More Lies, Damn Lies, and Liberals.. even Jeffrey Simpson and the Globe can't keep score anymore

Well.

More examination today of the lies, damn lies, and the Liberals who tell them, specifically, from the high lama of lies, Michael Ignatieff.

Rather than editorialize, I'll leave the talking to his slyness himself:

Toronto Star, September 11, 2009, quoting Michael Ignatieff:

"Let me be very clear, the Liberal party would not agree to a coalition," he said. "In January we did not support a coalition and we do not support a coalition today or tomorrow."

Seems pretty unequivocal, no?

What a minute..

Globe and Mail June 6, 2010:

“A coalition is legitimate, but my intention, my plan is to form a Liberal government,” Mr. Ignatieff said during a news conference after a meeting with Quebec party members. “I will play the cards the Canadian voters deal. I’m not going to deal with those cards until they are dealt, until they are on the table.”

Oh, sorry, I must have misunderstood you a scant nine months ago Michael, obviously you DO think that if you can't win an election clean, you will be happy to co-manage Canada with Jack Layton.

Well.

At least we know where Liberals stand on the coalition issue now, they're obviously good to go, right?

Well, Jeffrey Simpson, at the Globe and Mail, appears to still be confused, responding to what he describes as Conservative "exaggerations, inaccuracies and, when it comes to describing opposition politicians, distortions", and specifically, in response to the suggestions of the Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s warnings of the Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition in waiting:

 “Mr. Ignatieff made it clear then [i.e., two years ago] and certainly subsequently, that he did not favour a coalition.”

I see.

"Exaggerations, inaccuracies, and distortions"?

Seems to be that all that's happening is the reporting of Michael Ignatieff's lies..err.. "confusion" regarding his intent on forming a coalition.

Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party of Canada.

Power at any cost.

Lies, damn lies, and Liberals.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Liberals

Well.

One day into my effort to take up the hobby of target shooting and already I'm seeing a hubbub on my blog about my choice being "childish".  About not understanding that there are "obviously good reasons for the gun registry".

Really.

Like how the gun registry helped save lives at Dawson College.

Like how it prevents guns from getting into the wrong hands (like the shooter at Dawson College, at l'ecole Polytechnique).

If people like Michael Ignatieff and his GTA friends had simply been honest - that gun registration makes it easier, in a very few cases, to investigate crimes, but won't obviously prevent anyone with a registered gun or who refuses to register their gun from using it to commit a crime - well, I would have perhaps felt less offended by the wishes of the "important" cities of Toronto and Montreal.

This minion from the unimportant hamlet of Lethbridge might have just chalked it up to yet another expensive effort for a very minor positive return - nothing new in Ottawa.

But when so much time was spent trying to support a cause with the use of lies and more lies, well, that offends.

When Michael Ignatieff puts the families and victims of the Dawson College shooting on display and talks about how the registry saved lives - without making it clear that Kimveer Gil HAD registered his weapon - well, that offends.

The Liberal Party of Canada. 

Do not forget the theft of Canadian taxpayer dollars to sprinkle around their pals in Quebec.

Do not forget the lies told to support their effort at propping up their failed gun registry.

Remember this:  there are lies, damn lies, and Liberals.

P.S.:

The message seems to be getting out there -

Toronto Star today: McGuinty sinking, poll shows: 76% want new party in power

Toronto Star today: Tories trounce Liberals in New Brunswick election

Well. One more new gun owner thanks to the Coalition of Urban Alarmists

I have never owned a gun of any kind.

I have never considered taking up target practice or hunting, not that I have anything against it, I just never really thought about it.

And, until last week, I don't think I ever would have.

But when some elitist state-control advocates from Toronto and Montreal tell me what I shouldn't have, well, I'm the kind of guy that thinks about having it.  Even if I didn't want it in the first place.

Call me a rebel.

So, I need a little advice today as I prepare for obtaining my first ever FAC.

When I do, what would you recommend in terms of a long-gun?  I'm thinking of hunting rabbits.

The IWI TAR-21?

Or...

The Colt AR-15?

I just can't decide..

And of course I'm going to need a handgun as well, I don't want anything too powerful, as I'm just starting out, and I need something that's relatively stable and easy to use.

Again, what would you recommend, between the:

Barretta 92FS

And the Glock 35?

Thank-you Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton, for making me think about the need to have something you don't want me to have.

The Canadian Bat Registry: Coming Soon from the Coalition of Urban Alarmists

The Bat: Unregistered, Used with Alcohol, and Improperly Stored.. a tragedy waiting to happen.

As the Canadian Media reported of the tragic death of 15 year old Delta, B.C. student Laura Szendrei today , allegedly beaten with a baseball bat in broad daylight - the coalition forces of Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff immediately came to the fore.

Following an earlier incident, being a reported assault in Winnipeg where residents of a home were assaulted with baseball bats, causing one of them to sever a finger, in a speech to hundreds of frontline police officers, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff proposed the establishment of a "bat registry" system that would address frustrating irritants for baseball-playing Canadians while giving our police the tools they need to keep our communities safe.

“You are the frontline of our system of justice, and we’re committed to giving you the tools you need to do your job,” Mr. Ignatieff said to the gathering of the Canadian Police Association. “That’s why the Liberal Party proudly stands with Canadian families and Canadian police officers for effective bat control.  Our initial estimates are that the bat registry can be established at a cost of less than one billion dollars, however, it would be a bargain at double the price if it saves just one life.”

Immediately, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police applauded the effort, with
Toronto police chief and CACP president Bill Blair telling CBC's Power and Politics with Evan Solomon, "I think it's a very strong statement of the commitment of our members to safe communities and for retaining the tools for our police officers that help them do their jobs."

“Canadians want bat control that works, and that treats bat owners fairly,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “But we won’t abandon bat control. Not when bats are responsible for so many deaths and injuries in Canada over the years. Not when the bat registry is a vital tool that law enforcement will use every single day.”

In his speech, Ignatieff stated, “Let me be perfectly clear: the Liberal Party opposes the Conservative government’s effort to block the bat registry altogether and we will vote to a man in favor of the bill at third reading in the House of Commons."

“Police across Canada are taking the lead on crime prevention, and finding new ways to keep our communities safe,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “We have supported tougher sentences, when they are appropriate. But we also support giving police the tools they need to prevent crime, and the bat registry is a crucial part of that support."

Initial polls in Montreal and Toronto show strong support for the registry - though some segments of the Sikh and Hindu communities raised questions about whether the registry did or didn't apply to cricket bats.

