Our favourite Liz May is in the news again. She says Canada is breaking the law by cancelling the Kyoto Accord.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/12/13/pol-may-kyoto.html

To which I have one thing to say: what does a delegate from Papua New Guinea have to do with Canadian policy?

So, Elizabeth May *finally* got herself elected. It didn’t come easy, or cheap: first, she had to pick the most hippie-like riding in the country (I’ve been to the Gulf Islands) and then she had to spend the entire campaign in her own riding, and blow more than half  of her entire national budget on buying herself some votes.

In the mean time, all her other 307 candidates were out there, unsupported, with no money to spend.

Then you go on TV stating there was a “growing green movement”, while in fact, your party’s support fell by 360,000 votes, or 39%. You were just talking about yourself, weren’t you?

Seriously, I don’t know why those 307 green candidates keep putting their names on the ballot.

So, the campaign promises have started. Already the collective Opposition leaders have promised about $1B per day. Where this money comes from no one knows, but hey, it’s a campaign, and Canadians have been known to believe a promise or two (remember the GST?).

After attaching the government on the so called “in and out” scheme, both Iggy and Jackie themselves are offering a sort of in-and-out scheme to the taxpayers. Yesterday Iggy came up with the most complicated, convoluted scheme to “help” students with some sort of $4000 (or something) grant in some sort of program (if I am being vague, well, it’s because no-one understands the damn thing). One university professor (didn’t catch his name) said on the radio yesterday, that, while complicated, it basically means nothing more than taking something away from some students and giving it to other students, using programs already in place (like the RESPs), the net result being zero. In and out.

Today Jackie came out swinging saying he’d lower taxes for small business, but to pay for it, he’d raise taxes on corporations. I guess no-one told him that most small businesses are corporations, providing most of the jobs (at least here in Ontario). You know that nail-salon you go to, next to the Lebanese pizza place? Well, both of them are corporations. And so are all the other small businesses in that strip mall. They will get a lower tax through his small business cuts, and then pay more tax through his corporation raise. Sounds a lot like an in-and-out scheme to me.

Lizzy May is talking to a lawyer so she may, once again, act like a spoiled child and scream through everybody around the discussion table at the National Debates (that are somehow directed by “The Broadcast Consortium”, a term one only hears during electoral debates, thankfully).

And Gilles? Well, Gilles is in Quebec. Big surprise.

Ms. May, perhaps in search of a seat somewhere in Denmark where she may be elected (since she can’t get elected anywhere in this country), popped up, once again, on the radar at an ‘environmental’ conference at Hopenhagen, the world’s Schmooze-fest on Global Warming (even though there is no warming).

Unfortunately, I have already called her every name in the book in my many post before this one, so I have none to give you. I apologise.

Granted she hasn’t mentioned her book just jet, but has already told Canada to ‘shut up’ and has been seen rubbing shoulders with such great human beings as Al Gore. Wonder if he showed her his Oscar… Oh Al, are you happy to see me, or is that a statue in your pocket? Al Gore and Elizabeth May, now there’s a couple I wouldn’t mind reading about in National Enquirer!

She says Canada is embarrassing itself every time we open our mouths, so we should shut up. I think she got her facts mixed up just slightly, there. All this globe-trotting to each and every conference flappin’ her gums off with crazy-talk may have gotten her off the track a little bit and she substituted ‘Canada’ for ‘Me’. That’s just what I think. I think she may have lost a few of her marbles (provided she had some to start off with) and is starting to excrete even more garbage than usual.

How did you get to Denmark, by the way, Ms. May? Did you swim? Row your boat?

Oh, you flew…

Hypocrite.

Now, go away. Again.

So I guess Twitter has gotten too big for its own good–the web site’s down half the time due to traffic, and I am now getting about 200 notifications a day of various vague people following me with such names as: Susan, Allison, Alyssa, Melody, James, Kristen, Erma, Jodie and Alexis: it’s like the cast of Melrose Place wants to be my friend! As a result, I now have 20 spammers listed as followers and the fun has been taken away. Much like Facebook, which was a good tool at first to keep in touch with people, but is now not much more than a glorified soapbox for narcissistic people who want show off what they have, and let us know about every fart they pass. That, and having to install sixty-five applications to watch a video. No thanks.

