ChuckerCanuck 2.0

Millionaire preacher, Jeremiah Wright, and now a guest sermonizer, Father Pflegger, put Trinity United Church just shy of a Wahhabi funded madrassa on the extremist scale. It was the latter's mysogonystic screed that made Barak Obama finally quit the church. (A mysogonyst in the priesthood? Unthinkable!)

Now, I know that if I had all seasons of the West Wing in my DVD collection and got excited of chick pea salad with tahini vinegrette, I'd be saying to myself, "wow, how brace. He's such a post-politics politician." Then I'd collapse to my knees, weeping his name. I'd fiddle with the ends of my fair trade knit wear and say people are getting all hysterical without the context.

But its strange that a church could generate such a sudden, short burst of controversy worthy of resignation after twenty years of wonderful, eye brow levelling stuff. If Trinity United is recently beset by a plague of hate, shouldn't the senior congregants step in to clean house. Certainly, Barak Obama would qualify as a senior congregant and you would think instead of running away from the problem at Trininty United, he would care enough to get involved. A press release demanding a house cleaning from the man most likely to be president would probably do the trick. Afterall, Barak Obama found Christ at Trinity United Church. He owes them.

Maybe instead, what we hear is what you would hear week in - week out at the church for the last 20 years. Maybe the plague of hate was difficult to react to because only when everyone else was pointing to it did Senator Obama recognize it as such. Up til then it was just ordinairy church. If that was the case, then Senator Obama has taken a step to oppose a part of his history. Setting yourself up against your old self is a dangerous game - call it
the Romney risk. When you hold the flag of change and decide to repudiate 20 years of your association with a movemement, religious organization, policy positions, you run the risk of letting John McCain smile at you and say, 'yes, Senator, we all agree you are the politician of change.'

Labels: change - the only thing I can believe in

Aliens have landed. And they are perverts.

While maybe not aliens, something tells me scientology is mixed up in this story.

So long as we are daydream mode when it comes to whatever type cabinet shuffle we will see, allow me lobby for my choice, Stockwell Day, one more time.

The next foreign affairs minister will receive a fair bit of scrutiny by the opposition. Of course, they react about as well as they act, so most of the time, their rhetoric bombs don't make it out of their trenches. The media's gotta do what its gotta do and, at day's end, we can expect intelligent criticism only from them. But criticism will come out of that corner.

So, the first filter is: who won't screw up. I know I'd be a screw-up - I'm too scared to fly to be any good for that! Cross the Pacific? 12 hours in a plane? No way, thanks - ask the Japanese foreign minister if he has a webcam. Screwing up is pretty normal and good people can screw it up, like Maxime Bernier. Let's say after an election - he should return to cabinet. He did important work in Industry and could do more again once a productive pennance is served.

Stockwell Day, along with precious few, gets passed the filter. He won't screw it up.

So why him over the other people on that no-screw-up list?

The hipsters lining up to see Canada's proudest moment in art and free speech, "Young People F----", demonized and cartoonized Stockwell Day and this high-profile performance will scrub him clean of that history. His moderate, morally clear voice and competence will cause people to wonder how they ever got fear-mongered about him. Unlatching the "scary-right-wing" tag on Stockwell Day, unlatches the party from it as well. Fully and finally.

Labels: Go Stock Go

With Maxime Bernier out of cabinet, Quebec's voice within cabinet has been "disastrously" weakened, says opposition MPs. Or, as Mr. Dion put it: looking at the caucus Mr. Harper has from Quebec, backfilling Quebec representation into cabinet will be difficult.

If we look at the past 2 years of government, Quebeckers are happily represented in cabinet. By the Prime Minister. On matters of serious interest to Quebeckers, the Prime Minister has shown a determination that Quebeckers have not seen in since.... since.... well, you know - pre-Kim Campbell. Instead of the stalemate Liberal-Bloc symbiosis ; the paralysis of separatism vs. federalism, we have unity and reconciliation. The leader who united the conservative movements of Canada under a single banner has taken that skill and applied it to the confederation.

And here's the joke of it all. There is a simple remedy for this supposed disaster. It is a remedy entirely in the hands of the opposition to administer: vote the government down and have an election thereby handing over a truckload of more seats to the Tories in Quebec.

Labels: I thnk the state secrets angle is a better strategy

This corner praises Jason Cherniak for keeping the heat on Warren Kinsella for the high crime of NOT being a federal Liberal.

Jason's case is rock solid:

1. Warren Kinsella says he's not a federal Liberal. Pow!

2. Warren Kinsella described Dionistas as Martinites. Kazam!

3. Warren Kinsella does not automatically defer to David Suzuki or Elizabeth May on environmental policies. Ouch!

4. Warren Kinsella has inadequately demonized Stephen Harper and failed to acknowledge the devastation the PM's extreme right-wing ideology has caused to Canada. Smack!

5. Warren Kinsella has said kind things about a news agregator. Boom!

This pile-driving, slam-dunking attack on Warren Kinsella by Liberal-land's philosophical fountainhead has an important point:

Stupid readers with their pint-sized thinking caps don't understand that Warren Kinsella is a Tory-wolf in Grit-sheep's clothing. His stealth campaign to destroy the Liberal party through deception and mis-direction can only be stopped by brave, young men, like Jason Cherniak, calling him out. I am grateful for the clarification because, as one such stupid reader, it was all too complicated for me to parse.

Meanwhile, its hard to believe that Warren Kinsella could let this yapping dog lie.

INSTADATE:

No sooner had I slapped this puppy up did I find Warren Kinsella in full fighting mood. Conceding Cherniak's primacy in the hierarchy of great Liberals, Kinsella re-produces, for our pleasure, an email where Jason encourages Warren to smear Iggy during the 4 year long Liberal leadership race. Yes, it seems Jason Cherniak is a great Liberal - so long as his boys run the party.

One good line from Mr. Cherniak in that email: "I can't post on it because nobody would believe me.." hmmmm.... being just a stupid reader, I'm wondering why that is but can't seem to figger it out.

Labels: Just when you thought there was peace in Abstainistan

Today is a big thrill for me. As you know, I am a Quebecker who blogs Tory propaganda. That gets me attention outside Quebec, but because I write in english, not so much in Quebec. Until today! I have been linked by a hard-core separatist web forum, Le Quebecois, as an example of "an enraged Canadian" over the Reine Negre description of our Governor General.

Here's the link. Take a look and have some fun. You'll notice a couple of things:

1. Many people represent themselves with uber-patriotic pictures. Some are 19th century Patriotes on a background of the Quebec provnce. Some show Patriotes riding horses alongside Aboriginal Canadians. It's a lot of nationalist imagery that makes you think you're looking at folks from a slice of backwater bordering the Caspian sea.

2. Their comments are innocuous fantasy-land stuff. One guy sounds a deluded as an Obamaniac with, "hey federalists, is that all you got???"

Anyway, good for a laugh. Where once the separatist movement gathered a huge flock of Quebeckers, guided by intellectuals and whipped by artists - it has been reduced to a cyber-cartoon of unwashed nerds who have yet to discover the joys of Dungeons and Dragons.

My prediction:
Soon, the only manifestation of separatist yearnings will be on fallow fields over weekends with costumed faux-warriors re-making ancient battles - a patriote one weekend, an evil henglishman the next.

Meantime, Chuckercanuck will be the picture of a typical, 21st century Quebecker. Moi, enrager? Au contraire, mes amis independistes.

Labels: Bienvenue chez Chuckercanuck

5. I got some of the facts of this very personal, life-altering story about my uncle wrong. We were in Bosnia when he told me about it and he didn't speak above the

4. Words matter. Facts? Not so much.

3. Lay off my uncle - its not like he invented the internet.

2. Making a distinction between Buchenwald and Auschwitz is exactly the kind of old style politics that have kept us apart for too long. We can only seek achieve our higher purpose on a higher ground. I honour John McCain's service to our country.

