Canada and First Nations relationship.

I've written before on the dysfunctional relationship between Canada's Native communities and the Federal Government, so hopefully I don't repeat myself too much.  But I was reading an article in the Sun (http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/06/20120609-101306.html) that seemed to have FN peoples contradicting themselves.

One statement said "On June 11 2008, Harper apologized for treatment... and more than a century of an assimilation policy that profoundly damaged Aboriginal communities across the country."  This leads me to think two things, 1.) Aboriginals are possibly resistant to assimilation into the society in which the rest of us live, and 2.) they may think assimilation is an option.

No offense to First Nations people, but to get anywhere today, assimilation is inevitable. What this DOESN'T mean is that you have to give up learning about your culture and heritage, and practicing/celebrating it whenever you want to.  It doesn't have to be one way or the other, but learning how to live and thrive in the main society you are in is both beneficial and helpful to that society.  I cordially invite you to take your place within Canadian society.

The dysfunctional relationship that the First Nations have with the Federal Government in regards to financial "dependency", and how I believe this is actually hurting First Nations people rather than the intended purpose of helping them.  Attiwapiskat is a prime example here, where buckets of money have been shoveled at a problem that continues to persist. Even when aided with "emergency" financial assistance, the leader said it wasn't enough and wanted $50,000/month more with no strings or accountability. http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/10/attawapiskat-chief-wants-more-cash-from-ottawa

It's beneficial for everyone to learn how to stand on their own feet, and I think that we are failing our First Nations people by over funding them, and not giving them the opportunity to feel how empowering it is to succeed on their own.

UPDATE:
Dec 23, 2012.
After the "Idle No More" protests, I found this. "The time to eliminate the Indian Act is now."

Update:
Jan 6, 2013
To correct myself, it was pointed out to me that "Assimilation" was not actually what I meant in the above post, but it was "Integration". Because I'm not asking First Nations to give up their culture and heritage, on the contrary, but hoping they see a better way that the current dependent situation much find themselves in. It doesn't have to be "one way or the other", Canada is a great place with tons of opportunities for everyone.

How safe are you?

This may come across as more personal than political, but remember we live in a society that believes it is "mostly safe" with help from civil &/or Federal law enforcement agencies. This is a dire misconception.

Last night my son and his girlfriend were mugged by a man with a knife as they were out together on a walk.  Thankfully my son took the initiative  and talked his way out out any harm, and in total they only lost the $10 cash they had on them.  It could have been much, MUCH worse, and I am so grateful that he had the wits to handle the situation to what I consider the best possible outcome.

But here's the thing; Where were the police? Could he have called them and not have had this happen?

Look around you for a minute. When you walk down the street, how many people are walking around with you that may be the next "Vince Li"?  Where were the police when Li beheaded his victim?  How about "Luka Magnotta"?  Sure these are extreme cases, but it goes to show that there is a need as an individual to be responsible for your own safety and well being that does not rely on Law enforcement agencies.

Don't get me wrong here, our men and women in uniform deserve both our respect and our support, but I also believe that they deserve a fair assessment of their abilities (because they can't be blamed for things that are beyond their control, like a mugging.) This is because the Police Services (as I have said before) are "reactive", and generally are only called after a situation has already occurred.

This is where I advocate personal defense; not just physical self defense (Although this cannot be left out should the need arise), but the knowledge and ability (assessment) to handle a situation completely to bring out the best outcome.  Because we live in a society where there are criminal elements that prey on those of us that are either unsuspecting or perceived as vulnerable.  I believe your personal safety, is your personal right and responsibility.

I'm proud of my son, he took appropriate measures to not escalate the situation, and took initiative to lead the mugger with a polite manner to accept what little cash they had between them.  They walked out of it with a little less cash, but unhurt.  This isn't always possible though, and I think it important that people know how to defend themselves to whatever point it is necessary to protect themselves and their loved ones.


Update 11:23a.m. June 24;

The RCMP now have an official account on twitter now, and even they acknowledge with a tweet that individuals need to be proactive in their own safety.

The costs of civil disobedience.

Obviously I'm not an Investigative Journalist, but certain things start to make me wonder where I might get information about certain things.
Like for example:
1.) What is the costs of extended manpower in police law enforcement after 14 weeks?
2.) What is the cost of damages to businesses through vandalism?
3.) How much have businesses lost in revenue over the 14 weeks of protests/riots?
4.) What happens to the students tuition for the term the likely won't complete?

I started wondering at costs when this article from the National Post decried warnings to the Montreal Tourist Season due to protests: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/23/montreal-tourist-season-at-risk-over-tuition-protests/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

This was also brought to attention by Brian Liley, who quoted a report from the Desjardin Bank that said  if Quebec were it's own country it's Debt/GDP was listed as 5th among the world, right behind the European countries that are in economical crisis. http://blogs.canoe.ca/lilleyspad/category/byline/
Which means without federal transfer payments from more prosperous regions, Quebec would be force into an extreme form of fiscal austerity.

