I Shaved My Head When Robert Stanfield Died

HuffPost's Real Misery Index: Recalculating The Hard Times

2009-07-21T16:32:00.001-07:00

It's an interesting metric Huffpo, but it's very middle-class centric. Your misery index doesn't take into account wages, income gaps, the working poor. It doesn't show the people who are working 60 hour weeks and bashing their head against the wall trying to make ends meet and actually succeeding, or workplace fatalities, postponed doctor visits, or any actual measure of waged income, just how tightly it's rationed. To borrow from RFK: The misery index measures all the terrible things happening in the economy except those that most frequently happen and hurt the most.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2009-07-13T03:24:00.000-07:00

To www.antimisandry.com Seriously guys, you're not helping.

After some general e-battling on Huffington Post and doing some research, I've begun to wonder: Where in the hell are the articulate, liberally educated and complex-minded anti-misandrysts out there. Where's the scotch swilling man's man of a masculist who'll be in favor of sexual freedoms, opposed to homophobia and transphobia and ready to point out the cold hatred that spews from the pens of tenured professors like Janice G. Raymond? Where are the actual egalitarians out there beyond Nathanson and Young? We need your help people. Male post-secondary enrollment is down to 42%, there's legitimate evidence in the latest US census, that among Single people of similar experience and education, that the wage gap is going the other way. There are significant legal, political, and social inequities that are being built as an edifice of empowerment and the tipping point is being reached, and nobody is around to intelligently build a coalition of the egalitarians, reform and classical liberals, classical conservatives, and counter-cultural modernists into opposing the entrenchment of these barriers.

To wit: Give me an articulate left-wing anti-misandryst! Give her tenure! Give him a lecture series, a seat in parliament, a chair opposite Keith Olbermann! Give her a fourth party presidential run! Give him a New York Times Best Seller! Give her cohorts and a whole intellectual tendency, please!

Anyway, so ends my complaining, but that's an issue that's always nagged at me, one that'd get me back into party politics, one that would bring me back to academia. Give me someone to follow in this regard with some actual credibility, who'll make a political career over this.

Kids recant abuse claims after dad jailed 20 years

2009-07-12T23:38:00.001-07:00

The same reason some people plead guilty to murders they don't commit. And because having your children testify against you might be considered traumatic, you know, the same reason people want rape shield laws, basically to weaken the court system to prevent aggravating an already traumatic situation.

How about you watch this documentary on Frontline for some answers on why 90% of all cases don't get to trial?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/view/

ShakeYourComplacency. I'm officially becoming your new best friend. You're not going to be able to spread this kind of circular, blame-the-victim misandry unchallenged. Quoth the president: Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Krugman/Limbaugh Nightmare: President Obama Might Succeed

2009-03-30T04:35:00.001-07:00

"Nor does Krugman's ideas involve the War In Wherever, a possible

new Health System, the Auto Industry, Unemployment, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc."

Really? Because I got here from this page, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/29/geithnerkrugman-feud-come_n_180477.html where Paul Krugman says, in a roundtable discussion, that the healthcare plan is the key to balancing the budget in the medium term. Further, he talked about the differences between Iraq and Afganistan and the political consequences of withdrawal in either country. And also he talks about the increasing unemployment rate and the 600,000 jobs shed every month for the next few months. He explains how the US debt will not be left unmanageable by the stimulus, etc. etc... So yes, he views economics through the prism of human costs.

You know, though, everyone impugning the motives of someone who has said, quite accurately, that the bank reorganization plan is similar to the Japanese plan, which didn't fail, but didn't really succeed in the way everyone expected, and not that it is a poor plan but that better ones are available for which the president does not appear willing to summon the political will, should probably take a page from the Vice President who consistently mentions what a poor idea it is to question those motives which they cannot divine.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2009-03-07T16:06:00.001-08:00

Oh, Rush... it's so delightful to watch you tempt fate like this.

324.6 lbs.

He's definitely not the first, or by any means the last, but most assuredly the quintessential willfully ignorant gourmand thug (I like the ring of it far more than Big Fat Idiot) of North American politics. Everyone else's motives are darker than his, to believe them, or perhaps, seeing as he wants the president to fail, hopes for rioting at political conventions, and general unrest, he attempts to make everyone's motives as dark as his. I think it is a uniquely interesting feature of hard right movement politicians. They are so effective because their ultimate goals are perpetually unsatisfied. In democratic politcs no group has ever succeeded in turning back social progress for any amount of time. Sure, economic progress has been turned back, and renewed and... ad infinitum, but you'll never get a solid, unimpeachable majority of Americans to again believe that the social, political, and economic benefits of marriage are exclusive to hetrosexual couples, or that abortions should be going on in back alleys instead of doctor's offices. I, on the other hand, am a left-wing, anti-post-modernist, statist, neo-Fordist/Kensian red tory. I will forever be warring with both sides of the spectrum... especially the center.

It's a good place to struggle, I think.

2009-02-28T13:23:00.000-08:00

What Passes for Sovereignty In a Monoculture.

331.8 Pounds, a testament to what bloat can do to swing water-weight.

So, like me you probably have a McDonalds or a Taco Bell in your neighbourhood, drink carbonated beverages made by Coke or Pepsi, and generally don't have the energy to escape the subtle standard of imperialism as it pervades your life. And yet, advertisment supported media, available on that most global of mediums, the internet, is indifferently available to us. A small complaint, I suppose, save for the agressive defense of that media from other delivery sites means, that, for most people, some art must remain American, while we are still the wards of their commerce. It's the standard insensitivity of empire, and something truly minor I suppose, but it is the peculiar conceit of Americans that they are so commercially unique, when that is the true mark of what has made their empire's spread in the developed world so effective and remarkable. They believe in nation states that they dissolve. Just a strange thought for the day. Continue with your business.

2009-02-27T09:18:00.000-08:00

A Whole Other Person

336.2 lbs.

Hello Blog. Been a long, long, time, hasn't it? I'd pretty much forgotten about you what with my new job dealing cards, and my spiral into complete complacency and depression. I'd best get my rear in gear then, I suppose, and start putting my life back together. After a series of battles with dieting, and really, dieting well, just losing the will to eat well, of all things, I tipped the scales this morning at 336.2 pounds. That's 137 pounds over weight and 153 over my ideal weight. That's a whole other person in there, and today, I gotta start killing him off. He shrugs and comes up with a thousand reasons why I shouldn't do what I'm good at. Well, fuck him. I'm going to get back to what I do best: Obscure, left-wing Al Hamiltory politics... also, expecting people to get obscure references like that.

I have found only one side of my life rolling along as it should: I don't struggle to make ends meet, by virtue of living cheap. No car, roommates, few bars, not too many gadgets. This is what makes me save money and lets me work four days a week. It's pretty easy when you can live on next to nothing, but then, not everyone has it so easy. Not everyone can split a two bedroom apartment three ways or has no dependents or the intelligence and wit to really be able to fall back on and know that they can keep working without too much difficulty... so I'm a little lucky that way... but then, most needs are really excuses at any rate. And what we most need is an absence of excuses. Lots of people make excuses, and their favorite one, simply because of its statistical significance, is their tax burden... hence why, when the government should be spending billions more on [wood] Planes [for building social housing], Trains, and [electric] Automobiles, we're once again blowing the money on tax cuts for the already making ends meet.

Dear, 'Middle Class:' You're poorer now because you've castrated government with your endless exemptions for the family with 2.1 kids, 1.2 dogs and 1.4 incomes. The weaker government had to pass on those tax cuts all the way up the ladder, leaving us with a still progressive, but more hobbled revenue stream. And now, it's happening again. Twenty more bucks on your paycheque is, well, 20 more bucks, but it pales in comparison to what that money would actually do for creating jobs, building infrastructure that might shorten your monthy commuting time by more than an hour or two, improving our universities, or avoiding public sector hiring freezes that will limit job opportunities for your children... you know, just incase the sports tax credit isn't the tipping point that makes them an NHL star.

And what's more, is that it pales in comparison to the slide in real wages over the last 35 years. If you're like me, you probably got a raise in pay that just falls short of inflation... maybe half a percent. Half a percent of 50K isn't much... but what about 17%? That's how short we've fallen since '73 That's the promise of generations passed being torn from your fingers and already ripped from your children's, and all because we haven't spent adequate public dollars to ensure that it's easy to keep the job you have without being abused by skinflint employers, that it's inexpensive to get to your job with good public transport and, to a diminishing extent, roads, because energy prices constantly rise, owing to our unwillingness to build the clean, and green, and long-term energy grid that we all know is the most logical solutuion... and because we've pulled a comprehensive university education further out of reach of working class Canadian children, causing them to aim low, and to misuse obvious talents. At any rate, these deficits will, as Diefenbaker's did in the late fifties, stauch the flow of jobs and incomes, but they fail to capture a perfect opportunity to not just save the economy in the short term, but build it for the long term, as that government, that toryism, so long forgotten, crumbles like our ambitions... not all at once, but, after a while, turn around and there you are... missing yourself.

2007-05-29T01:42:00.000-07:00

Here's why you find the following so funny:

Strong citizenship builds tolerance.

Belief in duty promotes adherence to law.

Also, the Spaniards.

2007-02-28T08:40:00.000-08:00

South of the Border:

After a month long absence, I thought I'd come back and explain Canada US relations to you, and I can think of no better way to do so than with this short, educational, film.

Enjoy.

2007-01-24T10:48:00.000-08:00

I'd just like to give a shout out...*

No, make that a hearty fuck you, to all the misandristic classist ivy league white boy bashing dressed up as feminism over the trumped up charge that is/soon to be was the Duke Lacross rape case. I make it a point to be skeptical of charges, and that includes, in fact, is accentuated by, sexual assault charges, because of the ease of conviction that seems to stem from them due to the outrageous nature of the charges. People get really mad when they think of this stuff, and since Fatty Arbuckle, the overblown-trumped-up-high-profile-rape-case has been a fact of life. Anybody remember Kobe Bryant? I'm not saying that someone's accusations are to be derided and declaimed instantly, but whatever happened to the idea of innocent until proven guilty. On left wing forums, such as www.rabble.ca/babble , when it comes to causes celebre, such a position is considered anti-feminist and thus unacceptable. The discusssion ended six months ago, the forums have long been locked and closed, and so I take this opportunity to give a hearty 'fuck you' to these, still, innocent mens' detractors.

Fuck You.

That is all.

*warning: The previous post may not have been suitable for all audiences.

2006-12-26T23:06:00.000-08:00

Ford on Iraq: 'I don't think I would have gone to war'

-2004 an embargoed interview (sadly the ex president was very good at keeping his mouth shut.)

I wish there were a barber open...

Gerald Ford died. The great constitutionalist has passed on. A truly good man, who kept a nation's sanity together for an additional twenty-seven years...

Poor, poor, America.

Nixon covered up a burglary that he never ordered and he gave 'the highest apology.'

Bush Jr. Started a war on false pretenses, bankrupted a national economy, prolonged a recession that Nixon precipitated, but wasn't responsible for, and brought to fruition the piecemeal dismantling of the consitiution that Clinton embarked upon. What an utter disaster that this is, and how horrible that there disappears from the landscape the last non-Bush Republican. At this time it hurts a little that Bush I could never manage to criticise his son. Something I don't think JFK and RFK would refrain from doing for each other. *sigh* "Living in America" just got harder, what with the "Long National Nightmare" and all...

I'll stop with the references now... "Wouldn't be Prudent."

... dammit.

Dammit.

2006-12-21T00:16:00.000-08:00

Rocky Balboa:

I have never before gone to see a film on it's opening night, and fortunately, I haven't yet been disappointed. Forget the idea that Rocky is just some Walter Mitty fantasy, forget all the tired stereotypes about sequels and remakes being done to death. This movie needed to be made, it was beautiful, it was touching.

(Possible Spoilers, I'm not so sure)

The film opens in a modest house in Phili, Rocky still wakes early and in every little way, he gives the appearance of a man who, though decent, has shrunk down inside himself. From the turtles, to the cursory, half hearted jabs at his excercise equipment Rocky has been ruled by a sort of quiet fear. A desire to simply keep a few lodestones of his past. The sublte little touches that show that, for example, Rocky is an intensely lonely man, or that Paulie is consumed by regret, or the grief and dissappointment and frustration that sublimates into a tightly masked rage in Rocky... these things you might not otherwise understand, unless you had seen the first three, and the fifth. Rocky 4 is, to my mind, almost completely self-contained.

This is a story of fear, and will and self-respect, not about boxing, though the match itself is important, the emotions that inform both characters are far more important. That said the film needed about another half hour to develop Dixon better. The franchise presented an opponent with the most complexity seen yet, but he didn't get to present enough neuance. So instead the character was revealed almost through exposition, a shame, because Tarver did a fine job in the role.

So now my definitive rankings of the Rocky films:

Stand-Alone (As part of the series)

Rocky 3rd (4th)

- The almost sullen acceptance that he can't beat Apollo is what loses this movie for me, see next review.

3 of 5

Rocky II 2nd (2nd)

- I know I may take some flack for this, but Rocky II was great because it was the triumph of Rocky over his personal flaws, wherein he finds the will to actually win, instead of simply flying along side the angels, he challenges them. Also Weathers is finally developed as a real character instead of a one dimensional caracature of Ali, trying to play an entire country as a cross-section of rubes. It's Creed's own ego that defeats him.

4 0f 5

Rocky III 4th (3rd)

- "lol Mr. T" That's what makes this a sorely underrated film. In fact the greatest failing of this film is it's inability to develop and allow us to empathise with this ball of unadulterated rage in Mr. T who produces some great acting that, only now, has become a caracature of itself. Stallone had hoped to get Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust" for the title track. It shows.

3 of 5

Rocky IV 5th (6th)

Completely self-contained Reagan era B.S. no real conflict, no great emotions, Adrian as Trixie (designated fretter) It's telling that Dolph Lundgren may have well produced the best moment of this film when he was cut in the final fight. 'War' from the soundtrack is on my mp3 player though...

2 out of 5, but irredeemably bad, unlike...

Rocky V 6th (5th)

-Though the story had some great potential, the desire to have the real villain of the movie (Duke) frustrated in his attempts to get Rocky in the ring, and yet still have Rocky fight with Tommy Gunn, manages to fail to connect with one of the main motivations of the series. Also, to rationalise Rocky Balboa, which I think is done well, Stallone himself says it's kind of odd that Rocky would never have gotten a second opinion about his injuries.

1.5 of 5, though with an additional hour of screen time to turn this into an actual fight movie, it could have been a great finale, or even a continuation.

Rocky Balboa 1st (1st)

-I did not ever think I would cry at a Rocky film. Stallone is a better actor today, or just easier to identify with, than he was in 1976. The film wouldn't work on it's own, though so much is dependent on the subleties and knowing these characters, identifying with them. Only other thing I wish they'd done is give us the character behind Duke. Dixon's also slightly underdeveloped and the film could have easily gone to two hours and had me wondering what they could have possibly cut out (perhaps the market scene though it's a nice contrast to his meeting with his white collar son)

4.75 of 5

In closing, if there are any members of the academy reading this blog, this film deserves an Oscar nomination, possibly for: Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor, Best Film, and Cinematography.

2006-12-14T02:43:00.000-08:00

And now for something completely different, m'kay?

