ChuckerCanuck 2.0

Ten Great Things about Being Canadian

10. Ketchup chips

9. There's a whole list of places our King or Queen would rather live than here.

8. The greatest homegrown superhero has one power: he can go through any situation - gun fight to flipped car - and not spill a drop of his rhum and coke.

7. Water, wood, coal, base metals, precious metals and diamond, oil, natural gas, uranium, iron. We've got it all, baby.

6. We made flanel cool.

5. Even the flight to Heaven connects through Toronto.

4. Maple syrup.

3. Using Coline Feore as a queue that the following production is Canadian.

2. Shovelling 2 feet of snow onto 6 foot snowbanks to get to an anti-global warming rally.

1. Having a terrific Prime Minister.

Labels: Canada Day

It shouldn't surprise anyone that a right-wing cook takes a conservative outlook on food and cooking ideas. For example, extreme-right foodies relish vinegar pie and other pioneer culinary triumphs. Its a matter of conserving our heritage and demonstrating how creativity is exercised under a tightly proscribed set of circumstances. Two golden oldies making a resurgence these days are barley and brine. And, as evidenced at my house Saturday, these blasts from the past should have every right-wing tastebud watering.

Brine:
Porc was made from brine. When you brine, you put your pig - any chop will do - in salty water from morning to cook off time. The porc will tenderize, stay moist when you cook it, get seasoned with salt and whatever aromatics you put in. Aromatics are whatever you think might be tasty - garlic, of course; crushed juniper berries or caraway seeds; a bay leaf. How salty? Like the ocean salty. And, some folks add sugar. I've done it both ways.

This weekend, it was pork tenderloin. Enough for 10. Grilled over indirect heat for about an hour. For the last twenty minutes, I basted the tenderloins with a Worcesteshire / honey glaze. Brined Tenderloin with Worcesteshire Glaze. Sliced and served with a grilling of marinated veggies - red pepper, zuchinni and green onions.

Barley:
To stand up to the brined tenderloins, barley risotto. Barley, as an alternative starch, has no place in Canadian eating even though its such an iconic grain. Serving barley on a plate makes the barley look more exotic than seaweed. Thing is, barley can be made like a risotto only many times more easily than a rice-based risotto.

With barley, its always 2 parts liquid to one part dried barley. Dice an onion, throw it into a saucepan. Soften in melted butter. Throw in barley, stir up. Add liquid. Cover. Come back in thirty minutes. If it looks ready and tastes ready (al dente), its ready. If not, add more liquid and wait a little bit. Once done, add pepper and grated cheese until its creamy.

With the tenderloins, the barley was done by using 25% wine / 75% chicken stock as the liquid (you could use water or some other stock). With the onions, a hash of sun dried tomatoes was added and some rosemary. The cheese must be cheddar for it to be really Barley Risotto. In this case, Cabot Creamery Private Stock Cheddar. But anything old and sharp with be perfect.

Labels: Right-Wing Cookery

The picture painted for me is that polar bears are drowning and magnolias bloom in April along the arctic coast. There's a climate change crisis happening here. When the word "crisis" gets thrown around like its salt over french fries, it makes today's reaction by the northern premiers to Dion's carbon tax almost fatal. These are the folks on the frontlines of disaster and the Liberal plan has them scared.

In terms of global warming, Canada could eliminate all carbon consumption and the planet would still explode. Launching a new tax in hopes of reducing Canada's carbon consumption is, to the folks on the frontlines of the climate change crisis, a crippling folly. It achieves nothing for the arctic - the only possible benefit: morally shaming big emmiter countries. Moral shame hasn't the currency that makes this kind of investment too attractive.

As far as within our borders, until we have signed an agreement that includes all major emitters, we should not whistle past the graveyard. If we decide to act at the federal level, the major part of our investments should be in adaptation, not greenhouse gas reductions. Until a real, international agreement takes shape, reducing Canadian greenhouse gas reductions is whistling past the graveyard. The arctic is melting and Canada should make sure it readiess our citizens for living safely and productively in a new climate.

Any climate change plan that does not address climate adaptation trades Canada's interest for the ability to wag our finger at, well, anyway, not China (but really, yes, China and the Evil Yanks.) The arctic premiers, whether intended or not, have made that point very clear - without climate adaptation, any plan is pretty much dead.

Labels: Adaptation - in this case silence is deadly

Mostly, news like Zimbabwe doesn't rate comment from Stephane Dion. His time is exclusively devoted to selling his green sh*ft. From what I read, if the green sh*ft has any problems, its not delivery - Stephane Dion is doing fine - the problem is content-related. Like, the part about the carbon tax, quite literally, screwing the West.

"Revenue Neutral" is a term that should be immortalized as the Canadian equivalent to the Clintonian "depends on you definition of sex". We will giggle for a time at the cleverness of the term but get sicked out before we spend a penny on it (er, "revenue neutrality", that is). I can picture William Shatner saying, over some loungy bit from Ben Folds, "whose revenue? not mine!"

This is an Ontario stronghold strategy - make a token effort elsewhere and aim to get 75+ seats in Ontario. It necessarily alienates strong numbers in the west, and for kicks Quebec too. (Where, in Quebec, its enough to block any national alternative from picking up seats through a politically helpful separatist party). Good luck with that.

Today, Stephane Dion decided for the first time in a while to hop off the Green Tax Gravy Train and talk about something else. No, it wasn't Zimbabwe or Afghanistan, nothing about the G8 meetings; not even the justice minister's announcement today or the supreme court ruling. Stephane Dion paused from his tax talk to demand an inquiry into the Maxime Bernier thing.

Half his party is cheering that the other half set up a now partially-discredited inquiry. An inquiry shown to demonstrate bias in its execution that Stephane Dion points to as proof of non-involvement in the sponsorship scandal. He chooses, at that moment, to start demanding an inquiry. I've lost count, but I think that would be the 6th or 7th inquiry that the Liberals want right now. Picture the agonizing 12 months where 6 or 7 Gomerys squeeze out all other news. It would be madness. Then, as we see this week, expect another couple of years where the lawsuits and countersuits monopolize the news media further. But Canada will be so much better for it.

To me, bravely admitting that his carbon tax will screw the west is better politics than starting a job program for retired judges.

Labels: adaptation is a wiser spend than ghg reduction

Well, today the blogophere continues to burn up with talk of the sponsorship scandal - that dark stain on Canada's wondrous history. Kinsella, Wells - the whole gang has added lots of new stuff to remind us of those ignoble moments.

So, here's my contribution to today's conversation:

In commenting on the in-and-out non-scandal, Ralph Goodale suggested that the 2006 election results were invalidated because the Conservative Party acted in a manner similar to the NDP and Liberals.

