Thursday, September 30, 2010
Has the PMO released the Flying Monkeys?
Sunday, September 26, 2010
How is the CBC Radio 1 program "Day Six" like the Campus Conservatives?
If I learned on thing as a kid, the really cool kids don't say they're cool, everyone knows it. So if they're trying this hard, it means only one thing, THEY ARENT COOL!
The U of A Communist Club is renaming itself the U of A Ski Club. At least this way someone will come to our meetings.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Silly me. I thought she was talking about Harper's cabinet
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Tolkien wasn't so bad after all
Isn't reflexively attacking critics a display of lacking confidence
Remember this weekend next time you hear "Left wing" main stream media
Thursday, September 16, 2010
An exploration of the Conservative - Postmedia - QMI relationship
In search of the perfect post
Knock. It. Off.
May gets Harper's suppress the vote strategy
The theory – shared by few – is that Stephen Harper will call an election this fall. People don’t understand what he is up to, Ms. May said. It doesn’t matter that he’s not even at 35 per cent in the polls and the Liberals are crowding him. The point we’re missing is that “he doesn’t think about elections the way the rest of the world thinks about elections.”For him, it isn’t “I am trying to become more popular.” Rather, his strategy, she says, rests on “voter abandonment.” He wants to drive the ever-diminishing participation in Canadian elections down further. Then it becomes a matter of which party can get its base to vote in the largest numbers. The Harper base, as she noted, is more committed.
In the 2008 election campaign, she maintained, Mr. Harper purposely drove down voter participation in several ways. He called a snap election, he had the minimum numbers of days for a campaign, he had election day right after the long Thanksgiving weekend, he had changes in the Elections Act that meant people couldn’t vote without additional ID, and his attack ads had increased cynicism toward politics. The result was that every party’s total vote number went down, except the Green Party’s. The Liberals’ dropped the most and Mr. Harper was able to increase his minority.
In the May view, the cynical plan this time is to drive down the numbers even more. Michael Ignatieff, Ms. May said, doesn’t know what is about to hit him. From his pre-political history, he has made more controversial statements than can be imagined. The Tories have them all stored and ready for attack-ad delivery. An example, she said, is some incredible statements the Liberal Leader made on torture when he appeared once on the Charlie Rose show. “The Conservatives must have a video archive of him saying things that Harper believes will make him unelectable.” The Prime Minister is saving them for the campaign because “he wants the shock value.”
She added: “I think we’re going to be into a November election. We’ll see it coming, when we start getting soft, warm friendly ads about how wonderful Stephen Harper is. They’ll probably feature him with the Queen and the G8 leaders. Then the attack ads will hit.”
Everybody thinks Mr. Harper’s right-wing manoeuvring, like his move on the census, has been disastrous, Ms. May said. “I bet he doesn’t think so. For his base, which is essentially the tea party of Canada, these are good messages.”
I am one of the few Mr. Martin refers to. I have been saying this since the last election. If you subscribe to conventional wisdom you will think that low turn outs make a mandate less legitimate. Since when has Harper cared about legitimacy?
Ignatieff's past comments are troublesome. The best way to cleanse this stain is for Iggy to go out and repudiate his past comments in a sincere and thorough fashion. Does he have the guts to do it?
Overall, I am glad Ms. May has highlighted this strategy and she is correct in her assertion that the way to defeat Harper is to get out the vote. Ideally Harper is defeated as a result of a massive turnout. But does it not raise a question? If he is success in his tactic, might May, Duceppe and Layton just as well wear buttons proclaiming that "I support Harper"?
Recommend this PostWith regards the notion that the Conservatives achieved their LGR goals
This is just Harper whining through one of his mouthpieces in a fit of pique. True, Stephen Harper is evil. But he isn't Dr. Evil.The blame (or credit) goes to a one-issue MP yahoo named Garry Breitkruez who unleashed rabid registry overkill last month.By suggesting RCMP were just itching to storm the homes of anyone whose gun license has expired and seize their weapons was the sort of distortion which made it increasingly difficult for New Democat MPs to join the Conservatives in a registry take-down. Which may have been his bizarre assignment all along.
...
Things didn’t any better when they sent studious attack dog Pierre Poilievre to the microphone wrapped in the Maple Leaf to denounce the Liberal’s anti-registry position as a conspiracy insulting all rural Canadians.
...
Deep in the bowels of Conservative party backrooms, gleeful laughter can be heard from a government celebrating a defeat.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Shorter Don Martin
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Harper gets no travel points for this trip
The timing and abruptness of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's campaign-style visit to central Vancouver Island is puzzling....The prime minister made no new funding announcements and offered few clues about the purpose of his visit, leaving us to speculate that he may be more concerned about recent public opinion polls than he and his party like to admit.
The impression made on the local media.
It's interesting to contrast the approach Harper had with local media and the public during his visit to the Island on Wednesday with that of Ignatieff when he visited Nanaimo.
Harper's carefully managed and scripted visit kept him away from the public.
Ignatieff met and listened to the concerns of the public at a Nanaimo cafe on Aug. 20.
Harper and two other Tory heavyweights -- Defence Minister Peter McKay and Treasury Board president Stockwell Day -- were on the Island Wednesday, flown out here at taxpayer expense. Presumably, taxpayers also paid for the large security contingent that kept Islanders from getting close to their prime minister.
Ignatieff's trip was paid for by the Liberal Party of Canada and he was accompanied in Nanaimo by Toronto-area MP Ken Dryden.
