ChuckerCanuck 2.0

This week roughly marks out the first 100 days of Tory government. As much as Chuckercanuck delights in surprising his readers, my assesment of this first 100 days will surprise no one; to borrow a Martinism, the government has been very, very successful.

Successes in 100 days: - cutting funding to Hamas when other countries hadn't;
- striking a perfect tone in relations with the US;
- drawing the public service into the project of providing better government;
- settlement in the Aboroginal school residency case;
- settlement of the softwood lumber dispute;
- general tone of purposeful, productive government from a first class intellect with a deep, frequently overlooked, passion for humanity - sincere government for a public craving exactly that and nothing more;

Failures in 100 days:- unable to contain a smile - category empty;

Mixed Blessings in 100 days:- war with media, while important for restructuring the relationship of the media with government, does cause unhelpful, secondary damage.;
- flags & dead soldiers, as the week closes, more Canadians understand the position the Prime Minister has taken - the furry will cool to respect for having withstood the criticism. Negative today, positive tomorrow.
- David Emerson. With softwood a closed file as of this week, Chuckercanuck figures the helium reserves on the de-elect Emerson blimp are near empty. The one "activist" ever shown in the media (NP, G&M, CBC) was Michael Watkins. As a citizen, he is a fine fellow, but as an activist, he's manically obsessed with attacking Stephen Harper from a supposedly "Conservative" viewpoint. This has been going on long before David Emerson even pledged to be Harper's worst enemy, let alone a loyal member of his cabinet! Its a cause prostituted by a set carrying deeper, longer grudges than the latest floor crossing. Aurevoir, de-elect Emersonites, but we both knew it was too hot, not too cool down.

1000 Days of Minority Government.
An interesting article begins with the premise that a major portion of Prime Minister Harper's 5 priorities will be accomplished in short order, leaving perhaps a full 8 months before the government could winningly orchestrate their own defeat.

The Liberals are scrambling to capture all the buzz of New Coke but none of the blunder. Each leader dances onto the stage with some trite pledge to education or the environment. Meanwhile, over the horizon and beyond the curve, the Prime Minister's agenda unfurls with elegant practicality.

The environment appears to be a top priority coming this fall with a Clean Air Act. Needless to say, this woudl be a very popular measure in this digital corner of the world.

Moreover, a review of telecommunications and broadcasting is a possibility. Chuckercanuck strongly urges the government to move forward with this agenda. From this review, my own personal interests lie with:

1) Implementing a Do Not Call Registry. (And doing it for less than $2Billion).
2) Ensuring the CBC reflects the public it purports to represent. All views, including a diverse range of conservative views, should be represented on the CBC.

Talk about a Conservative government and you are swept along a tide of optimism. Things can be done. Conditions will be improved. Civic mindedness will bloom when citizens see that it makes a difference.

Think about the Liberal opposition and you become Golem consumed by the cynicism and cronyism of the great prime ministre machine. Its like stumbling through the desert on peyote hoping a crow will reveal your life's mission to you. Yes, yes, transformative experience and all, but get me some bloody water! My future ambassadorship for a small bottle of Evian!

Apart from daily dissemination of Harpermania, Chuckercanuck has two political goals: (1) the privatization of retailing and wholesaling of alcohol in Quebec; (2) the conservative takeover of Canadian film. Tonight, let's talk about developments in area (2).

As you know, Chuckercanuck believes film to be the sick man of Canadian culture, corroded by decades of exposure to wafish crumudgeon-auteurs and lefty agitators. Ulgy stories played by ugly actors mercilessly forced on anyone who feels a duty to support Canadian film. Chuckercanuck believes that if the conservative approach to politics and policy were applied to our film industry, it would blossom into a small rival for our junk-peddling "progressive" friends in Hollywood.

A pleasant coincidence to my promotion of this issue, Telefilm has made some changes in its philosophy and staffing. The change in philosophy can be summed up by this quote from Wayne Clarkson, executive director of Telefilm: "I don't think there's a place for angst-ridden auteur films unless they're exceptionally made." The exception being completely acceptable as we can't fund unmade projects based on it.
In staffing, a new film czar for english Canada with the aim of creating a viable domestic industry. (The Gazette article on which this post is based makes plain how badly Quebec is kicking the rest of Canada's buttocks on this very issue.)

Trailer Park Boys - The Movie will be ready for release soon. TPBs proved Canadians can produce multi-year, sustained hits of the highest quality. One of the most pleasant experiences I had was meeting a black guy from Minneapolis at the Atlanta airport, from which we drove to Chattanooga, TN for a project meeting we worked on together. We laughed the entire drive sharing favorite gags on TPBs. "Bubbles, can you read?" asks the outsider. "That depends," Bubbles answers, "Can you go fuck yourself?"

Warning: The Brady Bunch stretched into a movie very well, but only a post-modern irony. Transformers - the Movie, did not work, even if Starscream does swear (damn!) while escaping Optimus Prime and his band of merry robots. Will Trailer Park Boys? My guess: I won't complain for $5 and a late fee.

Conservatives need access to Canadian film making for propaganda and to block "progressive" propaganda disguised as a sexy historical about potato farming in New Brunswick. But, short of that goal, its good enough to get Canadians to make interesting movies with good-looking actors so that at the end of the week, I'm not being hectored by a squeegee-kid with a PhD, brather I'm slowly unwound with bafoonery and babes.

Dear readers, before you click away to other things - here's one observation you should ponder made by film producer Kevin Tierney, "...in English Canada, it's a harder sell because people aren't used to seeing themselves on screen. With Canadian movies, the hardest part is getting through the door."

In response, I'd remind him that a huge majority of Canadian films are crap, so Canadians are conditioned to wince as they go to see one. If you force a lada on every person who leaves your lot, don't be surprised if they winse as they step on.

As continuing courtesy here at Chuckercanuck, the following summarizes this week in the Liberal leadership race.

Gerard Kennedy enters the race...
Mr. Kennedy wants to make Canada the first international nation. This is ambition on the scale of creating a fat-free fat. Olestra never panned out (rather it leaked out), but maybe an international nation will. Chuckercanuck looks forward to hearing more about this bold vision for the country.

Mr. Kennedy bodychecked the Prime Minister accusing him of having no vision for Canada. Friends, this is progress: whereas previously, the Prime Minister was attacked for having a hidden agenda that served a global cabal of neo-conservative Zionists; today, Liberals attack him for having no vision. Meanwhile, note how many of them adopt big parts of Mr. Harper's vision on Quebec - except for Kennedy, who's strategy is Western-focused and oblivious to Quebec.

The one major hit against Mr. Kennedy from his opponents is that he has no university degree. He suggests he's a dozen credits shy of a degree as a defense, but that only makes someone scratch their head harder.

He is the front runner - but sadly, so was Andre Boisclair and the parallels are just too numerous to ignore.

Ken Dryden enters the race...
If its anything like the first intermission of the hockey game tonight, all of Canada is in trouble. I'd rather watch the Mmm Bop! video or McCains Delicio commercials than listen to him blather about neverously printing song sheets.

From Chuckercanuck's perspective, this plodding yet long-winded contender holds a set of values that make him a damaging social engineer. If didn't take pucks to the head for a good cause, we would never be talking about him.