1. Cut me some slack, I've been to all 57 states in the past 6 weeks alone. I'm tired.

Labels: Obrother '08

We have been told, mostly by those folks who pine for the days of Allan Rock and Jean Lapierre, that our current government has a shallow pool of talent from which to form a cabinet.



It was a fair point in the early days of 2006 when the Tories were in power for the first time in over a decade. Even with the Minnas, MacCauleys and Easters of the world, Liberals had the sheen of government and therefore looked, by default, more competent.



Now, many more months than anyone expected, it takes the resignation of a cabinet minister to highlight just how wrong that notion is. Judy Sgro, fr'instance, resigned over her lap-dance policies and other alleged improprieties just 12 months into the reign of Paul Martin.



Imagine that: this natural governing party, after a decade of stewardship, finally led by the juggernaut of Liberaldom, had to drop an incompetent minister a full 14 odd months before the Tories had to drop their first incompetent minister. To put it relatively, the Tory cabinet avoided a gaffe-induced harikari for more than twice as long as the most recent Liberal regime.



Pretty impressive stuff. It speaks to the disciplined management of Prime Minister Harper and the talent he can draw on from the Tory caucus (and he hasn't yet exhausted the backbench potential, like Diane Ablonzy).



Against that, it wouldn't be so comforting to display your most able alternative.... Bob Rae.

Labels: Turning the Bernier affair into a veritable hit machine

We interrupt the mourning of Maxime Bernier's life in cabinet to highlight the funniest headline ever written:

"Harper government baffles former PM"

That former PM? Joe Clark, of course! What living ex-PM could the word "baffle" be applied to so appropriately? Joe Clark is baffled by a range of things - from bar exams to how they get the fruit at the bottom of a yogurt cup.

And, as we learned when he was Prime Minister for six days or so, its not just the Harper government that baffles him.... its all government. There's all the confusing departments and you have to make decisions. Every day, there's some decision to make. Even Saturdays, cripes!

But Joe Clark's criticisms are relevant to the Bernier affair since his big complaint is foreign affairs under Harper. Its a probing, original analysis that contends Canada must be close and distant from the Americans. Allied but independent. Clark thinks Harper is just close to the Americans.

Well, I'm sure the Chinese wish we were more American in our foreign policy. I'd bet the Colombians hope we don't get all American with our foreign policy. Hamas probably bet we'd follow the American lead with our foreign policy. I'd bet the Francophonie has been confounded by our adroit performance sans Americans. Oh, and probably the Americans hope we follow lock-step with their position over the Arctic - I guess you can call that particular hope "audacious".

Labels: Now back to Bernier

Personally, I don't care. Was he gaffe prone in foreign affairs? Well, it certainly proves that his predessor, the current defense minister, can do some good ministering. The buck stops at Harper. I am largely happy with foreign policy at the moment and especially proud of Stephen Harper. He would have been a great foreign affairs minister in the 90s. So, with the foolish act of leaving cabinet materials - however innocuous - deserves the time off ice. Letting Liberals three days of cheering on this as a reminder to the rest of cabinet and cabinet-one-days about what happens when you make a big embarassment of yourself.

But you catch your opponents with their pants down: on the day the president of Ukraine comes to thank Canada for supporting its bid for NATO membership, the Liberals - especially experts like Iggy - are decrying Tory foreign policy. So, Liberals are taking the Putin line on the Ukraine? What's the public to think about that contrast? the next thing you know, the public's saying, "wait a second, that's Mr. War Crime talking." The guy who, when it became politically convenient (well, admitedly, necessary) to ditch his Kurdish allies and go against the Iraq war, he did so with narcissistic eloquence. So, they get some laughs now without realizing how poorly their own criticism can turn on them.

Does this end Maxime Bernier's career? I tried to find a parallel - inexperienced minister, makes an awfully dumb mistake, who goes on to brighter days? I couldn't find an example from the rolling lands of the Beauce but managed one from Estrie. His name is Jean Charest and better than even money says he's the first third term* Quebec premier since Duplessis.

Labels: consecutive

Since its a slow news day so far and apparently, Liberal bloggers have not decided to rip each apart over some quibble, I will use this post to share with you a project for reducing my carbon footprint.

Yesterday, I cleared out our furnace room so that fellas could come in this morning and replace my oil furnace with an electric furnace. With this change, I've had to upgrade my electricity and replace my water tank (to an electric one).

The total project costs are approximately $5,500. Using the experiences of two other switchovers in my Harper-mad family, the payback will be about 4.5 years - certainly not the kind of payback that gets people ecstatic in the corporate world, but a payback nonetheless. Additionally, we remove the single biggest fire and environmental hazard in my house - the oil tank. So, I haven't factored in the premium cut I will ask from my insurer when the tank is finally gone.

There are soft benefits too. One, we will increase the usable square footage in our basement. Two, peace of mind for my wife. Three, I get to stick it to Ultramar. You see, in March, Ultramar sent a letter informing us that the monthly withdrawel from our account was to be upped by $150 in order to make up the deficit we had accrued. In itself, this was fair but for the two previous years, we had a surplus (the monthly payments exceeded the actual oil consumption) and NEVER did Ultramar send us a letter to inform us they were reducing the monthly withdrawels so we would have no surplus at the end of the year. Dear Ultramar: I know what a cash float is. So, I'm sinking your monetary battleship.

Now, to the carbon footprint thing-a-ma-jig. Since my electricity is generated via hydro-power, I am reducing my carbon footprint. In fact, I consume more oil for heating than gas for my car. So, its quite a hefty reduction. I did this with no subsidies, no revenue-neutral carbon taxes, no compulsion - it was simply the happy coincidence of economics and duty. By duty, not because of some Elizabeth May whipped climate crisis - although its nice to hedge on that issue a bit - rather to leave as much carbon energy in the ground for my children to use. Anyway, it strikes me as a very Tory thing to do - you know, do something on my own initiative. And, as I mentioned at the beginning of my post, the Quebeckers I know who are doing this are.... Harpermaniacs.

Labels: Back later when news hits

This is so important, it can't pass without notice or comment.

The separatist ideology is pathetic. Its a wasteful trap, a fruitless indulgence, a laughable cureall, a balding remedy. At heart, this is my basic position.

So I have only a vague familiarity with Mr. Beaulieu. Its certainly possible that some separatist theorist would not be able to resist using "nigger" on the post-modern irony of calling a black woman, "nigger", but in an entirely non-racial sense. Afterall, separatists see themselves as the "white niggers of America". However, I can't remember having a GG referred to that way before so the coincidence seems to suggest that the shamblesl cart came before the none-too-swift horse.

Where Mr. Beaulieu hits his stride is when he frames his personal suffering as an issue of the colonizer and the colonized:

"“It forever reminds us of the presence of British colonization from the time they were the colonizers."

...when the British "colonized" who exactly, Mr. Beaulieu ? Oh yeah, you French colonizers. You'd think a guy whose lineage is so strongly linked to colonizing wouldn't be so bummed by the practice. And judging by modern Quebec, the British did a piss poor job of colonizing, didn't they?

Separatism, I'd suggest, really is an idea entirely owned by a single, albeit large, cohort of baby boomers. It would be very hard to play the "colonization" angle to a young Quebecker and get them to bite - unless you stopped some bearded twig on the way to tam-tams at Mt. Royal. The separatist analysis of just about anything is so far-removed from reality, well, its like calling Lucky Charms part of a complete breakfast.

Thing is, separatists understand this change in separatism better than federalists. Its why they never, ever, ever want to talk separatism.

The reasonable accommodation commission is over in Quebec. Now, the Toronto media have used the whole ordeal to play up Quebec as a racist backwater. But really, is Quebec not ahead of the curve in this discussion?

