How delusional are the Liberals to think that they actually have a chnace to win an election and form a government if they need to rely on a loan?!? Neither the Conservatives nor the NDP were forced to take out a loan to cover operating expenses.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Liberal Party Debt!
According to Elections Canada's online records database, the Liberal Party received a $2,000,000 bank loan from the Banque Nationale du Canada in 2007!
How delusional are the Liberals to think that they actually have a chnace to win an election and form a government if they need to rely on a loan?!? Neither the Conservatives nor the NDP were forced to take out a loan to cover operating expenses.
How delusional are the Liberals to think that they actually have a chnace to win an election and form a government if they need to rely on a loan?!? Neither the Conservatives nor the NDP were forced to take out a loan to cover operating expenses.
All Canadians Suffer when the Order of Canada Inducts Undeserving People like Henry Morgentaler
The decision announced yesterday to induct Henry Morgentaler into the Order of Canada has completely debased and devalued the entire system because his so-called "contributions" do not warrant official state recognition. The Order of Canada ought to be restricted to individuals who make Canadians proud and who are worthy of our praise. Making it easier (in a system that had already been far too easy to acquire an abortion) is not a contribution of which we should be proud.
Although I myself am firmly pro-life, I do understand (although I do not agree with) why some people are in favour of abortions being available. I understand their motivation and agenda, but I cannot in any way understand why this man is being celebrated. It is one thing to reluctantly allow abortions, but it is another to glorify the procedure. Abortion should never be celebrated or honoured - it is not a "good" procedure; it is regrettable and unfortunate.
Morgentaler’s appointment to the Order of Canada debases the entire system because his so-called “contributions” do not warrant official state recognition. The legacy of enabling the termination of 1/3 of all births in this country does not constitute a contribution to society or “desiring a better country.” It’s appallingly ironic that as survivor of a Nazi concentration camp himself, Morgentaler holds so little regard to human life.
Morgentaler’s crusade does not constitute “desiring a better country”, as the Order’s mantra states. The Order of Canada needs to be focused on individuals who promote a better Canada, not one devoid of morality and principle.
The inclusion of individuals like Morgentaler and Buzz Hargrove (who has done far more to hurt Canadian workers with his stubbornness and arrogance than to help them) in the Order of Canada is reprehensible. As of yesterday, it has little worth in my mind anyway; it has become little more than a false, superficial honour bestowed on the most undeserving of individuals.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Police Inaction in Native Seizure of Lawrence Cannon's Office Unacceptable
According to the Ottawa Sun, a group of Native and pro-Native protesters has seized and are currently occupying Lawrence Cannon's constituency office in Buckingham. This blatantly illegal and criminal action; however, has not prompted the police to swiftly remove them. Instead the protesters are "occupying the offices [...] under the watchful eye of police."
When a group, no matter what their heritage, ethnicity, or motivation, illegally enters and occupies any space to which they are not lawfully entitled, it is the obligation of the police to remove them. If a group of drug dealers had broken into and occupied a private residence, there is little doubt in my mind that the police would arrest them and charge them. Why the double standard when it comes to native protesters?
When a group, no matter what their heritage, ethnicity, or motivation, illegally enters and occupies any space to which they are not lawfully entitled, it is the obligation of the police to remove them. If a group of drug dealers had broken into and occupied a private residence, there is little doubt in my mind that the police would arrest them and charge them. Why the double standard when it comes to native protesters?
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
More Smug Elitism for Liberal Senators - What a Shock!!!
Earlier, I had written about Liberal Senator Larry Campbell who wanted to dictate that Canadians spend their post-tax money only on things he considers good for the community, not as the individual sees fit. Now another senator, Celine Hervieux-Payette, the Liberal leader in the Senate is trying to overrule parental authority. In discussing the recent anti-spanking bill passed in the senate, she said it was important "to make sure that parents who are not properly educated" learn it is unacceptable to physically discipline their children.
Who is she to decide how a parent chooses to rear their children?!? And the elitism she has shown in claiming that parents who advocate their right to raise their children as they see fit are "not properly educated" is absolutely despicable and disgusting.
There is a great deal of difference between physical assault and spanking. Hervieux-Payette needs to wake up and realize that just because she is a senator, she doesn't know better than ordinary Canadians.
Who is she to decide how a parent chooses to rear their children?!? And the elitism she has shown in claiming that parents who advocate their right to raise their children as they see fit are "not properly educated" is absolutely despicable and disgusting.
There is a great deal of difference between physical assault and spanking. Hervieux-Payette needs to wake up and realize that just because she is a senator, she doesn't know better than ordinary Canadians.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Flying Banana Failure Shows that Individuals are a lot Smarter with Money than Culture Bureaucrats
Ordinary, hard-working men and women have once again shown that they are much smarter than bureaucrats in understanding the value of money and the value of public "art". While the Canada Council of the Arts gave $95,000 to an artist planning to fly a giant helium banana over Texas, normal people contributed only $12,018.
