What do the Opposition parties propose for the economy?

I find it quite astonishing that there is absolutely nothing coming from the Opposition parties as alternative policies to ruling Conservative government. All they can do is complain and produce a motion to topple the government:

The Liberals have prepared a motion saying the House of Commons has lost confidence in the Conservatives, their economic strategy is insufficient in the face of the global financial crisis and they’ve failed to introduce a plan to boost the economy.

Uh….. OK. So, the House has lost confidence but what should be the economic strategy??? Let me be clear: I am not saying that the Conservative strategies are fine. I just find it hilarious that the Opposition has not presented any alternatives. You would think they would have at least something. Maybe Canadians should fear the Opposition parties more than anything else!

If anybody has found something resembling a shadow budget from the Opposition parties, please let me know.

Dan McTeague wants the government to rescue Canadians from Thailand

The government should not be responsible for rescuing Canadians who are in trouble abroad. Rather, the travel insurance companies should be responsible for that. Here is some nonsense that comes from one opposition member:

Liberal MP Dan McTeague says it’s “absolutely paramount” that Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon take steps to get Canadians out of Bangkok as soon as possible.

Nobody Panic: Harper’s Not Going Anywhere

If you’re watching the news lately, you’ve probably heard about this new “coalition government” cooked up by Chretien and Broadbent. The Liberals, NDP and Bloc are going to unite under one banner (Let’s call it the People’s Freedom Party for Democracy and Freedom), thus saving Canada as we know it.

The PFPDF is never going to happen, and I’ll tell you why. First (and most glaringly obvious), the Bloc is never going to sign onto something like that. They’ll do exactly what they’ve done in the past, which is reviewing legislation on a case-by-case basis, which is not enough to convince the GG that the PFPDF is viable.

Second, and only slightly less damning, is the fact that anyone who claims to be able to unite the Jack! guys, the Rae guys, and the Ignatieff guys around Stephane Dion (who doesn’t even HAVE guys anymore) is either fooling you, or fooling themselves.

And finally, Harper is just so smart to lose to the PFPDF. Of all the politicians in Canada today, he is undeniably best at the game of politics.

So can all of us pundits please just calm down? Our government is not collapsing.

Media Frames Defunding of Parties as an Attack on Opposition

It looks like some people were paying attention to what the Conservatives did to Stephane (I keep wanting to call him Celine) Dion.  When the Conservatives went out and bought TV spots all over the place talking about how wishy-washy and flaky he was, they successfully framed him and framed the conversation around him.

Now, in a time of economic crisis, the Conservatives are looking for things to cut that will save us from more taxes, a very bad thing when people already are paranoid they might not have any money or employment to tax.  They recognize that Jean Chretien, a decade or so ago, came up with the brilliant idea of addicting federal political parties to the government’s largesse.  He had this clever scheme, you see, of making sure that rich people (or any organization with a vested interest in the political process) could not give scads of money to political parties to curry favour.

The less well-publicized reason was to handicap conservative political foes with business contacts.

Still less publicized was the fact that Chretien still needed money coming into Liberal offers to run things like elections, which he preferred to call every 3 or so years because that was when he could most handicap his opponents, despite the cost to taxpayers for an election.  So he decided to make elections even more expensive – he dreamed up the current system where the parties get money, for free, from the government, instead of having to fundraise.

Conveniently, the Liberals were running high in the polls, so they got most of the money.

However, because of this program, parties which have become immensely lazy and poorly organized can now garner national attention and spend money on advertising and campaigning, without expending hardly any effort to fundraise.

So now the Conservatives, having prudently planned for the future (something most leftists aren’t familiar with), have a solid fundraising infrastructure and no debt.  If the government teat for political parties gets shut off, sure as the party polling highest, they will lose the most funding, but they know they will hurt their opposition more because the opposition has not created the fundraising infrastructure to seriously compete.

Is this the Conservatives’ fault?  No.

But the media is surely working hard to frame them that way.  They are trying desperately to make this cost-cutting, pro-democracy, populist, conservative move to do away with federal funding of political parties into a totalitarian move bent on crippling any voice of dissent.

Funny, the media isn’t affected by this cut.

To de-fund political parties is a brilliant move to save this country tens of millions of dollars per year.  Political parties were never meant to be funded by government.  It is crazy to think that Canadians for the last 10 years or so have been forced to contribute to political parties via their taxes.  I can’t believe that law was ever passed.  If I contribute to a political party, it is because I choose to, based on their positions and their platform.  If I disagree with them all, I should be able to take my contribution and move it to another party that better reflects my viewpoint.  That was how the Reform Party was begun.  That was how every party in existence began.  Forcibly requiring all Canadians to contribute to political parties is completely undemocratic and only serves to entrench the current parties as the only options.  It makes it doubly hard for any new party to arise to replace moribund or untrusted parties.  Any new party starting up faces the uphill battle of raising all of their support from the grassroots, while those they fight against simply siphon off the government the money they need to beat back any competitors.

Especially in light of a party like the Liberals, so close to simply collapsing, they are being propped up by the government after their fundraising and all public faith has evaporated in them.  If this program didn’t exist, a new, energized form of Liberals (or something) could arise with a strong network of support on equal footing.  The Liberals’ waste and corrupt ways would drag them off the political map in a well-deserved hurry.  Then we would have true renewal.