Proliferating polygamy in Toronto may seem like evidence of that city's multicultural virility but when you read quotes like the following from Imam Aly Hindy, you get the sense that we are cruising our corner of civilization to a precipice:

"This is in our religion and nobody can force us to do anything against our religion," he said. "If the laws of the country conflict with Islamic law, if one goes against the other, then I am going to follow Islamic law, simple as that."

So, Torontonians may be urging polygamous families to march in the Toronto Pride Parade to show off their open-minded diversity-ness but I think its much braver and appropriate to be here in La Belle Province, wondering if citizens really should be able to make the dominion's laws optional.

Labels: Everything in moderation - including accommodation

Phew. With all the excitement yesterday of a intra-Liberal fight iced with a delicious frosting of white supremacist charges and anti-semetic lines being crossed, I couldn't squeeze in a word or two about Garth Turner.

Thankfully, the man has kept the story barely beating today - just enough for me to semi-justify posting about it.

Garth, as we all know, is a key player in the Dion caucus. His staggering influence on policy, strategy and communications is matched by very few other Liberal MPs. But his penchant for crass vulgarity creates problems.

He called Prime Minister Stephen Harper "a whore". He urged his fellow Liberals to grow balls and featured a shiny set of bull's testicles on his blog to make that point. He once blamed the war in Iraq for the bridge collapse in Minneapolis/St-Paul - a rather disgusting abuse of that tragedy and its victims to score some political points. (When confronted about this absurdity since Quebec had a deadly overpass collapse which could not be attributed to Iraq, he went quiet).

Yesterday, Garth called Jane Taber a wealsette because she reported on how offended women MPs were by a power point presentation that was - as we can all imagine - likely pretty off-colour. For Garth, you see, life is one big Hooter's dining room. The rumor mill kicked in - spinning madly over the possibility that he'd get kicked out of the Liberal caucus for this.

But no. Stephane Dion has assured him that the rumor is "bullshit of the highest order". Obviously, the OLO cannot afford to lose one of Mr. Dion's staunchest supporters and most revered MPs. Further, dropping him would raise questions about Mr. Dion's judgment in bringing him into the Liberal fold. Finally, freeing Garth to vote on confidence matters would weaken Mr. Dion's ability to support the Tory agenda.

Labels: Maybe Dion should tap into Garth Turner's reservoir of male hormone juices

A rumour floats that Ian Brodie is resigning and Guy Giorno will be replacing him by July.

My interests in the staffing side is a bit weak so unless something egregious happens, I don't really have much of an opinion - stories about it are more for a trade publication like the Hill Times.

Right now, I'm happy with the government's performance, so that's obviously my tribute to Mr. Brodie as it is to all of Stephen Harper's staff. And, I trust Stephen Harper's judgement, so I have every reason to believe that Guy Giorno will succeed in the post.

Candian Press suggests that the Obama-Nafta embroglio was the egregious happening. Maybe its a convenient way to handle two things at once, but I doubt that was it. That stuff played well to the base (except, I'd bet women are 8 to 2 for Obama in Canada so project outreach requires some Obamafication of any party. To this end, I want to congratulate the Prime Minister on his apparent slim down.)

Tom Flanagan has been an excellent addition to our media in terms of being able to discuss the situation from a Harper mindset. Hopefully, Mr. Brodie will do the same - it makes the story that much richer when you hear the thinking of folks who'd have a real good clue.

Labels: Hopefully Garth will still be a story tomorrow

In one corner, Chretien uber-strategist, Warren Kinsella. Scrappy, pugnacious, unaccustomed to losing.

In the other corner, Liberal uber-blogger, Jason Cherniak. Chief enforcer of Dion doctrine, revered in Liberal circles and by political journalists across the country.

Round 1 begins with Warren Kinsella making the mistake of stating that the Dion Carbon Tax is a collosally stupid idea (now). Of course, Warren Kinsella is stating the obvious, but that doesn't mean he isn't deserving of a fatwa.

Round 2 is the fatwa. Jason Cherniak tells the world that Warren Kinsella has sold his soul to a cabal of anti-carbon tax companies and this is why Warren doesn't like the "Dion Tax Shit". In lefty-land, this is a fatwa. When you disagree with someone, you charge that they are not arguing on principle, but have been bought off by some industrial concern. It is used to shut people up or, at least, innoculate the world from their greed-monger opinions.

Round 3. Kinsella responds. Hey Jason, that's exceptionally rude and a little bit condescending. You weren't so concerned with my client list when you were kissing ass for a sweet job at the Daisy shop.

This judge awards a TKO to Kinsella.

One, I'm embarassed by this Dion Carbon Tax debate. Not a single proponent of this tax scheme have offered a credible explanation of why this tax grab would save the planet. Anyone who supports the concept of a carbon tax should be against this "tax shit" sophistry. The thing's a lemon that confirms to everyone that Stephane Dion should never get closer to government than he is right now. He's dumb on his big issue, he'll be dumber on issues he doesn't really care about.

Two, Jason Cherniak can be ruthless and reckless. There was nothing to be gained by issuing his fatwa against Kinsella except an enemy. The post smelled of the Olivia Chow cheated rumor he spread last summer. Not pretty and when you sink to ad homenims, you basically admit your position is a clunker.

UPDATE 1:
The bell is rung and still these two Liberal champions continue to beat at themselves outside the ring and the hall to the dressing room. Warren Kinsella hits Jason with a couple of good hooks - one to some gossipy piece that isn't flattering to Mr. Cherniak; the other, a link from small dead animals, that Kinsella calls "white supremicists." Cherniak is wobbling and has a knee heading to the floor.

UPDATE 2:
But look at this folks, Cherniak hits back and hits back hard. Maybe you handle the label "white supremacy" a little delicately around Jews, Mr. Kinsella. Its a fiesty play to make on Mr. Cherniak's part and should be congratulated by onlookers. I can't see how Mr. Kinsella doesn't respond. Meanwhile, we Tories can enjoy the spectacle of one Liberal talking up another Liberal's support from the "white supremacists" crowd while the other talks up the first guy's religious insensitivity. Insert Garth calling a journalist a "weaslette" and how does that triple play not help you sleep well tonight?

Labels: Keep it up boys

Friends, this blog has three purposes. One, its a place where I get to write, write, write - like a crossword or soduko puzzle - its exercise for me noggin. Two, its a place where I get to throw propaganda and rhetoric into a public space for use by Conservatives as they see fit. Three, its a place where I get to define what news I think people should talk about.

This morning's post serves this last purpose above all. So, indulge me please and consider how important this report is. The trend, since the Great Satan elected the best little Satan in Texas as president is that terrorism is on the wane. Some highlights:

Fatalities from terrorism have declined globally by 40%.

Terrorist activities have declined everywhere but Pakistan, Afghanistan and Algeria.

Al-Quaeda has experienced a dramatic collapse in popular support across the middle east.

Barak Obama and his ilk want people to think differently. He wants to rail against fear-mongering by fear-mongering (that's the kind of change you can believe in). But, the movement he leads (which is international), is so committed to defeat and surrender that any sign of progress will have to be squashed. Any hint that the narrative of Bush as Catastrophe is a convenient fiction must be squelched. Any suggestion that supreme sacrifices have not been in vain are, hmmmm, not helpful.

Threats have receeded, not disappeared. But in receeding, the Bush approach to terrorism is being validated. And, the alternatives being proposed look shakier and more troubling than ever.

Labels: Summer of W

Should a cabinet shuffle actually happen this summer, please consider putting Stockwell Day in charge of Canada's foreign affairs.

The reasons to do so are obvious: Stockwell Day is a gifted communicator who masters files quickly and carries his charges with both solemnity and humour.

