Riding Roughshod over the McVety Show

I've never seen Charles McVety talk for more than a few snack-sized sound bites, so last night I watched his show, which runs on the Miracle Channel, online. OUCH. My unrelentingly logical mind tends to start screaming in agony when exposed to more than a few minutes of incoherent non-sequiturs and straw men, so 20 minutes of raw, unleashed and unchained McVety was kind of a shock to the system. I may have to call in sick today.

This week, McVety treated his viewers to a rambling, repetitive and factually-inaccurate diatribe against the she-devil, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. He opened with something about "42 groups filing a complaint" (inaccurate fact #1) and went on to list 7 ways McLachlin had contravened Chuckles' Rules of Order. McLachlin, it seems, is a threat not only to democracy, but to the very fabric and foundation of Our Society, the rule of law, the family, marriage and everything else, because according to McVety she "rode roughshod" over the Order of Canada constitution. McVety got more "uh uh umm" exercised the longer he spoke, at one point sounding like he was shitting his pants ("Uh! Huh! Uhh! UHHH!!!"). And maybe he was: I would be too, if I'd been caught ASTROTURFING.

McVety was particularly incensed that in the past, McLachlin advised judges to have "active imaginations". "Active imaginations" -- what kind of thing is that for our judges to have??" thundered McVety. Those active imaginations were apparently responsible for "re-defining marriage" and causing the sky to come crashing down upon us. McVety rode roughshod over Justice Roy McMurtry, who was instrumental in making equal marriage the law in Ontario. After which all the provinces fell, one by one, like rainbow-coloured dominoes... SHRIEEEK!

McVety's 20-minute tirade was naturally punctuated with feverish pleas for cash -- "Get involved! Get a degree from Canada Christian College! Call us tonight! Our operators are standing by!" -- as the words "MASTERCARD or VISA available!" scrolled along the bottom of the screen. These unrelenting hucksters always have an eye on the Main Chance.

"Call us tonight"? Well, I tried.

Unfortunately, operators were not standing by -- either that or the Jesus Camp Phone Police already have my number flagged as that of a godless miscreant and worse, a cheapskate. By divine intervention, my call was greeted with a continuous busy signal, and being one of the amoral "leftists" who demands instant gratification, I hung up. Maybe that's how they weed us out. Oh well, I'm pretty sure Chuckles wouldn't have wanted to answer my questions about Astroturfing anyway... even if he'd really been available to speak to, which he wasn't, this show having been pre-recorded. Chiselers!

The video, should you be so inclined, is up at word.ca... it really must be seen to be believed.

Heck hath no fury

...like a socon scorned, and after he unloaded on the CFAC's complaint against Justice McLachlin in the National Post yesterday, Colby Cosh might be feeling some socon wrath. (But like most of us, he probably doesn't care.)

Cosh's op-ed hit one out of the park: he called the CFAC's letter of complaint "bizarre" and jeered at the Massive 42 Organizations™ that supposedly signed on to it, putting "42 organizations" in "quotes". HA! He even referenced some of the original information turned up by Buckets in his research on the CFAC's astroturfing, and appropriately disgusted at yet another odious example of socon sleight-of-hand, proceeded to tear the CFAC and their complaint 8 new assholes:

"CFAC’s letter of complaint is a bizarre document even if one overlooks the sheer improbability of having a Chief Justice cashiered over some supposed act of jiggery-pokery involving the Order of Canada. CFAC’s Web site, whereupon the hyperlink to the letter is currently broken, has marshalled “42 organizations” in support of their missive; eccentrically, the “organizations” include several small businesses (Can Am Fabricating and Welding stands strong in favour of life!) and at least one private citizen."

"Its arguments, rest assured, are no less weird. The Constitution of the Order states that a member may be terminated if his conduct marks “a significant departure from generally-recognized standards of public behaviour which is seen to undermine the credibility, integrity or relevance of the Order.” According to CFAC, Morgentaler’s years of challenging abortion law are obviously in violation of “the norms of society”: Ergo, the Chief Justice of Canada must be fired. It’s simple logic, people!"

But socon Johnny Quest was not pleased, leaving this odourific little diatribe on the carpet of the comments section:

HRCs attacking socon groups!?? Feminazis driving them out of universities? The Broadcast Standards Council rendering them too controversial for airtime!? They have their own 24/7 channel, fer fuck sake. JQ's brain is clearly squirming like a toad on crack, but his comments highlight the delusional persecution complex that characterizes the religious right. They truly believe that if they can't tell everyone else how to live, they're being silenced, censored and persecuted.

