A grand total - Macleans.ca
 

A grand total


 

Western Standard, Dec. 6, 2008. It had the feeling of a Reform Party rally. 2500 angry partisans gathered near City Hall in Calgary today to protest the Layton-Duceppe-Dion coalition … Former Conservative MP Monte Solberg stole the show with good humour and insight. He mocked the arrogance of the coalition of “the runners-up, the rejected and the rabble.”

Monte Solberg, tonight. Despite being shamelessley promoted by big newspapers, TV outlets and the opposition parties, a grand total of 3,000 showed up on Parliament Hill to protest the alleged end of democracy in Canada. There are six or seven rallies every year on Parliament Hill that attracts more people, and with none of the media hype. Seriously, you can’t propagandize people into getting mad about something that just doesn’t ring true to them.


 

A grand total

  1. James Moore re-tweeted this as well, so he obviously agrees with it.

    What Canadians want only matters if it's what Harper wants.

    Anyone notice a pattern emerging here?

    • Pattern? Yah … Monte Solberg is only a fairweather comic.

  2. The total # of protesters across Canada far outnumbered the anti-coalition protesters last year .. both in numbers and in ratio of protesters vs Facebook group members. Monte is merely desperately spinning and trying to help his still-friends in government. When David Akin says that CAPP passed its test of getting protesters out on the streets and Craig Oliver calls the amount of people that came out across Canada extraordinary and the beginnings of a grassroots movement – media folks that have no real reason to say this and were probably sceptical beforehand of the amt of ralliers who would come out, I say Monte doesn't know of what he speaks.. tho I'm sure he'll try and justify it in his next guest op-ed in the Sun Media chain.

    • I beg to differ, I think the anti-coalition protesters far outnumbered these prorogation protesters.

      • There were numerous anti-prorogation protests across the country. What was your point?

        • My point is that there were more anti-coalition protesters.

          • No, there wasn't.

          • There were fewer by about half…

      • I believe Scott is basing his comparison on this post which had anti-coalition rallies from coast to coast pegged at 9,600 (with pro-coalition rallies pegged at 9,300).

        I'm kinda interested in all the comparisons, so if you can point to some reasonably reliable larger numbers for the anti-coalition rallies I'd like to see.

        If 9,600 is really the "number to beat" though, I'm pretty sure today's protests just in Ottawa, Toronto and Vancouver matched that.

        • OK, I've taken a look at the parliament hill pics. The protest looks to be about the same size as the anti-coalition protest at the same location a year ago.

          • QED. Can't argue with quality, independently-source information like that.

            Seriously dude, you accuse everybody here of hopeless left bias, then you just eyeball some pics all by yourself and conclude that you are in, fact, right?

            That's ridiculous even by your standards.

          • "then you just eyeball some pics all by yourself "

            Yes, the eyeballs don't lie. You do.

      • clearly you are simply full of sh@t scf.

        • Thanks. Coming from you, that tells me I must be on track.

          • Well, I can tell you that las year, in Toronto, about 500 anti-coalition protesters barely covered the parking spaces at Queens Park. I say 500 as that's what CTV, the National Post and the cops put the number at. Even the organizer didn't dare say anything beyond "around 1000".

            Compared to today's event at Dundas Square, with an (ahem) conservative estimate of 5000, ranging up to 8000 or more, perhaps you may wish to do some media research. Google archives is quite useful. And full of, you know, facts.

          • Boy, that's going to hurt the Conservatives in all those metro Toronto ridings those people live in.

          • Gotta love those moving goalposts….

          • That's right, I keep forgetting that now, if your MP isn't part of the ruling party, your voice doesn't count. Thanks for the reminder.

          • That is one heck of a straw-man argument. Do you think that makes you look clever?

          • If you don't mind I'm going to take that as an admission that the general opinion of Harper may have changed sine 2008.

            I'm know, I know…I'm just some anon commenter and bla bla bla change is impossible bla bla bla opinions don't matter bla bla bla pinko commie hemp lover.

          • I don't need to do media research, I've already done some, enough to know your figures are bunk.

          • Ah, how definitive the word "bunk" is. Why bother with actual proof, when a strong statement of "bunk" will do.

            Reading back on what you've posted so far, you simply don't want to believe the Facebookers could raise the same numbers (or more) than the coalition foes. You don't want to, so you can't be swayed.