I think it’s time to quit Twitter, before it gets REALLY annoying: when Viagra wants to follow me, or worse yet, Elizabeth May.

Tory Senator Nancy Ruth told reporters on Tuesday that “Canada Geese should be culled and fed to the poor”. Now, I agree there’s too many Canada Geese, andexcrement is a problem, but feeding them to “the poor”, whoever they are, is not a solution. I mean, have you ever tasted wild goose? It isn’t much good. I am sure those “poor” (I assume they would include the bums on our streets who get their nutrition from a regular bottle of rum), would turn up their noses at the sight of Canada Goose. Might as well serve up beaver. Or Elizabeth May.

And I wouldn’t serve that to my worst enemy…

…who happens to be Elizabeth May.

My favourite <insert expletive here> Lizzy May was interviewed by Kate Heartfield of the Ottawa Citizen this morning. Of course, she was peddling her new book, Global Warming By For Dummies, co-written by a student (!). In between the own horn tooting, she mentions this little tidbit:

I’ve already gotten in trouble for suggesting giving a copy of the book to Stephen Harper! Conservative bloggers thought this was an insult.

And there you go. Once again, we made a difference!

So where’s this “climate crisis” everyone keeps talking about?

The last time we heard from Lizzy May, we hoped it would be the last time. But, she’s back. As Joanne over at Blue Like You reports, Lizzy May has been recorded as saying she plans to give a copy of her book “Global Warming By Dummies”, er, “Global Warming For Dummies” to PM Harper when parliament resumes.

So, not only does she think that the Canadian Electorate is stupid, she also thinks our PM is a dummy.

Not only is the title old news (it’s called “Climate Change” now, DUMMY!), it is written by two non-scientists, and has been “fact” checked by several members of the IPCC panel. Great! They couldn’t even find the facts in their own publications!

But it’s not a book to convince the Deniers, no, no, it’s not, honestly!

Give me a break. Lizzy, go away, again, please. I’m begging you. Just…. go away.

While the mercury in Ottawa got stuck overnight at -32 (I hear it is going to be -38 over in Calgary), a senior Environment Canada scientist is blasting the federal government for causing a “public embarrassment for Canada” by preventing him from organizing a world gathering of experts on global warming. Don MacIver is the director of the Adaptation and Impacts Research Division at EC and was chairing a committee for the WMO (World Meteorological Organization) at the UN climate change summit in Poland, the same summit where Elizabeth May is peddling her Global Warming For Dummies book. Senior bureaucrats scrapped the trip in a cost-cutting measure. I agree, sending our “scientists” to false UN summits on subjects that don’t exist is not in the tax payers’ best interest. And if Elizabeth May is there, it can’t, by definition, be good for the taxpayers. According to Ms. May, delegates from other countries were “puzzled” by the cancellation of our committee chair’s address, and were left “wondering why it got cancelled” (that’s quite the “public embarrassment”). Earlier in the week, May was heard saying people at the summit had ”burst into tears” when they heard Harper had prorogued parliament.

I guess what I am trying to say is that Ms. May is more of an embarrassment to Canada than any cancellation of any speech ever will.

This all comes on the heels of a report that melting polar ice caps could actually help the fight against global warming. Apparently, there is excessive plankton growth in the sea areas that are now ice free, creating a huge carbon sink.

And Jack Layton just can’t give up.

While Martha Hall Findlay wiped the tears from her eyes, the World’s Seventh Intellect (is this the same as “Canada’s Foremost Thinker” to describe a certain GG husband?) stumbled in his first speech yesterday. “Determined determination” must be the epitome of smartness. So utter intellectual that simple folks like you or I would almost think it doesn’t make any sense. But I suppose there are only about six people in the world who could come up with better phrasing, so who are we to complain?

It also seems that the World’s Seventh Intellect likes the smell of manure. He’s such a farm-boy, our little Iggy. Doesn’t he look like he could, at any given time, peal off his suit like Superman, reveal his dirty coveralls underneath, grab a pitch fork and shovel some shit?

