Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Private Members Bill C-232

Just a short time ago Bill C-232, Yvon Godin's (NDP from Acadie-Bathurst New Brunswick) private members bill passed 3rd reading by a vote of 140-137 and is now headed to the Senate.

C-232: This enactment amends the Supreme Court Act and introduces a new requirement for judges appointed to the Supreme Court to understand English and French without the assistance of an interpreter.

So the NDP, Liberals and Bloc have passed a Bill that requires new Supreme Court Justices to speak both official languages and in doing so have effectively ruled out many otherwise well-qualified candidates, from across the country, for the high court in the process.

All I can say is Nuts!

Do we want the best legal minds for the job or do we reject them in favour of possibly mediocre legal minds only because they can speak both languages and can comply with this politically correct nonsense?

While I recognize that having anyone, including SC Justices, be able to understand both official languages would be beneficial, that requirement alone should not disqualify anyone from from the job. We are not talking about a clerk working the phones at a government office here, we are talking about the Supreme Court where impeccable legal credentials, good character and sound judgment should greatly outweigh a persons ability to speak both languages; and considering the translation services that are, and will continue to be available, it is also unnecessary.

Another thing that stinks about this Bill is that these high and mighty opposition MP's are demanding that future SC Justices have to comply with a requirement that will NEVER be imposed on MP's. Shouldn't those same demands be placed on MP's as well for all the same reasons they use to justify it for the SC? Perhaps the Bloc would like to propose that in a private members bill in the near future, but we all know that will never happen.

Political correctness is again running amok and the opposition are leading the way.

Here is how they voted.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Today's victim: Guy Earle

Guy Earle, or at least his lawyer, faces off against the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal today over a complaint that Earle, acting in his role as MC of an open mike comedy night, subjected a woman and her same-sex partner to discrimination in the provision of a service on the basis of gender and sexual orientation, which is in breach of Section 8 of the Human Rights Code.

In other words a comedian offended some people who were heckling the show, which is apt to happen to hecklers in a comedy setting, and now he has to defend himself for doing the same thing that every other comedian who has ever performed comedy in public has done before; heckle the heckler.

What has this country come to.

Human Rights Tribunals/Commissions: Fire them all

Some background on the case can be found here including a post by Ezra on Susan Cole, the women who recently went on Fox News to speak out against free speech and Ann Coulter.

BIG UPDATE:Earle's Lawyer walks out of tribunal.

Attempt to quash.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

The Elusive Liberal Platform

Where is the Liberal election platform?

It was supposed to be all ready to go in June 2009.

It was supposed to have been ready when Ignatieff uttered his famous "Mr. Harper, your time is up." back in September 2009.

So here we are in late March 2010 and what does Michael Ignatieff have to say about that elusive Liberal election platform now:

"The conference will be a key step in the development of the Liberal Party's platform for the next general election."

Friday, March 26, 2010

Liberals Thinkers Conference: A late call for help.

In another example of flip flopping the brilliant leadership of Michael Ignatieff a call came out today for Liberal MPs to drop everything and come to Montreal to attend the 'thinkers conference'. The same conference which they were told a few day ago that they were not welcome to attend.

So heavy was the ‘former' representation of Liberals that a last-minute e-mail went out from party headquarters inviting current Liberal MPs, who had been discouraged from attending, to change their plans and rush to the conference. Too many empty chairs perhaps?

Oh this one is too good to pass up:

*Michael Ignatieff: There is a break here, between the political class and the citizens of the country. It's the fault of the political class," said Mr. Ignatieff. "In truth, politicians don't know how to keep young people interested in politics anymore.

Ann Coulter: Exposing the Intolerant Left in Canada since 2010.

While last nights speech at the Red and White Club at Calgary's McMahon Stadium may have marked the end of Ann Coulter's mini Canadian speaking tour, the aftershocks will be felt in this country for some time to come.

Thank you Ann Coulter, please come again, soon.*

*But next time please try to put Edmonton on your list.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Canwest: How to miss the real story.

I got an email earlier today that pointed me towards this story which appeared in the Edmonton Journal on the failed Liberal abortion 'family planning' motion. This is the story that appeared in print the next morning BTW.

Take a look for yourself; notice something missing? Incredibly there is absolutely NO mention at all about the 3 Liberals who voted against the motion or the 13 who were absent from the vote; in effect the article missed the major part of the story which caused such a stir yesterday.

The writer of the email asks if perhaps the story was edited or if that story appeared in any other papers, so I did some checking and it turns out that yes the Journal story was edited and indeed it had appeared elsewhere, but even in the non-edited versions of the story there is NO mention on how the minority conservatives managed to defeat a motion backed by all 3 opposition parties. Something that you would think would have been questioned by the author or even one of the many editors that looked at this piece.

Perhaps Canwest was using the same calculator that the Liberals used to figure out if they had the votes to pass their own motion, or perhaps they were using their own; the one that they use to keep track of their share prices. Either way they missed the blatantly obvious on this one.