So when you break it all down, how much did this outrageous temper tantrum actually cost the taxpayers? Because you know the bill isn't being carried by the protesters/rioters, because even some of their leaders want their rent for free.
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120523/quebec-student-leader-promo-120523/
http://bit.ly/Le2tN5

Beyond reason.

Have the Student protesters/rioters gone that step which breaches reason?  I would have to say that the minute violence took place they gave up any credibility, and also lost the right they claim to protest (Charter of rights and freedoms 2(c) freedom of PEACEFUL assembly.)
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html#l_I:s_2
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2012/05/20120520-112205.html

Yet here we are, 14 weeks into a protest which I believe the student groups had no intention of mediating an end to, with progressively increasing violence and mayhem. I'm not sure what political end game some of the students may have had, but the obvious immediate tactic was to Govern without being elected through activism and mob thuggery. Policy is made by politicians, and in a civilized society if we don't like it we vote against them in the next election. What civilized people don't do is the "lord of the flies" scenario the Quebec currently sees itself in.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/11-injured-including-4-police-officers-as-quebec-student-protest-turns-violent/article2423712/

Why? I came across an article the other day where the police were lamenting the outcomes of the 2 decision they make in a riot situation: "It is frustrating because we have tried a passive approach and had it backfire, and we have tried to jump on it quickly and then be criticized."
It seems to me that of the only 2 options, you have to choose that which has the best result with the least damage. This would say take the criticism, and take control before things get out of hand. Police will always be criticized no matter what choice they make, because someone is always going to feel like they are the "victim" if they can't do what they want.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/18/police-struggling-to-cope-with-emboldened-riot-culture-in-canada/

Jean Charest no longer has any choice in the matter: if he backs down he sets the precedent for every activist group to stage ever increasingly violent protests to get the Government to capitulate to it's will.  The students have pushed as hard as they can, now it's time to "grow a pair" and show them that they don't run the Province, and that you do. Newly minted laws may seem like a good idea, but with that you have to give the authorities room to take charge of the situation.  I have even advocated for Martial Law, since the rioters seem to indignantly break even the most reasonable laws.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/charest-should-not-back-down/article2433870/

Time to teach these spoiled brats that they can't get anything they want by throwing a tantrum, and do what it takes to restore order to your streets.

Letter to the editor - National Post.

The National Post published this article on May 10th, about the "National March for Life" that occurred in Ottawa. "Thousands of anti-abortion protesters shut down streets near Parliament Hill":
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/10/march-for-life-2012/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

I was a little annoyed at the clear bias of the writer, so I fired off a quick letter to the editor. Which went like this:
-----------------

I'm not sure how this blatantly biased article managed to end up on your site, but I would imagine that there were more even tempered, non biased reports that you could have chosen from. Even if you would have edited the wording to a less inflammatory headline, not to mention the inaccuracies in "estimated" numbers.

Right from the start I found the writer's bias was front and foremost with the term "Anti-Abortionists", instead of calling it by what everyone else knew to be the "National March for Life". This was more than a protest against abortion, and it was disingenuous of the writer to even suggest that was merely the point.

I delve further into the article to find an offhand "police" estimated turnout of 15000 (less than last year), when organizers and other media come to a record breaking number of 19,500 (so much for fact checking.)

There is even mention of a "few dozen" Pro-choice protesters, but they are courteously given the "socially acceptable" moniker of "Pro-choice" rather than a more equally inflammatory title of "Pro-Abortionists".

I think it's fair to say that there comes with reporting a certain expectation of "Journalistic integrity", which I found sorely lacking of Terry Pedwell and the Canadian Press. Any editor worth his salt would have toned down the biased rhetoric, and made this article an actual piece of Journalism.

Sincerely

Bob Klassen

--------------------

H/T Twitter friend @AlbertaGrl and @JoanneBLY for both input and prompting me to write.

About the "March for Life" rally; http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-canadian-march-for-life-smashes-previous-attendance-records-19500

Here's a pro-abortion rally: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/abortion-advocates-stage-huge-protest-with-over-50-ppl-against-pro-life-mot

Manufactured rights vs inalienable.

A few things have topped my thoughts in the last few days, and they are: Human rights (conscience, thought and belief), Omar Khadr (and the Geneva convention), and gay marriage, abortion, and feminism.

Seems like a pretty random collection of items, but when they are put under the initial topic of Human rights, they do all fit. Fair warning this could be a long post, which started for me at 3:38a.m. while I was trying to sleep.

Let's start at the beginning with Human Rights: Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being."  Wikipedia.  In short as I understand them a Human right must apply to everyone equally. 