Apparently, when it's your own money to spend, stupid ideas aren't given much priority. When you're a bureaucrat freely spending taxpayers' money, then you spend it on idiotic projects like a flying banana.
Apparently, when it's your own money to spend, stupid ideas aren't given much priority. When you're a bureaucrat freely spending taxpayers' money, then you spend it on idiotic projects like a flying banana.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Banning Bottled Water is Going Way Too Far
This report from the National Post that the Toronto and Ottawa-Carleton school boards are considering banning the sale of bottled water in their elementary and secondary schools is a sign that governments are going way too far in encroaching on individual prerogative. The nanny state is apparently expanding to the point where it will make it difficult to choose one's own water source.
Let people choose whether or not they want to purchase bottled water, rather than taking away the option. Some people, myself included, prefer the taste of bottled water over tap water (I like the taste of Dasani water the best), and we should not be forced to drink tap water for the school boards to make an irritating environmental statement.
If students find the bottled water too expensive, of poor taste, or environmentally problematic, then those students can drink tap water. I'll stick with the bottle though.
Let people choose whether or not they want to purchase bottled water, rather than taking away the option. Some people, myself included, prefer the taste of bottled water over tap water (I like the taste of Dasani water the best), and we should not be forced to drink tap water for the school boards to make an irritating environmental statement.
If students find the bottled water too expensive, of poor taste, or environmentally problematic, then those students can drink tap water. I'll stick with the bottle though.
Friday, June 20, 2008
What Will Happen to Dion's Spending Promises if Carbon Emissions Go Down??
If Dion's Green Shift ever comes to be enacted (and I certainly hope it does not), I'm wondering how he would continue to pay for his spending promises if carbon emissions decline.
When announcing his plan yesterday, Dion made several spending initiatives (which do not count as tax cuts), such as their child tax benefit, their larger working income tax benefit, etc. The money to pay for these spending initiatives is supposed to come out of the revenue raised by the carbon tax. These are expensive initiatives that need large sums of cash in order to be paid for.
Even though the carbon tax would escalate over four years, what would happen if Canadians become so good at reducing their carbon output that not enough revenue is gathered??
When announcing his plan yesterday, Dion made several spending initiatives (which do not count as tax cuts), such as their child tax benefit, their larger working income tax benefit, etc. The money to pay for these spending initiatives is supposed to come out of the revenue raised by the carbon tax. These are expensive initiatives that need large sums of cash in order to be paid for.
Even though the carbon tax would escalate over four years, what would happen if Canadians become so good at reducing their carbon output that not enough revenue is gathered??
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Liberal Commercial so Stupid it's Hilarious
Has anyone else seen the Liberal commercial designed to promote their carbon tax plan? It is by far, the most ludicrous, stupidest, and silliest thing they have done for a long time! The Liberal caucus stands around clapping like fools as images of trees and animals are shown.
They complained that we weren't engaging in a debate on the substance of their carbon tax, and they respond by not promoting the specifics of their plan. What Idiots!
My favourite part of the add is the look on Bob Rae's face; he clearly doesn't want to be there. He's the smartest one of the group obviously.
They complained that we weren't engaging in a debate on the substance of their carbon tax, and they respond by not promoting the specifics of their plan. What Idiots!
My favourite part of the add is the look on Bob Rae's face; he clearly doesn't want to be there. He's the smartest one of the group obviously.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Liberals Want to Dictate How We Spend our Own Money
Liberal Senator Larry Campbell recently said that he believes that Canadians shouldn't be free to spend their money as they see fit. In a National Post article, he said the following, "There's always this idea that, if it's your own money you're spending, you can do whatever you want. Sorry. That doesn't happen in my world. You should be looking out the good of the country and the good of your community."
Do Stephane Dion and the rest of the Liberal Party agree with statement or do they believe, like most sensible Canadians, that we should have the freedom to spend our post-tax money as we see fit??
Do Stephane Dion and the rest of the Liberal Party agree with statement or do they believe, like most sensible Canadians, that we should have the freedom to spend our post-tax money as we see fit??
Can Someone Please Explain why the Government Pays for This???
According to an Ottawa Citizen article, Canada's government employs a parliamentary poet laureate, which costs taxpayers up to $83 ,000 annually (plus costs to select a new one every second year). Seriously, I want to know how and why Parliament thinks this is an acceptable use of taxpayers' hard-earned funds...
Party of the money is for a stipend, part for translation, and part for travel costs. Some of the previous holders of the office have written poems to commemorate important occasions, while others have apparently refused to write on request.
Heritage Canada is already notorious for wasting our money, and this is just further proof that the department's budget should be cut. Positions like Poet Laureates should not be filled while we have long wait times in hospitals, not enough police officers on the streets, and our military still requires increased funds to operate at a satisfactory level.
