Did I say two weeks ago that Ignatieff had peaked?

So, Thursday CBC reports:

The federal Conservatives have pulled slightly ahead of the Liberals in voter support for the first time in months, according to a new EKOS poll released exclusively to CBC News after a week of political brinkmanship that saw Michael Ignatieff threaten to trigger a summer election.

Asked which party they would support if a federal election were held tomorrow, 34.8 per cent of respondents said they would cast their ballots for Stephen Harper's Tories, while 32.6 per cent opted for Ignatieff's Liberals, EKOS said.

..my thoughts return to a brief comment I made on James Curran's site exactly one week earlier.

Thursday, June 18, 2009
The New Ekos Poll is Out

CBC has released its latest poll. Here's the full poll.

Posted by James Curran at 11:45 AM
Reactions:

1 comments:

roblaw said...

One might opine that Michael has peaked too early.

To use the words of Ignatieff's shnauzer, WK, guess the Tories are getting "less unpopular."


Indeed.

Canada's Economic Tide Turning

What?!? The economy is coming around?

According to the Canadian Press today,

Canadians may be in store for the most encouraging economic news in months on Tuesday with release of new output numbers expected to confirm the worst of the recessionary spiral ended in April.

Full story here.


Sorry Michael, I guess you'll have to go back to Harvard.

For months now, the Liberals have been railing on Stephen Harper, making it clear that they feel he is responsible for the current economic climate in this Country. Well, won't it be interesting to see if they follow through on that logic, and nominate Stephen Harper for the Nobel Prize in Economics, in single-handedly turning around the cripling global economy.

Seriously, though, an improved economy is not only welcome news to so many Canadians struggling through these difficult economic times, but it also bodes ill for the Liberal Party of Canada, the one-note song writers, who basically have nothing to campaign on other than the difficult economy. Take that away, and what is left?

Their opposition to the seriously flawed "law and order" agenda of the Conservative Party? Oh, yeah, they stood up WITH the Conservatives on that front.

What else?

It was nice of Michael, today, to confirm what everyone West of Ontario has known all along - "In part, he said, the Liberals have tried to win votes in Toronto by blowing off Alberta and bashing the oil sands."

(Ti-Guy, read that again.. this is Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff confirming that his party's established election strategy has been to ignore Alberta and in fact attack the provinces economic base to curry favor with the GTA.)

But I'm sure they are all better now. Michael says so. But then Michael also said he supported indefinite detention of terrorist suspects and "enhanced interrogation techniques". That is until he didn't. He also "didn't lose any sleep" over the lives lost as a result of military action by Israel. That is until he did. So - nice of Michael to affirm the dismissive and hostile attitude of the LPC towards Western Canada, but pardon me if I choose not to put faith in your "word" that the LPC is suddenly going to have concern and respect for citizens outside of the major (read, "vote rich")areas, particularly in Ontario and Quebec.

Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett are dead. So what?

I hesitate to even mention this non-event, however, as it is apparently front-page news, following up on yesterday's blog, I thought I might vent on the stupidity of those who see this as something worth having any feelings about at all.

Two entertainers died. Two people who, by all accounts, were completely self-obsessed, one of which who was an accused child-molester, and somehow their death is treated as some world event.

I'm thinking in Somalia, in Darfur, no one cares.

I'm thinking in Manitoba aboriginal communities, where people are dying over the swine flu, no one cares.

So why do the rest of us?

Think about that.

Are our lives so plastic, so devoid of "real" concerns, that the passing of two celebrities merits that much public interest? How many people will despair over the death of these two societal misfits who they never met, but wouldn't cross the street to give condolences upon the passing of a good neighbor?

This is the new western culture. Where real people don't matter, where we are "fed" our "friends" on television, and where we ask the government to please look after our children, so we can make more money to by more stuff we don't need. Where we discourage and in fact look down our noses at the real people in our communities who work hard and succeed, and then demand that they give us more of what they acquired through their sacrifice.

I read a fascinating book last month, called "Generation Kill", written by an imbedded Rolling Stone reporter who travelled with the First Recon Unit of the Marines entering Iraq at the start of the war, and one of the soldiers, looking at the poverty and the hardship endured by many, many Iraqis they encountered, pointed out that in America, there is so much excess that event the poor people are fat.

Perhaps it would be a great thing for this recession to continue for a decade or so.

Ti-Guy Broadens the Discussion

At it's worst, the blog world is basically a collection of pointless noise, where the bloggers are preaching to the converted, and, quite often, throw around invective and insult at the "others" with whom they disagree with little point or purpose.

However - at it's best, it gives us a forum to both learn more about the society around us, and to engage in discussion, sometimes spirited, about matters of interests and importance to society to help us mold our own views, and, if we're really lucky, in a manner that perhaps helps others to mold their views in a way which is more thoughtful and more useful than "my party says it's good, so it's good".

So - today, I've had a bit of a discussion with Ti-Guy regarding my concerns in my previous blog, and concepts of personal liberty. And he makes, actually, a pretty interesting observation, while perhaps not completely original, is still very worth thinking about:

Ti-Guy:

One way of re-orienting the imagination with respect to freedom is to realise that your rights are *not* inalienable or fundamental. They're not rights at all. They're social conventions and require constant vigilance and concerted action in order to be protected.

The last eight years (illegal surveillance, rendition, secret prisons, official propaganda passed off as 'news', 'free speech zones', systemic corruption and rampant conflict of interest, etc. etc.) have taught me that. There's been no bigger fraud perpetrated on the average North American democrat than the one that has convinced them that their rights are something no one can take away from them.

Sure, it'd be great if that were true, but unfortunately, it isn't and never will be.

In some respect, he is exactly correct. Just belonging to a society requires that we relinquish some of our personal freedom to provide for the common benefit of that society. I don't have freedom to kill my neighbor. My neighbor doesn't have freedom to steal my car. As society becomes more complex, this social contract becomes more abstract and less personal. If I wish to have a road to drive my car on, I must give up some of my income, even against my will, to allow for that common benefit, and I don't have the choice to say, "but I don't drive a car".

However - that being said, I think Ti-Guy's point is perhaps too defeatist.

I still believe that "they" are "us".

