Tuesday, January 31, 2006

UK "religious hatred" bill neutered

The disturbing anti-free speech Racial and Religious Hatred Bill has had most of its sting pulled by Parliament. The Government lost a couple of key votes on the bill, one of them by just one vote after Tony Blair had left the House!

TONY BLAIR’S authority was shaken by two surprise defeats last night that weakened his Bill to create the crime of inciting racial hatred. Key measures were lost by a majority of just one after he failed to stay for the crucial vote.
In a humiliating blow to Mr Blair, who has a 65-seat Commons majority, 21 Labour rebels voted with Opposition MPs while at least 40 more were absent or abstained.



It soon emerged that Mr Blair had returned to Downing Street after being told by Hilary Armstrong, the Chief Whip, that there was no point in staying for the crunch vote after an earlier measure was lost by a majority of ten.

In what proved to be a disastrous miscalculation, however, Mr Blair’s absence will be blamed for the loss of key clauses designed to combat “abusive and insulting” behaviour inciting religious hatred.

.....
The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill was heavily watered down by 283 votes to 282 in the second most serious defeat for Mr Blair since the terror Bill last autumn. In an earlier vote, the Government was defeated on a technical measure by 288 votes to 278.

To a chorus of “resign” from Conservative MPs, Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, told the Commons that he accepted its verdict and that the Bill would become law. But it was stripped of measures to outlaw “abusive and insulting” language and behaviour as well as the crime of “recklessness” in actions that incite religious hatred.

Had Mr Blair not left and the crucial vote been tied, the final decision would have fallen to the Speaker, who by convention would be expected to vote with the Government.

The Islamo-fascist fifth column in Britain, who had been hoping to use the Bill as a weapon in forcing Islam upon the country, was predictably "disappointed".
Mohammed Sarwar (Lab, Glasgow Central) said: “The Muslim community in this country will be very disappointed that Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and of course the rebels within the Labour Party have done this.”


Addendum: The BBC has further comments from those who voted against the Bill:
Shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve said the defeats were "a victory for Parliament".

He branded the bill a "foolish manifesto commitment" introduced to "appease" some minority groups, and which had "threatened freedom of speech".

Mr Grieve said in multicultural Britain people had to accept that freedom of speech may mean people could be offensive to them, as well as vice versa.

He said: "This (bill) was completely contrary to our national tradition of free speech."

Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrats human rights spokesman, said: "The government just failed to understand that they can't take liberties with freedom of expression.

"This has showed tonight that we will stand up for freedom of expression."

ID & creationism in Britain

An interesting post at the YouGov blog on a survey conducted about attitudes to evolution, ID and creationism in Britain.

A BBC Horizon programme last week covering the recent court case over the teaching of intelligent design in US schools commissioned a MORI poll asking what people in Britain thought. 48% of people in Britain thought the theory of evolution best described their view, 17% thought intelligent design best described their view and, startlingly, 22% of British people thought creationism best described their view.

Go for it Belinda!


McKenna....withdrawn.
Manley.....withdrawn
.
Tobin......withdrawn.

Cower before the power of BELINDA!

Coming soon to a natural party of government near you.

The Palestinians are the problem

Dennis Prager (who I often find irritating), nails it this time:

First and foremost, it proves what people who perceive reality have been saying for decades: The great majority of Palestinians -- like the majority of Arabs elsewhere and like vast numbers of non-Arab Muslims -- want Israel destroyed. Even granting legitimacy to the argument that the complete moral, financial and political corruption of Fatah was partly responsible for the Hamas victory, those who voted for Hamas did not find that organization's terror, religious celebration of murder or charter calling for Israel's destruction an impediment to their vote.

It is true that in 1933, some Germans who voted for the Nazis did so out of anger at the Versailles Treaty and because of the economic chaos that engulfed their country. Indeed, it is widely agreed among historians that Hitler played down anti-Semitism in the Nazis' electoral campaigning. But every German voter was aware of the ferocity of the Nazis' Jew-hatred. And, whatever the case in 1933 Germany, in 2006 Palestine, Hamas has never played down its anti-Semitism or its support for continuing terrorism.


So the Palestinian vote reveals the falsity of the worldwide Left's view of the Palestinians as committed to peace. It likewise reveals the falsity of the Left's belief that Palestinian terror is supported by a small minority of the Palestinian population.

Defending Mike Harris

The rhetoric employed by the political left during the election concerning Mike Harris reminded me a lot of what you hear from British leftists about Margaret Thatcher. The left hates both of these politicians, of course. They both inherited an economy shattered by left-wing policies, and they both turned things around with tough but necessary common sense measures (usually involving conflict with the vested leftist interests who had created the problems in the first place), leaving far healthier and more responsible economies when they retired.

Leftists, as a result, scream nonsensical historical revisionism about gutted social programmes and gigantic deficits. My personal view of Margaret Thatcher is that she not only saved Britain from becoming a socialist gulag, but restored our pride, self-belief and respect on the international scene. As Winston Churchill was to the first half of the 20th century, Margaret Thatcher was to the latter years of that century.

Back to Mike Harris, who has also been the victim of a dishonest leftist onslaught. Lorrie Goldstein explodes the myths currently being propagated by the left as to his government, most specifically in the Liberal election ad.

First, the ad’s claim that Harris’ Common Sense Revolution (CSR) left Ontario with “huge deficits” is false. In reality, Harris inherited an $11.2-billion deficit from the defeated NDP government of Bob Rae in 1995. Harris and his finance minister, Ernie Eves, steadily reduced it until they achieved a balanced budget in 1999.

When Harris resigned as premier in 2002, the budget was still balanced.

.....
Next we have Martin’s allegations that Harris’ CSR led to “environmental neglect ... shattered social programs ... crumbling schools and hospitals.”

In fact, Martin, while finance minister, slashed federal transfer payments to the provinces for health care and social spending. This began in 1996, a year after Harris became premier. Martin’s multi-year cuts cost Ontario (and other provinces) billions of dollars in funding for health care and social programs.

Essentially, Martin balanced his budget by downloading the federal deficit onto the provinces, then blamed Harris for the problems that created. Talk about hypocrisy.
......
Another charge Liberals and their shills make is that Harris is responsible for the ongoing gang and gun violence in Toronto because of his cuts to social spending in the mid-1990s. Liberals have taken to calling the gangsters “Harris’ children.” More propaganda.

While many Canadians are skeptical of Statistic Canada’s annual reports on the crime rate, believing they under-report the problem, the Liberals and their cheerleaders constantly cite these figures to bolster their argument that since crime is going down, there’s no need for dramatically tougher laws.

But if the Liberals believe these numbers, how do they explain that, according to StatsCan, the Toronto area crime rate dropped by 8.6% in 2004, following eight years (1995 to 2003) of Harris/Eves policies? Why did Ontario have the lowest crime rate in Canada in 2004 (with a 5% reduction) as well as in 2003? Why, in 2003, when Canada’s crime rate rose by 6%, was Ontario only one of two places where it remained stable?

In order to blame Harris for Toronto’s gun violence in 2005, Liberals would have to explain how his policies apparently reduced crime prior to last year, then suddenly increased it. Right.

In the forthcoming Provincial election, there will be much more of this leftist nonsense, and it wil be important for Conservatives to aggressively respond and set the record straight.

The Shari'a supporter in Parliament

A disturbing column about new MP Omar Alghabra, who won election in Mississauga.

Despite the Conservative victory in Canada, the Liberals can boast a new member of parliament, Omar Alghabra from the suburban Toronto riding of Erindale-Mississauga. Even before his election, Alghabra’s nomination victory made news because of the Islamic supremacist statements made then.


The event featured declarations such as "This is a victory for Islam! Islam won! Islam won! ... Islamic power is extending into Canadian politics!" as reported by Arab attendees, even those who had voted for Alghabra. Many said that Alghabra’s key supporter, councilor and Liberal party member Khalid Usman who came from Markham, took the podium with Alghabra, announcing, "We have the East, we have the West, and now we have Mississauga!" Outgoing Liberal MP Carolyn Parrish confirmed she heard several pro-Islamic remarks from Usman, that "made it sound like [Muslims] were taking over. It was extremely inappropriate." A Liberal party official, Elias Hazineh, heard Usman say, "this is a victory for Muslims". Usman onstage crowed to the crowd "although Mr. Hazineh (the riding president) keeps telling me he is a Christian I am telling him that he better be a Muslim," one witness reported. The Toronto Star reported that Alghabra supporters came from outside the riding and some were urging people to "vote for the Muslim, not the infidel."