More of this, please: more articles like Cosh's, taking these cretins to task, and more public displays of inanity like Johnny Q's comment. And more questions before taking these people at their word about who they are and what credentials they've earned.

The "42 Organizations" Crash Diet

Woohoo! Here's the most current list of the Canada Family Action Coalition's "42 organizations" that signed the complaint against Justice McLachlin, revised to reflect its Ultra TRUTHfast™ diet and subsequent slim-down. As it stands, without the bloat there are now 20 legitimate "groups", less than half of the original 42. To those still left on the list:

"Have ya called Buckets yet?"

UPDATE (Aug. 23): 18! ~ 18! ~ 18! ~ 18! ~ 18! ~ 18! ~ 18!

Chuck McVety: Feminist Icon

Shorter Chuckles McVety: "My complaint against Justice McLachlin is swirling in the bowl. Look! Over there! Shiny, sparkly, pornographic thing!"

"A faith-based conservative family group said it would like the Harper government to intervene to block a broadcasting licence issued to a new Canadian porn channel.

The Canada Family Action Coalition wants the Conservatives to quash last week's decision by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to grant a licence to adult film network Northern Peaks."

The licence granted to Alberta-based Real Productions requires the new channel broadcast 50 per cent Canadian content. That means Canadian young people will be enlisted to work on and in some cases appear in porn films, says Charles McVety, president of CFAC.

"It is to the public detriment to fuel an industry where women are degraded and treated as sex objects," he said." (emphasis mine)

HAHAHAHAHAHA! Like taking away our reproductive rights and turning us into baby-making machines isn't treating us as objects? How is being treated as a forced-birthing object any better than being treated as a sex object?

And bonus: "Charles McVety"? Not "DOCTOR Charles McVety"? You're getting it, MSM. Next step: questions! questions! and more questions!

(H/T: PSA)

A little balance... from the Globe & Mail!

From an editorial today titled "Smearing the Chief Justice": now this is more like it:

"Still upset over the appointment of Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada, a coalition of anti-abortion groups has filed a complaint with the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC), accusing Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin of misconduct for her part in chairing the Order of Canada advisory council. It is a frivolous accusation and one that the Chief Justice should not have to answer at all, much less publicly.

Those who oppose abortion, or seek restrictions to protect the lives of fetuses, take the decision to honour Dr. Morgentaler as an affront. To disagree with his appointment is reasonable -- abortion remains a polarizing issue -- but complaints about the outcome should be made to the Governor-General, who awards the Order of Canada, not to the CJC.

To attack the process by which Dr. Morgentaler was appointed to the Order of Canada is also open to the Canadian Family Action Coalition. The group can do so by challenging the Constitution of the Order of Canada, which obliges the Chief Justice to act as the chair of the advisory council to the Order of Canada.

Accusing the Chief Justice of judicial misconduct, however, suggests these activists are merely looking for publicity." [...]

"If the Canadian Family Action Coalition is concerned about the constitutionality of the provision under the Constitution of the Order of Canada requiring the Chief Justice to chair the advisory council, the group should challenge the requirements of the law. This complaint to the CJC about the Chief Justice's alleged misconduct is a cheap shot, and unconvincing." (emphasis mine)

W00t! And that's without even knowing about the Astroturfing.

Today's "42 Organizations" special: 50% off!!!

I had so much fun with the migraine-inducingly confusing United Families Canada that I couldn't resist checking out another name on the amazing shrinking List of 42™©®. Next target: "Live-In International". Can you believe I was unable to find out anything about this organization/business or whatever? (What? You can believe it?)

I realize that some of these "pro-life" and religious groups are teenie-weenie (heavy on the "weenie"). But it raises the question of how small is too small -- one person is too small to be a group, but it can still be on the list as one person, as long as it's verifiable that they exist. Even the tiny little one-person businesses on the list are at least searchable (which is how buckets found out some of them were astroturfing).

So should the elusive "Live-In International" be included in the list of organizations behind the complaint? Well, maybe -- if we could prove that it exists. But given what I've found (or not been able to find) so far, I think it's chopping material. Using an organization that's unsearchable and unverifiable is almost like, well, making up names and adding them.

So Chop-chop, "Live-In International"! Unless Buckets or one of you guys reading can find out something about this thing, it's Bye-bye! And this 50% Off Astroturf Sale brings the original List of 42™©® down to 21. For now.
UPDATE: CC has more on another one of the "complainants", 4 My Canada... more astroturfing? And then there were 20?

