Friday, March 19, 2010

Great Moments in Abundantly Obvious Irony

Mike Duffy says some students ‘brainwashed’

Senator Mike Duffy isn’t backing down on his criticisms of the University of King’s College and other Canadian journalism programs, saying he “dared to show a little spotlight on some of the bias in the media.”

Last weekend, Duffy delivered a speech to local Conservatives in Amherst criticizing journalism schools for teaching critical thinking and Noam Chomksy’s book Manufacturing Consent. He also said students aren’t being taught to be fair and balanced.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

The End of 10-Percenters?

It may be the end of an era in Ottawa, as MPs have voted to trash 10-percenters. Sadly Canadians may need to turn to other sources to find out about Michael Ignatieff's secret coalition plans, and what who Stephen Harper is trying to kill.

MPs have voted to put a stop to the practice of mailing taxpayer-funded political flyers to voters outside their own ridings.

In a surprisingly close result, MPs passed Tuesday a Liberal motion to scrap the so-called ten percenters by a vote of 140-137.

New Democrats, who had argued in favour of retaining the right to communicate with voters all across the country, ended up supporting the motion, which included several other proposals aimed at saving the government more than $1-billion annually.

The Bloc Quebecois also supported it while Conservatives, who've made the most use of the mailouts, were opposed.


Even though the Liberals are trumpeting this as a binding motion, in reality, we've descended into the kind of procedural grey water that only Kady O'Malley, and maybe 1 or 2 of the party whips actually understand. From what I've read, it appears a super secret all-party committee will be discussing this on Monday. Complicating the issue is that Stephen Harper has shown a willingness to respect the vote he lost, while Jack Layton is suffering some buyers remorse on the vote he won:

In fact, the NDP, which voted for the Liberal motion, may be the party that gets the Conservatives off the hook on the bulk-mailing issue.

NDP Leader Jack Layton launched a blistering tirade against "King Stephen Harper" only to waffle when it came down to whether his party would actually support the ten-percenter ban behind the closed doors of the Board of Internal Economy meetings.

"There were some (measures in the motion) where we would have done it slightly differently and so we'll have to take those issues up at the Board of Internal Economy," Layton said when pressed on the ban.

His party House leader, Libby Davies, indicated the ten-percenter vote may be the jumping-off point for a negotiation over bulk mail.

"We believe we've got to focus on the abuses and not rule out what is a legitimate use of ten-percenters by members outside of their own ridings," Davies, who sits on the board, said in an interview.


So they voted for it, even though they're against it. O...K...

And no one, not even the Liberals, seem to be pretending that the rest of the motion - which calls for the government to slash a billion dollars in partisan advertising and consultant expenses - has a chance of actually happening.

But, just to toss a nutty idea out there - what if the Liberals agreed to a 5 year phase-out of the public vote subsidy? They're closing the fundraising gap on the Tories, and losing the subsidy would hurt the NDP, Bloc, and Greens more than the Liberals. Here's the percentage of revenue each party generates from the subsidy:

CPC 37%
Lib 43%
NDP 55%
Green 62%
Bloc 82%

In exchange, the Conservatives would agree to trash the billion dollars in partisan expenses the Liberal motion calls for. Because I'd wager the Conservatives are getting more value from that than they are from either their subsidy or fundraising dollars.

I doubt it would happen, but it's something to think about.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Drugs are bad...Marijuana's bad...mmkay....

Michael Ignatieff shows he can relate to the kids these days:

"If I had to tell you as a parent or as someone who has spent his whole life working with young people, the last darn thing I want you to be doing is smoking marijuana," the federal Liberal leader said.

"I want you to be out there digging a well, digging a ditch, getting a job, raising a family ... doing stuff, instead of parking your life on the end of a marijuana cigarette."


Coincidentally, S-Harp was also trying to show he's down with the young ones by doing a YouTube interview and, wouldn't ya know it, the topic of marijuana cigarettes came up there as well. While Harper didn't come out for a national ditch digging program, he too was adamantly against pot legalization.

*sigh*

Remember when Canada was all set to decriminalize marijuana 7 years ago? The Economist put the moose with sunglasses on its cover and called us "cool". It made sense to most people, even stodgy old senators and stodgy old writers - after all, criminalizing the stuff clearly wasn't curbing its use, and it's hard to enforce a law which, if properly enforced, would saddle millions of Canadians with a criminal record.

But for a variety of reasons, those plans went up in smoke. And judging from the comments above, it doesn't look like things will change any time soon. Which is a shame, because the current laws are asinine - the stuff should just be legalized outright.

Because once you legalize, you can tax and control it - you don't see a lot of rum runners these days, do you? You think we'd have learned our lesson from alcohol prohibition, but I guess not.

