Blog Update II

Note that we are in the process of updating our blog and changing domain names. This should be completed by the end of this weekend. We thank you for your patience. Future Site: www.broley.org For a great site offering a variety of up to date news items, please go see Bourque: www.bourque.org

Dear Mr. Harper,

Dear Mr. Harper, I want to extend sincere congratulations on your success in today's election. It was a hard-fought campaign and you have received a very significant vote of confidence from the Canadian public. I know the feeling of exhilaration when the people express confidence in your leadership and vision. It has been a great privilege for me to serve as Canada's ambassador to the United States throughout the past year. I was most grateful for your personal support and that of your party during my committee hearing on the appointment. It has also been a tremendous personal satisfaction to have been able to serve with the outstanding men and women of this embassy and consulates across the United States of America. Canadians may not fully appreciate the strength and commitment of these dedicated public servants who serve our country so proudly. I've always placed great value on the importance of the Canada-U.S. relationship, and, in a short period of time, have learned much about how this critical link can be improved and expanded. In that regard, I would be pleased to offer my full co-operation in sharing insights on management of the many significant and crucial issues that we deal with on a daily basis. However, I believe you would agree that the enormous value of a political appointment to this position is based on the ability to work intimately with the Canadian government. It is this perception of closeness that provides a strong platform for the Canadian ambassador to advance Canada's interest. While I would have no difficulty working with you or your government, it would be virtually impossible to establish the appearance of total confidence and support in a jurisdiction where political ambassadorial appointees traditionally resign immediately after an election. Consequently, it is in the best interest of our nation that I submit to you my resignation as Canada's ambassador to the United States. I would be pleased to continue to serve until such time as a replacement is named or, I could depart more expeditiously if it is your wish. With warmest personal regards and best wishes for a productive mandate. Sincerely, Frank McKenna

Frank McKenna

The Frank McKenna Resignation just made Harper's job a lot easier.

Blog update

Note that we are in the process of updating our blog and changing domain names. This should be completed by the end of this weekend. We thank you for your patience. Future Site: www.broley.org For a great site offering a variety of up to date news items, please go see Bourque: www.bourque.org

Bush congratulates Harper (SORRY FOR THE TEXT LAYOUT. BLOGGER SOFTWARE IS MALFUNCTIONING)

U.S. President George W. Bush called prime minister-designate Stephen Harper on Wednesday, offering his personal congratulations on this week's election victory. Many people may think that this bit of news flash is relatively insignificant, but believe me it is. In diplomatic terms, each of the various ways an international leader can choose to recognize a recently elected Prime Minister of Canada are significant. The best is a personal phone call. Even better is when that phone call takes place the day or the day after the election result has been made public (ie today). Down the list are other forms of recognition such as a phone call made later on (but still within a week of the election), a personalized letter, a phonecall made by a senior official (in the US case someone in the Whitehouse such as the spokesperson for the president or Condi etc.), or absolutely nothing. If I may guess I think that this gesture is an improvement upon previous gestures made by the US since the second election of Johnny C, during the Clinton years. More food for thought: Could the best candidate for ambassador to the U.S. be Preston Manning? Note: I have met Preston and even with my then ill-founded bias at the time, I was very impressed by the sense of integrity that one felt when speaking with him. While he likely would be well suited for the position, I think that unless McKenna wants to leave his post he will remain ambassador. Harper will not want to appear that his first order of business is a partisan political appointment. (note now that the hedgemony has been broken, if this government plays it's cards right, I think that there is an opportunity for expectations to be well exceeded, especially on the Fed-Prov and constitutional front - the NDP,BQ and Liberals will keep the Conservatives in check regarding social issues ).

Privacy, Google and the USA

Most of you know that there has been quite an issue recently regarding the privacy of internet search strings. In my opinion there are two main issues: a) Governments obtaining search records; and b) The amount of data search engines are compiling on individuals for commercial purposes (how much and what limits are the reasonable). In many ways Google, through the intergration of various mediums (e-mail, search engines), has become the ultimate medium for consumer espionage. While I believe that Google is honestly collecting the information to allow their products to be tailor-made to suit consumer preferences (which helps for commercial applications), if this is cross referenced with the information that government agencies are collecting (see NYT story below) it may amount to one of the largest invasions of privacy that we have seen in quite a while. I should note that in the domain of combating money laundering and terrorist financing this already happens. Businesses, Credit Bureaus, and Financial Institutions collect tons of data on their clients. This data is often public (so are urine test results in some US states) leaving it free for governments and business organizations to purchase. For more information on the potential issues: Google case boosts furor over US privacy threats Google Balances Privacy and Reach Google Privacy Center Internet Users Thinking Twice Before a Search

Broley.org

Sorry for the lack of posts lately. Broley.org is under construction. We are by no means world famous but it is definitely time to take this to the next basic level and at least have our own domain. More importantly our format will change improving things for you the reader.

The International Community and the Canadian Election

Here are some links that highlight the response of the international community to our election results. The take from the Chinese is rather amusing: From China:

Socialist NDP pledges vital role in Canada's next parliament

From the US:

Canada's new right-wing leader faces uphill fight U.S. says hopes to solve Canada lumber dispute (ironic annoucement timing?)

