Alberta Ardvark

Hours after touting their upcoming budget, Alberta PCs go on taxpayer funded trip to Jasper

2012-02-01T19:23:00.002-07:00

Alberta Treasury Board President Doug Horner: "Bill 1 will be about getting better value for taxpayer's dollars, doing things better, smarter," "Certainly we are going to be frugal."

But just a few short hours later: the Tory caucus was in Jasper for a three day, two night retreat – at a cost of $70,000, funded by taxpayers, days before another deficit budget is set for release.

This all after last weeks 4 day taxpayer funded (although they refuse to reveal the costs * ) 'cabinet tour' which one PC MLA called nothing but "a photo-op for the pre-election".

No, nothing partisan going on around here. No siree: Many newly nominated Progressive Conservative candidates and party organizers will also travel to Jasper this week for a concurrent party meeting.

This party has become so damn arrogant that they aren't even pretending anymore.It is time to give the PCs the boot.

-----------------------

* update: The ~~PC campaign~~ err 'cabinet tour' ended up costing taxpayers $100,000 (seems low considering 77K in flights alone over the course of 4days vs $70,000 for 3 days in Jasper with few if any flights involved.)

But who are you going to believe? Your own tired eyes or the Treasury Board President of the tired PC party when he said earlier today: "Certainly we are going to be frugal.".

Suspect donations to PC's hit 50 and Ron Liepert loses it.

2012-02-01T09:17:00.002-07:00

Just a couple of tabs open currently on my browser.

This appears to be illegal donation to the PC party number 50. Yes, 50!
Related: About those donations to the PCs from the Calgary Zoo

Corruption and arrogance, a wicked combination. Someone questions the sorry record of the PCs and Minister Ron Liepert loses it.

How the PC's are ignoring our seniors: Video. They didn't listen at all.

I'll pay a 370k fine everyday of the week of I can make 5.5 million in the process.

Remember how Bill 26 was such a high priority. It was all about safety doncha know.

The PCs are a mess. I just hope Albertans care enough to notice and give them the boot they deserve.

About those donations to the PCs from the Calgary Zoo

2012-01-27T08:00:00.003-07:00

I was going to blog about the illegal donations to the PCs from the Calgary Zoo story the other day when the story originally broke but decided against it as illegal donation stories to the Alberta Progressive Conservatives seem to be all I have been blogging about lately. But here we go again, but this time with a twist.

The original story was broken by the Wildrose on Wednesday with details that the "Calgary Zoo Inc" was issued 2 tax receipts from the Banff-Cochrane Progressive Conservative Association for a total of $725.00. This of course appears to be another in the long line of illegal donations that the PCAA has received over the last few year as "The Calgary Zoo is wholly owned by the City of Calgary and as such under the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosures Act [Section 1 (l)] it is prohibited from contributing to political parties."

Seems pretty clear cut; another in the latest of a long line of illegal donation stories had come to surface but early Thursday came a response from the Calgary Zoo who in full spin mode were trying to explain the donations. From The Calgary Herald: But a spokesperson, Laurie Skene, said the zoo is not wholly owned by the City of Calgary and broke no law when it made a contribution to a golf fundraiser event for Banff-Cochrane MLA Janis Tarchuk.

It looks like the Zoo is trying to parse words here in an effort to defend themselves but it doesn't really matter if the City of Calgary 'wholly' owns the zoo, owns 1% or owns 99% because the issue is a total red herring.

Let me explain.

First off the Wildrose claim that the Calgary Zoo is wholly owned by the City of Calgary is not 100% accurate, but that is no fault of the Wildrose as that exact wording appears on the zoo website: The Calgary Zoo is owned by the City of Calgary, which has entered into an operating agreement with the Calgary Zoological Society to manage the facility on behalf of the citizens of this city.

So what is the truth? From their financials it appears that the City of Calgary does indeed own the zoo; that is it owns the land and the buildings (not sure on the animals but that doesn't really matter), and provides the zoo with taxpayer dollars to operate. Calgary though does not run the zoo, that is done by the Calgary Zoological Society who have a contract with the city to run it until 2015 and this seems to be what the zoo spokesperson was using to cloud the issue of who exactly owns the zoo, and of course whether they are allowed to contribute to a political party. But as I noted earlier it does not matter in the least because even if the city owned 1% of the zoo and the Zoological Society the other 99% (here is that twist I mentioned earlier)

The Calgary Zoological Society is a "not-for-profit organization and is a registered charity under the Income Tax Act of Canada" and cannot by law make any donations to any political party or candidate at any level of government.

By playing word games trying to defend themselves from possible violations of Alberta elections law they have all but admitted to breaking federal law and risk losing their non profit charitable status. Well done Calgary Zoo, well done. Anyone from the CRA listening?

Quick AM update:

One last question: I know that the PC supporters are always trying to spin the multitude of illegal donations as simple mistakes or one offs, but I have to ask. How is it possible to issue 2 tax recipients to a group named "Calgary Zoo Inc" and not have any questions come up or alarm bells go off saying that something might not be right here? Remember; it is this very same party that we have entrusted with looking after all of Alberta's finances.

This donation scandal becomes a national embarrassment."If Albertans get angry enough to rid themselves of their one-party state, perhaps they will come to understand the best part of democracy: Our ability to kick the bastards out of office."

Alberta deserves better. Let's give the PCs the boot.

More illegal donations from AHS to the Alberta Progressive Conservative party...

2012-01-23T09:34:00.003-07:00

You have to wait hours before even seeing a doctor in our emergency rooms and months to see a specialist. They think nothing of putting Granny on a stretcher and parking her as the third patient in room designed only to hold 2 patients after waiting a day in the emergency department.

But yet they have the time and extra money to donate to Redford's PC party.

Calgary Laboratory Services, which describes itself as a “wholly-owned subsidiary” of the Superboard, donated $3,000 to the PCs in 2004 and $850 in both 2009 and 2010, according to Elections Alberta disclosure statements.

CLS was incorporated in 1996 with the former Calgary Health Region (CHR) as the 49% owner and MDS Kasper Laboratories as the majority owner. Before 2006, MDS sold 25% of its share to CHR and on April 4, 2006 sold its remaining 25% to CHR – making the Alberta government through CHR the sole owner of Calgary Lab Services.

Update: Donations confirmed by Alberta Health Services Chief Financial Officer: Chris Mazurkewich, the Chief Financial Officer of AHS, admitted this morning that the donations took place, were wrong and AHS would begin an internal investigation immediately.

This is beyond believable that this type of thing can occur in Alberta, but after 40 yrs of 1 party rule it is inevitable.

We need a change of government now. It is the only thing that will stop the rot.

It makes it tough for Redford to blame the victim if the PCs are the ones doing the asking.

2012-01-19T14:31:00.003-07:00

In what has become an almost daily occurrence in Alberta, new revelations come out about the Progressive Conservatives and illegal donations.

Since 2007, the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta has sent at least 16 explicit invites to their Premier’s Dinner fundraisers to groups prohibited by law from attending, the Wildrose Caucus revealed today. “Please join us in our evening of appreciation knowing that your support and the support of others will contribute to a strong provincial PC party,” reads a letter sent from PC Alberta to Thorhild County, inviting them to attend the Premier’s Dinner held on Aug. 24, 2011. Many more examples can be found at link.

According to Section 34(1)(2) of the Election Finances and Contributions Distribution Act, it is illegal for political parties to solicit money from groups such as municipalities, school districts and post-secondary schools.

So far the standard PC spin has been that it is not their fault and decided that blaming the victims rather than taking any responsibility was the way to deal with this mess. Essentially saying that municipalities and prohibited groups such as schools are the ones in error because they gave the PC's the money, no matter that the PCs happily cashed those cheques and have yet to return any of the money (using this money would also be against the law), but considering that the PCs have been actively soliciting municipalities and other prohibited groups makes their desperate attempts at spin all the more laughable.

Speaking of laughable:

Redford: "and we are going to have no part in any kind of practice or procedure that would suggest that that was acceptable." (remember that the newest of these allegations involve a dinner for Premier Redford)

The problem appears to be systemic:

http://thealbertaardvark.blogspot.com/2012/01/it-keeps-getting-worse-pcs-accepted-15k.html

http://thealbertaardvark.blogspot.com/2012/01/its-firday-time-for-another-illegal.html

And making matter worse is the fact that the PCs are not only blaming the victims but are hiding behind Alberta election laws (which they conveniently wrote) that keeps these investigations and findings private, out of the public view.

The PCAA has to go, Albertans deserve better than this.

A question for Alberta PC supporters.

2012-01-17T08:46:00.001-07:00

Actually this may turn out to be more than one question over the next little while but for today I would like to ask the PCAA supporters who read this blog a question. Of course others are also welcome to add their 2 cents as well.

What was the last thing that Alberta's PC government has done, legislation wise, that you would consider to be 'conservative'?

I have a long list of things that this government has done that nobody in their right mind would consider as being conservative but that will have to wait as now it is your turn to give examples of conservative legislation or policy from our government.

The comments are open.

The future under Alison Redford?

2012-01-15T14:26:00.006-07:00

(coming soon to a local paper near you)

A family celebration took a strange twist yesterday for an Alberta Family:

A mother was fined yesterday for smoking while her 18 year old son present with her in the car.

She had just picked up her son, a private in the Canadian Armed Forces, after he had recently returned from duty in Afghanistan as part of Canada's ongoing training of the Afghan Army when police stopped her and issued the fine. The 2 were headed to a family gathering celebrating the sons return and the mother had just informed her son that he would not be able to drink any alcohol at the celebration due to recent changes to Alberta's drinking age brought in by Premier Alison Redford who maintains that "Albertans have asked us to do this" and added "Won't somebody please think of the children!"

To make matters worse the mother who during the incident had become distraught called her husband who was already at the celebration only minutes away, but when he arrived police seized his vehicle and took his licence after he had blown a 0.05 on a roadside device. Pleas to the officers that he had only had one drink and had finished it less that 5 minutes previous to blowing fell upon deaf ears as he watched his work vehicle being towed away.

When asked for comment the Son said "WTF, is this really Alberta?"

----------------------------

Think such a scenario is impossible? Think again.

Banning smoking in cars + Raising the legal drinking age to 19 = what you read above becoming a real possibility. As for Bill 26, we need not look beyond our neighbours in BC to see what kind of problems we can expect to see soon here in Alberta.

Is this really the Alberta we want? It is time for a change.

Monday update: Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Jonathan DenisTweeted:

"No changes to Alberta's drinking age. http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/01/15/top-tories-cool-to-increasing-albertas-drinking-age-to-19 #ableg"

Good, but I have this nagging feeling that this was a trial balloon and that raising the drinking age was indeed on Redford's radar.

It's Friday, time for another illegal Alberta PC donation.

2012-01-13T15:53:00.004-07:00

Another day another revelation of Progressive Conservatives accepting illegal donations:

"The Medicine Hat Catholic School Board says it did improperly buy tickets to Premier Alison Redford’s leader’s dinner - and has likely been breaking provincial laws against making donations to political parties for the last seven years."

7 years! ( the provision making it illegal for schools to donate became law in 2004)

I feel sorry for my PCAA friends, it can't be easy making excuses for their support while turning a blind eye to almost daily revelations of illegal donations being accepted by the PC party.

Related:

School board officials say they have attended PC fundraisers for years for "networking"

Wildrose press release that started it all this AM.

An attempt to make it all go away: Tweet from Joey Oberhoffner:

@RAndersonMLA Unbelievable is right. As in: "Didn't happen." shar.es/W8Z #ableg

What the link in the tweet used to bring up: (Target has been edited to now go to story linked to at top which refers* to the following, now deleted?)

"The Wildrose Party’s latest blast at the Tories over improper donations appears to have fizzled.

Wildrose issued a news release Friday saying the Progressive Conservatives took illegal donations at Premier Alison Redford’s leaders dinner in Medicine Hat last fall.

It cites a report from the Medicine Hat Catholic School Board saying the board had purchased five tickets for the dinner. Under provincial election law, school divisions are “prohibited corporations” not allowed to make partisan political donations.

But Peter Grad, chairman of the Catholic board, said in an interview board members had purchased the tickets themselves and were not reimbursed by the school division.

He also said the party had not solicited the board to buy tickets to the Oct. 20 event.

The chief electoral officer is investigating 10 Tory constituency associations and a number of municipalities and organizations over alleged illegal contributions"

* "This blog initially reported the comments of Peter Grad, chairman of the Catholic board, who had told the Herald in an interview that board members had purchased the tickets themselves and were not reimbursed by the school division. Leahy said Grad was mistaken."

From Yesterday: How the PCs are blaming the victims.

From Tuesday: It keeps getting worse: PC's accepted $15K in illegal donations...

It keeps getting worse: PC's accepted $15K in illegal donations...

2012-01-10T13:08:00.009-07:00

Hot on the heels of news that at least 10 Alberta Progressive Conservatives riding associations are being investigated for accepting or soliciting illegal donations comes news that the PC's accepted $15,000 in illegal donations from the University of Lethbridge.

"The Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta collected more than $15,000 in illegal donations from the University of Lethbridge between 2004 and 2007, the Wildrose Caucus revealed today.
According to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (see chart below), the PC party collected $15,075 in contributions from the U of L for Premier’s Dinners, golf tournaments, “Meet the Minister” dinners, and party policy conferences.
Under the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, political parties are prohibited from soliciting and accepting contributions from groups such as municipalities, post-secondary schools, and other public institutions."

I doubt that this is even close to being the end of it either.

After 40 years of the PC's holding majority power in Alberta this type of nonsense and entitlement thinking runs rampant through all levels of our government and bureaucracy; the only way to stop it is to replace those who after 40 years continue to believe that they are entitled to rule, make up the rules, and that they themselves are above those rules.

Alberta, it is time for a change. Lets put an end to PC cronyism, entitlement, and systemic intimidation before it is too late.

UPDATE: The University of Lethbridge response can be found here.

Of note are the following lines:

1. In the fall 2005, the University of Lethbridge was notified of changes to the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

2. As soon as the University of Lethbridge was notified of changes to the Act, University Administration, the Board of Governors and the Board Finance and Audit Committee took immediate steps to ensure the University was in compliance with the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

Small problem. It was unlawful for any school, including the U of Lethbridge, to donate money to political parties LONG before fall 2005 and whether they were aware or not of this fact does not change at all the truth that illegal donations that were made and were accepted by the PCAA.

This Editorial, published before the U of Lethbridge story was known, in The Calgary Herald nails the real problem.

"We needn't qualify this by using "alleged" illegal contributions because elected officials in Alberta municipalities have publicly admitted it's been going on for years. Four decades of Progressive Conservative rule is so inculcated in Alberta that elected representatives in some small municipalities thought it was standard operating procedure for them to financially support their local MLA"

Here is something that might surprise you:

"The problem is we'll never know. Under Alberta's legislation, the results of the investigation will not be made public."

Surprise! They make the rules and conveniently enough those rules will end up shielding the PC party so that we will never know.

We need a change now.

Susan Elliot, campaign manager for Alberta PC's & Alison Redford, meet the internet.

2012-01-09T10:03:00.003-07:00

The following is a now deleted Facebook posting made January 6th, 2012 by Susan Elliot "campaign manager 2012 for PC Alberta and Premier Alison Redford". (highlighting mine)

"Susan Elliot
is disappointed that PM Harper today appointed a Senator from Alberta, knowing full well that at least six people from two parties are actively campaigning for the job, with a vote to be held within a few months. While the list he chose from may be technically valid, it is 7 years old. It is disrespectful to urge provinces to hold a vote, and when they schedule one, to act in advance of it being held."

Welcome to the internet Susan. It never forgets.