How Democracy Works in Torontistan.. and why it's time to pack our bags.

Well.

Apparently I'm not the only one who is offended at Marissa's arrogance, in dismissing the little "hamlets" of this Country as being too insignificant for Toronto and Montreal to worry about.

One of my favorite comments was from UsualSuspect who wrote:

Of course she is right. Two wolves and a sheep deciding about dinner IS democracy.

Its a strange thing. While we here in Next Year Country champion the ideals of democracy most, we also tend to have the lowest expectations of government.

It's a prairie thing.

A good year is one where the elephant forgets you are there and leaves you be and one good year in three is enough to rise again in the Spring.

Next year will be better...

Is our lot in Western Canada really that pathetic?  Is the best we can hope for that Ontario and Quebec won't "rape us too much"?

Think about THIS for a moment.

As we have pointed out to us, over and over, our resource revenue is a non-renewable resource.  Oil, natural gas, coal - are finite resources.  At some point, they will either run out, or society will find alternatives where they are not required.

In the meanwhile, we make hay while the sun shines.  And a massive part of that harvest gets funnelled out to Quebec and Ontario.   Beyond the obvious example of equalization payments, government resources like VIA rail and others are concentrated in southern Ontario and Quebec, and general government benefits are typically doled out on a per capita basis - which means that the taxes that Ottawa collects go primarily to Ontario and Quebec.

Now consider that Quebec doesn't want to belong.

They have elected as their MP's, overwhelmingly, the Bloc Quebecois for some time.  They have held a referendum to separate and had their goals foiled by a thin margin.

And this is while their citizens are being fed a steady diet of transfer payments, the pigs at the trough have been very well fed indeed.. and still they clamor to leave.

What do you think is going to happen when the resources start to run dry?

Do you anticipate for a moment that la belle Province is going to consider returning the favor?

Consider their recent response to Newfoundland's effort to expand it's export of hydro electric energy. While Newfoundland had struggled for generations financially, when they have the good fortune to be able to generate some wealth from their resources, not only are they not supported by Quebec - in fact, the Quebec government actively tries to prevent their profit.  What Danny Williams has so subtly referred to as "hydro robbery".

The writing is on the wall, my friends.

If we're going to leave, best we do so while our wallets are full.  Because the alternative is a future of serfdom to the lords of the manor in the duchy of Torontistan.

Torontistan Wisdom: "Hamlets" Don't Matter in THEIR Canada

Alright.

So I'm pissed off.  I'll admit it.

But, curiously, my anger has been focused thanks to a post yesterday from Marissa (who happens to be from Toronto).

In response to my suggestion that our current Liberal/NDP coalition running this country is really doing the bidding of the so-called "Greater" Toronto Area, there was a post from Marissa which crystallized EXACTLY why this Country is a mess that I for one no longer wish to be a part of. 

In her haste to attack my own disappointment with the defeat of the bill seeking to scrap the gun registry, Marissa articulated a point which I think every citizen outside of Ontario and Quebec need to take to heart:

"There are more people in the GTA than in your entire province. Add the population of Montreal, and you've got almost a third of the country.


You know the way this country works? It's called "representative democracy". That means that you do not get to dismiss the concerns of a fifth of the country because you're jealous because they're more important than the little hamlet that you hail from."

Well.

She put me in my place.

Silly me - they are clearly "more important".  People in my "little hamlet" don't matter.  And I guess the same holds true for little hamlets all over the rest of this faux-confederation, places like Prince George, Kamloops, Red Deer, Medicine Hat, Swift Current, Saskatoon, Brandon, Flin Flon.

We don't matter.  Just ignorant little hamlets who don't measure up to the big boys in Montreal and Toronto.

And, sadly, she's exactly right.

And as much as the rest of us hate to admit it, this is exactly how this so-called "Confederation" works.

The resources of the rest of the country, whether it's oil from Alberta, hydro from Newfoundland, Coal from British Columbia - those resources really belong to Montreal and Toronto.  We've been sending money east since I was born, and we've been getting effectively NOTHING in return.

And now we get to not only send our resource revenue to the bottomless sink-hole of tax dollars called Quebec, but we get to pay more tax because of a pointless gun registry that makes urban Canada (see Montreal and Toronto) sleep better.

Nice.

And get ready to pay yet more taxes as the new coalition pushes their agenda of having the government look after the children of all of the parents in Montreal and Toronto under the Liberal "Universal Daycare" program.

What are you going to do, citizens of Kelowna?  Cry?

What are YOU doing to do, Regina?  Complain to your MP?

The last time a group realized that they were getting unfairly taxed, without representation, I think they had a little get together they called a "Tea Party".

Anyone west of Kenora up for a spot of tea?

Welcome to Torontistan..

Bin Layton

So the Gun Registry is saved, by the thinnest of margins. Personally, it will have marginal impact upon me.  I don't hunt, don't own a gun.

Are we shocked that the great intellectual elite of Toronto was able to marshal their forces to mislead and lie to Canadians about what the Gun Registry actually does?  Trotting out families of shooting victims and putting them on display, telling us how the Registry "saved lives" at Dawson College (without ever explaining that, yes, Kimveer Gill DID register his gun before he stared shooting people with it.)

Are we surprised?  Hardly.

Welcome, fellow Canadians, to the Brave New World being created for us, all in an effort, ultimately, to create a new "Torontistan".



The good news, is that today, more than perhaps any day in the recent history of this Country we still call Canada, we have seen so clearly that the interests, that the ideals, that the thoughts of Canadians who live outside of the Greater Toronto Area do not matter to the leaders of the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party.

Who are these "leaders"?

Jack Layton.  Mr. Downtown Toronto.  (Married to Olivia Chow, who while born in China, has been cloistered in Toronto continuously since she was 13.) While Layton grew up in Montreal, his political life has been focused on one City. Toronto.  His experience and understanding of anything outside of the GTA is almost non-existent.

Michael Ignatieff.  Born and raised in Toronto, for a while Ignatieff left the city when it wasn't, apparently, "elite" enough for him, choosing to live in London and then Cambridge, Massachusetts, before returning to Canada to seek what he considers to be his "divine right" of leadership.

Recently Ignatieff was seen donning plaid shirts, travelling through Canada (I'm sure he was shocked with the existence of a "great unwashed" west of Kenora) pretending he was a man "of the people".  Of course even then, he couldn't help explaining to a Calgary Stampede crowd how ignorant they were buying cowboy boots outside of Quebec.

