smoke gets in my eyes

2009-12-10T04:29:00.001-08:00

Despite our esteemed MPP's protest to the contrary, Ontario's new Green Energy Act makes sure that no environmentally sensitive area of the province is off limits to industrial wind turbine development. Which must come as a surprise to those of us who have lived through all the previous environmental restrictions of the Oak Ridge Moraine Act. This is the "New" Green.

Even Fairies Cannot Hide

2009-08-05T08:00:00.001-07:00

I appears that the Fairywriter has disappeared. But even fairies cannot hide from Google

Fairy Tales

2009-08-04T23:49:00.001-07:00

...the newspaper reporter never asked me about an election or about anything else related to the Prime Minister. She had no, repeat, no questions, so, at least not of the national scene. She asked something about a local community college. But that was it. And then I wake up this morning and here they've got me singing the praises, great rhetoric. Well, let me tell you, as much as I like to think that every speech is a good one, they've obviously never heard me when I've gotten going as we have. And so, they put it, all this great rhetoric. I was reading a grocery list of, of projects for the island. So anyway, this whole thing is manufactured. And I was thinking so much about you today as I read the paper and the brilliant column you wrote in last week's Sun about wafergate in New Brunswick, where the editors made it up. It had nothing to do with what the reporter said. And so, I'm saying to myself, my God, this is like the virus or something. It's creeping across provincial borders. Now all of a sudden the Charlottetown paper can't just report the news. They've got to make it up.
Hey Guardian, when your reporter calls herself Fairywriter, it is possible that she might be making stuff up!

H/T SDA

The Drinking 10 Percenters

2009-04-15T18:32:00.001-07:00

According to the University of Victoria's Centre for Addiction Research, More than half of all the alcohol consumed in Canada is being downed by just a 10th of the population.

According to the CBC,Canadians consumed $18 billion in sales at beer and liquor stores in 2007. Not included here is the amount of liquor purchase at licensed establishments.

That works out, for that 10 percent, to about $300 per person.($18bil/2)/3mil

Yet according to that same CBC article, the average per person spent on alcohol in 2007 was $667. The CBC report does not define whether the 'per person' is spread across the entire population or just those persons legally permitted to purchase alcohol.

Obviously, alcohol sales in Canada is tightly regulated by the provincial governments to prevent underage Canadians from purchasing alcohol.

Statistics Canada likes to confuse the issue more and splits the census numbers at age 15. In my initial look at the 2006 census data, I was unable to determine the actual over 18, 19, population in
Canada. But assuming there are 21 million Canadians over the age of 15, if we deduct the 10% of Canadian that consume half the liquor, we end up with a per capita purchase of of $500.
($18bil/2)/(21mil-3mil)

So, to conclude, most of us are buying a lot of drinks for the few.

Or the CBC is out to lunch. Drinks all around!

Or the CARBC have been drinking the MADD kool-aid.

Cheers!

Your Morning CAFE

2009-04-08T06:39:00.001-07:00

When CAFE gets to 35mpg, Government Motors will need something else to peddle to keep the Silverado cash cows rolling out the door.

Even if you give PUMAs away, a 20mpg truck suddenly becomes a 40mpg miser. On paper, anyway, which is all that counts….Corporate Average Fuel Economy.

Next up…bicycle racks classified as fuel economy devices.

On the Job Training

2009-01-23T16:53:00.001-08:00

After all, Bush was the Doofus....

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
Now, here's audio sound bites. This is Obama. He has to ask Greg
Craig, the White House counsel, for help here, signing the closing of
Gitmo executive order.

OBAMA:
(chiseling in marble sound effect) In order to effect the appropriate
disposition of individuals currently detained by the Department of
Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly to close the detention facility
at Guantanamo consistent with the national security and foreign policy
interests of the United States and interests of justice, I hereby
order. And we then we will then, uh, provide the process whereby
Guantanamo will be closed no later than, uh, one year from now. We
will be... Uhhh.... Ummm.... Is there a separate executive order, Greg,
with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that
it, eh, uh, what we're doing?

CRAIG: We'll set up a process!

OBAMA: We will be, uh, setting up a process whereby this is going to be taking place.

RUSH:
By the way, we are etching his words. We're chiseling his words in
marble, since that's how CNN has portrayed the articulate
pronouncements of President Obama. "By the way, Greg, what are we
doing here? Separate executive order with respect to how we're going
to dispose of the detainees. Is that what we're doing?" "We will set up
a process! We'll set up a process. I'm sorry. I've also been asked
not to be so critical 'til Obama really messes up. I know he just
messed up, but I don't think some of the dingleberries in this country
quite understand how he screwed up yet, and if I didn't tell 'em, they
won't know. We're going to set up a process? Can I translate that?
How would you translate that, "We're going to set up a process for
dealing with the people that are there now"? (interruption) That's
exactly right: We don't have a clue what we're doing. This is the "we
don't have a clue" executive order. We don't have a plan. We don't
have a plan. We're going to take care of the plan during the next
year. Political.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
Here's one more audio sound bite from Obama. Now, this is just this
morning at the White House in the Oval Orifice, and Obama here is on
the task force that they're gonna use process to create to deal with
the detainees that are going to end up being released from Guantanamo
Bay. And once again, Greg Craig, the White House counsel, has to
explain it to Obama in the midst of Obama's announcement here. Greg
Craig, as you know, sometimes we don't know who he works for.
Sometimes it's the American government; sometimes it's the Cuban
government. I mean, he did represent the father (this means Castro) of
the young Elian Gonzalez, who Janet Reno eventually saw to it was
dispatched back to the slums and the authoritarian tyranny of Cuba.
Here is Obama announcing what they're going to do with the detainees.