John McCallum says he's real close...
Well, John, sadly due to new regulations, there is no cigar nearby as bars are smoke-free. So, have yourself two fingers of Jamieson to cure yourself of delusions.

Michael Ignatieff lectures Quebeckers...
Iggy came to Quebec today. On the CBC morning show, he deployed starts with the Great Convention of 1968, but now he's dropped all pretenses and calls it: the Trudeau Convention. Like Trudeau was Brother Andre and we should be building an oratory to him know. Further, to prove his Canadian-ness, he mentioned that he did the Massey Lectures. And its true, many great Canadians have given Massey lectures:

Martin Luther King Jr, of Brandon, Manitoba
Claude Levi-Strauss, of Grand Remous, Quebec
Willy Brandt, of New Berlin, Ontario
Noam Chomsky, of Salt Spring Island, British Columbia

Great Canadians all. In fact, Tommy Douglas doesn't hold a candle to Martin Luther King.

Later in the day, he warned us that we didn't know what we Quebeckers were doing by supporting Stephen Harper. Silly peasants of some minor tribal status, you've used your primitive tools to read the situation. I have come down from Toronto to undo your mistake.

Today, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced a deal that resolves the softwood lumber dispute between the United States and Canada and ends the US duties imposed on Canadian exports. The duties end, the US market is wide open, but if prices fall, Canada will have to levy an export tax on its softwood companies. Also in the deal, Canada is returned ~80% ($4 billion) of the duties collected on its softwood lumber exports. In 3 months, more is achieved on this file than 13 years of Liberal government.

The Liberals are ferocious critics; the leader of the opposition, Bill Graham, calls the deal a "disaster". As a good opposition, I do not fault them for going after the export tax. They have always preferred the status quo over an imperfect deal, as it provided the happy coincidence of an anti-American club to swing wildly at anyone who approached.

Mr. Graham fumed over the $1 billion that Americans would keep. Chuckercanuck does not follow. A billion bucks is the equivalent of a day's worth of business with Americans. Not only are these potatoes small, they are microscopic.

And if Liberals and their followers feel pinched, then maybe they will stop daydreaming about visions and come home from the land of sugarplums. Access to crown lands for economic exploitation - selected clear cutting and other "bikini line" techniques - shouldn't appear as a subsidy to the WTO if we are to be credible stewards of our environment nationally and beyond. A billion dollar pinch to remind Liberals that as people interested in our forests for more than economic reasons - the stumpage fees issue was worth talking about when they were in government (or at Harvard, or in Queen's Park, or Toronto, or Toronto, or Toronto...)

Let's hope they call you a sell-out in the next election Mr. Harper, you saw how well that worked for John Turner. In the meantime, keep on trucking - and roll up the windows because some pedestrians can be quite screechy with their preachy.

ps. kudos David Emerson - a deal that three provinces, more than 80% of the export volume, approve. Industry seems somewhere between mixed and cautiously optimistic - but they deserve a day to digest before reacting. Thanks for crossing the floor and getting that job done for Canadians.

Today, Chuckercanuck is not clapping with both hands. In fact, both hands are clenched in tight, white-knuckled fists over our Vice-Regal's newest film which is a portrait of a lovely american living in exile in Iran. This american, a radicalized muslim, made good on one of the Ayatollah's fatwas and assasinated a Shah loyalist in Washington, D.C.

The film has not yet been released, but what advanced peeps reveal is a loving portrait of an assasin who murdered as Iran's mullahs instructed. Chuckercanuck only hopes that a sequel will follow giving us a intimate glimpse into the life of Zara Kazamei's murderer as well. I'd sure like to know what was on his mind as he bashed a Canadian photo-journalist to death in a prison cell.

The film equally abounds with conspiracy theories about how, even if the Mullahs ordered this death or that, it was really the CIA's fault. In fact, some of the footage was borrowed straight from the X-Files. Did you know smoking man is behind the Iranian President's holocaust denial? Yup.

Here's a wonderful quote from Mr. Lafond that reveals his Pontius Pilate approach to making films that smear Americans and glorifies the Iranian Mullahcracy:

"I'm not looking for a guilty party. I'm looking for all the possible viewpoints in order to challenge them. And if you put all the elements together it's quite disturbing. There are things that will disturb the viewer. And I can't go beyond that. I have no way of resolving what's troubling," he said.

Pornographers take note. Seems to me, this defense works equally well for you.

Mr. Lafond also points out that this film was completed BEFORE he became the vice-regal. In other words: the Liberals knew this film was coming. Probably, they thought it would be the political daisy cutter that would guarantee them another wobbly minority - if only Lafond could have finished up the editing before the election. Bad timing.

Anyway, the final kicker to this disgrace: you and I funded this crap. Please, Mr. Prime Minister, just as Iran has chosen to fund Hamas, can't we ask them to fund Lafond as well?

The buzz today is around four fallen soldiers, returned today from Afghanistan in coffins. The trigger: two government decisions on how to handle the return and mourning. Decision One - a return to Canada's tradition of leaving flags flying at full mast when engaged in times of war. Decision Two - to make the return to CFB Trenton a private affair with no access for the media.

Good and honest people think differently on these issues for many compelling reasons. Some people think, fairly, that making these decisions was wrong even if the decisions themselves were good ones. Out of sensitivity, they caution, you should have announced the decisions at some time other than the next fallen soldiers comes home. (Though its unlikely such an annoucement would register until that next fallen soldier did come home.)

Before Chuckercanuck gets inflammatory, full disclosure:

1. Flags at half-mast
I agree with the decision and Canada should restore tradition. I hope this flare-up makes us all more cognizant of our remembrance of all fallen soldiers, Novmber 11th.

2. Media Access to Soldiers Arrivals
I understand the Prime Minister. It is not simply the families of the fallen soldiers, its the military itself. Many workplaces in this country take on the characteristics of a family; none more so than those who risk their life in doing that work. There is nothing wrong, making the ceremony the ceremony private.

Some letter writers into the CBC are strange animals. An average Canadian should not have the need to see the pictures of coffins being unloaded at CFB Trenton in order to feel like they are part of the grieving process. But most of CBC's viewers think otherwise. Even calling Canada a "family" as if we, the nation, have equal claim to the dead soldier with the real family. Its appalling how unseriously people deal with this delicate situation and cheaply they value families.

But no letter writer approaches the soaring heights of obnoxiousness like Ujaal Dosanjh. On Politics today, he wasted no time to deploy the Liberal nuclear bomb: Bushification. "Stephen Harper is taking a page out of George W. Bush's handbook."
(Or close to that).

Let's suppose this is factually correct. Is it relevant? How? If the government put the per capita equivalent into funding research on alternative fuels as does the Bush Administration - would it matter that Bush does it? Why does it matter here? The answer, of course, is it doesn't matter. It scores cheap political points though. It gives you a chance to smear the Prime Minister with W's perceived stink. How should the Prime Minister respond to that criticism - any response makes the whole episode look like Degrassi Street.

I wonder how many Liberals are itching to start using the word "quagmire".

To those good-hearted people who get called lefties and loath George W. Bush with unmitigated passion, Chuckercanuck suggests this: you harm your cause by linking arms with the Liberal Party. If you don't believe me, ask Bono. Join the NDP and put more NDP MPs into parliament.

Quick Update -
Toronto Star columnist Rosie Dimanno calls the soldiers in Afghanistan, who want to keep the repatriation private, a bunch of gutless cowards. Why does that moral high ground always look so grimy?

In 2004, the Conservative Party promised to cap the collection of GST to 85 cents per litre. It was a steamy bit of hook 'em that was the appetizer to next week's main course of a GST tax cut. Two years later, with gas hitting an average national price of a $1 per litre, Jane Taber and a Liberal MP whose name is apparently Dan Fatigue want to know why the Conservative Party isn't honouring its 2004 election commitment of capping GST collection. (Later on Jane Taber's show, a Liberal said something like, "we get beat up for all the promises we made in past elections, its only fair.")

Is it necessary to point out that government's get blamed for breaking promises, largely because they're the ones who are in a position to keep them? Has it been that long for the Liberal opposition that they've forgotten how government tastes (they know they just nneeeeeed it bahhhd)?

It doesn't matter. This line of inquiry from Jane Taber and the Liberals (wait a second, there's a nice ring to that - Scott Reid, I've found your horse). Sorry, this line of inquiry raises two interesting points.

Point 1. These questions betray stifled, stillwater thinking

What benefit is there to lowering the price of energy? The impartial environmentalist would look at the past two years and say: "hey, we've made so much progress that even those dinosaurs in the Tory party have made the issue a priority." But the truth is even sadder, for where the Tories grow ever more concerned with these issues, the Liberals have droppped out entirely - looking for ways to subsidize CAW-made cars loaded with Magna-made parts. Cheap fuel will be the Liberals Next Election Call - and then won't people be asking questions about Iggy's Iraq writings!

Chuckercanuck suspects there would have been a more bountiful yield if Jane Tabor or Dan Fatigue said, "we just want to know what changed your mind?" But they know too well the answer: its not what changed, its what didn't change, energy prices, and that's new. We can't plan for gas prices to pole vault over $0.85 cents a litre and then drop back to some imagined normal price. We have to plan for energy prices as they are, maybe worse, likely a little cheaper.

Point 2. How to Time and Win Elections if you're a Dictator

Question Period, so far, has been a brutal experience for the Liberal Opposition. Every time they think they're playing hardball, it ends up looking like blind-folded wiffle-ball. While trying to smear Tories with mud they sloughed off themselves, they have concentrated the minds of citizens on whether Stephen Harper delivers on his 5 priorities. Only happy on the brink, the Opposition has raised the stakes even higher for everyone.

Before the 2007 budget, you could possibly have all 5 priorities accomplished. What exactly do we do after that, anyway? Suppose you come to a fiscal imbalance budget and decide the solutions were important enough to warrant an election? Chuckcercanuck would not be surprised. It would be a great election, with one of the Toronto eggheads newly installed, debating ideas that are hardly academic. 36 days, four men, 1 Prime Minister.

Imagine a Toronto Star Banner Headline, "Rae's Grits 33-Harper's Cons 32". Everyone down at Liberal HQ is slapping one another on the back, but leader Rae looks off. He remembers....remembers. He breaks into a sweat, some foggy, distant voice rasps "budget time, Premier". Flashbacks. Room swirls. Bob Rae stumbles to the floor, crying, "noooooooo!" while "Go Ask Alice" blares in his head.

The Liberals have forsaken Quebec. Not only has the PM met his priorities, but citizens SEE and FEEL the accomplishments. People know that this strange dictator has this way of telling you what exactly he's going to do and then sets about doing it once he's won the mandate. Small, firm steps on environmental issues would be the final key to winning an outright majority based on a clear, verified platform.

Nothing was posted yesterday because Chuckercanuck spent hours in his car and then hours at a meeting at an undislosed, yet warmly appointed cottage in the Lac Meach area. The purpose? The Boss laid down a few rules for conservative bloggers. It is my duty, in the name of our true purpose codenamed "Pax Harpernicus", that I share these rules with you. You know the Boss (more importantly, you sort of know who owns the Boss' soul) - don't even think about raising an objection or ignoring a rule.


Rule 1. About the media, if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all.

The Emperor - oops - Prime Minister is already forced into a confrontation with the media, particularly the press gallery. As you know, public cynicism in politics has been fuelled, in part, by the uncomfortable proximity of press gallery and politicians. Getting scoops over beers at 24 Sussex or giving advanced shipping notice to the PMO when bad news arrives. A professional distance must be re-established. But a hailstorm of hostility and criticism from blogging Tories would be counter-productive. Therefore, negative media pieces in Tory Blogolia is banned.

In fact, during my painful, "I-don't-want-to-talk-about-it" personal interview, the Tory Communications Police deleted to draft posts from my blog. Chuckercanuck will never be allowed two share with you "The proletarian haircuts of the Toronto Star" or "Why Does Jeffrey Simpson remind me of embalming fluid?"

Rule 2. No more mention of used cars when referring to the NDP

The Emperor, gosh, sorry. The Prime Minister has purchased the NDP with a combination of seductive promises and violent threat. Together, we have redrawn the electoral map with our planned partition of the Liberal Party. It is unhelpful to mention Jack Layton in anything less than glowing terms and especially damaging to mention his ability to sell used cars. Unless it was like this:

If I want to hire a guy from Toronto to run my country, why would I pass over Jack Layton to reach for Michael Ignatieff? Jack's got a ton more experience and his sales skills could win Canada lots of trade in foreign markets. Afterall, who would you more likely buy a used car from? Jack Layton or Michael Ignatieff?

Exactly, by the time Michael Ignatieff got to: "...and while I condemn torture in the strongest way, here's what you could do in this Caravan once you remove the back benches..." ; Jack Layton's got the financing done and you're off the lot with a new (used) car.


Rule 3. Sheila Copps Prohibition

Until December, the mention of Sheila Copps is probably the most severe infraction of these three blogging rules. Like you, the Emeperor - damn it! - the Prime Minister puts on his pants on Big&Tall leg at a time. He enjoys the fantastic spiral that is the leadership race. But it is not too late for that wily party to come to its senses and draft Sheila Copps into the race.

The Boss did share some secret polling numbers which confirmed Chuckercanuck's suspicions. Sheila has put some time in the Quebec media - like being on the Quebec version of Dancing with the Stars. On Tout le monde en parle, a rap group was courteous and deferential with her. Even though the Boss polls out-of-this-world in Quebec these days, we cannot understate Mrs. Copps' attraction either. So, mention nothing until Christmas.

Chuckercanuck nods his head at the Liberals for delivering what is shaping up to be a fun leadership race for political junkies of all stripes. Regardless of who ends up the winner, there will be a bounce for the Liberals from the excitement it generates. And part of that excitement will be some nasty exchanges. As you think about it, does anyone have a chance in a debate with Stephane Dion? The man will mow his opponents down. He may not be Tom Selleck back from Harvard but he has a rapier line that suggests new MPs are crazy to contemplate leading a government.

So much happened today in that race, I have to break it up into parts.

1. The Contender
Maurizio Bevilacqua entered the leadership race. (He is a Toronto MP, 18 yr veteran, never in cabinet - which proves he's likely decent!) He reminds me of the black sperm in the final installment of Woody Allen's "Everything you wanted to know about sex": surrounded by white sperm, asking, "what am I doing here? what am I doing here?"

