900 million bucks for security at a G20 conference! That seems like a lot of scratch to protect a bunch of suits?
The talking point of the last few days on every call in show, and nearly every political television program has been the cost of the G20 conference in Toronto.
The Liberal supporters have even gone as far as to call it Harper’s “Billion Dollar Boondoggle”.
Public sentiment when it comes to politicians is often pretty straightforward, we don’t like em, we don’t want to be inconvenienced by em, and we don’t want to spend money on em.
With that in mind even the original 160 million dollar budget would have been enough to annoy most Canadians.
Now we have watched the cost go from the budgeted 160 million to over 900 million (which for the sake of shock-value we can round up to a BILLION dollars, even though for some reason 900 million sounds worse, but what do I know?)
Why has the cost gone up?
My first guess would be that the firebombing of the RBC branch in Ottawa and targeting of civilians’ who happen to work for “evil” corporations may have raised the stakes a little bit,
The fact that the amount of protestors that are estimated to descend on the city of Toronto is around 10,000, to put that number into perspective there are 5,800 sworn in members of the Toronto Police.
Coupled with the fact that some of these Anarchist Groups have promised “militant” protests aimed to “humiliate the security apparatus” according to yesterday’s Toronto Star.
Let me be the first one to say that spending 900 million on anything that doesn’t play the Dallas Cowboy’s at least once a season is simply beyond me, but to attack the government for this is about as short sided as it gets.
Is the threat posed by these protestors real?
I believe it is; and going after a bank branch with a firebomb leads me to believe that these folks mean business.
So what is the correct response in the face of these threats?
The summit could have been canceled?
Maybe I am just old school, but bowing down to a vocal minority of protestors and giving into what they want generally breeds more of this sort of behavior.
If firebombing buildings and promising violence gets them their way just once, we open a door that we may never be able to close.
To me canceling the summit in the face of a bunch of whiney 20 something’s and some burnt out hippies is not an option, especially less then a month out.
Which leaves us with two choices:
We take all measures to adequately protect our guests,
or we don’t.
Those who are threatening violence are getting off far too easy in the media and amount angry Canadians.
The money that needs to be spent is because of the violence that has been promised, not because the government has decided to waste money on items that are not needed.
I would imagine that 99% of people think I am totally nuts in the fact that I am not foaming at the mouth over this money being spent,
However I am one of the few believers that the G20 has done some good work, and I am damn proud that we are on an international stage hosting 19 leaders of the world…even though it’s in Toronto…
Friday, May 28, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Why I am Unpopular at Cocktail Parties
The topic du jour around most glasses of wine and fine cheeses over the last few weeks has been Arizona’s “controversial” immigration law.
Needless to say I have never seen Godwin’s Law invoked as quickly as I have in these last few weeks. Everyone in Arizona’s government are evil, they are passing a law that “everyone” is against…
The problem is that over 50% of Arizona voters are in favor of the legislation, so even if it was made a ballot issue it would most likely pass.
Damn that Democracy! It’s getting in the way of the minority acting as though it’s the clear 90% majority.
I have heard both sides of this debate (as usual) give me the most ridiculous examples that they try to pass off as the “norm”.
The Democrats would lead me to believe that the police will walk up to tables in food courts around Arizona pull aside the girl lunching with her friends with the brown skin and demand she supply proof of citizenship.
Whereas the Republicans are paining a Mad Max sort of situation of illegal’s pouring in over the border with heavy artillery.
As per usual the reality falls somewhere in the middle.
As I understand the situation, it’s already illegal to be in the United States illegally.
The problem seems to be that only ICE agents are able to stop people and demand proof of citizenship.
The trouble is there are only something like 2000 ICE agents for 3169 km of border.
I have watched the Democrats defend the “need” for illegal workers as they do jobs that Americans “Don’t want”. Perhaps that can be sold to folks in Washington, they are about 1500 miles away from the border, but if the voters of Arizona are in favor of this legislation then perhaps the people in the state where illegal workers are doing jobs that “Americans don’t want” don’t agree that they are jobs that are unwanted?
This is typical of the political landscape of large nations,
If it’s not happening in my backyard then what do I care?
Regardless of your stance on this legislation, this is what happens when a nation’s government starts to tolerate “acceptable crimes”.
Washington in general, and the Democrats in particular don’t want to lose the support they have in Latino vote rich areas, at the same time they don’t want to further push some Southern border states away, especially not with the midterms looming in November.
This legislation is a product of frustration, the people of Arizona rightly or wrongly so are in favor of this rather harsh measure, but with that said are they not simply asking for the enforcement of a law that is already?
This has become a situation where Washington has allowed a law that is popular with some and unpopular with others to go unenforced so they could secure support from both sides.
Now the issue has been forced,
And I have to wonder what the solution is?
The people in Arizona are not “racist” they just want a law enforced, and if Washington feels that law is unjust then they need to address it rather then painting the people of Arizona as being backward.
Needless to say I have never seen Godwin’s Law invoked as quickly as I have in these last few weeks. Everyone in Arizona’s government are evil, they are passing a law that “everyone” is against…
The problem is that over 50% of Arizona voters are in favor of the legislation, so even if it was made a ballot issue it would most likely pass.
Damn that Democracy! It’s getting in the way of the minority acting as though it’s the clear 90% majority.
I have heard both sides of this debate (as usual) give me the most ridiculous examples that they try to pass off as the “norm”.
The Democrats would lead me to believe that the police will walk up to tables in food courts around Arizona pull aside the girl lunching with her friends with the brown skin and demand she supply proof of citizenship.
Whereas the Republicans are paining a Mad Max sort of situation of illegal’s pouring in over the border with heavy artillery.
As per usual the reality falls somewhere in the middle.