So.

This is the Canada of Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff.

This is the Canada where, if you don't live in Toronto or Montreal, you don't matter.

This is Torontistan.

I'm sending my cheque to Stephen Harper today.  I suggest for those of you not looking forward to your new citizenship in Torontistan do likewise. 

Enough is enough.

Non-News Item of the Day.. the Sean Bruyea "Scandal"

Well.

Another Faux-Scandal in the Globe.  More Non-News to fill space.

Sean Bruyea publishes details of his mental problems to the whole of Canada in the Globe and Mail, but complains that his "privacy" was compromised when government bureaucrats shared that information internally.

To understand the situation:


Bruyea makes a complaint that his file isn't properly handled.

Some entry level bureaucrat then refers the claim to a higher up, and they then, no doubt, delegate a review of the claim to a couple minions. Those minions, in turn, seek input on various matters from other minions and internal medical advisors and possibly lawyers.. and over time, any combination or all of them quit, get fired, get transferred, and the file is then inherited by yet another group of minions and government types..

And during all of this, Bruyea makes a public figure of himself, speaking constantly about his condition, his post-traumatic stress disorder - and so, as happens, HIS file gets extra attention.. not to undermine him, but to assure that the loudmouth giving evidence on the Hill has had every "i" dotted and "t" crossed.

And, as happens, the Liberals get booted and the Conservatives are put in power, and still Bruyea is loud and clear in his complaints over how he and other veterans have been treated.

So the government reviews his file, yet again, to see just how badly he WAS treated, no doubt.

And throughout all of this, and in the face of every sort of complaint about government that Bruyea could make - NOT ONE ASPECT of his personal medical information becomes public.

Nada.

Until HE decides to publish in the Globe and Mail about how his “mental condition is deteriorating and he is now actively experiencing suicidal ideation”.

And now he's complaining again (no shock there).

Memo to bureaucrats.

Review the claim, keep it to yourself, and when you deny benefits - no one reviews it, no one gives a second opinion. If you don't understand the claim, you DO NOT ask for advice. Just stamp it "DENIED" and file it away. And forget about it.

That's how Bruyea and his lawyer want Veteran health claims handled.
 

Stephen Harper.. More of This, and Less of That

Prime Minister Stephen Harper lectured the UN development conference on aid yesterday

Dear Mr. Harper:

I read of your speech at the United Nations today.

Well done.

A little more leadership of this caliber domestically, and you will get the majority you seek.

Sincerely,

RGH

From the Montreal Gazette:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper adopted a schoolmasterly tone as he addressed the UN's development conference yesterday, telling world leaders the debate is off cue.

Amid claims by numerous leaders of the developing world that rich countries are not doing enough to help them, Harper signalled the focus of the conference should be on the efficiency of aid dollars.

"At this summit, our discussions should be less about new agreements than accountability for existing ones," he said. "Less about lofty promises than real results. Less about narrow self-interest in sovereignty's name, than an expanded view of mutual interest in which there is room for all to grow and prosper."

The approach is risky at a time when Canada is campaigning for a seat on the UN Security Council, the world organization's most powerful body.

Developing countries make up a significant portion of the 192-member General Assembly, which will next month choose from Canada, Germany and Portugal to fill two Security Council spots reserved for Western countries throughout 2011 and 2012.

In a more conventional gesture, Harper also announced an increase in the Canadian contribution to the Global Fund to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in poor countries.

Figures released by the government show Canada will make an added commitment of $540 million, bringing its total contribution to more than $1.5 billion -the largest ever made by Canada to an international health institution.

India's Preparation for Commonwealth Games as Expected

Workers clear the debris from a pedestrian bridge that collapsed Tuesday outside the Jawaharlal Nehru stadium, the main venue for the Commonwealth Games, in New Delhi

From CBC News:

"Anywhere else, at any other time, nobody would have noticed it, but the microscope is so acutely focused on what's happening at the games that every little hiccup right now seems to add to people's angst," CBC's Adrienne Arsenault said.

Ok.

So she was talking about a ceiling tile dropping in the weight lifting area.

Let's be honest..  is anyone even remotely surprised?

But now think about THIS from the Economic Times:

India set to rake in $100 billion through carbon trading

I'm sure THAT money will be used wisely, though.

Kimveer Gill

Burning "Witches" and the Politically Correct Reformation

Bill Maher.

The Tomas de Torquemada of his generation.  The Grand Inquisitor.  Woe to those who dare to challenge "proper thought".

Or, to bring it to a more modern equivalent - the new Joe McCarthy.

When Christine O'Donnell dared to challenge the "power elite" of the Republican Party, and succeeded, not only were Republicans stunned, but the frantic ideologues supporting Barack Obama were all up in arms as well - and no one was more frantic and desperate to hold on to the maintenance of the status quo than former comedian, and now left-wing political hack Bill Maher.

Sadly, Bill Maher, having been born in 1956, was a true child of the 60's.  And his contemporaries should be ashamed of what he's become.

I wouldn't call myself a 60's child.  I was born in 1962, so didn't really start becoming fully aware of the culture around me until maybe the early 1970's.. but I remember the remnants.  I remember the sense of hope for freedom.  Wild clothes, wild art, wild music.  A sense that we could be whatever we wanted - that our limits were only self-imposed.

I had an older cousin who fed my love of music, and gave me my first LP's when I was like 9 years old.. I still remember, "In-a-gadda-da-vida" by Iron Butterfly, "7" by Steppenwolf, "American Woman" by the Guess Who, "Grand Funk" by Grand Funk Railroad, and "Rubber Soul" by the Beatles.

I listened to those albums over and over again, and was left with a life-long appreciation for the drive for freedom and individuality which was inherent in the music of the 60's and early 70's.. and to some extent continues today.

The music of my youth lead me to become an English major in University, and discover the poets and writers of those days, like Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac.. and their eventual progeny, one of my favorite writers, Hunter S. Thompson.

At their best, these artists ignored political ideology, and instead, reached out for freedom to find their way "their way". 

Don't TELL ME.. let me find my out for myself was really the mantra of the 60's.

And there is a place for this in new Conservatism.  Not the loud but relatively small numbers of conservatives carrying out book burnings and pressing for the imposition of "Christian Values", but the larger more expansive conservatism of allowing us to tend to our own affairs without the heavy hand of the "man" on our shoulders.

And, really, this loss of independence is feeding political malaise, particularly in the United States of America, a whole nation created expressly for the purpose of over-coming tyranny and establishing freedom.

