And the debate begins again...

With the most recent mass shooting in the States, there has been more and more talk of firmer gun control - and the debate begins again. Before I begin, I'd like to state that I am obviously biased in this discussion as I don't own a gun, will probably never own a gun, don't believe that the average person should have a gun and am Canadian. I'm not going to bore everyone with all of the same old statistics that we've all heard before, for those, you can go watch "Bowling for Columbine" or read a newspaper or watch the news these days and you'll come across plenty of reasons why gun control is important, in fact, Neil Macdonald summed it all up very well on CBC news the other day (read it here). All I'm going to say is this, if you think you "have the right to bear arms", go right ahead and keep your shotgun in your basement, but if you want to argue with me that you should own a gun that is designed solely for the purpose of killing people, quickly and efficiently, then you are ridiculous. The gun used in that shooting in Connecticut was not designed for self defense or hunting dear, it was designed to kill. What gives anyone the right to do that?

Who's "undemocratic" now Mr. Harper?

It feels like just yesterday that the Conservative's pushed through a monstrous Omnibus bill totalling over 400 pages...oh wait, it was only 3 months ago! Now they're at it again with a budget bill that is expected to be even larger than the bill in the spring. I know our current government is not the first to do this and probably won't be the last, but what I find funny is that Harper once described Omnibus bills as undemocratic and a "contradiction to the conventions and practices of the House." Does that mean that Stephan Harper thinks of himself as undemocratic? Doubtful! I guess when the Liberals do it, it's undemocratic, but when the Conservatives do it, it's justice. Personally, I think it's ridiculous and so does Rick Mercer!

Check out Mercer's latest rant. Or to read more about what Ralph Goodale, Deputy Liberal Leader, has to say, click here. Or, if you're interested in doing your part to help prevent more of these bills in the future, you can sign the Liberal's petition.

WAKE UP CANADA!

I'm not an economist or a politician or an expert on budgets, but I still knew that Bill C-38, which aims to change over 70 laws in one omnibus bill, was bad for many Canadians...and boy, was I right! After doing some reading, from sources all over the place, it is clear that the Conservative Government is trying to pull one over on us and we should be ashamed for how little we all seem to care!

Now, while there are some positive changes in the bill, there are also many, many negative ones - too many for me to list. It is important to note that these many issues include negative changes to laws concerning the environment, charities, fisheries, equal rights for women and minorities, pensions and so much more.

Unfortunately, this bill is likely going to pass this week, but this goes to show that the time for apathy needs to be over! Our Government is sneaking sweeping changes in right before our eyes and as many have pointed out, no one seems to care. WAKE UP CANADA!

For a more robust list, read Linda Leon's letter to her MP. Or, to read more about this bill, check out the following:

• http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1210351--omnibus-bill-exposes-pragmatic-stephen-harper-as-a-radical
• http://www.behindthenumbers.ca/2012/05/30/the-real-culture-of-dependency-in-defense-of-atlantic-canada/
• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/20120613/mulcair-budget-votes-120613/
• http://www.vancouversun.com/news/More+debate+needed+Tories+Bill/6767641/story.html

Are you a serial killer?

Do you believe climate change is happening? Do you believe that we might have just a little something to do with it? If so, you just may be a serial killer, mass murderer or terrorist according the Chicago-based Heartland Institute! The US think tank launched a poster campaign that compares people like the Unabomber and Osama Bin Laden to people concerned about global warming. According to the Guardian, it is "quite possibly one of the most ill-judged poster campaigns in the history of ill judged poster campaigns."

Here are a few highlights from their own justification for their actions:

• Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the “mainstream” media, and liberal politicians say about global warming.
• Still believing in man-made global warming – after all the scientific discoveries and revelations that point against this theory – is more than a little nutty. In fact, some really crazy people use it to justify immoral and frightening behavior.
• The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.

This campaign is so utterly ridiculous and unbelievable that I can't even find the words...

To read Bill McKibben's (350.org) open letter to the Heartland Institute, click here. Or, to hear what others have to say about this utterly ridiculous campaign, check out the following articles:

• http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-heartland-unabomber-climate-20120504,0,6654611.story
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/heartland-institute-launches-campaign-linking-terrorism-murder-and-global-warming-belief/2012/05/04/gIQAJJ3Q1T_blog.html
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/heartland-climate-change-billboard_n_1478011.html?ref=green

Hypocrisy at its best!

Lately, it seems the Harper Government is doing everything in its power to reduce Canada's environmental sector to nothing! With their muzzling of Canadian scientists and their shrinking of our environmental impact assessments and their attack on Canadian charitable organizations, it just doesn't seem to end! Harper did say he was going to run a more transparent government and I suppose his aversion to the environmental sector couldn't be more clear...somehow, I don't think that's what Canadian's thought he meant by transparency though.

