Iggy's Regime change ideas.

If the Conservatives happen to only get another Minority Government, you can pretty much guarantee the revival of "The Coalition".  Michael Ignatieff said as much by his blatant avoidance of the question from the media, and his sudden exit (he "fled") from the scrum. The full article HERE.

But he is determined on twitter to follow through. Check it out.

This is definitely his prerogative, but what was the straw that broke the camels back after a year of redrawing his line in the sand? The Harper Government finally had a semi-credible scandal involving possible influence peddling.  But what did the PM do? He called the police on the party alleged of it! Scandal dead.

Bob

"The most vulnerable in society".

One thing that really ticks me off is how Liberals are always INAPPROPRIATELY throwing out the phrase "the most vulnerable in society" for every group they think is not being adequately represented. (Scott Brison & John Mccallum, 10:30 & 10:40am March 24/2011 in the House debate of the budget.)

STOP THIS, IT'S RIDICULOUS!!!!  THE POOR ARE NOT THE MOST VULNERABLE! ABORIGINALS ARE NOT THE MOST VULNERABLE! UNBORN CHILDREN ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE!

There is one group that are the most vulnerable in society, and that group is under attack thanks to Liberal values of ABORTION!  If the Liberals had any concern for the TRULY most vulnerable in society, ABORTION WOULD BE ILLEGAL! MURDER IS MURDER, NOT WOMEN'S RIGHTS!

There is NO OTHER HUMAN CONDITION that puts us AT THE COMPLETE AND TOTAL MERCY OF ANOTHER!

How Moronic.

Bob

Here's a kicker when the Opposition parties Say "There is no Coalition" or don't talk about it.

CBC has an article that was updated Dec 1st, 2008, which gives the outline of what and why with the Coalition deal. When looking at the "Details" you find that the Coalition is technically still in place, at least within the Liberals and the NDP.  FULL ARTICLE HERE.

The excerpt on the right hand side of the page, just below the picture of the document you will find;
"Details of the deal

The proposed coalition government includes:

• 24 members of cabinet and Dion as prime minister
• 18 Liberal cabinet ministers (including a yet-to-be-named Liberal finance minister)
• 6 NDP cabinet ministers
• 6 NDP parliamentary secretaries
• The 2 caucuses would sit side by side in the House of Commons
• The agreement between the NDP and Liberals would expire on June 30, 2011, unless renewed. The Bloc is only committed to 18 months."

So make note, when you vote Liberal or NDP, you WILL BE voting for "The Coalition!"

Thanks to Joanne at Blue Like You for pointing this out on Twitter.

Bob

If there is an election..

Even if the Conservatives hoped for it, this will be an election forced by "The Coalition."

However watching Question Period after the March 23rd Conservative budget, I notice that surprisingly enough something is missing.  What's missing is Conservatives "Hedging their bets" in case the Budget actually passes.  What I mean is that the appearance is such that despite all the allegations that they put forward a budget to force an election, it seems that they would honestly rather see the House pass this budget rather than go to an election.

I don't think the Government is entirely happy with the budget, which will happen when you have 2 parties pandering for socialist programs, and the Bloc sitting with their hands out like entitled children. I don't think it would have mattered what was in the budget, because it was already decided (whether collectively or independently) by "The Coalition" that it would be defeated.

There is something we can do about it, stop voting for Fringe parties (NDP and Bloc). That would force the Fringe candidates to choose one of the parties that can actually make a difference.

Bob

Blocs block more representatives for growing Provinces

I have to start by saying I don't remember how a Provincial party like the Bloc ever even gained 1 seat in a Federal forum like the House of Commons.  This becomes even more of a concern as I watch the Bloc debate on bill C-12 (Democratic representation), as they are staunchly opposed to allowing the rest of the Country to have adequate and proper representation. Why?  Because with growth in the rest of the Country, and with proportionate representation in the House, it means that The Bloc will have less ability to bully the Government to force them to hand over more money only to Quebec.

I don't think Quebec realizes how much of a bunch of spoiled child this makes them all seem. The bloc will never form a Government, for that matter they never want to. All they really want is to pillage the rest of the Country for their own gain.  The Bloc simply has NO BUSINESS having any seats in a Federal Platform like the House of Commons, because they have NO interest in ANY OTHER Province than their own (which would be better served by electing representatives from one of the 2 major parties that CAN Govern our Country.)