Sadly, the dreams of Thomas Jefferson have been buried in the compost heap of those who have lost the fundamental ideals of freedom, and who have, instead, create a new "Politically Correct Reformation" - replacing offenses of blasphemy and apostasy under Christian rule with offenses of banishment and societal ex-communication to those who dare utter forbidden words or fail to nod like sheep when the call to support the "right cause" goes out.

Just as the freedom and growth of society during the Renaissance created unease in the power-structures of the day, so to have efforts at true freedom created unease in the current power-elite.

A little advice Bill Maher, from another 60's child:

The line it is drawn

The curse it is cast

The slow one now

Will later be fast

As the present now

Will later be past

The order is

Rapidly fadin'.

And the first one now

Will later be last

For the times they are a-changin'.

Indeed.

Legalize Heroin Use? Pay Alcoholics? What next.. Respecting Pedophiles?

"Be Nice to me.. I'm Differently-abled"

Well.

First we have to allow people to possess and openly use heroin in Vancouver.

Now we have to PAY addicts.

As readers may recall, on Friday I expressed my distaste with the Ontario Court of Appeal's edict that alcoholism is a "disability" which cannot be discriminated against under the Ontario Human Rights Code, and therefore requires the Province to provide disability benefits to alcoholics.

Gary Wise, a fellow lawyer and blogger (Wise Law Blog) stopped by SFL and commented:

Well for starters, see the DSM IV (and draft of DSM V as to the diagnosis of "substance abuse:" 

http://www.jointogether.org/news/features/2010/dsm-v-draft-includes-major.html

It's not a new development that these disorders are considered diseases and disabilities.

I appreciate Gary stopping by to offer his thoughts, but the problem with the implication that anything listed in the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) makes the condition a "disability" and therefor a prohibited ground of discrimination, is this:

Included in the DSM-IV is the condition of "Pedophilia"

So.

Then.

As pedophilia is, officially, an "illness" just like substance abuse, one can imagine that the time will come in the not too distant future, probably in Ontario, when the article we read in the Star will be this:

Province Discriminates Against Child Abusers, Court Finds

Denying long-term government support payments to pedophiles violates the province’s Human Rights Code because it discriminates on the basis of disability, the Ontario Court of Appeal has affirmed.

In a 3-0 decision Thursday, the court dismissed an appeal from the director of the Ontario Disability Support Program, who argued that provincial legislation preventing pedophiles from drawing long-term disability benefits was meant to discourage of child abuse.

The ruling means some people who are unable to work or function in the community because of pedophilia— including a former ice cream truck driver at the centre of the case — will be entitled to nearly twice as much in government benefits.

Had the province been permitted to deny Dirk Diddler long-term disability payments, his only social assistance option would have been a welfare cheque of $585 a month through the Ontario Works program, which also requires recipients to look for a job and undergo treatment for addictions.

Under the Ontario Disability Support Program, which does not impose the same obligations on recipients, a single person can receive up to $1,042 per month.

“It is well known that pedophiles have been, and continue to be, the subjects of stigma and prejudice,” said Justice Janet Simmons, writing on behalf of a panel that included justices Eleanore Cronk and Paul Rouleau.

The case focused on a provision in the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, which withheld disability benefits from anyone whose sole disability was pedophilia.

That provision places pedophiles at a disadvantage, the court said, because it deprives them of benefits available to other disabled people and perpetuates stereotypes.

The legislation was introduced by the Conservative government of former premier Mike Harris.

It contains no “obvious explanation” for why they were excluded from disability benefits, the appeal panel said.

Is this where we are going?

Where we cede the ground for social control and social policy to academics and intellectuals who eschew concepts of personal and social responsibility?

Of course, the so-called "experts" are considering removing "pedophilia" from the DSM. 

Earlier, in the December 2002 issue of a prestigious journal, the Archives of Sexual Behavior, Moser--along with several other prominent mental-health experts--argued in favor of de-pathologizing pedophilia. Some of the commentators writing in that issue said that there is little or no proof that sex with adults is harmful to minors. Another mental-health expert argued that society should not discriminate against adults who are attracted to children--noting that many beloved authors and public figures throughout history have been high-functioning individuals who could actually be classified as pedophiles.

"Any sexual interest," Moser concluded in his Archives commentary, "can be healthy and life-enhancing."

Welcome to McGuintyland.

Paying People to be Drunks and Addicts.. from the Great Minds Who Brought us Gun Registry and.. coming soon, Universal Daycare

Welcome to McGuintyland.. and the view from their Bench

With thanks to Halls of Macadamia for bringing THIS to SFL's attention.

Now, according to the Ontario Court of Appeal, government disability payments have to be given to drunks and addicts, because of their "disability".

Even though the legislation specifically prohibits it, the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled that because alcoholism is a "disability", and because the Ontario Human Rights Code prohibits discrimination based upon disability, well..  you can't deny disability payments to an alcoholic.

So.

In other words.

If you are on the streets and can't get by on welfare, well, drink up chum!

Get yourself good and sauced and then wander down to the Disability Support Program, and get your disability cheque.

And don't even think about getting treatment, I mean, why kill the (grey?) goose that lays the golden egg.

This is the logical extension of decades of the modern liberal mindset.

Paying people to hurt themselves.

According to the Court, the legislation contains no “obvious explanation” for why they were excluded from disability benefits. 

Really?  Because a self-created "sickness", a self-perpetuating "sickness" isn't a reason to distinguish between an obnoxious drunk and someone who has lost their limbs in a car accident, or someone with cerebral palsy?

Coming soon -

"Stupidity determined to be a "disability": Appellate Judges Line Up for Cheques"

l'Ecole Polytechnique, Dawson College.. Dishonoring the Victims by Supporting the Gun Registry

The Ruger Mini 14 - Marc Lepine's Weapon of Choice. 

The Gun Registry does nothing to prevent buying one today.

Nothing to prevent some nut from using one today.

$2 billion.. for nothing.

Read this article on the pressure being put on Jack Layton to maintain the gun registry here:

Family and friends of Montreal Massacre victims visit Layton's home riding

And then, even as you feel grief and anger over these senseless, twisted acts, put your rational brain back in gear and ask yourself some pretty basic questions.  Do your best to be honest in your assessment of the situation.

With respect to the killings at l'Ecole Polytechnique:

Marc Lepine applied for a firearms acquisition certificate in August of 1989, and was granted his certificate in mid-October of that year.  His insane plan, clearly, had been plotted for some period of time.  On November 21, 1989, Lepine purchased a Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic rifle. 

