m5slib

Toronto Votes 2010: The Timidity of Hope

2010-10-24T14:42:00.004-04:00

Tomorrow is the vote day for Toronto's municipal election, so now's probably a good time to chime in.

There are a couple standout elements from this election campaign that I find a bit disheartening. First, the three most recognizable names who entered the campaing are the ones left standing - that's of course not counting Giambrone who didn't really get started. Sure, there are a million fringe candidates left (40 actually), but there are three legitimate candidates, and two of them have a possibility of becoming Toronto's next mayor. Joe Pantalone's fate is sealed as a formidable also-ran.

I find the fact that these three are left disheartening because it says that voters didn't really look beyond the most popular names. Once again, Toronto will have a mayor who previously served in elected office. So much for the outsider notion. Even John Tory, who never officially entered the race, was polling high enough to win just based on name recognition only. I hope this doesn't say what I think it does about Toronto voters. This links to the second thing that makes me shake my head, and I've heard it way too much throughout the campaign: there are no good candidates. Really, Toronto? Were there no good candidates or did you just not pay enough attention?

Usually I'm pretty tough on the press for focusing on the backroom stuff and not on policy, but this time they did a reasonable job of finding the right mix. The big items in this election were transit and finances. From my perspective, the people with the least specific plans are the ones with the chance to be mayor, showing that Torontonians aren't being that discriminating about their choices. Sarah Thompson and Rocco Rossi campaigned pretty hard on policy, but they were unable to make any connection with voters. It seems that instead of listening to the ideas from these candidates (some ideas were better than others), voters turned the other cheek and complained that there's nothing good to listen to. Sure, there's the retort that it's the objective of campaigns to make voters listen. In Rossi's case maybe that's what did him in. His failure to grab attention despite being positively reviewed by the left and right wing media oulets caused him to announce some radical ideas that did very little to solidify him as a legitimate contender.

What we're left with is Smitherman vs Ford. Sure there's Joey Pants, but let's be serious, this is a two horse race. If you're thinking of voting Pantalone, I would first urge you to measure that against your ability to live with Ford as mayor. If that's not much worse than Smitherman as mayor, then by all means, vote freely. Otherwise, vote strategically because there are only two people who can win. Yes, I get it, you should vote for the person you want, not against the person whom you don't want, but if voting with your heart causes you a headache, then being strategic could save you an advil or two.

Or it may not even matter. I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but I think Ford's passionate supporters will show up in higher numbers than those who've been reluctantly relegated to the Smitherman camp. I haven't looked at any demographic polling data, but since Ford's cornerned the conservative market who tend to be older and more diligent about their civic duties, I expect his voter turnout to be the deciding factor. Well if he does win, let's pray that he'll surprise everyone and not be a complete disaster.

I'm hoping, but not too audaciously.

Merger?

2010-06-08T22:16:00.002-04:00

To the point:

I don't have anything against the NDP even though I don't like their leader. Still, I'm a bit reluctant about a merger. Electoral cooperation? Sure. A merger? I dunno.

I'm reluctant for a few reasons: first, Canada would become a two party state. Yes, there would still be the Bloc, but they're not really in the business of governing Canada. If the Bloc performs well, but the campaigns are fully decided in ROC due to only having two choices, does this isolate PQ? Maybe not in reality, but in perception. What are those ramifications? Conversely, what if we can't get a solid decision from ROC and the Bloc has the balance of power? Do we really want a party who doesn't believe in this country controlling the agenda? The last bit sounds a bit like late 2008 Harper anti-coalition scare tactics, but it should be considered (especially since there would be one less player).

Additionally, the Liberals have rebounded from doing poorly before: Turner to Chretien. I know those were different circumstances when the right became fractured, but is this the only way forward? Something to think about.

The most compelling anti-coalition reason from my perspective is the least self serving as a Liberal. I like having the dippers around. Yes, their current incarnation would likely not gain power anytime soon, but I think we need those smaller voices that are willing to put ideas out there that the "blue chip" parties can't. Turning into a two party state virtually eliminates this, and ideas from left field that might end up being beneficial might be silenced. Even though the NDP has never governed, they've punched above their electoral weight, and Canada's benefitted from this. Put them under a party umbrella, and compromise might eliminate some of their shine.

I get that Harper's unsavoury. I know he'll do everything he can to destroy other parties, but is the electorate passive enough to let him? What about the press? Even though I don't respect, I can't fathom them sitting around like a Harper cabinet minister -- completely bound and gagged.

I like the idea of electoral cooperation, but a merger? Use whatever Liberal stereotypes you want against me, for me but Liberal is Canada. I love a strong and independent Canada.

Oh Snap! (pwned)

2010-03-28T15:11:00.002-04:00

If the Liberal Party were Precious, and Robert Fowler were Monique, then the Liberal party just got a vintage television thrown at their heads via this little ditty (not about two American kids growing up in the heartland).

Granted, he was equally or even moreso harsh on the Conservatives, but he said some things Liberals need to think about. Read the speech while I get a plate of pig's feet.

CTV's Bob Fife...

2010-03-27T07:59:00.003-04:00

According to Bob, the Liberals are losing their way because they've been focusing on things Canadians don't care about; things like the Afghan detainee issue, a First Nations University in Saskatchewan, and Israel.

Isn't that just emblematic of what's wrong with the Canadian media? His vision is that you should only focus on the "big headline" issues, but I'm pretty sure that the point of having 300 plus members from across the country is that a wide range of issues can be brought to the agenda. The question is, then, should the Liberals focus on uncovered issues before they're mainstream and elevate them to headline grabbing status, or wait until they're headline grabbing and desperately latch on to them. This is a bit of a dilemma because in Bob's Question Period 101 class, you don't focus on non headline issues, but if you don't find these other issues, there won't be any to bring to the forefront. I guess MP's should play more politics than they do now, and Jane Taber can get more fodder for her gossip column.

Seriously though, some of these issues might not be Lisa Raitt sexy, but they're worth discussing. Additionally, bringing up issues that aren't in the headlines might reveal some that deserve more spotlight. You know, investigating and uncovering issues. I guess some media bodies don't really value that.

I'm talking about this from a Liberal perspective because that's just me, but the standpoint from which a lot of media members operate isn't beneficial to any political party long term. I never really thought about this, but this could be one of the reasons why Harper hasn't had a majority. He's operating within a media sphere where he has to manoeuvre within such narrow confines that it's pretty hard to expose himself and his party. Would exposing himself and his party give him his majority? Well there are two sides to every coin.

I'll never understand the Canadian Media

2010-03-26T15:20:00.005-04:00

This week the Liberal party is having a grand policy conference. This should, seemingly, be welcomed by political commentators given that one of the major knocks against Iggy and his crew is that they haven't really presented many alternatives to the governing party. I guess things like national childcare and abortion strategies in developping nations don't count, but I digress.

Now that the Libs are having this policy conference to, you know, strengthen ideas so they can present themselves as a credible alternative, it's being met with dismissal by the ink armed terror squad. The reasoning - it has too many experts and not enough grass roots involvement. So if I understand correctly, they're knocking the Liberals for consulting policy experts rather than asking Joe six pack (not the plumber) for sensible policy ideas?

Call me foolish - it's been done many times before - but I'd much rather have people who've dissected ideas inside out involved in the policy discussion. Sure, there can be good ideas from the grass roots level, but I for one don't have enough time to juggle my career and personal life, plus determine Canada's environmentally sustainable future.

It feels typical knocking the media, but my inclination is that a media body that doesn't remain earnest in its purpose does a huge disservice to its political process. Nevertheless, I find myself in a position for which at least one commentator criticizes Ignatieff: it's a poignant question how to fix the media going forward, but the solution might be out of my grasp

Liberals and Michael plus thirteen

2009-11-21T19:07:00.003-05:00

Well it's been quite a while since I've written. I've pretty much taken my ball and run home since the last election. It's mostly been work etc that's taken my time.

Nevertheless, Stephane Dion's wife supposedly went on a bit of a tirade today. Everyone has the right to their opinion. She has some good points because I've always contended that Dion was done in by his own party. The most unencouraging thing about the whole affair though is that the party is airing its dirty laundry. There's bickering for the Tories to see, for the NDP to see, for the Bloc to see, for the Media to see, and most importantly for the people to see.

It's funny being in a party -- you have to make compromises as an individual and as sects within the party because they party will never fully represent all of your views. I'm not a Liberal party insider with the accompanying knowledge, and the difficulty of being in opposition usually brings about similar discontent. This then begs the question, how much are the members of the Liberal party really willing to compromise? They weren't really willing to do so with Dion, and now there are obvious dissensions with Ignatieff as leader. Where Ignatieff has surpassed Dion is that he replaced his inner circle to try and correct the course. Time isn't always that much available in politics, but are the party powers willing to compromise enough to allow the party to correct itself because increasingly it's becoming self evident that the party needs time to strengthen itself. After all, there were 13 years of Liberal rule. This was mostly because of a helluva PM, but the other guys were also in a similar position to the one the Liberals are in now. Do the liberals really need 13 years for the message to sink in?

Waydowntown

2009-08-08T19:58:00.001-04:00

Waydowntown - Bet | Movies & TV | SPIKE.com

More CBC

2009-03-23T08:11:00.000-04:00

Worth reading.

Flag Folly

2009-03-20T07:43:00.002-04:00

This whole mess over the Gov't of Ontario ordering flags from China is a bit ridiculous. People are criticizing the government for ordering cheaper flags that save taxpayer money from a different country. Boo hoo. I bet these same people also complain when their taxes go up, and when the government goes into deficits. Keep it consistent people! As a taxpayer, I have no issues with the government seeking ways to save money. Furthermore, it's bit silly for Canadians whose economy is so dependent on international trade to call foul when one of their governments does an international transaction. The bottom line is that if the local companies were competitive enough, they would get the contracts. If they want these contracts, make themselves more attractive. Not only will they likely get a contract from the local government, but they might also get some of the business these similar Chinese companies are getting. What's next, a buy Canadian clause?

The Apocalypse?

2009-03-17T09:00:00.001-04:00

I actually agree with a lot of what Jonathan Kay is saying.

Back and more mediocre than ever!

2008-12-30T13:56:00.001-05:00

Since the election, I’ve been on a bit of a blogging hiatus. My spirit was kind of broken by a good man’s misfortune, and life was just a bit busier overall. Nevertheless, I have been keeping touch with the goings on north of the 417.

What has been on my mind lately is the senate appointments. Not because I think Harper’s appointments are questionable (which they are), but just because it brought the debate on triple E senate back into the spotlight. Well, triple E is probably the best prescription in theory, given that we live in a democratic society. However, I think people need to calm down a little about the whole thing. First of all, to actually make an amendment with any real staying power it would have to be done via the Constitution. I don’t know any pundit or political scientist who thinks it’s a good idea to open up a Constitutional debate – at least not given the recent context. This is especially true because we don’t really have any super strong national party to champion this or any issue across the whole country. This would make the whole thing messy and destructive.

Then if the senate were equal, it probably wouldn’t be agreed to by the smaller provinces. And I think rightfully so for them. The senate isn’t proportional. Just like the US where it gives states an equal voice, the senate in Canada gives regions an equal voice. For sure that can be tweaked, but I’m not sure if there’s an agreement that can be forged to everyone’s pleasing.

The other factor is political will, and I don’t mean from ideological politicos. I mean from the voters. I don’t think people care about the senate enough to think about triple E senate before they go to bed frankly. Yes, that’s not usually a good excuse, but this isn’t a matter of equity or human rights. It’s a matter of political systems, and people can carry on just fine with the current one. Right Stephen? If they really object, then there’s also the case that making a change now wouldn’t really be the will of the entire people. We’ve seen declining voter turnouts, surveys showing that Canadians don’t even understand our political system, and more than likely many people can’t even name their MP. People can barely muster the time to vote on one election, what add another round into the mix? Given the political IQ of the country, and the fact that this is a precarious debate in a time when there are far more important things to worry about, I think leaving the senate the way it is might be ok for the immediate and medium term. Besides, the current incarnation got Mike Duffy off TV didn’t it?

oh yea.. bonne annee

Mike Duffy Live.. until 75

2008-12-22T20:39:00.004-05:00

But he doesn't really have to show up that often. Get it - it's a Senate joke. Excuse me while I adjust my glasses.

Anyway.

This is from an article written after Dion did less than famously in the last election.

http://www.thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2008/10/28/Dion/

"And the press, with the Aspers' National Post and Mike Duffy's Countdown on CTV leading the pack, gave Harper and the Conservatives nearly unlimited access to their audiences to disseminate the Conservative message, as The Tyee reported in March 2007."

Fast forward to 22/12/2008 and we have this: Duffy, Wallin, Greene among 18 new Senators

And to all you con-trolls who are going to come and say the Libs appointed 2 journalists as GG. True - but GG's have very little above a ceremonial role as evidenced by this month's goings on (she had no legitimacy to do otherwise). This means they can keep their supposed neutrality throughout and after their journalistic careers. In Duffy's case, someone who likely applied for such a post or at least did some serious unofficial lobbying can't have been that neutral to begin with if he's so quick to jump on the CPC bandwagon just two months after the election.

But I guess only the losers complain.

Define or be defined.

2008-12-21T13:44:00.001-05:00

It's on like Donkey Kong bitches!

A Man out of Time. I like.

Memo to the Liberals

2008-11-29T08:31:00.002-05:00

Don't blink!

Harper has bought time because he thinks all of the self interest manifest in the Liberal party will cause this coalition to self destruct. Well to all and their egos, put your self interest aside for a moment.

Leave Dion as leader, install a credible finance minister.. clearly the Libs have a lot more to choose from than the CPC. Continue with the leadership race on the side. Negotiate a set term with the other opposition parties that gives enough time post leadership, and let that new leader will fight the election.

This man called Harper is trying to destroy your party and hurt the country in the process. Let's look at the bigger picture.

The fundamentals..

2008-11-28T10:39:00.002-05:00

I believe it was our dear PM who in the last election said the fundamentals of our economy are strong. Correction: they were strong before you mismanaged the elements you control, and now you're destroying peace order and good government.

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper put away his friendly sweater vest and, in an epic mistake that might only be resolved if his Conservative government does an uncharacteristic retreat, pulled on his brass knuckles in an ugly bid to inflict knockout blows on his political rivals."

But where's the win for Harper in this beyond appeasing a loyal Conservative base that may be unimpressed by his oncoming mega deficit?

While the merits of political funding might be worth a debate during calm prosperous times, it has no place on an agenda that should now be devoted to important decisions.

That impressive review is from Stevie H.'s hometown paper.

So much for national interest:

Harper and his Conservative government bared their partisan teeth with a measure that is designed to undermine the opposition parties, particularly the Liberals.

Harper and the Conservatives, it appears, would rather play politics than tackle the tough assignment of saving jobs and whole industries.

That's from Harper's former hometown paper.

And let's not forget how we got here:

Parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page told MPs Thursday that Canada's deficit next year could be as high as $13 billion and that Conservative government decisions to cut the GST and raise government spending are to blame, not global economic events.

And that's from the Ottawa paper - you know, that place that Stevie H is putting in a big mess.

Nestor - the unsung hero

2008-11-17T17:36:00.004-05:00

If you bring up the name Mike Weir, most Canadians will have an idea who that is. Surely, you mention any above average hockey player and most Canadian sports fans would be embarassed if they didn't know the subject.