This moves us logically on to Gay marriage, and the “right” to it. First off it should be obvious that the “Institution” of marriage is not a right, it is a human contrivances, not something we were born to receive but something man has put in place therefore to be granted by those that sanction it. This is what can be considered a “Manufactured right”, because it applies to only a specific (and small) group of people rather than the whole. The same can be said for the “right” to Abortion, even more so because it violates the Human Right to LIFE that the aborted human has (Zygote, cluster of cells, we can try to justify it by renaming it all we want, but there is only one thing it will ever turn out to be, and that is a human being.)

Of course these two items bring us to a hot button issue in the current 2012 Alberta Provincial Election, Conscience Rights. Here we are talking about an ACTUAL Human Right, belonging to all people, which is trying to be superseded by the manufactured rights of gay marriage and abortion. Wilfred Laurier said “The rights of each man (er, and woman) end precisely at the point where they encroach upon the rights of others”. These are called individual rights, and to have the expectation that others will respect yours, you have the obligation to respect theirs. Rights must apply equally to all people, institutions man has created should, but can not be subjected to, if they violate another’s inalienable human rights.

Both of these manufactured rights are part of a social re-engineering experiment taking place in our society: we are unaware of the consequences they yet hold, but you can be sure that in time they will bear fruit, just as Feminism has.

Feminism has not stopped at women's right, but has gone beyond equal rights of men, to the need to reduce/remove men in the lives of women. Feminism has also left a void in society that was once filled by a compassionate caregiver who instilled in their children a sense of identity and belonging. This has been replaced by the emotionally (sometimes) strong, sexually free, absentee mother role model, which has been replaced by the entertainment industry, and peers, as the main emotional caregiver and nurturer. We are coming upon a generation of lost ad confused kids, and we can see that the social experiment of Feminism may be fine for those that had what today’s kids are missing out on, but not so fine for this generation (and potentially worse for the next.)

I understand that today we have many more single parents, many of which have no choice but to work to support their children (to my dismay), but what social re-engineering took place to cause the current state? (Look back at the 60's and 70's and you will find your answer.)

Finally I move on to Omar Kadhr; This is troubling on so many levels. I keep hearing him called a “child soldier”, yet according to the Geneva Convention rule 136 Children MUST NOT be recruited into armed forces or armed groups. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/612-136?OpenDocument Ok so then he wasn't a soldier at the time when he admitted to killing a US soldier, then what was he? If not a civilian based on his actions as a combatant by throwing a grenade, and not a soldier according to the Geneva Convention, there is only one other option, a Terrorist. This makes me question the insistence that the left parties in Canada have, that he should be immediately repatriated and incarcerated here because his “Charter Rights” were violated. Didn't this person violate someone else's HUMAN RIGHT to life?

Human rights, if not applied equally to all people, have no value to them. Manufactured rights are at best social re-engineering our society, and the courts should be forced, by responsible Government, out of this practice.

Quebec student "strike".

The ongoing saga of the Quebec student initiative to stop the minor increase ($325/annum)  in tuition rates, as set to come into place by the Charest Provincial Government, is starting to come to an uncomfortable conclusion as the term wraps up.
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120417/quebec-student-tuition-protests-120417/

If the students protesting the hike don't finish their assignments, and write the final exams, they may end up losing the terms credits. Some institutions are extending the term to try to help accommodate the students in their fight.

There are numerous issues I have with the situation, and none of them are with the increase:
1. The need for an increase in tuition is inevitable, to compete properly you need good teachers, equipment, and facilities, all of which have incurred cost increases.
2. The students are customers of the service provided by the institution, and in future will benefit by the knowledge they should be willing to pay for now.
3. The same students protesting at the end of this term, may lose all the money they just spent on it to make their point. I equated this on twitter today like "Holding their collective breath till they fail out", the same way children throw a temper tantrum.
4. Quebec will still have the LOWEST tuition rates in ALL of Canada, which is now being subsidized by federal transfers, in effect having the productive portions of Canada paying for their cheap costs.
5. The "Strike" has been alienating those very taxpayers that help fund low tuition within Quebec, who are suffering from loss of revenue due to obstruction and vandalism.
6. The "Strikers" have alienated the rest of Canada by showing us an unprecedented level of entitlement that could have only come from Quebec.

Just to name a few.

Redefinition of Rights.

I'm a law and order guy, I live trying to follow all the rules of society. I take issue however at some of the laws/law enforcement agencies that have been infringing on one of our inalienable Human Rights. By this I am referring to the specific right of self preservation, or self defense. Now I see this as an obviously inalienable right, but apparently the courts and justice system has begun to decide that if you fight back you will be charged with a crime. What the hell kind of nonsense crap is that?

One thing we are born with is the will to fight to survive; no matter what outlook you take on Human development, the one thing that stands true is that we all fight to survive (whether physically or emotionally). It's in our DNA, the will to survive has pushed people to do incredible things just to remain so. Take the young hiker/rock climber Aron Ralston, who cut off his own arm to survive after being trapped in a canyon. These are the instincts we are born with, FIGHT TO SURVIVE. This works the same in the case of self defense, you do what is necessary to make the situation safe for you and yours.