On December 6, 1989, Lepine walked into l'Ecole Polytechnique There, he entered a second-floor classroom where he separated the men and women and then ordered the approximately fifty men to leave. He then shot the nine women who remained, killing six and injuring the rest. After this, Lépine moved to other areas of the building, including the cafeteria, corridors and another classroom. A total of fourteen women (twelve engineering students, one nursing student, and one university employee) were killed, and four men and ten women injured before Lépine turned the gun on himself.

Horrible. Tragic.  Senseless.

Now, what went wrong here?

Well, firstly, Marc Lepin, insane misogynist, was granted a firearms acquisition certificate.  Problem is, he had no criminal record, no prior act which would have disqualified him then, and in fact, nothing would disqualify him today.

The "cooling off" period inherent in the use of the FAC program clearly was not sufficient in this case - and in fact, it is clear that regardless of how long he was asked to wait, he would have carried through on his plan.

Finally, he was, with the use of the FAC, able to go purchase a semi-automatic rifle, which he then used to commit his murders.

Now - the hard part to admit for anyone who supports the gun registry system.

The Gun Registry System, for all the billions of dollars it costs, wouldn't have made a stick of difference.  The implementation of the gun registry system would have done nothing to prevent the deaths of these people.

Firstly, for all we know, Lepine would have registered the rifle - he complied with every other legal requirement of arming himself to commit murder, so,presumably he would have also registered his Ruger, and then walked over the l'Ecole Polytechnique and carried out his executions thereafter.

Now - maybe he wasn't THAT compliant with state regulation, but then, I'm certain that as he carried out his planned executions, and then killed himself - somehow, he probably wouldn't have been all that concerned about the fact that he was committing an offense if he didn't register the firearm.

The reality of that is all to clear and obvious in the more recent shootings at Dawson College.

Pretty much the same story.

In that case, as with Marc Lepine, the killer a Dawson College, Kimveer Gill did in fact have a restricted-class PAL and his weapons were registered with the Gun Registry.  He acquired and owned his weapons in complete compliance with Canadian law. The only law,in fact, that he did not comply with was the transport of those weapons when he attended Dawson College and killed one person, injured 19 and then killed himself.

Did the gun registry "save lives", as the article above suggests.  Clearly not.

Sadly, as is obvious from the article at the beginning of this post, so many have used the victims of these tragedies as pawns to support a flawed and pointless expense which saves no lives at all.  None.  And by suggesting differently, and by ignoring the reality of the true facts of these tragedies, we dishonor the dead and the injured of those tragic events by essentially lying about what happened.

By playing a little "sleight of hand" with the circumstances of those tragedies, we essentially ignore the real problems, and create "pretend" problems.  And when we pretend that a registry system would have someone changed the outcomes above, we are putting lives at risk.

Honor the victims of l'Ecole Polytechnque and Dawson College by being honest about what happened.

To do anything less does them, their families and all Canadians a gross disservice.



Jack Layton on CTV: Please Don't Make My MP's Accountable to their Constituents

Jack Layton and his puppets are on CTV as I write this.

His voice, thick with desperation and fear, pleading with Stephen Harper, "Please don't go ahead with the vote, Stephen.."

He's followed by Sudbury NDP MP Glenn Thibeault.   "This is the wrong way to do politics", Thibeault says.  What is that, Glenn?  Ignoring the wishes of your constituents when you get leaned on by downtown Toronto?

The opinions of the citizens of Welland,Ontario, pop. 50,331?  Who cares, says their NDP MP, Malcolm Allen.

The wishes of the citizens of Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing, pop. 82,340?  Not my concern says their NDP MP Carol Hughes.

Likewise the voters in Peter Stoffer's riding of Sackville-Eastern Shore, Nova Scotia, pop. 83,655, and the 76,699 citizens in Claude Gravelle's riding of Nickle Belt.

Charlie Angus, NDP MP in Timmins-James bay is also saying, "What matters is what the downtown Toronto crowd wants..  the McGuinty people SHOULD get to run the country."

Screw em.. they all say.

Me? I don't own a gun, and am not likely to ever own a gun.

So, personally, I am hoping the vote dies.  Not because I think the registry is a good idea - I think it's a joke.  It's a complete waste of money.

But the net result of this little charade will be that Canadians will see that the Liberal Party and the NDP Party are a party of metropolitan Ontario and Quebec.  That the opinions of the downtown Toronto crowd are the only opinions that matter.

So.. while so often, we in the hinterland of Alberta are told that we're a redneck crowd who just don't want to be a part of the Canadian "team"..  this vote will show,clearly, that there is no Canadian "team".

There is a downtown Toronto team.

Fidel Castro: Socialism Doesn't Work

Never mind.

Remember that pompous windbag, Michael Moore, and his faux documentary, "Sicko"?

Remember him touting the Cuban health care system, and making a great show over taking Americans to Cuba for their medical care.

Remember him complaining bitterly about the free market in "Roger & Me" and "Capitalism: A Love Story".

Well, as reported in the Vancouver Sun today, apparently, his good pal, dictator Fidel Castro isn't such a big fan anymore of the socialist dream.

Apparently about one million government employees being laid off by the Cuban government aren't so impressed with the socialist dream either.

Said Castro to a reporter with the Atlantic Magazine:

"The Cuban model doesn't even work for us any more."

With the Cuban economy on the brink of total collapse, the government under the Castro brothers has announced the layoff of some one million Cubans, who are being encouraged to *gasp* go into business for themselves.

Why didn't socialism work?

Well, Raul Castro said it best in his statement to the National Assembly:

"we have to erase forever the notion that Cuba is the only country in the world where one can live without working."

Really.

No free lunch?

I'm shocked.  Shocked and appalled. 

Maybe Fidel should have a chat with Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff.

Sun News.. make it optional.. along with CBC, CTV and CNN!

So.

Here's a challenge.

Remove the inclusion of CBC, CTV and CNN as obligatory channels on all cable and satellite packages in Canada.

Make all of them available for, say an additional $2.00 per month, together with the new Sun TV news channel.

And then let democracy and the open market do it's work.

But, until this happens, frankly, the loud and ignorant braying from the liberal left intelligentsia, who insist on having the sole right to feed all Canadians what is "good for them" should cease.

The stupid and profane from people like John Doyle in the Globe and Mail ("Sun TV News only works if shoved down our throats") and Margaret Atwood (opposing inclusion of Sun TV in basic news package, asking CRTC to "continue to stand up for Canada's democratic traditions") is either signifying their grotesque ignorance or their fear.

