Harper: Call Me "Mr. Bungles"

The HarpoCons insultingly attacked a speech inflection that Paul Martin had and dubbed him "Mr. Dithers"... Mr. Martin's "hems", and "ums" were quite noticeable and did impact his effectiveness as a leader - it made him appear to waffle or dither... It's poetic justice that Stephen Harper is now being besieged by the greatest number of scandals in such a short time in Canadian political history. Call him Mr. Bungles.

The Conservative scandals are numerous, and all so serious that they warrant serious public attention. Much of what has occurred really just points to the complete lack of talent in the Conservative Caucus. The ineptness of the Harper Government has reached "biblical" proportions - to use a typically Alberta Conservative phrase.

We all recall "Cadscam". We are still awaiting Harper's answer as to what he knew in the way of "financial considerations" - you know, the one's all of Canada heard him discuss on tape.

Then there is the fiasco surrounding income trusts. Once again Stephen Harper used his "great political judgment" and appointed a totally inept Minister (Flaherty). Income trusts were not the only thing Flaherty/Harper bungled. They shamelessly talked up the Canadian dollar (good for their conservative friends who all want to invest in American blue-chips on "Teh Wall Street", or in US big oil... or just their retirement home down South in their "promised land"). The dollar's "Flaherty-shock" has bounced it up to high levels that have laid waste to Canada's manufacturing sector.

There's the scandal involving election financing, and the potential that the Cons won the last minority with a little "illicit funding". This scandal is STILL wide open, and is being investigated.

There are other scandals, flubs, and signs of an inept government, but the one that really stands out is "NAFTA-gate". What was the Conservative government of Canada doing in appearing to help their equally conservative Republican friends South of the border? Were they attempting to discredit the odds-on favorite to be the next President of the US? It's funny that Maxime Bernier's name seems to pop up there again - as the minister who gave the nod to hire the son of a senior elected Republican - the same kid who apparently was the courier for the scandalous (and false) info going to the US media. The facts on this huge international incident remain to be uncovered. The next government of Canada needs to ensure there is a detailed investigation, as it is pretty certain that using your elected post to try to influence the elections of another country HAS to break some sort of rule... We know Harper's government is pretty adverse to investigating itself...

Mr. Bungle's government is beginning to be known for their lack of talent. They have put their best feet forward - and it appears they are "smelly" and "hammer-toed"... The extreme lack of talent in the Conservative camp is amplified by the fact that all the "good" people are staying on as provincial PROGRESSIVE Conservatives (Danny Williams, Bernard Lord, etc.). The provincials that did decide to climb the federal ladder are the same ones who bungled Ontario's economy under Mike Harris's "common-sense revolution" (what a misnomer THAT was). Of course it took the "political genius" of Mr. Bungles to give them starring roles in his cabinet. One only has to look at what Jim Flaherty has done (with Harper's direction) to lay waste to Canada's manufacturing sector, and our surpluses, and our tax-roles, AND income trusts, etc., to see how poor a team Harper has - or how poor a judge of character and skill he is.

The Conservatives can't misdirect Canadians away anymore. They are a party filled with extremely incompetent MPs, and "Mr. Bungles'" insistence in being in FULL CONTROL of each MP means that he has been fully aware of what they have been up to. I mean, c'mon, this guy reads their House notes before they speak. Mr. Bungles is the most anally-retentive, control-freak PM Canada's ever had. And he used to joke about "Chairman Jean". What a joke. Harper/Mr. Bungles knows what's going on around him - we have to admit that. If not, than his whole "cool operator/political genius" ruse was just that - a ruse. Most certainly a media concoction. Harper must have been intimately aware of details surrounding these major scandals. People who share time (and beds) with top cabinet members do have their backgrounds checked. People who attend state functions (like dinner at 24 Sussex, or the White House) are watched carefully, AND have their backgrounds checked. Ms. Couillard's admission - in her recent interview - that "they must have known", is blatantly accurate. She - a most politically "un-savvy" person knew the protocols - yet the Cons and Mr. Bungles actually believe they can Con Canadians into believing otherwise?

History will show Mr. "Bungles" Harper's regime to be one of slack-jawed, incompetent henchmen, and a leader who was aware of every move - yet lied to the populace, and stood behind his own incompetent appointees.

Time to give Harper his new "title"... He's earned it: Mr. Bungles. If someone else has already had the wit and foresight to christen him thus, my apologies, and my congratulations - at being a master of nomenclature.

Edit: And tonight, Mr. Bungles royally bungles his meeting with Italian PM Berlusconi... That's what happens when you are "anti-elite", and don't want the best of the best representing you abroad. Sheer incompetence. The sooner this government is over, the better for our international reputation.

The Truth About Polls, Polling Companies, And "Consulting Firms"

Much is always made about polls and who the polling companies are "biased" toward. A recent poll shows approval of Harper and the Tories waning BEFORE the Julie Couillard/Maxime Bernier affair. Some have questioned the intermittent timings of polls by this company, when they seemed to be polling a lot more when the Cons were riding high. There are also the usual barbs about this firm leaning towards the Cons or the Libs.

Most polling firms have done work for both parties - while IN AND OUT of government. This is a key point. Polling companies and "consulting firms" can gain a lot from lucrative government contracts. One clear observation is that they tend to "nurse" the party in power up to the point it seems that they shouldn't - due to genuine voter angst or mistrust. When the party is "going down" they quickly start finding friends in the soon to be government. You often see former advisers and "hangers-on" of governments seeing themselves potentially losing their Hill jobs, then opening political polling/consulting firms to try to appear "unaffiliated" or "neutral". Working on the Hill for a while generally nets you a few friends on the "other side" (most partisan voters would be shocked at how many friendships there are between party staff on the Hill - although the Cons seem to be a bit further removed - you need to show some real ideological leanings before you can be their friend).

Polling firms tend to favor the results they want to see: When you hear "a whopping 42% of Canadians do not disapprove of the government", what do you think? If you confuse that with the 40%-plus needed to be in "majority" territory - or if the pollster makes the distinction "hazy" for you, you may be led to believe the government is ready for a majority. The same number, however, also implies that 58% of voters DISAPPROVE of the government. Taking a closer look at the 42%, you may also find that 32% may ACTUALLY approve, while 10% may simply think that they "haven't enough evidence to disapprove", or are "undecided". If you break it along partisan lines, someone could interpret the numbers to mean that the government is in majority territory, but that the opposition is split with numbers in the 20s, or lower.

Bottom line is that you can play with numbers, or a biased media (who usually pay for these polls) can choose to headline what they want from a poll, cherry-picking what suits their needs at the time. It's best to take polls with a grain of salt. The Julie Couillard/Mad Max scandal is currently being polled... We will see if the various media, pollsters, "consultants", etc., start opening up their allegiances a little bit to include a little more disapproval of the ineptness of the Harper government...

Julie Couillard Had Dinner With Harper

According to Julie Couillard, she and Maxime Bernier had dinner with Stephen Harper in a private residence, AND she visited 24 Sussex Dr.  She further adds that the Conservatives MUST have known who she was (background, etc.), as they allowed her to such occasions AND even had her meet President Bush (as evidenced by a picture).  More interestingly, apparently she was also courted by the Conservatives as a potential candidate. So much for Harper's claim that he was not aware of details about this woman, or what her past was.  She was also very clear about the fact that she let "Max" know about her ex's at the start of their relationship.

Judging by her demeanor - and apparent lack of in-depth general knowledge - it is quite easy to believe what she is claiming.  It was really sick to hear her "dress story" - how Bernier used her to get publicity for himself when she attended his swearing in.

One very frightening point brought up during the interview was that she had evidence of her home - even her box-spring of her bed - being wiretapped - while she was seeing Bernier.  There could be some serious repercussions.

We'll see where this latest Conservative/Harper scandal ends up...

Why Education Is Conservatives' Greatest Enemy: Goodale Comments On Conservative Attack On Education

Received another one of Ralph Goodale's Weekly emails today. In it Ralph discusses the Harper Conservatives' attack on education in general, and their stopping the Millenium Scholarship Foundation after it expires next year. Thousands of Canadian students have benefited from this great Liberal program...

I guess Conservatives would rather students don't attend University... After all, you don't want them to turn into "elitist" intellectuals now, do you? We always knew Conservatives don't give a hoot about education, and have always been adversarial to what they term the educated "elite". This move by Harper simply reflects the Conservative fear of the "elite". We know they'd rather have a "dumbed-down", US-style population fed a constant barrage of "action movies" and "action TV", interspersed with lots of sports and advertising, that they can simply manipulate with "Fox-like" news and "hot-button" politics.

It's all part of the Conservative "action-plan" - coming directly from their neo-Con Republican buddies, and their partners in the "New American Century" bunch... For Conservatives/conservatives, educated citizens are dangerous. You can't simply let the "television culture" and their religion drive them. They ask questions. They "think" for themselves. Education is the conservative's biggest fear, and greatest enemy.