Take for example the late night firebombing of Ian Thomson's home. After the attack began Ian, who was fortunate enough to have a firearm, took his weapon out and scared the attackers off by discharging it without harming the people that were trying to burn down his home with his wife and himself STILL INSIDE! Yet the police charged HIM with “careless use of a firearm”. He has now been tied up in court for 6 years for appropriately using HIS INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHT to defend himself! I credit Mr. Thomson for his self control, because I feel he was justified in aiming directly at his ATTACKERS.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/20/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers/?__lsa=36fe1d5d

Let's talk about a restaurant owner more recently, who was charged after defending himself with a broomstick and some SPICES! After having multiple items stolen, in multiple instances, Mr Polapady fought back when he caught a thief in the act. However the police decided to victimize him further by charging him with assault causing bodily harm, assault with a weapon, and the coup de grace “Administering a Noxious substance” (which can have a jail term of 14 years). Let's bear in mind that his wife and kids were just upstairs, and his thoughts were of protecting his family and property.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2012/04/20120406-090308.html

So here's the question; When you are being attacked by another person, how is it “against the law” to fight back?

This in itself pits those that are law abiding AGAINST the LAW, by criminalizing THE VICTIM! How does this make any sense? How has this been allowed to happen? In a society that is all about making new rights for everything, how the hell are they allowing the degradation of a most basic and fundamentally inalienable right?

It makes no sense that a society based on the rule of law would subject victims to even more abuse by laying charges, on top of suffering from criminal activities. The very thought of it suggests our law enforcement are no better than the thugs they are supposed to be there to protect us from.

I don't put that last statement out there lightly either, because I have an enormous amount of respect for the men and women of law enforcement that put themselves on the front line for the safety of others. However I think they have also forgotten that people can, will, and should protect themselves if it is required, because waiting for the police is not always an option.

A few links for interests sake;
The Constitution act 1867: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/PRINT_E.PDF
The Constitution act: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-11.html#sc:7:s_1
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Charter/
Canadian Constitution Foundation: http://constitutionday.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Curriculum.pdf

The Modern protester.

Protests use to be held for "free love", and "Integration". Now they consist of "Free condoms", "Free money" (While drinking the "we are the 99% Kool-aid"), and basically "Free University"!

See the difference?

Free birth control; If you go before congress in the US and say you need $6000 a year for birth control, you might be a liberal (or a ______).

Free money; Protesting all the while in $150 nike shoes, and checking facebook on an iPhone.

And lastly Free University; Quebec has the lowest costs for tuition in the Country, yet it is the ONLY Province to have a mass student uproar over a less than $400 a year increase (over 5 years).  I guess the only real culture in Quebec is one of entitlement.

Robocalls after the hype.

It appears today that The Chief Electoral Officer from Elections Canada has made a statement on the issue. Here is the letter from Him: CBC Chief Electoral Officers statement. 


So it turns out that crack investigative Journalists who broke this "greatest election fraud in history" story; "Robocalls probe centres on disposable 'burner' cellphone linked to black ops in Guelph riding." May have jumped the gun. 


As it turns out, The Elections Canada Chief Electoral Officer said "Immediately following the 2011 general election, the Commissioner of Canada Elections deployed resources to investigate complaints of fraudulent or improper calls. Since then, over 700 Canadians from across the country have informed us of specific circumstances where they believe similar wrongdoing took place".  This is a far cry from the media hyped number of 31000 which was solicited by The Globe and Mail, and Lead now's website.


Apparently even 700 calls is too many for some people like CBC's Kady O'Malley, but at the same time for others it is smack in the middle of the average.

H/T Stephen Taylor














I did a little quick math after this broke this afternoon, where I calculated the difference and the results.
31000 (Lead now is now claiming over 41000) - 700 = 30300 ROBOSPAM.
700 robocalls at lets say .05 cents (double the bulk as I couldn't find an actual cost, except for HERE. Racknine's site did not seem to have the available info HERE.) would run $35.  Not 3500, just THIRTY FIVE DOLLARS.  Even if it was $100 this could EASILY have been a rogue individual, who could have done it for ANY reason! As opposed to claims of the "Anonymous" source by Glen McGregor and Stephen Maher in this article; "Unlikely a Tory staffer could have acted alone in Pierre Poutine scam: source"


That's what broke today.

Democracy; What's good, is also what's bad about it.

What makes democracies so great is the ability of the will of the people to change that which is unjust. By this I mean Protests for the common good (ie: intergration.). What makes democracies bad is the perversion of protests by lobbyists and activists, who are only interested in getting their way (ie: Quebec students protest tuition increase, and Leadnow's attack to overturn a valid election.)