The reasons not to, are, once scratched and poked at, reasons to put him there too. There is a mindset - unreasonably unaccommodating - in our country when it comes to devout but non-traditional Christians, i.e., evangelicals. I can't pretend that I too didn't share in this mindset for basically most of my life. Literalist interpretations of scripture that lead folks to believe in Creationism somehow disqualified them from the critical posts of political life. I have no statistics on how widespread this anti-Evangelical attitude is, but I doubt I need them to convince you that its pervasive. Nor should I have to convince you that Stockwell Day, more than anyone in Canadian political life, has suffered from that prejudice. Picture Kinsella's dinosaur and you'll know what I mean.

But what this mass of Canadians who harbor antipathy towards creationists have failed to do is mount an argument as to what precisely about those beliefs disqualifies citizens from directing ministries or making judgements on basically all manner of things. True enough, I wouldn't want Stockwell Day to pull evolution from science curriculums across the country, but he couldn't do it and even if he had the means, the will of the people would prevent it. So, even that tiny shard of policy where a creationist might make judgements counter to what a likely majority of Canadians would want is moot.

Tolerant, diverse, accommodating. If that is Canada, then our bias against creationists must be purged. Stockwell Day could become one of the great spokespeople for Canada on the world stage. The only reason not to put him there is that the Prime Minister decides he could do more for Canada in some other role.

Labels: Its not like he thinks Aliens are invading

10 years ago today, if someone asked you who was America's greatest ally in the Arabic world, the answer was Saudi Arabia.

Today, the answer is Iraq. Which, by the way, is a democracy. (Or do we have to wait for an unelected senate full of journalists before we declare Iraq a democracy?)

So it will be interesting to see how close to reality this fine piece of salesman's enthusiasm comes true. My hunch is the number is closer to that than the current estimates. Too bad so many competent thinkers who now find themselves in opposition here or on the cusp of greater, in the U.S., have wedded themselves to the "Its All About Oil" meme.

Of course, its all about oil. The awesome gift bestowed to the citizens of any country so blessed. The terrible corruption and evil when it accrues in the hands of few - as Saddam made proof: there will be blood. Now that the more sobre folks on the War for Oil side of the fence want things, like Presidencies, they will be confronted with very serious dilemma with catastrophes down the end of many roads untravelled.

Supporting an Iraqi democratic government is more important than anything because the consequences gives resources to killers beyond what ordinairy psychopaths can ever dream of having at their disposal. Instead, that resource will fall within the league of democracies to the benefit of its citizens; inarguably the best possible use of that resource. This point is inarguable and I'd bet that many who let the Oil War crowd do some dirty work for them would agree with it.

Even if the resource was only twice the current reserves, that would, in Canada and Iraq alone, put the largest pie of the total world oil resoure, within the league of democracies. Withdrawing from Iraq - when a very noble success is germinating - and foresaking that resource to some demonic poodle of Iran's president is a mistake of proportions as large as those folks make out the initial Iraq invasion.

It is about oil. How it gets used. I realize many want to settle a grudge and punish George W. Bush for what they consider an epic mistake. That's fair. But stupider doesn't cancel out stupid. And the conversation should be joined up there. Certainly, advocates of Responsibility to Protect, like Paul Martin and Michael Ignatieff here in Canada, and their american counterparts, would have to agree that if the R2P principle applies anywhere in the world, Iraq is it.

Labels: Obama Spring - W Summer - McCain Autmun

So, we's going to have a cabinet shuffle this summer. The prima facie reason for shuffling the cabinet is that Vic Toews may be heading to the bench in Manitoba and Maxime Bernier hasn't worked out as a senior miniter. But underlying that, there are some good reasons to shuffle cabinet. One, it gives the press (and bloggers) stuff to write about for the next few months. Two, it gives the cabinet an opportunity to develop depth and seasoning.

You see my friends, even 1.5 years ago, when there was a crowd of folks begging to be Liberal leader, we were told by the Liberals and the media that a veritable dream team of politicians were filling slots in opposition. Imagine, they told us, Iggy - the war crimes minister, Just Call Me Bob - the finance minister, Martha Whatever - the, well, er, giver her something Minister, Scott Brison - Minister of U Being Happy, Gerard Kennedy - Minister in Hiding. Wow, they would make minced meat of the weak field of Tory ministers that Canada is stuck with.

But it hasn't worked out that way, has it? The Tory cabinet has emerged as a talented, careful, terrifically competent bunch. I highlight a few:

Jim Prentice. Intelligent, practical, accomplished. He was terrific in Indian Affairs and is terrific in his current posting at Industry.

Jim Flaherty. An iconic finance minister in the making. Slyly, he has shifted the nature of Canada's finances in favor of taxpayers. And no one yet has noticed. Income splitting. Income Trusts. The tax-free savings account. Revolutions each.

Lawrence Cannon. Sure, he got flustered with questions about the United Canada resolution - but that's some pretty tricky metaphysics pulled off by the Prime Minister. Still few in the press gallery understand it, so why not permit Mr. Cannon to have 30 bad seconds. As a transport minister, he is doing great work. Particularly here on the neglected West Island - anglo ghetto without ministerial representation in any level of government.

Diane Findlay. Tackling the most contentious portfolio around - immigration. The questions she grapples with (quite handily, I add) are core issues for Canada's identity and future. And, unlike predecessors, she isn't beholden to the lap-dance industry - even when that puts her life in danger. Tough. Courageous.

Tony Clement. A nerd's Nerd. To quote Mr.Leahy, "when the shit storm hits, Randy, Tony Clement is the only thing keeping us from being covered in shit." Okay, maybe Mr. Leahy didn't exactly say that - but certainly, I feel much safer with Mr. Clement running health.

Stockwell Day. Stockwell Day is the sleeper of the Tory cabinet. He runs his department, post 9-11, with the gravity it requires. I have never seen him do an interview or scrum and not look many times brighter, more-informed and in control than whoever pesters him with questions. I'm sure he loves his post, but Stockwell Day could do MORE.

Peter McKay. Solid. Fun. Professional. Admirable. Nuff said.

I am not trying to write a love-letter to the entire cabinet - though I like basically all of them - Chuck Strahl, Peter Van Loan, Gerry Ritz, etc.. I just wanted to highlight a few and then, once you see the list, ask you to play a game of imagination:

Maria Minna. Hedy Fry. Allan Rock. Denis Corderre. David Collenette. Reg Allcock. Andy Scott. Joe Volpe.

Its not just how laughable Iggy, Rae and Brison could potentially be - its how laughable previous cabinets were compared to the current one. And with every passing month, the guffaws grow.

Labels: The World's most awesomest cabinet

Ach! Please help if you know how. I want to publish sheet music on this blog.

This here post is a little tune written by Rainbow and Chuckercanuck called, "The Mouse went round the corner".

Labels: Royal Weddings

Where me and Reverend Wright are alike is where we are unlike Barak Obama. We are in this Cult of Lame. But when I watch performances like this, I think maybe he's not in his own cult either.

He starts strong. He emphasizes warmly how much its a time for celeberation of Israel's 60th anniversary. He says 'knesset' with real authenticity - like he's used to saying 'knesset' two to three times a day. From warm celebration and 'knesset'-saying, he segues into some personal outrage which looks lovely on him. He's a very elegant man.

Then he's off with some pretty typical, plebean fare about Bush as Satan - tying McCain to Bush everywhere. All of it would be devastating stuff if this were the West Wing season finale. But we'll skip over that because better to refute later when it matters instead of supply answers to the enemy before the battle begins. Except one - I love where he criticizes Bush for insisting on elections in the Palestinian Authority. Breath easy planet, one thing Barak will never insist on is an election!

Point is, he's delivered about 4.30 minutes of Dean Martin cool that is totally adequate to fire up his base (includinge most of Canada's media). Then he perceptibly freezes up when he says that Iran funds Hizbulloh and is the greatest threat to the United States, Isarael and the middle east. I'm glad he froze up because it confirms he knows what a clunker some speechwriter slipped into the text. It fits so badly into his speech cause now we've got an image:

If Obama were President he'd begin a middle east trip celebrating with Israel one day, off to chat with President Ahmadinejad after making a powerful, powerful speech in the 'Knesset'.

Imagine the Israeli press reaction: "Obama visits with President of the greatest threat to our security. Squeezes in 60th anniversary gathering in Israel." Afterall, to many people, including many Israelis, what would President Obama say to President Ahmadinehad face to face, that he couldn't say over the television like Hillary Clinton: "touch Israel and you will cease to exist." What else could there possibly be to say that needs to be face to face?

Imagine the Iranian press reaction: "Obama says Iran's strategic position has grown strong. Visits to make deal." If the President says: country X has grown strong, country X is our greatest threat, country X supports terror - then country X relishes the chance at face to face diplomacy. You the President (Obama) have just staked so much political capital in this negotiation that you'll be desperate to make a deal to "show progress". But country X hasn't much at stake, since the governing regime has scored benefits just by having the President of the United States grovel down a read carpet on the presidential grounds of country X.

Labels: C'monm - he actually said sending videotapes with impunity

I am particularly excited by the revolutionary thought that a tax system should tax bad things and not tax good things. Income and investment are good. Don't tax them. Pollution and smoking are bad. Tax them. In principle, this makes sense. Until you think about what Liberals would do if we allow them to make it an operating principle....

1. We know Liberals are Obama poodles. They will spike NAFTA as soon as he gives them a chance. Trade with the US is bad - so we should implement a NAFTA tax. 10% on all products made in the US and Mexico.

2. We know Liberals think women who raise children in the home are retrograde cancers on society. They would like to have children go through a baby-raising factory while their mothers toil on an auto plant assembly line. Homemaking is bad - so we should have a head tax of $7,500 for all mothers who do not enter the workforce after maternity leave.

3. We know Liberals think Tories are bad. In fact, their leader said we had no social conscience the day after he was elected leader. If we are so bad for society - if we are threatening the planet and such - shouldn't we get taxed for our political opinions? Yes! All Tories must pay a $3,000 tax for not being Liberals. Dippers will be charged too, but only $1,000. The Bloc are good for Liberals, so they don't get taxed anything.

Now, don't get too worked up. These new taxes will be offset by targeted reductions on things Liberals like so the net effect will be revenue neutral. Some of the tax cuts include:

1. Soft Core Porn. To encourage artistic expression and generally feeling good, not only will their be NO GST on this material, but each consumer will be entitled to a $100 tax credit for each purchase of soft core porn exceeding $60.

2. Swedes. Everyone knows that all good ideas come from Sweden. In order to encourage more Swedishness in the world, every citizen of Sweden will receive a $35 subsidy from a Liberal government.

3. Bilinguilism. Speaking two languages in Canada - not just any, but specifically french and english - is good. So, each citizen who passes a bilinguilism test will receive, each year, a $1,200 tax credit.

I urge the Harper government to come up with its own list of revenue-neutral tax-shifting so that we can start taxing bad things too. Like phony scandal-mongering. That should be taxed, no?

Labels: No one will be neutral on revenue neutral tax schemes

Let's pretend some government wanted to do some tax shifting.

Tax Shifting (noun): 1. restructuring our tax system by simultaneously reducing some taxes while increasing others by the same absolute total dollar amount. 2. the re-branding of "revenue neutral" the way "global warming" suddenly became "climate change".

Promoting it is making cotton candy with words - like this, from Andrew Coyne:

"Is it so hard to imagine that the public could be persuaded of the wisdom of a relatively simple idea: that we should tax less the things we want more of — work, savings, investment — and tax more the things we want less of, like greenhouse gases?"

I suspect, however, Andrew Coyne is being a sneaky conservative (or real liberal) - he wants to dramatically shift the tax burden to consumption/activity)from income and investment. That a government's revenues might fall as a result is not necessarily a negative outcome to him - but to Liberals?

This measure is only effective if carbon consumption falls as a result. If carbon consumption falls, then what was revenue neutral on day 1 becomes revenue negative for the government by day 140. We would soar the heights of a deficit in less than a year and without changing a thing - we would be in deficit forever...well no, we would go bankrupt first. So the options would be: run deficits; raise taxes; cut spending.

You could only keep the tax shift intact by a massive cost reduction program. Otherwise, the taxes get cranked up again pretty soon. Or, most likely, the scheme stays revenue neutral because the consumption of carbon never drops and the whole thing was for not. You can't be revenue neutral without being results neutral.

Okay, over at Calgary Grit, our soon-to-be Harpermaniac (yes, that's you, Dan) posted an Aislin cartoon that mocks the horrible hole Mario Dumont has put himself in. Well, not necessarily put himself in, but is in, regardless.

So let me explain, friends, why Mario Dumont's Action Democratique have fallen so low in the polls (forewarning: it ain't rocket science):

1. The ADQ rose in the polls primarily due to disaffection with the traditional parties of Quebec. Jean Charest's Liberals bungled everything they touched and failed to deliver on the promise of restoring fiscal sanity to Quebec. Folks, like ME, gave up on the Liberals because they were just the PQ without the referendum. Voters were equally turned off by the promise of more referendum talk and social upheaval promised by the PQ. Fed up. Fed up. We just want bridges to stay up and garbage to be collected. A tall order in Quebec. So, the third party one alot of votes and support.

2. Mario Dumont is personally popular. Always was and will be for a long, long time. Last year, he was Mr. Sunshine making bold, exciting pronouncements like wanting Quebec to be a NET CONTRIBUTOR to equalization not a receiver. In comparison, Andre Boisclair was a paranoid freak who thought the federalist media was out to get him AND the separatist hardcore of his party was out to get him. Similarly, Jean Charest seemed dour and tired. This year, Mario Dumont looks pessimistic and forever angry. Jean Charest is cheerful and funny. Cheerful beats the blues every time.

3. The ADQ has more than Mario Dumont to showcase itself - and, the rest of the crew is more circus than caucus. The next big-wig in the party is Gilles Taillon who brings alot to the table resume-wise but has proven to be politically clumsy and more silly than serious. They are not a government in waiting. They are an opposition in training. Quebeckers - even the ones in white hoods burning crosses in Liberal day-dreams - don't elect governments on training wheels.

Sorry that it's not sexy. But its also not un-fixable. If I were to bet, I would put my money on the staying power of the ADQ. If you think its because of racism or homophobia, well, good luck to you.

Labels: Yellow revolution turns sour

How the Liberals vote on Denis Corderre's latest legislative initiative will be fascinating.

Sounds innocuous enough: all supreme court judges must be, by law, bilingual. Afterall, as the man from Kandahar, in high-gear victim mode, whines:

"I don't think that I am a second-class citizen... I think that as a francophone I have the right to make sure that I have access to all the tools to work with and they will provide me with resources including a full understanding of my case."

He slithers twice in that sentence. Access to quality english education is not universal in Quebec and his disqualifying some potentially talented, wise judges applies to the minority francophone group he claims to defend. Furthermore, for it to be effective, this law would force candidates to pass a fluency test for bilinguilism that hardly anyone - certainly not Stephane Dion - would pass. Otherwise, if I was before a panel of Stephane Dions getting them to talk in english so I could understand - well, I think I'd prefer to rely on the translation thank you. And guess what, so would everyone in any permutation of the situation.

That's just a soundbite and I wouldn't want to judge a person on a soundbite - afterall, ahem, we've seen how misleading a soundbite can be down in Yankeeland recently. But there is a troubling state of nature that belies this intended language law. If Canada is not a country that works in translation, what does that say about Canadians? Is this French-brain / English-brain essentialism?

Don't get me wrong, friends. Most or many Supreme Court judges will be functionally bilingual the way Stephane Dion is. That's what happens to the very small number of Canadians who would be eligible for such a nomiation, by and large, without a law. And it will happen more and more, without a law. This is good and good enough.

