Monday, October 31, 2005
Case in point, the Toronto District School Board sent out a memo to school principles recently urging them to forgo any Halloween celebrations because they are disrespectful to Wiccans.
Says the memo:
“Many recently arrived students . . . share absolutely none of the background cultural knowledge that is necessary to view `trick or treating’; the commercialization of death, the Christian sexist demonization of pagan religious beliefs, as `fun’”.
And rather than handing out candies the Board suggests students “write health warnings for all Halloween candies”.
What we really need of course is a warning about fun-hating school officials.
Mind you maybe these officials are just taking their cut from Venezuela’s socialist leader Hugo Chavez who has condemned Halloween as part of the “U.S. culture of terror.”
And here I thought it was about getting candies.
Essentially Jackson urged the Tories to get tough in the next election.
“Get (Prime Minister Paul) Martin on the run, trip him up, and then put the boot in when he’s down on the ground . . . (Harper) must mercilessly tear Martin and his coterie apart at every touch and turn. Wage trench warfare.”
Sound kind of brutal, but then politics is and always will be a blood sport.
That’s something the Tories forgot in the last federal election. Indeed, one of the big mistakes in the Conservative 2004 campaign was their failure to counter the Liberal Party’s negative advertising blitz.
Nobody likes to admit it, but in politics going negative can work.
Friday, October 28, 2005
But it was a close vote, and many today argue the turning point was the historic “No” rally where thousands of flag waving Canadians from all parts of the country passionately displayed their love for both Canada and Quebec.
It emotional, it was patriotic and it was also quite illegal.
Yes that’s right.
The famous rally that may have saved the country actually violated Quebec’s election gag laws, which impose strict limits on how much either side can spend in a referendum.
Ironically the Liberal Party which helped to organize this illegal rally later went on to enact its own election gag law, quite similar to Quebec’s.
Funny isn’t it.
The Liberals think it’s Ok for them to speak out, even it means breaking the law, but they expect the rest of us to obey their undemocratic gag law.
Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Politicians in Quebec are now loudly complaining about paying to clean up Alberta’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Quebec wants special exemptions under Kyoto because they use hydro dams for power more than fossil fuels and they want Alberta to pick up more of the tab.
Of course, back when Parliament ratified Kyoto, Prime Minister Paul Martin said the plan would treat all provinces fairly.
Easier said than done.
Maybe they should get Rick Mercer to do more One Tonne Challenge ads.
Yesterday an auditor concluded that Dingwall’s infamously lavish expenses that he racked up while heading the Royal Canadian Mint was more or less within the public agency’s guidelines.
That may be so, but I wonder what a “moral audit” of his expenses would turn up.
Was it really moral for Dingwall to throw tax dollars around on his foreign travel junkets? Was it really moral for him spend more than $700 on dinner? And is it really moral for him to now demand a rich severance package?
Those are questions you can’t answer by studying receipts and guidelines.
Not that it matters.
When it comes to taking care of their cronies, the Liberals don’t care much about morals anyway.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
The number of shootings in Toronto is soaring, so the Liberal government is naturally blaming, who else, the Americans.
And not just any Americans.
The Liberals are talking about suing U.S. gun manufacturers.
Yeah, that will stop the killings.
I can just imagine what the Canadian government lawyer would say in court:
“You’re honour, our case is simple. Until these evil gun makers smuggled their Glocks and Smith & Wesson’s into Canada, Toronto was – thanks to our gun registry program -- an idyllic crime-free paradise.
Our young people engaged only in wholesome government approved activities, such as finding out creative ways to meet Canada’s One Tonne Challenge.
Then, these merchants of death driven by a mad desire for profit, smuggled guns into our peaceful land and as if that’s not enough they forced our innocent kids to use them in American-style killing frenzies.”
That kind of logic, of course, probably won’t fool any judge; but it might very well fool the Canadian media.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
But that’s nothing.
Today, he meets with NDP leader Jack Layton, envoy of the most powerful political party in Canada.
In fact, in the Liberal world Layton, with his 19 precious seats in the House of Commons, is much more important than even the United States of Amercia.
Consider that while Martin is all macho and tough-talking when it comes to dealing with the Americans, he becomes a groveling, kow-towing Super Wimp when Layton comes a calling.
Whatever Layton wants, Martin eagerly delivers on a silver platter.
The last time these two met, Layton demanded the government increase spending and put off promised tax cuts.
