RoadKill Radio

A letter in response to Bushwhackers embarrass PM, by Mark Bonokoski

It’s remarkable that a national editorial writer would submit his two-year-old child’s article as his own. OK, that’s probably not what Sun Media’s national editorial writer Mark Bonokoski did. His child probably would have written something far more intelligent than what Bonoski himself churned out for February 9. He was writing about the move by three MPs to write a letter to the RCMP to investigate the deaths of born alive babies as possible homicides. One can’t help but wonder if he had a personal agenda, such as personal affection for the Prime Minister and strong empathy for the terrible anxiety that a weak and sickly man like Stephen Harper must be dealing with in the dark hours of the night when everybody else is peacefully sleeping!! Note that Bonokoski’s article is dated February 9, a week after the RCMP letter was made public, giving time to read and consider the other material that has been published on the controversy.

Bonokoski actually suggested that Harper should have kicked these 3 MPs out of caucus. These were the reasons he gave: “backstabbing, stupidity and the abuse of their perceived power.” A person should be kicked out of a caucus over stupidity? What pathetic totalitarian sympathies a person must have to advocate such an anti-democratic view! Bonokoski’s attitude toward caucus discipline sounds almost Stalinesque.

We’re commenting on Bonokoski’s column because of the entertainment value of its rank stupidity. It doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, and this for one reason alone. He – even as a supposed conservative (he notes that he once ran as a Canadian Alliance candidate) – claims still a week after the incident that it is all about investigating and criminalizing abortion. This is what he writes: “If they knew anything about the law, and they clearly don’t, they would know there is no section in the Criminal Code of Canada dealing with abortion. Abortion is not a crime in this country, and therefore nothing for the RCMP to possibly investigate.”

The media rarely issues corrections, yet Canadian Press, which insinuated that the investigation being demanded was over abortion, issued a correction by the end of the first day of coverage. A week ago! It’s now been well established in the public square, even by critics, that the investigation being requested is over reports of born alive babies, not abortions. Yet, consistent with the worst caricatures of religious fundamentalists, Bonokoski has clearly made up his mind about this issue and so doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Yet this is the specific point over which Bonokoski called the MPs “obviously stupid”. If this wasn’t so remarkably pathetic, it would be funny.

Bonokoski also says that it was outrageous for the MPs to exercise their own initiative in sending a letter to the RCMP. He talks about them getting their letter “past the PMO’s firewall” and he calls it “bushwhacking” of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The PM once had a much-criticized reputation of having an iron grip on his caucus. That reputation has eased up in the last year or two, but Bonokoski seems to be approving of the worst caricature of Stalinesque heavy-handedness that was ever imagined by Harper. Conservatives can be thankful that a goon like Bonokoski never infiltrated the ranks of the Conservative caucus as a sitting MP. Voters can also be thankful because Bonokoski is a coward and an ignoramus when it comes to knowing what he has the freedom to do as a Member of Canada’s Parliament and as a representative of his constituents.

Bonokoski also accused these MPs of “the abuse of their perceived power.” He writes: ” backbench MPs should not be using their elected position to call upon our federal police force to chase their tail over personal agendas, especially when their claims of crimes being committed are based entirely on their incredible ignorance of the law.”

First, Bonokoski should have more confidence in the RCMP as having more intelligence than he himself possesses. If these MPs are out of line, the national police force is fully capable of writing a letter back to them to tell them so, explaining why this is the case.

Second, Bonokoski demonstrates how abortion has fried his brain and turned him into a zombie. One of the favourite lines on abortion for cowards who don’t want to debate the issue in the political realm is to say that it’s an MP’s personal issue. In fact, every MP has both pro-life and pro-abortion constituents. If he’s pro-life, he will be better at representing his pro-life constituents on that issue. If he’s pro-abortion, he will do better at representing his pro-abortion candidates on the issue. Attempts to shut an MP up on the issue by accusing him of only championing a “personal agenda” are cowardly – and totalitarian because that assertion disenfranchises all the constituents who agree with the MP. Apparently the MP is not allowed to represent those constituents because he happens to share their view on the issue. Instead, he is supposed to represent the constituents who hold the opposing view. Only an illiterate would think that view was logical! Only a fool would consider it democratic!

Third, Bonokoski never explains what point of political protocol, law or the constitution he is using to defend his accusation that backbench MPs should not write such letters to the RCMP. This is probably just Bonokoski’s personal agenda.

Fourth, he says “… especially when their claims of crimes being committed are based entirely on their incredible ignorance of the law.” We’ve already addressed this point of embarrassing and gross ignorance on the part of Bonokoski himself.

On the matter of abortion, we see the utter cowardice of Bonokoski on display. He says that when he ran as a Canadian Alliance candidate, he was asked for his view on abortion, and his response was that: “Until I grow a uterus and am able to bear children, it is absolutely none of my business and certainly outside my emotional and psychological purview,” adding: “It’s not a cop-out. It’s a fact.”

That is actually one of the most despicable, pathetic and cowardly cop-outs that militant pro-aborts have come up with. Only the most insane feminists demand such a stance from men. It’s an utterly contemptible position for men to hold. Real men don’t abdicate their integrity or responsibility in that fashion.

Bonokoski also repeatedly states that the action of the MPs is foolish because the law is the law. For example, he writes: ” There is no question, however, that abortion remains a hot-button issue, driven primarily by the religious right. Fair enough. But it doesn’t change the law.”

Thanks for the enlightenment! But even if the controversy Bonokoski discusses had to do with abortion, the obvious fact is that you aren’t going to change the law without bold action, so simply stating that the law is the law, as though that was an argument against actions intended to challenge the law, is patently absurd, and just another example of how the matter of abortion fries pro-aborts’ brains and destroys their rationality.

~ Tim Bloedow