The arguments being put forward by our leaders are so weak, I have a hard time believing they actually believe what they're saying. First up, is Mr. Ignatieff:

Noting he likes an occasional drink and having a good time, Ignatieff didn't seem concerned if his anti-weed stance made him appear conservative.

"Given the things we need to do together [ed note: ditch digging?], that's what I think," he said, adding that legalizing marijuana would create problems in dealings with the U.S. because the drug would remain illegal there.


I won't even touch the "I like an occasional drink" comment, but when you consider the relative effects of alcohol and marijuana on human beings, well, that kind of tells you how we should be handling this issue.

As for his second point, over 20 states have gone ahead and decriminalized marijuana. And, as someone quite familiar with border crossings, I'm sure Michael is fully aware that you can still prevent legal items from crossing the border - so just treat marijuana like we treat oranges. Problem solved.

Harper, meanwhile, goes the emotional route in his YouTube interview:

I have to say young children, I guess they’re now…Ben and Rachel are now getting pretty close to 14 and 11, but maybe they’re not that young, but they are at the age where, you know, they will increasingly come into contact with drug use, and I guess as a parent, you know, this is the last thing I want to see for my kids or anyone else’s children.


Agreed. But the thing is, under the current prohibition system, Ben and Rachel are able to get marijuana. Easily. However, if we legalize it, you could ban sales to minors, just like we do now with non-marijuana cigarettes, or dozens of other things. I know some will say it's about sending a message that we don't condone it, but anyone who thinks teenagers will avoid something because it's condoned by society has never been a teenager.

But his heart is probably in the right place on that comment. So go on Mr. Prime Minister:

Now, I also want people to understand what we’re really talking about here when we’re talking about the drug trade. You know, when people say focus on violent crime instead of drugs, and yeah, you know, there’s lots of crimes a lot worse than, you know, casual use of marijuana. But when people are buying from the drug trade, they are not buying from their neighbour. They are buying from international cartels that are involved in unimaginable violence and intimidation and social disaster and catastrophe all across the world. All across the world.


And, with that, Stephen Harper gives the best argument I have ever heard in my life...for legalizing marijuana. Because the second you legalize it and decide to sell it in LCBOs or licensed stores/restaurants/etc, you drive a stake through the heart of organized crime and drug cartels, both inside Canada and around the world. By controlling who sells it, you move the industry above ground and choke off a huge source of revenue from organized crime.

Maybe Iggy and Harper do believe the talking points they're dealing. But if they were being completely honest, I suspect their answer to the kids would go something like this:

"Yeah, I don't have a problem with legalizing the stuff. It just makes sense. But let's be honest. The second the media and opposition gets wind of that, I'll be faced with daily questions, ridicule, attack ads, and 10-percenters on the subject. I'm sure legalization will happen one day - probably within your lifetime. But until enough of us old fogeys die off and the public attitude on this shifts enough, I'd be crazy to go near this one. Next question."

Labels:

Somewhere, Stephane Dion is smiling

Harper's pre-taped YouTube interview is late getting started - now 15 minutes and counting...

UPDATE: And the video is up!

Harper goes with the suit and tie, which strikes me as a bit formal for a YouTube video. Yeah, yeah, I'm not expecting torn jeans and a Hannah Montana t-shirt, but maybe he could have gone with the Ahmadinejad-casual look.

So far, tough questions on deficit and foreign aid. Harper dodges them. But still, good on him for doing this interview. I wouldn't mind seeing this sort of thing from all the party leaders on a semi-regular basis - it gets Canadians engaged, and we'll get more substance out of this than from 50,000 question periods.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Provincial Uprising

Angus Reid has updated their Premier approval numbers from November and it's not rosy - only 2 of the 10 Premiers crack the 30% approval barrier.

And suddenly, Stephen Harper's underwhelming poll numbers start looking a lot more whelming by comparison. The man has struggled of late and may spend his life chasing an unobtainable majority, but at a time when voters are P.O.'d at governments coast-to-coast, he's still Canadians' top choice for Prime Minister.

The Premiers

Danny Williams 80% approve, 11% disapprove
Brad Wall 56% approve, 24% disapprove
Greg Selinger 27% approve, 28% disapprove
Darrel Dexter 23% approve, 53% disapprove
Gordon Campbell 23% approve, 60% disapprove
Jean Charest 22% approve, 53% disapprove
Dalton McGuinty 21% approve, 52% disapprove
Ed Stelmach 16% approve, 62% disapprove
Shawn Graham 15% approve, 62% disapprove

Despite his American vacation, Danny Williams towers over the field. 80%? Crap, I'm not sure Sidney Crosby could get that. The scary thing is, 80% is on the low side compared to other recent polls.