In other words, the governemnt exists, still, as a servant of the people, and fundamentally, our freedoms, at least in a democratic society, cannot be "taken away", they can only be given away.

So - the good news is, we have the power, collectively, to take them back.

And I'm not talking about some anarchists or pure libertarians view of "freedom". I'm talking about an ordered society, where there are rules of conduct and obligation towards eachother.. but not to the extent that we allow wiretapping, surveilance of internet activity, presumptions of guilt before innocence, untrammelled police power.. all in the effort to "protect" us.

Newsflash. The world is not, and will never be, perfectly safe.

My buddy saw a kid on a big-wheel yesterday, wearing a bike helmet. The kid is 6" off the ground and her parents force her to wear a bike helmet.

Is this where we are going? A society of big wheelers wearing bike helmets? Please.

Truly, to live, we have to every once in a while, get on a skateboard. And as Stephen King points out in his novel, "The Stand";

You can't be careful on a skateboard, man.

Conservatives.. walking a line they should be VERY careful of

It's curious. I would classify myself as a moderately libertarian conservative. I don't believe in anarchy or an absence of government, I don't even have a disagreement with concepts such as a strong social safety net, and Universal Health Care.. but, I lean towards less government intervention as opposed to more.

Now - there is another conservative, who isn't necessarily opposed to government intervention, and I guess I would call them social conservatives. They are happy to use government to foist upon the population their view of social utopia.. much like the Liberals have been doing, but from a different perspective. At the core, however, they have much in common - more government regulation, less personal liberty - see my past blogs about the left and right convergence towards fascist ideology.

Well, again, the Conservative government is embarking upon a course which has not been demonstrated, by any stretch, as a necessity for society, but is appeasing the social conservative, "law and order" crowd.

Currently being introduced is the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century (IP21C) Act. Sounds all futuristic, doesn't it? Well, I suppose it is, in the sense of a future like "Total Recall" or "1984", where personal liberty takes a back seat to the government "protecting us". Yeah, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is just protecting Iranians right now from "hooligans".

The IP21C legislation effectively allows the government increased ability to spy on you, in some respects, without Court oversight.

For a brief explanation of the problem with this legislation, I recommend the Internet site of Dr. Michael Geist and the specific article HERE. Dr. Geist is a law professor at the University of Ottawa where he holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law. He knows of what he speaks.

So - what is a Conservative, who values liberty over social control, to do?

Well, at least for this Conservative, and I hope for others, the passage of this legislation may be a tipping point where support may NOT be there for Stephen Harper come next election.

Certainly, there is no question that every vote counts right now. I would encourage other Conservatives who value independence of government intervention to write their MLA's and Stephen Harper and say, "whoa". This goes too far. And if they don't listen, well, my pencil on ballot day, as we speak, is being swayed elsewhere.

Ontario Organized Labour and Socialism.. The Hens are Coming Home To Roost

Well. So the City of Toronto is on strike.

Apparently, the core issue, besides a wage increase, is the "banked sick leave" the City wants workers to give up. You see, CUPE had bargained that if workers aren't sick, and still go to work, they should be paid a bonus when they retire for the days they went to work when they could have otherwise stayed home and lied about being sick.

Sounds stupid - because it is - but that's what formal sick leave policy is meant to answer. We can't trust employees to simply be honest, and call in sick when they are really sick, so we have to give them a carrot and reward them EXTRA for just being honest and not stealing from their employers - in this case, the citizens of Toronto.

Oddly enough, in Southern Ontario, where thousands have recently found they have NO JOBS AT ALL, the CUPE is not getting a lot of sympathy. And so it should be.

Ontario is a mess, let's be honest. The power afforded organized labour has allowed them to effectively ruin Ontario's economy. And now, Toronto's lovely socialist Mayor, David Miller, is discovering the hard way that money doesn't grow on trees. You can only appease a Union so long before the tab comes due, and so it is now.

Miller is becoming aware that he either has to say "no" to a greedy union, or he is going to have to increase taxes on an economy that is already in a shambles.

Looks good on him.

Guess the hens have come home to roost in the GTA. Guess their willingness to elect all sorts of "social" minded, but fiscally irresponsible government representatives isn't giving citizens in Toronto the Shangri-la that their socialist leaders promised.

Go ahead, vote for Jack Layton and Olivia Chow again. But don't ask me to feel sorry for you when the logical result of your poor decision making lands back on your doorstep in the form of a big green bag of garbage.

Another Canadian is arrested in Iran..

So, as little if anything continues to be done for Hossein Derakhshan, now being arrested and in custody in Iran for going on a year, we read that another Canadian/Iranian journalist has been arrested in Iran.

According to the article on CBC's website, apparently 24 journalists have been arrested in the Iranian crackdown on journalists and bloggers.

Consider that for just a moment.

And then consider the freedom that we take for granted in Canada.

When the government wishes to control their people, the first thing they must control is "information". As we have seen, the Internet, via blogging and twitter, is the only viable source of information now in Iran. The significance of the internet in supporting free speech and in fact, democracy, is very real and it is substantial.

So - as we watch matters unfold in Iran, perhaps we should take another moment to consider those in our own Country who seek to limit the ability of the internet to express ideas and thoughts. And consider to what extent we should regard such efforts with suspicion and distrust.

And to what extent we should be very, very concerned over the head of the CHRC, Jennifer Lynch, telling us all that, with regard to those who question or attack the mthods of the CHRC, she is "keeping a list".

A Sober Moment for Something Real

This is Neda Agha-Soltan.

Neda was a 26 or 27 year old student, who was on the streets of Tehran during recent anti-government protests.

On June 20, 2009, Neda was shot through the heart, allegedly by a basij government thug, and died on the street where she fell, next to her music teacher.

Neda was killed because she, and hundreds of thousands of others, were speaking out against the results of the recent Iran elections. She died in the midst of a protest demanding democracy and demanding the right to speak freely against government tyranny.

As we, here in Canada, talk about human rights and freedom of expression as interesting academic topics of discussion, Neda and others like her are dying - are giving their lives, in the pursuit of those goals.

"Neda" means "voice" or "calling" in Farsi - and she has, since her death, been referred to as "the voice of Iran".