How about an Olympic Champion, career grand slam winning, multiple time ranked number one doubles tennis player? Who? No, I'm not talking about Anna Kournikova - she's missing quite a few of the attributes. She never won a tournament, she's never been number one, and she's certainly not an Olympic champion. And oh yea, she's not Canadian.

Daniel Nestor, on the other hand, is. He just finished the tennis season as a part of the number one tennis team in the world, and this time with a different partner. He's one of the handful of guys to win the career grandslam in doubles during the open era, and most impressively he's part of the select few who's done that with not just one partner. To boot, his Olympic gold is with a third partner (what a slut!).

All this and he's not a household name. His grandslam triumphs and his top notch performances are rarely more than an after thought on the SportsCentre bottom line. Fools we are.

Here Canada, be proud.

2008-11-17T17:36:00.000-05:00

Warren is right.

2008-11-05T17:36:00.001-05:00

Take a look.

Flaherty and Harper F'd up the balance sheet.

2008-10-31T15:19:00.003-04:00

Here.

"The federal Conservative government abandoned prudent budgeting just when it was needed"

"Not only did the government, against the advice of private sector economists, eliminate the annual multi-billion dollar cushion against the impact of an unexpected economic slump in the last budget, but it has let spending get out of control as well"

"The government should be able to avoid posting a deficit this fiscal year by drawing heavily on the multi-billion dollar windfall from its broadcast spectrum auction, but appears to be headed for multi-year deficits"

"Unfortunately, the Conservatives abandoned the principles of prudent budgeting just when they appear they will be needed"

Deja Vu

2008-10-29T08:25:00.002-04:00

Remember after 9/11 how the airline companies used that as an excuse to rescue their failed business practices? Well now it's the financial sector's turn:

'Disaster' unless Ottawa offers pension relief
Companies launch behind-the-scenes lobbying effort for temporary reprieve from pension funding obligations
Article Comments (67) JANET MCFARLAND AND TARA PERKINS

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

October 29, 2008 at 12:00 AM EDT

Canadian companies are lobbying the federal government for relief from their pension funding obligations as market turmoil drives down the value of their pension-fund assets.

Pension industry consultants and corporate executives have confirmed that a behind-the-scenes effort is under way to persuade the federal Finance Department to offer a temporary reprieve for a diverse array of companies and not-for-profit organizations. Among the voices lobbying the government is Nav Canada, which operates Canada's air-navigation system.

Some companies say they are facing possible financial devastation if they are required to immediately make enormous contributions to their pension plans to fund shortfalls.

“There are companies that would absolutely fold if they had to make contributions based on the provisions of the legislation as they stand now,” said pension consultant Jeff Kissack of Watson Wyatt in Toronto.

BCE Inc.

Related Articles
Recent

New rule on funds relieves pinched insurers
Auto-parts industry seeks $1-billion in loans
One company executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said his firm cannot afford to fund the huge gulf in its pension plan, which was already a problem even before stock markets tumbled this fall. Since the beginning of 2008, Canada's benchmark S&P/TSX composite index has fallen about 37 per cent and Tuesday's surge will do little to offer much relief.

The executive said it cannot be the government's policy intent to act in defence of employee pension plans if it means fatally weakening companies that would otherwise have no other financial problems.

“If you actually force some of those companies out of business, it would be a disaster for the poor pensioners who only get 70 cents on the dollar or 80 cents or whatever it was at that point,” the executive said.

“It's not asking for a tax break or a bailout or a handout. … You're really saying let us use the money earned within the company and being spent to do the best things for people's jobs and for the company in the long run.”

The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, which oversees about 1,400 federally regulated pension plans, confirmed this week it has met with companies concerned about the impact of the current market turmoil on their defined benefit pension plans.

Judy Cameron, managing director of OSFI's private pension plans division, said OSFI is “monitoring the industry very closely” and is talking to some plans about their funding issues. But she said it is not within OSFI's powers to change funding regulations for plans whose investment holdings have dropped in value.

Such decisions would come from the federal Finance Department, which has not yet offered any commitments of support.

However, a Finance official said Tuesday the department has had a history of providing help to pension funds in difficult circumstances, offering temporary relief in 2006, for example, to help plans cope with funding shortfalls built up earlier in the decade. That relief has since expired.

“The government is closely monitoring developments related to pension funding,” the official confirmed.

One solution proposed by companies would be a temporary extension of the time limit for funding pension shortfalls, increasing it to 10 or 15 years. Companies currently have five years to make up shortfalls.

Another proposal being weighed by Ottawa would give companies a reprieve from doing a pension solvency valuation at year-end, which would help them avoid recording and “locking in” their lower asset valuations for required funding purposes.

Pension funds normally have to do a valuation of their obligations and assets every three years, then plan sponsors have five years to fund shortfalls. However, once federally regulated funds are in a shortfall position, OSFI requires valuations to be done annually.

Ms. Cameron said about half the pension plans OSFI oversees were in a shortfall position prior to this year, so are doing valuations annually. That means a majority of Canada's federally regulated pension funds will be required to do a valuation report at Dec. 31 this year, giving companies no leeway to wait to see whether asset values recover over the next year or two.

Another pension industry expert said the funding situation is especially exaggerated because pension funds are required to measure their obligations and assets on a “solvency” basis, which assumes a company is going to shut its doors immediately and must fund its pension now.

He said the calculation is artificial for most companies that are in good health, but they must nonetheless make large contributions to allow for this worst-case scenario.

“Before the market turmoil, this was a big issue, but now it's much worse,” he said.

Ron Singer, a spokesman for Nav Canada, said yesterday his company is one of the voices urging Ottawa for pension relief, especially regarding the unpopular solvency level funding.

“We are very concerned about the kind of regulations as they apply to solvency – as are most federally regulated companies that have defined benefit plans,” he said.

Insightful and on the Mark

2008-10-28T07:50:00.001-04:00

http://www.thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2008/10/28/Dion/

The Real Blitz that Buried Dion
Et tu, media? Grit Leader done in by the media? You read it first in The Tyee.
By Donald Gutstein
Published: October 28, 2008

print email share
digg del.ico.us facebook stumbleupon reddit

TheTyee.ca
When Stéphane Dion announced his decision to step down as Liberal leader on Oct. 21, he blamed his dismal showing on a Conservative ad blitz that kicked in as soon as he won the party leadership in late 2006. The advertising onslaught questioned his qualifications for the job, helping "define him with the public and he never recovered," the Globe and Mail reported the next day.

Dion done in by Tory ads became the story of the week in the commercial press, as papers across the country jumped on the bandwagon.

At the Vancouver Sun, Miro Cernetig wrote: "[the Conservatives] spent millions of dollars on ad buys to attack Dion... As a result... Dion was instantly framed in the voters' minds." And L. Ian MacDonald wrote in the Montreal Gazette "there's no doubt that the Conservatives effectively defined Dion as 'not a leader' from the first series of pre-writ television ads at the beginning of 2007."

Some in the media questioned whether the ads alone could make Canadian voters turn their backs on the Liberal leader. "The commercials would not have worked if they didn't seem true to the electorate," offered a National Post analysis. Someone needs to explain to Dion "that attack ads only work if they are grounded, however tenuously, in the truth," a Winnipeg Free Press editorial chimed in.

But nowhere in the discourse was there recognition of a factor even more defining in bringing down Dion -- the reporting and commentary in the news media themselves. Most Canadians have never met Dion. Their knowledge and impressions of him are mediated by the press. And the press, with the Aspers' National Post and Mike Duffy's Countdown on CTV leading the pack, gave Harper and the Conservatives nearly unlimited access to their audiences to disseminate the Conservative message, as The Tyee reported in March 2007.

Media reflected ads they sold

If the commercials seemed true to the electorate, it was because the media were repeating the same message in their news stories and commentaries.

ADVERTISEMENT

It was the combination of paid (ads) and free (news stories and commentary) messaging that did Dion in. But the role of the media in that endeavour has been pretty well expunged from history.

No sooner was Dion crowned leader than the Conservatives pulled out all the stops to implant a Dion-as-flip-flopper frame in voters' minds, attempting to define Dion for the voters before Dion did it himself.

For this work, they turned to Frank Luntz, then a prominent Republican spin doctor, a master at framing the political debate through his use of language. He's credited with the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 via his bogus Contract with America.

Luntz visited Canada in May 2006 to meet privately with Harper and to address the shadowy Civitas Society, whose members include Harper's then chief-of-staff Ian Brodie, his long-time political mentor Tom Flanagan, and Environment Minister John Baird. Montreal Gazette reporter Elizabeth Thompson heard Luntz tell the 200 libertarians and neoconservatives that voters want someone who is credible and they can trust more than someone who shares their ideas. "More than anything else, they want to know you are a straight shooter," he added.

Pulling from the Bush's 'flip-flop' playbook

Luntz assisted George W. Bush eke out his narrow victory over John Kerry in 2004 with similar messaging. Google "John Kerry" and "flip flop" and you'll still get 250,000 hits four years later. In 2004, you would even have found a brand of footwear called the John Kerry flip-flops, which were perfect to wear to the beach. That's where you'd find Kerry -- or on the ski slopes -- while his rival was busy in Washington looking after the nation's business.

Bush, the straight-shooter; Kerry the effete flip-flopper.

After Bush featured Kerry's flip-flopping as a central theme in his 2004 convention acceptance speech, Luntz asked swing voters in Ohio to give him one word to describe Kerry. The top answer was "flip-flop." The message got through, and Luntz must have been satisfied. Bush won Ohio and Ohio gave Bush the presidency. Of course, we must remember that the state Republican administration ensured that 357,000 Ohio voters, the overwhelming majority of them Democrats, were prevented from voting or did not have their ballots counted.

Harper can't rely on such shenanigans to get him elected in Canada, so the Dion-as-flip-flopper frame had to do some heavy lifting for the Tories. And thanks to an obliging media, it worked here, too.

Harper kicked off the flip-flop campaign in the House of Commons during the debate over the extension of sunset provisions in the Anti-terrorism Act regarding preventive arrests and investigative hearings. The Liberals had enacted the law in 2001 and Liberals were voting against an extension. This was a flip-flop of colossal proportions, they charged. The accusations of Liberal flip-floppery were relentless, occurring 33 times over the next three weeks. Most were about the Anti-terrorism Act, but accusations of flip-flopping spread to Liberal policies on Kyoto and sending troops to Afghanistan. Harper himself used the term five times.

By the time Parliament recessed, the campaign had taken full flight in the media and on the Internet. Dion the flip-flopper was placed prominently on the Conservative Party's home page. Under a banner showing Harper "getting things done for all of us," was mounted the bodiless head of Dion on a blood-red background, interlaced with the words flip flop flip… The title read "Dion's terror flip flop exposes weak leadership."

CTV steps up the message

One vehicle for disseminating the flip-flop message was the nightly Mike Duffy Countdown segment on CTV, where the Conservative frame was provided a friendly welcome. Anti-Dion ads played during the commercial breaks were reinforced by Duffy's guests.

Government Whip Jay Hill led off by slamming "the flip-flop on Afghanistan, or the flip-flop now of the anti-terrorism act ..." Next, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day skewered Dion's flip-flop on the anti-terrorism law and its implications for the Air India investigation. Jay Hill was back several days later, as the vote on the anti-terrorism law extension neared. Harper appeared the same evening, repeating the phrase "abruptly flip-flopped" he used twice in Parliament. Apparently abrupt flip-flopping is worse than gradual flip-flopping.

Conservative strategist Roxanna Benoit couldn't understand why Dion needed to flip-flop, parliamentary secretary Pierre Poilievre hoped Dion would flip-flop once again on the environment and backbencher Garry Breitkreuz accused Dion of being like a fish out of water, going flip, flop, flip, flop, repeating the phrase for the benefit of slow learners in the audience.

Harper has changed his mind more than a few times. Think of his about-faces on Kyoto and taxing investment trusts. But few in the media called him on it. And while Dion's flip-flops demonstrated weakness, Harper's were a sign of strength, at least according to National Post columnist Don Martin. After slagging Dion for most of his column, Martin then writes, "to be fair, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been known to change his mind. Just ask income trust investors." Harper the straight-shooter changes his mind. Dion never changes his mind, just flip-flops.

National Post played role of Fox

Aping the role of Fox News as the main cheerleader for the Bush administration, the Asper family's right-wing bully pulpit, the National Post, led and broadened the campaign against Dion. One editorial attacked Bill C-257, which would outlaw replacement workers in strikes against employers in federally regulated industries. Liberal support for this bill, the Post hectored, "would mark another colossal flip flop of the kind the former governing party has become famous for since Stéphane Dion took over as leader last December."

A week later, in a piece headlined "Liberals go from Dithers to Flipper," Post columnist Don Martin weighed in with the assessment that Dion had a "lousy week." Why? "Not once or twice, but three times in four days we saw Mr. Dion flip-flop on positions he'd taken during the leadership race or his party had supported last fall." The column was apparently considered vital reading for all Canadians, since it was reprinted in the Montreal Gazette, Vancouver Sun and Ottawa Citizen.

And a few days after that, another Post editorial reminded readers of the "already long list of Liberal flip-flops, which includes … Afghanistan, the Anti-Terrorism Act, Bill C-257... the rehabilitation of Adscam bagmen... and a carbon tax on fossil fuel consumption." Whew! A week later, a Post editorial mused that Dion's "new policy stance on law-and-order issues" incorporated a flip flop.

In case you didn't get it...

Fast forward a year and the Post was still at it. Dion's flip flop on a carbon tax "could not come at a better time for the Conservatives," a May 2008 editorial surmised. That sentiment was mirrored two weeks later by a Don Martin column decrying "Dion's flip flop on the carbon tax."

In case Canadians still didn't get it, the Aspers' Calgary paper helpfully provided two more editorials, the second published after the election was called, with the headlines "Dion's carbon tax flip flop," and "Dion's deficit flip flop."

So it was more than a bit hypocritical when the Post's Kelly McParland wrote in the paper's blog after Dion announced he would step down, that Dion lost, not because of the ads, but because "the ads confirmed what Canadians already thought:" that Dion's "judgement and leadership skills were suspect."

Hmmm. Wonder how that happened.

Dion

2008-10-16T17:58:00.000-04:00

There are so many things that could be said about self serving goons, the media, and the need for deep deep introspection, but the strongest thing I can say is I support Dion.

Good Analysis

2008-10-09T08:51:00.002-04:00

From Andrew Steele's Globe and Mail Blog:

Last election, Stephen Harper wanted to be Tim Horton's to Paul Martin's Starbucks.

This time, he's is in danger of becoming Krispy Kreme: a brand that misread the marketplace and was unable to change with the times.

Let me just add, like Krispy Kreme, Harper is full of very little substance and bad for your (the country's) health.

Gratuitous endorsements for le Dion

2008-10-07T15:43:00.002-04:00

just cuz i felt like posting...

230 Leading Economists back Carbon Tax
note: don't forget Dion's offsetting Income Tax cuts

Top Scientists say vote for the environment

And if you want to vote strategically, go here first.

Obama Dion isn't... but it's not a bad thing.

2008-10-07T09:47:00.001-04:00

These two couldn’t be more different. Well they could, but nonetheless these two are pretty different. Obama is the new Kennedy of the American political scene, and in many cases Dion has caused his friends and foes alike to cry for a second coming of Trudeau – Pierre, not Justin. Still, I think it would serve each of their countries to elect both as leaders above and below the 49th parallel.