From the UK:

Conservatives vow to change Canada

From France:

Au Canada, le Parti conservateur revient au pouvoir sans éclat

Observations from the results and polling experience: a) All in all looks good. The Conservatives can proceed with changing the way Ottawa functions, Federal-Provincial relations, and introduce new economic initiatives; the voice of the country now also includes the voice of the west; a minority government will keep the fundamentalists in check; Liberals and the NDP have the numbers to introduce and influence social policy; the Bloq Quebecois have been dealt a setback. Notes from voting: b) Watching a newly arrived Canadian from Iran plead with election officials to allow his children to accompany him to the polls to experience what voting is like made me appreciate the time spent in voting line. c) Incredibly there was an argument among idi_ts in the line up. One woman started shouting obscenities about the Bloq Quebecois and Francophones. The converstation started to reach fever pitch among a few people with anglophones and westerners even chiming in to shut her up..I can only imagine what it was like here 10 years ago. d) Why were Bloq Quebecois officials in charge of the voter registration booth? I am contemplating writing a letter to Elections Canada about this. I find it completely innappropriate that a member of the Bloq Quebecois was the only person in charge of registering my application to vote. That said he was a pleasurable bloke and we had a nice conversation about L'Extranger in French of course.

Election Results

I have been asked where to find early election results, prior to them being officially released. In a nutshell I have no idea and even if I did I would not divulge this information as it is against the law. That said the links below may contain information that is helpful for readers.....or they could be complete bunk....I have no idea: Odds Blog The Captain

Greening the Torino Winter Olympics

Greening the Torino Winter Olympics: an EU success story "The upcoming 20th Winter Olympics and Paralympics in Torino in February and March, respectively, will be the first ever truly “green” major sports events in Europe. Both events will achieve this goal by making good use of EU voluntary environmental tools, in particular the EU eco-management and audit system (EMAS) and the European eco-label. At a press conference today, Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas congratulated the representatives of the Torino Winter Olympics Organising Committee (TOROC) for rigorously applying these EU standards and tools from the planning to the execution of work at the Olympic sites."

The Privy Council Office

I just cannot help but wonder what is going on in the minds of the upper mandarins who work in / have been appointed to the Privy Council Office. While it is true that they have been rather demoralized by Paul Martin's lack of direction and constant waffling...(just imagine the Canada-US secretariat where it must have been on the agonizing side to at the same time try to improve relations with the US on behalf of the Prime Minister watch him stick a verbal pitchfork to all things American)... ..yes the amount of indecision with regards to the preparation of cabinet documents may make a woman go bald by the age of twenty. However the question has to be asked as to what will happen to the brass high up who generally are appointed directly by the Clerk (for how long???) on the advice of the PMO and Prime Minister (for how long???) via an order in council. In some cases the PM directly reaches them by telephone. While they are selected to provide non-partisan advice, they definitly have personal viewpoints that often represent the government in power. My prediction is that there will: a) be an orgy of change at the top; b) we will see an increase in the number of Secretariats in the PCO so that the new government can avoid having legislation go through a partisan system of government machinery...until new orders in council and appointments have taken place and the machinery has adjusted. c) even though the people in the Privy Council have lost sleep this election campaign due to the late release of political party plaforms....making the preparation documents a living hell.....it still will be a while before they can get some shut eye. ***** Among other things here is a story that some people do not seem to be fond of: Strange Bedfellows

La vache qui rit ou la vache folle?

Will the cows get the last laugh? I am not going to sound off about the latest cow to be found to be a little on the mad side. However I am going to provide you all with some links to make your own decisions. While I am not generally found up a tree barking like a fanatic (my wife may disagree), a system in where cows need to be fed antibiotics to be able to digest food that they naturally would not consume (without these antibiotics their stomachs would explode), as well as one where fish can be fed animal waste...may need some improvement, even though the status quo is more profitable. Queensland, Au: Animal health in beef cattle feedlots Infectious diseases Mayo Clinic: Mad Cow FAQ: Do Not Panic Organic Consumers Association (US-Based Interest Group): Mad Cow and USA and Beef Safety New South Wales: Cattle Health and Feedlots Bayer Pharmaceuticals: Beef and Feedlot Cattle

Property rights and Stephen Harper

Stephen Harper has promised to enshrine property rights in the constitution. This might sound fairly innocuous, but this one act would have enormous implications for the effective enforcement of environmental regulations throughout the country. First of all, the constitution is the "prime directive" of government. It overrides all other federal, provincial and municipal laws, and is not something to be tinkered with lightly. The Conservative plan would put property rights on the same legal footing as human rights. The result could be demands for compensation whenever an environmental law prohibits a property owner from doing something (like putting a toxic site in the middle of a community), or requires them to do something extra (like building subdivisions to a higher density to prevent urban sprawl). This has already come to pass in Oregon, where "Measure 37" voted property rights into the state constitution in 2004. The Washington Post commented, "the property-rights law …is on the brink of wrecking Oregon's best-in-the-nation record of reining in sprawl, according to state officials and national planning experts." Put more bluntly, "Measure 37 blew up our land-use system," said Democrat Senator Charlie Ringo, from suburban Portland. In Canada, such a measure would undermine the ability of all levels of government to encourage smart growth of sustainable cities - a major challenge of the 21st century. Since property rights would be in the constitution and protection of the environment is not, it could also effectively trump any environmental law in the country. Nor is this intervention even needed. Our common-law system of justice was primarily designed to protect private property, and it does a superb job of doing just that. What Canada needs, instead, is a constitutional guarantee of a clean environment.

Michael Moore wieghs in on the Canadian election!

