Friday, May 23, 2008
The left side of the blogosphere is full of comment on Dion's carbon tax along with the political ramifications of running with this type of policy, and some of it isn't pretty. Take this example between Kinsella and Cherniak. Both are at odds with each other over Dion's tax and it has gotten even more bizarre with each new post. To quickly bring you up to speed; Kinsella posted his opinion on Dion's tax. Cherniak, being the ever true Dion supporter that he is, posted his response by saying Kinsella is biased because of his client list. Kinsella rips into Jason for his post, with a little bit of libel thrown in for good measure, and Cherniak responds by playing the race card.
I somehow doubt that this little battle is ending there, so stay tuned as this is sure to be very entertaining to follow and well worth the price of admission.
Friday, May 16, 2008
For at least two years now, Liberal Leader Stephane Dion has been clear -- emphatic even -- there will be no carbon tax if his party wins the next federal election with him at the helm.
Of course, he was being disingenuous about that sometimes. For instance, last spring he suggested that instead of a carbon tax, the country's 700 largest carbon emitters might be charged a carbon fee.
On a practical level, there would be no difference. A gouging, punitive, regressive tax by any other name would still be a gouging, punitive, regressive tax.
Still, on a dozen or more occasions, Dion has pledged never to introduce a carbon tax.
In June 2006, during the first Liberal leadership debate, Dion scoffed when Michael Ignatieff said a carbon tax "would do more to address climate change and help us be good stewards of our environment than any other measure." Then, as now, Dion was a passionate defender of the Kyoto accord and even he rejected the notion that a carbon tax could help reduce emissions to the levels mandated by the UN's global-warming accord.
Weeks later, when he released his campaign platform it referred to a tax on the production or consumption of fossil fuels as "simply bad policy."
Also, Dion told the National Post's editorial board in November 2006 (just weeks before he was selected as Liberal leader), if he ever became prime minister he would not even consider a carbon tax, because "for Albertans it's a non-starter."
He claimed in the Globe and Mail to have "always been against" a carbon tax. He had "other ways" to achieve emission reductions -- mostly investment in new energy-saving technologies and tax incentives for individuals and businesses that reduced their carbon footprints.
Dion did say he wanted to establish a link between Canadians' pocketbooks and the environment -- between "your wallet and the planet," in his words -- but not by taking money out of those wallets, but rather by fattening them up with government cash.
Within weeks of becoming Liberal boss, Dion rushed to Alberta to assure the Journal's editorial board, among others, that there would never be a carbon tax if he had his way.
I wrote at the time that I didn't believe him. His plan, regardless of what he was going to call its components, would hit Alberta disproportionately hard and as such amounted to a carbon tax. Dion wrote our editors insisting "the plan I will reveal soon to decrease Canada's industrial greenhouse gases will not include a carbon tax. I have said that I will be the best partner for Alberta and I mean it."
Even this past winter, speaking to an Alberta audience, Dion assured the crowd he had two "bottom lines": "there will be no carbon tax" and the profits earned by Albertans in the current energy boom "will stay in Alberta."
So, of course, what has Dion proposed this week? A carbon tax.
From the sounds of this, Elizabeth May looks to be well on her way to destroying the Green Party of Canada from within.
“Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party of Canada, says she’s ready to contemplate a strategic debate with the three opposition parties in Ottawa to work out new forms of electoral co-operation to block the re-election of Stephen Harper’s party.
“She would even be ready to imagine a strategy which is being discussed by some environmental groups, which would consist of calling in every region on people who are aware of the environmental stakes to put aside their party preference at the next election to support, in each riding, the candidate likeliest to beat the Conservative if the latter has the slightest chance of winning power.“…She wouldn’t hesitate to make strategic alliances with the Bloc Québécois, as she admires the rigorous work of several of their MPs, even though she does not share their vision of Canada’s future.
