Saturday, December 24, 2011

Merry Christmas,


I would like to wish a Merry Christmas to everyone who has stopped by the blog or has followed me on Twitter over the past year. May 2012 be your best year yet!

I know I have posted the following video before, but you can't go wrong with a Canadian classic.

From Canada's own NFB: The Great Toy Robbery.


Sunday, December 18, 2011

Nanny Redford. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Do you live in Alberta an call yourself a conservative?  If so, please read the following article from Rick Bell in the Calgary Sun paying particular attention to Premier Alison Redford's own words.

Excerpts: (highlighting mine)

“We know some of the choices people make with respect to tobacco and with respect to alcohol certainly are consumption choices. They also have an impact on quality of life.”

Redford talks about how increasing taxes on alcohol and tobacco can be “a public policy tool.”
She says if the province is thinking about health and wellness as more than just putting more beds in hospitals “one of the other things we can say is what are some of the choices we can make in this society that will actually ask people to consider again some of the choices they’re making in their life.”

“Albertans are really sensible. They want to be healthy, they want to be safe and they want government to take some leadership and say: ‘You know what, we’re going to make some choices and these choices are going to be conducive to building a safer and a healthier community...

“I’ve heard Albertans say: ‘We want to have more opportunity to take responsibility for our health. We want you to emphasize wellness. We want to know if we’re a healthy person we’re not going to get penalized in the health care system.’ (BTW: How the hell does bigger gov't give someone the opportunity to take responsibility for their own health, or their 'own' anything for that matter? Total nonsense.)

Pure big government knows what is best for yo, nanny state nonsense that we have heard many times before whenever the government makes a grab for your wallet under the false pretense of helping you. It is the exact same argument that the federal Liberals used when they were trying to impose a carbon tax; it was for our own good and we should smile and thank them for the privilege of paying. Thankfully Canadians saw through the Liberals BS on their carbon tax and my hope is that Albertans will also see through Redford's very liberal like plans for another tax grab even if it is supposedly being done "for our own good".


Today it is smokes and booze but reading Redford's comments it is clear that she will not stop there. It is pretty much a given that all fees/licences/vehicle registration etc WILL be going up under the PC's but given Redford's concern for our money err I mean our health, you can expect that soon it will be taxes on sugary drinks, 'fast' or any high fat food, salt, coffee and on and on, because like all liberals Redford will not stop taxing you or stop telling you what to do because she believes that she knows how you should live your  life better than you do yourself. They can't help themselves.

When a so called conservative premier is talking like this, it really is time for a change because there is nothing at all conservative about Redford or her nanny state ideas.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

The worm has turned on media obsession with the Irwin Cotler story

Reprinted from David Akin's blog, a comment from our friend Gabby in QC that totally destroys the MSM narrative on the Cotler story with examples of the media doing the exact same thing.

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

Let me begin by saying: my gut feeling is that Mr. Cotler is beginning to mount a campaign for the leadership of the Liberal party.

Now … when I first heard about this story, my reaction was ugh! Why is my party engaging in such dirty tricks? I jumped to that conclusion because I read / heard that people in the Mount Royal riding had received calls actually telling them Mr. Cotler WAS retiring and that there WAS an imminent by-election.
However, in the real call (from the video Mr. Akin posted) I notice the caller says: “Some people are suggesting that the current MP may retire … if you would consider supporting the Conservative party if there’s a by-election.”

• Mr. Cotler’s name is NOT mentioned, so he is not being personally targeted. Given some people’s lack of interest in politics, they may not even know who their MP is.
• “the current MP MAY retire” is not the same as “the current MP IS retiring.”
• “IF you would consider supporting” and “IF there’s a by-election” are hypotheticals, not statements of fact.
So, sorry to say, the reports about the calls were inaccurate. If there have been untruths, it is the way in which some media have portrayed the calls.

Furthermore, the media often engages in rumours, using unnamed sources to lend credence to their articles. In November 2010, Chantal Hebert, Jane Taber, and John Ibbitson all wrote columns about the imminent departure of Peter Mackay to go to a Bay St. law firm. Did Peter Mackay raise that as a question of privilege? No.

In 2008, Mia Rabson “discovered” Vic Toews was about to be appointed to a Court of Queen’s Bench judgeship. Did Vic Toews raise that rumour as a question of privilege in the House? No.
And who can forget the infamous “wafergate” accusations? Did the PM ask the House to look into it? No.
Some may argue that those rumours were not started by a political party so the Cotler issue is not the same.
BUT Mr. Cotler’s main argument is that his job as an MP was hindered by those rumours. Regardless of the source, the rumour was the aggravating factor supposedly hindering his work. Would Mr. Cotler have felt less aggrieved if the calls had been placed by the NDP? Would his work as an MP have suffered less or not at all?

Finally, Andrew Cohen in a column entitled “The smearing of Irwin Cotler”
wrote:
“It is true that Cotler has had doubts about remaining in Parliament, which isn’t unusual for a politician of his age, experience and interests, who now finds himself a backbencher. Even before the Liberals became the third party, Michael Ignatieff had to persuade him to run again this year.”

SO, the rumour that Mr. Cotler was considering leaving politics did not necessarily originate with the Conservatives. Why is Mr. Cotler now making such a big deal out of it? And why are media people like Susan Delacourt, Jennifer Ditchburn, Greg Weston, Evan Solomon, and even the usually fair Bruce Anderson trying to keep this issue alive?

--------

After a solid week of stories from most of the MSM, with the Globe and Mail in particular who seem to have a sick obsession with continuing this non story, come some relevant facts that the media has chosen to ignore.

Their own actions.

WTG Gabby, but don't be surprised if you find yourself named in a letter from Bob Rae to Elections Canada.

Link to John Ibbitson story on Peter MacKay leaving that was published AFTER MacKay himself had said he was not leaving.

And this from the CBC on Vic Toews, who also said he wasn't leaving but yet CBC published the 'reprehensible' rumour anyways and may have violated Toews 'privilege' as an MP, at least according to what the Globe and CBC have been repeatedly saying in their numerous Cotler stories.

Thursday, December 08, 2011

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

Have you read or heard something like this from a PC Minister, MLA or PCAA hack recently in defence of the very flawed Bill 26:

We are not lowering the limit to 0.05, this is current law, the new law only changes penalties.

It may make for a nice sound bite but the reality is that every one of these statements are outright lies! There is no place at all in existing (before Bill 26) Alberta law where this mythical 0.05 blood alcohol concentration is actually written. It simply does not exist in any of our laws.

Alberta law as it existed before yesterday: Section 89 of the Alberta Traffic Safety Act reads:
(1) If a peace officer reasonably suspects that the driver of a motor vehicle has consumed alcohol or otherwise introduced into the driver’s body any alcohol, drug or other substance in such a quantity so as to affect the driver’s physical or mental ability, the peace officer may require the driver to surrender the driver’s operator’s licence to the peace officer.

0.05 is not there. It never was there. The reality is that the Redford government is in fact setting the limit and writing 0.05 into the law, and no matter how many times that they claim that they are not changing anything, the facts say otherwise. It would be nice if they would at least drop the lies and admit that they are indeed changing the law, but that would get in the way of their attempts to spin the public and admit that they are lying or that they do not know what our exiting laws say. Either way it does not give me much confidence in these people who claim to represent Albertans.