Taking the 2 examples I give;
1. The student's are mad that they will have to pay more for schooling. Understandable, yet at the same time the costs incurred with providing that education must be adequately covered as well. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/03/07/student-protest-montreal.html
2. The robocalls scandal has shown a vast separation between even the centralized Tory government and the radical nature of the Left, leading to the media acting as lobbyists/activists on their behalf.  http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/14/unlikely-a-tory-staffer-could-have-acted-alone-in-pierre-poutine-scam-source/

Now I'm not saying there aren't justifiable reasons to remove a Government from power, but to do so when that Government is actually accomplishing positive goals for a Country shows an ideological desire for power, rather than overall social well being and justice. I also agree that there are times, and ideas, where University students have change the course of countries with positive results. But that is less and less the case when you live in a Country like Canada, which has all the benefits it does to offer. Protests and activism have become about getting your way, not making life better for everyone.

The same thing that makes our democracy great, can be perverted to make it all about self.

How Robocalls play out in the HOC.

I was thinking about how the robocall affair has been playing out in the house of commons this morning.  I find the narrative goes something like this:

Oppositions; "AHA GOTCHA!!"
Government; "Got us doing what, when, where?"
Oppositions; "You tell us!!"
Government; "Well we know that Frank Valeriote broke Election Canada rules, and how about Adam Carroll, will the Parliamentary hearings ever get to interview him?"
Oppositions; "BUT, BUT YOU ARE EVIL CONSERVATIVES!!!

It appears though that illegal tactics are not limited to the "Evil Conservatives", as has been shown by Vikileaks, and admissions of guilt by Frank Valeriote and Bob Rae themselves about robocalls in Guelph.
Now we find out that there may be illegal activities on the part of the NDP in an ethnic riding in Toronto. The CBC tells how both Conservative and Liberal complaints have been "brushed off" by Elections Canada, who should now find themselves under investigations of impropriety. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/03/13/voting-scarborough.html?cmp=rss

What caught my interest:

March 9, 2012.

Here are my 3 top tweets today:

If there is pre-election complaint of voter suppression against the Tories, will EC broaden it's investigation? http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/09/tory-campaign-worker-in-guelph-tweeted-robocall-warning-two-days-before-election/


@SunNewsNetwork: DISGUSTING: Child molester fights deportation to Iraq. http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2012/03/20120309-095101.html 


Citizen's arrest is not vigilantism.  Especially if Police refuse to act on your behalf. http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/08/vigilante-speaks-out-about-confronting-vandals

What caught my interest March 8, 2012.

A lot less about Robo-calls, but let's start off with the latest about Elections Canada.

Elections Canada has a fair amount to answer to, especially after reading the ATIP that was presented to start the Robo-smear. The latest buzz is how non registered voters were allowed to vote without giving an address. With the amount of Elections Canada mistakes coming to light it begs two questions; 1. If they can't manage the Electoral powers they have now, why would they even want more? 2. Why isn't there an investigation into Elections Canada in regards to all the screw ups?
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/08/voting-irregularities-marred-toronto-area-vote-in-federal-election-report/

Next we head to Quebec, where University students took to the streets to protest an increase in their tuition (which currently stands alone as the lowest in Canada.)  However the demonstration turned towards violence when police were targeted with snowballs, and respond with force to break up the crowd. I feel that once any object is thrown at law enforcement, they must take every step possible to disperse the crowd prior to further escalation.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/03/08/montreal-student-protest-eye.html
More pictures and info here;
http://blogs.canoe.ca/lilleyspad/general/photos-montreal-students-clash-with-riot-police-in-tuition-protest/

On to the separatist that will live off Canada for the rest of his life, National "Teddy" winner Gilles Duceppe! I can't even comment much here, because instead of being charged with his treason, he gets a fat Canada pension.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/07/duceppe-wins-national-waste-award

Finally I move to something that bothers me more deeply than anything else. In BC a member of our armed forces was attacked, his neck was slashed, waiting for a bus.  This bothers me for a couple of reasons; 1. Our armed forces are generally peacekeepers, and the ideological mentality that would make someone perpetrate violence against any of our defenders of freedom show a sickness of the  anti military viewpoint. 2. That this offender will be afforded the freedoms the victim has chosen to defend.
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=12818bf7-d022-4e14-aed9-cdde1d578a0f

So many good blogs.

There are so many good blogs out there that give balance to the current, predominantly liberally, biased media.  I just thought I would mention a few here, that stand up for truth in news rather than the one sided, half information you are probably getting now.