The entire attributed article can be found here in the National Post. (note that in the comments someone asks the question about how the motion failed when the opposition had the numbers.)

Your daily affirmation.

Your daily affirmation from Denis Coderre: "It was not a question of discipline, it was a question for a calculating machine . . . Someone should have done the math."

Some other memorable affirmations from yesterday:

One Liberal MP is even calling it “clown city.” & “Michael went to war without checking,” said another Liberal MP

Ignatieff and Bennett channel allied leaders from WW2:
Ignatieff: "the buck stops here."
Bennett: "This was not our finest hour."

"We look like fools," one Liberal MP said privately.

"Sometimes you eat the bear," he said Wednesday. "Sometimes the bear eats you. I guess the bear had the day." Liberal Whip Rodger Cuzner.

Scar Tissue.

 An excerpt from Michael Ignatieff's book Scar Tissue.   Nothing is off limits in his writing, including his own family.

In the August, 1984 — the summer of Michael Ignatieff's "good year" — there was a family gathering at the house in a village in Provence that George and Alison had bought in 1962 as their only permanent residence.

The older Ignatieffs were there. Andrew had flown in from the shanty barrios of Peru where he worked for the Canadian arm of Save the Children. Michael, Susan and baby Theo had come from London — making it the first time three generations of the family were gathered under one roof.

It was a taxing time. Alison had begun her descent into Alzheimer's. George, the all-powerful force in his sons' lives, was showing signs of frailty. There were raw emotions and difficult conversations as the family struggled with its psychological past, with the unfamiliarity of living together, with the pain of coming to terms with Alison's illness.

The sons' difficult relationship with their father came to the surface.

George, who had had no real childhood of his own, had little idea of what to do with fatherhood when it came to him. He could appear warm and affectionate, but found it difficult to convey his hopes and aspirations to his sons beyond declamations of grand dynastic expectations.

Michael said things that wounded his father. He accused him of crushing his mother's creativity and independence by taking over her life and making her subservient to his needs.

A year later, as Andrew would tell Sandra Martin for Saturday Night, he came home to Toronto from Peru for a visit, walked into a bookstore and saw the entire story of his family's summer laid out in an article Michael had written for the British literary magazine Granta.

Or, almost the entire story: Andrew had been written out of the script. He just didn't appear.

"I just remember standing there and my eyes filling up with tears in the middle of the bookstore," he said.

Not long afterward, Andrew quit his job in Peru to return to Toronto to care for his parents, while Michael's career continued to flower in England — as a television host, newspaper commentator, author and screenplay-writer.

In early 1989, he came briefly to Toronto to spell Andrew off as caregiver — "'once or twice a year, it's my turn" — and shortly afterward, Granta published "Deficits," a deeply moving account of a son looking after his mother, with a forensically detailed description of Alison's deteriorating mental state.

Said Andrew: "I came in one evening and my father was really upset, and I said, 'What's the matter?' and he said, 'Michael's written an article about your mother'"

There were family members — for example, Alison's sister, Charity Grant, and her brother, George Grant, and his wife, Sheila — who could never bring themselves to forgive Michael for having publicly exposed his intensely private mother.

That summer, George Ignatieff died. Andrew was with him. Michael was in France.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits!

Now available from Ardvark Records: Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits.

This is sure to go down in history as the definitive Carolyn Bennett Collection. So order your copy today!

This album has it all. From her latest single, A Real Job: "Women of Canada want to hear about early learning and child care; that is the key to their economic independence, to be able to get back to school, to get a real job, to be able to go to work."

to her very popular, Prisons for Children : "Well it certainly uh uh, the approach to child care is just spiteful its its its canceling the supplement for our most vulnerable children. There is actually no plan for early learning and childhood education . So its a good job they're putting more money for prisons in the budget because we're gonna need them if we don't get this early childhood right."

And who could ever forget Body bags:This is an absolute disgrace. This is morally appalling. This Reform-Conservative government deserves to be condemned in the strongest terms for this insensitive and callous act,” said Dr. Bennett. “Instead of flu-kits, instead of preparing and planning to get the vaccine on time – instead of planning to save lives – they spent their time planning on how to deal with the deaths.” and the follow up to Body Bags: I am sorry. “We would never do anything to offend; we did believe that raising attention for the real dire needs that we saw when we were [in Manitoba] was uppermost in our minds.”

and what about this timeless classic, and my personal favorite, Bob Rae: The reason I got into politics was because of the mess Ontario health care was in "after five years of Bob Rae" .

But wait, that's not all. Buy now and Ardvark Records will throw in a sex toy (certified safe by Ardvark Labs) at no extra charge!

If you only buy one album this year make it this soon to be classic record of Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits. It makes a great gift for those hard to shop for Liberals on your list.

Hurry supplies are limited. Operators are standing by.

Update: Now including her latest singles:  PM Harper is a dictator and Canadians are too stupid to understand for themselves.

Runaway Caucus!!!

Where have we heard this before.

3 Liberals defy a whipped vote on a Liberal motion to include a broader range of family planning programs in a maternal health initiative for developing countries and vote NO! 2 Liberals abstained and 1 just vanished into thin air. Ugly, but not totally unexpected.

