http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2013/05/20130523-115240.html

What is striking is that the Toronto Star makes no mention of it.

Now, one could say this is an isolated incident. But I am told that if one reads the back pages of Professionally Speaking Magazine, that all teachers get for free in the mail, we read all sorts of stories like the above.

There is a lot of mediocrity in teaching because it is so hard to get rid of an incompetent teacher, almost impossible short of a criminal act.

I’m not saying unions are a bad thing. But let’s listen to one of the greatest thinkers in the U.S, a black man, economist and political commentators Thomas Sowell: “The biggest myth about labor unions is that unions are for the workers. Unions are for unions, just as corporations are for corporations and politicians are for politicians. Nothing shows the utter cynicism of the unions and the politicians who do their bidding like the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act” that the Obama administration tried to push through Congress. Workers’ free choice as to whether or not to join a union is precisely what that legislation would destroy. Workers already have a free choice in secret-ballot elections conducted under existing laws. As more and more workers in the private sector have voted to reject having a union represent them, the unions’ answer has been to take away secret-ballot elections. Under the “Employee Free Choice Act” unions would not have to win in secret ballot elections in order to represent the workers. Instead, union representatives could simply collect signatures from the workers until they had a majority. Why do we have secret ballots in the first place, whether in elections for unions or elections for government officials? To prevent intimidation and allow people to vote how they want to, without fear of retaliation. This is a crucial right that unions want to take away from workers. The actions of union mobs in Wisconsin, Ohio and elsewhere give us a free home demonstration of how little they respect the rights of those who disagree with them and how much they rely on harassment and threats to get what they want……”

He says much more, but I think you get the point. As one union leader recently said, “when students start paying union dues, we’ll represent them.” How does one ignore this concrete evidence that teachers unions do not have the best interest of students in mind, nor do they have the common good of the civil community in mind, they don’t even have the rights of the constituents at heart. Just look at the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association. It is an arm of the NDP party. What about those teachers who vote conservative? They don’t get representation. Their dues are used to support the NDP and for campaigns against the Ontario Conservatives. But that’s not their mandate. Their mandate is to represent teachers, to find out what they need and represent them. Instead, they use their position to fulfill their dreams of political activism.

Unions are no different than corporations. Both are for themselves. The difference is that corporations give us things we value, ie cars, soda pop, cell phones, computers, televisions, lawnmowers, microwave ovens, tools, airplanes, buses, toothpaste, etc., while teachers unions give us mediocre teachers who can’t be fired. Which one do you want?

It’s true that with ST, teachers are tempted to teach to the test, but what do we do when kids are not getting the education they could be getting, because the teacher is a lazy lout and couldn’t care less about the kids, but cares first and foremost about him or herself? There are lots of teachers that are like that. Not all, of course, but I know many great teachers and their biggest complaint is not the kids, not the administration, but their colleagues in teaching. The majority are not good teachers, just as the majority of unionized nurses are not good nurses, but mediocre nurses. If everyone were the dedicated gold star teacher that we like to write about and celebrate, we would not need ST or private schools, etc.

You think there are simple solutions. There are not. There are only trade offs. Which alternative has the best trade offs? You have just attacked one side, but let’s hear about the other side so we can understand why people over react, or what is perceived to be an over reaction.

Your thinking is very simple and one sided. Life is more complex and subtle than your simple “oppressed vs. oppressor” “victim vs. greedy money hungry capitalist” model of reality. I don’t like the standardized test thing either, because I think kids learn at a different pace, and people have different intellectual dispositions. But you reduce all problems to the greed of corporate free marketeers. That’s just a simple paradigm, and it is one that is not true to reality. Reality is just more complex than the simple Marxist dialectic that you use to interpret reality. Sorry, but that’s the truth.

The only point I want to make now is that things are far more complex than you make them out to be. For example, the following line:

“No one has done more to destroy Canadian democracy than Harper.Who owns the papers?”

This is just dumb. You can’t be serious. Destroy democracy? Where in the world do you get this idea? I think people are tired of unemployment.

“Have you ever heard of the Sun chain doing anything other than opinion”.