More examples:
Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Jonathan Denis:  "We are not changing the blood alcohol limits. There already is a .05 legislation if you refer to Section 89 of the Traffic Safety Act"

Justice Minister Verlyn Olson: “This is not being pushed through for political reasons,” Olson said. “We have had a .05 guideline for signs of impairment in Alberta for a long time. That hasn’t changed.

Albertans don't like being lied to.


A quick update: For those that claim blowing a 0.05 on a roadside device is an automatic suspension should really read Section 89 again in particular the following:
5(a) at a place designated by the peace officer, undergoes a test the purpose of which is to show the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood, and the result of that test indicates that the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood does not exceed 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood... the peace officer shall forthwith return the operator’s licence, if any, to the driver and the disqualification from driving is terminated.


In other words if you challenge the roadside finding of 0.05 on a breathalyzer and blow less than 0.08 you get your drivers licence back immediately. Further proving that any statements about current law being 0.05 is nothing more that a lie designed to hide what the government is actually doing.

Monday, December 05, 2011

Elizabeth May: Canadian MP and delegate of the Government of Papua New Guinea???

Call me crazy but I am having a real hard time with a sitting Member of Parliament from Canada being named as an official government delegate to ANOTHER country, never mind the fact that this is happening while our Canadian House of Commons is currently sitting.

If there is not some kind of rule against this:

Tweet from Green Party MP Elizabeth May.
Amazing. My request to Papua New Guinea came through. I have full credentials as a government delegate - fm PNG. Strong negotiators 4 Kyoto.

there should be!

Where do her loyalties lie? If she can work for a foreign government on this...

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

More "Business as usual" in Alberta.

On Monday the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers or CAPP were found to be in "full compliance with the requirements of the Lobbyists Act" by Alberta's Ethics Commissioner, but on Tuesday that finding has been put into question.( A PDF of that report can be found here)

Internal government documents obtained by CBC appear to contradict some of the evidence upon which Alberta’s lobbyist registrar dismissed allegations of illegal lobbying against the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

 Under the act, lobbying is distinguished from collaboration by which organization initiates the communications. If an outside group initiates talks with the government that is lobbying. In the case involving CAPP, Odsen found that it was the government that initiated talks with CAPP. But documents obtained by CBC, and statements made by the government itself to CBC, directly contract Odsen’s findings.

Sadly this is business as usual in Alberta.

Where the PC government would rather work behind closed doors with industry to develop communications strategies and write press releases and would rather lie to Albertans then tell the truth about their own legislation.  

When this kind of crap becomes an almost a daily occurrence, it really is time for a change.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Friends of the CBC mocks US culture by using well known Canadian porn promoter in its ad.

Friends of the CBC have put out an ad mocking US culture and television by showing what may happen if the CBC were to be taken off the taxpayer funded dole. The ad (see below) titled CBC's new owner gives the news some action shows "new owner" Lance Fury's, an American former pro wrestler, plans for the new CBC; hot babes and lots of 'action' with not so subtle shots at the conservatives with a picture of PM Harper visible in some background shots.



The ad intentionally mocks the culture, or what many on the left believe is the culture, of our neighbors to the south and their television programming. Scantly clad women and lots of action is what the Friends of CBC claim will become of the CBC if it were to be privatized.

And how do the 'Friends' mock the culture of our American neighbours? By using a known Canadian pornography photographer and promoter Uncle D, known as "the Canadian Ass Man" in their ad. (because our culture is so much superior to that of the US)


 Uncle D as seen in the Friends Ad. Note the unique tattoos.



Uncle D as seen on CBC's Dragons Den, so it is not as if this guy was totally unknown to the CBC or its so called friends, where he was openly promoting his porn work and asking the Dragons for some cash to help his business. Some more info on Uncle D can be found here.


Financing the CBC............... 1.3 Billion taxpayer dollars a year.
Helping the Assman.............. 250K (as asked of the Dragons)
Mocking US culture by using a Canadian porn promoter... Priceless.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Alberta's new "impaired" driving legislation.

More bad law written by a bored government trying to pander for votes.

From the St Albert Gazette: The government also plans new suspensions for drivers caught with an alcohol limit between 0.05 and 0.08. Drivers caught within that range the first time would face a three-day suspension and three-day vehicle seizure, rising to a 15-day suspension and seven-day seizure on the second offence and 30-day suspension and seven-day seizure on a third offence.

There are plenty of reasons why this is bad law, and I could write pages as to why, but just for the fact alone that one is tried and convicted at the side of the road with NO chance of an effective appeal makes this legislation a farce. While I realize that arguing against drunk driving law is like arguing against kittens, I would hope that most Albertans can see that this legislation for what it is. Written for optics and pandering.


From the comments: "The argument seems to be that not enough drivers are being caught and convicted, therefore the limit must be lowered."


Updated with link to newer post on Bill 26.

Monday, November 21, 2011

The Alberta Redux Act of 2011.

The Redford government announced today that in an effort to be more efficient that they would be putting forward only one bill in the second part of the fall sitting of the Alberta Legislature. The legislation entitled "The Alberta Redux Act" would effectively erase the past five years of PC government from the memories of Albertans and wipe out any legislation passed during this period.

"It will be much more efficient and save us a lot of time," said Alberta's Minister of Miscommunication, "instead of putting forward numerous bills to fix our flawed legislation, we will just pretend as if the past 5 years never happened and start from scratch." "It is both efficient and transparent" quickly adding, "and change too; must not forget to use the word change a lot."

The second part of the once cancelled fall session begins today.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something.

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something. Too bad that her own history reveals her to be a hypocrite on the subject.

There was plenty of discussion yesterday about a blog entry the Citizen's Glen McGregor wrote about former PMO d-comm Dimitri Soudas showing up at an event with current MP Eve Adams, and whether or not gossip such as that should be considered news. To McGregor's credit he did a follow up today talking about the controversy which can be found here opening up the discussion further. I myself do not think that such nonsense is worth writing about as does not even come close to what I would consider 'news' but something I read in his follow up struck me as interesting.

"And  on Evan Solomon’s Power and Politics on CBC News Network, an entire panel segment was devoted to a talking about whether it was appropriate to talk about it. By a three to one decision — four to one if you include Solomon — the pundits ruled that it was not. Canadian Press reporter Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically while only NDP strategist Ian Capstick defended it. Ditchburn compared the issue to the outing a gay MP, which I think is an unfair comparison, as neither Soudas nor Adams appear be hiding their relationship." 

Here is the part that piqued my attention: "Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically..."  Yes she did do so most emphatically, in fact here is what she had to say on the subject. Ditchburn: " I got a lot to say about it. This is not a story. Someones personal life, their relationships with someone; I don't believe is a story, a national news story, first of all." In response to Capstick she also said the following: "When does gossip become news, that is what I want to know?"

While I do agree with Ditchburn that gossip should not be news, I have to wonder how she could sit there and defend that position after she wrote the following back in 2010.

Guergis had a history in the clubs with hometown playboy: acquaintance.