Mr Alghabra is involved with a number of organisations that have ties to terrorists and are blatantly anti-Semitic. He also supports the introduction of shari'a law to Canada.
His backing for this initiative comes out in an interview with Alghabra in Al Mughtarib, a Canadian weekly, dated Dec. 14. (This article is not on the Al Mughtarib website; I was alerted to it by a comment on this entry by a reader named "hr" who sent me a scan of the Arabic text.) In reply to a question about the Shari‘a, Alghabra replies:

Unfortunately, the majority of [Canadian] Muslims remained silent during the research of this law and abandoned the field to a dissenting minority [of Muslims] which had a louder voice. As a result, this plan ended in failure. The problem was not a stand taken [by non-Muslims] against Muslims, but it was we [Muslims] who were divided among ourselves and disunited in our ranks.
Canada will not be immune from the onslaught of militant Islamism. Sooner or later it will need to be confronted here, and if there are members of Parliament who support it, and who view democracy merely as a tool to be used in the advancement of Islamist goals, that task will be much harder. We need to remain alert to the Islamic fifth column in our midst.

Monday, January 30, 2006

The seventies: the armpit of history

Michael Barone writes a good column on the most putrid decade of the post-war period: Stuck in the 70's.

Do you ever get the feeling, while listening to the political debate, that we're stuck in the '70s? The 1970s, that is, that slum of a decade which gave us the worst popular music, the ugliest hairstyles and clothes, and the most disastrous public policies of the 20th century.
The decade in which a Republican president imposed wage and price controls, the decade when we managed to have inflation and recession -- stagflation -- at the same time. The decade when crime and welfare dependency zoomed upward. A decade when Americans saw our diplomats seized -- an act of war -- and no effective force used to free them. A decade when a president was forced to resign in disgrace and when America lost its first war.

The self-hating left loves the seventies. The decade of failure and defeat. Fortunately most of us woke up in the eighties, and left the decade of crap (and the failures of the left) behind.

Good riddance Mr. Martin

Hartley Steward doesn't mince words in the Toronto Sun:

Paul Martin: Full to overflowing with the notion that the Liberal party was the rightful ruling party of Canada; fuelled by an awful ambition to somehow redeem his father and become PM; blessed with the skin of a rhinoceros; cursed with a mind that maddeningly simplified the most complicated of ideas; possessed of a vocabulary so intemperate and vicious, he lowered the level of political debate and discourse in the nation to new levels.

I have to agree. This campaign reached shameful new lows, driven largely by Mr Martin's embrace of the worst kind of fear mongering and outright falsehoods. He demonstrated a meanness of character and a complete lack of the qualities needed in a statesman. He wont be missed.

Liberal's helicopter cockup may cost taxpayer $1 billion

From the Regina Leader Post:

Stephen Harper's new government could face a $1-billion legal penalty after a European aerospace firm filed a claim for damages, citing political interference by the Liberals during the 2004 purchase of naval helicopters.

Aerospace giant Agusta-Westland recently filed the $1-billion claim for damages in Federal Court, alleging its EH-101 helicopter didn't win the competition to provide Canada's military with a maritime chopper because of political interference by the Liberal government.

In reading the rest of the article, it seems this company has already benefitted to the tune of $470 million at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer, when the Liberals scrapped a previous contract to buy EH-101 helicopters. Maybe they think this is an easy way to make a billion, in which case, the Harper government should fight this case fiercely.
Cancelling the EH-101 contract was one of the first things Chretien did when he came to power in the fall of 1993. At the time his government paid more than $470 million in cancellation fees to scuttle the deal.

But in 1998 the Chretien government was embarrassed when the EH-101 was once again selected by the Canadian Forces as the best chopper for its search-and-rescue operations. Fifteen of those helicopters were bought for that role.

Agusta-Westland lawyer Gordon Cameron said no timetable has yet been set for the legal proceedings, but the firm is hoping to start the process of questioning government officials for the lawsuit sometime this summer.

"We're aiming for a September trial," he added.

Agusta-Westland had filed a previous claim in Federal Court alleging government bias in the helicopter selection process. This latest move adds the $1-billion claim for damages.

In its statement of claim, Agusta-Westland contends the Liberal government wanted to ensure the EH-101 didn't win the Sea King replacement contract because it wanted to avoid political embarrassment. The firm alleges the Liberals were worried that if the EH-101 did win, the government would be accused of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars in cancelling the first deal.
On the other hand, this sounds like classic Liberal behaviour, bending the rules to cover their own asses. Unfortunately, there will probably be many more stories like this coming to light showing the huge waste of taxpayer's money.

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Seven heroes

The crew of the shuttle Challenger, lost twenty years ago today.

From President Reagan's address:

For the families of the seven, we cannot bear, as you do, the full impact of this tragedy. But we feel the loss, and we're thinking about you so very much. Your loved ones were daring and brave, and they had that special grace, that special spirit that says, "Give me a challenge, and I'll meet it with joy." They had a hunger to explore the universe and discover its truths. They wished to serve, and they did. They served all of us.

We've grown used to wonders in this century. It's hard to dazzle us. But for twenty-five years the United States space program has been doing just that. We've grown used to the idea of space, and, perhaps we forget that we've only just begun. We're still pioneers. They, the members of the Challenger crew, were pioneers.

And I want to say something to the schoolchildren of America who were watching the live coverage of the shuttle's take-off. I know it's hard to understand, but sometimes painful things like this happen. It's all part of the process of exploration and discovery. It's all part of taking a chance and expanding man's horizons. The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted; it belongs to the brave. The Challenger crew was pulling us into the future, and we'll continue to follow them.

I've always had great faith in and respect for our space program. And what happened today does nothing to diminish it. We don't hide our space program. We don't keep secrets and cover things up. We do it all up front and in public. That's the way freedom is, and we wouldn't change it for a minute.

We'll continue our quest in space. There will be more shuttle flights and more shuttle crews and, yes, more volunteers, more civilians, more teachers in space. Nothing ends here; our hopes and our journeys continue.

I want to add that I wish I could talk to every man and woman who works for NASA, or who worked on this mission and tell them: "Your dedication and professionalism have moved and impressed us for decades. And we know of your anguish. We share it."

There's a coincidence today. On this day three hundred and ninety years ago, the great explorer Sir Francis Drake died aboard ship off the coast of Panama. In his lifetime the great frontiers were the oceans, and a historian later said, "He lived by the sea, died on it, and was buried in it." Well, today, we can say of the Challenger crew: Their dedication was, like Drake's, complete.

The crew of the space shuttle Challenger honored us by the manner in which they lived their lives. We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for their journey and waved goodbye and "slipped the surly bonds of earth" to "touch the face of God."

Give them their Tim Horton's!

The Ottawa Citizen, via Nealenews:

The Canadian Forces want to raise morale among troops deployed here by setting up the furthest flung coffee and doughnut franchise in the world: Tim Hortons Afghanistan.

But the Canadian icon is balking at the idea of opening shop at Kandahar Air Field, where more than 2,000 Canadian soldiers are being deployed this month, saying it "is not part of our business model."

U.S. soldiers serving in the sprawling Kandahar base have their own Burger King, Subway and Pizza Hut franchises and, with thousands of Canadian troops heading to southern Afghanistan this month, senior Canadian officers have decided it just won't be a Canadian base without a Tim Hortons.

Frank Cley-son, director of the Canadian Forces Personnel Support Agency for the Afghanistan mission, says his agency is in negotiations with the coffee chain to set up a franchise here, 10,000 kilometres and nine time zones from North America.

"It's still in discussions between (National Defence Headquarters in) Ottawa and Tim Hortons headquarters in Oakville," said Mr. Cleyson. "There hasn't been a decision yet ... (but) I understand the ball is in Tim Hortons' court right now."
Come on Tim's! Step up to the plate and give our boys and girls a nice taste of back home to keep their morale up. They're putting their lives on the line for freedoms we take for granted.

Come to think of it, let's send over the Canadian Tire guy as well. To destroy the enemy's morale, I mean. ("Grenade launcher jammed? In Canada we have the Mastercraft blastomatic......")

Friday, January 27, 2006

Will the Democrats filibuster?