I’m not even sure what this means. Looking at the next line about “digging”, I’d say that Sun News digs far more often and far more deeply than any other news channel. But the Toronto Star always gets it wrong when it writes on the Church. Always gets it wrong. And aren’t those opinion pieces? I have no idea the point you are making.

At least the Star digs like newspapers should.

What does this mean? It means absolutely nothing.

The Sun and many US rags channel the positions of the wealthy owners. Hence the support of Harper.

Okay, but what are those positions of the wealthy owners? I guess the best answer is read the newspaper and find out. What is the position of the Toronto Star? What is the position of the Globe and Mail? You’d be a complete fool to say “conservative”. The Sun does not try to hide its conservative bias. It acknowledges it. But that’s not the case with the CBC.

Yesterday on Sun News, Michael Coren interviewed Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, from the Polycarp Research Institute. He spoke about the well documented link between the contraceptive birth control pill and breast cancer (not to mention the other adverse medical side effects). He spoke about how solid is the evidence, but that it will simply not be published by the major newspapers–until they begin to get sued by women suffering from breast cancer, which will eventually begin to happen. And you know the pharmaceutical companies are behind this. Big dollars behind this, and so they don’t want to piss off the pharmaceutical companies. Meanwhile, a Firestone tire explodes on the road, injuring a small family and there is a massive recall of Firestone Tires.

So that confirms your claim, but the problem is you too have fallen for this. You wouldn’t post anything like the link between the pill and breast cancer. You wouldn’t defend Church teaching on contraception. For you, morality is all on the level of government distribution. Like Marx, it has nothing to do with individual persons. You too are right in line with these big corporations. You have an inconsistent position. It’s the smaller businesses we have to help, but you have it in your mind that “business = conservative”.

The best thing that can happen to you is that you establish your own business and learn what is involved. Yes, you can’t compete with the big fish, because of crony capitalism, and these big fish do not wear blue, they wear red. They are thoroughly liberal. The problem with genuine conservatism is that they believe in free competition. That scares those who have the monopoly. I remember when I was a teenager (1979), my phone bill was more than it is today. There was no competition. Competition and the free market raises people out of poverty. Look what’s happening in India. Untouchables have become billionaires. Since 1991, millions have been lifted out of poverty. All as a result of opening themselves to the free market. China the same, although it has a ways to go.

I don’t think you have a clue to the distinction between crony capitalism and genuine capitalism.

Of course the Internet is worse, giving free rein to the angry white men crowd—-yet, yet there are many sites which bring excellent information—but generally don’t look to corporate controlled papers.

That’s precisely why newspaper readership is sinking, NOT because people are tired of controlled news, but because of internet. That’s why newspapers are struggling. People are getting their news online. But still, what you write above is so confused. Giving free rein to the angry white men crowd? What kind of nonsense is that? Who are you referring to? White men? There are no angry black men? No angry brown men?

What is it you want? You don’t want corporate control of the news, and that’s understandable, but you want it controlled by whom? By the left? By those who hold the same positions you hold politically and economically? What is the role of news? Let’s clarify that for starters.

Why isn’t this on the local news?

http://ezralevant.com/2013/05/mulcairs-bestkept-secret-oppos.html

How’s that for digging? Why so much on Rob Ford and nothing on this man?

“Newness always makes us a bit fearful, because we feel more secure if we have everything under control, if we are the ones who build, program, and plan our lives,” Pope Francis said. “This is also the case when it comes to God. It is hard to abandon ourselves to him with complete trust, allowing the Holy Spirit to be the soul and guide of our lives.”

We fear that God may force us to strike out on new paths and leave behind our all too narrow, closed and selfish horizons in order to become open to his own. Yet throughout the history of salvation, whenever God reveals himself, He brings newness—God always brings newness—and demands our complete trust.”

Drawing from the examples of Noah, Abraham and Moses, Pope Francis said that the “newness” of the Holy Spirit brought the joy, serenity and courage to proclaim the Gospel to the disciples of Christ. However, the Holy Father called on the faithful to ask themselves if they are “open to God’s surprises” or if we are “closed and fearful before the newness of the Holy Spirit.”