Saw it, it was true to the spirit of Python and should be shown to all.

2006-12-13T08:07:00.000-08:00

By now, he should know, he's only encouraging me:

Rick Mercer had this to say about delegated conventions:

Go here and click on Rick's Rant for December 5th

I finally was spurred to briefly articulate why I'm in favour of delegated conventions:

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Tisdall 
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 06:03:15
To:rick@rickmercer.com
Subject: Delegated Conventions

Rick:

As a delegate to the 2003 PC convention:

First off, every member gets to elect delegates who are sworn to
vote a candidate

Second: If it weren't for delegated conventions:

Claude Wagner would have been opposition leader and possibly prime
minister.

Trudeau would never have been prime minister (most of his core support
was from establishment Liberals)

Peter MacKay would have a shred of credibility left with the Canadian
public (No signed deal, no public humiliation.)

Third, we get the Prime Minister in pretty much the same way.

Last: Where else does a non-prominent citizen get this much opportunity
to practice at public mindedness and politics?

But then, I'm a 23 year old geezer, what do I know?

Thanks,

Sean Tisdall

Rick's verbose reply:

Sean
All good points geezer.
RM
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

Cool... what do I win?

2006-12-12T15:56:00.000-08:00

I know it's not remotely politics based but...

This wins

2006-12-11T02:42:00.000-08:00

I don't really believe in hell...

But Augusto Pinochet is rotting there, finally. That is all.

2006-12-05T05:30:00.000-08:00

Three quick suggestions as to how to effectively hit the ground running in your criticism of Ed Stelmach:

Daveberta writes:

After entering Ralph Klein's Cabinet, Stelmach served as Minister of Agriculture from 1997 to 1999,

And did nothing to solve the problem of contaminated feed that a mere 4 years later led to the BSE crisis.

Minister of Infrastructure from 1999 to 2004,

Infrastructure? You mean the nine-billion dollar infrastructure deficit that accumulated during the Klien years? Most of it during the boom?

and Minister of Intergovernment and International Affairs from 2004 to 2006.

Ah, yes, when he was invisible in negotiations on the childcare file, and essentialy, much like Michael Chong, was not the minister responsible, rather the Premier was.

Years of Cabinet experience aside, I seriously cannot name anything that Stelmach did while he was a Cabinet Minister. Can someone help me on this one?

I already named plenty of things he didn't do... I'm lost as well.

2006-12-02T15:04:00.000-08:00

The Real Winner of the Liberal Leadership Race:

2006-11-24T13:01:00.000-08:00

Formerly Great Comic Flips Out:

You guys might wanna see this... you'll never think of this guy the same ever again.

This isn't the clip you think it is either:

2006-11-11T05:14:00.000-08:00

Robert McNamara Retires!!!

Oh... wait, it's Don Rumsfeld... and he's far less likely to criticise his own policy 30 years after the fact... *sigh* ah well.

2006-11-07T09:37:00.000-08:00

Attack on the Hon. Rona Ambrose is Sexist, no?

As reported in the Vancouver Province:

"The convention has seen some outstanding presidents and some ordinary ones. Canada's Rona Ambrose was neither,'' Canadian environmental groups wrote in the newsletter.

"She might have the best hair of any (conference of parties) president, but she will be remembered as the worst COP president in the history of the climate convention.''

Utterly disgraceful! They'd certainly never make comments about a Male Politician's Hair i-Oh no! It's...

BLONDEMAN!!!

Attack on the Hon. Rona Ambrose is sexist... No?

Back in the late 80's, millionaire British politician Michael Heseltine launched a long and acrimonious shadow campaign for the Conservative Party Leadership. (Paul Martin anyone?)

At any rate the satirists, (largely anti-tory) at Spitting Image produced a sketch regarding mr. Heseltine called Blondeman in reference to his blonde locks which to them constituted the whole of his political personage. But of course it was a one ti-Oh no! There's more...

BLONDEMAN!!!

Attack on the Hon. Rona Ambrose is sexist? No?

Yes, well, certainly there have been ad hominym attacks on prominent female politicians based on appearance, of course the Conlandian campain saw the PM compared to a talk show host... truly shocking attempt to diminish the- Bugger that! More...

BLONDEMAN!!!

Attack on the Hon. Rona Ambrose is sexist... No.

2006-11-01T13:31:00.000-08:00

Sean Asks the Audience!

Which is the worse Flip Flop?

Jack Layton on the Corus Radio Network bashing Bob Rae's fiscal policy, or Finance Minister Jim Flaherty introducing tax treatment that will cause Income Trusts to be taxed like corporations?

You decide. You know where to comment. Tell me which one and I'll write about it.

... er, ah... the little link that says comments.

2006-10-25T01:30:00.000-07:00

This just in: Conservative Party an arm of the Government of Canada!

Well, that must be the case, otherwise they wouldn't be distributing hockey pucks with the logo of the Government of Canada, autographed by the Prime Minister.

"He did not say how many pucks - which carry the official government insignia on the side opposite Harper's signature - were paid for by the party."

It has always been my opinion that it is actually better that these sort of things, especially if they're being used for government purposes, like being given to fireign dignitaries, and under the auspices of the Governemtn of Canada, are paid for by the government. If Harper, or any head of government for that matter, hasn't got the political capital to do that, then they shouldn't be made.

In the race to make the public purse tighter, we may well be foolishly re-blurring the line between a shrinking government, and its growing political machinery.

2006-10-22T00:14:00.000-07:00

If we Were to Turn off the Cameras would Jack Layton Still Exist?

This is without a doubt the most pathetic attempt to politically profit off of percieved outrage in Canadian political history:

"People believe they heard him say certain things and he should be a big enough man to stand up and say, 'Irrespective of what I think I might have said, obviously some people heard me say something that was deeply insulting, and I apologize,"' Layton said.

So... Jack just said that Peter Mackay should apologise for things that others think they heard, even though he belives he didn't say them? Look, I'm the first to believe that Peter MacKay should be apologising, prostrating himself before the Canadian people, David Orchard, and Belinda Stronach for past slights, but if he believes that he didn't say what he's accused of saying, then he has a responsibility to not apologise, to proclaim his innocence. Jack, you have just pissed away whatever remaining credibility you have with the 'average canadian' and YOU should resign your position as leader of the New Democratic Party.

-In Memory of Sherry Lavery.

An unrepentant tory.

2006-07-12T13:03:00.000-07:00

The Trouble with NAFTA:

"If a guy buys 85 per cent of our exports, and wants to call me Steve, that's OK with me."

-Paul Martin

Okay it was Stephen Harper, but we're not too far off, really. And that's the problem. We feel an incredible obligation to make nice with the American President, despite the fact that he doesn't control trade policy like the Canadian Prime Minister does. Steve should be tippling mimosa with Denny Hastert if he really wants to improve our export position. Not handing a lame duck cowboy a neato belt buckle. Not to say that bugs me.

If a couple of weary heads of government wanna be a little buddy buddy I don't particularly see the harm as long as they continue to do their jobs properly. I don't soft play my friends at the poker table, and I'm sure Steve doesn't back down at the negotiating table anymore than his inherent fear of an independent Canadian economy on its own drives him to do.

2006-07-09T03:50:00.000-07:00

So... What did I get for my Birthday? Money, Beer, Lawn Furniture, a sniff of Redemption:

I was actually set to come before you to announce my retirement from electoral politics. Some of you might remember the campaign that melted in my hands. I made a boo boo and it appears likely the complete financial facts of my campaign in 2004 will never be fully known to even me. I know I raised about a thousand dollars, spent about a thousand, and lost a thousand dollar deposit that I maxed out my credit card to pay. It was a disaster, one that was, to me, worth it. I got to call Anne McLellan on her 11 year littany of disrespect for civil rights and the spirit of the charter of rights. I got to take quite a few shots that I've been meaning to take at the Conservatives, the NDP, and the Liberals, in general.

"Well Sean, You kicked my ass."

-Anonymous candidate, following all-candidates forum

So if it were my last federal campaign, the one that I could remember fondly, even if it was the only time I didn't get 1% of the vote, then I suppose it would be ultimately worth it, even if I were, in the eyes of the new guarantors of political integrity, now too stained to ever run again at any level, and legally not allowed to run federally in perpetuity. So I was going to retire from politics at the age of 23. I was going to make my electronic goodbye to the Canadian electorate when next I posted.

But then Principled Conservative posted my ray of sunshine. Sure I buggered up a $2000 campaign, of which my dad provided $500 and I provided $1000, but I didn't fail to report $2 Million dollars in contributions. That's more than $6000 per Conservative Candidate. And my campaign consisted of me, my agent, and one night of my dad coming out as our 3 hour sign blitz. The Conservatives are a well oiled machine, with a paid full time crew who's job it is to organize every facet of these campaigns, conventions, and other sundry party events. Any suggestion by Conservative apologists that this was an unintentional documenting screw-up tends to ring hollow in the ears of someone who has produced one of the bigger ones of the last couple years.

So. I will not retire from electoral politics. I will secure, from the party auditor, the release of my financial documents. I will seek to have my right to run in federal elections acknowledged. This may be a most messy process, but then the past two years have been messy for me. I've sort of slunk into a premature obscurity.

I'm back.

2006-06-29T12:20:00.000-07:00

Gee, I was expecting that my 200th post would be something more mundane than this:

Israel arrested a third of the Palestinian Cabinet! How the hell do you achive peace in that situation? Honestly... I just... and he... with things... gah!

I was gonna have a mopey post or somethin' but, nope. I'm flabber-fecking-ghasted.

2006-06-22T19:32:00.000-07:00

I'm taking a break until my birthday. Don't worry it's a week from now:

Who reads my blog, honestly? Who agrees, disagrees, loves my writing, hates my writing, wants me to write about something new, something different? Tell me so that I stop feeling that I'm an angry shepard screaming at the rain.

2006-06-22T03:43:00.000-07:00

As we here at ISMHWRSD begin to round into post #200, (this is #198, I believe) I thought I'd reflect on Paul Martin's Legacy vis a vis the Democratic Deficit:

How'd they Vote is a cool resource for the batting averages of members of parliament, when it comes to who showed up for what and who told their party to take what flying leap where. I like how the NDP's dissentingest member, Peter Stoffer, ranks 81st in dissentions in the last parliament with a whopping 4. (Bev Desjarlais had 9, one every 2 months, and she was drummed out of the party.) Oooh, bad boy Peter. Also the 16 orneriest MPs, the ones who were freest to tell their leader to take a flying leap were all Liberals. 44 of the top 50 mavericks were Grits too. But hey, it's not the Conservative Party's fault that their independent minded MPs all think alike. They do really feel that way, don't they?

2006-06-20T20:21:00.000-07:00

Hey, the PM is Entitled to that free jet ride, and it'd be a waste if he didn't take 6 of his caucus mates with him.

Besides. They need those seats in the gold section. Helps them stand up for Canada... I'm sure.

2006-06-20T15:07:00.000-07:00

It's time for this Stupid Edmonton Calgary Hockey Rivalry to end:

And our even stupider 101 year general inter city rivalry to continue...

And the Eskimos lost to the Stamps this week to top everything off. This is uncharacteristic. Oh, where are the Calgary Cannons when our Edmontonian Morale needs them? Nevertheless I am a man of my word and I will be buying Dylan a hearty meal, which I am sure he will consume, whilst making great chortiling noises throughout,
and copious boozes if they are of any nutritional value,
at Hallsy's favorite place to plug: Tony Romas. This is about as close as the PC's will have come to a convention in some time. Ah well, it was still quite a bit of fun, and to beat 28 teams is no mean feat... I just really wanted us to beat the 29th.

I should probably fume about his worship Stephen Killjoy and the martial law he seemingly ordered imposed upon Whyte Avenue. For fear of Heather Reisman's windows I was treated with the sight of one of my city's peace officers striking a bound woman to the ground on the front page of the Edmonton Journal. Mr. Mayor, that makes me more ashamed than fireworks and broken bus shelters ever could. To hear that police were arresting people on Whyte for not moving cements in my mind that the mayor doesn't have a conception of what a public place is.

The time for friendly shots at Calgary is over. We've got bigger fish to fry.

2006-06-20T03:15:00.000-07:00

Good effort boys. I raise my delicious onion loaf in a toast to you.

2006-06-19T03:31:00.000-07:00

Uh, hey, we don't have anything new to say:

Shut up and put on that beer ad and note with clucking irony how the company in question is now owned by Americans.

Ooh, good one, eh?

For shaaaaaaaaame.

2006-06-18T02:14:00.000-07:00

If there was one Principle that I thought that Stephen Harper would not Jettison:

It was that of every Flames fan: Utter, unmitigated hatred of the Edmonton Oilers and all they stand for. But apparently the Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper can't manage to avoid pandering to hockey fans long enough to keep that principle. It's not that he showed up, but that he failed to cheer for Carolina. He could have justified it too, like Dylan did. No, Calgarians are made of sterner, bitter...er stuff than this guy. Pity, he's no villain, he's a loud concilliator. That's worse.

2006-06-15T19:58:00.000-07:00

I could fire off a post about the TV media today but, Oiiiiiiiiilerrrrrrrrs!

And there's this video: Disco Nationalists Rejoyce!

2006-06-11T17:38:00.000-07:00

I'm gonna be first! I'm gonna be first! Do excuse me, I get so few thrills:

To: National Media
Subject: [PC PRESS RELEASE] What's the rush?

Well, I'm readable nationally, and I broadcast through a medium... Yeah I count.

PRESS RELEASE

What's the rush?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 11, 2006

Toronto, ON – Only one reason exists for the Government of Canada
bullying those concerned about the terms of the Canada-United States
Agreement on Softwood Lumber. Prime Minister Harper wants to have it
ready to be signed when he meets with President Bush early in July.
That strategy has two benefits. The first is that it prevents
concerned Canadians from making the case to the Canadian public that
this is a bad deal. Mr. Harper does not want Canadians to realize
that this new agreement gives us less than we have already won under
existing agreements and dispute mechanisms. The second reason for
speedy passage is that it keeps this issue out of the U.S. mid-term
elections and prevents U.S. consumers from realizing it is a bad deal
for them as well – adding as much as $1,000 to the price of a new home.

All prior NAFTA panels have ruled that claims of subsidies are
unsubstantiated. Yet this new agreement not only gives up these prior
judicial victories, but it also requires a complete surrender of
Canadian sovereignty in the area of forestry management. Despite
their constitutional rights, Provinces cannot implement any new
forestry management practices without permission from Washington, "the
anti-circumvention clause". Further, the deal is also predicated on
U.S. approval of new and as of yet unspecified practices which will
also require U.S. approval. In short, we have won nothing and paid
dearly.

Coast Forest Products Association Rick Jeffrey was absolutely correct
in stating "We think that it's better for us to go slower and either
reconvene Parliament . . . and get a good deal rather than rushing
through the agreement and getting a bad deal,"

How will the Prime Minister react should some of the lawsuits launched
to protect producers interests are not withdrawn? Presumably he will
follow the same strategy that has mired Canadians in Afghanistan for
an additional two years. He will retreat from the press, rush
through debate and label anyone who dares to oppose him as
anti-American.

What should he do? He should face down American pressure and press
forward with the NAFTA dispute settlement process.

He should stand up for Canadian producers interests. He should
realize that Canada's window of opportunity lies in the upcoming
American Mid Term Elections .