When you coerce people to conform to some national characteristic you want everyone to have, it tends to erode the very legitimacy of that characteristic (or in this case, "Canadian values"). By creating this law, bilinguilism will cease to be a national treasure bestowed on us by the fact of a french-speaking and english-speaking Canada - it will be as potent a national symbol as our stopping at stop signs.

Stupid victims cleaved by language - that's what Canadians are in this law. Denied justice. Persecuted. Desperately in need of an Iron Man-type Liberal government to put each and everyone's lives back together.

Labels: Where is the francophonie this year and when

Stephen Taylor has a funny piece on a desperate request from Mark Holland to anyone on the Hill that can get him extra tickets to the hot new movie, Young People Fucking. We are told that Young People Fucking is a "smart, fast-paced comedy that blah, blah, blah, over the course of one sexual encounter."

It does seem really smart. And I guess if the characters are like me, it would be fast-paced (too fast-paced, if you ask my wife). It takes a lot of artistic vision and daring to use Fucking in the title. To me, that's the first clue that what we're about to get will be stimulating stuff that will have me talking for weeks about it. Maybe it will change my life, as artists frequently promise to do.

Interestingly, as Taylor points out, Young People Fucking was a reference point for the debate over Bill C-10 - you know, the law that will mean Canadian taxpayers don't have to fund Young People Fucking. Terrible censorship, that! Anyway, have no worries, the sequel, Old People Fucking, won't need government subsidies: viagra will be happy to pick up the tab.

Back to Mark Holland. Class act. To me, the definition of a future leader, of a noble, distinguished MP, is the guy in a hot sweat to see Young People Fucking.

Labels: Official Critic for Ewoks and now cretons

Dear Ontario,

We are all feeling so alike these days, you know, two peas in a have-not pod, but sometimes you are like aliens from Planet Mukluk to me.

Why would you want to be North America's Top Auto Producing Jurisdiction?

I mean, sure, if it happened, its a nice thing. But why actively seek it out? Or put another way: do you folks think that a Premier setting that objective is articulating a VISION?

In your next election campaign, will you vote Tory if the PC party promises to make Ontario the No. 1 Producer of Pet Toys in North America? Talk about a vision! Maybe you'd split the vote equally three-ways if the NDP came out with a VISION to be North America's No. 1 Producer of electric can openers. The endless horizons; the limitless sky; Ontario, VISION is yours to discover!

I bring it up because it should make - in my mind - some Ontario tax payers awfully upset to see money thrown at the auto industry to keep a Premier looking vision-full and keen to make "strategic investments" that look like a sand pile standing against the tide. It should make Ontario tax payers doubly upset to hear their Premier demand that Ottawa drop similar bags of cash down a "job making" drain hole.

Premier McGinty is not Warren Buffet; if he was, he'd be playing bridge with Bill Gates and counting his personal fortune. Stop letting him play venture capitalist with your money. The best he can and should do? Cut taxes. (Oh, and please tell the guys on this side of the Ottawa river to do the same! Thanks).

ILLUMINATING UPDATE:

Springer put it best when he suggested in the comment thread that Ontario promise to buy every 5th truck rolling off an Ontario plant. That's what this subsidizing amounts to. Thought it was the perfect image.

Labels: If only Ottawa sanity could trickle down to Toronto

Three Quebec by-elections that mean nothing - except perhaps the current woes of Mario Dumont. But even Mr. Dumont's frat-house opposition party are not that interesting and, my money would wager, transient.

No, the part I love is this:

"Much of the protest vote in Hull went to Quebec Solidaire candidate Bill Clennett, the social activist who became a household name in the region after being manhandled by former prime minister Jean Chrétien in 1996 during a demonstration."

To this day, I can't help chuckle and cheer Prime Minister Chretien in reaction.

But let's play a thought experiment, shall we? How would this have played if Prime Minister Harper had throttled the social activist protesting him on behalf of social housing?

Labels: Please submit responses by 10 am Tuesday

One celebrity that I unashamedly admire is Gordon Ramsay - the British chef who made it politic to say, "fuck me". In fact, when he says it, its not even a four-letter word, as the correct spelling is, "fhawck me."

I'm sure you've seen his shows - Hell's Kitchen, Kitchen Nightmares - he stalks kitchens like a tiger waiting to pounce on an easy kill, exploding volcanically over anything less than immaculate counters, bludgeoning restaurant owners into successful entrepreneurs. I became a fan after watching the original, British Kitchen Nightmares and found many of his lessons on running a profitable operation to be fairly applicable to many business operations.

Anyway, Gordon Ramsay came out over the weekend urging the British government to force restaurants into serving local, in-season produce only. That means, scrap the airfreighted leechees and January strawberries. Or, more pointedly, it means that when Al Gore wants to serve fish at his party, maybe he shouldn't reach across the planet to get that catch.

Largely, its a nutty idea and no right-wing fanatic like me would hoot and hollar over an opportunity to constrain consumer choices. But the other day, a Liberal with a Canadian flag license plate was bragging to me about how much her daughter loved mangos and guava juice. I was dumbfounded. What the hell is wrong with apples? Why can't we teach our children to love stuff grown around town? Fhawck me.

Eating local produce will not make you a hippie. Likewise, eating fruits and veggies from the four corners of the planet does not make you sophisticated. The less carbon we consume, the more carbon there is for our children to consume. Lay off the star fruit, will ya?

Labels: Quebec lamb costs more than New Zealand Lamb - can you believe that

The Liberal pollster has, supposedly, quietly cautioned Stephane Dion that his revenue neutral carbon tax will be, um, not particularly popular on the campaign trail. Not everyone in caucus falls asleep dreaming of going door-to-door with the promise to make their constituents ability to heat their homes more difficult thanks to a Liberal government. But their leader is keen to show he's no wimp. He's a leader. And if it means he has to do something reckless, bordering on stupid, to prove it, he will, dammit. However they dress up revenue neutrality with a candy bag of programs for swing Dippers, it will be a snickers-worth promise. Everybody knows life will get more expensive and none of their projections will come true . So why don't they just admit that and work within that frame? A truly revenue neutral scheme would accomplish nothing, everybody, including the Liberals, knows that - so we're all waiting to find out what the actual catch when we can finally say, "a tax by any other name is still a tax."

Labels: Sequester this

Fellow neo-theo-geo-Rio-cons (afterall, what better sign of being a conservative than a minivan - and the one with the best value-for-dollar trade-off, though I am a Caravan man myself I admit readily accepting the loss of cool such a declaration entails):

Tired of potaoes - baked, twice baked, roasted, deep fried, sauted, boiled, boiled and mashed, scalloped, grated and pancaked, souped in chunks, souped screamed, saladed, in bread and mashed and breaded?

What about rice - plain, pilaf, basmati, jasmin, cooked, cooked then fried, puddinged and balled?

Then noodles -buttered egg, zuchinnied, raviolied or in any other way degraded as a side dish?

You've done extra salads of varying fibre content. You've tried bread. Starch alternatives are starting to be as bland as the starches themselves. Now, a liberal would sit around and wait for the government to issue more detailed food groups for ideas. But, as a good conservative, you find you own way and this blog offers a small step forward along that path:

Barley Risotto.

Sure, barley is a grain beloved by the Scotch that finds its way into many soups and broths across Canada. The mass of Canadian consumed barley goes to the production of sustenance that many of us would argue is superior to soups and broths for longevity and vitality. So, as a food item, its fairly exotic.

Anyway, take it out of the soup and cook it on its own. Its easier than risotto but achieves, by virtue of its ironically exotic position in our food, the same result: a creamy, toothsome grain enhanced by the flavours it absorbs and accompanying roast chicken or turkey = in a recent meal, the Chuckercanuck family served it against Montreal-style ribs (til they hit the flame, they are in brine - marinading and tenderizing - we don't smoke ribs in Montreal).

1. Cooking barley
Key is, 1 part barley to 2 parts liquid - at least that was the guideline I followed, but I found it a little low on liquid to make it rissoto-comparable.