Following that logic, would Ralph Goodale be suggesting that every election between the 1995 referendum and 2006 were invalid due to the corrupt and illegal practices of the winning party? I don't see how it could be any other way.

Oh, maybe as a Martin loyalist, Goodale thinks 2004 counts - just the Chretien wins came only by way of massive cheating.

Labels: Where did all that money go

I promise never to invoke :) in a post again, but how could this be anything but a day of smiles?

Today fate has gifted me with the opportunity to use the word "sponsorship" with the names Chretien and Gomery without feeling cheap. I could slap Gagliano and Jean Brault in without flinching. If I really pushed it, I could remember the fun about being entitled to their entitlement, or more simply, the nice comfy fur of the Liberal party. I would be within the upper limits of reasonableness.

I am not sure why keen-minded Liberals wouldn't want to bury this story. Kinsella, Cherniak and Calgary Grit have all passed comment, giving me permission to talk about the sponsorship scandal. In other words, the blogosphere will be blanketed by the words sponsorship, scandal, cash-brown enverlopes, Chretien/Gomery, Martin/Gagliano for a day -maybe two if fate is really smiling.

One way to keep the story alive is to get Gilles Duceppe to demand - once more - that the Prime Minister launch a new commission of inquiry to answer the question that no one's ever answered - Gomery or otherwise:

We know where the cash brown envelopes came fron, where did they go? Only half the people involved have been found out by a flawed inquiry.

The people cheering the results of today's ruling are a strange mix - practically to the last one, they are cheering for a Mulroney/Schreiber inquiry, without bias for the outcome, of course. What if only half the people get "caught out" in that inquiry? The other thing I wonder - is discrediting the Gomery commission such a good thing for Stephane Dion? It established his total, absolute innocence (in so many ways). Is that establishment being razed by his very supporters?

The funniest part of this story is that we get to be reminded of how strangely nitwittish Paul Martin's government was. Calling the inquiry was stupid, politically as much as a matter of governance. It was a stupid thing done stupidly. (That sums up the whole asymetry of the Martin era.)

Labels: Sponsorship Gagliano For the Cause Fake Billing Tax Payer Money Stolen

Dear Canwest,

I subscribe to the Montreal Gazette and National Post. The arrangement works as follows: you deliver the papers each morning to my doorstep and then, each month, siphon away the fees from my bank account.

Generally, I hate automatic withdrawels. Convenient, yes. But as a customer, it makes it very difficult for me to express displeasure with service problems. Like, for instance, about once a month - maybe more - only one paper lands on my doorstep. I can't figure out why both papers aren't there - you know, I paid for both papers and you happily took the money for both papers. But once in a while, you decide to fill half the bargain.

Its flikkin' annoying. The Gazette stays at home for my wife who rolls out of bed around noon. The Post comes with me for my train ride into town. What do I do when there's no Post?

I know you want me to go to some website and register a complaint so you can send me a useless apology or $0.30 credit. Stuff it. If you can't offer the service, you shouldn't get paid. One missed day should equal one missed month in pay. Otherwise, I don't think you folks understand the newspaper rage. Of course, you'll never agree to that.

So, I'm going to cancel next time you screw up. Then, 6 months later, when you want me back, you'll throw me a sweetheart deal and we'll be friends again until you screw up again.

Labels: poor delivery guy is supposed to take the fall

Analysis and propaganda probably have the same latin root, distinguished only by an "ex-" slapped onto the root to mean "propaganda" and an "in-" is slapped onto the root to mean "analysis". A propagandist like me is a wolf knocking at the sheep's front door. The analyst is already in the sheep's house pretending to like sheep food and sheep television until his sheep hosts fall asleep. Then the wooly buffet begins.

Not the analyst's fault, us sheep pay the talking head's salary and we like pretending there's such a thing as a panel of disinterested experts. No truly disinterested expert exists. Worse, like some experiment of quantum mechanics, the observation by these experts alters the results of our political experiment. This is as it should be. We can't assemble the facts of life without trying to build models of what's going on. Those folks are the Home Depot of political model making - together, we do it. Just remember that they decide what's on the shelves for us to buy. That means, off the bat, they define the total set of possible options.

Not really, just mostly. So when hiring the staff of this political Home Depot, we should try and snag actual people. Not tools.

Labels: But Fox News is Banned in Canada

Childhood memories and interesting information. John McCain doled out $0 of pork while Barak Obama pumped $740M in pork - including to that mysogynist priest who berated Hillary Clinton.

Anyway, as far as websites are concerned, I prefer McCain's. Mostly, that's because I made the mistake of filling out information before proceeding to the Obama site. Now, my yahoo account is filled with O-spam-a.

Labels: McCain 2008

Okay, the shuffle isn't so shocking, but the demands of aliteration weighed more heavily than the demands of factual accuracy.

Christian Paradis get Public Works. James Moore is the point man for the Olympics and, really, more importantly: the infrastructure that keeps our trade flowing with Asia.

Michael Fortier takes over at International Trade - he'll do a terrific job, I have no doubt.

Meanwhile, our friends opposite are still bullying a little company and grinding their goodwill to dust. Charming and in a way, convenient. By turning their green shift plan into a fight with a defenseless consultancy, the Liberals avoid the tough questions coming from both ends of the spectrum:

Hey, how many tonnes of GHGs does you plan eliminate?
(Answer: None).

Hey, how much cash are you planning to take out of my pocket for some non-green initiative?
(Answer: Lots).

Labels: There we go

Stephen Harper is the Mick Jagger of Canadian politics in the midst of becoming its Elvis.

So, there's no shuffle like the Harper shuffle. Word on the steet says a small but vital shuffle. A short two-step where David Emerson slides fully into foreign affairs and someone moves in the international trade without prompting a long chain of change.

International trade will be an important ministry come January, 2009 with polls showing Barak Obama likely the next president - he has campaigned against NAFTA and most recently let an advisor explain that Canada should probably start looking for oil customers elsewhere. My vote? Well, you guessed it, the name rhymes with Rockwell Play.

But that would possibly set off too many changes to make sense. Time to call up Diane Ablonzy. I think it would be a terrific gift if the Liberals then tried to use the "too many Calgary cabinet members" attack. Odds are better than even that they will. (But until they do, I won't mention possible homerun responses.) Either way, in political hockey, she's a bruiser with grace, handling pucks like a Finn but slamming opponents into the boards like a steak-eating monster from the Miramachi.

One certainty, Maxime Bernier won't be in cabinet. However, I remind you that a guy from the townships (just up from the Beauce) once resigned federal cabinet; he's now on his second mandate to be Quebec's premier. Maxime Bernier is only down. Not out.