UPDATE II: Or... maybe not. From PSA at CC.

UPDATE III: Correction! "Live-in International" is a real group after all, a small group by the sounds of it, but big enough to be considered a group. So says buckets here in the comments. D'oh! No Half-price sale today, we're back up to 22!

Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to

...ASTROTURF!!!

Last night, looking at the slimmed-down list of groups named in the complaint against Justice McLachlin, I got interested in "United Families Canada". UFC got my attention because it didn't appear to have a website or anything else to prove its existence, other than some text in the banner of the "Restore Marriage Canada" website, and this, on the RMC "About Us" page:


"The Canadian affiliate of United Families International" -- is that so? Well, that's funny because "United Families Canada" isn't even listed on UFI's "Affiliates" page:


In fact, I combed the UFI site and couldn't find "United Families Canada" listed anywhere at all. The closest thing is in the UFI's "Projects" category, where "Restore Marriage Canada" is listed. And of course, as mentioned previously, "Restore Marriage Canada" claims to be a project of "United Families Canada". And around and around and around it goes, where the bullshit stops, nobody knows.

When the obfuscating crap is pared away, there are only two players here: a US group, "United Families International", and one of its projects, "Restore Marriage Canada". (Why the state of Canadian marriage would be any concern of a US group is another story.) There is one person, Jill Cahoon, who calls herself "president of United Families Canada". There's a PO box for UFC in Aetna, Alberta. On the Canada Family Action Coalition's "Defend Marriage"astroturf list contacts page, "United Families Canada" is listed with Ms. Cahoon's home phone number in Tofield, Alberta.


I've been unable to find any members of "United Families Canada" other than its president... probably because it isn't a group at all. It's one person who copy/pastes newsletters from the US group "United Families International" on the "Restore Marriage Canada" website, which itself is a project of the aforementioned UFI:


and for that she gets the honour of calling herself "El Presidente". In fact, the only proof that "United Families Canada" even exists, is that Ms. Cahoon says so...


...and, well, given the truthiness track record of Rushfeldt's 42 groups™©®, I'm afraid that's just not acceptable. Certainly not if it's to be named in something as serious as a complaint against a Supreme Court Chief Justice. What do they think this is, friggin Amateur Hour? This is serious fuckery. "United Families Canada" should therefore be struck from Rushfeldt's list of groups, and at best, replaced with the name of an individual person, Ms. Jill Cahoon.

Yo, buckets: did you say "25"? How about 24??

UPDATE: And another one's gone and another one's gone... "Take Back Canada" isn't a group or even a person fer fuck sake, it's just a website. I'm sure some douche runs it (the "Stop The HRCs" banner looks, um, familiar), but Whois didn't reveal any information. Therefore, chop chop! Off it comes! What have we got now, 23?

UPPERDATE: Goodbye, North Shore Pro-Life (or "Right to Life", with the same address and phone number it's all good), subsidiary of Pro-Life BC, provincial affiliate of Life Canada. And then there were 22... will we make it down to HALF? Stay tuned...

Let the good times (and letters to the Globe & Mail) roll!

HAHAHAHAHA! Here in the Miscreants' Corner, it's been an asskickingly good time today since law blogger Christopher Bird took the fundies' complaint against Justice Beverley McLachlin out to the parking lot for a good beat down. But it's not all fun and games. There's work to do.

What have we got? Let's recap:

1. An entity misrepresenting itself as "42" groups, organizations, coalitions, circlejerks, whatever, when in fact (as meticulously documented by Buckets), there are at best 28 27 groups.

2. Even some of the "groups" within the Gang of 42™ were found not to be groups at all, but rather ideologically like-minded individuals. Sophistry like this -- a woman who runs a one-person wedding and marriage counseling service under the name of "Together for Life Ministries" and is counted as "an organization" -- is rampant.

3. According to Christopher Bird's spectacular smackdown, from a legal standpoint the complaint itself is bogus, misrepresenting not only the people who filed it, but Justice McLachlin, the Order of Canada process and the law itself:

"The Canada Family Action Coalition and their “42 organizations” have misrepresented themselves, misrepresented Chief Justice McLachlin and misrepresented the law. This is dishonest."

