The difference makes it interesting

You know the difference between Canadian and American politics? Canadian politicians can actually stand to be around other that don’t have the same bent- that can’t be said for our neighbors to the south. I’m convinced of the fact that John Baird (environment minister) doesn’t dislike David McGuinty (Liberal environment critic), and I’m relatively sure that Stephen Harper and Stephane Dion have a lot in common. Peter MacKay and Belinda Stronach? Alright, probably blanket statements won’t work, but you get the idea.

In the States it’s a totally different political culture. Republicans just don’t like Democrats. They think they eat stem cells for breakfast. Democrats don’t like Republicans. Good God-fearing Republicans, but probably too God-fearing for the lefties.

Argue against it. Say they love each other. Why then are there news organizations like FOX News, who’s slogan is “Fair and Balanced” when nothing could be farther from the truth. And look at daytime TV-

**DISCLAIMER- I do not watch “The View.” The thought of a show where 4-5 women yell at each other and no one actually knows what is happening makes me run for the TUMS...ahh relief.

If you haven’t heard- they talked a little about politics yesterday on “The View.” Well, probably a little more than a little. Well, probably a ten minute screaming match between Rosie O’Donnell and Elizabeth Hasselbeck about who was a coward and who wasn’t. Basically, they confirmed yesterday what “viewsees” have been thinking about this show since Rosie joined the clan- Elizabeth (Rep.) HATES Rosie (Dem.).

It was purely about politics. Rosie (who holds nothing back) said something that was blown out of proportion by FOX and asked Elizabeth (who never lacks praise for G-Dub) to pick up for her. The response was (as most political conversations go), this is a good time for you to clarify what you said and what you meant by it. Rosie proceeded to call her a coward, and the fight was on!

Alright, that’s it about “The View.”

I’m glad there isn’t that climate in Canada. There may be what has been referred to as the “left wing bias” in the media. But it hasn’t spawned a host of right wing papers, television stations and radio programs telling people that anyone with a liberal bent should be avoided like the plague.

I would caution people about getting too wrapped up in politics. Unless you are a person who feels the need to put your name on the ballot- listen to other people’s opinions. You may not agree, but at least you can take a little time to listen to their “view.” I know, I’m sorry.

No School For You

Threats have been made in the Halifax area over the last week- no doubt, some idiot thinks that it’s a lot of fun to call the school and say there’s a bomb inside. This, of course, forces the evacuation of the school and ensues in a day off for the idiot and his/her classmates.

Doug Hadley, a spokesperson for the Halifax Regional School Board, says they’re looking into their own form of discipline to deter youngsters from pulling this prank.

But, what would deter these morons? It’s obvious they don’t have a whole lot of grey matter to begin with. Even the arrest of a 17 year old student this week didn’t stop them from doing it again the next day.

They must think they’re smart. WAKE UP CALL TO THE MORONS: send your threat in an email- IP address can be checked. Ditto for phone records. The police will find you. It might not be today or tomorrow, but you’ll be found.

I actually have a suggestion for Mr. Hadley and the Halifax School Board. Anyone arrested by police and convicted of a threat such as this- Expulsion. Not just for the year- or the next year.....from every school in the board- for good. No education for you....you obviously do not respect the people trying to help you get through school.

Certainly, these idiots are not even smart enough to understand that they need a high school education to get somewhere in life. Hell, they’re not even smart enough to read this letter.

The Potemkin Nova Scotia

(Editor’s note: Since I didn’t know the meaning of the “Potemkin Village” until recently myself here is a link that you can go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village#Modern_view)

Rodney MacDonald is out to lunch. Of this, I have little doubt.

Let’s go back in time a little (insert those squiggly lines and the stupid music to indicate time warp capability). Just a couple of weeks ago, the now aptly nick-named Jim “flip-flop” Flaherty came to the Halifax Stanfield International Airport and had a sit-down with the acting minister of Finance- the Hon. Angus MacIsaac.

MacIsaac was told, in no uncertain terms, the “new” government of Canada was not going to waver on the budget measures implemented that would see the province lose their offshore accord signed with the previous government in 2005. Rodney must not have been listening.