There are interests in the United States in support of the NAFTA
findings and opposing the Harper-Bush Agreement. Groups like the
American Consumers for Affordable Homes and the Manufactured Housing
Institute do not support having an estimated $1 000.00 U.S. added to
the cost of every home constructed in the United States of America.
These groups oppose the representatives of the U.S. Lumber lobby whose
support has been purchased with over 500,000,000 dollars taken
illegally from Canadian companies.

Tracy Parsons, Leader of the Progressive Canadian (PC) Party
reiterated her statement of August 2005 "The current US policy has had
dire impacts on Canada, but also has negative consequences for the
average American. For instance, a US homebuyer is paying far more
than they need to for housing. Our government needs to reach out and
get this message out."

Jim Love, President of the PC Party restated the Party's position "The
BC Chamber of Commerce has taken the lead in acting to influence
American public opinion. The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party urges
the Government of Canada to follow their lead. With American mid-term
elections the U.S. government will not want to be seen as pandering to
special interests at the expense of consumers."

The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party is a registered Federal Political
Party comprised of progressive-conservative minded Canadians
rebuilding from the roots of the former Progressive Conservative
Party. For more information on the PC Party, it's policies, structure
or general information, go to www.progressivecanadian.org or call
866-812-6972.

-30-

For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

Tracy Parsons, Leader
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel 866-812-6972
tracy.parsons@pcparty.org

Jim Love, President
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel (647) 403-5519
jim.love@pcparty.org

QUOTES AND INFORMATION CITED DRAWN FROM:

Basic Terms of a Canada-United States Agreement on Softwood Lumber
http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/eicb/softwood/basic-terms-en.asp

Other Clauses: The Parties will agree to clauses with respect to the
following issues:

a. litigation: the Parties will take steps to terminate all
litigation by the entry into force of the Agreement;

c. anti-circumvention: Neither Party will take action to circumvent
commitments set out in the Agreement, or to offset the export measure.

Policy Exits: Canada, with full participation of the provinces, and
the US will make best efforts to define "policy exits" from the export
measure for each province within 18 months of entry into force of
this agreement.

=====
Forest policies must now be vetted by U.S.
Emerson: B.C.'s timber pricing system awaits Washington approval
http://www.canada.com/cityguides/winnipeg/info/story.html?id=fdc62e52-4e6b-460b-81c8-c991ca12bfcc&k=4714&p=2
Gordon Hamilton, Vancouver Sun
Published: Saturday, May 13, 2006

======
B.C. stands firm on forest policy
Analyst says U.S. position could prove to be a deal breaker

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=7cda330a-23be-453d-9763-a5216ffc5e7c&k=62526
Gordon Hamilton, CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, June 03, 2006

"We are going to compete and this deal is going to be good for British
Columbia as well as Canada or it's not going to be a deal."

Campbell's remarks came two days after the U.S. tabled its own draft
of the proposed softwood lumber agreement that Canadian forest leaders
say would result in a policy freeze on all Canadian forests.

The U.S. draft includes an anti-circumvention clause that would kill
any attempts at market reform, or at combatting the effects of the
mountain pine beetle infestation for the seven-year term of the agreement

=====
Emerson hopes softwood legislation can be introduced before fall
by Romeo St. Martin
http://www.politicswatch.com/softwood-june5-2006.htm
[PoliticsWatch posted 6:00 p.m. June 5, 2006]

Last week, the trade committee spent two days listening to about a
dozen lumber companies and lumber groups.

The majority of those appearing all said they had problems with
various components of the deal, ranging from the speed that duties
will be refunded to language in the agreement some say would be an
admission that Canada subsidized its industry and dumped lumber into
the U.S. market.

=====
Opposition parties soften up on softwood
by Romeo St. Martin
http://www.politicswatch.com/softwood-may29-2006.htm
[PoliticsWatch posted 6:45 p.m. May 29, 2006]

Criticism ranged from concerns about the government trying to rush the
deal through without what the witnesses consider proper consultation.

Jamie Lim, of the Ontario Forest Industries Association, criticized
new language in the 24-page U.S. draft proposal given to the industry
on Friday that she said in effects admits that Canada had been dumping
lumber into the U.S. and subsidizing its industry.

"That kind of language will not preserve our legal victories," she
said, describing it as "punishment" of the Canadian industry and an
admission of "guilt."

Carl Grenier of the Free Trade Lumber Council, meanwhile, accused the
Harper government of giving up the fight and telling the industry to
take the deal to resolve the dispute.

"No industry in the world can fight an attack from the U.S.
government, which is supporting its industry, without the support of
its government," he said.

"We've been told this is the deal. This is a take-it-or-leave-it
thing. And if you leave it, don't expect support. We were told that."

=====
Ottawa suckered on softwood -- again
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/3521029p-4068651c.html
Wed May 31 2006 FRANCES RUSSELL

Gordon Gibson, former B.C. Liberal leader, political commentator and
Fraser Institute fellow with high-level connections to the B.C.
government and its lumber industry, calls the new softwood lumber
agreement negotiated by the Harper Conservatives "a sellout."

Harper was "snookered" by the Bush administration, says Gibson. "We
were within months of winning, finally and decisively, in a U.S. (not
free trade) court with the power to order (the U.S.) to cease and desist."

=====
Ontario groups' lawsuits revive softwood feud
Action aimed at forcing sides to allow NAFTA panel to complete its review
http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20060517/RSOFTWOOD17

The groups -- the Ontario Lumber Manufacturers Association (OLMA) and
the Ontario Forest Industries Association (OFIA) -- are trying to
force the two governments to allow a North American free-trade
agreement dispute panel to complete its review of the case.

=====
Lumber producers angry as Ottawa pushes for Sunday deal on softwood
19:28:52 EDT Jun 9, 2006
STEVE MERTL
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/060609/b0609122.html

"We think that it's better for us to go slower and either reconvene
Parliament . . . and get a good deal rather than rushing through the
agreement and getting a bad deal," association president Rick Jeffrey
said Friday.

Meanwhile, lumber remanufacturing companies who make everything from
siding to flooring are upset that some of the products previously
exempt from duties are now captured by the agreement.

"This deal is a terrible deal," said Michael Wiggin, who operates
century-old Wynndel Box and Lumber Co., a family-run sawmill and
remanufacturing operation in the southern B.C., Interior.

"There has been virtually zero meaningful consultation with industry.
They're hanging the remaners out."

Wynndel is a party to two trade lawsuits that are among those that
must be withdrawn before the deal can be implemented.

Wiggin said he has no intention of withdrawing, nor will he sign a
waiver allowing some of the duties Wynndel paid to be funnelled into
U.S. industry coffers.

But he said a provision of the draft agreement threatens such holdouts
with legal action by Ottawa if they don't comply.

"They're going to say we don't care if you withdraw those lawsuits,
we're going to take your property anyway," said Wiggin.

"They're saying if we don't roll over and sign . . . meaning
expropriation."

Annex 2 of the June 6 draft of the agreement, obtained by The Canadian
Press, calls for the U.S. duty cash deposits to be funnelled to the
Canadian government for distribution instead of directly to the
companies that paid them.

Ottawa would then dole out the money, less the amount being handed
over to U.S. producers and the special fund.

The draft language states that if companies fail to assign their
portion of the cash deposits, "these deposits and liquidated duties
will be subject to a measure to recover these duties."

=====
Precedent for funding LUMBER AWARENESS AND TRADE ADVOCACY INITIATIVES
http://w01.international.gc.ca/minpub/Publication.asp?publication_id=379283&Language=E

=====
American interests opposing duties:

American Consumers for Affordable Homes (ACAH) 1-703-536-7776
http://www.acah.org/052506.htm

Manufactured Housing Institute Softwood Lumber Trade
http://www.manufacturedhousing.org/lib/showtemp_detail01.asp?id=114&cat=6

The Protectionists Strike Back: Examining the Defense of Trade
Restrictions on Lumber
http://www.freetrade.org/new/dearcolleague.html#_ftn7

You know what? I got nothin' to add here. Economic Nationalists and the Fraser Institute on the same side... It happens... at times.

JJ For Vendetta:

JJ had a little injury, apparently. Guess he was out on his morning stroll and was hit by a motorboat. Damned if the socialist motorboat didn't call him a neo-conservative, whatever that is, political science majors... Doesn't stop him from a good cartoon on the old game of Want, Settle, Get. (You want and end to Terror groups. You'll settle for a stable democracy in Iraq. You get Zarcowi) So, give my love to JJ, because I trust his spam filter no longer accepts it at the source... Good show JJ McCullough. (For once.)

2006-06-07T01:25:00.000-07:00

I guess I'm not Alone... Politically:

Fellow PC Brian Marlatt has an article in ensign, which, while being short, says exactly what I want to say about the undesirability of changes to the Senate.

Oh, and some lovely lady broke my heart, so my prose likely won't be as overly ambitious as it usually is for the next little while.

2006-06-04T07:59:00.000-07:00

Man, I'll be glad when the Oilers win the Stanley Cup so that Calgarians can stop hating Edmonton for their Hockey team:

And start hating us for the River City Shakespeare Festival, The Fringe Festival, The Street Performer's Festival, and the Inbetween Festivals Festival. Okay, that last one wasn't real. But we did pioneer the rigged election, bringing the Capital to Edmonton, by allowing parts of the city to be encompassed by six ridings, while Calgary was fully contained in a single riding. However, as the 2004 city elections proved, where Edmonton originates, Calgary innovates, and gives us the biggest, best damned election fraud Alberta has ever seen!

But honestly, last night, I was guarding an installation in Sir Wilfred Laurier Park, part of an uninterupted network of usable River Valley city parks that are many times larger than Central Park in New York City, and I had been toying in the back of my mind where would be the best place to take Dylan's wallet full of Ralph Bucks and other assorted Calgary graft.

"Graft is defined as a good thing that you're not in on."

-Bob Edwards, Calgary Eye Opener

So first I had to think about location. Do I dare pick one of our fine Whyte Avenue eateries, knowing full well that if the Edmonton Oilers so much as glance in the direction of the Stanley Cup it will be burned to the ground?

"Why is Calgary like a training bra? Lots of support. No Cups"

-Can't remember who.

And then I thought, If Dylan's subconcious deludes him into thinking that we're going in the General Direction of Tony Roma's... As an aside, they do good ribs, but you could suck money out of the Canadian, and Edmonton, economy more efficiently by going to Tim Hortons, At Tony Roma's I'd be obliged to leave a tip.... Then I'd better pick somewhere near TR's. (As Hallsy puts it... man that's one creepy sportscaster.) But There's a Tony Romas in West Edmonton Mall, which would entirely defeat the purpose of the lesson to be taught, near Tom Goodchild's Moose Factory on Calgary Trail, who I wouldn't give a plug nickel too, the weasel, or at Bonnie Doon mall, but it is technically on Whyte Avenue.

However, I know of a great little cafe on Whyte Avenue. My Edmonton Readers will be familair with Dadeo's as will anyone whose ever had a hankering for sweet potato fries. Mmm. Unhealthy...

But that's not sufficiently expensive for the man from Moneyville.

Screw it. We're going to Hy's steakhouse. If it's good enough for Ottowa Tories. It's good enough for Edmonton Tories. Oh, and gracious host that I am, I'll show Dylan the legislature building. I'm sure that King Ralph won't mind. It's not like he ever uses it.

2006-06-03T11:42:00.000-07:00

Dammit! JJ has forced me into it by Presenting me with a Hilarious, yet Strawman Arguement:

Aw yeah, that's right, No asking you to click the link, I'm a force it on y'all!
Ah, JJ. Always proud to present a Bulls*** Sundae with Funny Syrup.

Let's give JJ his turn, unabridged:

I drew this in bitter response to the cartoons that some of the other big-name Canadian editorial cartoonists have been churning out as of late.

There are people in this country who are so obsessively anti-American that they are incapable of seeing Harper's various democratic reforms as anything other than the sinister "Americanization" of Canada. We can toil endlessly under a stagnant, undemocratic, relic system of government from the 19th Century, but that's apparently a-ok to the Canadian left so long as nothing reminds us of the hated United States.

Alrighty then... So left wingers, and I guess that includes me, the left wing conservative, Hate these reforms because we see them as an americanisation of the electoral system. He's half right. I do oppose the reforms after looking at the American system. But JJ wants to just say that it's rife Anti-americanism. Well, he may have a point with those who are not familair with Canadian political history. So for those knee jerk anti-Americans following in the sickening tradition of George Cartier:

"It is necessary to be Anti-Yankee. That we have to oppose their damned system - that we can and will build up a nothern power... The Dominion is determined to do it"

-John Boyd George Ettienne Cartier p. 202
Here's your talking points, and let's start with the hard stuff:

1. An elected senate will be powerful enough to block bills on the strength of their own mandate.

Now, some may see this as a good thing. But I would argue that the Senate is far more effective as a House of Sober Second ThoughtTM than it ever will be as a house of the regions or some crap like that.

"Gratitude is simply thanks given in expectation of future favours"
-Sir Humphrey Appleby (I may have paraphrased)

Right now what we have are a group of professional legislators who have only their own consciences to follow. What's going to happen if they double cross the PM who appointed them? No more appointments? I'm sure they'd be heartbroken. So the senate is free to oppose its own party and often does do just that, when it is within reason, but more often the Senate is a legislative filter. They stop really stupid bills or bills that deserve grerater evalutaion.

The classical example is the FTA enabling legislation. Thanks to a plea from John Turner to the Liberal majority in the Senate (This coudn't really be an order.) The legislation was delayed, forcing Brian Mulroney to call an election to seek a mandate for the legislation (The nation backed parties opposed to the FTA by a margin of about 9 to 7, but that's the way the redistricting crumbles.

Of course the Senate blocked a Liberal bill in 1994 to delay redistricting which would have severely altered the seats of newly elected Liberal MP's. The Senate rapidly blocked that, and the '97 election was fought on the redistricted boundaries. But would the Senate have had the respect of the public in opposing these act if they had felt the push from their respective parties to obstruct the business of those on the other side of the house? I sincerely doubt it. Right now we have a weak upper house that acts as a brake on reckless legislation that would quite simply have to differ with the House of Commons more often if it were elected, because it would have more legitimacy. And thus the lines of what is truly unacceptable legislation, would be blurred.

2.Fixed election dates eliminate the flexibility of the system to seek renewed and radically different mandates.

The '88 election as case in point again.Brian Mulroney ran opposing Free Trade in 1983 and '84. He would have violated the faith of his electors if he had decided to simply ram through such radical legislation. But were he on a fixed time table, he may have, "Had no option."

A more radical example would be the Maitres Chez Nous campaign in Quebec. Lesage had come to power in 1960 with no plans to do anything radical to the electric utilities, then privately and widely owned. Would he have been justified in springing such a plan for debt financed Nationalisation of Hydro on the people of Quebec in 1962? He had little ability to delay the program for a futher two years, he would have most certainly have forced the resignation of his national resoucres minister, the Hon. Rene Levesque and most likely watched his government fall apart. The most honest action he could have taken was to call an election and ask for a mandate for Hydro nationalisation. Lesage did, and the system is hailed by Quebecers as a triumph of public enterprise.

Without the ability to ask for a renewed mandate, (One that if sought without reason, ala Peterson in 1990, is often rejected) governments are rendered unable to take action on a pressing public concern.

3. Fixed election dates lead to a longer undeclared writ period.

Those of you who remember your most recent civic election could do well to remember their example. In Edmonton, the mayoral campaign in 2004, while officially lasting 28 days, was a more than half year affair, diverting the attention of both the previous mayor, Bill Smith, and the current mayor, then councillor Stephen Mandel. Our legislators should legislate, not perpetually campaign.

4. Responsible Government is also a relic of the 19th century, should we jettison that as well?

Given the Prime Minister's treatment of the House of Commons' opinion in advance of the Afganistan debate, that such an idea is simple hyperbole is not as concrete as I should like such an assertion to be.

Ball's in your court JJ.

2006-06-03T06:30:00.000-07:00

It's official. There's a split in the PC Party:

Yes folks it's one of those knock 'em down drag 'em out fights that can tear tories apart. And it's in the issue area that we all knew it'd be in: Economic Nationalism.

Dylan AKA Traitor to the Independant Canadian Economy and Calgarian (Sorry if that seems redundant) has haughtily declared that he cares not one wit for an Oilers victory. Stating that the Canadians shilling for the Carolina Hurricanes are more than enough to justify their being the Canadian team. Well, if that isn't NAFTA in action!

Well, it's come down to it. Dylan will be coming to Edmonton and on July 8th, after the Edmonton Oilers win their 6th Stanley Cup. He will be buying me lunch at the restauraunt of my choosing. All that I had to offer in exchange was a promise that I would buy him lunch at the restauraunt of his choice should the Oilers lose. Won't happen. You'll sooner see me on the Capital Health Authority.

Of course, so as to contribute to the local economy, I will bring my eatin' pants to whatever fine establishment I will bankrupt Dylan at...

2006-06-02T04:48:00.000-07:00

"A Grit-Tory coalition? Only in Gorffwysfa."

So, went a searching online for reaction to my scripts. That's the first thing that comes up when I search for Gorffwysfa. But of course, it's some business report dealie... Meh. I'll rant about the Seante and Election deforms later.

2006-05-30T16:44:00.000-07:00

Ooh, it rained today. Must mean the Liberals are back in Power:

Honestly, the Edmonton sun tried to tell me today that the 90 cent dollar is the product of Conservative government. My reply?

Regarding your editorial about the strong dollar:

The major connection between dollar devaluations and increases is the interest rate spread between Canada and the United States. You may recall that during the 89-91 recession, that the loonie rose sharply, because Canadian interest rates were on average 4-6 points higher than the American rates. Combine this with a balooning government debt and interest finds the ability to bankrupt a nation.

Today, when the Canadian economy is humming along, thanks largely to a government that has been very good at running surpluses, a high interest rate keeps the economy from over heating, and placing pressure on wages and prices. The election of a Conservative government committed to neutering our ability to raise funds will produce a downward pressure on interest rates and the dollar. The dollar has been near the 90 cent mark for most of the last year as well, to equate this symptom of long term macroeconomic policy with 3 months of Stephen Harper at the head of government, as opposed to 13 years of Chretien -Martin is ludicrous in the extreme.

Sean Tisdall, PC Party Candidate, Edmonton-Centre, 2004 General Election.

Oh, and the editorial is 2 and a half weeks old, way to keep it current Sean! Guh.

But honestly, if the Sun is so damned intelligent why are they so stupid?

2006-05-29T06:00:00.000-07:00

Holy S***! The Toronto Sun gets it Right!

From Lonnie Goldstein no less. I pretty much agree with him on every count, except that the Liberals were perceived to be corrupt, but were not, as a body, actually corrupt. Governing without vision, yes, corrupt, not so much.

The best description I heard from Lonnie:

"Finally, voters are still satisfied, for now, with having thrown out a Liberal government they saw as arrogant and politically corrupt, just as Ontarians were in 1990 when they tossed out Peterson and elected Rae. But will Harper's early numbers hold a year from now? Who knows? So far all we really know about him is that he has some excellent leadership qualities (drive, intelligence, focus, vision) and some bad ones (stubbornness, arrogance, hypocrisy , pettiness.)"

Wow. How many times do you hear me chide the PM, who has a demonstrable intellect, for playing cynical low brow politics. Stephen Harper's smarter than he acts. I wonder how he reconciles his purported love of free speech with the 'messaging' that his government engages in. However the Rt. Hon. Mr. Harper's problem may well prove to be that he thinks he doesn't have to win people like me over. He does if he ever wants a majority. Joe won in '79 because he won 'average folk' over, giving the earnest impression that he actually gave a damn. And he actually tried to win the chattering classes during his government, unlike Harper who thinks he will be able to win the next election against the Chretien government. The only propblem that Clark had was that Trudeau clobbered him with his newfound nationalism in '80. Otherwise, if Trudeau had exited, we might be talking about the Clark era today.

I'll blog about fixed election dates and the elected Senate later. (And why I remain opposed to both.)

2006-05-28T04:36:00.000-07:00

In the Interests of Full Disclosure. Also, Go Oilers:

This one to JJ about the May 24th toon:

Subject: Croatia's totally hot.

That's pretty much it. No editorial musings. Serbia and Montenegro drifted apart. But they'll still meet for Christmas... no, wait. Also, ever seen the worst movie about the Balkan conflict ever made? Behind Enemy Lines. Absolutely hilarious. Like it's "Welcome to Mooseport" bad. But still saved by Gene Hackman's Hacmanery. Yes, that's a word I just made up.

Keep doing the thing with the stuff!

Sean

This one to JJ about the May 27th toon:

Subject: Important paralells, and important differences in the May 27th toon

On May first, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants marched to demand that they be allowed to stay. You don't see similar protests in Iraq to have American troops stay. Whether the occupation is beneficial being beside the point, it is not seen as being similarly beneficial.

Keep up the fine artwork,

Sean Tisdall

2006-05-25T07:03:00.000-07:00

Quake at the awesome power of the Anti-Conservative Media:

Shudder as they walk out on a Prime Minister who won't allow them to set up a first come first serve question mike.

Chill as the head of the press gallery states that he is not pro-Conservative.

Gasp in horror as they laugh out loud en masse at the Prime Minister's interpretation of events.*+

Seriously, Prime Minister, you begin to stretch credulity when nearly every newspaper lined up against Paul Martin this January and you accuse them of partisanship. Stephen, you're smarter than this. You have an MA. You can't get that by regurgittating Ted Morton's rhetoric. You actually have to be somewhat analytical... otherwise I should have just stuck with it and I'd have a PhD right now... dang.

*Prime Minister Paul Martin's interpretation, but according to Jack Layton, he's worse than Conservatives, so let's just call it a chuckle between two sides of the iron Liberal triangle or Media Government and, uh, Witchcraft.

+They're all the same link. Watch the video to the right of the text.

2006-05-22T03:50:00.000-07:00

I can't remember if I mentioned this... but Dubya... are you F&*@ing Serious?

I mean really, your proudest moment as president? Sure there are photos of Diefenbaker smiling proudly having caught fish, there's always a happy sense of accomplishment there, but his proudest moment was the passage of the Bill of Rights. You seriously should be prouder of something you did as president, everything you did as president, otherwise, why be president? I... uh... GAH!

2006-05-21T16:10:00.000-07:00

He must have been an Impartial Partisan Conservative:

Good ol' JJ. He never ceases to swallow the Post's spin whole hog. Recently Harper tried to appoint an independent appointments czar. Former Encana CEO Gwyn Morgan. JJ explains:

"But the parliamentary committee rejected him, in an embarrassing set-back. And why did they do this? "He said that refugees tended to be less qualified than economic immigrants. He questioned the role of multiculturalism," said New Democratic Party MP Peggy Nash, who introduced the motion to reject Morgan."

-JJ McCullough, May 18th, 2006

Of course this must be the only reason that the other 5 members of the 6-5 majority supported Nash's motion, after amendment. It must have nothing to do with the fact that Harper's man appointed to departisanise the appointments process has done Conservatvie fundraising, and is to a good degree a partisan Conservative. Why would JJ blame post-modernism, which is, to my mind, the scourge of Canadian poltical discourse, for blocking the appointment of a well-heeled party hack? Certainly, it's not because he's as blindly partisan a Conservative as the orator of our last words today:

"Of course I'll appoint Liberals and New Democrats. When I've been in office for fifteen years and there isn't a living, breathing, Tory anywhere left in the country!"

-The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney.

2006-05-20T00:38:00.000-07:00

You know, if Harper doesn't show, Tracy Might:

So, I hear scuttlebutt that Stephen Harper might skip out on the press gallery dinner. If he doesn't want to give a speech, maybe they could invite the leader of Canada's other conservative party, Tracy Parsons. She's witty and she'd be the only female leader there, unless they wanted to give Connie Fogal a ring. So, how about it press gallery, Harper wants to punish you, you embarass him.

Just a suggestion.

2006-05-17T07:27:00.000-07:00

Thrill as the Conservatives cop out on the one good thing I thought they were going to do:

No, Stockwell. Keep the licencing fee, scrap the registry, not the other way around. Please. If you can't pay 12 dollars a year to confirm that you are qualified to own a gun, I don't want you owning a gun. Do I want a registry? Hell no. Here's my plan that would have cost the same amount of money as the registry over the next 10 years and still reduced crime:

Phase 1: The touchy feeley children phase:

We take the children of 12 thousand single parents earning under 30 thousand a year. 6000 children of single fathers, 6000 single mothers. We give them a 20,000 RESP. Boom! 12 thousand more university grads with a way out of poverty for their children and their children's children. "But Sean, why don't we give that money to students?" Because upper middle income voters hate students. They think students are whiny know it alls who don't work for a living.

This is odd seeing that today's upper middle income voters were yesterday's students and had to work about 2/5ths as long at the minimum wage to raise their tuitions as todays students, but whatever. Apparently money is more important if given to a toddler or a child. Fine, 250 million for the kids.

Phase 2: The rehabilitation phase:

We take the current prison population and a quarter billion and just go on a rehabilitation spending spree! Farms, fine arts, university level seminars, just go nuts spending money, not only to rehabilitate prisoners, but to place them in meaningful jobs in the workforce. That way there's an actual reason to look forward to getting out. If we tell a convict that they are paying their debt to society over a certain term (read: sentence) Then we, as a society, must ensure that they do not continue to pay after that debt has been paid in full. How about some truth in sentencing Vic?

Phase 3: The quicker turnaround phase:

We spend 100 million to build the best forensics and ballistics labs that the country has ever seen. Hell, we may even be able to recoup the costs with a new series: CSI: Soviet Canuckistan. Then we take the extra 150 million and hire 300 new judges and additional infrastructure for their court proceedings. That means that when somebody robs you at work on Easter Sunday 2005, you'll receive a subpoena sooner than May 30th, 2006! That slower turnaround time will make eye-witnesses more reliable. (Am I bitter about this?)

Phase 4: The stupid cash rebate phase:

Cut every canadian a cheque for $7.49 (The stamps are 51 cents) There. There's your sponsorship money back. Even the part of it (at least 60%) where we got value for money. Will you shut up about it now?

Tah Dah!

It's crunch time Canada. Are you guys are madder at $100 Million worth of theft than $1 Billion worth of negligence? Go ahead, prove my creeping cynicism wrong.

2006-05-15T22:19:00.000-07:00

Under NAFTA, Do we even retain the right to write our own laws. And if so, can we use Canadian Pulp?

PRESS RELEASE

Standing down: Actions betraying slogans.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 15, 2006

Toronto, ON – Mr. Harper came to office under the slogan “Stand up for Canada” but he drops final determination that the United States has abrogated a signed treaty (NAFTA) in return for an agreement that returns only part of the money taken illegally [My emphasis] from our lumber industry. This alone is enough to say that this new Conservative government has lost the "moral authority to govern", to use Harper’s words.

"Open Federalism", another Harper feel good phrase, in the softwood lumber agreement is accepting that alterations in provincial forest policy changes be subject to U.S. government approval and requesting the provinces agree to this and all other terms within 24 hours.

This new Conservative minority has mastered “spin” – and the defenders will try to persuade Canadians there is no loss of sovereignty. Or they’ll go on the attack. But the reality is – so far, there is only one party that has come out strongly on this issue and it’s the Progressive Canadian party. We were critical of the Liberal approach and we abhor the neo-Conservative approach.

The P.C. Party is absolutely against giving up our sovereignty and has the expectation our trading partners keep their agreements. Doing anything else merely telegraphs that we can be bullied whenever it is convenient.

As one agreement being broken another “agreement” is negotiated. No wonder they want it done quickly. The government is practicing “sleight of hand”. It doesn’t want people thinking this through carefully, debating the implications or even reading this agreement and finding out how we have given away our sovereignty so that the Harper government can redeem Mr. Emerson. There is no cost to the U.S. It doesn’t have to live up to the North American Free Trade Agreement, why would one more agreement matter? The only possible rationale is that this new agreement is so lopsided in favour of the U.S. interests that they’d be fools not to follow it.

There are no doubt MPs on the government side who know this is wrong but refuse to speak up. They have seen what Mr. Harper does to anyone who disagrees with him. There are also those who know this is wrong but would make a deal with the devil because they are so close to power that they can taste it. Either way, Canada’s interests go undefended.

Speaking in defence of the Agreement, Mr. Emerson speaks of the U.S. making "concessions" where none exist. He says "At the end of the day the government has to represent the public interest and of Canada as a whole," which for him is avoiding the situation that " if Canada continues to rely on NAFTA, the Americans are likely to expand their attacks on the Canadian forest industry to include other products."

Canadians ought to be informed of what is happening. Mr. Harper is once again denying his words, “Canadians don’t turn and run” by his actions. We are to accept tucking our collective tails between our legs and begging the U.S. to give us back part of the money they took from us illegally. And we’ll go cap in hand with any forest management program we have to have the U.S. tell us what Canadian provinces can and can not do. If that’s not turning and running, what is?

"As every child learns in the school yard, you don’t deal with a bully by running, hiding or begging. You stand up to them. Quietly and with dignity you say --- no, I’m not going to take this. And you stand your ground. That’s what people with character do.", stated Tracy Parsons, Progressive Canadian Party Leader.

Stand up for Canada? It requires a back-bone to stand up. There is none evident in the Bush-Harper agreement. There is courage in following through with the challenge the U.S. has made to the March 17 NAFTA panel findings which went in favour of Canada. Anything else is like failing to show up for the last game of the Stanley Cup finals.

The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party is a registered Federal Political Party comprised of progressive-conservative minded Canadians rebuilding from the roots of the former Progressive Conservative Party. For more information on the PC Party, it’s policies, structure or general information, go to www.progressivecanadian.org or call 866-812-6972.

-30-

For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

Tracy Parsons, Leader
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel 866-812-6972
tracy.parsons@pcparty.org

Jim Love, President
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel (647) 403-5519
jim.love@pcparty.org

QUOTES AND INFORMATION CITED DRAWN FROM:

Emerson defends softwood deal
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/05/12/1577382-cp.html

Ottawa's softwood deadline called 'railroad'
TREATIES I The Tories are fast-tracking the agreement process
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=0c6be61b-4616-45cf-b6e5-1a6742e6f51d

Forest policies must now be vetted by U.S., Emerson says
SOFTWOOD DEAL I B.C.'s timber pricing system awaits Washington approval
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=d2238df1-293b-44c4-aca4-e223df2f6cd4

That's the essential Canadian dilemma. Do we aquiese or disagree?