Normally voting against your party on a whipped vote would meet with consequences for the MPs who defied the party line, but with Ignatieff as leader there are no consequences.

Remember the 2009 budget?

6 Liberal MPs voted against party lines and the wishes of Ignatieff and they did so without consequences. They went public, voted against the budget, and instead of facing discipline they watched Ignatieff back down: "Ignatieff said this morning that he is allowing the MPs a "one-time" vote of protest to "display their anger and indignation" at the budget. "

Great leadership there Iffy, I can see no possible problems with that decision. "The fact of the matter is, they're going to say, 'you did it for Newfoundland, we want our one-time coupon to cash it in,'" Fife said. "This is a problem. He's opened a Pandora's box here." Maybe the 3 Liberals from yesterday were just cashing in their "one time" coupon; ya that's it.

There were no consequences then so why would these MPs expect that there would be any consequences now? They wouldn't, but even if there were, Ignatieff has a strange way of dealing out the consequences.

Remember this? Michael Ignatieff: "What Mr. Coderre does is his business." "He took actions earlier in the week that have consequences."

And what were those consequences?

Ignatieff fired his staff at the OLO and Denis Coderre went about his business preparing for his leadership bid once Ignatieff is gone.

I wonder if Ignatieff will fire Donolo now? That will teach those rogue MPs a lesson!

The Liberal caucus is out of control and there is no one to blame for it but Ignatieff and his lack of leadership skills; and all on the eve of his great thinkers conference too. It must suck to be him right about now. So in bi-partisan spirit and because I don't have $695 to pay the Liberals I will offer up some advice to Ignatieff here for free:

When a problem comes along
You must whip it
Before the cream sits out too long
You must whip it
When something's goin' wrong
You must whip it

Devo - Whip It

Update: Ignatieff's director of communications Mario Lague said the leader would not discuss whether there would be any consequences for Liberal MPs who voted against the motion or abstained, saying it was a question of "internal discipline."

Ignatieff speaks on consequences. "Those are matters of internal discipline and we'll be dealing with them."

Donolo must be shaking in his boots.

(related: Liberals accidentally vote in favour of budget)

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Ann Coulter's speech in Ottawa cancelled!

When embarrassing letters are not enough, resort to threats of violence to get the job done.

The tolerant left strikes again.


ht Dr. Roy.

Related links on Susan Cole: BCL and from Ezra here and here.

What a piece of work this woman is.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Linda Duncan, cry me a river.

"Duncan says she's not sure the people of Edmonton-Strathcona will be happy with Calgary dollars flowing north to try to influence their votes, she said.

"I'm not sure they'll look kindly on that," she said. (In the 2008 campaign, Duncan received about $3,700 from NDP supporters outside her riding, raised about $83,000 in her riding and spent about $64,000 on her campaign.)"

But they will take kindly to this, right?

NDP National HQ raising money "to go and interfere" in Edmonton Strathcona.

Also from the Journal story: "Duncan said Hastman was on hand with Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose to hand out $14.8 million to the University of Alberta, also in Duncan's riding." While she was "was excluded from these events and not informed about when the cheques were going to be handed out."

Funny thing that. If you are so popular and are doing such great things for the riding, why didn't the U of A (or the other stakeholders) bother to invite you to these PUBLIC events?

Cry me a river Linda.

BTW I if knew about the U of A presentation as did hundreds of other people, why didn't Duncan? Nothing was secret about any of them.

Related: How Duncan supports her riding. Ms. Duncan voted for an amendment that would eliminate tax incentives for the oil and gas industry to provide funding for a bailout of the forestry industry in Quebec.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Did the ads do what they were intended to do?

That would be an unqualified yes.

A last minute rush to qualify for the Home Renovation Tax Credit pushed retail sales up 0.7% in January, according to government data released Friday.

Home improvement stores were the largest contributor to the month’s $35.7 billion in retail sales, Statistics Canada said. The deadline to qualify for a maximum HRTC rebate of $1,350 was Feb. 1. The popular temporary program was part of the federal government’s Economic Action Plan designed to boost spending.

But surprise surprise, the Liberals and the NDP, who were screaming that they wanted more stimulus spending and they wanted it now, are upset at the success of that very same stimulus spending.

"The government was out there promoting itself and serving up perceptions instead of accountability on what happened to the dollars," Kennedy said.

"Our worst fears are realized. These advertising campaigns are more about shameless self-promotion than informing the public about programs," said New Democrat MP Pat Martin.

Here is what they are upset about: 3% of respondents responses.

OMG 3%! Stephen Harper is pure evil. How dare he provide a stimulus program that had documented positive results for our economy. Won't somebody think of the children!

"One category in the list of possible unprompted responses to a question about words, sounds or images that came to mind included: Conservative, government or otherwise political imagery or message, images of the Prime Minister and the Conservative party logo. It did not differentiate between negative, positive or neutral statements.