Party of the money is for a stipend, part for translation, and part for travel costs. Some of the previous holders of the office have written poems to commemorate important occasions, while others have apparently refused to write on request.
Heritage Canada is already notorious for wasting our money, and this is just further proof that the department's budget should be cut. Positions like Poet Laureates should not be filled while we have long wait times in hospitals, not enough police officers on the streets, and our military still requires increased funds to operate at a satisfactory level.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Actually, the Bar is Much Higher for Elected Officials
Some media reports today are quoting a former Mountie and CSIS agent as telling a parliamentary committee that the government has a "double standard" with regards to the security screenings for Ministers. Some Opposition MPs have also complained that bureaucrats have to go through much more rigorous security screenings.
I disagree with the argument that Ministers are given an easier screening, since they face the electorate first, which bureaucrats and civil servants do not. Instead, they are appointed and hired (often staying in their jobs for years and decades) with no public scrutiny into their suitability or merit for the position. Instead the public is forced to just trust other bureaucrats that these people are fit for their positions.
Maxime Bernier was elected by the people of Beauce. He passed the most stringent examination possible already.
I disagree with the argument that Ministers are given an easier screening, since they face the electorate first, which bureaucrats and civil servants do not. Instead, they are appointed and hired (often staying in their jobs for years and decades) with no public scrutiny into their suitability or merit for the position. Instead the public is forced to just trust other bureaucrats that these people are fit for their positions.
Maxime Bernier was elected by the people of Beauce. He passed the most stringent examination possible already.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Liberals Accuse Conservatives of Misleading in Order to Cover their Efforts to Mislead
The Liberal Party's website has a press release from yesterday which attempts to mislead Canadians about the Canada Elections Act and its legal obligations. Either the Liberal Party doesn't understand the Elections Act, hasn't even read it, or just hopes that Canadians are too stupid to understand it themselves.
Rather than admitting that they have contravened the Canada Elections Act by not repaying leadership campaign loans on time, they pretend that they are under no obligation to do so within the 18 month prescribed period.
They claim that: "In fact the rules are clearly spelled out the Canada Election Act in Section 435.29. A number of people are under the impression that June 3 is a debt repayment deadline. In fact, the Elections Act allows candidates to honour binding agreements to pay beyond the 18-month period. The June 3 deadline is not a 'repayment' deadline at all."
How can the Liberals claim that June 3 is not a repayment deadline when the Elections Act [s. 435.24 (1)] clearly states a leadership debt "must be paid within 18 months after the end of the leadership contest." To pretend that the phrase 'must be paid with in' does not constitute a repayment deadline is sheer lunacy.
Furthermore, the Act [s. 435.26 (1)] states that an extension may be granted if the Chief Electoral Officer is "satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for doing so." This is not an automatically granted extension as the Liberal press release seems to indicate. I find it laughable also that the Liberal Party seems to think that 'reasonable grounds' for an extension include inability to pay due to lack of support, lack of fundraising, and general poverty of the Liberal Party and its former leadership candidates.
I suggest that the Liberal Party actually read the Canada Elections Act in full prior to making erroneous claims about the Act and its provisions for the repayment of debts by leadership candidates.
Rather than admitting that they have contravened the Canada Elections Act by not repaying leadership campaign loans on time, they pretend that they are under no obligation to do so within the 18 month prescribed period.
They claim that: "In fact the rules are clearly spelled out the Canada Election Act in Section 435.29. A number of people are under the impression that June 3 is a debt repayment deadline. In fact, the Elections Act allows candidates to honour binding agreements to pay beyond the 18-month period. The June 3 deadline is not a 'repayment' deadline at all."
How can the Liberals claim that June 3 is not a repayment deadline when the Elections Act [s. 435.24 (1)] clearly states a leadership debt "must be paid within 18 months after the end of the leadership contest." To pretend that the phrase 'must be paid with in' does not constitute a repayment deadline is sheer lunacy.
Furthermore, the Act [s. 435.26 (1)] states that an extension may be granted if the Chief Electoral Officer is "satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for doing so." This is not an automatically granted extension as the Liberal press release seems to indicate. I find it laughable also that the Liberal Party seems to think that 'reasonable grounds' for an extension include inability to pay due to lack of support, lack of fundraising, and general poverty of the Liberal Party and its former leadership candidates.
I suggest that the Liberal Party actually read the Canada Elections Act in full prior to making erroneous claims about the Act and its provisions for the repayment of debts by leadership candidates.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Cadman Tape Doctored!
The Conservatives have presented evidence to the media that the tape made by author Tom Zytaruk on the subject of allegations that the conservatives made offers to MP chuck Cadman in exchange for his support in a 2005 confidence vote against the Liberals has been proven to be a fake tape!