Obama is the saviour America has been desperately waiting for. Not because he has any earth shattering ideas, but because he has the story, the message, and the persona to reassure Americans domestically as well as to restore their reputation internationally. For Dion, his poindexterish demeanour is deficient in bravado but has the right ideas for a well managed country to remain on the straight, narrow, and prosperous.

In terms of their gifts, Obama is best in front of a teleprompter. Some of his critics might even propose that he’s very little sans teleprompter. For Dion, the opposite is true. As most of his speeches are done in his second language, it is seldom that you find him not tripping over his complicated proposals – not because they lack sense, but because his solid command of English might not be sufficient to explain his complex ideas in his naturally frantic cadence. Still, engage him in a debate or a discussion and that’s where he shines: he comes through as one with a solid grasp of not only the issues, but also their solutions. In this forum he speaks convincingly with passion and clarity. Contrast that with Obama who relies on his oratorical gifts to mask his vague pronunciations on policy specifics.

Their speaking gifts can be best explained by what Warren Kinsella describes as visuals. In a field that’s filled with rhetoric and talking points, he says, “it’s 70 per cent how you look, 20 per cent how you say it, and 10 per cent what you say.” Obama passes with flying colours in the first ninety percent, but on the ten percent that really matters – you know -- in terms of governing, Dion takes the crown. The challenge for Dion is that Canadians don’t watch with their eyes closed.

In terms of their accomplishments, their political careers too offer differing paths. Obama emerged as a star in what was likely a carefully plotted 2004 DNC convention speech that signalled a presidential run was not a matter of if, but when. As for Dion, he was recruited by former PM Chretien to fight for the unity of this country during the 1995 referendum. He’s not a natural political creature, but he was called upon to serve his country, and for that we were rewarded with clarity – the act. After his stint as Intergovernmental Affairs minister, Paul Martin put him as Environment Minister in a time when Al Gore wasn’t so Oscar worthy. Dion performed more than ably as President of the Montreal Climate Change conference, but a scandal plagued government put and end to any designs Dion had of advancing his environmental cause.

In Obama’s case, he is a Senator who prefers to tout his record a community organizer, suggesting his record in the Illinois legislature or on Capitol Hill might not impress the folks over at Guinness.

On paper it would seem that Dion is the clear choice as the better leader, but that is not the exercise. First, they’re not each others’ opponent or even in the same country. Also, their countries require different remedies to that challenges they are facing. The US is stuck in such a convoluted system of governmental irresponsibility that there is no panacea in the near future, regardless of the leader. For Dion, his country, due in large part to his former government, is in much better shape. What it needs is a leader who can mitigate shocks and prepare them for future prosperity.

Just for the record though, if they were running against each other, a reference to high school has to be made because that’s quite often what politics seems like. In high school, I would have much preferred to have the geeky kid with glasses help me with my homework rather than the popular guy or even the bully for that matter.

Economic Fundamentals

2008-10-06T09:58:00.004-04:00

What a Monday morning: it's full of good news all around. Scotiabank is predicting a recession for our economy and so is UBS. This, of course, should come as a surprise to none considering what's happend to the US and Europe.

But all of last week, we heard Harper say everything's ok. I hate to quote Jack Layton, but I'm afraid he was bang on when he said to Harper, "Either you don’t care or you’re incompetent, which is it?"

Of course the economy in Canada is better regulated than the US so we won't implode like they will, but I beg to differ Mr. Harper -- everything is not ok.

The saddening part of all this is Harper's approach. Of course government can't fix the economy, but government and business are always and will forever be linked. The role of government in these situations is to alleviate shocks that will be felt mostly by middle income taxpayers. To do that there are things like EI and other employment programs from the worker level, but there also needs to be some kind of assistance on the corporate level. Harper doesn't show this kind of understanding, and this is why he's shown to be unfit to help the economy. Regardless of what whichever stripe of government does, we're in a downturn, but choosing Conservative is seems will make average Canadians a little more blue (unzing?).

Anyway, enough with the partisan jabbing.. you can find some interesting reading and podcasts vis a vis the current economic climate here sent to me by an unnamed source (see i'm pretending to be Jane Taber with all these unnamed sources...)

Mme. Couillard

2008-10-05T22:47:00.002-04:00

For some reason, I just keep watching.

Julie Couillard had two interviews in "prime time" tonight: one in french on "Tout le Monde en Parle" and the other in english on CBC Sunday Night. Of course, she's more relevant on the former show as it's Quebec's top rated (likely Canada for that matter) current affairs talk show and the Couillard affair has more legs there.

I don't really think she's going to be that big of an issue in this campaign except that she's one more nail in the coffin of the CPC's 2008 Quebec electoral grave. She reinforced the fact that Quebecers should be wary of the conservative government. She might have even done that in english Canada too, but I think her effect would've been to scare of a few (and I mean few) undecideds.

She had an ok time in the french interview however -- mostly because of the format which is more like a conversation rather than an interview and because it was more light hearted. There was even one segment where she teared up a little. It didn't seem like crocodile tears to me though, but what do I know.

Of course, there's the whole she can't be trusted issue. Really, I don't think it's an issue. That's because there's nothing that she's saying that's not plausible. I don't know if she's honest or not, but the conclusions that she makes aren't at all far fetched. Furthermore, if you're a CPC supporter who didn't believe her to begin with, there's nothing that could've changed that. The only people she might matter to are the aforementioned undecided voters who might be thinking of voting CPC but aren't sure if they should trust them. Well this will give them one more reason not to: it doesn't have to be true, but it will add to the doubts that were already there.

In the end though, like I said before, she won't be a significant factor. Nevertheless, I can't stop watching.

I don't want to laugh..

2008-10-03T11:41:00.002-04:00

but...

Even though Harper's been beaten up a lot over the last couple of days, this just validates it:

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/features/decisioncanada/story.html?id=c1400f98-c9b4-49d0-a952-2ed3498cae10

I Know Kim Campbell said election campaings are no time for issues, but are they also no time for platforms? If you haven't released your platform by now, there's something fishy. Eleven days to go, and their party still hasn't proposed to voters why they should elect them. I guess they might be delaying their platform release in order that they can actually maintain their lead.

(note partisan jab coming)

Are the Tories scared that their platform will in fact scare off their support?

English Debate.. game changer, it's over!

2008-10-02T23:14:00.003-04:00

Well not really!

I thought Paikin did a great job as the moderator first of all.

About the rest... well I think the French debate was more enjoyable to be honest. In terms of the leaders, well Harper did better here than in the French debate but he certainly can't call victory -- partly due to the format, but still because he seemed uncomfortable at times, and he didn't put enough forward.

In terms of Dion, I think he is a slow starter in these things. He seemed a little bit nervous at the start, but he became really comfortable and gave the performance (less the language barrier) that Mr. Harper would have liked to give: he became more and more poised, he didn't engage in too many attacks, and he stayed on his message. His one negative point I think is when he got kind of mad and called Harper a liar and then said ok I know the game you're playing. Some people might call that passion, but it might not have come across perfectly. He did recover in the rest of the answer though.

Layton did very well. He attacked, attacked, attacked but that's typical Layton. Compared to Dion and Harper though, he didn't really make his case for Prime Minister, but he did make some good points.

May.. well this was her shining moment I think. She attacked, but she also gave clear detailed answers. She might have even helped Dion in explaining the whole Green Shift concept. Seriously though, when she spoke Harper looked scared. If she were the leader of a major party, that party would likely have the clear momentum toward victory.

In the end, I sincerely think every party can claim victory for this. May owned the english, Duceppe was great in the french debate, Layton was able in both, Harper rebounded from an atrocious french debate, and Dion followed up a superb french debate with a B+ english debate. The last thing I can say about Dion though is that most people expected a D or an F performance from him over these two nights, and he likely ended up with a conglomerate A- (probably the best combined score).

Notes from the day after (and the day of the english debate)

2008-10-02T08:50:00.005-04:00

Last night I called Duceppe the winner and I'm sticking to that. I said Dion was the clear second place, but apparently francophone voters across the country disagree and give him a little more credit than I do.

Ipsos gives him a 16 point winning advantage over his closes rival, and the La Presse post debate survey gives him very strong competing numbers behind Duceppe.

This begs the question, which debate were Jeffrey Simpson and Don Martin watching.

At least there is a little bit more sensible coverage here. Still, the debate coverage by some of the big media guys shows that their analysis and reaction seems like it was written even before the debate took place. Maybe I'll throw them a bone: I don't know if either are bilingual, and if they're not, that can be their excuse because I don't think Dion's passion and conviction came across as well through a translator.

Still, I stick by my initial reaction that Duceppe was the best with Dion a clear second. I think Dion's performance seemed that much more impressive because of the really low expectation for such and able mind, but as he says, he loves being underestimated.

Oh how I love updates

After how Harper was crushed last night and Flaherty's embarassing 52-29 loss to Brison on that CBC debate thing earlier in the week, no wonder the Tories are avoiding debates.

Le Debat

2008-10-01T22:55:00.003-04:00

Well who's the clear winner? Likely Duceppe, but there was no one who stamped their supremacy on the debate; however, I do think Harper clearly lost.

He tried to go for the stay above the fray/I'm not going to engage in this madness kind of approach, but it didn't work for 2 reasons. First, the moderator actually did a superb job of controlling the debate and keeping order, so it wasn't quite the madness that we are used to. Second reason -- well Harper didn't say much of significance. He was actually a bit too disengaged and he seemed out matched intellectually. Now I'm not suggesting harper isn't smart because that's not true, but in terms of policy and actually presenting clear, well thought out positions he was way outmatched.

In terms of Dion, he ended up doing really well. For the first 5 minutes or so I wasn't sure about this, but he settled in and was very good at explaining his policies and staying on message. He didn't attack or get angry too much, and he seemed sincere. He also constantly hammered out the point that he was the only one aside from Harper who could be PM and that was a good thing from his POV to remind people of.

In terms of Layton, well let me give a disclaimer - I can't stand the guy. He did pretty well, but I don't think he is going to change many minds. His positions are the same as he had explained as is the same for all the leaders, but I don't think he let go enough of that car salesman persona enough. Overall though, I think he performed better than average, but not as well as Dion or Duceppe.

Well Duceppe - he's the king of debates. I didn't watch the french debates last election, but I watched the english one and I was very impressed. I think he scored points on the issues he needed to in terms of he nationalist agenda and bringing up things such as Harper's position on youth crime, culture etc. Duceppe was the top performer for sure.

May - she was a bit of a hit and miss. She got the attention she wanted, but I'm not sure if it was all good. Her french wasn't very good, so I'm not sure how that will play out, and she was very aggressive. She did have a big effect however. She did a lot to keep Harper quiet because she attacked him most frequently, and he dared not return those attacks because it would play into the image that he's desperately trying to get rid of (via the blue sweater). She also helped Dion in that she could attack Harper and he didn't have to do it. That allowed him to focus on giving his own position. I think May might have turned a lot of people into supporters, but she might have abandoned just as many.

Overall, I really liked the roundtable format. There wasn't too much yelling that couldn't be understood and the moderator was in control. Oh one more thing about May that none of the media outlets have mentioned. In the segment when they were giving the qualities they liked about other leaders.. if I remember correctly, she spoke after Harper who said the customary thing about Layton that there are some issues that they worked hard on together or something like that, and then May said well I can certainly think of one issue they really worked hard on together (or something like that), and of course she meant trying to keep her out of the debate. She'll be interesting in her natural language. I just hope too many Canadians aren't preoccupied with Palin to notice.

Instant update

Similar to the first comment.. reaction on Lapresse.ca has Dion Winning
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/elections-2008/200810/01/01-25532-debat-des-chefs-lanalyse-de-marc-cassivi.php ..he was underestimated, but he played his cards well and came out as Harper's true rival.

Oh Poillevre.. you Douchebag

2008-09-21T19:34:00.002-04:00

I'm currently watching Goldhawk Live on CPAC: Poillevre is one of the panelists, and he was asked to name a famous environmentalist who supports the Tories' green plan, after stalling a couple times he then blurted out, "John Baird, our current environment minister."

That's jokes.. sometimes I think this guy speaks to entertain himself.

It was really funny though.

The Fourth Estate

2008-09-15T20:55:00.002-04:00

I have refrained from commenting on the election so far because I believe people have the right to make up their minds based on their own opinions. Obviously political parties will try to sway those opinions, but that's what a campaign is all about.

However, what I've been extremely disappointed about is the press. Obviously, I'm a geek who writes a political blog, so I'm pretty in tune with the political goings on of this Country: that's policy wise, strategically, and in terms of trends.

The average Canadian voter isn't. It's what's called the principle - agent problem. They don't have the time with all their work, family, fitness and general living life to be consumed with politics. They rely on our press corps to help them come to a decision on their democratic exercise vis à vis the information said corps provides.

Unfortunately, the press hasn't lived up to its role. Don't get me wrong, we all know that the campaigning and power struggle is what makes campaigns exciting, but it seems like the press has taken Kim Campbell's position that campaigns are not time for policy discussion. Copying Kim Campbell in any fashion is, dare I say, a faux pas. Instead of analyzing the policies each of the parties has put forth so far and helping citizens decipher the pros and cons of these policies, the press has been consumed with how Harper's blue sweater makes him look or how good at sreet hockey Dion is.

That's not your job, press; you're not supposed to be there to regurgitate the bull the campaigns feed us. You're there to analyze the information and help Canadians formulate educated voting choices. Given the declining voter turnout, this is especially important. Heck, the press not doing its job is probably likely to blame.

I saw on National Newswatch today that CTV's Robert Fife is being accused by a radio host of acting like of Fox news produced conservative talking head, and I wouldn't disagree. I just saw on Mike Duffy Live one of Pierre Trudeau's campaign managers talking about how Dion is not with it because he's not going negative enough -- yes, going negative works, but is this the kind of thing the press should be promoting? What I didn't hear was any substantial policy discussion talking about what's important for our country and what the parties plan to do. Further with Mike Duffy's show: all I see are old white men who were once really powerful being upset that they're no longer in decision making roles. Who knows, maybe they're right, but that's for the parties to decide, not the press. I shouldn't single out Mike Duffy's show, even though it's one of the worse offenders. Don Newman also engages in similar misguided discussions.

The press doesn't need to perpetuate the old boys' club feel of politics. They need to explain to Canadians what the issues are that they should be deciding and what each party has to offer. While I understand the interest in the chess game element of poltiics, the coverage needs to be more than just that. Most voters complain about being turned off because of the cynicism in politics, and if there's any entity to blame for this, it's the press. The parties will always play politics, but the press needs to do its job and inform the nation.

Le Grand Leader

2008-09-14T10:37:00.003-04:00

This is the new Lib ad in French - attacking uncle Steve's leadership. In urban vernacular.. this is what the Libs need to do: step up their ad game. Their ads that I've seen are all good, but the problem is that I haven't seen them that much on TV, whereas the CPC has their ads all over. On vera ce que le leader va faire.

More good multimedia From Dion

2008-09-09T12:26:00.002-04:00

http://www.thisisdion.ca

http://www.scandalpedia.ca/Home_en.html

The latter is both funny and pretty sad from a Tory standpoint.. shows their vast history of scandals in the last 2 years, as well as stupid "poop" they've said over the years.

This is an election ad...

2008-09-08T00:36:00.011-04:00

That's a nice ad: it's not cheasy, doesn't look too amateur like most political ads do. It's not a robotic conservabot trying to look human. It's succinct, pleasant, and well flowing.

Dysfunctional?

2008-09-02T20:52:00.003-04:00

The only thing dysfunctional is Stephen Harper's version of the truth. Where does he get off saying parliament is dysfunctional when every single one of his confidence motions have passed and he's been able to put through his agenda.