Now Layton wants Martin to clampdown on private health care, to help ensure cancer patients can’t make use of non-government facilities or treatment.
Martin will once again likely deliver.
Will this mean that sick Canadians will continue to suffer while waiting for government health care?
But Layton doesn’t care because to the NDP anyone who suffers this way is simply a martyr to socialism.
As for Martin, well what’s a little suffering compared to meeting the overall aim of his tenure: to hang onto power no matter what.
Monday, October 24, 2005
In an editorial in today’s paper, the Star seems shocked that the Liberal Party might actually make a decision to cut taxes based on political gain rather than principle.
I mean, come on we are talking about the Liberal Party here, the most cynical, and unprincipled political outfit since the Tammany Hall political machines of the 19th century.
Prime Minister Paul Martin won’t even put a tie on in the morning without consulting an army of spin doctors, pollsters and media consultants.
And what worries the Star is that Martin, in a move to boost his poll numbers, might actually cut taxes.
Writes the Star:
“If the Liberals make the choice they think is best for them, they will be able to do less for poor children who are forced to rely on the charity of food banks go get enough to eat.”
If we get a tax cut the Star argues it will turn Canada’s cities into some sort of Dickensian nightmare with armies of starving children roaming the streets.
As usual, of course, the Star has it backyards.
It’s the government’s crushing taxes which are driving us into the workhouses.
The TD Bank reported recently that take home pay for the average Canadians has stagnated for the past 15 years. The reason: high taxes.
Thanks to government, we are working harder and harder and getting less and less. What’s worse, our tax dollars aren’t used to save poor children; they are used to help poor Montreal ad executives, they are used to pay for David Dingwall’s gum; and they are used generally wherever the Liberals think they can buy some votes.
Maybe it’s time the Star got out of its fairy tale world and got a grip on what life is really like for Canadians.
Friday, October 21, 2005
NCC Says Liberals Playing Politics with Taxes
(October 21, 2005) The National Citizens Coalition says the Paul Martin government should stop playing politics with Canada’s tax policy.
Media reports indicate the Liberal government could introduce across-the-board tax cuts as early as next month, to offset any political damage resulting from the Gomery report due out on November 1.
“If media reports about the Liberals planning income tax cuts are true, that would be good news,” says NCC vice president Gerry Nicholls. “But their motivation seems to have more to do with politics than with sound fiscal management.”
Nicholls says the Liberals should have and could have cut taxes years ago, but they opted to put their own political needs ahead of the needs of taxpayers.
“Only now with the Gomery report looming and an election in the offing, are the Liberals discovering the need to help out overburdened taxpayers,” says Nicholls. “Political panic is not a sound basis for running the economy.”
Nicholls says tax relief and reform should be a central plank for all Canada’s political parties.
“We can’t afford a government that only cuts taxes every four years,” says Nicholls.
Nicholls says the Liberals seem more concerned about holding onto power than about doing the right thing for Canada.
“The Liberals represent old time politics,” says Nicholls. “We need leaders who understand the new global market realities. Canadians needs lower taxes to be competitive.”
If he does, then there’s a good chance the Liberal government will introduce “across –the-board” tax cuts for middle class Canadians as part of its strategy to defuse voter outrage.
Funny how politics works, isn’t it?
Not too long ago, when the National Citizens Coalition or others suggested Canadians needed tax relief, the Liberals and their allies in the media reacted with horror.
“If you cut taxes” they screamed “It will mean our hospitals will have to be gutted, our schools shut down and our environment ruined.”
Now, however, tax cuts are suddenly a key part of the Liberal “prosperity” package.
Of course, if Gomery goes easy on the Liberals on November 1, than tax cuts may go back to being bad again.
As one anonymous Liberal insider told the National Post, “They (the Liberals) want to see how things unfold in the Gomery report [before a final decision of a tax cut announcement is made.]"
This tells you everything you need to know about the Liberal Party: it has no sense of what is right or wrong, it embraces no real values.
Somewhere along the line this party stopped believing in anything. It has no philosophy, no moral compass, and absolutely no principles.
The Liberal Party is a cold, heartless and relentless machine programmed for only one thing: to win elections.
The Liberal Party has no other purpose.
So they won’t cut taxes because Canadians need relief; they won’t cut taxes to help our economy compete in the global economy; they won’t cut taxes out of any sense fiscal concern; but they will cut taxes if it serves a self-serving tactical political need.
