Blog Comments Blog Archives About Me Radio Gems The Trailer Links Contact

Politics


Page 14 of 37

Ottawa Senators

December 22, 2008 @ 20:54

I might as well respond to this one quickly before all the Harper haters fill my inbox demanding my take on today's Senate appointments.

I know what the take will be by the Harper haters. The words patronage and abuse will be heavily used. Harper haters will try and angle the appointment of eighteen Senators as some kind of seedy back room deal.

But it's not.

To my mind it's a lot like the four billion dollar bailout that Harper was forced into.

The Prime Minister didn't want the country to go into deficit, but once it became apparent that the auto makers would need a bailout, and that some form of stimulus would be needed there was no avoiding it.

The irony is, the same people that demanded the Prime Minister do something, are the same people that are now criticizing him for the deficit.

Mindless really.

Same thing with today's Senator appointments. The Prime Minister pushed and pushed for an elected Senate but experienced nothing but push-back at every turn.

So what does he do? He does what any rational human being would do. With another federal election staring him in the face, he fills the Senate with his own choices.

He didn't want to. He wanted to reform the Senate. He wanted Senators to be voted into office, but when that was met with resistance he was left with no alternative.

He had to play the appointment game.

And why the hell wouldn't he?

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


The Rational Man

December 19, 2008 @ 15:55

Sorry folks, but I've got to do it. I've got to defend Stephen Harper again.

The man simply can't win.

Yesterday I received an e-mail from regular reader Mark Irvine who was almost pleased that Canada would be going into deficit for the next couple years. He pointed to the fact that the Prime Minister had promised some time ago that we wouldn't.

Of course that was before the economic shit hit the fan and every Liberal and his little brother New Democrat demanded something be done to "save the world economy."

All along the Prime Minister took the rational road and maintained there wasn't much use doing anything until we found out what the Americans were going to do when it came to the big three auto makers.

It really was the only plan of attack. There was no other. Why spend the money if the Americans weren't going to.

Surprise, surprise. Almost immediately on the heels of the American governments plans to throw $17.4 billion dollars at the auto industry down there, Harper has announced that he'll reveal his plans tomorrow.

What a whacky guy that Stephen Harper. He's a real doofus.

But there's an amusing attachment to all this.

All the Harper haters out there demanded he do something weeks ago are now poised to jump all over him for running a deficit. But how do you throw billions at the auto industry and save the economy without running a deficit?

Seriously, the guy can't win.

Yes, he's made some mistakes lately but that comes with the territory when you're dealing with a Liberal media and a bunch of hatchet men who want to grab power without earning it.

Here's what I really like about Stephen Harper and why I continuously call him the "Rational Man." Despite all the bullshit he's had to take lately he remains true to his beliefs.

Today he admitted he finds himself "uneasy" as a small-c conservative at all the government intervention in the economy, but his training as an economist tells him that these are the policies we must adopt under the circumstances.

I wouldn't be surprised if the "circumstances" he's talking about is a minority government.

No wonder if an election was held tomorrow he'd win a majority in a landslide.

He's the "Rational Man."

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Food For Thought

December 14, 2008 @ 09:23

Hey Fred,
Just thought I would share this, may be worth the read!
Neighbour John

Letter to the editor from a Ford dealer.

Category: Politics | Stuff

Permalink Discuss


Can You Say Backfire?

December 13, 2008 @ 16:29

I'm sure it was with great reluctance and pain that the Toronto Star had to print today's headline - Strong Tory Majority - Poll.

Being a bright red Liberal paper the Star likes to avoid such things, but in this case, the newspaper simply can't. It's the third poll released in the past week that reveals how much the reprehensible coalition back-fired.

If wasn't so pathetic you could almost laugh at how Jack and Gilles went up the hill with that other little squirt and tried to grab power without earning it. How they totally misjudged the Canadian public through their slimy little game.

I keep thinking of the battle waged on CanadianThinker.com with all the whack jobs out there that actually supported the coalition, without an election, while being totally oblivious to how the majority of their fellow Canadians really felt.

Here's the deal you legion of losers. Canadians may be indifferent to their politics but when you try to pull a fast one on them, they re-act.