It appears that John Kerry and Edward Kennedy may attempt a filibuster on the Alito nomination. This is political suicide. Alito's confirmation is strongly supported by the American people. The Democrats are split, with a significant number already indicating that they will vote in favour of Alito. All the Democrats will demonstrate is their own impotence and how much they are pandering to the extreme left. Dianne Feinstein has already demonstrated this by reversing her previous decision to support Alito, after moonbatwoman Cindy Sheehan threatened to contest her Senate seat if she didn't.

Captain Ed discusses this madness further.

ABC news says that there is enough votes for cloture.

Atheist madness

As usual, the regular disclosure: I'm an atheist.

And this is complete madness:

An Italian judge heard arguments Friday on whether a small-town parish priest should stand trial for asserting that Jesus Christ existed.

The priest's atheist accuser, Luigi Cascioli, says the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people for 2,000 years with a fable that Christ existed, and that the Rev. Enrico Righi violated two Italian laws by reasserting the claim.

Whiff of patronage scandal hits Toronto Mayor's office

David Miller, Toronto's leftwing (and extremely useless) Mayor is up for re-election in November. This wont help his re-election bid:

Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong (Don Valley East), a critic of the mayor, has been asking questions about how Northstar Research Partners won a competition to do market research for several city departments. Veteran political strategist John Laschinger, Mr. Miller's campaign director, is a senior associate with Northstar.

This is a story worth keeping tabs on for Torontans who are sick of this Mayor's leftwing, economy-destroying, soft-on-crime policies. Hopefully, more and more media and blog focus will be brought to bear on the record and actions of David Miller as the election draws closer.

What young people are being taught today

"It's not a good thing to think that you have to earn everything, because that's an illusion."

That quote pretty much sums up most of what is wrong with the political left. It was made by Professor David Weale at the University of Price Edward. Professor Weale is currently on suspension for bribing his students with an offer of a B- grade if they dropped out of his class.

The Globe & Mail article on this disgrace is here.

This is what young people are being taught by the leftists in the teaching profession in this country. That you don't have to earn things, and that you are therefore somehow entitled to them. No wonder there is such a culture of entitlement and an aversion towards personal responsibility: it's indoctrinated into young people at their places of learning. Don't take responsibility for yourself, you are owed a living by the state, and it's OK to parasite off others to get what you want. that's the message young people are getting, and it doesn't bode well for the future of Canada.

Bloggers and politics

Canadianna discusses the role of blogging in the media, beginning with

Darcy of Dust my Broom points to a column in Winnipeg Free Press which, like so many others before it, dismisses political bloggers (conservative bloggers in particular) as the stereotypical 'guy in his pyjamas, typing away in the basement of his mother's home'.

I really don't know why the MSM have this idea of political bloggers being pajama-clad basement denizens. People who live in their parent's basement and spend their time on the computer are going to be playing video games or looking at porn, not reading and discussing current affairs and politics. (Just for the record, my mother lives on another continent, I live in my own house with my wife, and I run my own accounting business).

In fact, I've found many bloggers to be valuable sources of information and perspective. Some of them are in the links and blogrolls to the right. To be sure, you have to keep in mind that what you are reading reflects the blogger's own views and opinions, but that has unfortunately become increasingly true of the mainstream media as well, and at least bloggers don't try to hide this fact behind a facade of faux professionalism and objectivity.

Canadianna concludes:
Bloggers might not change the world or influence the way the public thinks, but it's been heartening to find that there are other people out there whose view of the world isn't skewed left. When assessing the value of any medium, understanding the intentions of its users should be the first step. Professional journalists who discount the importance of political blogs, have approached this from the wrong angle.

My main intention with this blog is simply to have a place to record the many interesting columns and articles I read on the web, so that I can re-visit them in the future without having to search in a futile fashion for hours on end. Sometimes I'll give a bit of opinion on them, sometimes not. If other people read this blog and find the articles referenced interesting, that's a bonus. But I have no pretensions that this blog will be a breaker of news or exercise any political influence whatsoever. It's just a blog, a small part of an active life.

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Al Gore, Idiot

Al Gore has been spouting moonbat nonsense about oil companies bankrolling the Conservatives.

"The election in Canada was partly about the tar sands projects in Alberta," Gore said Wednesday while attending the Sundance Film Festival in Utah.

"And the financial interests behind the tar sands project poured a lot of money and support behind an ultra-conservative leader in order to win the election . . . and to protect their interests."


Obviously Al Gore is totally ignorant of Canadian politics, as the article explains:
The federal Elections Act limits how much money individuals, corporations and unions can donate to political parties. Individuals are allowed to give as much as $5,000 a year, while companies and unions are capped at $1,000 a year.

In their election platform, the Conservatives promised to further limit individual donations to a maximum of $1,000 and ban all donations from corporations, unions and organizations.

Parties and candidates are required to make public any contributions exceeding $200.

But then, inconvenient facts rarely get any consideration by leftists these days.

Hypocritical fearmongering by Eastern politicians

Especially the useless David Miller, who should be top of the list for a free trip to the scrapheap of history.

Toronto Mayor David Miller did his best prior to and throughout the long, eight-week election campaign to create panic amongst Torontonians toward Harper by saying revenue-sharing programs from the feds to the cities would evaporate like gasoline fumes should the Tories win.

Miller has repeatedly worried aloud the Conservatives would scrap the now-defeated Liberal government's program to share gas tax revenues with Canada's cities.


Anyone who follows policy in this country and who doesn't suffer from an advanced case of amnesia knows the idea of sharing federal gas tax revenues with municipalities was originally an Alliance party idea.

B.C. Conservative MP James Moore moved a motion to share the federal gas tax with provinces and municipalities for infrastructure way back on June 12, 2003. It was the Liberals who voted against it. Indeed, the Liberal party never latched on to that idea until it looked like the mighty Martin might actually lose in the June 2004 federal election.

Read more here.

Choose your Belinda

Hillarious stuff from Lorrie Goldstein in the Toronto Sun.

Imagine if the folks who may soon be running for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada apply the same ethical standards to attacking each other as Paul Martin did to attacking Stephen Harper during the election.

Ready? Here we go. Cue the ominous pounding of drums and an ugly picture of each candidate slowly coming into focus...

Remember Belinda Stronach?

Remember how she wanted to "bake a bigger economic pie?"

She actually said that.

But what's in that pie?

Blonde hair? Magna car parts? Peter MacKay's heart?

We just don't know. She just won't say.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

How the Liberals worked for self-defeat

Shiela Copps writes on the infighting in the Liberal party that may have cost them this election.

The untold story of this election campaign is how many Liberals were hoping their own party would go down to defeat.

But not for the reasons usually enumerated in the media. The fight between the Chretienites and Martinites was so divisive and bitter that it played out like the aftermath of an ugly divorce. Across the country, voters turned their backs on the Liberal party and it was no coincidence that some of the biggest losers were Liberals who had done it to themselves.

Meanwhile, Roy Clancy in the Calgary Sun examines how Paul Martin blew his credibility.
Paul Martin lost more than the election Monday.

He lost his dignity.

He lost the respect of the Canadian people.

And he lost the reputation he'd built over many years as a straight-shooting, no-nonsense politician who had many Canadians convinced he'd lead Canada to greater glory.

Rosie O'Donnell, get lost!

We don't need Hollywood moonbats up here!

Rosie O'Donnell says she and all her gay friends will be moving to Canada if Stephen Harper gets elected. "If you get another Bush up there, we're going to move to Canada," O'Donnell said. "We love Canada ... and if someone is raising gay marriage as an election issue, it's sad. But as [White House advisor] Karl Rove -- the most evil man in the universe -- said, the issue of gay marriage is the gift that keeps on giving. It's a way of activating a right-wing base."

Saskatchewan Conservative alleges election irregularities

I doubt the result will be overturned, but it is interesting to read yet more about the Liberal dirty tactics.

Harrison, who was first elected in 2004, said the Conservatives are suspicious about voter turnout levels that seemed to reach 100 per cent on some First Nations in the riding.

"We got reports of things like the Liberals driving around and threatening Natives that they wouldn't get their cheque if they didn't vote Liberal, reports we had from individuals of plans to stuff ballot boxes.

"Even the last poll, somehow it took three-and-a-half hours to count the last poll and lo and behold, it was nearly 100 per cent turnout, all of which went Liberal, just enough votes to go over the top. So we're really concerned. These are the kinds of things that happen in banana republics, not in our country," he said.

Harrison also said Elections Canada had not appointed the people put forward by his campaign as deputy returning officers.