Recently broken in The Globe and Mail, the story confirms that the tape which the Liberals have been using to smear and slander the Conservatives is incomplete and doctored through the deliberate insertion of a sound clip into the tape.
the Liberals will now have to answer a serious of serious questions:
1. Did they know the tape was doctored?
2. How long have they been using the tape knowing it was doctored?
3. Who is responsible for this?
4. When will the Liberals apologize for their slanderous attacks and misrepresentation of the Prime Minster, Conservative officials, and the Conservative Party as a whole?
Recently broken in The Globe and Mail, the story confirms that the tape which the Liberals have been using to smear and slander the Conservatives is incomplete and doctored through the deliberate insertion of a sound clip into the tape.
the Liberals will now have to answer a serious of serious questions:
1. Did they know the tape was doctored?
2. How long have they been using the tape knowing it was doctored?
3. Who is responsible for this?
4. When will the Liberals apologize for their slanderous attacks and misrepresentation of the Prime Minster, Conservative officials, and the Conservative Party as a whole?
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Left-wing Outrage over Illegal Downloading Laughable
One of today's articles in the National Post seems to argue that imposing fines on Internet users who illegally download copyright material are objectionable and harmful. I think the far more objectionable attitude is that taken by these critics who seem to feel that blatant theft is not only harmless, but ought not to be criminalized.
The article argues: "Critics have said the [similar] U.S. copyright bill is ineffective in enforcing infringement and sends the wrong message to consumers." Actually, I think it sends the 100% right message: that theft is wrong, incredibly serious, and has real and harsh consequences.
Some of these left-wing activists seem to believe that there should be no consequences for depriving artists and producers of income that they should expect to earn (and maybe if they were getting all of the income they deserved, they would feel less entitled to Canadian taxpayers' money in the form of subsidies and tax credits...). The act remains that copyright material is a good produced by an individual and/or company which they expect to sell for a profit. They do not do so for nothing so that consumers can steal and distribute their work free of charge.
We need to strike back at this outrageous culture of entitlement where theft is not wrong. Theft is a crime, a very serious crime, and it's time that Canada stood up to send this message to thieves and their advocacy groups.
The article argues: "Critics have said the [similar] U.S. copyright bill is ineffective in enforcing infringement and sends the wrong message to consumers." Actually, I think it sends the 100% right message: that theft is wrong, incredibly serious, and has real and harsh consequences.
Some of these left-wing activists seem to believe that there should be no consequences for depriving artists and producers of income that they should expect to earn (and maybe if they were getting all of the income they deserved, they would feel less entitled to Canadian taxpayers' money in the form of subsidies and tax credits...). The act remains that copyright material is a good produced by an individual and/or company which they expect to sell for a profit. They do not do so for nothing so that consumers can steal and distribute their work free of charge.
We need to strike back at this outrageous culture of entitlement where theft is not wrong. Theft is a crime, a very serious crime, and it's time that Canada stood up to send this message to thieves and their advocacy groups.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Liberal Delusions Obvious on their Website
Has anyone else noticed that the photo the Liberal Party uses on their website is actually a photo from the thirty-eighth Parliament with Paul Martin as the Prime Minister? It seems to me that the Liberals are so deluded and desperate to get back into power that they are pretending as though they still are the government.
If you look closely at the picture, you can see that the man standing on the government side is Paul Martin and the individuals seated next to him is Anne McLellan. You can also identify Judy Sgro and Lucienne Robillard to the right of Martin. On the opposition side, it is easy to identify Dean Allison, James Lunney, Art Hanger, Lynne Yelich, and Gerald Keddy.
The Liberals still seem to think they are the government, both in their actions in Parliament as well as on their website. When will they realize that they are the opposition and they are there rightfully so.
UPDATE: Apparently, the Liberals have now since removed this image from their website. It had been one of the rotating photos on their homepage.
If you look closely at the picture, you can see that the man standing on the government side is Paul Martin and the individuals seated next to him is Anne McLellan. You can also identify Judy Sgro and Lucienne Robillard to the right of Martin. On the opposition side, it is easy to identify Dean Allison, James Lunney, Art Hanger, Lynne Yelich, and Gerald Keddy.
The Liberals still seem to think they are the government, both in their actions in Parliament as well as on their website. When will they realize that they are the opposition and they are there rightfully so.
UPDATE: Apparently, the Liberals have now since removed this image from their website. It had been one of the rotating photos on their homepage.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Finally, Something For Which to Applaud the Supreme Court
In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada has overturned an appeal court's decision to reduce a convicted child abuser's sentence from 15 years to nine. Following several of their missteps lately, we finally get to see the Supreme Court doing the right thing.
Thanks to the SCoC, the man who, according to a ctv.ca story, "sexually assaulted his four-year-old daughter and took pornographic pictures of her and a young friend," will no be adequately punished for his heinous and terrible crimes.