Labels: Julie Couillard may be out of it - but she is not down

It depends.

Elms make a racket. Silky-leafed maples are relatively silent by comparison.

An insight to our character perhaps?

Labels: at think you call them elms

Actually, there is a long history of this sort of thing.

Whether it be Mulroney's infamous Sears Canada accord or the tragically-flawed Canadian Tire agenda that Pearson set out in the early 60s.

In fact, few remember this only because it was so quickly and deeply buried, Stephen Harper's 2004 platform contained what he called the Ipod Approach. A quick call from Steve Jobs meant the party improvised hurriedly and the child porn press release was born.

This isn't such a big deal, since what matters is that 48 pages of gold and most of it, it looks like, doesn't have much to do with the environment. So, we could swap in another banner name for the whole shpiel. Like, Pizza Pizza or Mr. Lube.

Labels: I hear New Coke is available on eBay

The leader of the official opposition has released a rambling, 48 page screed on a green shift - carbon tax. Not just that we're going to start paying a carbon tax, but somehow its going to actually put money in our pocket. Its not revenue neutral, since when you enter their benefits calculator, there is never an instance where the benefits add up to $0.

He's demanding a debate with the Prime Minister on his plan.

While not exactly Bridgit Bardot or Boner from U2, the demand should be swatted away as a complete distraction.

Think of what an utter waste of our time and money to have the official opposition abrigate its responsibility to hold the government to account in favor of leading the government into a Wonderland of liberal shop-talk. The Liberal party should dream up and develop its campaign platform; The Conservative party must debate and critique that campaign platform during an election; Neither the leader of the opposition nor, more importantly, the Prime Minister should waste any time on this future campaign platform when there's governing to do.

Stephane Dion may look out over the summer horizon and see nothing but backyards and burnt burgers but when Stephane Dion and Garth Turner roll hot dogs across hot grills together, Stephen Harper will be at the G8 meeting with folks like Vladamir Putin's stand-in (with the Arctic on the brain). One can debate how much carbon tax there will be in beer all night long. The other is balancing critical issues that will affect Canada's future prosperity and security, at home and abroad.

Its a fairly narcissistic thing of Stephane Dion to demand a debate that isn't needed until an actual election campaign. His dealings with the government should be focused largely on what the government is doing. His efforts to distract the government from its foremost responsibility should be seen for what they are: an abuse of the monies spent on government by us.

Thankfully, the citizenry are defended by another opposition, the media, who can go on criticizing government operations while explaining to Mr. Dion that he should not confuse government with Liberal Party Business as the same thing. Agreed, its a fairly easy thing for Liberals to do. Debate amongst yourselves, grits.

Labels: Maybe Boner and Stephane should tackle this together

Before Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, I would not be free from paying my total tax bill on this day.

Not just would I still be paying taxes today and for a few days more, it had been getting later in the calendar since 2002.

The Harper government reversed the trend. We're finished paying off our taxes more than a week sooner than the 2005 peak and haven't seen such an early tax freedom day for 10 years. In three years, the Harper team undid ten years of negative trending. In five?

For now, the story is getting ignored. That's fine. It won't be come campaign time. Any Prime Minister would like to face an electorate with that ray of sunshine shining from recent history.

Labels: Happy BElated Tax Freedom Day

Most of the time, Jim Traverse is a columnist who's headlines is sufficient reading. There's probably no real Jim Traverse - he's just a computer program for which you input a few dates, names and events. press "write" and then watch it spit out full columns that need nothing more than an editor's proof read. Today, is a classic case but the column is still a marvelous work of circus side-show. A bearded lady of rhetoric.

I can't refrain from commenting.

Is McCain better for Canada than Obama? Yes. Even if Obama turns out to be gaming the lunatic fringe on campuses and in wacky churches that are his core supporters. Traverse explains that point just fine.

But to suggest that Conservatives stayed away because McCain is too far left of Stephen Harper to be liked by Stephen Harper? Then, to cherry-pick a few issues on which there is some huge gulf? Well, even those issues: climate change? Not much separating McCain and Harper in action and policy. Human rights? I would love to read Mr. Traverse expand on that one. How about, Mr. Traverse, you consider the issue of gay marriage? Who's to the right of who on that issue? Mr. Harper opposed it, but has done hardly nothing about it since taking power.

But, Mr. Traverse needs to keep the Bush poodle narrative alive. 36 days of column writing, be it this fall or next, depends on having that line of attack available every other day or so. However, for Conservatives, the best electoral prospects since the last election will come the minute the U.S. election is over and Bush becomes more history than reality*. The Liberals know this, so they want an election this fall. I'd bet Traverse does too.

(*Except, if it were a president-elect Obama, he should not expect Bush to go gentle into the night.)

Labels: Back to the yard work

The Liberal carbon tax website contains a "calculate your benefits" page. The basic premise is perverse in a Latin American dictator kind of way. Here's a tax that actually pays YOU. The benefits of this supposedly revenue neutral tax materialize from thin air like on Star Trek. There are no costs. Its a cost-free tax that puts money in your pocket.

So I played a little game and tested what the benefits for being a single person under this amazing green shift.

First, I tested at two income levels - $35k and $70k per year. Guess what? For all the demonizing of "regressive" Tory policies and blatant class-warfare rhetoric, the policy puts more money in the pocket of the high-income earner than the low-income earner. To my dipper friends, I sure hope you pick up on this. (In Quebec, for example, the high-income earner pockets and extra 50%.)

More interestingly, I tested those two income levels in two different provinces - Quebec and Alberta.

Guess what? At both income levels, Albertans get more cash than Quebeckers. At $35k, the Quebecker gets $60 bucks - or 20% less - than the Albertan. At $70k, the spread goes to $90 bucks (same 20% roughly) in favour of the oil patch cowboy over the footprint-free dam builders.

Living in the greenest economy is not as economically rewarding as living in the carbon rapacious economy. How will this play to Gilles Duceppe and the separatists? It would be a delicious, "I told you so" moment, that would be instantly identified as a winning condition for sovereignty.

The chance of its implementation may be remote, the chances that it would trigger a constitutional crisis would be great if it was. How does a sane carbon tax end up hurting Quebeckers more than Albertans? Who would conceive such a plan unless provoking nationalist sentiment in Quebec was a specific objective of it?

Labels: Un -flikkin - believable

After a georgeous drive from Queens, NY to Montreal's anglo ghetto - uninterrupted XM satellite radio station, POTUS '08, I come home to the release of the Liberal Green Shift carbon tax plan. Shock and awfil captures my reaction.

An immature one, however, since I cannot and probably will not ever read all 48 pages of offending gobble-speak.