More and more, Danny is looking like this generation's Ralph Klein - he could choke 101 puppies to death in the Legislative Assembly and voters would shrug and say "that's just Danny being Danny". Because, after all, even puppies don't get 80% approval ratings, no matter how cute they are.

What's remarkable is that Williams has done it without the same partisan foundation Klein stood on - it's not like Newfoundland is an ultra-Conservative province, after all. I don't know how he does it, but if you could bottle Danny Williams, a teaspoon of him a day would turn anyone into a contender.

The news is less good for Danny's fellow Atlantic Canadians, who could certainly use a teaspoon or two of the Williams magic.

The biggest loser since November is Nova Scotia's Darrell Dexter, who has seen a 20 point swing in his numbers, most likely due to a series of expense claim scandals. Let this be a cautionary tale to all you kids out there on the dangers of experimenting with NDP governments.

Shawn Graham is now less popular than Ed Stelmach, which tells you all you all you need to know about how the New Brunswick Hydro sale has gone over. The weird thing is, you can't count Graham out in the upcoming election (likely this September) - a recent poll has him just 6 points down. The same holds true for equally unpopular McGuinty, Charest, and Stelmach.

No matter how cruddy the job of "Premier" has become, it still beats "opposition leader".

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 12, 2010

This Week in Alberta - The Toboggan Ride Ends

Environics released a new poll yesterday, similar to their numbers from October:

PC - 34% (nc)
WRA - 30% (+2%)
ALP - 23% (+3%)
NDP - 10% (+1%)
Green - 2% (-6%)

So no real changes - my suspicion is the now-deregistered Greens were prompted as an option on the October survey but weren't in this one.

This is, of course, less cataclysmic for the PCs than the Angus Reid poll from December that had the Wildrosers up by 14 points. When deciding which numbers to go by, a good rule of thumb is to go with what feels right, and these new numbers do feel right. Danielle Smith is in the game, but to form government she's going to have to do more than smile and say "aww shucks" when someone asks her about climate change and what services she'd cut.

And what does a competitive political landscape mean? Well, it means we'll see a lot more moves like yesterday's decision to slash royalty rates. One week, Stelmach and Ted Morton are lecturing Albertans about getting a runaway deficit under control. The next, they're giving away 800 million dollars in annual revenue.

Sure, they'll say it's all about jobs and economic growth. But the reality is, political donations have been flowing straight from the oil patch to the Wildrosers over the past year. The next election will be a bloody one, and Stelmach needs to get the PC war chest filled - this was the easiest way to do just that.

Labels: ,

Gilles Duceppe Woos the Ethnic Vote

"That means that Canada can continue to impose its multicultural ideology, the old Trudeau ideology, on Quebec."

-Gilles Duceppe, in the House of Commons yesterday.

Labels:

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Maybe his assistant can play him in the movie...



I don't have a lot of time for MPs who run attack ads against their opponents during elections for being soft on drugs, then get busted for possession of white powdery substances.

But I tend to agree with Misters Radwanski and Steele on this one - Jaffer got off easier than he should have, but there's certainly no conspiracy here and I don't think Jaffer, let alone Stephen Harper, owes anyone an explanation on this.

That said, the poster above, sent to me anonymously, was just too gosh darn funny to not post.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Heaven forbid we find out Michael Ignatieff doesn't like beavers

Responding to accusations that maybe Jim Flaherty shouldn't have spent $3,000 for a double-double hours after talking about belt tightening, John Baird shot back:

[Baird] also accused Mulcair of having something "against Tim Hortons" which he called "un-Canadian."


This is in addition to other positions deemed "un-Canadian" by this government, such as wanting to know exactly what's going on in Afghanistan and proposing campaign finance reform.

You know, this made me think back to a simpler time. A time before "just visiting" adds. Here's Stephen Harper on the opening day of the 2004 election campaign:

Harper answered the criticism minutes later, accusing the Liberal Party, which has governed the country since 1993, of creating a campaign of fear. "You know, in this country," Harper said, "you can be Canadian without being a Liberal."


True.

But heaven forbid you have something against thousand dollar donut photo opps.

Labels:

Tuesday, March 09, 2010

Always got time for Tim Hortons



Jim Flaherty's budget speech:

GOVERNMENT EXPENSES

Canadian families and businesses have accepted the need for restraint. Fairness requires that government too should have to keep costs under control.



Later that day...

OTTAWA — A day after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promoted government restraint to balance the budget, he reportedly spent $3,100 of taxpayers' money to fly to London, Ont., in a private jet for a photo-op at Tim Hortons.


That's one expensive cup of coffee.

Labels: