Shorter Garth Turner

Garth sez: “It’s important that individual MPs be allowed to stand up against the party leader!”

Garth sez: “I support legislation which would require MPs to resign after leaving the party they were elected under, removing arguably the most important method for individual MPs to stand up against the party leader!”

How to reconcile the two? Make whichever choice is more likely to get Garth some coverage.

Join the 1st Bi-Weekly Conservative Redemption Run!

When the Liberals score a defection in Parliament, they celebrate. But not us ethical Conservatives! In recognition of this fact and of David Emerson’s defection, make room on your calendar for The 1st Bi-Weekly CPC Redemption Run, to be held the day after tomorrow!

We will meet at the Harbour Centre in Vancouver at 4AM. After paying their registration fee, participants will be given ashes with which to smear over their bodies. Then as a group activity, participants will tear their shirts and wail out towards the heavens, begging the gods for forgiveness. Once our shirts are sufficiently rendered, participants will be given the offical Run uniform, a piece of sack-cloth. After the uniforms have been fitted, runners will begin the run from Vancouver to Kelowna, straight across the mountains. Runners will engage in the requisite wailing, gnashing of teeth, and begging for forgiveness during the duration of the run. At Vancouver city limits, runners will be given complimentary whips and sticks so that they can whip their own bare backs and red asses for the entirety of the run. Hopefully a bit of evil can be beaten out of the runners before reaching Kelowna.

It is expected that some runners will expire before we reach our destination. This is to be expected and welcomed as a gift to the gods to atone for our evil ways. The Redemption Run has been scheduled to occur bi-weekly, but it is likely that Conservatives will find something abhorent in the actions of the government more often than that, so stay tuned for further updates!

Porn Sleaze Peddling CBC - Your Tax Dollars at Work

Check out what the CBC has been doing with your tax dollars. In the pursuit to broadcast the highest quality television for Canadians, the CBC has outdone itself with the show, Nerve. Apparently filming bizarre sexual activities and otherwise deviant behaviour is now passing as quality television on our public broadcaster. Is this show adhering the broadcasters mandate?

Lets hope Stephen Harper pulls the plug on this national embarrassment.

Update: Learn more about this show and its content at ProuttobeCanadian.ca

Update 2: The CBC can broadcast this, but it has reservations again the Howard Stern Show?

“It’s no secret that Howard Stern’s programming is not consistent with the kind of programming you would find on CBC/Radio Canada’s airwaves, but this is a Sirius Canada decision,” said CBC spokesman Jason MacDonald.

He’s kidding right? Does he not watch the network he works for?

They lost the election, but not the ability to feel

Here is an interesting group session centred around the question, “How does the Emerson defection make you feel?” Naturally, many participants have had their feelings hurt. I would just like to say that I think it’s wonderful that these guys have the opportunity to come together and share their feelings with one another so openly and so honestly. Real men cry. Yes, real men do cry.

Princess Monkey: “I thought when nonsense like this happened, I, as a Harper-opposed voter, would feel some kind of perverse vindication. I wish I did, but I don’t. I just feel dejectedly indifferent. Is that cynicism? Must be. It sucks.”

Balbulican: “I’m working on malicious glee, but I’m having a hard time keeping it…”

Treehugger: “I think I am still stuck on “I told you soâ€? smug.”

Ti-Guy: “With me, it’s reverting back to my resolute dislike of Stephen Harper.”

No word on whether the session ended with a big ‘ol group hug.

UPDATE: And here are the same players expressing decidedly different emotions over the defection of Belinda Stronach. It looks like Harper is not the only one who can reasonably be accused of hypocrisy in this episode.

The newspaper editorial that never was

“Following the election a couple of weeks ago, we, like most other media outlets, made much of the fact that the Conservative government had not won any seats from Canada’s “major urban centres,” namely, Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal. In unveiling his cabinet this week, the prime minister took decisive and unorthodox steps to correct this situation. Both Vancouver and Montreal are now represented not just in the Conservative government, but in the cabinet as a whole. Given our previous preoccupation with the government’s lack of representation from these urban centres, we applaud the prime minister’s leadership on this file.

Oh wait, that was yesterday. We no longer care about representation from urban centres; we now care solely about the the circumventing of the democratic process represented by appointing a non-elected minister and a member elected by another party. We call on the prime minister to address this egregious problem.

Of course, we also called on the prime minister to address the egregious problem of lack of representation from urban centres, which he just has. But that was yesterday. And rest assured that if the prime minister addresses the problem that we are currently dissatisfied with, we will find a whole new problem with him to bitch about the next day. That is, as the Canadian media, our sacred trust, that is our solemn promise to you. ”

Making an early appearance: The Tory Syndrome

#1: Read this book.

#2: Read this post by a Blogging Tory.

#3: Say, “Oh, now I understand why the Liberals were in power for most of the last century.”

Update: Steve Janke is keeping a list of Blogging Tories who have come out supporting Harper on this issue.

Update 2:: Andrew has responded to this post here. He is a nice guy and disagreeing with him is always a chore.

The Courageous John Manley

John Manley has indicted his own party and a Liberal prime minister for mishandling Canada’s friendship with the United States.

A former senior Liberal cabinet minister says repairing Canada’s relationship with the United States should be a top priority for new prime minister Stephen Harper.

