable states. For that, he needs Canada. His style is bipartisan, so he won't come at Mr. Harper with a closed mind.
The potential is there for Mr. Harper to bask in some of the Obama limelight for as long as it lasts. The two leaders will never be buddies. At root, Mr. Harper is too different for that to happen.
But if he can be seen as working shoulder to shoulder with the new president in fighting the great recession, he will succeed in doing what he cares about most -- scoring political points. His finding common cause with the exalted American liberal would be too much for Canadian Liberals to bear.
-30-
Harper won't be able to find a common thread.
Obama doesn't need to find a common thread.
Obama won't like Harper.
We'll see Harper's smarmy smile throughout. If he thinks that Obama won't see through him, his eyesight is impaired.
by Lawrence Martin, the Globe and Mail, January 15, 2008.
Stephen Harper has about as little in common with Barack Obama as John Diefenbaker had with John Kennedy.
It's not just that one is liberal and the other conservative. They clash on myriad levels. One's a visionary, the other more of a plodder. One's a renowned communicator, the other spent almost his first term trying not to communicate.
The Obama approach is that of a consensus builder. The Harper approach is divide and conquer. The Obama world view is of one family. Mr. Harper inclines more toward the "clash of civilizations" template. The new president is about to shut down Guantanamo; the Prime Minister didn't have much of a problem with it. The new president is soon to shut down the Iraq war; Mr. Harper didn't have much of a problem with it.
In style, Mr. Obama is GQ, Mr. Harper Rotary Club. Mr. Obama is a fine wine, Mr. Harper lime juice. Mr. Obama is relaxed, Mr. Harper suspicious. One is inspirational, the other isn't. One makes Americans feel proud. The other makes Canadians - except when he's almost overthrowing his own government - feel indifferent.
Related Articles
Mr. Harper and other leaders suffer unfairly in comparison to Mr. Obama. The new president's gaining all these glorious notices without even having served a day on the job.
But what's striking about the incoming American leader is that he's probably closer to the Canadian mainstream than the Canadian leader, who's closer to the Calgary or Texas mainstream.
As might be expected, Mr. Obama has more similarities to Michael Ignatieff. From his years at Harvard and elsewhere, the Liberal Leader has several close contacts in the Obama camp and will no doubt, with time, be cultivating them.
Put it all together and you might get the impression that Mr. Harper is dreading the advent of Mr. Obama. But you could be wrong. Mr. Obama's arrival has Canadian Conservatives optimistic. In contrast to George W. Bush, who was a barnacle, the Democrat presents Mr. Harper with a big opportunity.
If the PM plays it properly, he can share in Mr. Obama's winds of change. By building rapport with the new president, he can establish for himself a more moderate, modern and attractive leadership personality.
Economic conditions are already forcing a commonality of approach from the two leaders. Deficit spending, stimulus spending and tax cuts are the way each is going. Mr. Harper's outlays will be more along the lines of a dime-store New Deal than Mr. Obama's, but that's because we don't need as much of an overhaul.
On the environment, each favours a cap-and-trade system to combat global warming. The PM has moved slowly on this issue, but Mr. Obama's arrival prompted him to quickly propose a mutual accord on the environment. If he can be seen to be at one with Mr. Obama on this issue, it will help Canadians forget his three years of foot-dragging.
On border barriers, a problem Mr. Harper unsuccessfully raised with Mr. Bush, he should be able to make more headway with the new president. Mr. Obama campaigned against Republican politics of fear, which has led to America's putting up walls around the wall, including along the Canadian border.
Mr. Obama has a vested interest in quickly building rapport with the Harper government. One of his priorities is getting Americans off their dependence on foreign oil from unstable states. For that, he needs Canada. His style is bipartisan, so he won't come at Mr. Harper with a closed mind.
The potential is there for Mr. Harper to bask in some of the Obama limelight for as long as it lasts. The two leaders will never be buddies. At root, Mr. Harper is too different for that to happen.
But if he can be seen as working shoulder to shoulder with the new president in fighting the great recession, he will succeed in doing what he cares about most -- scoring political points. His finding common cause with the exalted American liberal would be too much for Canadian Liberals to bear.
-30-
Harper won't be able to find a common thread.
Obama doesn't need to find a common thread.
Obama won't like Harper.
We'll see Harper's smarmy smile throughout. If he thinks that Obama won't see through him, his eyesight is impaired.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Mr Harper, Meet Mr Obama
Time for Mr Harper to be on his best behaviour and to put on a genuine and warm smile.
Everyone seems to be offering Mr Harper a few tippers, so here goes:
1. Be genuine.
2. Be warm and friendly.
3. Don't fake a smile; when you do that, it comes across as patronizing
4. Invite Mr Obama back with his family, for a few days in Ottawa or at the lake....that's Harrington Lake.
5. Don't press any issues with him. This is a "getting to know my neighbour" visit, not a visit to lay down the law or press ANY point except that we are neighbours.
6. Relax!!!! Lighten up!
Further to to this...please don't wear that suit and tie that you recently wore in Vancouver. It is too formal, looks like your top-of-the-line power suit, and doesn't convey the right image for this occasion (did it in Vancouver?). And for heaven's sake don't wear BROWN!!!
Everyone seems to be offering Mr Harper a few tippers, so here goes:
1. Be genuine.
2. Be warm and friendly.
3. Don't fake a smile; when you do that, it comes across as patronizing
4. Invite Mr Obama back with his family, for a few days in Ottawa or at the lake....that's Harrington Lake.
5. Don't press any issues with him. This is a "getting to know my neighbour" visit, not a visit to lay down the law or press ANY point except that we are neighbours.
