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

Politics


Page 36 of 37

Not Worthy

February 23, 2007 @ 11:05

The Order of Canada has lost all credibility. Read this and then tell me how Valerie Pringle would qualify.

Nothing against the woman, but good god she can't seem to keep a job.

And to think they keep snubbing Don Cherry.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Bloody Ontario

February 22, 2007 @ 09:24

The latest Ipsos Reid poll says that Canadians think Stephen Harper would make the best Prime Minister. He's got a huge lead over Jack Layton who's second, and Stephane Dion who's a distant third.

This comes as dismal news to the Liberals who see their leader fall behind Layton who runs a party that can't even be taken seriously anymore.

However this also comes as dismal news to most clear thinking Ontarians, because it also displays how unbelievably stupid the people of this province can be.

Just think about it. Before the Conservatives were elected, Harper appeared to be their biggest problem. He was saddled with the image of a pro-American, big business shill who wanted to incarcerate all homosexuals.

It was all bullshit of course and Harper has proven to be a strong and decisive leader whose party has quickly won over most of Canada. But the key word is "most" because most doesn't include Ontario.

In this peculiar province, despite having Stephane Dion in third place in leadership polling, and the Conservatives leading in national polls, the Liberals still have a ten point lead over the Conservatives in Ontario. What the hell is the matter with us?

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


The Name Game

February 22, 2007 @ 08:45

Here's my take on the street naming controversy. I don't think a politician should have a road named after them until they're dead.

The issue exploded yesterday when street signs were erected in the Jane and Wilson area (Ward 7) with the names of MP Judy Sgro and former federal cabinet minister Sergio Marchi on them. It's considered a thank-you for what they've done for people in the area.

Apparently city policy stipulates that names of "living people should only be used as street monikers in exceptional circumstances" and the question begs to be asked, do these people qualify? And that leads to an obvious solution. When it comes to politicians, don't do it till they're dead.

The naming of streets is a political process therefore whenever a politician is involved it's going to raise eyebrows. It's also self indulgent and to be honest I'm surprised that Sgro and Marchi would allow it to happen.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Just Another Shill

February 17, 2007 @ 08:57

A few times during my radio career I had the (pleasure?) of meeting David Suzuki. Suzuki is one of those guys who walks into a room and immediately you're somewhat intimidated by his assumed intelligence.

I've seen his television shows and there's no doubt that he can push a point of view and make it sound like there's no alternative, no other side, no other story.

Well this week I've lost a lot of respect for the man. He's doing a cross country bus tour with the purpose of getting Canadians to wake-up to climate change.

I don't know if its Suzuki's strategy, maybe it is, but he's coming across an arrogant and rude know it all. Maybe that's his method of getting people to buy in, but it's having the reverse affect on me.

He's giving people shit at every turn with a total disregard for reality. The reality that people have to live and work and feed their families and pay the bills. It's easy for the financially independent Suzuki to tell people to change their lives tomorrow, but in reality it can't be done.

Even David Miller, the left wing head up his ass mayor of Toronto has come to the conclusion that the Suzuki's plan to save the world isn't realistic. There are too many jobs on the line. Toronto' can't conform at the speed Suzuki thinks it can or should.

I'll go back to a point I made earlier in the week. Whenever anyone questions climate change or the Kyoto protocol, they're accused of being shills for the oil industry. It's like calling someone a racist, just to shut them up.

I wonder who Suzuki is a shill for. Who's paying for him to sit on that bus and storm into places demanding things change immediately without a realistic game plan?

I'd like to know who's really behind his crusade and I question the timing. The Liberals agreed to Kyoto, and the Conservatives reject it. The Conservatives are in power, and the Liberals are not. To embrace the science of climate change is cool, to question it is to be an enemy of the planet. Yea, I wonder who's paying Suzuki?

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Not So Smart, Smart Guy

February 16, 2007 @ 08:03

Dr. David Suzuki made a complete asshole of himself on the John Oakley Show yesterday. Talk about an arrogant condescending jerk off.