As I understand the situation, it’s already illegal to be in the United States illegally.
The problem seems to be that only ICE agents are able to stop people and demand proof of citizenship.
The trouble is there are only something like 2000 ICE agents for 3169 km of border.
I have watched the Democrats defend the “need” for illegal workers as they do jobs that Americans “Don’t want”. Perhaps that can be sold to folks in Washington, they are about 1500 miles away from the border, but if the voters of Arizona are in favor of this legislation then perhaps the people in the state where illegal workers are doing jobs that “Americans don’t want” don’t agree that they are jobs that are unwanted?
This is typical of the political landscape of large nations,
If it’s not happening in my backyard then what do I care?
Regardless of your stance on this legislation, this is what happens when a nation’s government starts to tolerate “acceptable crimes”.
Washington in general, and the Democrats in particular don’t want to lose the support they have in Latino vote rich areas, at the same time they don’t want to further push some Southern border states away, especially not with the midterms looming in November.
This legislation is a product of frustration, the people of Arizona rightly or wrongly so are in favor of this rather harsh measure, but with that said are they not simply asking for the enforcement of a law that is already?
This has become a situation where Washington has allowed a law that is popular with some and unpopular with others to go unenforced so they could secure support from both sides.
Now the issue has been forced,
And I have to wonder what the solution is?
The people in Arizona are not “racist” they just want a law enforced, and if Washington feels that law is unjust then they need to address it rather then painting the people of Arizona as being backward.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
When is being "right" at the expense of being right, Wrong?
I hate war.
I hate losing young men, who die in the service of this nation in order to do some degree of good in a part of the world that the vast majority of the Canadian population will never visit within 1000 miles of.
It turns my stomach a little bit when I watch those on the left make an attempt to make politicians who are right of center in their political leanings either war mongers or somehow guilty of war crimes.
The concept that anyone in power regardless of political stripe takes any sort of pleasure in sending soldiers into harms way is perhaps the greatest slander and most epic insult that can be volleyed onto a person.
It implies they are somehow subhuman, when in reality we know that regardless of who makes the discussion; it’s never easy.
As I sat watching the Sunday talk show circuit that pits a left of center and right of center rhetoric machine against each other in an attempt to see who can make the most fantastic and utterly ridiculous claim against the other side, and comment was made that stuck with me.
“You need to do the RIGHT thing”
I don’t recall which side it came from, nor could I pick the guy who said it out of a line-up but it caused me to dwell on the word “right”
What is the “right thing”?
As a Canadian the topic that is most discussed when the matter of war is raised is that of the ongoing Afghan War,
I have watched the typical partisan ballet;
The Liberals who entered this conflict in 2001 where in favor of the conflict till January 24th 2006 which interestingly enough is the first day that the Conservatives took power in Canada.
After that every attempt was made to paint this as “Harper’s War” and to make out anyone who was the Minister of Defense as some sort of trigger happy war monger.
If you took a poll today it would swing a few percent one way or another but both sides tend to hover around the high 40’s or low 50’s depending on the poll, which as far as I am concerned pretty well puts us at a tie.
In 2001 when Canadians were asked if we should go into Afghanistan after the September 11th attacks, the numbers were in the high 70’s to low 80’s in terms of percentage.
This is where the “right” thing comes into effect,
30% of Canadians have gone from pro to con over the course of the 8+ years this conflict has raged on.
What I have ask them is very simple:
What do we owe the Afghan people? Should we not finish the job?
We walked into their country with our NATO allies, we kicked the Taliban to the curb, we beat back insurgents in the streets, we have got them to a point where they have at least the most rudimentary democracy in place, and then we lost interest, because we started losing soldiers.
I can’t blame Canadians for wanting to take our troops out of harms way, but at the same time I have to wonder why we are so quick to be willing to trade lives.
How many Afghan lives are worth that of one Canadian?
It may sound like a harsh question, but its one that the Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democrats, as well as BQ have indirectly asked me as a Canadian to decide.
How many Afghan Civilians do I feel are worth the life of a single Canadian troop?
There are two ways to approach that simply morbid question;
You can be right; or you can be politically right.
The see the difference I can cite a very simple example.
In the early 1990’s the UN sent a Peacekeeping team into Somalia to attempt to stop a pending civil war, this mission ended after the Battle of Mogadishu when news footage of the dead U.S. soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu found its way back to the people of the United States in 1993.
Public opinion of the conflict in Somalia plummeted, and President Bill Clinton did the politically right thing and pulled out the US soldiers from the Somali mission after 19 US soldiers were killed during the Battle of Mogadishu (31 for the entire mission), which resulted in the collapse of the mission, and Somalia falling into a continued state of Civil War.
The Somali Civil War still rages on, and has resulted in the death of about 400,000 people, with well over a million displaced from their home.
The question of how many Somali lives are worth a single American life was answered:
31 Americans died,
The American people wanted out.
They got out
400,000 Somali's are dead
400,000 / 31 = 12,903 Somali’s died in exchange for every US solider that did.
But;
Bill Clinton was re-elected in 1996 by one of the largest margins every won by a Democrat in a Presidential election.
He made the “right” call, politically speaking, he was “politically right”.
But that call resulted in the deaths of thousands upon thousands of Somali citizens,
The question then becomes, was it the “right” choice?
Was there any obligation to finish what they started?
George W. Bush is often called a War Monger because he oversaw the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and Stephen Harper is often call the same for his support of the Mission in Afghanistan, but it should be noted that roughly 8,309 civilians have been killed in Afghanistan since October 2001, with estimates as high as 16,000, Iraq based on IBC’s numbers have experienced 104,119 civilian deaths (as the high estimate, roughly 96,000 as the low)
Even if I am being generous; the inaction in Somali led to roughly 4x more civilian deaths then the direct action of invading two nations.