          • Yes – see above where scf claims to have eyeballed the photos personally and provided definitive estimates of crowd sizes. I guess that's technically "some" media research.

          • ^in tract

      • scf, you are partisan but you aren't a troll (what is with the trolls this weekend, was there an emergency alert sent out?) so I want to respond to you with a little more respect. I wasn't at an anti-coalition rally, nor do I know that one was even held in my region. Do you have any link or compilation of numbers to support your assertion? As I say, I know the anti-prorogation numbers, I hear they were double the anti-coalition numbers, but I don't have any evidence on the earlier rallies.

        • The huge difference here is the national media promoted the prorogation rallies for 2 weeks,
          non-stop, linking to FB and rally sites, imploring Canadians to attend,
          And that 2 weeks also gave the unions and every other special interest group a lot of time to organize.
          Yet the turn outs were similar.
          I'd say the media must be disappointed their efforts drew so few.

          • And of course the media luke warm reality check that the coalition was legitimate to counter the Conservative spin of a coupe is only my fuzzy recollection of that time.

            I participated in the Ottawa rally in support of the coalition last year. There doesn't seem to be a pro-prorogation movement this year though. But silly me that is the fault of the media.

          • Pro-prorogation? Have you ever seen a rally for a speech from the throne? Have you ever seen a rally for the appointment of a speaker? Have you ever seen a rally for any other parliamentary procedure?

          • I wonder what other archaic parliamentary procedure just HAS to be abused for the sake of it.

        • Most of my own research shows they were about the same size, the two rallies. I have the same sources as everyone else – media estimates and photos. From the pics, I can say with certainty that the rallies on Parliament Hill were about the same size.

          As for trolls, what can I say? This blog is a shark tank. Dare to disagree with one of the Wherry disciples and the sharks attack. We all have the same photos and polls available. Somehow Scott Tribe, the one who started this thread, is claiming the Conservatives dropped 15 points when in fact they dropped 4 points, which is a ridiculous falsehood, yet somehow I'm being labeled the partisan here. I haven't trotted out numbers, but as CR pointed out, most people that are listing numbers are listing severely inflated numbers.

          • "Anyway, I can tell what is a reasonable argument and what is trash"

            Me too. For instance, when scf says: "OK, I've taken a look at the parliament hill pics. The protest looks to be about the same size as the anti-coalition protest at the same location a year ago."

            …that's trash.

      • There were also pro-coalition rallies last year. I participated in the one on Parliament Hill.

        I haven't noticed any Pro-prorogation rallies though. Whats up with that?

  3. "Monte Solberg, tonight. Despite being shamelessley promoted by big newspapers, TV outlets and the opposition parties, a grand total of 3,000 showed up on Parliament Hill to protest the alleged end of democracy in Canada."

    And the PMO coupled with the full and complete authority of the PM, and the resources of the wealthiest political party in the country had nothing to do with the anti-coalition protests?
    Solberg is the embodiment of the ideaoligically committed. Either that or he's a cynical @#$%

    • Also, according to RCMP estimates, the "grand total" in Ottawa was 500 more people than Solberg claims.

      • First of all, nobody was taking attendance, so both Monte and the RCMP are listing guesses.

        Secondly, you're quibbling over a difference of 17%?

    • But journalists used to gush over Solberg (maybe still do) so he must have
      something going for him …….. doesn't he?

      • Yes, he's nice to the journalists. They'll forgive a lot for that. See McCain, John.

    • The only thing shamelessly promoted by big newspapers is Monte Solberg

  4. Sorry, but I don't find Wherry to be a reliable and impartial source, not in the slightest.

    • Actually it shows how the skewed media coverage at the time influenced people's perceptions of what happened, because in most cities last year, the pro-coalition rallies DID draw larger numbers than the anti-coalition ones, s_c_f.

      • Well, if a person named anonymous says so, it must be true, LOL

        • You're an ass.

          • Same goes for a person named anon.

        • I think the only step further Aaron Wherry could take to hammer down the facts is to march into your house with an Elephant parade and all of the Police Officers, Rally Organizers, and Journalists who wrote reports on the rallies which Aaron takes his facts from.

          Stop being asinine and start clicking on Aaron's links before judging his "facts". Or just walk away.

    • what about CR? he has a running totall that tallies much higher than Stephen Taylor's own recording of the scope of the anti-coalition rally. or is CR a liberal attack?