Not every icon of political change is a Martin Luther King Jr. or a Mahatma Gandhi. Sometimes they are just people caught up in circumstance, like the lone man standing before the tanks in Tiananmen Square. Or, like a young female student standing with a multitude of others to say, "no".

So then, perhaps, one should take pause and appreciate both the freedoms that we do have, and the importance of maintaining those freedoms.

The Convergence of the Far Right and the Far Left

Hmm.

So - here I sit. On the one hand, continuing to be completely irritated with the Liberal Party of Canada and their continuing goals to effect pointless and expensive social engineering..

And, on the other hand, my Conservatives are now suggesting that we should welcome random roadside breath alcohol checks. Random. Suddenly, all the suggestions of the left being cozier with the fascist political ethic sort of go out the window.

While I have been very supportive in the past of the R.C.M.P. when they have been attacked, let's be real at the same time. Do you really think that unrestricted random arrest of Canadian citizens is a good idea? Do you really feel that the police can truly be trusted to always exercise discretion in a responsible manner? Well, if you do, read the recent headlines and think again.

And so, a concept which I recall reading of some time ago strikes a chord in me today, and that concept is this:

There is an uncomfortable convergence between the far right and the far left regarding how they would like to go about their business.

And, I think, the word that best describes it, as alluded to above, is "fascism".

Without getting into the ongoing and pointless debate of whether fascism is truly and animal of the left or the right, as I've studied it, it strikes me that, truly, it is neither. "Fascism" is a tool. It is a tool for a government to institute a program that puts ideology ahead of personal freedom.

In other words - it is ok for your freedoms to be restricted or even suspended because it's "best for you".

Today, as I read about the continuing mistakes of the Conservative government in seeking to instill its "law and order" plan, I am left to feel like a citizen without recourse. We are, perhaps, damned by all parties, as, at the present time, they all seek to impose an ideological will, and the interests of personal freedom and responsibility be damned.

Perhaps it is time for us to say enough. The problem is, however, who speaks for those of us who don't want government to either goose-step us into a "safer" society, or who don't want the government's "benevolence" in constantly wiping our noses every time we sneeze?

Who Indeed.


P.S. - with thanks to AlbertaArdvark - it gets worse.

Hossein Derakhshan's continued detention in Iran - and why he's of no use to Michael Ignatieff

Well, today I received correspondence from Canadian Consular Affairs Director of Case Management, Sean Robertson. Mr. Robertson advises that, in response to my concerns raised regarding Hossein Derakhshan, the Canadian government continues to seek access to Mr. Derakhshan, however, is hampered in that Iran does not recognize Hossein's dual citizenship, and as such, considers him an Iranian.

If you recall, Hossein Derakhshan is an Iranian/Canadian journalist who began to explore and expand Iranian blogging in Iran, and has often been referred to as the "Blogfather" of Iranian bloggers. Many of his posts were conciliatory in nature between Israel and Iran, although, oddly enough, more recently his posts were supportive of the current Iranian regime in some respects. Hossein was then arrested in November of 2008, apparently as an alleged "spy" although very few details have been released since then.

More pointedly, the mainstream media and the political left in this country have all but forgotten about Hossein and his difficulties.

Curious.

Mr. Derakhshan's arrest and detention is, at it's core, the most blatant example of the state of Iran preventing free speech. As we see at present, following the election debacle in that country, the effort that the Iranian government exerts in preventing free expression is massive, in some reports, second only to China.

"Free speech" is the foundation upon which all true democracy exists. Without it, the concept of freedom is truly an illusion. How odd, then, that the supposed "progressive" factions in our western society appear so complacent and uninterested in it's protection and promotion.

While we see the mainstream media and so-called liberal or "progressive" bloggers barking over and over about the need to assure the return of people like Omar Khadr and Abousfian Abdelrazik to Canada, they are strangely silent on the issue of Hossein Derkhshan's detention. Why?

Well, firstly, one might just posit that the fundamental issue of "free speech" is not high on the priorities of the left. That the need to have the unhampered ability to question and sometimes attack government or other bodies openly and without restriction, is not a goal that resonates with true "progressives".

More pointedly, however, is that Hossein is not being held by any act of the Canadian government or the U.S. Government. Hossein is not, in any sense, a convenient "tool" to allow the left to acquire and hold power.

Because, when we strip away all the rhetoric, isn't that what people like Michael Ignatieff are all about? They don't really care about Abousfian Abdelrazik at all - he is just a tool, an implement, in allowing Michael Ignatieff and his friends to try and return to power. If it were otherwise, we would hear them standing up in commons and demanding assistance for Hossein Derakhshan. Unfortunately, however, for Hossein, the Harper government isn't at all complicit in his arrest and detention, and as such, he is of no use to the Liberal Party of Canada.

And if you aren't of assistance to the Liberal Party of Canada, well, you don't matter.

Indeed.

Ok. I'll admit when I've been bettered

So, I've been pointing out some flaws in the concept of Michael Ignatieff as Prime Minister of this great country, and as much as I like to think I can express myself, well, today I've been clearly outdone.

WIth thanks to AlbertaArdvark, Charles Adler makes the point beautifully on his site today. My favorite quote is this:

Michael, you have talked incessantly about the Prime Minister giving you a report card on what his government is doing on infrastructure, on deficit, on EI, and on Isotopes. What have you been doing? What have you been offering for ideas, suggestions, a map that is coherent and accessible and motivational? Do you think if Rahm Emanuel, Obama's mainframe, main brain were to give you a grade, it would be anything above C Minus? Is the general public excited about getting to vote in another election, less than eight months after the last one, just to have the opportunity of voting for a C Minus Ethical Lightweight?

I encourage all to read the whole article, here. It is just that well done.

Ignatieff's Platform - the World Recession was Stephen Harper's Fault

Hmm. So, it appears no summer election. Shock and surprise, don't want to say I told you so James Curran, but, hey, elections are about seizing power, and where both main parties seem uncertain, well, they're not going to charge into an election now.

Of course, Michael's schnauzer, said different. He was saying he was going to be busy preparing for Michael's coronation and so his blog would be down.

Huh. Guess the mastermind "James Carvell of Canada" was wrong. Shock.