As well, there were problems with voters not receiving their identification cards or being directed to vote in the wrong area, he said. And the campaign only received the voting list a day before the election, not the three days stipulated by law, he added.

Harrison added his campaign did not have scrutineers at all of the polling stations on the reserves because of the remote locations.

Third-place finisher Anita Jackson of the NDP said her office also received complaints about Liberal tactics, and she supports a recount and an investigation.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Reaction to the election

Rick Bell, Calgary Sun: Ontario blinks
Licia Corbella, Calgary Sun: Leader thrilled with Quebec support
Paul Jackson, Calgary Sun: Darkness Lifts

Kerry Diotte, Edmonton Sun: Laurie has the last laugh
Mindelle Jacobs, Edmonton Sun: Take a deep breath, you Chicken Littles!
Paul Stanway, Edmonton Sun: Night of the living dead

Larry Cornies, London Free Press: Harper rides blue Tory wave

Greg Weston, Ottawa Sun: Derailing the big red train

Mark Bonokoski, Toronto Sun: Highlights and lowlights
Lorrie Goldstein, Toronto Sun: Bittersweet victory
Linda Williamson, Toronto Sun: A win for democracy
Peter Worthington, Toronto Sun: Harper made history, Martin is history

Tom Brodbeck, Winnipeg Sun: Voters knew Grits were the scary ones

Toronto Star Editorial: Harper has a duty to govern for all
Arthur Cockfield, Toronto Star: Hopeful signs for Harper
Richard Gwyn, Toronto Star: Conservatives' changes no big deal

The Economist: Canada's new government

Mark Steyn, The Australian: A very Howardesque leader

Paul Jackson, The American Thinker: Narrow win for Canada's Conservatives

Monday, January 23, 2006

The optimistic viewpoint

Despite this being a weaker minority than hoped for, the opposition parties will probably be smart enough not to trigger yet another election for at least a year. During that time, the Conservatives will run a steady ship, acting to disprove the scary right-wing extremist label that the Liberals have been so successful in hanging on them (including it would seem, yet again in this election). In the next election, that tactic will be so much less effective.

In the meantime, the Liberals will have to reinvent themselves, ditching Martin and making themselves into a more balanced and centrist party again.

In the next election then, the main contenders will hopefully be both strong and moderate centrist parties, one slightly to the right, one to the left. This is good for Canadian democracy, and I'm confident that the moderate right can engage and win the healthy conflict of ideas that will ensue.

Election night

12:13 Paul Martin concedes, and will resign the leadership of the Liberals.

11:54 And the despicable Svend Robinson fails. Good!

11:49 Olivia Chow wins, knocking off Tony Ianno. Big pickup for the NDP.

11:27 There's no doubt that this is a weaker result than Tories were hoping for. I was looking forward to at least 130 seats. It is worrying that the Libs and NDP have a combined total at least 10 seats greater than the Tories. Despite what the polls were saying, the Tories just didn't break through enough into Ontario, which remains the Liberals last major fortress.

11:12 Whoah! Duffy just said that Paul Martin may not concede tonight!

11:02 Tony Valeri is also history. The Liberals have lost some big scalps tonight.

11:01 Pierre Pettigrew goes down.

10:53 CTV calls Bulte a goner!

10:49 It's looking like quite a weak minority. Tories at 123 currently, Libs at 103; NDP 29: Bloc 50. Unfortunately the Libs and NDP combined have more than the Tories.

10:42 Anne McLellan is down by about 10% in Edmonton Centre. Looks like she's history.

10:40 Olivia Chow is now losing again to Ianno; extremely close, about 30 votes

10:36 The Globe & Mail sucks. Their live tracking isn't updating.

10:34 Sam Bulte is losing in Parkdale - High Park

10:31 Martin and Stronach are called elected by CTV. Damn!

10:24 Toronto is staying Liberal. Ignatieff has been called elected by CTV

10:23 Anne McLellan is losing in Edmonton centre

10:20 CTV proclaiming Marc Garneau defeated.

10:05 Prince Edward Island seems to have stayed pure Liberal. Disappointing.

10:00 CTV has predicted a Tory minority...LOL...sticking their necks out?

9:57 - CTV showing currently Tories leading in ridings by 80 to 69. Early days.

9:50 - Tories appear to be leading in bellweather of Peterborough.

9:35 - The first double scotch of the evening bites the dust. Oh yes, and St John's may be about to make us smile.

9:28 - By the way, Captain Ed has an interesting blog.

9:25 - Getting mixed signals from Atlantic Canada. No results can be published until 10, of course.

9:00 - An hour to go until results are available. Things are looking good for the Conservatives, and hopefully this will be a post that details the commencement of a new era in Canadian politics. Updates will be at the top of the post.

Today, Stand Up For Canada


Sunday, January 22, 2006

The Decline And Fall Of The House Of Martin

By Douglas Fisher.

And hopefully they stay fallen.

All the stupidity that's unfit to print

tjic.com has examples of idiocy from the New York Times.

The odds against meeting someone else at a party with your birthday are not 365 to 1. In a room with just 23 people, the chances that two of them will share the same birthday are better than even.


And this howler:
On the other hand, it is deeply satisfying to know that a Canadian farmer named McDonald has the postal code EIEIO

As tjic says:
Remember the next time you read something in the NYT: this is a paper that can’t get EITHER the Birthday Paradox or Canadian zipcodes right, but they feel confident to pontificate on geopolitics, constitutional law, and technology.

Via Relapsed Catholic.

Linda McQuaig rants about "elites"

Oh the irony.

If Stephen Harper's Conservatives win tomorrow, their victory will no doubt be heralded as a seismic shift in Canadian politics „ as the dawn of a new conservative era.

Actually, it will probably have more to do with the shifting loyalties of Canada's elite.

Yes, it's all the fault of rich, older men. The perennial evil on Planet McQuaig have shifted their loyalties from the Liberals to the Conservatives for their own selfish interests. Meanwhile the poor "progressive" types (those who wish to progress backwards to discredited and failed socialism) will have to wail in the political wilderness, while comforting themselves that Canada hasn't really changed, it's just those evil men being selfish again.

The tinfoil hats at the Toronto Stalin are obviously being issued too tight.

The minority coalition question

I've read in several places the question as to whether the Liberals and NDP could form a coalition which has more seats combined than the Conservatives, and in this way request the Governor-General to appoint them as the Government, thereby keeping the Conservatives out.

Such a possibility is extremely unlikely, as this National Post column points out.

In Canada, there has been only one time when the party that didn't win the most seats was asked to form the government, and that was in 1925. Conservatives under Arthur Meighen had more votes than the Liberals, but the Liberals, who had the support of the Progressive Party, were asked to form the government. That coalition lasted a year. The Governor-General then asked the Conservatives to form the government, but it fell within days.

If the Liberals, as the incumbent governing party, think they can govern with the support of another party, they have the right to ask, but it's ultimately up to the Governor-General to decide who is most likely to govern and control the House.

Other questions asked in the article: could two opposition parties form a coalition to prevent official oposition status for the Bloc? What happens if the Tories win 154 seats?

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Paul Martin continues desperate lying and deception

And is nailed for it in this Globe & Mail article.

With only the weekend left in the campaign, Mr. Martin has tried to rev up crowds in London, Kitchener and Brampton by telling them that he is in the same position now as he was late in the game in the 2004 campaign.

"Today, we're right where we were when we were going into the final weekend of the election the last time," he said to a crowd of supporters packed into a small room in London, Ont.. "And we pulled that one out."

But on the last weekend in 2004, polls showed his Liberals just ahead of the Tories, while a new poll conducted by The Strategic Counsel and published today in The Globe and Mail found the Liberals 10 points behind Mr. Harper's Conservatives.

He also said the fact that Mr. Harper will not commit to living up to a November agreement on quality of life for aboriginals, and that Mr. Harper does not accept the science of climate change. However, Mr. Harper said in December that in fact he does accept the science of climate change.

Mr. Martin teed off on a question from a local Punjabi radio host, Amarjeet Sidhu, who joined a press conference after cheering the Liberal Leader in a rally in Brampton, Ont. He asked what Mr. Martin thinks of the fact that Mr. Harper has never traveled abroad.
"Stephen Harper hasn't left the country? I was just told that apparently he said he'd been to Mexico but he'd never left continental North America," he said, apparently forgetting [ed.: yeah right] that Mr. Harper had traveled with him on the prime ministerial jet to veterans' ceremonies in Italy, Holland, and Ireland. "Well, I find that unbelievable. It is such an opening that I don't know how to take advantage of it."