Elizabeth, I have a question for you. In how many ridings in Canada would the Green Party candidate be "the likeliest to beat the Conservative" candidate? Since Ms. May is unlikely to respond and answer my questions, lets try to put a realistic number to the above.
For the sake of argument lets use 50? You can look at the results from the last election and see how many Greens finished in the runner up spot yourself, but I think I am being REAL generous by using this figure.
So based on her comments above, now what?
By May's own proposal it appears that over 250 candidates, their EDA's, and the various workers and supporters (you know, the grass roots) would be forced to put aside their efforts and countless hours of work they have dedicated toward THEIR candidates and party to vote for someone else. And judging by her bizarre alliance with Dion, it is safe to say that she wants her party to vote Liberal.
Not having respect for your own party and it's supporters, and folding before the hand is even dealt. What a way to invigorate those Green Party supporters Liz, your leadership ability astounds.
Monday, May 12, 2008
What a performance! If I was a Liberal supporter I would be worried about the next election.
* to the Conservative Party of Canada that is.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Here we go again.
Cartoonist Bruce MacKinnon finds himself facing the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, and the Halifax police, over a complaint about this cartoon published April 18th in Nova Scotia's leading newspaper, the Chronicle Herald. (cbc)
Zia Khan, director of the Centre for Islamic Development in Halifax, said the cartoon goes beyond what can be considered free speech. He said the group also filed a complaint with the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, and Khan's group also called police on April 21.
Another offensive cartoon; oh the humanity of it all.
I am not the biggest fan of Bruce MacKinnon and his work as he has taken more than a few shots at the Prime Minister and other conservatives in the past. Although to be fair, I must admit that once in awhile he does get it right. But whether or not I like his work is irrelevant, because Mr. Mackinnon has the right to express his views and opinions and any threat to those expressions is not only an assault on his rights, but also to my rights, and YOURS as well.
Mr. Mackinnon, I may not like or agree with what you draw, but you damn well have my support in the fight to keep on doing it. I wonder on which side Mr. Kinsella will find himself to be supporting this time?
Updated: I was thinking earlier today that since I posted the 'offensive' cartoon on my blog that I might be opening myself up to the same kind of thing that happened to Ezra. Remember he did not draw the cartoons, but only published them in the Western Standard because they were newsworthy, which is kind of what I have done above. Oh oh!
Does anyone else find it strange that the person depicted in the cartoon is not the one who is bringing forward the complaints? How the hell can a 'group' be offended by the depiction of an individual?
For reference here is a news photo showing Cheryfa MacAulay Jamal.
I think that MacKinnon did a real good job with his drawing, but now I am left even more confused as to what the actual problem is, and why someone other than Ms. Jamal would take issue.
Friday, May 02, 2008
When the wheels are falling off the Liberal Party machine, what else is he to do?
The latest attempt to smear the government, this time with the "in and out" fiasco, is blowing up in their faces as their own hypocrisy is exposed, and more of the story makes it's way to the public.
On the policy front the Liberals are a mess. Trying to convince Canadians that having them pay more money for taxes so the Liberals can spend it on big expensive programs of very dubious nature is going to be an very difficult, if not impossible, task. Their past record speaks for itself, and Canadians To make matters worse for the Liberals, the Conservative Government is passing real legislation that that matters to Canadians.
Internally things are not any better for the LPC. The knifes continue to be sharpened, and those doing the sharpening are not even bothering to try to hide it. What does this say to the voting public about the leadership of Dion as these types of stories become even more frequent in the pages of the MSM?
Financially things are not going that well for the LPC, and the same can be said for Dion's repayment of his own personal debt from his leadership campaign. I guess Dion should thank Bob Rae after he successfully took Elections Canada to court in order to get back his "non refundable" deposit paid for the leadership race, as Dion sure could use the money. Come to think of it, so could the LPC.
The wheels are falling off the big red machine, and I predict that it is going to get worse before it gets better, but then again, there is always the environment issue to run on. Good luck with that.