Here's the complete Goodale write-up... Worth a read:

WEEKLY COMMENTARY

By Ralph Goodale, M.P.

MILLENNIUM SCHOLARSHIPS BENEFIT THOUSANDS

In the late 1990’s, the Government of Canada decided to mark the upcoming “turn of the millennium” in the Year 2000 with a new federal investment in higher education. Thus was born the “Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation”.

Fully transparent and at arm’s length from the government, the Foundation was endowed with $2.3 billion. Its mandate was to provide outstanding young Canadians with meaningful financial assistance in pursuit of their post-secondary studies.

The Foundation has offered a wide variety of bursaries, scholarships and other awards based upon each applicant’s achievements in leadership, social innovation, academic performance and community service. To date, more than 800,000 students have received support.

The selection process is guided by an independent board of distinguished Canadians drawn from across the country.

Saskatchewan young people have been major beneficiaries.

During the Foundation’s nine-year tenure, close to 3,000 students in my Wascana Constituency have received over $8 million in Millennium funding. Across Saskatchewan, more than 32,000 – from every walk of life – have benefited from nearly $92 million in Millennium awards.

But despite this program’s proven success, it has only one year left to run, and then it is being cancelled by the Stephen Harper’s Conservatives – with no replacement.

The “new” money which Mr. Harper claims to be investing in post-secondary education is not “new” at all. It is taken from existing programs like the Millennium Foundation and others.

So in absolute terms, there is little incremental federal support for higher learning across Canada. Mr. Harper is just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Such an approach is extremely short-sighted. Additional federal Transfers to provinces, a more sensitive student loan system, and new direct grants to students should not cause the Millennium Foundation to be killed.

All of these tools are, in fact, needed.

Conservative Anti-Immigrant Antics Continue

There was an "apology" announced a few days ago... Anyone recall it? Hear about it? It wasn't like the apology to the Chinese for the "head tax". It wasn't like the apology to interred Ukrainian Canadians (during WW2). It wasn't like the apology to Japanese Canadians. Somewhere a lone messenger from Parliament Hill sneakily spoke to Indian Canadian groups (mostly Sikhs) and indicated there would be an "apology" for the Komagata Maru incident.

For those unfamiliar with this episode in Canadian history: After serving in the British Imperial Indian Army Indian soldiers returning from serving were channeled across Canada to begin their trek to India via the Pacific. These soldiers saw the beauty and potential of Canada and wanted to return. The (Liberal) government of the day had bowed to conservative perception and pressure and caved in to allow for a law which - at the time - prevented anyone from immigrating to Canada, who could not make it with one "continuous journey". This law basically dis-allowed anyone from Africa or South Asia from immigrating to Canada. It was carefully worded, so as not to appear to discriminate, because the Commonwealth was supposed to be "open" to immigration between it's member nations. The law was fought and overturned in court. When this happened, a group of enterprising Indians chartered a Japanese ship - the Komagata Maru - and sailed it laden with Indian passengers, from Hong Kong to Vancouver. By the time the ship arrived in Vancouver, the government had hastily reworded the law to circumvent the court ruling, and sent police/troops to keep the unwanted Indians from landing. Onboard the Komagata Maru, many became sick... some died. Eventually the ship set sail back to India, where - to add further insult to injury - British police beat and imprisoned many of the passengers.

One has to understand the prevailing mood of the country - and of the world - in those days, to understand how this law would have been taken. Conservative opposition members were angered that the law did not go far enough, and that the wording had to be clearly anti-immigrant. They also apparently wanted to go further - against Eastern Europeans, etc. It was difficult for any party to stand up for the rights of immigrants or would be immigrants. Immigration was also a fairly recent concept worldwide - so it wasn't a "worldwide norm" to welcome foreigners with open arms. Societies also tended to fear and ridicule foreigners. This was the case worldwide - not just in Canada. So, while the measures seem draconian, they are looked back upon now the same way that segregated washrooms in the US are looked back on, or how some peoples' views on same-sex marriage may be perceived 80 years from now. Here are the words of the BC Premier of the day:

To admit orientals in large numbers would mean in the end the extinction of the white peoples and we have always in mind the necessity of keeping this a white man's country. -- Sir Richard MacBride, Premier of British Columbia at that time.

Here is an excerpt from a book by noted Indian scholar Kushwant Singh regarding the Komagata Maru incident:

"The leaders of the Keep the Indian Out school were members of the Conservative Party, notably Mr. H.H. Stevens, Member of Parliament for Vancouver, and members of provincial legislature, Messers C.E. Tisdall and Dr. Maguire, and the Mayor of Vancouver, Mr. Baxter. They provided the solid citizen backing to the Immigration Department headed by Mr. Reid, who had equipped himself with special staff to deal with Indian immigrants.

Reid's right hand man was William Hopkinson, who had served in the Punjab police and had a smattering of Punjabi. Hopkinson had in his payroll group of Indians who kept him informed of the immigrant organizations. The chief informer was an ex-soldier, Bela Singh from Hoshiarpur. By virtue of his association with the immigration department Bela Singh was able to influence them to deal with each case individually. For some time before the arrival of Komagata Maru, Bela Singh and Hopkinson had been able to augment their income by charging regular fees to have the applications of the immigrants favourably considered.

In this hostile atmosphere the Indians were persuaded by their Counsel, Mr Bird, to go to a Canadian court and try out the validity of the new Orders in Council. On May 28, a full bench of Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the new Orders of Council effectively barred the courts from interferring with the decisions of the Immigration Department. (In re Munshi Singh No. 20 of 1914 British Columbia Law reports, p243)

The doors of justice was thus finally slammed in the face of the Indians.

The next step was to order the ship out of Canadian waters. The passangers committee took control of the ship from Capt. Yamemoto and his Japanese crew. On July 4th, an armed Canadian police force of 120 men aboard the tugboart, Sea Lion, tried to overpower the passengers committee. Mr Stevens accompanied this force. The passengers kept the policemen at bay fighting with nothing better than rock-coal and staves made out of driftwood floating in the Burrard inlet. The failure of Sea Lion picqued the Canadian police, particularly Mr. Stevens, who used his influence to get the cruiser, Rainbow, and the army brought into operation.

On the night of July 21st, the Rainbow with 150 blue-jackets on board, slipped into the Burrard inlet alongside Komagata Maru. In the morning the helpless passangers woke up to find guns of the warship trained on them from one side and the entire harbor lined with local militia and units of Irish Fusiliers and Seaforth Highlanders on the other."

Societies modernize their values over time. 100 years ago most Christian Canadians would have looked in scorn upon someone who didn't show up at church on a given Sunday... Women were treated as "chattle"... and lynchings occurred openly in the US South - while the KKK roamed the Canadian prairies and actually had input into government policy in Alberta. The most conservative elements of society then - as now - were the most vocally anti-foreigner. Some took it as far as violence. So... the world was a different place back then, and one cannot compare the actions of the government of the day with today's standards. You can, however, request an apology for the actions - especially an honest, heart-felt, and well-explained and vocalized apology coming from the most conservative elements of society - as it was people of their ilk who created the draconian conditions of the past to "conserve" their "lifestyle".

For years South Asian groups have worked on getting an apology from successive Canadian governments. Mulroney didn't care because he had very little South Asian support. Cretien's people probably looked at two factors: 1) South Asians by and large supported the Liberal Party, and 2) They were worried about all apologies due to the worry that after a formal apology (which they wanted to make) the groups would ask for financial reparations as well. We saw that debate occur with the "head tax" issue, and the Ukrainian incarceration matter - as well as the Residential School debate. The biggest hold back was reparations (or potential reparations) in a climate where funds were being slashed from programs (the 90s), while a very populist and anti-immigrant opposition could easily play on people's fears and play up a government cutting programs, while "paying" a minority group for something that happened almost 100 years ago. Mr. Martin's government had very little time to meet with groups from the community - let alone act.

Along come Harper's NeoCons. They have a background of stirring up anti-immigrant hostility. They were known to back the campaign against Sikhs wearing turbans in the RCMP (some openly - like particularly well-known "law-and-order" Calgary MPs). They were guilty of numerous anti-immigrant statements during election campaigns. Jason Kenney - a current Minister - went as far as to comment about "hot-headed" Sikhs "playing the race card" because of his anger at potentially losing control of a nomination battle in Ontario.

The Harper-cons are pretty open about their "courtship" of the "minority vote" (the word "vote" is critical here, as this is all they're after - they don't really believe in any minority issues). Polling has shown Stevie and the boys (and it is mainly "boys") that they need to break into the South and East Asian vote to have a hope of gaining a majority. They need that vote to break into the "cities". They've tried a lot of measures to do so. They have courted community leaders with promises of "grandeur" and "recognition". Some have succumbed. The Cons understand what it means to have a few community leaders in their pocket. They are aware of the networks that extend from that. More recently the Cons have talked up "immigration changes" which are supposed to increase immigration, when they are actually a veiled way to limit family class immigrants and permanent immigrants (because conservatives don't want them), in favor of "temporary workers".