I managed the executive summary which is no summary of a plan at all. It is a statement of objectives, a slightly mystic casting of what the carbon tax costs us the taxpayers and what the total sums of government finance are involved. If you were Donald Trump and this was the executive plan to a billion dollar plan to save the planet, would you accept this as an executive summary? I write executive summaries to executives all day long. This was no executive summary, it was a knock-off essay done the night before. Probably, the answers to the questions lie buried in the report.

However, they do manage to say a lot of interesting things. Never the word tax, of course. But they do plan to build on the Harper government's still young but clearly enduring legacy. They promise to hand over cash to me for every kid I have. That was, according to this very party, pure evil. Handing parents money was like asking a coke addict to run a package of white powder across town - the parcel won't get to its intended recipient. Now, its so critical to stopping the planet from exploding, parents have to get cash for having kids.

Think about that:

The Liberal Party is arguing that we can only save the planet from the ravages of carbon consumption by creating more carbon consumers. We drop per capita consumption 50%, but increase capitas by 100% thanks to the Liberal plan. Carbon consumption, in case the math seems tricky, doesn't actually drop.

While there are tremendous reasons to keep Canada's birth rate strong, cutting carbon emissions is not one of them.

A credible alternative government cannot walk around with spouting fundamental contradictions like that - its not simply having a bad plan, its a case of having an incapacity to plan in the first place.

Oh yeah, past the executive summary, the title of the next chapter, the introduction:

"If there is one characteristic that defines Canada, it is our ability to surmount great challenges."

To me, if that's the primal characteristic that defines Canada, we're in trouble. That's a primal characteristic that defines human beings. All of them. Does Stephane Dion think one thing that defines Thais is their inability to surmount great challenges?

Labels: Part 2 of 2 in a few minutes

Dear Bono,

Do me a favor, run for office, take over Ireland and turn the Celtic miracle into a permanent cash stream to Africa. I'm tired of you asking me to play Jesus with the lepers in your head.

Yes, you've put together a few great ditties - no one slaps three chords together like you. No one can squeeze as many millions out of a 4/4 beat. No argument. Does this mean we should follow lock step with your priorities? Do we go to Meatloaf for advice on a carbon tax? Maybe Liza Minelli could tell us how to re-engineer our health care system while Vanilla Ice directs our anti-terrorism activities.

So, tell me, Bono - what's so shitty about making Haiti a priority? What's such a stain in deciding to pay attention to South America where no celebrity seems to give a shit (unless easy sex at Ipanema is the issue)? Most importantly, if we have soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan - isn't it incumbent on us to make that country our highest priority?

There is only one tainted legacy you should worry about, Bono. Ask The Edge who's legacy I'm talking about.

Labels: Gimme a flipping break

I was weeding my yard when suddenly to epiphanies struck me at exactly the same time:

1. Rap is not the best musical genre for whistlers.

2. Perhaps we have been hoodwinked by a brilliant carbon tax roll-out strategy.

Step one of the strategy, drop the idea a few weeks out to the media. Step two, drain that vipor pit of venom as it explodes in vicious fury. Three, deliver the plan when the enemy has exhausted itself and the public tires of the cartoon and wants the real thing. Wham-o! Suddenly, everyone is listening and the narrative is about how wrongly they demonized the plan. And the timing is perfect too. An election this fall lets the Liberals surf to Obama-wave to power.

Sounds quite admirably devious. But so far, every detail made public seems to confirm the old adage, "stupid, by any other name, is still stupid".


Mr. Dion promises to have the auditor general confirm the revenue neutrality of the plan and promises, at the same time, "substantive" tax cuts to Canadian families. The last bit, substantive tax cuts, is new. So how do I get substantive tax cuts in a revenue neutral world? Revenue neutral means not only that revenues don't go up, but that revenues don't go down either.

The price of gas, to everyone's relief, won't go up. That's right, Liberals will be not adding any tax to the current price of gas. This is why you announce this now during vacation season. Do it before people start up paying home heating bills again. Because that's getting taxed. Don't tax the thing you've invested billions creating alternatives for, like public transit. No, tax the thing that's very difficult for a great many to alternate from. Suddenly, the image of the bus-riding granny getting royally pinched by this carbon tax looks pretty darn realistic. At least when she's had her house foreclosed after a winter in a 12 degree house, she can be pleased to have helped get some folks cushy jobs installing solar panels for the government.

This tax reform won't be so much a green shift as class warfare in mother nature's stockings. Which is okay - plenty of folks have done good business in the class warfare trade; but so far, suggestions that this may be a stroke of strategic genius are overselling their product.

Labels: Air Canada didn't help either

I post this entry with a single, vain hope that perhaps it will find its way into the clippings file that Elections Canada keeps of people talking about them. If you thought Tom Cruise was a paranoid freak when it came to media coverage, you ain't met Elections Canada.

You see, what happened to be a series of cosmic coincidences that ended up with RCMP officers raiding Tory HQ with support and encouragement provided by the CBC and the Liberal Party looks a tad like collusion.

Impossible! Unthinkable! Everyone knows that if two institutions in the country were to collude, it would never be the Liberal Party and the CBC. They hate each other! Remember the last election when the CBC flashed "Heil Martin!" on the screen - of course they quickly apologized for the mistake but really, they were stickin' it to the Liberal party. What? It wasn't "Heil Martin!" Oh..... hmmm.

Could you toss Elections Canada into that mix? Probably not - the Liberal party has only so much comfy fur to lounge on. But does the whole in-and-out scandal smell? Worse than day-old tuna sandwiches in the middle of a heat wave. Coincidence is the sort of thing you can stretch so far.

Labels: Howard Hughes wasn't so paranoid

Chuckercanuck did not write the title of this post, and so any misrepresentation of its contents by the head line, is no one's fault really. If it's remotely reflective of the post's contents its in that there is a slight possibility the Liberal passion for fighting climate change - the real terror war, nudge, nudge, wink, wink - rises to the banning science in pseudo-fossil-fuel technology. Some concepts are too dangerous. For now, the Liberals haven't gone anywhere near there yet and only logic makes it possible.

Still, there's a wiff of "anything" as answer to the question, "what's the Liberal approach to climate change?" when architects of Dion's cyber-messaging come up with stuff like this.

Essentially, the Dion camp is arguing: Tories having an advanced copy of the Dion Tax Plan is a crazy thing. Its ridiculous to be thinking about it.

But the only reason the Dionistes know the Tories don't know is that they themselves don' t know either. There is no particular plan - they fully intend to sell twelve taxes for the price of ten by spelling out of a thousand points of lights til people just see stars. Make it too difficult to sort between bad and good and caramel-coat it with climate change. But what that exact list is and how will each bullet point will be implemented? Tories couldn't know what's just a nervous giggle and feigned thoughtful pause.