But there seems to be this mentality that if its not on CNN then it didn't really happen. If a child is murdered in Africa, and various international news agencies don't bother to cover it, does it count? Clearly to those on the left, it does not.
As a fairness test;
If I stand by and watch a man drown or;
If I drown a man,
The man is just as dead at the end of the day.
I understand that politicians can draw a line between civilians who die when we are watching, and then those who die when we are not.
I however, do not.
Civilian death seems to be different depending on your party line; and while that may pass salt in Washington or Ottawa, it doesn’t work with me.
If we held the withdrawal from Somalia to the same loose international legal standard that is being used by pundits to damn all Conservatives, Republicans, and Labour Party Members over Iraq & Afghanistan; Would Bill Clinton not be subject to the Yamashita standard?
I don’t think so; but he was a Republican I can assure you that it would at least be a hot topic of debate on the Sunday talk circuit.
Why is the opposition in Canada in such a rush to potentially have our own withdrawal which could potentially lead to civil war weighing on our conscience?
Will it win them an election?
Perhaps.
Damning our troops and the government who supports them may be “politically right” but I have to wonder what the consequences of being “politically right” would be for the average Afghan?
We went in there, and we need to finish the job.
Scoring points off our troops who are in harms way every day from the confines of the Parliament buildings may score you political points;
But I still have a hard time as an average Canadian when I am asked to indirectly answer how many Afghan lives are worth that of a single Canadians?
Because that is what a withdrawal, and calls for withdrawal basically amounts to.
And that is when bring “right” vs. “politically right” becomes the choice of every Canadian.
I hate losing young men, who die in the service of this nation in order to do some degree of good in a part of the world that the vast majority of the Canadian population will never visit within 1000 miles of.
It turns my stomach a little bit when I watch those on the left make an attempt to make politicians who are right of center in their political leanings either war mongers or somehow guilty of war crimes.
The concept that anyone in power regardless of political stripe takes any sort of pleasure in sending soldiers into harms way is perhaps the greatest slander and most epic insult that can be volleyed onto a person.
It implies they are somehow subhuman, when in reality we know that regardless of who makes the discussion; it’s never easy.
As I sat watching the Sunday talk show circuit that pits a left of center and right of center rhetoric machine against each other in an attempt to see who can make the most fantastic and utterly ridiculous claim against the other side, and comment was made that stuck with me.
“You need to do the RIGHT thing”
I don’t recall which side it came from, nor could I pick the guy who said it out of a line-up but it caused me to dwell on the word “right”
What is the “right thing”?
As a Canadian the topic that is most discussed when the matter of war is raised is that of the ongoing Afghan War,
I have watched the typical partisan ballet;
The Liberals who entered this conflict in 2001 where in favor of the conflict till January 24th 2006 which interestingly enough is the first day that the Conservatives took power in Canada.
After that every attempt was made to paint this as “Harper’s War” and to make out anyone who was the Minister of Defense as some sort of trigger happy war monger.
If you took a poll today it would swing a few percent one way or another but both sides tend to hover around the high 40’s or low 50’s depending on the poll, which as far as I am concerned pretty well puts us at a tie.
In 2001 when Canadians were asked if we should go into Afghanistan after the September 11th attacks, the numbers were in the high 70’s to low 80’s in terms of percentage.
This is where the “right” thing comes into effect,
30% of Canadians have gone from pro to con over the course of the 8+ years this conflict has raged on.
What I have ask them is very simple:
What do we owe the Afghan people? Should we not finish the job?
We walked into their country with our NATO allies, we kicked the Taliban to the curb, we beat back insurgents in the streets, we have got them to a point where they have at least the most rudimentary democracy in place, and then we lost interest, because we started losing soldiers.
I can’t blame Canadians for wanting to take our troops out of harms way, but at the same time I have to wonder why we are so quick to be willing to trade lives.
How many Afghan lives are worth that of one Canadian?
It may sound like a harsh question, but its one that the Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democrats, as well as BQ have indirectly asked me as a Canadian to decide.
How many Afghan Civilians do I feel are worth the life of a single Canadian troop?
There are two ways to approach that simply morbid question;
You can be right; or you can be politically right.
The see the difference I can cite a very simple example.
In the early 1990’s the UN sent a Peacekeeping team into Somalia to attempt to stop a pending civil war, this mission ended after the Battle of Mogadishu when news footage of the dead U.S. soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu found its way back to the people of the United States in 1993.
Public opinion of the conflict in Somalia plummeted, and President Bill Clinton did the politically right thing and pulled out the US soldiers from the Somali mission after 19 US soldiers were killed during the Battle of Mogadishu (31 for the entire mission), which resulted in the collapse of the mission, and Somalia falling into a continued state of Civil War.
The Somali Civil War still rages on, and has resulted in the death of about 400,000 people, with well over a million displaced from their home.
The question of how many Somali lives are worth a single American life was answered:
31 Americans died,
The American people wanted out.
They got out
400,000 Somali's are dead
400,000 / 31 = 12,903 Somali’s died in exchange for every US solider that did.
But;
Bill Clinton was re-elected in 1996 by one of the largest margins every won by a Democrat in a Presidential election.
He made the “right” call, politically speaking, he was “politically right”.
But that call resulted in the deaths of thousands upon thousands of Somali citizens,
The question then becomes, was it the “right” choice?
Was there any obligation to finish what they started?
George W. Bush is often called a War Monger because he oversaw the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and Stephen Harper is often call the same for his support of the Mission in Afghanistan, but it should be noted that roughly 8,309 civilians have been killed in Afghanistan since October 2001, with estimates as high as 16,000, Iraq based on IBC’s numbers have experienced 104,119 civilian deaths (as the high estimate, roughly 96,000 as the low)
Even if I am being generous; the inaction in Somali led to roughly 4x more civilian deaths then the direct action of invading two nations.