Maybe it's dysfunctional because he no longer has an agenda to put through. I don't think it's a maybe.

Germany in 72 years.

2008-07-24T14:55:00.001-04:00

1936: Jesse Owens wins four gold medals in front of an angry Adolf Hitler.

2008: Barack Obama gets the rock star treatment in front of a jam packed berlin crowd.

Black in America: the Remix!

2008-07-23T22:56:00.002-04:00

Of course the title is ironic. That's the point. Remix, which likely brings connotation of rap music, is one of those quick associations with black. That's what I'm here to talk about.

I decided to write this because I was so inspired; it came from within. Just kidding, I watched "So You Think You Can Dance" earlier and I'm channeling the wrong show. What I'm watching now, and not particularly taken by, is CNN's "Black in America."

Now I'm not here to bash CNN for the cream puff of Journalism that it actually is (does that count as bashing?). I don't really know what my evaluation of their program is, and I really also don't know what their whole point is. Are they trying to act as social catalyts or just going for the coveted Emmy? I don't have the answer. What I do have are some observations.

Black.

It's five letters, but very powerful. It doesn't have as much anger as nigger, but yet it's a bit more organic than African American. What does African American even mean? What about European American?

Those five letters, however, are at the centre of a great nation's struggle. That in itself is a problem. While "black" is this great nation's problem, it is also the predicament of a great continent, and that is often not recognized enough by the aforementioned great nation, and many others around the world. Nevertheless, I will continue hypocritically and focus on the struggle of "black" in said great nation.

What I noticed watching this little "special" is that "black" is so poorly handled in this great nation. The report was at times patronizing, and not only to black people I might add. Instead of providing superior journalism, they engaged in Carrie Bradshaw topics such as being a succesful woman trying to get married. Oh wait, this was "Black in America," so it was Joan Clayton topics. Silly me. Anyway, I think there could be more substantial topics. Other topics ranged from Aids, Violence, and Interracial families.

Now I'm a bit reluctant to put forward this criticism because I might be labeled a complacent black man, but how is a black person supposed to watch that and feel good about themselves with those uplifting topics? Of course there are problems, and I wouldn't want to diminish them, but it's also linked to what I think might be the most significant thing about being "Black in America."

Identity.

Now any competent anthropologist or maybe even scientist will tell you skin colour is just one trait that doesn't do very much else in determining the rest of your characteristics, so it's a bit silly the way people are grouped through skin colour. It is what it is though. In terms of being black, the biggest bond I think comes through history. A history of struggle, a history of subjugation, and a history of feeling inferior. It would be irresponsible of me not to point out that if one explores pre-colonial times this history would be much more varied. However, in an American context - expanded here to include north, south and central - black history is one that's quite battle scarred. Every black person is aware of that and likely cannot shed it.

The black identity isn't all bad though. There's strength; there's pride; there's solidarity; there's culture; there's athleticism. The good comes with the bad, but unfortunately what I think must be realized is that these are definitions that come from outside. They come from families instituting black identities. They come from soceities seeing you as black. They come from socialising agents such as school and churches, but quite often it doesn't come from one's own invention. Granted, very little comes from one's own invention because we're all socialised, but I guess the point is how.

From a young age, a black individual is aware of their blackness for all the good and bad, and likewise for many other ethnicities. What's the difference with blacks? Is it their position as "second class" in the world's dominant cultural and economic power? Perhaps it's their ever-present devastation from colonialism. I don't completely have that answer. What I do know is that any individual only lives up to the potential that you give them.

My issue then with "Black in America," and quite a large number of these discussions about blackness performed by those from all parts of every spectrum is that they make the label of black more pervasive for all its good and its bad. Arguably, compared to other ethnicities, the difference between the percieved good and bad attributes of black is less divergent than that of other ethnicities. Hence, the predicament of blacks in that great nation.

What's the solution? Well I don't have one. I'm not nearly that presumptuous about my intellect, but from my experience I would conclude that blacks don't have to be black. Now don't get all Johnny Cochrane on me because I'm not suggesting anyone go all "Uncle Tom." My perspective is that for anyone, beyond race or any other identifiable traits, power and potential lies in creating your own image of yourself. Don't give in to the image of how to act, how to speak, how to dress, and importantly how and what to achieve. Don't accept what people think you should amount to, just view yourself based on your own merits. So, I'm Oprah now?

Now of course I'm not naive. There will always be ghettos, and there will always be blacks in ghettos, so there's no panacea forthcoming. Nevertheless, regardless of the rhetoric in this endless discussion, black parents need to promote the notion of black kids not limiting themselves to the perception of black. It's not easy, and it's not simple. It might, however, produce some slow changes. Perhaps, just perhaps, that's why many black people so wholeheartedly support one Mr. Obama. Afterall, he's half white, so he couldn't be limited as just black. Could he?

Khadr, Khadr, Khadr

2008-07-15T17:59:00.002-04:00

Undoubtedly, this is pretty much all that's playing on any news station today, but the "blogosphere" has been pretty quiet about it.

While this whole affair has been going on for a few years, it is worth revisiting with the release of the tapes.

Observations:

On the detention itself, I don't think it's justifiable. I understand the US security interests, but there are also human rights. If you tell anyone you're going to lock a kid up without trial or conviction for more than 5 years in a relatively remote foreign location, you wouldn't make many friends. Furthmore, you just can't trump human rights. There are constitutions in countries like Canada and the US for a reason: they're time tested and they provide stability. The reason they're so hard to change is that we can't alter the guiding principles of our societies on every knee jerk reaction. In the same vein, you can't just pretty much suspend the application of your constitution on a knee jerk reaction. That's why Khadr deserves due process. If he's guilty, let the process show it. You can't justify locking someone up in the name of security in my opinion. I think the bottom line of this whole situation can be summed up in the Ben Franklin quotation, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

In terms of the actual release of the tape, what does that mean? Well, it's not exactly going to make the Americans happy, and this might influence how the act in securiy matters with Canada in the future. For Khadr himself, well it gets people talking about him again - at least temporarily, but I don't think it's going to change people's minds thave have already been made up. If you weren't for Khadr's rights, you likely didn't put that weight into his age and naivete. If you're a Khadr sympathizer, this probably just strengthens your support.

Another outcome of the tape release might be anger. It might galvanize those who agreed with Khadr's alleged actions, and in a way give them the justification they're looking for. Is that right? Absolutely not, but neither is detaining Khadr the way he has been. It's all about lenses.

Overall, I'm not sure how productive or dangerous the release of the tapes is, but in the end it's just representing the truth: you can't argue with it, but you can form your own opinions.

The Kennedy mystique

2008-07-13T18:04:00.003-04:00

No no, not Arnold's family by marriage.

It would be to this country's detriment to not have Gerrard Kennedy play a key role in this country's future. To the point.

To the left, to the left, and er to the right to the right

2008-07-12T07:49:00.002-04:00

Stephane Dion is legit.

Sure, he was dogged by the Tories and the media for all sorts of things, but he has survived. He's even gone beyond surviving, he's turned the corner. Sure, he had many MP's retire during the earlier parts of his tenure, and the caucus wasn't always behind him; however, I think you can say that's he's now on the up-slope. Sure, there will be bumps (and blood perhaps too), but his main political purpose is no longer to deliver Harper a Majority on a silver platter. Recently, Buzz Hargrove, Canada's most notable union organizer has pretty much dismissed the NDP and is seriously considering a liberal run because he thinkgs Dion is "on the right track." Likewise, NPD pioneer Reid Scott is disaffected by his leader and is favourable to Dion's policy. Consequently, he's joining the federal liberals.

Does that mean victory for Dion? Not yet. However, since being elected leader, it's been pretty much common knowledge that's Dion's growth potential is on the left - the right I guess has no affinity for guys with conviction and the intellect to back it up. That means Dion is showing some success in encroaching on Layton's NDP territory. That's a pretty good sign compared to the Tories who are polling lower than their election results, and the NDP who are have the Greens on their heels.

Speaking of the Tories. it seems like they're pushing themselves to the right. They've appointed Preston Manning to some science advisory panel. Yes, former Reform Leader Preston Manning. I'm not saying Prestong Manning isn't a sound policy mind, but for a country of 30+ million, I'm sure there are many more appropriate candidates than what see as a right wing, bible thumping Conservative, but I guess that's what Stevie H. sees as science. If you look at his history, he did appoint John Baird as environment minister. That was well received. Oh yes, while we're on appointments Bernier, Bernier Bernier, Couillard. That last sentence had everything to do with the topic at hand. Anyway, what I want to say is that appointing Preston to this panel is only going to appeal to his right wing base which Stevie H. already has under his belt. Not much room for growth.

R v. Morgantaler?

2008-07-02T22:15:00.002-04:00

Ok, well not really Regina(aka the crown), but a bunch of people with nothing better to do. All this hoopla: Dr. Henry doesn't deserve the order of Canada, yadda, yadda. Agree with his views of not, he's been a very significant part of recent Canadian history. Most Canadian high school students learn his name, and he's a hero to many even though he's hated by others. Still, that hate doesn't warrant his order being taken away. Do people even put that much into the order of Canada? To be honest, probably not. There have been 5500 given out, and if most of us can name more than 10 with the order of Canada, then you can begin to entertain the debate of who deserves one. Until then, let Michaelle have her little ceremonies and give pretty prizes to whomever she feels. After all, she gets to decide. She IS the head of state (sort of).

Onto more pressing matters...

Apparently Stevie-H is upping the money demand for his little lawsuit against the libs. Is that really the job of the PM, or should he be coming up with good policies in these critical times? Yes, I can hear all the Tory puppets now, "he has a right to defend himself." Bla Bla. What about his duty to lead the nation? Not very effective anymore say I.

And sad news for both big parties: The libs didn't raise that much money last year, and they barely spent anything on advertising. The sad news for the tories is that the libs didn't raise that much money and they barely didn't spend any money on advertising, but Stevie H. et al still can't shake the libs. Instead of the infamous Dion quote, "you think it's ezee to make tough choices," it's gonna be Harper "ya think it's er easy to win without policies?" Just hope he's not dressed in chaps and a cowboy hat while he says it. Smokin'.

Chretien Vindicated

2008-06-26T14:18:00.002-04:00

Just read the story. Hell yes.

Now this is the whole mess that spent the Liberal fortunes into a tailspin.. could this be somewhat of a cosmic symbolic turning point?

someone who likes to write this blog clearly likes to read too deep into things.

a-ways, congratulations to The Man.

Fool's Game

2008-06-25T17:15:00.002-04:00

Let's play a game: it's called what do you do after your poor judgment allowed you to make Maxime Bernier a top Quebec minister?

A) you buck the trend and stop trying to play regional politics and just appoint the most qualified people
B) you laugh at me for coming up with "A" because you realize you have so few qualified people
C)you wish you had poached more than just one Liberal
D)you appoint a junior, inexperienced not quite as attractive as Bernier MP to an important post, and you give an unelected cabinet minister another notable position after some think he's been incorrectly using his now former position

If you guessed A, you've clearly never worked in Canadian politics.. but that's not a value judgment. Seriously.

If you guessed B, you'll soon receive a cease and desist order from the PM while John Baird barks, "why don't you laugh like that outside the House of Commons?"

If you guessed C, you probably work somewhere within the PM's inner circle.

And finally, if you guessed D you think talking about Quebec nationhood is a smart thing to do. Oh yea, you might also live at 24 Sussex (I'm not saying who it is.. can you guess?)

Vive le Quebec

2008-06-24T22:45:00.002-04:00

So if Stephen Harper had any genuine feelings about Quebec as he tries to portray, he wouldn't have given them Maxime Bernier as their posterchild. No matter how esthetically pleasing that poster might be.

Anyway, Warren Kinsella couldn't be anymore bang on if he tried.

Happy St. Jean Baptists day à tous!

How much will Dion's green policy shift Canadians politics?

2008-06-22T22:00:00.003-04:00

With no mention of their own policy, the Tories have been attacking Dion's plan. Is this just a mask for their own lack of direction when it comes to policy, and the environment in particular? The answer is a resounding yes! The Tories have been surviving thus far on crafty politics, but due to a scandal plagued parliamentary session, their political machinations haven't been serving them to their comfort. Increasingly bad for the Tories is that they have no substantial policy to change the tune, so Canadians might be ready for an alternative.

Then comes Mr. Dion. Weak; not a leader; incompetent. All ways that the Harper cabal have tried to paint Dion, but Canadians will likely discard these political depictions if Dion gives them something substantial on the policy front. So far in selling his policy on the environment, Dion has been confident and convincing. He's showed a different comfort level with this issue, compared to the corny one liners he's delivered in the past such as "Harper gave you Flaherty, I gave you clarity." That wasn't funny or witty -- not even to a room full of political science students. But I digress. He's gone further than being confident: he's challenged Harper to an adult debate. Good move. His lucidity in English seems to be improved as well.

Harper might have been on to something when he tried to lure Dion into an election when he seemed weak and incapable. Well Dion smartly didn't bite, and now with his revamped political persona he's taken a large chunk of the political agenda with this week's announcement: the Green Shift.

Overall, the plan is very economically focused: it proposes tax breaks for individuals and businesses, along with tax credits for rural and northern Canadians plus an increase in things like the child tax benefit and gauranteed income supplement. Dion tries to sell this as way more than a green plan: it sets a definite focus on steering Canadians to life altering strategies respecting the use of carbon fuels and in terms ofeconomic innovation. It also sets out to directly address (though not completely) the rising number of Canadians who are considered low income, and likely living in poverty.

While we've seen Dion's plan receive positive reviews from the Suzuki foundation and TD bank economist Don Drummond, the plan's proposal also includes statements from the World Bank, CD Howe Institute, and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives. Given that green plans have been typically dismissed as leftist, socialist, and environmentalist fanfare, citing these stalworths of the current neolib/neocon paradigm shows taht Dion's ideas are not simply pie in the sky.

Continuing with the plan, the good of the plan is also the bad. It is broad ranging, addressing the economy as well as the environment and poverty. Anyone has to be weary of political promises, so promising these tax cuts might be initially seen as, well, shifty. However, the taxes aren't so radical that they aren't implementable. We already see Canadians changing their way of life in a more environmentally conscious way, so Dion's challenge is to convince them to go a little further.

As for the PM's response calling the plan insane and anti western, well he's the one who's actually coming off looking crazy -- not to mention un priministerial due to his off colour language. Furthermore, he has no plan. It would be one thing if he could give Canadians an alternative to Dion's plan, but he can't. And saying the plan is anti-western, well that's just juvenile fear mongering. What part of Canada isn't heavily dependent on the use of carbon based energy and fuels? None. This means big polluters accross all of Canada will pay, and the payers most certainly won't all be coming from west of Ontario. In fact, this is a policy borne in BC -- at least in the Canadian context, so how is implementing a western concept in a national sense anti-western? The reality is that it isn't.

Dion's off to a good start with this plan, but he will need to consistently perform at this level because you can be sure that Harper and his empty barrels will be bringing the discourse level even lower, trying to swindle Canadians into accepting a sub par government. On vera.

This Shift is Bananas

2008-06-19T11:48:00.003-04:00

I haven't had the opportunity to go over the Green Shift that was finally announced by M. Dion. So far, by the leaks and the little I've read on the nice website, they've definitely started off on the right (or should I say left - I kill myself!) foot.