      • What about CR? I'd have to see what his numbers are, what he had to say ,and how he got his numbers in order to make a judgement.

    • Heh. that's too bad scf, because Wherry got his number from reading last years newspaper's accounts. You'll need to find a source or 2 to prove otherwise, and Stephen Taylor's estimations don't count as an impartial source.

      Fact is.. when 9600 protesters out of 127K FB members of the anti-coalition side show up.. that was considered an expression of grasroots discontent with the coalition plan..and the polls bore it out.

      25 000 or so out of 211K on FB is a better number then the anti-coalition numbers.. both in number and in FB to protester ratio. And.. polls showing the Cons have dropped 15 points in 15 days also bear that this is a valid expression of the Canadian public's discontent. Con supporters like Solberg and you can desperately try to spin it some other way, but the facts are what they are.

      • Facebook protester ratio? Are you kidding me?

        "polls showing the Cons have dropped 15 points in 15 days"

        That's an even more ridiculous statement. Try 6 points in 1 month and you're in the ballpark.

        • On the demographics of Facebook, there's more on the demographics of U.S. Facebook users here.

          Among U.S. Facebookers anyway, 11% are under 18, 35% are 18-25, 24% are 26-34, 17% are 35-44, 8% are 45-54 and 5% are over 55. Of course, how one defines "kids" can vary.

          • Ok, 46% are under 25. Half are kids.

        • I think all Scott is saying with the "Facebook ratio" is that it would appear that not only is the anti-prorogation Facebook group larger than the similar anti-coalition group, and not only were the anti-prorogation rallies larger than the anti-coalition rallies, but that the ratio of real world protesters to Facebook group members was better for the anti-prorogation forces as well.

          Also "most of the people logging into facebook are kids" shows a real misunderstanding of Facebook, imho. The average age on Facebook was 33 the last time I checked. Anecdotally, of my 86 Facebook friends the youngest is 22 and the oldest is over 70.

      • Actually, I take that back. If you look at the polls, the Cons have dropped about 4 points in 1 month, they were averaging 37 in december and now they're averaging about 33.

      • Actually, I take that back, 4 points in a month is more like it. Cons were averaging 37 in december and 33 now. Your numbers are false.

  5. CPAC is reporting the police as saying 3,000 anti-prorogation protesters on Parliament Hill today.

    How many anti-coalition protesters did the *police* estimate last year on Parliament Hill for that protest? (As contrasted with a *Calgary* anticoalition protest cited here.).

    It shouldn't be too difficult to compare Parliament Hill apples to apples in this situation to let readers know who had the biggest turnout.

  6. The media has been hammering away at the bogeyman of dictatorship and anti-democracy for WEEKS, and Coyne is constantly updating the thousands of FB group members on this site, as if to show that this movement is SWEEPING THE NATION! He himself has used words like TYRANNY! in his posts.

    A year ago, the debate about the coalition was more, iirc, centred on constitutional law, etc. etc. and the rather curious notion that a man who was had already been shown the door by his party for an electoral thrashing suddenly becoming PM. I don't recall the G&M proclaiming for days on end, it seems, the END OF DEMOCRACY IN CANADA!

    And then, like clockwork, the media drastically overestimates the level of commitment of the more than 200,000 who have signed-up for the famous FB group, A GROUNDSWELL!, and something like 5-ish% of that number can actually be bothered to leave the house when push comes to shove.

    In the end, this CRISIS is more likely than not to adhere to Wells' Rules:

    Rule 1: For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome.

    Rule 2: If everyone in Ottawa knows something, it's not true.

    • Hilarious rendering of history! I suppose you were in a cave or wearing industrial strength tinfoil, top-to-bottom, if you thought last year's anti-coalition debate was kept on the refined-and-high-brow… A handful of CONs and all their rabble were essentially inciting hatred with words like 'coup' and 'illegal'; Closet-dweller Baird himself I believe fulminated that the angry mob would go over the Governor General's head should parliamentarian rules be followed (as Harper had tried to do when he formed his coalition with Layton and Duceppe in '04).
      Another clown moment from the 'reality-doesn't-exist-unless-I-say-so' CON disembowel movement.