And on the Pathetically Desperate front:
Earlier, in London, Ont., Mr. Martin ridiculed his Conservative rival for cancelling his daily formal question-and-answer session with reporters covering his campaign.

He argued it shows Mr. Harper's claim to be accountable is insincere.

"Stephen Harper says he believes in open and accountable government. But now, he'll no longer make himself available to the press,"

Martin is pathetic. His hunger for power is so great that he cannot even lose with dignity. What an embarassment to Canada he is.

Paul Martin best conman: poll

Interested in a game of poker against theleaders of Canada's main political parties? According to a national survey bythe online poker website PokerRoom.com, you'd do well to be wary of PaulMartin: the majority of Canadians believe the prime minister would be the bestat bluffing his opponents, more than all the other federal leaders combined. The survey, conducted for PokerRoom.com through global market researchfirm Synovate's eNation Panel found that 54 per cent of voters believe that Paul Martin could con his way to victory in a game of poker. Conservative party leader Stephen Harper would be the next best bluffer at 22 per cent,followed by New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton at 13 per cent. BlocQuebecois party leader Gilles Duceppe has the worst poker face - only 11 percent thought he could bluff the best.

Cue jokes about craps.

Who you should vote Conservative

Michael Coren lists the many reasons in one column.

This is one of the most important elections in the history of Canada and the future of the country is in the balance. There are some things about Stephen Harper that do not impress and some things about his party that cause concern.

But whatever your reservations about the Tories and however much you have to hold your nose on Monday as you vote, chant that word to yourself.

Liberals. Liberals. Liberals.
A vote for the Conservatives on Monday wont just be standing up for Canada, it may well be saving Canada.

How the Globe & Mail tried to influence the electorate

The Globe & Mail endorsed the Conservatives in a tepid fashion. That hasn't stopped them from creating a fake Liberal surge in the pages of their newspaper. Obviously, a tighter race will mean more people tuning in to the MSM to keep up with the election, which will mean more revenue (and influence) for those MSM outlets. Sadly, non-partisan and objective professionalism should be considered a thing of the past when it comes to the MSM.

Terence Corcoran explains the Globe's little scam.

Friday, January 20, 2006

Liberal candidate tells WW2 Veteran to move to the US

At small dead animals.

At an all candidates meeting in Refrew, ON. ("up the valley" from Ottawa) last night, a WW2 vet (one Mr. Tomkins) stood up and asked the Liberal candidate, Don Lindsay, what plans the Liberals had to compensate handgun owners for seizing their private property. Instead of answering the question immediately, Lindsay started by spouting Martins favorite line: "The United States is our neighbour. This is Canada. And if you want to live that lifestyle, perhaps you better move there". The crowd instantly became very vocal and started shoting at Lindsay. Imagine the nerve, the GALL of this man to TELL A WW2 VET to MOVE TO THE US!
The Liberals have no decency. They have no integrity. Their only objective is power. The Liberal Party is the greatest threat to freedom Canada has faced since this courageous veteran fought in World War 2.

Rona Ambrose responds to Paul Martin

And she does so effectively, pointing out how he is using women as pawns to try and get votes through fear. Paul Martin obviously thinks that women are incapable of rational thought, weak-minded creatures who can be swayed with a bit hysterical fear mongering. Fortunately, there are women like Ms. Ambrose.

"I am truly troubled and disappointed in Paul Martin’s fear mongering on women’s rights – because women’s rights is a very important issue to me. Violence against women is one of the reasons I became involved in politics. Paul Martin is doing a disservice to women by using a campaign of fear and lies to scare women on issues like abortion.

“I’d like to introduce Paul Martin to some great young women who are involved in the political process, and some that aspire to be in politics one day. Their message is that they want to debate important women’s issues, but based on a campaign of facts, not a campaign of fear. I want Paul Martin to know that women are not here to be used as political pawns in this election. We – like all voters – want information and facts.

“So I am taking this opportunity to make it clear that Stephen Harper has said on many different occasions that there will be no legislation to regulate abortion under his watch. Attempts by Paul Martin to scare women on this issue are shameful.

“The Conservative Party is running a campaign of positive change. We’re offering women a choice in child care, access to skills training and post-secondary education, changes to the tax system so young women can succeed in the business world.

“So I ask Paul Martin – I know he is desperate for votes – but I ask him to stop his campaign of fear against women and to focus on facts. We all need to make politics a welcome place for women and to stop using women as political pawns. Canadians want a change in government – a change from the Liberal Party that has disrespected tax dollars and has lost the trust of Canadians."

Ignatieff slags riding president as "Liberal of convenience"

From the Ignatieff campaign:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Defection of opponent “overdue” and “no surprise” to Ignatieff campaign

Etobicoke Lakeshore, January 20, 2006 – The official defection of “Liberal of convenience” Ron Chyczij to the Stephen Harper camp in Etobicoke-Lakeshore is a welcome and long overdue event according to Ignatieff supporter and former MP Jean Augustine and Ignatieff campaign manager Sachin Aggarwal.

“Chyczij and his supporters, who engineered a coup in the Liberal riding association months ago, advised the Ignatieff campaign that they would be working for the Tories before Christmas and have been working for the Tories in the riding for weeks. They have finally had the courage to come out of the shadows. Better late than never” adds Aggarwal.

We have known for a long time that these people are not real Liberals” said Jamie Maloney, Past President of the Etobicoke Lakeshore Liberal Association. “Mr. Chyczij and his friends are staying true to form. He never supported Jean Augustine’s successful campaigns either. They’ve been the cheerleaders for the Tories at public events in the riding, and they are behind a series of “anonymous attacks” on Michael Ignatieff throughout the campaign. We are delighted that they have returned to the Tory ranks from whence they came.”

The Ignatieff campaign has enjoyed the support of hundreds of Liberal volunteers from across Etobicoke Lakeshore and Ignatieff is being welcomed on the doorsteps as someone who will continue the tradition of strong Liberal representation for the riding.

So if someone doesn't bow and scrape and let the Party walk all over them, they are not a real Liberal. I guess that belongs in the same class as the Liberal's idea that if someone doesn't agree with them, they can't be a real Canadian.

Liberal hypocrisy on abortion

Stephen Taylor has the quotes from the two-faced Liberals, including Paul Martin, fake Catholic.

Paul Martin on abortion:

"I am personally against abortion on demand, but I believe it is very clear that there must be legislation brought in that will deal with what is becoming simply a mish-mash of approaches" - Paul Martin (Halifax Daily News, July 20, 1989)

Further, according to the same edition of the Halifax Daily News:

"Martin said the prime minister must immediately recall parliament to introduce new abortion legislation"

and finally, Paul Martin on abortion laws and judicial activism:

"It's very clear that we are going to have 10 different [abortion] laws and that we are going to have these laws made by judges" (Halifax Chronicle-Herald, July 20, 1989)

Etobicoke Liberal riding president throws support to Tory

From The Toronto Star, a possible disaster for Ignatieff:

In a last-minute blow to high-profile Liberal candidate Michael Ignatieff, the president of the party’s riding association in Etobicoke-Lakeshore swung his support today to Conservative rival John Capobianco in Monday’s federal election.
The controversial process by which Ignatieff was acclaimed the candidate over local hopefuls ruled ineligible by the party was a major factor in the decision, said Ron Chyczij, who had hoped to contest the nomination himself.

“I can no longer in good conscience support the Liberal candidate in this riding,” he said in a statement released this afternoon.

“After the nomination fiasco, I’ve purposely waited on the sidelines to see if Michael Ignatieff can in some way redeem himself as a credible Liberal candidate in this riding . . . this has not happened.”

So exactly who has the hidden agenda?

The New Scientist says that Paul Martin employs the most spin.

According to a new computer algorithm, Prime Minister Paul Martin, of the Liberal Party, spins the subject matter of his speeches dramatically more than Conservative Party leader, Stephen Harper, and the New Democratic Party leader, Jack Layton.

Spin, in this case, is defined as “text or speech where the apparent meaning is not the true belief of the person saying or writing it”, says the algorithm’s developer, David Skillicorn at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada.

He and his team analysed the usage patterns of 88 deception-linked words within the text of recent campaign speeches from the political leaders. They then determined the frequency of these patterns in each speech, and averaged that number over all of that candidate’s speeches. Martin received a ranking of 124, while Harper and Layton scored 73 and 88, respectively.

