One thing I've noticed since the Tories took office, is the Opposition parties (especially those that consider themselves the "natural Governing party) to cast blam on the Conservatives for things they themselves had no interest in fixing while they had the chance. Yet again the Leader of the Liberal party is "Shocked and amazed" at how the Conservatives have let something like Attawapiskat happen, failing to accept his own responsibility of neglegence.
Sun News puts it across quite plainly, and it's been a trend I've seen since before the Tories took a majority. Rae ignores history.
Bob
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
The "Harper Government" must be doing a lot right...
When one of the major complaints against it is the appropriation of media terminology "The Harper Government".
The major negative media buzz has been trivial inconsequential items against the Conservatives time as a majority Government. The biggest buzzes revolve around;
1. The profanity of the NDP Opposistion party. The Globe and Mail.
2. The use of media terminology "The Harper Government". The Globe and Mail.
3. The profanity of the Liberal party. Huffington post.
Now maybe it's the type of people reposting stuff like this, or maybe this is the best that these media outlets can come up with. Whatever the case may be, these articles say a lot about how well the Conservative Government is now running the country. When you have to "find things" to blame on the Government, it says 2 things: 1. the Government is doing well. 2. The quality of the media outlet by what they print.
I start to wonder if the "Other Side of the House of Commons" is "winning" much like Charlie Sheen and the reporters of these stories.
Bob
The major negative media buzz has been trivial inconsequential items against the Conservatives time as a majority Government. The biggest buzzes revolve around;
1. The profanity of the NDP Opposistion party. The Globe and Mail.
2. The use of media terminology "The Harper Government". The Globe and Mail.
3. The profanity of the Liberal party. Huffington post.
Now maybe it's the type of people reposting stuff like this, or maybe this is the best that these media outlets can come up with. Whatever the case may be, these articles say a lot about how well the Conservative Government is now running the country. When you have to "find things" to blame on the Government, it says 2 things: 1. the Government is doing well. 2. The quality of the media outlet by what they print.
I start to wonder if the "Other Side of the House of Commons" is "winning" much like Charlie Sheen and the reporters of these stories.
Bob
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
The Cabinet comes out today for the new CPC Majority Government.
First thing I noticed as I listen to CPAC; The 2 Opposition parties (that are left in Parl) strategists are coming back with the same old rhetoricic about "why the Government fell in the 40th Parlaiment, which obviously didn't fly with a plurality of Canadians. It's not like this hasn't been discredited throughout the Election Campaign, and you can see by the results that the propaganda that "The Government fell because it was in contempt of Parliament" was seen through by the voters for what it was, bunk (a ploy, a farce, a kangaroo court of Opposition members in committee who weren't getting exactly what they wanted and weren't going to stand for it any longer.)
The second thing I noticed, and this seems to be trending lately among the media; It's more about the reporters than it is about the news. This is a disturbing trend of narcissism within the Main Stream Media which should be making viewers/readers wary of both quality and quantity of the information these self important reporters/media outlets are presenting to them.
Here is the Cabinet for the 41st Parlaiment from the website of the Prime Minister.
The second thing I noticed, and this seems to be trending lately among the media; It's more about the reporters than it is about the news. This is a disturbing trend of narcissism within the Main Stream Media which should be making viewers/readers wary of both quality and quantity of the information these self important reporters/media outlets are presenting to them.
Here is the Cabinet for the 41st Parlaiment from the website of the Prime Minister.
The Ministry
 | Prime Minister of Canada |
 | Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada |
 | Leader of the Government in the Senate |
 | Minister of National Defence |
 | Minister of Public Safety |
 | Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women |
 | Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development |
 | Minister of International Cooperation |
 | Minister of Foreign Affairs |
 | President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario |
 | Minister of Finance |
 | Leader of the Government in the House of Commons |
 | Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism |
 | Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board |
 | Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture) |
 | Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages |
 | Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec |
 | Minister of Health and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency |
 | Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway |
 | Minister of the Environment |
 | Minister of Labour |
 | Minister of National Revenue |
 | Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development |
 | Minister of Veterans Affairs |
 | Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway |
 | Minister of Natural Resources |
 | Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada |
 | Associate Minister of National Defence |
 | Minister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency) (La Francophonie) |
 | Minister of State and Chief Government Whip |
 | Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism) |
 | Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas and Consular Affairs) |
 | Minister of State (Western Economic Diversification) |
 | Minister of State (Transport) |
 | Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario) |
 | Minister of State (Finance) |
 | Minister of State (Democratic Reform) |
 | Minister of State (Seniors) |
 | Minister of State (Sport) |
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Prophesy fulfilled.