Curiously though, he tips Michael Ignatieff's hand regarding his brilliant election platform, you see, according to his schnauzer, the world recession is Stephen Harper's fault.

As he says, and I quote, "Here's what it's about. It's simple."

No. You are simple. Canada's issues are complex.

Good luck, Michael, you will most certainly need it with brilliant tacticians like this in your camp.

Yes.

Truly inspired. Can you say, "We have no clue, but vote for us anyway?"

Remember this Clown.. now he's putting everyone's lives at risk

So, after going out of bounds at a ski hill that he had never been to, getting lost, and then wandering away from his "SOS" signs.. resulting in the death of his wife, Gilles Blackburn has sued the B.C. Search and Rescue, together with the R.C.M.P. and the B.C. Government.

B.C. Search and Rescue volunteers have, in response, suspended service in Kimberly, Fernie and Golden B.C., fearing civil liability while performing volunteer service, and not wishing to have to pay for third party liability insurance to allow them to do their life-saving work. See CTV story here.

Ok. So I'll say it. This guy is so monumentally stupid that he leads his wife to her death, and now, for his trouble, he's going to sue everyone else because they didn't apparently do a good enough job saving him and his wife from their own ignorance.

The net result - now everyone in the back-country is at risk. When someone falls down a ravine or is washed down river in an accident, well, they'll just have to sit there and wait to die, because, you see, apparently, Gilles Blackburn isn't happy with just contributing to his wife's death - he wants to spread his sickness around, and put more lives at risk.

Nice.

Deconstructing Warren Kinsella.

Ok. I'm going to break a promise made to myself. I'm going to mention "Warren Kinsella". Why have I broken this blogs taboo? Because he's made a post that is way too illustrative of what a punch-drunk, yesterday's man he truly is:

Here is his post with my comments:

TOP TEN REASONS TO DEFEAT THE REFORMATORIES NOW

(Ok.. out of the shute. How do you respect someone, or take someone serious who seeks to use "name-calling" as an avenue of political influence. Yes Warren, we are the "Reformatories" and you are a doodie-head. Something I would expect from the oafish zealots at Canadian Cynic, not from an alleged "serious" politico)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night, as in previous days and nights, people have asked me if I want an election now or later.

Now, I say, even though I know I'm not going to get my way (because the NDP fears losing seats to us, and because the Bloc fears losing the next opportunity to top-up their pensions). I never get my way, dammit.

Here's why I personally want to go now:

1. The economy is down, way down. Unemployment, bankruptcies and the deficit are up -way up. And the Harper "government" has no plan to get us through any of it. If having no plan - not an idea, not a clue, not the faintest inkling - about how to get Canada through a brutal recession isn't reason enough to defeat Harper's B-Team, can someone tell me what is? The job of the opposition is to oppose. Period.

(If this isn't the pot calling the pot a pot, I don't know what is. Seriously. The Harper government is running the country. They are spending $10.5 million more on pandemic funding, with some apparent foresight as far back as 2006 regarding the current pandemic which is hitting frightening levels in Manitoba first nation communities. They are battling your friend Barack Obama's country over unfair subsidies on "black liquor" which is killing the Canadian pulp industry. They have committed 80% of stimulus spending to Canada-wide projects - including expansion of the National Trails program for which Harper just received an award from the CCSO.

Which begs the question - what is Michael Ignatieff doing? What is he planning on doing? Well, we, the Canadian public are waiting. And that's the point. For all of their complaints about closet Republicans, Michael is the closest thing this country has to George W. Bush. He is a good-old boy, big man on campus, who seeks to obtain power based upon pure force of will and personality - but devoid of intelligent, reasoned goals to lead us forward. He has no playbook, but is demanding to be the quarterback. Seriously Kinsella.. at least have the intelligence to put forward YOUR plan when your criticizing someone else for not having one.)

2. Journalists say people don't want an election right now. Journalists always say "people don't want an election right now." Hell, I recall one recent campaign that happened over Christmas, and parka-clad Canadians still showed up in their millions to vote. Remember that one? Call it, and they will come.

(In other words, Canadians, Michael and I don't care what you want or when you want it. You'll have an election and like it. Regardless of the impact on the current economic turnaround, we want power, and we're just that arrogant to put our needs ahead of the rest of you. Which isn't surprising, seeing as Michael isn't truly a citizen of this country in any committed sense.)

3. Some people will say to pollsters that they oppose having so many elections all the time. That's fair. It's also fair to observe that, if they wanted to avoid elections happening three times since 2004, they would have elected a majority somewhere in the meantime. They didn't.

(Truly, you cannot have just said that. Yes, don't you know, Canadians, that when you last went to the polls, each and every one of you placed your ballot ASKING for a minority government - you remember that extra box, don't you, "I want a minority government". I confess, I must have missed it, but Warren assures us it was there. Conservatives, Liberals, NDP's, Greens - each of you, according to Kinsella, DESERVE to have an election foisted upon you. Why? Because Michael wants one.)

4. All Summer, the Reformatories (again with the name-calling)will crisscross the country, making all manner of "stimulus" spending announcements, alongside beaming mayors and Premiers. Opposition politicians don't get invited to those announcements. The Conservatives may not get more popular, as a result, but they'll arguably get less unpopular.

Ah, now we're getting closer to the truth. The Liberals polls are peaking. So, because Warren and Michael are afraid their thin little window of opportunity is closing, they want the election now. Again - to hell with what Canada needs - this is about political opportunism - but it's different from the opportunism that Michael complained about with Lisa Raitt, really, trust us. Memo to WK and MI - when Chantel Hebert is taking the Tory's side on this point, you know you're wrong)

5. They'll get less unpopular, too, because the House of Commons won't be sitting. That's what always happens when a legislature isn't in session - governments go up in the polls. Question Period is good for the questioners, not the answerers. Ask the Harper Minister who says cancer is "sexy."

("Less Unpopular"? Think about that description. Sounds like what he really means is "the Conservatives are going to get MORE popular. And someone doesn't like that. Even if it means that the Country is going to be better off.. we can't have that. Michael Ignatieff and Warren Kinsella are deathly afraid that the economy is going to come around. Consider that for a moment too. They are unhappy if the Country does better - because is diminishes their chance for glory. And Ignatieff complains about Lisa Raitt.. for shame.)

6. The Liberal Party of Canada is ready - it's got the big money, it's got the dream candidates, it's readying a winning platform, it's more united and pumped-up than it's been in years. Drop the writ, and we're ready to drop the Reformatories.

(Warren: "I'm not scared, really.." I think it's called whistling by the graveyard.)

7. And while we are on the subject of the Reformatories (again, the name calling. one might be forced to think this is all Warren has. Like the little twirp in schoolyard, when you're left with nothing but name-calling, well, you don't have much): in politics, as in war, you attack when your opponent is weak, not strong. (That's so intrinsically basic, I'm not sure why I need to say it so often, but apparently I do.) Right now - due to the recession, due to a stumblebum Tory team, due to their leader who nobody likes - we know the other side is really, really weak. In a few months - due to a economy rebounding, mainly - they could be strong. Go with what you know is the reality, not what you hope may be the reality. (And hit first, make it hurt, and don't stop hitting the Harper Cons until the day after the election.)

(Warren: "We know the other side is really, really weak". Uh, gee, if being really, really weak means being behind 4.7% in the polls with a 1% margin of error, the Liberals must have been practically DEAD when they were behind 12 POINTS going into the last election. But - better yet -Warren finally, opens up to the real basis of his whole post - "In a few months - due to a economy rebounding, mainly - they (Conservatives) could be strong."

Again - this is the fundamental point. Ignatieff and his schnauzer Kinsella are extremely upset that this recession may be short-lived. That more Canadians may not lose their jobs. And that, sorry, is just pathetic. Fundamentally, this is Michael Ignatieff's raison d'etre, his reason for being - to be liked, to be admired, to be the big man on campus. His is not the goal of seeing Canada succeed, his is the goal of seeing Michael succeed. What he truly wants is to criticize everything that Stephen Harper does, and then, when it succeeds, he wants to sit on the throne of government and take the credit.)

8. Not only do the Reformatories (more name calling - see above) not have a plan, they don't know who they are anymore, either. They - the great fiscal hawks - have conjured up the greatest budgetary deficit in Canada's history. They - the great men of conservative principle - have shredded every conservative tenet they once held dear, just to hold onto power for a bit longer. As a consequence, their grassroots and caucus are very, very, very uncertain - and a lot of them are very unhappy, too. It's mean, I know, to suggest kicking them when they're down - but we should kick them when they're down.

(In other words, as much as we like to mislead and distort, suggesting the Conservatives are zealots and ideologues, in fact, we have to admit, they are able to adapt their policy to the needs of the Country. And they have shown a willingness to do that even at the risk of alienating some of their hard line fiscal Conservatives. How dare they!)

9. We've got the best leader in Michael Ignatieff. We just do. Our guy is smart, calm, and accomplished; their guy is an alleged economist who can't balance the books, and a rageaholic who critically requires anger management therapy. Harper has spent $3 million to run ads attacking Michael's personality - but ended up (a) reminding everyone what they didn't like about Stephen's personality and (b) reminding everyone that Stephen is really, really worried about Michael. The Reformatory brain trust (an oxymoron, I know) did those ads because Michael Ignatieff scares the living shit out of them. They should be scared. He's Prime Ministerial; their guy, even after four long years at 24 Sussex, still isn't.

(Blah, Blah, Blah.. isn't Michael pretty, isn't he bright.. didn't you see, he had his picture posted in his true country of preference, in New York and Las Vegas.. and oh yeah, Stephen Harper is a rotten, mean man for telling the truth about Michael having no demonstrated desire to live in, let alone serve, Canada - but when we just make gratuitous, unspecified attacks on Stephen Harper (a rageaholic), well, that's ok. MICHAEL DESERVES TO BE PRIME MINISTER. JUST LIKE HE DESERVED TO BE THE LEADER OF THE LIBERALS.)

10. Change. Change, change, change. People want it. They need it. These idiots have been in power for what amounts to a majority term. Apart from creating a massive deficit (at the Demand of Michael Ignatieff)- and apart from incessantly bleating "it's a global recession, it's not our fault" whenever asked for an economic plan (are you that stupid that you deny that reality, are you actually suggesting that the global recession is the responsibility of Stephen Harper?)- the Harper Reformatories have done precisely diddley squat. They had their shot, and they made things measurably worse. It's therefore time for a change.

And change is coming, sooner or later.

(Yes, I agree. And that change will be that Michael and the Canadian public, will discover you are yesterday's man, as a result of, hopefully, the Canadian public realizing that a forced election will be an effort to accomplish nothing but feeding Michael's incredible ego.)

With thanks to Kez - Indoctrination of our Children at Work

I came across this on Kez's blog, "Random Musings of a Tormented Mind".

There is a frightening piece of propaganda being shown to school children to indoctrinate them into the left anti-free market view shared by the radical left (which, no shock, includes many in the teaching profession).

This is apparently being brought into school systems and being used as a "teaching tool" over young children - this one-sided view of capitalism by a former Greenpeace worker, no less.

This piece of work is the video on the website, www.storyofstuff.com. Don't bother watching it, it will just irritate you. Better to just go to the FACTUAL analysis of this piece of garbage here:











The left is hard at work, lying and misleading the public (remember the polar bears dying off?)

Check with your local school boards, make sure this isn't happening to your children, and if it is, demand the critique be shown as well.

Get Ready for Old Style Liberal Politics

So - Ignatieff is musing on forcing an election.

"He Who Shall Remain Nameless" is letting everyone know, in his not so subtle way, that he's an "insider" and that an election may be in the offing. It would be great sport to see him eat some humble-pie.

Surprised? Why would you be? For all his posturing on how terrible it is that Lisa Raitt would be seeking to make political points by taking control of the isotope issue, Michael Ignatieff will not hesitate to push the country into an election, effectively bringing government to a stand-still during our difficult effort to right the economy - if he thinks he stands a chance of being "king", of being the "big man on campus" which is ultimately his raison d'etre.

While I'm suspicious that an election will be forced, I think it's fair to say that there may be some indications that the Liberal support is peaking. With the government taking good steps on addressing the H1N1 flu issue, taking Obama to task on paper mill subsidies in he U.S., and indications that the economy is on the upswing, the Liberals may feel this is their small window of opportunity.

On the other hand, their finances are still in the toilet and a slim minority government certainly isn't the prize that Ignatieff covets - but some power is better than no power for a vain egomaniac like Michael Ignatieff. Although, you can be certain as the sun rises in the east, that if the economy does come around and the Liberals manage to steal an election, the barking dogs who have been blaming Harper for doing nothing, will be very quick to assume complete credit for the upswing.. that's just how they roll.

And here's my take:

Ontario and Quebec are certainly hurting. And, knowing the Liberals as we all do, they will shower money on Toronto and in the Province of Quebec, and if you are anywhere west of the Manitoba border, you can pretty much expect a big "f*ck you" from the Liberal party. The problem is, however, it will be damn difficult to spoil the electorate without ramping up the deficit.

Expect more cutbacks on Provincial allocations, with another shift to put more weight on the backs of the Provinces a la Chretien and Martin. In Western Canada, with basically Conservative governments, you can then expect the result to be cutbacks on social and health care funding, and a hue and cry that the bad conservatives are to blame.

The Great Gambit:

The Liberals gambled last election, and got pasted. Dion didn't forsee the recession, and brought in his "greenshift" at exactly the wrong time.

With a little luck, they'll screw up again. They push for an election, the economy starts turning around and the public gets behind Harper as the captain who steered the ship right.

We'll see.

Thank-god we don't have Layton and Igantieff at the helm..

Well, the World Health Organization is on the cusp of declaring the H1N1 flu a world-wide pandemic, and is seeing frightening parallels between the current course of the H1N1 flu and the Spanish flu outbreak in 1918 which killed millions of people - all the more frightening as we see serious outbreaks occurring in the Province of Manitoba, see Vancouver Sun story here.

What is the Harper government doing - well last week they announced a $10.8 million increase in funding for pandemic research. This was no knee-jerk reaction. The $10.8million comes from a funding commitment to fight pandemics laid out in the 2006 federal budget.

Huh.. so 3 years ago, the Conservatives budgeted an additional $10.8 billion for pandemic research - which just might now is perhaps one of the most serious problems the Canadian public is facing in many, many years.

What is Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff doing?

Well, as everyone is very, very much aware, they are complaining because Lisa Raitt used the word "sexy". They spent the better part of the last day in commons creating "much ado about nothing".

Is the Harper government devoid of political opportunism - hardly - but at the same time, they are at the wheel, and, for the most part (with the spectacular exception of recent Bill C-15) they are steering us on course. Slow and steady..

Thank God we don't have Layton and Ignatieff at the helm, with their good friend, Gilles Duceppe. The "real" problems of Canadians clearly take a back seat to semantics and political game playing as far as they are concerned.

For an excellent take, surprisingly, I can't do better than to recommend yesterday's article in the Toronto Star of all places by, yes, Chantel Hebert, here.

The "Raitt Tapes" - Let's Put It In Context

Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff are all up in arms because Lisa Raitt said that if the Health Minister won't address the isotope issue, she will - and will reap the political benefit of handling the issue, which is "sexy". (In political parlance, "sexy" refers to an issue which captures the headlines and the interests of the population.)

Grow up boys. While I have my own questions about how Raitt could hire some incompetent boob who clearly has strong Liberal connections - Canadians have a lot more to worry about than the use of the word "sexy" in reference to the isotope issue.

- the unemployed in Canada reached an 11 year high yesterday, at 8.4%, with Ontario losing 65,000 jobs in May, and unemployment in that Province reaching 9.4%

- Our manufacturing sector, already in trouble with the recession, is now under the gun as a result of new U.S. protectionist efforts;

- Islamic extremists continue to seek to establish a foothold in Pakistan, and in so doing, control of nuclear weapons;

Do you see a pattern?

Ask yourself, when is the last time that either Jack Layton or Michael Ignatieff made a positive suggestion as to what the government should be doing - assuming they disagree with government. Well, yes, they did demand that the government provide massive increases to stimulus spending and increase Employment Insurance benefits.. and of course, when the government did just that, well, the barking dogs got up in Commons and complained bitterly about the resulting deficit.

I'm a Conservative, but even I couldn't support Bill C-15, seeking minimum sentences on certain drug crimes. One would assume that bastion of the middle-left, the Liberal Party of Canada, would have been all over it.

Nope. When they had the opportunity to actually vote against bad legislation, they backed off. Ignatieff said, well, nothing.

For all the posturing about how terrible Lisa Raitt was for discussing the political benefits of taking control and fixing the isotope problem, the reality is that Layton and Ignatieff are doing exactly that. They are doing nothing of value for Canadians, and are seeking to hide behind the pain and emotional trauma of cancer survivors, to make political points on an issue which, really, is no issue at all.

We have some real issues in this country that need addressing, wouldn't it be nice if Layton and Ignatieff did something constructive, for once, instead of seeking to make political points every time a Conservative stubs their toe.

Like the proverbial arm-chair quarterbacks, while Harper is on the field, doing a pretty admirable job of handling a crushing world-wide recession, Layton and Ignatieff sit, guzzle beer and munch nachos, all the while complaining about the calls that the quarterback makes. Typical.

New Blog Worth Reading - Garth Turner's "Troubled Future of Real Estate"

Ok. So I decided to cut "Galloping Beaver" from my blog list of things worth reading. To be honest, well, she was just getting tedious - like her pals at Canadian Cynic.

In her place, I've added Garth Turner's blog. If anyone is incensed with Stephen Harper, it's Garth Turner - but, at least he's somewhat interesting, and his blog seems to generate some disussion beyond calling Tories "fucktards" and other insults devoid of anything that might be considered a thinking mind.

The Lisa Raitt Tape - Let's Give You Something to Talk About

Ok. By now perhaps you've read the reports of the content of the tape recording of conversations between Lisa Raitt and her aid, Jasmine MacDonnell. The full report is here.

So.. what of the tape? Well, not much to talk about there, really. Raitt refers to being willing to take on the issue of radioactive isotopes, calling it a "sexy" issue. In political parlance, "sexy" is an issue which captures the public interest. Anyone in politics wouldn't blink twice at the reference. And she intimates that while the current Minister of Health is "very capable", she confides in her aid that she may not be strong enough for the "rough and tumble" of Parliament.