Paul Martin is scary!

The Tyee BC seat projection

Conservatives 21
NDB 12
Liberal 3

Read the analysis.

Why do people vote Liberal?

John Derringer takes a look at the three (worthless) reasons some people are still voting Liberal.

A typical conversation with a voter who's on this program goes something like this: I ask, "Why is it you're so dead- set against Harper?" "Well, he's got a hidden agenda," comes the response. " What kind of agenda?" I press. "I don't know," states the Liberal, "it's hidden." There's only one way for the conversation to go from there, and it's down.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Liberals falsely accuse Conservative candidate of sexual abuse

Updates below:

So this is how low the Liberals are willing to go and how desperate they are.

The Liberal Campaign in the Saskatoon-Wanuskewin riding of Saskatchewan has reached a boiling point after the campaign office was caught calling in to a television show falsely accusing the Conservative candidate of sexual abuse. Tuesday night on Shaw Cable, a caller phoned in falsely accusing front-runner Conservative incumbent MP Maurice Vellacott of sexually assaulting his church secretary at North Park Church.

Vellacott has never been accused by any woman of sexual assault and was never a Pastor at North Park Church. Bishop Jerold Gliege former long-term Pastor of North Park Church and now of Holy Covenant Orthodox Church, confirms that Vellacott never served there. Gliege says, "Vellacott is an upstanding, honourable man who has served this Saskatoon-Wanuskewin constituency very diligently." Bishop Gliege suggests that Vellacott is being targeted with slander due to his pro-life and family views. "Because he is an articulate defender of life, marriage and family, he is the target of attacks by those who have differing views," he said.

Vellacott responded quickly to the televised accusation by looking directly into the camera, stating to the technicians that he needed to get the name and phone number of that caller for defamation proceedings.

After the cable show ended, Vellacott was handed the requested phone number by Shaw Cable producer Gracie Field. Upon arrival back at his campaign office he was told that a person had reported in and was confident that the accusers voice was that of a friend of Liberal candidate Chris Axworthy. When the (306) 956-2570 number provided by the Shaw Cable staff member was dialed, it was found to be Chris Axworthy's campaign office phone number.
There is nothing, nothing, that excuses this. The Liberals have no decency and no integrity left. They belong in the dustbin of history.

UPDATE: Officially Screwed is following this with more updates.

UPDATE 2: Response statement on Vellacott's website is here.

UPDATE 3: CP is now reporting this:
An already tense race in the riding of Saskatoon-Wanuskewin has taken a downright nasty turn.

Liberal candidate Chris Axworthy has apologized to Conservative incumbent Maurice Vellacott after someone used a phone in Axworthy's campaign office to falsely accuse Vellacott of sexual assault on a live televised candidates' forum earlier this week.

Axworthy concedes the call came from his office but believes someone not connected to his campaign sneaked in and made the call.
I know, it must have been Karl Rove!

UPDATE 4: National Post report here.

Sarmite Bulte fundraiser

Michael Geist deconstructs Bulte's justifications.


As Sam Bulte gears up for her fundraiser tonight (and Online Rights Canada holds its event at the Drake Hotel at the same time), several people have written to ask whether Sam Bulte really tried to argue that CRIA et al are not hosting a fundraiser for her as was reported in the Toronto Star. It turns out there is an MP3 version of that all-candidates event available for download. The copyright discussion runs from roughly 21:00 - 31:00 and includes a question on copyright policy (which is targeted at Peggy Nash and just happens to come from the co-author of a letter to the editor in today's Toronto Star, the other author of the letter being a Bulte fundraiser co-host) as well as one on the fundraiser.

Bulte's comments on the fundraiser are remarkable because she makes three claims in about 30 seconds that are all subject to challenge.
The Globe & Mail has a report on the controversial fundraiser, including an extraordinary threat of a lawsuit!

The back-and-forth between Ms. Bulte and Mr. Geist, the blogger, is getting increasingly personal and nasty. In an interview, Ms. Bulte accused Mr. Geist, members of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Ms. Nash of trying to discredit her.

"I will not be silenced by zealots like Michael Geist and political opportunists like Peggy Nash who are making something out of nothing," she said, adding that she believes Mr. Geist's comments are nearing the point of being defamatory.

"I am not going to sue him before the election but dammit, watch me after the election."
Previous posts about: Sarmite Bulte
Sarmite Bulte scandal makes Macleans
Sarmite Bulte confronted
Latest on Sarmite Bulte
Sarmite Bulte: response and counter-response
Back to Sarmite Bulte
Sam Bulte influence peddling follow up
Sam Bulte, Liberal MP and entertainment industry lackey

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

BBC talking point on Canadian elections

The BBC is running a "Have Your Say" on the Canadian elections. Of course, being the BBC, most of the comments are from the moonbat leftist end of the political spectrum. If you want to see a Liberal's wet dream, amble on over and read all the Scary Stephen Harper comments.

Buzz Hargrove says.......










Buzz says VOTE PALPATINE and stop the imperialistic Tories!

Buzz Hargrove says......




















Buzz says VOTE KLAN, and stop the racist Conservatives!

Arrogant bastards do let arrogant bastards run as Liberal candidates


MADD are the latest group to get pissed off at the Liberals arrogant behaviour:

Mothers Against Drunk Driving has accused a Nova Scotian Liberal candidate of trivializing their message, "Friends don't let friends drive drunk."

Gary Richard, the Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley candidate, is using the slogan "Friends don't let friends vote Conservative" in his campaign pamphlets.

The similarity of the two slogans has upset the president of the Cobequid Chapter of MADD.

"We're disappointed with it. We feel it trivializes a very serious message about driving impaired," Kathleen Foster-Alfred said.

But Richards said his slogan is a proper use of what has become an idiom.

"I believe the association of this campaign with their organization can do nothing, but honour them," Richards said.

Yes indeed, being associated with a bunch of corrupt and crooked sleazebags is a real honour for MADD, Mr Richard.

Sarmite Bulte scandal makes Macleans

Are you feeling toasty, Sam?

Sarmite Bulte, the Liberal MP running for re-election in Toronto's Parkdale-High Park riding, is the focus of what may be the most written-about controversy in this election, though many can be forgiven for not knowing anything about it. Most of the coverage Bulte has received has been in the online world of blogs, where in recent weeks she has become the focus of an audacious, blogger-driven investigation into campaign funds she received from several entertainment lobby groups.
Previous articles about: Sarmite Bulte
Sarmite Bulte confronted
Latest on Sarmite Bulte
Sarmite Bulte: response and counter-response
Back to Sarmite Bulte
Sam Bulte influence peddling follow up
Sam Bulte, Liberal MP and entertainment industry lackey

Buzz Hargrove tries thinking laterally

Vote for the Bloc to defeat the separatists, says Buzz.

Interesting thought, I mused, while sticking my head in the blender to get a haircut. It just might work....

Meanwhile, Andrew Coyne remains disturbingly sane.

Tories will list Tamil Tigers as terrorists

The Tamil Tigers, listed as terrorists by the US, UK and Australia (amongst others), and with good reason, would also be listed as a terrorist organisation by the Tories, according to Peter Mackay.

A Conservative government would add the Tamil Tigers to Canada's list of outlawed terrorist groups, deputy leader and public safety critic Peter MacKay said yesterday.

"The short answer is yes," he said when asked by the National Post if the Tamil Tigers would be listed if the government changed on Monday. "We would list them."

The Conservative party would also act swiftly to deport accused terrorists such as alleged former Tamil Tiger fundraiser Manickavasagam Suresh.

Mr. Suresh was arrested for deportation 10 years ago, but still lives near Toronto.

"In fact, we have in our platform that there's a need to move quickly on the reduction of the backlog that is there right now for unexecuted deportation orders, including Suresh," he said.

Mr. MacKay made the comments hours before the Canadian Tamil Congress was to host an all-candidates meeting in Scarborough, home to a large concentration of Tamil-Canadians, some of whom are sympathetic to the Tigers and call Mr. Suresh a political prisoner.

But Mr. MacKay said "we draw a very distinct line between the Tamil community, who are extremely peace-loving, productive members of society, and this very small terrorist group that has been listed, as I understand it, by many of our traditional allies, including the U.S. and the U.K.
Quite a difference from the attitude of Paul Martin and the Liberals who are quite happy to raise some funds for a terrorist group if they think there's a few votes in it.