“The Holy Spirit,” the 76 year old pontiff said, “would appear to create disorder in the Church, since he brings the diversity of charisms and gifts; yet all this, by his working, is a great source of wealth, for the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of unity, which does not mean uniformity, but which leads everything back to harmony.”

“In the Church, it is the Holy Spirit who creates harmony. Only the Spirit can awaken diversity, plurality, and multiplicity, while at the same time building unity. Here too, when we are the ones who try to create diversity and close ourselves up in what makes us different and other, we bring division. When we are the ones who want to build unity in accordance with our human plans, we end up creating uniformity, standardization. But if instead we let ourselves be guided by the Spirit, richness, variety and diversity never become a source of conflict, because he impels us to experience variety within the communion of the Church.”

Pope Francis reminded the members from all the various movements and ecclesial realities of the Catholic Church to always remain true to the Church, warning that when one embarks on a “parallel journey” that goes beyond the Church’s teaching, they “are not one with the God of Jesus Christ.”

Concluding his homily, the Holy Father emphasized the need for the Holy Spirit, comparing to the wind which fills the sails of the soul and drives it forward.
“The Holy Spirit,” the Pope concluded, “draws us into the mystery of the living God and saves us from the threat of a Church which is gnostic and self-referential, closed in on herself; He impels us to open the doors and go forth to proclaim and bear witness to the goodness of the Gospel.”

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS GO TO MASS AND HEAR SOME.

Was the Spirit absent from the world before Jesus? Hardly.

YES AND NO. PENTECOST IS NOT A REALITY IF THERE IS NOTHING NEW AFTERWARDS, THAT IS, NOTHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENT BEFORE. GOD IS NEVER ABSENT FROM HIS CREATION, BUT JESUS CAME TO RESTORE “DIVINE FAVOR” TO HUMANITY (DIVINE GRACE). THE PROPHECIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CLEARLY INDICATE THAT SOMETHING NEW WILL TAKE PLACE. “And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.” Joel 2, 28.

THAT CLEARLY POINTS TO SOMETHING THAT WILL HAPPEN, THIS OUTPOURING WILL BE SOMETHING NEW.

The Holy One has been at work right from the beginning. The life force has been working within all of creation forever.

THIS IS REALLY A SUBTLE DENIAL OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE FAITH. GOD HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT WORK, BUT DIFFERENTLY AT DIFFERENT TIMES. HE REVEALS HIMSELF NATURALLY IN CREATION, BUT HE CHOSE TO REVEAL HIMSELF THROUGH HISTORY IN HIS COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM. THAT’S UNIQUE. AND THEN HE REVEALED HIMSELF IN THE FLESH, AGAIN, SOMETHING UNIQUE AND SUPERNATURAL. THE DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS SOMETHING RADICALLY NEW.

It was this deep intuition, in the scripture it is called “kingdom” or basileia in the language of the New Testament, this felt reality which brought Jesus.

HUH? THIS IS MUDDLED.

He was hardly the first to be so touched.

TOUCHED? TOUCHED BY WHAT? WE ARE TOUCHED BY HIM. HE CAME TO TOUCH US.

There have been other avatars.

OH, BOY! THERE WE HAVE IT! NO, JESUS IS NOT AN AVATAR AMONG AVATARS, NOR THE AVATAR OF AVATARS. HE’S THE WORD MADE FLESH. CLEARLY YOU’VE DEPARTED FROM THE FAITH.

NAME ME ANOTHER AVATAR!

Christians believe of course that his response was the fullest,

THAT’S BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE HE WAS DIVINE: BOTH GOD AND MAN. IF HE WERE NOT, THEN CHRISTIANS ARE CHILDISH TO SAY THAT HIS RESPONSE WAS THE FULLEST: OUR AVATAR WAS BETTER THAN YOUR AVATAR!

a breakthrough moment in history. Ernst Troeltsch said this: “Jesus did not bring the kingdom, the kingdom brought Jesus”

YEAH, SO? WHO IS ERNST TROELTSCH? WHAT AUTHORITY DOES HE HAVE? WHY SHOULD I LISTEN TO HIM OVER 2000 YEARS OF CHURCH TEACHING?

and it is bringing us—if we are open to its dynamism, creativity, relationality.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? DO YOU THINK YOU SOUND PROFOUND? BECAUSE YOU DON’T. YOU SOUND SILLY.