So how does Harper approach this attempt at taking some of the vaunted "minority vote" without angering his "base" (hard-right)? He does it so quietly that no-one notices. It's not an apology - no - it's a bloody insult! What's the purpose of an apology if the entire country doesn't know, and more importantly, does not know WHY? While millions of Canadians know about Japanese interment, hardly anyone knows about the Komagata Maru. That knowledge is part and parcel of any REAL apology. The government's duty is to make the public aware of the grievance, as the origins of the grievance were publicly driven.

And how does Harper present his apology? To add insult to injury, he sends Jason Kenney - yes, the same Jason Kenney of the "hothead Sikhs/race card" comments to quietly convey the message to affected communities. He came out here to Surrey, BC. to meet with Sikh leaders. He also went elsewhere across Canada speaking to small groups of South Asians. No big media blitz. No explanations. Just a quiet, basically hidden apology.

Stephen Harper can keep his apology - or apparent lack of it. When you ask a child to apologize, you ask them to say it with meaning. To apologize and MEAN IT. Also, to recognize WHY they are apologizing. Here we have a government that is apologizing for votes, while forgetting why, and more importantly, destroying any reason "why" by continuing to push policy that is anti-immigration and anti-minority.

What a sham. Mr. Harper, you know where you can stick your apology.

WesternGrit - on behalf of a large and vocal contingent of South Asians from Greater Vancouver.

Anti-Immigrant Conservatives Continue With Their Not-so-secret Agenda

Looking at this story coming out of the committee rooms on Parliament today, it becomes pretty clear that the Conservatives are continuing in the same anti-immigrant bent they began as Reformers and the Alliance.

The immigration minister HAD to admit today that, "In terms of dealing with the backlog, the first thing we have to do is limit the intake before we can reduce it." That statement alone still makes it sound like they're focused on reducing the backlog - as long as you don't talk about the "limit" on the intake. When you take into account the following facts, it becomes even more certain just what the Conservatives are attempting to do:

"In 2006, the Conservative government admitted 10,500 fewer permanent residents than the previous Liberal government, and 25,500 fewer in 2007 when only 236,689 permanent residents came to Canada. The Conservative government has actually cut the total number of permanent residents that would have been admitted to Canada over the last two years by 36,000.

However, in an attempt to cover up these facts, the Minister misled the House of Commons on March 14, 2008, when she stated during Question Period that "this Conservative government welcomed more immigrants to Canada than has been done in almost 100 years."

The Minister went on to mislead the House of Commons again on April 4, 2008, when she claimed: "That is why we were able to welcome 430,000 new Canadians last year to this country, the highest in over 100 years."

In fact, when testifying before the House of Commons Finance Committee on April 28, 2008, the Minister admitted her government is “deliberately blurring the line between permanent and temporary so as to meet the needs of our economy.” (LPC Newsfeed)

The facts speak for themselves. These Conservatives are being extremely conservative (as usual) in their approach to immigration. Facts like these will find their way into the ethnic media. Good on Minister Findlay for actually being honest about something. It took an appearance before a Parliamentary Committee before she did it, but she did come clean.

Whatever Happened To "Support Our Troops"?

To illustrate how shallow and political the Cons are, one just has to look at how they constantly use the military to justify their own ends ("Support The Troops", etc., etc.), yet pilloried one of Canada's most distinguished Generals and experts on child soldiers yesterday. To say you "support" the troops, then to disparage the man who - being a senior officer - knows more about the military, war, fighting, insurgencies, and child soldiers. In addition to his many years of leadership in the military, General Dallaire was actually ON THE GROUND with a very skeletal group of soldiers defending innocent civilians in a civil war. He - along with his troops - actually had their lives threatened many times. He had his sleeves rolled up, and was "in the trenches" with his troops - not some "corporate pencil-pusher" General who was simply looking for the media spotlight (as some are known to do).

Mr. Dion has to ensure that Sen. Dallaire WILL NOT be censured for anything the Conservatives are trying to make the media perceive as being "out of place". The general spoke very openly and honestly about Canada abetting the breaking of international laws in covering up the illegal detention and torture of civilians - including our own.

As for Jason Kenney's yipping, as Liberal Hearts and Minds put it, the Cons like to invent their own outrage. General Dallaire is an exemplary Parliamentarian and was an exemplary soldier. For the General to say something disparaging the military would be to criticize himself. How idiotic are these Cons to believe that they can push that one over on the public?

Time to Support Our Troops - especially a soldier who understands the inner workings of the military better than anything any politician or civilian - or even front line soldier - would ever know.

Wanna Win An Election?

Forget a "carbon tax". We can keep the gas tax (and divert it to cities as we had promised in 2006). The bottom line is: oil companies want to (read: HAVE to) operate in Canada. We have them by the figurative "short and curlies". There must be a price for them to operate in Canada. A price that the Saudi's extract, the Kuwaiti's extract, heck, all of OPEC extracts... Cheap gas for their residents.

The Liberal promise should be this: We will control gas prices domestically. We've a population smaller than the state of California. We can be granted this by Big Oil - in exchange for access to (read: "exploitation of") resources which BELONG TO THE CANADIAN PEOPLE.

If the foreign oil companies don't like it, there are plenty of smaller CANADIAN companies ready to earn billions exploiting our resource.

Yes, we would still regulate pollutants - and ensure that along with the provinces we extract fines and fees associated with VERY STRICT federal pollution standards. The KEY however will be the control of gas prices. Oil companies will still profit (hell yeah, we know how much they make on a barrel or liter). It will be the price they pay to access our resource.

What would the political fallout be? Well, some oil companies MAY not donate to the federal Liberals anymore - but we're trying to get away from corporate donors anyway. A lot of people working for Big Oil won't vote for us... Yeah right - like they do right now anyway! We may lose a seat in Alberta... Oh wait! We DON'T HAVE ANY SEATS IN ALBERTA! Besides, we may earn votes from those - particularly in urban areas - who don't work for Big Oil. We could actually GAIN seats in urban Alberta!

What other political ramifications would there be? How about cheaper gas EVERYWHERE in Canada. Guaranteed by the federal government. Real action for a real problem. Our transport industry would be ecstatic. Commodity prices would come down, as the cost to transport them across this land would come down.

What is the purpose of "owning" a resource IF OUR PEOPLE DON'T BENEFIT? It is the DUTY of our federal governments to ensure resources are mined/drilled/extracted with the benefit of the population in mind - not to line the pockets of mega-billionaire industrialists from the US. We have greater oil reserves than the US. We have almost what the Saudis do - some say even more... Know what the Saudis pay at the pump? It'll sicken you. Go to Bahrain, Dubai, UAE, Kuwait (yeah, the country where the man and material cost of drilling is WAY higher than Canada - I'm talking about the cost in lives and military hardware). All these nations benefit from ridiculously low gas prices.

What about the environment? With the economic stimulus provided by cheap fuel, the gov't will be awash in funds... These funds would be used to provide strong incentives to be green. REAL tax breaks for buying fuel efficient vehicles (which would also stimulate the auto industry). Levies on "gas-pigs" - SUVs (which are not "work vehicles"), while ensuring that pickups (the lifeblood of farms and small business) are made more fuel efficient (We could ban the sale of non-hybrid, or non-clean-diesel pickups, and tax-rebate back the cost difference of hybrids to consumers). Tax breaks or grants for retrofitting your home with better insulation, solar, or geo-thermal heat. This would immediately benefit the construction industry (which is seeing a home building slow-down). Some of the federal funds (all the fuel tax funds) would be channeled to urban areas, and would have to be earmarked for REAL fuel saving projects, such as: transit systems which people can actually use to get to work, transit-only lanes, more car-pool lanes. All these incentives and levies would have the same (or better) net effect of higher fuel prices - without the associated slow-down in the economy.

So... do we want to guarantee an election victory? Are we bold? Do we want to join the ranks of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and other OPEC countries in receiving the benefits WE DESERVE for our resources? Resources OWNED BY THE CANADIAN PEOPLE? Let's see what the voters think. We should be pleasantly rewarded.

Testing The Empathy Of The Harper Cons

Another day, another global disaster. We've already seen the painfully inadequate response by the West to the disaster in Myanmar - simply because of the orientation of the Myanmar government (yes, they're a bunch of evil "dick"-tators, we all do agree). It will be interesting to see if Harper and his angry band of haters do anything for China that amounts to more than a token. Jimmy Karygiannis, Liberal MP, is leading the charge with Canadian Chinese groups to see if the Harpocrytes will increase funding for disaster relief - or if they will cling to their anti-Chinese policies.

It is wrong to play with human lives simply because you disagree with their government's ideology. To do so is just as evil as the evils that government perpetrates.