Suzuki is doing a cross country tour defying his intelligence by telling Canadians we should buy into Kyoto lock, stock and barrel.

It's one of those situations where we're supposed to fall in line because no one should ever argue with the great Dr. Suzuki when it comes to science. Bullshit.

And kudos to Oakley for not backing down and throwing valid questions on the table for Suzuki to chew on. Unfortunately Suzuki doesn't like to be challenged and he proved that by throwing a little shit fit and storming out of the studio.

I find it amusing that a consistent defense of environmental sheep is that they accuse skeptics of being on the payroll of the big oil companies.

After hearing yesterdays compelling segment on the Oakley Show, I wonder who's paying Suzuki to sell us out with a flawed piece of crap like Kyoto.

Category: Politics

Permalink


Leadership

February 3, 2007 @ 17:43

I hope over the next few days Canadians stop-down and appreciate the man running this country right now.

On the heels of yesterday environmental report out of Paris, Stephen Harper showed great leadership by not buckling under to the hysteria, and giving Canadians a rational and realistic response.

As Harper says, before Canada reduces emissions, they have to be stabilized. Having been a skeptic of the science of climate change, Harper has now been convinced that it's real and steps have to be taken, but he's not about to bullshit his way through it.

"You can't just snap your fingers and reduce emissions by one-third and reduce Canadians energy use by one-third, in the space of a couple of years." he said. "We have to talk about fact, not about fantasy. The application of new technology over time is the only way to get absolute reductions."

How can you argue with that? There's no other way to look at it, because when all is said and done it will all come back to the economy. Jobs will be lost through this, lots of jobs and the Prime Minister has to prepare Canadians for that inevitability.

As he said yesterday,

"I don't think, realistically, we can tell Canadians to stop driving your car, stop going to work and stop heating your homes. The science is clear that these changes are occurring, they're serious and we must act. It's large; it's long term; and there are no quick fixes."

To be honest, I'd rather have a leader respond this way than to have some quack promising the moon when it simply can't be done.

And that quack ladies and gentlemen is Stephane Dion, who had several years to act on this problem and accomplished less than nothing - Canada went backwards.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Kyoto Blows

February 1, 2007 @ 17:36

This whole climate issue is starting to bug the shit out of me. We all know global warming is a problem but it's got to be attacked in a shrewd and calculated manner.

Right now it's the "term" of the day, and it bothers me how anyone who raises any questions about it is deemed an enemy of the planet.

Yesterday the awkward Stephane Dion and the Liberals were up the Prime Minister's ass for something he wrote back in 2002. He questioned the science of climate change and called the Kyoto accord a money sucking socialist plot.

Good on him. Back in 2002 he should have been questioning Kyoto and we still should be today. It's a flawed piece of crap .

As for questioning the science of climate change that would have been a natural position to take in 2002 prior to it becoming such a sexy issue. It would have been irresponsible to do anything else.

And don't forget, in 2002 the Liberals were in year nine of doing nothing about the environment. Harper could have jumped on the environmental bandwagon then and used climate change against the governing Liberals, but instead he did some homework and simply raised some questions which are now being used against him.

I hate the way this issue is being positioned. We're all supposed to be a bunch of freakin' sheep and believe every goddamn thing we're told.

Climate change is a huge undertaking and before we spend the time and money on tackling it, we better ask a lot of questions.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


FP Was Almost An MP

January 24, 2007 @ 15:29

Don't be surprised by the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party making an offer to OPP Sergeant Cam Wooley, this stuff happens all the time.

As they gear up for elections political parties think of every angle to give themselves and advantage and one of those strategies is to plunk "profile" people into open ridings and that's the situation with Wooley.

The Ontario PC's think his folksy and warm personality, along with his developed media persona will make him the type of candidate people will vote for - because we all know people don't vote after doing their homework, that takes up too much time.

I make this point because I can relate to it. Back in the fall of 2003 while working at a radio station, I received a call from the Alliance Party of Canada. It was a month before the Alliance and PC Party merged, and roughly seven months before the next federal election.