6. Relax!!!! Lighten up!
Further to to this...please don't wear that suit and tie that you recently wore in Vancouver. It is too formal, looks like your top-of-the-line power suit, and doesn't convey the right image for this occasion (did it in Vancouver?). And for heaven's sake don't wear BROWN!!!
Monday, January 12, 2009
Canadia Core Values
In a letter to the editor in The Globe and Mail this morning, a fellow named Owen Leitch writes from Toronto that "innocent people {are} dying by the hundreds {in Gaza}."
"We in Canada should stick to our core values of peace, tolerance and respect for human rights...."
How seldom we read in the newspapers about Canada's "core values." The word 'values' is bandied about, without the speaker/writer really knowing what he/she is talking about. It sounds nice, it seems to get attention, it apparently makes the speaker appear knowledgeable.
One definition of "values" is our "deeply held beliefs." And 'core values' are those few that are at the heart of a person or country (in this case). There aren't lot of core values; there are few. But Leitch hits it correctly when he says that there are three core values which are at the heart of this country: peace, tolerance and respect for human rights. Without these, we would not be what we have become.
And that is why some Canadians are so opposed to the change in our armed forces, from a group who act to maintain peace, to a group that far too often is the aggressor.
"We in Canada should stick to our core values of peace, tolerance and respect for human rights...."
How seldom we read in the newspapers about Canada's "core values." The word 'values' is bandied about, without the speaker/writer really knowing what he/she is talking about. It sounds nice, it seems to get attention, it apparently makes the speaker appear knowledgeable.
One definition of "values" is our "deeply held beliefs." And 'core values' are those few that are at the heart of a person or country (in this case). There aren't lot of core values; there are few. But Leitch hits it correctly when he says that there are three core values which are at the heart of this country: peace, tolerance and respect for human rights. Without these, we would not be what we have become.
And that is why some Canadians are so opposed to the change in our armed forces, from a group who act to maintain peace, to a group that far too often is the aggressor.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
A Wonderful Respite
It was a blessing that Canadian politicians took a break over Christmas and the New Year holidays. It was refreshing not to hear complaints, criticism, political spin, and verbal beating on others.
And, last night, the victory of the Canadian men's under 20 hockey team at the World Junior Championships gave everyone a chance to be positive. The game was well-played, the enthusiasm of the young men almost contagious, and the patriotism palpable. What a great way to start 2009! Thanks to the athletes and all the support staff that assisted them through a long try-out period and training camp and training.
Let's hope that the litany of doom and gloom will be less, and politicians will realize how much we enjoyed their hiatus!
And, last night, the victory of the Canadian men's under 20 hockey team at the World Junior Championships gave everyone a chance to be positive. The game was well-played, the enthusiasm of the young men almost contagious, and the patriotism palpable. What a great way to start 2009! Thanks to the athletes and all the support staff that assisted them through a long try-out period and training camp and training.
Let's hope that the litany of doom and gloom will be less, and politicians will realize how much we enjoyed their hiatus!
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Admiral Landymore
I REMEMBER: BILL LANDYMORE
As captain of HMCS Iroquois, he knew every sailor by name
CHRISTOPHER PRATT
December 27, 2008
Christopher Pratt, captain (RCN) retired, writes about Admiral Bill Landymore, whose obituary appeared Dec. 15.
Not one person who knew him would be able to write a full memoir of Bill Landymore's long and eventful life. Although short in stature (as many admirals seem to have been), he was oversized in every other dimension, from the depth of his parade ground voice to the breadth of his generous heart. His classmates at RMC nicknamed him "shadow," but he was no shadow in real life, in which he was always the embodiment of all three elements of the RMC motto: "Truth, Duty, Valour."
Above all, he lived in the knowledge that morale is the key to success. No "popularity Jack," he was instead imbued with the "Nelson touch," that ability to motivate and bring out the very best in his men. He worked in subtle ways to make the rigours of life at sea more tolerable. While in command of HMCS Iroquois in Korean waters, he could address every sailor on board by name and knew their family circumstances.
Small wonder that his sudden forced retirement came as a shock to the fleet. After defence minister Paul Hellyer told him to retire, he considered taking drastic action. On the flight back to Halifax, he told me that he had thought of asking for a court martial, which would have brought the whole conflict into the open. He was prevented by the thought that might result in destroying the very thing he was trying to preserve - the identity of the navy during the process of unification.
Nobody who was there will forget the scene in the Halifax dockyard on the day of his departure. Had he so much as lifted a finger, the sailors would have walked ashore in protest. Instead, in his farewell message (I still have his handwritten draft), he told the sailors to stand fast and do their best to keep the naval spirit alive. The sendoff was tumultuous. Flags flew from every yardarm, sailors cheered and the band played. It was a day in history.
Lacking self importance, he laid aside his rank after his retirement and asked to be called Bill. And behind his bluff exterior lay a mind that was always ready to have some fun. One time, he startled a meeting of the staid Naval Officers Association in Toronto by arriving in a Beatles wig.
He spent his retirement on his farm overlooking the sea, and gave himself to raising funds for charities and serving on a hospital board. And even when he himself became a hospital patient, with his hearing gone and his memory sometimes failing, his courtesy never failed. Not long ago, a friend of mine who is a retired chief petty officer stopped by to pay a visit. The admiral looked at him and announced, "McBride ... radar plotter ... Iroquois."
Fraser McKee of Toronto also writes about Bill Landymore.
About three years after his spectacular firing by Paul Hellyer, I was serving as the local president of the Naval Officers Association and decided to call Adm. Landymore to see if he would be a speaker at a forthcoming dinner and review his feelings after events.
I spoke to Mrs. Landymore in Nova Scotia who said he wasn't available just then. When pressed, she advised that he was at Grace Hospital in Halifax. When I expressed concern, she laughed and said he was working in the laundry. It seems the hospital services staff were on strike, and the board members, including the admiral, were voluntarily filling in.
When I did reach him a few days later, he said he no longer discussed unification publicly. "That would simply cause problems for the current maritime commander," he told me. "I've made my point, and the commander's job is difficult enough without me adding fuel to the fire."
Not only was Bill Landymore a dedicated naval commander, but he was prepared to step in and help at any level and yet not contribute to the difficulties of others.
from The Globe and Mail, December 27 2008.
---------------
I well remember my father speaking of Bill Landymore. Landymore was at RMC at the same time that my father was. In fact, Landymore might have been my father's "recruit." In those days, the senior cadets took recruits under their wing for a year, to help them acclimatize to RMC, and to offer guidance. Perhaps they still do that.
Landymore had a reputation, not of being "bad" but of being one who undertook/led schinnagans! He also was well-regarded by the class that my father was in.
The remembrances in The Globe are interesting. Pratt's comment that Landymore knew that "morale is the key to success" is a useful thought that today's Canadian leaders might keep in mind.
As captain of HMCS Iroquois, he knew every sailor by name
CHRISTOPHER PRATT
December 27, 2008
Christopher Pratt, captain (RCN) retired, writes about Admiral Bill Landymore, whose obituary appeared Dec. 15.
Not one person who knew him would be able to write a full memoir of Bill Landymore's long and eventful life. Although short in stature (as many admirals seem to have been), he was oversized in every other dimension, from the depth of his parade ground voice to the breadth of his generous heart. His classmates at RMC nicknamed him "shadow," but he was no shadow in real life, in which he was always the embodiment of all three elements of the RMC motto: "Truth, Duty, Valour."
Above all, he lived in the knowledge that morale is the key to success. No "popularity Jack," he was instead imbued with the "Nelson touch," that ability to motivate and bring out the very best in his men. He worked in subtle ways to make the rigours of life at sea more tolerable. While in command of HMCS Iroquois in Korean waters, he could address every sailor on board by name and knew their family circumstances.
Small wonder that his sudden forced retirement came as a shock to the fleet. After defence minister Paul Hellyer told him to retire, he considered taking drastic action. On the flight back to Halifax, he told me that he had thought of asking for a court martial, which would have brought the whole conflict into the open. He was prevented by the thought that might result in destroying the very thing he was trying to preserve - the identity of the navy during the process of unification.
Nobody who was there will forget the scene in the Halifax dockyard on the day of his departure. Had he so much as lifted a finger, the sailors would have walked ashore in protest. Instead, in his farewell message (I still have his handwritten draft), he told the sailors to stand fast and do their best to keep the naval spirit alive. The sendoff was tumultuous. Flags flew from every yardarm, sailors cheered and the band played. It was a day in history.
Lacking self importance, he laid aside his rank after his retirement and asked to be called Bill. And behind his bluff exterior lay a mind that was always ready to have some fun. One time, he startled a meeting of the staid Naval Officers Association in Toronto by arriving in a Beatles wig.
He spent his retirement on his farm overlooking the sea, and gave himself to raising funds for charities and serving on a hospital board. And even when he himself became a hospital patient, with his hearing gone and his memory sometimes failing, his courtesy never failed. Not long ago, a friend of mine who is a retired chief petty officer stopped by to pay a visit. The admiral looked at him and announced, "McBride ... radar plotter ... Iroquois."
Fraser McKee of Toronto also writes about Bill Landymore.
About three years after his spectacular firing by Paul Hellyer, I was serving as the local president of the Naval Officers Association and decided to call Adm. Landymore to see if he would be a speaker at a forthcoming dinner and review his feelings after events.
I spoke to Mrs. Landymore in Nova Scotia who said he wasn't available just then. When pressed, she advised that he was at Grace Hospital in Halifax. When I expressed concern, she laughed and said he was working in the laundry. It seems the hospital services staff were on strike, and the board members, including the admiral, were voluntarily filling in.
When I did reach him a few days later, he said he no longer discussed unification publicly. "That would simply cause problems for the current maritime commander," he told me. "I've made my point, and the commander's job is difficult enough without me adding fuel to the fire."
Not only was Bill Landymore a dedicated naval commander, but he was prepared to step in and help at any level and yet not contribute to the difficulties of others.
from The Globe and Mail, December 27 2008.
---------------
I well remember my father speaking of Bill Landymore. Landymore was at RMC at the same time that my father was. In fact, Landymore might have been my father's "recruit." In those days, the senior cadets took recruits under their wing for a year, to help them acclimatize to RMC, and to offer guidance. Perhaps they still do that.
Landymore had a reputation, not of being "bad" but of being one who undertook/led schinnagans! He also was well-regarded by the class that my father was in.
The remembrances in The Globe are interesting. Pratt's comment that Landymore knew that "morale is the key to success" is a useful thought that today's Canadian leaders might keep in mind.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Christmas
Christmas is a special time, a religious holiday.
Pope Benedict's comments in his Christmas message are appalling. To liken homosexuality to global warming is probably the most amazing, and ridiculous comparison made in all 2008.
If he thinks there is sin in the first, perhaps he might comment upon sin in the latter. The idea that companies deposit very harmful emissions into the environment, and do this thoughtlesssly, is sinful. And do it all with little regard for others.