"As every child learns in the school yard, you don’t deal with a bully by running, hiding or begging. You stand up to them. Quietly and with dignity you say --- no, I’m not going to take this. And you stand your ground. That’s what people with character do."

-Tracy Parsons.

I'm proud to be supporting a party that has, to quote Joe Clark in 1966, "The will to live, a nation alone." I'm proud to be a Tory.

2006-05-15T09:58:00.000-07:00

Methinks the blogger doth protest too much:

At any rate, realised that there was 4 years worth of ill thought ideas and drive by smears that I had yet to criticise JJ for, so I continue. Nice to have the morning to myself.

JJ:

Was thumbing through the archives and thought I might point out an odd fact and arguement or two... or six.

March 26th, 2004:

" I am really getting sick of the word "neo con," especially in Canada. What does it even mean? No one seems to have a clear answer, other than it is some sort of "eviler" conservative."

Neo-Conservative: The exact opposite of conservative.

-John Ralston Saul, The Doubter's Companion.

March 15th, 2004:

"Apparently the best way to deal with this new climate of terror is to throw out the party which has been most aggressive in participating in the war on terror."

Indeed it is a good idea to respond by throwing out the supporters of a war against a state, when the actors are non-state actors. Much like invading the US for the actions of the IRA, in the 20s, Invading Iraq due to the actions of Al Qaida is a nebulous strategem indeed.

" I mean, we have the President of an island, who came to power three decades ago, and is still in power. And he has a long gray beard, smokes cigars, and wears the same damn green outfit 365 days a year. Castro is really a cartoon character on his own."

Actually, despite the aporcryphal poison cigar plan, Fidel Castro stopped smoking in 1985-86 (There appears to be some disagreement about the exact date.) in an attempt to encourage better health amoung Cubans. Nit picking here, but still, just as traditionally one could wear hats in the house, despite Rick Mercer's "Tradition" sketch, this aside weakens an overall good entry. And he came to power in 1959, 5 decades ago, either by 10 year spans or rounding, as it stands. Moreover you made that point in your January 2nd cartoon, so I'm assuming that this is simply a typo. But the Cigar thing is 20 years out of date.

December 24th 2003:

Where's the direct line pointing from the Queen to the GG? I bet the chart would appear far less nebulous if drawn in that manner. Kudos, on the other hand, for separating the queen from the crown.

November 7th 2003:

" Everyone knows who Noam Chomsky is, right? He's some really whacko socialist professor guy who writes lots of books about how all of the world's suffering is the result of one gigantic capitalist conspiracy, planned and coordinated by the United States."

You really do spread the word Socialist around like cream cheese. Noam Chomsky has continually identified his support for Anarcho-Synicalism, (notably in Manufacturing Consent) which is a system of government even more inimical to a Classical conservative like my self.

November 5th, 2003:

It's truly amazing that such an easily bullied state has never failed to gain territory in a single war in its strife filled history. This, however is a repetition of the National Post fallacy, identify Jewish ethnicity with the Israeli state, thus pigeonholing and stereotyping both groups. A cute rhetorical trick, but it does little to truly evaluate the issue.

November 3rd, 2003:

The American Gross Domestic Product, which according to my "introduction to economics" university course is the total value of produced American goods and services, has gone up by a shocking 7% this year. "

The 7% increase is in nominal GDP: GDP including inflation. US inflation has been runaway since the 2002 (ahem) recovery and tends to be on the order of magnitude of 3-6% per annum. (This has begun to slow) In addition, it should be expected that strong growth should follow such a devastating recession. Economic output nearly doubled in the United states between 1931 and 1935. Using the doubling rate, that means that over those 4 years the GDP increased roughly 17% per annum.

What the heck, let's make it an even half dozen.

June 4th, 2003:

"Peter MacKay was elected leader of the Canadian Conservative party this week, after making a last minute deal with socialist activist David Orchard who was also running for some reason."

1. As a delegate o said convention, I can tell you the following: Joe Clark brokered the deal, and the terms were pretty much named going into convention.

2. I'd like to challenge you to produce one article in which David Orchard identifies himself as a socialist. Maybe you could start with, "What makes me a Conservative."

In conclusion. You seem to use Socialist in the same manner that you accuse others of using the word Neo-Conservative. Your failure to grasp the minutae of history and constitutional law bodes not well for a reader trying to ascertain your grasp of the broader strokes of same.

As always it is my pleasure to offer constructive criticism of your excellent work,

Sean Tisdall

2006-05-15T04:32:00.000-07:00

7 Down, 9 to go, and some thoughts on the forward thinking Fossils versus the one note Arsonists:

the Edmonton Oilers are 1 win away from the conference championships, 5 wins from the Stanley Cup Final and 9 wins from cup #6. Why did Edmonton, which was faring so poorly in games 1 and 2 manage to so thoroughly dominate the Sharks upon their return to the Tank this Sunday? The ability to learn.

San Jose has such horrendous ice that the Oiler's typical fast, hitting style of play was punished instead of rewarded. Shots weren't as valuable as posession. Defense was at a premium as goals were marginal. It was defensive hockey at its best. Edmonton learned to throttle back, much as the Edmonton politician advocates putting 30% of Oil royalites into an education endowment, the Oilers left their gas in the tank instead of wasting their prodigious advantage in free wheeling skating by actually bothering to employ it in San Jose. We will have a squad that is rested and ready after 3 days off to really hammer the Sharks into submission, by playing our style of game, when it is warranted.

Also, if Dylan wants to criticise the violence of the Edmonton Oilers he really ought to start with Mr. Vehicular Homicide himself, MacT.

Oil is a result of work, time and pressure. Flame is fleeting and indicative of lack of control.

TTFN from ISMHWRSD. Have fun golfing Calgary.

2006-05-14T08:58:00.000-07:00

JJ McCullough, Master Tactician:

I will take this opportunity to note that all my correspondence with Mr. McCullough via e-mail is available on this blog.

"J.J. McCullough" wrote:

Please stop emailing me.

-JJ

JJ:

In reply to your request, I must ask you to diligently apply those skills pertaining to critical analysis that only Margaret Trudeau's alma mater can provide. I use this email adress so as to express my disappointment when you argue in what strikes me as a disingenuous fashion. I shall most certainly not cease to point out your editorial oversights with rapid turn around, like any other political publication, paperless or otherwise. The Edmonton Sun, Journal, Star, Globe and Mail, Free Dominion, Joe Hueglin's Daily Digest, Right of Center Ice, DaveBerta, Vue Weekly, etc, etc, get precisely the same standard of treatment. Just because the stunning visual aids are yours, most certainly does not mean that I would deny you my honest opinion and simply respond with sycophancy.

However if you find my messages in this particular inbox to be an inconvenience and thus you would prefer to set up a letter to the editor e-mail for all those responding to your content or would rather have me comment you by some other equally immediate and cost free media, I shall be happy to oblige.

Keep up the work,

Sean Tisdall

PS: You may have accidentally received my last letter twice. This would have been due to some confusion with the mailer. My apologies.

2006-05-14T04:29:00.000-07:00

Thought I'd be good enough to make this yet another open letter to JJ this is regarding his May 13th cartoon:

"The contents of the letter were predictable, and the US State Deparment is dismissing it as an irrelevant distraction."

-JJ

Have you actually read the contents of the letter? If you have, I find it most odd that you use the phrase Great Satan, given that the Iranian President attempts to appeal to the faith of the US President [and does not use the phrase at any point]. But hey, I keep forgetting, you're in this to make cartoons, not comment intelligently on world affairs.

Predictable. What a great nebulous insult you can use on anything you haven't read or your audience is unlikely to take the time to read, so as to reaffirm conventional truths to your audience. Now, I've actually read the works referred to below, but I'll just use these sentences to confirm to you the efficacy of such tactics:

"Adam Smith's [An Inquiry into the Causes and the Nature of]The Wealth of Nations is predictable in its opinions on the owning class"

-Adam Smith actually said that the owners of capital, not land however, had interests inimical to those of society and should be mistrusted.

"Joe Clark is predictable in his choice of party endorsement in the 2006 federal election"

- Joe's only public comment was to praise the PC party saying that they were doing good work.

"JJ McCullough maintains his predictable degree of independence from left and right wing political orthodoxy."

- ...

Love the artwork,

Sean Tisdall

2006-05-13T23:35:00.000-07:00

Edmonton is too classy to respond with equal vulgarity and sneering condesension to cheap potshots:

Like the one Dylan lobbed from the capital of the 51st state. Calgary is a city with a grand inferiority complex. It has built them an impressive hiway system that mirrors Atlanta's. It has given them the economic foresight of the Hon. Bill Vanderzalm, and the civic mindedness of Ayn Rand. Sure Dylan, we like having a big mall, but that wasn't a city initiative. That was an individual initiative, like the one that Bill Hunter, who founded the WHA had. However, as a city we don't collectively approve of hooliganism:

"bluemile.ca will not post pictures of broken property,
but we will submit your face if we catch you doing it"

- www.bluemile.ca website

Edmontonians resent Calgary, true, but because their politicians pauperise what should be their partner, not thier helot and pool of northern labour. Whereas Calgary seems to resent Edmonton... apparently because we have the Legislature. Well from the actions of the provincial government led by a Calgarian, it is curious that what a people covet, they should be so loath to make use of.

Please God let them have another boom. It's fun to watch them piss it away.

2006-05-12T10:01:00.000-07:00

My one rant about sentencing. It's not the length, it's the proportion:

Botched Kidnapping, wherein the victim is accidentally smothered: 15 to life

Gas and Go, wherein the victim, a gas station attendant, is dragged 7 kilometers, leaving a bloody trail on the roadways for police to follow: 4-9 years including time served.

The major difference: The cruelty and negligence of the criminal: One actually was actively trying not to kill. The other, really didn't seem to give a shit.

The difference that determined sentencing: The age of the victim.

Our courts are indeed hypocritical. They claim to use rehabilitation and social harm as sentencing guidlines, but noble goals, and ones easily pursued, that they are, they are obviously not being used as the criteria for sentencing in this event. And it's not the judges. The Crown only asked for 10 years in the gas station dragging death, because, after wasting the courts time for a little while, Darnel Pratt copped a plea. On the other hand, Min Chen maintained steadfastly that he had accidentally caused Celia Jiang's death during the comission of a crime.
He plead guilty quicky, expressed his remorse and is going away for a time that won't bring the victim back.

But justice isn't about punishment. It's about salvaging as much humanity as possible from the comission of a crime. That's what rehabilitation is about. Davie Fulton said as much as Diefenbaker's Progressive Minister of Justice when he announced that the government's prison policy was going to be rehabilitation. Mr. Toews of course, not a big fan of Mr. Fulton I guess. But then none of these so called Conservatives are...

(Ah the double entendre)

2006-05-11T02:51:00.000-07:00

Who's the PC finance critic anyway?

Maybe it should be Chris Schnurr.

2006-05-10T11:56:00.000-07:00

And then there were four:

Wow. The PC Blogosphere has undergone mitosis! Principled Conservative and Chris Schnurr/Jason Silvert (The brains behind our Windsor stronghold... as far as PC strongholds go.) both have blogs that are Big P Progressive Canadian and small c classical conservative. The rumors are true! We're not alone! And really, wouln't you rather read about this as opposed to the entirely unsubstantiated rumor that the Oilers are down 0-2 in the second round? Good. I knew you would. Anyhoo.

Having a network of shoot from the hip strategists and pundits a sufficient distance away from the leader (i.e. not written by her fingers... toes either, though that would be impressive.) is, to my mind, a sign of a healthy and growing party. In that vein, I should begin throwing up some policy discussion blub type things...

Soonish.

2006-05-10T06:51:00.000-07:00

No politics today, just was really proud of my reply e-mail:

ben coroma wrote:

FROM THE DESK OF BEN COROMA (ESQ).
THE HEAD OF FILE DEPARTMENT, AFRICAN
DEVELOPMENT BANK (ADB)
OUAGADOUGOU BURKINA-FASO WEST AFRICA.
PHONE: 00226-7885 7597.
PLANE CRASH WEB SITE...http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/859479.stm.

("REMITTANCE OF $15 MILLION U.S.A DOLLARS
CONFIDENTIAL IS THE CASE")

COMLIMENTS OF THE SEASON 2006,

FIRST, I MUST SOLICIT YOUR CONFIDENCE IN THIS TRANSACTION.THIS IS BY
VIRTUE OF ITS NATURE AS BEING UTTERLY CONFIDENTIAL AND TOP SECRET.
HOWEVER AFTER SERIES OF PETITION WAS RECIEVED BY THIS PRESENT REGIME FROM FOREIGN CONTRACTORS AND INABILITY OF THE BANK OF AFRICA (ADB)TO FULFILL THEIR OBLIGATION FOR THE PAYMENT TO ITS FOREIGN CREDITORS, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS, THEY MANDATED US TO CARRY OUT A CAREFUL AND COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ALL OVERDUE PAYMENTS TO FOREIGN CONTRACTORS AND TO EFFECT PAYMENTS IMMEDIATELY.

DURING THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROCESS, WE DISCOVERED AN ABANDONED SUM OF US$15 M (FIFTEEN MILLION US DOLLARS) IN AN ACCOUNT THAT BELONGS TO ONE OF OUR FOREIGN CUSTOMER WHO DIED ALONG WITH HIS ENTIRE FAMILY IN A PLANE CRASH THAT HAPPENED IN (MONDAY 31ST JULY 2000).SINCE WE GOT INFORMATION ABOUT
HIS DEATH, WE HAVE BEEN EXPECTING HIS NEXT OF KIN TO COME OVER AND CLAIM HIS MONEY BECAUSE WE CANNOT RELEASE IT UNLESS SOME BODY APPLIES FOR IT AS NEXT OF KIN OR RELATION TO THE DECEASED AS INDICATED IN OUR BANKING GUIDELINES AND LAWS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE LEARNT THAT ALL HIS SUPPOSED NEXT OF KIN OR RELATION DIED ALONGSIDE WITH HIM AT THE PLANE CRASH LEAVING NOBODY BEHIND FOR THE CLAIM.

IT IS THEREFORE UPON THIS DISCOVERY THAT I AND OTHER OFFICIALS IN MY
DEPARTMENT NOW DECIDED TO MAKE THIS BUSINESS PROPOSAL TO YOU AND RELEASE THE MONEY TO YOU AS THE NEXT OF KIN OR RELATION TO THE DECEASED FOR SAFETY AND SUBSEQUENT DISBURSEMENT SINCE NOBODY IS COMING FOR IT AND WE DON'T WANT THIS MONEY TO GO INTO THE BANK TREASURY AS UNCLAIMED BILL.