Only 3 per cent of those who recalled the ads gave an answer that fit into this category, whereas 29 per cent gave the most common response: tax credits or savings.

When asked an open-ended question about what was the main point the advertising was trying to get across, the most common response, given by 22 per cent of participants, was: "If you conduct home renovations the government will provide incentives, tax credit, will help you."

BTW what the hell is Kennedy upset about? The Liberals voted AGAINST the now proven and very successful home renovation tax credit.

Related: Canadian Sense has some thoughts on the games the opposition played with the home reno tax credit.

Friday, March 19, 2010

And they say the PM is power hungry.

NDP justice critic Joe Comartin will move a motion next Tuesday calling on the Ontario Attorney-General and the Ontario Provincial Police to come before a Commons committee to explain themselves on the the Rahim Jaffer plea bargain.

Let me guess Joe; Parliament is sovereign so they have a RIGHT to do what ever they want by calling in anyone, including other levels of governments, to "explain themselves". Ya right. Here is hoping that the Ontario Attorney-General throws a copy of our Constitution at him and tells him to go screw himself.

To harsh perhaps?

Not really; just think what the response would be if a Commons Health committee decided that they wanted Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams to come in and "explain himself" for his decision to get cardiac surgery in the US. It did result in a loss of faith in our health system after all, so why not?

Now that would be a harsh response.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Rock Solid. Elizabeth May gets it wrong again.

Elizabeth May: "The data is rock-solid and it tells us that there's now 30 per cent more CO2 than at any time.”

Any time? There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today. The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today.

So May gets another one wrong. Time to add it to the collection of other May foibles.

Calling Canadians stupid and tries to lie her way out along with a few others.

May loses it at the Munk debates and gets her Mic shut off, while her mouth keeps on going. Oh and there is the AIDS comment as well. It all starts about the 2:20 mark.


10 percenters, how I shall miss thee.

Farewell 10 percenters. You will be missed.

I will miss your over the top political rhetoric, spin, and smears.

I will miss writing emails to the Liberal MP's who sent you to my door and I will miss those same Liberal MP's not even bother to reply back or even acknowledge those emails.

But most of all I will miss the easy target they presented and the ease of which you made coming up with a blog post simpler.

So long 10 percenters.

Ujjal Dosanjh rejects our reality and substitutes his own.

A Tale of 2 McGuinty's

Brison's ten-percenter vs Ignatieff's stock portfolio.

You will be missed.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Helena Guergis beat me up and stole my lunch.

Traffic has been kind of slow lately so I figured I would try to get picked up by National News Watch. For those of you that don't know, NNW had a link up yesterday to this story and continued to keep the link up even though within a short period of time the story was debunked by many people, including the author of the blog that the Hill Times blog entry was supposedly based on.

One good truth deserves another, so here is my 'truth'.

Helena Guergis beat me up and stole my lunch.

Wow. That was kind of liberating. As my therapist says; the road to healing starts with being able to speak about traumatic events, and let me tell you the day that Helena beat me up and stole my lunch will live in infamy in the annals of my personal traumatic events.

It also feels good to join the pile on; you should give it a try as well. I hear that it is all the rage at present.

Come on National News Watch, what are you waiting for? Do I need to write a letter to my MP to get some action from the press on this outrage?

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Stephane Dion got it wrong.

Remember Dion's famous quote from the 2006 Liberal leadership convention.

" Do you think it is easy to make priorities?" ( This would make a great commercial =) Note the date! original post on the quote)

Sorry Stephane, but Ignatieff knows what his priority is. Himself!

Monday, March 15, 2010

Abstaining makes the Liberal heart grow fonder; an explanation.

As you may know 29 Liberal MPs did not register a vote on the budget, nor did the Liberals offer up any amendments to try to improve that budget. The budget is important and for the Liberals to miss a vote on it after all of the outcry over prorogation just reeks of hypocrisy and political game playing. Here is what the Iceman said on the subject: "The budget is hands down the most important piece of legislation affecting the greatest number of Canadians that they could possibly vote on. If ever there was a day to show up to vote on behalf of the people you represent, it is budget day. Not only did they skip an afternoon of work, it was the most important afternoon of 2010!" (link)

But not so fast everyone; the Liberals may have a legitimate excuse for being absent from the budget vote.

It turns out that this was not out of the ordinary for the Liberals, in fact despite leader Michael Ignatieff's vow that his party would no longer sit on its hands during votes in Parliament, Liberal MPs have missed three times as many votes in the House of Commons as Conservative members so far this year. "The average Liberal MP did not participate in about 12% of the recorded votes on bills and motions in the House of Commons since the parliamentary session began in January, compared with Conservative MPs, who on average skipped 4%"

"The Liberals posted the worst record for voting of the four parties in the House, standing to be counted fewer times on average than even Bloc Quebecois MPs."

So stop picking on the poor Liberals you guys, it is normal for them to miss work.

Related: After re-reading my original post from April where I first wrote on the attendance story, I couldn't help to be taken by the something in the first line: "...Michael Ignatieff's vow that his party would no longer sit on its hands during votes in Parliament." So a quick Google search was preformed and looky what I found.