Click here for Mike and his open letter to all Canadians

Paul Martin describes Alfonso Gagliano in Colour and Love

This is wild..watch it..Paul Martin's opinion of Alphonso Gagliano Check out the rest including a link to Gagliano's security clearance here at the Western Standard

Stephen Harper and The Council for National Policy in Montreal, June 1997

A lot has been said about Stephen Harper's speech that he made to a right wing group in the US of A a few years ago. Yes it is true that some of it was tongue in cheek and may not be fair to drudge up. That said, people should be able to know what was actually stated and then left alone to make their own judgements. I warn you that the text is long......it is in the Globe and Mail today also. Some of it is spot on, some of it a little tongue and cheeck funny, and some of it out of line. STEPHEN HARPER in his own words “Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let’s start up with a compliment. You’re here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world. Now, having given you a compliment, let me also give you an insult. I was asked to speak about Canadian politics. It may not be true, but it’s legendary that if you’re like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians. But in any case, my speech will make that assumption. I’ll talk fairly basic stuff. If it seems pedestrian to some of you who do know a lot about Canada, I apologize. I’m going to look at three things. First of all, just some basic facts about Canada that are relevant to my talk, facts about the country and its political system, its civics. Second, I want to take a look at the party system that’s developed in Canada from a conventional left/right, or liberal/conservative perspective. The third thing I’m going to do is look at the political system again, because it can’t be looked at in this country simply from the conventional perspective. First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States. In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half, don’t feel particularly bad for many of these people. They don’t feel bad about it themselves, as long as they’re receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance. That is beginning to change. There have been some significant changes in our fiscal policies and our social welfare policies in the last three or four years. But nevertheless, they’re still very generous compared to your country. Let me just make a comment on language, which is so important in this country. I want to disabuse you of misimpressions you may have. If you’ve read any of the official propagandas, you’ve come over the border and entered a bilingual country. In this particular city, Montreal, you may well get that impression. But this city is extremely atypical of this country. While it is a French-speaking city -- largely -- it has an enormous English-speaking minority and a large number of what are called ethnics: they who are largely immigrant communities, but who politically and culturally tend to identify with the English community. This is unusual, because the rest of the province of Quebec is, by and large, almost entirely French-speaking. The English minority present here in Montreal is quite exceptional. Furthermore, the fact that this province is largely French-speaking, except for Montreal, is quite exceptional with regard to the rest of the country. Outside of Quebec, the total population of Francophones, depending on how you measure it, is only three to five percent of the population. The rest of Canada is English speaking. Even more important, the French-speaking people outside of Quebec live almost exclusively in the adjacent areas, in northern New Brunswick and in Eastern Ontario. The rest of Canada is almost entirely English speaking. Where I come from, Western Canada, the population of Francophones ranges around one to two percent in some cases. So it’s basically an English-speaking country, just as English-speaking as, I would guess, the northern part of the United States. But the important point is that Canada is not a bilingual country. It is a country with two languages. And there is a big difference.(Robin's comment: He is right) As you may know, historically, and especially presently, there’s been a lot of political tension between these two major language groups, and between Quebec and the rest of Canada. Let me take a moment for a humorous story. Now, I tell this with some trepidation, knowing that this is a largely Christian organization. The National Citizens Coalition, by the way, is not. We’re on the sort of libertarian side of the conservative spectrum. So I tell this joke with a little bit of trepidation. But nevertheless, this joke works with Canadian audiences of any kind, anywhere in Canada, both official languages, any kind of audience. It’s about a constitutional lawyer who dies and goes to Heaven. There, he meets God and gets his questions answered about life. One of his questions is, “God, will this problem between Quebec and the rest of Canada ever be resolved?” And God thinks very deeply about this, as God is wont to do. God replies, “Yes, but not in my lifetime.” I’m glad to see you weren’t offended by that. I’ve had the odd religious person who’s been offended. I always tell them, “Don’t be offended. The joke can’t be taken seriously theologically. It is, after all, about a lawyer who goes to Heaven.” In any case. My apologies to Eugene Meyer of the Federalist Society. Second, the civics, Canada’s civics. On the surface, you can make a comparison between our political system and yours. We have an executive, we have two legislative houses, and we have a Supreme Court. However, our executive is the Queen, who doesn’t live here. Her representative is the Governor General, who is an appointed buddy of the Prime Minister. Of our two legislative houses, the Senate, our upper house, is appointed, also by the Prime Minister, where he puts buddies, fundraisers and the like. So the Senate also is not very important in our political system. And we have a Supreme Court, like yours, which, since we put a charter of rights in our constitution in 1982, is becoming increasingly arbitrary and important. It is also appointed by the Prime Minister. Unlike your Supreme Court, we have no ratification process. So if you sort of remove three of the four elements, what you see is a system of checks and balances which quickly becomes a system that’s described as unpaid checks and political imbalances. What we have is the House of Commons. The House of Commons, the bastion of the Prime Minister’s power, the body that selects the Prime Minister, is an elected body. I really emphasize this to you as an American group: It’s not like your House of Representatives. Don’t make that comparison. What the House of Commons is really like is the United States Electoral College. Imagine if the Electoral College which selects your President once every four years were to continue sitting in Washington for the next four years. And imagine its having the same vote on every issue. That is how our political system operates. In our election last Monday, the liberal party won a majority of seats. The four opposition parties divided up the rest, with some very, very rough parity. But the important thing to know is that this is how it will be until the Prime Minister calls the next election. The same majority vote on every issue. So if you ask me, “What’s the vote going to be on gun control?” or on the budget, we know already. If any member of these political parties votes differently from his party on a particular issue, well, that will be national headline news. It’s really hard to believe. If any one member votes differently, it will be national headline news. I voted differently at least once from my party, and it was national headline news. It’s a very different system. Our party system consists today of five parties. There was a remark made yesterday at your youth conference about the fact that parties come and go in Canada every year. This is rather deceptive. I’ve written considerably on this subject. We had a two-party system from the founding of our country, in 1867. That two-party system began to break up in the period from 1911 to 1935. Ever since then, five political elements have come and gone. We’ve always had at least three parties. But even when parties come back, they’re not really new. They’re just an older party reappearing under a different name and different circumstances. Let me take a conventional look at these five parties. I’ll describe them in terms that