So, since know one knows, including the oness who claim some vague notion of knowing, anything is possible, including banning science that makes organisms whose excrement can be pumped into our cars for the exuberant vacations dreamt of by Nabokov, minus the creepy, stomach turning bits. Nor the parts about murder and violence. Nice, happy car trips.

So yes. Liberals may want to ruin your summer vacations. Liberals may want you to run your houses at 15 degrees next winter. They may ban science. They don't know. So don't pretend you know what it could possibly be.

Labels: Dionistes Talking Points

Wow.

The most fascinating non-scientific aspect of this story is that, like stem-cell research, this research should be very controversial. Did Stephane Dion, Al Gore and Elizabeth May have no idea it was going on? For them, developing an algae that eats crap and craps oil would likely amount to one of the singular evils of scientific achievement.

Anyway, as the global warming hystericists turn ballistic on this science, I am amazed by the genius that has produced it.

Labels: In Stowe - still busy - see y'all tomorrow

While Canada tumbles through the ridiculous consequences of its own human rights commissions, apparently the UN's own Human Rights Commission feels the need to top us.

Apparently, human rights luminaries like Saudi Arabia, Syria and Cuba have put together a list of top actions required to advance the cause of human rights across the planet. No 1? A referendum to abolish the monarchy in the United Kingdom.

I think its pretty non-controversial to suggest that our Queen is a symbol of oppression and depravity - the nations for which she is the Head of State are all, to the last, squalid hell-pits of misery. It explains, at least for Canada, why so many of us risk life and limb on rickety planks of beechwood to escape the Queen's North American gulag for the comfort and security of Cuba.

One interem step between the status quo and complete abolition of the monarchy would be to transform the monarchy from the pure embodiment of evil that it is to a much more humane monarchy, like in Saudi Arabia. We could abolish our parliament and transfer executive powers to the Queen. See, a big part of the human rights abuses for which our monarchy is responsible lies in the fact that all decision making power, executive, legislative and judiciary, was ceded to citizens long ago. To quote Stephane Dion, "do you think its easy to make priorities?" If we followed the Saudi-style monarchy, we could free our citizens up from those difficult decisions and guide them to a life of happiness.

The UN must be congratulated for releasing this brave and useful report. It is a strong reminder of how precious that organization is and how close to perfect life would be if the only monarchy on the planet was the UN itself.

Labels: Back to work

Still very busy. So, please discuss:

1. On the day after Stephane Dion delivers a considered and noble speech, it would be unfair to think the purpose of his action on this particular file is not sincere. He will need to bring more to the table to demonstrate that sincerity - the Prime Minister's response appears so appropriate that its as if Stephane Dion was unaware of the base facts if the particular case. Perhaps a quick glance at the folder might make him reconsider this approach.

2. The McCain campaign, I think for real, starts in Canada.

The debate has been shaped up to be, who's going to deal with our enemies the best. Well, how candidates want to treat closest friends feeds that first question. Barak Obama demonizes our trade agreenet and oil supply everywhere he goes. This, at a time when he claims the real epicenter of the war on terror is Afghanistan/Pakistan.

Not just that Canadian soliders have died in Afghanistan in solidarity and common cause with the United States - its even contrary to his supposed emphasis on Afghanistan/Pakistan. Does it make sense, if have as much focus on Afghanistan/Pakistan is the real priority, antogonize a country serving that interest as well?

In how Canada would fit in Obama-nation, McCain will find a small crack propagating all the way across from friends to enemies.

I will be too busy over the next days to guarantee an entry until Sunday night. So, as usual, no comments are off limits within the framework of my previous esthetic guidelines. However, in the spirit of having as many discussions as possible, here are some topics:

A. MacLeans is fast beocming a great paper. As we move to a digital word with minimized carbon footprint, should newspapers, beyond the freeby dailys on mass transit, exist? Isn't the internet better suited to deliver news and magazines a better format to deliver analysis?

B. The fundamental driving force in Canadian politics is multi-year requirement of keeping the Liberals out of office. This mission is best for Canada and the Liberals. The force on the horizon is Harpermania - the fact that we have a Prime Minister with the potential to be one of the great, greats. In other words, the longer this plays out, the better for the PM. While he could astonish the average Canadian at this moment with the scope and accomplishment of his goals and win an election now, the argument will get better with time. However, at this moment, he and other Canadians are fully entitled use batter Liberals with their record of government.

C. It remains an astonishing thing that Canadians could so overwhelmingly wish that Barak Obama be the next president. All explanations that I can come up with for it rest on ignoble reasons, except the cynical belief that Barak Obama doesn't mean what he says on anything he's said - it is so utterly contrary to the Canadian interest. We may be right on this. Imagine for a second, if Obama declared three things:

1. Iraq may have been a mistake and I want our troops out, yet conditions on the ground suggest a continued effort to guarantee victory is a better use of national blood and treasure than a surefire, immediate surrender.

2. I cannot break treaties with my neighboors if I expect international treaties to stand. NAFTA cannot be touched in any way.

3. If I become President, I intend to put John McCain in my cabinet.

Holy tamole, that's a slam dunk Obama win.

C. In the meantime, John McCain is coming to Canada. I couldn't be more excited. We should be central to this campaign - at least where foreign policy is concerned. We are the opposite of a U.S. enemy, rival or opponent. The defense of the total of North America would be to the end. How the U.S. deals or treats with us with every bit as important and telling as how the U.S. deals or treats with enemies.

Right now, Obama has demonized our trade agreement with the U.S. - while Obama wants to sit down with an ayatollah, he wants to bully us into trade concessions that would close their market to our goods and services if ever so slightly.

John McCain supports our trade agreement and urges more agreements like it. He has reminded Obama that while Canadian troops are offering the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan in solidarity with the United States and in response to the horrific slaughter on 9/11, it is callous and offensive to attack our mutual economic interest so savagely.

I deeply envy the lucky few with a ticket to that room.

D. Harper in Canada, McCain the United States. The promise of an exceptional time in North America is there.

Labels: See you Sunday

Today in the National Post, Bob Rae shows us once again why he should be the leader of the Liberal party. In a fairly even, appropriately Liberal piece, Mr. Rae delivers the argument for supporting the government's position on dropping out of the UN's racist conference on racism, Durban II. This stands in stark contrast to the NDP who have recently embraced racism, so long as it is mulilateral racism.

More importantly, Bob Rae's approach to this issue is not find some wedge to demonize or bash the government, its to take a position that reflects the Liberal party regardless of where that places him in reference to the government.

Contrast that with Stephane Dion whose hollow professions of politeness conveniently ignore the kinds of things that slip out of his mouth - examples including that Tories have no social conscience and Tories have detroyed civilization and inflicted the mortal wound on the planet.