Whether or not you agree with the government's statement that opposing the oil sands shouldn't be a charitable act is irrelevant. If they are going to point the finger at charities that are anti-oil sands, then they must also point the finger at those that are pro-oil sands as well. The Fraser Institute, an "impartial" think tank that many describe as conservative, right wing and libertarian are just as political as all of the other charities under scrutiny.

All I'm saying is that the hypocrisy of it all is ridiculously apparent and enough is enough!

Here are some more fun facts about the Fraser Institute. Please note that all of the quotes were found on www.fraserinstitute.org but the sarcasm is all my own.

• The Fraser Institute describes itself as "an independent Canadian public policy research and educational organization" - Ha ha ha...independent...funny.
• The Fraser Institute also claims they are "improving the quality of life for people of all ages and income levels" - I see, supporting big tobacco and trying to disprove climate change is all aimed at improving my quality of life? Wow, thanks Fraser Institute! What would I do without you encouraging me to smoke and waste fossil fuels?
• The Fraser Institute also "depend on donations from people who understand the importance of impartial research..." - Oh, so impartial research refers to situations like when you receive money from ExxonMobil and Koch Industries to fund "climate research" that claims climate change fears are overstated and alarmist which goes against other so-called impartial scientists? I'm sure glad that's cleared up. 

For more information on the hypocritical conservative government and the Fraser Institute, check out the following links:

• http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/new-rules-in-budget-create-more-fear-among-politically-active-charities/article2388001/
• http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/26/koch-brothers-fraser-institute_n_1456223.html
• http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2012/04/25/%E2%80%9Ccharitable%E2%80%9D-fraser-institute-accepted-500k-foreign-funding-oil-billionaires
• http://www.fraserinstitute.org/default.aspx

There are more than two choices people!

In the last few weeks I've heard a lot of people saying things like "I'm sick of the Conservatives so I think I'm going to vote for the Wildrose Party," or "it's time for a change so let's support Danielle Smith." This is ridiculous! There are more than two choices in this province and we don't just have to choose between the right leaning Progressive Conservatives or the ultra-right leaning Wildrose Party!

For all of you who think the Wildrose party is a legitimate choice for you because you don't like the PCs, I'd like to challenge you to complete the Vote Compass before you make up your mind. I have first hand knowledge of two people who thought the WRP was their only choice and after completing the Vote Compass survey, they both found themselves leaning to the left, more in line with the Liberals and NDP. How eye opening!

Now, the purpose of this posting is not to sway anyone one way or another, but to help point out that there are choices! I'm not naive, I know that a lot of people will take the Vote Compass and probably arrive exactly where they expected, but I would guess there are also a lot of people who might be surprised at their outcomes. Just take a minute to really understand what ALL of these parties represent before you jump on somebody else's bandwagon.

To check out the platform's of the major Alberta parties, check out the following:

• Alberta Liberals
• Alberta Party
• Alberta's NDP
• PC Alberta
• Wildrose

I condemn you Mr. Hunsperger!

As election day nears in Alberta, more and more scrutiny is being placed on all of the candidates and thank goodness for that, as we have now learned that Wild Rose candidate Allan Hunsperger is a bigot. I don't know about you, but I don't want someone with his views anywhere near my provincial government! Over the weekend, it was brought to our attention that Hunsperger had a blog posting basically condemning gay people to hell. Here are just a few ridiculous tidbits from his posting:

• "...and if you die the way you were born then you will suffer the rest of eternity in the lake of fire, hell..."
• "Warning people not to not live the way they were born is not judgement or condemnation - it is love!"
• "Accepting people the way they are is cruel and not loving."

What's even more ridiculous about this whole thing, besides Hunsperger's atrocious punctuation, is the fact that he defended himself by saying "the views I expressed in this blog posting are my own personal religious views and were given in the capacity as a church pastor" and "I fully support equality for all people, and condemn any intolerance based on sexual orientation or any other personal characteristics."

Well, what is it going to be Allan? Is condemning someone because they are gay considered love, as you said in your blog? Or, is it wrong to do such a thing as you said this weekend after everyone condemned you? Make up your mind!

Now, if you're wondering what kind of action the Wild Rose leader Danielle Smith is taking on this issue, the answer is nothing! Instead, she just regurgitated the same old thing she's been saying all along which doesn't really mean much: "our party is not going to legislate on contentious social issues."

Hopefully your party won't be legislating on anything!