A person's orientation is private. Contributing to global warming is public. One has no impact upon others, while the other impacts others for generations.
One is a force for good, while the other is a force for bad.
Just think about it.
Pope Benedict's comments in his Christmas message are appalling. To liken homosexuality to global warming is probably the most amazing, and ridiculous comparison made in all 2008.
If he thinks there is sin in the first, perhaps he might comment upon sin in the latter. The idea that companies deposit very harmful emissions into the environment, and do this thoughtlesssly, is sinful. And do it all with little regard for others.
A person's orientation is private. Contributing to global warming is public. One has no impact upon others, while the other impacts others for generations.
One is a force for good, while the other is a force for bad.
Just think about it.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
It's a Matter of Principle
OGL (Our Glorious Leader, according to John Doyle of The Globe) continues his unprincipled bossing around of Canadians.
This man said he would not appoint Senators; they had to be elected.
Yesterday, he appointed 18 new Senators, including two people who consider themselves (and are considered by others) to be journalists. It's no surprise that Wallin and Duffy are closet Conservatives, but it's pretty blatent not only to appoint them, but for them to accept appointment. Their status has plummeted in the eyes of Canadians.
One wonders what other countries think of Canada, if they think of the country at all.
There are few mentions of Canada on CBC Overnight, a fine program that brings news, commentary and info from other public broadcasters to Canadians on a daily basis. OGL would be well-advised to listen to the radio overnight for even one night, to hear what other countries, like Germany, Australia, Great Britain, are doing and thinking.
Canada is small potatoes in their eyes. And no wonder, since the current PM is an unprincipled bully.
This man said he would not appoint Senators; they had to be elected.
Yesterday, he appointed 18 new Senators, including two people who consider themselves (and are considered by others) to be journalists. It's no surprise that Wallin and Duffy are closet Conservatives, but it's pretty blatent not only to appoint them, but for them to accept appointment. Their status has plummeted in the eyes of Canadians.
One wonders what other countries think of Canada, if they think of the country at all.
There are few mentions of Canada on CBC Overnight, a fine program that brings news, commentary and info from other public broadcasters to Canadians on a daily basis. OGL would be well-advised to listen to the radio overnight for even one night, to hear what other countries, like Germany, Australia, Great Britain, are doing and thinking.
Canada is small potatoes in their eyes. And no wonder, since the current PM is an unprincipled bully.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Barack Obama's Inauguration
It is disappointing to read that Obama has chosen Rick Warren for an invocation at his inauguration. In fact, it is very upsetting.
Warren is anti-abortion and anti-gays/lesbians, and he makes no secret of his opinions.
Perhaps we expect too much of Obama, but surely in this day and age, he could select someone who supported the right of women and men to have an abortion, should it be their choice, and marry someone of the same sex.
If he is courting a particular sector of the American people for political reasons, it is disappointing. He HAS been elected President. He doesn't have to cater to any constituency.
One wonders if he is going to change his stance on issues, like the Canadian PM did after HE got elected (with a minority). Let's hope not.
Warren is anti-abortion and anti-gays/lesbians, and he makes no secret of his opinions.
Perhaps we expect too much of Obama, but surely in this day and age, he could select someone who supported the right of women and men to have an abortion, should it be their choice, and marry someone of the same sex.
If he is courting a particular sector of the American people for political reasons, it is disappointing. He HAS been elected President. He doesn't have to cater to any constituency.
One wonders if he is going to change his stance on issues, like the Canadian PM did after HE got elected (with a minority). Let's hope not.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
No More Senate Appointments
That WAS the position of Stephen Harper before he got power. Talk.
How power changes one's actions.
In the Globe and Mail this morning, two university professors (in a letter to the editor) suggested that IF Mr Harper is going to fill the 18 seats (and they do not say that he should), the seats should be filled with 18 women.
Now, there's a great idea! The percentage of women in the Senate would still be less than 50, but it would be a great improvement.
No one should doubt that Mr Harper could find 18 Alliance/Conservatives to appoint.
How power changes one's actions.
In the Globe and Mail this morning, two university professors (in a letter to the editor) suggested that IF Mr Harper is going to fill the 18 seats (and they do not say that he should), the seats should be filled with 18 women.
Now, there's a great idea! The percentage of women in the Senate would still be less than 50, but it would be a great improvement.
No one should doubt that Mr Harper could find 18 Alliance/Conservatives to appoint.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Stephen Harper's Place in History
I'd love to be here in 30 years to read what historians have to say about Stephen Harper's place in Canadian history. He will probably go down as even less popular and more disliked than Brian Mulroney.
The interesting questions are these: why is he so Machavillian? what does he think he is accomplishing? why does he have so little regard for this once-great nation? why does he need such control and apparent power?
We will recover from whatever he does that is hurtful to Canada, but it will retard our growth, our standing in the world, and our ability to help less fortunate countries.
That's a pretty sad part of his legacy.
The interesting questions are these: why is he so Machavillian? what does he think he is accomplishing? why does he have so little regard for this once-great nation? why does he need such control and apparent power?
We will recover from whatever he does that is hurtful to Canada, but it will retard our growth, our standing in the world, and our ability to help less fortunate countries.
That's a pretty sad part of his legacy.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Compromise?
This morning on CBC Overnight, in the segment from Albania, a man spoke about the work of their government, which is a coalition.
One sentence stood out: "Compromise does not mean persuading the other side to YOUR position."
I wonder if Stephen Harper heard that??!
One sentence stood out: "Compromise does not mean persuading the other side to YOUR position."