Probably the latter.

They never acknowledge, but are certainly aware, that the CRTC requires that we have CBC and CTV news on all cable and satellite packages.

They never acknowledge, are certainly aware, that CBC in particular, betrays an obvious liberal bias and that the inclusion of Sun TV would simply balance the playing field.

Their whining and mewling, no doubt, is simply based in fear.

Fear that Canadians, not liberal elite intelligentsia, will be allowed to choose for themselves what is "good for them."

I mean, where would Margaret Atwood be without her pals in the liberal intelligentsia being able to marshal their forces to assure that all schools and universities require her self-indulgent and dull pap as part of their curriculum?

I'm sure, they see the inclusion of new ideas as the thin edge of the wedge where art and culture in Canada becomes a factor not of what we are TOLD is good for us.. but what WE DECIDE is good for us.

And then.. so long Margaret Atwood and CBC.

Good riddance, I say.

Shocker.. Canada's Health Care System Not Sustainable

Free Lunch.

Remember Ralph Klein?

Remember way back when when he was talking about how we need to find a "Third Way" for health care in Canada, and he was soundly attacked both within and without the Province for seeking to destroy health care.

Friends of Medicare, and their ilk, telling us that everything was fine.. no problems.. the Titanic is unsinkable.

Well.

It seems the European Think-Tank, the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) has released a report saying.. well, that he was right.

In a report released today, it cautioned that our deficits will become uncontrollable without significant changes to accommodate our changing population demographic, as reported in the Star today:

"..expanding deficits will explode unless provinces and Ottawa deal with the rising health care costs associated with a quickly aging population.


In an analysis released Monday, the OECD highlights the long wait times and the shortage of doctors that already undermine patient care.

It warns that the costs and problems will only multiply as a larger share of the population reaches old age.

And unless Canadians want to give up other social services or shoulder heavier taxes, deep reform is required of the way health care is delivered.

“It’s going to blow those budgets right out of the water unless Canadians dig deep in their pockets for major tax increases or cut back in a big way on other services,” said OECD senior economist Peter Jarrett.

The analysis is far more than a list of options from yet another think tank. It was put together with extensive input from the federal government.

It says health spending increases that have averaged eight per cent a year over the past decade need to be ratcheted down to about four per cent in order to be sustainable.

Let me translate to our culture of entitlement: 

"There is no such thing as a free lunch (or doctor).

The Charter.. done right.

The Charter..  Ontario Superior Court got it "Right"

Well..  today the usual suspects are screaming and crying because the Ontario Superior Court has held that the Charter does not apply to the policies of non-governmental organizations.

So.

Apparently, the Catholic Church doesn't HAVE to conduct gay marriages.

Apparently, a black woman doesn't HAVE to date a white man.

Apparently, a Mosque doesn't HAVE to read from the Talmud during prayer times.

While those who advocate for government control over every single thing we do are understandably crushed that their drive to a "Brave New World" has hit a road block, for the rest of Canadians who value things like freedom and liberty, the ruling is bang-on, from the point of view of understanding the purpose and the scope of the charter.


To often in Canada, our Courts have bent the law to suit the facts - leaving laws and statutes meaningless.. everything depending upon how "sympathetic" you were.

The mischief of allowing the Charter to apply to non-governmental organizations and, in fact, to inter-personal interaction is exponentially more damaging than the over-reaching arguments about this being the "thin edge of the wedge".

This is one of the better decisions I have seen in the last two decades of my practice as a lawyer and I applaud it.

Those who suggest that this will be a harbinger of massive government "outsourcing" to protect against Charter challenges are just fear-mongering.

Now - should gay men be prevented from donating blood? Probably not. But that isn't the question. To allow Charter application to non-governmental groups is to invite Charter application to inter-personal relationships.. and I don't think I should be subject to a Charter challenge because I choose not to date a gay man because of his (and my own) sexual preference.

California.. the guys complaining about mercury in Alberta.

Welcome to California

Mercury.

A heavy metal, a neurotoxin that can cause developmental damage in children and brain, lung and kidney problems in adults.

And, in the source of drinking water supplying the City of San Francisco, the "stomping grounds" of Corporate Ethics International, fish are apparently full of it.

As reported in the San Francisco Gate July 7, 2010:

..the study showed that the fish in the San Mateo County lake - which collects rainwater as well as water piped in from Yosemite's Hetch Hetchy reservoir - had some of the highest mercury levels in the state.

Odd..   nothing in the Corporate Ethics webpage discusses any concern over mercury contamination in their own backyard.

Pity.

Re-Think California.

Tamils, Roma.. thin edge of the wedge for social programs..

How quickly can we get about a hundred more of these full of Tamils?

Well.

There appears to be another boat of Tamil terrorists..err.. refugee claimants heading for Canada.

Meanwhile, our American neighbors, particularly in the south west, are struggling with massive numbers of illegal aliens from Mexico - with an estimated 10.8 million illegal immigrants residing in the U.S. at present..  roughly equivalent to the combined urban populations of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary combined.

And across the pond, we see France struggling with an influx of illegal Roma immigrants.

And in all cases, efforts to prevent the incursion are met with complaints and attacks by the usual suspects..  left-sided political do-gooders.

But consider this my lefty friends.

What is at stake is no less than our vaunted social safety net.

Imagine if you will combining the whole populations of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary..  with no one paying taxes.

Driving on roads, going to hospitals, going to school, getting arrested, going to Court, doing all the things that our taxes pay for, but paying for none of it.

Who is going to pay for it?

The choices?  Keep them out, or let them in.. and start making cuts.

Mostly to social programs.  Things like free health care, employment insurance, Canada pension.. all those things that we have grown to believe is our birth right.

Oh, sure, we'll raise taxes for a while.  We'll go all Sweden and Norway on our asses.. but then, even Sweden is now struggling under the weight of social programs being accessed by illegal immigrants.

The result in Sweden?  From a sociological study in Sweden:

Results from multilevel models reveal that multiple measures of immigration at the county-level have significant negative effects on support for the welfare state. Moreover, recent immigration has a negative effect on attitudes towards universal spending. Thus, this analysis provides clear evidence that ethnic heterogeneity negatively affects support for social welfare expenditure—even in Sweden.

In other words, as we increase the "ethnic heterogeneity" in our society, and times get tougher, broadly speaking, we will lose our taste for "social welfare" expenditures.

In other words, the programs will be cut.