Jack Layton is laying low. After in effect being called stupid by Ignatieff in the aforementioned speech, and his wife’s online poll-gaffe, I think it is best to hide out until after Christmas. Plus I’ve seen enough of his moustache for a while.

With Dion gone, Rae gone and Lizzy May out of the country, politics have suddenly become non-humourous. Shame, shame, shame.

UPDATE: Thanks to Blue Like You and Small Dead Animals for sending hordes of folks this way and keeping me from doing my work all afternoon (and that’s a good thing!)

Obama has teamed up with Nobel Peace Prize and Oscar winner Al Gore to, once and for all, change the climate back to where it once was, damn it! Changing the Earth’s climate? Sounds like a bad James Bond plot to me. Gore, for all his help, does not want a cabinet post, though Obama is rumoured to have offered him Secretary of Propaganda. “The Time for Denial Is Over” they proclaimed. So is the Time for Common Sense, apparently.

Holland (or: The Netherlands) have come up with a “brilliant” new strategy to spend their climate change fighting $15 Billion/yr budget: they are now going to pay companies in Brazil to not cut down trees. And you thought our politicians were wacky.

Elizabeth May, yes that one, has been spotted in Poland on the UN Climate Change conference, officially titled “14th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and Fourth Meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto Protocol” – sheesh, I guess that’s one way of weeding out those pesky climate change deniers. She says in her blog:

Everyone with whom I speak is heart-broken that Canada’s government has been so unhelpful

and

I hear that the youth delegates burst into tears – from many countries around the world – when news reached them that the Canadian Prime Minister was hanging on to power by shutting down the Parliament. 

Proving once and for all that she’s a certified nut-case.

She’s peddling her book “Global Warming for Dummies“. I guess she thinks that, besides the Canadian electorate, Poles (what do you call people from Poland?), the UN and indeed the world, are stupid as well.

Bob Rae, one time Liberal Party Leadership Racer and bankrupter of the Province of Ontario, was very un-democratically pushed out of the top lines of the party this week. After claiming the country could be taken over by another PM without a vote, and then claiming the opposite when it came to his own job, the Liberal caucus decided that Rae was a liability, and they’ve had enough liabilities over the past two years. Out he goes.

And Stephane Dion, after being fired from the Liberal Leadership position (is there any other word?), has decided to launch a new series of books in the “For Dummies” style, called “Do You Think It’s Easy?”, in order to generate enough revenue to pay off his extensive leadership race debt. The first in the series is titled “Do you Think It’s Easy? – Making Priorities”. A second one is in the works called “Do You Think It’s Easy - Home Videos – Part One: Focusing on your subject”.

This is the first election I’ve heard the opposition parties say: If the Conservatives win a strong minority or a slight majority that means they got 40% of the vote which means 60% of Canada did NOT vote for them. 60% of Canadians DO NOT WANT them. That means 60% of Canada voted for US and so we should govern.

So I did some research into past elections and, applying the above ‘rule’, where you don’t have the Canadian people’s blessing to govern if you don’t get more than 50% of the vote, the history of our country would have been quite different:

• 1867: Conservative won with 50%, Macdonald can stay.
• 1872  Conservative won with 49.9%. Macdonald thrown out. Liberals and Other govern. (Blake PM)
• 1874: Liberals won with 53.8%. Mackenzie can stay.
• 1882: Conservative win with 53.4%. Macdonald can stay.
• 1887: Conservative win with 50.7%: Macdonald can stay.
• 1891: Conservative win with 52%. Macdonald can stay.
• 1896: Liberals win with 45.1%. Laurier thrown out. Conservative & Order govern (Charles Tupper PM)
• 1900: Liberal win with 52%. Laurier can stay.
• 1904: Liberals win with 52.5%. Laurier can stay.
• 1908: Liberals win with 50.6%. Laurier can stay.
• 1911: Conservatives win with 51.2%. Borden can stay.
• 1917: Conservatives win with 57%. Borden can stay.
• 1921: Liberals win with 40.7%. Mackenzie King thrown out. Other and Conservatives govern. (Arthur Meighen PM)
• 1926: Liberals win with 43.6%. Mackenzie King rown out. Conservatives & Other govern. (Arthur Meighen PM)
• 1930 Conservatives win with 49%. Bennett thrown out. Liberal & Other govern. (Mackenzie King PM)
• 1935 Liberals win with 44.4%. Mackenzie King thrown out. Conservative, Social Credit & Other govern.
• 1945: Liberals win with: 41.4%. Mackenzie King thrown out. Progressive Conservatives, CCF, Social Credit & Other govern. (John Bracken PM)
• 1949: Liberals win with 50.1%. St-Laurent can stay.
• 1953: Liberals win with 50%. St-Laurent can stay.
• 1957: Progressive Conservatives win with 39%. Diefenbaker thrown out. Liberals, CCF, Social Credit & Other govern. (St-Laurent PM)
• 1958: Progressive Conservatives win with 53.7%. Diefenbaker can stay.
• 1962: Progressive Conservatives win with 37.3%. Diefenbaker thrown out. Liberals, Social Credit, NDP & Other govern.
• 1963: Liberals win with 41.7%. Pearson thrown out. PC, Social Credit, NDP & Other govern. (Diefenbaker PM)
• 1972: Liberals win with 38.5%. Trudeau thrown out.PC, NDP, SC & Other govern. (Stanfields PM)
• 1974: Liberals win with 43.2%. Trudeau thrown out.PC, NDP, SC & Other govern. (Stanfields PM)
• 1979: PC win with 35.9%. Joe Clark thrown out. Liberal, NDP, SC & Other govern. (Trudeau PM)
• 1980: Liberals win with 44.3%. Trudeau thrown out. PC, NDP, SC & Other govern. (Joe Clark PM)
• 1984: PC win with 50%. Mulroney can stay.
• 1988: PC win with 43%. Mulroney thrown out. Liberals, NDP, SC & Other govern. (Turner PM)
• 1993: Liberals win with 41.3%. Chretien thrown out. Bloc, Reform, NDP, PC & Other govern. (Lucien Bouchard PM!!)
• 1997: Liberals win with 38.5%. Chretien Thrown out. Reform, Bloc, NDP,PC & Other govern. (Manning PM)
• 2000: Liberals win with 40.8%. Chretien Thrown out. Canadian Alliance, Bloc,NDP, PC & Other govern. (Stockwell Day PM)
• 2004: Liberals win with 36.7%. Martin thrown out. Conservatives, Bloc, NDP, Green & Other govern. (Stockwell Day Harper PM)
• 2006: Conservatives win with <50%. Harper thrown out. Liberals, NDP, Bloc & Green govern. Dion Martin PM.

So, to recap, with this new ‘rule’ we’d have had: No Jean Chretien (+), A BQ as PM (-), No Paul Martin (+), No Free-Trade (-), One term of Trudeau (+), Right Government for past 15 yars (+)

Hmm… more pluses than minuses. Maybe they’re onto something here…

Hypothetical scenario:

Minority Conservative Government. First vote of confidence will be on Tough on Crime for Young Offenders. It will (obviously) be defeated. Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens will go to the Governor General, and form a new coalition government. We’ll get:

1. Prime Minister Stephane Dion
2. Minister of Finance: Bob Rae
3. Minister of Defense: Jack Layton
4. Minister of the Environment: Elizabeth May

If this doesn’t scare anybody I don’t know what this country is a-comin’ to.

And this is a VERY REALISTIC scenario. The Bloc, Greens and NDP have already said they’re open to it. Dion has REFUSED to rule out putting May in his cabinet, indicating he’s open to a coalition. The only way to stop this is by electing a majority Conservative government.

h/t to Lowell Green‘s radio show

To Elizabeth May:

I’ve had it with you. First you were voted out of the debates and you cried foul. Then some people cheered for you and you were, with kind permission of Harper and Layton, let back in, even though your numbers didn’t allow it. You called it a “victory for democracy”. At the debates all you did was talk through people and point fingers. Then you were accused of making a deal with Dion to, at the last minute, call upon your people to vote strategically, and in most ridings that would mean Liberal. You denied this deal.

Now, it comes out, that you are actually calling upon your followers to vote strategically in certain ridings to stop Harper.

