Archive for June, 2008

Stuff White People Like: “Comparing People to Hitler”

This time-tested white-person maneuver may seem so awesomely useful to you that you are tempted to go out and try it right now. Not so fast. White people have spent the last 30 years perfecting this technique. There are cultural guidelines.

It’s also critical that you avoid the fatal mistake of getting creative and comparing people you don’t like to other evil dictators, such as Joseph Stalin or Fidel Castro. With few exceptions, white people are actually fond of almost any dictator not named Hitler, and your remark that “this is just like something Mao Zedong would do” will be met with blank stares and possible social alienation. This is because, with the exception of Hitler, oppressive dictators share a passion for many of the things white people lovesuch as universal health care, conspiracy theories, caring about poor people while being filthy rich, and cool hats. Stick to the script and compare things you don’t like to Hitler, and Hitler alone.


Judge Judy: not President enough

“He’s white and she’s Hispanic. What are you?”


Love freedom? Boycott Toronto



Leftwing logic: Lee Harvey Oswald had a dream, too!

“The best thing that ever happened to civil rights in this country was the bullet through JFK’s head”

Obama not leftwing enough for this cowardly anonymous dame but “he’s about the best we can do.”

Why do so many leftists blog anonymously? Aren’t they proud of their beliefs?


Shocker! Leftists still can’t read

Next time you consider taking the Village Voice the least bit seriously, consider how this guy managed to misread my post yesterday.

You see, Professional Journalist Roy Edroso actually thinks the restricted gun course I took Sunday and signed up for months ago was somehow timed to coincide with the Heller decision of the US Supreme Court.

Which is a bizarre, paranoid and utterly pointless thing to think under any circumstances, but dude:

I don’t even live in your country (sheesh, those geographically ignorant and arrogant Americans, huh?) Did you know that US Supreme Court Decisions don’t apply to the citizens of other nations?

Hey, so what? Edroso’s gotta a Michael Moore-like point to make (although I’m not sure what it is except “Guns R 4 Haters and Uppity Wymin” or something.)

The most amusing part of this article, as it is with so much modern leftist ranting, is  their weird notion that merely quoting mundane, commonsensical comments they disapprove of constitutes an actual argument.

Were Mr. Edroso an honest, mature man, he’d admit that he wouldn’t like his kids (assuming he has ‘em) “growing up to think” that public displays of homosexuality were “normal”, either. (And of course, they can’t ever be “normal” because, at 1% of the population, homosexuality is not the “norm”, but why let silly things like word definitions screw up your precious worldview?)

It is defacto absurd and laughable to Edroso that “the Gospel needs to go into” a particular country. He finds this comment particularly disgraceful, again, without explaining exactly why:

“Instead of whining about guns, why not launch a program to encourage young black men to stay home with their children and to marry the mothers of those children so that those same kids won’t end up in gangs?”



This poll wasn’t gamed or anything…


100%! (updated with Foxy Brown trailer PLUS added dissing of Village Voice Idiot)

SUNDAY UPDATE: welcome, Village Voice readers. Say, are you all as willfully stupid as that Roy guy or what?


I was the only person to get a perfect score in my Restricted handgun course today.

So: now what? I’d much prefer a semi-auto to a revolver.

Remember American readers — we aren’t allowed to have these:

but your suggestions are still welcome as long as they fall within the regulations:

Prohibited firearms, devices, and weapons are:

* full-automatic firearms
* sawed-off rifles or shotguns with barrel length less than 457mm (18 inches); this does not apply to firearms manufactured with short barrels
* sawed-off rifles or shotguns with overall length less than 660mm (26 inches); this does not apply to firearms manufactured with short stocks or short barrels
* handguns with a barrel less than 105mm (4.14 inches), except certain specifically listed competition handguns which are restricted
* handguns in caliber .25 or .32, except certain specifically listed competition handguns which are restricted
* silencers

* large capacity magazines for a semi-automatic center-fire firearm. What constitutes “large capacity” varies; as a general rule, the maximum capacity is 5 rounds for long guns, 10 rounds for handguns “commonly found in Canada”, and 5 rounds for handguns “not commonly found in Canada.” Magazines for rimfire cartridges, the 8-round clips used in the M1 Garand, and 10 round Lee Enfield rifle magazines are exempted by name from this prohibition.
* any of a long list of firearms specifically listed as prohibited. With few exceptions, if it has a remotely military appearance, it is prohibited.
* replicas of firearms
* any type of Taser or other firearm that discharges a dart or other object carrying an electrical current.
* tear gas, Mace or other gas, or any liquid spray, power or other substance that is capable of injuring, immobilizing or otherwise incapacitating any person
* any type of stun gun or other electrical charge device of length less than 480mm
* a large additional class of prohibited weapons, such as nunchakus, switchblades, brass knuckles, etc. which are not discussed here.