Ottawa- Helena Guergis may have nurtured the image of a straightlaced cabinet minister on Parliament Hill, but people who knew her in younger days paint a picture of a regular club-goer often seen on the arm of a hometown playboy.

 A story based on Guergis's personal life, her relationships with others, gossip & allegations not even from 2010 but from 10 years earlier, combined with the now proven false, allegations surrounding her and her husband at the time of writing.


So what was it that you were saying about relationships and gossip not being news Jennifer?


Related: Another post I wrote on Ditchburn can be found here.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

An Alberta Sales Tax: The final nail.

Alberta Finance Minister Ron Liepert says it’s time to consider implementation of a new provincial sales tax.

Still think that there is anything even remotely conservative about Alberta's PCAA government?

Updated: Sun story: Sales tax cometh

Monday, November 14, 2011

Karl Heinz Schreiber's revenge!

Now: Lawyer says a government committee could be violating the Constitution if they force the CBC to turn over documents.

Then: The Liberal run ethics committee demanded that private citizens Karl Heinz Schreiber and Brian Mulroney hand over personal private documents, including tax and bank records (both domestic and foreign) to the committee. Nothing was off limits, as it was the will of parliament. The committee also believed that they had the right to release that info, no matter how sensitive.

If these things could be demanded by a government committee of a private citizen, which if I remember correctly was cheered on by many at the CBC at the time, then there is no possible reason why the same could not be demanded of the CBC, a crown corporation owned and funded by the government.
 
Sorry CBC but when you claim to have more rights than a Canadian citizen, you lose.




Optional title: Those that defended the Liberal run ethics committee when they ran the Karl Heinz Schreiber / Brian Mulroney circus have the "will of Parliament" bite them on the ass.

Update: Video: Ezra on the hypocrisy of the CBC. Oh, and their 728 cars.

Friday, November 11, 2011

11/11/11 We Remember.

On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month an armistice was  signed to end the war to end all wars. 

Lt Col John McCrae:

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.



We Remember.

Sunday, November 06, 2011

The state of the Canadian news media.

Summed up in a single tweet.
 
Jane Taber:  "Hollywood star Mark Ruffalo on @ctvqp about XL pipeline with @KevinNewmanCTV! Good get"

Meanwhile, in boardrooms all across the land, network executives huddle and wonder why they are not only losing viewers/readers but also why they are rapidly losing credibility and the respect of the general public.


Related: Some interesting background on pipeline expert Mark Ruffalo.

And from CTV comes this description of a video:


"CTV's Question Period: Breakdown of pipeline: Despite the debate that the Keystone XL pipeline will create jobs, actors and regular citizens are coming together to fight the project saying it isn't needed." (Because actors are so much better than the rest of us)



Next week on CTV's Question Period: Lindsay Lohan talks peace in the Mideast and Kim Kardashian discusses her plan to solve the European debt crisis.

Friday, November 04, 2011

Hey look at me. The latest Liberal strategy.

It is hard to be the third party and even harder when you believe that you are 'the natural governing party' of Canada. A disinterested public doesn't really seem to care and the media all but ignore you in favour of covering the governing party and the official opposition.

So what do you do?

Easy; you stage some sort of event that will garner attention from the press and try to get some media time to yell look at me into the cameras so that you can appear relevant.

Not a bad idea in theory but it is important to pick the right issue and personally I don't believe that a uni-lingual AG is that issue. You know that this will eventually come back to bite them in the ass at some point in the future and I think that most Canadians would rather see these things awarded on merit rather than on fluency in both official languages, which makes the Liberals move appear self-serving.

However it appears that the Liberals do not share my thinking on this as earlier today under interim leader Bob Rae they staged their little attention grabbing walkout. While we don't know how well it will go over with the public, who seem to have issues when Liberals don't show up to work, according to Bob Rae the media bought into it big time.

Bob Rae: Well I think actually in this case it is more effective, your talking to me today so are many other reporters. (CTV video clip approx 4:30)

Update: Kelly McParland on how out of touch the Liberals are on this. 

Civil servant and Ignatieff donor walks away from his job.  (Pure coincidence that he uses the same lame tactic as the Liberals I assume.) Further update:  Dorais quit the committee to select a new AG after a new AG had been chosen and there is no longer a need for the committee.  Wow, what courage.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Your daily Redford Government screw up

Earlier this evening Infrastructure Minister Jeff Johnson (link now dead*) held a press conference where he announced that the proposed new Royal Alberta Museum in downtown Edmonton was indefinitely put on hold Wednesday after Ottawa pulled $92 million in funding.

Indeed breaking news but there are couple of small problems with what the Minister claimed: First the federal government only promised to commit 30 million to the RAM project, as can be seen here in this Alberta Government press release which reads: "The new museum is expected to cost a total of $340 million. Budget 2011 includes $180 million over the first three years for the project, which includes $30 million previously committed by the Government of Canada." and second, that 30 million dollar commitment has not been pulled. It still stands.

Another day, another screw up.


So what happened?

Paula Simons from the Edmonton Journal had these thoughts: It’s even possible, I suppose, that the Redford government, lacking, perhaps, in enthusiasm for Ed Stelmach’s legacy project, was looking for an excuse to mothball the project, and made federal funding a convenient scapegoat.

No doubt there will be lots more on this tomorrow.


* The dead link was from Alberta Premier Comms which stated that "Infrastructure Minister Danyluk" was holding the press conference even though Danyluk is not actually the Infrastructure Minister, Johnson is. I guess deleting tweets is just part of the change we can expect from this government.That and they don't even know who holds what portfolio within their own government. #fail




Well played Mr. Prime Minister. Well played.

Michael Den Tandt nails it with his latest in the Ottawa Citizen: "Harper proves his political marksmanship."

Here's the not-so-secret weapon underlying the Conservatives' incremental takeover of the mainstream of Canadian politics: they listen.
Not in Ottawa, where the Tories are hard of hearing to most voices but their own - but in the country proper. Through a combination of anecdotal reports from their MPs and relentless polling, the Conservatives appear to listen rather well, indeed.  Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Harper+proves+political+marksmanship/5606184/story.html#ixzz1bu6pyEBN

The base is happy. Very happy.

HT BC Blue.

Monday, October 24, 2011

After 40 years in power: This is business as usual in Alberta.

Hot on the heels of Friday's fiasco on transmission lines miscommunications comes news that certain energy firms in Alberta had the jump on everyone, including  PC cabinet ministers who had yet to the approve the deal, on an ethane incentive program worth $350-million.

From the Edmonton Journal: Energy companies learned of potentially lucrative changes to a $350-million incentive program before cabinet ministers approved it, documents obtained by the Alberta Liberals show.
Internal emails reveal that days before cabinet approved the program, aides to then-energy minister Ron Liepert were working with a Williams Energy lobbyist who was already preparing to announce the company's plan to take advantage of the incentives.
The records also show a former vice-president and lobbyist for Nova Chemicals helped redesign the program, aimed at boosting ethane production, which ultimately benefited his one-time employer.

 The timeline reveals a cozy relationship with the ministers office.
 
In an email dated March 17, Royer wrote to Liepert's executive assistant, Courtney Luimes: "As mentioned last week, Williams is preparing a draft ... for when the announcement is eventually made. You'll see there is a spot in there for a quote from the minister."