Speaking of disrespectful:

The richness of a PC mouthpiece calling PM Harper disrespectful while ignoring the facts that it was her party, where Alison Redford was cabinet minister and cheerfully agreed with the policy that 'postponed' the last senate election scheduled in 2010 and arbitrarily extended the terms of those elected senators by 3 years until December 2013, (The ~~reasoning~~ spin was that it was to save money, but the real reasons are well known.) is one thing, but deleting it from the internet in a brazen attempt to make it disappear in the name of partisan politics reeks of the arrogance that has overtaken the Alberta Progressive Conservatives and insults our intelligence.

This crap is pure political hackery. It really is time for a change in this province.

Bonus: More love from a PC supporter.

@Pjhwalsh tweeted: @PrairieStorm2 @brockwharrison @crockatteer @susan_elliott I'm not sure but I think that was the slogan for the SS

Yes. SS

In reply to PrairieStorm2: @BrockWHarrison @Crockatteer @Pjhwalsh @susan_elliott Good on you Brock. #pcaa can run but they can't hide from the scrutiny of #wrp.

The CBC Ombudsman essentially finds police chief Blair to be a liar.

2012-01-06T11:55:00.003-07:00

The title pretty much sums it up.

CBC Ombudsman report on Rob Ford's 911 call. (PDF)

"Resolution of such a dispute requires an impartial investigation. In view of the fact the Toronto Police Service depends on budget deliberations headed by the mayor, and in view of the fact this year’s police budget that averted layoffs was reached only in the week before this incident, I concluded CBC could not rest on Blair’s account. Not only were its sources adamant about their information, the chief was not a disinterested party."

"I did not find a violation of CBC Journalistic Standards"

Call me crazy but taking the word of an anonymous source(s), who may or may not have heard ANYTHING (because CBC refuses to tell us who they are) over the Chief of Police for the City of Toronto who we know has heard the tapes and has publicly said so, does not sound like high journalistic standards to me.

BC Blue has an update here: Police spokesperson Mark Pugash: “Chief Blair listened to the calls, the CBC did not. Chief Blair’s account is accurate and truthful, he stands by what he said, and Mr. LaPointe’s suggestion that the ongoing budget process makes the chief ‘not a disinterested party’ is completely wrong” Link.

The Toronto Sun has the story here.

late update: OPP commissioner listens to tapes, confirms Blair's account and further makes the CBC look incompetent for standing by the obviously wrong story.

If there was ever any doubt the CBC had its own agenda, this should remove those doubts.

Merry Christmas,

2011-12-24T08:28:00.000-07:00

I would like to wish a Merry Christmas to everyone who has stopped by the blog or has followed me on Twitter over the past year. May 2012 be your best year yet!

I know I have posted the following video before, but you can't go wrong with a Canadian classic.

From Canada's own NFB: The Great Toy Robbery.

Nanny Redford. Be afraid, be very afraid.

2011-12-18T03:42:00.001-07:00

Do you live in Alberta an call yourself a conservative? If so, please read the following article from Rick Bell in the Calgary Sun paying particular attention to Premier Alison Redford's own words.

Excerpts: (highlighting mine)

“We know some of the choices people make with respect to tobacco and with respect to alcohol certainly are consumption choices. They also have an impact on quality of life.”

Redford talks about how increasing taxes on alcohol and tobacco can be “a public policy tool.”
She says if the province is thinking about health and wellness as more than just putting more beds in hospitals “one of the other things we can say is what are some of the choices we can make in this society that will actually ask people to consider again some of the choices they’re making in their life.”

“Albertans are really sensible. They want to be healthy, they want to be safe and they want government to take some leadership and say: ‘You know what, we’re going to make some choices and these choices are going to be conducive to building a safer and a healthier community...

“I’ve heard Albertans say: ‘We want to have more opportunity to take responsibility for our health. We want you to emphasize wellness. We want to know if we’re a healthy person we’re not going to get penalized in the health care system.’ (BTW: How the hell does bigger gov't give someone the opportunity to take responsibility for their own health, or their 'own' anything for that matter? Total nonsense.)

Pure big government knows what is best for yo, nanny state nonsense that we have heard many times before whenever the government makes a grab for your wallet under the false pretense of helping you. It is the exact same argument that the federal Liberals used when they were trying to impose a carbon tax; it was for our own good and we should smile and thank them for the privilege of paying. Thankfully Canadians saw through the Liberals BS on their carbon tax and my hope is that Albertans will also see through Redford's very liberal like plans for another tax grab even if it is supposedly being done "for our own good".

Today it is smokes and booze but reading Redford's comments it is clear that she will not stop there. It is pretty much a given that all fees/licences/vehicle registration etc WILL be going up under the PC's but given Redford's concern for ~~our money~~ err I mean our health, you can expect that soon it will be taxes on sugary drinks, 'fast' or any high fat food, salt, coffee and on and on, because like all liberals Redford will not stop taxing you or stop telling you what to do because she believes that she knows how you should live your life better than you do yourself. They can't help themselves.

When a so called conservative premier is talking like this, it really is time for a change because there is nothing at all conservative about Redford or her nanny state ideas.

The worm has turned on media obsession with the Irwin Cotler story

2011-12-17T15:20:00.008-07:00

Reprinted from David Akin's blog, a comment from our friend Gabby in QC that totally destroys the MSM narrative on the Cotler story with examples of the media doing the exact same thing.

-------------

Let me begin by saying: my gut feeling is that Mr. Cotler is beginning to mount a campaign for the leadership of the Liberal party.

Now … when I first heard about this story, my reaction was ugh! Why is my party engaging in such dirty tricks? I jumped to that conclusion because I read / heard that people in the Mount Royal riding had received calls actually telling them Mr. Cotler WAS retiring and that there WAS an imminent by-election.
However, in the real call (from the video Mr. Akin posted) I notice the caller says: “Some people are suggesting that the current MP may retire … if you would consider supporting the Conservative party if there’s a by-election.”

• Mr. Cotler’s name is NOT mentioned, so he is not being personally targeted. Given some people’s lack of interest in politics, they may not even know who their MP is.
• “the current MP MAY retire” is not the same as “the current MP IS retiring.”
• “IF you would consider supporting” and “IF there’s a by-election” are hypotheticals, not statements of fact.
So, sorry to say, the reports about the calls were inaccurate. If there have been untruths, it is the way in which some media have portrayed the calls.

Furthermore, the media often engages in rumours, using unnamed sources to lend credence to their articles. In November 2010, Chantal Hebert, Jane Taber, and John Ibbitson all wrote columns about the imminent departure of Peter Mackay to go to a Bay St. law firm. Did Peter Mackay raise that as a question of privilege? No.

In 2008, Mia Rabson “discovered” Vic Toews was about to be appointed to a Court of Queen’s Bench judgeship. Did Vic Toews raise that rumour as a question of privilege in the House? No.
And who can forget the infamous “wafergate” accusations? Did the PM ask the House to look into it? No.
Some may argue that those rumours were not started by a political party so the Cotler issue is not the same.
BUT Mr. Cotler’s main argument is that his job as an MP was hindered by those rumours. Regardless of the source, the rumour was the aggravating factor supposedly hindering his work. Would Mr. Cotler have felt less aggrieved if the calls had been placed by the NDP? Would his work as an MP have suffered less or not at all?

Finally, Andrew Cohen in a column entitled “The smearing of Irwin Cotler” wrote:
“It is true that Cotler has had doubts about remaining in Parliament, which isn’t unusual for a politician of his age, experience and interests, who now finds himself a backbencher. Even before the Liberals became the third party, Michael Ignatieff had to persuade him to run again this year.” 
SO, the rumour that Mr. Cotler was considering leaving politics did not necessarily originate with the Conservatives. Why is Mr. Cotler now making such a big deal out of it? And why are media people like Susan Delacourt, Jennifer Ditchburn, Greg Weston, Evan Solomon, and even the usually fair Bruce Anderson trying to keep this issue alive?

--------

After a solid week of stories from most of the MSM, with the Globe and Mail in particular who seem to have a sick obsession with continuing this non story, come some relevant facts that the media has chosen to ignore.

Their own actions.

WTG Gabby, but don't be surprised if you find yourself named in a letter from Bob Rae to Elections Canada.

Link to John Ibbitson story on Peter MacKay leaving that was published AFTER MacKay himself had said he was not leaving.

And this from the CBC on Vic Toews, who also said he wasn't leaving but yet CBC published the 'reprehensible' rumour anyways and may have violated Toews 'privilege' as an MP, at least according to what the Globe and CBC have been repeatedly saying in their numerous Cotler stories.

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

2011-12-08T14:21:00.002-07:00

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

Have you read or heard something like this from a PC Minister, MLA or PCAA hack recently in defence of the very flawed Bill 26:

We are not lowering the limit to 0.05, this is current law, the new law only changes penalties.

It may make for a nice sound bite but the reality is that every one of these statements are outright lies! There is no place at all in existing (before Bill 26) Alberta law where this mythical 0.05 blood alcohol concentration is actually written. It simply does not exist in any of our laws.

Alberta law as it existed before yesterday: Section 89 of the Alberta Traffic Safety Act reads:
(1) If a peace officer reasonably suspects that the driver of a motor vehicle has consumed alcohol or otherwise introduced into the driver’s body any alcohol, drug or other substance in such a quantity so as to affect the driver’s physical or mental ability, the peace officer may require the driver to surrender the driver’s operator’s licence to the peace officer.

0.05 is not there. It never was there. The reality is that the Redford government is in fact setting the limit and writing 0.05 into the law, and no matter how many times that they claim that they are not changing anything, the facts say otherwise. It would be nice if they would at least drop the lies and admit that they are indeed changing the law, but that would get in the way of their attempts to spin the public and admit that they are lying or that they do not know what our exiting laws say. Either way it does not give me much confidence in these people who claim to represent Albertans.

More examples:
Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Jonathan Denis: "We are not changing the blood alcohol limits. There already is a .05 legislation if you refer to Section 89 of the Traffic Safety Act"

Justice Minister Verlyn Olson: “This is not being pushed through for political reasons,” Olson said. “We have had a .05 guideline for signs of impairment in Alberta for a long time. That hasn’t changed.

Albertans don't like being lied to.

A quick update: For those that claim blowing a 0.05 on a roadside device is an automatic suspension should really read Section 89 again in particular the following:
5(a) at a place designated by the peace officer, undergoes a test the purpose of which is to show the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood, and the result of that test indicates that the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood does not exceed 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood... the peace officer shall forthwith return the operator’s licence, if any, to the driver and the disqualification from driving is terminated.

In other words if you challenge the roadside finding of 0.05 on a breathalyzer and blow less than 0.08 you get your drivers licence back immediately. Further proving that any statements about current law being 0.05 is nothing more that a lie designed to hide what the government is actually doing.

Elizabeth May: Canadian MP and delegate of the Government of Papua New Guinea???

2011-12-05T02:20:00.003-07:00

Call me crazy but I am having a real hard time with a sitting Member of Parliament from Canada being named as an official government delegate to ANOTHER country, never mind the fact that this is happening while our Canadian House of Commons is currently sitting.

If there is not some kind of rule against this:

Tweet from Green Party MP Elizabeth May.
Amazing. My request to Papua New Guinea came through. I have full credentials as a government delegate - fm PNG. Strong negotiators 4 Kyoto.

there should be!

Where do her loyalties lie? If she can work for a foreign government on this...

More "Business as usual" in Alberta.

2011-11-30T01:24:00.002-07:00

On Monday the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers or CAPP were found to be in "full compliance with the requirements of the Lobbyists Act" by Alberta's Ethics Commissioner, but on Tuesday that finding has been put into question.( A PDF of that report can be found here)

Internal government documents obtained by CBC appear to contradict some of the evidence upon which Alberta’s lobbyist registrar dismissed allegations of illegal lobbying against the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Under the act, lobbying is distinguished from collaboration by which organization initiates the communications. If an outside group initiates talks with the government that is lobbying. In the case involving CAPP, Odsen found that it was the government that initiated talks with CAPP. But documents obtained by CBC, and statements made by the government itself to CBC, directly contract Odsen’s findings.

Sadly this is business as usual in Alberta.

Where the PC government would rather work behind closed doors with industry to develop communications strategies and write press releases and would rather lie to Albertans then tell the truth about their own legislation.

When this kind of crap becomes an almost a daily occurrence, it really is time for a change.

Friends of the CBC mocks US culture by using well known Canadian porn promoter in its ad.

2011-11-29T14:11:00.006-07:00

Friends of the CBC have put out an ad mocking US culture and television by showing what may happen if the CBC were to be taken off the taxpayer funded dole. The ad (see below) titled CBC's new owner gives the news some action shows "new owner" Lance Fury's, an American former pro wrestler, plans for the new CBC; hot babes and lots of 'action' with not so subtle shots at the conservatives with a picture of PM Harper visible in some background shots.

The ad intentionally mocks the culture, or what many on the left believe is the culture, of our neighbors to the south and their television programming. Scantly clad women and lots of action is what the Friends of CBC claim will become of the CBC if it were to be privatized.

And how do the 'Friends' mock the culture of our American neighbours? By using a known Canadian pornography photographer and promoter Uncle D, known as "the Canadian Ass Man" in their ad. (because our culture is so much superior to that of the US)

Uncle D as seen in the Friends Ad. Note the unique tattoos.

Uncle D as seen on CBC's Dragons Den, so it is not as if this guy was totally unknown to the CBC or its so called friends, where he was openly promoting his porn work and asking the Dragons for some cash to help his business. Some more info on Uncle D can be found here.

Financing the CBC............... 1.3 Billion taxpayer dollars a year.
Helping the Assman.............. 250K (as asked of the Dragons)
Mocking US culture by using a Canadian porn promoter... Priceless.

Alberta's new "impaired" driving legislation.

2011-11-23T09:57:00.002-07:00

More bad law written by a bored government trying to pander for votes.

From the St Albert Gazette: The government also plans new suspensions for drivers caught with an alcohol limit between 0.05 and 0.08. Drivers caught within that range the first time would face a three-day suspension and three-day vehicle seizure, rising to a 15-day suspension and seven-day seizure on the second offence and 30-day suspension and seven-day seizure on a third offence.

There are plenty of reasons why this is bad law, and I could write pages as to why, but just for the fact alone that one is tried and convicted at the side of the road with NO chance of an effective appeal makes this legislation a farce. While I realize that arguing against drunk driving law is like arguing against kittens, I would hope that most Albertans can see that this legislation for what it is. Written for optics and pandering.

From the comments: "The argument seems to be that not enough drivers are being caught and convicted, therefore the limit must be lowered."

The Alberta Redux Act of 2011.

2011-11-21T11:03:00.001-07:00

The Redford government announced today that in an effort to be more efficient that they would be putting forward only one bill in the second part of the fall sitting of the Alberta Legislature. The legislation entitled "The Alberta Redux Act" would effectively erase the past five years of PC government from the memories of Albertans and wipe out any legislation passed during this period.

"It will be much more efficient and save us a lot of time," said Alberta's Minister of Miscommunication, "instead of putting forward numerous bills to fix our flawed legislation, we will just pretend as if the past 5 years never happened and start from scratch." "It is both efficient and transparent" quickly adding, "and change too; must not forget to use the word change a lot."

The second part of the once cancelled fall session begins today.

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something.

2011-11-17T16:21:00.001-07:00

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something. Too bad that her own history reveals her to be a hypocrite on the subject.

There was plenty of discussion yesterday about a blog entry the Citizen's Glen McGregor wrote about former PMO d-comm Dimitri Soudas showing up at an event with current MP Eve Adams, and whether or not gossip such as that should be considered news. To McGregor's credit he did a follow up today talking about the controversy which can be found here opening up the discussion further. I myself do not think that such nonsense is worth writing about as does not even come close to what I would consider 'news' but something I read in his follow up struck me as interesting.