I wonder if Stephen Harper heard that??!
Friday, December 05, 2008
Afghanistan...3 more Canadians die
News just in the last hour that three Canadian troops died this morning in Afghanistan.
I wonder if Ottawa politicians pause to reflect when they hear this.
Do they think what they have been squabbling over (do we really know?) for the last few days is more important than other issues that Canada is involved in? Like the war? Like our peace missions? Like the thousands who are now out of work, and who, at their age, are unlikely to EVER have another job?
Perspective.
When these politicians get to the Pearly Gates, do they think that they will be asked if they ever were PM or if they ever governed Canada? Not very bloody likely.
I wonder if Ottawa politicians pause to reflect when they hear this.
Do they think what they have been squabbling over (do we really know?) for the last few days is more important than other issues that Canada is involved in? Like the war? Like our peace missions? Like the thousands who are now out of work, and who, at their age, are unlikely to EVER have another job?
Perspective.
When these politicians get to the Pearly Gates, do they think that they will be asked if they ever were PM or if they ever governed Canada? Not very bloody likely.
Why Is He so bitter and Angry?
I sure hope that some fine grad students are studying the Prime Minister.
It would be interesting to know how he got to be so angry and bitter. Where did this come from in his background?
Does he deal with his family this way? Imagine being one of his children, and doing something that made him mad.
Stephen Harper has not demonstrated the interest or ability to work co-ooperatively with anybody (perhaps not even members of his own party) throughout his political career. I can't see him changing at his age and stage in life. He couldn't even work with Preston Manning.
This isn't a hopeful situation.
Canadians are upset. This is OUR country that the PM and other parties are "playing" with, and we don't like it.
Politicans, take a break. Have some eggnog and don't talk about what you have created until the end of the year. Then, make a New Year's resolution that you will look for common ground, you will respect everyone, you will converse, and you won't raise your voice...anywhere, including in the House.
That's the easy part.
The next steps are to make a public statement to your constituents and the country, that you have made this resolution. AND, that if you break the resolution, you will resign your seat.
The honourable thing is to promise something, and explain the consequences of not fulfilling that promise. THAT is the ethical thing to do.
There has been little discussion about the ethics of the current situation. For the first time , there is a letter to the editor in The Globe in which the writer uses the word "ethics."
Don't the principals in this rhubarb see anything related to ethics in it?
Those of us who are interested in ethical behaviour, and have done a bit of study on it (in my case, in sports), wonder if these politicians consider their behaviour to be "ethical."
I have plenty of time these days to reflect. Yesterday, I wondered about Stephen Harper's ability to reconcile his blatent lying with his religious beliefs. Is there a "guideline" in his religion that says anything about being truthful? Being honest?
One of the fundamentals in the Christian faith is adherence to the Ten Commandments. I truly wonder how the Commandments fit into Mr Harper's philosophical and/or spiritual paradigm. Perhaps they don't, and that is why many of us find his behaviour incomprehensible.
It would be interesting to know how he got to be so angry and bitter. Where did this come from in his background?
Does he deal with his family this way? Imagine being one of his children, and doing something that made him mad.
Stephen Harper has not demonstrated the interest or ability to work co-ooperatively with anybody (perhaps not even members of his own party) throughout his political career. I can't see him changing at his age and stage in life. He couldn't even work with Preston Manning.
This isn't a hopeful situation.
Canadians are upset. This is OUR country that the PM and other parties are "playing" with, and we don't like it.
Politicans, take a break. Have some eggnog and don't talk about what you have created until the end of the year. Then, make a New Year's resolution that you will look for common ground, you will respect everyone, you will converse, and you won't raise your voice...anywhere, including in the House.
That's the easy part.
The next steps are to make a public statement to your constituents and the country, that you have made this resolution. AND, that if you break the resolution, you will resign your seat.
The honourable thing is to promise something, and explain the consequences of not fulfilling that promise. THAT is the ethical thing to do.
There has been little discussion about the ethics of the current situation. For the first time , there is a letter to the editor in The Globe in which the writer uses the word "ethics."
Don't the principals in this rhubarb see anything related to ethics in it?
Those of us who are interested in ethical behaviour, and have done a bit of study on it (in my case, in sports), wonder if these politicians consider their behaviour to be "ethical."
I have plenty of time these days to reflect. Yesterday, I wondered about Stephen Harper's ability to reconcile his blatent lying with his religious beliefs. Is there a "guideline" in his religion that says anything about being truthful? Being honest?
One of the fundamentals in the Christian faith is adherence to the Ten Commandments. I truly wonder how the Commandments fit into Mr Harper's philosophical and/or spiritual paradigm. Perhaps they don't, and that is why many of us find his behaviour incomprehensible.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Return of the GG
I hope when Steve pounds on the front door of the GG, she welcomes him with these words: "Welcome, Mr Prime Minister. Please wait in this ante-room until you settle down. I won't talk to you while you are yelling and screaming, and have lost perspective. Press this little button when you are ready. I'll send in something to eat later, and a sleeping bag later tonight."
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
"You Are Playing A Very Dangerous Game"
This, from Stephen Harper, last Friday in the House.
This "game" was started by Harper, and it will be finished when he goes down in Canadian history as the worst, most deceitful PM that the country ever had.
It won't be long before elected Alliance/Conservative MPs start leaking info and expressing their view about their party's leader. It's impossible to believe that all those faces behind the PM on TV agree with him, and support what he has done and is doing. Some of them are going to crack soon, and the sooner the better. Perhaps then, Stephen Harper will resign as their leader, as Canada's PM, and a more moderate, concilliatory leader of the Alliance/Conservative party will emerge. One of the "old" Conservative line and not one of the red-necked Alliance members.
