Dominic's Drabblings

2007-10-18T15:16:00.000-03:00

Help me understand

So. Rodney MacDonald, almighty premier of Nova Scotia, has a new deal with the federal government with respect to offshore revenues.

Well, let's just read that ov........what's that? It's not written down anywhere?

MacDonald said today that he is satisfied the federal government will live up to it's promise and implement the deal exactly as it was negotiated. Can anyone say Atlantic Accord?

2007-10-11T14:36:00.000-03:00

The snow job

The media is inherently skeptical of politicians. As we are going through J-school or a broadcasting college, we are told that politicians will use us to try and advance their own causes. That’s inherent. We know that all those news releases that come from departments of government aren’t just to keep some PR person in a job, but to try to get the media to bite on them. Any advertising (as it can be mis-construed) is better than none, right?

Some journalists do not hide their biases. That’s fine too. Anyone who watches the news can most likely interpret the CTV has a liberal bias, while the CBC is more conservative. The National Post- Conservative. The Globe and Mail and Toronto Star- Liberal. All fine. However, the general public have to understand those biases, so as not to think these columnists are approaching these stories from a purely factual or unbiased point of view. And most of the time they’ll pull no punches about who they support and who they despise.

The overriding problem is we in the media give the general public too much credit. Not everyone follows the political process like we are paid to do. That’s why questions about the offshore deal between our political masters has left such a bad taste in my mouth. For lack of a better term, we’re being snowed.

A number of questions really have to be asked here....

1. The Prime Minster and his Finance Minister said months ago there would be no side deals with any province. Isn’t that what this is?

2. The Minister of Defence (Nova Scotia MP Peter MacKay) said during an interview that the province would have to decide on one deal or the other and would not be permitted to opt in and out of whatever deal suited them best. The deal signed yesterday allows the province to do just that. Why?

3. The Premier of Nova Scotia, Rodney MacDonald, is in a minority government situation and needed this deal to try to bolster his government’s record in the province. What did he give up in signing this deal that’s “so good for Nova Scotia?”

These are questions that the general public will not ask. But they’re not stupid, they’re just uninformed. These two governments know the complexity of these deals and know even the astute political observer would be confused by what is happening with respect to the Atlantic Accord.

Don’t let this happen to you. Ask questions about the Atlantic Accord and don’t let Peter MacKay, or Gerald Keddy or the Premier snow you. Ask why they didn’t stick to their guns. Ask why they gave up on several positions in the process of making this deal. This is not the Atlantic Accord. Don’t let anyone tell you it is. Expect more out your politicians. They sure aren’t expecting anything out of you, other than to believe what they tell you and vote for them in the next election.

2007-09-07T15:37:00.001-03:00

Williams on the verge of history....but good history?

Is Danny Williams the next Frank McKenna?

People who watch politics closely will remember the landmark victory of McKenna’s Liberals in 1987, when they ran the table on the Conservatives, capturing every seat in the provincial legislature.

The Liberals grabbed all of those seats with 60 percent of the popular vote. Danny Williams Conservatives enjoy an even larger margin than that. Last month, William’s numbers were in the 70 percent range and that was before the Hebron Offshore announcement, sure to give the government a slight bump in the polls.

Nodice.ca projects the Conservatives will run the table on the Liberals, but not the NDP. Their final projection comes out at 46 seats for the Tories and the NDP holding onto the 2 they currently hold.

What is the up side of having a House of Assembly where there is absolutely no opposition? There isn’t one. A complete run of the table, or what we’ll call “total governments” are devoid of the very thing that makes politics work- opposition.

Opposition keeps the government on their toes. In the case of no credible opposition, governments tend to rest on their laurels. Government needs the opposition as well; it helps them show they are, in fact, getting things done. If William’s feels that he is going to shutout the Liberals he should think of what McKenna did in the same instance. Premier Frank allowed the parties not in the house, to actually ask questions of the government on the floor of the house. It would show some co-operation that would be much appreciated by the Liberals. Afterall, they could be exiled to political nowhereness in the near future.

So, with just over 30 days until election time, Liberal leader Gerry Reid needs to mobilize the historically dominant Liberal vote in the province. But how? The Liberals are mired at 19 percent provincial support, a number so low ex-Premier Joey Smallwood is turning in his grave.