About 2 hours after the election results started coming into Saskatchewan Michael Ignatieff indicated that he was going to resign as leader of the Liberal party. Man, I TOTALLY called that!! When the House decided to push an election I even tweeted my goodbyes to Iggy right off, letting him know that I thought this election would be his folly.
Now I'll be honest, I had NO expectation that the NDP would MASSACRE both the Liberals AND the Bloc (especially after having read their platform). I expect the Dippers to pull up somewhere around 70, I coulnd't get a feel for Libs or Bloc though. I even expected the Conservatives to pull a slight Majority 157-159, but I am THRILLED with the extra 167 seat territory!!
What a great turn of events for both the Country, and the Conservative party! Time to get some work done.
Bob
Now I'll be honest, I had NO expectation that the NDP would MASSACRE both the Liberals AND the Bloc (especially after having read their platform). I expect the Dippers to pull up somewhere around 70, I coulnd't get a feel for Libs or Bloc though. I even expected the Conservatives to pull a slight Majority 157-159, but I am THRILLED with the extra 167 seat territory!!
What a great turn of events for both the Country, and the Conservative party! Time to get some work done.
Bob
Sunday, May 01, 2011
Voting, both a right AND a responsibility.
Today as I was reading through some blogs on the impending election, I wandered acoss one that reminded me why the push for people to "just vote!" is wrong. This Blogger (whom I don't know, and this was my first visit to their site) said "I have always reflexively cringed whenever I hear blather about forcing our youth to vote.".
But I go a step further, and express how I cringe thinking about how many people out there will be voting based on propaganda!! In watching and participating in some of the social media punditry (of which when I include myself I use the term loosely) on Twitter, my initial assessment has been confirmed. I have maintained that the general population is swayed more by emotion than logic, which is why:
A. Attack ads are used
B. There has been a surge in NDP popularity.
I have always been a staunch proponent of "informed voting", which means I read party platforms and watch performances in the House of Commons. I am by NO MEANS a political junkie like some others, but I feel it is all of our responsibilities to make sure we know where the parties stand before we make our decisions. As I've said in previous posts, this was the first year I have ever even considered reading an NDP platform because this is the first time in history I have ever felt that they may have serious influence in the House (even in an opposition capacity). Now I don't go into detailed critiques of the platforms, I look for things that stand out both good and bad. But at least I look at what the parties are offering, and base my decision on the plan I feel is best for the Country.
However the same cannot be said for the majority of Canadians, and this is where Democracy #hashtagfails, and this is especially true when it comes to pushing people to vote.
I think it can be generally applied that people don't like attack ads. How can we make these ads irrelevant? It's simple, make Government a part of your day everyday. Watch CPAC, or read Hansard (however I recommend avoiding Question period, because that is a full hour of attack ads that doesn't really get anything done.) Spend an hour looking through proposed and passed bills for the day instead of watching TV for that hour. I mean what could it hurt to give an hour a day for your Country?
When their is an election, read the parties platforms. Get informed, because voting is about more than just getting out and marking a ballot, and it's more than whether or not you like a candidate or a leader, it's about the future of OUR COUNTRY!!!
Get serious, and GET INFORMED! And then go vote!
Conservative Platform.
Liberal Platform.
NDP platform.
Bob
But I go a step further, and express how I cringe thinking about how many people out there will be voting based on propaganda!! In watching and participating in some of the social media punditry (of which when I include myself I use the term loosely) on Twitter, my initial assessment has been confirmed. I have maintained that the general population is swayed more by emotion than logic, which is why:
A. Attack ads are used
B. There has been a surge in NDP popularity.
I have always been a staunch proponent of "informed voting", which means I read party platforms and watch performances in the House of Commons. I am by NO MEANS a political junkie like some others, but I feel it is all of our responsibilities to make sure we know where the parties stand before we make our decisions. As I've said in previous posts, this was the first year I have ever even considered reading an NDP platform because this is the first time in history I have ever felt that they may have serious influence in the House (even in an opposition capacity). Now I don't go into detailed critiques of the platforms, I look for things that stand out both good and bad. But at least I look at what the parties are offering, and base my decision on the plan I feel is best for the Country.
However the same cannot be said for the majority of Canadians, and this is where Democracy #hashtagfails, and this is especially true when it comes to pushing people to vote.
I think it can be generally applied that people don't like attack ads. How can we make these ads irrelevant? It's simple, make Government a part of your day everyday. Watch CPAC, or read Hansard (however I recommend avoiding Question period, because that is a full hour of attack ads that doesn't really get anything done.) Spend an hour looking through proposed and passed bills for the day instead of watching TV for that hour. I mean what could it hurt to give an hour a day for your Country?