But there seems to be this mentality that if its not on CNN then it didn't really happen. If a child is murdered in Africa, and various international news agencies don't bother to cover it, does it count? Clearly to those on the left, it does not.
As a fairness test;
If I stand by and watch a man drown or;
If I drown a man,
The man is just as dead at the end of the day.
I understand that politicians can draw a line between civilians who die when we are watching, and then those who die when we are not.
I however, do not.
Civilian death seems to be different depending on your party line; and while that may pass salt in Washington or Ottawa, it doesn’t work with me.
If we held the withdrawal from Somalia to the same loose international legal standard that is being used by pundits to damn all Conservatives, Republicans, and Labour Party Members over Iraq & Afghanistan; Would Bill Clinton not be subject to the Yamashita standard?
I don’t think so; but he was a Republican I can assure you that it would at least be a hot topic of debate on the Sunday talk circuit.
Why is the opposition in Canada in such a rush to potentially have our own withdrawal which could potentially lead to civil war weighing on our conscience?
Will it win them an election?
Perhaps.
Damning our troops and the government who supports them may be “politically right” but I have to wonder what the consequences of being “politically right” would be for the average Afghan?
We went in there, and we need to finish the job.
Scoring points off our troops who are in harms way every day from the confines of the Parliament buildings may score you political points;
But I still have a hard time as an average Canadian when I am asked to indirectly answer how many Afghan lives are worth that of a single Canadians?
Because that is what a withdrawal, and calls for withdrawal basically amounts to.
And that is when bring “right” vs. “politically right” becomes the choice of every Canadian.
Conservative Supporters are Paranoid & Crazy...
I often sit on the sidelines and enjoy watching my friends who cover the right and left spectrum of politics argue back and forth about the fairness of media.
The Conservative supporters have this conspiracy theory that the "left wing" media is out to get them, and the Liberal and New Democrat supporters simply laugh and say that they are crazy, and that reporting the truth does not constitute bias.
As I was thumbing through the Globe and Mail website the other day, I came across this interesting article that caught my eye.
The headline was:
With the little blurb online before the article saying:
Neat! I had to read more!
This revelation was made based on a Nanos poll which basically asked based on the following institutions do you feel they have too much power, the right amount of power, or not enough power, or unsure.
The results from the poll which is displayed within the very article shows the following when asked about the office of the Prime Minister:
Too Much Power: 41.6%
The Right Amount of Power: 40.4%
Not Enough Power: 9.3%
Unsure: 8.7%
Perhaps I fell asleep in grade school when they taught the class how to add, but based on the Nano's poll I see it as 49.7% of Canadians feeling that the PMO has either the right amount of power, or not enough...
That is a higher figure of Canadians believing that the headline of the article is incorrect, then correct.
But again, what do I know?
Have a look at the article yourself and make your own judgment.
I guess maybe there is something to the old saying:
"It's not paranoia if they are really after you"
The Conservative supporters have this conspiracy theory that the "left wing" media is out to get them, and the Liberal and New Democrat supporters simply laugh and say that they are crazy, and that reporting the truth does not constitute bias.
As I was thumbing through the Globe and Mail website the other day, I came across this interesting article that caught my eye.
The headline was:
PMO has too much power, poll finds
With the little blurb online before the article saying:
More than 40 per cent of Canadians put Prime Minister's Office ahead of Senate as institution most deserving to have its wings clipped
Neat! I had to read more!
This revelation was made based on a Nanos poll which basically asked based on the following institutions do you feel they have too much power, the right amount of power, or not enough power, or unsure.
The results from the poll which is displayed within the very article shows the following when asked about the office of the Prime Minister:
Too Much Power: 41.6%
The Right Amount of Power: 40.4%
Not Enough Power: 9.3%
Unsure: 8.7%
Perhaps I fell asleep in grade school when they taught the class how to add, but based on the Nano's poll I see it as 49.7% of Canadians feeling that the PMO has either the right amount of power, or not enough...
That is a higher figure of Canadians believing that the headline of the article is incorrect, then correct.
But again, what do I know?
Have a look at the article yourself and make your own judgment.
I guess maybe there is something to the old saying:
"It's not paranoia if they are really after you"
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Damn You, and Your “Responsible” Budget!
Let me be clear, I don’t have anything against the Liberal Party of Canada.
Historically they have done some pretty interesting things, and had some very interesting leaders, who have benefited this country for electing them.
However, this incarnation of the Liberal Party of Canada just gives me the creeps.
I hate appointed leaders, nothing makes me more angry then party brass around a board room table anointing the leader of a political party that is suppose to represent Canadians especially when that leader shouldn’t buy the support of other leadership hopefuls in 2006.
I wasn’t thrilled when Harper ran in 2003, as a merged party shouldn’t have either of the former parties’ leaders running the show,
I wasn’t thrilled at the 11 month delay in 2006 which basically gave the Conservatives an unelected majority government while the Liberals samples eight potential leaders
And I wasn’t thrilled that Ignatieff was anointed rather then elected.
But in the first two cases, at least the unwashed masses got to have some input into selecting their leader, and the problem with men in smoke filled rooms selecting a leader is that those men rarely if ever understand the plight of the working class stiffs like me.
Last year was like watching a tennis match at the US open when it came to where the Liberals stood on issues.
March 2009 – We will support this reckless spending the government is putting forth, but we want them to submit reports as to where the money is going…
You know, do what a government is legally required to do anyway when it comes to spending tax payer money…
They even went as far as to create a cute “onprobation.ca” website to show us how they were like vigilant hawks who would strike down at anyone who abused us minions as we toiled in the fields.