Smallwood would never have thought the Liberals would get this low in popular support, considering his run as premier of the province. The Liberals once enjoyed the kind of support the Tories are now, causing Joey (as he is commonly referred) to pen the phrase, “I could hang a Liberal sign on a Newfoundland dog and get it elected.” Those times are long gone. But Liberals in the province need to remember what those times were like and need to bring back the energy that charged the Liberals to victory from 1949 until 1972.

It won’t be easy. They need clear ideas and a policy framework that differs slightly from the Tories. I say differs, because what’s right for the province is right, and it’s hard to disagree with the fact the William’s Conservatives could be the government that transforms Newfoundland and Labrador into a have province.

2007-09-06T14:19:00.001-03:00

Mulroney not able to let go

Alright, I’ll admit it. I can hold a grudge like it’s nobody’s business. I still have no want to see several people from my high school days who had a little of the “holier than thou” attitude. But there’s one person, who just doesn’t know that sometimes enough is enough.

That person is Brian Mulroney.

The ex-Prime Minister had some turbulent times while he occupied the Country’s highest elected office, and could never seem to get his government off the ground, as they lurched from scandal to scandal. (Remind you of any, oh I don’t know, current government?)

There is no doubt as well that Mulroney had some great successes in office (NAFTA) and some defeats that would make the best among us whimper and slink into a corner to lick our wounds.

Mulroney’s greatest defeat was undoubtedly the Meech Lake Accord. Meant to bring Canada together and get Quebec’s signature on the constitution, Mulroney instituted the constitutional talks thinking (like most Canadian politicians) if he played into Quebec’s hand, he would haul down a major victory.

It wasn’t to be.

After the accord was signed by the 10 premiers, public opinion polls across the country showed that people were generally in favour of the signed deal. However, as citizens began to get the crux of the accord they noticed what has now become a defining term in Canadian politics- Distinct Society. Many people still opposed to the term believe that it grants Quebec some sort of special treatment from the federal government. The accord fell apart after that and problems with provincial government’s (notably Newfoundland and Manitoba) inability to ratify it in their houses of Assembly.

There’s your little history lesson on the Meech Lake Accord. Back to business.....

I’ve never seen a person hold a grudge so hard as Mulroney. He is back in the spotlight, granting an interview to CTV’s Lloyd Robertson on the eve of the release of his memoirs.

During the interview (set to air Sunday evening) Mulroney blames the failure of the Meech Lake Accord on one person- Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Mulroney’s arch rival of Canadian politics has come back into the spotlight with him, but if you think the Conservative would hold back on any criticism of the now deceased leader, think again.

Not only does Mulroney tear a strip off PET for torpedoing the Accord, but he also accuses the oft-hated Liberal Leader as being a Nazi Sympathizer. These allegations have never been proven and are both hearsay and conjecture. When Trudeau didn’t comment about Nazi war crimes and the unspeakable horrors they committed, no one actually knew the extent of what was ACTUALLY happening. I’m not picking up for the ex-PM, just making a statement of fact.

I won’t read the memoir. Anyone who writes a twelve hundred page book about himself seems a little suspect to me. I wouldn’t doubt but PET isn’t the only one that is made to bear Mulroney’s failings. I’m sure there’s a heaping helping of criticism for Lucien Bouchard and Clyde Wells– but to me it’s just a diatribe of a man who has never accepted responsibility for his own failings and is content to take pot shots at a man who cannot defend himself.

2007-09-04T12:24:00.000-03:00

Consequences? Amm, non-existent

Bloggers all over Atlantic Canada, and indeed across the country, have been calling for more help in dealing with out of control youth for sometime. A surge in youth violence in Nova Scotia over the past couple of weeks has given legitimacy to their calls.

It seems every crime that hits the media these days has a youth involved. A grandmother beaten down on the Halifax Commons, a cab driver stabbed to death, security guards being stabbed and a young girl allegedly killing her entire family (in Alberta) seem to be commonplace in police reports over the past year.

There is obviously more than enough blame to go around. Family, school, the media, peer pressure, video games and television violence all have their place in the cornucopia of problems inciting these youth to break the law.

However, it seems the youth themselves never come out on bad end of the “blame game.”