The first alternative isn't even a blog, but an (admittedly) right wing news station. When you watch Sun News, at least you know what to expect, unlike the Main Stream Media that actually thinks it has no bias.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/home.html

Here are just a few blogs that I regularly follow to balance my "news" diet;

Brian Lilley (Sun News): http://blogs.canoe.ca/lilleyspad/

Russ Cambell: http://russ-campbell.blogspot.com/

Stephen Taylor: http://www.stephentaylor.ca/

Moose and Squirrel: http://mooseandsquirrel.ca/

BC blue: http://bcblue.wordpress.com/

Blue like you: http://www.bluelikeyou.com/
Daniel Dickin: http://www.danieldickin.ca/

Small dead animals: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/

Crux of the matter: http://crux-of-the-matter.com/

CAW workers voice of reason: http://paulsrants-paulsstuff.blogspot.com/

There is a whole list of Conservative bloggers that can be found at;

Blogging Tories: http://www.bloggingtories.ca/

What caught my interest, March 7, 2012.

Law and health care always attract interest from me, and today I came across a couple of each.

Health;
The tragic story of a woman discharge at 11p.m. from a hospital in Manitoba, who died as she reached her front door; http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/calls-for-inquest-into-post-er-death-141718033.html

Saskatchewan is looking for immigrants with skills, yet Doctors are unable to find any jobs? And yes we absolutely have a shortage of them: http://www.globalregina.com/doctors+having+trouble+immigrating+to+saskatchewan/6442595683/story.html

Law;
Police defend issuance of cell phone ticket to an elderly man who claims he doesn't own one.  I am absolutely behind the law, but if the officer thought he saw something that wasn't, it will give weight to the "the officer was mistaken" defense: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/police-defend-issuing-of-ticket-141718633.html

Protection of property. When you put up with crap from punks, you should NOT be the one charged! http://www.winnipegsun.com/2012/03/06/senior-in-court-for-bringing-vandal-to-rcmp

Weather:
Saskatoon got hit by a blizzard in the past day or two, hopefully as the old adage goes "In like a lion, out like a lamb."; http://www.leaderpost.com/sports/Photos+Winter+blast+hits+Saskatoon/6258212/story.html

And so far today, I have yet to see one Robo-story.

Behind the Robocall movement.

I think the most disturbing aspects of this article at Canoe News are 1. “organized by some of last fall's Occupy Ottawa ringleaders” and 2. “Neither Elections Canada nor the RCMP could say whether they'd received any of the online petitions.”

Now I can attribute the second aspect to the fact that it is an ongoing investigation and protocol more than likely dictates this, even though I don't see a conflict with admitting where you are getting you information (especially if the information could be deemed inflammatory, incomplete, or even incorrect. Ie: from a site like Leadnow.ca which has been actively soliciting complaints.)

I attribute the first to the nature of the robocall scandal itself. The disenfranchised Left which seems unable to concede that the Conservatives have a Majority Government. Of course they are being spurred on by the fact that the Tories are trying to achieve their goals in the House of Commons, and have cut debate at times (to prevent the never ending repetition of the Opposition.)

I was once again surprised at a Globe and Mail piece that points out the ridiculousness of the Faux robo-call scandal. Margaret Went's editors must be seething to run “Robo-calls? Get a grip. We'reCanadian”. 


Brian Lilley gives us the lowdown on the background of some of the members of Lead Now in his Blog. And at Sun News Network in this Video.

The Globe and Mail concedes:

Something I usually don't do is post many articles from the far left media The Globe and Mail, however 3 of today's articles seem to be almost a precursor to retracting their past rhetoric on Robocalls.

In the first article: "The case against a Conservative conspiracy", aside from the possibility of a training school staffer accidentally misspeaking with a hypothetical “You didn’t hear this from me, but here’s one thing you could do…” However they concede (unlike the Liberal party has been able to do, even after Vikileaks), “But a vast Conservative conspiracy to steal the general election? No.” Which is a far cry from how they have been misrepresenting the situation thus far, highlighted by their article soliciting complaints.

In the second article: “If robo-calls were meant to keep voters away, they failed miserably”, they go so far as to concede “It seems very unlikely that these alleged tactics greatly influenced the results of the 2011 election.”

In the third article: “Tory support steady despite robo-call,e-snooping uproars: poll”, they have assessed the damage that these scandals have had on voter support, which has been none. Nick Nano's correctly assesses that “I think for many average Canadians who are very cynical, they find it hard to believe that politics of any colour is ethical,”. Although I myself would go a step further, and I would say that the Conservative base remains unchanged because they generally agree with rule of law, which is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Which is something the rhetoric against the Tories as a whole has failed to do. I am concerned at the increase of support for the Liberals though, especially after Vikileaks was shown to be of their party's invention. (Whether the Leader knew or not, you have to wonder if Adam Carroll was the scapegoat for an MP.)

Smoking gun vs Ballistic report.

Yesterday sometime I came across a blog (wish I could credit where I found it) from an NDP supporter that put out an argument against an NDP, Liberal, and Green party Coalition. In the Blog calles "Straight Goods" they point out a number of things quite correctly, which I have been finding bloggers (even on both sides obviously) have seen but have neen severely lacking in the Main Stream Media.