Michael Ignatieff: ' ...and our job as an opposition is to say that, stand up for Canadians and fight for them, and we will. In a word, no more sitting on our hands.'

So how is Michael Ignatieff going to fight for us this week? I am not sure, but it certainly won't be in Ottawa or Parliament because beginning Saturday, Ignatieff again is embarking on a town hall tour, to seven Canadian cities, including Burnaby next Friday and he again will be absent from the House of Commons.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

How can Parliament work if the Liberals don't show up?

The Iceman made an interesting comment over at the Phantoms place that got me thinking thoughts.

Iceman: "Half a million Canadians voted for one of the abstainers. Half a million Canadians who went to the polls to vote for a representative, and that representative was absent on the most important legislative vote of the year."....

Half a million! Wow, that is one hell of a lot of Liberal voters not represented by their chosen MP, but what about the rest of the people? The ones that did not vote Liberal. Are they not entitled to at least have their MP show up at work.

Time for some weak math: 29 (absent Liberals) x 100,000 (My guestimate of the average population per riding ) = nearly 3 Million People!

3 Million constituents were not represented when their MP's vote was not recorded on a budget that the Liberals themselves thought was bad but didn't even attempt to introduce an amendment to improve it. They couldn't be bothered. They couldn't be bothered with trying to improve things and they couldn't be bothered to even show up at work. Some alternative that is.

Sure they will stand in front of the cameras and claim that they are trying to get things done, represent the people, and make Parliament work, but really, how can Parliament work if the Liberals don't even bother to show up.

More games, but not giving 3 million people the representation they deserve is really not a game is it.

Friday, March 12, 2010

And in local news: NDP MP Linda Duncan is upset...

Linda Duncan the NDP MP for Edmonton-Strathcona is upset. She is upset that conservatives in Alberta want to win back her riding and are, gasp, holding fundraisers for the conservative candidate Ryan Hastman. Oh my, those evil conservatives will stop at nothing to target helpless little ol' Linda.

You can read the article here, but there is more to this story than what you read.

First off the article is factually wrong; sort of.

After reading it a few times I was unsure if Calgary-West gave/transferred the money to the Hastman campaign or if it came from a fundraiser. The first part clearly states there was a fundraiser in January, which is correct, but then we get Duncan's comment “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.”, followed up by a comment from an Elections Canada official talking about .."constituency associations aren’t breaking any rules if they transfer cash or raise donations for another riding so long as they comply with federal contribution limits." which leaves me wondering; what really happened?

Here are the facts which have been confirmed by a senior conservative. A fundraiser was held in January specifically for raising money for Edm-Strathcona/Ryan Hastman campaign. The Calgary-West EDA did not, organize it, pay any monies towards it, receive any money from it, or transfer any money to Edm-Strathcona. This was just one of the many political fundraisers that take place almost daily somewhere in Canada; which brings me to the second issue I have.

What in that story is really news, and what prompted its writing?

Was it that the CPC wants to win back the seat? Like that is news to anyone.

Was it because of the issues in Calgary-West? I doubt it because nothing is mentioned in the article on that.

Was it possibly because of Rahim? Again I doubt it since he is not even mentioned and that happened on the 9th, 1 day after the Sun story appeared.

Did the author just decide to do a story on Edmonton-Strathcona out of the Blue? Could be ;)

Was the story fed to the author from either the conservatives, which makes no sense what so ever, or perhaps from the NDP?

I don't know the answers, and perhaps the author would like to drop me a comment or email to clarify, but what I do know is that Linda Duncan is confused about the facts and the NDP sure loves irony.

Remember Duncan's comment from above “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.” because as it turns out that Sun article made its way into a fund-raising email from National NDP HQ. (the same day!)

Yes, NDP HQ is doing what Duncan accused Calgary-West of doing, 'interfering' in Edmonton-Strathcona, and all over a simple fundraiser.

Click on image to enlarge. (the top link goes to the Sun story, the other 2 to a secure donation page)

I like the top line: Have you seen today's story. Today? Damn, that was fast.

Why was this story written again?

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

The 29 Liberal MPs that Ignatieff would not let do their job.

29 Liberals were absent from Parliament for a confidence vote on the budget earlier tonight.

29 Liberals were not there to do their job and represent the people who elected them to office, which is a bit ironic considering their biggest complaint over prorogation was that they were not allowed to do their job, in Ottawa, in Parliament.

Here are the Liberals that did not vote, either by choice or by being told not to show up.