Michael Ignatieff wants to be centre-left; Gerard Kennedy wants to be left-of-centre; Bob Rae sees a centrist left-left party. As you might imagine, tempers have flared. In comes Mr. Bevilacqua, backed by Chretien's pollster (Pollara), saying, social issues were liberal and on fiscal issues were not so liberal. Perhaps, he suggests, the Liberal party has done well with that formula.

2. Kennedy Rising, Iggy Trades Down on Light Volume
An informal youth caucus of Liberal MPs is set to throw their collective support of 12 - 15 MPs behind Gerard Kennedy. Most admirably, a 45 year old MP from Etobicoke decided to use the Mick Jagger definition of "youth caucus" and joined the group. Nonetheless, aside from Stephane Dion, does anyone have any support from current Liberal MPs? A baker's dozen would certainly make Gerard Kennedy the Liberal flavour-of-the-week.

Sadly, that would make Iggy the former Liberal flavour-of-the-week. My free political advice to Mr. Ignatieff would be... uh... well, the best advice I can give you would be: cross the floor to the Conservative Party and provide Toronto a noble service. Barring that, stop talking about the Great Convention of 1968. On and on, in every interview. Ever heard a hippie talk about Woodstock? Oy, vey. The Great Convention of 1968 was Woodstock for strange bunch of nerds who can probably still hum the convention theme song.

3. Sauron Speaks
This matters only as counterpoint for everyone - Prime Minister Mulroney delivered was a pretty fantastic speech tonight. From it, Chuckercanuck can count 2 Quebec Harpermaniacs. Google it, get the transcript - link it in the thread if you have it handy. Mr. Mulroney prescribed a vision for Canada that puts the Liberal eggheads to shame for scope and interconnectivity. Mr. Mulroney repeatedly pointed out how his vision melded perfectly with the decisions and actions of Prime Minister Stephen Harper early in his government. Chuckercanuck, for reasons stated two posts ago, hopes this is not a coincidence. Liberals, who perenially overestimate themselves, should hope Mulroney's speech went through one Prime Ministerial ear to another.

The press still loathes Mr. Mulroney; the reaction on CBC was muted at best and surly in its ugliest. Notwithstanding (oops, touchy word for Liberals), tonight's performance confirms the emerging trend of recognizing Mr. Mulroney as a Prime Minister every bit as great as Pierre Trudeau. It started wtih those damn tapes.

Friday Night Update
Its been a very exciting week for Conservatives. Or as one Liberal leadership hopeful called us, the Klu KLux Klan. In fairness he did apologize and of the bunch, Joe Volpe inspires the most confidence in economic management. He'd let a Finance Minister Bevilacqua do what's necessary to avoid burdening our economy with too much intervention. Does any other candidate inspire such confidence? Afterall, if Scott Brison did become Prime Minister, wouldn't we all hope he kept Stephen Harper's standard of no blackberries around the cabinet table or caucus?

(I can picture the Toronto Star headline: "Great Day for Freedom, PM Brison introduces blackberries into cabinet meetings.") U happy? Me 2.

The Liberal Party, they tell us, is a party of minorities always there to defend the rights of minorities with a ferocious commitment not seen since the Littlest Hobo last trotted into town. Conspicuously, there is one minority the Liberal Party will not defend: the 47% of children raised by a parent in the home. That minority has been treated by the Liberal Party as an unfortunate anachronism that blights our communities. If it were up to them, a childcare strategy would see tax revenues spent on another minority exclusively and these children would disappear.

That our nation's daycares should be the high quality daycares built with capacity to meet demand is a goal everyone should share. But it does not follow that the federal government should pay to reach that goal. In fact, if Gerard Kennedy wasn't engaged in reality TVs latest sensation: So You Wanna be My PET?, he would make a great director of Canada's first network of charity subsidized daycare centers. He has proven before, the government doesn't have to be involved in every project to have success. And his Liberal colleagues have proven many times, government involvement can invite quite the opposition.

When asked about the Conservative plan to provide direct assistance to parents, Liberals recoil like a vampire to garlic. The first line of attack sounds more like ransom negotiation than a policy debate: the handout is big enough. They want more cash in their brown envelopes. It doesn't matter what the government can afford, what matters are the good cats' car payments.

One objection that stays buried deep in the Liberal mindset is that cash assistance to parents will get squandered. Only Ken Dryden can be trusted to use the money wisely. Parents, they whisper amongst themselves at symposiums and lobby conferences, will spend the money of beer and popcorn, not their children. Its still the basis of their criticism, but like "money and the ethnic vote", they have learned that it is impolitic to say it out loud. They don't know why the "beer and popcorn" attitude is so terrible, but they do know they'll get further ahead by hiding that part of their agenda.

Thursday night, a gala dinner at the Chateau Laurier in Ottawa will be held in honour of former Prime Minister Mulroney. A panel of heavyweights from the environmental activist community voted Mr. Mulroney the greenest prime minister in our nation's history. These judges, ranging from Elizabeth May of the Sierra Club to Sheila Copps, former environment minister, are by no means Tory supplicants. Elizabeth May, you'll recall, campaigned harder than Buzz Hargrove on Paul Martin's behalf this January. Ironically, she nominated Mr. Mulroney, calling his government "valhalla" for the environmental movement.

When the prune in the seacap published the secret Mulroney tapes, the "shock" of it all was the foul language. Many commentators blushed - but for Chuckercanuck, it sounded something like Thanksgiving Dinner at my parents' house. Beyond the swear words I heard a compelling man, unquestionably dedicated to the health of his nation. From the land of unintended consequences, those tapes triggered renewed consideration for Mulroney's many important accomplishments and noble failures.
The honour of greenest Prime Minister is another reminder.

So where is Prime Minister Harper in the midst of this? Mr. Harper introduces Mr. Mulroney at the dinner, where the former Prime Minister will not only talk about past accomplishments, but future projects. Meanwhile, Elizabeth May no longer scaremongers on the Liberals' behalf - she talks of the opportunity Mr. Harper has to carry on with Mulroney's legacy.

The partisan hack in me sees an intriguing path to follow: the fatest part of our greenhouse gas emissions lies in urban traffic. Those Liberal bastions make their global warming contributions in the most gratuitous ways - clogging streets 12 hours a day; lone riders commanding monster vehicles. The party of Magna and the boss of the CAW will probably not manage to reduce urban traffic - just a guess. Against their sweeping gestures, our baby steps will ring true to the calm and cautious Canadian people. The transit pass tax incentive is one such baby step which Chuckercanuck hopes to see in the upcoming budget.

The TOry bridge to urban voters would be narrowest at the environment. Chuckercanuck hopes the politial engineers decide to bridge the urban gap there.

No wind for a second day, the good ship Chuckercanuck will take this still day to scrape the barnacles and seaweed that drag the boat when winds are strong. Adam Radwanski's latest blog entry is about the press gallery - PMO war on parliament hill. It is reasonably pro-media; Adam has never been a big fan of Stephen Harper. And, as he testified in the National Post, his heart is in a pre-Martin Liberal Party. In the column, he laments the story of Rona Ambrose told in one of Don Martin's columns last week.