The NeoCons have demonstrated time and time again, that they value angrily adhering to their ideology more than they value human life - particularly Developing World lives. The Harper/Reform motto of course has always been: "If you're brown, yellow or black, you better step back, Jack..." These clowns have never been humanitarians, carers, or "givers". It's just not in their conservative - particularly NeoCon - philosophy. The believe in the "everyone takes care of themselves approach" - "no hand up, that's too much like a hand-out". They shamelessly use their ideological bent to attempt to marginalize anyone they don't like, or who disagrees with them. Unless, that is, there's something in it for them - like oil, or financial investments/gain.

I'm hoping I'm wrong, but we're all probably right... Getting real action on these global disasters from this government will be like pulling teeth. Remember, these are the very same Reformers who used to lambaste the Liberal governments of Cretien and Martin for their foreign aid, CIDA, and aid to Africa. Door-knocking in Sask and AB, I remember the repetitive Reformer refrain of, "what the hell are we doing sending money to Africa... Keep it here". These people never understood the repercussions of NOT sending foreign aid: famine, crime and terrorism, and eventually, refugees - who we have to take care of anyways. Small-mindedness or narrow-mindedness has never allowed the conservative thinking to evolve beyond their "me first" mentality.

Here's to hope.

Myanmar Relief - Western Altruism Lacking?

I'm astonished at how the West seems to be playing games with the Myanmar government on the disaster relief issue. Anyone else feel the same way? When the tsunami struck most of Southeast Asia, we had an immediate jump to support the nations. In particular, nations like Thailand (long time American allies) were quick to get aid... no matter how corrupt local officials are in those nations (and, yes, they certainly ARE corrupt). Ditto for Sri Lanka... extreme corruption. Since these nations operate under the "guise" of democracy, or at least have "friendships" with Western nations, the US and others were very quick to pump in the aid.

Before going any farther, I do have to say that Burma/Myanmar has a deplorable regime. Something needs to be done about it. The point is, however, many other nations who openly receive our aid cannot account for where the aid goes, and STILL receive it. We send billions of dollars of "foreign aid" and disaster assistance to shady African and South American governments. The thing is, very often, we are either sending to "friendly" governments, or we are trying to curry favor.

So what's with the hold-up for Burma? Why let food aid rot on the docks? Yes, we all understand they don't want our people in there distributing the aid. Why would they? Like any relatively closed nation, they are afraid that they would be spied on - in particular with nations who don't consider them as allies. Still, wouldn't it be a kind gesture - to help break the ice - if the West were to say, "we will provide assistance". We say we fear that the government will use the aid to control it's population. Wouldn't they be committing political suicide if they withhold the most basic human necessity? Starving people would topple the regime quickly... Even military regimes have to fear their people - perhaps even more so.

To truly reach out to dying and suffering peoples of the world, we should not hold ideology, or religion, or race, or nationality stand in our way. We should show our Western piety and altruism, and deliver the goods. An act of kindness would certainly wake people up - even in that closed government... Maybe we need to rethink our "conditional" aid...

New Harper Defense Plan

So the Prime Minister is deciding to re-announce his 1-2yr old running defense plans today. Good for him. I guess when conservatives run out of ideas they either a) steal them from the opposition, or b) re-issue old plans.

While a concerted plan of replacement and augmentation of the forces is a good idea, there are serious concerns as to the dubious nature of the (current) government's intentions for the military. The long-term plan has to be looked at seriously. Militaries tend to like "capital" equipment (ships, tanks, airplanes - the jet-fighter variety). They like "sexy" toys that make them feel military-like.

What the Forces actually need today are tools to help fight insurgents, quell uprisings, and maintain urban combat for protracted periods. They need tools for mountain combat, gear for infantry to be operational in hazardous conditions (gas, toxins, etc.). The military also needs tools to keep the peace - including better education (in particular, in how to deal with local populations), better psy-ops, better training in counseling victims of war and disasters.

While maintenance of our forces, is a good thing, as the Opposition, we have to question attempts by Harper to "marry our forces" to the US equipment. As it stands right now, a LOT of the new hardware the Conservatives are buying is inextricably linked to American weapons platforms and systems. While Harper claims: "Harper said having a long-term plan for stable funding will create jobs and opportunities for tens of thousands of Canadians who work in the defence industry and communities with military bases", we have to be concerned that these contracts are going to mainly end up with American firms and American workers.

It is quite apparent that the Cons want a "macho" army, with all the "cool toys" they can get their hands on. We need to make sure they invest in what the army needs - not what looks cool and lets them play with the big boy they want to play with (the US Army). Careful investment - especially in this time of economic uncertainty - is very important. It is also perhaps not quite the time to add even more funding to the military - besides what is required for the job they are doing right now, and to maintain for yearly turnover. It appears the conservatives are trying to sneak some spending by - using the excuse of "our troops need it" - even though the stuff they are buying is "long term". Not sure if this falls in the domain of "fiscal prudence". I think many of us would prefer to see money saved for the "rainy day fund", or spent on shoring up infrastructure and economic assistance measures... at this point. Once we're clear of the US recession, then by all means, move forward.

"People's Private Lives Are None Of Your Business" (Bernier)

Maxime Bernier, on answering questions about his "biker gang-linked" ex-girlfriend:

“People’s private lives are none of your business,” Bernier told the House, garnering a standing ovation and chumly pats on the back from Conservative members around him.

Ahead of the debate, Prime Minister Stephen Harper dismissed the reports as irrelevant to government business, calling Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe "gossipy old busybodies."

"I hear one of my cabinet ministers has an ex-girlfriend," Harper said. "It’s none of my business. It's none of Mr. Duceppe's business. It's none of Mr. Dion's business."

Remember that line when the Cons come asking to ban abortion, or religious rights of minorities, or continue to use "racial profiling" at border crossings, or choose to smoke pot in the confines of their own homes, etc., etc.

More Accountability, or More "Invisibility"?

Stephen Harper came to power (along with some other MPs, who we don't see or hear much from) on the pretense of more accountability than previous governments. Two years under Harper rule, or "Harper Rulz", we are not seeing any of the accountability promised. We are actually seeing secrecy, closed doors, and the death of freedom of information itself. What went wrong? Or, for Mr. Harper, what went right?

NeoCon/Republican campaign experts brought Harper to power through the magic of a buy-able media. Never has Canada seen as inept a group of yahoos try to run the nation. Ill-qualified, uneducated, and without creativity (sworn to the mantra of the NeoCon "bible"), the massive ad campaign and smear of innocent Liberals (see the bogus attempts to discredit Cretien, Goodale, etc.) was able to bring these "less than the best for the job" people to the big show.

It is becoming apparent now, that Conservative strategists were told by their foreign advisers that "playing more righteous" can come back to bite you in the ass. Instead, the strategy became to HIDE everything and anything from the public eye. Your MPs are a bunch of racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice bumpkins? Gag them. You are quoted attacking Canada, and calling it a "Northern European Welfare State"? Deny it. Confuse the public with Quebecscam/Adscam. You talk about immigrants living in ghettos in Western Canada... Say you were "mis-quoted", or better, try the new-fangled, "I misspoke"... Yeah... that's the ticket. You want to break election laws, and all rules of Parliamentary accountability (mailers, spending, patronage appointees, etc., etc.)? Just create the "Accountability Act"... The very fact that you created it will make everyone think you're all about accountability and integrity. Don't want people to find out what you've done while in power? Get rid of the Co-ordination of Access to Information Requests System (CAIRS).

You can't be called "unaccountable" or "dishonest" and "lacking integrity", if no-one can find out you were. The old Liberal government of Cretien, then later, Martin, were very open, and becoming increasingly more open. Being so open led to the visibility of the whole "adscam affair". Sure the PMO had power, but it was different power. It was power to exercise party discipline (a good idea when wanting to present a CLEAR MESSAGE to voters). Harper's PMO is more about power itself. It's about breaking down Canada's traditional institutions, about attacking and destroying the bureaucracy. It's about making sure MPs hide the party's true feelings - not say things the party doesn't agree with. Most importantly, Harper's PMO is all about hiding information from Canadians.

Harper's strategy is simply to "not get caught". If you don't get caught, they think, no-one will know you lack accountability and integrity altogether.

Lucky for Canadians, someone is calling attention to these facts. We just hope the media doesn't continue to turn a blind eye, while they continue to dub Harper the "master strategist". To be honest, the "master strategist" mis-nomer is probably in place because the media is as shocked as anyone else about Harper's ascent to power - after being written off only a couple of years ago. Goes to show, the public will buy it, as long as tons of money, foreign advisers, and a media looking for sensationalism and creating stories (rather than just reporting the news) are around.

Keep up the good work fellow bloggers. At some point the "so-called" journalists will turn on their "owned" corporate masters, and actually begin practicing their profession. Journalists have "clubs", however it is too bad they don't have some sort of authoritative body like the Law Societies, Medical Boards, etc. For a group that can change so much in the public forum, and can impact so many lives, it's a wonder there isn't a professional body that helps them maintain integrity better. Before I get skewered by my reporter friends, I just want to point out that I'm referring mainly to journalists who get hoodwinked into "editorializing" then have their "owners" paint the piece as a "news" story...