This bill should pass, because it goes directly to equal and proportionate representation for all Canadians.

Bob

A "what the heck?" moment.

Sandy Crux of "Crux of the Matter" blog came across a facebook page, under causes, which has Amnesty International running an "Anti-Harper" campaign (with a donate button and everything!)

What on earth would prompt this? Why would an organization, worthy of respect for assisting with human rights for those that have them oppressed, suddenly "sell" themselves to partisan politics?

One reason could be they need to maintain their base, which is hyper-Liberal College students, by pandering to their ideologies. Although as Sandy points out there may be other nefarious and selfish reasons than just ideology for it. Either way I think they have lost a certain credibility by "choosing sides".

Bob

Quebec freeloading.

Apparently Quebec has some sort of problem with the way the rest of the Country sees them as Freeloaders. I guess if they would learn to not "expect" constant handouts, that perception might change. (And at this point I won't go into how the Bloc has no business in Federal Politics, but maybe some time later.)

Check out the National Post Article HERE. As well as Dr. Roy's BLOG (is that pronounced "Wah", or is it still "Roy" out here in the West? lol)

Bob

Too funny not to share!!

"Michael Ignatieff, truly, is the George Costanza of Canadian Politics" from Hunter Thompson at "Searching for Liberty". :-)

Bob

The facts on Michael Ignatieff's immigrant family.

Royalty always seems to believe they are entitled to power, and when you come from deposed royalty that's what you quest for. Here is a little look at the "poor immigrant" Ignatieff family which came knocking on Canada's door to ease their burdens.

I don't even think this would have become an issue, if Ignatieff hadn't brought it up himself.

Bob

Tory's lead in Honesty polling

Not surprising though after watching the desperate antics of the Coalition trying to build Conservative scandals where there are none.
The Montreal Gazette reports.

And on NDP Pat Martin's ridiculous behaviour in committee; Hunter at Climbing out of the dark, graciously took the time to go through the footage and post some here.

And lastly the Toronto Sun looks to be breaking Michael Ignatieff's "exit plan" to work at the UofT if the whole "Prime Minister" thing doesn't work out.

Bob

Liberals misplaced priorities.

With all the Hubbub from Michael Ignatieff over "how much new justice incentives are going to cost", then promising $180 Million in funding for a recreational facility for Quebec city, it is no wonder we have the level crime that we do. Once again Liberal priorities are misplaced, being more concerned about their own personal advancement than our safety.

Here's the article.

Iggy's Liberal policy: tax you and promise it to Quebec.

It appears that this is what Michael Ignatieff feels it will take to "win" (aka buy) the top spot in Canadian politics. http://bit.ly/dPKMlJ

To me this speaks volumes of the desperation the Liberals must be feeling, especially when they aren't in the position the feel rightly belongs only to them, which is The Government. Thankfully it also screams to everyone at the lengths they will take to make sure they get what they want, and to make sure that you and I pay for it.

I really think this is going to hurt the Liberals even within their own support base. Any rational person sees this for exactly what it is, and how do you support someone willing to pick the pockets of all Canadians to send it to only one Province for a recreational facility? Federal politics revolves around all of Canada and not just Quebec, and any party willing to loot the rest of us for their own gain needs to be sent packing.

Bob

Regina Extension cord bylaw.

I was upset about getting a ticket for a bylaw infraction, and wrote a letter about it to the Leader Post here in Regina Saskatchewan. My letter went like this;
BEWARE! Winter parking on the street means no power for you!
Those of us forced to park on the street overnight in winter are going to need stout vehicles, because in Regina it's actually a ticket-able offense to run an extension cord across a sidewalk to plug your car into! What an absurd bylaw to have, let alone to enforce, in a Saskatchewan winter!

The explanation I received from the Bylaw division was that “it is a trip hazard, and the city would be liable for it”. Now I understand that the city wants to protect itself from liability, but with reasonable measures (such as a bright yellow extension cord, and a contentiously cleaned sidewalk, there should be no reason that even an infirm individual will not recognize and be able to avoid this sometimes very necessary and insignificant “hazard”.