The request for a comment from the minister was passed to Liepert's communications director, Jay O'Neill, who is now communications director for Premier Alison Redford.


On March 21, one day before cabinet approved the changes, O'Neill drafted a quote and sent it to Luimes. Luimes responded: "He wants us to use this instead: 'I'm pleased to see that Williams is the first of what I believe will be many companies to benefit from the recent changes to our ethane policy.' " It is not clear from the exchange who "he" is.


The quote appears in the Williams news release, which also notes the company set aside money for the investment back in February - more than a month before the program was announced.

Call me old fashioned, but I like my governments to actually approve programs and the spending of $350-million before staff from a ministers office go around helping private business write their press releases by providing quotes from the minister.The rot is deep.

The documents used by the Journal for their story.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Is incompetent too strong a word?

Another day another flip flop or in this case a "miscommunication" from Alberta's ruling PC government.

Earlier today (approx 10:30am) it was announced a decision by the Alberta Utilities Commission on a controversial power line west of Sherwood Park is on hold after it received a letter from Energy Minister Ted Morton saying the the government was going to review the project. Link.

Big news, and rightly so as this seemed to be a complete reversal for the govt, and it swept across the news wires and twitter for most of the day. That is until Premier Redford announced 4 hours later (approx 2:30pm) that there was a "miscommunication" and that the AUC process on the Heartland transmission project will continue after all.

4 hours to correct a supposed 'miscommunication' on something this big that every major media org in the province was covering since it was announced? 

Something stinks, and it is not that it took 4 hrs to correct something that would have been done in minutes if it indeed had been just a simple miscommunication problem.

For the record here is Mortons letter to the AUC, written 2 days ago, that seems about as clear as it can be in what it says.


So far, and in spite of promises of change, we have had a broken promise on fixed election dates, a fall session which was cancelled one day then rescheduled the next and eventually shortened to 2 days next week and 6 days in November/December, the appointment of what looks more like a Gary Mar cabinet filed with good ol' boys, Gary Mar being appointed as Alberta's trade rep to Asia and being paid a salary greater than that of the premier, and a 'miscommunication' flip flop on power lines in just 4 hours. Meanwhile the smell of pork from 40 years of being in power still wafts through the air.



Is incompetent too strong a word to describe what is going on?

For what it's worth: The Government of Alberta still has this totally wrong information up on its website 1 full day after the heartland fiasco Friday.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Our Media: Move along. Nothing to see here.

 Update: It appears as though the government of Ontario lets anyone run licence plates for a fee. They don't give out address info ( the name and a phone book or google should do that easily enough) but the owners name is given out. As noted on the comments: They should call it the "stalker search" or better yet, the 'need to know the name of that hot blond' you saw driving the other day search.

And so with that I eat my words as there really is nothing to see here other than privacy laws that offer no privacy as long as the government gets their $18 bucks for the search.


Remember how Canadian media went nuts over the 'phone hacking' story that came from the UK?

Where are the multiple stories and live tweets over this?

From today's Toronto Star: "Leung would only give his first name, but the Star was able to find his full name by putting a trace on his licence plate."

"Over the past few weeks, the Star has tracked the makes and plates of dozens of cars in the neighbourhood."

The Star openly admits that it traced dozens of licence plates, which can only be done through Ontario Ministry of Transport computers, and we have almost complete silence from the Canadian media. I guess that phone hacking was much more important for our media to cover, and live tweet, than it is when a home grown media outfit like the Toronto Star uses private information protected under legislation and most likely illegally obtained through Ontario government sources. ( I can't see ANY way that it was done legally.)

If only there was some way to tie Rupert Murdoch to this; then I could guarantee you that our MSM would be all over it.

Update: My tweet to the author of the Star story Antonia Zerbisias:

. @AntoniaZ Who's your licence plate info source? Would be interesting to run some plates from around certain 'clinics'. #oops #cdnpoli

Thursday, October 13, 2011

The Alberta PC's: Getting by with a little help from their friends.

With the PCAA being in power in Alberta for the last 40 years; is it any surprise that this type of crap routinely happens?

A top municipal official in St. Paul, Alta., used the city's email system to solicit votes during the Conservative leadership race in a bid to ensure a local MLA remained in cabinet, a CBC News investigation has found.
Ron Boisvert, the town's chief administrative officer, also helped organize a golf tournament in June to raise campaign funds for MLA Ray Danyluk. Boisvert participated in the tournament at the town's expense, along with the mayor and two councillors.

Another town (Cardston) gives the PCAA a sweetheart deal on a golf tournament.

(PDF)
Premier’s Golf Tournament:
Council discussed the request of Pat Shimbashi with the P.C. Party to have the Town of Cardston host their fund raising golf tournament in Cardston on September 15, 2009.Moved by Cou. Bengry to waive the green fees and cart fees for the P.C. Party GolfTournament on September 15, 2009.  Carried

Just business as usual in Quebec Alberta politics.

When nobody at the municipal or even at the provincial level see nothing wrong with this type of thing; it is seriously time for a change.

Update: More Municipal Councillors use taxpayer dollars to attend a PCAA fund raising golf tournament.
(PDF)
May 30, 2008 Battle River - Wainwright Progressive Conservative AssociationGolf Tournament is being held.632 /08 MOVED by Councilor Fossum THAT up to 4 Councilors be allowed to attend the Battle River - Wainwright Progressive Conservative Association golf tournament.

CBC video: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Canada/Edmonton/1305516385/ID=2153249329

Sunday, October 02, 2011

Alison Redford: Alberta's 14th Premier.

Early this morning Alison Redford was elected leader of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta and will become Alberta's 14th Premier.

I know that this makes at least a couple of federal Liberal candidates very happy, along with an assortment of other loons, but considering the total number of PC party members who voted yesterday is down by a whopping 66,000 voters from the 2006 second ballot vote, I have to wonder how many longtime rank and file PC members are even happy with the result and the PCAA itself.  The funny thing with 'instamembers' is that once they have voted, they don't stick around to do the work needed (at all levels) for a party to be successful.

Congratulations on your win Alison, but considering the dwindling number of party faithful who voted and the fact that 48 PC MLAs endorsed Gary Mar believing that he was better to lead the party than you were, you do have your work cut out for you. ( But not as much as Raj Sherman, you have more Liberal support than he does.)

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Gary Mar unrepentant on improper membership sales.

Gary Mar is above the rules, but he isn't doing it for himself, he is doing it for the good of democracy.

What a guy.

PCAA leadership candidate Gary Mar said his campaign volunteers did nothing wrong by selling party memberships within 50 metres of an Edmonton polling station. Adding that his supporters were only trying to help people who can't speak English. "Within the polling station, the advance polling station, you could buy a membership from the party," Mar said. "Except that there's no one at the party table that speaks three different dialects of Chinese."


So there you go. Even though selling memberships within 50 meters of a polling location is totally against PCAA rules, Gary doesn't care and claims that his volunteers did nothing wrong. Rules and ethics are for others I guess (which might just explain how this happened back in 2001-2004 while Mar was the Minister of Health)  

When he entered the race for leader Mar signed an agreement with the PCAA to follow the rules of the leadership contest, not just the rules he liked or agreed with, but all of the rules. I guess a signature on an agreement doesn't mean as much as it used to.(ud)

Honestly, is this the type of person that you want to lead our province? If this type of stuff happens during a leadership campaign can you imagine how a Mar led government would operate.