Some nice quotation I like from Dion's kinda preamble message:

"Some have said that nobody would have the courage or the political will to do what we believe is right. We need to do it. We will do it."

Very poignant. Puts forth the needed idea that he's a man of substance, and not just politics. That's a good comparison compared to the PM.

"In the coming weeks and months we Liberals look forward to speaking with Canadians and asking them to join a growing coalition. A coalition that crosses party lines and will move us beyond outdated notions of what it means to be right- or left-wing."

This second one I think is very au courant.. kinda post politics. I could see Obama saying something like this (because he has). Regarldess if it's accurate, it's a good message.

I'll take a closer look at this shift later.

Harping...

2008-06-16T17:40:00.004-04:00

It's not the final story yet, but here I suggested these conservative ads, might not be as effective as they could have. The hill times new poll shows that they've been preaching to the choir a bit.

Still, don't underestimate Harper and rush to the polls. They have a big "chest" that they will huff and puff.. So Dion needs to work really hard and come with a good plan re: the carbon tax. It's a big risk, but he can win on this plan. He could also lose on this plan, but for the first time I think he has an issue where he can go toe to toe with Harper. Of course, it just be all the lighting and thunder lately that's messing with my thoughts. Snarfer.

Addition

I just turned on Don Newman's show and they're talking about the story today where Mr. Couillard said she wouldn't appear in an inquiry. I call BS. This is a woman who's been smeared and she's fighting back. This woman's been around organized crime top guns and politicians, not exactly the most sheepish of people, so I definitely think she knows what she's doing. Did the Tories do something to really piss her off? Maybe, maybe not. Well hell hath no fury like a woman scorned as my grade 9 english teacher told me, and she's been scorned left right, and right. By her holding out it builds a story of her not coming. Then there will be the rumours of her possible coming, and finally when she does come, it will be so anticipated that everyone will listen to what she has to say. If she wants to be heard, she's gonna make sure everyone listens. Not bad Ms. Couillard.

The Tiger Woods of Politics?

2008-06-15T22:33:00.003-04:00

So it's been a Tiger Woods weekend, and rightfully so with his performance at the US Open, but it got me thinking about another (potential) phenom.

At the start of his career, people would deem Tiger the Michael Jordan of golf, so who is the Tiger Woods of what? A good candidate I believe is Barack Obama. Can he be the Tiger Woods of politics?

Let's start with the most obvious: they both come from multi-ethnic backgrounds, and they've both tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to deflct the attention from their race. That's probably because they're both in fields that have been dominated by white men. They've both been touted as great long before they took center stage: Tiger with his six combined US amateur and US junior amateur titles, while Barack was an up and comer in the Illinois Legislature and US Senate.

Now onto the main stage. Tiger took the world by storm with his record setting victory at the '97 Masters, and Barack's comparable break out moment would be the '04 DNC convention when he stole everyone's thunder with an inspirational speech. Still, after both these events everyone wasn't convinced. Tiger for his part reworked his swing which led to him being in transition during his 1998 season where he won only one tournament. For Barack, after announcing himself as a presidential candidate, he quickly learned that an audacious story full of hope and a positive message wasn't enough to withstand the survival of the fittest world of politics, nor was it enough to fight off one of the strongest democratic families. Additionally, both these phenomenal men have been met with some institutional, or at least old boys club, resistance: for Tiger it was Fuzzy Zoeller quipping about whether he would serve fried chicken at his Masters champion's dinner, while Barack's case is Fox news' depiction of his wife as his "baby mama."

What else ties these young men is that they both entered their fields at a young age when the next saviour was needed. For golf, Jack Nicklaus was now a senior citizen, Faldo and Norman's best days were behind them and fresh blood was needed. For Barack, it was 8 years of right wing government that destroyed their country's international reputation and the people's collective psyche. So golf needed a new Nicklaus, and Politics needed a new Kennedy.

For golf, Tiger has lived up to his field's elder statesman's credentials after rebounding late in the '99 season to win his second major, and going on a tear in 2000. He capped it off with a Tiger slam, winning four majors in a row from 2000 to 2001.

Barack hasn't yet had the full opportunity to prove himself Kennedy-esque, but he has been endorsed by the family. After a lesson learning primary season, it can be said that he's gone through his rebuilding stage that Tiger went through in '98. Also, his winning the DNC nomination is like Tiger winning his second major in '99 showing the first breakout moment was not just fleeting. So Barack has shown that he's able to adapt and produce winning circumstances, but what lies ahead of him is more challenging than whatever he's faced before. What he has, though, is an audience as large if not larger than ever for his type of message, just like how golf was ready for Tiger to rebrand it. The question is whether Barack will show the intestinal fortitude as Tiger did and bring home his own Barack slam? If he does, it could culminate in, hmm I dunno, November 08'?

Prime Time Tiger Woods

2008-06-14T22:14:00.002-04:00

He is the greatest.

Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, Jesse Owens, Roger Federer, Muhammad Ali, Jack Nicklaus, Pele...

those are all greats in their fields. Tiger Woods is at least one notch above. The performance he gave today in prime time after coming back from knee surgery: grimacing on practically every shot and shooting a magical round on a typically punishing US open course. Simply unbelievable.

You think the PGA tour and the networks' advertising dollars missed the two months he was off? Awe.

What, someone else disgusted with Stephen Harper's government? Say it ain't so!

2008-06-10T16:45:00.005-04:00

Even though I'm still mad at CTV.. I'll link to them

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080610/tory_ads_080610/20080610?hub=TopStories

Tory attack on carbon tax is dishonest: economist
Updated Tue. Jun. 10 2008 12:00 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff

A prominent resource economist has pronounced himself disgusted with "dishonest" Conservative attack ads on a Liberal carbon tax proposal that's yet to be unveiled.
"The Conservatives -- and I say this with great sadness because I don't care which political party is in power -- but if we're going to do anything about climate change, we're going to have to be honest with people," Marc Jaccard of Simon Fraser University told CTV.ca on Tuesday.
"This is just totally dishonest."
On the weekend, the Tories previewed ads aimed at the proposed carbon tax, painting it as Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's "tax on everything."
The ads are to start running Tuesday.
Jaccard, a co-author of the recent book Hot Air, said the Conservatives' own policy on reducing greenhouse gas emissions won't work because it doesn't put a price on carbon for consumers.
"Their policy is to regulate industry and then have these offset loopholes where industry can subsidize consumers. But those are the types of policies that have never worked in the past," he said.
The Conservatives have said their plan will cut Canada's greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent below 2006 levels by 2020. But many environmental groups join Jaccard in saying the plan won't work.
If it did work, the Conservative plan wouldn't see Canada's Kyoto Protocol target -- to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent below 1990 levels by 2012 -- achieved until 2025.
The Liberals are said to be proposing putting a tax on carbon. While the policy has yet to be released, the Grits have said it will be "tax shifting" and "revenue-neutral," meaning that any revenue collected would be given back in the form of income or other tax cuts.
In the House of Commons' question period on Monday, junior minister Jason Kenney accused the Liberals of engaging in a massive tax grab to pay for billions in unbudgeted election promises.
Dion said the ads are "misleading and a lie."
Honest dialogue
"I'm not a fan of Stephane Dion, but when you get a politician out there that's trying to start an honest dialogue and say to people, 'you know what? We won't get our emissions down if there isn't a price on them and that's just the truth'," Jaccard said.
"And to see politicians saying, 'Maybe I can stay in power' or gain more power, or maybe a majority government, by distorting this" disgusted him, he said.
"Every one of those ads should say, 'Oh and by the way, your income taxes are going down if (the Liberals) do put in that tax,' but it's not there."
The Liberals say their plan, unlike the Conservative one, offers offsetting tax cuts.
Dion has said the plan won't drive up prices at the gas pump, where high oil prices have driven gasoline prices up to record levels.
Some of the Tory ads were to run at gas pumps in Toronto and other parts of southern Ontario.
But Fuelcast, the company that operates the pump-side advertising network, said Monday it won't run the ads.
The Conservatives have said they have a binding contract with Fuelcast, but if the company doesn't honour the deal, they will up their radio buy instead.

Boycott Stephen Harper's propaganda

2008-06-09T16:46:00.004-04:00

This worthwhile suggestion I saw on Bigcitylib's site is urging people to boycott gas stations that broadcast Tory propaganda.

About the ads:

Well first, I'm not going to doubt the effectiveness of going negative, but I think they would be more more scathing if they hadn't Harped (no pun) on Dion so much, and if they had any credibility in ANYTHING. Especially effective government.

Furthermore, while I understand politics, it's extremely sad that our national's government's biggest move on the environment is to criticize the opposition's supposed plan. 1, the plan is not even released, and 2, shouldn't they be busy coming up with a legitimate plan. Call me a liberal with a sense of entitlement, but Canada wake up.

(p.s to all you "anonymous" Tory talking heads, take it to the gas station.. we've heard enough from you over on ctv.ca)

I don't know, but my naive youth has me feeling really sad for the state of government. There's always been politics galore, but never can I remember such a lacking in legitimate policy.

Addition

While business is business, some things should be untouchable. CTV acquiring the rights to the Hockey Night in Canada theme song just doesn't feel right. Shakes head.

Usain Bolt: new fastest man in the world!

2008-05-31T23:24:00.003-04:00

Result from the Reebok Grand Prix in New York; Asafa Powell better hurry up and heal his injury!

Finals
1 Usain Bolt JAM 9.72 1.7
2 Tyson Gay USA 9.85 1.7
3 Darvis Patton USA 10.07 1.7
4 Mike Rodgers USA 10.11 1.7
5 Daniel Bailey ANT 10.12 1.7
6 Shawn Crawford USA 10.13 1.7
7 Leroy Dixon USA 10.24 1.7
8 Rae Edwards USA 10.33 1.7

A penny for your thoughts?

2008-05-30T14:39:00.001-04:00

How about a quarter? Well one more quarter of negative growth and we are in a recession (for real real). While the gov’t really can’t fix these things, it’s really not wise to be doing pretty much absolutely nothing.

… wait,I lied. They are doing things: fouling up in Italy, engaging in tabloid worthy governing (Maxed out as I like to call it), Cadscam, Naftagate, Mulroney-Schreiber, fighting with provinces, giving contracts without any real scrutiny, possibly interfering in municipal elections, and giving Dion a break from all the negative press.

Except for being engaged in a war in Afghanistan, the country is pretty peaceful, but order, good government… are they allergic to the Harper cabal?

Layton's not making a fool of himself here

2008-05-29T23:16:00.002-04:00

but I'm not sure if I agree with him here. Yes, the EI fund is for the administering of the program, but the whole program is a labour market cushion. Using the funds to make the labour market more amenable to employment (at least in the current economic ideology) would seem like it's within the purview of the EI program because it contributes to the bottom line of getting people re-employed, n'est pas?

I wanna be down

2008-05-29T14:51:00.001-04:00

Less governing, less approval by the Canadian public.

And this was before the Harper gov't was "Maxed" out. Hey, everyone else is coming up with cheesy monikers.

Love, War,and the NDP

2008-05-28T20:44:00.002-04:00

Love:

Bernier. Well the Liberals caught a bit of a break on this one. They pushed the issue and they pulled a rabbit out of Mlle. Couillard's cleavage. Pfft, I don't have to be PC, it's a blog that no one reads. This just shows more and more of what I think which is that the CPC is bad at governing, and it's showing more and more everyday.

War:

Cherniak and Kinsella. Well despite the debate, they're both in the liberal family and I don't like to see them fighting. I know who would: the NDP and the CPC. To Cherniak, Kinsella's fought a few wars before, he's way better at it. Don't enter the jungle and attempt to take down the lion. To Kinsella: he's young, he's passionate, and you have more Tory fish to fry (the man and the party). These guys used to be amicable, so just remember there was something worth admiring before. To both, if you don't have something nice to say, say it about the Tories!

The NDP:

Out of it. They are abandoning their principles to try and make the Liberals look bad. I think a better option would be abandoning Layton. There are some NDP MP's I can tolerate, but the leader and the brand make me regurgitate.

.. now back to So You Think You Can Dance.

Does the Harper gov't really want another fight right now..

2008-05-23T14:29:00.004-04:00

Who woulda thunk? The CPC clashing with a union!
Maybe the one good thing is that it might "upset" a lot of public servants in Ottawa and they take it out on statesmen like Baird and Poillevre. A boy can dream.

http://www.psac.com/news/2008/releases/23-0508-e.shtml

Full article from the above link, because I felt like it:

May 23, 2008
News release
PSAC tells Harper government to get real
OTTAWA – After a year of bargaining, negotiating teams for the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) are less than impressed with the Harper government's wage offer tabled this week. The government has offered increases of 1.5%, 1.5%, 1.2% and 1.2% in a four year agreement retroactive to 2007.
“The government's proposal is an insult and a joke,” says Patty Ducharme, PSAC's national executive vice-president. “The wage offer is below current inflation and well below projected inflation rates. It doesn't even allow our members to stand still.”
Gas prices alone have risen by over 25% over the past year and are projected to rise by another 15 to 20% before the summer is over. “A wage offer that reduces our members' real income also has a ripple effect on sectors such as manufacturing and tourism that are already being hard hit by the high Canadian dollar and rising gas prices.”
“How does the government think it can recruit and retain workers with this kind of offer,” says Ducharme. “Wages may be moderating in the face of an economic downturn but both public and private sector wage settlements were much higher in 2007 than the 1.5% being offered by the Harper government.”
“When gas hits a dollar fifty a litre or more, we will have to pay. When food prices rise, as they are around the world, we will have to pay. When our children's tuition fees increase because of government cutbacks, we will have to pay.”
According to Ducharme, the Harper government already has a dismal record on the economy and this is just one more example of its failure to protect workers' jobs and incomes.
“Our members provide quality services to Canadians from coast to coast to coast. What we expect is a fair increase that protects our purchasing power and compensates us for increased productivity.”
The Treasury Board offer is in stark contrast to a settlement between PSAC and the Canada Revenue Agency reached last fall. The union negotiated a 2.5% increase in each year of a three-year agreement starting in 2007, in addition to another 1.6% average increase resulting from a new classification plan.
“Our members at Treasury Board are continuing to fall behind their counterparts at the CRA, thanks to an out-dated federal classification system,” says Ducharme. “This latest offer just compounds the problem. In addition, the offer does not address an ongoing problem in the Operational Services unit. Unlike 93% of the federal public sector, these workers are still paid on a regional basis.”
PSAC represents over 100,000 workers in five Treasury Board bargaining units.

Ceci et Cela

2008-05-14T21:31:00.003-04:00

Why would Jason Kenney pick a fight with Romeo Dallaire. He has more statute, more cred, and more expertise than the parliamentary secretary does. Bad move. Not because Mr. Dallaire might by some political heavyweight, but because he's a household name that has a lot of respect. Oh Tories, it's not enough for the Liberals to be their own worst enemy... you had to go and copy.

In a bold, revolutionary move, John Edwards is neither rotund nor female, but he has sung -- albeit with a bit of redundance.

And as I love tennis.. Justin Henin has retired. Never my fave, but she won a lot of tournaments, and 7 Grand Slams. Many will laud her for that feat, but It can't be forgotten that she won quite often against depleted draws. My most outstanding memories of her will be poor sportsmanship at the French Open and achieving well beyond what her stature ever professed.

EI Priorities

2008-05-12T16:55:00.002-04:00

There are many things one could focus on when tinkering with Employment Insurance. For instance, I think it should be looked at how to make it more effective for low income earners in big cities, and how to make it more equitable for single parents (mothers). However, this is not one of them. Give it up; work on something that will actually improve the program for the future. Thanks.