A couple of days later, MacDonald mused that the government had been thrown a bone, and would be given a larger window to opt in to whichever situation would help them the most. The premier indicated they had been given until 2013 to decide and would be able to carry on in the new equalization scheme until that time. The feds quickly stomped down that rumour, and so now MacDonald is in spin mode.

Rodney says everything’s fine. His “potemkin village” of Nova Scotia is making progress in getting the Feds to cave into the pressure of a province that delivered 3 MP’s to the Commons. A grand total of 3! All three of those MP’s voted with their party last night and passed the measure of the budget that would effectively scrap the Atlantic Accord. (The 3 MP’s from Newfoundland did to, even though they were given assurances by the party they would not be reprimanded if they chose to vote against it).

The premier must be thinking if he keeps saying “nothing is wrong” and the province will make the feds bow at the mercy of the province, then people will start to believe him. He better hope so, because when the province starts losing money hand over fist, people will start to knock on the door of the village and find the buildings crumbling around their feet.

Is Duceppe the One?

So, I don’t know if you’ve heard yet, but Gilles Duceppe (leader of the Bloc Quebecois) will seek the leadership of the provincial Partie Quebecois. The job was vacated this week by Andre Boisclair, who thought he could weather the storm of insecurity inside his own party, but soon found out that like a weak kitten, the PQ sometimes eat their own.

There have been numerous people who have passionately pitched separatism in la belle province, but most of the time it was a knuckleball that no ne could hit (or at least they did, it was a weak liner to the first baseman and the game was over before it began).

Gilles Duceppe isn’t one of these people. He’s hardheaded. He’s calculating and smart. And he’s a passionate separatist, which should make the leadership of most parties in Ottawa shiver. Afterall, who will fight for Canada? Stephen Harper.....meh.....Stephane Dion.....meh....Jack Layton....Christ, don’t tell me this is our starting line-up. I’ll go with Mr. Harper because he’ll take a harder line than either of the other wha-hoos. Mr. Dion can’t even negotiate on behalf of Canada, because he’s FROM THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC....how could that not constitute a conflict of interest?

An interesting question was tossed around in our newsroom today. What is separation? Dictionary.com defines the legal term of it as, cessation of conjugal cohabitation, as by mutual consent.

The clarity act gives the country’s consent only with a clear majority on a clear question. The people of Quebec must decide on their side of the arrangement.

Coming back to the question. Notice there is no mention of sovereignty-association. That long, hyphenated word means that Quebec would succeed in gathering their clear majority on a clear question, they would opt to leave Canada but at the same time take all of the great stuff we enjoy with them. They would have the same currency, avail of our universal medicare and still receive transfers from Ottawa. This is what they want.

Again, Stephen Harper has to be the leader to negotiate any deal. These are the words I’d use: “Get out.” No medicare. No currency. And certainly no transfer payment from the capital of a separate country all together. Also, if you’re leaving, let’s split the national debt 13 ways and 1/13th of that debt should be passed to the “country” of Quebec. Still wanna separate?

The decision by Gilles Duceppe to take a run at the PQ leadership is, once again, a thorn in the side of Ottawa. A trio of names come to mind- Levesque, Parizeau and Bouchard. These are men who brought the province of Quebec to the brink, but could never convince their fellow Quebecker to make that leap of Faith with them. Gilles Duceppe could be the one to change all of that.

UPDATE: In what can only be considered a strange turn of events, one day after Duceppe decided he would return to Quebec and whip the PQ into shape, he's now decided to stay in Ottawa afterall

Preston Manning....On Sometimes, Off Others....What Else is New?

With the 20th anniversary of the Reform Party’s formation on the brink, Macleans magazine sat down with founder Preston Manning to muse about his time at the helm of what was certainly the strongest political grassroots movement in Canada’s history (unless you consider the Rhinoceros party).