In that column, Don Martin proves the prudence in Stephen Harper's media approach. Don Martin likens the Prime Minister to Big Brother in Orwell's 1984 for denying an interview request with a Cabinet Minister. While the nut of his complaint legitimately provokes frustration, it is a mighty, canyon-sized leap to go from there, to a totalitarian regime as sick as Big Brother's. Besides, it is not Mr. Harper's party gripped in a never-ending debate on using torture.

Don Martin commands respect and has influence, to be sure, but when frustration is his muse, hysteria generally follows. Inappropriate hysteria does not do the cause of press gallery privelege any good. In cow talk: we citizens need a steady hand to ride the herd were sending to Ottawa. You can't go all shaky on us because one day you'll call "wolf" and we'll say, "oh, every party does that, that's politicians, for you. those silly rascals..."

As a young manic alien from Ork, Robin Williams was funny. But somewhere between hepped up and sober, the man became better known as the hairiest thing in Hollywood rather than the on-the-spot quipmeister that mesmerized the late night talk show circuit in the 80s. Today, his movie career consists of playing creepy perverts through 90 minutes of boredom. He needs to create buzz and instead of marrying into the family of Scientologists as most celebrities would, Robin Williams has become a political pundit on the Canadian scene.

He calls Prime Minister Stephen Harper "basically a Bush Baby" who snuck in on a sea of voter apathy. While this likely requires no mention, Robin Williams, from Hollywood, only likes "progressives" or as they say in yankee land, small-l "liberals". Everyone else is the embodiment of the Bubonic plague.

Chuckercanuck, for one, thanks Mr. Williams for his contributions to our national discourse. Instead of criticising a policy or position that the Prime Minister Harper has taken - at least Paul McCartney had the "savvy" to do that - Mr. Williams has decided to simply liken him to the President and assume the rubber-glue principle sticks.

But there is truth in Mrs. Doubtfire's observation. President Bush, I believe, is old enough to have been Stephen Harper's father; I'm not sure the first lady could have pulled it off. No need for a Maury Povich show to establish paternity:

Fitness Obsession
Both men are maniacally devoted to rigorous physical exercise. Mr. Harper has come under intense fire for spending too much time in the gym.

Dumbing Down
Both men are famous for employing the tactic of appearing dumber than they are to seem more common-like. Mr. Bush regularly affects a laboured speech to seem like a normal man struggling with super-normal problems. Mr. Harper has successfully appeared as merely very smart when he is known to be utterly brilliant.

Folksy Charm
Both men love to mingle with Joe Sixpack and Sally Pentium 3 - winning crowds with their easy manner and comfort handling chicken wings. Mr. Bush covets his Texas twang and strut. Mr. Harper enjoys regaling people with how far into the number Pie that he can recite.

Chefs Scandal
Both men had to fire incumbent chefs after too many wild mushroom mouses.

The parallels could be drawn forever, but I'm sure my dear readers can see Prime Minister Harper likely is George Bush's baby. They even look alike. And the most compelling piece of evidence: they have assembled around them a coterie of advisors and sycophants whose true loyalty is to the Zionist conspiracy that calls all shots.

Nanu, nanu, Mr. Williams. You're most serious concern is that we in Canada will, as a result of electing Prime Minister Stephen Bush, go down the path of staggering debt. I wouldn't worry, Mr. Williams - we're not about to vote ourselves $44B for highways when a city needs complete reconstruction.

Like many enthusiasts of the Canada project in Quebec, Chuckercanuck read too much into Michel Tremblay's renunciation of separatism.

Late this week, Michel Tremblay publicly corrected the record. The La Presse headline that suggested the change of heart was misleading. True enough, as pointed out by an astute blogger, Cameron, here at this site, The content of the interview does not contain a renunciation; his point was, he is disillusioned and if separation is about economic issues, then he's not for it.

He made this public declaration after luminaries in the separatist movement began to tear him down in public. Bernard Landry swore never to support Mr. Tremblay's plays again - effectively banning them from his life. Other artists decried Mr. Tremblay as shallow on politics or deprived of sleep. They also sneered as they dropped him into one of Parizeau's two problem groups: money and the ethnic vote. Mr. Tremblay winters in Florida, like many Quebeckers do. Perhaps Mr. Rich guy isn't such a Quebeckers anymore?

Mr. Tremblay clarified his separation bone fides and rightly suggested there was something sick about the movement's reaction to his criticism. He won support from Joseph Facal, an articulate but sadly robotic former minister under Bouchard. Mr. Facal said the only way to promote sovereignty is to frame it in as an ethnic nationalist project.

Since Parizeau's famous night of the double martini, the separatist movement has been allergic to ethnic nationalism. Remember, Parizeau's remarks came some weeks after Lucien Bouchard told the truth: we do not produce enough white, french Quebeckers to keep the ethnic nationalist dream alive. Like a fiery priest in pre-Quiet Revolution Quebec - Bouchard commanded the white, french women of Quebec to make more babies for the cause. Quebec had replaced God but marching orders stayed the same.

So demographic practicalities and terrifying outcomes of ethnic nationalism abroad, convinced the separatists that economic nationalism was the only way to bring the allophones into the project. Trouble is, those arguments are ignoble and mostly silly. No one starts a new country for better capital gains taxes.

Like Thelma and Louise, the separatists have the cliff of ethnic nationalism or surrender. The apetite for ethnic nationalism in Quebec rivals its apetite for whale blubber - we travel, we work internationally, we deal with Canadians in other provinces, we scivvy off to Banff as student; at home, the shish taouk or a bowl of noodles are the preferred fast food. More importantly, Quebec has demonstrated, with the tools available within Canada, that it can not only protect its culture, but allow it to blossom.

Ironically, one of those tools is the Not Withstanding Clause - that very bit of the Charter than the Liberals want to nip away like an infected appendix.

I promise not to talk about CalgaryGrit anymore than this second post in a row. However, today, this Liberal blogger has posted long and hard with an endorsement of Gerard Kennedy. If you don't know who Gerard Kennedy is, well, you'll get a fleeting glimpse of the man in the near future. Here's what I know, in brief:

He's a college drop-out from a rich family (sorry, its more politically correct to say "college unfinisher" from a "non-working family"). He starts a food bank in Toronto and it quickly becomes the largest food bank in the country (very succesful too). With good-looks and a masterful way with putting himself in "The Thinker's" position even while standing, the food bank story has made him hot potatoes in Liberal circles.

Here's how Calgary Grit summed him up:

"In 1986, he moved to Toronto to run Canada's largest food bank, managing a 30 million dollar non-profit organization without a dime of government support. Try running an attack add against that."

Without a dime of government support, you say? So, why then, would we ever want to introduce the type of interventionist governments Mr. Kennedy thinks we need? It appears to Chuckercanuck that Mr. Kennedy's great success serves to show that Prime Minister Harper's vision of Canada solves problems with greater success. Don't smother us with government; get out of our way and watch 1,000 Gerard Kennedy's bloom across the country.

Gerard Kennedy, in the land of vision, is his own attack ad.

See? We can render him an unpalatable option without ever mentioning the irony of a Minister of Education who didn't feel it was all that necessary for him.