And people will have to learn to be more self-sufficient.

Hmm...

Perhaps a few more boats full of Tamils isn't such a bad thing after all.

Barak Obama and Anderson Cooper are stupid assholes.

Anderson Cooper..  putting American Lives at Risk

So.

Some clown in Florida wants to burn a Quran.

A so-called "Christian" Minister.

And this is news.. uh.. how?

His so-called "Church" has 50 members.

And if one crazy moron yells in a forest does he make any noise?   Hardly.

It's only when CNN and the President of the United States make it an issue that it becomes "news".

And watching Anderson Cooper and Barack Obama on television talking about this wackjob "threatening the lives of Americans" is almost enough to make me vomit.

Left to his own devices, no one in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Tallahassee, Florida for that matter would have cause to even think about it.  Because one idiot burning a book isn't news.

Who is threatening U.S. lives?

Anderson Cooper.

Barak Obama.

Because they have a huge platform.  Their gibberish gets broadcast from here to, well, Katmandu and back.   And by putting their hypocritical faces on television every minute for the last week, well, THEY are the wackjobs who truly put Americans at risk.

And lets not just lose sight, for a moment, that the risk arises because of crazed religious zealots that we seem to want to placate instead of challenge on their violent and warped version of Islam.

Imagine watching your neighbor pour raw sewage into his yard.. and then complain about your car leaking oil.

"Corporate Ethics" Backyard..

Don't eat the fish.. they are contaminated with DDT, PCB's and Mercury. 

Interesting website, "Scorecard.org".

You type in the zip code for a community, say,  Los Angeles County (90001) - and it tells you some interesting things about the "environmental umpires of the world".


Like:

a) Re: Toxic Chemicals Released by Factories, Power Plants and Other Industrial Companies - in 2002, this county ranked among the dirtiest/worst 10% of all counties in the U.S. in terms of total environmental releases.

b) In Los Angeles County alone, in one year, they release 3,261,037 pounds of Amonia into the environment, a severely toxic chemical ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to ecosystems.

c) There are ELEVEN (11) Superfund Sites in Los Angeles County alone..which are sites representing the worst environmental contamination in the U.S. requiring severe remedial action. Taking into account the number of sites and the severity of contamination - Los Angeles County ranks amongst the wost in the whole of the U.S.A. for environmental contamination.

Los Angeles.. California.. is a mess. Yet, what is "Corporate Ethics" doing in Los Angeles County? Well, in their website under "Environmental Justice" they complain about Alberta and Africa. Nothing about their own backyard.

Typical.. "Let's save the environment.. as long as WE don't have to pay!"
 
Hey "Corporate Ethics".. how 'bout you stop killing YOUR animals and citizens FIRST, before you attack other neighbors about what they are doing in their backyard?

Re-Think California.

Michael Ignatieff woos the Voters.. I could forgive it all, if he weren't such a bore.

So.

I'm watching "Family Guy" this week..  and I'm struck by an exchange between Brian, the dog, who wants Quagmire to like him.

And I can't help but see this as a perfect metaphor for Michael Ignatieff's attempt to woo the voters of Canada.

Watch the clip and then imagine Michael Ignatieff as "Brian" and the lunch-bucket middle class as "Quagmire".

And then tell me you don't see it too..

Imagine if voters weren't sheep.

Well.

Yesterday my viewing numbers were down.

No shock, I wasn't attacking Michael Ignatieff or the Liberals.. I was *gasp*, taking a shot at the party I support.  The party I donate money to.

Pardon me.

And, clearly, bertie was a little miffed with my suggestion that if the Conservatives weren't so busy with appeasing their small but vocal base (who, by the way, have no where else to park their vote anyway), they might actually be getting ready for a majority government.


Why is it that whenever, as a conservative voter, as a donor to the Conservative Party - I suggest that they could do better.. the response I get is that the Liberals are worse.

Yes -  I get that.

Hence me not voting Liberal.

But.. pardon me for asking the party I vote for, that I give money to, to do better than the Liberals and the NDP.

Pardon me for suggesting that if they weren't so wrapped up in their ideology, they might just be massively ahead in the polls instead of continually breathing life in the luke-warm corpse of Michael Ignatieff.
 
Pardon me for suggesting that the Conservative party act.. well.. "conservatively".  As in not spending unnecessary money on building jails while we're in a massive deficit. As in bringing honesty and transparency back to government after years of Liberal dishonesty and graft.. instead of hiding behind the prorogue of Parliament to prevent an honest (even if painful) disclosure of the whole Afghan detainee debacle..  like Canadians really care anyway.
 
And - as I allude to in the first point of yesterday's post.. they're otherwise doing a good job.  Canada is a beacon to the world response to the recession.  It's just the good work gets lost amid the host of gaffs being committed -which all have the stench of "fundamentalism"..   "conservative" fundamentalism.  A belief which, while founded upon nothing more than superstition, leads a party to behaviour which is not only unnecessary, but in fact, damaging.
 
So.. how 'bout we get back to just doing good, basic, governance.  Leave the social engineering to the Liberals.  Less government, less spending.. and I'll be happy.  And, looking at the reaction of the polls, so will the rest of the "non-sheep" in Canada.

Imagine Stephen Harper..

So.

Canada's economy continues to show progress, even as our friends south of the border continue to sputter and stall.

And, as a conservative, this morning I read more good news, Job Market at its Brightest in Nearly 2 Years.

It seems our slow and steady approach to managing our economy shows continued positive results..  and it leads me to wonder where the Conservative Party might be in the polls if they just put their head down and did the job.. instead of the periodic stunts that have helped the Liberal party hold a neck and neck place in the polls.  A party with no leader, a party with no platform.. and they are still holding their own.

Imagine Stephen Harper:

Imagine there's no Colvin

It's easy if you try

No prorogue behind us

Above us only sky

Imagine all our people

With more jobs today... ay..ay..

Imagine no fights on census

It isn't hard to do

Nothing to whine or cry for

And no new jails too

Imagine less Fed spending

As taxes start to ease..

You may say I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us

And our Country could be as one

Justice Lori Douglas.. lying down with dogs?

Well.

Manitoba Justice Lori Douglas and her husband, Jack King, have succeeded in convincing one of her fellow Judges, Justice Joan McKelvey, to compel Alex Chapman to return nude photos of her and various emails related thereto to Jack King.

According to CBC News:

Justice Joan McKelvey of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench ruled that Alex Chapman must immediately return "all documents, emails and photographs" ever sent to him by Winnipeg lawyer Jack King.