fit your own party system, the left/right kind of terms. Let’s take the New Democratic Party, the NDP, which won twenty-one seats. The NDP could be described as basically a party of liberal Democrats, but it’s actually worse than that, I have to say. And forgive me jesting again, but the NDP is kind of proof that the Devil lives and interferes in the affairs of men. This party believes not just in large government and in massive redistributive programs, it’s explicitly socialist. On social value issues, it believes the opposite on just about everything that anybody in this room believes. I think that’s a pretty safe bet on all social-value kinds of questions. Some people point out that there is a small element of clergy in the NDP. Yes, this is true. But these are clergy who, while very committed to the church, believe that it made a historic error in adopting Christian theology. The NDP is also explicitly a branch of the Canadian Labor Congress, which is by far our largest labor group, and explicitly radical. There are some moderate and conservative labor organizations. They don’t belong to that particular organization. The second party, the Liberal Party, is by far the largest party. It won the election. It’s also the only party that’s competitive in all parts of the country. The Liberal Party is our dominant party today, and has been for 100 years. It’s governed almost all of the last hundred years, probably about 75 percent of the time. It’s not what you would call conservative Democrat; I think that’s a disappearing kind of breed. But it’s certainly moderate Democrat, a type of Clinton-pragmatic Democrat. It’s moved in the last few years very much to the right on fiscal and economic concerns, but still believes in government intrusion in the economy where possible, and does, in its majority, believe in fairly liberal social values. In the last Parliament, it enacted comprehensive gun control, well beyond, I think, anything you have. Now we’ll have a national firearms registration system, including all shotguns and rifles. Many other kinds of weapons have been banned. It believes in gay rights, although it’s fairly cautious. It’s put sexual orientation in the Human Rights Act and will let the courts do the rest. There is an important caveat to its liberal social values. For historic reasons that I won’t get into, the Liberal Party gets the votes of most Catholics in the country, including many practicing Catholics. It does have a significant Catholic, social-conservative element which occasionally disagrees with these kinds of policy directions. Although I caution you that even this Catholic social conservative element in the Liberal Party is often quite liberal on economic issues. Then there is the Progressive Conservative Party, the PC Party, which won only twenty seats. Now, the term Progressive Conservative will immediately raise suspicions in all of your minds. It should. It’s obviously kind of an oxymoron. But actually, its origin is not progressive in the modern sense. The origin of the term “progressive” in the name stems from the Progressive Movement in the 1920s, which was similar to that in your own country. But the Progressive Conservative is very definitely liberal Republican. These are people who are moderately conservative on economic matters, and in the past have been moderately liberal, even sometimes quite liberal on social policy matters. In fact, before the Reform Party really became a force in the late ‘80s, early ‘90s, the leadership of the Conservative Party was running the largest deficits in Canadian history. They were in favor of gay rights officially, officially for abortion on demand. Officially -- what else can I say about them? Officially for the entrenchment of our universal, collectivized, health-care system and multicultural policies in the constitution of the country. At the leadership level anyway, this was a pretty liberal group. This explains one of the reasons why the Reform Party has become such a power. The Reform Party is much closer to what you would call conservative Republican, which I’ll get to in a minute. The Bloc Québécois, which I won’t spend much time on, is a strictly Quebec party, strictly among the French-speaking people of Quebec. It is an ethnic separatist party that seeks to make Quebec an independent, sovereign nation. By and large, the Bloc Québécois is center-left in its approach. However, it is primarily an ethnic coalition. It’s always had diverse elements. It does have an element that is more on the right of the political spectrum, but that’s definitely a minority element. Let me say a little bit about the Reform Party because I want you to be very clear on what the Reform Party is and is not. The Reform Party, although described by many of its members, and most of the media, as conservative, and conservative in the American sense, actually describes itself as populist. And that’s the term its leader, Preston Manning, uses. This term is not without significance. The Reform Party does stand for direct democracy, which of course many American conservatives do, but also it sees itself as coming from a long tradition of populist parties of Western Canada, not all of which have been conservative. It also is populist in the very real sense, if I can make American analogies to it -- populist in the sense that the term is sometimes used with Ross Perot. The Reform Party is very much a leader-driven party. It’s much more a real party than Mr. Perot’s party -- by the way, it existed before Mr. Perot’s party. But it’s very much leader-driven, very much organized as a personal political vehicle. Although it has much more of a real organization than Mr. Perot does. But the Reform Party only exists federally. It doesn’t exist at the provincial level here in Canada. It really exists only because Mr. Manning is pursuing the position of Prime Minister. It doesn’t have a broader political mandate than that yet. Most of its members feel it should, and, in their minds, actually it does. It also has some Buchananist tendencies. I know there are probably many admirers of Mr. Buchanan here, but I mean that in the sense that there are some anti-market elements in the Reform Party. So far, they haven’t been that important, because Mr. Manning is, himself, a fairly orthodox economic conservative. The predecessor of the Reform Party, the Social Credit Party, was very much like this. Believing in funny money and control of banking, and a whole bunch of fairly non-conservative economic things. So there are some nonconservative tendencies in the Reform Party, but, that said, the party is clearly the most economically conservative party in the country. It’s the closest thing we have to a neo-conservative party in that sense. It’s also the most conservative socially, but it’s not a theocon party, to use the term. The Reform Party does favor the use of referendums and free votes in Parliament on moral issues and social issues. The party is led by Preston Manning, who is a committed, evangelical Christian. And the party in recent years has made some reference to family values and to family priorities. It has some policies that are definitely social-conservative, but it’s not explicitly so. Many members are not , the party officially is not, and, frankly, the party has had a great deal of trouble when it’s tried to tackle those issues. Last year, when we had the Liberal government putting the protection of sexual orientation in our Human Rights Act, the Reform Party was opposed to that, but made a terrible mess of the debate. In fact, discredited itself on that issue, not just with the conventional liberal media, but even with many social conservatives by the manner in which it mishandled that. So the social conservative element exists. Mr. Manning is a Christian, as are most of the party’s senior people. But it’s not officially part of the party. The party hasn’t quite come to terms with how that fits into it. That’s the conventional analysis of the party system. Let me turn to the nonconventional analysis, because frankly, it’s impossible, with just left/right terminology to explain why we would have five parties, or why we would have four parties on the conventional spectrum. Why not just two? The reason is regional division, which you’ll see if you carefully look at a map. Let me draw the United States comparison, a comparison with your history. The party system that is developing here in Canada is a party system that replicates the antebellum period, the pre-Civil War period of the United States. That’s not to say -- and I would