I met with two officials of the Alliance Party at a little restaurant just up from the radio station. It was no nonsense and they got right to the point.

They had listened to me on the radio for several years and they thought my profile and attitude was just what they needed in the riding of Toronto Centre. I was given the option of running in Brampton if I wanted, but they wanted me downtown.

The offer was intriguing and I actually thought about it for a few days. But it would mean leaving radio and getting my head around a whole new lifestyle.

I was used to working for five or six hours and day and then having the rest of my day to myself. In politics you have no time to yourself and no set hours. You become the property of your constituents and the party you run for.

It would mean long hours, lots of travel between Toronto and Ottawa, and probably mean I wouldn't get to spend much time in my beloved Kawarthas during the summer.

But in the end, it all came down to money. I looked at the job and salary I had, and then I looked at the job and salary that was proposed and the decision was simple. I couldn't afford the pay cut. Prime Minister Freddie P. would never be.

But shit happens and things change, and now, if like Wooley, I was to receive a call from the Provincial Tories, it might be a whole different story.


Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss


Extreme Right

January 23, 2007 @ 12:22

Something else I did in Florida last week was tune into some right wing radio, notably Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Before I proceed, let me say this. On more than one occasion I've been accused of being a right wing bastard on this website, but I dispute that claim.

Yes I have become a Canadian conservative but only because of what was force fed to me for the previous 13 years. I have a party right now, but I'm not necessarily partisan.

If the Stephen Harper government gets a majority and then pisses me off I'll acknowledge it.
The only reason I've become a Conservative is because the Liberals have been ramming it up are collective assholes for more than a decade.

Blind Liberals have turned me into a Stephen Harper fan, and I can't understand why more people don't think the same way.

I plead my case because I'd hate to be grouped with the Rush Limbaugh's and Sean Hannity's of the world. These guys are blind conservatives. Pathetic blind conservatives.

Listening to them defend George Bush and the current American administration makes them sound downright silly. They refuse to budge on any issue. No matter what Georgie does, it's the right thing, regardless of the outcome.

But the biggest reason I wouldn't want to be grouped with these guys is because they're cowards, especially Limbaugh. He's a nasty little creep who sits in a little dark room making all kinds of vicious accusations against all kinds of people.

And when he's confronted, he runs and hides like a spineless little weasel. And Hannity isn't far behind.

Category: Politics | Radio

Permalink Discuss


Democracy

January 23, 2007 @ 12:17

When we were in Key West last week, my buddy Darren and me and visited the southernmost point of the continental USA.

There's a monument at a street corner that declares such and it points out that it's only 90 miles to Cuba. When you stand there and look at a map of Key West, you might argue whether this is actually the most southerly point, but that's beside the point.

I found something else more interesting.

It was one of those gloriously patriotic plaques that you often find in your travels around the United States. I wish I had taken a picture so I could refer to it word for word - but I didn't, so I can't.

However, I do remember one line about the United States being the worlds beacon for democracy, and that made me piss my pants.

It's amazing how Americans declare themselves so many things - especially when most of it is bullshit.

When I read the line about "beacon of democracy" I thought of all the voter irregularities in the 2000 American election and how there always seems to be a higher incidence of voter irregularities in areas with a higher density of black Americans.

And it made me think of the upcoming elections in 2008. If Barack Obama wins the democratic ticket you'll see voter irregularities like never before in the so-called beacon of democracy.

It's all in the numbers. If Obama wins the democratic ticket more blacks than ever before will vote in the next election. As it stands, the black vote is extremely pessimistic and reluctant in the States. It's an attitude of "what's the use?"

Watch what happens if Obama becomes the democratic candidate. Blacks will want to vote and they'll want to vote in big numbers - they'll want to vote in such huge numbers it will probably provide the balance of power - and that won't escape those conducting the election.

I predict we'll hear about more complaints of voter irregularity that ever before, in fact it will make 2000 look like nothing more than a minor glitch.

Once and for all we'll see what the world's great democracy is all about and it won't be pretty.

Category: Politics

Permalink Discuss