Therefore, you'll need 2 parts chicken broth, 1/2 part wine to 1 part barley. Get that set up.

2. Flavouring the barley
Like all good things, you must start with olive oil in a saucepan and a chopped onion thrown in to soften and brown a wee bit. As the onion melts, get some thyme and a bay leaf, salt, peper.

So, thrown in the dry barley with the onions to toast them and coat them properly with olive oil and onion juices in the pan.

Once covered and toasted, pour in the 1/2 part white wine. Let it boil and disappear - its mostly getting sucked up by the onion and barley.

Then, add the 2 parts chicken broth, thyme, bay leaf, seasoning. Sitr it up real good. Cover. Simmer about 30 minutes.

3. Cheese
This being barley, italian is a big no no. The cheese must be a british aisles cheese. Needless to say, we get great cheddar in Quebec from producers in eastern Ontario up to Lac St-Jean, so I go with something scalpel sharp, cheddar. Grate it up. I can't tell you how much- as much as makes you happy, is the right answer. Or, as much cheese as you would add to anything else.

Grate it up. The barley's ready for some cheddar love when thirty minutes is up and/or it looks just barely wet with broth. Mix it up real good. Taste. Season and toss in some last minute herb if you want to look real fancy (from parsley to chives to Obama's arugula ,whatever you want to clear from the fridge.

Serve as many as you need, keep as much as you can for lunch tomorrow.

Paul Wells links to this article from UPI which reports on the soaring fertility rate in France due to increased baby making by french French and not by muslim immigrants. He calls it "so embarassing" - cheerfully, but still sharply - for somebody. No names and unlike other posts, no comments.

I would think he means embarassing for Mark Steyn - who scaremongers brilliantly about the nature and intent of muslim immigrant baby making (in his book, America Alone). The fact is that like chats do it, chien do it, gay Parisien once-again do it to. His thesis of a muslim invasion via baby making shows that even if it were true, the French front is a tough patch for the invasion. But as I read the article, I felt like the sicilian in Princess Bride, trying to pick the glass of poisoned wine from the good one. Maybe Paul Wells was calling it embarassing for Mark Steyn's critics, not Steyn:

The article has three reasons to find French fertility interesting:

1. Incentives, like childcare and $100/mt/child support SEEM to make a difference. I would say that choosing to use the word "seem" renders this interesting fact very non-facty. "Seem" is a word to call forward hazy recollections, not state quantifiably justified corrolations. Anecdotally, these things help, to be sure. Would we not have children without them?

2. Its white, post-Christian babies. Immigrants are a small portion of the fertility increase. In fact, the article concludes that this french French baby boom would be happening without immigrants. Interesting. In point one, they say without X no baby boom. In point two, they say without Y, still a baby boom.

But nothing to support those statements. The fact of a baby boom doesn't actually show either of those points. And Mark Steyn would latch onto the falsity of point 2. Suppose we looked at those fertility numbers broken down not by race, but voting preferences - and had the date by year so we could see the year-over-year trend before 9/11 and after 9/11. What kind of french French are having children? Pretend there aren't a whole lot of Sergo-Royalistes in the high fertility crowd. That's a Steynian vein he could mine.

3. The trend is all over Europe - Germany, Holland, Britain. Call off the demography dogs, we're fine. Europe can stop making whopee now and go back to its first passion: running commercial toponomy regulatory bodies. Actually, the numbers are still well below replacement rate so instead of running out of Belgians by 2087, they'll actually make it to 2114. Maybe they should hold off on any crusade to catalog the salamis of Europe and keep working at it until they start replacing themselves.

Today's separatist walks into a separatist convention like a trekkie who has been to the conventions since day one. All these Picardistes ruining the concept of good taste in sci fi. They walk around with their Spock ears and whatever meagre turnout there is kinda stares at them as if alien-spotting. Separatists are the old guys in Spock ears.

And when France speaks, the Spock-eared group listen like it were William Shatner, the original Kirk, speaking. And Captain Kirk has asked the separatists if they still live in their parents basement. But for separatists its even worse, because they have to answer, "er, no, we moved out of there to move into our children's basement." At least, in terms of who owns the mortgage.

So, maybe Generation Harper began in Quebec City with the children of Spock-eared separatists now working for a living and appreciating the full value of that mortgage. How absurd it is to speak to their parents about problems big and small and have their parents answer, "ah, but when we are our own country."

This is not to say the concept is not an enduring political threat in principle. Only that the practice of it has become such a Frankenstein's monster, you might as well scrap the beast and stark working from the concept up again.

It became a Frankenstein's monster when separatists compromised the ethnic part of their ethnic nationalist movement. Turning it to a strictly civil affair forces leaders like Gilles Duceppe to look like a foolish communist in a cheese cap when he "pretends up" new history. (Before Fort Pitt became Pittsburgh, it was Fort Duquesne, part of New France. Shouldn't a Habs-separatist like Duceppe naturally switch allegiance to Pittsburgh? Of course. But he won't because Quebec's history, this one-day proud country, started only when the civil boundaries of the province of Quebec were defined.

And this Frankenstein's Monster has made an obsession with public displays of language that are ridiculous. When you cross the border from Vermont into Quebec, there's a road sign that alerts drivers to "nouvelle signalisation" since speed limits are now posted in km/hr and not mi/hr. Every Quebecker, except the Spock-ears, laughs that the sign is in french: anyone who reads french (Us Home) doesn't need the sign; anyone who needs the sign (Yanks into QC) can't read them. Meanwhile, you'll get french signs on the US side of those roads - which are in fact, the kind of signs you want to see when it comes to French in North America.

But Spock-eared separatists won't notice. They'll drive past all the Bienvenue a Vermont signs distracted by their border line up grumpling and cracking Bush is so stupid jokes. Forced compliance by Quebec or market catering by Vermont -- which signals the relative vibrancy of the French fact in North America?

Liberals are chomping at the bit to hit the summer BBQ circuit with promises to raise taxes. Okay, so you don't have to worry about the summer driving season - gasoline taxes are to remain the same, supposedly. But heating your home is about to get more expensive! Hooray! As the price of oil spent this winter kicking us in our collective groin, a Liberal government would give us an extra little pinch to remember them by.

But don't worry. This will be a revenue neutral carbon tax. That means, for every dollar raised through a carbon tax, the Liberals will cut a dollar from income tax collection. Ultimately, they promise, not a single extra dollar of revenue will be raised.

I am not an economist and will, if convincingly argued, defer to more professional analysis of the situation. However, how the hell can a carbon tax be revenue neutral?

Unlike a broad based consumption tax to which more general economic benefits can be attributed, the carbon tax is set to help us meet GHG emission reduction targets. The only important measure of its effectiveness is whether or not carbon consumption shrinks.

If it doesn't shrink, then the move would be revenue neutral but we wouldn't help civilization one bit. Its a matter of robbing Peter to pay Paul while draped in enviro-robes for the chicks.

If it does shrink, then government revenues would fall and, to support our social benefits programs, we would have to raise taxes to compensate.

A carbon tax does its job, in which case it can't be revenue neutral. Or it doesn't do its job, and then its simply window dressing. Funny how both options are classically Grit, eh?

Labels: How about pledging to campaign without jets

Rainbow is five but the contrast to days-old Mermaidia makes her look practically like an adult. She has not been pasturized by regulated daycare - her sins, as Dr. Bennett would tell us, are completely mine. I saw this on an "awesome" bike ride with her today.

We crossed a small park studded with dandelions across the rejuvenated lawns. As I am instructing her on our end destination and near term behaviour, she stops, drops off her bike, starts yanking at the dandelions, cat-like, she darts between small clusters - scheming her next dart with an eye to maximizing dandelions in hand before Chuckercanuck intervenes to stop the madness and return to bikes. Its not quite defiance - she has every intention of remaining within the confines of safety - its just a matter of inserting a little extra agenda of her own authorship to the whole trip.