Big deal.

But - now, the baying dogs are up in arms. And as I digest the situation, the clear facts are as follows:

Lisa Raitt had the poor sense to hire an aide by the name of Jasmine MacDonnell.

Jasmine MacDonnell, in the space of her very short tenure as Raitt's aid, managed to:

a) Leave "secret" government documents laying around, to be picked up by the press;
b) Record a lengthy conversation between herself and her boss without her boss's knowledge or consent;
c) Accidentally left he recording in a washroom;
d) When the recorder was found by a newspaper reporter in Ottawa, he allegedly contacted MacDonnell, and told her she could come pick it up;
e) After being told the recorder had been found - well, apparently Jasmine didn't pick it up for over five months, by which point, the intrepid reporter decided to apparently listen to the tape.

Ok. You get the picture. Now - the real question is, do you truly believe that someone, even a young, 26 year old someone, could truly be that galactically incompetent or stupid? Really?

Think about that for a second and let me tell you a little bit more about Jasmine MacDonnell. You see, Jasmine is the daughter of Ralston MacDonnell.

Who is Ralston MacDonnell?

Well, let me tell you.

Ralston MacDonnell is Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of the ISIS Canada Network of Centers of Excellence. He is President of MacDonnell Group Consulting Ltd., a group of engineering and management consulting companies with a track record of support for leading technology development and fostering economic growth in Canada. In other words, Ralston MacDonnell is connected.

Connected to who?

Well, Mr. MacDonnell was in the middle of a bit of a "sticky wicket" over the purchase of the Digby Wharf in 1999. You see, apparently, the Maritime Harbour Society was able to purchase the Digby Wharf form the Federal Government in 1999 for the grand sum of one ($1.00) dollar. And to make it an even better deal, the Federal Government threw in another $3 million operating grant for the society to assist it in taking over wharf operations. Oddly enough, however, is that none of the society directors lived or worked in the Digby area, but were paid $52,000.00 per year by, yes, the MacDonnell Group - the company who subcontracted to manage the wharf. Over five years he paid these society members $250,000.00 each. MacDonnell's consulting group itself, apparently, charged the Society 4,068 hours in consulting fees. When he was questioned regarding complaints over this transaction and the use of the government money, and asked to provide some explanation the response? "The contract was a lump sum contract," MacDonnell explained to reporters. "What we spent on any one service or component was our affair." His firm received $2 million of taxpayers money through a management contract which MacDonell says didn't require his company to itemize or account for what it spends to anyone.

Three guesses who was in power in 1999 - the first two don't count.

Yes - the party in power at that time was the Liberal Party of Canada, and the Prime Minister of Canada at that time was, yes, Joseph Jacques Jean Chretien. You remember him - for further details see the "Gomery Report".

Yes - that is who Ralston MacDonnell is VERY WELL connected to. Obviously.

Better, he continues to be connected..

To - no less than Mr. Michael Ignatieff himself. Yes, it seems Mr. MacDonnell is a fund raiser for Mr. Ignatieff.

So - how curious then that when Jasmine MacDonnell's resignation produced a response from her father's pal, Michael Ignatieff, that "I don't like people blaming 26-year-olds."

Yes, I'm sure you don't Michael, especially where they are the children of well-healed financial supporters for you - something I note you have neglected to also mention in your public scorn over this issue.

So - getting back to the point at hand. The tape itself is not much, really.

On the other hand, the circumstances of how Jasmine MacDonnell found herself in the middle of a shit-storm of galactic proportions, all based upon an almost unbelievable run of bad luck and mindless stupidity - that just happened to emberrass the Conservative Party of Canada.

Well, as the Church Lady might say to Michael Ignatieff, "How conveeeeeenient."

Ontario's "eHealth" Program is a Little Sick

There perhaps is no area of government support that is more in need of quality management and concern over prudent use of funding than health care.

So then, so much more offensive the conduct that resulted in the firing of Sarah Kramer, CEO of eHealth Ontario.

Why was she fired? Well, as reported in the Toronto Star today:

"That Sarah Kramer was hired at $380,000 and paid a $114,000 bonus after just five months on the job, that $2 million in untendered contracts were awarded by eHealth to longtime associates of Kramer and the agency chair, that consultants were billing $300 an hour for reading newspaper articles and checking email, that taxpayers were being dinged for the cost of muffins and Choco Bites by consultants making $2,700 a day might understandably have struck taxpayers as an obliviousness to the new reality of breathtaking proportion."

Complete story here.

So, Ontario, any second thoughts on your selection of Dalton McGuinty and his crew as saviors of your Province? I guess he made damn sure that religious-based schools didn't get government funding, so, there's that. On the other hand, Ontario's deficit is $4 billion more than projected in it's last budget, and two bond-rating agencies have revised Ontario's status to "negative" from "stable".

Manditory Jail Sentences for Drug Crimes - a Bad Idea All Around

Well. The Conservatives are pressing forward to pass legislation that will require mandatory jail sentences for those selling drugs, even in minor amounts. Including so-called "soft drugs" like marijuana.

The right side of the political spectrum, for the most part, will cheer this as evidence of the difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals - that is, those on the right who don't truly understand what the result of this will mean.

Those who do - and I have some understanding as a lawyer, will know it will mean two things:

a) Increased government spending. Serious increases. Already, drug prosecution expenditures have increased to record levels never before seen - and with no discretion, Courts will be clogged. The ability to make plea bargains will effectively be taken away, so more and more trials, and more and more appeals = increased government spending. Money that could be spent on health care, or other useful endeavors, will be spend on drug prosecution and the added jails which will be required.

And it won't work. Witness the American experience. Hard line, mandatory jail sentences, and drug use and trafficking is worse than ever. It doesn't work. It appeases those who have a simple idea of the "cause and effect" of jail - but, those in the know, know it won't work.

b) Increased rates of criminal behaviour. Yup. You hear me. Jails do two things.. they keep you off the street for a little while, and then, they teach you how to be a criminal. The don't rehabilitate. You get to spend day after day with other criminals. They become your peers. You are surrounded on a day in and day out basis by others who, for various reasons, found committing criminal offenses a reasonable life choice. Criminals become "normalized". You compare notes, you discuss what you did wrong - and you maybe learn how to perfect your craft or how to learn a new craft.