John Manley says the two countries have to regain a personal trust that critics say deteriorated between President George W. Bush and former prime minister Paul Martin.

Critics say? And why only finger Paul Martin?! The decline in Canada’s relations with the United States was well under way with, and because of, Jean Chretien. And it was not any better during Pierre Trudeau, for that matter.
If Manley had said that the relations with the US need improvement, that would signify that they were Okay but could be better. Manley’s call for a repairing of our relations with the United States, however, is an admission that his party and the two previous PMs, not just Paul Martin, have significantly hurt them and placed them in a state of disrepair. Typically, things that are working well do not need repair.
While he was in office, Manley once mused about getting rid of the Monarchy. He summoned enough independence of mind to call into question that institutions, but never dared to criticise either of the last two Liberal prime ministers for their part in damaging the relations with our closest neighbour.

So, he now calls on Harper to fix the mess. What a tough guy. While he was in the arena himself, Manley remained in a corner quietly watching the corrida, half afraid of the bull. Now that he is out of harm’s way safely seated among the spectators, he’s full of bravado. Now he can yell at the matador and tell him what to do.

I am inclined to say that it’s bull, but chicken is the animal that most readily comes to mind instead.

Crossposted from Civitatensis.ca

A Head-scratcher

Many people may have earned the right to criticise Stephen Harper for bringing David Emerson to the Tories and to the Cabinet. Liberals are not among them, we all know that. But among Liberals the last one you’d expect to call into question the ethics of the Conservative gamble on Emerson would be Belinda Stronach –if she were bright. If…

“I think the Canadian public will look at this and have the right to ask questions,” she [Stronach] said. “They’re going to be left scratching their heads.”

People can ask questions, to be sure. But Ms. Stronach really is not the ideal person to prompt them to do that. It amazes me –though it doesn’t surprise me– that she would not know that.

Crossposted at Civitatensis.ca

Lies, Lies and Entitlements

It is apparent that Paul Martin openly lied to Parliament and to Canadians when he said that David Dingwall had quit his job at the Royal Canadian Mint of his own volition.

In one of its last actions before transferring power, the Liberal government has agreed to pay David Dingwall $417,780 in compensation for his dismissal as head of the Royal Canadian Mint.

Privy Council Office announced the payment Saturday following the decision of an independent arbitrator, George Adams, who concluded that Mr. Dingwall had not resigned, as the government suggested at the time, but had been fired.

Mr. Dingwall left [was fired from] the $277,000-a-year-job in September after a prolonged controversy about his six-figure office expense account.

Is anyone surprised?

David Akins at CTV tells us that George Adams’ report, finding that David Dingwall was fired and therefore “entitled to his entitlements,” was issued on January 20, three days before the federal election. Ottawa bureaucrats issued a release today claiming that Paul Martin did not know of the report until today. Until today, but Dingwall was cut a cheque for the $417,780 on Friday. Who can believe that?

A senior official in the Prime Minister’s Office said neither Prime Minister Paul Martin nor any other campaigning politician knew about the Dingwall settlement until Saturday, when officials in the Privy Council Office issued a news release.

Government bureaucrats refused a CTV News request to view the report produced by Adams.

No one in the Prime Minister’s Office or the Privy Council Office would appear on camera.

I am sure Paul Martin was really sincere when at his last press conference he said that he regretted nothing.

We need to start getting used to this sort of thing. No matter how much shredding has been going on in Ottawa for the last couple of weeks, the new government is bound to discover more and greater lies and Liberal mischief.

Crossposted from Civitatensis.ca

Appointed Politician Shuns Elected Politicians

The chief Supreme politician wants elected politicians not to be involved in judicial politics.

Chief Justice Beverly McLaughlin reportedly does not want the process to select Supreme Court Justices to be politicised. Interestingly, when Liberals and select interest groups have pushed for one judge over another to be appointed, the Supreme Justice has never complained about politicisation.

Chief Justice McLaughlin said the public would not want its high court to be a “mirror� of Parliament.

There is something really curious about this. The appointed Judge is not making a constitutional argument about balancing democratic power, or a legal argument in favour of the present arrangement of selecting judges. She is basing her remarks on her supposed understanding of what the public wants. It is an argument based on a democratic appeal.

But under our constitutional structure, elected members of the House of Commons are the repository of democratic authority. MPs, not judges, may speak for the public. Law is the business of judges, not public opinion.

When judges claim authority on the basis of what the public wants, they are shamelessly usurping the authority of the Commons –and hence the voice of the electorate. The point of having MPs elected is so that they may have the required proximity to the pulse of public opinion. Judges are appointed precisely to insulate them from public opinion.

The demagoguery of the Chief Justice is apparent. In essence, McLaughlin is politicking when she appeals to public opinion, and in doing so, she undermines her own argument rejecting the politicisation of the judicial (Isn’t it kind of late for that?). By acting like a politicians she is very much politicising her own office.

Ultimately, Chief Justice McLaughlin is either demonstrating supreme ignorance about our proper constitutional order, or a blatant desire to beat politicians at their own game. Either way, she undermines the legitimacy of her office.

Crossposted from Civitatensis.ca

« Previous Page — Next Page »