Case in point, when have you heard the media say that the Opposition parties are trying to invalidate the 2011 election results so there may be need of ANOTHER election?  Not that it isn't out there, Pat Martin from the NDP said as much in his frist speech (found at the bottom of this lawsuit filed by RackNine) "hundreds ofthousands of phony phone calls by the Racknine rascals it makes you wonder about the legitimacy of the Conservatives 39% Majority Mandate". The endgame seems pretty clear.

But I digress; my point was not about lack of media integrity/awareness, but how the mentality of the Left and Right differ.  I read in the past few days: "The left is very vocal and run on emotions. The right are silent and run on rules and facts. The left likes disarray and dysfunction, the right likes peace and order." (Found here.) The truth in this is quite apparent to me, as I have chance to interact with young people whos views are predominantly Left. The instant "Harper should be in jail" posts I see confirm a sharp lack of logic, and/or respect for the rule of law, which I myself hold quite dear.

Look at this like it were a CSI case: Where the Opposition (Lib, NDP) have a smoking gun sitting on Conservative's lap, as Bob Rae likes to say, the Government (Tories) are waiting for the ballistics report so they can catch a criminal and actually convict him.  However  waiting for the results of an investigation doesn't actually do the 2 things this "scandal" is intended: 1. It is intended to tarnish the reputation of the Conservatives through rhetoric and hyperbole that is so easily ingested by the "anything but Conservative" Harper Haters lefties. 2. It is to try to invalidate the 2011 election and send us to the ballot boxes again.

Right now all the Opposition has is allegations, speculations and assumption. Even if the truth is able to come out, after how difficult the left has made the investigation with the solicitation of "complaints", at best there will be an individual, maybe even a small renegade group at fault. At worst they will find out that it was actually the Opposition themselves that is at fault. Bottom line is that the "evil" Stephen Harper was more than likely unaware of any of it, nor were any of the Tory MPs.

I believe we should get to the bottom of this, find the truth, and punish the resposible. However if we had Bob Rae and Pat Martin's way, all the Conservatives would be in jails (which they are supposedly against) and we would be going back to the polls for another election.

H/T Stephen Taylor for coming up with what may be the source of the 31000 complaints to Elections Canada.

Here is a copy of the complete text that would be sent to (as of Mar 2, 2012):
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
William H. Corbett, Commissioner of Elections Canada
Bob Paulson, Commissioner of the RCMP
Nycole Turmel, Leader, New Democratic Party
Bob Rae, Leader, Liberal Party
Louis Plamondon, Parliamentary Leader, Bloc Québécois
Elizabeth May, Leader, Green Party

" Dear Prime Minister Harper, Mr Corbett, Mr Paulson, Ms Turmel, Mr Rae, Ms. May and Mr. Plamondon,

I am gravely concerned by the Elections Canada report that has just traced illegal phone calls made during the 2011 federal election to a company that worked for the Conservative Party across the country.

The “robocalls” were apparently designed to stop non-Conservative voters from casting ballots in key ridings by falsely telling voters that the location of their polling stations had changed, causing them to go to the wrong location on election day.

This news casts doubt on the legitimacy of our Government. We need answers now, and real consequences for illegal behaviour that may have determined the outcome of our election.

I demand a full and independent public inquiry, backed by Elections Canada and the RCMP, to expose the facts about the robocall scandal and ensure that the penalty for this election fraud matches the consequences of the crime - including new elections.

We cannot allow individuals to be scapegoated for actions that benefit institutions. We need to lay the foundation for new laws to restore the integrity of Canadian elections."
Found at Lead Now.

Once again I'll say it looks like this is a ploy by the disgruntled opposition parties to try and gain a "Mulligan" (do over) because they just can't stand the thought of a Conservative Government.

Robocalls part ?

As the robocalls "scandal" continues, I decided to add my 2 "non-cents" to the mix. Now although I did receive robocalls during the 2011 Federal election, I have no recollection of what was said, as I'm sure most of the 31000 new complaints don't.  But I sent an obviously phoney complaint to the "paper" soliciting them, in attempt to show them the ridiculous effort they are attempting.

I also noticed the way this "paper" is leading people to submit these complaints quickly, or the nasty Conservatives will "get away with it".

With such an obvious Left bias, I have a hard time calling this anything close to "news".  The Globe and Mail called me soliciting a subscription just a few days ago, and ovbiously my response was "Not friggin likely!"

Touching on some fudged numbers.

I'm going to start by addressing the first issue, which is the right to vote. If you don't exercise that right, then by default you have decided to accept the will of those who do vote, and therefore you are no longer counted in the final decision. I happened to be directed to the Marxist Leninist Party, which was complaining how the Conservatives didn't get a majority of votes.
Some of their numbers went like this;

Voter turn-out of 14,720,580 out of 23,971,740 registered electors or 61.4%

Harper's Conservatives received 5,832,401 votes, representing 24.3% of the eligible voters

Voters who cast their ballots for candidates other than those of the Conservative Party totaled 8,888,179, representing 60.4%

(emphasis mine)

The 2011 election was riddled with cries of how this from basically all opposition parties, who seem to have forgotten what kind of democracy we live in. This is easily explained away: It's called the “First past the post” system. This means that with more than 2 parties running (and sometimes there can be a number of fringe parties that run in Canada), the winner of the most votes OUT OF ALL OF THEM is considered the winner.

