taking heed

slightly exaggerated
2008-05-09 09:30:45 (UTC)

Billshit: A man and government's crusade against creativity

There is a guy named Charles McVety. This guy is what some
would call a 'Jesus warrior,' others would call
a 'lobbyist', and still others would term a 'wing nut.'
This McVety character has taken it upon himself (with the
good graces of the right-wing Canadian government
currently in power) to spearhead the revival of a nasty
legislative bill that would inhibit federal tax credits to
Canadian film and television programs deemed to
be "offensive" (by the government/PMO). 'What is the big
deal,' you say? Well, Canadian film is no Hollywood; as it
stands right now, public funding is effectively the
floatation device, if you will, of Canadian-based film and
tv. Stripping away said funding would surely be the death
of film and tv in this country as we know it.

Upon refelection, this Bill (C-10), is not all that
shocking. It is and it isn't. As I write, there is a
veritable auction going on... let's just say that there
are some disturbing things going on at parliment these
days. Strange by any standard, well, except maybe Nazi

It is the interperative nature of the word "offensive"
that makes Bill C-10 a potentially harsh censoring tool.
And, judged on the merit in which this this bill was re-
concieved (*re-concieved as it was origionally drafted
years earlier by the Liberals in an effort to suspend
funding to a prospective movie about Karla Homolka),
McVety taking issue with the film "Young People Fucking"
after only observing the trailer, one has to wonder, would
the same rigorous screening standards apply to future
films in their fate?

George Strombolopolous, resident straight goods guru and
host of "The Hour," posed an interesting question to the
evangelist McVery during an interview on said program.
Paraphrased, "If Bill C-10 is about what is valued by the
average tax payer (and wanting to withold tax funds
to 'objectionable' films and tv programs) should not the
same standards be applied to other tax-funded areas of the
gamut? Like for instance, churches; there are a number
of 'average tax-payers' who would rather not fund
churches." McVety skirted the question, obviously, but
that is a good point in that hilights the fucking
rediculousness of this haneous bill.

So McVety, if you read this (I know you must have a diary
of secret confessions about your adventures with little
boys or something on here), I implore you to shut your
word hole, stick to your fantasies, and leave well enough

I really hope this goddamn bill gets vetoed.


Here are the email addresses of some Senate memebers, if
you have time, and even if you don't, drop them a line on
this matter:

[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]

Angus, W. David Chair - C - (Alma - Quebec)
Goldstein, Yoine Deputy Chair - Lib. - (Rigaud - Quebec)
Biron, Michel - Lib. - (Mille Isles - Quebec)
Eyton, John Trevor - C - (Ontario)
Harb, Mac - Lib. - (Ontario)
Jaffer, Mobina S.B. - Lib. - (British Columbia)
Massicotte, Paul J. - Lib. - (De Lanaudière - Quebec)
Meighen, Michael A. - C - (St. Marys - Ontario)
Moore, Wilfred P. - Lib. - (Stanhope St. / South Shore -
Nova Scotia)
Ringuette, Pierrette - Lib. - (New Brunswick)
Tkachuk, David - C - (Saskatchewan)

Try a new drinks recipe site