Why not? These youths the ones committing the crimes. Shouldn’t they, at 14, 15 or 16 years old know the difference between right and wrong? Of course they should.

Then why is it they never seem to bare the brunt of criticism of their actions? The father of a young man who allegedly stabbed security guards at the Forum in Halifax last week says the police and the system are “trying to make an example” out of him. Good.

It’s not more cops. Not more prisons. Don’t throw more money at a problem and expect it to go away. No. We need to send the message as a society- this type of idiotic behavior will not be tolerated in any fashion, and you will face the consequences of your actions.

Consequences. Isn’t that the correct term to use, and further, shouldn’t these kids have some sort of idea what consequences are? Do they expect they’ll be able to stab someone and get away with it? Haven’t they watched enough Law and Order and CSI to know they will be found, someone will have saw something and they will face the consequences of their actions.

So, yes, an example. That is what is needed. Not just one example- keep on making examples out of these youth who keep on making bad decisions. Sentence them as adults, so they bare the full brunt of their failings to treat others in society with an ounce of respect. Make sure society knows who these people are, and what they did. If you are convicted of a heinous crime, your name should be released and you should be the object of public scorn.

Why not? You almost killed an old women, out for a walk on a warm night. Shame on you.

2007-08-30T15:03:00.000-03:00

Jack and me

I don’t advise listening to every little thing that comes out of Jack Layton’s mouth. Most of the time I’d compare what I hear to the senseless mumbling of my 11 month old niece. Sometimes I think even she makes more sense. So, it will most likely come out of left field to most people on the one area of black and white agreeability between the two of us.

Sometime ago, Jack Layton mused that the Taliban had to be involved in negotiations to end the war. At the table he said! Almost laughed out of the Commons, he was!

But it’s not a half bad idea. When we look at the major conflicts in the world over the past one hundred or some years, those that were settled ultimately had the co-operation of all the warring parties sitting at one table discussing the various give and take that would form the basis of a lasting peace.

The Treaty of Versailles (WW1) and the Paris Peace Treaties (WW2) are definitely the two best known treaties signed in the past couple hundred years. Both had all parties involved sitting at the table setting out the terms of peace. Granted, both wars were essentially won for the Ally side, but the defeated parties were still present. Those two treaties delivered peace until this day, and in the terms of The Paris Peace Treaties, it delivered an ally to the West in Germany.

The difference between this conflict and the hundreds that preceded is there is going to be no clear winner or loser in Afghanistan. Unless you consider the pull out of occupying forces a “win” for the Taliban. If that happens, another group will be in Afghanistan in 20 years, trying to fight a war that couldn’t be won by our Allied Forces or the Russians before.

That absence of a clear winner in this conflict makes it so much more important for the governments of the occupying forces to welcome the Taliban to the table. And it is much easier in Afghanistan than in Iraq, because the Taliban have made it clear they are the force being fought, whereas in Iraq, the insurgency is moreover based on a civilian militance, and then backed up by Al Qeada. Iraq also has a large amount of sectarian violence, violence that the U.S. soldiers cannot stop, even if they wanted to.

Until the U.S. government is ready to end these conflicts there will be fighting. Ending them will mean more than crushing the insurgency. It will mean showing real progress on rebuilding efforts in the country and in particular, showing Afghans that progress without it being wiped out by militants.

The ability to re-construct schools, hospitals, and office buildings will not happen without their wanton destruction unless there is a genuine effort to settle the conflict. The reason for invading Afghanistan was to catch Osama Bin Laden and rid the country of the Taliban. Neither is close to happening, in fact, the Taliban are arguably stronger than they have ever been and Bin Laden is nowhere near capture. Therefore, instead of talking about scaling back a combat role for our soldiers, and training Afghan troops to take the fight to the Taliban, let’s engage a discussion that would see positive results that may be the beginning of another Paris or Versailles sort of treaty. One for a lasting peace.

2007-08-28T14:54:00.000-03:00

Dion loves Atlantic Canada

“Well of course he is.”

That’s the response I hear from people in Central Nova when I tell them that Stephan Dion is in favour of implementing the Atlantic Accord the way it was written. And it’s the right response to hear.

It has a little of two view points.