How about you do your job as a journalist

2008-05-11T22:03:00.004-04:00

.. instead of gossiping.

So in this CP story about Dion's proposed carbon tax, they don't actually talk about the pros and cons of a carbon tax. Instead, the talk about the possible potential alleged likely plausible seeming reluctance of some Liberal MP's to accept the measure. Really, is that your job? Shoudln't you be reporting to the Canadian public what is actually being proposed so they can make up their mind on whether they want to support it. I'm sure based on those opinions, be they well informed, MP's will adjust their stance (no matter what party).

I realize I'm being complacent, but how is a guy like Dion supposed to define himself if the press is also obstructing the process. I mean you already have a government that has shady ad spending, his own party that rightly needs an internal flush: they're a part of the current problem, and now the press is dabbling into it.

Addition: there's actually some substantial discussion about real journalism over here.

Well Mr. Bolt..

2008-05-04T11:39:00.002-04:00

You just made the men's 100m at this summer's Olympics a lot more interesting. I hope not, but there's a strong chance of this mirroring the 92' Barcelona women's 200m results. How's that for obscurity?

Calgarygrit is jokes

2008-04-29T09:13:00.003-04:00

This is the funniest thing I've seen in a while:

http://calgarygrit.blogspot.com/2008/04/letter-from-nigerian-prince.html#links

...apologies to my Nigerian (and Tory) friends.

Peter Van Loan: government house misleader

2008-04-25T17:25:00.003-04:00

That's the line that came from Don Newman's show with a rep from Democracy watch on. He was countering claim that Democracy watch pretty much cleared them of doing anything that the other parties aren't doing (or something like that). Clearly someone in Pedro's staff needs to buck up.

The more important issue, however, is that this is typical Tory behaviour. Anyone can admit they ran a pretty good campaign last election, and they've been pretty agressive at trying to control the political agenda. One thing they forgot: they're the government! You, by default, have control of the agenda so as long as you, um, govern.

Well they haven't been governing. They've been playing politics, perhaps a bit too much. Maybe they were too used to opposition. Unfortunately for them, they lived by politics...

The cops don't just come to your house to have some dessert...

2008-04-16T02:12:00.003-04:00

Isn't that right Tories? Remember #3 on this post? Well, it isn't going away after yesterday's raid. And seemingly, there is stronger evidence and now more political traction in this scandal.

Obviously the Tory talking heads have been swamping message boards and blogs to spin this (not a bad strategy btw), but am I supposed to believe, given all the facts and the balance of probabilities, that

1) The Tories didn't do anything illegal regarding campaign finance?
2) They didn't try to bribe Cadman?
3) John Baird didn't try to interfere in the Ottawa Mayoral race?
4) Maxime Bernier is an idiot?

Ok fine, I don't know who put number 4 in there, but for good measure you can argue that the CPC also has some homophobic (see the tape) and racist (oh the secretary of state for multiculturalism) elements.

Really though, this should all be trumped by the fact that they've had very meager policy offerings, and they've taken a fiscally healthy government and put it on the brink of a deficit. But I guess that's, er, leadership?

p.s it's funny to go to any story that CTV posts re: politics to see all the made up tory supporters with random names like John F giving the same spin that the Tories will give in the house and on TV. It's funny how that works out..

Tories seeping through the facade...

2008-04-03T16:50:00.002-04:00

First the idiotic musings about re-opening constituational debates vis a vis Quebec, and not a Tory MP's homophobic history is shown.

Sometimes people say, "hey, maybe a Tory majority wouldn't be so bad," but just remember, in a majority situation Harper wouldn't have to be so strict, and people like those mentioned above would be playing a significant part in government. No thanks.

Dryden to Leafs? ...Is this a bad April fools joke?

2008-04-01T07:46:00.001-04:00

http://www.ctv.nationalnewswatch.com/CTVNews_0201829810_TopStories_.htm

I'm pretty sure it is.

"Competitiveness is defined by a broad range of factors including education, health care, and yes, taxes,"

2008-03-25T23:25:00.003-04:00

That kind of thinking is exactly why Ontario chose McGuinty/Duncan and rejected Flaherty.

A sound budget with sound ideas such as retraining to enhance workers' job matching in a manufacturing sector that seems to be going through structural changes.

While there were a lot of things broken in the 90's by other governments, McGuinty is tackling them in a balanced, sober approach. Kudos.

Enjoy: http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=d03b6f44-6f5a-4b13-962a-dac628ad5c6b

Newman owns Layton

2008-03-23T11:56:00.002-04:00

As I sit relaxing in rural Ontario (away from the m5s), I'm just recalling one of my most satisfying political moments of the week. Don Newman owned Jack Layton this week. Jack tried to skirt around the unskirtable issue that his party is in desperate trouble. His avoidance of the truth speaks volumes about why his part is in trouble. Watch and enjoy.

http://www.cbc.ca/video/popup.html?http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/politics/politics_tue.wmv

I have a message to Stephen Harper... I'm coming!

2008-03-18T00:43:00.002-04:00

That's the very likable Ms. Hall Findlay with perhaps one of the best lines of the night. Unfortunately she needs to tighten up her speeches in the future to maximize her time on TV.

Well.. what a night! Everyone won, except not really because everyone lost. The only people who actually won were Liberals and Conservatives.

The Liberals won 3 out of 4 and that's never bad. The conservatives won the one swing seat, and while that's good, you can never boast too much about having 1 for 4 as your standard of excellence.

Good themes tonight for the Liberals.. the team aspect. I think they should run with it (and get Karen Redman off tv.. oh yea and Scott Reid while they're at it).

Also, maybe I'm just stretching, but when all the ridings were in Western Canada and Ontario, there was sure a lot of French in the Liberal speeches. Of course bilingualism etc, but I think there was a focused effort to show the Liberal team as palatable to Quebec. It's not like there's a huge french cleavage in Willowdale. I do like Rae's closing line, "Vive le Canada." I see it as a sort of plea for the Liberals to once more become the prime federalist force. I could be stretching it.

In terms of the Tories, I think it's going to be hard for them to sell 25% as a good night regardless of which ridings were in play.

In terms of the NDP, well I think they're more in trouble than any other party. I think their leader is stale, their message is weak, and they're having to watch their backs because of the green party. Unfortunately they just never seem to have their message in order, and being in bed with the Tories in the tag team against the Liberals haven't done them well though. I don't know what other choice they have, however.

What does this mean in terms of an election? Well my guess is that it's Harper's choice. I wouldn't be surprised if the Liberals pulled some kind of surprise move on the whole RESP thing, but I think that's wishful thinking. It's Harper's choice because if he keeps on pushing, Dion will eventually have to push back, and one can argue with a pretty strong case that he now has a lot more strong hands to do the pushing back.

For all that Dion's gone through over the last year, there's a way out for him - though not at all gauranteed. Let's just hope his caucus isn't filled with a bunch of "self serving goons."

Bonne nuit.

The best defence is a good offence?

2008-03-03T12:44:00.002-05:00

I think not. If he were so concerned about the truth, why would he not give a similar notice to the Cadman family? This is all just for politics. Here Dion needs to show his grit.

Also, isn't this just giving more traction to the story.. this is a new headline that'll continue to make it a talking point.

Also msg to Mr. Kinsella, you sound like an undercover Tory. Good thing you're in great company at Queen's park.

When did the era of bickering end?

2008-03-02T14:46:00.002-05:00

I didn't get the memo with the exact date.

Anyway, what do you do when the country's economic prospects are cloudy? Why you undermine the country's economic engine.

Idiotic.

Schreiber-Mulroney; Cadman-Harper

2008-02-28T18:44:00.002-05:00

The only thing that separates Stephen Harper from Brian Mulroney is a fiscally responsible Liberal Government.

Mr. Harper came in on accountability, and even though nothing has yet to be proven in Cadman Harper, this supposedly clean Conservative government has been up to dirty old tricks.

1) Not pursuing Mulroney Schreiber when they had the info
2) John Baird's alleged interference in the Ottawa Mayoral race
3) Being investigated by elections Canada for breaking the rules
4) Gary Lunn interefering and scapegoating Linda Keene
5) And now, a conservative nominee accusing Harper et al of trying to bribe a member of parliament for political gain.

Like Iggy said Either the wife of a very honourable former member of parliament is lying and conservative Candidate is lying, or the Prime Minister is lying. Either way, a Conservative is lying to Canada.

Random Question..

2008-02-11T20:52:00.000-05:00

If a guy-- say a Prime Minister -- wants a fixed election date of October 19th, 2009, why would he introduce four confidence motions in less than 6 months?

Maybe Harper is finding it not so easy to make priorities.

You, Mr. Dobbs, are Wrong

2008-02-04T20:05:00.000-05:00

First I must apologize to anyone worth a penny for watching CNN, but the US party primaries have been quite exciting and thus for my viewing pleasure. Still, I have many points of contention. The main one came today when Mr. Middle class himself, Lou Dobbs, proclaimed that the problem with America right now is that the view of the majority is not being represented, and that's the beauty of a democracy where the view of the majority is represented.

Well I must disagree. Sure, in a democracy the majority makes the final choice, but I think for a democracy to be effective, a multiplicity of views must be represented. That's what's wrong with America. In a way that's what's made the primaries so excited because if anyone wants to be president they have to come from one of the two big tents, democrat or republican. While that might make an exciting year of political tv, it makes for sub par policy. I don't think Romney out "conservativing" McCain is going to fix health care, nor do I think the Kennedy clan's desperate gesture to preserve their spot as top democrat family is going to bring the troops home, but it's definitely got people engaged. Let's look at what's being ignored though: take Ron Paul for instance, he was basically deliberately silenced by the silver fox himself during the last republican debate because his ideas were out of the mainstream. Well let me tell you something Mr. Cooper, not all, dare I say most of the good ideas don't come from the mainstream. The beauty of any well functioning democracy is that you can have a dynamic conversation with good ideas, hopefully with the best one selected.

For instance, take the Chretien Liberals. Even though they didn't have on major political opponent, they have a bunch of faction parties that would once in a while bring up a good idea. The people who would champion that idea as government would be the Chretien government, but they didn't necessarily invent the idea. That's the difference Mr. Dobbs, your system and increasingly ours is silencing those fringe voices that may be on to something that the bandwagon jumpers don't know about.

Good ideas are good ideas before the majority wants them to be implemented.

Beyond Ridiculous

2008-01-16T17:07:00.000-05:00

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080116/keen_fired_080116/20080116?hub=TopStories

Firing the head of the agency under investigation for the Minister's and the head's performance on the day before a parliamentary committee hearing is absolutely disgusting. This government has no interest in good government, and I would infer they take a similar position on peace and order. Disgraceful.

This seems like as good as time as any to say something

2007-12-19T20:08:00.000-05:00

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/287099

Yes, the poll above is quite a lot of good new for the Grits, and quite a lot of not so good news for the Tories.

What does it mean? Well at that one moment Canadians weren't so happy with the Tories.

What else does it mean? Canadians don't trust the Tories. You don't make such a mad dash when someone you trust slips up.

What should the Liberals do. Well in the worst of times the Liberals supposedly only stand for winning. While this isn't by any means a victory, I hope the smell of blood revs of the Liberals and gets them all on the same page (a boy can dream). They also need to put some better people on those political shows (Politics/Mike Duffy). I'm not insulting these people's capacities as Parliamentarians, but people like Karen Redman aren't silver tongued enough to go against those empty Conservative mouth peices. More of Martha Hall Findlay, she's a convincing speaker. We need a better tone in the press, and we need to be prepared for the attacks from the New Democratic Conservative Party. Step up dream team, and step up on the right issues.

Who gets it?

2007-11-27T13:19:00.000-05:00

So Campaign 2000 just recently released their 2007 Report Card showing that there has been no improvement to Child poverty over 18 years. That's one generation's transformation into adulthood and nothing's changed.

How does our esteemed finance minister react? Well, I suppose with the proposal that will end the long era of bickering by child poverty activists. Surely not. Proposing to lower taxes for high income earners even though the proportion they contribute (as a bracket) to tax revenue has been going down steadily is what Flaherty sees as an appropriate way to tackle what's becoming Canada's latest black mark.

He just doesn't get it.

How about this one?

Liberal Senator Colin Kenny is calling for a moratorium on Taser use after the Vancouver and Nova Scotia Taser deaths. Well I don't have enough facts to know whether a complete moratorium is needed, but something definitely needs to be done about these trigger happy cops. I think he kinda gets it.

Let's get it straight, not all officers of the law should be painted with the same tainted brush, but when I played team sports as a teenager many a coach told me a team was only as good as their worst player. If we apply that principle to these recent taser incidents, the RCMP is in need of some desperate roster shuffling.

Sure there is the other side that says we civilians don't know the urgency in which these officers have to make these decisions and we should recognize this when we criticize. Some on other discussion boards have even said we shouldn't criticize unless we're a fellow member of one of the various forces because only then will we know what's it's like.

Well, that's just nonsense. Yes we might not know the urgency in which these decisions have to be made, but we're also not trained like these officers on how to make good, safe decisions in these urgent situations. These officers are so trained, and it doesn't take an ape to recognize that these situations were not the result of these good, safe decisions.

On the issue of criticism is only valid from peers, well that's even more ridiculous. Politicians, doctors, bureaucrats, teachers, and many other people whose job it is to serve the public are under frequent scrutiny and the police are no exception. If taxpayers don't think their dollars allocated to public safety are being properly served, then I say voice your opinion.

If a doctor botched a surgery, quite likely there would be a lawsuit. In the same token, if a police officer engages in reckless behaviour, then they too should be subject to the consequences. Their office doesn't protect them from the law, nor does it make them above it. These bad members of our police forces surely do not recognize this.

As the English say.. Merci Beaucoup

2007-11-21T22:13:00.003-05:00

Ohh Mr. Chretien.. he brought out his old charm on the National tonight. He doesn't have to do that much and it reminds me of the good old days. Don't get me wrong, I like Dion and I fully support him with an expiration date of the next election, but for a guy whose speech has been such a topic of conversation, he smooth talks with not an ounce of sleaze. Icon.

To other things: this article on why EI is unfair to women is a bit misguided. Yes, I think in some ways EI reflects some of the disparities between the sexes in labour force conditions, but those problems are societal, not policy based. EI's not a social program that's there to right all of soceity's wrongs, it's an insurance program that's meant to support our labour force. Sure, EI isn't perfect, but some of the findings in this article are misleading.

First, a lot of women are in part time and non standard jobs so it makes it harder for them to qualify. Not exactly. As a regular participant in the labour force, an individual needs between 420 and 700 hours in a 52 week period. If you take the highest minimum standard for a regular qualifier, the weekly amount of hours over a 52 week period needed to qualify would be less than 14 -- not even half a full time work week.

How about this bit said: " When a woman does return to work after a few years, she is required to re-qualify for EI from scratch by working at least 910 hours in the most recent 52-week period." That's very misleading. If a woman takes time off to have a baby and collects maternity benefits then subsequently stays home to take care of her child, she has a year period before she'll need to have a minimum of 910 hours to qualify for EI. Until that 5 year period expires, she'll still need the minimum that falls between 420-700 hours just as someone who's had continuous labour force participation. I think after 5 years a new child would definitely be in school.