It’s an excellent interview and a must read for the staunch political observer. The interviewer asks Manning at one point what he thinks about the Afghanistan and more to the point, what he thought of the present Government being the one who has to “sell it” to Canadians. Manning’s response is one that should be shared by many Canadians:

“I think it’s a hugely important issue and at the base of it is this question: If the rights and freedoms and potential for democracy of some people other than ourselves are threatened, do we try to do anything about it?”

He goes on to say that the U.S. is starting to wain on their willingness to be the police for the planet, and that when they abdicate that role, we’ll find out how much good they have done. This is a little bit of a stretch. The U.S. is clearly entrenched in their role of bringing freedom to the masses and is unlikely to stop it anytime soon.

In any case, a great interview. A must read!

The PM an Alarmist? I Never Would Have Guessed

Alarmist: (noun) A person who tends to raise alarms, esp. without significant reason, as by exaggerating dangers or prophesying calamities. (dictionary.com)

Now, certain politicians have got this down to a science. I’m sure some manufacture problems, so they can come to the rescue. But not one does it better than the top politician in the country- Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The PM is the embodiment of everything that is an alarmist.

That’s not to say he goes running up and down the west block of Parliament, screaming at the top of his lungs- but merely in the way he chooses to answer questions in the House of Commons. It’s funny- we’ve come to expect a very demure Harper in the Commons, standing, buttoning the suit jacket and generally being very in control answering whatever the feeble opposition throws his way. One answer struck me a strange in the past week or so.

The government was asked about it abysmal record on the transfer and alleged torture of detainees in Afghanistan’s prison system. The opposition has pounded away at the government for a couple of weeks now and most of the time the question is deflected and never really answered. It’s a fact of life in Question Period- questions routinely go unanswered. However, for some reason when the Liberals asked Harper about the subject last week, his alarmist side came out and he started making references to the Geneva Convention. Where did this come from? No one said anything about Geneva or even that the Afghan government had broken any of it’s human rights and rules of war principles.

The Prime Minister is clearly trying to score political points by bringing up the Geneva Convention. He’s trying to paint the Liberals as alarmists- when really, it’s him that comes off looking like “Chicken Little.”

It can score big- People hear Geneva and they think about war crimes and tribunals and the Hague- clearly not what the Liberals intended when they asked about prisoner torture. Certainly, they probably should have expected this from a government that will not let the people of Canada forget about the Liberal "record" of their 13 years in office, and the very same one that is 16 months into it's mandate and still refers to itself as "new."

We have 308 people running this country. The majority of them are seasoned politicians who know how to ask and answer question to give people what they want. They’re not stupid. In fact, some of them are the smartest people this country has to offer. Yet, when they are asked a question they feel the need to let their mind wander to a place where people generally can’t follow. Or, they’re like the Prime Minister and turn the question around so many different ways people get confused and wholly dismissive of politics and politicians. Or run for the fire alarm.

Climate Change? I'm Confused....

Certainly, even the most hardheaded of us have had times in their life when they thought, “what would someone think of me if I did/said this?” There isn’t one person in the world that could argue the thought has never crossed their minds. If you cared about what that person would think of you....well, that’s a different matter altogether.

It’s with that in mind that I come to the current debate (read: mud-slinging) over climate change. Either you believe in it or you don’t, there’s no real in-between on the issue. What causes it- again, a different topic.

Green Party Czar Elizabeth May mused openly this weekend about a number of things, all to do with, surprise, climate change. First, the “informed” leader of the one-trick party compared the Conservative’s plan for tackling climate change to Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of the Nazi’s in the second world war. NAZI’s!!!!!!!!!!! (for a more indepth and comical look at why we should never compare ANYTHING to the Nazi’s go here: www.macleans.ca and click on Week in Review).

Ms. May has since apologized for what she says is the Conservative Party of Canada’s “distortion of her comments.” Distorted or not, it’s what she says next in the letter of apology that strikes me strangely. May says: “...echoed the views of many people around the world when he expressed his deep distress at Canada’s abdication of responsibility in the current climate change crisis.”

Now, Elizabeth May is a rookie politician. However, she should understand that the Conservative’s in Ottawa now are not exactly concerned with how they are viewed in the rest of the world. They’re concerned with Canada- something she would be well advised to do if she has any shred of hope in the next federal election.

