Dumb And Stupid

Holy cow!!!

I have no idea where to go with this….

Creation, which opened the Toronto International Film Festival last week, might be winning favourable early reviews, but its still-controversial protagonist — naturalist Charles Darwin — has prevented the film from snagging U.S. distribution, according to one of its producers.

The Jon Amiel biographical drama stars real-life couple Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly as the evolution theorist and his devout wife, during the period when Darwin struggled with his faith, the loss of a beloved daughter and with the decision to publish his seminal On The Origin of Species.

Though Creation has scored deals to screen in movie theatres around the globe, U.S. distributors have been reluctant.

I guess progressives and liberals are really not controlling Hollywood? So, a graphically violent movie like The Passion Of The Christ based on a fairy tale is ok with the distributors but a biopic on one of the greatest scientist in the history of the world, is a big NO.

Absolutely pathetic.

Tim Hortons Playing Politics?


Tim Hortons is scrubbing its hands of a Rhode Island event opposing same-sex marriage after an online outcry went viral yesterday.

The iconic Canadian coffee shop was listed as a sponsor for a “Marriage and Family Day” hosted by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), an organization that campaigns against gay marriage.

Tim Hortons had agreed to provide free coffee for the Aug. 16 event in Warwick, R.I., but pulled out yesterday as the news spread and complaints came flooding in.

Tim Hortons said it would no longer be a sponsor, citing a policy not to sponsor events “representing religious groups, political affiliates or lobby groups.”

Well this is really good news. I was ready to ban Timmies from my life is they had not withdrawn the sponsorship. It would have been difficult but I would have done it. And here is a statement from the organisers :

“We had no idea that we would cause an international incident by having coffee donated,” said Chris Plante, director of the Rhode Island chapter of NOM.

They had planned for 250 cups of coffee, he said.

On the brochure, the iconic “Tim Hortons” signature is printed next to the event’s intended purpose: “To take a stand for marriage as it was created to be.”

“Oooooh, it’s just coffee”. “Why would anyone be offended by having coffee served to gay hating, homophobic people?” I am glad that the TDL corporation nixed in the bud (even though they took their own time to do it).

And for all those twitter naysayers :

News of the sponsorship set off a furious stream of angry “tweets” about what appeared to be the Canadian company’s partisan involvement in a controversial political battle.

Many of the comments, which were coming at a rate of a dozen every minute, were demanding the company pull the sponsorship. But others went further, accusing the company of homophobia and saying they would boycott the company.

Yesterday afternoon, Tim Hortons released a statement saying the sponsorship had been cancelled and that the franchise owner had run afoul of corporate policy. The company does not allow sponsorship of religious, political or lobby groups.



The man who built insurance giant American International Group Inc. from a startup to a global behemoth said he didn’t mismanage the company — but the government did.

In his first testimony since the government stepped in with the first of four bailouts for AIG, Greenberg told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Thursday that his leadership team had “nothing to do” with failures that so far have cost taxpayers more than $182 billion.

Yup, he had nothing whatsoever to do with the crisis that AIG faced. No matter that he ran the company from 1962 to 2005 and was instrumental in starting the company AIGFP which bought down AIG as a whole by giving the CEO Joseph Cassano complete backing of the AIG brand, financially and philosophically and now he says he had nothing to with the whole thing.

E.g., in his testimony he claims that AIGFP should have been “walled off” (whatever the hell that means), despite the fact that it was Greenberg himself who negotiated the profit sharing deal and along with the full AIG backing with Cassano.

This is basically a repeat of  the episode of Enron and Kenneth Lay. I am not a psychologist or an academic who would understand why lust for money generates immoral bastards but the line between greed and the need for power/money is now erased in the financial sector.

Here is a very interesting article on the financial collapse.

Also, there are innocents who are now facing the brunt of public opinion even though they had nothing to do with the mess that has been created by the “financial wizards”.

Corporate Responsibility Is Just Another Word

So, now they are not even going to pretend to be green, anymore?

Shell will no longer invest in renewable technologies such as wind, solar and hydro power because they are not economic, the Anglo-Dutch oil company said today. It plans to invest more in biofuels which environmental groups blame for driving up food prices and deforestation.

Excellent, so corporate responsibilities is just another word?

The company said it would concentrate on developing other cleaner ways of using fossil fuels, such as carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. It hoped to use CCS to reduce emissions from Shell’s controversial and energy-intensive oil sands projects in northern Canada.

The company said that many alternative technologies did not offer attractive investment opportunities. Linda Cook, Shell’s executive director of gas and power, said: “If there aren’t investment opportunities which compete with other projects we won’t put money into it. We are businessmen and women. If there were renewables [which made money] we would put money into it.”

I fail to understand how a company or shareholders of a company can be so blind with greed that their attitude is “fuck it, let’s make more money”. I understand that the whole idea is behind a company is to make money but as it has been amply demonstrated in the past few months, just making money for investors is not enough. The aim has suddenly become to make enormous amounts of money under moral and legal ambiguity.

Canadian oil sands has become a real thorn in the side of Canadian politics. How long will it be before a responsible government is sworn in and a clamp down on the oil sands production occurs. Nothing much can be expected from the bunch of clowns running the Canadian government right now, but sooner or later, it’s bound to happen. What are Shell shareholders going to do then?