Apparently, the dissenting judge argued that the 'original sentence was overly sever in comparison to sentences in similar cases.' I would argue that he is wrong and instead, these other similar cases were underwhelmingly lenient and irresponsible. When an individual does something so wrong as to abuse, physically and mentally harm, and exploit young children, a very harsh sentence is required in order to see justice served.
Unlike their recent decision to enshrine the youth court into the constitution of Canada, which is factually incorrect (seeing as it was a policy decision to create it in 1908, it should continue to exist solely at the privilege of parliament with the right to change or even remove it remaining firmly in the hands of policy makers), this is an example of the SCoC doing the right thing.
Now if only we could see more similar decisions!
Thanks to the SCoC, the man who, according to a ctv.ca story, "sexually assaulted his four-year-old daughter and took pornographic pictures of her and a young friend," will no be adequately punished for his heinous and terrible crimes.
Apparently, the dissenting judge argued that the 'original sentence was overly sever in comparison to sentences in similar cases.' I would argue that he is wrong and instead, these other similar cases were underwhelmingly lenient and irresponsible. When an individual does something so wrong as to abuse, physically and mentally harm, and exploit young children, a very harsh sentence is required in order to see justice served.
Unlike their recent decision to enshrine the youth court into the constitution of Canada, which is factually incorrect (seeing as it was a policy decision to create it in 1908, it should continue to exist solely at the privilege of parliament with the right to change or even remove it remaining firmly in the hands of policy makers), this is an example of the SCoC doing the right thing.
Now if only we could see more similar decisions!
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
David Miller Goes Crazy Once Again - This Time it's about Guns
Toronto Mayor David Miller's plans to introduce a ban on handguns and gun clubs in Toronto is, quite simply, one of the stupidest plans he has had in a long time (and for David Miller, that is saying quite a lot).
Miller advocates rescinding licenses held by two gun clubs, and making it illegal (through zoning restrictions) to "manufacture, assemble, or store" firearms in Toronto. He tries to justify this by saying, "I want a safe city. The truth is, guns are too easily available and if you talk to some kids in some neighbourhoods they tell you they want a gun to protect themselves."
While Miller seems to think that these kids are cowering in fear at the thought of target shooters and gun club members, I suspect they're probably a lot more afraid of street gangs and illegal guns smuggled in from the United States. Maybe instead of attacking responsible and legal gun owners, he could try to do something to reduce violence in those neighbourhoods he mentioned perhaps.
David Miller it's time to wake up and realize that if you want to reduce gun violence, you need to focus on those people who use guns in a violent manner and not everyone else.
Miller advocates rescinding licenses held by two gun clubs, and making it illegal (through zoning restrictions) to "manufacture, assemble, or store" firearms in Toronto. He tries to justify this by saying, "I want a safe city. The truth is, guns are too easily available and if you talk to some kids in some neighbourhoods they tell you they want a gun to protect themselves."
While Miller seems to think that these kids are cowering in fear at the thought of target shooters and gun club members, I suspect they're probably a lot more afraid of street gangs and illegal guns smuggled in from the United States. Maybe instead of attacking responsible and legal gun owners, he could try to do something to reduce violence in those neighbourhoods he mentioned perhaps.
David Miller it's time to wake up and realize that if you want to reduce gun violence, you need to focus on those people who use guns in a violent manner and not everyone else.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Quebec Politicians Need to Back Off and Let the American Film Industry Make Its Own Business Decisions
According to ctv.ca, many Quebec politicians, including the ADQ, are demanding that the American film industry dub their films into French in Quebec. They would be willing to see a law passed forcing this to occur, unless the industry is willing to cave into their demands.
This is absolutely ludicrous and ridiculous! The government of Quebec has no right or business whatsoever placing demands on an independent and foreign industry. What's next? Dictating the content of Hollywood films to their specifications??
The film industry needs to be free to make their own business decisions. If they see economic justification for dubbing a film into French in Quebec, then they will do it. If they don't, then they shouldn't be forced to do so.
This is absolutely ludicrous and ridiculous! The government of Quebec has no right or business whatsoever placing demands on an independent and foreign industry. What's next? Dictating the content of Hollywood films to their specifications??
The film industry needs to be free to make their own business decisions. If they see economic justification for dubbing a film into French in Quebec, then they will do it. If they don't, then they shouldn't be forced to do so.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Vic Toews Judiciary Rumors
Apparently, former Justice Minister and current President of the Treasury Board Vic Toews is being considered for an appointment as a Federal judge in Manitoba. If true, and he accepts the appointment, it will be a great loss for the Conservative government as well as a great gain for the people of Manitoba.
Although he has not received as much visibility or publicity as President of the Treasury Board, his actions as Minister of justice included some of the most commendable and innovative reforms in generations.