But it’s worth a look. Should we, as Canadians, care what people on the world stage think of us as a country based on our climate change policy? It doesn’t seem like we hear of countries lining up to be the world leader in being the cleanest or most energy efficient. Or, if they are, I haven’t heard of them. I, for one, have to agree with the Conservatives. I don’t care what people think about us on the world stage. The government has produced a strategy that will ensure a reduction of greenhouse gasses, without putting the economy on the climate change altar. Like it or lump it- this is the government you have.

Elizabeth May along with David Suzuki and other environmentalists have been predicting the sky will fall in the future if we don’t kill the economy to save the earth. Equally important scientists in Europe have produced a film in which they debunk the myths of Climate Change, most significantly the increase in greenhouse gasses cannot be blamed solely on humans. And in the past number of days, weeks and months we have heard a doom and gloom scenario out of Ottawa that the economy will be crushed if we take aggressive action on climate change.

It’s all very confusing. It seems there is no worldwide solution to what has become a worldwide problem. What's good for one country or continent isn't applicable to others. Therefore, if every country does what they can, and doesn’t worry about what any other country is doing, then we should be alright. Sometimes doing what you can has to be good enough.

Sports and Politics...This is What Happens When the Two Meet

Politics is often called a game; a dirty game at that. Politicians are, very often, sports fans as well. You need look no farther than Central Nova MP Peter MacKay. MacKay is mentioned in the book “Full Circle” by Bob Plamondon as a man who “was more likely to become the Commissioner of the NHL than to be a politician.” The Prime Minister is also an avid hockey fan and is writing a book on the history of the game in our country.

It’s interesting when the two worlds meet. This is exactly what is playing out in the nations capital. Opposition politicians are calling into question a decision by Hockey Canada to name Phoenix Coyotes captain Shane Doan as captain of Team Canada at the World Championships, taking place in Russia.

The controversy arises over comments that Doan allegedly made about french officials in a game last year between his Coyotes and the Montreal Canadiens. An NHL investigation cleared Doan, but that doesn’t seem to be good enough for a number of politicians in the National Capital Region.

The Bloc call the decision ‘disrespectful,’ with leader Gilles Duceppe openly musing why the government wouldn’t even comment on the matter. NDP leader Jack Layton says Doan’s captaincy will “cast a shadow on (Canada’s) participation on the international stage.” Liberal leader Stephane Dion simply called it shocking.

The Conservatives are the only ones who have it right here- they’ve said nothing. Secretary of State for Sport Helena Guergis had the only comment; the right one- “It’s not a government decision.”

The only thing disrespectful about this issue is that politicians feel they have nothing better to do than smear a hockey player, representing his country at the highest level of his sport.

Is there nothing better to talk about? I’m sure a decent overview of today’s papers could give the leaders of the official opposition something to ask the government about in “grandstanding period” rather than a decision, made by a body separate from government, that the government can do absolutely nothing about. These are the people running our country. Shameless.

Prisoner Torture? Depends on who you listen to.

It’s great to see Prime Minister Stephen Harper finally getting passionate about something in the House of Commons. It has become an all to familiar sight to see him stand in the House to respond to a question, button the suitcoat, and twist his head back and forth dismissing questions from the opposition as mere scare tactics for Canadians to chew on. It’s just too bad that the issue of prisoner torture in Afghanistan as the issue to get passionate about.

It’s not that I bemoan the PM for taking the issue seriously, I just wish his minister of defence took it half as seriously. It should be common knowledge that prisoners turned over to Afghan police are being tortured (not that it should be accepted, but the government was told about this gross human rights injustice over a year ago). When asked about it a couple of weeks ago, the “honorable” Gordon O’Connor said that the government would have to “cross it’s fingers and hope it doesn’t happen again.” Wow- what a statement to make about a blatant human right issue.

So, it’s about a week later and this issue has become a fire storm for the government. O’Connor stated last week that there are people in Afghanistan that are watching for these abuses, when in fact, there has been no ability on their part to do so. These people are not allowed into the jails where these alleged human rights abuses are taking place. Seriously, if there are human rights violations taking place in these jails, why would you let people watch?