All we can do is hope that Gomery provides them with a political need to do the right thing.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Good because it mentions the National Citizens Coalition.
Actually, Susan Martinuk’s piece is about the Lively Seven, a group of courageous women who are battling against forced unionization.
The NCC is helping to finance the Lively Seven’s legal challenge and this has some union bosses hopping mad.
As Martinuk writes:
The Steelworkers recently issued a press release labeling the Lively Seven as a ‘band of martyrs’ who are being funded and ‘shamelessly exploited by’ a national right-wing, ‘extremist’ group that is never actually named.
This appears to be Canadian union-speak for the equivalent American statement, ‘vast right-wing conspiracy.’
Since the Steelworkers are reluctant to name the groups they target in press releases, I'll do it: The National Citizens Coalition is now assisting the Lively Seven in their legal battle. The group is dedicated to defending basic political and economic freedoms in Canada; no wonder the union feels threatened
You can learn more about this important case by visiting the website http://www.freethelivelyseven.org/
Yes he voluntarily left his job at the Canadian Mint; Yes he resigned under a cloud of suspicion; Yes he will receive a rich MP pension – but despite all this Dingwell still expects and indeed is demanding a fat severance package.
Because as he put it, he’s “Entitled to his Entitlements”.
In other words, all that matters is that Dingwall get his share of the loot. Nothing else factors into the calculation, certainly not whether or not such a payout is morally correct or whether or not it’s in the interest of taxpayers.
It’s Liberal greed and arrogance in its purest form.
What Dingwall and his Liberals don’t seem to understand is taxpayers have entitlements too.
We are entitled to honest government.
We are entitled to leaders who don’t view the public treasury as their own private slush fund.
We are entitled government free from cronyism and corruption.
Dingwall, of course, wouldn’t never understand our needs; it’s not part of the Liberal mindset.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
The battle we lost, of course, occurred last year when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 6-3 in favour of the Liberal government’s election gag law.
Consequently it’s now a crime for citizens to freely and effectively express political opinions during federal elections through paid advertising.
However, the NCC did succeed in delaying gag laws for more than 20 years.
Pierre Trudeau actually enacted a gag law way back in 1983 – but the NCC had the courts strike it down.
In 1993 Brian Mulroney also proposed a gag law, but the NCC succeeded in striking that one down too.
In other words we put off gag laws until 2005, when technology might make these kinds of laws unenforceable.
The emergence of Internet, emails and blogs offer citizens with a way to make their voices heard gag law or no gag law.
Indeed, nothing in the gag law prohibits the use of the Internet for political communication because there is no expense involved – the law is designed to stop election spending.
Can the Internet be an effective tool?
Yes. Political blogs in the United States have played a key role in raising funds for election campaigns, in getting out the vote and in raising the profile of certain candidates.
Meanwhile here in Canada, bloggers are beginning to debate what role they can play. See here and here for some interesting commentaries from Paul Tuns and Stephen Taylor.
Of course, if the Internet does become an effective tool, watch for politicians to quickly move to regulate and control it too.
And once they do, the NCC will be there to stop them.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
And now, a study from the Fraser Institute confirms this view.
The study, Government Failure in Canada, 2005 Report, uncovers 284 examples of government incompetence, boondoggles and waste that occurred since 1992.
That’s right – 284.
In other words, the Adscam Scandal was not an isolated incident; it was, in fact, more like the norm or as the Fraser report puts it these kinds of scandals occur with “predicable reliability.”
Because it’s the nature of government, that’s why.
Government has no incentive to be cost-effective or efficient or scandal-free. Indeed all the incentives are for politicians and bureaucrats to spend as much as possible without pausing to think if such spending is actually wise or ethical.
So what’s the answer?
Easy. Make government smaller. Give our bureaucrats and politicians less to do. That would give them less opportunity to waste.
Friday, October 14, 2005
That led me to send out the following news release:
“The National Citizens Coalition welcomed the news that Carolyn Parrish won’t seek re-election.
“Parrish’s crude and crass behaviour, her strident anti-Americanism, her insulting comments were all embarrassments for Canada,” says NCC vice president Gerry Nicholls. “She won’t be missed.”
Nicholls says he hopes the former Liberal MP eventually fades into well deserved obscurity.
“All we can say is good riddance to a bad MP,” says Nicholls.”
I talked to a Canadian Press reporter who said he wished I didn’t “mince my words”.
What can I say?