To check out his blog posting in its entirety, read the Edmonton Journal article. Or, to read what others have to say about this ridiculous, ridiculous man, check out the links below:

• http://www.albertaparty.ca/statement_allan_hunsberger
• http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/15/wildrose-anti-gay-blog-alberta_n_1427008.html
• http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/15/allan-hunsperger-wildrose-blog/?__lsa=dd873a4a
• http://daveberta.ca/2012/04/allan-hunsperger-wildrose-candidate/

What?!

The Tennessee Senate recently approved a bill that would allow teachers and students to debate scientific theories in the classroom - theories such as evolution and climate change to name a few. Obviously, this bill is opposed by several groups including the National Center for Science Education, the American Civil Liberties Union and 350.org.

While I completely agree with students being encouraged to think critically and question what they are taught, I think it is ridiculous to go back to they way things were in 1925! There is a reason why we don't use mercury anymore to treat every injury or spray DDT on every weed that pops up or put cocaine in our Coca Cola and none of those need to be explained because it's obvious why we don't do those things anymore! It should be just as obvious why we shouldn't pass a bill allowing teachers to teach against evolution or climate change.

To read a more eloquent perspective on this and other issues, check out David Suziki's article in the Western Star! Or, check out the links below for more about this bill:

• http://act.350.org/sign/tennessee
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/20/tennessee-science-bill-al_n_1368261.html
• http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120320/NEWS0201/303200034/TN-science-bill-protects-teachers-who-allow-debate-over-evolution

Not again!

I don't know about you, but promising Albertans "energy dividends" up to $300 sounds a lot like buying votes! In a province with over 3.6 million people with a deficit of over 3 billion dollars, that seems like an awful lot of money that could be spent on much more important things. Perhaps we could improve our health care system, or work towards ensuring that everyone has the opportunity for higher education or even save for a rainy day or disaster. However, according to Danielle Smith, spending surplus money on those things is squandering and wasteful. Hmm, and she accused Redford of not liking Alberta...

It was a ridiculous idea when Ralph Klein did it in 2005 and it's a ridiculous idea now!

To read more about these dividends, check out the following articles:

• http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120402/CGY_energy_dividend_120402/20120402?hub=Calgary
• http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/04/02/kelly-mcparland-wildrose-opens-albertas-vote-buying-bazaar-with-a-bid-of-300-per-voter/
• http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/04/02/albertavotes2012-smith-bucks-dividends-wildrose.html

For a few more reasons not to vote for the Wildrose Party, check out the following:

• Rob Anderson's diva behaviour.
• Danielle Smith claiming that Alison Redford doesn't like Alberta.
• The Wildrose Party agrees with conscience rights that would allow health care and marriage workers the right to refuse treatment or service to people that have lifestyles they don't agree with or believe in.

Check out the Vote Compass to see where you fit in the Alberta political spectrum.

Where do you draw the line?

Now that Albertans are going to the polls on April 23, I felt it was important to talk about one of the many reasons to NOT vote for the ridiculous Wildrose party!

Danielle Smith believes medical professionals and marriage commissioners should have conscience rights which basically means that they should be able to refuse treatment or service if it's against their religion. Now, while I respect that people have different beliefs, I also respect the fact that we live in a society with laws! It is NOT against the law to get an abortion and it is NOT against the law to marry someone of the same sex and until it is, we shouldn't allow medical or marriage professionals the right to abstain from providing treatment or service.

As the article below points out, what if it against someone's "beliefs" to marry an interracial couple, does that count? Or, what if someone thinks being gay is wrong and refuses treatment to someone who is gay, is that within someone's conscience rights? Where do you draw the line?

http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/news-views/news/conscience-rights-need-protection-wildrose-leader-8013/

Truck Balls = Douche Bag

I wish I could meet the man who invented truck balls so I could throw some at his face! I like to think I'm a fairly open minded individual who doesn't like to "judge a book by it's cover", but I'm sorry, when I see a truck with balls hanging from the back of it, I automatically assume the driver is a douche bag. Maybe I'm wrong, but how can I think anything different when they have gone to a considerable amount of effort to hang balls from their vehicle AND thought it was a good idea. Not only that, but I Googled "truck balls" and you wouldn't believe how many websites out there sell them, and the varieties available are endless...sigh. Ridiculous.

I wish I could make $512,000 just for quitting my job...

I never thought I'd agree with the Wildrose Party about anything, but they are correct in saying that the current MLA severance in Alberta is ridiculous (read Wildrose story here)! The payout is so ridiculous in fact, that it made the news in Vancouver which just goes to show that Albertans need to wake up and do something about this (read Vancouver Sun article here). I don't know about you, but every time I've quit a job, I've been thanked for my service and sent on my merry way and have certainly not ever made an extra chunk of cash just for quitting.