How's that for a difference of values?

Toronto Star endorses Liberals (Shocka!)

Demonstrating once again that corruption is an accepted part of left wing ideology, The Toronto Pravda has editorialised its support for the Liberals.

But on a wide range of issues about which the Star cares deeply, the Liberal vision and program come out ahead. And Martin himself has gotten a lot right since the June 2004 election, even hobbled by a minority.

Those "issues" include continued gouging of the taxpayer, an ever more intrusive and "activist" central government, not letting parents make their own decisions about childcare, continued irrelevance in international affairs, a gutted military, and more carriages on the gravy train.
Regarding Quebec, the Star says:
The Liberals remain better placed in Quebec to speak for Canada.

Sure, the party responsible for the Adscam that has so enraged Quebec will be the better ones to speak for Canada in Quebec. What planet are these socialists on? Nothing will encourage seperatism more in Quebec than re-election of the Liberal Party.
The Liberals are still stirred by the idea that Canada must strive to be not only a richer society, but also a more just and compassionate one.

Ridiculous. The Liberals have demonstrated over and over again that the only thing they are stirred by is remaining in power, and that they are perfectly willing to steal taxpayers money in order to enrich their buddies who can help them do so.

The Star has taken leave of what little senses they had.

Liberals try to subvert the Privy Council Office

Unbelievable!

Paul Martin's Liberals have issued an "urgent" call to Privy Council Office staff for their support and donations in the run-up to the Jan. 23 vote.

Liberal party president Mike Eizenga mailed bright yellow teledispatches directly to the office addresses of employees of the PCO, which is supposed to remain non-partisan and non-political.

The memo lays out the Liberal election platform and asks for a minimum $100 donation.

"We need your support now to make sure we form the next government," says Eizenga's letter, which landed in many in-boxes of the Privy Council's Sparks Street office building on Jan. 9.

NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis slammed the Liberals for their donation tactics, pointing out that Justice John Gomery's Adscam report underlined the importance of the PCO remaining non-partisan and free of political meddling.

"The danger is that people in that office might feel some pressure to donate to keep their jobs," Wasylycia-Leis said.

You don't say.

McLellan says Martin hurt her chances

You have our sympathy Anne. Not.

The comments from Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan were a further indication of disarray in the ruling Liberal Party which is trailing badly in polls ahead of the Jan. 23 elections.

McLellan said she has spent too much time defending Martin to her constituents in the western Canadian city of Edmonton, Alberta.

"It's the national campaign and they've done something they don't like and we have to respond to that and it takes time," McLellan said. "I wish I could be out there talking more positively about what we have done."


By the way, consider the outrageous examples of bias in this "news report":
The Liberals have been in power for 13 years. But Canada's Conservative Party, which would be more in line with Bush administration policies, is gaining strength.
Harper is against gay marriage and the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouses gases, and once referred to Canada as a "northern European welfare state." He also said he would reassess Canada's decision to opt out of the U.S. ballistic missile program.
Canadians have largely praised Martin for standing up to the White House on such issues as missile defense, Iraq and lumber tariffs.

That could be a press release from the Liberal Party.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Why I hate polls

SES: Con 35.8%; Lib 29.6%

Strategic Counsel: Con 42%; Lib 24%

Globe & Mail monkeying with reports

See Andrew Coyne for the strange tale of the disappearing paragraph.

Option Canada: omerta

Omerta is the vow of silence amongst mafiosi.

Oh, and it seems to apply to Liberals as well.

The Canadian Council for Unity signed a confidentiality agreement in the 1990s with one of its former officials who it alleged had misappropriated $300,000 in federal funds without alerting the government or law-enforcement authorities, sources have told The Globe and Mail.

The Montreal-based federalist group made the surprise revelation to officials at Canadian Heritage two months ago, fearing that a book by investigative journalist Normand Lester would reveal the existence of the confidentiality agreement.
Previous posts about: Option Canada
Borque: Pettigrew involved in Option Canada scandal
Option Canada documents were left "next to dumpster"
Option Canada update
Significance of Option Canada scandal
Yet another Liberal scandal: Option Canada

Joe Volpe: $1,000 limo ride

Holy cow! Couldn't he find a staff member to give him a ride?

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Joe Volpe rented limos to ferry him on long trips from Toronto last year, with one ride to Buffalo and back costing more than $1,000, Sun Media has learned.

Leaked documents detail a 12 1/2-hour trip to the nearby U.S. city last March that included an $850 fare, $127.50 tip and $68.43 in GST for a total cost of $1,045.93.

Another 10 1/2-hour trip to an undisclosed location from Pearson airport cost $522.

Rest of story.

AFL pitch for NDP candidate in Alberta

The Alberta Federation of Labour is urging its members to support NDP candidate Linda Duncan in a bid to stop Alberta being a blue wash.

ATTENTION: UNION MEMBERS IN EDMONTON-STRATHCONA

Dear fellow union member:

Re: Punish the Liberals sure -
but let's not punish ourselves by voting Conservative

With only a few days left until the federal election on January 23 it has become clear that support for Paul Martin's Liberals has collapsed across the country. As a result, barring a major turn of events, our next Prime Minister will probably be Conservative leader Stephen Harper.

That's why I am writing to you today. Voters like you in Edmonton-Strathcona have an opportunity to buck the trend and send an MP to Ottawa who can go toe-to-toe with the new Conservative government. In particular, you have an opportunity to choose a representative who will stand up and be counted on issues that matter to all of us: like protecting Medicare, preserving programs that help working families and
defending our rights in the workplace. The candidate that I'm talking about is Linda Duncan from the NDP. You may be wondering: a New Democrat MP from Alberta? Is he crazy?


Well, I was considering a sentence containing the word "crazy", but it wasn't a question. It is a good indication of just how low the Liberals have fallen though.

For reference, the 2004 results are here. There will need to be a huge amount of strategic voting for this riding to go NDP. Yeah, yeah, now watch it happen.....

Harper compared to Howard

An article in the Globe & Mail compares Howard and Australia to Harper and Canada, noting the shared characteristics of their campaigns and outlooks.

UK pays attention to Canadian election

And also to the Libs infighting. From the Telegraph:

Liberal sources have begun briefing journalists about widespread internal dissent. One Liberal told the Toronto Star that Mr Martin, in office since December 2003, would pay the price for a failed campaign.

"He'll be out of here on election night," he told the paper.

Will the Bloc be the new opposition

They may be in striking distance, according to a poll by Ipsos Ried.

The Conservatives, with 38 per cent support, are poised to win 149 to 153 seats next Monday, just short of the 155 needed to form a majority, according to an Ipsos Reid survey of 8,256 voters that was conducted Jan. 13-15 for CanWest News Service and Global National.

"It will either be a narrow Tory majority or a strong Tory minority," said Ipsos Reid president Darrell Bricker.

The Liberals, trailing with support from 26 per cent of voters, could fall to between 64 and 68 seats from 133.

The Bloc, meanwhile, would have a potential for 57 to 61, up from 53.

The NDP, with 19 per cent support, would win about 29 to 33 ridings.

The results are virtually unchanged from a Jan. 6-8 survey, indicating that voters have already made up their minds, Bricker said.
We may end up in the curious position of having a seperatist party as "the loyal opposition".

On the other hand, it may be the Conservatives who prevent this happening, as their support in Quebec is skyrocketing (in relation to their previous levels, anyway):
The Decima Research online survey provided exclusively to The Canadian Press indicates the Tories have raced far ahead of the Liberals as the preferred option of federalists in the province.

The Bloc Quebecois remained the favourite among Quebecers with 45 per cent support but Conservative Leader Stephen Harper will no doubt be buoyed by the 28 per cent recorded by his party.

Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals, the traditional voice for Quebec federalists, stood at 14 per cent, five percentage points ahead of the NDP.

Bad news for the Liberals all round.

UPDATE: Not only that, but a Strategic Counsel poll is saying that Canadians are now becoming receptive to the idea of a Tory majority:
A new poll finds that more than half of Canadians think a Conservative majority government would be a good thing for the country and surprisingly one-in-four traditional Liberals supporters feel the same way.

The poll, which was conducted for CTV and The Globe and Mail by the Strategic Counsel on Jan. 14 and 15, found that 55 per cent of voters believe electing a Conservative majority government would be a healthy outcome for the country (in per cent; total good/ total bad / do-not-know, not applicable, refused to answer):

Quebec: 64-30-6
West: 59-28-13
Canada: 55-35-10
Rest of Canada: 51-37-12
Ontario: 45-45-10

Monday, January 16, 2006

Former Liberal voters....