Pathetic.

On the bright side at least no volunteers were blamed or scapegoated today; although campaign spokesman Mark Kastner might not feel that way as it was yesterday when Kastner blamed the improper membership sales on "overzealous supporters" only to have his boss say today that nothing was wrong with those very same sales. Ouch.

Update: A scrutineer from the advanced vote says that she "spoke with at least 3 volunteers who were acting as interpreters and always available."

Why does this not surprise me.

Another bad day for Team Gary Mar.

"If you can't run the campaign with integrity, then how can you promise integrity after?" PCAA leadership candidate Doug Griffiths.

Yesterday was advanced voting day for the PCAA leadership race here in Alberta, and as it turns out, it was also another bad day for team Gary Mar.



Representatives from Gary Mar's leadership campaign were seen breaking party rules Tuesday by selling Progressive Conservative memberships outside an Edmonton advance polling station.
Mar membership sellers were also shooed away from the Calgary polling station on Tuesday.

Team Mar's response, which seems to be the norm of late, was to blame volunteers: "Mar campaign spokesman Mark Kastner blamed the membership sales on "overzealous supporters"

You might think that after the free membership fiasco where Team Mar also laid blame on a hapless volunteer that they would have tried to be a bit more careful and made sure that ALL of their people were properly trained and following the rules to the letter. But after yesterday it appears that neither of these were that high on their priority list, making me wonder how this bunch would ever run a government if they can't even properly train their volunteers in a leadership campaign on the basic rules.


Team Mar wasn't done yet as they went old school by busing in elderly supporters to the advanced poll. (Something that I oddly happened to write about yesterday morning. See 2nd last paragraph)


Gary Mar bus parked within 50 meters of polling place.    Photo Credit: P. Pilarski 

Now busing in supporters is not against the rules per se as Team Mar were quick to point out: Mar campaign spokesman Mark Kastner said the busing is allowed under party rules, and Gary Mar said "I'm not going to apologize because we are better organized than other campaigns", but it is definitely bad optics and reeks of good ol' boy politics that have turned so many away from politics in the past.

How Team Mar managed to find 100's of elderly supporters in both Edmonton and Calgary who all just happened to not be able to vote in the regular poll this coming Saturday (rules state the voters must sign a form saying that they are unable to vote in the regular polls to be able to vote in the advance poll) remains a mystery, but being the ethical bunch they are I am sure that there is a very logical explanation for this mathematical odds defying event.

More on Team Mar's bad day can be found here at Global Edmonton.


"I'm disappointed to hear this today because that sort of conduct, I think, speaks to a pretty cynical approach to politics," PCAA leadership candidate Alison Redford.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Free memberships and the PCAA. The real elephant in the room.

My first post on Team Mar giving away free memberships can be read here.  My second post which contains an audio clip of a volunteer stating "a donor is paying for student memberships" can be found here.

Both of those posts caused quite a stir and I must admit that it was entertaining watching Team Mar try to spin their way out of a 'problem', although having myself accused of fabricating the entire thing or being a partisan hack was not, but here is the rub; there are absolutely NO rules ( according to the PCAA who I called to clarify before Fridays blog post and now also verified by the Edmonton Sun) as to anyone, including the candidates, buying or paying for the memberships of others!

Yes it is true. Giving away 'free memberships' breaks absolutely no rules what so ever within the PCAA and if a donor paying for student memberships the PCAA has no problem what so ever with them doing so as long as they get their 5 bucks. Honestly I was shocked to hear this, as I am sure most of you are as well, and that is why I never wrote or made the accusation that Team Mar was breaking the rules as some have claimed, because the sad reality is that they had not.

It makes more sense now as to why my emails to some of the other candidates campaigns on this subject went unanswered. It makes you wonder just how wide spread a practice this is. ( BTW: For the record only the Doug Griffiths campaign responded to my questions and condemned the practice)

The reasons that this practice is wrong are numerous. First off the optics are terrible. Not only does it lead people to believe that the entire process is corrupt, it brings back visions of the 'old days' when some good ol' boys would load up buses with people they found on the street, handing them $5 to buy a membership to vote for their guy.  More serious than the optics is the very real possibility of someone just buying the leadership (and the Premiers office!). In theory with 250k of donated money someone could buy 50,000 memberships and pass them out to people, and 50,000 votes would have been more than enough to win the PCAA leadership on the first ballot in 2006. Sure it would not be an easy task to do for the average candidate but what about if that candidate had the backing of a large union/s (for example) where finding 50,000 people might not be that difficult of a task. The PCAA, and the Premiers job could be bought for a relatively small amount of cash and NOBODY could stop them!

This type of crap is not allowed in the Conservative Party at the federal level for good reason and looking towards Alberta, the Wildrose Alliance Party's constitution is very clear on this:

3.1.2 indicate their intention to join the Party by personally authorizing an application for membership in the Party...
3.2.1 have paid the prescribed membership fee, personally or through an immediate family member;  (PDF)

So why is it allowed in the PCAA?

You know this entire thing stinks; it is absolute nonsense on so many levels but it is something that I have come to expect as of late from the PCAA. Antiquated rules for an antiquated party.

What happens now?

I guess the candidates have a couple of options. Call out this unethical practice for what it is and promise to make changes to the rules so this embarrassment never happens again, or go grab the cheque book, pass out memberships, and rent the buses for Saturday.

Now that the elephant in the room has been revealed and everyone now knows that paying for memberships is not against the rules, your guess is as good as mine as to what will happen.

Monday, September 12, 2011

Team Mar volunteer: " ...a donor is paying for student memberships"

We get letters (and emails), lot and lots of letters...  And look what showed up in one of them.




  " a donor is paying for student memberships"      

Spin that.

Audio clip taken from a video taken Sept 7, 2011 at that very same Gary Mar table at the U of A where this picture was taken.  I decided to use audio only and not full video because the identity of this hard working volunteer is not important and I am not here to toss her under a bus. Team Mar seems to be doing a good enough job of that already.


Background: Last Friday I posted a picture of the Team Gary Mar table at the University of Alberta where it was quite obvious that they were giving away free memberships.

The response was quick from Mar spinners and supporters: "Complete fabrication guys." was the first, but seeing that the free membership sign was so prominently displayed in the photo, that line was going to go nowhere. Next up came what would become the main spin from Team Mar: "it was a mistake by a volunteer, nobody was instructed to do this. Problem was corrected right away."  Which was to be repeated, almost word for word many more times throughout the day. They were in the 'nothing to see here' mode and were only too happy to blame one poor volunteer ( there were at least 3 volunteers there, all of which could see the sign on the table and NONE doing anything about it )  hoping it would all go away. Honestly I have lost more respect for Team Mar over how they tried to spin their way out than I did about some 'free memberships' that were given out.


So what do you think?

