Wow. Apparently the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party now thinks that Stephane Dion is such a bad leader that they no longer even want him to have membership in the Liberal Party. That's quite an insult, even for Dion.
As reported today by the Ottawa Sun, a group of Liberals, led by former candidate Pierre-Luc Bellerose, has threatened to revoke Dion's party membership if he insists on remaining their leader. Instead, they hope to have a new leader selected and in place by the summer to prepare for the possibility of a fall election.
To engage in such an act of hostility and to do so in such an overt and public manner really shows the degree to which Dion is out of touch with the wishes of his members. If he ignores them when they will go to this length to send him a message, he will only weaken himself further. If he heeds the membership now, he might be able to get out with at least some dignity intact, although perhaps not.
Personally, I encourage Dion to remain Liberal leader for as long as possible just because I find this whole saga highly entertaining and I can't wait to see how much worse it will/can get for Dion!
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Happy Four Years with Stephen Harper as Our Leader
Today is the fourth anniversary of Stephen Harper winning the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, and I would like to take this opportunity to offer my congratulations on this milestone event!
Based on how far the Conservative Party has come over the past few years, it seems like a lot longer ago than four years that we have had this excellent politician as our leader. He is truly a leader, offering decisive and sound decisions on both domestic and foreign issues. The Canadian government no longer bases its policies on day-to-day polls, pretending that every cause is our number one priority depending on who the audience happened to be. Without Stephen Harper, I don't know that we would be in power today. Many thanks to a great leader.
On a day like today, I am very proud to be a Conservative!
Based on how far the Conservative Party has come over the past few years, it seems like a lot longer ago than four years that we have had this excellent politician as our leader. He is truly a leader, offering decisive and sound decisions on both domestic and foreign issues. The Canadian government no longer bases its policies on day-to-day polls, pretending that every cause is our number one priority depending on who the audience happened to be. Without Stephen Harper, I don't know that we would be in power today. Many thanks to a great leader.
On a day like today, I am very proud to be a Conservative!
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Ludicrous Claims by the NDP on Afghanistan
Today, I noticed that the NDP's website featured a photo of Jack Layton in front of a map of Afghanistan. The headline proclaims "NDP stands up for peace" - I can't believe the audacity and arrogance of the NDP to put up this type of story.
The article it links to features a letter by Jack Layton addressed to "Dear Friend" and criticizes the Conservative and Liberal Parties for their decision to support extending the mission until 2011. He writes that "our position is clear: Canada needs to safely withdraw from the combat mission and lead a process for bringing about security, stability and improving the lives of the Afghan people by building a path toward peace."
Will Jack never understand the military mission is there in order to facilitate peace in Afghanistan? Does he actually think our soldiers are over there just for fun? Does he think that our government is spending over a billion dollars in Afghanistan for nothing? The entire point of the Afghanistan mission is to bring peace and development to Afghanistan, which will never be possible without this mission to back it up.
I wonder if Jack has ever tried to build a well while being shot at? Or perhaps, has he ever tried to educate young boys and girls while being abducted by the Taliban and beheaded?
If we do not physically prevent the Taliban from harming Afghan civilians by getting in their way and opposing them militarily, they will not stop until they have terrorized and subjugated the entire population.
How on earth do the NDP expect peace to come about with the Taliban still present and active in Afghanistan???
The article it links to features a letter by Jack Layton addressed to "Dear Friend" and criticizes the Conservative and Liberal Parties for their decision to support extending the mission until 2011. He writes that "our position is clear: Canada needs to safely withdraw from the combat mission and lead a process for bringing about security, stability and improving the lives of the Afghan people by building a path toward peace."
Will Jack never understand the military mission is there in order to facilitate peace in Afghanistan? Does he actually think our soldiers are over there just for fun? Does he think that our government is spending over a billion dollars in Afghanistan for nothing? The entire point of the Afghanistan mission is to bring peace and development to Afghanistan, which will never be possible without this mission to back it up.
I wonder if Jack has ever tried to build a well while being shot at? Or perhaps, has he ever tried to educate young boys and girls while being abducted by the Taliban and beheaded?
If we do not physically prevent the Taliban from harming Afghan civilians by getting in their way and opposing them militarily, they will not stop until they have terrorized and subjugated the entire population.
How on earth do the NDP expect peace to come about with the Taliban still present and active in Afghanistan???
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Gomery Wrong in Criticisms of the Government
Today, former-Sponsorship Scandal Inquiry Head John Gomery criticized the government for what he characterized as overly centralized in the PMO. According to a CTV article, he said, "[Canadians] elect a House of Parliament which is there to deal with government policy. I don't think government policy should arrive only out of the prime minister's office."
Mr Gomery is completely wrong on this issue. The House of Commons is elected to serve as the legislative branch of government - it is NOT the executive branch of government, nor should it be. It is the role of the Cabinet to design policy directives, and the legislature has the right to approve or reject government policy, but not to make it.
Furthermore, it should especially not be the government bureaucracy and civil service setting government policy. The role of the civil service is to implement policy as directed by the Prime Minister and Ministers, not to dictate what it should be.
The different branches of government serve different functions here in Canada, and each should stick to their roles as laid out in the constitution. Development of government policy is the purview of the Executive branch and it should remain that way.
Mr Gomery is completely wrong on this issue. The House of Commons is elected to serve as the legislative branch of government - it is NOT the executive branch of government, nor should it be. It is the role of the Cabinet to design policy directives, and the legislature has the right to approve or reject government policy, but not to make it.
Furthermore, it should especially not be the government bureaucracy and civil service setting government policy. The role of the civil service is to implement policy as directed by the Prime Minister and Ministers, not to dictate what it should be.
