Harper's videos go VIRAL... INTERNATIONALLY

So I'm talking to a Canadian via Skype who lives in Grand Cayman, and she tells me that she walked into a business down there today where the Caymanian owner was, of all things, WATCHING THE YOUTUBE VIDEO OF PRIME MINISTER HARPER SINGING "Sweet Caroline"!

That's right... THE VIDS ARE GOING VIRAL INTERNATIONALLY!

Or, to put it another way, as one great Canadian put it, "Stick that in your pipe, you left-wing kooks!" ;-)

It's true... HARPER ROCKS

And you thought Prime Minister Harper was an icy, uptight stick in the mud... PM Harper did a pretty rocking five number set at the Tory Christmas Party tonight. Check the video here, on the CBC of all places.

And if you want to completely SHATTER any false Liberal illusions about Harper you might have, check out the 9:36 mark of the video...

Let's see Iggy try to top this one!

Liberal Senator to Iggy: "Go fly an F-35"

Liberal Senator Colin Kenny says that the Harper Government is making the correct decision regarding the procurement methods for the F-35... and that Iffy's position on trying to secure a lower price by opening up the bid to competition "doesn’t make sense". (and that's a DIRECT quote, for my Liberal readers)

And just in case anyone's wondering about his credentials, he's the former chair of the Senate’s National Security and Defence Committee... for eight years.

Downtown Toronto gives the ROC the finger

Take a good look at the electoral map for Toronto's election, and tell me what it looks like to you...

Yup... once again, Downtown Toronto gives everyone else the finger.

Liberal MP John Cannis Hansard quote on rallies: "It was not a Canadian rally. It was an NDP rally"

As promised, here's the exact quote... check the 2:33:25 mark of the video to see it for yourself.

Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, during the period the member for Hamilton Centre referred to, I remember I went to a rally in Toronto, downtown at Yonge and Dundas. I really wanted to participate, not as a Liberal, a Conservative or New Democrat, but as a Canadian taxpayer and express my frustration. I was disappointed.

I was pleased with the people who showed up, young, old and everybody in between. However, as the rally moved on, it was hijacked by the NDP. It was not a Canadian rally. It was an NDP rally. I left because it was not a true expression of all Canadians, but more so politically motivated.

Liberals launch negative attack ads... but can't afford to put them on TV!!!

File this one under the heading of "EPIC FAIL"... the Liberals yesterday launched a negative attack ad, targeting Prime Minister Harper for the spending on the G8/G20 summit... but the ads have hopelessly backfired on them.

First, the ads have opened them up to attacks for hypocrisy, as they once decried the Tories for using ads of this nature. Should the Tories respond with ads in kind, the Liberals won't have a leg to stand on.

Secondly, they ad is, well, pretty pathetic, if you ask me... it completely falls flat one pretty much every count. Don't forget, to see if an ad is going to be affective, you have to watch it ON MUTE. Television is a VISUAL medium, and the audio is supposed to simply augment what's being shown. Watching it without any sound, it's a completely nondescript ad until about the :12 second mark... prior to that, it's just a Muskoka chair on a lake. There's no hook, so folks on the couch will lose focus and either start talking to each other, or get up for a snack or washroom break. Then you won't necessarily clue in that it's about Harper AT ALL until about the :17 second mark... by which time most folks have already tuned out. Then, unless you're already familiar with the "fake lake" non-story, you won't even realize that it's a NEGATIVE ad about Harper until about the :22 second mark... so most of the hangers on who you didn't lose in the first :17 seconds will have tuned out as well. Then even the end hook falls flat... "an ego trip Canada can't afford". Good luck with that one guys. For an attack ad to be EFFECTIVE, you have to REINFORCE a concept that people have ALREADY FORMED ON THEIR OWN. The reason why our ads have been so effective is because people already thought that Dion was "Not a Leader", and that Iggy is "Just Visiting". It's things they've already heard via the media, or that they've formed on their own by watching the news. I don't think the concept that Mr. Harper is on an "ego trip" is going to catch on... in fact, if anything I think it only reminds Canadians that Harper is a much stronger leader than "Iffy"!!! (* see comparison note at bottom)

And finally, it has reminded everyone of the fact that the Liberal Party of Canada IS BROKE BEYOND BELIEF. Has ANYONE seen these ads on TV? I mean other than on CTV News, where I heard they were showing it over and over and over again. (maybe trying to make nice to the Liberals after getting on their bad side for airing the Dion tape) And on YouTube, where ANYONE can upload a video for FREE. (anyone spotted any spoofs of it out there yet?) But seriously, has ANYONE seen them anywhere else? They got a mention in today's papers, and they've bought ad space on National Newswatch, but are they airing ANYWHERE on national TV? Didn't think so... because we all know they're broke.