"And on Evan Solomon’s Power and Politics on CBC News Network, an entire panel segment was devoted to a talking about whether it was appropriate to talk about it. By a three to one decision — four to one if you include Solomon — the pundits ruled that it was not. Canadian Press reporter Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically while only NDP strategist Ian Capstick defended it. Ditchburn compared the issue to the outing a gay MP, which I think is an unfair comparison, as neither Soudas nor Adams appear be hiding their relationship."

Here is the part that piqued my attention: "Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically..." Yes she did do so most emphatically, in fact here is what she had to say on the subject. Ditchburn: " I got a lot to say about it. This is not a story. Someones personal life, their relationships with someone; I don't believe is a story, a national news story, first of all." In response to Capstick she also said the following: "When does gossip become news, that is what I want to know?"

While I do agree with Ditchburn that gossip should not be news, I have to wonder how she could sit there and defend that position after she wrote the following back in 2010.

Guergis had a history in the clubs with hometown playboy: acquaintance.

Ottawa- Helena Guergis may have nurtured the image of a straightlaced cabinet minister on Parliament Hill, but people who knew her in younger days paint a picture of a regular club-goer often seen on the arm of a hometown playboy.

A story based on Guergis's personal life, her relationships with others, gossip & allegations not even from 2010 but from 10 years earlier, combined with the now proven false, allegations surrounding her and her husband at the time of writing.

So what was it that you were saying about relationships and gossip not being news Jennifer?

Related: Another post I wrote on Ditchburn can be found here.

How long before we see these pop up all across Alberta?

2011-11-16T08:17:00.000-07:00

Ed Stelmach: Miss me yet?

An Alberta Sales Tax: The final nail.

2011-11-15T20:28:00.001-07:00

Alberta Finance Minister Ron Liepert says it’s time to consider implementation of a new provincial sales tax.

Still think that there is anything even remotely conservative about Alberta's PCAA government?

Updated: Sun story: Sales tax cometh.

Karl Heinz Schreiber's revenge!

2011-11-14T09:36:00.002-07:00

Now: Lawyer says a government committee could be violating the Constitution if they force the CBC to turn over documents.

Then: The Liberal run ethics committee demanded that private citizens Karl Heinz Schreiber and Brian Mulroney hand over personal private documents, including tax and bank records (both domestic and foreign) to the committee. Nothing was off limits, as it was the will of parliament. The committee also believed that they had the right to release that info, no matter how sensitive.

If these things could be demanded by a government committee of a private citizen, which if I remember correctly was cheered on by many at the CBC at the time, then there is no possible reason why the same could not be demanded of the CBC, a crown corporation owned and funded by the government.

Sorry CBC but when you claim to have more rights than a Canadian citizen, you lose.

Optional title: Those that defended the Liberal run ethics committee when they ran the Karl Heinz Schreiber / Brian Mulroney circus have the "will of Parliament" bite them on the ass.

Update: Video: Ezra on the hypocrisy of the CBC. Oh, and their 728 cars.

11/11/11 We Remember.

2011-11-11T11:24:00.000-07:00

On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month an armistice was signed to end the war to end all wars.

Lt Col John McCrae:

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

We Remember.

The state of the Canadian news media.

2011-11-06T14:52:00.000-07:00

Summed up in a single tweet.

Jane Taber: "Hollywood star Mark Ruffalo on @ctvqp about XL pipeline with @KevinNewmanCTV! Good get"

Meanwhile, in boardrooms all across the land, network executives huddle and wonder why they are not only losing viewers/readers but also why they are rapidly losing credibility and the respect of the general public.

Related: Some interesting background on pipeline expert Mark Ruffalo.

And from CTV comes this description of a video:

"CTV's Question Period: Breakdown of pipeline: Despite the debate that the Keystone XL pipeline will create jobs, actors and regular citizens are coming together to fight the project saying it isn't needed." (Because actors are so much better than the rest of us)

Next week on CTV's Question Period: Lindsay Lohan talks peace in the Mideast and Kim Kardashian discusses her plan to solve the European debt crisis.

Hey look at me. The latest Liberal strategy.

2011-11-04T01:54:00.002-06:00

It is hard to be the third party and even harder when you believe that you are 'the natural governing party' of Canada. A disinterested public doesn't really seem to care and the media all but ignore you in favour of covering the governing party and the official opposition.

So what do you do?

Easy; you stage some sort of event that will garner attention from the press and try to get some media time to yell look at me into the cameras so that you can appear relevant.

Not a bad idea in theory but it is important to pick the right issue and personally I don't believe that a uni-lingual AG is that issue. You know that this will eventually come back to bite them in the ass at some point in the future and I think that most Canadians would rather see these things awarded on merit rather than on fluency in both official languages, which makes the Liberals move appear self-serving.

However it appears that the Liberals do not share my thinking on this as earlier today under interim leader Bob Rae they staged their little attention grabbing walkout. While we don't know how well it will go over with the public, who seem to have issues when Liberals don't show up to work, according to Bob Rae the media bought into it big time.

Bob Rae: Well I think actually in this case it is more effective, your talking to me today so are many other reporters. (CTV video clip approx 4:30)

Update: Kelly McParland on how out of touch the Liberals are on this.

~~Civil servant~~ and Ignatieff donor walks away from his job. (Pure coincidence that he uses the same lame tactic as the Liberals I assume.) Further update: Dorais quit the committee to select a new AG after a new AG had been chosen and there is no longer a need for the committee. Wow, what courage.

Your daily Redford Government screw up

2011-10-26T22:28:00.002-06:00

Earlier this evening Infrastructure Minister Jeff Johnson (link now dead*) held a press conference where he announced that the proposed new Royal Alberta Museum in downtown Edmonton was indefinitely put on hold Wednesday after Ottawa pulled $92 million in funding.

Indeed breaking news but there are couple of small problems with what the Minister claimed: First the federal government only promised to commit 30 million to the RAM project, as can be seen here in this Alberta Government press release which reads: "The new museum is expected to cost a total of $340 million. Budget 2011 includes $180 million over the first three years for the project, which includes $30 million previously committed by the Government of Canada." and second, that 30 million dollar commitment has not been pulled. It still stands.

Another day, another screw up.

So what happened?

Paula Simons from the Edmonton Journal had these thoughts: It’s even possible, I suppose, that the Redford government, lacking, perhaps, in enthusiasm for Ed Stelmach’s legacy project, was looking for an excuse to mothball the project, and made federal funding a convenient scapegoat.

No doubt there will be lots more on this tomorrow.

* The dead link was from Alberta Premier Comms which stated that "Infrastructure Minister Danyluk" was holding the press conference even though Danyluk is not actually the Infrastructure Minister, Johnson is. I guess deleting tweets is just part of the change we can expect from this government.That and they don't even know who holds what portfolio within their own government. #fail

Well played Mr. Prime Minister. Well played.

2011-10-26T09:58:00.001-06:00

Michael Den Tandt nails it with his latest in the Ottawa Citizen : "Harper proves his political marksmanship."

Here's the not-so-secret weapon underlying the Conservatives' incremental takeover of the mainstream of Canadian politics: they listen.
Not in Ottawa, where the Tories are hard of hearing to most voices but their own - but in the country proper. Through a combination of anecdotal reports from their MPs and relentless polling, the Conservatives appear to listen rather well, indeed. Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Harper+proves+political+marksmanship/5606184/story.html#ixzz1bu6pyEBN

The base is happy. Very happy.

HT BC Blue.

After 40 years in power: This is business as usual in Alberta.

2011-10-24T10:42:00.006-06:00

Hot on the heels of Friday's fiasco on transmission lines miscommunications comes news that certain energy firms in Alberta had the jump on everyone, including PC cabinet ministers who had yet to the approve the deal, on an ethane incentive program worth $350-million.

From the Edmonton Journal: Energy companies learned of potentially lucrative changes to a $350-million incentive program before cabinet ministers approved it, documents obtained by the Alberta Liberals show.
Internal emails reveal that days before cabinet approved the program, aides to then-energy minister Ron Liepert were working with a Williams Energy lobbyist who was already preparing to announce the company's plan to take advantage of the incentives.
The records also show a former vice-president and lobbyist for Nova Chemicals helped redesign the program, aimed at boosting ethane production, which ultimately benefited his one-time employer.

The timeline reveals a cozy relationship with the ministers office.

In an email dated March 17, Royer wrote to Liepert's executive assistant, Courtney Luimes: "As mentioned last week, Williams is preparing a draft ... for when the announcement is eventually made. You'll see there is a spot in there for a quote from the minister."

The request for a comment from the minister was passed to Liepert's communications director, Jay O'Neill, who is now communications director for Premier Alison Redford.

On March 21, one day before cabinet approved the changes, O'Neill drafted a quote and sent it to Luimes. Luimes responded: "He wants us to use this instead: 'I'm pleased to see that Williams is the first of what I believe will be many companies to benefit from the recent changes to our ethane policy.' " It is not clear from the exchange who "he" is.

The quote appears in the Williams news release, which also notes the company set aside money for the investment back in February - more than a month before the program was announced.

Call me old fashioned, but I like my governments to actually approve programs and the spending of $350-million before staff from a ministers office go around helping private business write their press releases by providing quotes from the minister.The rot is deep.

The documents used by the Journal for their story.

Is incompetent too strong a word?

2011-10-21T15:59:00.003-06:00

Another day another flip flop or in this case a "miscommunication" from Alberta's ruling PC government.

Earlier today (approx 10:30am) it was announced a decision by the Alberta Utilities Commission on a controversial power line west of Sherwood Park is on hold after it received a letter from Energy Minister Ted Morton saying the the government was going to review the project. Link.

Big news, and rightly so as this seemed to be a complete reversal for the govt, and it swept across the news wires and twitter for most of the day. That is until Premier Redford announced 4 hours later (approx 2:30pm) that there was a "miscommunication" and that the AUC process on the Heartland transmission project will continue after all.

4 hours to correct a supposed 'miscommunication' on something this big that every major media org in the province was covering since it was announced?

Something stinks, and it is not that it took 4 hrs to correct something that would have been done in minutes if it indeed had been just a simple miscommunication problem.

For the record here is Mortons letter to the AUC, written 2 days ago, that seems about as clear as it can be in what it says.

So far, and in spite of promises of change, we have had a broken promise on fixed election dates, a fall session which was cancelled one day then rescheduled the next and eventually shortened to 2 days next week and 6 days in November/December, the appointment of what looks more like a Gary Mar cabinet filed with good ol' boys, Gary Mar being appointed as Alberta's trade rep to Asia and being paid a salary greater than that of the premier, and a '~~miscommunication~~' flip flop on power lines in just 4 hours. Meanwhile the smell of pork from 40 years of being in power still wafts through the air.

Is incompetent too strong a word to describe what is going on?

For what it's worth: The Government of Alberta still has this totally wrong information up on its website 1 full day after the heartland fiasco Friday.

Our Media: Move along. Nothing to see here.

2011-10-19T13:47:00.006-06:00

Update: It appears as though the government of Ontario lets anyone run licence plates for a fee. They don't give out address info ( the name and a phone book or google should do that easily enough) but the owners name is given out. As noted on the comments: They should call it the "stalker search" or better yet, the 'need to know the name of that hot blond' you saw driving the other day search.

And so with that I eat my words as there really is nothing to see here other than privacy laws that offer no privacy as long as the government gets their $18 bucks for the search.

Remember how Canadian media went nuts over the 'phone hacking' story that came from the UK?

Where are the multiple stories and live tweets over this?

From today's Toronto Star: "Leung would only give his first name, but the Star was able to find his full name by putting a trace on his licence plate."

"Over the past few weeks, the Star has tracked the makes and plates of dozens of cars in the neighbourhood."

The Star openly admits that it traced dozens of licence plates, which can only be done through Ontario Ministry of Transport computers, and we have almost complete silence from the Canadian media. I guess that phone hacking was much more important for our media to cover, and live tweet, than it is when a home grown media outfit like the Toronto Star uses private information protected under legislation and most likely illegally obtained through Ontario government sources. ( I can't see ANY way that it was done legally.)

If only there was some way to tie Rupert Murdoch to this; then I could guarantee you that our MSM would be all over it.

Update: My tweet to the author of the Star story Antonia Zerbisias:

. @AntoniaZ Who's your licence plate info source? Would be interesting to run some plates from around certain 'clinics'. #oops #cdnpoli

The Alberta PC's: Getting by with a little help from their friends.

2011-10-13T11:59:00.006-06:00

With the PCAA being in power in Alberta for the last 40 years; is it any surprise that this type of crap routinely happens?

A top municipal official in St. Paul, Alta., used the city's email system to solicit votes during the Conservative leadership race in a bid to ensure a local MLA remained in cabinet, a CBC News investigation has found.
Ron Boisvert, the town's chief administrative officer, also helped organize a golf tournament in June to raise campaign funds for MLA Ray Danyluk. Boisvert participated in the tournament at the town's expense, along with the mayor and two councillors.

Another town (Cardston) gives the PCAA a sweetheart deal on a golf tournament.

(PDF)
Premier’s Golf Tournament:
Council discussed the request of Pat Shimbashi with the P.C. Party to have the Town of Cardston host their fund raising golf tournament in Cardston on September 15, 2009.Moved by Cou. Bengry to waive the green fees and cart fees for the P.C. Party GolfTournament on September 15, 2009. Carried

Just business as usual in ~~Quebec~~ Alberta politics.

When nobody at the municipal or even at the provincial level see nothing wrong with this type of thing; it is seriously time for a change.

Update: More Municipal Councillors use taxpayer dollars to attend a PCAA fund raising golf tournament.
(PDF)
May 30, 2008 Battle River - Wainwright Progressive Conservative AssociationGolf Tournament is being held.632 /08 MOVED by Councilor Fossum THAT up to 4 Councilors be allowed to attend the Battle River - Wainwright Progressive Conservative Association golf tournament.

CBC video: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Canada/Edmonton/1305516385/ID=2153249329

Alison Redford: Alberta's 14th Premier.

2011-10-02T08:34:00.001-06:00

Early this morning Alison Redford was elected leader of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta and will become Alberta's 14th Premier.

I know that this makes at least a couple of federal Liberal candidates very happy, along with an assortment of other loons, but considering the total number of PC party members who voted yesterday is down by a whopping 66,000 voters from the 2006 second ballot vote, I have to wonder how many longtime rank and file PC members are even happy with the result and the PCAA itself. The funny thing with 'instamembers' is that once they have voted, they don't stick around to do the work needed (at all levels) for a party to be successful.

Congratulations on your win Alison, but considering the dwindling number of party faithful who voted and the fact that 48 PC MLAs endorsed Gary Mar believing that he was better to lead the party than you were, you do have your work cut out for you. ( But not as much as Raj Sherman, you have more Liberal support than he does.)

Gary Mar unrepentant on improper membership sales.

2011-09-14T20:17:00.005-06:00

Gary Mar is above the rules, but he isn't doing it for himself, he is doing it for the good of democracy.

What a guy.

PCAA leadership candidate Gary Mar said his campaign volunteers did nothing wrong by selling party memberships within 50 metres of an Edmonton polling station. Adding that his supporters were only trying to help people who can't speak English. "Within the polling station, the advance polling station, you could buy a membership from the party," Mar said. "Except that there's no one at the party table that speaks three different dialects of Chinese."

So there you go. Even though selling memberships within 50 meters of a polling location is totally against PCAA rules, Gary doesn't care and claims that his volunteers did nothing wrong. Rules and ethics are for others I guess (which might just explain how this happened back in 2001-2004 while Mar was the Minister of Health)

When he entered the race for leader Mar signed an agreement with the PCAA to follow the rules of the leadership contest, not just the rules he liked or agreed with, but all of the rules. I guess a signature on an agreement doesn't mean as much as it used to.(ud)

Honestly, is this the type of person that you want to lead our province? If this type of stuff happens during a leadership campaign can you imagine how a Mar led government would operate.

Pathetic.