Contrast that with Iggy whose single skill is to take dumb thoughts and say them smartly, be that accusing Israel of war crimes or admitting that his academic background means that he peddles fruitless and frivolous ideas.

Contrast that with Justin Trudeau, the civil rights champion for aliens across the galaxy and beyond.

Maybe Gerard Kennedy will re-surface one day and mount a serious challenge to Bob Rae. Until then, titles be damned, Bob Rae is the real leader of the Liberal party.

Labels: I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers

I've tried to drum up some interest in one of the most important foreign policy shifts the Harper government has enacted since emancipating the country from the wilt and wither of Liberal government. It is the Americas strategy.

Everybody on the planet is scrambling into Africa, tossing tax dollars around like Richard Pryor in Brewster's Millions. On the positive side, Canadian foreign diplomats get to huddle in Swiss resort towns with pot-bellied rock stars drawing up 17 point action plans over mai-tais and tequila shooters. On the negative side, its been ineffective and condescending.

The Americas are a neglected piece of world real estate. There are insufficient pictures of abject suffering to draw the attention of a Bono or Pamela Anderson. No one wants to set up a concert to raise funds for educating Bolivians. Into that void comes Canada with trade, aid and increased cultural exchanges. We want to secure democracy, diminish Chavezization and help improve the standards of living for our neighbours.

Along with President Bachelet of Chile, I commend our Prime Minister for defining such a unique and important foreign policy goal.

Labels: Do what we can and do it well

I feel like I am late for this party, but let me say the viral campaign on Stephane Dion`s carbon tax is a mighty impressive and inspiring piece of work. That there are some hiccups and obstacles doesn`t matter a bit - done perfectly, these sorts of things will make our politics better. In this instance, the revenue-neutral carbon tax with salutory fiscal cushions for old people and other charity cases, likely had some big troubles before the ads came out - what with so many Liberals fighting over the issue while other Liberals preferring to talk about anything but, including the civil rights of Martians.

Susan Delacourt and Paul Wells are now reporting on the reporting of ads. If you report ads, they say, you are giving those ads free advertising. The only way to stretch the value of that free advertising out is to report on the reporting. In the land of free advertising, reporting on the reporting of free advertising is the corned beef hash you enjoy the next morning. We should be especially grateful if either of them figure out next that we should really start reporting on the reporting of the reporting of free ads. That`s corned beef hash making its way into an empenada you take for lunch at work.

Anyway, in terms of content, the ads work because they are true.

Labels: Just keeping the conversation going a little bit longer

Admitedly, governments to not rise or fall on today's topic, but its not everyday that I find an academic who shares a passion of mine: exposed g-strings.

Okay, so many of you may take offense at what I'm about to say, but it is a burden I can no longer hold in private: I find g-strings unappealing and exposed g-strings down right gross. My ideal of feminine beauty has a woman wearing comfortable, utilitarian Haines-style underwear. I choose function over form.

One, it seems to me that from the perspective of hygene - the basic purpose of underwear - g-strings are an inadequate guard against the worst case scenarios of everyday life. Cloth should not be wedged into every possible crevice on our bodies but if you must, that cloth should be disposed immediately and not mixed with the balance of laundry you produce in a week.

Two, the exposed g-string can only be so exposed thanks to the accompanying fashion of low-rider pants. The find that fit imperfectly on the top and leave a dome of space between pant and back. The technical term for this dome of space is "fart vent". It is not sexy and the g-string does nothing to block said fart vent. It is, at best, a finger in the proverbial dyke. (Yes, there is a pun there somewhere, but a rather distasteful and impolite one for which I apologize even if I did not intend it.)

Three, Professor Julien's analysis of why there is a fashion of showing off your g-string strikes me as entirely correct. It is, subliminally or not, an advertisement that the human who wriggled into the string and patch, is ready for action and constant gratification. Some may argue that this is women asserting themselves as sexual actors with apetites as full and cravenous as men. Maybe. But the first thought in my head when I see someone lean over a bar stool and show off the offending underwear is not, "geez, I'd bet she'd make a great mother."

Labels: Part 1 of an analysis of current Canadian academic research

To me, a federal injection here is a slam-dunk.

Its not exactly small potatoes but the Pan Am Games is still less than 1/10th the cost of an Olympics. For that cash, here's what you accomplished:

1) Toronto and its environs gets to show some leg. GTAers will be happy and a huge pool of tourists will see stunning photos of a clean, vibrant, lakeside metropolis with lots to keep a family busy within an hour or so's drive of the CN tower. I guess, in accounting terms, you sort play with that value under the line item, "Goodwill". But no Montrealer on Grand Prix weekend can deny the huge economic benefit a city reaps from that kind of event.

2) Tories get to swoop into Toronto and make a happy announcement with two other layers of government. Conciliation, cooperation, co-habitation. Its a great gig because it helps build comfort with a Tory majority possibility. Torontonians might be tempted by the checks and balances of a left-leaning Premier against a right-leaning Prime Minister who can, despite lots of oppositioning, get things done together.

3) The Pan-Am Games fit exactly with the immediate foreign policy goals of Canada. Namely, to foster closer economic and cultural ties with the rest of the Americas. It fits with the recent free trade agreement with Columbia as actions towards achieving that foreign policy goal. The two could and should be linked publicly as part of the foreign policy goal.

The first two points should be easy to sell to the Liberals, only the last bit will be something distasteful enough to vigorously abstain over.

See, my friends, the whole Third Way thing is dead on the left. Blair is gone, Brown is drowning at Downing. The Clintons have exited the stage, back to their hundred million dollar charity factory. The tide sweeping over the left is decidely traditional socialist democrat with a touch of "crack pot". Crack-pot leftyism, sometimes referred to as "anarchist activism", has gravity - the Bilderberg Conference - of whatever its called - say that and people think you're talking about Darth Vader. Everything is a conspiracy. When they say, "fair trade, not free trade", don't ask them what they mean by "fair trade" unless you're hankering to hear the premise for the movie Soylent Green.

So, Canada will be treated to a heavy load of skullmulderry from the Liberals, and NDP, as the two try to gather up as much of the crack-pot vote as possible. Liberals, though, will ultimately support both initiatives, Pan-Am and Columbia FTA, and the larger foreign policy. However, expect David Orchard to huff followed by pilgrimmages from the three next-in-lines, Rae, Iggy and Justin to lunch with Orchard.

Labels: next you'll tell me the NAFTA superhighway will start in Santiago

A commenter from this blog went onto Justin Trudeau's website under the Ask Justin and asked him why his bio did not include his time at Ecole Polytechnique. Justin Trudeau is a Liberal and I am one of those folks who say the smaller the Liberal caucus, the better. But, Justin Trudeau published the question and gave a fine, good-natured response to the question.