Once again, the Liberals have blown it... they took an issue they MIGHT have had some traction on, and have now turned it into a process story ABOUT THEMSELVES, and the current fiscal problems within their own Party.

Way to go guys! Thanks again!

* COMPARISON NOTE: For contrast of our ads with this pathetic Liberal ad, check one of our "Not a Leader" ads from 2008... by the THIRD SECOND, the message is CRYSTAL CLEAR, that "Stephane Dion is Not a Leader", thanks to "The Shrug". Even if a viewer tunes out at this point and leaves the room, they've already got the message LOUD AND CLEAR.

Criminal defended by Liberals gets 8 years in prison

How SWEET this headline is... "Schreiber gets 8 years for tax evasion". That's right boys and girls... looks like the Liberals went to bat for yet another convicted criminal.

Here's a really interesting quote from the article... "It was notable that the accused sought refuge in red herrings and was consistently silent on the really decisive questions," Judge Rudolph Weigell of the Augsberg state court said in handing down the sentence.

Hummm, you don't say... "red herrings" and "consistently silent on the really decisive questions". Looks like the German courts didn't find him credible either. So one has to wonder, why did the Liberals take his word at face value? Yep, he played them LIKE A FIDDLE.

It's really nice to see the Liberals get what they deserve on this one, after they went to the wall to defend him, advocating the Government halt his extradition to face justice in Germany.

While Conservatives seek to "Stand up for Canadians", it turns out that the Liberals have once again made the decision to stand up for a CRIMINAL.

Political Subsidy issue to return to the House?

Maybe I wasn't so far off the mark after all... Dimitri Soudas has dropped a hint that the Liberals may have opened the door for us to take another stab at the politial subsidy issue.

"But if the opposition parties are so concerned with saving money, Soudas said, they should support the Conservative’s position to end all political party subsidies, which cost about $25 million a year. He said that would “demonstrate a real commitment” to saving money.

In late 2008, the government tried to introduce legislation ending the per-vote-subsidy of political parties, which sparked the coalition crisis that nearly booted the Conservatives from power."

With the Liberals trying to ban 10%ers under the guise of "saving taxpayers millions of dollars", they may have inadvertantly opened the door to a re-introduction of our efforts to save the taxpayers even more money by eliminating the taxpayer funded politial subsidy altogether.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the House's Internal Board of Economy come back to the House with recomendations for a new bill that eliminates funding for BOTH "ten percenters" AND the per-vote political subsidy. Either that, or they end up deadlocked, with the Liberals and the Bloc opposed, with the Tories and the NDP supporting some reform on both these issues. Because, let's face it... the elimination of the subsidy hurts the Liberals WAY MORE than it hurts the NDP.

This one could end up being yet another instance where the Liberals are too clever by half... or where Iffy again tries to put Harper into "CHECK", while Harper responds with a "Check-mate... shall we go again? How about best 5 out of 7? Oh come on, don't give up now... I know you're down 4 to ZIP, but keep playing... you'll get better. Eventually. Maybe."

CTV: "Anger is replacing Hope"

You don't say.

Barack Obama's challenge: Anger is replacing hope
The Associated Press
Date: Monday Feb. 15, 2010 11:45 AM ET

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama won the White House with a campaign message focused on hope. Now he is trying to get himself on the right side of a remarkably different national sentiment these days: anger.

Obama's expansive domestic goals are largely the same, but his message is changing, now constructed around a concession that the public is disillusioned and wanting results. If he cannot show people that he understands their frustration and is working to fix it, the risks are real.

All that angst that Obama wants to harness as a force for change -- as he did in his campaign -- will turn against him. That means eroding public support for his agenda and potentially big losses for his party in congressional elections in November.

So it was telling when Obama offered this take on Republican Scott Brown's Senate win in Massachusetts last month, one that weakened the Democratic president's hand: "The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry, and they're frustrated."

A new White House talking point was born, and it was hardly hope and change.

Oh wait a sec... I believe I did say...