An improperly trained volunteer, who knew enough about the memberships to say that they normally cost $5, who on the spur of the moment just happened to come up with this 'donor paying for student memberships' idea on her own, or perhaps is there is more to the story than what Team Mar is telling us? Personally I think that there is more to the story*, but given what we have already seen from Team Mar, I don't expect that we will really ever find out the full story and all I expect to see is more spin and damage control.


As I said in my original post: I guess ethics left the PCAA a long time ago.




*There may indeed be much more to the story but in the end it really doesn't matter; which is the real elephant in the room that nobody is yet talking about.

More on that elephant tomorrow.  (BTW and it isn't the 'donor'.)

UPDATE: More spin from Team Mar: 'campaign advisor Mark Kastner said the incident was a mistake.
“A new volunteer did put the sign down. It was corrected quickly and we don’t think any memberships were given away,” said Kastner in an email.'   To put it simply, BS!  Memberships WERE given away and in case there is doubt about this, there is a certain video...

Friday, September 09, 2011

Team Gary Mar gets caught giving away party memberships.

Can it really get any more blatant than this?  The following photo was taken September 7th on campus at the University of Alberta. In it you can clearly see members of Team Gary Mar openly offering anyone willing to fill out the paperwork a 'Free membership' in the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta; allowing them the opportunity to cast a vote for the next leader of the PCAA who will also be the next Premier of the Province of Alberta.





Now just get that demon dialer set up, give away* 20,000 memberships, and hope those free membership members all show up and vote.

*Not really a give away. Each membership does cost $5 and that must be paid to the PCAA, but all you need is just 1 big fat $100,000 donation to buy it pay for it and you get a great shot at the Premiers Office and all that goes with the job of leading the Province of Alberta.


A bargain at twice the price!


I guess ethics left the PCAA a long time ago.


Update Sept 10: Major update coming soon! Monday morning. 
  
And here is that update in a new post.

Tuesday, September 06, 2011

Incompetence at Edmonton City Hall.

It seems that the City Manager and the Transportation Department jumped the gun by not only ordering the new seasonal parking ban signs but by having city crews install them before City Council had made the decision to do so.

I wonder how many dollars that move will cost us?

Update: Councilor Bryan Anderson said it could be a waste of $600,000. If that number is accurate, transportation boss Bob Boutilier must be fired immediately and to use Boutilier's own words: "All I can say is, 'tough! I got no other way of saying it..." you cost the taxpayer $600,000, and you did so without the approval of the elected representatives of the citizens of Edmonton; you have to go. This is an embarrassment.


City Council has yet to make a final decision on the matter but according to news reports (and Councilor Don Iveson), as of right now the seasonal ban is on hold and all of those expensive installed signs are to be ignored.

Friday, September 02, 2011

Like a runaway train. Team Libby can't be stopped.

Okay; it may be a solar powered train at dusk but there is no denying that the ranks of Team Libby are growing!



Come join us won't you. You will be glad that you did.*






*Jack would have wanted it that way.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

City of Edmonton puts up seasonal parking ban signs but City Council has yet to approve the move.

I take it as a sign of an already done deal (just how do they know it is a done deal is a good question though) as City of Edmonton workers are all over the place putting up Seasonal Parking ban signs throughout  Edmonton. But the matter does NOT come before City Council for discussion until theTransportation & Infrastructure Committee meeting September 6th at 9:30 am at City Hall where these reports will be debated.



Previous news stories here here and here ALL seem to suggest that the City was looking at this, and that NO decision was going to be made. Wrong.

So what happened?

According to someone I spoke to at City Hall they are claiming that the City Manager made the call under Bylaw 5590, which is the all encompassing traffic bylaw, but strangely enough 5590 makes NO mention at all of a seasonal parking ban.


So I ask: Who authorized these signs to be produced? Who gave the go ahead for them to be put up?  Can Council reverse this or are they powerless against the moves of Transportation and the City Manager? And lastly: why bother having council discuss this stuff at all if the City Manager can just do as he pleases without any concern as to what the citizens of Edmonton have to say?

Not that Transportation boss Bob Boutilier cares about what you think as he is already on record saying: "All I can say is, 'tough!' i got no other way of saying it. The situation we run into is, we got to keep the system operating." when citizen concerns over the seasonal parking ban were brought up.

BTW: Edmonton has had the Snow Route Bylaw since the 1970's which they did NOT even bother to use at all the last few years ( How do they know that it doesn't work if they didn't even bother trying it?) before some unelected civil servant ran off and passed enacted this new seasonal ban.


Saturday, August 27, 2011

Google ad-sense gone awry.

Another case of Google ad-sense gone awry. Found this the other day over at Moose and Squirrel.



Friday, August 26, 2011

NDP exploiting Jack Layton for political gain.

It seems that the NDP have been flat out busted exploiting Jack Layton for their political gain, and do you know what?  Jack Layton would not have it any other way.

Before the hate mail starts flowing and I get piled on for being too insensitive or it being too soon after Jacks passing: I would like to point out that up until this post that I have refrained for the most part from making comment on his untimely death and the subsequent sometimes over the top coverage (msm,twitter,blogs), but
back to the topic at hand.

Who did not see this coming? Raise your hand if you honestly did not think that the NDP would use Jacks passing for their own gain. Somehow I doubt that there are many, if any, hands raised right now; not because you would look stupid sitting at your computer with your hand in the air but because if you are in any way familiar with the NDP and Canadian politics the answer is obvious; they would and in fact are doing just that.

When Ed Broadbent said on Wednesday: “We have to build on Jack’s legacy. And quickly.” he wasn't just sputtering nonsense because of his grief, he was telling the truth.
 
When Pat Martin tweeted: The only criticism Jack would have over the release of his letter is that there was no fundraising appeal at the bottom...I can say that... he too was telling it like it is and reminding us all about the real Jack Layton in the process.

The letter that Mr. Martin is referring to above was Jack Layton's message to Canadians, which a few days ago could get one tarred and feathered if they pointed out the obvious that it in part was political in nature.

We can expect to see plenty more and of course the inevitable 'Jack would' or 'wouldn't want' that is already making its way out into the political world.

That is politics. It is what it is.

I did not know Layton personally but I do know that he was a masterful politician that knew the game inside and out and one who clearly relished in it. You can believe what you would like to believe but he was a very smart man and IMHO to deny that as the time of his passing neared that Jack never gave thought about how his own death could help out the party that he had recently led to its greatest electoral success, is an insult to the mans political skills and acumen.

Layton the politician would do what it takes and that is the Jack Layton that I choose to remember. The consummate politician, right up until the end and as it now appears, beyond.

Rest in peace Jack.

As I wrote earlier' that is politics' and as I also wrote earlier, 'Jack wouldn't have it any other way'.


Update: The CP has something with an eerily similar feel: Politicization of Layton's death was what he wanted

Saturday update: "this mass outbreak of recreational grief..."


Monday, August 22, 2011

Jack Layton 1950-2011

“We deeply regret to inform you that the Honourable Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, passed away at 4:45 a.m. today,” his family said in a statement. “He passed away peacefully at his home surrounded by family and loved ones. Details of Mr. Layton’s funeral arrangements will be forthcoming,"

Layton was 61.

 Rest in Peace Jack.


CTV

CBC Video tribute

CP

PM Harper: I know one thing: Jack gave his fight against cancer everything he had. Indeed, Jack never backed down from any fight.
 

Monday, August 15, 2011

I wonder if Heather Mallick's employers have apologies pre-printed when they hire her.

Because it seems that they do have to make a few of them.

The latest comes from Mallick's latest employer, The Toronto Star:

"A column by Heather Mallick on July 28 contained a number of inaccurate statements about the well-known British journalist and author Melanie Phillips.

Ms. Phillips has expressed her horror at the slaughter at Utoya, Norway in a clear and unambiguous way, writing “there can be no excuse, justification or rationale whatsoever for the atrocity perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik.”

The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.

The defamatory article has been removed from our website.

The Star and Ms. Mallick regret the errors and
apologize to Ms. Phillips."



And here is a report from the CBC Ombudsman on a column Mallick wrote while she was an employee of the CBC. That too has been removed from the CBC website but is available to read here. Notice a trend?


HT to Blazing Cat Fur who has a screenshot of the text of the now deleted Star column which can be seen here


Saturday, August 06, 2011

What is CBC Policy on publishing the names of suspects... That depends.

What exactly is CBC News Policy on the naming of suspects?

Here is what CBC stated was their policy in regards to publishing the names/pictures of suspects
"CBC News' practice is not to name suspects, and therefore is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time."  (Note: The original wording in that story read "“CBC News is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time” and it was changed sometime after the original story hit their website.)

Since that story hit the web others have found examples of CBC doing the exact opposite and naming suspects, but today the CBC has really outdone themselves and have hit the trifecta today with this story. "Edmonton police are searching for a 17-year-old woman who is allegedly having unprotected sex without disclosing her HIV-positive status."

Not only did they publish the photo and name a 'suspect', something they claimed they do not do, but this particular suspect is a 17 yrs old minor who now has had what most would consider to be her private medical information posted by the CBC on the internet!

I think we need a clarity act for CBC Policy.

BTW: I hope that Kirk LaPointe, the CBC Ombudsman, (whom I have great respect for) gets on this ASAP.

Saturday, July 30, 2011

2000 Days

Congratulations PM Harper on your 2000th day in office. Contrary to what the screaming leftists claimed would happen if the Conservatives were to be ever elected (The Campaign of Fear™ ), Canada is in good shape and leading the way.


PM Harper is currently in 10th place on the list of longest serving PM's, with the next Federal Election scheduled for October 19, 2015. 

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Then:“I think it is contemptuous to tell people we are going to target your religion...

Now: Liberals launch outreach campaign in bid to recapture ethnic vote.

Oh oh. This isn't going to sit well with Michael Ignatieff or all of the others who took offense to the CPC's efforts in this area.

Michael Ignatieff: “I think it is contemptuous to tell people we are going to target your religion, we are going to target your ethnicity, we are going to target your national origins. No! We must target the fact they are Canadian citizens.”

“I don’t like the word “ethnic,” Ignatieff said, in French. “A Sikh is a Canadian, a Hindu is a Canadian, a Muslim is Canadian, a Tamil is a Canadian.”

What about the current placeholder err leader Bob Rae?  Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae suggested the initiative was more about winning support in ethnic communities — groups that Mr. Kenney has been actively courting for the Harper government in its attempts to build a majority government.
“It has much more to do with Canadian domestic politics than it has to do with the necessity of having a coherent strategy for the promotion of democracy and human rights,” said Mr. Rae.
“It's more a domestic strategy than a foreign affairs strategy.” (ht BC Blue)

BTW how do you reach out to the 'ethnic vote' without a leader or any policy other than 'we will try super extra hard the next time to get it right'. Sorry Liberals but being totally rudderless does not inspire much confidence in your party to anyone, including the 'ethnics'.

Saturday, June 25, 2011

My BSdar is going off on 'gaydar' study.

The term junk science comes to mind.

A new study led by researchers at the University of Toronto suggests that ovulation significantly improves a woman’s ability to judge a man’s sexual orientation.  The researchers found that the nearer a woman was to peak ovulation, the more accurate judge of sexual orientation she was."These findings suggest that women's accuracy may vary across the fertility cycle because men's sexual orientation is relevant to conception and thus of greater importance as women are nearer to ovulation," Nicholas Rule, lead author from the Department of Psychology at the University of Toronto, said in a release. (link1 link2)

The women did not meet, or speak to any of the men (gay or otherwise), they were able to determine that the men were gay or straight by only looking at photos of their faces. (The men were all equally attractive and wore the same facial expression, researchers said. Women were encouraged to use their intuition.)

There is so much wrong with this that I don't know where to begin. Do all gays look alike? (or straight males) Were the study males ( who self identified as gay or straight) totally honest? Did this Kreskin like ability of ovulating women reveal some straight males as being only in denial and fooling themselves because they really were gay; since 'science' doesn't lie. Did any ovulating lesbians participate, or do they not have the same power? I have more but I think I will might apply for funding to conduct my own study to disprove, and I bet it would be quite easy to do so, this study that was no doubt partially funded by your tax dollars.

I hope the Iranians or any other non gay friendly country doesn't ever catch wind of this study. The next thing you know they will be putting ovulating women out in the street to identify gay men for 'special treatment'. After all, it is now science.

I wonder what GLAAD or any of the other gay rights organizations have to say about this.

Thursday, June 23, 2011

NHL Awards Show Mixup

Just finished watching the NHL Awards show on PVR. I never noticed how much Mike Gillis looks like Steve Tambellini before. 

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

The Senate reform act. Coming soon to a Senate near you?

Take a look at the news release



Personally I think it is the best that can be expected without reopening the constitution.


The fact is that the PM gets to appoint Senators, it is his constitutional duty. IF Provinces elect candidates, and this could be anyone (even Duceppe), the PM should have to consider that democratic choice in his decision. He doesn't have to appoint them but heaven help him come next election if he does otherwise. (Quick someone ask Jack Layton if he would respect this if he ever became PM)

Oh and I believe this same principle applies to the legislation, ( again more like a suggestion per our constitution) of the PM not calling an early election in a majority situation. He can do it but come that election....toast.



As I said, the best that can be expected without opening up that can o' worms that is our Constitution.

Update: Canadian Sense had a great idea  "A substantial cut in pay/benefits for upper chamber would help with turnover and not require Constitutional talks."

That would get some of those hanging around just for the perks to willingly depart sooner.  Making it a volunteer position could also be an option....

 Another update: Pat Martin agrees

Friday, June 17, 2011

Vancouver riots: Preston Manning's fault

Deluded article from Murray Dobbin that takes the usual lefty line and applies it to the Vancouver riots by blaming others for the actions of the rioters. 

Yes, of course, it is a big stretch to suggest that Preston Manning, the former head of the Reform Party had anything to do with the rioting in Vancouver after the hockey game. But in trying to determine what is at the root of this mindless violence – and the almost equally mindless spectator sport of watching the violence and doing nothing – we need to examine just how it could be that so many young men’s lives are so meaningless. I think it comes down to community – or rather its dramatic decline – a deliberate by-product of neo-liberalism and consumerism.   

Read the rest here

( BTW I will wager every penny I have that most of those involved in the rioting were not CPC supporters, if they voted at all)

Here is one poor lost young man's story. ( A member of our national Water polo team, or should I say used to be a member of...) 