I ended up with two fists full of dandelions, having seen both my wife and me in Rainbow's impromptu dandelion hunt.

Labels: Think long

Liberals, as Ken Dryden says, Think Big. It's a very seductive approach come short election campaigns in Canada.

Thinking Big means Trying. Every error that resuls from Trying a Big Idea is just an investment in campaign platforms in the future: every cock-up becomes a program to Reform the Program that was based on the Big Idea. You could spend a billion dollars on making a government list and it doesn't matter, The Big Idea of harassing hunters to get guns off the streets and out of crimes was worth Trying and, when failing, Fixing. The gun list cock-up doesn't just not hurt Liberals on that very issue, it helps them because it reinforces the idea that they Think Big and Try. There's probably a sharply-peaked optimal failure rate of government programs for Liberal electoral fortunes. 40% failures keeps them looking relatively competent and with a campaign platform chock-full of failures to promise to fix. Any higher, incompetent. Any lower, and they might have to do something.

Like the human-civilization-saving Kyoto Accord, for real. Instead, they Tried. And They Didn't Get it Done. They Tried, though. And in order to be able to pledge in a future campaign that they want to Fix the problem and Get it Done, they will always fail - or get 60% on the program audit. So, Human Civilization will be on the brink on more time.. And again. And again. On the same issue.

Tories, as Dryden would say, are Pinched and Mean. We say "no" a lot, especially if someone wants off early on Christmas Eve to be with his sickly son. Humbug. We're against Big Ideas and Trying. And Fixing. Every time a program fails and a Liberal gets to recommit to Dreaming Big, they get to slam the Tories for being pinched and mean.

The trick in this short time since the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives merged is to root a counter-narrative as deeply into the soil as Liberals have their late 60s acidellic fairy-tale. Our narrative is simple, we are sunny optimists who believe slow but steady wins the race. We don't Think Big. We Think Long.

In June, the Prime Minister will be on a few major trips - through Europe, the Middle East and Japan this june. So the PM figures no snap election. Or, perhaps, the optics of calling an election that cancels important multinational dialogue for whatever picayune excuse an opposition could conjure up do not play favorably for the opposition in an election. Afterall, important soft power business is being dirupted by the soft powerites. So, by announcing the trip, the Prime Minister raises the stakes too high for an electorally-conservationist party.

Either way, Stephane Dion replies that while the Prime Minister goes about Canada's business, he will be doing some meet-and-greets on the bbq circuit where he'll ankle bite the Prime Minister with great moral fervour. If you're wondering what that strange smell is, the Dionistas call it the smell of success. Personally, I can't quite identify it.

Michael Ignatieff springs - in the Barrie Examiner - saying the choice to have an election belongs to a single, isolated person, Stephane Dion. Either way, he promises, they're ready with an onslaught of Ontario focused priorities (note: not consipiratorially, simply because the speech was in Ontario, he was right to be Ontario focused in the context).

To me, the move - unsparing and smart - maybe a move too far. Ignatieff has unleashed Hanibal's elephants on Dion. A leader from Quebec has to bring Quebec to the table. Put Quebec out of play and the leader has no street cred in Ontario. Ontario Liberals, like Jason Cherniak et al, want an election now hoping to capitalize on Ontario's economic tubulence. But a Quebec leader cannot risk the election because of how marginalized they would be in Quebec. How many summers does Stephane Dion spend "getting to know everyone" before this cold hard fact smacks a critical mass of Liberals sober. Ignatieff accelerated the pace and increased the ferocity of smacking Liberal faces.

The risk for Ignatieff - if he paces this narrative too quickly or narrates it too obviously - he'll be spun to death as quickly by other wing waiters. Today, he cuckolded Dion in public. That's nastier than any supposed "tough-guy" stuff people use on the Prime Minister. Ignatieff would be damaged goods because it will take away a cherished weapon against Stephen Harper; sure Stephen Harper is a firm boss, but he's not a ruthless status-monger who chews goodwill to pulp, like Ignatieff.

Labels: Dion could very well step aside this summer

Via Tiger and Springer - some fascinating bit of journalistic synchronicity that creates:

MacLean's Paul Wells serves up a portrait of Canadians under 40. The Sarkozy revolution on sabbatical, Paul Wells has returned from his to focus on the home scene where perhaps a - pardon the irony - quiet revolution brews. It's a really valuable piece of writing where he gives us a nice glimpse of the conservatization of young Canadians, by the number and story. This gives the Tories no immediate advantage since we're talking about self-identifying conservatives who may still, and traditionally, vote Liberal, eyeing the Conservatives suspiciously simply because they are Hatfields. But long term, when families with three or more children are 50% more likely to vote Conservative than Liberal, brand Conservative has the long-term edge.

Meanwhile, the United States is going the opposite way.

While a Martian runs Venus, a Venusian might end up running Mars. (And every day that goes by, the folks on Venus keep noticing more and more Martians move in).

Labels: People say in Boston even Beans do it

I've been busy. Being a hip, post-modern, spot-Spock parent, I respect the whole-humandness of my little girls Rainbow and Skypiper. I asked them what we should call no. 3 and they told me.
So, Mermadia has joined the world.

In the good old days, when men made the world their own little cadillacs, fathers-to-be got to pace outside closed doors that diminished the sounds of a wife's anguish. All we did was pace and worry until a nurse came out to tell us the whole thing's over and we could come inside to enjoy the new baby.

Nowadays, fathers are there for the whole thing - impotent spectators to this glorious torture. At certain camera angles, the room looks worse than the worst-looking anti-Vietnam war movie. And then, just as you can relax because the magnificent punshiment on your wife is over, the doctor foists scissors in your hands and tells you to cut the embillical cord - a horrifying thought that doesn't hit you until your 3/4 through cutting this human calimari.

But its a good thing that a husband sits through the birth. At the height of contractions and pushing - at the peak of this epic exertion your wife undertakes on your behalf - you kind of understand where a lady like Andrea Dworkin is coming from. Put simply, after she does that, you owe your wife a debt you could never repay.

Labels: Back to rocking

1) Young people ain't making the kind of money they used to make.
2) Old people ain't making the number of young people they used to make.

An irresistable force (falling taxes revenues due to fewer and poorer workers) meets an immovable object (the plumage of a social welfare system supporting a geriatric society) - well, something's gotta give.

Please, go read the comments attached to the CTV article. It is, shall we say, a tad worrying:

A legion of anthropology majors admitting they have racked up $40k in student debts with no reasonable prospects of paying them soon. Can we call these people educated if they haven't the basic economic tools to determine the value of those debts?

Its not like they graduate with no forewarning that the economy isn't hot of Derrida experts. And certainly, their earnings prospects haven't been hidden from them. However, as a society, we are to blame. We have forced down their throats the criticality of a university education. We trash trades. "Foucault for credits", we tell them, "develop your critical thinking." But never critical enough to wake up one morning and say, "holy shit, this BA is BS."

Well, some of us do. I woke up one morning, went to class, watched purple faux-hawked students nod as a professor said, "in a way, Mickey Mouse is a mouse. And yet, he isn't a mouse. And that's the problem of predication." Up I left, feigning a bathroom break, and into the engineering admissions department I went. I am forever grateful to Professor Lewis at McGill for repulsing me into the productive arms of the engineering world.

Now, I have children. (As of any day now, three). When my daughters ask me if they should study english or political science in university, I will tell them: that crap can be learned on your commute to and from work, on rainy weekends and at night before sleepytime. If you go to university, get a profession (preferably, engineering). Otherwise, get a trade. Life will reward you a thousand-fold for bucking the social pressure to become another useless, childless adult-baby wanting to discover yourself on the beaches of Costa Rica while critically thinking about Radiohead's latest album. Oh, and watch the demographic timebomb - something's gotta give.

Labels: Make babies, not love