The different branches of government serve different functions here in Canada, and each should stick to their roles as laid out in the constitution. Development of government policy is the purview of the Executive branch and it should remain that way.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Brenda Martin Case Regrettable but not Controlable
I, like many other Canadians, was dismayed this past week to hear about the case of Brenda Martin, a Canadian citizen, who has been accused by the Mexican government of money laundering. She was interrogated without having either a lawyer or an interpreter present, which is contrary to accepted international standards.
Although I truly do sympathize with her plight and wish a speedy and favorable resolution to her case, the Canadian government does not have the power to just bring her home as many people have been advocating. Canadian law covers activities occurring in Canada, while Mexican law covers activities which occur in Mexico. We cannot just overrule Mexican law because we feel we have the moral high ground.
The Canadian legal system is one of the strongest in the world, which benefits us when we have to deal with it here. Unfortunately, not all legal systems around the world are as strong and respectful of human rights as ours is. When Canadians go abroad to travel or live around the world, we need to keep this in mind and be cautious.
It is a great privilege to be able to travel, but we must remain cognizant of and respectful of the laws and legal of wherever we are. Just because we are entitled to legal protections as Canadian citizens at home does not mean we will be entitled to similar treatment abroad.
While the Canadian government may want to bring Brenda Martin home, we do not have jurisdiction in this case - only the Mexican government does.
Although I truly do sympathize with her plight and wish a speedy and favorable resolution to her case, the Canadian government does not have the power to just bring her home as many people have been advocating. Canadian law covers activities occurring in Canada, while Mexican law covers activities which occur in Mexico. We cannot just overrule Mexican law because we feel we have the moral high ground.
The Canadian legal system is one of the strongest in the world, which benefits us when we have to deal with it here. Unfortunately, not all legal systems around the world are as strong and respectful of human rights as ours is. When Canadians go abroad to travel or live around the world, we need to keep this in mind and be cautious.
It is a great privilege to be able to travel, but we must remain cognizant of and respectful of the laws and legal of wherever we are. Just because we are entitled to legal protections as Canadian citizens at home does not mean we will be entitled to similar treatment abroad.
While the Canadian government may want to bring Brenda Martin home, we do not have jurisdiction in this case - only the Mexican government does.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Controversy over Bill C-10 is Meaningless
In the last few days, the opposition parties have been in uproar over Bill C-10. This bill would ensure that taxpayers' dollars do not go to support offensive and objectionable film productions.
Some left-wing commentators and politicians have decried this as censorship; well to do so is just plain wrong. There is a vast degree of difference between refusing taxpayer support for a project and stopping the project from being made. Film producers should not be able to receive public funds if their projects are offensive, derogatory, or overly violent. If they really want these types of films to be made, they are free to fundraise or seek other funding options.
If I am offended by a movie, I don't want to pay for it. I can already choose not to go see it, but offensive films should not be able to get any of my money from the government. If I want to support a film and its content, I will pay money to go see it in a theatre.
Some left-wing commentators and politicians have decried this as censorship; well to do so is just plain wrong. There is a vast degree of difference between refusing taxpayer support for a project and stopping the project from being made. Film producers should not be able to receive public funds if their projects are offensive, derogatory, or overly violent. If they really want these types of films to be made, they are free to fundraise or seek other funding options.
If I am offended by a movie, I don't want to pay for it. I can already choose not to go see it, but offensive films should not be able to get any of my money from the government. If I want to support a film and its content, I will pay money to go see it in a theatre.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
NDP Interference in US Elections?
Recently Jack Layton has been complaining that the Prime Minister or Senior Members of his staff have been interfering in the American Presidential Election, and yet he has clearly taken sides in the elections himself. What hypocrisy!
According to a Toronto Star Article (http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309460), Jack made the following insinuations:
"NDP leader Jack Layton said [Stephen Harper's Chief of Staff Ian] Brodie should be dumped for his 'interference' and wondered whether the senior aide wasn't acting on Harper's own orders.
"'Is it possible that the Prime Minister himself knew about this information and authorized the leaks in order to discredit the campaign of Mr. Obama for president of the United States?' Layton said in the Commons."
On the NDP website, Jack and the Party proclaim to Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama "You have an ally with the NDP on NAFTA" (http://www.ndp.ca/page/6236).
Opening declaring yourself and your parties as allies to two of the contenders is a blatant case of interference in the presidential election. Taking sides and encouraging both candidates and a renegotiation of NAFTA shows Jack's arrogance and disregard for the sovereignty and independence of the United States.
Jack, you can't have it both ways: you can't complain about unlikely and unproven allegations of interference and then go off on your own and interfere in the election!
According to a Toronto Star Article (http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309460), Jack made the following insinuations:
"NDP leader Jack Layton said [Stephen Harper's Chief of Staff Ian] Brodie should be dumped for his 'interference' and wondered whether the senior aide wasn't acting on Harper's own orders.
"'Is it possible that the Prime Minister himself knew about this information and authorized the leaks in order to discredit the campaign of Mr. Obama for president of the United States?' Layton said in the Commons."
On the NDP website, Jack and the Party proclaim to Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama "You have an ally with the NDP on NAFTA" (http://www.ndp.ca/page/6236).
Opening declaring yourself and your parties as allies to two of the contenders is a blatant case of interference in the presidential election. Taking sides and encouraging both candidates and a renegotiation of NAFTA shows Jack's arrogance and disregard for the sovereignty and independence of the United States.
Jack, you can't have it both ways: you can't complain about unlikely and unproven allegations of interference and then go off on your own and interfere in the election!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)