McKelvey's ruling also compels Chapman, of Winnipeg, to ask that any of the material held by someone else be returned. He is forbidden to distribute the material to anyone else.

The photos show King's wife, Justice Lori Douglas, associate chief justice of the family division of the Court of Queen's Bench, naked and in various forms of bondage, with sex toys and performing oral sex.

Really?

So..  apparently Douglas and her husband (also a lawyer) wanted to "expand" their repertoire of intimate behavior to include another man - Chapman.

To induce him to join them, they send spicy emails and photographs to this gentleman - Jack King's former client.

How could that possibly go wrong?

Now - let's have a little look at Lori Douglas (sorry, no nude pictures here my friend).

She was a lawyer, a former University of Manitoba professor, and the Associate Chief Justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench.

During the currency of his divorce file, Alex Chapman, a black man, was propositioned by Douglas's husband, Jack King, to have sexual relations with Douglas.  At the time of the proposition, Lori Douglas was a lawyer in the same firm.

Now.

It appears quite clear that Alex Chapman is no saint himself - with a prior criminal record for hiring a man to attempt to burn down his ex-wife's home, and a penchant for filing law suits against provincial justice officials.

However, it would strike me as, well, unseemly, that the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba Justice Joan McKelvey , a sister Judge of Lori Douglas, would direct that all materials be returned to the Defendants in the case.

Not simply an order restraining further publication.

Not simply an order direction production to the Court for safekeeping.

But ordering that they be returned to the same unethical lawyer and his wife who are alleged to have propositioned their client.

Smells?

Yup.

Keeping in mind that King had already published pictures on a public website, "Darkcavern.com" (No the pictures are no longer there..  reportedly..  not that I checked or anything..)

I really don't think what Chapman or Douglas do in their private life matters relative to her seat on the bench.  And I don't agree with the notion that she should have "disclosed" her behavior either.

However - trying to induce a client to sleep with your wife in the course of representing him - that is an ethical breach in my opinion.

And while Chapman may be no paragon of virtue himself - as the saying goes, when you lie down with dogs, you get flees.

And now, apparently, the flees are starting to infest the Manitoba judicial system.

Forest "Ethics". Can you say lying scumbags?

So.

Forest Ethics.. buddies of Corporate Ethics International, fires off a release this week saying that Levi Strauss, GAP and Walgreens are boycotting Alberta oil.

Today, we find that they are anything but ethical, clearly mis-stating the position of Levi and GAP, from today's National Post:

Gap on Monday released a letter to customers. “It has been reported that Gap Inc. initiated a boycott related to the oil sands,” the company wrote. “That’s not true.” The company, the letter explained, merely “asked” shipping firms “what they are doing to eliminate high-carbon intensives fuels,” which likely includes Alberta’s crude, but also, several other sources.

This was a “standard request for information,” a Gap spokesman explained to the CBC. The company doesn’t “anticipate taking any further action.”

Timberland, too, said it merely “asked” shipping firms how they are “avoiding carbon-intensive sources like Canada’s Tar Sands.” In a website posting titled “Reducing Emissions — Not Boycotting Fuel,” the company said the answer “informs our decision about whether to hire or keep carriers.” It added, “we don’t believe boycotts are the best path toward collaborative problem solving or positive sustainable outcomes.”

Levi Strauss and Co. posted a statement on its website “to set the record straight.” While the company “supports the development and use of clean and renewable fuel sources, we have not taken a position opposing or supporting any fuel or energy source from Canada.” It had, instead, decided to give “preference to low-carbon fuels” in choosing its transportation providers. But, Levi spokeswoman Sarah Anderson says, “we also told Forest Ethics that we do not dictate how our suppliers achieve that goal.”

Of the four alleged boycotters, only Walgreen’s, with 7,500 U.S. stores, but none in Canada, showed no interest in moderating the boycott rumour. “We have had very little exposure to tarsands fuels to start with, so it was a simple process,” a company spokeswoman cheerily told reporters.

“Forest Ethics wants to act as the Fortune 500 judge, jury and spokesperson,” says Janet Annesley, vice- president of communications for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. “Unfortunately accuracy and ethics are not their strong suit.”

Fundamentalism killing the Conservative Dream

Warren Jeffs..  not MY brand of conservatism!

What is a "conservative" anyway?

For me - it's less government spending, less government intrusion into our lives - and a message to the masses that your best chance of success is on your own shoulders.

And there was a time when conservatism of this ilk ruled the western world.  When Bill Clinton's claim to fame was welfare reform and a balanced U.S. budget.  When the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and our Prime Minister was a lawyer and the CEO of shipping company, Canadian Steamship Lines.

Remember Paul Martin?  As Liberal Finance Minister, Martin erased a $42 billion deficit, recorded five consecutive budget surpluses, and paid down $36 billion of national debt.

Remember the days when socialism had become a dirty word, and even the most strident liberal acknowledged the need for a "hand up, not a hand out."

What the hell happened?

Fundamentalism happened.

Not fundamentalism in a religious sense - though there is some of that infecting conservatism.. but fundamentalism in the broader sense of forming a belief system based upon nothing more than "faith" - with that belief being so strong that it defies logic and reason.

This is infecting conservatism and it's moving the swing vote back to the Liberals.

Did we really need to scrap the mandatory long-form census?  I think it's an unnecessary intrusion into our personal lives - but easy enough to bullshit your way through it (did I mention I'm an African Jedi?) so why the necessity of doing this now, particularly under a minority government?

Did we really need to expand our deficit to build more jails to deal with "unreported crimes"?  Ignoring the reality than under our current system, crime has been reducing on a consistent basis for decades?

Did we really need to prorogue parliament just so we weren't forced to deliver up documents about what was going on in Afghanistan with detainees?  Canadians, frankly, didn't care if they were getting slapped around - but they sure as hell don't like a government that seems to not want to let us see what's going on.

The reasons for all of these "stunts"?

Fundamentalism.

A "belief" that we had to take these steps - regardless of what good sense and reason told us.

Time for thinking conservatives to step up and say, "enough".

Stop with the political stunts and bullshit - let's get back to good government.

Get control of the deficit, scrap the jails, scrap the mandatory minimum sentencing.. (all of which will increase government cost to no good result)..  and reclaim conservative for the meat and potatoes crowd - taking it away from the fundamentalists who have somehow taken control of the conservative agenda.

Or don't.

All it will mean is Michael Ignatieff as Prime Minister.