4. We have our intrepid mainstream media, who without a second of research or critical thought, swallowed whole the story barfed up by one of the shysters who's running this pernicious little scam, then regurgitated it for public consumption. (Including continuing to call McVety "doctor", a title he may or may not have earned.)

Those are the pieces to the puzzle.

Now. All summer long, McVety and his fellow socon travellers have been grousing and whining, gasping and swooning, shrieking and fainting about the Morgentaler Order of Canada. They've tried protests, facebook groups, medal returns, MASSIVE polls and more, all to no avail. The complaint against Justice McLachlin is just one more item in a laundry list of failed fetus fetishist fuckery. But MASSIVE POLLs are one thing, trying to have a Supreme Court Chief Justice impeached is another.

It's long past time for the MSM to look at the puzzle we've obligingly pieced together ('specially Buckets and Christopher) and publish the truth: start exposing these cheap chiselers and theocratic snake oil salesmen for the frauds they are. To start, let us make a not-so-joyful noise unto the Globe & Mail. To start.

UPDATE: Antonia Z gets it. If only the rest would follow her lead.

And the BLOGGER gazed upon her e-mail... and saw that it was GOOD.

Last night something came up in my Google alerts that looked interesting. It was a post at Court.ca, the Osgoode Law School blog, that seemed to indicate the complaint filed by the 42 Religious Groups™ against Justice McLachlin wasn't all it was cracked up to be.


So I clicked: 404. Damn. Google cache yielded nothing, obviously it was too recent a post. Fuck. But to my coffee-spewing delight, an email from Christopher Bird, the author of the post, informs me that the post is up now, baby, and WOOHOOHAHAHAHA, YES!

Christopher picks up the 42 Religious Groups™©® ball and runs with that awhile:

"In short, the list of “42 organizations” is shockingly dishonest even before it says anything, seeking to portray individuals as political organizations and overstating the political impact of the actual organizations by falsely multiplying their number."

...then he gets into the legal meat of the complaint itself and kicks its ass around the block.

Christopher winds up for the TKO:

"Of all the allegations contained within this deeply spurious letter, this is the most serious, which is no doubt why it led Chief Justice McLachlin to take the rare step of publicly addressing the matter. She explained that she did not lead discussion or even vote for Morgentaler, but merely chaired the meeting to make sure that the vote is conducted fairly. In response to this eminently reasonable answer, the Canada Family Action Coalition complained that she did not address their spurious complaints and insulted her repeatedly.

The Canada Family Action Coalition and their “42 organizations” have misrepresented themselves, misrepresented Chief Justice McLachlin and misrepresented the law. This is dishonest. More ironically, it is also un-Christian: as the Bible states in Isaiah 8:20, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.”"

Oh, Chuck. Bad Chuck. NASTY Chuck. UN-Christian Chuck. THIS judge finds you GUILTY of LYING DOUCHEBAGGERY IN THE FIRST DEGREE, and hereby sentences you to a lifetime of watching an endless loop of "Young People Fucking"... oh wait, that's already ongoing, isn't it?

UPDATE: In my feverish Chuckstomping excitement, I didn't read any further than Christopher's email, but I see Pogge also emailed me about this, and posted about it. (Thanks, pogge!)

Keep talking, douchebags

After a 2-day window of stunned silence (and scrambling like chickens on speed to come up with a statement that might help mend their tattered credibility), there's finally been a response to Justice McLachlin's drop-kick to the withered nads of the 42 39 38 37 36 33 29 28(?) Religious Groups™ demanding her impeachment. And a slimy piece of goalpost-shifting sophistry it is, but what else would you expect from a vile scumbag and cheap chiseler like Charles McVety?:

"However, Dr. McVety, whose organization launched a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council about the Chief Justice's conduct in the Morgentaler matter, said her explanation implicates her even more deeply in misconduct. "We* were quite astonished to read reports of what she had said," Dr. McVety said.

"We never accused her of voting. We accused her of disregarding the constitution that she is bound to serve. By expressing her approval of the process, she is expressing approval of Morgentaler's activism on abortion."

*"We" -- heh. And so what? Abortion is a legal procedure, so who cares if McLachlin approves of it or not? Well, there's an answer for that, too:

"Dr. McVety said that as the chair of a committee that is instrumental in conferring honours on individuals, some of whom may represent controversial causes that could come before the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice's independence is automatically compromised." (emphasis mine)

"Controversial causes that might come before the Supreme Court" -- like abortion, maybe?