Although he has not received as much visibility or publicity as President of the Treasury Board, his actions as Minister of justice included some of the most commendable and innovative reforms in generations.
- He worked tirelessly to raise the age of sexual consent to protect children from sexual predators and exploitative adults.
- He helped ensure that criminals convicted of serious crimes are not eligible to be sentences to house arrest.
- He was responsible for initiating reforms calling for mandatory minimum sentences for people who commit gun crimes.
- He accurately recognized that a lenient and mild youth criminal justice system does nothing to help rehabilitate criminals or to protect society.
- He fought to protect society and innocent victims by introducing revamped 'dangerous offender' legislation.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
UN Security Council Seat a Popularity Contest Not Necessarily Worth Winning
If the only way to get a seat on the UN Security Council is to pander to tyrannical regimes and totalitarian states, then perhaps Canada should not be so desirous of one.
Canada is currently not represented on the Security Council, although we are currently seeking election to a seat for 20011-2012. There has been some media speculation that Canada's chance of getting one of two available seats has decreased. Yesterday the Liberal Party put out a press release criticizing the government saying that "in two years, this Prime Minister has diminished our place at the United Nations."
I am proud of the stands that Canada's government has taken on issues under the Conservatives. No longer do we stand on the sidelines, afraid to give an accurate assessment of a situation out of fear of offending some nation or another.
We should not concern ourselves with what the dictatorships and authoritarians of the world think of us. If they approve of what Canada is doing, then we are obviously not doing enough to stand up for security and human rights and freedoms in the world. If the price for representation on the Security Council is to lose our ability to comment accurately and frankly on the state of world affairs, then I, for one, would rather we sacrifice the seat than our principles.
Canada is currently not represented on the Security Council, although we are currently seeking election to a seat for 20011-2012. There has been some media speculation that Canada's chance of getting one of two available seats has decreased. Yesterday the Liberal Party put out a press release criticizing the government saying that "in two years, this Prime Minister has diminished our place at the United Nations."
I am proud of the stands that Canada's government has taken on issues under the Conservatives. No longer do we stand on the sidelines, afraid to give an accurate assessment of a situation out of fear of offending some nation or another.
We should not concern ourselves with what the dictatorships and authoritarians of the world think of us. If they approve of what Canada is doing, then we are obviously not doing enough to stand up for security and human rights and freedoms in the world. If the price for representation on the Security Council is to lose our ability to comment accurately and frankly on the state of world affairs, then I, for one, would rather we sacrifice the seat than our principles.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Dion Pitches Carbon Tax Plan to the Wealthy who can Most Afford it
The Toronto Star has a short article this morning which describes a speech Stephan Dion gave last night to a 800 supporters in Montreal in favour of his carbon tax plan. Each of these supporters paid $500 a plate to hear him speak.
$500 a plate?!?!? Anyone who can afford to spend/waste $500 to listen to Stephane Dion clearly has enough money to pay for a carbon tax.
These supporters will be able to afford paying higher gas prices every time they go to the gas station. These supporters will be able to afford paying higher heating bills every winter and higher air conditioning bills every summer. These supporters will be able to pay higher prices for food and goods they already depend upon and use.
I wonder why Dion choose that particular crowd to pitch his carbon tax plan to? Why didn't he announce his plan to a group of senior citizens living on fixed incomes? Why didn't he announce his plan to a group of middle class parents who worry about paying for their children's extra-curricular activities, school trips, and university education? Why didn't he announce it to a group of small business owners who rely on fuel and energy to power their business and get products made? Why didn't he announce it to a group of automotive sector employees whose jobs are already tenuous enough without increased fuel and energy taxes?
The answer is quite obvious: these groups cannot afford to pay his carbon tax, while the wealthy elite can.
Even though the Liberals claim that they would respond with decreases to income taxes (a claim which I do not trust - the Liberals never saw a tax they didn't like or wouldn't accept), they seem to have forgotten that not every Canadian pays income taxes. What about students, low income Canadians, and retirees who aren't making enough money to be taxes? they won't see any benefit, but they will see their heating and gas bills rise.
Stephane Dion choose to unveil his intention to introduce a carbon tax plan to a group of wealthy elites, because they're the only Canadians who can actually afford to pay for it.
$500 a plate?!?!? Anyone who can afford to spend/waste $500 to listen to Stephane Dion clearly has enough money to pay for a carbon tax.
These supporters will be able to afford paying higher gas prices every time they go to the gas station. These supporters will be able to afford paying higher heating bills every winter and higher air conditioning bills every summer. These supporters will be able to pay higher prices for food and goods they already depend upon and use.