On the bright side at least no volunteers were blamed or scapegoated today; although campaign spokesman Mark Kastner might not feel that way as it was yesterday when Kastner blamed the improper membership sales on "overzealous supporters" only to have his boss say today that nothing was wrong with those very same sales. Ouch.

Update: A scrutineer from the advanced vote says that she "spoke with at least 3 volunteers who were acting as interpreters and always available."

Why does this not surprise me.

Another bad day for Team Gary Mar.

2011-09-14T10:33:00.002-06:00

"If you can't run the campaign with integrity, then how can you promise integrity after?" PCAA leadership candidate Doug Griffiths.

Yesterday was advanced voting day for the PCAA leadership race here in Alberta, and as it turns out, it was also another bad day for team Gary Mar.

Representatives from Gary Mar's leadership campaign were seen breaking party rules Tuesday by selling Progressive Conservative memberships outside an Edmonton advance polling station.
Mar membership sellers were also shooed away from the Calgary polling station on Tuesday.

Team Mar's response, which seems to be the norm of late, was to blame volunteers: "Mar campaign spokesman Mark Kastner blamed the membership sales on "overzealous supporters"

You might think that after the free membership fiasco where Team Mar also laid blame on a hapless volunteer that they would have tried to be a bit more careful and made sure that ALL of their people were properly trained and following the rules to the letter. But after yesterday it appears that neither of these were that high on their priority list, making me wonder how this bunch would ever run a government if they can't even properly train their volunteers in a leadership campaign on the basic rules.

Team Mar wasn't done yet as they went old school by busing in elderly supporters to the advanced poll. (Something that I oddly happened to write about yesterday morning. See 2nd last paragraph)

Gary Mar bus parked within 50 meters of polling place. Photo Credit: P. Pilarski

Now busing in supporters is not against the rules per se as Team Mar were quick to point out: Mar campaign spokesman Mark Kastner said the busing is allowed under party rules, and Gary Mar said "I'm not going to apologize because we are better organized than other campaigns", but it is definitely bad optics and reeks of good ol' boy politics that have turned so many away from politics in the past.

How Team Mar managed to find 100's of elderly supporters in both Edmonton and Calgary who all just happened to not be able to vote in the regular poll this coming Saturday (rules state the voters must sign a form saying that they are unable to vote in the regular polls to be able to vote in the advance poll) remains a mystery, but being the ethical bunch they are I am sure that there is a very logical explanation for this mathematical odds defying event.

More on Team Mar's bad day can be found here at Global Edmonton.

"I'm disappointed to hear this today because that sort of conduct, I think, speaks to a pretty cynical approach to politics," PCAA leadership candidate Alison Redford.

Free memberships and the PCAA. The real elephant in the room.

2011-09-13T08:21:00.002-06:00

My first post on Team Mar giving away free memberships can be read here. My second post which contains an audio clip of a volunteer stating "a donor is paying for student memberships" can be found here.

Both of those posts caused quite a stir and I must admit that it was entertaining watching Team Mar try to spin their way out of a 'problem', although having myself accused of fabricating the entire thing or being a partisan hack was not, but here is the rub; there are absolutely NO rules ( according to the PCAA who I called to clarify before Fridays blog post and now also verified by the Edmonton Sun) as to anyone, including the candidates, buying or paying for the memberships of others!

Yes it is true. Giving away 'free memberships' breaks absolutely no rules what so ever within the PCAA and if a donor paying for student memberships the PCAA has no problem what so ever with them doing so as long as they get their 5 bucks. Honestly I was shocked to hear this, as I am sure most of you are as well, and that is why I never wrote or made the accusation that Team Mar was breaking the rules as some have claimed, because the sad reality is that they had not.

It makes more sense now as to why my emails to some of the other candidates campaigns on this subject went unanswered. It makes you wonder just how wide spread a practice this is. ( BTW: For the record only the Doug Griffiths campaign responded to my questions and condemned the practice)

The reasons that this practice is wrong are numerous. First off the optics are terrible. Not only does it lead people to believe that the entire process is corrupt, it brings back visions of the 'old days' when some good ol' boys would load up buses with people they found on the street, handing them $5 to buy a membership to vote for their guy. More serious than the optics is the very real possibility of someone just buying the leadership (and the Premiers office!). In theory with 250k of donated money someone could buy 50,000 memberships and pass them out to people, and 50,000 votes would have been more than enough to win the PCAA leadership on the first ballot in 2006. Sure it would not be an easy task to do for the average candidate but what about if that candidate had the backing of a large union/s (for example) where finding 50,000 people might not be that difficult of a task. The PCAA, and the Premiers job could be bought for a relatively small amount of cash and NOBODY could stop them!

This type of crap is not allowed in the Conservative Party at the federal level for good reason and looking towards Alberta, the Wildrose Alliance Party's constitution is very clear on this:

3.1.2 indicate their intention to join the Party by personally authorizing an application for membership in the Party...
3.2.1 have paid the prescribed membership fee, personally or through an immediate family member; (PDF)

So why is it allowed in the PCAA?

You know this entire thing stinks; it is absolute nonsense on so many levels but it is something that I have come to expect as of late from the PCAA. Antiquated rules for an antiquated party.

What happens now?

I guess the candidates have a couple of options. Call out this unethical practice for what it is and promise to make changes to the rules so this embarrassment never happens again, or go grab the cheque book, pass out memberships, and rent the buses for Saturday.

Now that the elephant in the room has been revealed and everyone now knows that paying for memberships is not against the rules, your guess is as good as mine as to what will happen.

Team Mar volunteer: " ...a donor is paying for student memberships"

2011-09-12T08:37:00.007-06:00

We get letters (and emails), lot and lots of letters... And look what showed up in one of them.

" a donor is paying for student memberships"

Spin that.

Audio clip taken from a video taken Sept 7, 2011 at that very same Gary Mar table at the U of A where this picture was taken. I decided to use audio only and not full video because the identity of this hard working volunteer is not important and I am not here to toss her under a bus. Team Mar seems to be doing a good enough job of that already.

Background: Last Friday I posted a picture of the Team Gary Mar table at the University of Alberta where it was quite obvious that they were giving away free memberships.

The response was quick from Mar spinners and supporters: "Complete fabrication guys." was the first, but seeing that the free membership sign was so prominently displayed in the photo, that line was going to go nowhere. Next up came what would become the main spin from Team Mar: "it was a mistake by a volunteer, nobody was instructed to do this. Problem was corrected right away." Which was to be repeated, almost word for word many more times throughout the day. They were in the 'nothing to see here' mode and were only too happy to blame one poor volunteer ( there were at least 3 volunteers there, all of which could see the sign on the table and NONE doing anything about it ) hoping it would all go away. Honestly I have lost more respect for Team Mar over how they tried to spin their way out than I did about some 'free memberships' that were given out.

So what do you think?

An improperly trained volunteer, who knew enough about the memberships to say that they normally cost $5, who on the spur of the moment just happened to come up with this 'donor paying for student memberships' idea on her own, or perhaps is there is more to the story than what Team Mar is telling us? Personally I think that there is more to the story*, but given what we have already seen from Team Mar, I don't expect that we will really ever find out the full story and all I expect to see is more spin and damage control.

As I said in my original post: I guess ethics left the PCAA a long time ago.

*There may indeed be much more to the story but in the end it really doesn't matter; which is the real elephant in the room that nobody is yet talking about.

More on that elephant tomorrow. (BTW and it isn't the 'donor'.)

UPDATE: More spin from Team Mar: 'campaign advisor Mark Kastner said the incident was a mistake.
“A new volunteer did put the sign down. It was corrected quickly and we don’t think any memberships were given away,” said Kastner in an email.' To put it simply, BS! Memberships WERE given away and in case there is doubt about this, there is a certain video...

Team Gary Mar gets caught giving away party memberships.

2011-09-09T11:15:00.003-06:00

Can it really get any more blatant than this? The following photo was taken September 7th on campus at the University of Alberta. In it you can clearly see members of Team Gary Mar openly offering anyone willing to fill out the paperwork a 'Free membership' in the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta; allowing them the opportunity to cast a vote for the next leader of the PCAA who will also be the next Premier of the Province of Alberta.

Now just get that demon dialer set up, give away* 20,000 memberships, and hope those free membership members all show up and vote.

*Not really a give away. Each membership does cost $5 and that must be paid to the PCAA, but all you need is just 1 big fat $100,000 donation to ~~buy it~~ pay for it and you get a great shot at the Premiers Office and all that goes with the job of leading the Province of Alberta.

A bargain at twice the price!

I guess ethics left the PCAA a long time ago.

Update Sept 10: Major update ~~coming soon!~~ Monday morning.

And here is that update in a new post.

Incompetence at Edmonton City Hall.

2011-09-06T18:50:00.006-06:00

It seems that the City Manager and the Transportation Department jumped the gun by not only ordering the new seasonal parking ban signs but by having city crews install them before City Council had made the decision to do so.

I wonder how many dollars that move will cost us?

Update: Councilor Bryan Anderson said it could be a waste of $600,000. If that number is accurate, transportation boss Bob Boutilier must be fired immediately and to use Boutilier's own words: "All I can say is, 'tough! I got no other way of saying it..." you cost the taxpayer $600,000, and you did so without the approval of the elected representatives of the citizens of Edmonton; you have to go. This is an embarrassment.

City Council has yet to make a final decision on the matter but according to news reports (and Councilor Don Iveson), as of right now the seasonal ban is on hold and all of those expensive installed signs are to be ignored.

Like a runaway train. Team Libby can't be stopped.

2011-09-02T11:31:00.001-06:00

Okay; it may be a solar powered train at dusk but there is no denying that the ranks of Team Libby are growing!

Come join us won't you. You will be glad that you did.*

*Jack would have wanted it that way.

City of Edmonton puts up seasonal parking ban signs but City Council has yet to approve the move.

2011-09-01T15:31:00.009-06:00

I take it as a sign of an already done deal (just how do they know it is a done deal is a good question though) as City of Edmonton workers are all over the place putting up Seasonal Parking ban signs throughout Edmonton. But the matter does NOT come before City Council for discussion until theTransportation & Infrastructure Committee meeting September 6th at 9:30 am at City Hall where these reports will be debated.

Previous news stories here here and here ALL seem to suggest that the City was looking at this, and that NO decision was going to be made. Wrong.

So what happened?

According to someone I spoke to at City Hall they are claiming that the City Manager made the call under Bylaw 5590, which is the all encompassing traffic bylaw, but strangely enough 5590 makes NO mention at all of a seasonal parking ban.

So I ask: Who authorized these signs to be produced? Who gave the go ahead for them to be put up? Can Council reverse this or are they powerless against the moves of Transportation and the City Manager? And lastly: why bother having council discuss this stuff at all if the City Manager can just do as he pleases without any concern as to what the citizens of Edmonton have to say?

Not that Transportation boss Bob Boutilier cares about what you think as he is already on record saying: "All I can say is, 'tough!' i got no other way of saying it. The situation we run into is, we got to keep the system operating." when citizen concerns over the seasonal parking ban were brought up.

BTW: Edmonton has had the Snow Route Bylaw since the 1970's which they did NOT even bother to use at all the last few years ( How do they know that it doesn't work if they didn't even bother trying it?) before some unelected civil servant ran off and ~~passed~~ enacted this new seasonal ban.

Google ad-sense gone awry.

2011-08-27T06:58:00.006-06:00

Another case of Google ad-sense gone awry. Found this the other day over at Moose and Squirrel.

NDP exploiting Jack Layton for political gain.

2011-08-26T14:13:00.009-06:00

It seems that the NDP have been flat out busted exploiting Jack Layton for their political gain, and do you know what? Jack Layton would not have it any other way.

Before the hate mail starts flowing and I get piled on for being too insensitive or it being too soon after Jacks passing: I would like to point out that up until this post that I have refrained for the most part from making comment on his untimely death and the subsequent sometimes over the top coverage (msm,twitter,blogs), but
back to the topic at hand.

Who did not see this coming? Raise your hand if you honestly did not think that the NDP would use Jacks passing for their own gain. Somehow I doubt that there are many, if any, hands raised right now; not because you would look stupid sitting at your computer with your hand in the air but because if you are in any way familiar with the NDP and Canadian politics the answer is obvious; they would and in fact are doing just that.

When Ed Broadbent said on Wednesday: “We have to build on Jack’s legacy. And quickly.” he wasn't just sputtering nonsense because of his grief, he was telling the truth.

When Pat Martin tweeted: The only criticism Jack would have over the release of his letter is that there was no fundraising appeal at the bottom...I can say that... he too was telling it like it is and reminding us all about the real Jack Layton in the process.

The letter that Mr. Martin is referring to above was Jack Layton's message to Canadians, which a few days ago could get one tarred and feathered if they pointed out the obvious that it in part was political in nature.

We can expect to see plenty more and of course the inevitable 'Jack would' or 'wouldn't want' that is already making its way out into the political world.

That is politics. It is what it is.

I did not know Layton personally but I do know that he was a masterful politician that knew the game inside and out and one who clearly relished in it. You can believe what you would like to believe but he was a very smart man and IMHO to deny that as the time of his passing neared that Jack never gave thought about how his own death could help out the party that he had recently led to its greatest electoral success, is an insult to the mans political skills and acumen.

Layton the politician would do what it takes and that is the Jack Layton that I choose to remember. The consummate politician, right up until the end and as it now appears, beyond.

Rest in peace Jack.

As I wrote earlier' that is politics' and as I also wrote earlier, 'Jack wouldn't have it any other way'.

Update: The CP has something with an eerily similar feel: Politicization of Layton's death was what he wanted.

Saturday update: "this mass outbreak of recreational grief..."

Jack Layton 1950-2011

2011-08-22T07:50:00.004-06:00

“We deeply regret to inform you that the Honourable Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, passed away at 4:45 a.m. today,” his family said in a statement. “He passed away peacefully at his home surrounded by family and loved ones. Details of Mr. Layton’s funeral arrangements will be forthcoming,"

Layton was 61.

Rest in Peace Jack.

CTV

CBC Video tribute

CP

PM Harper: I know one thing: Jack gave his fight against cancer everything he had. Indeed, Jack never backed down from any fight.

I wonder if Heather Mallick's employers have apologies pre-printed when they hire her.

2011-08-15T01:55:00.003-06:00

Because it seems that they do have to make a few of them.

The latest comes from Mallick's latest employer, The Toronto Star:

"A column by Heather Mallick on July 28 contained a number of inaccurate statements about the well-known British journalist and author Melanie Phillips.

Ms. Phillips has expressed her horror at the slaughter at Utoya, Norway in a clear and unambiguous way, writing “there can be no excuse, justification or rationale whatsoever for the atrocity perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik.”

The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.

The defamatory article has been removed from our website.

The Star and Ms. Mallick regret the errors and apologize to Ms. Phillips."

And here is a report from the CBC Ombudsman on a column Mallick wrote while she was an employee of the CBC. That too has been removed from the CBC website but is available to read here. Notice a trend?

HT to Blazing Cat Fur who has a screenshot of the text of the now deleted Star column which can be seen here.

What is CBC Policy on publishing the names of suspects... That depends.

2011-08-06T07:54:00.003-06:00

What exactly is CBC News Policy on the naming of suspects?

Here is what CBC stated was their policy in regards to publishing the names/pictures of suspects
"CBC News' practice is not to name suspects, and therefore is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time." (Note: The original wording in that story read "“CBC News is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time” and it was changed sometime after the original story hit their website.)

Since that story hit the web others have found examples of CBC doing the exact opposite and naming suspects, but today the CBC has really outdone themselves and have hit the trifecta today with this story . "Edmonton police are searching for a 17-year-old woman who is allegedly having unprotected sex without disclosing her HIV-positive status."

Not only did they publish the photo and name a 'suspect', something they claimed they do not do, but this particular suspect is a 17 yrs old minor who now has had what most would consider to be her private medical information posted by the CBC on the internet!

