Wednesday, September 28, 2011
So, What's the Deal With Canada's Reputation? Redux
Really bothers them.
In an etching at Dr Dawg's kennel, John Cross has evidently taken umbrage at your not-so-humble author taking some time out to acknowledge the fact.
As it turns out, Cross expected that Canada would fare poorly in any attempt to measure and compare the global reputations of the world's countries. He was -- and still is -- one of the very Canada-bashers now absorbing a healthy dosage of crow.
Not that they aren't doing whatever they can to try to wriggle free of the ultimate implications of the results of the survey. Cross complains that, of all things, human rights was not featured as a subject of the survey. Apparently, in the mind of John Cross, that is some kind of game breaker.
As in so many things, Cross has apparently declined to acknowledge which way the global wind is blowing. In a world where the United Nations human rights council is populated by the worst human rights abusers in the world, it seems that human rights has become devalued as the currency of global morality.
This is very unfortunate, particularly for Canada. If the UN and its apologists had any sense of moral probity in relation to these important principles, Canada would be one of a couple dozen countries in the world considered eligible to chair that particular committee.
Unless one considers the myth of Omar Khard's torture -- for which there is no evidence -- or the myth of Canadian involvement in torture in Afghanistan -- again, for which there is no evidence.
Cross also commits a genetic fallacy in attempting to attack the source of the information used to compile the Reputation Institute's report. He claims that the survey used only respondents from G8 countries, but this is false. The report was compiled from responses from 42,000 respondents worldwide.
It's not at all unfair to keep in mind that John Cross is an individual who does exceedingly poorly with any facts that refute whatever popular far-leftist narrative he may be pushing at any given time.
His favourite seems to be that of man-made climate change, and it behooves a responsible thinker to remember that Cross has been an apologist for climategate, and invested considerable energy in propping up the long-disproven hockey stick model of climate change; a model long shown to have absolutely zero scientific merit, and was reached through omitting an entire time period.
So, yeah. John Cross and evidence. Not really bosom buddies.
Which is the amusing thing about it all. Cross and his cohorts in Canada's far-left have obsessively insisted that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been allegedly-disastrous for Canada's global reputation.
What they've never offered is the evidence. Never offered any evidence that Canada's global reputation is suffering; never offered any evidence that it's because of Stephen Harper.
And now that it's been shown that Canada's reputation has suffered no less than each and every country governed by the kind of welfare state government they want Canada's to emulate, they're all-too eager to simply dispense with the evidence, even if they know deep down that they can't.
Deep down, John Cross simply must know that he can't sweep this one under the rug, although it is amusing watching him try.