I can't imagine a potential leader, like Michael Ignatieff, being able to deliver as authentic and engaging answer. P.E.T. built the House of Liberal and his son has come to collect rent; big-dreamed Liberals should have this on their sonar in loud, rapid pings.

I said Canada's Obama. I'd say the wannabe-Obamas have good odds over the wannabe-Clintons.

The trouble with Canada's Obama is the same trouble with Obama. Its all oratorical tricks - the whole switching from english to french mid-thought is supposed to dazzle us, but its a circus show. The idea of a country where people walk around swapping between french and english one or more times in a single sentence is a frightening one. We would be, individually and collectively, stupider since the mental work done to do the language swapping is mental work not available for generating the concepts that the sentences convey. See the movie Ideocracy - that seems where Justin Trudeau would have Canada go.

Its no trivial thing either because its precisely such a trivial thing. If you invest so much wasted effort into such a trivial thing, where would you plough my tax dollars wisely? The response I'd expect would be the magic cure-all response, "global warming."

Labels: McCain Harper 2008

Warning to the Prime Minister: you may want to have Stephane Dion in a desperate state, but not Britney-desperate. That could be a whole mess of trouble for you.

Labels: Yes I should leave her alone - but this - come on

Spot: Freedom of Speech

Rotation: Heavy, Multi-lingual

Text: [female narration, ominous score in background, scroll on black]

"The Liberals pretend to be defenders of human rights. But some rights count more than others. And some people's rights count more than others. If the Liberals get their way, special interest groups will be able to criminalize and bankrupt you for saying things they don't like. A country without the freedom of speech is not a free country. That's okay for Liberals, so long as they are the wardens of prison Canada."

[transition to a row of prison cells. Camera looks into each cell where ordinary Canadians sit on dirty cots by rusty toilets. Score goes from ominous to tragic - Tchakovsky's last symphony, "The Pathetique"]

Prisoner No. 1 (white guy, nerdy glasses): I said Jesus was our salvation, in public.

Prisoner No. 2 (muslim woman in hijab): I said I wanted to protect my daughters from the sex culture of Hollywood that too many Canadian girls idolize.

Prisoner No. 3 (hippie with green hair): I called Albertans planet-killing rednecks in public.

Prisoner No. 4 (young woman, nervous): They haven't told me why I'm hear.

[transition to a university classroom where students and professor are engaged in a vigorous debate. Brighter score - "Ode to Joy"]

The Conservative Party of Canada knows that to sacrifice one freedom is to sacrifice all freedoms. To sacrifice the freedom of one person is to sacrifice the freedom of all people. Without the free and open exchange of ideas, Canada will falter. This election, stand up for freedom. Vote Conservative.

This message is brought to you by the Conservative Party of Canada.

Labels: Other Blogging Tories are doing a fine job on the HRC fiasco

First and last time that I direct traffic this way.

Justin Trudeau has launched a new - and admittedly snazzy - website to promote himself. While it is a creepy piece of work, there are some good laughs to be had - here are some highlights.

From his bio, he proudly boasts:

"He succeeds where most politicians fail — he engages young Canadians. Capturing the attention of students from elementary school through to university"

There is a reason most politicians fail at this, Peter Pan. See, normally, you call yourself a "politician" once you've been elected to something. Getting elected means getting votes. Children don't vote. So politicians don't normally invest a whole lot of time in children. But no doubt, that strategy will pay off in a decade or so!

He has an "Ask Justin" page where you can ask virtually any question you want. F'r'instance, Justin Trudeau is asked about alien invaders and whether they are covered by the Charter of Rights. Maybe the attempt was to be irreverent with the question. Instead, he makes three bizarre points in his extremely sobre answer:

1. Why would aliens take any interest in this planet and boring old us?

2. Yes, if aliens went through our immigration system legally, they would enjoy the same rights and freedoms as us.

3. Omar Khadr, while not from another planet, deserves to be treated as well as we would treak Spock or Chewbacca.

There is a section called "Issues" but I recommend you avoid it. You'll find a barrel-full of spelling mistakes - yes, as bad as a Chuckercanuck post written up close to midnight - and at one point, he capitalizes Industry as if it is a single organism with a proper name. That sort of smells commie to me.

Labels: The more you see of the guy - the more you understand Dion's qualms with him

Tonight begins the general election for the 2008 presidency. Barak Obama wins the Democratic primary and joins John McCain as the final two. He did so tonight by getting walloped in South Dekota and edging Clinton in Montana. Not my idea of a spectacular entrance.

But it is a spectacular day in the history of not only the United States, but for the continent and world. Not simply does Barak Obama become the first credible, non-white contender for the job; he's actually entering the race as the heavy favorite, gathering crowds and cash like David Bowie on tour. As a milestone of our civilization on this continent and abroad, it is a remarkable thing.

However, Republican sympathies mean I am as jealous as joyous: I would have much preferred to enjoy that honor ourselves than to see Democrats have a process where the best person won and that best person happened to be Barak Obama. Any political party should want to score these achievements first because it wins votes. Winning votes is nothing to shirk from, it's noble, noble work. The Democrats, it so happens, deserve the win.

However, I do not hope he wins. In fact, I want him to lose. The only way I could tolerate his presidency is if he repudiated virtually everything he has pledged to do. Trade, economics, foreign policy, Iraq surrender - all these things he would have to reject once elected. It sounds ridiculous but there is a good chance this will happen. We Canadians know, from NAFTA-gate, that Barak Obama has no intention of messing with free trade with us and he's jerking the unions around. Its fake rhetoric taken from the NDP play book - kinda wonky leftyism by Canadian standards but much more centrist thinking in America. (And we're more left than America?)

But then he's a phony - exactly as Reverend Wright described, "a typical politician." So, I would prefer to see him lose nobly based on the immaturity of his thought. Then, four years later, a senate term grows him up, gives him a more 3rd way glean, and he wins. That's a nicer story.


Until he drops the couch communist dogma, my job is to see him lose by as wide a margin possible knowing the odds are stacked in his favor. Let's hope Barry bruises.

Labels: Good night and good luck

It is with regret, my friends, that I announce I am leaving this little corner of cyberspace for my new digs at Al Jazeera.com. As you know, basically the entire staff of the CBC is clamouring for work with Al Jazeera and, being the kind of guy who jumps off bridges when my friends do, I am following suit.

You will still have access to my insights over at Al Jazeera.com, starting with my inaugural post, "The Infidel Carbon Tax - Revenue Neutral?". I will also moderate a discussion amongst the former CBC crew at Al Jazeera on the many ways to spell and pronounce "Hizbullah". It should be a good time.

