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.

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!)

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.

Candidate Bob Rae issued a warning that Layton and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May are robbing votes from the Liberals and as a result, are actually strengthening the Conservatives’ chances.

Bob, you’re all on the left, and judging by the debates, you’re all battling a common ‘enemy’! Of course you’re “robbing votes” off each other. All parties are constantly “robbing” votes off each other. There are not any more voters now than 20 days ago. It is the same pool. They go from party to party. That’s how the system works!

“We know for certain that if Stephen Harper had been Prime Minister five years ago we would have troops in Iraq,” Rae said.

Um, if Ignatieff was the leader of the Liberals 5 years ago, we’d be there too.

And if you were Prime Minister, this country would be bankrupt within the year.

If I was the PM and I was at the French debates I’d say:

To Gilles Duceppe: Can I finish my sentence for once?
To Jack Layton: How come you sound like a Scot, and I sound effeminate?
To Stephane Dion: Can you take a stand on something? I know Rae and Iggy are not here, but geez. You can’t even say if you’re for or against a our crime bill. At least Jack said he’s fundamentally against so he’ll vote against. You say “we’ll see”.
To the moderator: They have four minutes to pile on me, and I have 1 minute for rebuttal. Why are we sitting around a giant guitar pick? Do I have to sit next to the passion flaky? Why am I facing a three headed firing squad? Why is my back to the camera in the overhead shots, and the firing squad is facing the audience?
To Elizabeth May: God, you’re annoying. You remind me of Jar Jar Binks (”Global Warming comin dees way: Meesa Gonna Die!”) I hope so…

And that is why I would never be a PM. But that’s OK.

The debates

Wouldn’t it be fun if, at the debates, whenever someone says something really stupid (and the chance of that is pretty high, with Dion, Layton, Duceppe AND May in the same room), that Harper looks into the camera a la Jim Helpert of The Office with a look of “What am I supposed to do with this?!?”.

That’s what I want out of these debates.

I am tired of hearing the phrase “third election in four years”. Doesn’t that sound like we’ve had an election nearly every year? What they don’t mention is that normally we have two elections in four years (one at the start, one at the end of the four years), and this is just one more. And they don’t mention the fact that two of three opposition parties have been trying to get to this election for two and a half years, and the third party has been threatening to do it for that same amount of time. So, this is an election ALL FOUR PARTIES WANTED, AND THUS, BEING A DEMOCRACY, MOST OF THE POPULATION.

Dion’s finally talking about the economy. Now it’s time, maybe, to brush up on it so you actually know what you’re talking about. Another example this man as no idea how the economy works: he said yesterday that “For people to get benefit of this [GST] cut , they needed to spend, and now we have this mess”. He blames the current downturn of the economy on a tax cut, rather than looking south or to the rest of the world. Did the rest of the world cut the GST as well?

Layton’s candidates are dropping like shorts off a body paintee.

Lizzy May pulled into Toronto with not much fanfare and declared: “Don’t vote for me!”. Here’s one who knows how to run a campaign.

The Tories’ get-tough approach to youth crime could just lead to jailed teenagers being used as “young flesh” by pedophiles, Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe said Wednesday. “That could be a boon for jailed pedophiles,” Duceppe said as he campaigned in Montreal. Instead of worrying about that, Gilles, why aren’t you worried about the young punk’s victims? Maybe they were “young flesh” to the “jailed teenager”. And what about the fact we’re apparently putting pedophiles and young criminals together in the same jails? It seems to me, that if you separate the two, both of them would be happily in jail for a very long time. Put the pedophiles in a jail in the middle of nowhere, somewhere around Mirabel Airport sounds about right, and the young criminals somewhere else. Since they are little “teenagers”, maybe like the nice liberal prisons where hardened criminals have so much freedom they can ride horses, play golf and order in KFC. They can even go on strike if they don’t like the cable package.

The joke that is our penal system, from PrisonJustice.ca:

Most of the approximately 440 inmates in the general population at the penitentiary were locked in their cells after they refused to show up for work Monday, said prison spokesman Trent Mitchell.

The inmates staged a walkout to draw attention to a variety of issues, including overtime pay and non-smoking areas in parts of the facility, Mitchell said.

OVERTIME PAY?!?

Trains, Planes and Automobiles. And ponies.