Let's hope.
This "game" was started by Harper, and it will be finished when he goes down in Canadian history as the worst, most deceitful PM that the country ever had.
It won't be long before elected Alliance/Conservative MPs start leaking info and expressing their view about their party's leader. It's impossible to believe that all those faces behind the PM on TV agree with him, and support what he has done and is doing. Some of them are going to crack soon, and the sooner the better. Perhaps then, Stephen Harper will resign as their leader, as Canada's PM, and a more moderate, concilliatory leader of the Alliance/Conservative party will emerge. One of the "old" Conservative line and not one of the red-necked Alliance members.
Let's hope.
Monday, December 01, 2008
The PC Party Should Rise Again
Never will I be mistaken for a conservative. Period.
But, the Alliance/Conservative Party of 2008 should give impetus to members of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada to get their "old" party going again, sell memberships, insist that their members tear up their present "Conservative" party cards, and start being vocal.
The PC Party wasn't malicious and autocratic.
The Alliance Party, under the cloak of the Conservative Party, is all this and more.
Let's hope that the backroom "boys" and "girls" are planning a quick resurgence of the old PC Party.
But, the Alliance/Conservative Party of 2008 should give impetus to members of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada to get their "old" party going again, sell memberships, insist that their members tear up their present "Conservative" party cards, and start being vocal.
The PC Party wasn't malicious and autocratic.
The Alliance Party, under the cloak of the Conservative Party, is all this and more.
Let's hope that the backroom "boys" and "girls" are planning a quick resurgence of the old PC Party.
A Positive Front-page Story
On a day when the PM is at his worst (well, let's hope it is his worst), and Canadian politicians are in a feisty mood, the Whig Standard runs a positive, hopeful story above the fold on the front page.
Queen Street United Church in Kingston is facing a $1 million repair/renovation bill. Realizing that that kind of money isn't within their realm of possibility, they have put their church, their adjacent houses and property on the market, for $1.45 million.
Parishioners are actively exploring, along with St Margaret's Church, the possibility of coming together to form one strong church at the location of St Margaret's on Sir John A Macdonald Blvd.
The Whig's story, written by reporter Jorden Press, is a positive look at their day together yesterday, and the church members most positive steps to build one strong church. The two churches have taken advice from experts, it appears, on how to affect change, what to do to forge one organization from two. There's lots written on this topic, and it seems that it has been heeded.
No doubt is is difficult to lose one's church. It is something that I can't imagine. In Saskatoon where I held a senior position in the Anglican Cathedral, I could not support an idea to sell the Rectory in order to raise money. But now, I can see that it has to be done. But it wouldn't be a decision that I would take lightly.
Members of Queen Street and St Margaret's United Churches deserve any support that we can offer them. Their journey over the next year will be guided by their faith. May it be strong.
Queen Street United Church in Kingston is facing a $1 million repair/renovation bill. Realizing that that kind of money isn't within their realm of possibility, they have put their church, their adjacent houses and property on the market, for $1.45 million.
Parishioners are actively exploring, along with St Margaret's Church, the possibility of coming together to form one strong church at the location of St Margaret's on Sir John A Macdonald Blvd.
The Whig's story, written by reporter Jorden Press, is a positive look at their day together yesterday, and the church members most positive steps to build one strong church. The two churches have taken advice from experts, it appears, on how to affect change, what to do to forge one organization from two. There's lots written on this topic, and it seems that it has been heeded.
No doubt is is difficult to lose one's church. It is something that I can't imagine. In Saskatoon where I held a senior position in the Anglican Cathedral, I could not support an idea to sell the Rectory in order to raise money. But now, I can see that it has to be done. But it wouldn't be a decision that I would take lightly.
Members of Queen Street and St Margaret's United Churches deserve any support that we can offer them. Their journey over the next year will be guided by their faith. May it be strong.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
No law against being repugnant
Acquitted: Abusive ex-hockey coach of teen teams known for their 2-fisted drinking and 3-way sex
November 29, 2008
by Rosie Dimanno, Columnist
NAPANEE–He wore untucked fat-man shirts to court that failed to conceal the sagging paunch of a beer gut.
His hair is a modified mullet, the face slack and jowly.
Some days, he appeared greasy enough to slide off his chair.
And he's got an anatomical abnormality that, mercifully, was never entered as a photographic exhibit – a plum-sized blood sac resembling a third testicle.
But little is actually known about who David Frost is today – apart from innocent of sexual exploitation, acquitted across the board. Frost: 4, Crown: 0.
Does he even have a job, this evermore hockey pariah, decertified as an agent, stripped of coaching credentials, barred from rinks in various leagues, though often spotted? And whence the money for the sharp cookie lady defence lawyer, who so devastatingly deked a brace of accusatory witnesses out of their Jill-straps?
Court never heard. Frost never spoke.
Except yesterday of course, expletive-short, after long-winded Justice Geoffrey Griffin finally got around to the punch-line of his not-guilty verdict and abruptly left the room in a swish of judicial robes.
"Scumball!" a spectator – sibling to one of the aforementioned witnesses – hissed at Frost. "That's for my sister."
Upon which the cleared defendant turned, faced the female and spat back: "Go f--- yourself."
Now that's the Frost most people know, defiant and crude, ego wider than his girth; not the accused who sat so quietly through weeks of trial, endlessly writing notes, rarely lifting his head.