Bagnell, Larry
Bennett, Carolyn
Bevilacqua, Maurizio
Byrne, Gerry
Cannis, John
Coderre, Denis
Cotler, Irwin
Dhalla, Ruby
Duncan, Kirsty
Eyking, Mark
Foote, Judy
Fry, Hedy
Garneau, Marc
Kania, Andrew J.
Karygiannis, Jim
LeBlanc, Dominic
MacAulay, Lawrence
Martin, Keith P.
McTeague, Dan
Murphy, Brian
Murphy, Shawn
Murray, Joyce
Pacetti, Massimo
Patry, Bernard
Regan, Geoff
Sgro, Judy
Silva, Mario
Russell, Todd
Trudeau, Justin

By being absent, these 29 Liberals allowed this motion: "That this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government. (Ways and Means No. 1)" to pass 142-132 even though Michael Ignateff and the Liberals have stated that the budget is bad for Canada and they disagree with it. The Liberals are again playing games rather than doing their jobs or providing a real alternative.

Contact information is linked to names of the 29 Liberal MPs. Feel free to email, or call and ask them if Ignatieff forbid them from doing their jobs and representing you, or if it was their choice for them not to do their jobs.

Feel free to let us all know the responses.

(For some added fun ask them what was their biggest complaint against prorogation.)

The Iffy Alternative.

Michael Ignatieff : “They’ve (Canadians) [Interesting that Ignatieff uses 'they've' instead of 'we've' * here.] had three or four elections and they’ve told me as clear as can be: ‘Listen up, Ignatieff, we don’t want an election, we want an alternative’ -- and that’s what I’m doing,”

Here is just the latest example of 'what he is doing'.

Ignatieff and the Liberal Party did not bother to introduce one single amendment to a budget that Ignatieff himself described as being full of "freezes, cuts and gimmicks," and that "the throne speech and the budget let Canadians down. They expected vision and got gimmicks. They deserved ambition and got drift,".

Imagine that; a budget that Liberals have declared as being bad for the country will not only pass because Ignatieff is not going to allow some of his caucus to do their jobs and vote, but will pass as is written because the Liberals could not even be bothered to table any amendments to improve it. Not that I am surprised considering Michael Ignatieff pretty much summed up his leadership philosophy when he said the following "I am the leader of the opposition. I have no position to clarify.", but Canadians deserve better.

(Update: the budget did pass thanks to the 29 chosen)

That is quite the alternative you are showing us Mr. Ignatieff. Under your leadership we have seen a Liberal Party who would rather play political games and smear than do anything helpful or constructive, and worse yet are too damn scared to even back up for their own words and rhetoric with action. Mr. Ignatieff you may by definition be called an 'alternative', but by the actions of yourself and your party you have shown Canadians that you are only in it for yourself and are truly one very Iffy alternative.

A selection of related blog tags on the strategy of our Liberal opposition.
Campaign of fear. Faux Scandal, Games.


I will continue to update this post as new material becomes available on why Ignatieff and the Liberals are a very Iffy Alternative.

Epic Fail: Ignatieff shows us that he is not even capable of running his own party.

Thoughts on the Rahim Jaffer story.

A couple of thoughts on the Rahim Jaffer story from yesterday.

First off, Anita Neville or anyone else too stupid not to know the difference between what is a Provincial and a Federal matter, the entire thing was handled by the authorities of Ontario. He was stopped by the OPP, was prosecuted by the Ontario Crown, and judged by an Ontario appointee to the bench. The federal government had absolutely nothing to do with it, so if you are having issues take it up with the Liberal Premier of Ontario who actually has some say into how things are done in his province.

Next the cocaine charge along with the impaired driving charges were dropped by the Ontario Crown Prosecutor. Why, we don't know, but the charges were dropped and the matter is settled as far as the law is concerned. I say this because I have noticed more than a few comments in various places that don't just border on libel, they flat out jump right into it. If Rahim needs some help paying for his lawyer bills it wouldn't be hard today to find a few people for that very same lawyer to extract some easy money from with a libel suit or 2.

We do not know the reasons why the charges were dropped, and I hope an expanded explanation is forthcoming, but everything else to this point about why it happened is nothing but pure speculation. If the cops, the lab, or even the prosecution screwed up is unknown. If something was dropped in order to get a guilty plea or some other kind of deal was made is also unknown, but plea deals are very common and listening to the left you might be led to believe that this deal (if there even was one) is somehow as damaging to Canadian justice as the Karla Homolka deal was.

He plead guilty to reckless driving and the last time I checked that does not usually result in jail time. All of this running around pointing fingers and crying hypocrisy is nothing more than an attempt to gain some political capital on a news story, and an ironic one at that coming from the hug a thug left. Rahim Jaffer is now a private citizen and the opposition should be careful if playing this game. If they want to open up that big Pandora's box where spouses become fair game I hope that they are prepared for what might happen and don't run around playing the victim if it does. Heaven forbid that Zsuzsanna Zsohar ever get a speeding ticket or worse. BTW is Zsuzsanna Zsohar even a Canadian citizen, and if she isn't would the same crowd that is running around today condemning Jaffer suggest that she be deported if she was in Rahim's place? Somehow I doubt that very much.

More games from a party that doesn't care who they smear if they see some gain out of it.

Update: A couple of stories from Feb 23 that everyone seems to have missed.

Monday, March 08, 2010

Iggy Approved The Money!

My new hero..... Bigcitylib. An honest post that deserves recognition.