CalgaryGrit, one of the star Liberal bloggers and a very funny person, landed an exclusive interview with Liberal leadership hopeful, Michael Ignatieff. This is quite an excellent coup for the CalgaryGrit and at least a weak acknowledgement of Blogolia's influence.

In my own fantasy interview with Mr. Ignatieff, I start with the following question:

Mr. Ignatieff, you said you want to plant the Liberal Party firmly at the centre-left. In other words, you want to fold in the NDPs and become the Democratic Party of Canada. Do you think Canadians are interested in your importation of US-style politics to Canada?

According to the drooping blather Chuckercanuck reads all to frequently in the
Globe & Mail, cuts in income tax are more efficient than cuts in consumer taxes. And, the Liberals are quick to chime in that a mad house of economists support this notion. Some even chide Mr. Harper who, as an economist, should recognize the folly of his tax cutting.

Any of you can find the arguments made that income tax cutting is more efficient than consumer tax cutting - Chuckercanuck readily admits that the arguments have serious sway. Still, the Prime Minister announced the GST cut will be in the first Tory budget. The economists should hop into the backseat and put away their maps, because the gains from the GST cut are fundamentally productive; making conditions more favourable for these disgruntled dismalists in the long run.

The GST tax cut will change the way Canadians think about taxes. Remember, the Accountability Act provides for a parliamentary budget office - revenues, costs, surpluses and deficits will no longer be beyond the reach of ordinairy citizens. Governments will not be able to spring surprises come budget time, cordoning off the potential for any debate over government finances until budget week.

Meanwhile, every citizen - including those who pay no income taxes, will have an easily identifiable and quantifiable tax cut in front of them to value and judge. They will do things with their savings. In 2004, the Liberals told us, "we can't have American-levels of taxation and Canadian-levels of social services."

All the media nodded - hey, the Liberals are water-walking budget-makers - we can't disagree with them. You could never have American taxes and Canadian social services. The sad part about this "noble vision" of Canada that the Liberal Party of the Canadian Worker foists on us is that it is utterly deflating. You know, we could have American-level taxation and Canadian levels of social servives if we:

1 - eliminated our debt and debt servicing costs
2 - charged user fees to recoup new capital spending, like toll roads
3 - generated an economy with higher incomes

Some combination of the three above could yield American-level taxation with Canadian level social-services. If you don't believe me, watch Alberta prove it.

Cutting the GST, because of its visibility and easy quantification, will make Canadians believe in tax cuts and generally reforming our taxation. Armed with knowledge from a parliamentary budget office, Canadians will engage in more sophisticated discussions of taxation, government revenues and expenditures.

This shift in public awareness is worth more than an invisible income tax cut. Do you remember the "record breaking" tax cut the Liberals gave us a few years back? Exactly. You didn't feel that one, but you will feel this one. And that will make it a whole lot easier for us to talk about the next one.

In Quebec, life breaks down thusly:

Nerds are federalists.
Cool rebels are separatists.

As you all know, we churn out artists like Alberta does barrels of oil. And, up to last week, they have been monolithically separatist. But Michel Tremblay, arguably the dean of literature and Quebec’s greatest playwright, broke with that tradition. He no longer supports Quebec separation. It was a lovely dream in the days when all that mattered was asserting pride in being French. Today, in the sober light of a globalized economy, separatism is an exercise in futility, securing nothing for French culture in North America and leaving us poorer in the process.

Clearly, Michel Tremblay has been doing what all Quebeckers are doing: ignoring Andre Boisclair. Our next referendum is to be a photocopy of the 1995 referendum, Mr. Boisclair has commanded. And that means: no one is allowed to change their mind. So, Mr. Tremblay, kindly retract your statements or else face the wrath of a Boisclair tantrum.

Oh yes, one thing Mr. Boisclair: a neat way to repeat the 1995 referendum would be to call for a recount of the votes. If our side lost by that narrow margin, you can bet we would have re-counted every single ballot cast. Why don’t you call for a recount? I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that federalist ridings had a “spoiled ballot” count 6 times higher than the rest of the province. Nothing to do with that at all.

Off-Topic: Chuckercanuck gets a "best of the blog" nod from the Toronto Sun today for the "Afghan Debate Redux". That's number two and I'm mighty thrilled with the attention.

If I were a betting man, and too often I am, I'd bet that you missed the Afghan debate. Coronation Street, E News with Ben Mulroney and 24/7 coverage of the Bandito massacre all get more airplay with Chuckercanuck's readership. So, as a public service, I have condensed here the substance of the debate.


Liberal MP: Mr. Speaker, without question, we support this mission. But, due to the vagueries of democracy, we have been denied our rightful place as government. The fact that we are not government puts undue strain on our troops and we move that effective immediately, we be returned to government and elections be banned henceforth.

Bloc MP: Monsieur Speaker, without question, we support this mission. But, we also support the notion of a sovereign Quebec. Therefore, we are calling for a separate contingent of military, henceforth to be called "les militants Quebecois" that will basically operate in tandem with the Canadians, even under Canadian leadership from time to time, but will have a fleur-de-lys sewn onto their armbands. Our caucus has been working very hard on fresh new designs for this fleur-de-lys patch that will surely catch the eye of our friends and enemies alike.

NDP MP: Mr. Speaker, without question, we support this mission. But, we have a few questions. Is there American involvement in the mission? Are there Americans in Afghanistan? Does the Canadian military actually talk to Americans? Mr. Speaker, I'm sure this house will recognize the immediate need to cease all cooperation with the Great Satan and I hereby declare Canada a yankee-free zone.

Liberal MP #2: Mr. Speaker, when we invaded Afghanistan to topple the Taliban, our mission was to advance the dialectic of history towards democractic expressions for voiceless individuations of the human collective. When we invaded Saddam Hussein's Iraq, it was to show solidarity with the Kurds and Shiaa, and manifest the theoretics of social justice and human rights. In Iraq, we removed the personification of brutality in its most insipid form -

(Liberal MP #1 nudges Liberal MP #2)

Liberal MP #1 (in a whisper): Michael, Michael. This is Canada. Not the United States. We didn't invade Iraq.

Liberal MP #2 (whispering as well): What? Canada? Really, you guys didn't join us in the Iraq invasion?

Liberal MP #1: No. In fact, the party you want to run was emphatic in its disagreement on that. Plus, its bad optics to refer to the US as "we" and not "them", especially in this caucus.

Liberal MP #2: Oops. My bad. (returns to loud speech) Mr. Speaker, please strike my remarks from Hansard. I'm just going to shut up now and let my front bench do all the talking.

NDP MP #2: Mr. Speaker, my research staff has turned out some pretty stunning revelations. Did this House know that Americans were part of NATO? I thought NATO was just us, the French and the Germans. But know, I discover that the Great Satan was allowed into NATO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we expel America from NATO and end our support of its imperialist ambitions. Having said that, we support this mission emphatically.

Tory MP #1: Mr. Speaker, we actually didn't get clearance to speak from the big guy, so we're just going to sit here and hope, hope, hope Mr. Ignatieff wants to confuse his nationality some more.