One needs an evolutionary perspective to come close to understanding this.

AH! THANKS FOR STEERING ME IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. YES, GOD IS IN PROCESS! REALITY IS THE EVOLUTION OF PURE CONSCIOUSNESS! SO DEEP, SO SOPHISTICATED, SO RATIONAL.

We fumble with language, metaphor, ways of expressing this.

CORRECTION: YOU FUMBLE WITH LANGUAGE. THE DOCTORS OF THE CHURCH WERE VERY CLEAR.

Biblical words like Advocate and Comforter are not helpful.

YES, RATHER YOUR FUMBLING TERMINOLOGY IS MUCH MORE HELPFUL. GOLLY, WHY DIDN’T GOD INSPIRE YOU TO WRITE THE SCRIPTURES? I SAY WE HIRE YOU TO TRANSLATE THE BIBLE AND RE-WRITE IT MORE ACCURATELY, FOR US DUMB IDIOTS STUCK IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

So what did we hear in our churches? I don’t know.

SO YOU DIDN’T GO TO MASS YESTERDAY? HAVE YOU LOST YOUR FAITH?

My hope is that we might first grasp the Johannine wisdom that “the Spirit blows where it wills.”

THE JOHANNINE WISDOM FILTERED THROUGH YOUR EYES, NOT AS INTERPRETED BY THE CHURCH THAT IS 2000 YEARS OLD.

The Catholic Church has no exclusive claim to this.

BUT YOU DO?

We all know people of no religion who exhibit Spirit like qualities and committed energy to justice and the common good to cosmic and global sustainability. They are vehicles of the holy energy.The kingdom has come close in these people.

HOLY ENERGY. SOUNDS SO NEW AGE. YOU MEAN DIVINE GRACE? OKAY, YES, THAT’S TRUE. YOUR POINT?

YES, THAT IS TRUE, BUT YOU ONLY HAVE HALF THE STORY. THE MEDIA IS LIBERAL DOMINATED. THERE ARE MORE THAN 5 CORPORATIONS. THE DEMOCRATS HAVE CORPORATE BACKING. YOU (WHO ARE ON THIS FORUM) SEEM TO IDENTIFY CORPORATE WITH CONSERVATIVE. THAT’S THE SUBTLE ERROR YOU ARE MAKING, LIKE MAKING A SIMPLE DIVISION ERROR IN MATHEMATICS, THE REST OF THE CONCLUSIONS VEERS OFF COURSE. THE BIGGER CORPORATIONS ARE LESS IN FAVOR OF A FREE MARKET, BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT COMPETITION. THE SMALLER CORPORATIONS TEND TO BE MORE CONSERVATIVE. THAT’S WHY NEWS MEDIA (RADIO, NEWSPAPER, TELEVISION) IS PREDOMINANTLY LEFT WING LIBERAL. I PROVIDED THE DETAILS TO THE AUTHOR OF THIS BLOG IN AN EMAIL. MAYBE HE’LL POST IT.

SO YOU ARE CORRECT, BUT YOU GOT HALF THE STORY.

Its not surprising to learn that what corporations choose to reveal is whatever is beneficial to their corporate agenda and the health of their corporations.