Torture Whistle Blower's Carr Center Position Was Funded By Tobacco Company Front Group--And Iggy Approved The Money!

He is getting a hard time in the comments so why not stoke the fire a bit. Hey Stephen, maybe we should add BCL to the BT aggregator >=)

Joanne ponders the ramifications for the "not election ready" Michael Ignatieff.

Saturday, March 06, 2010

This guy is going to get himself fired from The Star...

Thomas Walkom is going to get himself fired from the Toronto Star if he keeps writing stuff like this.

Some excerpts from "How Harper won the recession":

"International finances remain wobbly.

Governments around the edge of Europe, in countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece, are in danger of defaulting on their debts. Questions are being raised even about Britain's debt load.

Spooked European governments are being pressured to cut back on the very spending that has kept these nations from collapsing into depression....

...However, in Canada, all of this seems very far away. In Toronto, housing prices remain hot. Interest rates are at rock bottom. Inflation is low. Unemployment, while high, remains below the levels experienced in the recessions of the '80s and '90s.

Unemployment is America's number one topic. Here in Canada, pundits fret not about joblessness but the federal deficit.

The Harper Conservatives have used all of this to shift public discussion into what they hope will be more optimistic channels.

That story, sketched out in Wednesday's Throne Speech, is that the bad times are effectively over and that the country can now set its sights on a brighter future – one in which, under the leadership of a far-sighted Harper government, Canadians will be able to replicate the achievements of their Olympic athletes and create a brand new tomorrow.....

....None of this means that Harper is necessarily fated to win the next election. Much can happen between now and then.

What it does mean though is that, barring a second economic crisis, he will not be blamed for this recession. He may even be credited for any recovery.

And that is a very big plus."

Read the entire article at the Star, and wish Thomas luck. He might need it.

Friday, March 05, 2010

You may have missed this yesterday

A couple of things that you may have missed yesterday thanks to the ever vigilant and balanced Canadian MSM.

McGuinty prorogues the Ontario legislature. Heard about it? No; why not? Wasn't the outrage over the "anti-democratic" practice of prorogation recently the subject that the media couldn't stop talking about? When the PM prorogued it was on TV for days on end, it was the subject of hundreds of columns in the papers across the country, and there were few if any political blogs that didn't weigh in on the topic. But when McGuinty does it we get almost nothing for coverage other than a couple of stories and some of those deal more with a bizarre press tradition than the subject of prorogation, which we were recently told by that very same media, outraged Canadians so much. Why the double standard? Kady? Anyone?

Does anyone but me find it odd that legislative press galleries have actually developed their own traditions revolving around prorogation? It is almost as if proroguing was a common occurrence or something, but that couldn't be because that same press was saying something entirely different just a few weeks ago. Weird.

And speaking of outrage, or rather a lack of it, where was the MSM on the recent revelation that an outbreak of Liberal flu is imminent and that they are going to be playing games with the vote on the budget?

Yesterday Ignatieff came out and said that the Liberals were going to vote against the budget, but there would not be enough Liberals to show up to vote against it to force an election.

Wow. Just freakin' wow. Why is the MSM in this country just regurgitating Liberal press releases and taking democracy lessons from Ignatieff, a man who has NEVER won any nomination/leadership contest in his life, or the Liberal Party who ignored the wishes of its own members and party constitution by letting a handful of unelected people appoint Ignatieff?

Think about it for a minute. There are only 2 possible ways that the scenario Ignatieff expressed can occur. The first is to ask for volunteers from among the ranks of Liberal MP's for those who want to avoid doing their job (remember prorogation and how important it was to be on the Hill working) and to not represent those that elected them by being absent from the vote, or Ignatieff chooses which MP's are going to be allowed to be there to represent the people who elected them to do their jobs. Either way it is not an example of how democracy should work and considering all of the outrage over prorogation from the Liberals since before Christmas and which continues to this day as shown yesterday when in oral questions the first question that Ignatieff asked was on prorogation, how the hell are the Liberals getting such a free ride from the media on the hypocrisy of the whole thing?

I should not get my hopes up too high because even if the media did ask Ignatieff about the particulars of how he is going to accomplish his plans for the budget vote (or on anything else for that matter) he would use his standby answer and say that he 'does not answer hypotheticals' in one breath and then claim that he is offering the Canadian public a real alternative in another. An alternative that does not answer any specific questions or offer up any policy I guess, but the media would buy it and give him yet another pass. I might as well hope that the MSM call out Jack Layton for his complaints about tax breaks for banks and corporations, the very same tax cuts that he signed off on and agreed to implement when he was negotiating to be part of the coalition. Sadly though I doubt that either one will happen.

Update: another Liberal talking point bites the dust.
"Flaherty’s travel arrangements became news last weekend when CTV broke the story that he had flown to London on a government jet rather than going commercial at a cost of $800.