Jack Layton is talking (again) about kitchen tables and being Prime Minister. Talk about being a one trick pony. He did put in a good dig about Liberals not following up on their promises in past elections and taking a promise off the table during the current election.

Finally a pet peeve of mine gets addressed: the naming of serious offenders of 14 years old and over. It always was very frustrating to see these young punks ‘protected’. And not a minute after Harper announced this new measure, and the bleeding hearts are already complaining how teenagers do not have a developed enough brain and can’t be blamed for their actions. And how the death penalty is not far behind and how Harper is turning us into the United States. We don’t need the death penalty. Just stick them in jail for a really long time. I’d be happy with that.

The Liberals released their “platform”, which is not much more than THE GREEN SHIFT withsomelittlethingsaddedon. It is funny to see that even the Liberals do not think the Green Shift will result in any decline in greenhouse gas emissions. They estimate a $40B influx of carbon tax to fund 80% of their platform. If the Green Shift would actually work, and reduce greenhouse gases and thus carbon taxes, that $40B would be in serious jeopardy and their entire platform would be doomed. Just the fact that they are serious about implementing their platform lets us know that the Liberals have no intention of reducing greenhouse gases. Where will the income tax cuts come from when the carbon tax income dries up due to the success of the Green Shift? Its own success will be its undoing. Good plan there, professor.

Elizabeth May hopped on her train yesterday and hasn’t been heard of since. You know, May, if you want to be a leader in this country, you have to get elected first. Riding the hippy train is not getting your message out to enough people. The other leaders may be, as you put it, flying back and forth across this country, but at least they are seeing people. You are harassing people that put good money into an expensive VIA rail train ticket with in promptu talks and multiple camera crews. If I were one of those train ticket holders I’d sue VIA for ruining my vacation.

And we’re spending like drunken sailors!

I complained before Harper is only rolling out small announcements. I am beginning to understand his reasons. These are hard economic times, whether the electorate realises it or not. The recession in the States WILL drag us down, the question is how far. And reckless spending will not help this situation in any way. A measured, controlled spending will be the best thing to do economically. Canadians should realise we’re on the brink of a recession. This is not the time to go spending like drunken sailors.

My only problem is this: does the average Canadian realise that this is the time to be frugal, and we can’t afford to be spending money left and right, or does the average Canadian just want, want, want? Harper is a brilliant economist, but I doubt the average Canadian is.

The Liberals announced $70B for infrastructure that we’re not going to be using after the carbon tax will make everything so expensive we won’t be able to drive on it.

While Harper announced a small but real $150/yr tax credit for seniors, Layton trumped him with a $1B/yr promise to allow more home care. His “As Prime Minister I will…” speech was amusing. Dream on, Jackie. I wonder, though, if this is how one wins elections: just promise in the vicinity of $1B for EVERY GROUP you encounter on the campaign trail. You’re with students: promise $1B for education. You’re with nurses: promise $1B to hire more of them. You’re with auto-workers: promise them $1B to save the plants. You’re with seniors: promise them $1B to allow home care. He has no chance in becoming PM, so he can promise all he wants. That’s his prerogative. What I don’t understand is the people voting for him thinking that he means all of this.

The Green Party rolled out her election platform. What do you know, new taxes, raise taxes. This is not the time to raise taxes, Global Warming or not. People can’t pay their bills as it is. And not just the low income bracket. I’d say most of the middle bracket income earners fear the coming winter, with over $1.10 for a litre of heating oil, that’s $1000 per fill-up. In February, we usually have two fill ups.  Over the winter, from October to April, we usually have 6-7 fill-ups. You do the math.

With apologies to all drunken sailors out there.

Hear no evil, speak no evil.

Elizabeth May has resurfaced. Yes, after two days of curious absence, she has reappeared. It took her two days to come up with this plausible excuse: No, I said DISagree. I have a speech problem where I speak too fast and people didn’t hear the “DIS”. Are you kidding me? Are you such a Dion groupie that you’re even reaching for the same excuses now? One can’t hear, the other can’t speak. Great. And these two want to lead the country? For me, this just confirms it. If you expect us to believe this, you must really think the electorate are stupid. It seems Elizabeth May has made the final transition from fringe party to national party. In the words of the Marg, the Warrior Princess: Welcome to the sleaze-fest!