Why Not Now: Hon. Ralph Goodale Presents A Succinct Perspective

A lot of us have been going back on forth on these blogs, debating the right time for an election. I've been on both sides on the issue. It would be good to wait a bit to hear more about Conservative scandals and corruption, but it would also be good to pull the plug on the matter of the immigration secret agenda Harper has tried to slip into law.

James Curran has a very interesting take on whether there will be an election this Spring, or not (well worth reading)...

I received one of Ralph Goodale's "Weekly Commentary" emails today. I was going to "quote" from it, but decided to just post the whole thing lock, stock, and two smokin' barrels... Ralph does a really good job verbalizing the Liberal position, and highlights why having A strategy, is more important than firing off "non-confidence" votes like the Dippers. A party that aspires to power has good reasons to employ some strategy, and also has to realize that the public trust is more important than just a "media-attention-grab" vote of non-confidence.

Here's the Hon. Ralph Goodale's take (put succinctly - as only Ralph is known to do):

WHEN TO END THIS MINORITY PARLIAMENT?

For more than a year now, Stephen Harper’s minority Conservative government has been trying to engineer its own defeat on a long string of “confidence votes” in the House of Commons.

They clearly want a fast election – before voters become more familiar with the worsening scandals that are exposing Conservative corruption, and before the economic slowdown in Ontario and Quebec becomes an outright recession, exposing Conservative incompetence.

But to date, the government’s trickery has failed, because the Liberal Official Opposition has exercised disciplined, strategic patience. We have refused to be suckered into every technical opportunity to vote “no confidence”.

Why? Because we want to make sure that the issue and the timing ultimately selected for an election will line up with what Canadians want – not just reshuffling the status quo, but actually changing the government. Otherwise, what’s the point?

That’s how Liberals in this Parliament are different from the NDP.

We don’t want a permanent role in Opposition, while such a role is all the NDP can hope for. Unlike the NDP, the Liberal strategy in Parliament will not only force the Harper government into an election, but also result in that government being replaced. Liberals can do that; New Democrats cannot.

Three factors are coming together to create a compelling rationale for change.

First, there’s that disturbing pattern of unethical Conservative behaviour which reinforces a strong feeling that this government cannot be trusted.

Secondly, Mr. Harper’s short-sighted and ideological mismanagement of the economy has destroyed Canada’s fiscal security and is bringing the nation to the brink of an unacceptable deficit.

Third, Liberals are laying out a generous, ambitious vision for Canada’s future – all within the bounds of fiscal responsibility – providing powerful reasons to vote for a new government, and not just against the old one.

What The F@&#??? Cons Disparage Pillar Of Our Democracy

Who the hell do these dangerous nutjobs think they are? What the Conservatives did yesterday in Parliament was akin to what shady dictators do around the world to grab power... These arrogant fools have repeatedly attacked any institution that seems to contradict them or their views. This is reminiscent of some acts of "manufactured crisis" that have been witnessed around the world, prior to military coups, or dictatorial take-overs... Burning of houses of assembly, marginalizing of parts of the population, making light of dangerous national unity situations, etc., etc.

Certainly these idiots that attempt to govern don't intend to install a dictatorship, but their complete lack of respect for the institutions that make up this country is frightening. Their very skewed world-view leads them to believe that their way is the only way (right wing, no compromise), and that anyone that isn't completely with them is against them.

Many bloggers - including myself - have blogged about the Conservatives' ulterior motives. Until they took power it was just speculation, but they have time and time again proved us right. It is our job to convey this very frightening message to the Canadian public... Canada, as we know it, is under threat. It's not Al Quaida, or "terrorists", or China, or some other foreign power. No... Canada is under siege from within... From neoCon fifth-columnists who will stop at nothing to destroy the fabric of this great land. It is NEVER right to allow the left or right to contort democracy too greatly, but this is exactly what is beginning to happen here. Our democracy - which is rooted in public responsibility and accountability - is slowly being eroded so it can be sold off to corporate and foreign interests.

Time to wake up Canada!

OUR Oil

Some bloggers today have put forth some interesting arguments regarding "to carbon tax, or not to carbon tax". I'm in favor of measures to help our environment, but I think we need to rethink the whole "oil deal". We tend to approach these discussions with the mindset that the oil belongs to the oil companies, and they are "making" the gasoline and giving it to us. I think we need to take the view that much of the world (Saudis, China, Russia, etc.) take with their oil - ie - that it is OUR OIL. Big oil simply comes in and refines it for us.

Now to put that into perspective. Imagine you have a garden. A landscaping company wants to come in and "prune your trees" and "mow your lawn". Now this is very well something you can do on your own, but you concede that you "don't have the time". So, you hire the company, thinking it will be a reasonable cost, and your yard will be beautiful. You come home and find, however, that your trees are gone, your veggies have all been dug up, your lawn is now a private golf course with "brought to you by XYZ Landscapers" billboards, and the lawn jockeys are sitting in your driveway selling you your vegetables at a nice mark-up. You are upset, but deep down inside you're kind of happy not to have to do the work yourself. Besides, all the neighbors are doing it. The landscaping company also happens to be a part of a conglomerate that indicated your giving them access to your yard means their "home security division" will provide you lo-cost security.

This is basically what has occurred to us vis-a-vis OUR OIL.

That oil belongs to you and me. It surprises me how many of the general public treat the oil as something the oil company provides.

These money-grubbing leeches (yeah, I love BIG oil) cajoled successive federal and provincial governments into rights to resources on vast tracts of land to make mega-trillion dollar profits over the years. Now when times are tough, and we have an economy that is seeing inflation and stagnation, and gasoline is a key contributing factor, expect BIG oil to sit back and do nothing. Actually - correction - they will do something - they will spend countless millions advertising to ensure that people like Albertans will think those companies look out for their best interests. You'll see citizens who may not even work for big oil agreeing to the blatant raping of Canadian consumers.

Yes, BIG oil will cry and say, "but we developed your industry. We found your oil". Oh really? I suppose they also created it. When the commodity itself is worth so much, you don't need a mega-rich FOREIGN (emphasis on foreign) conglomerate coming in to "assist" us in getting it out of the ground.

It's like having a garden, but letting ridiculously highly paid lawncare pros come into your back yard, harvest it, then resell your tomatoes to you, at a nice profit (to justify paying for the employees earning 100,000-plus, plus, plus, per year).

We need to be a LOT tougher as a government, and also institute price controls in the oil sector to ensure that a vital commodity is available to the very people who own it - the Canadian people. Yanks will still come here to find some of the safest oil in the world - no matter the price. We also need to have an "export price" and a "domestic price" to give Canadians some of the benefits of the oil. Keep the taxes where they are (yes the Cons will argue agains the taxes, but the taxes create our only legacy from the oil currently - the highways, bridges, etc.). A controlled and regulated "domestic price" will be fair. Heck, it won't hurt the companies at all, considering our population is less than California's (one state), and we own less cars.

We would regulate pollution as well, and need to ensure that the oil companies pay for the damage to the environment - more importantly, ensuring the damage doesn't happen in the first place.

Regulation is a tough one. We can't expect local or provincial governments to be responsible. Yes, resources are partially provincial, BUT, it's too easy for a provincial government to see itself as "owned" by the oil cos... just take a look at some semi-arid Western provinces... Regulation has to be a federal duty. The federal government HAS to look out for the best interests of ALL Canadians - not just the ones who happen to live in an oil-rich province. Environmental protection will be huge part of the regulation. We will have to be tough on the industry that for many years has treated our beautiful landscape as a dumping ground. We need to protect our water too, as so many hundreds of thousands of liters of fresh water are pumped through each oil well daily... and we watch while rivers like the Bow run dry... The oil industry will need to right these wrongs before they come for more. They will still come, however, as paying a little more is still better than paying a lot more AND getting shot at in the Middle East.

Our nation is a vast one, and we rely heavily on fossil fuels for heating and transport across our vast distances. We need to ensure the growth of our land - while we continue to take measures to protect the environment. Real government regulation is the key.

Why We Don't Care For People Like Harper...

Some nice work by fellow BC Bloggers (Mound of Sound, Woman At Mile 0, etc.) in beginning to assemble a "picture" of the Stephen Harper we all fear and hate.  I urge all bloggers to put down their thoughts on why people with Harper's neoCon mindset cannot be trusted, and are BAD for this country.

I've written a lot on what I think about Harper, but here's a comment I left for "Mound of Sound":

"Mound: This is fantastic stuff. You (and/or your partner) have basically outlined Stephen Harper, Bush-Cheney, and the entire neoCon movement. I'd say your comments should really be a part of speaking points for every Liberal MP - and every Liberal Party member.

I agree with you precisely. My greatest fear is Harpo's techniques - along with the complicit media (they would just discredit the CBC as being lefty-Liberal appointees) - would destroy Canada's "management infrastructure" to such a point that we would have no alternative than to join a stronger union with the US, or allow for corporate hegemony to get out of it.