never be quoted as saying -- we’re headed to a civil war. But we do have a major secession crisis, obviously of a very different nature than the secession crisis you had in the 1860s. But the dynamics, the political and partisan dynamics of this, are remarkably similar. The Bloc Québécois is equivalent to your Southern secessionists, Southern Democrats, states rights activists. The Bloc Québécois, its forty-four seats, come entirely from the province of Quebec. But even more strikingly, they come from ridings, or election districts, almost entirely populated by the descendants of the original European French settlers. The Liberal Party has twenty-six seats in Quebec. Most of these come from areas where there are heavy concentrations of English, aboriginal or ethnic votes. So the Bloc Québécois is very much an ethnic party, but it’s also a secession party. In the referendum two years ago, the secessionists won 49 percent of the vote, 49.5 percent. So this is a very real crisis. We’re looking at another referendum before the turn of the century. The Progressive Conservative Party is very much comparable to the Whigs of the 1850s and 1860s. What is happening to them is very similar to the Whigs. A moderate conservative party, increasingly under stress because of the secession movement, on the one hand, and the reaction to that movement from harder line English Canadians on the other hand. You may recall that the Whigs, in their dying days, went through a series of metamorphoses. They ended up as what was called the Unionist movement that won some of the border states in your 1860 election. If you look at the surviving PC support, it’s very much concentrated in Atlantic Canada, in the provinces to the east of Quebec. These are very much equivalent to the United States border states. They’re weak economically. They have very grim prospects if Quebec separates. These people want a solution at almost any cost. And some of the solutions they propose would be exactly that. They also have a small percentage of seats in Quebec. These are French-speaking areas that are also more moderate and very concerned about what would happen in a secession crisis. The Liberal Party is very much your northern Democrat, or mainstream Democratic party, a party that is less concessionary to the secessionists than the PCs, but still somewhat concessionary. And they still occupy the mainstream of public opinion in Ontario, which is the big and powerful province, politically and economically, alongside Quebec. The Reform Party is very much a modern manifestation of the Republican movement in Western Canada; the U.S. Republicans started in the Western United States. The Reform Party is very resistant to the agenda and the demands of the secessionists, and on a very deep philosophical level. The goal of the secessionists is to transform our country into two nations, either into two explicitly sovereign countries, or in the case of weaker separatists, into some kind of federation of two equal partners. The Reform Party opposes this on all kinds of grounds, but most important, Reformers are highly resistant philosophically to the idea that we will have an open, modern, multiethnic society on one side of the line, and the other society will run on some set of ethnic-special-status principles. This is completely unacceptable, particularly to philosophical conservatives in the Reform Party. The Reform Party’s strength comes almost entirely from the West. It’s become the dominant political force in Western Canada. And it is getting a substantial vote in Ontario. Twenty percent of the vote in the last two elections. But it has not yet broken through in terms of the number of seats won in Ontario. This is a very real political spectrum, lining up from the Bloc to reform. You may notice I didn’t mention the New Democratic Party. The NDP obviously can’t be compared to anything pre-Civil War. But the NDP is not an important player on this issue. Its views are somewhere between the liberals and conservatives. Its main concern, of course, is simply the left wing agenda to basically disintegrate our society in all kinds of spectrums. So it really doesn’t fit in. But I don’t use this comparison of the pre-Civil War lightly. Preston Manning, the leader of the Reform Party has spent a lot of time reading about pre-Civil War politics. He compares the Reform Party himself to the Republican Party of that period. He is very well-read on Abraham Lincoln and a keen follower and admirer of Lincoln. I know Mr. Manning very well. I would say that next to his own father, who is a prominent Western Canadian politician, Abraham Lincoln has probably had more effect on Mr. Manning’s political philosophy than any individual politician. Obviously, the issue here is not slavery, but the appeasement of ethnic nationalism. For years, we’ve had this Quebec separatist movement. For years, we elected Quebec Prime Ministers to deal with that, Quebec Prime Ministers who were committed federalists who would lead us out of the wilderness. For years, we have given concessions of various kinds of the province of Quebec, political and economic, to make them happier. This has not worked. The sovereignty movement has continued to rise in prominence. And its demands have continued to increase. It began to hit the wall when what are called the soft separatists and the conventional political establishment got together to put in the constitution something called “a distinct society clause.” Nobody really knows what it would mean, but it would give the Supreme Court, where Quebec would have a tremendous role in appointment, the power to interpret Quebec’s special needs and powers, undefined elsewhere. This has led to a firewall of resistance across the country. It fueled the growth of the Reform Party. I should even say that the early concessionary people, like Pierre Trudeau, have come out against this. So there’s even now an element of the Quebec federalists themselves who will no longer accept this. So you see the syndrome we’re in. The separatists continue to make demands. They’re a powerful force. They continue to have the bulk of the Canadian political establishment on their side. The two traditional parties, the Liberals and PCs, are both led by Quebecers who favor concessionary strategies. The Reform Party is a bastion of resistance to this tendency. To give you an idea of how divided the country is, not just in Quebec but how divided the country is outside Quebec on this, we had a phenomenon five years ago. This is a real phenomenon; I don’t know how much you heard about it. The establishment came down with a constitutional package which they put to a national referendum. The package included distinct society status for Quebec and some other changes, including some that would just horrify you, putting universal Medicare in our constitution, and feminist rights, and a whole bunch of other things. What was significant about this was that this constitutional proposal was supported by the entire Canadian political establishment. By all of the major media. By the three largest traditional parties, the PC, Liberal Party and NDP. At the time, the Bloc and Reform were very small. It was supported by big business, very vocally by all of the major CEOs of the country. The leading labor unions all supported it. Complete consensus. And most academics. And it was defeated. It literally lost the national referendum against a rag-tag opposition consisting of a few dissident conservatives and a few dissident socialists. This gives you some idea of the split that’s taking place in the country. Canada is, however, a troubled country politically, not socially. This is a country that we like to say works in practice but not in theory. You can walk around this country without running across very many of these political controversies. I’ll end there and take any of your questions. But let me conclude by saying, good luck in your own battles. Let me just remind you of something that’s been talked about here. As long as there are exams, there will always be prayer in schools.” - Stephen Harper, speaking to American far right group, The Council for National Policy in Montreal, June 1997 “I don’t think my fundamental beliefs have changed in a decade, but certainly my views on individual issues have evolved.” – Stephen Harper (Globe and Mail, January 12, 2006) Authorized by the His Own Words Coalition. Members include: Council of Canadians; Carpenters Union Central Ontario Regional Chapter; Egale Canada; First Peoples for Progressive Government; Friends of Nature.