I suppose Andre Boisclair should be given some lee-way. Afterall, his education amounts to a certificate from Harvard's School of Giving Certificates to Rich Kids Who Otherwise Wouldn't Be Able to Graduate Hamburger College. His work experience consists of a single job: cabinet minister. That's right, in Quebec, our early chidhood development centres are so strong, that once you've done two years in them, you can run a ministry, stoned on all manner of intoxicants.

Point is, if Andre Boisclair sees the world through Kafka-coloured lenses then you can blame it on that insufferable cocktail of inexperience, ignorance and drugs.

He has shied away from provincial parliament (called the National Assembly), largely to avoid talking about those complicated things like running the government and improving services. That's boring talk he leaves for the ever-dwindling number of grey-haired PQistes who cling to the idea that to start a country, you must give people a sense that you can run a country. No, Mr. Boislcair prefers hopping from high school to high school, talking student newspapers and hairgels that sustain your "do" through an 18 hour rave.

This weekend, his big announcement was that he doesn't want the next referendum to be a 3rd referendum. He wants it to be a repeat of the 2nd referendum.

Please, read that bit 4 times. Tell Chuckercanuck it makes sense to you. Once you give up on that, you will get a sense of what its like to be a Quebecker trapped in the quicksand of referendumonium.

I've tried to imagine it. I guess my marriage gets anulled. My daughters must "disappear". I go back to school. I move in with my - arrgh - parents. All this must happen to re-create the 2nd referendum for Mr. Boisclair. Where did you live in 1995? Sorry, you must return in order to "re-create" the 2nd referendum. Move over Stephen Harper, Jean Chretien is once again Prime Minister of Canada; must "re-create" 1995.

Oh wait, Mr. Boisclair, I know why you want to re-create the 2nd referendum: you won't have to lead the separatist forces and can spend that campaign in some chaps loft, blaring Guns'n'Roses and snorting your way to Paradise City.

How many professors does it take to change a lightbulb? Well, the answer depends on how you define the term "change"... Today we saw the official entry of two illustrious professors in the Liberal leadership race: Michael Ignatieff and Stephane Dion.

Iggy gives good speech and today he was in fine form - telling us he was the man not only to save the Liberal party, but to make Canadians proud of their politics once more. Iggy, next time you're in the House of Commons, squint with all your might, looking way, way down at those government front benches. See the big guy who keeps running circles around your blubbering former Cabinet Ministers? That's the PM and if you read newspapers - oops, let me qualify: Canadian newspapers - you'll find a shower of letters announcing that people finally feel proud to be Canadian again. So if its restoring our faith in politicians, well, you'll have to join the Garth Turner band of heroes we aren't exactly looking for.

I heard several interviews with the Igmeister and he referred to 1968 perhaps a dozen times in each interview. I think if you contort like a pretzel in a mad attempt to highlight that you're the next Pierre Trudeau, you probably aren't the next Pierre Trudeau. But hey, good luck.

Stephane Dion did the rounds as well and his first order of business was to remind people that it is absolutely ludicrous for someone with no experience, like Iggy, to consider runnning. Then, in english we haven't heard since John Candy and Eugene Levy played the Schmengie brothers, he made sure to remind Canadians that he's not exactly a pleasant fellow. Mr. Dion does a really good imitation of a snapping turtle. And his advocacy for social justice? Remember, friends, "social justice" is code word for income and wealth re-distribution.

Both these men intend to put the Liberal Party to the left of the NDP and Chuckercanuck has no plans to stop them. Full steam ahead, boys, and don't look back - you may get depressed at how empty the queue behind you is.

Chuckercanuck will be wearing black a black armband until December, 2006. I am in mourning over the recusal of Belinda Stronach from the Liberal leadership race. Only Ms. Stronach had the charisma and glamour to make the Liberal look like anything other than it is: a wheezing, withering mass of wrinkles and claws. Afterall, do any of you want to see Scott Brison or Michael Ignatieff wrapped in tight leather? I didn't think so.

She offered us one reason for staying away from the race: she wouldn't participate in a race that didn't offer 1 vote for each member of the party. Chuckercanuck admits he doesn't know much about the inner-workings of the Liberal Party - like the FreeMasons - its a society of handshakes and lattes that eludes him. But it never occured to him that 1 member, 1 vote wasn't the mechanism for choosing a Liberal leader and I can understand fully why Belinda would be repulsed by this undemocratic amnner by which a Liberal is chosen. When the Liberals call all their propaganda Red Books - they aren't kidding: they run their shops like the Communist Party of China. Some members of the party are worth 0.33 votes, others are worth 5.

Another reason for bowing out, of course, was Belinda's inability to learn french. Quoting Steve Martin, she sighed heavily: "Those french... its like they've got a different word for everything!" Yes, yes, Belinda, its a complicated language, but you could have tried the Cyrano de Bergerac approach: hide a fancy gizmo in your ear and have some french person whisper through said gizmo what you're supposed to say. Let's not pretend you were planning to generate your content yourself, anyway. So, the gizmo would have been perfect in either language.

(Interesting though, I didn't, until recently, know she understood no french. Remember last June, she bolted the Tories to keep Paul Martin's diarrhetic government going. Why? Because Stephen Harper did not understand the complexities of Canada. Not a single journalist pointed out that this woman couldn't credibly speak to what's happening in the Beauce, or Gaspe, or Abitibi, or Valleyfield. Not a single journalist challenged that line of bullshit.)

Robert Fife at CTV provides another reason for her to pull a Frank McKenna. Sources close to Belinda say she anticipates a slaughter of Liberals at the hands of Stephen Harper's Tories in the next election. A new Environics poll proves her out: the Liberals are in a statistical dead heat with the NDP for the position of bottow-dwellers in our nation's heart - only 22% of Canadians have any inclination to vote Liberals.

Trying to rescue this party would be as productive as trying to capture the greenhouse gas emissions of our nation's bovine herd. It is like looking at the Hindenberg ablaze and saying, "someone call the fire department." By the time help arrives, all that's left is a heaping carcass of blind ambition and craven hunger.

The Liberal Party of Canada is severely sick and today's display in the House of Commons made that plain for all to see. Like any good samaritan, Chuckercanuck searched through all his families old cures and balms to see if there was anything on offer to make that party better. He found one and offers it here for their consumption:


Ingredients:

1 - The boiled meat of 1 large crow.
2 - 3 tbs. of Castor oil.
3 - 2 oignons, coarsely chopped.
4 - 1 cup sour cream.
5 - salt and pepper, to taste.
6 - 1 ready-made pie shell.

Directions:

Combine the first 5 ingredients in a mixing bowl. Then, fill the pie shell with the mixture. Into a 400 degree oven for 1 hour. Let cool for 10 minutes and serve immediately.

Oops. I nearly forgot. The name of this recipe is called Humble Pie. And Chuckercanuck recommends that each Liberal MP eat 1 every day until the next election.

Rarely do I get a chance to listen to CBC Montreal's noon-time show, but incapacitation has some benefits and this is one. As part of the show, the incoming president of the National Press Gallery did an interview on the kerfuffle between it and the government. In her exposition, the incoming president made statements that could be called startling at best and recklessly unhinged at worst. I offer them to you for your consumption.