But I have several serious concerns today [Jan. 20, 2009], on what ought to be a great day.

Firstly, I think Mr. Obama essentially used the hype of "Hope" and "Change" to swoon the voters, and millions of people bought into it. Not that that's necessarily wrong, but I honestly think that he's raised expectations so high, that when people realize that he is indeed just a man, and not the "Omabassiah" some people think he is, there could end up being a whole lot of anger, and dashed dreams. While "Hope" is a tremendously positive thing, I think the inevitable letdown could be a whole lot worse than the euphoric feelings people have right now.

Secondly, I think a significant amount of the "positive" vibes he's getting out of people are not really "real". In fact, it's not genuine love and admiration for him that we're seeing today. I believe a large part of what we're seeing today is in fact a response, the flip-side if you will, of the virulent hatred that some people had for his predecessor, the 43rd President of the United States of America, George W. Bush. And "love" for one man, born out of the sheer hatred of another one, is a very dangerous thing indeed.

Now of course, I'm not saying that about the "common man" on the street. I've been watching the coverage, and watching the interviews of regular folks in the US, and I think their feelings are indeed genuine. The people I'm talking about are the partisans, the dyed-in-the-wool liberals. Their love for Obama, I suspect, is built largely on their hatred of Bush, and as such, is a truly dangerous house of cards for Obama to build his support upon. I actually fear somewhat for the guy, because they're liable to snap if he doesn't do things their way. Think of a jilted lover, running from the arms of one man into the arms of the first available passerby. That's what I think a lot of his "support" is predicated on.

And as such, I'm genuinely afraid for the American people today. That's why I'm not feeling very celebratory right now. I think he's used people's hopes and dreams to get elected, but built them up in such a manner that they're going to get let down really hard. And I think that the "love" of the man isn't so much love for him, but a result of the hatred of another man.

Either way, I think Obama has to walk very carefully.

"In and Out" - Verdict is IN, EC charges are OUT

It's Liberal smackdown time once again folks... we, being the Conservative Party of Canada, just won the first of the "In and Out" cases before the courts.

To all the Liberals who tried to make a fuss over this... TOLD YOU SO.

UPDATE: Here's the key section of the Court's findings:

[202] Thus, having considered the totality of the evidence on record, the Court is not satisfied that the suspicions entertained by the respondent [the Chief Electoral Officer] support the impugned decisions or constitute reasonable grounds to suspend indefinitely the issuance of new certificates under section 465 of the Act. As further elaborated below, the applicants have clearly demonstrated to the Court that they have a clear right to be reimbursed because the evidence on record shows that the claimed advertising expenses qualify as “election expenses” under section 407 of the Act.

Iffy Liberals trying to make hay out of the truth?

While I'm not a fan of his, shall we say, unParliamentary language, I feel it's important to come to the defense of Nova Scotia MP Gerald Keddy today, after his comment about "some" unemployed folks in Halifax.

Okay, firstly, his comment from the Halifax Chronicle Herald...

OTTAWA — If anyone ever stops Nova Scotia farmers from hiring migrant labourers to harvest their crops, they would destroy a lot of businesses because unemployed Nova Scotians don’t want those jobs, says Gerald Keddy, the Conservative MP for South Shore-St. Margarets.

"Nova Scotians won’t do it — all those no-good *&#^^#*^&# ["illigitimate children"] sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax that can’t get work," Mr. Keddy said Monday.

Okay, notice how SPECIFIC he is with that comment? He's very specifically talking about the guys who are "sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax that can’t get work". But what's the issue at hand that he's commenting on? He's commenting on the issue of Mexican migrant workers... who are coming into Nova Scotia to do the jobs that the guys "sitting on the sidewalk" are REFUSING TO DO! He's talking about the truly lazy folks, who are most likely sitting there, collecting change and government benefits, while there are perfectly good jobs available for them!

I see them downtown in my area all the time... kids who don't WANT to work, but moan and complain every time someone even remotely threatens a government program that they mooch off of. These kids seriously just sit there all day long, "hanging out", leeching off the system, rather than contributing to it. They're irresponsible, argumentative, and have a "woe is me" martyr's complex. I see them usually gathered in their "spots", and you'll see them there every day without fail. They know the system, they know where to be and when to get the free stuff, and most of them have cell phones and iPods to boot. You'll see them in every Canadian city, part of Trudeau's legacy to our nation. Believe me, it's a CHOICE they've made... which is exactly what Mr. Keddy is taking them to task for!