As it turned out, one reason Flaherty used a government plane was so he could be up in time to do an interview with, uh, CTV, which initially reported he had commandeered a Challenger at a cost of $9,000, much more than the Cessna Citation he actually flew on at a cost of $3,100. Oh, and because he was doing 11 radio and five TV interviews in the morning, three staffers were along. So their equivalent commercial costs of $2,400 meant Flaherty was actually saving $100."

Thursday, March 04, 2010

Liberals will not vote to bring down the government over budget

Micheal Ignatieff, in a somewhat cryptic response today, said that the Liberals would not vote to bring down the government over the budge, at least not all of them..........

Is anyone really surprised?

What does have me wondering though is just how does Ignatieff plan to control which Liberals will vote to support the budget and which will vote against the budget. Is he whipping his caucus both ways? Does he have to pre-approve how his MP's will vote? If too many want to vote one way will he force others to vote differently than they had intended? Or is it just going to be a free for all with Ignatieff just hoping that the vote goes the way he wants it to go.

Leadership Ignatieff style equals more questions than answers.

Wednesday, March 03, 2010

Maybe the students should get suspended with pay

Oh wait, students don't get paid, only the teachers do, including the ones in this video.

Students who took the video footage of 2 Winnipeg teachers "lap dancing" may face punishment.

"The Churchill High School students violated the Winnipeg School Division's zero-tolerance policies forbidding the use of cellphone cameras and other devices in schools, officials said. School board chairwoman Jackie Sneesby refused to rule out punishment for the students."

Zero tolerance for 'other devices' that record video you say?

Hmm, do cctv cameras fit into the other devices category? (pdf file on contract to supply and install cctv cameras in WSD schools)

What about regular digital cameras? (pdf file on courses offered in WSD schools on digital photography)

Btw, how do you know that all of these videos were recorded on cellphone cameras?

Go for it WSD; punish the students, but be keep your resumes updated as you will need them soon.

Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Michael Ignatieff should beware the ides of March.

With numbers like these, people like this, are going to again become impatient.

Monday, March 01, 2010

Jack Layton, 2 minutes for interference.

Compare and contrast.

While PM Harper was sitting in the stands with Wayne Gretzky cheering on our men's hockey team during the gold medal game at the Olympics, Jack Layton was in Gretzky's Bar in Toronto waiting for the camera to go live so he could get his face on national television; and he was not going to let anyone get in his way. As you can see from the following.

Another video. Look closely at everyone's eyes around Jack, they are looking at the televisions while Jack is looking at the camera. That kind of proves the NDP spin, that Layton was trying to see the TV, is nothing but BS doesn't it.

Stay classy Jack.

I was going to make a separate post on the Olympics but this is as good a place as anywhere to make a few comments.

Some praise and a few failures.


VANOC, well done. You managed to pull it all off in-spite of the weather problems and a temperamental hydraulic cauldron arm. (nice touch making light of it in the closing ceremonies)

CTV: while I am not normally full of praise for CTV I have to give credit where credit is due. CTV and the other partners did an outstanding job of covering the games from start to finish and your live coverage was an example to the world of the right way to do things. The only thing that might have made it all better would have been to provided a little bit more in-depth back coverage on our athletes as the American broadcaster NBC did so well with their athletes. Well done CTV,Rogers, TSN,and RDS.

Our athletes: What can I say; you made us all proud with your efforts and accomplishments. 14 gold medals was well beyond anything that we could have expected and you have made a nation proud. You did own the podium!

The Canadian public: What can I say; the enthusiasm and patriotism shown for the games and our athletes deserves full marks, I only hope that this spirit will last longer than the 17 days the games did. We have a lot to be proud of and there is nothing wrong with being proud of this fact.

PM Harper: Thank you for proroguing Parliament and allowing Canadians to enjoy the games without all of the nonsense in Ottawa distracting us on a daily basis. Sure some are going to jump on me for saying this but the country really was better off because of it.


The Olympic protesters: A big fail. You took advantage of what this country offers and abused it by breaking windows and other such nonsense. Thankfully it was short lived.

CBC and all the other negative Nellie's who were quick to jump all over the games and our early performance. Peter Mansbridge complaining about not being able to show footage from the games after the CBC had done the same thing for years was the height of hypocrisy and the continued 'all negative all of the time' coverage that the CBC is known for did nothing but harm their reputation. As for all of those mocking the "own the podium" program long before the results were known, you are pathetic, and while I don't expect any of you to admit you were wrong and apologize, it might be nice if the next time you would wait until the results were known before going all negative. (like that will ever happen)

Jack Layton: see above.

While this is not a real fail, I think Loblaws/Superstore might want to re-think promoting their "blue menu" product by tying it to, and claiming it, as a reason for the success of a particular group of athletes when that group of athletes were shut out of the medals. You can't have it both ways here, if you want to claim the product was responsible for the success it must also be responsible for the lack of it as well; but we are Canadian after all so I won't rub it in.

Speaking of corporate sponsorship and advertising, if some company does not jump at the opportunity to get our ice dance team of Virtue and Moir to promote their company they are fools. These 2 are golden in more ways than one and they should be lining up to get these 2 to represent their company.

Updated: Proof positive that some people will believe anything.