I AGREE THAT 40% OF THIS MONEY WILL BE FOR YOU AS A FOREIGN PARTNER, IN RESPECT TO THE PROVISION OF A FOREIGN ACCOUNT,AND 50% WOULD BE FOR ME, WHILE 10% WILL BE FOR EXPENSES INCURE DURING THE TRANSACTION. THERE AFTER I WILL VISIT YOUR COUNTRY FOR DISBURSEMENT ACCORDING TO THE PERCENTAGE INDICATED.THEREFORE, TO ENABLE THE IMMEDIATE TRANSFER OF THIS FUND TO YOU AS ARRANGED, YOU MUST APPLY FIRST TO THE BANK AS RELATION OR NEXT OF KIN OF THE DECEASED INDICATING YOUR BANK NAME, YOUR BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER, YOUR PRIVATE TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBER FOR EASY AND EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION AND LOCATION WHEREIN THE MONEY WILL BE REMITTED.

UPON THE RECEIPT OF YOUR REPLY, I WILL SEND TO YOU BY EMAIL THE TEXT OF THE APPLICATION TO FILL AND SEND TO THE BANK. I WILL NOT FAIL TO BRING TO YOUR NOTICE THAT THIS TRANSACTION IS HITCH-FREE RISK AND THIS TRANSACTION WILL ONLY TAKE US 14 BANKING DAYS BECAUSE AS A BANKER, I KNOW WHAT TO DO AND MOVE THE FUND INTO YOUR ACCOUNT WITHOUT ANY DELAY AND THATYOU SHOULD NOT ENTERTAIN ANY ATOM OF FEAR AS ALL REQUIRED ARRANGEMENT HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE TRANSFER.

YOU SHOULD CONTACT ME OM MY NUMBER 00226-7885 7597 AS SOON AS YOU RECEIVE THIS LETTER SO THAT I WILL SEND YOU THE TEXT OF THE APPLICATION TO APPLY TO THE BANK AND THE DATA INFORMATION OF THE DECEASED .

YOUR'S FAITHFULLY,

BEN COROMA (ESQ).
FROM (ADB) OUAGADOUGOU BURKINA-FASO.

ï¿½Miles de amigos con tus mismas aficiones! http://www.latinchat.com

My reply? See below.

Which way does the water turn in your toilet?

2006-05-07T23:55:00.000-07:00

Daveberta mentioned it first, but the PC party beat Bill Graham to carping about it so far as I know:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 8, 2006

Toronto, ON – "The Kremlin", as the Prime Ministers Office is becoming called, must assume responsibility for the Government of Canada website, http://www.gc.ca/main_e.html , becoming a public relations tool for the Harper government.

From the “turning a new leaf” right down to the budget – it’s clear that this site is dedicated not to providing access to
services but to ensuring that anyone looking for services gets a Conservative Party commercial. The headline "Prime Minister Harper and Premier Charest sign historic agreement establishing a formal role for Québec in UNESCO" is found not only on the "gc.ca" site but also Conservative Party site, http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2444/ , and the personal site of Conservative Leader Harper, http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1151 .

Not only the headline story but the Five Priorities are featured on all three, all of which are in process as opposed to being Government of Canada Services. This site is no longer providing information to Canadians as to what the Government of Canada has available for them - rather it is what the Harper Government wants them to have.

To visit the three sites is to see the purely political replicated on the governmental . To view the attached pdf file is to see that, not content with the one page messaging of the Conservative Party of Canada positions, they are insinuated into other Government of Canada webpages as well.

These websites being available at tax payers expense remove the need for an adscam for monetary resources. Their provision of a means of controlled messaging diminish the role of the media and the desire or need to forge a positive relationship.

“It’s disgraceful” stated Progressive Canadian Party Leader Tracy Parsons. “This is the use of taxpayer funds to promote a political party. Taxpayers are already paying $1.75. Now they are paying advertising costs.”

Jim Love, Progressive Canadian Party President, in releasing the pdf presentation of the new Government website and the PC Party reaction to it stated . “It’s clear that this site is dedicated not to providing access to services but to ensuring that anyone looking for services gets a Conservative Party commercial.” said Love. “We urge the public to complain loudly to the Government and demand a return of a non-partisan website

The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party is a registered Federal Political Party comprised of progressive-conservative minded Canadians rebuilding from the roots of the former Progressive Conservative Party. For more information on the PC Party, it’s policies, structure or general information, go to www.progressivecanadian.org or call 866-812-6972.

-30-

For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

Jim Love, President
Progressive Canadian Party
(647) 403-5519
jim.love@pcparty.org

For the government of Canada website to actually be a government website it would not announce policy not yet approved, but rather policies already approved and services available. I for one have a problem with a government that campaigns on the public dime, all the while lambasting the previous government for the same sin.

But then a party that brazenly baits people to cross the floor, while attacking the previous government for keeping a floor crosser on the front benches; a party that talks about accountability in government and a director of public prosecutions, but won't hold Brian Mulroney to task on new allegations that he purjured himself by Karl Heinz Schreiber; a party that attacked the Liberals for fighting campaigns with money that wasn't theirs, yet has been monumentally slow in returning the 72 thousand dollars that they owe David Orchard in donations and deposits (plus interest, courts normally prescribe 3%/annum if memory serves,) is in absolutely no position to lecture anybody about ethical political conduct with the possible exception of Jack Layton.

Once again, we here at ISMHWRSD would like to say: Told you so.

2006-05-07T18:30:00.000-07:00

Sometimes it's all about the wording:

"The $1200.00 renewal of the Baby Bonus will not increase the availability of day care spaces, nor transit tax credits have more than minimal effect on degrading of the atmosphere,"
-Tracy Parsons, PC leader.

Thanks to Principled Conservative for throwing this up... and Dylan at Right of Center Ice (You're spelling it the wrong way!) for linking to a conservative blogger as opposed to a Conservative blogger.

At any rate. That's why the Liberals lost. They needed to win the name game with the Conservatives, which you can't if you don't play. Call it the baby bonus. Do so loudly and frequently. Do so without cessation:

The $1200 dollars is a baby bonus.
The GST cut is a Debt Preservation Measure.
The lobbying legislation before parliament is the Politcal Retribution, and Professionalisation Act.
Harper's constitutional position is: Domino Devolution
The record of this government: is Expectations Created, Consequences Delayed

Everybody up to speed? Good.

2006-05-06T02:03:00.000-07:00

Ooh, this will stir up a hornet's nest... My kind of Fascist:

"a nation consists of a people or of peoples who have decided to have the same government."
-Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists 1948 advocating one european government.

At any rate at www.oswaldmosley.com you can listen to what could be identified as a lawful, democratic, pluralistic fascist. A leader whose quarrel was not ethnic, but economic, a man whose fight was for commonality, not totalitarianism. He called himself a fascist and he brings credit to the ideology, which was either perverted by himself into messianic classical conservatism or perverted by the fascist governments of Germany, Italy, and Spain into tyranny. You be the judge:

"In the lives of great nations comes a moment of decision, comes a moment of destiny. And this nation again and again in the great hours of it's fate, hath swept aside convention, hath swept aside the little man of caution and delay... we shall follow men and movements... That is the permanent and mighty mood of Britain!"

Wow. A fascism not based upon blood, but upon ideas and respect for institutions. Is it fascist? Tom Mosley seemed to think so. You decide.

2006-05-04T20:52:00.000-07:00

"You lost the confidence, we did not,'' - Wayne Marston

We never had said confidence in you Mr. Marston. There's a reason that the voters gave your 308 candidates a smaller plurality than the Conservatives or the Liberals. It's that you have no intention of forming a government. The NDP intends to wait until the Liberals are but a twitching corpse lying in the desert before it ever begins to pretend that it is a government in waiting. But that is the goal isn't it? The raison d'etre of this new socialist movement, to pretend that it is acutally socialist long enough to gain the support of socialits without losing the support of those supporting capitalism.

2006-05-03T03:42:00.000-07:00

On strike breaking and the curse of Ted Lindsay:

I could have trained my guns on the Conservative budget, but really. I don't think I can level any sterner criticism than 2 Billion over 5 years to combat climate change. That and the original tax slashing monstrosity are the two stupidest decisions to come down from the feds this time around. I don't really have the will to discuss in minutae why there seems to not be an economist in this government, I'll just comfort myself in the knowledge that Edmonton is going to the second round of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

How happy was I? I could hear the cheering from Whyte Avenue from my house, which is a mile away. And any self respecting union man and or marxist (I'm a lot more of the former) should be happy that the club that broke the players union the first time and was instrumental in breaking it the last time around (let me know when those seat prices start falling guys) were humbled on May Day. Oilers of the world unite! you have nothing to lose but space on your ring finger!

Yeah, that's about it for now.

2006-04-26T04:01:00.000-07:00

One of the Best Things About Canadian Press is its Main Customer:

The Sun dailies often reprint news from the CP feed verbatim and thus the CP feed tends to be somewhat right wing. So, as a result, you only catch the particularly stupid policies of this neo-liberal 'Conservative' government. Like this particularly interesting story about the Government's decision to bar journalistic coverage of flag draped coffins returning home containing those Canadians who have, without regard to their personal feelings about the efficacy of this war, laid down thier lives for Canada. For Canadian freedom.

There are some times when I do sincerely wonder if the Right Honourable Stephen Harper believes, as he claims, that Canadians are willing to make sacrifices in the name of freedom and ,if he does, whether or not he has considered the implications of such a commendable attribute and how best to honour it. Why else would he allow his minister, the Honourable Gordon O'Connor, to present such a policy? Surely the bereaved families would not be displeased at the receipt of a nation's gratitude.

The father of Sgt. Marc Leger who died in Afganistan had this to say about what the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister described as what was supposedly a deriliction of what is in the interest of the bereaved:

"It was a Canadian thing. It was something we wanted to show all Canadians - what the cost of their liberty is... It's still heartwarming to (remember) the people's faces. People were lined up on the 401, in 2002, all the way from Trenton to Toronto... They wanted to be there. They had to be there. I was told that often. . . and those are the things I carry with me all my life."

The best reasoning that I have heard from the responsible minister on official mourning, on a slodier by soldier basis, is that the Canadian tradition is to remember war dead as a group on November 11th. As John George Diefenbaker cited Wordsworth: "He is the true Conservative who knows when to lop the mouldering branch."

Our war dead protocol was adopted at a time of massive casualties. When Canadian soldiers enter a combat zone they no longer die too quickly to count. Nor does our enemy. If we are to believe the experts who brought us modern warfare, war is surgical. It now involves more and more materiel costs and less and less human costs.

Our government should recognise this societal shift and move to meet it, lest the logical conclusion of such an impulse be the fencing off of our war monuments. Our Prime Minister, if he is serious about the non-politicisation of grief over war dead could kindly ask my mayor, Stephen Mandel, to move the World War II memorial, which overlooks Churchill Square to a more... private location, so as not to continually violate what, more than sixty years later, is still a very private grieivng process.

Carolyn Parrish said that Canadians would begin to turn against the war when they saw Canadians returning in flag draped caskets. Is Stephen Harper really taking Carolyn Parrish's advice? We'll have to see just how heavy this balloon is.

2006-04-20T03:29:00.000-07:00

I can't believe I forgot to plug this:

David Orchard, prospective Liberal leadership candidate, organic farmer, and Canadian nationalist. The man who could be Canada's 23rd Prime Minister, will be speaking at 7 PM Thursday (tonite) at:

Student Union Bldg of the Taylor University College and Seminary at 11525 — 23rd Ave. (The entrance is from Saddleback Road and there is plenty of parking on the campus. You can see the facility at http://www.taylor-edu.ca/about/ourcampus/facilities.htm, where there is a map that you can click for the details. The meeting room is a big room opposite the library.)

I'll be interested in what he has to say as always. He's a more complex politician than he's given credit for. If you want to discuss issues as an equal with someone who would be first amoung equals, here's your chance. However I must say, I'm not a Liberal, nor do I forsee myself becoming one. I was and am a PC, because I am a classical conservative. I don't see openness to such views in the Liberal party.

2006-04-20T02:28:00.000-07:00

On Marginal Differences:

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper has finally admitted that the ground rushes up at one when he stated that Canadians would have to get used to high gasoline prices. He did sidestep the question of whether he would implement his 2004 campaign pledge of eliminating the GST on that segment of gasoline over 85 cents a litre and upon federal and provincial excise taxes, by saying that his GST plan would make, "A marginal difference," To consumers.

Marginal differences do add up. People, especially those holding a Masters of Economics, know that a florescent lightbulb here, a meal at home, instead of out, there, these are the things that make big changes, little by little. And furthermore every marginal benefit forgone is a marginal loss. Which is what makes the government's action on energy supply so very worrisome indeed. I am at this point unconcerned about the science of climate change.

Why? Simply put, most climatologists state that we have already passed the threshold for significant alterations in the planet's weather patterns. Either they are rgith, or they are wrong, we shall know soon enough. But whether or not we are to have haywire weather, everyday that the Hon. Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Envrionment, sits on the alternative energy file and refuses to make major investments in wind, solar, geothermal, and other alternative forms of free energy, the more ground that this nation loses in the emerging lucrative market of emerging energy.

We won't keep much of the nation employed in labs developing these techologies, sadly enough, but we will keep them employed building windmills, refining wastes into bio-gas and bio-diesel (Though to be precise the diesel we use right now is from biological sources, we just had the planet process it instead of a refinery.) To turn canola oil into diesel and to burn the diesel to harvest more canola is a carbon neutral process. Canadians, on left and right, must stop being so superficial about the economics of the environment. An economically viable system should not be in the practice of drawing down it's capital yet we do that to the tune of millions of barrels of oil a day. Every day that we fail to invest fully in the development of these existing technologies costs us far more than will be gained in terms of economies from the private sector. That our Prime Minister, a master's economist, can't realise that simple fact, and myself, a line cook, can says more about the dysfunctionality of our political system than a tenth of a billion dollars in graft ever will.

2006-04-13T04:37:00.000-07:00

Harper's pledge to bankrupt the government:

Far be it from an opportunistic politician like me (best finish 6 of 8) to argue against a tax cut, but shouldn't we be using surplus revenue to pay down the half trillion dollar debt?! but anyway, quoth Harper about the GST Cut of 1/107th:

"It will help seniors to pay their utility bills, students to meet the rent, low-income families to put more groceries on the table," he said, noting that a home buyer could save about $4,000 when purchasing a $200,000 home.

A cut of 1/107'th will save less than $2000 on such a purchase. And don't you think the seller will pocket some of the difference. Do you see prices falling in anticipation of such a move? Hell no. You know why. Because prices won't move. You will pay the same tomorrow what you paid today. The only difference: Businesses will pocket the money instead of our healthcare or university system. Aren't you glad you elected an honest media dodger like Harper?

In addition, the government enjoyed a record surplus of $9 Billion, which is what a 2 point cut in the GST will cost. Don't we want to pay down the debt? Don't we want to solve the shrill whine of imbalance between the media coverage given to and the actual financial needs of the provinces? Do we hate those evil Liberals enough to nix child care for a generation? How will we afford those things when the first real fiscal move of the Harper government is a structural giveaway of $4.5 Billion?

I'm just askin' is all.

2006-04-10T23:59:00.000-07:00

For the first time In my life I got more flies with vinegar then I did with honey. Weird. Not classy. I didn't like it:

I essentially called Bonus Stage creator Matt Wilson a burnt out hack who coulnd't come up with an original plot if it infected him with syphilis. (I'm not proud of myself for that) Matt responded with the script for the next episode. It's damn good. It's funny. It's brilliant. It's less likely to get produced than a Police Academy-Godfather crossover. The moral: There isn't one.