When people put out reports like this that don't reflect accurate situations, they're more than counterproductive. EI definitely needs reforms in terms of the weekly amounts that are paid: there are no minimum amounts and sometimes lower income individuals are left to survive with less than $100 per week. Sometimes job losses can't be avoided and throwing someone into povery because of that just doesn't make sense. I don't think we need to look at qualification becaus the hours needed are fairly attainable, but once people are on EI, we need to look at how they survive.

A National Embarassment

2007-11-14T21:52:00.000-05:00

I watched the video tonight of newcomer to Canada, Robert Dziekanski, who was tasered to death after suffering through hours or what's likely to have been angst, hunger, thirst, and not in the least confusion.

Robert was failed on many levels. Let's start with the most obvious, the RCMP. In the last while there hasn't been much good news attached when those four letters are grouped, and this just makes things worst. In an instant after arriving, the quickdraw officers taser a man who had no weapons, no way of communicating, and was obviously confused. I don't know about you, but is it reasonable to assume that four trained officers weren't able to deal with an unarmed man without the use of deadly weapons? Obviously, hindsight gives a clearer picture and likely there are defences that will try to rationalize these officers' actions, but the fact is this is what these officers are trained to do. The reality is they failed in their job; furthermore, they failed miserably. They took the life of a human being, they bestowed hurt on a mother, and they put an ugly scar in our national reputation.

As for the border officers, well it's probably not in their job description to aid anyone who's lost or confused due to the volume they deal with each day, but I think it's definitely within everyone's job requirement to use common sense. This was not applied in this case. What was a confused man doing wondering around for 10 hours at an international airport? What if he was dangerous? He could have done a lot of damage in way less than 10 hours. It's more than an unfortunate way to learn, but let's hope that this man's memory can give life to better practices.

How about the other people working at Vancouver airport? This woman is going around for hours to multiple sources to inquire about her son's arrival and no one takes it seriously. That's ridiculous. I can't help but speculate how much better she would have been treated had she been better able to articulate herself in english. Too often sub par english is equated with lack of knowledge or lack of intelligence, and I wouldn't be surprised if this played a role in this particular case.

I hope the parties involve don't try to give any preposterous rationalizations and just apologize to this woman. That wouldn't even be close to approaching enough.

Did I miss something on November 8th?

2007-11-13T00:30:00.000-05:00

So from Nov 6-8 Ipsos did a poll giving the Tories a 14 point lead over the Liberals - 42-28. Another poll, from Nov 8-11, have the Liberals and Tories at 32% each; this one was by teh Strategic counsel. Either some massive seismic shift happened and I wasn't aware, or there is something to be said about the accuracy of these polls. Is that tuna I smell? No no, Atlantic Salmon.

Either way, I suspect the true numbers are somewhere in between. It's good and bad for both parties. The CPC with their election prepping anouncements haven't been able to really sway enough opinion in their favour, but the are leading. The liberals on the other hand are failing to capitalize on a party that Canadians clearly don't want to embrace, but they're not giving Canadians enough of an alternative.

Now if Jack Layton actually stopped applying for the job of opposition leader and maybe tried for PM there would be a third option. I know -- I crack myself up too.

Things I've noticed in this whole Mulroney affair

2007-11-12T17:48:00.000-05:00

1) Liberals should continue to press for a public inquiry and give Canadians the answer they deserve.

2) From the interviews I've seen, very few Conservatives are actually defenfing Mulroney; instead, they attack the intergrity of Schreiber. That's fine, Schreiber is shady, no doubt about that, but is there a reason they fail to defend their last leader to get elected to a majority. Liberals should continue to press.

3) The NDP is still the wrong party for this country. While they'll never govern in the foreseeable future, they're still doing a disservice to the country by going easy on the Tories. In this whole Mulroney affair, the NDP members I've seen on TV have been more keen to bring up adscam. First, I think the Liberals have bore all the burdens of adscam, and second, anyone who votes for the NDP instead of Liberals should realize the ramifications. It's nothing new, but it's worth reminding.

A coffee a day...

2007-11-12T12:16:00.000-05:00

Well not even that much should you expect from Canada's pre-pubescent (formerly new) government. A couple of days ago I compared the meagre tax cuts buying power vis a vis a cup of joe, and it turns out that these tax cuts are powerless when compared to the best part of waking up. Turns out these tax cuts' daily value won't put folgers, maxwell house, or anything Juan Valdez produces into your cup.

I guess the Tories spent so much time playing politics in opposition that they're having more than a tough time of shedding those habits and actually providing effective government. Dommage.

The black school debate

2007-11-10T09:58:00.000-05:00

I must admit when I heard this issue resurfacing after a couple years I was a bit peeved because I didn't agree with the idea then, and I'm not sure I agree with the idea now. The positive thing is that this debate is happening because it's much needed; hopefully, the results will mirror the seriousness of the debate.

Well, why black focused schools? I've heard various reasons. Obviously, there are the statistics of lower graduation rates which would then lead to black students diverting their attention to other activities. I'll just leave those activities up to your imagination. A good point I read on the discussion board is that in the current system, the expectations from teachers is for black students to max out their potential with a college diploma, so the mindset in administering their education is different. I think that's a strong point because as an insecure youth or teenager, the type of encouragement you receive can be quite significant. Personally, I had great encouragement at home, at school, in extra curriculars, and even sports teams; take that away, and who knows what would have happened.

But every time there's something potentially positive about installing black focused schools, there are points to the contrary. As I see the greatest potential value of the black focused schools being the mental boost these schools would provide, there's quite the likelihood that the opposite will occur. Do any of you know anyone who's gone to an inner city type of school that's perhaps not been so well funded or has not had adequate reinforcement? Well, from what I've seen these people are often sensitive about their attendance at these schools because they might have a stigma as an inferior or ghetto school. Let's think back to the whole "ghetto dude" fiasco: this guy was judged as ghetto by his mom's accent or something. Let's flash forward five or ten years with a kid from a black focused school listing that school's name on her or his resume. How many more ghetto dude scenarios that might go unnoticed could there be?

What about other cultures? This is one of the most popular rebuttals against black schools but it's valid. In the US where these black schools are reasonably prevalent, their ethnic division is majoritarily tripartite. Not so in Canada. Especially in our urban centres, we have a great mix of ethnic diversity, and I don't see how singling out one ethnicity can be justified. Even if other ethnicities are adapting better to the current way in education, doesn't mean it's serving them as well as it could be. I think a solution would have to incorporate how each ethnicity can benefit from the reinvention of our school system because they are all a part of the Canadian normal, and I don't think that's reflected. Furthermore, a great deal, if not most, of the value from elementary and secondary school is due to the outside the classroom activities. If we're having black students sheltered in a closed environment how are they going to get the maximized experience from after school clubs, music, or sports. These kind of experiences and lessons do translate to the work place. In Canada, the work place will likely be a multi ethnic one, so I don't see how preparing students for a multi ethnic workforce by segregating them is valuable.

I know the arguments that this has been successful in the US, and my reluctance to accept American born policy aside, I don't think it's acceptable for Canada. Yes I'm sure there are some positives from the American example such as a stronger sense of community, but I think the black and ethnic Canadian experiences are different from those of the US. In the US they have black American schools for black American children who've have had at least three or four generations in the US. In Canada, there would be black Canadian schools for African and Caribbean Canadians who are a likely first or second generation. Their attachment to Canada as a first or second generation citizen would inform their perception of these schools, and I think because of having such a relatively short history in this country, the sense of community wouldn't be built the same way as it is in the US.

Most definitely what and they way these children are taught has to be reviewed. The solution, however, is not through division. It might be division with good intentions, but it's still division. I think a more holistic approach is needed; one that addresses the lessons and perceptions it provides all students regardless of ethnic background. For instance, Canada loves to tout its multiculturalism but in history classes we're pretty much stuck in biculturalism. That's so sixties. If we're going to be truly multi ethnic, it has to be reflected in our education and show that European history isn't world history, there was globalization before 90's globalization, and that the Industrial revolution was more than a European triumph. That's the kind of knowledge and accompanying attitude that's needed.

One thing I want to caution as well, is that this is quite easily likened to the religious funding debate, and it's logical as to why. I think the difference in this case is that our school system isn't failing any specific religion.

Either way, this debate is a worthwhile one and I hope people don't divert from the serious issues by introducing pesky issues. I don't agree with the proposal, but it's definitely worth listening. Not so much to be convinced, but at least to confirm the issues that need to be addressed.

Dion attacks poverty

2007-11-09T15:02:00.000-05:00

Well this is something I feel pretty strongly about, so I'm glad Dion's proposing something on this front. I would've liked more details, but I'm guessing that would be provided in an actual campaign. Nevertheless, this is a real problem in Canada, and it needs to be fixed. At least one leader is willing.

http://www.liberal.ca/story_13293_e.aspx

It's easy to criticize, and I will!

2007-11-07T19:33:00.000-05:00

McGuinty is definitely on base here. This high dollar is not good for the way our economy is structured. Wasn't it a Canadian trait to be cautious and anticipate the storm after the calm, always second guessing our good fortune? Where's the prudence now? I guess it's busy thinking up ways to make everything a matter of confidence. Well I'll make it simple for them: I have no confidence in where they're taking this country. Besides, it's not like those benefits of the high dollar are being passed on to jane and joe consumer. I suppose we should be satisfied with an extra cent off the GST; how much less does a "double double" cost now anyway?

This next one goes under duh! Even though it's not common knowledge to finance ministers current and present, the aforementioned joe and jane consumer (who've now changed their last name to Canadian) are well aware.

UPDATE:

Interesting, both Harper and Bank of Canada Economist Stefan Marion expressing some caution about our dollar's performance. Let's see what action if any will be taken.

What Happened to Canada?

2007-11-06T23:35:00.000-05:00

Tonight on the subway coming home, there was another crazy homeless person. She wasn't really noteworthy until she opened the door and stood between the two cars. Then you could see her yelling at no one in particular, perhaps just her predicament. Even then, it wasn't too noteworthy -- just another crazy Toronto homeless person up to crazy things. Then she came back into the subway car seemingly composed after releasing her frustration between the two cars. Wrong. She couldn't hold it in any longer: at the top of her lungs she screamed, "can somebody please help me, I haven't eaten for 3 days. I have no money because I'm homeless." Yes, we're all aware of the shelters etc. This woman, however, represented something that Canada shouldn't be. Isn't Canada supposed to have measures to deal with these issues. Toronto surely doesn't have the money, but it could. Where can it be fixed? I'd much rather fix this than get some measly income tax cut, but I'm sure both are feasible. Thirteen billion dollars later, and I don't think we're gonna get an answer.

I love politics; I love the strategy and the game, but as they say, it's not all fun and games. It's people's lives we're dealing with. As much as it's said, I don't think it's often realized.

...colour me naive.

Here and there

2007-11-05T23:28:00.000-05:00

Just a couple of things I've been noticing over the past few days...

I remember last Liberal leadership convention, Chretien said something in his speech to the effect of opposition parties don't win election, governing parties lose them. It's not word for word, but you get the picture. Well, I wonder how M. Chretien would rate Harper's handling of Mulroney's latest episode. I hope he keeps a firm grip on that ball.

Next, Stockwell day not advocating for Canadians facing the death penalty abroad is abominable. There's respecting sovereignty, and there's disregarding Canadian lives. I don't think this is really an issue of respecting sovereignty because it's not like the Canadian government is organizing some secret escape or military mission to achieve their goals. However, I do think this is an issue of having no regard for Canadian citizens because if a citizen were being tortured in a foreign land, we would act. Well, I think the death penalty is a pretty severe form of torture don't you? Exactly, it's beyond.

A lil happier.. new Kinsella site looks good. It's almost crossed over to so official though, but that's what people were asking for I guess.

Quebec: Ethnic Controversy?

2007-10-24T10:19:00.000-04:00

Ok so these new suggestions by PQ leader (btw look up what PQ means in France) Pauline Marois that limits should be put on immigrants vying for public office based on the French language ability is a bit stirring: it's undemocratic, unconstitutional, and downright unreal.

This is a desperate party of yesteryear trying to stab in the dark with hopes of gaining popular support in Quebec. Unfortunately those stabs are putting wounds into immigrants and Canada's image, if nothing else, of ethnic diversity. This, my friends, is over the line. Civil liberties and personal freedoms are not topics of political debate, this is why we have stable constitutions and legal traditions that protect these tenets of our society.

As for our central government -- well, Canada's formerly new perhaps now becoming stale government has ducked the issue saying it's a Quebec issue. Wrong! It's a Canada issue. Last time I checked and much to the despair of M. Duceppe and Mme. Marois, Quebec is still a part of Canada. The Tory government needs to "stand up for Canada." For a government that's been courting minorities with Rosh Hashanah cards and the like, why not show your real and sincere interest by standing up when it matters. Or perhaps that interest is not sincere, it's only in place when it doesn't alter their hopes of gaining a majority.

Shame!

Curiosity says...

2007-10-21T21:00:00.000-04:00

What's your aim when you, in the same week, decline your party leader's offer to be the Quebec lieutenant and then make an appearance on the top Quebec current affairs show, "Tout le monde en parle"?

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times

2007-10-17T11:15:00.000-04:00

As the Liberals and Tories are having their post throne speech caucus meetings this morning, all the reporters are emphasizing the conrasting moods of jubiliation and panic in the respective Tory and Liberal caucuses.

Well, that's good news and bad news for both of Canada's two top parties. For the elated "not so new" government, after almost 2 years of governing, their consistent support has not grown significantly save a few polls showing their flirting with but not actually in majority territory. With an opposition that's to say the least divided, good economic times, and a fractured Liberal Quebec branch ther Tories should be wondering why it is that this is the best they can do. However, they might find some comfort in that it will take some time to repair the Quebec Liberal reputation, and they must find some way to capitalize on that. The bottom line is that they're leading regardless of the details, but Harper shouldn't become frivolous with this lead.

As for teh Liberals, well their problems are well documented. Problems in Quebec, not enough support for Dion, and that results in them being a weak opposition. Heck even the NDP who seem to think the Liberals are governing based on how they favour attacking the Liberals more than the Tories have mockingly suggested that they will be the official opposition rather than the Liberals. Someonw should tell the NDP that the real prize is governing, not being official opposition, but the NDP's never understood what it's about anyway. Back to the Liberls, to add to their problems, there's that quack from the Turner years that likes to berate the leader at every opportunity. That's the bad news, and frankly that's a lot of bad news, but if the party can get its house together, they'd realize that Harper has not won over enough Canadians, and many Canadians -- outside of Quebec at least -- are willing to see what the Liberals have to say before they give Harper their support. Unfortunately, the message they've been giving to Canadians as that they can't even manage their own house, much less a G8 country.

In terms of having a change in government, well the polls right now suggest that much wouldn't change if an election were held right now, but before the start of the Ontario campaign Mcguinty and Tory were neck and neck. Lesson: election campaigns matter, but of course that's elementary. The current situation tells me that even though Canadians might not fear Harper as they once did, if they had a reasonable alternative he would be booking tee times with John Tory faster than you can say faith based funding. And all this smack about people not being ready for another election, well it might be the case, but are people that irresponsible that they can't donate the hour or so (quite often less) to go mark an "X" for their, their family's, and their country's interest? Enough with the excuses.

It's official

2007-10-15T21:01:00.000-04:00

Ray Heard is senile. There is no other explanation. Any media outlet that gives this man more opportunity to publicize his thoughts should really think about how they treat the ill.