Jails take people who may have been teetering on the edge of society - and assure that for the rest of their lives, they will be marginalized members of society. Not all, certainly, but a good portion of them will forever be branded and see themselves as "criminals".

For all the media coverage of those committing crimes while on probation, there are many, many more who use probation as a tool to help them get their lives back on track. I know. I've seen it. Not all of them, by any means, but enough to know that probation serves a purpose.

So - you might ask - am I somehow the only Conservative who knows these things? No - I'm certain the Prime Minister knows it. His aids, his advisors, and the Attorney General knows it. But - here's the thing.. polls are neck and neck, boyo.. and gosh darn, but putting the bad guys in jail is a great way to solidify your base and get the vote out.

The Liberals know it too.. hence their support of the bill - which is actually even more pathetic - for tough guy Michael Ignatieff, the guy who was putting the Conservatives on "probation" to let this go, shows just where his principals lie. Whereever they can buy a vote - that's where.

Politics is sick. It's no longer about doing the right thing - it's about pandering to votes and getting and holding power.

Ti-Guy raises an interesting.. and troubling Question.

Most political bloggers have come across Ti-Guy at some point. He (or she) is a regular poster on political blogs, and, of late, has been giving me some grief on some of my thoughts and ideas.. from his (or her)anonymous nom de plume, he (or she) throws thoughts around like Molotov cocktails - often not very directed or precise, but seeking to damage the target against whom they are thrown.

But today, Ti-Guy raised in my mind a very interesting and unsettling thought about what we might expect if this Country were to give the reigns to the liberal left untrammelled.

On BigCityLib, I was engaged in some debate about the effect of libel chill on free speech, and the complicity of our Courts in hampering free political debate.

On my own blog, yesterday, I engaged in a discussion about the need to prevent the Government from being permitted to indoctrinate our children, and my support for Alberta Bill 44, in respecting a parents right to raise children according to their own religious faith.

On both of these positions, I was taken to task by Ti-Guy, and, in posting to my blog yesterday, he called me a hypocrite for taking these two positions. It was at that point, that something crystallized in my mind.

The left is apparently very opposed to two things:

a) Allowing children to be raised with a moral sensibility which is, perhaps, different from that of the Liberal left; and

b) Allowing open and free debate by those who oppose the Liberal left's point of view.


Think about that. Let that sink in for a moment. If they had their way, they would determine what is "politically acceptable", and they would broach no debate or expression which went beyond those boundaries, and, apparently, they would assure that the education of our children regarding what is "politically acceptable" would be assured by government, with no ability for parents to say otherwise.

That was the central goal of Nazi germany. That is the central goal of all fascist dictators. That is not, and cannot be, my Canada.

For clarifying this intention of the Liberal left,I say, thank-you Ti-Guy.

Bill 44 a done deal.. One Small Step Against the Thought Police.

Everyone has heard of George Orwell's "1984". If you haven't read it, or haven't read it recently, I recommend reading it or reading it again.
It is difficult to read "1984" without raising the hairs on the back of your neck when you see the fat hand of the state on your shoulder.

In "1984", the state has the "Ministry of Truth" - which, is anything but. Ultimately, the government has decided that what is "truth" is really a matter of what the people need to know, in the best interests of the State, of the collective, even when that "truth" is clearly untrue.. after all, it's for their own good.

If people seek to question or criticize the "Truth", well, they will be corrected by the Ministry of Love.. in reality, they will be imprisoned or tortured, to show them the error of their ways.

Such is life in "1984".

So then.. today, in Alberta, we have a few loud advocates of the Ministry of Truth and the Ministry of Love. People who feel that parents shouldn't be able to prevent the "Truth" being given to their children. And, today, these advocates of the Thought Police are very upset that, in Alberta, we still have the freedom to have our own opinion and our own ideas - that we have the freedom to say, "No Thank-you" to certain limited areas of instruction in our Public School system.

Yes - those same people who have complained, loud and long, that a "Civil Union", would have been no answer to gay persons wishing to marry, are now saying, "If you don't like what we are going to tell your children about your religious faith in school, well, school them at home, or pay for a private school - because in our brand of "education", we will teach them the "Truth" whether you like it or not.

Well - today, our government said, "no". It said, we respect a parent's right to raise their child under their own moral code - whether we disagree with that moral code or not. Such is the price of freedom and liberty.

This is not Oceana. This is not "1984".

Today - the Thought Police lost. And all of us, whether gay or straight, Christian, Muslim or athiest.. we are all better of for it.

Canada invests in GMC

Today, on my drive home, I was listing to that shrew Liberal apologist Barbara Budd on CBC Radio, interviewing Joseph D'Cruz, Professor of Strategic Management with the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.

Professor D'Cruz was speaking on his impressions of the bankruptcy filing by GMC and Canada's acquisition of a stake in GMC. While doing his best to fend off Budd's inane efforts to discredit the PM, he did make a couple of excellent points.

Firstly, his take was that the Canadian arm of GMC was in a much stronger position than it's American parent because it was less highly leveraged - and, on that point, the decision of the U.S. and Canadian governments to provide support by acquiring equity in GMC was much more helpful than a loan - because it did not increase the already heavy leveraging that required bankruptcy in the U.S.

On the other hand - he had some concerns.

Ok. Here I go.

Agreeing with an Academic.

From Toronto.

Disagreeing with Conservative government policy.

D'Cruz made two very salient points and raised some serious questions:

a) The supposed fall-out of a failure of GMC would be corrected by market forces. As jobs would be lost, other auto manufacturers would step in to the void, and presumeably increase their own market, and, in the long run, the impact would not be nearly as oppressive as suggested by Barack Obama and Stephen Harper, so he questioned the need to bail out the auto industry;

b) Following upon the last last point - he then questioned why lost jobs in the auto industry are so important, while lost jobs in the B.C. lumber industry aren't.

Ok. Color me cynical. Professor D'Cruz, the answer to both questions is actually quite simple.

Ontario = More Votes;
British Columbia = Less Votes.

'nuf said.

*sigh*