Ridiculous Statement No.1

She complained that the Prime Minister has muzzled the bureacracy, in addition to muzzling his MPs and Cabinet. She pointed out that the bureacracy is supposed to be independent from the government. She went on to argue that the sponsorship scandal was precisely a problem of the government exercising this kind of control over bureaucrats - she even said that Harper was critical of the sponsorship scandal but he was committing the same "errors" as had been committed in the sponsorship scandal.

First, Chuckercanuck is not an expert in our government institutions. It had always been my impression that the Prime Minister and his Cabinet are the executive part of government. Aren't they precisely the people who administer the bureaucracy? If bureaucrats are independent from Cabinet - who do they report to? Let me guess, the press gallery!

Second, equating communications controls with stealing tax payers money to enrich a Quebec cabal is so ludicrously disproportionate one has to wonder: on whose behalf do the press gallery report? To borrow Gilles Duceppe's line of questioning, where did all those cash-stuffed enveloppes end up? (Members of the press gallery who read this blog: lighten up, it was just joke, but you get my point, right?)

Ridiculous Statement No. 2

The host (a raving "progressive") did try and even out the discussion by suggesting that being a new government, the Tories needed to get a handle on their files and such before getting stumped at every corner by journalists wanting to turn every moment into a "gotcha'" moment. The incoming president responded by saying that Paul Martin's government had as much of a learning curve as did this government. Paul Martin's Cabinet was loaded with backbenchers who had no clue about running a government but they still managed open communications with the press gallery.

Let's see... so, Paul Martin was never finance minister? Bill Graham? John McCallum? In fact, his Cabinet had a healthy whack of - er - former Chretien Cabinet Ministers. But here's the incoming president of the press gallery trying to convince Canadians that Paul Martin moving from Finance to the PMO was something bewildering and new to him. Okay, it was. But it shouldn't have been.

Besides, the Martin government is not a precedent of success on any measure. Despite the press gallery telling us that this Canadian Collosus would walk away with Ralph Klein-like monopolies of parliament for the next two decades, he managed nothing close to the expectations laid by said press gallery.

The press gallery have nothing but democracy in mind, of course. They're our only defense from the totalitarian instincts of a man with too much Alberta in his blood. Ironic though, that even the Senate is a shade more democratic than the press gallery - since at least the person who put Senators where they are was himself elected.

None of us get to choose who does our reporting. None of us get to choose who does our punditing. We are stuck with the press gallery we have. Chuckercanuck begs one of them to break ranks and suggest that cash stuffed enveloppes is actually worse than telling people not to talk policy without clearing it with the boss. Just to restore faith in the unelected press gallery who boldly defend our democracy with bloated analogies and flights of hyperbole.

Chuckercanuck is moving from couch to couch, in a nasty fight with pnemonia. As I type, I am eyeing a basement futon that hasn't seen a warm body since university. Lying down is eminently preferable to sitting at a computer desk.

On Politics this afternoon, the Bloc's Richard Marceau and the NDP's Lorne Nystrom repeated over and over how smart Stephen Harper was. Richard Marceau, in particular, went at great lengths to talk about the Prime Minister's brilliance. I wanted to give him a shake and ask, "are you sure you represent the Bloc Quebecois?" Interesting to see what banner he runs for in the next election.

Jack Layton made an appearance too. Poor guy. "The NDP," he declares, "is not a party that opposes, its a party that proposes." How's this for a proposal: if you can explain it with a catchy-phrase, don't. Remember, to kill off the Liberals and become the one left-of-centre party, people have to think that you could run a country (and preferably, not ours).

Moving easily from Jack Layton, this morning I saw a Tommy Douglas quote which I share here:

"Canada. The West feeds it. Ontario and Quebec milks it. And you can imagine what its doing in the Altantic provinces."

I read the quote - I know its cute and funny because he makes you think poop without saying poop - but really, this is terrifically offensive. How terrible that we would nominate this guy as "greatest Canadian" when he wasn't much more than a Western Canada chauvinist in Leninist garb.

Like every time I listen to Rex, a good chunk of callers make my blood boil. Today, the topic was US-Canada relations. Needless to say, when I hear that the caller is from Toronto, I begin to wince, expecting a spew of venom in a British accent. The callers, in the majority, I would say, thought Stephen Harper was pursuing the right tone and directness.

But this little entry is not about US-Canada relations. Its about oil reserves.


"Resouce" is the geological concept. It means: how much stuff is in the ground.

"Reserves" is an economic concept. It means: how much stuff is in the ground that I can make a profit extracting.

While the total resource of a deposit of zinc, diamonds or oil is fixed, the total reserve fluctuates with market conditions. At $9 per barrel, Alberta's oil reserves shrink significantly because it is no longer profitable to recover reserves that are profitable at $60 per barrel. When we say, Alberta has the largest oil reserve in the world - that is at $60 per barrel, not $9 per barrel.

I introduce this concept to you, fair readers, because there were some troubling comments on the check-up about a new NEP. In a subsidized world, the unrealized profit of producing oil is the burden of the government - us. In an exporting world, the profit of producing oil is the burden of the rest of the world. Isn't this clear? Moreover, I'd think an expensive oil environment will direct consumers to greener choices? What think you, Mr. Orchard?

Anyway, my point was simply, if you want to advocate for knuckle-dragging nationalism, economic or otherwise, you have to understand, the minute we nationalize the oil resource in Alberta, the reserves shall fall sharply.

I don't normally comment on the politics of other provinces. For the most part, its because I don't know enough to comment with any intelligence - except Ontario, where provincial politics is not exactly interesting (Ernie Eeves? You have folks greasing back their hair AND running the province? Oh, I don't think so.) But news that Preston Manning might take a crack at the Alberta PC leadership means that I have to say something.

I grew up a loyal, mindless Liberal. My parents were Liberal (not today!), my grandparents parents were Liberal - it was a veritable Clairol commercial. When my uncle announced his support of Bryan Mulroney, the family went into mourning. But as I matured, small thoughts crept into my head that were very bad, very unLiberal.

It wasn't until my second year of university that I abandoned my skin-deep attachment to the Liberals. My girlfriend, an exhausting ideologue always with a ready-quote from a Marxist Radical feminist or some union boss, returned to Montreal after having gone home (the Peg) for Christmas.

"You wouldn't believe who I sat next to on the flight," she told me.
"Who?"
"Preston Manning."

Preston Manning was head of the Reform Party and to most Quebeckers at the time, he was a Quebec-hating, Christian totalitarian from Alberta. Among college students, there was no question but to roll your eyes and make some annoyed grunt anytime his name came up.

"And guess what?" she went on, "he's the nicest, most interesting person you'd ever meet. I'd never vote for him, but I he's a really good person."

I was shocked, but intrigued. Two-months later, I met a guy who was brave enough to say he was would vote Reform in an election. "Strategically," he confessed to rolling eyes and annoyed grunts, "for the deficit." If he was brave enough, so was I. And henceforth, I joined the band of Alberta rednecks and Ontario Bible-Thumpers to rid this fair land of the Hollywood Party of Canada.

When a wave of voters replaced Preston Manning with Stockwell Day as the leader of Canada's conservative movement, Chuckercanuck lamented that we'd never have Preston Manning to kick around anymore.

Now Stephen Harper is in Ottawa as Prime Minister. And Preston Manning is mulling a bid to replace Ralph Klein in Alberta. Me thinks Laurier was right all along, he just got the wrong century.