IT’S CALLED CRONY CAPITALISM. THE CRONIES ARE LIBERAL. THAT’S WHAT YOU PEOPLE DON’T SEEM TO UNDERSTAND, AND IN MANY WAYS, YOU’VE BOUGHT INTO IT. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW MEDIA DO AN ACCURATE TREATMENT OF THE ABORTION ISSUE? THE NATIONAL POST IS THE ONLY PAPER THAT COVERED THE MARCH FOR LIFE THIS YEAR, BUT IT POSTED A MISLEADING PICTURE AND CUT THE FIGURES IN HALF (THERE WERE 25,000 YOUNG PEOPLE THERE, BUT THEY REPORTED 12,000. THE OTHER PAPERS DIDN’T EVEN MENTION IT. THAT’S LIBERALISM FOR YOU. WHATEVER WILL KEEP THIS CULTURE MORALLY LEFT, THAT’S WHAT GETS IN. ANYTHING THAT IS A THREAT TO THIS IDEOLOGY, THAT GETS FILTERED. YES, IT IS ABOUT MONEY, BUT NOT MONEY ALONE. THERE IS A MORAL VISION BEHIND THIS. IT’S MONEY COMBINED WITH THIS LIBERAL MORAL VISION. AND YET YOU PEOPLE BUY INTO THIS MORAL VISION. HOW DO I KNOW? TELL ME YOU DID NOT VOTE FOR THE NDP (OR LIBERALS), AND I WILL ADMIT THAT I AM WRONG.

Whatever helps to keep their lifeblood – cold hard cash – flowing.

HALF THE STORY, AGAIN.

Democratic governments are enabled to carry out policies and actions behind the veil of public ignorance.

INDEED, THAT IS TRUE. AND THE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM ARE WOEFULLY IGNORANT OF THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND HOW THE MARKET WORKS, JUST AS LIBERALS WOULD LIKE YOU TO BE.

To verify these assertions look no further than the crimes committed on Wall Street in the last decade, the pretexts for the invasions of Kuwait (USSR could have resolved the standoff peacefully) and Iraq,

PRETEXTS? RAPING MOTHERS AND KILLING THEIR BABIES? EVEN AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL DID A THOROUGH COVERAGE OF SADAAM HUSEIN’S CRIMES. AND WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU OFFER THAT THE USSR COULD HAVE RESOLVED THE STANDOFF PEACEFULLY? HOW? ON THE BASIS OF WHAT DO YOU MAKE THIS ASSERTION?

the untold stories of military interference in Cuba, South America and other parts of the world, or the war in Viet Nam.

IT’S TRUE THAT WE DON’T CARE TOO MUCH ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS AROUND THE WORLD, BECAUSE WE’D RATHER READ ABOUT MICHAEL JACKSON OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, OR INSIGNIFICANT NEWS ABOUT ROB FORD, BUT YOU ARE JUST A PRODUCT OF THE HIPPIE GENERATION. AGAIN, WHAT YOU SAY IS HALF TRUE.

This amounts to the corruption of journalism on a vast scale, and the dumbing down of average citizens in supposedly democratic nations.

YES, THAT IS TRUE, BUT THAT BECAME SO EVIDENT DURING THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE. THINK BACK TO THE FIRST ONE, WHEN ROMNEY SLAUGHTERED OBAMA IN DEBATE. 80% OF THE CBC POLLS FAVORED OBAMA IN THE DEBATE, THAT IS, THOUGH OBAMA WON THE DEBATE. NOW, YOU MIGHT NOT LIKE ROMNEY, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE PRETTY STUPID TO COME AWAY FROM THAT DEBATE THINKING OBAMA WON. THERE IS A DUMBING DOWN FOR SURE. THE PEOPLE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ALMOST GOT CAUGHT, BUT THEY TOO ARE RELATIVELY UNENLIGHTENED, THAT IS, WELL TRAINED BY THE CBC. THANK GOD THEIR LEADER STARTED TO OPEN HIS ECO-FASCIST MOUTH, WHICH WOKE THEM UP SLIGHTLY. BUT STILL, THE CLOSE CALL SHOWS JUST HOW DELUDED THEY ARE. TOO MUCH POT.

To verify these assertions look no further than the crimes committed on Wall Street in the last decade, the pretexts for the invasions of Kuwait (USSR could have resolved the standoff peacefully) and Iraq, the untold stories of military interference in Cuba, South America and other parts of the world, or the war in Viet Nam. This amounts to the corruption of journalism on a vast scale, and the dumbing down of average citizens in supposedly democratic nations.