It's become abundantly clear that the religious whackjobs and crotch-sniffers are hoping for some kind of court action involving abortion in the foreseeable future, probably initiated by Bill C-484 (if it passed, which is unlikely), and are working feverishly to ensure that no womens' rights-favouring judge will screw it up for them. If they can't stack the Supreme Court with conservatives by appointment, they'll do it by attrition. That's one of the reasons this bogus complaint won't go anywhere -- if McVety was successful in having one justice removed, that would just be the beginning.

It's funny how they totally miss the underlying meaning of this whole Morgentaler thing, which is that Justice McLachlin's independence hasn't been compromised for the simple reason that abortion rights will never come before the Supreme Court again. Ever. It's already been done, and no government with an instinct of self-preservation would even think about doing it again, regardless of what some of the fundamentalist chimps in caucus might say.

"42" isn't the answer to everything...

Saturday started on a bad enough note for the fetus fetishists, when Justice Beverley McLachlin took their mewling complaints about her supposed involvement in the Morgentaler Order of Canada straight out to the woodshed for a good flogging. The revelation that McLachlin had nothing to do with the Morgentaler appointment left the "42 religious groups" who sought her impeachment too busy wiping egg from their faces to respond to Judge Bev's righteous smackdown.

But while the MSM dutifully continued to refer to the "42 religious groups", some of us idly wondered just what "42 groups" really meant. Bene D published a list of all the groups behind the complaint, and it turned out that some of them weren't groups at all, but individuals and businesses. It was already a given that a few of the groups probably had some serious overlap -- different names, but basically run by and representing the same people. It's an American strategy that McVety imported to Canada -- establish a shitload of groups, coalitions and organizations to make the religious right "grassroots" look bigger and more important than it really is. So it was assumed that the "42 religious groups" were probably less than the sum of their parts.

Then Buckets got interested.

Oh fuck.

At that point, the fetus fetishists' day just went from bad to worse.

As he started researching and cross-referencing the groups on the list of 42 and eliminating individuals and overlap, Buckets found the number of legitimate "groups" coming down a bit... and a bit more... and more... and even more... and still more... at this point, who knows how low it will go?

So what we have here is a small coalition of religious right ideologues, misrepresenting themselves as "42 groups", erroneously filing a complaint seeking the removal of a Supreme Court Judge. That's serious fuckery -- serious enough that the MSM should be asking some very pointed questions about these people, their organizations, their tax status, and why they were able to push this as far as they did under such false pretenses. Will they?

UPDATE: Down down down it goes, where it stops, who the fuck knows?

What a waste

Talk about your "misdirected outrage". The 42 "religious groups" (yeah yeah, okay, 41 religious groups plus "Physicians for Life", nothing religious about them) who filed a complaint against Justice Beverley McLachlin, are apparently wasting their time. The 42 groups -- and for the sake of simplicity, let's just call them, oh, I don't know -- how about fetus fetishists! -- who want McLachlin removed from her post over her supposed role in the Morgentaler Order of Canada appointment are, typically, barking, whining and shrieking up the wrong tree. At her annual Canadian Bar Association news conference today, Justice McLachlin addressed the misinformation that's been spun around Dr. M's OC, and the OC selection process itself:

"Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin defended her role Saturday in the controversial appointment of Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada, shedding light on the secret process that awarded the abortion-rights doctor the prestigious distinction.

Ms. McLachlin, as head of a Governor General's advisory council that selects Order of Council recipients, said she abstained from voting on the July nomination, despite "misinformation" that she was the driving force behind Mr. Morgentaler's appointment." [...]

"Ms. McLachlin also disputed news reports that it was unusual for the advisory council to vote on a candidate and the group usually reaches a decision unanimously.

"There has been no practice of consensus," said Ms. McLachlin. Rather, the group routinely votes on a nomination and she said she has only voted once to break a tie."

So there you have it: fetus fetishists, wrong again. Wrong and stupid. Wrong, stupid and wasting taxpayers' dollars, since every complaint has to be investigated and responded to. Hands up, everyone who's shocked!

What!? Not even a little?

UPDATE: Birth Pangs got there first! (With UppityDate goodness.)

LYING LIARS! UPDATE: About these "42 religious groups"... Buckets begs to differ.

DON'T GET ON THE BAD SIDE OF BUCKETS! UPDATE: Buckets digs... numbers fall...

BUCKETS ON A ROLL! UPDATE: Buckets keeps digging, and the numbers keep falling... and falling...

BUCKETS IS ON FIRE! UPDATE: Down, down, down...