So now it's time to plug my latest effort: Gorffwysfa. It's the kind of series you'd expect from me, except that I've tried to get a webtoon together that Eugene Forsey and your 14 year old gamer cousin would both enjoy. Only problem? It's not animated or voiced at this point. We're working on that.

In other news. I gots other important stuff to do too.

2006-04-04T02:49:00.000-07:00

I Usually leave the Iraq War alone, because I'm an economist and thus interested in the opportunity cost of transactions:

When Something Awful told me that you could buy an HDTV for every American (No layaway) or 16 grand and a plane ticket to the USA for every Iraqi I felt the need to point out what a colossal disaster this war is. I mean, An HDTV for everyone. Now there's a part of the NDP platform I missed! By the way we were calling for a free ride scholarship after a period of time spent in country for all students, whereas SA calls for 7+ Million. It's affordable, it's a good idea, and you put it short of matching the Cristian Heritage Party. Next time.

2006-04-03T00:05:00.000-07:00

I was gonna write relevant political commentary, honest I was but...

Look, Something Awful that looks mysteriously like the Harper Family!

WARNING: Foul language and demonic meat by-products!

2006-04-01T14:43:00.000-08:00

I suppose I should be happy he's got an april fools gag... but it's JJ baiting the lefties:

EDIT: Well, he took it down and I didn't have the foresight to save it here. Suffice it to say JJ drew haprer is what I suppose was supposed to be a communist uniform and had him holding a Hammer and Scythe flag and listening to the radio: "Suspending parliament? Decreeing laws? Is this waht counts for democracy in Canada?" Or something to that effect. And having harper think that. "maybe now isn't a good time to unveil the new flag."

Ooh, this is a good one Mr. McCullough: Let's say that Harper is suspending parliament and legislating by decree and let the lefty blogsters howl and then tomorrow say, "see things aren't so bad. Also the left is willing to believe anything." Well at least someone got the joke. Only question is if it's Mr. McCullough. Salami tactics JJ anyone looking to suspend civil liberties doesn't work like that. They go little slice by little slice so that you don't have to make one decision to oppose them, you have to make a thousand. But yeah, don't you think there'd be portraits of Friedman on the buildings if it was that kind of Conservative takeover?

2006-04-01T11:22:00.000-08:00

Looks like the provincial PC's may have found some progressive:

Or maybe I'm just reading too much into this. But I'm positively giddy. More analysis as things unfold.

2006-03-30T10:53:00.000-08:00

JJ McCullough: Arbiter of Socialism:

Which is some strange ideology which seems to encompass everything that ever veers left of McKenna Liberalism.

Let's see what Mr. McCullough Had to say about David Orchard's possible Liberal leadership run yesterday:

Also showing an interest is David Orchard, who is this weird socialist activist with an extraordinarily intense pathological hatred of the United States and free trade. Orchard is what they call an "entryist," namely a guy who tries to take control of things he should not be taking control of. He repeatedly tried to get elected leader of the old Progressive Conservative Party, for example.

Not withstanding the fact that he finished second each time, I wondered what the internet thought about Entryism, Anti-Americanism, and Socialism when searched for in conjunction with another Canadian politician: Pierre Trudeau.

When I search "Pierre Trudeau" on www.google.ca I get about 587,000 hits.

When I search "David Orchard" I get 363,000. Therefore if the ratio of "Pierre Trudeau" + X to "David Orchard" + X is 587/363 (About 1.6 or 8 to 5) or greater, Pierre is considered by the vox poppuli to be more X than David Orchard. Agreed? Good.

When Searching "Weird Socialist Activist" David: 16 Pierre: 229 about 15 to 1

When Searching "Hatred" + "United States" David: 4510 Pierre: 22,400 about 5 to 1

When Searching "Entryist" David: 102 Pierre: 6

This last one I will concede. People think David Orchard is an entryist. However, given that Mr. Orchard made his decision to first seek the PC leadership after talking political history with Pierre Trudeau one might simply say that the old dog was never one for good optics, which he proved when he took the leadership of a party that he had spurned his entire life time previously.

So was David Orchard a PC entryist when he'd never run for another party, but Pierre Trudeau who ran as an NDP'er, vocally criticised Pearson as the, "defrocked priest of peace," and proceeded to serve as his justice minister is not? Sure thing JJ.

Also David shaved that most Canadian of 'staches three years ago. Pity. And he's over six feet tall. So I don't know why you continue to draw him as some sort of bespectacled midget.

I suppose it's the Joe Clark effect. Joe was actually a few inches taller than Pierre Trudeau, but don't tell that to anyone who followed the era.

So yeah, JJ. Do the legwork, study the issues, and don't let Rod Love do your backgrounders. Oh, and JJ if you'd like equal time here at ISMHWRSD you're welcome to it.

McCullough Classiness update:

In response to a picture of Alberta PC Leadership contender Mark Norris JJ had this to say to me on MSN:

"Obese!"
"I hope he wins he'll be so much easier to draw [than Jim Dinning]"

Classy Mr. McCullough You're lucky you draw so damn well.

2006-03-28T23:14:00.000-08:00

I wanted to talk about boycotting Morrissey, but I can't. It's a constitutional thing:

So the Prime Minister in his firm grasp of the nature of Canadian politics states that the Cabinet doesn't legally have to inform people of when they are meeting. How does he claim this right to cabinet secrecy?

"It's a constitutional thing."

Well, sure I agree with the right of Cabinet to have full and frank in camera discussions at which point they can disclose as much or as little about the meeting they see fit. That is indeed a constiutional thing.

But you know what else is a constitutional thing? Disuetude. The right of Cabinet to not disclose the very fact that it is meeting has long since been forefeit by the government. You know why? They never invoke it! That's disuetude.

Just another constitutional thing brought to you by the good person at ISMHWRSD. I'm sure it'll catch on.

2006-03-28T08:42:00.000-08:00

150th Entry at I Shaved My Head When Robert Stanfield Died? I Just Passed Strongbad's Email Total? I think I'll Celebrate with that Promised Analysis of Stanfield's 1971 Speech to the Empire Club:

Behold, the wisdom of Red Toryism!

Stanfield on the Economy:

"I think we can sum up the economic challenge that faces us in one question. What is the direction in which our economy must go if it is to provide our workers with jobs, our children with opportunities and our people with an acceptable standard of living? That is the fundamental question we must answer. "

Yes! He goes on to say that economic growth is a means to this end. Nothing about competing with emerging market, paradigm, or other assorted BS. People gotta eat and we gotta get 'em food. Of course that'd be Alvin Hamilton's speaking style but you get the drift.

Stanfield on the 'Special Relationship'

In the past, we have been cushioned against the full impact of United States trading decisions. It was assumed in Ottawa that our two countries were involved in a very special relationship. And Washington very often acted as though this were the case. So, even though we occasionally complained that we were being taken for granted, we lived with the comfortable feeling that, regardless of what else might happen, the United States would always consider our interests as well as its own.

Sure, deal with the Americans, but remember the difference between neighbours and family. There is no 'special relationship,' only exigencies of geography.

Stanfield on the state:

Big government will not disappear. That is obvious. But there must be a realization that the purpose of any government, large or small, must be to serve the people, not to serve itself.

Libertarians and neo-classicalists who desire to have the state wound down betray conservative traditions. They are right wing, not conservative.

Finally, without accompanying commentary from me: Stanfield on Canadian Nationalism:

It has been said that what matters most are a people's knowledge that they have done great things in the past and their hope to do greater in the future. We in Canada have accomplished great things in knitting together half a continent. And we are capable of doing much more. We have a common destiny, and our challenge is to fulfill that destiny.
That is what Canadian nationalism means to me. And in that sense I am proud to be a Canadian nationalist.

2006-03-27T17:57:00.000-08:00

Oh, Come on, You knew this would happen:

David Orchard Mulling run at Liberal Leadership.

So let's look at this rationally. First thing to ask David: Why?

Because there are no symetrical, centralist, federalist, NAFTA skeptics running, who put their money where their mouth is wheen it comes to issues of sustainability. I don't even know if there are any symetrical federalists running.

Why now? Why not Months ago when you had an organisation to get together?

David is very lucky in this respect. He has an organisation of former PC's who were already inclined to support the Liberals over the Conservatives. By waiting he's lost some to the NDP, Conservatives, PCs, and Greens, but given the polling numbers he would probably have about 6,000 of his previous 10,000 activists who would have no compunction about joining the Liberals and in addition those other 4000 might have to think hard about making the switch too.

Who inside the existing party would support him?

Red Tories who already made the switch, Turner Liberals, Modernists, who are often seen as the party's soft social conservative wing, Hard Quebec Federalists, who are willing to combat as opposed to accomodate separatists, Neo-Trudeauites. Finally his conversations with Pierre Trudeau about which party to join would come in handy as opposed to making him look like a fish out of water. Let's not forget that the country was intitially ruled by a liberal-conservative coalition.

Which camps, and factions could David Orchard draw support from before the convention?

Get David Orchard up on a platform debating Belinda Stronach, Scott Brison, and Michael Ignatief and we could see David serve as a lightning rod for the party's nationalists.

If Orchard comes to convention with a sizeable chunk of support, won't he run out of growing room?

This assumes that the Liberals are of one mind on NAFTA. He softwood dispute has brushed away the veil on how the Americans respect agreements and Liberals realise that it probably wouldn't cost much to pull out of or at least renegotiate NAFTA and it would probably be beneficial to the Canadian economy to get the muscle of the WTO back behind it. David Orchard is seen as a refugee, not a pariah in this party.

So what sequence of events could actually cause an Orchard victory at convention?

1. Ignatief loses a lot of uncommitted delegates with a lackluster speech that reads well, but confuses, or even worse, alienates quite a few Liberal insiders who were backing Ignatief based on his saleability not his ideas.

2. Bob Rae's campaign fizzles in Ontario, the NDP keeps their activists away from his campaign in the West, and Ken Dryden, or better yet, John Godfrey picks a fight with Rae over his record.

3. Brison's campaign picks up the Bay Street right of the party, but doesn't retain a lot of PCs.

So what would David have to do on the first ballot?

Beat Dryden + Godfrey, and take 20 percent. David doesn't have to outrun the bear, he just has to outrun one of his opponents on the perceived 'left' of the party.

What happens next?

Godfrey drops out and moves to DrydenDryden drops off, and his supporters go to David. Then Rae's supporters find that Orchard is a better bet than Stronach to achieve their policy ends so they break heaviliy for Orchard.

Does this remind you of anyone?

Yeah.

2006-03-24T17:30:00.000-08:00

Oil in the engine:

Remember the hyper inflation of the 70's and 80's? Sure you do. Anyway it was pretty bad for our economy, because it weakened the dollar and made capital more expensive to import. Also it drove people out of stocks and into bonds. These things are signs of economic decline. So now we have moderate, predictable sustainable inflation between 1-3% per year. Now the National Post wants the inflation rate to go even lower, possibly as low as 0%. Well great, we must think. If lowering inflation a little is good, then lowering it even further will be excellent.

That, ladies and gentlemen is the same logic used by John Crow in 1990 and it was an exascerbating factor in the '90 recession and the jobless recovery that followed. An economy needs a certain amount of inflation so that prices can change more readily, relative to one another reflecting changes in demand and input costs. This brings us to the metaphor of the oil. Just as an engine will run poorly with too much oil running between parts, thus creating extraneous motion, our economic engine will run poorly with too little economic lubrication (inflation) causing prices to stick until they face massive correction.

Keep the economy moving. Keep inflation.

2006-03-22T16:15:00.000-08:00

Quick Question:

If Health Care is so unsustainable in Alberta, then how come it's rising slower than program spending? The latest Alberta budget calls for an 8% increase in program spending and a 7.5% increase in health spending. This is the disater that the aging population hath wrought? Looks just fine to me.

2006-03-21T22:26:00.000-08:00

Wow. It's been a while hasn't it folks?

I still really have nothing new to comment on. Other than the fact that for a government to lose 1 dollar in every ten thousand to corruption is fantastically good and that as long as the Saskatchewan party holds the PC name hostage I won't be supporting them.

Also an ex-pat Canadian / registered Republican has called my criticism of the United States measured. To my fellow disco nationalists, I apologise. But in all seriousness, I don't hate America, I just shudder at the thought of implementing their political and economic culture and continually attempt to remind my American readers (I'm as surprised as you are) that what makes the good guys moral is that they play by the rules.

So, in conclusion, I'm going to have a look at the Stanfield speech shortly and give my analysis later, but until then I leave you with a quotation from Sir George Etienne Cartier:

"It is necessary, at times, to be a little anti-yankee."

And from Will Ferguson:

"If America is exhibitionist, Canada is voyeur. Our fetishes mesh nicely."

2006-03-12T21:48:00.000-08:00

I know I'm moving fast, but this is heavy stuff:

"I did not join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy,"

-Ben Griffin SAS Officer.

Mr. Griffin said he had witnessed, "dozens of illegal acts," by US troops, claiming they viewed all Iraqis as "untermenschen" - the Nazi term for races regarded as sub-human.

Anyone who decries the treatmet of prisones after serving in Ireland (feck Northern Ireland... I'ts one fecking country. Look at a map!) gets my attention.

2006-03-12T21:23:00.000-08:00

The other day I wrote a column in support of Rush Limbaugh Circa '90. I've never felt more thouroughly rebuked by today's Rush.:

I can't find Rush's e-mail address so that I can't send my lamentation. If anybody can find a way to contact rush with a simple non-membership link I owe them a drink... containing alcohol. And a Dinner. Not containing alcohol.

Therefore I leave you with the ballad of the hypocrite:

2006-03-12T20:24:00.000-08:00

Anti-Zionism aside, I looked for love on the Internet:

And found a billion matches. Probalby about half of those are women. There's hope out there.

Also comics.

2006-03-12T20:09:00.000-08:00

Israel I beg you:

Fulfill the spirit of tolerance and love that is responsible for the re-creation of your state. Do not approve a constitution that begins the process of declaring a supreme people in your land. Ensure that people are given full rights to declare their vision for your land. Only then will your people be free.

2006-03-11T21:51:00.000-08:00

Modernist vs. Post Modernist:

Just saw this blog entry while browsing crooks and liars.

Read below after you've watched the video.

Oh how Rush Limbaugh hath fallen. This was a fairly quiet and reasonable person on this show. He was being moderately venomous, as most good pundits are, in decrying a boycott of Idaho Potatoes linked to an Idaho abortion bill. I'm glad of course that the Idaho Gov. vetoed the bill. I'm glad that the audience cheered. I'm glad that the point was made that illegal abortion costs lives in terms of the mother's life and in terms of unwanted pregnancies being prone to higher rates of crime and lower life expectancy.

You know what I'm not pleased at. Rush couldn't get a sentence in. It wasn't a dialogue, it was a shouting match and Rush didn't play that game. He didn't call people murders, he certainly had 10 minutes to do so. He didn't tell anyone to shut up. He didn't have a group of people ejected. I disagree with most of what he said except for what would be the creed of the Modernist:

"I am not responsible for your behavior."

I wish that the Bushist right would understand that. I wish that they wouldn't compare dissent to comfort to the enemy. I wish that Rush '90 had the decency of Rush '06. I wish that post-modernists on the right and the left would realise that retricting the freedom of our enemies is, in effect, rendering freedom useless.