We need to continue getting our message out - we are in more dire times than people know (even the "think-they're-neoCons" who vote Con, but don't even fit into the category of people who would benefit from conservative policy - ie - "the Heartland farmers")."

We're seeing a time in Canadian politics where a lot of people are not thinking about why they vote for a person or party.  The Conservatives and Stephen Harper BOTH need to be defined.  The continuing scams and scandals involving this government are a good framework, however, it is more important that these ideologues get put in their place based on their simplistic ideology - rather than a scandal.  Canadians did not reject Liberal values and principles when they gave the Cons a slight minority government in 2006 - they voted against a scandal that was blown way out of proportion by both media and opposition.  While it is important that people retain the right to punish their elected officials through the ballot, it needs to be done carefully - and after considering what they accept or reject along with the seeming impropriety.  

This Is How We Shovel The BS...

Okay guys... all together now...

Yup, Bush is showing the "wanna-be" cowboy how real cowboys shovel the $hit...

We must say, they've gotten pretty good at it too... even had the media fooled... until the cops show up with search warrants...

This would make a pretty good election ad, wouldn't it?

"Stephen Harper wants to keep feeding you something... But honest, hard-working Canadians just won't be fooled again..."

Talk about not having the foresight to limit photo-ops when they present you in a poor light!

"Con-fidence" Poster... A Little Fun With Photoshop...

(Follow the link in the image to source)

Everyone recalls the "Libranos" posters the Cons were flouting in 05/06... Well, I don't have the time to photoshop this beaut, but someone please take a moment or two, and get this done up... I can see Harper, Flaherty, Baird, and maybe Geiorgous (sp?) gracing this poster - with "Con-Fidence" along with the CPC logo emblazoned on it.

I have the resources to print these... Any takers? (Obviously giving credit to whomever has the copyrights)...

The Party of Nationbuilding: Time To Build

With the recent revelations (well, not really revelations to those of us who knew all along), we have to fear there is going to be an increased public perception of dishonesty in politics. Scratch the NDP, Greens, and even more irrelevant Bloc, the fact is the public is going to lose faith even more after this Conservative scam... More so as more facts come to light.

Something is stinky in Ottawa, and it needs to be fixed. Grumpy Voter made some good points about us not "pointing fingers" and laughing... I mean, hey, the public has fairly long memories (everyone remember Mulroney?). One thing he does forget though, is that this current Conservative scandal (one of many) taints the entire party - including the leadership. And by taint, I mean that it appears they are all involved. On the Liberal side of things, we know that Adscam was basically some members of the Quebec wing playing stupid with the rules.

So what can we do - in a positive vein - to attract voters? We can sit back and let angry Canadians slide over to us. They will. There is, however, always a fear that there is slippage to the Greens... Maybe even the Bloc in Quebec. What can we do to really stand out? I say we introduce aggressive new accountability guidelines in Ottawa. Something the NDP and Bloc would support. Talk about these being "real" measures - unlikes Harper's "lip-service/anything-to-get-elected plan". Let the Tories vote against it - THEN - we topple the government and give Canadians a choice. A choice to vote FOR something, rather than against it.

Think we can do this? Give Canadians something to vote FOR??? To be really accepted with open arms, it may be the best thing we can do for ourselves. If we don't, we may suffer in the near future as well - as the odd Quebec operative gets trotted before the courts and reminds the public of old stuff that doesn't involve the whole party - but drags us through the mud...

Sound accountability measures - maybe giving the auditor general more staff - coupled with a strong Liberal/liberal, center-of-the-road platform with a solid economic, social, and environmental plan, WILL get us elected.

Van Loan (Con MP): "In & Out" = Adscam... Hmmm...

Hope all other bloggers pick up on this and repeat it ad nauseum:

Conservative MP Peter Van Loan on a TV interview:

"But it is the same issue in that money was spent off the books in election campaigns. ..." (comparing the Conservative "In & Out" Scam to "Adscam").

Thank you Mr. Van Loan. Thank you for the admission. Let's ensure the crooks on the Conservative side are fined/charged.

ps: This overspending apparently also included PM Harper's riding...

Crooked Conservative Election Scheme Swindles Taxpayer Dollars?

Well, today we learn what some members of the media (handpicked by Conservative Party officials to be "embedded spin-recipients") probably weren't told yesterday in the series of secret meetings held around Ottawa by frightened Conservatives running rodent-like from hotel room to hotel room...

Can't wait to see Fatboy Harper spin his way out of this one.  Enough of this pig at the trough already...

So much for their feigned attempt at "goodness", and reigning in of government corruption.  Like the saying goes, the only "good" Tory is a suppository.  My only fear is Canadians will stop having any faith in "goodness" existing in Ottawa.  

Shame.

Adscam: Liberals Were Victims

Yup. Based on charges laid by the RCMP, it's turning out, more and more, that Adscam really just involved people who HAPPENED to be members of the Liberal Party of Canada (Quebec) ripping off BOTH the Liberal Party, and the government.

This is something akin to someone who happens to be a VP in some large company robbing the company along with some customers - to pad his own pockets. To color the whole organization is just plain wrong - and I think we ALL take offense to that (maybe we should sue the other parties for defamation? Class action suit anyone?) It's what happened to us in 2006. We were drive-by smeared by the Opposition because of appearances. Because the perp just happened to be a member of our party. I wonder how many crimes have been committed by members of other parties? When a Vancouver NDP MP stole a piece of jewelery from a store, did we call the entire NDP crooks? No. Not even when around the same time a senior Saskatchewan NDP MP was involved in an illegal action. What about the Cons? Obviously they're not "squeaky clean" either - based on what we're seeing recently (and have seen in the past). It's all public perception, and the timing of accusations which can bring down a government.

Senior Liberals probably knew that Gomery would find someone robbing from the Party, and from the government. This is probably why Mr. Martin was so earnestly pushing for investigation. He was as angry as any Liberal - and any Canadian - should be. We were wronged. It goes to show that a party needs to be careful of just whom they appoint to key positions. Someone's track record in business or private life needs to be looked at... not just what they've done for the party. Like every party we do unfortunately appoint/elect some flakes sometimes. We have to be careful to put forward more "selfless" individuals, and not people who are just party members for personal gain (notoriety, etc.). We should look more to life-long members for key positions (many of the "Adscam" perps were former Tories, or had also worked with the Tories - like Chuck Guite). During the "wake" of the old PC Party, many PC refugees swam over to the good ship Liberal. Many of them brought baggage. Remember, there were a lot of crooks in the old Mulroney government. When they had nowhere to go, they jumped on the Liberal Team - particularly the Martin bandwagon (many Alberta and Sask Tories worked for the Federal Liberals in the past 10 years, but are "back home" now).

So, why the "interesting" headline? Well we WERE indeed victims (the Liberal Party, that is). This is in CLEAR CONTRAST with what the Conservatives are (as it currently appears). In the recent cases of Conservative Scandal, people in the PMO were involved, and what appears to be the national party (Cadscam, "In & Out", etc.). So what does this amount to? Basically, the Liberals were blackballed over some things that never had anything to do with the Liberal Party (Income Trust Leak), or never happened ("Shawinigate"), or were gross distortions and misrepresentations ("Adscam"). However, with recent events (and some that occurred years ago - like "Cadscam"), Conservatives can never again play "holier than thou".

General Hillier's Plans

The last two governments have had a somewhat stormy relationship with General Hillier. Both the Cons and Liberals have had occasion to claim that the General's actions were partisan. Very often the differences were brought out publicly by the media.

As someone with a family past rooted in the military, I have to say that while the General was out of place many a time (and soldiers and police shouldn't be "public" figures), his intentions were always for the betterment of his army - our armed forces. Yes, he was outspoken. Yes, he got under everyone's skin sometimes - okay, a lot of times. But the good General was able to obtain for his troops the tools they needed to do their jobs. Even if it was to ensure his legacy isn't tainted, General Hillier has brought significant attention to the needs of the army in Afghanistan. As a commander of his forces, he has been a "good soldier".

What will the good General do now? Perhaps a career in politics? He was a fixture on the Hill. I recall meeting him in an elevator on the way up to the Parliamentary cafe' for lunch one day. He was all business-like. The day was the fall of the Paul Martin government, and the General must have been on his way to speak with senior government officials - to brief them - on goings-on in Afghanistan. Even on that day - a day where the future of the government was up in the air - the Liberal officials were meeting with the General, and showing concern over recent events overseas. Both Hillier, and the Liberal Government officials understood the importance of these global events... something it seems Conservatives just don't get... (considering their constant international faux pas'). It could be easy to imaging General Hillier running in the next election for one of the two major parties.

While some on these boards will criticize the General, we can most likely save that for the election. At this point it is important to respect his zeal for supporting his troops - our troops. A good soldier is one who carries out his duty faithfully, follows orders, and maintains the welfare of the troops. Expressing the will of the nation is critical too, and it would seem that General Hillier was faithfully expressing the will of this government - even when he was "hung out to dry" by Conservative denials/lies about what really happened.