That's not the worst of it unfortunately; my first issue is how the officer (Badge No: C504) decided that rather than come to the house and inform us we were in violation of a city ordinance, and give us the opportunity to comply, he UNPLUGGED the vehicle and THEN wrote the ticket! (Obviously we were home, which of course we would have complied to!) My next issue is that this Officer failed to give a ticket for the EXACT same infraction, to the house right next door to us (not to mention any number of other offences occurring on the street, at the very moment he was issuing my ticket!)

Now of course we all feel like a victim when we get a ticket we don't want (and in this case weren't even aware that it was an infraction), but it's even worse when you are singled out among many of the same infractions occurring in the exact same single block street. If the officer was there to strictly enforce the bylaw (rather than give the person a chance to comply with it), then why was I the only one ticketed for that on my block?

My question is simple; What do you do in winter in Regina to keep your car running, if you have to park on the street?

It's really hard to “heart” Regina with bylaws like this enforced without the application of common sense and common courtesy.

I was also interviewed by CBC, Global, and CTV about this issue, and in an online poll conducted on the CBC article it seems that 85% of the voters agree that this should either not be a law, or the officer should have used judgement on whether or not it was dangerous.

I have started an online petition to start change, located at; PETITION.

I would love to hear ideas on how we can keep pedestrians safe, and at the same time accommodate the necessity of Saskatchewan residents to plug their vehicles in when they must park on the street.

Bob

Yes they are serious too!! And that's what's so scary!

Obviously I don't post a lot on here, because I honestly (and literally) find "career politics" like we have in Canada more often than not petty, stupid and depressingly upsetting no matter which party Governs. I do also find that the majority of idiocy can be found in the left, which include Libs, NDP and most definitely the Bloc.

I'm going to post the opening Question from Michael Ignatieff to the Prime Minister in Question period from October 20th 2010.

"Mr. Speaker, on Monday at Our Lady of Lourdes high school in Guelph, a young student named Diane asked me a question, “We are caring for my grandmother at home. If elected, what would you do to help people who are caring for the sick and elderly at home?” I replied to Diane, “Our answer is the family care plan”. The Conservatives' answer is, “Use your vacation time”.

How can the Prime Minister justify tax breaks for profitable corporations instead of helping families like Diane's?" (transcript here; under "Government priorities".)

My initial thought was "Huh????? You really don't see the need to help keep companies profitable in a recession so that Diane's parents still may have a job which helps them be able to take care of their Grandmother?" (And yes it's a long sentence, but I just don't think with punctuation.)

So the question here is simple, is it easier to tax, or to "un-tax"? Or an even more relevant question would be, Do we want jobs to continue, or are we okay forcing business closures by raising taxes in "tough economic times"?

I like Ignatieff's ideas for monetary support for families caring for sick and disabled, however I also see it as reckless taxation and spending at a time where creating and keeping jobs alive is important for everyone. (Which I believe has been a key issue for the Liberals against the Conservatives in past attacks as well. So this begs the question "what's changed the liberals minds?", has the Government fiscal responsibility turned the tides on the 21st century's great depression enough to make the Liberals feel their pockets are once again full enough to make pricey promises to the public?)

Bob

A short assessment on the reactions to the Federal Budget.

I only have a few short words of assessment on each of the Political Parties after having the latest budget come down.


Conservative;
Tightening belts in your own house is still necessary. Show Canadians which politicians are there for the people over themselves by introducing a pay cut for ALL MP's and Senators.

Liberals;
That's all you have to offer, "we will insist on frequent updates"? Quite posturing and try being there for Canadians with logical, acceptable non partisan ideas and bills.

NDP;
Thank you for choosing to be unsupportive of a stimulus budget before you even see the document, because that means you have no interest in doing what is in anyone's interest but your own advancement.

Bloc;
If you can't think of Canada first, and Quebec as an equal part thereof, you have no place in Canada's House of Commons.


My advice to the average Canadian; KNOW what's going on in politics, because if you don't these politicians will lead you around by a nose ring because of their "snake oil salesman" smooth talking.