I think we need a clarity act for CBC Policy.

BTW: I hope that Kirk LaPointe, the CBC Ombudsman, (whom I have great respect for) gets on this ASAP.

2000 Days

2011-07-30T10:44:00.002-06:00

Congratulations PM Harper on your 2000th day in office. Contrary to what the screaming leftists claimed would happen if the Conservatives were to be ever elected (The Campaign of Fear™ ), Canada is in good shape and leading the way.

PM Harper is currently in 10th place on the list of longest serving PM's, with the next Federal Election scheduled for October 19, 2015.

Best Political book from the last 25 years.

2011-07-25T01:23:00.001-06:00

From the Samara website:

"Samara and the Writers’ Trust of Canada are proud to present the shortlist for the Best Canadian Political Books of the Last 25 years. This project draws attention to highly readable accounts of the issues and personalities that figure prominently in Canada’s history, with a goal of creating a resource for Canadians to learn about their political history and encourage readers to reflect on the contribution books make to our country's great political debates."

Take a look at the choices and vote for what you believe is the best political book of the last 25 years.

I agree with BC Blue myself and have cast my vote for Ezra's "Shakedown". A great read and it remains as relevant today as the day it was written.

Then:“I think it is contemptuous to tell people we are going to target your religion...

2011-06-30T19:36:00.002-06:00

Now: Liberals launch outreach campaign in bid to recapture ethnic vote.

Oh oh. This isn't going to sit well with Michael Ignatieff or all of the others who took offense to the CPC's efforts in this area.

Michael Ignatieff: “I think it is contemptuous to tell people we are going to target your religion, we are going to target your ethnicity, we are going to target your national origins. No! We must target the fact they are Canadian citizens.”

“I don’t like the word “ethnic,” Ignatieff said, in French. “A Sikh is a Canadian, a Hindu is a Canadian, a Muslim is Canadian, a Tamil is a Canadian.”

What about the ~~current placeholder~~ err leader Bob Rae? Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae suggested the initiative was more about winning support in ethnic communities — groups that Mr. Kenney has been actively courting for the Harper government in its attempts to build a majority government.
“It has much more to do with Canadian domestic politics than it has to do with the necessity of having a coherent strategy for the promotion of democracy and human rights,” said Mr. Rae.
“It's more a domestic strategy than a foreign affairs strategy.” (ht BC Blue)

BTW how do you reach out to the 'ethnic vote' without a leader or any policy other than 'we will try super extra hard the next time to get it right'. Sorry Liberals but being totally rudderless does not inspire much confidence in your party to anyone, including the 'ethnics'.

My BSdar is going off on 'gaydar' study.

2011-06-25T09:03:00.004-06:00

The term junk science comes to mind.

A new study led by researchers at the University of Toronto suggests that ovulation significantly improves a woman’s ability to judge a man’s sexual orientation. The researchers found that the nearer a woman was to peak ovulation, the more accurate judge of sexual orientation she was."These findings suggest that women's accuracy may vary across the fertility cycle because men's sexual orientation is relevant to conception and thus of greater importance as women are nearer to ovulation," Nicholas Rule, lead author from the Department of Psychology at the University of Toronto, said in a release. (link1 link2)

The women did not meet, or speak to any of the men (gay or otherwise), they were able to determine that the men were gay or straight by only looking at photos of their faces. (The men were all equally attractive and wore the same facial expression, researchers said. Women were encouraged to use their intuition.)

There is so much wrong with this that I don't know where to begin. Do all gays look alike? (or straight males) Were the study males ( who self identified as gay or straight) totally honest? Did this Kreskin like ability of ovulating women reveal some straight males as being only in denial and fooling themselves because they really were gay; since 'science' doesn't lie. Did any ovulating lesbians participate, or do they not have the same power? I have more but I think I will might apply for funding to conduct my own study to disprove, and I bet it would be quite easy to do so, this study that was no doubt partially funded by your tax dollars.

I hope the Iranians or any other non gay friendly country doesn't ever catch wind of this study. The next thing you know they will be putting ovulating women out in the street to identify gay men for 'special treatment'. After all, it is now science.

I wonder what GLAAD or any of the other gay rights organizations have to say about this.

NHL Awards Show Mixup

2011-06-23T00:41:00.000-06:00

Just finished watching the NHL Awards show on PVR. I never noticed how much Mike Gillis looks like Steve Tambellini before.

The Senate reform act. Coming soon to a Senate near you?

2011-06-21T09:11:00.004-06:00

Take a look at the news release.

Personally I think it is the best that can be expected without reopening the constitution.

The fact is that the PM gets to appoint Senators, it is his constitutional duty. IF Provinces elect candidates, and this could be anyone (even Duceppe), the PM should have to consider that democratic choice in his decision. He doesn't have to appoint them but heaven help him come next election if he does otherwise. (Quick someone ask Jack Layton if he would respect this if he ever became PM)

Oh and I believe this same principle applies to the legislation, ( again more like a suggestion per our constitution) of the PM not calling an early election in a majority situation. He can do it but come that election....toast.

As I said, the best that can be expected without opening up that can o' worms that is our Constitution.

Update: Canadian Sense had a great idea "A substantial cut in pay/benefits for upper chamber would help with turnover and not require Constitutional talks."

That would get some of those hanging around just for the perks to willingly depart sooner. Making it a volunteer position could also be an option....

Another update: Pat Martin agrees!

Vancouver riots: Preston Manning's fault

2011-06-17T16:24:00.002-06:00

Deluded article from Murray Dobbin that takes the usual lefty line and applies it to the Vancouver riots by blaming others for the actions of the rioters.

Yes, of course, it is a big stretch to suggest that Preston Manning, the former head of the Reform Party had anything to do with the rioting in Vancouver after the hockey game. But in trying to determine what is at the root of this mindless violence – and the almost equally mindless spectator sport of watching the violence and doing nothing – we need to examine just how it could be that so many young men’s lives are so meaningless. I think it comes down to community – or rather its dramatic decline – a deliberate by-product of neo-liberalism and consumerism.

Read the rest here

( BTW I will wager every penny I have that most of those involved in the rioting were not CPC supporters, if they voted at all)

Here is one poor lost young man's story. ( A member of our national Water polo team, or should I say used to be a member of...)

If you're going to Vancouver BC...

2011-06-15T09:14:00.001-06:00

If you're going to Vancouver BC.
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
If you're going to Vancouver BC.
You're going to meet some freaky people there.

Now maybe Canadians will get the chance to see that hidden NDP constitution.

Welcome to the spotlight NDP.

Apologies to Scott McKenzie.

Interesting: Taking socialism out of the NDP constitution.

PM Harper: "Conservative values are Canadians values."

2011-06-01T13:40:00.001-06:00

And I agree with the Prime Minister, they are.

From Canoe.ca

Conservative values are Canadians values, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told his new team of MPs Wednesday, but urged them to stay "humble" as they kicked off their majority mandate.

Throne Speech Friday June 3rd and the budget comes down Monday the 6th

Jennifer Ditchburn in search of unhappy Conservatives.

2011-05-31T16:33:00.000-06:00

Jennifer Ditchburn is no fan of the Conservatives, as anyone who has ever read her stuff is keenly aware, and today is no exception as she finds a couple of unhappy Quebec Conservatives and writes about their disillusionment and uses the opportunity to again bring up the issue of weighing ridings for leadership votes, which will be brought up at the convention along with dozens of other proposals.

Anything that works negatively to the conservatives I guess.

BTW I always thought that candidates and their campaigns were responsible for their own signage. (Can you imagine what Elections Canada would do if the Party actually purchased and distributed the signs!)

Here is some more on Jennifer from this blog, and some from BC Blue including her big breaking story on Helena Guergis and the town playboy.

The good news keeps coming!

2011-05-30T09:54:00.002-06:00

Chrysler has repaid their 1.7 Billion in loans received from the governments of Canada and Ontario.

StatsCan: The Canadian economy expanded 3.9% in the first quarter of 2011.

Some action on the Senate.

And the House has yet to sit for even one day of Parl41.

Much more to come.

The end of the long gun registry.The end of the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly. The end of party subsidies...

NDP spin on new MPJean-Francois Larose's resume. #Fail

2011-05-24T08:05:00.002-06:00

More resume problems for the NDP and their pathetic attempt to spin their way out of it.*

This past Friday QMI learned that the new NDP MP for a federal riding north of Montreal does not have a degree from the University of Montreal, contrary to what his official electoral biography stated. This after another similiar resume incident with their most famous MP, Ruth Ellen Brosseau.

Like with Brosseau, the NDP spin on Lerose was that it was a staffers error: On Brosseau the story was that a staffer had "inadvertently" changed the wording, embellishing her resumé. On Lerose we hear of a similar tale using similar words describing how a NDP staffer (now gone) had made an "inadvertent change" to Lerose's resume posted on the party’s website.

Only with Brosseau the spin was at least plausible, staffers do make mistakes and there is really no reason not to take the NDP's word for what happened, but with Larose the NDP spin is so ridiculous that it insults the intelligence because this is not the first time that this has "inadvertently" happened. "The false credentials were also posted about Larose on the La Presse newspaper website when he ran for in the Montreal municipal election in 2009." So unless that very same NDP staffer wrote the bio in 2009 and again in 2011, I have some serious doubts that it was their fault in the least.

BTW what happened to that staffer? The NDP claim that they no longer work for the NDP but why is that?
Were they fired? Did they resign? Were the pushed to resign? We don't know and so far the media couldn't seem to care less about the NDP lying to them or about what happened to the staffer that the NDP claim was responsible. ( anyone remember certain MSM types mocking the CPC when they blamed a staffer for anything?)

HT BC Blue.

Related: More spin, also total BS that the media bought, from the NDP and Jack Layton's infamous shove to get some camera time for himself.

*Which appears to have worked because judging from the lack of questions and coverage, our MSM seems to have swallowed the BS spin from the NDP.

Another #fail from Canada's political journalists.

And now the end is near.....

2011-05-20T10:37:00.003-06:00

Number one on the list: An end to taxpayer subsidies for political parties.

Next up: The oppressive Canadian Wheat Board and soon to follow, the long gun registry.

And for an added bonus some common sense on cap and trade and incandescent light bulbs!

The left is going to go nuts.

For your daily media fear-mongering fix we have Lawrence Martin trying to convince everyone that the media is in the PM's pocket.

Alfred Apps and the Liberal Party: Passing on the blame.

2011-05-12T13:35:00.000-06:00

From the Globe and Mail: " In a Facebook post Thursday, Mr. Apps warned Liberals “not to put the cart before the horse.”

“Very gratified with the goodwill, as well as the honest and constructive dialogue with our MPs and Senators,” he said of the caucus meeting. “Even the high emotions are respected, after all it was a devastating defeat and desire to fix blame is totally understandable. But we should move on.”
Meanwhile, he said he and the party executive had nothing to do with the strategy behind the losing campaign. He said he delivered on his part of the job – supplying the money to fund the campaign. "

Sure Alf, aside from going down to the US to recruit Michael Ignatieff for the leaders job and then falsely using the coalition crisis as an excuse to trample the Liberal Party constitution and voice of the grassroots to appoint Ignatieff as leader, you the party executive had no part at all in the defeat.

Sigh. When will these guys learn. Ignoring the grassroots party members is never a good idea, and trying to re-write history to spin your own people is even worse.

Oh and there is also this about the party not authorizing funds to the struggling Ignatieff campaign in the last couple of weeks of the election campaign.

Previous entries on Alfred Apps.

Chretien urges PM Harper not to follow through on election promise.

2011-05-09T11:09:00.003-06:00

Prime Minister Stephen Harper should reconsider his vow to end the direct per-vote subsidy for political parties, says former prime minister Jean Chrétien.

Sort of arrogant, no? Having a former PM ask the current PM not to follow through on his election promises?

Thank you Jean, but cutting party subsidies was an election platform promise, in fact I would call it a major plank of that platform, and the Conservatives were elected on that platform. The Conservative Party of Canada is not the Liberal Party where promises to abolish the GST or the numerous times they promised a national child care system are never followed through on. This PM will follow through on his platform promise.

If a party's own members do not care enough to support that party with their own money, why should the taxpayer have to prop them up?

Did Quebec reject the Bloc to make a coalition easier?

2011-05-07T13:18:00.000-06:00

There has been lots written the last couple of days about the collapse of the Bloc and the NDP surge in Quebec and so far I have not read anything that really explains what happened. Did BQ supporters all wake up one day and decide to toss out a party that for years has enjoyed their support because of something Duceppe did or did not do? Were they all taken in by the guy from downtown Toronto with the big smile and equally big spending promises?

While I don't claim to know the answer I do have some thoughts and a possible piece of the puzzle as to why Bloc supporters decided to abandon their party and support the NDP.

The coalition.

Whenever the idea of a coalition has been discussed it has been quite clear that having Bloc MPs as part of any coalition was not to the liking of most Canadians. During the original coalition crisis both the Liberals and NDP were desperately trying to spin that the Bloc were not actually part of the coalition, only that they would be supporting it, and Ignatieff himself had this to say as to why he didn't enter into the deal he had signed: "I could be sitting here as your prime minister, but I turned it down because I didn’t think it was right for someone who believes in the national unity of my country to make a deal with people who want to split the country up,"

Having separatist Bloc MP's either in or supporting a coalition government did not fly in 2008 and was never going to go over well with Canadians. Bloc supporters were as aware of this problem as much as anyone else but what to do about it.

The solution: Drop the Bloc and elect enough NDP MPs so that a coalition would not only be legitimate but it would have a much better chance of being accepted by the rest of Canada.

It makes sense and possibly explains why dedicated separatists tossed their own party and blindly voted for NDP candidates some of which were barely old enough to vote themselves, did not speak French, or have NEVER even been to the riding in which they were running in.

Your thoughts?

Some Local Campaign 2011 Musings.

2011-05-06T09:38:00.001-06:00

Yesterday around noon I dropped off my last load of lawn signs officially ending, for myself at least, the 2011 election campaign. During the past 40 days I have run the gamut of emotions from depressing lows to exhilarating highs, with the added bonus of running myself to near exhaustion at times in the process, and now that I have some free time I thought I would put together a post on some of my election 2011 thoughts and experiences from the local level. From the time the writ was dropped until the last sign was removed, it was 40 days that I will not soon forget.

The early days consisted mostly of helping to get the local campaign office up and running, which in our case consisted of turning a rather large empty space into the hub of the local campaign, and getting the signs out. Desks and furniture had to be brought in, temporary walls/dividers had to be fashioned, equipment such as computers, phones, copiers, shredders and even TVs had to be located brought in and hooked up, and the volunteers organized. Aside from some early grunt work of hauling things around and some minor 'construction' work, the set up of the office was capably handled by many others; I worked more on getting the signs out.

When the writ was dropped on the last weekend of March there was 3 feet of snow in my yard, there were huge windrows along every road, and the ground frozen solid, not the best situation to be putting out election signs. The signs were being stored in a shed on a rural property in the riding and a Bobcat had to be used to clear a path through the snow just to get access. But we got them out and we got them up. Within 2 days all major and minor intersections in the riding had signs placed in all directions, but because the ground was still frozen they had to be placed in the deep snow and within a couple of weeks every single sign had to be re-visited and put solidly into the ground.

More on signs: There were plenty of stories during the campaign on sign vandalism etc and while there were some places more effected than others, I think it is fair to say that EVERY candidate had to face some type of sign vandalism. If you have ever dealt with signs in a campaign you can sort of tell who is going after your signage and why; when you see a bunch of signs knocked over or pulled out ( including those from your opponent) it is a good guess that it is just kids who did so as they walked by. It is when only your teams signs that get hit while the oppositions remain standing, or when your signs have be damaged or made non reusable ( no details but sign people know what I am talking about) that the political motive questions start being asked. Why people do it is beyond me, it is just stupid not mention illegal, but no matter the reasons when they knock 'em down, someone has to go out there and stand 'em back up. BTW there were more than a few times that I stood up NDP signs that were knocked down along side our own ( You're welcome Nadine).