RCMP Raid Conservative HeadQuarters...

Well, it seems like "Harper's Bunker" (the mega-million dollar command center the Cons built in Ottawa) couldn't hold back the forces of good... Elections Canada required RCMP assistance, BUT they did manage to get into the stronghold to obtain important information critical to proving the Cons broke Election Canada rules and Canadian Election Laws.

It remains to be seen what will come of this RCMP investigation, but it does certainly help to bring an important issue into the public spotlight.

Now wouldn't it have been good if we pulled the plug on these revisionist troglodytes a few weeks ago? Back when we had good public attention on the gay-bashing, and the regressive immigration policy these clowns brought in? Would have been great to see the RCMP march into Conservative HQ during week one of an election campaign - and talk about election "irregularities".

With all that has gone on in regards to the Conservative attacks on minorities, Cadscam, Mulroney-Schreiber-Gate, etc., and now this election "fraud" (perhaps?)... the time is ripe to "go" with a non-confidence motion. Parliament - the Canadian people - cannot continue to have confidence in a government which may not have even been legitimately elected. We know how much weight TV ads can bring to bear on campaigns.

Harper's bunker has been breached... Time for us to mass our troops and get ready for the campaign of Stephane Dion's life... The issues are: Conservative corruption and lack of integrity; Conservative attacks on minorities and the Canadian way of life; Conservative mis-management of the economy - in particular the attack on big cities and Ontario...

Jason Kenney, A Bigot? No! You're Kidding! Was He Trying To Hide NeoNazis?

As someone who lived in Calgary and Saskatchewan for many years, hearing things like this from the mouths of neo-Cons was all too common. That's why it doesn't surprise me that someone like Jason Kenney would be caught on tape bashing and stereotyping South Asians. His choice words for the Sikh community (stated pertaining to a handful of South Asians who happened to be on their board apparently) were angry, hateful, racist, and very condescending.

No matter how much the Conservatives try to curry favor with certain minority groups, and pretend they actually have a positive policy base for minorities and immigrants, their bigoted comments give away their true intentions all the time. They publicly state one thing, but then go behind closed doors and bash minorities, women, First Nations, Quebec, Ontario (well I guess that's pretty public now), the Atlantic, cities, etc. They also take part in "whisper campaigns" on the doorstep in every election.

What exactly did Kenney say? Specifically he said, "overheated Sikhs" would use "the race card" to win arguments. But it goes deeper. Much deeper. It appears that Kenney was looking to hide the fact that a candidate for the party may have been a member of the neo-Nazi Heritage Front. From Canada.com:

"Kenney and other participants on the conference call were told they must deal with a rumour that a member of the executive for the Canadian Alliance riding association in what was then known as Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale might be a member of the Heritage Front, a Canadian neo-Nazi white supremacist group. "The whole national campaign could go down on that alone," Kenney says, according to the transcript published by a magazine. Kenney then asks for more information: "Now, this notion that there's somebody tied to the Heritage Front on the executive. How do we know that and how do we know that this isn't overheated Sikhs using the race card, which they so often do when their credentials are being questioned?"

Now Kenney will claim - like all the good conservatives do - the typical bigot response - something like, "I got friends who are (insert minority here)", or "We have hundreds of (insert minority here) in our party". Well we know from his comments that the minorities are only in his party so they can be carted around to help win nominations and elections in ridings where the Conservatives otherwise wouldn't have a hope. They are manipulated with illusions of grandeur (although, for some - definitely for a few in my community - being a "big shot" is more important than the tactics or "anti-you" policies of some parties) and personal gain/notoriety, then see their members sit on the furthest back benches of power (yet often conveniently within camera shot of the Leader).

Yup, the Conservatives will trot out the "sellouts", just to try to "prove" that they're not all racists, or they're not anti-minority, etc. They'll also take a swipe at the odd Liberal or NDPer who may have made certain comments. Let them do that. If they want to go comment for comment, we could easily drag out about 95% of the anti-minority comments ever made by a politician in Canada - and attribute them all to people on the right of the political spectrum (Conservatives, Socreds, etc.).

There is a fundamental issue with the Conservative treatment of minorities. They do, however, do a pretty good job of convincing members of some minority groups that they're looking out for their best interests. They typically do this in a few ways: Assisting some key community leaders with immigration matters, then "taking back the favor" with the votes of all their kin and kith. Another common Conservative tactic is to take on "failed Liberals" (ie: members of a divided community who lost a bitter nomination battle, lost face, and now just MUST become an MP any way possible - meaning winning the Con nomination).

Regardless of how anti-minority, anti-immigrant, or anti-whatever the Cons' policies and ideology may be, they manage to get the "minority window-dressing" they need to legitimize their party. Sometimes they manage to appeal to a broader group of the minority - with focus on ideals dear to social conservatives - like draconian "law-and-order" measures, or same-sex marriage - where the Conservative take on the idea matches those of some ultra-orthodox (and extreme) members of some religious sects. While this may be one issue only - and other Conservative ideas could marginalize that community completely - they may still support the Cons to enough of an extent to win a riding.

Same old hateful Reform-Allia-Cons. So what should the Liberal response be? Well, sticking to our principles would be good, for one. If the party doesn't understand how much the immigration issue REALLY MATTERS to a core of supporters who are critical to win many urban and suburban ridings, then our "strategists" are a bunch of idiots. Here's to hoping that the "strategists" and "powers-that-be" grow some cajones and decide to vote down the ridiculous, and very frightening, Conservative changes to the immigration process.

American Rot, Part II - Regulatory & Gov't Agencies, & Big Media

Listening to the news this morning was just one more reason to avoid any US airlines when traveling this summer (or ever)... It appears FAA inspectors were harassed, bribed, and threatened when inspecting airplanes from several airlines. These inspectors had found cracks in metal and metal fatigue, faulty landing gear, electrical problems, substandard windshields, and other problems ad nauseum. The airlines response, it seems was to bribe, threaten, and make side deals with the FAA. One such encounter had an inspector warned about "losing his comfortable life" that he and "his family" enjoy so much. Another situation involved an inspector actually being fired because he didn't back down. It was finally those that take the risks to fly the subpar aircraft who stood up and complained (pilots and flight crew).

The failure of American regulators to "regulate" is an ongoing concern - especially in the past 15 or 20 years - but, has existed since the regulatory bodies were set up. The biggest challenge seems to be the "pro-corporate-giant" setup of the bodies themselves. A typical appointee to the FAA is former industry worker - often a former employee of Boeing, Lougheed, General Electric (largest manufacturer of jet engines/components), or one of the major airlines. A typical FDA adviser usually hails from the big drug cos, or from the rest of the medical industry. The list goes on. These former employees typically will have relationships within their old industry - they're usually appointed or hired BASED ON REFERRALS FROM THEIR INDUSTRY/BUSINESSES. The bodies will typically outsource a lot of their tasks to businesses who are friendly to the government and/or the industry they are regulating (after all, that is their lifeblood).

The compromising of a government agency. One that is a watchdog for civilian safety. So, when else has this happened?

FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Anyone familiar with tainted beef on US store shelves? Does anyone seem to care about the amount of hormones, steroids, and antibiotics pumped into cows, pigs, and chickens? Since when were real drumsticks the size of your whole hand??? Remember the VIOXX scandal? They were in such a rush to approve a big drug company's product, that... well, you know what happened. People died. The "ketek" scandal (ketek was an antibiotic that was improperly approved - against advice of FDA scientists). Then there was this story from a major health advisory group in the US: "The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, under sharp criticism for its drug safety behavior involving anti-inflammatory drugs, antidepressants, and the silencing of its own drug safety scientists, has been offered a new name today: the Fraud and Drug Administration. The winning name was chosen from among hundreds of entries submitted by health consumers fed up with the FDA's apparent mission to protect the profits of drug companies."

FEMA (Federal Emergency Measures). One can just say "Katrina" and leave it at that. The outsourcing in this government agency was so bad (and remember, it was run by one of Bush's arch-conservative buddies) that the following occurred (words alone can't describe this kind of crap): "The Federal Emergency Management Agency has hired Kenyon International to set up a mobile morgue for handling bodies in Baton Rouge, Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina. Kenyon is a subsidiary of Service Corporation International (SCI), a scandal-ridden Texas-based company operated by a friend of the Bush family. Recently, SCI subsidiaries have been implicated in illegally discarding and desecrating corpses. "(courtesy Miriam Rafferty - the Raw Story).

NSA/CIA/FBI (C'mon, like Sept. 11th and the Iraq invasion weren't unmitigated disasters) These agencies blew it in a big way on that day - and many days since then... They're also big "outsourcers" (to private American interests, not overseas).