Bob

New leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

Michael Ignatieff is the newly "crowned" interim leader of the Liberal party. So how was Mr. Ignatieff chosen to lead the Liberal Party? Was it by a democratic vote of all the party members? Not at all, Mr. Ignatieff was hand picked by 800 higher up members (out of approximately 60 000 total). This minority manipulation forced out his only opposition (Mr. Bob Rae) by yet another subversion of democracy, where instead of following common democratic processes of “One member, One vote” which is the BACKBONE of true democracy, the privileged few made the choice for everyone.

These proceedings beg the question; how do Canadians trust a party that holds true democracy in contempt if it gets in the way of them getting into a seat of power?

There is no way anyone can trust the Liberal Party after the clear disregard for the Voice of the Canadian people. This can be easily seen in the fallacy of the “62% majority” for “the coalition”, because “the coalition” didn’t run in the last Canadian election. This “fudging” of the numbers is a pretty obvious attempt to confuse Canadians and justify a non democratic take over of Canadian Parliament. If “the coalition” had run as a valid party on the ballot and won 62%, it would be ONLY THEN which they could be considered as a legitimate Government.

Welcome to Liberal political games.

Bob

How I see the arguments thus far.

The coalition;
1. We can't work with the (duly elected) Government because they don't listen to us.
2. The Government didn't get 60(ish)% of the votes which makes us the Government if we want it.
3. The Government is not working fast enough to get a financial stimulus package together.
4. We do not want public funds taken away from our parties to help us in elections.
5. The Government was ok with the Bloc voting with them in the past.
6. All the Prime Minister wants to do is hold on to his job and doesn't care about those losing theirs.
7. This Government has lost the confidence of this house.
8. The Conservatives attacked woman's equal rights.
9. The Canadian people have lost confidence in this Government and want this Coalition.


The Government;
10. Separatists should not hold a controlling position over any Government of Canada.
11. If you don't have a mandate by the majority of the electorate, you have no right to Govern.


My break down;
1. This is simply an excuse to justify a coalition and grab power in an undemocratic manner.

2. If this is truly the case we will really never see a "Minority" Government again. This is also an excuse to "fudge" the numbers in their favour, none of the individual parties got enough of the vote to form a Government therefore the Majority of votes went to what is supposed to be the Government of Canada.

3. Here is a real kicker. How much time is "the coalition" wasting in their attempts to "steal" control of the Country which they could be using to work with the "duly appointed" Government to further this goal? Instead what they are doing with this "coalition" is prolonging the agony of those that are waiting for the help that the "coalition" says they so urgently need.

4. Wow. Now this seemed to be the catalyst that "broke the camel's back", however it appears that this coalition came together long before anything cam about in the House because something like this doesn't come together over night (let alone in 6 weeks, which makes me think this was in planning even before the election.) Reducing or removing public funds from elections is not only a GREAT idea but a revolutionary and necessary policy, this would reduce the debt load of "average Canadians" thereby making that money available for other programs and incentives like a stimulus package.

5. Well Duh. The Bloc can only vote one of two ways, and if they sided with the Conservatives it is something that is inevitable. HOWEVER to form an allegiance with a non-federal party which is completely based on the dissolution of the Country we all Love is UNCONSCIONABLE!

6. Who is really worrying about their own political advancement here? The logic of argument is invisible, because while the coalition tries to take the power unscrupulously which they couldn't get legitimately they are neglecting the very people they are saying they want to protect! They are so focused on the rhetoric that they are fighting for the economy, that they are missing the damage they are causing through an unstable Government in Canada.

7. The problem here is that even though the House says they have lost confidence in the Government, the PEOPLE gave a CLEAR indication of who they thought was most suitable to run our Country at this time. The way I see the "coalition" formation was not simply because they had lost confidence in the Government, but as a backdoor way to steal the power they were too weak to take during a legitimate election. The timing really says it all, they didn't even wait until a budget was tabled before they said that they wanted to take over as a "coalition".

8. I didn't catch all the hubub behind this one, but this seems like an inflammatory accusation to create bad press rather than a legitimate problem for a 21st century Government.

9. The ONLY way that the "coalition" can use this argument with any validity is if they were to take their "coalition" party to the people of Canada in another election. If they use this without winning a majority election they have no right to say this or use this as an argument in any way!