And by pulling out of renewable energies saying it’s not a viable investment, isn’t Shell demonstrating a lack of foresight? Isn’t that what someone said about computers? Isn’t that what someone said about nuclear energy? Isn’t that what someone said about landing on the moon? Why is it that Shell has basically dropped the ball on “trying” to find new ways to better harness the sun, wind and water? What will the shareholders do to the company if an alternative for carbon based fuel is developed?

This is a poor corporate strategy which jsut so happens to do irreparable harm to Earth.

Defending The Undefendable


It sure does sting. A staggering $165 million — for employees of a company that nearly took down the financial system. And heck, we, the taxpayers, own nearly 80 percent of A.I.G.

It doesn’t seem fair.

So here is a sobering thought: Maybe we have to swallow hard and pay up, partly for our own good. I can hear the howls already, so let me explain.

Ok, go ahead and explain the absolutely pathetic nonsense you are obviously about to spew.

“This isn’t just a matter of dollars and cents,” he said (President Obama). “It’s about our fundamental values.”

On that last issue, lawyers, Wall Street types and compensation consultants agree with the president. But from their point of view, the “fundamental value” in question here is the sanctity of contracts.

That may strike many people as a bit of convenient legalese, but maybe there is something to it. If you think this economy is a mess now, imagine what it would look like if the business community started to worry that the government would start abrogating contracts left and right.

That’s your cop out? A legal binding document that is negotiated between an employee and an employer? Some people just have the stupidity to go against the flow for no other reason than “it sure would sell me”. That’s all I can think of this douche’s argument. He continues with his shit…..

As much as we might want to void those A.I.G. pay contracts, Pearl Meyer, a compensation consultant at Steven Hall & Partners, says it would put American business on a worse slippery slope than it already is. Business agreements of other companies that have taken taxpayer money might fall into question. Even companies that have not turned to Washington might seize the opportunity to break inconvenient contracts.

Oh, I see. The bonds that the businesses have with their employees should not be renegotiated.

Well, Mr. AssHat, I can assure you that businesses renegoitate contracts with their employees all the time, required by the government or not. If an employee’s job performance hammer’s a company’s bottom line, I think that the it’s safe to say that the employee is thrown out of the door and his/her severence or bonuses come into question by the legal department of the company. So why can’t it happen for AIG, a public owned company?

And don’t give me that mumbo jumbo about these very executives untying the mess they have created. That’s utter bullshit. You are telling me that all these 100 or so employees are the only ones in the US who can undo the damage that AIG has done?

It’s time for the current owner (the American public) to act as owner would against bad employees, kick them out the door and sue them. Thousands have been sued before by corporations, why not these executives?



Chrysler LLC threatened last night to pull the company’s production out of Canada – a move that would throw 9,000 employees out of work – unless governments here provide $2.3-billion (U.S.) in loans and its Canadian union agrees to slash labour costs by 25 per cent.

At a parliamentary committee hearing last night, Chrysler president Thomas LaSorda said the company would commit to maintaining roughly a quarter of its North American production in Canada if its “needs” are met.

Ah, yes.  The “you want these jobs to stay in Canada, you gotta pay for it” routine. We have seen it from GM and now from Chrysler. Boy, these companies sure are prudent in the art of blackmail.

In my opinion, these companies are on their way out, either way. We can throw money at them, give them tax benefits, or maybe give them the whole nine yards, these companies WILL fail. If not now, then sometime in the near future. So why does it seem like a good idea by the government to put money (our money) in this business? I would rather that the government spend those billions of dollars in repatriating the displaced workers!! Why is that so hard to do?

Part of the problem is probably the workers themselves. They are unionised and losing these companies would make a dent in their status quo. I have no clue how much these workers are paid but I have heard that the amounts are way above the average in Canada. Moreover, their voices in the political spectrum is loud. They represent a block of votes that could easily go the other way if an MP does not do their biding.

I am all for unions but this is getting ridiculous. Seems like these unions need to be taken to the washers kicking and screaming. I know there is going to be a huge impact on the Ontario economy (I have a couple of relatives working in the auto related industries) but I’d rather have the impact now when the economy is down in the dumps, than when it is recovering 2 years from now.

If I understand this correctly, to save their voting bank, the MPs are going to allow the GM deal to go through and, most likely, the Chrysler deal too. And we, the tax payors, will get shafted.

Great! Higher Bills


Rogers Communications Inc., [RCI.B-T] the country’s largest wireless and cable company, sunk into the red in the fourth quarter, posting a loss of $138-million even as sales climbed 9 per cent.

The loss reflected a non-cash charge of $294-million to write down goodwill and assets in its television business that the company said was necessary to reflect a drop in value due to “recessionary declines in advertising revenue.”

All this monopolistic company needs is another fucking excuse to raise Internet and Phone bills. God, I hate the ISPs and phone companies in Canada. There is no competition whatsoever and the customers are shafted every time. I am paying $100 every month for only phone and internet services and I make sure I use it minimally!! So much for the IT revolution!!