I wonder why Dion choose that particular crowd to pitch his carbon tax plan to? Why didn't he announce his plan to a group of senior citizens living on fixed incomes? Why didn't he announce his plan to a group of middle class parents who worry about paying for their children's extra-curricular activities, school trips, and university education? Why didn't he announce it to a group of small business owners who rely on fuel and energy to power their business and get products made? Why didn't he announce it to a group of automotive sector employees whose jobs are already tenuous enough without increased fuel and energy taxes?
The answer is quite obvious: these groups cannot afford to pay his carbon tax, while the wealthy elite can.
Even though the Liberals claim that they would respond with decreases to income taxes (a claim which I do not trust - the Liberals never saw a tax they didn't like or wouldn't accept), they seem to have forgotten that not every Canadian pays income taxes. What about students, low income Canadians, and retirees who aren't making enough money to be taxes? they won't see any benefit, but they will see their heating and gas bills rise.
Stephane Dion choose to unveil his intention to introduce a carbon tax plan to a group of wealthy elites, because they're the only Canadians who can actually afford to pay for it.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Liberal Party Wrong to Assume that All Institutions are Non-Partisan and Unbiased
Recently, the Liberal Party and its leader Stephane Dion have criticized the Conservatives for what he characterized as a "war on federal institutions," for daring to criticize and/or intervene in some government institutions, like the Wheat Board and Elections Canada.
Liberals merely assume that these institutions are non-partisan and unbiased; however, this does not seem to be the case. The Liberals treasure these institutions because they represent and mirror the values and policies of the Liberal Party.
For instance, Elections Canada has focused on a witch hunt of the Conservative Party over election financing when all parties, not just the Conservative Party, engage in financial transfers between local and national campaigns. Yet, Elections Canada has focused its energy solely on investigating the Conservatives. This can hardly be considered a hallmark of non-partisanship!
Similarly, members of the Canadian Wheat Board who support the Liberals' policy of pro-monopoly powers over wheat and grains grown in Western Canada have been removed from their government-appointed positions for not supporting the official government policy. It is not up to unelected civil servants to dictate what policy will be, even if they wish they could (especially if they are trying to preserve or implement policies of former Liberal governments!).
When a Liberal sees something as non-partisan, they mean that the organization or institution is not opposed to them, rather than being truly neutral and unbiased.
Liberals merely assume that these institutions are non-partisan and unbiased; however, this does not seem to be the case. The Liberals treasure these institutions because they represent and mirror the values and policies of the Liberal Party.
For instance, Elections Canada has focused on a witch hunt of the Conservative Party over election financing when all parties, not just the Conservative Party, engage in financial transfers between local and national campaigns. Yet, Elections Canada has focused its energy solely on investigating the Conservatives. This can hardly be considered a hallmark of non-partisanship!
Similarly, members of the Canadian Wheat Board who support the Liberals' policy of pro-monopoly powers over wheat and grains grown in Western Canada have been removed from their government-appointed positions for not supporting the official government policy. It is not up to unelected civil servants to dictate what policy will be, even if they wish they could (especially if they are trying to preserve or implement policies of former Liberal governments!).
When a Liberal sees something as non-partisan, they mean that the organization or institution is not opposed to them, rather than being truly neutral and unbiased.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Fighting Native Gang Violence Needs to be a Priority
This Globe and Mail story shocked me when I read it this morning. It concerns the proliferation and extreme violence committed by members of native gangs, specifically groups callings themselves the Indian Posse, the Manitoba Warriors, and the Native Syndicate.
The level of violence they are prepared to commit is heinous, deplorable, and nothing short of terrorism in trying to suppress dissent and co-operation with the police. One women they interviewed has been shot at, beaten twice, and has had her windows smashed and destroyed. Other members of the community have had their homes burned down in a deliberate act of aggression and intimidation. In order to finance their operations, they are involved in drug trafficking and organized prostitution.
Although the story does make it clear that many of the gangs' members are currently in prison (which is a very good thing), it seems they are still involved in directing the operations of the gang from their jail cells.
We as a society can no longer ignore the danger that gangs cause in Canada, especially these native gangs. They are preying on some of the most vulnerable Canadians who have no option to escape and must instead remain on the reserves alongside these criminals, thugs, and terrorists. The courts and corrections systems need to start taking this issue more seriously and put a stop to it. If gang leaders are able to direct the activities of the gang on the streets, then they have obviously been granted far too much latitude and freedom in their facilities. They need to be removed from any communication with the outside world in order to protect innocent victims.
Furthermore, the police need to be much more active in arresting and charging gang members. Once convicted, they need to receive longer and more stringent sentences. Keeping these people out of society and off of the reserves where they carry out their criminal activities and intimidation tactics is crucial to protecting innocent men, women, and children.
The level of violence they are prepared to commit is heinous, deplorable, and nothing short of terrorism in trying to suppress dissent and co-operation with the police. One women they interviewed has been shot at, beaten twice, and has had her windows smashed and destroyed. Other members of the community have had their homes burned down in a deliberate act of aggression and intimidation. In order to finance their operations, they are involved in drug trafficking and organized prostitution.