Frost: The coach whose teen teams were known for two-fisted drinking and three-way sex.
Frost: The agent targeted by one of his own NHL clients in a loony murder-for-hire plot.
Frost: The bench boss who brutalized his players, verbally and physically – there's no disputing this – slugging one of them in the face during a playoff game, pleading guilty to assault and receiving a conditional discharge.
So, a creep and a bully and a repugnant human being. But there's no law against that.
Frost walked out of court an innocent if disgraced man: Not guilty of perverting the trust of teenage boys as a person of authority in their lives, not guilty of inappropriately, directly or indirectly, touching their splendid young bodies, thus not guilty of coerced and sordid two-on-one sex involving the youths and their girlfriends.
While stating his decision wasn't simply a matter of accepting one package of evidence over another, Griffin clearly did not believe the testimony of two ex-girlfriends recalling events more than a decade after the Season of Frost, in nearby Deseronto.
Or, more accurately put, Griffin disbelieved the women more than he disbelieved the heated denials of three-way sex by a one-two combo of Frost's former player protégés.
Frost may have been "loud, vulgar, offensive, very aggressive ... abusive and intimidating'' in his coaching style, said Griffin. "But I am not prepared to conclude the level of control was as extreme and pervasive as the Crown would have me believe."
Griffin also smacked around the prosecution – led by assistant Crown attorney Sandy Tse – for failing to convince him on the crux of the case. The judge expressed amazement the Crown hadn't called players' parents, sports psychologists and police investigators, or subpoena cellphone records.
Even minus all that, the trial did expose a seamy underbelly to Canada's beloved national game, at least at the junior level, more specifically in Frost World, where females were routinely debased and males subjected to traumatizing abuse. It was an ugly environment.
"He's really relieved," said defence lawyer Marie Henein, speaking on behalf of her client. "It's been going on for four years. He has a lovely wife, lovely children and everything's been very difficult, just going out and about in town, sending their children to a regular school."
The Crown found itself in the awkward position of not only prosecuting the named defendant but needing to crush the credibility of the two "complainants'' at the heart of their case.
Now both 28, these former hockey players took the stand – in one of those courtroom gasp moments, and this trial had many – as witnesses for the defence, flatly denying sexual exploitation and three-way shags with their coach/mentor.
In coming to the testimonial rescue of a man they once feared and revered, the one-time junior stars methodically contradicted the evidence of friends, lovers, teammates, even their own previously sworn statements to police.
The four sexual exploitation charges related to alleged incidents dating back to the late 1990s, when Frost appropriated the coaching job on a rogue league junior team in Deseronto, the Quinte Hawks.
Teenage girls, some at least, were clearly giddy over the young stud players arriving in their dull hamlet and pursued them as boyfriends.
Two of these girls, now women in their late 20s, testified they'd reluctantly agreed to threesomes with their boyfriends and Frost.
Under cross-examination, one of the women admitted she'd never noticed Frost's blood sac, despite all the three-way sex she'd described.
Her ex disputed any sex with Frost had taken place, or that he'd ever touched the coach's penis, under any circumstances. There had been, he readily acknowledged, two-on-one sex, but only involving same-age teammates, with Jennifer more than a willing party.
These consensual threesomes, the player testified, included two specific teammates, one of whom was Mike Danton – then still using his family surname of Jefferson – the former St. Louis Blue currently serving a seven-year sentence in the U.S. for trying to hire a hit man to kill Frost, his then-agent.
The other key female witness, Kristy, recalled two alleged incidents of three-way sex with Frost.
Henein told court none of these sexual follies ever occurred, suggesting the women had colluded in a plot after the Crown dropped charges of sexual exploitation against them.
Technically, the "complainants" were the players – their identities protected by a publication ban – alleged by the prosecution to have been under thrall to and sexually exploited by Frost. But the players never actually complained to authorities and, driving a stake into the Crown's case, exculpated Frost of all allegations against him.
Frost will be back in court in a few weeks. He's been charged with fraud and impersonation for using Danton's credit card to buy gas.
-30-
The above column is from The Star.
Rosie seldom minces words.
November 29, 2008
by Rosie Dimanno, Columnist
NAPANEE–He wore untucked fat-man shirts to court that failed to conceal the sagging paunch of a beer gut.
His hair is a modified mullet, the face slack and jowly.
Some days, he appeared greasy enough to slide off his chair.
And he's got an anatomical abnormality that, mercifully, was never entered as a photographic exhibit – a plum-sized blood sac resembling a third testicle.
But little is actually known about who David Frost is today – apart from innocent of sexual exploitation, acquitted across the board. Frost: 4, Crown: 0.
Does he even have a job, this evermore hockey pariah, decertified as an agent, stripped of coaching credentials, barred from rinks in various leagues, though often spotted? And whence the money for the sharp cookie lady defence lawyer, who so devastatingly deked a brace of accusatory witnesses out of their Jill-straps?
Court never heard. Frost never spoke.
Except yesterday of course, expletive-short, after long-winded Justice Geoffrey Griffin finally got around to the punch-line of his not-guilty verdict and abruptly left the room in a swish of judicial robes.
"Scumball!" a spectator – sibling to one of the aforementioned witnesses – hissed at Frost. "That's for my sister."
Upon which the cleared defendant turned, faced the female and spat back: "Go f--- yourself."
Now that's the Frost most people know, defiant and crude, ego wider than his girth; not the accused who sat so quietly through weeks of trial, endlessly writing notes, rarely lifting his head.
Frost: The coach whose teen teams were known for two-fisted drinking and three-way sex.
