The Only Canadian Electoral Blog Resource You Need to Read

Peter, one of our newer and very welcome regulars, has noted correctly that 99.97 percent of blog discussions on the Canadian election can be summed up in a very few words, and has generously prepared the following summary to spare you all the tiresome necessity of actually reading the same wretched and inane polemics day after day. In the proud tradition of Stageleft Public Service, we hereby present for your edification and convenience –

Peter’s Unexpurgated Daily Precis of URQ, Leftist, and Libertarian Electoral Rhetoric (PUD-PULLER).

With a single, two-minute scan, you can now simulate the experience of a half-day reading Canadian political blogs. If you’re one of those oddballs with an addiction to substance, analysis or actual thought, you can still sneak in a hit of Dawg, Damien, Bow, or any of those shameless purveyors of the Real Thing. But clinical trials by the Bunker Research Bureau have confirmed that PUD-PULLER summarizes up to 99.97% of Canadian Political blogs up with NO loss of content whatsoever.

Reader’s tip: there’s no need for us to change the content of PUD-PULLER between now and the election, since most of the bloggers that it replaces haven’t changed their thinking since 2003. However, you might want to read the bullets in a different order each day, just to add a little artistic verisimilitude to your Virtual Canadian Blogging Simulation.

Ladies and Gentlemen: PUD-PULLER!

“This used to be a great country, but now it’s going down the tubes and nobody cares.”

“ Canadian Super-Patriot is reporting that (name of enemy leader) had a booger in his nose during his speech to-day. Do you think the MSM will report that? No way, they’ve been backing him from the start.”

“This just proves that the (left, right, greens, abstainers, the religious, PR and direct democracy types, flat-earthers, etc.) are the real anti-Semites.”

(After twenty straight posts with record numbers of comments on sweaters, hockey clips, jewellry, plaigerized speeches, gaffes caught on video or candidates forced to resign) “Dammit, when will people start discussing the issues?”

“What a bunch of *&#$%^ douchebags!”

And a couple of Bunker additions to Peter’s catechism:

“After careful thought and mature, objective analysis, it is my deeply, heartfelt, non-partisan conclusion that the candidate I’ve been backing all along totally kicked everybody else’s ass in the debate/doesn’t look stupid in a weird hat/has the only workable solution to either (a) avoiding a global economic meltdown, or (b) avoiding dumb partisan panic about our Non-global Non-economic non-meltdown.”

“REAL leadership isn’t about (whatever the heck YOU mistakenly thought real leadership was about – peevish aggression, coiffured mock-populism, nerdy earnest intellectual – because it can be argued that your candidate has displayed some of it), it’s about (whatever I think real leadership is about because it can be argued that MY candidate has displayed MORE of it.)

“Yes, it may SEEM to the naive that my party/candidate is crashing in the polls like the Hindenburg chained to the Challenger chained to a half-ton anchor, but political sophisticates like ME understand that’s really a GOOD thing at this point, because…”

“Of course, it’s way too soon to say, and it would be irresponsible to speculate, but I wonder if there’s anything to the rumours going around that an organization my opponent is rumoured to have been connected with in an unspecified way an unclear number of years ago might or might not be under what could be construed as some kind of critical scrutiny by an undertermined but vaguely official-sounding organization?”