But of course they lost interest in actually doing the job of the opposition party of Canada, and went back to whining that being in opposition is beneath Canada’s natural Governing Party, as the website now simply re-directs to the Liberal Party home page and has down so for several months…
So much for that….
September 2009 – They voted against legislation that would have made the Home Renovation Credit Law,
Yeah, you know that credit they supported in March that most of us spent when it was warm in summer so we could do the work on our “honey do” lists like replace tiles, have the roof fixes, finish the basement…basically all the stuff that most sane Canadians don’t wait till Fall to get started on when the credit is set to expire in February.
Because now, they are against reckless spending…
Yet they are not interested in keeping the Conservative accountable for this reckless spending they are now against, which they were for in March when they were in favor of the reckless spending in the first place…
Get all that?
As I sat there within thousands of dollars of renovation materials receipts in my hands for the first time in a long time I actually cheer the NDP as they did the right thing and supported passing the legislation the Liberals should have passed in the first place.
I wrote my MP, and I tend to never do that because writing my MP is like going into Best Buy and complaining to the guy who sells TV’s that I am unhappy with the quality of company XYZ’s TV’s, he may smile and nod, he may even show some apathy for my situation, but at the end of the day he/she has no real power to make any real choices because they have to pull the party line anyway.
My Liberal MP replied to my frantic “Ummmm dude? I spent a few grand doing work around the house under the promise I would write some of it off, and you supported that in March, and now you are punking me?? Really? REALLY???”
His response was basically;
The legislation has passed, and the reno credit is law.
When in reality,
The legislation had passed despite his party not supporting it, and had the legislation been voted down we would have hit the polls, and I may have never seen my credit ever again.
I may vote Liberal in the future, but never ever ever again will I vote for him.
Taking bread out of my mouth is one thing,
Offering me bread, putting butter on it, handing it to me, and trying to slap it out of my hand as I put it in my mouth is another.
Now here we are in February 2010;
The Conservatives have leaked parts of their budget.
No Tax Cuts
No New Spending
While I am disappointed that the Reagan approach to cut taxes to stimulate spending which historically increases government revenue anyway (also used successfully in Ontario by Mike Harris)
I am pleased that spending is under control,
But of course, that is terrible.
It’s being called a do nothing budget…
This is the problem with the opposition parties,
There is no right answer.
And in a minority government that creates a real legislative quagmire.
We have been in election mode since the day after the 2004 election, every political party wasting time in Parliament hoping for a soundbyte they can use in a election which could happen any day…
This of course at the expense of governing.
The Liberals are now against restraint,
The same fiscal restraint they were for when they opted to stop supporting the budget they supported in March in September.
They want to spend billions on daycare, they feel that not spending money that we don’t have is “doing nothing”,
As a normal Canadian who actually has to work for a living at a honest to goodness job, I call not spending money that I don’t have something very different,
I call it “reality”.
But what do I know?
Historically they have done some pretty interesting things, and had some very interesting leaders, who have benefited this country for electing them.
However, this incarnation of the Liberal Party of Canada just gives me the creeps.
I hate appointed leaders, nothing makes me more angry then party brass around a board room table anointing the leader of a political party that is suppose to represent Canadians especially when that leader shouldn’t buy the support of other leadership hopefuls in 2006.
I wasn’t thrilled when Harper ran in 2003, as a merged party shouldn’t have either of the former parties’ leaders running the show,
I wasn’t thrilled at the 11 month delay in 2006 which basically gave the Conservatives an unelected majority government while the Liberals samples eight potential leaders
And I wasn’t thrilled that Ignatieff was anointed rather then elected.
But in the first two cases, at least the unwashed masses got to have some input into selecting their leader, and the problem with men in smoke filled rooms selecting a leader is that those men rarely if ever understand the plight of the working class stiffs like me.
Last year was like watching a tennis match at the US open when it came to where the Liberals stood on issues.
March 2009 – We will support this reckless spending the government is putting forth, but we want them to submit reports as to where the money is going…
You know, do what a government is legally required to do anyway when it comes to spending tax payer money…
They even went as far as to create a cute “onprobation.ca” website to show us how they were like vigilant hawks who would strike down at anyone who abused us minions as we toiled in the fields.
But of course they lost interest in actually doing the job of the opposition party of Canada, and went back to whining that being in opposition is beneath Canada’s natural Governing Party, as the website now simply re-directs to the Liberal Party home page and has down so for several months…
So much for that….
September 2009 – They voted against legislation that would have made the Home Renovation Credit Law,
Yeah, you know that credit they supported in March that most of us spent when it was warm in summer so we could do the work on our “honey do” lists like replace tiles, have the roof fixes, finish the basement…basically all the stuff that most sane Canadians don’t wait till Fall to get started on when the credit is set to expire in February.
Because now, they are against reckless spending…
Yet they are not interested in keeping the Conservative accountable for this reckless spending they are now against, which they were for in March when they were in favor of the reckless spending in the first place…
Get all that?
As I sat there within thousands of dollars of renovation materials receipts in my hands for the first time in a long time I actually cheer the NDP as they did the right thing and supported passing the legislation the Liberals should have passed in the first place.
I wrote my MP, and I tend to never do that because writing my MP is like going into Best Buy and complaining to the guy who sells TV’s that I am unhappy with the quality of company XYZ’s TV’s, he may smile and nod, he may even show some apathy for my situation, but at the end of the day he/she has no real power to make any real choices because they have to pull the party line anyway.
My Liberal MP replied to my frantic “Ummmm dude? I spent a few grand doing work around the house under the promise I would write some of it off, and you supported that in March, and now you are punking me?? Really? REALLY???”