Frost: The agent targeted by one of his own NHL clients in a loony murder-for-hire plot.
Frost: The bench boss who brutalized his players, verbally and physically – there's no disputing this – slugging one of them in the face during a playoff game, pleading guilty to assault and receiving a conditional discharge.
So, a creep and a bully and a repugnant human being. But there's no law against that.
Frost walked out of court an innocent if disgraced man: Not guilty of perverting the trust of teenage boys as a person of authority in their lives, not guilty of inappropriately, directly or indirectly, touching their splendid young bodies, thus not guilty of coerced and sordid two-on-one sex involving the youths and their girlfriends.
While stating his decision wasn't simply a matter of accepting one package of evidence over another, Griffin clearly did not believe the testimony of two ex-girlfriends recalling events more than a decade after the Season of Frost, in nearby Deseronto.
Or, more accurately put, Griffin disbelieved the women more than he disbelieved the heated denials of three-way sex by a one-two combo of Frost's former player protégés.
Frost may have been "loud, vulgar, offensive, very aggressive ... abusive and intimidating'' in his coaching style, said Griffin. "But I am not prepared to conclude the level of control was as extreme and pervasive as the Crown would have me believe."
Griffin also smacked around the prosecution – led by assistant Crown attorney Sandy Tse – for failing to convince him on the crux of the case. The judge expressed amazement the Crown hadn't called players' parents, sports psychologists and police investigators, or subpoena cellphone records.
Even minus all that, the trial did expose a seamy underbelly to Canada's beloved national game, at least at the junior level, more specifically in Frost World, where females were routinely debased and males subjected to traumatizing abuse. It was an ugly environment.
"He's really relieved," said defence lawyer Marie Henein, speaking on behalf of her client. "It's been going on for four years. He has a lovely wife, lovely children and everything's been very difficult, just going out and about in town, sending their children to a regular school."
The Crown found itself in the awkward position of not only prosecuting the named defendant but needing to crush the credibility of the two "complainants'' at the heart of their case.
Now both 28, these former hockey players took the stand – in one of those courtroom gasp moments, and this trial had many – as witnesses for the defence, flatly denying sexual exploitation and three-way shags with their coach/mentor.
In coming to the testimonial rescue of a man they once feared and revered, the one-time junior stars methodically contradicted the evidence of friends, lovers, teammates, even their own previously sworn statements to police.
The four sexual exploitation charges related to alleged incidents dating back to the late 1990s, when Frost appropriated the coaching job on a rogue league junior team in Deseronto, the Quinte Hawks.
Teenage girls, some at least, were clearly giddy over the young stud players arriving in their dull hamlet and pursued them as boyfriends.
Two of these girls, now women in their late 20s, testified they'd reluctantly agreed to threesomes with their boyfriends and Frost.
Under cross-examination, one of the women admitted she'd never noticed Frost's blood sac, despite all the three-way sex she'd described.
Her ex disputed any sex with Frost had taken place, or that he'd ever touched the coach's penis, under any circumstances. There had been, he readily acknowledged, two-on-one sex, but only involving same-age teammates, with Jennifer more than a willing party.
These consensual threesomes, the player testified, included two specific teammates, one of whom was Mike Danton – then still using his family surname of Jefferson – the former St. Louis Blue currently serving a seven-year sentence in the U.S. for trying to hire a hit man to kill Frost, his then-agent.
The other key female witness, Kristy, recalled two alleged incidents of three-way sex with Frost.
Henein told court none of these sexual follies ever occurred, suggesting the women had colluded in a plot after the Crown dropped charges of sexual exploitation against them.
Technically, the "complainants" were the players – their identities protected by a publication ban – alleged by the prosecution to have been under thrall to and sexually exploited by Frost. But the players never actually complained to authorities and, driving a stake into the Crown's case, exculpated Frost of all allegations against him.
Frost will be back in court in a few weeks. He's been charged with fraud and impersonation for using Danton's credit card to buy gas.
-30-
The above column is from The Star.
Rosie seldom minces words.
Friday, November 28, 2008
That David Frost got acquitted is a travesty.
It's not the judge's fault.
Two of the players must have lied on the stand, saying that Frost never was in any of the "group sex" events.
The two former team members changed their testimony from their previously signed, sworn statements to police.
That the events happened is not in doubt. Those who have followed the sordid story of this man and his stranglehold on the players on his team, knows full well that these events did happen.
Now, the two women who described the "group sex" events will become the victims.
Just watch the media go after them.
Let's hope that some of the reputable journalists (probably women) who have space in mainstream newspapers write about this, and how the two former players changed their stories, making it look as if the women made it up.
If you follow Junior Hockey in Canada, you know that it is an unhealthy place for young people. No male who wants a career in professional hockey should have to go through what they have to go through to get there.
Just look for the dark side of Junior Hockey, and you'll find it.
It's not the judge's fault.
Two of the players must have lied on the stand, saying that Frost never was in any of the "group sex" events.
The two former team members changed their testimony from their previously signed, sworn statements to police.
That the events happened is not in doubt. Those who have followed the sordid story of this man and his stranglehold on the players on his team, knows full well that these events did happen.
Now, the two women who described the "group sex" events will become the victims.
Just watch the media go after them.
Let's hope that some of the reputable journalists (probably women) who have space in mainstream newspapers write about this, and how the two former players changed their stories, making it look as if the women made it up.
If you follow Junior Hockey in Canada, you know that it is an unhealthy place for young people. No male who wants a career in professional hockey should have to go through what they have to go through to get there.
Just look for the dark side of Junior Hockey, and you'll find it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)