10. This is pretty self explanatory; to have a Non federal, separatist, anti-Canadian group propping up a Government through an agreement, you open yourself up to manipulation and blackmailing by them to further their agenda to break up our Nation. (Personally I think for those in Quebec who want to separate, feel free to buy a ticket to France and separate yourselves from us. Quebec is Canadian property, and you are Canadian citizens.)

11. Even though this coalition is "technically" legal, no self respecting Canadian would stand by for a coalition giving the balance of power to a non federal, separatist party. And if this "coalition" wants to be the legitimate Government of Canada, we need to go back to the polls with a new "coalition" party to replace Liberal, NDP and Bloc.

Don't Steal My Vote!!

Disgustedly,
Bob

"Freedom is when the people can speak, democracy is when the government listens.
Alastair Farrugia."

Why to NOT support the latest "Coalition of the willing"

A very succinct, well thought out, and rational opposition to support the Lib, NDP and BLOC coalition.

"I think the mudslinging may be a result of the passion and anger generated by the Coalition option.
I for one can think of a number of reason's not to support it.
1) Canada has been, for the past number of years, a G20 leader in the Banking and Economic Policy Issues, which is evidenced by the "Canada last in - first out" results on the Global Downturn. Canada has been seen to be the example of prudent fiscal managment and policy and now, with the recent Coalition attempts, will not longer be the leading example. It will not make sense to the Markets, or our G7 & G20 friends, for us to change course when we are seen as the best at the helm. The number of stimulus packages introduced in the US have not resulted in the desired result and the prudent approach would see that Canada first knows what the new Administration in the USA is preparing to do, for any Governmental approaches to combat a world economic downturn, have to be implimented by the entire world economy or esle you are left with the "leaky bucket" syndrome. IE If there are holes in the bucket you can not pour the water(funds) in to fill the bucket.
2) The people of Canada have not had a chance to endorse the Coalition Spending & Economic Strategy. The details and costs of the Coalition Plan are unknown to the Canadian public and letting a plan go ahead without a clear endorsement from the people is not good for Canada and the democratic process. None of the Opposition Parties have campaigned on any of the Plan that they propose. Only the Convervatives are doing exactly what they said they would do.
3) Canada would be seen by the world as an embarassment and a backwards nation with a Separatist party being named within the governing body. This I fear will lead to further alienation of the West and the bolstering of the western separatist movement as well.
4) The non confidence motion is not substantially different then the Throne Speech that was passed in the house and therefore points to motivation of the Opposition Parties, which is to say, not in the best interests of Canada, but in the best interests of self.
5) All the CFA's and Economists agree that there is no amount of money that would fix and/or bail-out the auto industry and therefore the "Stimulus" package is not good for Canada.
6) The current Conservative Government is following standard operating procedures to first look internal for cost savings and then timed stimulus to gain the best effect. The GDP results released yesterday show that Canada's earlier(over the last 3 years) economic policies have helped Canada calm the storm that is facing the rest of the globe. This storm has affected the rest of the globe up to 14 months earlier, and much deeper than it is affecting our economy and thus it is prudent to not to change the captain at the helm right before his experience is needed most.
IF the coalition does proceed, and I hope and pray it does not, I suspect that the next election will result in the NDP getting wiped out and the bloc gaining even more seats from the Liberals in Quebec. The worst case scenario is that after the Liberals have set a precedent with joining with the Bloc, and again alienating the West, is that the Conservatives join with the Bloc to separate the Western Provinces and Quebec from Canada."

(Unknown author)


Bravo,
Bob

The newest "Coalition of the willing"

This new "coalition of the willing"; None of these parties were voted into a government position, and even though the Conservatives may not have the confidence of the House, it is even more obvious that the the Canadian people don't have confidence in the parties that do not form the Government. The ONLY people that have the right to choose which party will make up the Government are the Canadian voters. I know most people don't want to go to another election, but this should be the only way that the Government changes hands. (An excerpt from a letter I wrote to CBC politics).

Well how about them apples, a coalition government.

I'm curious how do those that voted Bloc and NDP feel about having your votes count as Liberal?