Although the story does make it clear that many of the gangs' members are currently in prison (which is a very good thing), it seems they are still involved in directing the operations of the gang from their jail cells.
We as a society can no longer ignore the danger that gangs cause in Canada, especially these native gangs. They are preying on some of the most vulnerable Canadians who have no option to escape and must instead remain on the reserves alongside these criminals, thugs, and terrorists. The courts and corrections systems need to start taking this issue more seriously and put a stop to it. If gang leaders are able to direct the activities of the gang on the streets, then they have obviously been granted far too much latitude and freedom in their facilities. They need to be removed from any communication with the outside world in order to protect innocent victims.
Furthermore, the police need to be much more active in arresting and charging gang members. Once convicted, they need to receive longer and more stringent sentences. Keeping these people out of society and off of the reserves where they carry out their criminal activities and intimidation tactics is crucial to protecting innocent men, women, and children.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Dion's Support for Terrorist the Wrong Policy for Canada
Yesterday, the Liberal Party of Canada posted a news release on their website calling for the Canadian government not to "pick and choose when to intervene on behalf of its citizens abroad."
Dion then proceeds to advocate on behalf of Omar Khadr, the terrorist and alleged murderer currently being held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, as if supporting him were the same thing as the recent support offered by the government of Canada towards Brenda Martin, who had been incarcerated in Mexico.
This is a completely ludicrous, naive, and dangerous political position to adopt. Omar Khadr and his entire family are dangerous and should be considered enemies of the Canadian state and way of life. The reason why he is in Guantanamo Bay in the first place is because he was captured fighting for the terrorist organizations of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Not only was he fighting on behalf of an oppressive and evil regime, he also is believed to have murdered an American soldier with a grenade.
Brenda Martin, on the other hand, worked as a chef for a man responsible for a fraud scheme. Although evidence was tenuous, she was convicted in the matter for accepting a severance payment from her employer which originated through the fraud scheme.
Brenda Martin is the type of Canadian we should be supporting abroad; Omar Khadr is most definitely not. There is a large distinction between being a side player in a fraud scheme and participating in a terrorist organization and murdering an American soldier.
It is imperative that Canada retain the ability to pick and choose who is deserving of our support abroad. Terrorists and murderers do not deserve the protection and privileges of the Canadian state.
Dion then proceeds to advocate on behalf of Omar Khadr, the terrorist and alleged murderer currently being held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, as if supporting him were the same thing as the recent support offered by the government of Canada towards Brenda Martin, who had been incarcerated in Mexico.
This is a completely ludicrous, naive, and dangerous political position to adopt. Omar Khadr and his entire family are dangerous and should be considered enemies of the Canadian state and way of life. The reason why he is in Guantanamo Bay in the first place is because he was captured fighting for the terrorist organizations of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Not only was he fighting on behalf of an oppressive and evil regime, he also is believed to have murdered an American soldier with a grenade.
Brenda Martin, on the other hand, worked as a chef for a man responsible for a fraud scheme. Although evidence was tenuous, she was convicted in the matter for accepting a severance payment from her employer which originated through the fraud scheme.
Brenda Martin is the type of Canadian we should be supporting abroad; Omar Khadr is most definitely not. There is a large distinction between being a side player in a fraud scheme and participating in a terrorist organization and murdering an American soldier.
It is imperative that Canada retain the ability to pick and choose who is deserving of our support abroad. Terrorists and murderers do not deserve the protection and privileges of the Canadian state.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Pat Martin Is a fool
In a ctv.ca story NDP MP Pat Martin has once again made a fool of himself in his rush to condemn the Conservative Party for legal expenses before properly uncovering the facts.
In this story, he complains that ridings are "misrepresenting the value of the polling" they had conducted. he basis this assessment on a quote he obtained by personally calling a polling firm for 400 people. Well, Pat, did it ever occur to you that maybe these polling calls were supposed to reach more than 400 people???
In elections, races are won and lost on the basis of their lists of supporters and the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) effort, which you get my conducting calls to people and asking them if they will support you. And, trust me, you need more than 400 people listed as supporters .
Maybe he was confused because the NDP is used to only being able to find 400 supporters in their ridings and assumed we would all have such low support...
In this story, he complains that ridings are "misrepresenting the value of the polling" they had conducted. he basis this assessment on a quote he obtained by personally calling a polling firm for 400 people. Well, Pat, did it ever occur to you that maybe these polling calls were supposed to reach more than 400 people???
In elections, races are won and lost on the basis of their lists of supporters and the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) effort, which you get my conducting calls to people and asking them if they will support you. And, trust me, you need more than 400 people listed as supporters .
Maybe he was confused because the NDP is used to only being able to find 400 supporters in their ridings and assumed we would all have such low support...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