I have very small hands with short fingers, and the instructors told me I’d have to take that into consideration.


I’m taking the Restricted (handgun) course today

So look for me when I get back. Check out for any breaking updates.

Thanks again for your congratulatory emails and donations. I promise you all a personal thank you as soon as I have more free time!


Those revealing emails from Khurrum Awan

Deborah Gyapong writes:

Well….here is “maximum disruption” at work.

I wonder if this is cause for an abuse of process lawsuit by the legal team to recoup their thousands of dollars in legal fees.

This shows what our mainstream media is slowly beginning to realize . . .that the process is the punishment and the maximum disrupters out there, the ones who want to steal our freedoms, know it.



God, what IS it about gays and fascism, huh?

A humourless dyke?!? Umpossible.

So glad I was out of the country when this happened.

Don’t you have something better to do, sweetie? Like, say, renting a U-Haul or cultivating your beerbelly?


Tearing Khurrum a new Awan (with update on Awan’s distinctly un-Muslim Friday night par-TAYS!)


One of my loyal readers emailed the “Male” Sock about their loss and got a dumbass response (shocker!)

For a guy who objected to Mark Steyn’s use of “sarcasm” and his “tone”, the twitchy bald kid seems anxious to wield those offending weapons himself, albeit without Steyn’s superior skill.

Can you imagine if these guys actually won the “right to reply” in Macleans? Five thousand words of “I know you are but what am I?”

PS: if you’ve had cataract surgery, or even if you haven’t, why not email Khurram Awan and tell him he’s an uppity little scared-of-an-unclean-infidel-girl pantywaist who sounds more like a surfer than a lawyer?

And ask him how his legal/political career is looking now that he’s admitted under oath to lying to the Canadian public on numerous occasions?

[email protected]

Here’s the email exchange:

My reader:

Only one to go.

To early yet – but things are looking good – well not for you.

No matter – you can always file against someone for telling a joke about Muslims – or maybe you can file against everyone in Canada – who didn’t find little church…oops mosque funny.


Khurram Awan responded:

ur hilarious need to take a closer look at what the Ontario
Commission said; maybe you require cataract surgery.

On another note…don’t you have things to do in life other than emailing

party on bro

In a follow up email, Khurrum Awan doesn’t sound like much of a Muslim, since he was partying all last (Friday) night:

lol…you’re hilarious bro. you really don’t get it do you??


More on the Supreme Court’s new libel decision

I agree with Deborah Gyapong, who wonders if it “grants license to bash Christians”:

I fear though that anyone who wants to protect their children from information that opposes their traditional religious beliefs and moral strictures concerning chastity de facto a bigot and intolerant.


Interesting, the word tolerance has, for the empty container/living tree crowd, morphed into meaning “agreement,” and “acceptance.” Thus when I read between the lines of this Rafe Mair decision, if you do not wholeheartedly accept and approve of the gay lifestyle and same-sex marriage, you are a bigot who at least tacitly approves of violence against gays and lesbians, or at least a “reasonable person” might arrive at that conclusion. Well, that’s because anti-Christian prejudice is so widespread, so fashionable. At least some of the justices agreed this was defamatory against Simpson.

And God forbid that you use any “Onward Christian soldiers” sort of language.

I don’t know of a Christian today who literally interprets the warfare imagery in the Bible. It is an internal, spiritual battle, and in no way a call to physical arms. In fact, St. Paul himself says we do not war against flesh and blood, a fact that seems to escape non-Christians who tend to be biblically illiterate.


Will the reader who emailed me…

their exchange with one of the sockpuppets please resend it to me at kshaidle AT

Sorry — it got lost in the 3500+ messages I came back to.


My interview with Ed Driscoll of Pajamas Media

As usual, I talked way too much but Ed & Co. did a great job of splicing the ok parts together.

However, you can hear the whole damn (boring, rambling) thing if you insist.

This show also features Jonah Goldberg, Lileks, Brietbart and other big shots. Have a listen!


Your tax dollars pay for bouncers at Human Rights Commissions

Incredible, except that it isn’t.