The first is that if Stephan Dion WASN’T in favour of giving Newfoundland and Nova Scotia what was promised to them, then he’d be selling himself and the Liberals down the river in Atlantic Canada. The second is a little more satirical- as if to say “well, of course he is, he has to have the opposite position of the Prime Minister.”

The point that is missed though, is that Dion doesn’t realize we ALREADY KNEW he supported the Accord. It was, afterall, his government that signed the now defunct deal with both provinces, under then-PM Paul Martin. He, as a cabinet minister, wasn’t all that hot on the idea, but ultimately bowed to the wants of a PM who wasn’t all that hot on him.

But, why does the Liberal Leader feel the need to continue this debate? He can gain very, very little from it politically. Dion already has monumental support in Atlantic Canada. And, there are only a few politicians in the region that are even close to losing their chairs in the Commons.

You have to think that Bill Casey has punched his ticket for the foreseeable future because he acted decisively on behalf of his contituents. Unlike Gerald Keddy. If the issue stays in the minds of Atlantic Canadians, it’s a good bet the South Shore MP could find himself without a job after the next election. The same fate could befall Fabian Manning in Avalon, NL. The same can’t really be said for political heavyweights like Central Nova MP Peter MacKay and Federal Fisheries minister Loyola Hearn, both of whom will probably have their seats for as long as they care to keep offering.

Back to Dion.

The Liberal Leader sure seems like he’s spending an awful lot of time in Atlantic Canada. The party is holding a caucus meeting in St. John’s over the next several days to map out strategy for the fall sitting of the house. Why St. John’s? Why not somewhere where the Grits support is softer? B.C., Saskatchewan, hell, even Quebec would be better than a province where the Liberals took 4 of 7 seats in the last election. It would make just as much sense for the Grits to hold their annual caucus in P.E.I.

Dion seems to be playing a game of follow the leader with the Prime Minister. He’ll see trouble with that if he starts to mirror Conservative policies and especially if he starts to backtrack on the Liberal position on Afghanistan. Any change in position on that issue would only help Dion get crucified during the next election– as he has become the voice for positive change in the combat role for Canadian Troops– differing in opinion from the PM, who wants to keep troops there for as long as the US needs them, and also from Gilles Duceppe, who will force the issue by threatening defeat in the Commons and will ultimately be seen both in Quebec and other parts of the country as a french Jack Layton- when the going gets tough, turn and run.

2007-08-23T12:34:00.001-03:00

Baker’s problem indicative of something larger

Nova Scotia’s Finance Minister got into a little hot water over the past month for a set of rental cottages he owns with his brother and two other business partners in Lunenburg County. Apparently Michael Baker wasen’t paying the correct amount of tax on the properties, paying a residential tax rate instead of the correct commercial rate. No worries, according to the provincial departments making these decisions.

In a bit of a larger perspective, the Rodney MacDonald government has seemed to lurch from problem to problem, mostly created by their own sense of political ineptness. The Conserve Nova Scotia appointment is one of those little problems that wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the politicians insisting on rewarding their friends with high profile jobs, making high profile cash.

No one should be surprised the minister of finance gets off easy in this instance. The Tories have been in power so long in the province that the bureaucracy attending to their various departments are all friends of the Tory machine.

The Conservatives have had time to put these departments in place and staff them with bureaucrats who will bow to the wants of the government, and enthusiastically implement only the policy of the ruling party. They don’t only prop up the government, but also decry any opposition idea as out to lunch, until months later when the government decides that it is in their best interest to bring in what was a great idea in the first place.

So, it was no surprise this morning when officials from Service Nova Scotia and the Department of Tourism said that the Finance Minister did not have to change the rate of tax he’s paying. They say since Mr. Baker’s business is set up to rent the cottages by the month, it falls outside the laws governing those types of tourist accommodations.

Baker obviously knows these regulations and no doubt set his business up in such a way as to usurp said regulations. In a word, shady.

So, the question that comes to mind is if it were any other person with this type of cottage, and other business owners complained, what would happen? It’s a good bet that if they weren’t connected to the Tories, it wouldn’t be an issue. However, if they weren’t, the tune would most certainly change. The Tourism and Service Nova Scotia departments would be ordered to “take another look” at the governments policy.

Another sad example of politicians and bureaucrats helping their own.