Keep in mind, it isn’t that I don’t think there should be opposition.  But there should be effective opposition.  There should be opposition that actually listens to its roots, and doesn’t simply tell them what is good for them.  Whether it is left or right or center, this is the way politics should be.  As long as the government props up failed ideologies, we will suffer under a lack of true democracy.

Myspace Terror Mom violated “Terms and Conditions”

The twisted vindictive mother who pretended to be a love-struck boy was convicted of violating the “Terms and Conditions” of the Myspace social networking site. She plotted to break the heart of one of her daughter’s “friends” knowing the girl was already suffering from depression. The poor girl committed suicide. The daughter had to testify against her mother and got immunity for confessing that she participated in the taunting.

Wow.
Thankfully, there was the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to get her on a technicality otherwise the world would be anarchy! I guess I am not the only one who is less than impressed.

Muslim honor killings and British money killings

It is all too easy to blame Muslim culture for conducting honor killings. I do not know what is worse: killing a person to defend family honor or killing a person for money:

The hit men – John Reeves, 55, of Adlington Road, Sheffield; Naveed Mahmood, 23, of Granville Road, Sheffield; and Sam Lee, 30, of Deerlands Avenue, Sheffield –- had been hired as contract killers by Arza Khan, 28, of Parkinson Road, Halifax – Mr Mehmood’s brother in law.

I think Detective Superintendent is only partially right when he declares:

It is my opinion that this murder had nothing to do with honour in the ordinary sense of the word, and everything to do with power and control over a young woman.

It is quite simply the most extreme form of domestic abuse.

There can never be any justification for murder and those convicted today will have a long time in prison to reflect on their actions.

We justify murder all of the time. We hire police officers and soldiers to do our bidding in exercizing deadly force. The way we justify “murder” is simply semantic: we change its definition. It was not long ago that the thought of marrying a woman after consulting her parents — nay, asking them for permission — was completely normal throughout the entire world. To do otherwise was dishonorable and asking for trouble.

Francoise David invites herself online to the Quebec leaders debate

Francoise David, the leader of the Quebec Solidaire party was refused participation in today’s leaders debate. [The leader of the Green Party was also refused.] In response, she is going to answer the debate questions online simultaneously by webcasting through her own site: www.FrancoiseDavid.com She will also field questions submitted to her online.

Facebook lawsuit against Adam Guerbuez (from Montreal) is a waste of tax money and an abuse of the legal system

A San Jose court has awarded more than $800 million to Facebook in an anti-spam judgement against a guy called Adam Guerbuez from Montreal. This is the nonsense that Facebook’s senior corporate counsel had to say:

“We are very much intent on policing the site and making sure Facebook is not seen as a place for spammers to target,” O’Rourke said.

To which I say: “No, sir, you are NOT intent on policing the site. Rather, you are doing the opposite. You are intent on making the tax-payer police your site. You should be cutting out the spam yourself instead of wasting tax-payer’s money seeking court judgements. Clean up your own site!”

Spam should be treated like a technical problem. The operators of Facebook should prevent it and police it internally. Tax-payers who do not avail themselves of the entertainment of Facebook should not subsidize the business of solving Facebook’s problems filtering spam.

Hassan Diab extradition from Canada is wrong

I object to these extradition hearings for Hassan Diab no matter what the “evidence” is against him. [I find the evidence to be highly dubious.] Extradition is kidnapping without a trial.

Instead of Canadians wasting time, effort and money to determine whether Hassan Diab should be extradited, the French police should face the following choices:

• come to Canada and hold their trial in Canada open to the Canadian public — all costs fully paid by the French
• invite Hassan Diab to voluntarily submit to a trial in France or convict him in absentia

I see no reason to trust a foreign judicial system.

Obama, Behind the Hope: Parts Two and Three: The Bad and the Ugly

Over the next few days I intend to do a short series of blogs on the new President-elect of the United States of America, Mr. Barack Obama, to try and dig past the “Hope and Change” buzzwords, the “Messiah” talk coming from the left, and the “Evil Muslim Commie” talk coming from the right. This series will come in three parts: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

Last time I outlined the positives for Obama, but this time I’m aiming for the bad, and the ugly. I’ll begin by looking at his stances and promises, in his own words. That’s right, GlacialGal, they’re still on his site!

For starters, there is his policy on service. While not in and of itself disturbing, his intention to require all high school graduates do 50 hours of public service bears similarities to the draft. While there are difference, his intention to require all teenagers to serve the country differs from the draft in degree, not in direction.

He also intends to further regulate the health insurance industry, reverse the Bush tax cuts and seems ready to target high earning citizens for tax increases.

To find more of his opinions, check out the link above. In short, Obama is a liberal (SURPREEZ!). He’s not a Marxist, no matter how you try to paint it, but his views on many positions are worrisome.

I chose to combine Parts Two and Three due to time constraints, similarity of the subjects, and the fact that most of our readers are conservatives who have already been informed of his many policy weaknesses.

Next Page »