..... do you want to be really progressive? [TM]

Forget the NDP, vote for The Sex Party.

According to their platform, the Sex Party would "favour a school sexual education program that encourages sexual activity", "pass legislation requiring all public parks and beaches larger than one hectare to designate areas reserved for nudists", repeal laws that prohibit "anal sex between individuals younger than 18 or in sexual activity involving more than two people", and get rid of prohibitions on "the possession of written material containing descriptions of sexual activity involving children".

Now that's progressive! [TM]

Note: Just in case there's any doubt, I don't actually want you to vote for these perverts. In fact, this look at where "progressive" values leads is yet another damn good reason to vote Conservative. Remember, sometimes slippery slopes do exist.

Martin Luther King: Conservative

And here's why.

It is time for conservatives to lay claim to the legacy of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. King was no stalwart conservative, yet his core beliefs, such as the power and necessity of faith-based association and self-government based on absolute truth and moral law, are profoundly conservative. Modern liberalism rejects these ideas, while conservatives place them at the center of their philosophy. Despite decades of its appropriation by liberals, King’s message was fundamentally conservative.

Globe & Mail editor on endorsement

Marcus Gee, editorial page editor of the Globe & Mail, answers a bunch of questions from pissed off leftists about why the Globe endorsed the Conservatives.

Most of the questions seem to be along the lines of "how could you be so biased as to endorse the Tories?" Presumably endorsing a left wing party displays a lack of bias to these questioners.

Australian "expert": bin Laden probably dead

According to a terrorism expert in Australia, bin Laden is probably dead.

Sydney, 16 Jan. (AKI) - An Australian terrorism expert says he has seen evidence, which could show al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is either seriously ill or dead. Professor Clive Williams, from Macquarie University told the Australian state radio ABC that he has been provided with evidence, by an Indian colleague, supporting the theory that bin Laden died of massive organ failure in April 2005.

Williams, a former Australian intelligence officer, said it may be impossible to ever prove if the al-Qaeda leader is alive or dead.

"It could be an embarrassment, particularly for an intelligence agency that said you know, we believe his dead, and then, you know a month later he pops up again," he told the ABC.

"But it does seem reasonably convincing based on the evidence that I've been provided with that he's certainly either severely incapacitated or dead at this stage."

Williams said Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's deputy, has been making all statements on behalf of Al-Qaeda for around a year. However he noted that even if Bin Laden was dead, it would not make that much difference as people would continue to fight for the things they believe he stood for.

Al-Zawahiri is believed to have been the target of a strike in Pakistan last week which has triggered massive anti-US protests throughout Pakistan.

Antonia Zerbisias is a bit worried

Worried:

Since my start as a TV columnist at the Star in January 1989, I have been constantly amazed by how thin-skinned most reporters are about any criticism -- and how defensive they are about owning up to errors. We can dish it out but we hate taking it. It is the main reason I believe why so many MSM types are disdainful of the blogosphere.

Which makes me wonder: Because so much of the Canadian political blogosphere is conservative or right-wing, what will it focus on if there's a Stephen Harper majority government?

The media, of course.

We journos ain't seen nothing yet.

Liberal infighting

From The Hill Times:

Liberals told The Hill Times that one of the main factors hurting their party in the current election is the infighting and the fact that future Liberal leadership candidates are not helping out in this election.

"There are these Chrétienites who are not taking any part in this election. And then leadership candidates are also watching all this in the hopes that we'll [Martinites] lose. If we lost the election, right after that, you'll hear from these [leadership candidates] calling on Martin to quit," said one Martin loyalist, who did not want to be identified, adding that a number of Chrétienites and supporters of leadership campaigns are sitting on their hands and not helping out the central campaign.

The source said that he doesn't blame those who are not helping out because Mr. Martin and his top advisers failed to reach out to other leadership candidates and especially to Mr. Chrétien after he took over as Prime Minister.

On the other hand, leadership candidates have their own interests in mind and think that the best outcome would be a Conservative minority because in that case, the Liberals would be able to get rid of Mr. Martin soon after the election and most likely win a 2007 election under a new leader.

Bob Richardson, a veteran Liberal Party player, confirmed in an interview with CHIN radio's Angelo Persichilli on Jan. 5, that many Liberals are intentionally sitting on the sidelines in this campaign.

Polls still good for Tories

Strategic Counsel: Con 40%; Lib 27%

The Tories, the poll suggests, are beginning to gain important ground in the Greater Toronto Area, traditionally a Liberal stronghold where the party now holds more than 30 seats.

Support for the Liberals there is now at 40 per cent, but the Conservatives are close at 37 per cent. The NDP is at 16 per cent.

The Conservatives are dominant in the rest of Ontario, where they outpoll the Liberals 42 per cent to 28 per cent. The NDP is at 20 per cent and the Green Party at 9 per cent.
.....
The Conservatives are also making gains on the Liberals in Montreal, inching up to within four percentage points of them. The Liberals are at 23 per cent, compared with 19 per cent for the Tories. And the upward trend continues for the Conservatives in the rest of Quebec where they are polling at 32 per cent compared with 41 per cent for the Bloc Québécois and 12 per cent for the Liberals. If these numbers hold, the Conservatives likely will win seats in Quebec.

EKOS: Con 38.6%; Lib 27.2%
In Ontario, home to 106 seats, the firm interviewed 514 people and found the Tories are at 41.7 per cent, the Liberals at 31.4 per cent, the NDP at 20.3 per cent and the Greens at 5.7 per cent. Those numbers are accurate to within 4.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

In Quebec, with 75 seats up for grabs, the separatist Bloc is at 46.6 per cent, the Tories at 21.6 per cent, the Liberals at 18.1 per cent, the NDP at 9.8 per cent, and the Greens at 3.3 per cent. EKOS polled 286 Quebecers and the data there is accurate to within 5.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Looking back on the Great War of 2007

Update below.

Professor Niall Ferguson: The origins of the Great War of 2007 - and how it could have been prevented.


So history repeated itself. As in the 1930s, an anti-Semitic demagogue broke his country's treaty obligations and armed for war. Having first tried appeasement, offering the Iranians economic incentives to desist, the West appealed to international agencies - the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations Security Council. Thanks to China's veto, however, the UN produced nothing but empty resolutions and ineffectual sanctions, like the exclusion of Iran from the 2006 World Cup finals.

Only one man might have stiffened President Bush's resolve in the crisis: not Tony Blair, he had wrecked his domestic credibility over Iraq and was in any case on the point of retirement - Ariel Sharon. Yet he had been struck down by a stroke as the Iranian crisis came to a head. With Israel leaderless, Ahmadinejad had a free hand.

As in the 1930s, too, the West fell back on wishful thinking. Perhaps, some said, Ahmadinejad was only sabre-rattling because his domestic position was so weak. Perhaps his political rivals in the Iranian clergy were on the point of getting rid of him. In that case, the last thing the West should do was to take a tough line; that would only bolster Ahmadinejad by inflaming Iranian popular feeling. So in Washington and in London people crossed their fingers, hoping for the deus ex machina of a home-grown regime change in Teheran.

This gave the Iranians all the time they needed to produce weapons-grade enriched uranium at Natanz. The dream of nuclear non-proliferation, already interrupted by Israel, Pakistan and India, was definitively shattered. Now Teheran had a nuclear missile pointed at Tel-Aviv. And the new Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu had a missile pointed right back at Teheran.


Update: There is an interesting dissenting view on this essay here.

Belinda Stronach: destroyer of the Liberals?

This is a very interesting post at Peaktalk about the media's attitude towards the Liberals.

In 2004, the media still believed in Paul, the man who would rescue us. I think the turning point came in May 2005, when Martin held onto power by bribing an opposition member (Stronach) into crossing the floor. I can't find the link, but there was a particular press scrum where all the journalists burst out laughing at the Liberals' explanations. And all of a sudden things began to change.

Maybe Conservatives shouldn't be too tough on Belinda after all!

Addendum:
"I have no regrets. It's not about what label I wear. It's not where I sit, it's where I stand. I've got to look in the mirror and ask: Did I follow my heart?"

This moment of cliche' overload is brought to you by the aformentioned Belinda Stronach. Enough already, Belinda. No, really.

Blogarama - The Blog Directory