Now, don't get me wrong, I've been a civil servant and I think it is important to pay government workers fairly and competitively so you have good people running your municipality or province or country, etc. Having said that, we had to account for every penny we ever spent and I can't imagine that the citizens of my municipality would have agreed with me receiving a few thousand extra when I quit!

Click on the links below to read more about these extravagent payouts:

• http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/03/06/alberta-mlas-defend-lavish-retirement-payouts
• http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Braid+Taxpayers+federation+helps+expose+seamy+system+retirement+payouts/5833264/story.html
• http://www.canada.com/opinion/editorials/Editorial+Gold+plated+severances+must/6260753/story.html

Click on the link below to tell the current government what you think about this:

• http://alberta.ca/contact.cfm

Or, contact your own MLA to tell them what you think:

• http://alberta.ca/albertaFiles/includes/DirectorySearch/search.cfm

We should send climate change skeptics to live in Kiribati!

I wonder if all those climate change naysayers would still think climate change was a hoax if they were going to be displaced due to rising sea levels? The Pacific island nation of Kiribati has purchased land in Fiji in case they need to move their population in the future. Read more here:

• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/SciTech/20120309/kiribati-pacific-nation-population-could-move-to-fiji-120309/ 
• http://www.treehugger.com/climate-change/kiribati-moving-entire-population-avoid-sea-level-rise.html

In a world where there is more scientific consensus than ever that climate change is an issue, there are still critics aiming to discredit this science with their misinformation. We can speculate all we want on why they're so desperately trying to prove that climate change isn't an issue, but I would guess that it has to do with money and power, what do you think?

Also, check out the Heartland Institute's website (http://heartland.org/) for an example of just one of the many ridiculous agencies that are attempting to "drown out" climate change science. Read more here:

• http://www.canada.com/technology/Climate+change+naysayers+drowning+scientific+research+expert+says/6165986/story.html

How does this guy still have a job?

When you make statements like this, not only should you be fired, you should probably also be slapped in the face:

"What does it say about the college coed Susan Fluke [sic], who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. So Miss Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here’s the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.” (Rush Limbaugh)

Ridiculous doesn't even begin to describe the above comment, or most of the things that come out of this man's mouth. Apparently Rush's latest has caused him to lose a number of advertisers...hopefully it will make him lose some listeners as well!

For more on Rush's antics, check out the links below:

• http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-limbaugh-apologize-20120304,0,1078435.story
• http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2012/03/stephen-colbert-jon-stewart-rush-limbaugh.html
• http://rumorfix.com/2012/03/gloria-allreds-open-letter-to-rush-limbaugh-read-it-here/
• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20120303/Obama-joins-in-denouncing-Limbaughs-slur-of-student-120303/

You "deserve" our oil?

Mitt Romney recently won two key primaries south of the border and in his latest victory speech he vowed to get Americans the "oil from Canada [they] deserve..."

Hmm, I'm not sure what Mitt Romney thinks the word "deserves" means, but according to Webster, it means "to be worthy, fit, or suitable for some reward or requital."

I wonder what he'll think Americans "deserve" next?

Here's more about Romney's ridiculous, poorly thought out statement:

• http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120229/romney-michigan-victory-speech-oil-that-we-deserve-remarks-120229/20120229/?hub=CalgaryHome
• http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/02/29/mitt-romney-oil-canada-deserve_n_1310711.html
• http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/canadians-bristle-romney-americans-deserve-oil-sands-crude-194201422.html

Who is this guy?

Since the GOP race started, I've known that Rick Santorum was someone that I would NEVER want running my country and thank goodness he never will! Recently, it came to my attention that in addition to Santorum's antiquated views on abortion, birth control, health care, gay people, women in combat, etc., he is now attacking the working woman. Who is this guy and why does he have a job anywhere near politics? How is it that he is one of the front runners to win the Republican nomination? Do the people voting for him really know what he stands for?

Here is just a small sample of the ridiculous things this man has said:

• “I think the Democrats are actually worried [Obama] may go to Indonesia and bow to more Muslims.”
• “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn money.”
• “Look at the political base of the Democratic Party: it is single mothers who run a household...Why? Because it’s so tough economically that they look to the government for help, and therefore they’re going to vote. So if you want to reduce the Democratic advantage, what you want to do is build two-parent families, you eliminate that desire for government.”
• "The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness..."

I know most politicians have made statements in the past that they wish they could take back, and I know that Rick Santorum isn't the only politician in history to be outrageous and even nonsensical, but let's just say that although I'm not usually the biggest fan of my own Country's leader, I would take him ANY day over this man!