It's refreshing to know there are a ton of Canadians out there who possess enough common sense to gravitate towards what's right. They may not have voted for Stephen Harper in the last election but a coalition that could only exist with separatists was too much to swallow.

It was enough to move them from the centre to the right.

What pro-coalitionists have to realize is that there were hundreds of thousands of people out there that voted for one party in the last election - Liberal and nothing else. They didn't vote for a coalition and the very thought of jumping into bed with the Jack Layton and the Bloq was such a turn off they've moved over to the Conservatives.

Yea, can you say backfire?

From today's Star - read it and weep.

"Canada's ruling Conservatives would win a strong majority in Parliament if elections were held today, according to a poll showing the new leader of the opposition Liberals has done little to boost public support.
Canadians favour the Conservatives over the Liberals by 45 per cent to 26 per cent, an Ipsos Reid poll showed. The New Democrats (NDP) had the backing of 12 per cent."

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


What's Wrong With This Picture

December 12, 2008 @ 08:56

Last night I caught the news flash about the United States senate refusing a rescue plan for the big three auto makers and I had mixed emotions.

Part of me worries about what's ahead if the car companies fail, but then part of me knows it probably won't be allowed to happen.

Another part of me sides with those who rejected the bail-out based on their reluctance to hand over money to whack jobs that've proven they can't handle it.

Like those hogs at AIG who are still handing out perverse bonuses under the disguise of
"retention" salaries. They claim if they don't hand over millions to executives who already have millions they'll lose all their good people.

I realize its easy for me to say, but given the current climate, I might suggest that good people wouldn't expect more millions when they've already got several million, but that's a whole other issue.

I'm sure part of the Senate decision last night was based on the reluctance to give the corporate pigs at GM, Chrysler and Ford a barrel full of money with no clear cut plans other than to make sure they look after themselves, personally.

It's amazing how greed takes over and who it can be applied to so many levels of business and government, including right here in Canada.

What happened in our country last week was nothing short of greed.

Jack Layton speaks for the people but he doesn't really care about the people. He cares about Jack Layton and nobody else. He proved it with the coalition crap.

Same with Stephane Dion. Given what he had been through, how he had been overwhelmingly rejected by the Canadian people, it was nothing short of amazing to watch him come back and actually take a greedy grab at power.

And it filters down. Take Vaughn mayor Linda Jackson for example. Take the time to read this article and you'll quickly appreciate how greed takes over.

How Jackson's greed would allow her to take taxpayers money in her city and literally dump it down her throat. The total disregard for those struggling families in Vaughn that might have a problem with her buying one hundred dollar bottles of wine at expensive restaurants and then charging it back to her citizens.

Where do these sows get off?

Given the given the current economic atmosphere, and the lead up to it, how could anyone like Jackson justify meetings at swanky Italian restaurants which included extravagant meals and booze.

At the very least, if you choose not to use a board room for a meeting and you just have to go to a restaurant to pig out on taxpayer's money, wouldn't it be cool to maybe pay for your own booze.

It brings us back to this question. Is anyone who would do this really worthy of being in position of power? Should anyone so disconnected from the people they serve have access to public money?

The capper with Jackson is the lies and then the backtracking and then the feeble attempt at justification.

Just plain sickening.

I'm sure the citizens of Vaughn can't wait for the next election.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


A Great Day For Canada

December 9, 2008 @ 20:18

Today was a great day for Canada. When Bob Rae withdrew from the Liberal leadership fiasco it was a triple punch for the country.

It means Bob Rae can't become Prime Minister, it means Jack Layton will not become a cabinet minister and it means the Bloq will not have an official say in our government.

What more could anyone ask for on one day?

Rae is a lot like Layton only a little more slippery. At least Layton is true to his party while he grabs for power without earning it. Rae is a socialist at heart who changed colours so he'd have a better chance at running the country through the ballot box.

Bob Rae was an unmitigated disaster as Premier of Ontario and there's no reason to think he wouldn't be just as bad or worse at Prime Minister. Bob Rae has absolutely nothing on his resume that qualifies him to lead the country and his decision to drop out of the race today and step aside for Michael Ignatieff was unwittingly patriotic.

Bob Rae cares only about Bob Rae and he desperately wants to be Prime Minister but the writing was on the wall and having backed a coalition that was overwhelmingly rejected by the country Rae went beyond the point of no return. He had to drop out. He had no backing.