Guns + religion + politics = fun

Please jump here then come right back.

This is one of the places where politics, guns, and religion love to congregate. These guys, for the most part, aren’t plain nuts – the genuinely believe America’s freedom is under siege from all sides. I haven’t read enough stories to be critical and doubt I will get there (ya I probably will) but what has really blown me away is the general…. “environment” this particular piece of web real estate has managed to construct.

There seems to be little debate yet there is tons of coverage with what some would see as valid points. Usually anything unchallenged remains unrefined. Some of the posts on this site go forever just bleeding passion. Intriguing.

Check out a few posts, it is really quite intriguing. If by chance you want to make Iran disappear you’ll love this place.

Parrot drops bomb

Just imagine you wipe down for prints, wash the sheets, hide the phone bill and tell all your neighbours you and your ‘brother’ like to have loud passionate discussions late into the night. You even start feeling a little cocky as if you yourself had not only invented cheating but perfected it. No one suspects a thing.

Damn that parrot.

In a story that would usually be attributed to the loyalties often associated with mans best friend, the hero in this story is an African grey parrot named Ziggy.

Chris Taylor was at home one day with his girlfriend Suzy Collins when his parrot Ziggy started up with an unfamiliar tune: “I love you Gary” – over and over again. Chris, being a computer programmer, had an eye for detail and noticed a look of embarrassment mixed with ass on his now former girlfriends face. Turns out she had been having an affair for over 4 months!

Cheaters beware there is a new sheriff in town!

There are left wing Christians - there always has been

This is just a quick reality check on the very loud, proud, dominating, RICH, oppressive and very right wing Christian movement in the United States and Canada. It didn’t start out this way in the very beginning.

A few quick points:

1. Jesus was the first socialist.


2. The first churches were houses of communism (big concern for Karl Marx).


3. God was originally a source of hope (later to become fear).


4. Christians were intimately linked to poverty.


5. Christians were intimately linked to the sick and disabled.


6. Christians were charitable.


7. Gay marriage was low on the priority list.

Christianity, believe it or not, was not based on abortion and gay marriage. Real world Christians, back in the day, spent their time helping people rather than trying to oppress them. Early Christians, like most left wing Christians, also had a couple of other wild and crazy beliefs: egalitarianism and peace!