(for the record... I am NOT talking about those who have mental issues who have fallen through the cracks. I am FULL supportive of programs for them to get them back on their feet, and they certainly need MORE, not LESS, help from all of us!)

So why is the Opposition trying to turn this into political hay? Because that's what they do... they put all their energies into scoring political points, not actually addressing the root issues, like Mr. Keddy was trying to raise with his, shall we say, unfortunately worded comments.

Thoughts? Am I way off base here? Or do you agree with me and see this as a much larger issue that needs to be addressed? We DO have issues of poverty in this country, but I don't count the folks who are choosing to "sit on the sidewalk" and refuse legitimate work as being in need of our help... I want to make sure that the people who REALLY need our help are getting it when they need it! Maybe I'm just cyinical, after all my years working in "the system", and seeing the levels of abuse that are rife within it. We need a serious overhaul, but while the Liberals are still around, willing to turn every single little offhand comment into a huge political scandal, I don't see much hope for real change... do you?

CNN covering for another Obama blunder?

What's this we see, ONCE AGAIN? CNN is once again covering for a serious blunder by Obama yesterday, in the wake of the Fort Hood shooting, where Obama spends the first two minutes of the press conference offering "shout outs" to his supporters, instead of, you know... being "Presidential" at a time of national mourning, when the whole nation is looking to him for, you know... "Leadership".

I'm sorry, but when something like this happens, you drop your partisan agendas and deal with the issue at hand. No "shout outs", no praising the organizers of some conference you're at, no making partisan comments regarding your agenda... you drop it all, and address the nation like a "President".

Here's the CNN "cover-up" clip, where they convienently leave out Obama's blatant error...

...compared to the FULL unedited live feed clip from Fox News.


Hey Jerry P, let me save you the trouble of commenting... yes, I MUST OBVIOUSLY be a racist exposing this blunder.

Oh, and just in case Obama's people manage to get the clip pulled... DON'T BOTHER, BECAUSE I AND SEVERAL HUNDRED OTHERS BY NOW HAVE GOT IT ARCHIVED.

h/t to SDA

UPDATE: Some rare honesty from the MSM... the local Chicago NBC affiliate has some choice words for Obama on this one... "Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting".

UPDATE II: The transcript, via the Washington Post:

Transcript
President Obama delivers remarks on Ft. Hood shooting at end of tribal leaders conference
CQ Transcriptions
Thursday, November 5, 2009; 5:42 PM

SPEAKER: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA

[*] OBAMA: Please, everybody, have a seat. Let me first of all just thank Ken and the entire Department of the Interior staff for organizing just an extraordinary conference.

I want to thank my Cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. I hear that Dr. Joe Medicine Crow (ph) was around, and so I want to give a shout out to that Congressional Medal of Honor winner. It's good to see you.

(APPLAUSE)

My understanding is is that you had an extremely productive conference. I want to thank all of you for coming and for your efforts, and I want to give you my solemn guarantee that this is not the end of a process, but the beginning of a process and that we are going to follow up.

(APPLAUSE)

We are going to follow up. Every single member of my team understands that this is a top priority for us. I want you to know that, as I said this morning, this -- this is not something that we just give lip service to. And we are going to keep on working with you to make sure that the first Americans (ph) get the best possible chances in life in a way that's consistent with your extraordinary traditions and culture and values.

Now, I have to say, though, that beyond that, I had planned to make some broader remarks about the challenges that lay ahead for Native Americans as well as collaboration with our administration.

But as some of you might have heard, there has been a tragic shooting at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas. We don't yet know all the details at this moment. We will share them as we get them.

What we do know is that a number of American soldiers have been killed, and even more have been wounded in a horrific outburst of violence.

My immediate thoughts and prayers are with the wounded and with the families of the fallen and with those who live and serve at Fort Hood.

These are men and women who have made the selfless and courageous decision to risk and at times give their lives to protect the rest of us on a daily basis.

It's difficult enough when we lose these brave Americans in battles overseas.

It is horrifying that they should come under fire at an Army base on American soil.

I've spoken to Secretary Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, and I will continue to receive a constant stream of updates as new information comes in.

We are working with the Pentagon, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, all to ensure that Fort Hood is secure and we will continue to support the community with the full resources of the federal government. In the meantime, I would ask all Americans to keep the men and women of Fort Hood in your thoughts and prayers. We will make sure that we get answers to every single question about this horrible incident, and I want all of you to know that as commander-in-chief, there's no greater honor, but also no greater responsibility for me than to make sure that the extraordinary men and women in uniform are properly cared for an that their safety and security when they are at home is provided for.

So we are going to stay on this, but I hope in the meantime that all of you recognize the scope of this tragedy and keep everybody in their thoughts and prayers. Again, thank you for your participation here today. I am confident that this is going to be resulting in terrific work between this government and your governments in the weeks, the months and years to come.

God bless you and God bless the United States of America.

Thank you.

END

Liberal MP's apologize for politicizing the Body Bag issue in 10%ers

And it's about time too... though of course the retraction is always printed on Page 8, while their initial and ultimately INCORRECT allegations of course ended up on the front pages.

Here's a thought for you Liberals... maybe instead of trying to score political points by making wild and untrue accusations, you could and get your facts straight first?

Silly me, what was I thinking... after all, Liberals will be Liberals.

Liberal MPs apologize for offensive flyer
By Christina Spencer, SUN MEDIA
October 28, 2009

OTTAWA — Liberal MPs apologized Wednesday for distributing a household flyer that attacks the government’s handling of H1N1 among aboriginals with the slogan “No vaccines, just body bags.”

The flyer, mailed as a message from Liberal health critic Dr. Carolyn Bennett, features a picture of body bags in a lab and a sick aboriginal child.

Grand Chief Ron Evans of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs told a parliamentary committee the flyer was “very disturbing...it’s really troubling to our people.”

The pamphlet arrived on doorsteps after an investigation into an incident in which an official ordered 100 body bags for a First Nations community in Manitoba struggling with an H1N1 outbreak. The investigation concluded there was no ill will and the number was a miscalculation.

Evans said the fact the flyer was apparently sent after the incident was resolved suggested the affair is now being politicized.

Bennett apologized, saying her party’s intentions were honourable.

Using the Cree expression for “I’m sorry,” Bennett said, “We would never do anything to offend; we did believe that raising attention for the real dire needs that we saw when we were [in Manitoba] was uppermost in our minds.”

Fellow Liberal MP Rob Oliphant suggested the flyers had been printed before the outcome of the body-bag investigation was known.

But Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq wasn’t satisfied. She told the CBC, “We are in a pandemic situation where Dr. Bennett should know better.

“First Nations communities should not be used as punching bags for a political party.”

chrisina.spencer@sunmedia.ca

YCF efforts ramping up again

Thought we'd heard the last of this... oh well. The YCF is attempting to branch out again, forming an "informal association" of Conservative youth. This time they're targeting individual EDA's, who's leadership might not be as informed about the goals and aims of the YCF's leadership... namely Immanuel. In my opinion, it's just his way of trying to make himself a player, which he's not. (he's actually disliked by many "youth", in part because of some of his antics at the Winnipeg Convention, and in part because many people see his efforts as a veiled attempt to lay the foundation for a "Youth Wing" vote at a future Convention)

And just for the record, so people don't get the impression that I'm just attacking him... he and I have exchanged several messages in the past few months, and during those conversations I advised him on how he could move forward with his ideas, while at the same time ensuring that his efforts weren't construed as an attempt to bring in a "Youth Wing" through the back door. I also clearly advised him that I'd oppose any efforts to continue his campaign in it's current form. Needless to say, he didn't heed my advice. This post is my re-entry into the counter-campaign.

This is the e-mail is currently circulating the around various EDA's. I'd advise all CPC members to ensure that your EDA's Board is warned to ignore it accordingly. I'll definitely be warning all my local boards.

Good day "x",

My name is Immanuel Giulea and I am a young conservative activist from Brossard, QC.

I am writing to you today on behalf of the Young Conservative Forum (YCF). The group was started nearly eight months ago under my leadership. My initiative had the objective to give a voice to young conservatives at the national level. [AH, YOU MEAN LIKE A YOUTH WING?]

The purpose of this letter is to introduce the organization and to explore opportunities for cooperation between your EDA and the Young Conservative Forum.

Today, the YCF has over 500 members on its Facebook group, and with over a dozen MPs, MPPs and other important supporters who are influential conservatives. The YCF aims to fill a void: whereas all provincial conservative like-minded parties have a youth association that allows young people to network, the territories and federal levels do not. [BECAUSE WE CLEARLY SAID WE DON'T WANT OR NEED A YOUTH WING IMMANUEL... YOUTH WINGS ARE JUST SANDBOXES TO KEEP THE KIDS AWAY FROM THE GROWN-UPS TABLE!!!] The current CPC Energy program is only present in about 40 campuses, many of which are not very active, and outside of the campus clubs, no events are organized. This means that over 500 campuses across the country are not represented.

The YCF is built around the concept of a grassroots organization with a bottom-up approach that will empower young conservatives. We are an informal association for young conservatives, not a youth wing. [YEA, RIGHT... SORRY, MOST OF US JUST DON'T BELIEVE YOU WHEN YOU SAY THAT] The mission of the YCF can be defined as to “provide networking, training, political experience, and discussion opportunities for young Canadians interested in advancing the ideals of individual liberty, limited government and free enterprise in Canada”.

More precisely, the YCF has five primary objectives:

- Connect young Canadians aged 30 and under, regardless of their political background (fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, progressive conservatives, small-c conservatives, green conservatives, libertarians, classic liberals and republicans) who want to engage and meet with other like-minded young Canadians.

- Foster involvement of the next generation of conservatives by assisting and facilitating Party/EDA/Campus events;

- Attract and educate young Canadians about conservatism. Train and mobilize those interested in gaining political experience;

- Raise awareness of conservative principles. Counter the left-wing bias on campuses and in the mainstream media by promoting discussions and debate amongst young conservative activists;

- Portray a positive image of the conservative brand:
- friendly of entrepreneurs/businesses, local artists, amateur athletes;
- promote environmental stewardship;
- promote foreign policy based on the belief that Canada has an active role to play in international relations;
- individual liberties and personal responsibilities belong in the hands of individuals, not those of the state.

In closing, we would like to emphasize that the YCF would like to become a partner with the EDA in their role “to encourage the participation and recruitment of youth”. We therefore respectfully ask if your EDA Board would consider and be willing to support the initiatives of the YCF. If you have EDA members under the age of 30 who would like to get more involved in the political process, could you please refer them to the Young Conservative Forum.

[AND CHECK THIS LITTLE BIT OUT...] The YCF is not an affiliated organization of the Conservative Party of Canada because the constitution does not allow for a youth organization, and creating one would require a constitutional amendment. [OH, SO YOU'D SUPPORT THE FORMATION OF A YOUTH WING IF THE CONSTITUTION ALLOWED IT? YEA, I THOUGHT SO...] We do not seek to have such an amendment made.

There are currently two events planned that fit our mission.

- The first one is a panel discussion about the “Future of conservatism in Canada”, this event takes place at Café République in Montreal (1200 Peel St). Similar events will take place in Calgary and Toronto in early 2010, and others will follow in the spring. These events fall under the objective to “raise awareness about conservative principles”.

- The second event hosts Satya Das, awarding-winning journalist and author of “Green Oil” which discusses how the oil sands can become the foundation of a green economy in Canada. This event falls under the objective to “Portray a positive image of the conservative brand”, specifically “promote environmental stewardship”.

If you would like to attend either of these events, please visit http://ycforum.eventbrite.com/ or send an email to info.ycf.jfc@gmail.com.

I once again wish to thank you for your time and consideration,

Immanuel Giulea
Founder and Contact for Quebec

I'll say it again... NO YOUTH WING. So long as this idea stays in it's little sandbox, it's fine, but I still think it's an undercover effort to lay the foundation for a youth wing.

Harper the Piano Man tops 500,000 views

Well what do you know? Over the Thanksgiving weekend, it looks like a whole lot of Tories did indeed show off our very talented Prime Minister to their family and friends... the number of hits on the video currently stands at 509,936.

Once more, for posterity...

Gazette: "It's time to end the $1.95 political subsidy"

What, they can't possibly mean to say that Harper was right, could they? Discuss.

End taxpayer subsidies for political parties
The Gazette - August 16, 2009

Last winter Stephen Harper barely survived a too-clever-by-half attempt to take away the money that political parties get from the government of Canada. Nothing unites our fractious opposition quite so quickly, it seems, as the thought that they might have to take their hands out of the taxpayers' pockets.

And Canadians, perceiving on the basis of no evidence that the change might give Harper's Conservatives an unfair advantage, also rejected the idea, to judge by opinion polls. True, chopping the subsidy would have given the Conservatives an advantage, in that they then raised far more money from individual contributions than any other party. What we don't see is how that's unfair. What's really unfair, it seems to us, is that every taxpayer is tapped to support the range of major official parties, even if she disagrees with them all.

In any case the subsidies - now up to about $1.95 a year for each vote the party received in the last election - survived unscathed.

Now it is time, we believe, to re-think this idea. The latest figures on party fund-raising, just released by Elections Canada, show that all the national parties are doing just fine, thank you: The Liberals actually raised more in the April-May-June quarter than the Conservatives did, although Harper's party had almost twice as many individual donors.

What do parties do with all that money, anyway? With the big parties raking in $4 million or so per quarter, why do they need more from taxpayers? With a federal deficit of over $50 billion, surely the government could save a few million by reining in subsidies for attack ads.

There's another interesting point here, too: The weakest donor base, by far, belongs to the Bloc Québécois. Because that party campaigns in just one province, it spends much less money than the other parties; its taxpayer subsidies leave it rolling in cash. Sensibly enough, the Bloc barely bothers to ask its supporters for donations; it asks them to give their money to the Parti Québécois instead. In a sense, then, federal taxpayers across Canada are subsidizing the PQ.

In response to this bizarre reality, some in Western Canada are proposing that the $1.95-per-vote subsidy should be available only to parties that present candidates across Canada; Green Party yes, Bloc no. This would be a mistake. The Bloc, however wrong-headed, is a legitimate democratic expression of some public opinion in Quebec, and to manipulate the rules against it would be unjust - and would be a whole new opportunity for sovereignists to manufacture outrage. Although Steven Fletcher, minister in charge of "democratic reform" has discussed this idea, he quite rightly doesn't support it. The Bloc has the right to be treated like every other party, and should not be penalized by any cunning contortions of the rules.

Which is all the more reason to shut down these subsidies altogether. Even today, in an an age when government subsidizes almost everything, helping already popular political parties remain popular and powerful at the expense of ordinary Canadians is bad politics, bad economics, and bad for democracy.

© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

This one oughta throw you all for a loop

Many people seem to think they know where I stand on all the issues, based on my blog name... www.ChristianConservative.ca.

Took one of those online "Political Spectrum" quizes. Check the results and discuss... (and maybe take the quiz yourself to see where you fall, see if the quiz is just whacked out)

My Political Views
I am a centrist social authoritarian
Right: 0.24, Authoritarian: 6.64

Political Spectrum Quiz

Maybe now the Libs will work with us on crime?

Congrats to all you "soft on crime" ninnies... we're one of the world's biggest drug exporters.

New strategy... how about, you know, actually "punishing" the offenders? Like how about significant "mandatory minimums" for producing and/or trafficing?

I'm thinking 10 years, MINIMUM, without parole if you're caught producing. I'm thinking we need to grant the police more powers to deal with people they know are producing, but they don't have enought to get a warrant. I'm thinking like 5-8 years for transporting over 500g of "E", because if you're moving that much product, your intent is to sell... that's not for "personal use".

We're the laughing stock of the world now. It's time to saddle up, and lock'em up. We could sure fight a winning campaign on this one.

Oh yea, and no house arrest.

"The Arrogant Minded Professor"

Nice job by "ace" in my comments section... now you've gone and made me mad. Thanks to you, I'm going to recount this little tale that I had been planning to keep to myself...

So someone I know gets invited to an small and intimate dinner with Michael Ignatieff and just a couple other people. You know what the feedback from this Liberal-leaning person was? They said they really WANT to like Michael Ignatieff, but they just can't bring themselves to do it.

Why? Because apparently, even in an intimate small group setting, he's still "an arrogant jerk"... and those aren't the words folks, that's a direct quote from someone who's spent time with the Liberal leader.

Just another Liberal mole, perhaps... and no, don't bother asking for names, I prefer to keep my source close to the inside.

See what happens when you make me mad "ace"? Now don't do it again.

Liberals sending out Tory-esque 10%ers

Well what do you know? All those Tory 10%ers the Liberals have been complaining about? Well they've finally followed suit, and are sending out photocopied 10%ers just like the Tories! I just got one in my mailbox today!

So, if I EVER hear a Liberal complaining about them again, I'll just refer them to Liberal Caucus Services.

Yea, as ususal... hypogrits.