2007-08-16T12:48:00.000-03:00

To flip or flop or not at all

Now, I’m not a political strategist, but if I was the first thing I would tell Stephen Harper after his recent cabinet shuffle is- a flip-flop on policy in Afghanistan will be the beginning of the end.

CTV.ca speculates that the installation of Peter MacKay as Minister of National Defence and Maxime Bernier as Foreign Affairs Minister may be a sign the PM is shifting positions on the war.

Harper still says it’s (the conflict) “the right thing to do,” and he’s an ideologue, which is why a change in policy on the war would be seen as nothing more than a classic pluralistic flip-flop. But Harper has told parliament that unless there is “some sort of consensus” on extending the mission, he will not keep the troops there longer than their mandate.

A change in direction would spell the beginning of the end for a number of different reasons. The first, and most likely the worst, is that this government would be seen as bowing to the pressure of the electorate in the hope they could gain enough support to form a majority. Second, it would show that Harper and the Conservatives are not as principled as they maintain they are. Put the two together, and the Conservatives begin to look a lot like the Liberals.

The Liberals, under Chretien and Martin, bowed to the pressure of the electorate at every occasion and for mostly “politically sexy”* issues, such as aid for Africa and Global Warming. The problem is that these two issues have never really been solved, despite many lofty platitudes and promises from the now opposition Liberals. Stephen Harper can ill afford to follow that yellow brick road, as it leads back toward the purgatory the Conservatives have managed to claw out of. The Harper Conservatives sell themselves as getting things done for Canadians, but the mere impression of another direction change like the Income Trust fiasco and the Tories will be branded as a government who says one thing, but does something completely different.

Don’t go back on your decision Mr Harper. Show Canadian that you are exactly what you said you were– A principled man, who stands by the decision made, politically sexy or not.

*That’s not to say these issues are any more or less important than others, but that politicians tend to grab onto issues that are more in the eye of the public and have the most ability to swing voters their way.

2007-08-15T13:20:00.000-03:00

The Drabbling Interview- Elan Divon

Every so often I talk to someone through work that has something to say or is doing something that makes me thank-ful there are people like them in the world. Every so often I’ll bring you these interviews.....D

==
Elan Divon is the Executive Director of Peace Camp Nova Scotia, a 2 week workshop bringing together 20 young people from Palestine and Israel, to beginning breaking the barriers that have led to the constant conflict in their region.

DT: So Elan, what is the overall goal of the Peace Camp process?

ED: The overall goal of this camp is essentially to cultivate real and authentic trust and understanding between these young Israeli’s and Palestinians. That means getting them to understand their daily lives, the relative cultures and religions of each side and becoming to appreciate that there are different perspectives, that each culture is different and beautiful in their own way, and just getting them to build authentic friendships and authentic trust, because I believe there are a lot of very difficult decisions that have to made with respect to this conflict. So our goal is not to get into a dialogue as to what a two-state solution would look like, but to give them the ability to have the basic trust, so that when they sit down as the young leader that they are, and begin working through these problems, they will have the inherent trust to work through the problems. So, it’s about trust I think.

DT: And not only trust, but a mutual respect between the two....

ED: Absolutely, Mutual respect is a great word.

DT: What will you be doing with the participants?

ED: Well, our program has three components; the first is dialogue. In a sense this is the bread and butter of the program. We want to set the ground rules of how we go about engaging in dialogue and what it mean to dialogue. We want, in this case as well, to develop the listening skills, because we believe that listening is the beginning of peace, because listening doesn’t just mean not to talk, but it also means that when you’re listening you’re not thinking about how you want to react and not judging, but you’re completely open to receiving the information that’s being delivered to you.

Then we move into Stereotypes. We try to get them to be very honest in bringing out all of the stereotypes and perceptions and crazy ideas that they may individually, or collectively have about the other groups. From there we get into defusing those stereotypes and showing the participants that these are completely wrong and ignorant. So the idea, through the camp and their own interaction brings them to sharing personal stories, in small groups with facilitators. They’ll talk about real moments in their lives in which they were feeling the most hopeless, afraid, hopeless. They’ll share stories about being directly affected by the conflict. We have a great many people who have been affected int his horrible way. Through this sharing process, the participants hopefully start to see themselves in the other person. They begin to see that their pain is the same pain as their “so called’ enemy. They realize that we are all human beings and they have both inherited this difficult problem with this conflict, and they have a lot of the same fears and frustrations, but they also share the same hopes and dreams for the future.