You won't have a discussion when you call your opponent a murdering pig. There is legitimacy in calling someone a hypocrite, but murderer? Pig? That's not discourse. That's not how to show support for the disenfranchise. That is naught but a strong arm tactic.

2006-03-11T12:22:00.000-08:00

An analysis of Mysandry in the media, better than I could manage, by someone who was able to write one of the best comedies of the 20th century, despite the cliffhanger closer:

Michael Markowitz one of the writer's for Duckman.

2006-03-11T11:43:00.000-08:00

2006-03-09T18:12:00.000-08:00

Were the wheels ever on?

So let me get this straight:

1. Emmerson re-elected. "Proud to be a Liberal"

2. Two weeks later Emerson joins Conservative cabinet, saying that he wanted to continue to serve as cabinet minister.

3. Conservatives, namely Peter MacKay, deflect by saying that this is diffferent than the Stronach defection. He's right Blindy had a pretext for why she fell out with her party. For Alan Park's take go here and watch "Emerson in the Dumps"

4. New Democrat from Burnaby-Sourgrapes or somewhere calls up the ethics commissioner, charging that cabinet positions are, in effect, bribes, and thus Harper, who was courting Emerson during the election was somehow bribing him.

5. Ethics comissioner decides that this case is unique ans based on complaint from lone New Democrat launches an investigation.

6. Ralph Goodale kicks back in an easy chair with a big scotch and soda.

7. PMO claims that Shapiro is a Liberal hack and tried to have him removed the moment he took power, making the ethics comissioner not so much responsible to parliament as to the PMO

8. Conservative sound-biters claim that then Mr. Harper will be able to deliver an ethics comissioner who is truly accountable.

So... If we take everyone at their words:

The Liberal Party wins one, they lose one, and they can balm their wounds with the fact that it makes Harper look like a hypocrite beccause he ruled out this sort of behavior.

The Conservative Party is making a mockery of logic and they are trying to exploit residual anger over the previous conduct of the Liberal party to give them the political capital to ride this out.

The NDP is continuing in their fine role of having every person who is clearly innocent investigated by making a complaint in the grave tone that only years of incestuous policy meetings and groupthink can breed.

And people wonder why I'm a PC.

2006-03-07T02:30:00.000-08:00

Well, for my American readers:

Here's the big one. This might be the biggest Civil Rights reversal since Dred Scot or the biggest Civil rights victory since Brown vs. Board of Education. I certainly would like to think that the Governor's words about protecting society's most vulnerable are true, but I doubt it. Quoth Canadian Comedian Mike MacDonald:

"So why is it just Right to Life until you're born and then, 'here's a piece of cardboard, good luuuuuuck!'"

And that's the way the world was this March 7th, 2006.

2006-03-01T11:46:00.000-08:00

Let she who is without pen:

Browing Yahoo today let me know that Margaret Atwood, bemused fan of David Orchard, hater of free trade, took a bit of a run at long distance autographing through her robotics company.

Intrigued, I popped by for a visit, and read briefly through Canadian Press' typically pedestrian and underly-ambitious prose.

But yeah, parodies of pompous former Harry Ainlay Presidents aside, Margaret Atwood has invented, with the help of a couple of engineers, a real-time long-distance autographing machine that lets author and fan communicate over long distances via web cam. This is a pretty cool invention with a lot of commercial possibilities, including 24 hour legal services, and the elimination of British author jet lag and the even greater fear of British Authors going abroad on a book tour: American Beer.

2006-02-28T20:27:00.000-08:00

Wow. Fifteen minutes without political blogging, that's gotta be a new record:

Oh, William McBeath, after this:

And this.

I was waiting to see this.

And really, were you willfully blind to the favourable coverage you were getting from all media sources Will? I'm not really willing to play the coverage watch game right now, because in a 24 hour news cycle and subjective analysis from all parties it becomes very diffficult to point to a set of data as objective or subjective. My rule of thumb, when a page or screen makes me want to talk back, it's subjective. And the papers that make me want to do that the most, agit-prop weeklies and the Edmonton Sun, both actually agree with me (more or less) on the Emerson file.

Really, you neo-conservatives make it far too easy.

2006-02-28T20:12:00.000-08:00

Well, while Dylan's doing my work for me I may well just post about trivial stuff:

To the Creators of Bonus Stage: Were you aware that the overarching theme of your work was that your only dynamic charactter was forced into a metaphysical nightmare deviod of free will, growth, or any degree of faith in benevolence, and that, when free will was sought the ultimate puniishment was meted out and thus the themeatic thrust of your work is, that free will is, at best, a bar to happiness in western society, and that Tetris used to be fun, but there are better games now?

Twylackian Princesses notwithstanding, this is a curveball for our normally political blogster!

Shut up narrator.

OK!

2006-02-25T09:50:00.000-08:00

This is what I get for only paying moderate amounts of attention:

So Edmonton's finest free paper, the Agitprop Weekly has refused to run the latest Bob the Angry Flower cartoon, and I'm not sure why because, it makes fun of the idiotic bomb turban cartoon that supposedly caused so much trouble in the first place. Way to go Vue, you'll stand up for the right of someone to hit an elected official in the face with a pie, but a cartoon lampooning a cartoon about blasphemy, that doesn't attack Judeo Christian faith? That's too damn far. FYI I'm an agnostic at any rate so I'm not offended myself and actually think that maybe there ought to be substantive discussion as opposed to howls of anguish from the post-modernists, liberals, and soft theocrats and hoots of derision from libertarians, classical conservatives, muslim refusniks, and the like, but that's not happening anytime soon is it?

Anyway the whole Vue Weekly thing is kinda ironic considering the only reason that Vue was Publishing Bob in the first place is because See Magazine (the other weekly agitprop/massage parlor ads publication) wouldn't run this cartoon.

So to conclude, the impulse to sensor will destroy art.

Also, thanks to Dylan at Right of Center Ice for pluggin' my blog by putting it next to the giant PC logo. You done me a solid dude, here's your plug, or you could just check out my blogroll, you regular readers you.

2006-02-23T07:33:00.000-08:00

Now the Democrats are planning to take us too:

Partial Transcript of Jon Stewart talking with Peter Tertzakian, author of, "A Thousand Barrels a Second":

JS: People will find this surprising, but where does the majority, not the majority I should say, but where does the largest percentage of the foreign oil that the united States imports come from?

PT: Comes from Canada.

JS: Now that shocked me when I read that fact I thought that Saudi Arabia or Iran after goin into Iraq.

PT: No, Canada is your lagest suppliier or in the addiction metaphor your pusher I guess (laughter, applause) but in fact, Canada supplies more than twice as much as Saudi Arabia does, and equal to basically the whole Persian Gulf area.

JS: To the United States?

PT: Right

JS: Then why havent we invaded them if I may?

PT: Longest undefended border in the world that's a good question.

JS: I mean we could go up there tonight. Just you and me in my Humscalade and I can get halfway to Winnepeg.

PT: You're right you wouldn't even need to call Tommy Franks.

Meet you in the Diefenbunker. I'll bring the tinfoil hats.

2006-02-22T03:05:00.000-08:00

No Diefence today, but rather some internet fun/Canadian political wankery:

So, I was futzing around looking for something to do online when a URL popped into my head from some years back:

www.urban75.com

Now this is a wonderful webpage on its own thanks to the game Downing Street Fighter.

It's pretty much what you think it is. But I wen't and tried another wonderful timewaster today that I had never tried before: The Cossack Love Calculator!

Basically it gives the liklihood of a match between two individuals based solely on thier names. Having rapidly run out of pop culture celebrities whose coupling liklihood I would be amused to see predicted, I went to the politicians:

Disclaimer: I hold no responsibility for the below results they are just an amusing list arbitrarily selected:

Margaret Thatcher and...

Tony Blair: 36.5%

Tony Blur: 57%

Tony Benn: 37%

Clement Atlee: 55%

Which led me to other mis-matches behold my Canadian Lesbian Politician Couplometer:

Kim Campbell and:

Sheila Copps: 48%

Flora MacDonald: 56.5%

Libby Davies: 58%

Maureen McTeer: 67% (Incidentally both made thier first foray into federal politics at the same time, political bedfellows if you will)

(Current PC leader) Tracy Parsons: 37.5% (One Tory who, according to a computer applet, doesn't think that Kim is particularly cuddly)

Rona Ambrose: 48%

Dianne Ablonczy: 56.5%

Laureen Tesky: 77.5%

Which got me thinking about Prime Ministers and their wives/significant others. I got the info either from Wikipedia or, in the case of Dief, Joe, Pierre, and Marty Muldoon, memory. I tried to go with maiden names as often as possible:

Stephen Harper and Laureen Tesky: 76.5%

Paul Martin and Sheila Ann Cowan: 36.5%

Jean Chrétien and Aline Chainé: 17.5%

Avril Phaedra Douglas Campbell (I should have used this earlier, but what the heck) and:
Nathan Divinsky: 87.5%
Howard Eddy: 89.5%
Hershey Felder: 88%

(Wood Nymph Indeed!)

Martin Brian Mulroney and Mila Pivnicki: 63%

John Napier Turner and Geills McCrae Kilgour: 90%

Pierre Elliot Trudeau and:
Margaret Sinclair: 91%
Deborah Coyne: 93%

Charles Joseph Clark and Maureen McTeer: 83%

Lester Bowles Pearson and Maryon Moody: 93.5%

John George Diefenbaker and:
Edna Brower: 93%
Olive Freeman Palmer: 88%

Louis St. Laurent and Jeanne Renault: 94.5%

William Lyon MacKenzie King and Joan Patteson(Singificant 'Female Friend'): 90%

Richard Bedford Bennett and (Rumoured Squeeze) Agnes Campbell MacPhail: 67%

Arthur Meighen and Jessie Isabel Cox: 64.5%

Robert Laird Borden and Laura Bond: 75.5%

Wifrid Laurier and Zoe Lafontaine: 85.5%

Charles Tupper and Frances Morse: 56.5%

Mackenzie Bowell and Harriet Moore: 95.5%

John Sparrow David Thompson and Annie Affleck: 70%

John Joseph Caldwell Abbott and Mary Bethune: 90.5%

Alexander Mackenzie and:
Helen Neil: 75%
Jane Sym: 56.5%

John Alexander Macdonald and:
Isabella Clark: 81%
Susan Agnes Bernard: 78.5%

Conclusions: Prime Ministers, paragons of family virtue, get around. Reagan was the only divorced President. We've had two Divorced PMs with 3 divorces total.

Nobody wants to visualise Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair...

Sorry.

2006-02-21T02:42:00.000-08:00

Not much to report today:

Some fucker stole my mp3 player at work. Now I can finally say that music theft has become a problem, because the theft of this music means I can't use it anymore.

2006-02-19T08:18:00.000-08:00

In further Diefence: Part Three, Diefending Canadian Soverignty or, "You're not in Massachussets anymore Mr. President."

John Diefenbaker, 20th century Canada's greatest Prime Minister, was well noted for standing up to the United States not simply by pursuing a different economic policy, which is comparatively easy, but rather, by challenging the American perception that Canada would kow-tow when it came to American leadership on NATO-Communist relations. Diefenbaker fully supported his agriculture Minister Alvin Hamilton in successful negotiations to sell surplus Canadian wheat to Communist China, a bold move considering the country wasn't even recognised by most western nations at the time. Because many shipping companies operating out of British Columbia's ports were subsidiaries of American companies, the US government invoked the Trading with the Enemy Act to prevent ostensibly Canadian companies from the exercise of what was, in Canada, a legal market perogative. Kennedy raised the grain issue with Diefenbaker to which the PM responded with the aforementioned quotation.

When it came to accepting nuuclear weapons on Canadian soil to arm the Bomarc air defence complexes, Dief balked, having accepted the Bomarc II the US and Liberalsx argued that Diefenbaker had agreed to accept the nuclear warheads that they had been designed to carry. However Diefenbaker argued against the acceptance on two points: Invoking the Canadian anti-nuclear weaponry precedent, and further, citing the high explosive warheads that were developed for the first Bomarcs, stated that similar warheads could easily be designed, the problem being that the Americans would refuse to do so should they think that such a refusal held out any prospect of Canadian aquiescence. So Diefenbaker did what he had to do to ensure that Canadians would not act as an extension of the American nuclear battery, he held firm. And Pearson, accused Diefenbaker of flip flopping. Pearson then proceeded to repudiate his party's anti-nuclear stance and announced that as PM he would accept the nuclear warheads.

This led one NDP candidate in 1963 to sneeringly refer to Pearson as, "the defrocked priest of peace." Unfortunately, Pierre Trudeau was unsucssesful in his election bid that year. Though 21 years later he saw the last of the warheads leave Canadian soil for good.

Diefenbaker, willing to publicly disagree with the Americans on defence policy during the cold war. That about does it for me.

2006-02-14T11:33:00.000-08:00

Godammit, now I have to boycott the Brier:

Apparently Monsanto is sponsoring the Brier. This disgusting absentee landlord company has left me nothing left damitt. Well, I will fight back. I'm giong to get drunk and possibly curl during the Labatt Brier. (PS it will always be called that to me) But I will not plant genetellicly (intentional high crusade reference) modified canola seed. That is all. I'm maybe dead to Steve Smith, but I don't know. Can someone guilt him into calling me back? Possibly John George Diefenbaker, whose legacy I'm going to the trouble of defending?

2006-02-11T00:23:00.000-08:00

There's Ballsy and then there's Peter MacKay:

I have to have some degree of begrudging respect for someone who can make such obviously stupid statements and trust that people will not call him on his logic.

Quoth MacKay regarding the defection:

"What David Emerson did, I would suggest, is different, in the sense that he has done this early after the election in hopes of continuing the important work that he was doing inside a government which he was obviously very disillusioned with."

The only disillusionment that David Emerson suffered with the Liberals was that the Liberals wern't what they seemed to him to be, namely the government.

He would have been perfectly happy continuing to supportt them had they won. Now I'm not opposed to Mr. Emerson crossing the floor, though I would say that normally it's over an actual issue or having tried and become disgusted with the new situation in parliament. No, David Emerson is so disgusted by the idea of being on the wrong side of tthe mace that he ffelt it best to simply join the government of the day. The Liberals coalition hadn't changed, their stance on issues hadn't changed, they weren't allying themselves witth any party that made Mr. Emerson uncomfortable, as was the case with Blindie, he simply looked at the opposition benches and said, F*** that noise!

More From Peter:

"Unlike other moves, it didn't happen at a critical juncture that propped the government up. There wasn't that sense that there was strict reward or leadership ambition."

I believe that it is best to give people the benefit of the doubt regarding their motives, and only attack them if it is possible to disprove their reasons for taking an action. David Emerson has simply said he'd like to keep working on the Softwood file in Cabinet. He has explicitly stated that he crossed the floor for power.

David Emerson crossed the floor to retain power, it does help prop the government up, and there is a reward.

I suppose I should have come to expect this from the Ethical ConservativesTM, In fact I had I don't have a problem with the actions per se just that the Conservatives told the people that they weren't going to play the game this way. I never believed them for a second being twice shy, but I'm just going to take this opportunity to say:

I TOLD YOU SO!

2006-02-10T10:07:00.000-08:00

This one's easy: Parliamentary Freedom

Dief NEVER invvoked Closure, no matter how annoying tthe opposition was.

Done.