Of course, comments will be moderated from now on. Certain words will not be allowed, like "busom", and the combinations will be banned, like "America" and "good", unless between those words comes "is no damned".

Petro-dollars will now fund my propaganda, but I have to give up certain topics as a result. I no longer support privatized liquor distribution and retail. I want it banned! I no longer acknowledge even a shred of global warming evidence. Oil is good. I no longer support tax credits for soft porn. Wait a second, I never supported that! I wonder how the CBC folks manage the contradiction.....

Labels: (clearly - I am not leaving this corner of cyberspace)

It strikes me that the ink spilled over the historic joint cabinet meeting between Ontario and Quebec yesterday are kinda off the mark. This article is typical - "Premiers thumb noses at Ottawa" - according to the folks paid to analyze our politics for us, the Ontario-Quebec cabinet meetings were about stickin', Danny Chavez-style, to the Prime Minister.


The Gazette's Don MacPherson starts his column off with this sentence:


"Harper's flirtation with Mario Dumont appears to have cost the PM dearly".


Well, its a microwaveable narrative that's ready in 30 seconds; Darth Harper does something evil and spurns a potential soul-mate, Jean Charest. Forget the whole Quebec election deal. Fiscal imbalance balanced. $1 billion to Quebec. Jean Charest ploughs it into tax cuts in a desperate (and succesful) bid to keep power. I don't blame Premier Charest - but I just think the premier played Scarlett O'Hara well.


So, who then pays the biggest price for this excellent initiative? Here's a clue... she's a a full-bodied woman who barely speaks english, lives in the Anglo Ghetto of Montreal and installs silent flush toilets wherever she goes. He's the leader of an appendix caucus in Ottawa who quit a leadership race six minutes after he joined it.


Still can't figure it out? Another clue:


They are a gang of dream-weavers who no one believes can get us through the night (h/t Air Supply).


Still puzzled?


Separatists! Separatists! Ontario, of all places, is the great enemy. Cooperation with the enemy will only make the separatist utopia seem all the more unnecessary. This greater intimacy between provincial cabinets can only highlight our common values and interdependence. True enough, Toronto is still lame and Montreal, lazy. Not all rivalries should cease.


But seeing this great leap forward in concrete national unity is no nightmare for Ottawa. We should be applauding - even the crusty bastards out west should be happy - I mean, the talk about the environment is just a friendly cover to make the meeting palatable to separatist suckers. The real goal? Make Quebec a equalization contributor and put the boom back into Ontario.

Labels: Poor Pauline

Help me out here. I'm trying to follow the thread here but think its seriously frayed.

One. Will MPs Summer Last Until November?

The report informs us that Tories are so desperate to avoid an election, they will recess parliament until November. Here's the opening quote:

"Stalled in the polls and running out of policy ideas, the federal Conservatives are certain to extend Parliament's summer break until mid-November to scuttle chances for a fall election, opposition MPs say."

So, if the opposition thinks the Tories are running away from an electoral confrontation, then why -

Two. Tories Appear Set to Survive Confidence Vote.

There is only one way to survive a confidence vote and that is having more folks vote for you than against you. The "against you" part, typically, comes from opposition MPs - you know, the ones saying Tories are running from the chance of being voted against. If I were an opposition MP and felt I had the Tories on the run, wouldn't I, you know, like vote them down now and not in some mythical opportunity in October?

Three. 'Storm Clouds' loom for Tories, poll finds.

I guess, if by 'looming storm clouds' you mean that since no storm clouds are presently overhead, but eventually all skies get stormy, so there are looming clouds somewhere out there, then yes, looming is correct. But since the poll shows that Tories have about a 36% floor in support, I'd rather take those looming storm clouds than the actual hurricane being visited upon others -

Four. Liberals Fall to Forth Place in Quebec.

Don't blame Dion for this. He's actually more popular in Quebec than the Liberal party - and remember, people generally don't like him in Quebec! A caucus full of quacks is the problem. The most pleasing nugget: Tories are ahead of the Liberals on the island of Montreal. Fortress Liberal has a crack in its defenses just large enough for us right-wing rats to squeeze through.

Labels: Special prize for someone who can spot the pattern in all this

So, it appears the fat lady is stuck in traffic and won't make the opera house just yet, let alone sing. The Bernier File continues which gives us a chance to take a long view for a half a second on a slow Sunday night.

When political scientists, like a McGill professor did this afternoon on the CBC, give background on Mr. Bernier the talk about two needs that put Maxime Bernier in a senior cabinet role. One, the need for senior Quebec representation. The Quebec caucus was not big enough to have the depth for a usual Quebec contingent in cabinet. Two, Maxime Bernier was put in foreign affairs to cover the Afghan mission during the Van Doos deployment in Quebec. The fear was that Van Doo deaths would ignite grief-sticken outrage that would jeopardize the mission and consequently deal punishment to the government come election time.

Happily, Bernier's penalty is about a busty babe and not about a tragedy. In other words, while Quebeckers as individuals may not "support" the mission in Afghanistan by a plurality if not slim majority, the vast majority assent to the mission and outright wish the mission well. For Tory fortunes, Afghanistan hasn't the same gravity it did last summer. The tacit assumption is that any Liberal government that would theoretically replace the Tories would fully support the mission to its successful conclusion with a thirst for gains for Afghans. Differences in position and differences of positioning. It seems to be an unremarked good news aspect of this story that Tories might want to turn into a campaign slogan: Vote for us! We give you boobs, not bombs!

(We could hire Andrea Martin to play Edith Prickley on some radio spots...)

On the thinness of the talent pool, Quebeckers sent that pool of talent. They do not expect a miracle worker of a Prime Minister delivered that pool. In fact, like the Afghan mission, Harper's first cabinet contained some potential hazards that look like fortuitious decisions now.

David Emerson walks into foreign affairs and no one skips a beat. No one's writing columns about the betrayal of democracy. No fake activists are working to have him resign and run in a by-election as a Tory. Everyone's pretty happy because of the "steady hands" theory.

Michael Fortier runs one of the largest ministries in Canada, Public Works, from the senate. The Prime Minister put him in the senate - a creative use of his available options - and caught a lot of flak for it. In so doing, he demonstrated to Quebeckers how seriously he wanted their perspective at the cabinet table. Perhaps one of the most useful senate appointments ever made. Still, its terrific how little attention Public Works gets when, during the Martin year and before, Public Works was a scandal plagued department that got daily public scrutiny. Senator Fortier, the wicked heart of that controversial first cabinet, can't make a headline because things are humming along just fine.

Good decisions.

Labels: The titles is purely nostalgic