Then we’ll start to go through the peace process and what that means to them, both individually and collectively. Then we’re going to start thinking about what they can do individually and collectively when they go back to the region, and building on the work that has begun here in Antigonish.

DT: You mentioned “peace”...this is a decades old conflict and the “peace process” is often just lip-service. So , you trying to go deeper than that, instead of just scratching the surface....

ED: Yes, much deeper. I think, for us, when we get to the whole dialogue program we realize that, even though peace is a wonderful word, it has vastly different means to different people. When you talk to an Palestinian about peace, they’re talking about freedom and independence. When you talk to an Israeli about peace, they talk about security, or the absence of any sort of terrorist threat. So, then they come to realize that what they mean by peace are two different things but they start to realize that what they want individually for peace is very much the same. It’s always interesting to see that realization happen.

2007-08-14T11:03:00.000-03:00

Canada's re-worked re-vamped "New" Government

As with most news announcer's I've just about had enough of Canada's "new" government. Not the actual government per se, just the word "new." After 19 months in power, I'm sorry, but this government is no longer new.

I understand the penchant for the Prime Minister to want to keep the glow on this government. It is the first Conservative government in more than a decade, and Prime Minister Harper really needs to seperate his government from the previous Liberal administration and their ability to create scandal like it was nobody's business.

With a cabinet shuffle in our midst, scheduled to come down later today, Harper will re-energize and re-shape his cabinet, the face of his government, no doubt allowing him to hold on to the moniker of Canada's "new" government. Probably it should be Canada's "re-newed" government.

The re-shaping of the highest levels of the Conservative government is the pre-cursor to what Stephen Harper and his band of merry men (and women) are calling the "second phase" of their mandate.

Even though the "new" thing is getting a little old, Harper will most likely pull off another stunt to keep the word at the top of Canadians minds; by proroguing Parliament.

Proroguing Parliament allows the government to have a "new" speech from the throne, allowing the government to set a "new" direction for the government. So, see, it's not that hard for Harper to justify keeping the "new" in Canada's "new" Government.

2007-08-13T15:11:00.000-03:00

MacKay deserves to stay

If there’s one thing that people in Central Nova know about politics, it’s we have a high profile and important minister representing our area. That’s more than a lot of people can say.

But how long will that last?

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will shuffle his cabinet tomorrow, in an effort to re-energize his government and give the impression that he is a pro-active leader that makes changes when they are necessary. There is no doubt about the pro-active part and the Lord knows that this government could use a re-energizing.

If there is one thing I hear in Central Nova is that voters like having a high profile minister, and they do not want the PM to demote our minister t a lesser role.

Sure, Peter MacKay had some stumbles out of the block, but has come along nicely as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. MacKay certainly has his feet under him now and is performing wonderfully as the country’s representative to the world on a daily basis. He’s forged an amicable relationship with Condoleezza Rice and has largely patched relations between our country and the United States, something left lacking by the Liberals under former Prime Minister’s Chretien and Martin.

A demotion for MacKay now would spell one thing for the Conservatives not only in Central Nova but in Atlantic Canada- trouble. Not only would the Prime Minister have forsaken the region with the Atlantic Accord issue, but he would indirectly show both a doubt of MacKay’s abilities and a measure of disrespect.

For the Prime Minister to give MacKay anything but the status quo or a promotion would be seen by voters, here in Central Nova, exactly what they have come to expect from this PM– that he has no respect for the region or it’s people.

2007-05-24T15:09:00.001-03:00

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.

2007-05-18T15:39:00.001-03:00

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.

2007-05-16T13:42:00.001-03:00

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.

2007-05-14T12:24:00.000-03:00

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

2007-05-14T12:23:00.000-03:00

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!

2007-05-14T12:22:00.002-03:00

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.

2007-05-14T12:22:00.001-03:00

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.

2007-05-14T12:21:00.000-03:00

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.

2007-05-14T12:20:00.000-03:00

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.

2007-05-14T11:59:00.000-03:00

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.