Da Kink in Canadian TV

2007-10-14T22:03:00.000-04:00

So tonight I watched the premier of the new caribbean, dare I say black, focused show on Global. It's called, of course, Da Kink in My Hair. It's a pretty new experience since I can't remember a black focused homegrown show on Canadian TV. I'm not a TV critic, so I'll leave that job to those who are so skilled; nonetheless, I did enjoy the show even though I worry that Da Kink'sappeal might be a bit narrow because of its cultural root. Funny enough, those cultural roots are the vehicle that drives the show and any potential success it might have.

In terms of the significance of the show, I think it's great to see a black focused show that isn't imported from the US. It's a step to have black and urban youth in Canada see a reflection of themselves that isn't presented through some innner city American lense because, in truth, that's not congruent with the Canadian experience.

It's also a bit of a statement for a station to take a chance on a black focused show because, in doing so, they take a chance on ad revenues and the bottom line of their television statement. At least some people, black or other, are doing the work that compels the Canadian television powers that be to realize the significance of black people in Canada. Nothwithstanding the foregoing, who knows what the shows lifespan would be, but let's hope for the best.

Still, with Da Kink and shows like Little Mosque, it's smart for Canadian TV execs to see new avenues of creating homegrown success. It's difficult to create Canadian shows that can create with the CSI's and the Desperate Housewives. Heck, even our reality shows are imported as evidenced by Canadian Idol and Canada's next top model. What the aforementioned shows provide, however, is a chance for Canadian TV to capitalize on their "competitive advantage." Canada has strong cultural communities and that's something that hasn't really been done in the states. In a country as ours that is fairly receptive to its diverse makeup, representing this reality on TV might be beneficial to the viewer and the network.

Now let's just work on the quality.

A Small Victory...

2007-09-30T12:57:00.000-04:00

Regrdless of how it came about.
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/261932

Kinsella's tough pill for Jamaica (ns)

2007-09-23T10:34:00.000-04:00

Usually when I hear people talking about the negative aspects of Jamaica, be it crime or hateful music, I become somewhat defensive. Warren Kinsella's column on why certain dancehall artists shouldn't be let into Canada kind of gave that same initial reaction.

On instinct, I was ready to defend the "different culture" and how most people don't take the language seriously, but truthfully those aren't good reasons. I am from Jamaica and I'm a direct subject of this hate against minorities, but I've never taken issue with this music. In actuality, I dance to this music and enjoy it. Even last night. However, I have to consider the bigger picture: I came from a reasonable family, in a reasonable neighbourhood, and went to a reasonable school where this kind of hate would have no traction, but this might not be the case for everyone. Everyone did not grow up like me. Since moving to Toronto, I've met many guys of Caribbean who descent who are on the "DL" and it's due to the attitude reflected by this music that is pervasive in Caribbean culture. This hate can and does affect people's attitudes and behaviours and that's dangerous. Certainly, that doesn't belong in Canada.

I didn't even know about the white hate part. That's beyond anything anyone can rationalize. As I said before, I'm usually quick to the Jamaican defensive, and when it said "Jamaican murder music" in the title, I was like here we go, another blow to the image. In reality though, Kinsella or any other writer doesn't owe Jamaica anything. They don't work for the Jamaica Tourism Board. What Jamaica needs to do is clean up their own act at home. That's as tall of task as there is, but if Canada joins countries like the UK in voicing their disgust maybe, in time, the message will be received.

In terms of the title, I've accepted it. This murder music is a product of Jamaica just like Appleton Rum or Blue Mountain Coffee. As well, it's not an attempt to single Jamaica out. I'm reading this book called Web of Hate and Kinsella exposes neo-nazi/aryan hate there, so doing the same in other venues isn't just fair, it's right.

That's debatable

2007-09-21T10:57:00.000-04:00

Well what to say about last night's Ontario Party Leader's debate?

I don't think anyone stole the show. I didn't like all those video questions, and I thought the debate was a bit boring. Ninety minutes of two guys with very little in common unrelentlessy attaching anothe guy kinda does that.

The team of the night was Mcguinty's brokem promises. Hello, may I speak to the last 4 years please? Yes. Okay well, I just wanted to say that these broken promises are now a broken record. People know about them and the anger won't resurface. Mcguinty on his part, however, was smart to start off with the broken promise, and he initially defined himself as a leader who made the tough and correct choice. Mcguinty's best show was to keep on referring to his family and the lessons his dad taugh him. I would think that would go over well. I didn't like him constantly shaking his head. I don't think it was the best body language, but I think he did well when he became passionate and went off on Tory for calling him a liar (in everything but name).

In terms of Tory: he wasn't bad, but he wasn't good. He focused too much on why people shouldn't vote for Mcguinty instead of why they should vote for him. Sure, you should make the contrast, but that's been done and done and done. In the end, Tory didn't give Ontario anything significant enough to say "we want that guy." Tory did have a good joke though, saying that "by the end of the debate Mcguinty will be blaming Sir John A. Macdonald for everything that's gone wrong." That was said in reference to Mcguinty's reference to the mismanagement he inherited. Tory, however, was quite weak when talking about poverty. No real ideas.

As for Hampton.. what's the NDP doing? They need a new leader. I understand he was ill, and that's quite symbolic of his party's prospects. Sure he's trying to get his ideas out, but he wasn't always coherent, and importantly he wasn't very inviting. I don't understand why he was trying to attack the funding formula so much when anyone with kids in schools or who's been in school over the last 10 years clearly knows education in Ontario has improved. He and Tory gave Mcguinty way too many chances to say that education in Ontario has improved. You think people are gonna toss and turn over some bureaucratic formula? Likely not. Explain in the bottom line, and in that regard Mcguinty has some traction.

In the end, well I'm sure you've heard this before in other debates, but by there being no real winner, Mcguinty was the winner because Tory didn't show why Ontario should vote for him.

Not so Live from the World Track Championships..doing it, and doing it, and doing it well.

2007-08-27T18:20:00.000-04:00

Well, the biggest story played out pretty dramatically. In the men's 100m Asafa Powell started well, but he couldn't put a good race together. In his own words he panicked, and Tyson Gay passed him for the win. In my opinion the result was Asafa Powell losing the race and Tyson Gay running well. Now the moniker of choker is on Asafa; well there were lots of expectations, justifiably, but this is still a huge accomplishment for Asafa getting his first major medal. Hopefully these guys will both be there for round two in Beijing. Congrats to Tyson, he seems like a nice guy.

In the women's 100m, a woman coached by Tyson Gay's coach did what she does best: she cleaned up Asafa's mess. In the '04 Olympics when Asafa didn't perform, Veronica Campbell stole the show for Jamaica and came out a double gold medallist. This year, when Asafa was beaten by an Amercican, Campbell edged two Americans and brought back the first 100m gold at a world championships or Olympics to Jamaica. Hopefully Sherone Simpson will get better, and these two can do the damn thing in Beijing.

As for my boy Adam Kunkel, he ran a pretty good semi in the 400m hurdles, leading just until after the last hurdle where the speedy Kerron Clement used his superior strength to power past Kunkel. Kerron is speedy and one of my favourites for gold. He's underperformed in major championships, so he should be motivated to prove himself. He's lost a bit of allure after breaking Michael Johnson's indoor 400m record, so he should be hungry. Stil, I think Kunkel can get a top 5, and possibly a top 3. He needs to run a smart race though and be smoother over the last 30 metres.

Let's handicap the race. The two Americans Carter and Clement should be the faves, then we have an Olympic champion (Sanchez), Olympic silver medallist (Macfarlane), former world junior champ (Plawgo), and a Canadian record holder all battling for the medals.

Next we have a couple of Canadian girls. 2003 100m hurdles world champion Perdita Felicien and Olympic finallist Angela Whyte. Perdita is rounding into form, and though she's not the favourite she's definitely back on the upswing the that great pre Athens 2004 season she had. As for Angela Whyte, she's always performing. She's one of those people that doesn't get that much glory, but she's always there performing. Hopefully they can make it to the finals, with Felicien having a higher likelihood. I'm tagging Felicien for a bronze.

Small notes:

In the women's 10 000m Tirunesh Dibaba of Ethiopia almost lost her shoe, put it back on, caught up with the field, the ran a lightning last lap to kick butt.. her own that is. She was riding that bike like whoa (I'm referring to her stride).

And CBC, their coverage is kinda random. I don't know who decided which heats they would show, but they show the most random things. They need to do their research on who's actually performing well this year rather than just looking at who's done well in the past. Still, I like Don Whitman and Michael Smith.. way better than Brian Williams and Peter Berwash on TSN tennis. Shiver.

Not so Live from the World Track Championships

2007-08-25T19:42:00.000-04:00

Even though the only other sport I've really spoken about on here is Tennis, I'm a massive sports fan. I'm just a passing fan of the major North American "big" team sports except for Hockey; I'm much more into Amateur and/or less popular sports. Purely just by accident.

Anyway, that was my prelude to my future random tirades about what's going on in the World Track Championships. Most people in Canada are probably not huge track and field championships, so they're missing out.

The champs started today/yesterday in Osaka, Japan. I say today/yesterday because the time difference with Osaka causes the daytime events to start in the late evening here and continue into the next day.

Either way, let's talk about the events. The marquee event is no doubt the men's 100m. It's usually the marquee event of what I think is the whole Olympics, and it's no different in this World Track Championships. It has a few dynamics: The current world record holder, Asafa Powell versus this year's world leader Tyson Gay. It has arguably the top two sprinting nations in the world facing off: Jamaica (Powell) vs. USA (Gay). Not to be outdone, it has Nike (Powell) versus Adidas (Gay).

While the last one isn't that significant, everthing about this meeting is. Powell and Gay haven't faced off at all this year. Gay has been running up a storm while Powell has been slightly injured this year, but he now seems to be back on form. I think most people are secretly picking Gay to win, but I'm not so sure. Powell has been the best sprinter over the last four years, but all he has to show for it is breaking the world record and equalling it twice. I'm not joking when I say that. Powell has hat big meet disappointments in the Olympics (poor performance) and the World Championships (injury). This year, though, he seems to have learned from it. Save one night out enjoying Osaka's nocturnal pleasures. He's looked good through the heats and the quarterfinals, running 10.34 and a very capable 10.01 respectively. The 10.01 in the quarterfinals was quite impressive because he eased up and was watching himself on the big screen; this means he has a lot more in his tank. 10.01, ladies and gentlemen is a wicked time. Only three people left in the competition have run faster this year, just to put it in perspective, and Powell did it without breathing heavily.

As for Gay, he's quite impressive. He ran a wind aided 9.76 which is faster than the world record, but the time doesn't qualify because it had too much of a helping win (above 2.0 meters per second I think). He's quite the 200m runner as well, second only to the legend Michael Johnson at that distance. Still, his emergence is a bit peculiar. His coach is in jail so he gets his workouts sent to him from his coach in jail. He also came up really quickly this year: last year he was an impressive 200m runner and a capable 100m runner, but now he's this 100m phenom.

It's just crazy how the US keeps on popping out these amazing 100m sprinters. After the very able Maurice Green passed his peak, former world record holder Tim Montgomery came out of nowhere. His career then died due to doping complications. Then after Montgomery's demise, 2004 Olympic Champion Justin Gatlin had a meteoric rise. He equalled Powell's current world record, but now he's fighting doping charges. Now we have Tyson Gay. Let's see what happens.

Let's move on to my favourite event, the women's 100m. The early rounds if this even starts August 26th. It's my favourite because two of my favourite atheletes are competing: Veronica Campbell and Merlene Ottey.

Campbell the silver medallist from the last world championships and the bronze medallist from the last Olympics at this event is looking for the medal that has eluded her (and Ottey) in this event. She's the only woman to have run sub 11 seconds in each of the last 4 seasons, and she too has a little bit to prove after being outshadowed last year by her Jamaican teammate Sheron Simpson. Last year Campbell was injured, and this year Simpson is injured and missing the world champs. While everyone is talking about Tyson Gay completing the men's sprint double (100m and 200m gold), Veronica Campell is just as serious. She's been a top 3 sprinter in the 100 over the last 4 seasons, and the only person who's run a faster 200m than her 2004 gold medal win since 1999 is Simpson. Like I said, Simpson is not competiting due to injury.

Who is competing this year, though, is the bionic woman, Merlen Ottey. Think about this: a woman who will be the qualifying age for the Senior PGA tour in less than 3 years is competing with athletes half her age, and she's performing very ably. While Ottey won't get a medal at these championships, she does have a shot at making the quarter or semi finals. That's pretty damn good for a 47 year old. To put her career in perspective, the first track and field world championships were held in 1983. Guess what? Ottey was there and she medalled. That's before I was even born. Here is she is 24 years later still proving she has it. To sum up Merlene Ottey's presence in the 100m competition, she has run below the world elite 11 second barrier more than 67 times in competition. I would bet good money that this mark is more than all of her other competitors' combined total of dipping below that barrier as only 8 other women in the field have accomplished that feat at least once. Merlene Ottey is the Spirit of Sport.

Now let's talk about the Canadians. I'm not CBC's Canadian trail, so I'm not gonna mention each Canadian and congratulate them for just showing up, but I will mention the ones to watch. My two for this weekend are Adam Kunkel and Diane Cummins. Kunkel is an up and comer in the 400m hurdles, and he's been lowering the Canadian record over the last couple of years. I expect him to make the finals in that event where if he does, he should be an outside shot for a medal. I wouldn't be surprised if he broke the Canadian record at these champs and follows Perdita Felicien and Tyler Christopher (whom I'm sure I'll mention later in these champs) as surprise achievers in the world champs.

As for Cummins, she's past her peak, but she's still world class. She's dipped below the magical 2 minute barrier this year in her event, the 800m. Unfortunately, the quality to medal will likely be above what Cummins can produce, but she has a half decent shot at making the finals. Cummins deserves even further credit as being a very consistent performe on the Canadian team. I remember in 2001 when Edmonton hosted the world champs, she was the only one who made Canada proud. This Victoria based athlete has represented her adopted home very well, and we should continue to support her.

Oh JT (John Tory)

2007-08-23T09:06:00.000-04:00

He's bringing stupid back (yaaa)

Ok, I just wanted to do that.

Seriously though John Tory and Tories in general must hate education because after a very tumultuous last decade that compromised my personal elementary and high school experience, they are once again advocating non sensical reforms to the Ontario school system.

What John Tory wants is for private religious school to receive public funds. His argument is to give the same treatment to other religious minorities as Catholic schools get. On the surface that seems like a good idea, but it really makes no sense to publicly fund religious schools. It would just create a segregated environment in which children won't really grasp the concept of the real world. By all means, it's a personal choice to attend a private school, but public funds shouldn't fund this personal choice and personal beliefs.

Changing the funding for Catholic schools currently doesn't make any sense. For quite a while now it's been done that way. Usually that's a really bad argument, but in this case it makes sense. Catholic schools are a significant part of the education infrastructure, and changing that should not be a priority given the recent history of disruption in our school system. There is a time and place for everything, and this is not the time. You can make the comparsion to official languages: English and French were chosen as the official languages in a different time with a different tone. Currently there are many languages spoken in Canada, but it wouldn't make much sense to add all of those as official languages even though many of them are spoken en masse. This is the same situation for funding religious schools.

I see this ploy by John Tory as an illadvised strategy. He's trying to attack McGuinty at what is arguably his most significance outperformance of the previous government: there is relative harmony for school kids, and I guess the tories hate that? This kind of cheap trick to try and get minority votes is stupid, and if that's the kind of divisive clash of civilizations strategy Tory wants to run on, I'd urge McGuinty and Kinsella to take him to school.