Blogging: One of the regrets that I do have was not doing enough blogging during the campaign. You would think that blogging would be a no brainer as it is a political bloggers 'busy season', but the time and my energy level were just not there. I have to look at my drafts but I can wager that I have at least 10 blog entries sitting there in various stages of completion that I started but did not finish/publish for various reasons. I had a great series that I had planned on Ignatieff, aka Mr. Democracy, for the final week of the campaign but to be honest I felt that it was a waste of time and towards the end I started feeling sorry for the guy and didn't want to pile on. On the positive side I did follow closely much of the wonderful work my fellow Blogging Tories did during the campaign and when I had the time I did quite a bit of Tweeting (a quick tweet is much faster than writing a blog post). Also my long running issue with Scott Reid and the CBC was finally resolved thanks to the Ombudsman, but even there what should have been a few days worth of good material only made it into a single blog post.

Door-Knocking: While I did quite a few other things during the course of the campaign, it was door-knocking that took up the most of my time and provided some of the most enjoyable moments along with some of the most depressing moments of the 2011 campaign. It is my favorite election activity as I enjoy going out and knocking on doors meeting people face to face getting instant feedback, and one of the more memorable trips occurred in the middle of a spring snow storm when I met up in Millwoods with the candidate and blogged about here. The trips into Edmonton-Strathcona though were memorable for much different reasons. The first trips I made into E-S were great; lots of positive feedback and when we left there were as many Hastman lawn signs out as there were Duncan signs. But those first trips were in polls on the edge of the riding and as we got closer to the University area things became much different. Most of people I met at the door were polite enough, although having a door slammed in your face even just once tends to make for a bad day, but it was clear that most of those met were Duncan supporters and in these polls the Duncan signs were everywhere. On one particular street there were 15 homes, 9 of which had Linda Duncan signs on the lawn, and this was not an anomaly as it was near impossible to go to more than 5-6 homes anywhere in these polls and not encounter an Orange NDP sign. Needless to say that after a couple of days of that sort of thing that ones confidence goes down somewhat and you become unsure if you are having any impact at all.

Election night: When it was all over and the votes counted we had won in Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont, lost in Edmonton Strathcona, consumed an over abundance of chicken wings, and for the first time ever the CPC had enough seats to form a majority government, but all I could really think about was that we didn't have to do this again for another 4 1/2 years and that in 2015 my daughter will be eligible to vote for the very first time.

It was over but for the clean up, which would begin bright and early Tuesday morning.

The campaign started when the government fell on March 25 on a Liberal motion of non confidence ( Insert joke of your choice here) the political situation for the Conservatives was not great, the weather was cold and miserable, and there was still 3 ft of snow on my front lawn. 40 days later and we now have a majority government, the sun is shining, the snow gone, my grass is starting to turn green and flowers are starting to come up.

It was worth all of the work.

2011 Election: What happened in Edmonton Strathcona.

2011-05-04T09:24:00.000-06:00

The contest in Edmonton-Strathcona between Linda Duncan of the NDP and Ryan Hastman of the Conservative Party was considered a riding to watch by many because it was the only riding in Alberta not held by the Conservatives. Duncan won the riding in the 2008 campaign defeating Rahim Jaffer by a slim 463 vote margin and it had been no secret that the CPC wanted it back and that the NDP would stop at nothing to hold it.

The end results: Turnout: 48,763 out of 71,050 electors. 68.6%

NDP   Duncan     26,134     53.6%
CPC   Hastman   19,755     40.5%

LPC   Sinclair       1,363      2.8%

GPC Fehr     1,127       2.3%

So what happened in Edmonton Strathcona?

The best summation that I can make is that the election was won by the Linda Duncan NDP campaign and that it was not 'lost' by the Ryan Hastman team. I know how that may sound like I am trying to blow smoke somewhere but it really is the best explanation of the reality in the Edm Strathcona race.

Full disclosure: On a few occasions during the 2011 election I actively campaigned (mostly door knocking) for Ryan Hastman in Edmonton Strathcona.

The NDP pulled out all of the stops in an attempt to hold the riding which they called "Battleground Alberta" in a national fund-raising campaign.They had volunteers from all over descended to do the ground work (there were rumours of paid door knocking crews but with the numbers of volunteers the NDP had at their disposal from provincial assets I have my doubts), and even Jack Layton came to town on two separate occasions to rally the troops and local dipper voters. They were funded, had the man power, were well prepared, and ran a smart and effective campaign.

On the CPC side similiar can also be said. They were well funded, had the man power, were well prepared, and ran a smart and effective campaign but they faced an uphill battle from the beginning as well as some obstacles and challenges that the Duncan campaign did not. Challenges such as the power of incumbency and demographics not seen in other Edmonton area ridings.

Getting rid of a sitting MP is not generally a easy task as people tend to re elect people they know and are 'familiar' with, and when that MP is believed to be doing a decent job it is even more difficult to accomplish. I heard it myself at the doors from people who would be considered to be conservative supporters that they thought that she was doing a decent job on the local level as their MP, they had issues with her and the positions she and the NDP took in Ottawa, but not her work at the constituency level. This is sort of a double whammy because one of the biggest reasons why voters turned to Duncan in the first place was because Jaffer was considered by many to be an absent MP. I don't want to go into the demographics too much other than the say that the riding contains the 'hipster' areas of Whyte Avenue and old Strathcona as well as the Campus of the University of Alberta. To say the riding is unique for Edmonton or even Alberta would not be an understatement.

It was an uphill battle to begin with and to make matters worse the Hastman campaign not only had to fight a formidable NDP campaign, incumbency and the unique demographics, they would have to face intangibles which nobody could plan for; namely the almost complete collapse of the Liberal vote and the unexpected surge of the NDP nationally. In 2006 the Liberal candidate received over 9,000 votes under the Paul Martin banner, in 2008 they received over 4000 while under Dion, (which many assumed would be the low point for the Libs and that under Iggy they would at least hold that vote if not increase it), but that was a very wrong assumption as their candidate received only 1,363 votes in total. As for the surge; I am not sure how many more votes were actually gained from it in the riding on the whole, I don't believe it was that many but one thing I am sure about is that it fired up their staff and volunteers and it galvanized the already existing vote/support in the only NDP riding in Alberta.

In the end Linda Duncan and her team deserve full credit for the victory that they worked so hard to obtain and Ryan can take heart in knowing that he and his team ran one hell of a campaign* against almost impossible odds.

* If there is one positive in this it is that Ryan has proven himself to be capable candidate and a tireless formidable campaigner. Having won a close nomination race in June 17th 2009 he had knocked on 9,000 doors before the one year anniversary of that nomination passed and when the writ was dropped hit the ground running, not stopping until it was over. He performed well in the campaign and even though it was not rewarded with a win at the ballot box, his determination, work ethic, and energy didn't go unnoticed; causing even the NDP to put extra money and resources into the riding into an effort to beat Hastman and hold the riding. I would say that is an accomplishment in itself.

We did it: A Conservative Majority.

2011-05-03T01:16:00.001-06:00

And now we don't have to do it again for 4 years!

A big thank you to all the volunteers from across the country that worked so hard during the campaign to reach our goal. Take a bow, as it would not have happened without you.

There will be much to write about over the coming days, including what happened in Edm Strathcona and of course on the future, or rather lack of a future for the Liberals, but first some much needed sleep and then there is a little matter of a few hundred signs that have to be dealt with.

Election Day 2011.

2011-05-01T23:07:00.000-06:00

Get out and vote. Canada deserves a strong stable majority government and as the news from earlier this evening reminds us, we also need a proven leader at the helm in these difficult times. Go with the guy with the proven 5 yr record. See you on the other side.

Comments have been put on moderation and there will be no updates until after the polls close in BC.

Curse you and your archaic rules Elections Canada!

It is as simple as this.

2011-05-01T11:57:00.000-06:00

You only have to look at the last 5 yrs under a Conservative government and their record and compare it to the oppositions of 5 yrs of smear/fear while they accomplished nothing constructive for Canadians to know who you should be voting for come Monday.

A conservative majority not only means stability by not turning over the reigns of government with its taxation and economic policy powers to the big spending left leaning opposition Liberals, NDP, Bloc (or any combination of), it alse ensures that there is not another 350 million dollar election for at least another 4 yrs.

You know what to do.

Look around today at your own situation and that of your country, and get out and vote Conservative tomorrow!

Rallying the base: Thanks Jack!

2011-04-29T07:48:00.001-06:00

If there is one thing that should gets conservatives out to vote on Monday it is the threat of Jack Layton as PM.

Please remind everyone you know or run into over the next couple of days just how important it is to get out to the polls on Monday, and if you are having trouble convincing them just have them repeat the phrase " Jack Layton as Prime Minister" a couple of time for it to sink in.

The post I put up the day the government fell still applies today, even more so.

This is nowhere near being over and there is still much work to do. Lets get it done.

Jack Layton says his cap and trade carbon plan will not increase gas prices.

2011-04-28T11:48:00.002-06:00

From Rosemary Barton with Layton on the campaign trail: Layton on cap-and-trade: will it increase gas prices? No.

He may be right in one aspect. The NDP plan won't JUST increase gas prices, it will increase the price on everything including home heating which he claims that he wants to reduce and is a major part of his platform.

Unbelievable.

Sorry Jack, but when business gets hit with any type of increase, taxes or otherwise, it gets passed on to their customers in the end, and someone who wants to be PM should know this and be honest enough to admit it.

Update: Jack Mintz has determined that the NDP policy will raise gas prices by $0.10/litre, rising by 2014 to an additional $0.18/litre.

Layton goes after oil companies.

I think it may be time for some Liberal EDA's to start worrying.

2011-04-28T07:53:00.002-06:00

Rumors were circulation before the start of the election that the Liberal Party of Canada was having trouble obtaining a bank loan to finance any possible upcoming election campaign and that some of the financially better off Liberal EDA's had to co-sign and provide 'collateral' in order for them to receive a bank loan.

I personally do not know the details or if any of that is true but it sort of makes sense looking at it from the perspective of any bank. They were being asked to loan money to a political party with fund-raising difficulties and who were behind in the polls, in order to fight an election that if they lost would cut off their prime source of income. ( Proposed Conservative plan to stop taxpayer funded party subsidies) When presented with the above it is easy to see why a bank would be looking for some sort of collateral before approving such a potentially risky loan.

If those rumours are true, I think it might be time for those EDA's that may have provided collateral for the Liberal Party to obtain a loan to start worrying.

Albertaardvark 1, CBC 0. Scott Reid and the CBC correct an error

2011-04-27T07:41:00.003-06:00

It only took a full year, many emails, and finally the big stick of the CBC Ombudsman to make it so, but Scott Reid and CBC's Power and Politics have finally corrected an error made April 1st 2010.

The original statement:

"He (Kory Teneycke) along with that, sort of, you know, paid professional brigand of ah, of ah bloggers that work for the Conservative Party; those guys can mobilize a grassroots movement in the snap of a fingers......

Here is the original post on the subject. With video.

Other related posts on the subject.

The CBC responds.

The CBC responds pt 2.

I would like to thank Kirk LaPointe, the CBC Ombudsman, for the work he did on finally getting this issue resolved and getting the record corrected.

Excerpt of the Ombudsman's finding: (pdf)

I am writing with regard to your complaint April 15, 2010, and request May 6, 2010, for a review by this Office concerning remarks made on the CBC News Network program, Power & Politics, on April 1, 2010.

Let me first apologize for the time it has taken to conduct this review. When I assumed this role last November, I helped my predecessor deal with a substantial backlog. Work on this continues, but that is of little consolation to you. Too much time has passed in dealing with this, and I regret the manner in which the complaint has been processed. Thank you for your patience.

Since your complaint, CBC has updated its Journalistic Standards and Practices. Given that your complaint preceded the update, the previous policy will apply to your request.

REVIEW

The complainant wrote CBC News shortly after he heard commentator Scott Reid on the CBC News Network program, Power & Politics, on April 1, 2010.

Reid, a former senior Liberal Party aide who appeared with Conservative Jaime Watt on the regular Point of Order panel in the program, was discussing the ability ofConservative Party supporters to mobilize support. In an animated exchange, he indicated those bloggers were paid.

“He (Kory Teneckye), along with that, sort of, you know, paid professional brigand of ah, bloggers, that work for the Conservative Party — they can mobilize support in the snap of a finger,” Reid said in the taped segment. He wasn’t challenged by Watt in their debate.

The complainant wrote CBC News to dispute the assertion that the bloggers were paid by the Conservatives. The managing editor of CBC’s Parliamentary Bureau, Paul Hambleton, wrote back April 13, 2010 to acknowledge the error and to thank the complainant for setting the record straight.

The complainant pursued his concerns, indicating that the remark violated CBC Journalistic Standards and Practices in effect at the time.

The executive editor for CBC News, Esther Enkin, wrote the complainant April 21, 2010, to note Hambleton’s email. She said that CBC regretted the error. She also said she did not expect Reid to apologize but that he would correct his remarks when the subject of partisan blogs next came up in the segment of the program “at an early opportunity.”

CBC Journalistic Standards and Practices policy in effect at the time of the complaint included provisions relevant to correcting errors. It said CBC would not “hesitate to admit and correct an error when it is established that one has been made. To do otherwise or to defend a program exhibiting poor taste or unacceptable ethics or containing errors would lead inevitably to loss of credibility by the CBC.”
The policy noted that the senior officer in news and information, or his or her delegate, should be consulted to determine the nature and time of any correction.

The complainant said it was possible that the subject of partisan blogs might not come up “until 2015” and asked if it “would be reasonable to wait that long for the correction to be made.”

Reid has since corrected his statement on the program. He said April 21, 2011, that he had looked into the matter and found no evidence the bloggers were ever paid. He retracted his remarks and apologized. Host Evan Solomon also apologized on the program for taking this long.

CONCLUSION

Mistakes are made regularly in journalism. Academic studies indicate roughly one in two stories contain a factual error, a rate that hasn’t changed much over the decades despite better educated journalists and more sophisticated and familiar guest commentators.

Live television debate — even when it is taped without editing — often leads to spontaneous hyperbole or overstatement to try to make a point or to respond.

What has changed, and for the better, have been processes to identify and correct the record for the public. CBC has a rigorous policy of scrutinizing its work, accepting public review of it, and holding itself accountable through transparent mechanisms to demonstrate its will to be accurate and fair-minded.

Even when contracted commentators make an error, CBC’s approach has been to acknowledge that wrong was wrong and for the program in which they appeared to address the mistake promptly. Its policy of acknowledgment is a virtue in contributing to overall integrity and often a distinguishing and differentiating feature in broadcast news.

In this instance, the statement didn’t receive a quick fix. Obviously, any error left untended only becomes more problematic to correct. Even when efforts are made by programmers to address the initial mistake, some of its viewers will never know it was corrected.

In correspondence with the complainant, CBC acknowledged the error and indicated it would make mention of the issue when the subject next arose on the program. Rather than wait indefinitely for the next discussion on partisan blogs, the program could have more quickly fulfilled its standards and practices with a correction at the earliest opportunity.

I am satisfied there was no intent to avoid addressing the matter. There was an expectation the opportunity would arise soon, and when it didn’t, the correction slipped into the cracks. It is noteworthy that host Evan Solomon apologized on the air for the time it took to address the matter. The correction was made amid an election campaign, when attention on politics is high and the correction’s impact might be greatest.

Sincerely,
Kirk LaPointe.

Advice the Liberals ignored. 3 elections in a row!

2011-04-26T07:56:00.002-06:00

The Liberals are in trouble in the 2011 campaign and just like 2006 and again in 2008 they have decided to go negative and again trot out the The Campaign of Fear™ in an effort to scare Canadians into not voting for a Conservative government.

It won't work this time either and the Liberals were advised years ago by one of their top strategists as to why. The advice rings even truer today.

(Warren Kinsella)

January 5th, 2006:
"TO: LIBERAL CAMPAIGN BOSSES
FROM: YOUR REALLY GOOD PAL WARREN
RE: TOP SECRET AND SUPER CONFIDENTIAL STUFF
Dear guys: it won't work. Did last time, won't this time. Have a nice two weeks, and good luck in your return to the Liberian shipping industry.

...

As I related to a group of scary-smart U of T political science students last night, there are three reasons for this:

One, every Canadian who is not comatose understands that Harper can't form a majority government, even if he wants to, and he does. Paul Martin's top-notch handling of the Quebec file means federalism is hooped in la belle province for the forseeable future. The numbers for a majority aren't there. Folks know that.

Two, (Shameless Book Plug Alert) as noted in no less an authority than Kicking Ass in Canadian Politics, in order for an attack ad to work, it has to be factual or, at the very least, plausible. The Liberals' planned Harper Is Satan™ campaign is not plausible. Canadians have now had a couple years to see how Harper operates. He isn't neceessarily(sp) someone you'd cuddle with on the basement couch to watch 'Friends' reruns, but neither is any other politician. In this case, familiarity breeds a comfort level.

Three, as my sage pal John Wright opined a while ago, Canadians gathered around family Christmas/Hannukah tables at the end of last month and came to a collective decision: we want change, and if Harper's the only way to achieve that, so be it. Pass the cranberries.

-----

Kinsella was right and again later in the same year he said almost the same thing. This time in a more concise way, but just as true.

October 16th, 2006: "The problem is that Stephen Harper doesn’t really scare Canadians anymore, or possibly never did. That’s the Grits’ problem. "

But they didn't listen in '06, and again in '08. Why would they bother to listen in 2011?

Lies, fear and smear. It is all they got.

Liberal candidate praises Layton and says Ignatieff is questionable.

2011-04-25T07:12:00.010-06:00

This past Thursday evening at a local all candidates forum Mike Butler, the Liberal candidate for Edmonton-Millwoods-Beaumont, had some interesting things to say not only about his own leader but also about NDP leader Jack Layton as well.

Here is what Mike Butler had to say:

On Layton: "I love Jack Layton. I think he is a good guy, I think he is a solid guy."

On the Liberal Party and its leader: "The people are good, Michael Ignatieff is questionable sometimes", before telling an interesting story about how Ignatieff wanted an election much earlier while we were still in a recession, "Michael Ignatieff wanted an election but our party knew it was the wrong thing to do and that is why we didn't call an election."

Not sure what to make of that last part about the Liberal Party stopping Ignatieff from forcing an election during the height of the recession, but from Mr. Butler's other comments it appears that he is not a big supporter or fan of the appointed leader of his party. A posting found on Facebook also seems to confirm this: "... our jaw dropped when Mike Butler came to our table and during conversation he stated he doesn't like or support Iggy as leader of liberal party, that he is to American with his ideas!!! Our table was floored!!! Lol"

It seems the the Liberal Party are not more united than they have been for a generation after all.

Was this a one off from a rogue Liberal candidate or the first of many more to come? My guess is that it is the latter but only time will tell; it is going to be an interesting final week of the 2011 campaign.

The "Butler Mobile": A pictorial Metaphor of the state of the Liberal Party?

2011-04-23T10:57:00.000-06:00

I first spotted the "Butler Mobile" shortly after the writ was dropped but did not have a camera or cell phone with me so I was unable to get a picture and had not seen it since in-spite of putting on many kilometers in and around the riding. I had many people tell me that they had spotted it driving around or parked in various locations, including a church parking lot, but I was unable to find and photograph it until it showed up at a local all candidates forum* a couple of days ago.

Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the "Butler Mobile", a pictorial metaphor for the current state of the Liberal Party.

Broken down looking with an attempt to spruce it up using a little bit of Iggy and some duct tape.

*Stay tuned. I have to verify and confirm a couple of things but I will having something very interesting up in the next couple of days on what was said at that forum.

Edmonton Strathcona Update: Complaint filed with Elections Canada.

2011-04-22T00:42:00.002-06:00

The Hastman campaign has filed an official complaint with Elections Canada alleging that 550 names on the Edmonton-Strathcona registered voters list are linked to addresses that don't exist or are invalid. It seems that many of these addresses are linked to businesses, including a gas station and industrial companies, an empty field, storage lockers and private mail boxes. "My team went through the entire voters list with a fine tooth comb and uncovered hundreds of illegitimate addresses," Hastman said. "It’s important that only valid addresses are included in the voters list."

And he is correct.

For those not aware: Edmonton Strathcona is currently the only non CPC riding in Alberta. It has been a political hot spot for some time and with the election has become a real political battlefield that I can guarantee you will show up on whatever channel you will be watching for election results May 2nd.

Spotted recently while door knocking in Edmonton Strathcona. The rare and elusive Liberal sign with the added bonus of it being in the same yard as a CPC sign!

On a more serious note: Here is what is happening on a daily basis to CPC signs in Edm Strathcona.

Strategic voting 2011 style.

2011-04-21T10:13:00.001-06:00

We are all familiar with the concept of strategic voting where people don't vote for the candidate or party of their choice but rather vote against a candidate by choosing the candidate/party that is most likely to defeat them and cast their vote in that direction. During the last few elections most strategic voting campaigns have been directed at the conservatives in an effort to stop them from getting a majority but that was then and this is now.

With the recent NDP surge in the polls and particularly in Quebec I have to ask the following: How many Liberals are now going to support the Conservative Party in an effort to stop the NDP from gaining more seats than the Liberals and becoming the official opposition? (which is now a distinct possibility)

I know some Liberals will laugh at the suggestion of ever supporting conservatives but they should ask themselves what would happen to the Liberal Party of Canada if Jack Layton and the NDP ever became the leader of the official opposition in Canada.

Short answer: It would be all over for the LPC a party. Irrelevancy does that.

Welcome to strategic voting 2011 style.

Unanswered questions from November 2008 and some from today.

2011-04-20T12:27:00.001-06:00

October 14th 2008: Canada holds a federal election resulting in a conservative minority government.

November 19th 2008: The Speech from the Throne.

November 27th 2008: The Government releases its economic update

November 29th 2008: The NDP hold a conference call telling their MPs about the secret coalition talks with the Liberals and Bloc.

In the taped conversation (highlights below in video, with complete version available here. pt1 and pt 2) Jack Layton speaks about the secret negotiations with the Liberals and the Bloc on a coalition and the NDP role. Calling it a "catalytic role actually" and bragging about how the NDP were the "glue" for all of this and how they had "prepared for the opportunity" and because they had made those preparations early they were ready when an opportunity came up.

Of note are the following quotes from Jack Layton:

"This whole thing would not have happened if the moves hadn't been made with the Bloc to lock them in early." "The first part was done a long time ago, um I won't go into details."

To my knowledge Jack Layton has NEVER stated exactly when those negotiations with the Bloc first started and I am unsure if he was even specifically asked that question by our MSM at any time since Nov 2008. Thomas Mulcair at the time stated that his party started talking with the Bloc only after the government's Nov. 19 Throne Speech, but if you listen to Layton's words it seems clear that these negotiations had begun more than just one week (The first part was done a long time ago) before this conference call occurred and for all we know the talks could have started 1 month earlier during the election campaign itself.

So here we are 2 1/2 yrs later and in another election campaign where the MSM are following the leaders across the country and covering their every word. Isn't it about time that they asked Jack Layton to come clean on the 2008 negotiation time-line details and more importantly ask ALL of the leaders if ANY such negotiations ( by anyone within their respective parties) have occurred recently or are occurring at this time?

The MSM blew it on their coverage in 2008. Will they do the same thing in 2011?

Do your job and ask the damn questions that Canadians want to know about!

While Michael Ignatieff was telling Canadians that he was going to take the high road...

2011-04-18T08:43:00.007-06:00

the Liberal Party of Canada, with full knowledge of Michael Ignatieff, was planning their attack ad campaign.

"... a senior Liberal official said the party strategy dating back six months ago was to launch these attack ads at this particular phase in the campaign – “whether we were 10 points up or 10 points down,”

Ignatieff, like every other Liberal leader after Chretien, made a promise that the Liberals would not go negative and then he broke that promise, but more importantly Ignatieff was making that promise to Canadians AFTER the attack ad strategy was planned.

What the hell does that say about the character of Michael Ignatieff.

BTW the Liberals have been completely busted on a quote by the PM in their health care scare ad. And by completely busted I mean Kady busted. - "Seriously, LPC, just apologize, edit the ad and move on. There is no earthly defence for allowing a misattribution to stand"

Further update: The geniuses at the Liberal Party have decided to release the link to where they got the quote from, but in doing so show that they KNEW it was a lie. (BTW the LPC used this quote and attributed it to the real author back in 2004, but today claim that they didn't know the truth)

I spoke too soon. The LPC have attempted to scrub the internet of their link to the page that released the link showing that they were lying.

Trying to keep up with the Liberal lies and attempts at cover-up are starting to confuse me.

Who better to lead Canada if the Party Quebecois gains power: A CPC majority or a Coalition backed by the Bloc?

2011-04-17T09:16:00.001-06:00

The Bloc loves instability in Ottawa and what could possibly create more instability than a Party Quebecois government in Quebec pushing for another referendum at the same time that Gilles and the Bloc Quebecois held the cards in some sort of coalition government.

Scary.

Monday Update: From the National Post.

Chantal Hébert: Liberals face a walloping in Quebec.

2011-04-16T08:53:00.000-06:00

Just a teaser: "Short of a game-changer between now and May 2, Michael Ignatieff’s Liberals will take a beating in Quebec next month." Read the rest here.

While I hope what Chantal wrote accurately reflects the situation in Quebec, I am not counting on it and I am going to work my butt off on the local level to get that majority without having to rely on Quebec. That would be sweet wouldn't it. Also a majority gov't would be much more effective if they had to deal with a PQ gov't at some point in the future, which is something a Bloc backed coalition could never hope to achieve.

We can get it done but it will not be easy as the last couple of weeks are going to be crucial with the desperation of the left/opposition only intensifying as May 2nd approaches. All hands on deck!

Neither rain nor snow......

2011-04-15T05:49:00.001-06:00

Out on the campaign trail last evening in Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont with incumbent Mike Lake and a few volunteers as they door knocked their way through a nasty spring snow storm. Although the heavy wet snow made for some tough going at times, it was clear at the doors that the effort was appreciated.

If you live in the Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont area and have even a couple of hours of free time to volunteer give the campaign office a call @ 780-466-0195, and if you live elsewhere please give your local CPC candidates campaign office a call. Election campaigns are won locally and on the ground. Any help that you can offer will be greatly appreciated.

Ignatieff: UN if necessary, but not necessarily the UN. Giving away our sovereignty.

2011-04-14T12:23:00.000-06:00

For Michael Ignatieff, for today at least, it is the UN if necessary, but not necessarily the UN.

Does Michael Ignatieff want to give away our sovereignty by letting the UN dictate where and when Canada's armed forces may be used?

As usual it is hard to tell because one day Ignatifeff says one thing and the next day it is something else entirely.

Yesterday Michael Ignatieff said the following in the French language debate: “The Canadian army must never be used outside the country without the authorization of the UN,” but today he seems to be backpedaling somewhat.

He wants us to trust him to be our PM, but honestly how can we when his positions seem to shift around depending on what day it is. Take the following quote as an example: “Well, the UN screwed up in Rwanda, it screwed up in Bosnia — it screws up most of the time,” Ignatieff is quoted as saying in a Maclean’s magazine article in June, 2003. “The United Nations is a messy, wasteful, log-rolling organization.” (must have been a Tuesday) But we are now to forget that he ever spoke those words and let that same messy, wasteful, log rolling organization that screws up most of the time, decide when and where our armed forces be used.

Does anyone really know what this guy honestly believes or where he stands?

Michael Ignatieff: "Politics is theatre. It is part of the job to pretend to have emotions that you do not actually feel."

Collapse in Quebec: Former co-chair of the Quebec wing of Liberal Party of Canada joins the CPC.

2011-04-14T02:58:00.001-06:00

Denise Verreault, campaign co-chair for the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada has abandoned the Liberals and announced that she is supporting PM Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada. (link, link translated,)

From the Globe and Mail Her decision to support the Conservatives sent a clear message to voters in the region that when it comes to jobs and investments the Conservatives still carry a great deal more weight than Mr. Duceppe’s promise to defend their interests. And that message alone may be enough for the Conservatives to hold-on to the seats they have in Quebec to help them in their quest for a majority government.

A collapse of what is left of Liberal support in Quebec, or just Quebec realizing that it is better on the inside of government than the outside? Either way, in Quebec I am starting to see shades of 1984 and Mulroney.

Impartial jury, my ass. The real contempt.

2011-04-12T07:56:00.001-06:00

If you were charged with an offence and at your trial you noticed that your accuser was the foreman on your jury, which was made up entirely of his relatives and friends, do you believe that you would get a fair trial and that justice would honestly be served in your case?

That could never happen in Canada you say?

Well it did happen, and it happened in the House of Commons. The only real difference is that in the H of C that jury foreman, the same guy who made the accusations in the first place, had the power to whip the jury on the verdict vote?

I am of course writing about the contempt of Parliament charges which brought down the Government. The opposition made the contempt accusations, they formed the jury, and that jury was, in the most unjust and undemocratically way possible, WHIPPED into voting on what was essentially the verdict. Not exactly as fair and as 'democratic' as the opposition is spinning it as the entire process was rigged from the start entire to get a result they wanted.

Parliament didn't speak; Ignatieff, Layton and Duceppe were the ones doing the talking as they took away the choice of elected representatives to speak for themselves and their constituents on a something that should always be above petty politics. Just having them think otherwise is more than enough reason not to vote for any of them or their parties, and reason why we need to work for a strong conservative majority.

Time to stop the games. Parliament is to there serve Canadians, and not political parties and the opportunists that run them.

Liberals postpone June national party convention

2011-04-10T20:06:00.006-06:00

The Liberal Party of Canada, who are trying to convince you that they can form a government, have decided to postpone their June 2011 party convention presumably because it is too hard for them to run an election campaign and a convention at the same time.

Yet the Conservative Party of Canada seem to have no problems with running a government, an election campaign and planning a June 2011 convention at the same time.

Telling isn't it.

Update: Also telling? Steve Janke gives his take on why this might be happening. Here.

Let the speculation begin as to why the Liberals are postponing what may very well be a Liberal leadership convention?

Rumours that Justin Trudeau was too busy in June have yet to be confirmed. =)

Gritchick ( a big h/t for convention story) has informed me that the NDP are holding their national convention in June as well. Ouch, Liberals.

If the CPC comes up 1 or 2 seats short of a majority...

2011-04-09T07:29:00.002-06:00

Will you be able to say to yourself that you did all that you could have done to help win those seats?

A majority is possible and within reach, but it is going to take every conservative in the country to help make it so. Get out and get active in any way that you can. It all matters.

A rarity in Canada: Interview with PM Harper on the issues, and not the ratings grabbing gotcha.

2011-04-09T00:17:00.000-06:00

Watch the interview of PM Harper on some of the issues that matter to Canadians that was conducted by Jeff Allan for 570 News in southern Ontario earlier today.

Refreshing wasn't it.

1 year ago the Liberals supported an IPOD tax, today they don't, tomorrow who really knows.

2011-04-07T02:17:00.007-06:00

The Liberals position on an IPOD tax is a bit shaky to say the least. They currently claim that they do not support one but...

On April 14, 2010 a vote was held in the House of Commons:

Pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mrs. Lavallée (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pomerleau (Drummond), — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, presented on Wednesday, March 17, 2010, be concurred in.

The vote carried: YEAS: 156, NAYS: 137

And what exactly was the "First Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage" that they were voting on?

That the Committee recommends that the government amend Part VIII of the Copyright Act so that the definition of “audio recording medium” extends to devices with internal memory, so that the levy on copying music will apply to digital music recorders as well, thereby entitling music creators to some compensation for the copies made of their work.

It was an IPOD tax, and it was only one year ago.

(A special note to Evan Solomon from CBC's Power and Politics where this issue came up yesterday. Yes, Martha Hall Findlay did vote for it, as did her leader Michael Ignatieff and the entire Liberal caucus) (Related: Having Ignatieff attend a vote in itself is quite a feat)

Present day and almost a full year after that vote the Liberals are now claiming the opposite and that they do not support an IPOD tax. I guess that is to be expected considering their complete reversal on long standing party support for corporate tax cuts , immigration reform (that one cost them an MP), HST, asbestos, Afghanistan and the list goes on (including the coalition but jury is still out on this one) but with such a long history of such flip flops how do we know what their position, on anything, will be tomorrow? How can we trust them not to change their minds yet again?

We can't.

BTW From the Liberal Platform: “Liberals have worked to pass effective copyright legislation, including a private copying compensation fund instead of any new tax on consumers”.

A 'private copying compensation fund'? And how exactly is that going to be funded my flip flopping Liberal friends? They may not call it an IPOD tax but I somehow doubt that we are going to get away without it costing us more in one way or another.

The video Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party of Canada do not want you to see.

2011-04-06T06:09:00.004-06:00

Because after all of these years they have yet to be able to spin it positively in any way, shape, or form.

It really is all about character.

BTW for those interested here are the numbers for the amount of times that Ignatieff used the words "We", "Us", "Our" and "Ourselves" in the 2minute and 8 second video above.

Updated with more of the same from Ignatieff:

.

Is the Liberal plan for an open competition for jet fighters already rigged?

2011-04-05T03:14:00.003-06:00

Is the Liberal plan for an open competition for jet fighters to replace the aging CF-18 rigged before it even begins?   I believe that the evidence suggests that it is. Read on.

Some background and much needed clarity:( because some seem to believe that the LPC will NOT be buying jets)

The Liberal plan is indeed to purchase new fighter jets to replace the CF-18. From Liberal.ca:
A future Liberal government will not proceed with the government acquisition process to purchase untendered F-35 stealth fighters, at a cost of $16 billion. Instead, Liberals will hold an open competition to replace Canada’s CF-18s based on clear and publicly disclosed foreign and defence policy requirements.

So in spite of all of the spin heard from the Liberals such as "vets not jets", “we choose families, not fighter jets,” "family care not fighter jets" the reality is that the Liberal Party of Canada intend to buy new jet fighters to replace the Cf-18.

So both the current government and the Liberals are planning to replace the Cf-18; the difference comes in that the Liberals are claiming that they would hold an open competition for the replacements and not necessarily go with the F-35. Michael Ignatieff: "a future Liberal government will cancel the F-35 stealth fighter deal and hold an open competition to replace Canada’s CF-18s."

While an open competition may sound like a good idea the current requirements from the Department of National Defence would disqualify every other possible aircraft in a competition other than F-35 because of its stealth abilities. (Kevin Page PBO report link PDF)   "First and foremost, the proposed acquisition must satisfy the DND's Statement of Requirements. The PBO has been provided with and has reviewed the relevant Statement of Requirements. The F-35 is the only strike/fighter jet that can meet the specifications contained in this document as written." Even some Liberals agree that the F-35 is the only fighter for Canada.

But lets put the discussion on the need for a competition aside for a moment and look at what the Liberals claim will be the result of such a competition. They will save us money and they will take that money and apply it to other programs:
“If the government were to hold an open competition, they could guarantee the maximum number of jobs in the Canadian aerospace industry while saving limited government funds that would be better spent easing the economic strain on hard-pressed middle-class families.”

“Liberals would rather save money by opening the contract to competition, freeing up funds to support hundreds of thousands of Canadian families who are caring for sick or aging loved ones with our $1-billion Family Care Plan,” concluded Mr. LeBlanc.

Interesting. Even before the process is held, the Liberals already know that the competition will save money, but what happens if in that competition the F-35 IS chosen as the best plane for our needs? A very likely outcome if we want to purchase the best possible aircraft for our military.

At a MINIMUM it would cost us exactly the same amount as the Conservative replacement plan, but could very likely end up costing us much more due to all of the delays and us jumping into a program late into the game. Either way no money could possibly be saved by having a competition.

So I have to ask. How is it possible for the Liberals to be able to claim that they will save money on a replacement fighter jet program, going so far as to have already delegated those 'savings' to pay for other programs in their platform, before any competition has even taken place and of course not knowing which aircraft will be chosen?

The answer is simple. The competition has already been rigged and the F-35 has lost before the competition has even started.

Related: Here is what one Liberal MP had to say on the F-35. Tell me if you think she sounds the least bit interested in a fair and open competition to find the best plane for our military:

Alexandra Mendes: "Mr. Speaker, I will start by acknowledging that I do not think my hon. colleague is an expert on the matter. I will just say that there are a lot of other planes that our air force could use and should use. We do not need stealth airplanes. Canada is a peaceful country. We certainly do not need those kinds of planes."

Sorry Alexandra but I prefer to let the experts in our military decide what their needs are and not the Liberal Party who are more interested in buying votes with suspect spending schemes than they are in the well being of our military.

What the F-35 brings to the fight.

When the real Liberal starts to show..... watch your wallets and your rights.

2011-03-31T20:50:00.002-06:00

More reasons why Canada needs a CPC majority.

The latest from Michael Ignatieff has him wanting to not only regulate the western oils sands, but YOUR diet as well. (screenshots @ bottom of page) You knew it was just a matter of time before Ignatieff got his true Liberal on in public. It is impossible for any of them to go any serious length of time without telling all Canadians what is 'best' for us and then regulate how we act.

Liberals; you don't know how to run my life better than me and just the fact that you actually think that you do makes the effort that I put into this blog informing Canadians and exposing your spin, just all that much more worth while. If I want to put pepper on my plate, that is up to me and not some over bloated nanny state created bureaucracy, and I don't want the government (of ANY political stripe) in my kitchen regulating and controlling how or what I can eat.

Now as for Ignatieff's comments on the oil sands...

Aside from the fact that Ignatieff is again treading into provincial responsibility as does his childcare and RESP changes, it would seem that the great uniter looks to be doing just the opposite by dividing us into regions and pushing the tired old west vs east shtick. Not that it is unexpected from any Liberal leader desperate to hold what he has for seats in the Toronto area, but having it happen so early in the campaign is a bit of a surprise. Divide and conquer is usually a week 3 trick in the Liberal playbook.

Screenshots of above twitter links:

Election 2011: Battleground Alberta Edmonton Strathcona

2011-03-28T11:25:00.003-06:00

One of the most watched ridings in the country this year is going to be Edmonton Strathcona, the only riding in Alberta that currently is not being held by the Conservatives.

Edmonton Strathcona is currently represented by Linda Duncan of the NDP, who won the riding in the 2008 election over incumbent Rahim Jaffer by less than 500 votes, and the NDP is getting very nervous about losing. So much so they have targeted the riding and have pulled out all of the stops to try and keep it.

And why are the NDP worried? Well it certainly is not because of the Liberal candidate, as there is NONE declared yet ( The LPC had better rectify this one fast or it will only add to the numerous coalition questions coming their way, and make a mockery of their 308 national party strategy) and it certainly can't be because of the Green Party candidate who seems to be asking people not to vote Green.

No, the answer to why Linda Duncan and the NDP are so worried is because of Ryan Hastman.

Ryan Hastman the tireless Conservative candidate (he now has knocked on over 17,000 doors in Edmonton-Strathcona) has been working hard reconnecting with conservatives in the riding who where turned off by the previous candidate, and anyone else who may have a difficult time with their MP rallying against the oil industry which is the life blood of not only the riding but the Province and the country.

Including this nose stretcher with Duncan lying about moose and bears. Oh my! "But it's all too little, too late, argues Alberta NDP MP Linda Duncan. "We pay attention to the tailing ponds because there's physical evidence in the dead ducks. But birds, moose and bears are dying in these ponds every day" ( 100% NDP/Duncan BS)

Do the good people of Edmonton Strathcona need someone in Ottawa who is voting against their best interests? No, Linda Duncan needs to go and Ryan Hastman is the man to make sure that happens.

Ryan and his team have laid the groundwork for retaking the riding but they are going to need the help of conservatives everywhere to make sure that goal is achieved.

It is time to get active and fight back. Give the Hastman campaign office a call and volunteer, even a couple of hours may make the difference, and help make sure that the single yellow spot on the electoral map of Alberta is removed for good.

The difference was less than 500 votes last time so don't be under the impression that your vote or your contribution, no matter how small in time or dollars, cannot make a real difference in Edmonton Strathcona.

Get out and get active!

Campaign Office located at 5611 Gateway Blvd (north)

Office phone: 780-433-0691

Website: http://www.ryanhastman.com/

.

Liberal John McCallum admits Ignatieff's corporate tax hike will cost jobs.

2011-03-28T02:21:00.004-06:00

Yesterday on the Roy Green show on the Corus Radio Network, Liberal MP for Markham—Unionville, John McCallum admitted that the Liberals plan to raise corporate taxes from 16.5% to 18 % would cost Canadians jobs.

That's John McCallum ladies and gentlemen, part of the Liberal Team!

Update: John McCallum apologizes to Peter Donolo for telling the truth about the Liberals plan to raise taxes! The Liberal Party of Canada, where telling the truth requires an apology.

Past posts on McCallum:

Meet your new Liberal Transport critic.

"I could be sitting here as your prime minister, but I turned it down.."

And you want to be my latex salesman Mr. McCallum

The front runner for Finance Minister under Ignatieff.

John McCallum again on the Roy Green Show. This time talking about Ignatieff signing the 2008 coalition deal. (listen as hilarity ensues)

Deja Vu as a Liberal again leader rules out a coalition.

2011-03-27T01:12:00.010-06:00

Some say history repeats itself and it looks like we are seeing that phenomenon in action in campaign 2011.

Sept 23 2008: Liberal Leader Stephane Dion rules out a coalition.

The day previously: "Mr. Dion had been less direct in his answer yesterday when asked about Mr. Layton's comments. Today, aides said, he came to the media scrum prepared with the answer he gave."

March 26, 2011 Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff rules out a coalition (sort of )

The day previously: "After leading a historic vote that pulled the plug on Harper's second minority government, Ignatieff was asked by journalists six times whether he would rule out forming a coalition government. Six times, he refused to answer." Vancouver Sun.

In 2008: Dion was proven to be a liar as he did enter into a coalition arrangement.

In 2011: Michael Ignatieff....

Is there really any basis to trust Ignatieff or the Liberals on this? Well if history does repeat itself, and so far in this case it has, I don't think we can or should.

It is not like Ignatieff has exactly been Mr.Honesty (Audio: Ignatieff lies to High School students) in the past.

Video: Ignatieff caught in another lie.

Edmonton-Sherwood Park: James Ford holds a grudge?

2011-03-26T03:06:00.000-06:00

James Ford confirmed Friday he plans to run as an independent in Edmonton-Sherwood Park.

It seems that Ford is still angry that Tim Uppal won the CPC nomination back in 2008, a nomination that Ford himself WAS NOT RUNNING IN, and after 3 years he is still finding it hard to bury the hatchet.

At least that is the 'official' story, but I think the other reasons may be found in some of Ford's remarks:

“He’s not from the riding,” Ford said Friday. “He doesn’t belong.”

But than again I might be totally wrong about the possible reasons for running again. After all Ford did at one time want Uppal to be investigated for winning the nomination fair and square showing that he does not quite understand laws or how nominations work. BTW here is what Jacquie Fenske, the person Uppal defeated in the nomination race in 2008, had to say about Tim's win.

Personally I think the CPC, the people of Edmonton-Sherwood Park and the people of Canada are immensely better of having a proven MP like Tim Uppal in Ottawa than having someone like James Ford there. I hope the voters of Edmonton Sherwood-Park agree

A message to conservatives all across Canada.

2011-03-25T14:08:00.002-06:00

Assemble!

Because the big blue machine is about to roll and a majority is in sight, BUT ONLY with your help.

Get out and support your local candidate in any way you can. Elections really are won on the ground and there are numerous ways for everyone to be able to contribute, even if it is for a few hours.

Get a sign. Volunteer to put up signs, drop lit, answer phones, door-knock, etc. There are literally hundreds of ways for you to help out your local CPC candidate get elected and they need your help.

Counter the oppositions smear and lies with the facts on the Harper government record and let everyone know why you are voting conservative and why they must get out and do the same on election day.

Doing nothing is not an option, unless you want a return to a minority government and the daily opposition games that have hampered Ottawa for nearly 6 years, and that does no one any good.

Get active now!

A 300 Million Dollar election just so Ignatieff can finish his book.

2011-03-25T03:40:00.004-06:00

What does Michael Ignatieff have to gain by forcing an election now?

That is a question that has been bothering me for some time now as I could not see any logical reason to do so. Politically speaking there is no reason to do so and if the latest polls are to be believed, the Liberals are going to be taking a shellacking, if they do go. Ignatieff will be gone, the party in tatters and other than a chance for the bleeding Liberal Party to rebuild itself after the election ( Hint: Elect the leader and not appoint them this time for starters) I can see no upside to forcing an election.

So if it is not political, what else could explain the reason why Ignaiteff seems to be so set on running his party towards a cliff?

The answer is simple. His next book.

Before people start jumping all over me for this please take a look at Ignatieff's past writings where he went into extreme detail on not only his own life and experiences, but those of his family, both present and past, as well. So much so even members of his own family were upset about his writing such intimate and personal details about the family. ( The Russian Album, Blood and Belonging, Scar Tissue, True Patriot Love)

Nothing is off limits for his writings and if anyone out there honestly believes that Ignatieff does not have plans to write about his years in the political arena I have a bridge to sell you. It is a no-brainer, he will write a book on his political years, it is only a question of when.

And who could really blame him for doing so.

The tale of an 'intellectual' protagonist as he is recruited to return Canada to be our next PM as he faces the trials and tribulations of Canadian politics, including his battles with an 'evil political genius', is guaranteed to become a best seller and keep him popular on the lecture circuit collecting speaking fees for many years to come.

I for one can't wait to read the chapter on Bob Rae, but even with as much as I am looking forward to reading that, it just isn't worth the price of 300 million tax dollars to do so.

Liberal Party campaign 2011 signs out pre writ in Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont

2011-03-23T23:20:00.001-06:00

The writ hasn't even dropped yet and Michael Butler,the former NDP candidate and now the current Liberal Candidate for Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont (sort of a one man coalition) , already has election signs up.

It is almost as if he is in a hurry to lose,

and with cheesy slogans like that he and his current party certainly will.

At least wait until the writ is dropped Michael; you are looking a little desperate by jumping the gun.

Your thoughts on the signs and their almost laughable tag lines?

Some background on Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont (courtesy of the best political information web site in Canada, Pundits Guide)

Nothing says "we support democracy" more than gagging a nanny.

2011-03-22T23:36:00.000-06:00

From the Toronto Star: Ruby Dhalla's family seeks to gag nanny.

"Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla and her family want a judge to force a nanny who claims she was exploited while working at their Mississauga home to accept a $5,000 payment and a gag order not to talk about the deal.."

From the archives: All things Ruby

Its Ruby Tuesday.

Background and timeline on the nanny story

How to keep your MP's loyal.

Ruby on youth crime?