What I love best about the left however is the consistency. While the modern left wing Christians differ on their beliefs surrounding gay marriage and abortion there is a very large group among them who subscribe to ‘consistent life’. Yes they are pro-life, but they are against war, capital punishment and poverty. They are consistent unlike their right wing counterparts who simply go along with what suits them best. I can respect that.

Right wing Christian movements? Wrong. It is THE right wing Christian movement here in North America. This is something we let happen. Something that is mostly a non-issue everywhere else except here.

Long story short there are a ton of left wing Christians out there doing a great job trying to save the world by concentrating on the real world issues affecting real world people who need help. They are not pushy, rude, or nearly as political as their counterparts.

Left wing Christians have credibility as a group while right wing Christians are a special interest group.

JUMPS

Wiki
Lerner
Turn-Left

Harper not getting approval from right wingers down south

It wouldn’t be a big surprise to see the religious right down south frothing at the mouth with the very likely prospect of a Harper led conservative government.

Not the case. Believe it or not they are fairly critical of Harper’s leadership because they think he is getting way too close to the centre on social policy issues. WTF?

Excerpts from the story:

“Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has successively come down more and more against even openness to social conservative causes within the party.  The original position of the Party was to allow for private members bills on moral issues including abortion and for free votes in the House of Commons on those measures.  However, in response to increased pressure from the Liberals and the media, Harper vowed to "use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote."

Even on the issue of traditional marriage Harper has backed away from social conservatives indicating that legislation on the matter is by no means a priority.

In the United States where such harsh politicking is commonplace, social conservatives have at least one mainstream political leader to speak up for them - the President - who, rather than being afraid, is proud and usually confident to affirm that he is pro-life, pro-family and pro-faith. This publicly projected confidence in his beliefs, totally lacking in many Canadian social conservative politicians, has had a powerful effect in disarming the influence of opponents on those issues.

Surveys have shown that television is where most Canadians receive their news. However, television is by far the most uniformly biased form of communications, with hardly any meaningful socially conservative Canadian presence represented on mainstream stations whatsoever.

So just in case you missed the above it says, in a nutshell, we are lacking a right wing Christian leader and we watch way too much TV. Immediately following the above however is my personal favorite:

“Fox News, in the United States, while not socially conservative, is at least usually 'fair and balanced', leaving openings for socially conservative views to be expressed and respected.” 

Fox News fair and balanced? Fuck right off you moron. Unbelievable. I’m not voting for the conservatives but I feel a lot better about them knowing the lunatic religious right down south doesn’t completely approve of him. The entire story is worth a read, they continue on to tell us that we need to do a better job searching for the truth on something called the “i-n-t-e-r-n-e-t”. By the way, per capita, the only nation in world that accesses the net more than us in those crazy Aussies.

I’m pissed, look for more religious stories to follow.
 

Paul Martin and Tattered Flags

The crew of a vessel owned by Prime Minister Paul Martin’s family is afraid the company is only waiting for the election to end before reflagging the ship and replacing the sailors with a foreign crew. The Atlantic Superior, a 220-metre bulk carrier that usually works in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, is in Halifax for repairs to its engine. The rumour on the docks is that Canada Steamship Lines Inc., the company Mr. Martin built and eventually handed to his sons, plans to register it abroad and hire a cheaper foreign crew, but is waiting until Tuesday, because the news might hurt Mr. Martin’s electoral chances if it came out in the middle of the campaign. "That’s why he might have kept the Canadians on board until just after the election, because he knows that it would kill them if he would do so right now," said a union source, who asked not to be named. The rusty ship, flying a tattered Canadian flag, is tied up at Pier 34 in Halifax, with a skeleton crew aboard.

Google defies US over search data

The internet search engine Google is resisting efforts by the US Department of Justice to force it to hand over data about what people are looking for. Google was asked for information on the types of query submitted over a week, and the websites included in its index. The department wants the data to try to show in court it has the right approach in enforcing an online pornography law. It says the order will not violate personal privacy, but Google says it is too broad and threatens trade secrets. Privacy groups say any sample could reveal the identities of Google users indirectly.And they say the demand is a worrying precedent, because the government also wants to make more use of internet data for fighting crime and terrorism. However, the Department of Justice has said that several of Google's main competitors have already complied. Act blocked The department first issued a request for the data last August. It wants: * A list of terms entered into the search engine during an unspecified single week, potentially tens of millions of queries * A million randomly selected web addresses from various Google databases. The US government is seeking to defend the 1998 Child Online Protection Act, which has been blocked by the Supreme Court because of legal challenges over how it is enforced.Google's refusal to comply prompted US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to ask a federal judge in the state of California on Wednesday for an order to hand over the records. But Google's lawyers said it would fight the order."Google is not a party to this lawsuit and their demand for information overreaches," associate general counsel Nicole Wong said in a written statement."We had lengthy discussions with them to try to resolve this, but were not able to, and we intend to resist their motion vigorously." Search decisions Google has also said that providing the data would make its users think it was willing to reveal personal information about them, as well as giving competitors access to trade secrets. One of its search rivals, Yahoo, said it had already complied with a similar government subpoena "on a limited basis and did not provide any personally identifiable information". And Microsoft said in a statement that it "works closely with law enforcement officials worldwide to assist them when requested". "It is our policy to respond to legal requests in a very responsive and timely manner in full compliance with applicable law," it said.