Both Harper and Ignatieff have a reputation for being aloof. If Wednesday's visit is any indication, Harper's is well-deserved.
Why come all this way at taxpayer expense and refuse to discuss issues with local media? The visit can hardly be called a goodwill or glad-handling exercise when local people were kept away from the PM.
The conclusion by the hinterland.
He ridiculed the suggestion this visit was part of any pre-election campaign and said it was just a coincidence he was following Ignatieff just two and a half weeks after the Liberal leader's visit to Nanaimo.
Harper was correct in one thing however: Canadians don't want a federal election right now, but he should realize they do want their federal representatives to make good use of taxpayers' money. Flying to the Island with his entourage and saying nothing about local issues can hardly be seen putting taxpayers' money to good use.
If Harper wants to increase his party's chances of forming the next government, he is going to have to do much better than Wednesday's waste of time.
The virtuous circle continuous to turn.
Recommend this PostTuesday, September 7, 2010
Alberta has a bad case of unrequited love
Either Robert Silver sincerely flatters me
Monday, September 6, 2010
A question about must carry channel provisions
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Canada's sovereignty and place in the world
Canada has been absent for the past decade. OK...and this means that it would be a coup should we be elected now? Well, if you look at our history of membership on the Council since 1966, if we were to be elected now it wouldn't really be a "coup." It would just be us taking our pretty regular turn, every decade. Here are our years of membership:
1967-68
1977-78
1989-90
1999-00
So if we are elected in 2010, that seems like right on schedule to me. Or, if you're John Ivison, aka standing "on the brink of a foreign policy coup." Gee, hopefully we beat out Portugal, who have been on the Security Council a whopping total of 4 years since 1966, to take our regular turn.
But Jay Paxton, a spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay, argued that a competition was already run — by the Americans.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Harper has competition for title of "Strategic Genius"
The virtuous circle
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
But. But. The Liberals did it. v. 19578238754.1.0.3
Blowing up F-35 deal would cause collateral damage, Tories say
The economic and diplomatic strings attached to Ottawa’s multi-billion dollar deal to buy the F-35 stealth fighters would make it extremely painful — if not impossible — for a future government to unravel or cut, senior Conservatives insisted Wednesday.
Gotta love the can't do attitude. That is the western spirit. Better not let a Sutter hear you say that.
But it isn't their fault.
“I don’t understand why the Opposition is playing political games with this,” Harper said at an aerospace announcement in Montreal.
“It was the Liberal government that in 2002 committed Canada to the development of this aircraft.”
Too bad they didn't the same respect for the Liberal Legacy with regards the Kelowna Accord, the surplus etc., etc., etc. But the jets will help us defend our sovereignty!. You mean sort of like this defence of the sole source nature of the contract?
But Jay Paxton, a spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay, argued that a competition was already run — by the Americans.
But this article is puzzling in other ways. The Stenographer attending the Harper propaganda conference wrote:
When Chrétien cancelled the $4.8-billion replacement for the air force’s geriatric Sea Kings in 1994, he ripped up one contract with European Helicopter Industries Ltd, an Anglo-Italian consortium. It cost taxpayers $500 million in cancellation fees.
Tearing up — or putting on hold — the F-35 Lightning II plan would be far more costly.
This Speaker of Pillow Talk to Power presented the following evidence of the costs involved:
It could endanger Canadian defence contractors, who’ve already won $375 (how is this directly lost to the government? - CV) million worth of work on the planes, anger allied nations already committed to buying the planes and waste hundreds of millions of dollars under existing agreements signed as far back as 1997.
...
In Ottawa’s case, that’s amounted to US $160 million, which allows Canadian companies access to bid on contacts associated with the project. Think of it as the federal government paying the cover charge to get into a club.
Between now and 2051, the federal government is committed to spending an additional US $551 million in order to remain part of the club.
So all the evidence that was actually presented is that the government would lose the tax revenue on $375 million. The $160 million in development fees allowed us to bid on the contracts, so we lose those how? The future commitments allow us to bid on contracts that would presumably net Canada more than that. In what way is this impacted by cancelling the deal? Evidence please. In any event, there have been no examples provided to support the statement that the penalties would be higher than the EH-101 cancellation. Sadly the Sun and National Post aren't the only organizations prone to regurgitating the garbage provided by the government.
Harper is turning into a One Trick Phony
The all powerful Liberal Party extends its reach
I feel like a fool for believing in the NDP’s devotion to women’s rights....
Why did this happen?
A smart NDP friend once explained that life is actually very nice for the caucus. Even though they aren’t in power as such, they have comfortable lives on the high moral ground. No radical or even interesting ideas emerge because it would disrupt the picnic. New ideas and brave stands are messy, like sand on the rug or spilled jam.
I abandoned the NDP after 12 members supported the Tories’ first go at the bill and I politely told a fundraiser over the phone never to contact me again for money or support. I like Joe Comartin, NDP justice critic, who’s working hard to change the NDP’s collective mind and would be happy to see him replace Layton.
No, the NDP will be staid, cowardly and in this case retrograde. The corpses of the Montreal Massacre are silent and the yapping gun-freedom brigade is so very loud.
Faced with the choice of whipping his caucus into line to save the long-gun registry or letting his MPs vote to kill it, NDP Leader Jack Layton has opted for the latter. It is a choice of expediency over principle
.The columnists at QMI and the NP have thus far been resistant to the commands of the OLO. They are next!
Recommend this Post