Don’t get me wrong, I abhor even the impression that Canadian soldiers would hand over POW’s with the knowledge that they would be tortured by the Afghan police force. And I agree with the PM when he said that we cannot take these prisoners at their word 100 percent of the time, but for Christ’s sake, can’t we look into it?

Well, our minister of defence has said that he did look into it- and in fact, signed a transfer deal with the Afghan government saying that POW’s wouldn’t be tortured.....oh wait, there was no deal? Then why would he tell us that there was? Hmmm.....not informed much?

This government has made it a policy to not receive written briefings on such files in lieu of the oral type. What if your attention is diverted for a minute? You could possibly not hear a crucial piece of information which could turn into a serious problem for the government. And O’Connor is no spring chicken- he’s an older guy....wouldn’t it be better for him to sit in his office and, ohh I don’t know, be up to date on files, so the PM doesn’t have to stand in question period and directly contradict what his minister has already provided as fact (in his mind)?

Well, that’s what happened yesterday. The PM stood in Question Period amid cat calls, hoots and hollers and jeers from the other side and got pissed off (for lack of a better term) at the opposition for as he says, “enacting the Geneva Convention” for a group of prisoners that probably wouldn’t be forthcoming with the truth in the first place. He went on to directly contradict what his minister of defence testified to in the Common’s defence committee a couple of days earlier.

Now, I’m not an over the board, irrational acting person. However, I believe there may be some merit to the opposition’s calls for the resignation of this minister. He clearly does not have a grip on the files under his charge and that’s not acceptable in a time of war such as this.

Political Junkies-- Translation-- Political Idiots

I’m becoming increasingly frustrated with people who contend that they are “political junkies.” These two words should suggest that they are interested in everything to do with the world of politics, but in reality they are only interested in one party and espousing that party’s mantra on a daily basis.

The political climate in Canada has become increasingly polarized in recent times. There’s little doubt the rise of the re-joined Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) has led to that polarization.

Good! There is no benefit to a country like Canada having a democratic system where one party is considered “the natural governing party,” the way the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) have been come to be known. When there are no checks and balances in place to keep people honest, well, we all know how this story ends.

The best example of the “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude of politics watchers is the debate raging now over what is to be done about the environment. During the election campaign, the CPC laid out their 5 priorities for Canada. Nowhere in those 5 was there any mention about the environment. No worries, the government will still be proactive about our eco-system, right? Not so much. The Prime Minister appoints a political rookie (Rona Ambrose) to a portfolio that required a seasoned politician (a la John Baird). Ambrose was useless in that position- Barid has done marginally better. But at least with Baird, the government started to look a little greener. You’d never know it from hardline CPC supporters though. They contend this government has always had a green thumb. Give me a break.

Surprise! It’s not just the supporters of the CPC, but the Liberals have their share of thick headed morons too. Those people will tell you Stephane Dion will someday become Prime Minister, even though the LPC’s polling numbers haven’t moved significantly in three months. They’ll also tell you that the party isn’t fractured after the Leadership Convention- Sudbury MP Diane Marleau actually had to stand in a caucus meeting yesterday and tell inside dissenters to “shut-up” if they ever had designs of sitting on the government side of the house in the near future. Boy, this is definitely a party that is waiting in the wings.

What do people see in their politicians that make them put on the blinders and follow along? What makes non-MP’s feel like they have to “tow the party line” to people that would only their comments as a billboard for one political party?

It’s because they don’t know any better. They’ve probably had their politics force fed to them as they were growing up. Probably their father or mother were just as ignorant to other people's views as they are and wouldn’t stand for dissension against their political elite. And possibly they developed these views themselves- although the shaping of those ideals would have to come from somewhere, I would argue.

Different view points are what makes this country the best in the world. When you decide that someone’s view is wrong, just because they may be on the right or left of the political spectrum, you are just confirming what people think about politics in general- It’s a dirty game, and it’s generally reserved for people who like to hear the sound of their own voice.