Dumb and Dumber - Genuine Idiot Savants

I admit that I am one of these A(*&holes who really do believe that most people are genuine idiot savants. Actually even this nomenclature may be awarding too much credit to the masses. The question I have in reference to the article below, is if this is indeed the case what about the rest of society?..or at least what will these idiot savants resemble in the years to come when they are not forced to read or attempt to write?

Johnny still can't read – in college More than half of students at U.S. four-year colleges – and at least 75 per cent at two-year colleges – lack the literacy to handle complex, real-life tasks such as understanding credit card offers, a study has found.

....this does beg the question that if people cannot understand basic instructions should we even encourage them to vote? Good luck understanding a political party plaftorm...nevermind even knowing what one is.

Rate of sexual infections increasing in Canada

Rates of sexually transmitted infections in Canada have increased so much from 1997 to 2004 that experts are calling the phenomenon a "hidden epidemic" and demanding a national strategy. * The rate of chlamydia rose by 70 per cent to almost 30,000 cases in 2004. People aged 15 to 24 mostly had the infection. * Gonorrhea infections went up by 80 per cent to 4,013 cases in 2004. Men aged 20 to 29 had the highest rate of infection. Among women, those aged 15 to 24 had the highest number of cases of gonorrhea. * Syphilis infections rose by a whopping 908 per cent to 598 cases in 2004. Men mainly over the age of 30 had syphilis, with a significant proportion of its transmission occurring between homosexuals. According to medical officials in Edmonton, the STI infection rates in Alberta are even higher than the national average. STIs counted for 62 per cent of all reported diseases in Alberta in 2004. That rate was just 37 per cent in 2000.

Whack Job: Why Is Martin Not Focusing On These People?

Watch the movie here Ajax--Pickering--Candidate: Rondo Thomas Email: info@rondothomas.ca Phone: (905) 619-0039 Web Site: http://www.rondothomas.ca

Best grilled cheese ever

There are a few things bachelors, former bachelors, students and former students pride themselves on cooking. The two most famous both involve cheese and neither would ever claim to be substantively valuable from a nutritional point of view. This time we will be paying homage to the all mighty ‘Grilled Cheese Sammich’. I’ll let you figure out what the other ‘cheese’ recipe is that I am referring to.

Recipes in no particular order:

George Foreman Mexican Grilled Cheese
Bread: Bolillo Roll (Torpedo shaped roll with crusty outside and moist inside)
Cheese: Monterey Jack
Spread/Filler: Tomato and Avocado

White Trash Special
Bread: Wonderbread
Cheese: Cheapest extra thick slices you can find
Spread/Filler: Bologna and Mayo
Once the outside of the sammich has been coated with butter lightly sprinkle brown sugar on both sides for caramelized effect.

Snobby Special
Bread: Olive Bread
Cheese: Herbed Goat Cheese
Spread/Filler: Pesto, tomatoes and salt and pepper to taste.

Jude Special
Bread: Nutty Multigrain
Cheese: Stilton infused with Guiness
Spread/Filler: Canadian Bacon with a hint of blackberry jam (just a hint)
This sammich needs to be cooked on cast iron in a very unhealthy amount of swine juice. The sandwich is done when it appears to be deep fried.

Best Ever Grand Prize Winner(s)

Way too complicated, make the jump here.

The best site for balls for your truck

Gold Pure Gold

EKOS, SES, IPSOS, DECIMA, GREGG

Who do we believe? Wild variations: CPAC-SES Jan 15-17 CP 36.9% Lib 31.5% Gregg Jan 14-16 CP 42% Lib 24% Decima Jan 12-15 CP 37% Lib 27%

Libido, Castration and Beer: Proof that Women are Gaining on Men

Man the world is going crazy... Broley Darwin Awards of the year go to the men: Nev. Man Castrates Himself to Lower Libido RENO, Nev. - A 50-year-old Reno man who was hospitalized after he castrated himself told police he learned of the procedure on the Internet and did so to lower his libido. The man, whose name was not released, called 911 at about 1:30 a.m. Monday and asked for help because he could not stop the bleeding from a self-castration operation, police said. Reno police and medics responded to the man's home and he was taken by ambulance to the hospital. Washoe Medical Center officials cited privacy issues on why they could not release any information on the man, including his condition. But police said hospital officials confirmed Wednesday the man successfully castrated himself."The man obviously needs some sort of counseling, (duhh do ya think?)" Reno police Lt. Ron Donnelly told the Reno Gazette-Journal. Man Locks Himself in Pizzeria for Beer PRAGUE, Czech Republic - AP - It will be the most expensive keg of beer he's ever had. A 32-year-old Czech man got himself locked up in a pizzeria late Wednesday to have free access to beer overnight. When the restaurant's staff left, he broke into a cooling box containing a keg, disconnected the pipes leading to the tap, put them in his mouth and drank as much as he could. The man, drunk and fast asleep, was found by cleaners in the early hours of Thursday. Police spokesman Vit Cvrcek said he will now have to pay for the beer he drank and faces up to one year in prison or a fine of $346 for the damage he caused to the cooling box.

Oh the world turns - A Photo Mugging of Paul Martin

You know that the centre of the world "Downtown Toronto" has started to change when they put pictures of the Prime Minister like this in the Toronto Star....bye bye, bonne soirée, bye bye