What's the common thread here? Conservatives and Big Corporate greed unfettered. And why don't we hear about it? Well, first of all, all these major companies are owned by wealthy old men who seem to all be members of, or benefactors of the Conservative parties in our countries (Republicans, Conservatives elsewhere). How else do they avoid detection? NBC is owned by GE, one of the world's largest manufacturers of nuclear bombs, aircraft engines, and other large commercial and military hardware. CBS? ABC? Fox? Take a look at the paragraphs below... Several key Republicans sit on the boards of these companies. Why would they EVER bite the military-industrial-complex "hand" that feeds them??? The ROT is deeper than it first appears...

How do they influence voting and consumer opinion? How about by owning all the news?

1) GENERAL ELECTRIC --
(donated 1.1 million to GW Bush for his 2000 election campaign)
Television Holdings:
* NBC: includes 13 stations, 28% of US households.
* NBC Network News: The Today Show, Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Meet the Press, Dateline NBC, NBC News at Sunrise.
* CNBC business television; MSNBC 24-hour cable and Internet news service (co-owned by NBC and Microsoft); Court TV (co-owned with Time Warner), Bravo (50%), A&E (25%), History Channel (25%).
The "MS" in MSNBC
means microsoft
The same Microsoft that donated 2.4 million to get GW bush elected.
Other Holdings:
* GE Consumer Electronics.
* GE Power Systems: produces turbines for nuclear reactors and power plants.
* GE Plastics: produces military hardware and nuclear power equipment.
* GE Transportation Systems: runs diesel and electric trains.

2) WESTINGHOUSE / CBS INC.
Westinghouse Electric Company, part of the Nuclear Utilities Business Group of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL)
whos #1 on the Board of Directors? None other than:
Frank Carlucci (of the Carlyle Group)
Television Holdings:
* CBS: includes 14 stations and over 200 affiliates in the US.
* CBS Network News: 60 minutes, 48 hours, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, CBS Morning News, Up to the Minute.
* Country Music Television, The Nashville Network, 2 regional sports networks.
* Group W Satellite Communications.
Other Holdings:
* Westinghouse Electric Company: provides services to the nuclear power industry.
* Westinghouse Government Environmental Services Company: disposes of nuclear and hazardous wastes. Also operates 4 government-owned nuclear power plants in the US.
* Energy Systems: provides nuclear power plant design and maintenance.

3) VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.
Television Holdings:
* Paramount Television, Spelling Television, MTV, VH-1, Showtime, The Movie Channel, UPN (joint owner), Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, Sundance Channel (joint owner), Flix.
* 20 major market US stations.
Media Holdings:
* Paramount Pictures, Paramount Home Video, Blockbuster Video, Famous Players Theatres, Paramount Parks.
* Simon & Schuster Publishing.

4) DISNEY / ABC / CAP
(donated 640 thousand to GW's 2000 campaign)
Television Holdings:
* ABC: includes 10 stations, 24% of US households.
* ABC Network News: Prime Time Live, Nightline, 20/20, Good Morning America.
* ESPN, Lifetime Television (50%), as well as minority holdings in A&E, History Channel and E!
* Disney Channel/Disney Television, Touchtone Television.
Media Holdings:
* Miramax, Touchtone Pictures.
* Magazines: Jane, Los Angeles Magazine, W, Discover.
* 3 music labels, 11 major local newspapers.
* Hyperion book publishers.
* Infoseek Internet search engine (43%).
Other Holdings:
* Sid R. Bass (major shares) crude oil and gas.
* All Disney Theme Parks, Walt Disney Cruise Lines.

5) TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL
(donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign)
America Online (AOL) acquired Time Warner–the largest merger in corporate history.
Television Holdings:
* CNN, HBO, Cinemax, TBS Superstation, Turner Network Television, Turner Classic Movies, Warner Brothers Television, Cartoon Network, Sega Channel, TNT, Comedy Central (50%), E! (49%), Court TV (50%).
* Largest owner of cable systems in the US with an estimated 13 million subscribers.
Media Holdings:
* HBO Independent Productions, Warner Home Video, New Line Cinema, Castle Rock, Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera.
* Music: Atlantic, Elektra, Rhino, Sire, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, WEA, Sub Pop (distribution) = the world’s largest music company.
* 33 magazines including Time, Sports Illustrated, People, In Style, Fortune, Book of the Month Club, Entertainment Weekly, Life, DC Comics (50%), and MAD Magazine.
Other Holdings:
* Sports: The Atlanta Braves, The Atlanta Hawks, World Championship Wrestling.

6) NEWS CORPORATION LTD. / FOX NETWORKS (Rupert Murdoch) (donations see bottom note)
Television Holdings:
* Fox Television: includes 22 stations, 50% of US households.
* Fox International: extensive worldwide cable and satellite networks include British Sky Broadcasting (40%); VOX, Germany (49.9%); Canal Fox, Latin America; FOXTEL, Australia (50%); STAR TV, Asia; IskyB, India; Bahasa Programming Ltd., Indonesia (50%); and News Broadcasting, Japan (80%).
* The Golf Channel (33%).
MEDIA HOLDINGS:
* Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Searchlight.
* 132 newspapers (113 in Australia alone) including the New York Post, the London Times and The Australian.
* 25 magazines including TV Guide and The Weekly Standard.
* HarperCollins books.
OTHER HOLDINGS:
* Sports: LA Dodgers, LA Kings, LA Lakers, National Rugby League.
* Ansett Australia airlines, Ansett New Zealand airlines.
* Rupert Murdoch: Board of Directors, Philip Morris (USA).
*(Phillip Morris donated 2.9 million to George W Bush in 2000)*

All of these big corporations have vested interests in America's Republican Party, its government, AND have former officers lodged in the "watchdog" agencies listed above. So, a consumer can clearly draw the links and parallels between the various industry watchdogs, the government, and how little ever gets done for the "little guy", "job public".

This military-industrial machine - headed towards becoming a vast monolith with "corporate incest" fast consolidating smaller companies - is slowly BECOMING the only higher authority in America. How else could drug companies and aircraft manufacturers shirk their responsibilities for public safety? How else could they - along with large insurance companies fail to respond when disasters like Katrina strike? How else could a government start a war to appease "big oil", (in the name of "energy security), then give all the private "war contracts" to its' own buddies (Halliburton, Blackwater, Carlyle Group, etc.)? How else could a government sell it's governmental duties to the private sector, then watch idly, while the for-profit sector pockets piles of public money and offers substandard, unregulated garbage for a "product"? Only in conservative America.

... And the media - the "unbiased media" - stands idly by, feeding the public trash like reality TV, celebrity gossip and scandal, and an endless stream of violence and gore to help complete the "dumbing down" of America. The media stands by, while planes fall out of the sky - not by terrorist bombs, but of their own accord. Patients in $5000/day US hospitals suffer from exploding hearts due to "experimental" drugs released too early by the FDA. How many Americans have been murdered in the past year alone, by negligence by large companies? How many of those companies have been "bombed back into the stone age" as a result - much less brought to justice?

Ahhh... the results of unchecked free enterprise... of unbridled, unfettered capitalism. The American decline continues, as the rot sets in deeper and deeper and deeper - to the point where consumers will accept anything that comes along, unquestioning.

We Canadians can stand back and say, "that's just the US", but we know darned well that Harper and his "America-annexation" fans in Parliament would like nothing better than to drag us down the US gutter along with the American rot. They'll do it by shrinking our government, attacking our institutions - including civilian bodies like the Senate, and selling out to big oil and private interest groups... We must be vigilant, and we MUST (as a party) ensure this does not happen in Canada...

Peter MacKay - Just Changin' The Truth A Little Bit Every Day...

Not sure why news organizations like the CBC don't apply some sort of "Stupidometer", or at least provide viewers with honest narrative?  Last night I had to endure an "ask the Minister" on "The National" with Peter MacKay and Peter Mansbridge, and watch as MacKay "distorted", or clearly lied about one fact or another in relation to the Afghan war...

Here are a couple of the best distortions:  When answering a voter's question about military success in Afghanistan - and the justification to be there, MacKay indicated that we were invited there by the Karzai government (that part is true, although we know Karzai had little choice if he wished to remain in power.  His Northern Alliance allies needed outside help.  MacKay did not stop here, though.  He went on to state that the Soviet Union was an unwelcome occupying force...  Hmmm... Actually Mr. Minister, the old People's Democratic Party regime in Afghanistan had also - similar to Karzai - invited a foreign power in to help them stay in control (in their battle against - guess who? - the Northern Alliance and Taliban, of course)...  

MacKay's second big "untruth", or distortion of the facts:  he stated that we are fighting a terrorist government (when we went to fight the Taliban).  Like the Taliban, or not, they took power in Afghanistan much the same way as power has always been achieved in that land - taking it in civil war and sectarian conflict.  The Taliban were no more legitimate rulers than any previous governments.  The Taliban did indeed support Bin Laden and Al Qaida, but were not terrorists.  Only terrorist sympathizers - in much the same way as Americans supported reactionaries in Angola, or the Mujahaddin in Afghanistan.  They mistreated their people in a fashion similar to religious regimes anywhere.  

It would be great if the CBC and other news agencies provided the public with some real background facts after interviewing political figures - to ensure that viewers got most of the facts straight.