Are you ready? Last summer, a busload of 40 people from the British government, the royal household, and even the provincial government travelled around the New Brunswick to see where the prince and the duchess will stay on their visit, and where they will go for walks on their visit to New Brunswick. But the TandT can't tell us anything about it. So they don't tell us anything for about a half page.
Boy! That's a relief. I'm happy to learn that my taxes are being spent for something essential.
And remember how yesterday's editorial was such a dumb one? Well, today's is clever. The cleverness is mostly in lying but, hey, you take what you can get.
This little effort begins with the theory (disproven some eighty years ago) that the way out of recession is to cut government spending. Mind you, this part is probably not clever lying. It's more likely just an editorial ignorance what what's beein going on in the world for the last eighty years.
But then the editor writes we must cut costs at all levels of government. WE MUST ALL SHARE THE PAIN.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Can anyone seriously believe the editor is suggesting the Irvings and McCains and Ganongs should share the pain? That they should pay higher taxes to balance the budget? They should give up their handouts and permits and special considerations?
Then, of course, the editor wants the government to be sure to fire lots of its bureaucrats - especially those in Parks Canada - so they lose their jobs in the same proportion as those who work in the parks. Great idea!
So when banks or shipbuilding firms or mines fire people because business is slow, shouldn't they fire their top bureaucrats in the same proportion? I've never seen it work that way. When American banks, by a combinaion of criminality, irresponsibility and corruption made millions homeless and jobless, and made paupers out of a full quarter of the nation's children, their bureaucrats didn't get fired. They didn't share the pain. Quite the contrary, they got bonusses. And no TandT editorial has even seen a problem with that.
The editorial ends with a slam suggesting the salaries of our civil servants (bureaucrats) are exorbitant. And it wants to see them published. Come off it.
There is nobody working for government who comes close to the salaries, bonusses and perks of the bureaucrats in private business. And there is nobody in the civil service who comes close to the private corporation sector in vote-buying, manipulation and corruption.
But no editor of the Moncton Times and Transcript will ever say that. How could he? The Moncton Times and Transcript is one of the prime means of manipulating the people of New Brunswick, and covering up corruption.
But it's a clever editorial - seeming to appeal on the side of the poor and downtrodden, and striking down those who oppress them. Too bad it's lying.
Incidentally, the world bureaucracy developed when, some 350 years ago, governments began dividng their work up by departments staffed by people with training in the work of that department. Since this originated with the France of Louis XIV, departments became known under ther French word - bureaux. So those who worked as officers of departments were called bureaucrats. It's not a dirty word.
In fact, the system was so successful, it was copied by business. That's right. Modern business structure is modelled on the civil service bureaucracy. Over the years, particularly from 1930 on, the civil service bureaucracy has proven itself far more efficient and honest, and far more economical, that the bureaucracy of private business. In fact, there was a period about 1950 when major corporations sent their senior executives to study the efficient methods of the civil service. Then they saw the dangers this posed to their own power and profits.
That's why pimping newspapers like The Times and Transcript have tried to make bureaucracy into a dirty word, and to suggest top civil servants are rolling in money.
The reality is that most civil servants are better, more honest, and far lower paid than their counterparts in private business.
There's a good, if not cheerful, column by Alec Bruce on how empty speeches, like Alward's recent one on innovation, con't get us anywhere.
Jody Dallaire writes a furious column about a private radio station that runs drooling, sexist ads and promos. I can certainly agree with her anger. She has to remember, though, that private radio is, for the most part, run by drooling louts so that it now is even more mindless than television. (I wouldn't have thought that possible.)
I was on private radio, a very large station, daily for a dozen years. All that made it worthwhile was my boss, Gord Sinclair (son of the Gord Sinclair some may remember from television a long time ago.). His bosses wanted rant and trivia, much like the Times and Transcript. But Gord, a real professional, one who believed in the ethics of journalism, stood like a rock against them - and he was too popular to be touched. When he died, I knew my days were numbered. And I was right.
Jody, you're dealing with irresponsible morons.
A letter to the editor complains about sex education in the schools. Damn right. Until schools started teaching sex education, students never even thought of sex. When I was a kid, I never thought of sex. I mean, God told Eve not to eat that apple. God's word was good enough for me. I never touched an apple.
Funny thing, though. Before He told Eve not to eat the apple of knowledge, he told Adam to be fruitful and multiply.
How the hell was Adam supposed to know how to be fruitful and multiply without taking a bite of the apple?