      • Let me establish a couple of things for you. First, I've alternated my votes, and am currently undecided. Second, I think that prorogation is pretty transparently opportunistic. I pointed out that national broadsheets like the G&M are proclaiming a national crisis, while on this very site columnists are using word like tyranny and despot, all the while tallying-up the ever increasing FB numbers.

        Your response is Rusty Baird, maybe the most partisan man in the country, and a 'handful of CONs and all their rabble.' People whom you may expect to be a bit on the side of hyperbole, nay? Be careful how you throw around 'inciting hatred.' That takes a polite debate to a very dark place. Because I find that the level of hype concerning the current situation is a little overblown, am somehow a misanthropic paranoid. You call me a clown, and curiously use the word 'disembowl' (?)

        You assert that Mr. Baird is a 'closet-dweller.' Do you mean to say that you suspect he is a homosexual? I have no clue, and am totally indifferent. However, using this rhetorical device to discredit another person is not exactly cool.

    • Why is the media against the troops!

  7. I beg to differ

  8. I was going to go, but there was a hockey game on instead. I'll protest with my vote.

  9. What else do you expect him to say?

  10. Plus, public protests, on any issue, don't seem to catch on here in Canada, like they do in other countries such as France or Italy. Given the extent of voter apathy here, I am impressed that so many showed up.

  11. Here are Ian Capstick's twitter-derived estimates. He places the national rally attendance at ~25,000.

    Toronto 9000
    Ottawa 4000
    Vancouver 2000
    Winnipeg 1500
    Waterloo 750
    Halifax 750
    Montreal 500
    Hamilton 500
    Victoria 500
    Guelph 500
    Saskatoon 450
    Regina 350
    Edmonton 300
    Calgary 300
    Orillia 300
    Sudbury 250
    Peterborough 250
    Belleville 250
    Oakville 200
    Whitby 200
    Newmarket 200
    Quinte 200
    Oshawa 150
    Fredericton 150
    Antigonish 150
    London 150
    Quebec City 150
    Kingston 150
    Sydney 100
    Thunderbay 75
    Duncan 35

    While some of Capstick's numbers are generally in line with media reports, others are far too high. For example, he reports Winnipeg as 1,500 even though Winnipeg's two newspapers both peg rally attendance at ~300. His number for T.O. is higher than most media estimates (he splits the difference between police estimates and numbers provided by rally organizers). His twitter estimates for Halifax and Waterloo are 50% higher than local media estimates for those cities.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/from

    • He is also missing some cities. There were rallies in Sault Ste. Marie and North Bay that local media have pegged at 60 and 100 people respectively.

      • Thanks, and he also missed Kelowna (100) and Prince Rupert (25), as well as many other smaller communities. I would guess that as many as 1,000 people who attended small rallies are not included in Capstick's numbers above.

    • His Kingston estimate is low by half from what I saw.

    • His London estimate is also on the conservative side. 200 at least perhaps 300.

    • That Toronto number is a joke. It wasn't close to 9,000. Maybe the organizers are including everyone who happened to walk up Yonge St. that day in their total. Pictures of the Waterloo event indicates a number far lower than 750.

      If they're going to exaggerate, they might as well have said there were 2 million people at the rallies. It wouldn't be much more ridiculous.

      • When they exaggerate, they want to keep just within the range of the possibly credible. Then the next guy can exaggerate the exaggeration, and so on. Then you have what's called an urban myth.

    • CR, again just for your interest, I got a thank you email from the organizers at the Facebook Group this morning, and their estimate for Toronto is 10,000-12,000, for what it's worth.

      They base that on Dundas Square being able to hold 7,000 (as you know, the Dundas Square website says 12,000) and the crowd overflowing it, and also on the fact (?) that (apparently) the police will only shut down Bay Street for protests over 10,000 people, and (apparently) the police shut down Bay Street.

      Anyway, just fyi.

      • Regarding Dundas Square, based on this site map Dundas Square has an area of 2,100 square metres. (30+50)/2*60.

        Crowd density estimates stem from the fact that people would each tend to occupy around a quarter of a square metre in a very crowded space, so for a tight crowd we could make a rough estimate of 8,400 people for Dundas Square (not counting people milling around on the nearby sidewalks and streets).

        I don't think the crowd density was this tight, so even allowing for the fact that many ralliers were not standing in the square itself, I'm still comfortable with the 7,000 estimate.