Rae's withdrawal today also means the end of the reprehensible coalition, that although legal and within the rules, was a disgusting prospect that anyone who really cares about this country should have discounted from the moment it was proposed.

It was wrong. No matter how you looked at it, from whatever angle, it wasn't right for the times, it wasn't right for the country, and obviously it wasn't right for Michael Ignatieff.

Using his brain, Ignatieff distanced himself from the coalition based upon nothing but feel. It felt wrong because it was wrong and he knew it. He knew even before the polls were released that Canadians didn't want a government forced upon them so he took the high road.

Michael Ignatieff, if nothing else, respected the very basis of our democracy. He respected our votes.

No doubt as this thing unfolds over the next few weeks Ignatieff will posture and position himself to put as much pressure as he can on the Prime Minister, but he will not jump into bed with Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe.

He will listen to the Conservative budget in late January and make a decision at that point. If the Liberals don't like it, they will vote against it, regardless of what the NDP and Bloq do.

But if the government should fall you can bet your ass there will be no coalition.... there will be an election.

Yes, it was a great day for Canada.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Comments We Like - Tom Flanagan

December 8, 2008 @ 17:11

This coalition changes everything

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


The Height Of Hypocrisy - Bob Rae

December 8, 2008 @ 17:10

This is beautiful, Rae believes the coalition should go forward without your vote, but it's the exact opposite when it comes to the Liberal leadership.

Too freakin' funny.

Rae email: 'The only way to go'

"I believe that ordinary Liberal volunteers must have a direct say in choosing the new Leader. That's the only way to go."

"To take away your chance to choose the person who leads you ... it just doesn't seem right."

"I urge you to contact your nearest Liberal Member of Parliament to let them know how you feel about this attempt to take away your vote."

Too beautiful!


Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


62 Percent Of What?

December 7, 2008 @ 11:52

One of the more fascinating aspects of the reprehensible coalition movement this week was how basic math was pulverized.

We saw it again yesterday at the Nathan Phillips Square rally.

What a perfect snapshot of Toronto; the city that prevented a Conservative majority, the city that elected David Miller and the city that's crumbling under a socialist city council had the largest coalition rally in the country.

It says so much, but back to the math.

Yesterday people were walking around with signs claiming they are "part of the 62 percent majority."

Hmmm. If you're part of the 62 percent majority then you must have committed some kind of election fraud. In order to be part of the 62 percent majority, you would have had to cast three ballots on October 14. One for the Liberals, one for the NDP and one for the separatists.

That's the only way you could become part of the 62 percent majority. The only way!

Let's take it one step further. The tedious claim that simply by not voting Conservative in the last election makes you part of a 62 percent majority is not true either. To do that, you're assuming that everybody who voted Liberal, NDP and Bloq in the last election feels the same way you do.

But you can't do that because you have no way of knowing and the only way of finding out is by having an election, and beyond that, the only way to absolutely find out is to have the coalition run as a single party.

So let's get something straight. Unless you voted three times it's impossible to be part of 62 percent.

You're either part of the 26.2 percent who voted Liberal, the 18.2 percent who voted NDP or the ten percent who voted Bloq.

Until this goes back to the people there is absolutely no way of determining percentages because we don't really know how many people actually support or don't support the attempted power grab.

We could always look to recent polls that reveal Canadians have overwhelming rejected the coaltion, but apparently, according to the pro-coalitionists on this board, you can't believe them.

But we're supposed to believe some half-baked 62 percent formula.

If anything, there's only one percentage that's clear at this point. While the Liberal and NDP vote supported by separatists has become fuzzy, the 37.6 percent of Canadians who voted Conservative, earning 143 seats remains intact.

How insulting that somebody who voted just once, for a losing party, thinks they have the right to take someone else's vote away.

And don't use parliamentary rules as an excuse. The rules allowed a power grabbing coalition to form and the rules allowed the Prime Minister to suspend Parliament.

Sometimes rules suck and should be changed, especially a rule that allows someone to have their vote stolen without an election.

Wake up Canada.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Dancing Power Snatchers

December 5, 2008 @ 21:32

Send your own ElfYourself eCards

Category: Fun Stuff | Politics | Video

Permalink Discuss