You call yourself a leader. You put forth candidates all across this country who put their heart and soul into canvassing and campaigning for YOU and now you tell them they don’t matter. People in their ridings should vote Liberal instead. If I was running for you in one of those ridings I’d be pretty pissed. Thanks for nothing. What, you can’t even get YOURSELF elected, you don’t want anybody else to either?

Ms. May, you are a liar, and you better crawl back into the hole you came from and if I never hear from you again, it’ll be too soon.

From The Star, December 21, 2007:

OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper expects Canada’s economy to suffer next year, buffeted by turmoil south of the border and the “cost” of new climate-change measures here at home.

In a calculated signal to Canadians, Harper said that 2008 will be “more challenging” for his government and the country.

“There remains very serious economic uncertainty in the United States and in other parts of the world, and it’s impossible for me to see how Canada can be entirely immune from those developments,” he said in a year-end interview with the Star.

While Harper has warned of uncertainty before, this is his strongest statement yet that economic problems will hit Canada in what many expect to be an election year.

As a result, Harper said the government is planning a “stand-pat” budget aimed at stability.

“We will have very much a stand-pat fiscal stance focused on stability, focused on paying down debt, which is what families and businesses do when they face a period of some uncertainty,” he said.

His warnings came as the International Monetary Fund downgraded its economic growth forecast for Canada to somewhat less than the 2.3 per cent it forecast just three months ago.

In the United States, housing and credit woes have sparked fears of a full-blown recession. Earlier this month, TD economists warned that Canadian economic growth will “slow materially” in the months ahead.

In Canada, a rising loonie has accelerated the loss of thousands of high-paying manufacturing jobs. Ontario’s manufacturing sector has been particularly hard hit, with the loss of 44,000 jobs in the first nine months of this year.

Harper also warned that climate-change measures that take effect next year “will start to bite.

“It will hit home the reality that you cannot reduce greenhouse gas – you cannot mandate it – without there being some economic cost in the short term,” Harper said.

“We happen to believe we’ve set it up so that those costs are manageable, so that we provide incentives for firms and sectors to exploit the technology opportunities that this regime requires,” he said. “But the fact of the matter is it will cost.”

The Prime Minister sat down with the Star this week at his official residence at 24 Sussex Drive. Sitting in the living room, a large Christmas tree behind him, he reflected on the year past and the year ahead.

Harper said the Canadian economy is “probably the strongest it’s been in 30 years” with low unemployment and has shown “considerable resiliency in the face of some worrying signs around the world.”

And he argued that his government has tried to put the Canadian economy on a good footing, most recently with the fall economic update that provided cuts to income and business taxes to “strengthen the confidence of consumers and families, and also strengthen Canada’s position as a place to invest.”

But because of fears of a slowdown, Harper said such largesse would not be repeated in the budget expected in February or March.

“This government will be very cautious when it comes to fiscal actions. … As I said we’ve taken our tax measures for the budget … this government will not be throwing billions of dollars around in the spring,” Harper said.

This obviously comes from a man who has been on the pulse of the economy for a very long time. As opposed to Dion, whose idea of a plan for the economy came to him during the English debate (about 24 days into a campaign) where he pledged to have 30 days of meetings to come up with a plan. Some plan. “Harper doesn’t have a plan!”, no, you confused him with you! What you mean to say is that YOU don’t have a plan!

Layton, on the other hand, has a plan, but unfortunately, to pay for his plan he intends to roll back (read: raise) corporate taxes by $50B. Someone ought to sit down with Jack at his kitchen table and tell him that corporations (businesses) are what keep this economy rolling and keep a lot of people employed. Especially the Alberta oil sands. Raising their taxes will surely slow down the economy and lose a lot of jobs.

Little Miss Sunshine from The Green Party want to “green” the economy. Buy less from the US (I am sure they’ll be thrilled with that and cut back the 80% of our products they buy), and re-establish the national dream, that is railroads (I’m not making this up, this is in their “economy” section).

I don’t care what the Bloc says.

There you have it folks, you can chose between a guy who has been seriously talking about the economy for years, versus: 1) a man who needs 30 days to come up with a plan, 2) a man who will tax this economy to a grinding halt, 3) a woman who dreams in green, and 4) a separatist who wants to tear this country apart.

Take your pick. I know who I’m voting for.