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

If you're going to Vancouver BC...

If you're going to Vancouver BC.
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
If you're going to Vancouver BC.
You're going to meet some freaky people there.

 Now maybe Canadians will get the chance to see that hidden NDP constitution.

Welcome to the spotlight NDP.


Apologies to Scott McKenzie.







Interesting: Taking socialism out of the NDP constitution.

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Jennifer Ditchburn in search of unhappy Conservatives.

Jennifer Ditchburn is no fan of the Conservatives, as anyone who has ever read her stuff is keenly aware, and today is no exception as she finds a couple of unhappy Quebec Conservatives and writes about their disillusionment and uses the opportunity to again bring up the issue of weighing ridings for leadership votes, which will be brought up at the convention along with dozens of other proposals.

Anything that works negatively to the conservatives I guess.

BTW I always thought that candidates and their campaigns were responsible for their own signage. (Can you imagine what Elections Canada would do if the Party actually purchased and distributed the signs!)

Here is some more on Jennifer from this blog, and some from BC Blue including her big breaking story on Helena Guergis and the town playboy.

Monday, May 30, 2011

The good news keeps coming!

Chrysler has repaid their 1.7 Billion in loans received from the governments of Canada and Ontario.

StatsCan: The Canadian economy expanded 3.9% in the first quarter of 2011.

Some action on the Senate.


And the House has yet to sit for even one day of Parl41.


Much more to come.

The end of the long gun registry.The end of the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly. The end of party subsidies...

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

NDP spin on new MPJean-Francois Larose's resume. #Fail

More resume problems for the NDP and their pathetic attempt to spin their way out of it.*

This past Friday QMI learned that the new NDP MP for a federal riding north of Montreal does not have a degree from the University of Montreal, contrary to what his official electoral biography stated. This after another similiar resume incident with their most famous MP, Ruth Ellen Brosseau.

Like with Brosseau, the NDP spin on Lerose was that it was a staffers error: On Brosseau the story was that a staffer had "inadvertently" changed the wording, embellishing her resumé. On Lerose we hear of a similar tale using similar words describing how a NDP staffer (now gone)  had made an "inadvertent change" to Lerose's resume posted on the party’s website.

Only with Brosseau the spin was at least plausible, staffers do make mistakes and there is really no reason not to take the NDP's word for what happened, but with Larose the NDP spin is so ridiculous that it insults the intelligence because this is not the first time that this has "inadvertently" happened. "The false credentials were also posted about Larose on the La Presse newspaper website when he ran for in the Montreal municipal election in 2009." So unless that very same NDP staffer wrote the bio in 2009 and again in 2011, I have some serious doubts that it was their fault in the least.

BTW what happened to that staffer? The NDP claim that they no longer work for the NDP but why is that?
Were they fired? Did they resign? Were the pushed to resign? We don't know and so far the media couldn't seem to care less about the NDP lying to them or about what happened to the staffer that the NDP claim was responsible. ( anyone remember certain MSM types mocking the CPC when they blamed a staffer for anything?)


HT BC Blue.

Related: More spin, also total BS that the media bought, from the NDP and Jack Layton's infamous shove to get some camera time for himself.


*Which appears to have worked because judging from the lack of questions and coverage, our MSM seems to have swallowed the BS spin from the NDP. 

Another #fail from Canada's political journalists.

Friday, May 20, 2011

And now the end is near.....

Number one on the list: An end to taxpayer subsidies for political parties.


Next up: The oppressive Canadian Wheat Board and soon to follow, the long gun registry.

And for an added bonus some common sense on cap and trade and incandescent light bulbs!

The left is going to go nuts.


For your daily media fear-mongering fix we have Lawrence Martin trying to convince everyone that the media is in the PM's pocket.

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Alfred Apps and the Liberal Party: Passing on the blame.

From the Globe and Mail: " In a Facebook post Thursday, Mr. Apps warned Liberals “not to put the cart before the horse.”

“Very gratified with the goodwill, as well as the honest and constructive dialogue with our MPs and Senators,” he said of the caucus meeting. “Even the high emotions are respected, after all it was a devastating defeat and desire to fix blame is totally understandable. But we should move on.”
Meanwhile, he said he and the party executive had nothing to do with the strategy behind the losing campaign. He said he delivered on his part of the job – supplying the money to fund the campaign. "

Sure Alf, aside from going down to the US to recruit Michael Ignatieff for the leaders job and then falsely using the coalition crisis as an excuse to trample the Liberal Party constitution and voice of the grassroots to appoint Ignatieff as leader, you the party executive had no part at all in the defeat.

Sigh. When will these guys learn. Ignoring the grassroots party members is never a good idea, and trying to re-write history to spin your own people is even worse.

Oh and there is also this about the party not authorizing funds to the struggling Ignatieff campaign in the last couple of weeks of the election campaign.

Previous entries on Alfred Apps.

Monday, May 09, 2011

Chretien urges PM Harper not to follow through on election promise.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper should reconsider his vow to end the direct per-vote subsidy for political parties, says former prime minister Jean Chrétien.

Sort of arrogant, no? Having a former PM ask the current PM not to follow through on his election promises?

Thank you Jean, but cutting party subsidies was an election platform promise, in fact I would call it a major plank of that platform, and the Conservatives were elected on that platform. The Conservative Party of Canada is not the Liberal Party where promises to abolish the GST or the numerous times they promised a national child care system are never followed through on.  This PM will follow through on his platform promise.

If a party's own members do not care enough to support that party with their own money, why should the taxpayer have to prop them up?

Saturday, May 07, 2011

Did Quebec reject the Bloc to make a coalition easier?

There has been lots written the last couple of days about the collapse of the Bloc and the NDP surge in Quebec and so far I have not read anything that really explains what happened. Did BQ supporters all wake up one day and decide to toss out a party that for years has enjoyed their support because of something Duceppe did or did not do? Were they all taken in by the guy from downtown Toronto with the big smile and equally big spending promises? 

While I don't claim to know the answer I do have some thoughts and a possible piece of the puzzle as to why Bloc supporters decided to abandon their party and support the NDP.

The coalition.

Whenever the idea of a coalition has been discussed it has been quite clear that having Bloc MPs as part of any coalition was not to the liking of most Canadians. During the original coalition crisis both the Liberals and NDP were desperately trying to spin that the Bloc were not actually part of the coalition, only that they would be supporting it, and Ignatieff himself had this to say as to why he didn't enter into the deal he had signed: "I could be sitting here as your prime minister, but I turned it down because I didn’t think it was right for someone who believes in the national unity of my country to make a deal with people who want to split the country up," 

Having separatist Bloc MP's either in or supporting a coalition government did not fly in 2008 and was never going to go over well with Canadians. Bloc supporters were as aware of this problem as much as anyone else but what to do about it.

The solution: Drop the Bloc and elect enough NDP MPs so that a coalition would not only be legitimate but it would have a much better chance of being accepted by the rest of Canada.

It makes sense and possibly explains why dedicated separatists tossed their own party and blindly voted for NDP candidates some of which were barely old enough to vote themselves, did not speak French, or have NEVER even been to the riding in which they were running in.

Your thoughts?