His response was basically;
The legislation has passed, and the reno credit is law.
When in reality,
The legislation had passed despite his party not supporting it, and had the legislation been voted down we would have hit the polls, and I may have never seen my credit ever again.
I may vote Liberal in the future, but never ever ever again will I vote for him.
Taking bread out of my mouth is one thing,
Offering me bread, putting butter on it, handing it to me, and trying to slap it out of my hand as I put it in my mouth is another.
Now here we are in February 2010;
The Conservatives have leaked parts of their budget.
No Tax Cuts
No New Spending
While I am disappointed that the Reagan approach to cut taxes to stimulate spending which historically increases government revenue anyway (also used successfully in Ontario by Mike Harris)
I am pleased that spending is under control,
But of course, that is terrible.
It’s being called a do nothing budget…
This is the problem with the opposition parties,
There is no right answer.
And in a minority government that creates a real legislative quagmire.
We have been in election mode since the day after the 2004 election, every political party wasting time in Parliament hoping for a soundbyte they can use in a election which could happen any day…
This of course at the expense of governing.
The Liberals are now against restraint,
The same fiscal restraint they were for when they opted to stop supporting the budget they supported in March in September.
They want to spend billions on daycare, they feel that not spending money that we don’t have is “doing nothing”,
As a normal Canadian who actually has to work for a living at a honest to goodness job, I call not spending money that I don’t have something very different,
I call it “reality”.
But what do I know?
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Beer and Popcorn Version 2.0
I am a simple man.
I believe that that I shouldn’t buy what I can’t afford (but at times I do)
I believe that if the economy is bad, it may not be the best time to make that huge purchase
I believe that being careful with taxpayer dollars is not just a courtesy, it’s a responsibility.
Most of all, I believe that no one is better suited to raise your own kids then you are.
In 1993 when a national daycare program was being touted, I will admit to feeling a knot tighten in my stomach. I have resided myself to the fact that I will spend my entire working life paying off a debt and interest on a debt that I had influence on as I was either not born, or was unable to vote.
While it doesn’t sit right with me it’s a reality.
My parents and grandparents screw me, all of our parents and grandparents did because they opted for instant gratification rather then responsibility.
When another money pit like national daycare was discussed in the early 1990’s I wondered how much of a hole would be left for my children and my grandchildren?
The problem with a multibillion dollar nationalized program is that it needs to be funded year after year after year.
If the economy is good, if the economy is bad, it doesn’t matter its billions of dollars that gets thrown into this hole so that a select few can benefit.
And I can assure you I will not be one of those select few, but I will certainly pay the price for those select few.
Its not that I dislike or look down upon low income Canadians, it’s more a matter of enough being enough.
I am not some evil billionaire twisting my moustache in my castle complaining that the tax hike be it via my income taxes or an increase in the GST will cost me an Ivory backscratcher,
I am an upper middle class Canadian who is going to have to funnel more money that I have worked for away from my RRSP’s, from my kids sports, from my rainy day fund, or from something else that I have worked hard to be able to have so that we can have a national day care program when we should be paying off the debt.
In Quebec there is a two to three year waiting list for their Provincially Subsidized Daycare.
Yet there seems to be this mindset that the program is some sort of Shangri-La?
Paul Martin already spent over a billion dollars in national daycare in 2005.
How many spots did it create in the nine Provinces without a program?
Zero.
Jack Layton, Gilles Duceppe, and Stephen Harper spent nothing and created the exact same amount.
I am so tired of the opposition playing to the squeaky wheel, and yeah that may make me a bad Canadian but I am so damn tired of being the forgotten majority.
It’s my damn tax dollars you are using to buy votes in the 416, 514, and 604 area codes,
And I have had enough.
While I don’t approve of all of the spending that the Conservatives have moved forward with,
At least they trust me enough to know what’s best for my children.
The Liberals called that “Beer and Popcorn” money,
The Average Canadian Family called that money “Winter Boots”, “Spring Coats”, “Running Shoes”, and “A Hockey Net”.
Now once again I have the Liberal Party of Canada (Along with the NDP, but that is to be expected) telling me that Canadian Families are not as well suited to care for their children as government workers are.
Great Plan!
Raise the taxes of the middle class,
Force both parents to work,
Require them to put their kids in the care of a stranger (If they can find a spot)
And call that job creation.
The solution is simple.
Allow Canadians to Income Split.
Why are you forcing Canadian Parents to work when at least one within most households would love the opportunity to actually RAISE their own children?
Give me the means to keep more of my salary so that rather then lining up to drop my kids off with a government employee, myself or my wife can be there with our own children.
Realize that I am the most qualified to care for my children, realize that I know what is best for my own children, and allow me to do so.
I believe that that I shouldn’t buy what I can’t afford (but at times I do)
I believe that if the economy is bad, it may not be the best time to make that huge purchase
I believe that being careful with taxpayer dollars is not just a courtesy, it’s a responsibility.
Most of all, I believe that no one is better suited to raise your own kids then you are.
In 1993 when a national daycare program was being touted, I will admit to feeling a knot tighten in my stomach. I have resided myself to the fact that I will spend my entire working life paying off a debt and interest on a debt that I had influence on as I was either not born, or was unable to vote.
While it doesn’t sit right with me it’s a reality.
My parents and grandparents screw me, all of our parents and grandparents did because they opted for instant gratification rather then responsibility.
When another money pit like national daycare was discussed in the early 1990’s I wondered how much of a hole would be left for my children and my grandchildren?
The problem with a multibillion dollar nationalized program is that it needs to be funded year after year after year.
If the economy is good, if the economy is bad, it doesn’t matter its billions of dollars that gets thrown into this hole so that a select few can benefit.