If we WERE to have a 2 party system, as it stands right now there would be no Liberal Party, Bloc or Green party in the House of Commons. And in this scenario the total number of voters that voted “anything but Conservative” would actually have a majority Government in Canada. These facts are sadly negligent in arguments from other parties who would rather not see the Conservative's take their rightful place as a Majority Government in the House of Commons.

On to the fraud perpetrated by these particular numbers.

1. If you notice they are counting all voters in the equation, in effort to dilute the percentage of the number of votes received by the Conservative Party.
2. They also inflate the number of those who voted against the Conservative's by clumping votes for ALL the rest of the parties together as if they were a single unit.

It's time for the losing parties to accept the democracy we live in has chosen a Conservative Majority, much like in the past they have chosen other parties in the exact same way.

Robocall reports expected to grow.

As the "Robocall" controversy continues I think I am starting to peace the puzzle together here. I remember hearing about these calls right after the election, but they were (as they should have been) passed on to Elections Canada for investigation and prosecution. However the recent activities going on in the House Of Commons, such as bills being passed in which the opposition lives up to it's name and vehemently opposes, or limits on debate for the sake of progress, seem to indicate to me a level of frustration within the opposition parties that would make use of a scandal to try to question the validity of the 2011 Election.

Yes you read it correctly, I am implying that the opposition parties are possibly colluding in a fraud against the Canadian people through false information and newly acquired outrage at a scandal which has been under investigation for some time now.

I think the greatest indicator of deception towards this scandal is the bluster and outrage that both the Liberals and NDP are putting forth in a seemingly collaborative effort to discredit the Conservative Government. This appears to me to be nothing more than a political scheme to create (as one blogger says “more anti-Conservative fearmongering”), albeit the fact that these calls were obviously fraudulent and must be investigated and prosecuted, it seems evident that the Opposition parties are trying to whip up a frenzy over the issue for an obvious purpose, a by-election (or even further a completely new election). I also question the newly rising numbers they are claiming, which started at 18 Ridings, then to 27 Ridings on February 25^th, then 34 Ridings on February 27^th. Again it seems to me very convenient, and I think they are probably manufactured to make the issue seem worse than it actually is (typical politics).

There have now been accounts brought forward of calls byConservative center employees (anonymously of course) who said they were “forced” to make these calls, despite their objections to the supervisory staff, and calls to the RCMP. You have to wonder what kept these poor people working at doing something they thought was wrong, and why they continued even when they disagreed with it or knew it was illegal? Yeah, I'm calling BS here too, mostly because the timing really makes it smell like the Opposition tactic to thicken the plot, but also because I think no honest citizen would continue to do something dishonest just because they were told to “stick to the script”.

There have been Conservatives that have received “Robocalls” too during the past election, now granted it appears that none of them fell for it, or they had the presence of mind to verify the information.

But let's touch on something else; It was not only the Conservatives who would have benefited greatly from these misleading calls, the Orange wave stood to gain as well, and being an the overlooked third party the spotlight usually glanced right over them. This is especially true when you note that there are more Conservatives which  have received “robocalls” too.

So far my hypothesis has the same weight as the evidence given so far in this “scandal”, I may or may not be correct, but there are other logical options when proof is not required.

"Robo" BullS***.

Yes folks, you heard correctly! I am calling ROBO-BS on both Liberals and NDP!  Here's my Rationale.

Feb 24 there was 18 ridings, Feb 26th there was 27 ridings, and as I pointed out yesterday on my own twitter feed today we now se the number rise again to 34 ridings.  The hypocrisy here is Frank Valeriote talking about the "convenience" for this to happen in Conservative riding, when the numbers semm to be "conveniently" rising as the days go on to support their position.  I guarantee that there will be more ridings "conveniently" come into the spotlight from both NDP and Liberals before this is done. But the endgame has already been revealed by the loose lipped King of Vitriolic Rhetoric, Pat Martin (who has the gall to speak of ethics or standards let alone both together in this video), the agenda is another election! (Vancouver Observer)

Now on to the failed logic of the Liberals in how "convenient" these numbers are; Remember that the claim was that these calls were in "close race" ridings where the Liberals lost. With a Tory majority, the most simple of logic say that these calls would have unquestionably happened in Conservative ridings, especially if the race was close.

The one problem we are going to have getting to the bottom of this "Robo-call" issue will be the manufacturing of evidence for political gain, which is as much of a fraud as the calls themselves.