When their is an election, read the parties platforms. Get informed, because voting is about more than just getting out and marking a ballot, and it's more than whether or not you like a candidate or a leader, it's about the future of OUR COUNTRY!!!
Get serious, and GET INFORMED! And then go vote!
Conservative Platform.
Liberal Platform.
NDP platform.
Bob
Friday, April 29, 2011
Looks like Jack "John" Layton was aptly named.
Apparently the news of the day is Jack (Whos actual first name is John), was found in a facility reknowned for it's "special" Shiatzu massages. In other words John Layton was found in a Whore house in Toronto Jan 9 1996.
Now aside from the humour I find in how his name turns out to actually be JOHN, and that JOHN was found in a house of ill repute, I really don't see much value in this story.
Sure Jacko was doing something you or I wouldn't, but is anyone in the East really going to care whether "Smilin' Jack" is spending his time with "Ladies of the Eveing" enough for him to lose votes based on principles? Sadly it is increasingly becoming the case that these thing are no longer looked on as an afront to morality, or even worse they elevate the basest element in society closer to those in authority by stripping away the moral code which should be expected from those in public office, and making them more relatable to the general public.
However I am very interested in not having Johnny Layton anywhere close to the purse strings of Canadian taxpayers, because no matter his moral, his policies will devastate Canada.
Bob
Now aside from the humour I find in how his name turns out to actually be JOHN, and that JOHN was found in a house of ill repute, I really don't see much value in this story.
Sure Jacko was doing something you or I wouldn't, but is anyone in the East really going to care whether "Smilin' Jack" is spending his time with "Ladies of the Eveing" enough for him to lose votes based on principles? Sadly it is increasingly becoming the case that these thing are no longer looked on as an afront to morality, or even worse they elevate the basest element in society closer to those in authority by stripping away the moral code which should be expected from those in public office, and making them more relatable to the general public.
However I am very interested in not having Johnny Layton anywhere close to the purse strings of Canadian taxpayers, because no matter his moral, his policies will devastate Canada.
Bob
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Skimming the NDP platform.
You know I've never actually read an NDP platform before, because I understand their ideologies by watching what they fight for in the House, and the bills they put forward and support. But with Jack Layton surging into a position that the party has never been in before (possibly the major opposition), I felt it was important to get to know what they want to say about themselves through the party planks.
I've made it to section 4, and that where I am starting to glaze over. There are 2 reasons for this;
1. by this time it is clear why the NDP have been limited to the position of a "prop up" party, because their platform is like reading a grocery list full of treats a child has made, while the parent is struggling to balance the chequebook. It is filled with promises and goals that are simply and clearly unattainable without severe debt increases, as well as tax increases (because neither alone can sustain the planks.)
2. section 4 is their "environmental" section, and it irritates and aggrevates me that they are still considering bunk climate change sciences as a basis for their ideology.
I'm not saying the NDP don't have some admirable ideas, and some that I would like to see worked in. But even they recognize the need for the caveat "if finances permit" in one of there items, which makes me wonder how many more will come off the table when they realize Canada can't afford everything they are promising?
Up till now we haven't had to take Jack seriously because his party was held in check by the adults at the table, but due to the devestating effect Count Iggy has had on the Liberal party, it's time to start taking the NDP seriously and evaluating their platforms and ideologies with the same criteria we would use on a party that has Governed. In my estimation the NDP are offering promises of increase to everything and everybody, and at best this can be seen as disengenuous, at worst it could be financially catastrophic for Canada.
Bob
I've made it to section 4, and that where I am starting to glaze over. There are 2 reasons for this;
1. by this time it is clear why the NDP have been limited to the position of a "prop up" party, because their platform is like reading a grocery list full of treats a child has made, while the parent is struggling to balance the chequebook. It is filled with promises and goals that are simply and clearly unattainable without severe debt increases, as well as tax increases (because neither alone can sustain the planks.)
2. section 4 is their "environmental" section, and it irritates and aggrevates me that they are still considering bunk climate change sciences as a basis for their ideology.
I'm not saying the NDP don't have some admirable ideas, and some that I would like to see worked in. But even they recognize the need for the caveat "if finances permit" in one of there items, which makes me wonder how many more will come off the table when they realize Canada can't afford everything they are promising?
Up till now we haven't had to take Jack seriously because his party was held in check by the adults at the table, but due to the devestating effect Count Iggy has had on the Liberal party, it's time to start taking the NDP seriously and evaluating their platforms and ideologies with the same criteria we would use on a party that has Governed. In my estimation the NDP are offering promises of increase to everything and everybody, and at best this can be seen as disengenuous, at worst it could be financially catastrophic for Canada.
Bob
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)