And I can assure you I will not be one of those select few, but I will certainly pay the price for those select few.
Its not that I dislike or look down upon low income Canadians, it’s more a matter of enough being enough.
I am not some evil billionaire twisting my moustache in my castle complaining that the tax hike be it via my income taxes or an increase in the GST will cost me an Ivory backscratcher,
I am an upper middle class Canadian who is going to have to funnel more money that I have worked for away from my RRSP’s, from my kids sports, from my rainy day fund, or from something else that I have worked hard to be able to have so that we can have a national day care program when we should be paying off the debt.
In Quebec there is a two to three year waiting list for their Provincially Subsidized Daycare.
Yet there seems to be this mindset that the program is some sort of Shangri-La?
Paul Martin already spent over a billion dollars in national daycare in 2005.
How many spots did it create in the nine Provinces without a program?
Zero.
Jack Layton, Gilles Duceppe, and Stephen Harper spent nothing and created the exact same amount.
I am so tired of the opposition playing to the squeaky wheel, and yeah that may make me a bad Canadian but I am so damn tired of being the forgotten majority.
It’s my damn tax dollars you are using to buy votes in the 416, 514, and 604 area codes,
And I have had enough.
While I don’t approve of all of the spending that the Conservatives have moved forward with,
At least they trust me enough to know what’s best for my children.
The Liberals called that “Beer and Popcorn” money,
The Average Canadian Family called that money “Winter Boots”, “Spring Coats”, “Running Shoes”, and “A Hockey Net”.
Now once again I have the Liberal Party of Canada (Along with the NDP, but that is to be expected) telling me that Canadian Families are not as well suited to care for their children as government workers are.
Great Plan!
Raise the taxes of the middle class,
Force both parents to work,
Require them to put their kids in the care of a stranger (If they can find a spot)
And call that job creation.
The solution is simple.
Allow Canadians to Income Split.
Why are you forcing Canadian Parents to work when at least one within most households would love the opportunity to actually RAISE their own children?
Give me the means to keep more of my salary so that rather then lining up to drop my kids off with a government employee, myself or my wife can be there with our own children.
Realize that I am the most qualified to care for my children, realize that I know what is best for my own children, and allow me to do so.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Love Politics, Yet Hating On Playing Politics
Watching the folks in Ottawa over the last few weeks is like watching a slowly escalating neighborhood battle grow into something outlandish over something that started as a result of something trivial like little Billy stepping on Ms. McGillicuddy's daisies.
Stephen Harper opted to prorogue Parliament and give all MP’s a few more weeks off then they would have otherwise enjoyed under the cloak of “It’s the Olympics Dude!!!”
Needless to say, the opposition has hit the spin cycle over these 18 or so days of lost legislating. So much so that they will waste three days of time debating a bill which will stop the government from every doing anything like this again…
While these entire matter is beyond stupefying, I hate being treated like I am an idiot and it seems that this is what all the parties in Ottawa seem to be doing right now.
Treating me and every voter in Canada like they are utter morons that have no idea how the political system works…
And the best part is that it’s working.
Why did Stephen Harper Prorogue Parliament?
Answer: Because as of January 6th 2010 the Conservative Party of Canada had the means to do something that no Conservative government has been able to do for decades.
That of course is end the Liberal majority in the Senate of Canada.
Now for those who don’t follow let me give you a quick breakdown as I understand it:
1) House of Commons introduces legislation, the bill is debated and fought over for weeks and sometimes months, voted on, if it passes, read again, voted on, if it passes, read again, voted on, and if it passes goes upstairs to the guys who sit in the red chairs (IE the Senate of Canada)
2) The Senate of Canada (That is made up of Senators who generally represent political parties) that is an unelected body looks at the legislation, goes bugeyed over it, they debated, send it to committee change it, send it back to the Commons to vote on it again, if the Commons says no, the Senate votes on the same bill they got in the first place, and if it passes it gets signed by the Governor General and becomes law (or its left to sit around till the end of the Senate session and dies on the floor so it needs to go thru Step 1 and 2 again)
Mr. Harper is pretty ticked that his legislation gets passed through the Senate at a much slower pace then it did when the Liberals were the largest party in the Commons and I would imagine he seems to believe the Liberals are playing partisan games with legislation.
You can form your own opinion on if that is true or not, but from best I can tell when a new session of Parliament begins the first few weeks are normally spent introducing legislation that died on the Senate floor because they opted not to get around to passing it.
Now of course the opposition has a different spin on the issue:
They are saying “Dude!!! We want to work and you are stopping us from working, and you are running from an investigation on Afghanistan”
Why is the opposition screaming about the Prorogue of Parliament?
Answer: Because it’s an issue that people actually seem to show some sort of interest in. Mr. Ignatieff is enjoying an approval rating that if memory serves is nationally around 20%.
Not exactly the type of number you want to see when your party is polling at 30% nationally, it basically means that in a best case 33% of the people who support your own party don’t approve of you as a leader.
We have watched this poor guy scramble to get a little love, he tries so hard to be likable but at least to me comes off a little creepy.
It’s all about politics.
They are saying Democracy is being hijacked because of the 18 or so days they will not be sitting in the Commons, yet they will waste the first five opposition days arguing about all the great things they could have done in those 18 days rather then actually doing them.
This is what makes me so apathetic towards politics;
We should as citizens of this nation know how our Parliament works, but we don’t and we allow that ignorance to be abused by politicians.
I think that abuse reached a boiling point (for me anyway) when I watched Bob Rae at an Anti-Prorogue Rally in Toronto…
As I recall he may have established one of the longest Prorogues in Ontario Legislature history from December 1994 to April 1995.