  12. I'd just like to note that Vancouver radio station 1130 did a report during the traffic-tying march, stating that a 'couple of thousand protesters' etc. They mysteriously rejigged their reports only an hour later to say 'hundreds of protesters'… I wasn't at the event because I had volunteer duty elsewhere; but i'm eagerly going to watch tonight's newscast to see how the other Rogers' pliant media members report it…

  13. No, I'm just doing an independent analysis to satisfy my own intellectual curiosity. I'm not surprised that my media-reported estimates are both higher than Taylor's and lower than Capstick's twitter-derived numbers. I'll bet that my tally turns out to be closest to the final media estimates.

    • i wasn't suggesting you were doing it for a reason CR, but you have a running tally in another thread that suggests that the total attendence of today's rallies surpasses what Taylor estimated attended last year's anti-coalition rallies.

  14. Also, the average age of Facebook users has been rising rapidly of late (at one point, the number of U.S. users over the age of 35 doubled in just 60 days) and the majority of U.S. Facebook users are over 25.

  15. Canadian protests were shown on New Zealand news, channel 0ne. Not!

  16. Reform/Alliance leaders such as Solberg and Harper only support populism when it's used against Parliament. When people actually want their elected representatives to have a voice and be respected by government, Reform/Alliance retreads dismiss such calls as unrepresentative of the popular will … which is deeply ironic, given their origins.

  17. Why didn't more people come out to protest the coalition? (As if it matters)

    Simple, that plan was essentially DOA. I don't think anyone truly in their hearts thought it was actually going to happen. Well, maybe Jack Layton did. Mr. Ignatieff probably didn't, and it showed.

    What was left to protest? I was a sham as soon as it was signed.

    Perhaps people who were busy making signs put down their markers during the minutes that we waited for poor M. Dion to finally get his video to the TV networks.

  18. There is an important point wrt comparisons with the coalition protests.
    1) On that issue both sides had traction, ie there were pro and anti coalition protests.
    2) This was reflected in the media, (I seem to recall Coynes and Wells creating new meanings for words like "legitimate" and then debating (seemingly) endlessly over the nuances of their new words.)
    3) It was inherently transient, and the damage was mitigated by Ignatieff acknowledging the protesters concerns and taking any coalition off the table. (conbots start yur engines)

    The prorogutests are quite different. The media response to Conservative spin has ranged describing it as obstinate (SH) to ridiculous (various MP's and former MPs) reinforcing the pubic recognition of two truthy perceptions. Harper is an arrogant SOB who has surrounded himself with a distinct lack of talent. Harper's intellect is being transformed into a liability as he morphs from a cunning tactician to a conniving sneak in the public's mind.

    I don't actually believe that Harper's demise is imminent, that will depend on a lot of political details. But someone could have predicted part way through Trudeau's reign that too many had decided his self confidence was arrogance. Long before he left office, the public recognized Mulroney's charm and blarney was cover for a compulsive liar. The negatives for Steven Harper are now well implanted in the public psyche and as one of the protesters pointed out… no sweater vest is going to help undo them.

    • What leader is not arrogant?
      Arrogance comes with the 'I can do better than the other guy' job.

      This Prime Minister has proved he is competent,
      that too is implanted in the public psyche.

      Look south to see the reality of 'hopey changey',
      once reality sets in, hopey changey looks like wishy washy nowhere.
      That describes the unelected leader of the opposition to a T.

      • Arrogance is the wholly-dismissive attitude towards the anti-prorogation movement while having embraced the anti-coalition demonstrators. See James Moore's comment after reading Mr. Wherry's post here.

      • Dear wilson – which book of fairy tales were you reading sunshine (This Prime Minister has proved he is competent)?
        if he was competent – he would have convinced 40% of the voters to support him and give him a full majority – at a time of his choosing – so that he could really show his competence!
        Instead – he screws up royally on economics – on budget making and on reading what the public really will accept!
        Other than that – you are probably right – he IS arrogant!

        • "if he was competent – he would have convinced 40% of the voters to support him and give him a full majority"

          Ah, but you see, Stephen Harper hasn't failed Canadians, Canadians have failed Stephen Harper.

          When, oh when will we be worthy of a Harper majority?

  19. The western standard is a single issue marijuana decrim publication funded by a convicted drug lord and staffed by children. Ask Matthew Johnston, a long time NDP supporter by the way as are most of the staff at the Standard, he'll tell you he is funded by Marc Emery, who himself is a bigtime NDP organizer and bagman.

    They are more of a joke than Maclean's magazine and I don't say that lightly, you couldn't have quoted a more ridiculous source if you tried.

    • Staffed by children? Fed gruel, chained to their chairs, forced to cut copy with dull exacto blades at the layout tables?

      The Horror…

  20. How sad…

  21. Ever notice how supporters of prorogation are nearly 100% Conservative, and how its opponents are nearly 100% supporters of the Marxist-Separatist coalition? Which is to say the protesters only oppose prorogation due to….partisanship?

    Show me a Liberal who says "actually most governments prorogue on a regular basis and at the discretion of the PM, Harper isn't doing anything wrong here." In the absence thereof, this is just a lot of partisanship, a partisanship that is ignorant of parliamentary procedure. Wilson makes a good point: the media has been inciting this lame-o protest for weeks so it is unsurprising that it has traction.

    Finally, as someone who attended the anti-coalition rally on the Hill I can tell you it was a hell of a lot colder of a day than was yesterday's sunny and balmy minus five.

    • Keep up the arrogance, Cons. It will be your undoing.

      • Hey, you'll be interested in this.

        Stephen Woodworth: ""Just because something is legal doesn't make it right,"
        Harold Albrecht: ""I can assure you, Canadians are not happy,"

        So at least we know they know this.
        http://news.therecord.com/printArticle/455162

    • Thanks for the weather report.

    • Remember a few years ago when Harper was all about transparency, openness, not using the powers of the PM to stifle Parliament, fixed election dates, and trying to force Paul Martin's minority government to "respect the will of govenrment"?

      Funny how people who backed all that now back a government doing the exact opposite, while talking about partisanship. Pot, meet Kettle.

  22. Here's my independent effort to establish a grand total for rally turnout. The numbers are all based on published media reports, unless marked with an asterisk. I place the national turnout at approx. 20,000 people (+/- 1,000).

    For Vancouver, I went with the consensus media estimate of ~1,000 (some organizers claim as much as 2,000). Feedback is appreciated.

    Toronto 7000
    Ottawa 3500
    Vancouver 1000
    Smallest rallies (~15 locations) 500
    Waterloo 500
    Halifax 500
    Victoria 500
    London 500
    Saskatoon 400
    Montreal 400
    Guelph* 350
    Hamilton 350
    Winnipeg 300
    Edmonton 300
    Calgary 300
    Orillia* 250
    Sudbury* 250
    Peterborough* 250
    Belleville* 250
    Regina 200
    Oakville* 200
    Whitby 200
    Newmarket* 200
    St. John's 200
    Oshawa* 150
    Fredericton 150
    Antigonish* 150
    Quebec City* 150
    Kingston 150
    Thunder Bay 150
    Charlottetown 100
    Sydney 100
    Kelowna 100
    North Bay 100
    Sault. St. Marie 60
    Maple Ridge* 50
    Duncan* 35
    Prince Rupert 25

  23. The anti-Coalition of Losers rallies did NOT have 2 weeks of national media promotion,
    nor over 2000 articles written with links to 'a rally near you',
    (Ian Capstick is part owner of G&M???).

    Considering the all out social and national media 'surge' against prorogation,
    I'd say the results were about the same as the 'Stop Harper' election campaigns…….

    So let's have an election, where the media coverage would provide a level playing field, or at least pretend to be balanced coverage, for the government!

    Take it all the way LibDippers/media,
    let's roll…!!!

    • They had the full bore support of the PMO plus CPC organizations driving the bus – wilson!
      Next fallacy to be knocked down – please!
      I have two hands you can send in doubles if you like!

    • Perhaps it's payback for "I'll take the back stairs" , "I watch only American news" and "I'll be taking softball questions on FOX"

  24. You already say that. Twice! This is the third time. If you say dumb things multiple times, does that make them more true? Do you ever add anything to a conversation? I've never seen it.

    • Imagine the irony – I quote scf directly and he accuses me of peddling falsehoods.

      If only he were self-aware.

  25. " I've already done some"

    s_c_f reaches up for his basement window, moves aside stacks of Capitalism magasine, peers out at a cackle of crows, concludes Aaron Wherry is bunk.

    If you would be so kind to post your sources so could also determine you are bunk without due evaluation.