To read more about Rick Santorum and the race in general, check out these links:

• http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/campaigns/santorum-out-of-step-with-americans-even-most-of-gop-on-birth-control-some-other-issues/2012/02/17/gIQAw8bJJR_story.html
• http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/12/nation/la-na-santorum-20120213
• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20120222/us-presidential-race-120222/
• http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17136768

Focus on the real criminals!

When even the Americans, famous for their "War on Drugs", are warning the Canadian government against harsh minimum sentencing for minor drug offences, you'd think our fearless leaders would at least consider the argument. I'm not saying that I think the conservatives are suddenly going to decriminalize marijuana, but at the very least, they should look at the harsh sentencing in their new bill. I don't know about you, but I don't think someone who grows 6 pot plants is the same as a pedophile and they certainly don't deserve a harsher sentence! 

For more information on the ridiculous Bill C-10 check out the links below:

• http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/22/u-s-law-panel-urges-harper-to-avoid-costly-failure-of-mandatory-minimum-pot-punishments/
• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120222/mandatory-minimums-drug-crimes-120222/
• http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/02/22/pol-mandatory-minimums-drug-crimes-us.html

Not so transparent...

In the past, Stephen Harper has pledged to have a more open, transparent government which leaves me a bit confused. Is his idea of transparency "muzzling" scientists and restricting scientific information available to Canadians? Hmm, that's not what I thought it meant so I looked it up and found a few definitions of transparency that don't seem to match Harper's ridiculously nontransparent actions.

"Transparency, as used in science, engineering, business, the humanities and in a social context more  generally, implies openness, communication, and accountability."

"In politics, transparency is used as a means of holding public officials accountable and fighting corruption. When a government's meetings are open to the press and the public, its budgets may be reviewed by anyone, and its laws and decisions are open to discussion, it is seen as transparent, and there is less opportunity for the authorities to abuse the system for their own interests." (The Transparency of Politics and the Quality of Politicians)

Read the articles below and then ask yourself how transparent the Harper government is.

• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120218/science-government-research-120218/
• http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/earthmatters/2012/02/16/science-journalists-appeal-harper-open-letter-stop-muzzling
• http://www.ipolitics.ca/2012/02/16/prime-minister-please-stop-muzzling-scientists-and-researchers-open-letter/

For more information on transparency:

• http://www.transparency.ca/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(behavior)

Fox News Does it Again!

If you aren't entirely convinced that Fox News is quality US programming, you will be now! On Sunday night, when discussing the increasing sexual assault in the American military, Fox News Contributor Liz Trotta had this to say:

"Well, what did they expect? These people are in close contact."

Now, I know what you're thinking, how ridiculous that someone on the news, an actual journalist, would say something like this, but wait, it gets better, or I guess I should say worse:

"we have women once more, the feminist, going, wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time...[feminists] have also directed them, really, to spend a lot of money. They have sexual counselors all over the place, victim's advocates, sexual response coordinators...you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much."

Yep, you read that correctly. Like I said, quality news programming.

To read more about this useless twit, click on the links below:

• http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/14/10405617-those-who-expect-sexual-assault-in-the-military
• http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2012/02/15/liz-are-you-for-real/
• http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fox-news-contributor-liz-trotta-spike-sex-assault-military-expect-article-1.1022097

You're either with us, or with them...

For those of you who don't know, the Conservative government is trying to pass a series of bills that will require Internet service providers to "store and make available to the government and police forces information on the Internet activity of the their customers." Talk about big brother! Now, when rational, concerned individuals speak out against the bills, they are spewed a series of statements that don't seem to have any facts to back them up. What is the most ridiculous statement made by our great conservative leaders: "He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers."

WHAT?! REALLY?!

The conservative government is accusing Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia, and those like him, of supporting child pornagraphers because he is trying to protect the privacy of Canadians. It's fear mongering and it's ridiculous!

Read the following articles for more information:

• http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/tories-on-e-snooping-stand-with-us-or-with-the-child-pornographers/article2336889/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Referrer%3A+Social+Network+%2F+Media&utm_content=2336889&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links
• http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/tories-have-yet-to-prove-case-for-e-snooping-bill/article2256197/
• http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120214/electronic-surveillance-bill-120214/

Find your MP here and tell them what you think of these bills:

• http://www.canada.gc.ca/directories-repertoires/direct-eng.html

Idiots!

A friend of mine brought the following to my attention and I was horrified. What is wrong with society today that women will joke about a man beating up another woman? It is ridiculous and idiotic and they should feel ashamed of their comments. I don't even know what else to say...

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/horrible-reactions-to-chris-brown-at-the-grammys