He didn’t even bother with a budget that year…
Along with two other rather lengthy breaks in Parliament as well.
The reality is that the right of the governing party to Prorogue Parliament has been a right since 1867, and I am a little stunned that the folks in the media have only realized this going into 2010.
Shouldn’t you be required to be well versed in civics to be a political reporter?
I hate political parties that prey on voters who are not informed with misinformation in an attempt to secure support, and the Liberal Party of Canada carting out Bob Rae to lecture the Conservatives on the practice of Proroguing Parliament…
Isn’t that sort of like carting Alfonso Gagliano to give the government a lecture on the prudence of treating tax payer money with respect?
I didn’t mind Iggy,
But I really don’t understand why the Liberal Party of Canada isn’t attempting to win over support with policy rather then propaganda?
Where is my alternative option?
I watch the Tories introduce legislation, and watch the opposition say they are opposed to it before the bill is finished being read, with zero alternative presented by the opposition other then “It’s Bad”
Okay, it’s bad, I get it.
So can you show me the better alternative?
Oh…You don’t have one?
This concept of parties’ campaign slogans being something along the lines of:
“Vote for us: We don’t have a plan, but hey…we’re not the Conservatives”
May excite some voters in some circles, but for the folks like me…well I need to vote for something not against something.
Stephen Harper opted to prorogue Parliament and give all MP’s a few more weeks off then they would have otherwise enjoyed under the cloak of “It’s the Olympics Dude!!!”
Needless to say, the opposition has hit the spin cycle over these 18 or so days of lost legislating. So much so that they will waste three days of time debating a bill which will stop the government from every doing anything like this again…
While these entire matter is beyond stupefying, I hate being treated like I am an idiot and it seems that this is what all the parties in Ottawa seem to be doing right now.
Treating me and every voter in Canada like they are utter morons that have no idea how the political system works…
And the best part is that it’s working.
Why did Stephen Harper Prorogue Parliament?
Answer: Because as of January 6th 2010 the Conservative Party of Canada had the means to do something that no Conservative government has been able to do for decades.
That of course is end the Liberal majority in the Senate of Canada.
Now for those who don’t follow let me give you a quick breakdown as I understand it:
1) House of Commons introduces legislation, the bill is debated and fought over for weeks and sometimes months, voted on, if it passes, read again, voted on, if it passes, read again, voted on, and if it passes goes upstairs to the guys who sit in the red chairs (IE the Senate of Canada)
2) The Senate of Canada (That is made up of Senators who generally represent political parties) that is an unelected body looks at the legislation, goes bugeyed over it, they debated, send it to committee change it, send it back to the Commons to vote on it again, if the Commons says no, the Senate votes on the same bill they got in the first place, and if it passes it gets signed by the Governor General and becomes law (or its left to sit around till the end of the Senate session and dies on the floor so it needs to go thru Step 1 and 2 again)
Mr. Harper is pretty ticked that his legislation gets passed through the Senate at a much slower pace then it did when the Liberals were the largest party in the Commons and I would imagine he seems to believe the Liberals are playing partisan games with legislation.
You can form your own opinion on if that is true or not, but from best I can tell when a new session of Parliament begins the first few weeks are normally spent introducing legislation that died on the Senate floor because they opted not to get around to passing it.
Now of course the opposition has a different spin on the issue:
They are saying “Dude!!! We want to work and you are stopping us from working, and you are running from an investigation on Afghanistan”
Why is the opposition screaming about the Prorogue of Parliament?
Answer: Because it’s an issue that people actually seem to show some sort of interest in. Mr. Ignatieff is enjoying an approval rating that if memory serves is nationally around 20%.
Not exactly the type of number you want to see when your party is polling at 30% nationally, it basically means that in a best case 33% of the people who support your own party don’t approve of you as a leader.
We have watched this poor guy scramble to get a little love, he tries so hard to be likable but at least to me comes off a little creepy.
It’s all about politics.
They are saying Democracy is being hijacked because of the 18 or so days they will not be sitting in the Commons, yet they will waste the first five opposition days arguing about all the great things they could have done in those 18 days rather then actually doing them.
This is what makes me so apathetic towards politics;
We should as citizens of this nation know how our Parliament works, but we don’t and we allow that ignorance to be abused by politicians.
I think that abuse reached a boiling point (for me anyway) when I watched Bob Rae at an Anti-Prorogue Rally in Toronto…
As I recall he may have established one of the longest Prorogues in Ontario Legislature history from December 1994 to April 1995.
He didn’t even bother with a budget that year…
Along with two other rather lengthy breaks in Parliament as well.
The reality is that the right of the governing party to Prorogue Parliament has been a right since 1867, and I am a little stunned that the folks in the media have only realized this going into 2010.
Shouldn’t you be required to be well versed in civics to be a political reporter?
I hate political parties that prey on voters who are not informed with misinformation in an attempt to secure support, and the Liberal Party of Canada carting out Bob Rae to lecture the Conservatives on the practice of Proroguing Parliament…
Isn’t that sort of like carting Alfonso Gagliano to give the government a lecture on the prudence of treating tax payer money with respect?
I didn’t mind Iggy,
But I really don’t understand why the Liberal Party of Canada isn’t attempting to win over support with policy rather then propaganda?
Where is my alternative option?
I watch the Tories introduce legislation, and watch the opposition say they are opposed to it before the bill is finished being read, with zero alternative presented by the opposition other then “It’s Bad”
Okay, it’s bad, I get it.
So can you show me the better alternative?
Oh…You don’t have one?
This concept of parties’ campaign slogans being something along the lines of:
“Vote for us: We don’t have a plan, but hey…we’re not the Conservatives”
May excite some voters in some circles, but for the folks like me…well I need to vote for something not against something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