OBAMA:
(chiseling in marble sound effect) What we're doing here is to set up a
special interagency task force on detainee disposition. They are going
to provide me with information in terms of how we are able to deal in
the disposition of some of the detainees that may be currently in
Guantanamo that we cannot transfer to other countries, who could pose a
serious danger to the United States, uh, but, uh, we cannot try because
of various problems related to evidence, uh, in a Article 3 court. So
this task force is going to provide us with, uh, a series of
recommendations on, uh, that. Is that correct, Greg?

CRAIG: That's right. And detainee policy going forward.

OBAMA: And detainee policy going forward so that we don't find ourselves in these kinds of situations, uh, in the future.

CRAIG: And there is clear guidance for the military as well.

OBAMA: And that we are providing clear guidance to our military in terms of having to do with it.

RUSH:
Unbelievable here! What am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to marvel
at this? Am I supposed to sit here and marvel at how this new teamwork
is taking place, about how the president is incorporating all these
people? It sounds to me like... You know, folks, this is not much
evidence to go on, but I'm sure we could find the audio sound bites of
me in the past saying, "You know, there's a part of me when I said I
was conflicted about Obama, I'm not sure what's going on. Does he just
want to be president with everybody else doing all the work and he gets
to just be the figurehead and play the big games?" I don't recall.
Honestly, I don't recall. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. But
somebody help me out here. Have we ever seen a president announce an
executive order and have to turn to his counsel to explain what the
hell the executive order is?

'Cause it's his order! He's the
president. It's his executive order, but then is it his executive
order? "Is that correct, Greg? This task force is going to provide us
with a series of recommendations? Is that correct, Greg?" "And
detainee policy going forward," and then Obama repeats it, "and
detainee policy going forward so that we don't find ourselves in these
kinds of situations in the future." Then Craig interrupts without even
being asked, "and there is clear guidance for the military as well."
And Obama says, "and we're providing clear guidance for our military in
terms of how to deal with this." What am I supposed to do? They
shoulda just put it on the prompter. They absolutely shoulda just put
it on the teleprompter, but then the press would report there was a
teleprompter. It's his executive order. And with Greg Craig in
there... Remember, Greg Craig also as he needed as Bill Clinton's lead
attorney during the impeachment proceedings.

That was after he
represented Castro and the father of Elian Gonzalez. Oh, this is...
You know, I so want my president to do the right thing and for our
country to succeed. This is not inspiring confidence. Is it?
(interruption) What do you mean, "he hasn't found his voice yet"? He
hasn't found his voice? This is the most articulate president we have
ever elected? I know that's what they said about Clinton when he
screwed up in the first two years, "He's still looking for his voice,
still searching." All right. I don't want to make too big a deal out
of it. I just don't recall a lawyer being in there, interrupting and
being asked for guidance on what the president's executive order. All I
can tell you, folks, is none of this that you heard has the slightest
thing to do with United States security.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
You know how I know it never happened that Bush had to turn to Cheney
or somebody and have the executive order he was signing explained to
him? You know how I know that? Because if it had happened we would
still be watching video of it today, because the whole template on Bush
was that he's stupid, that he's a blockhead, that he's an idiot, and we
would have seen that replayed over and over again. We would have had
stories, "Does Bush even run the administration?" 'Cause they thought
Cheney was running it all along anyway. So now here's Obama,
apparently not fully up to speed on what's happening with his own
executive orders. He has to turn to Greg Craig, who once was a lawyer
for Fidel Castro and Elian Gonzalez's dad in Cuba.

Have you
people seen the movie Blazing Saddles? Some of you youngsters out
there may not have seen Blazing Saddles, it's one of the funniest
movies ever, it's by Mel Brooks. You should go out there -- I know
some of you tightwads don't buy movies -- go out there and rent it.
Mel Brooks plays a bunch of characters, and one of the characters he
plays is Governor Le Petomane, and he's an absolute idiot. He's a
figurehead. All he cares about is the showgirl in the back room and
having some time with her after he finishes the so-called official
duties. Harvey Korman plays Hedley Lamarr, the chief of staff who's
constantly throwing official papers in front of Governor Le Petomane to
sign. He signs it, heads back to the showgirl. And, in fact, the movie
-- well, never mind. I'm not going to say more about it, but that's
what I thought I was watching. It's his executive order. I still
can't get over this.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I want to
go back and replay an audio sound bite. This is this morning in
Washington, the Oval Office, President Obama signing an executive order
calling for the closure of Club Gitmo within one year. Now, we will
not have the chisel sounds. We've already chiseled this bite in
marble, so you will not hear them here.

OBAMA: In order to
effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently detained by
the Department of Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly to close the
detention facility at Guantanamo consistent with the national security
and foreign policy interests of the United States and interests of
justice, I hereby order. And we then we will then, uh, the process
whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later than one year from now. We
will be... Uhhh.... Umm.... Is there a separate executive order, Greg,
with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that
it, eh, uh, what we're doing?

CRAIG: We'll set up a process!

OBAMA: We will be setting up a process, uh, whereby this is going to be taking place.

RUSH:
Greg, is there going to be another executive order? What are you guys
doing back there, did you write another executive order, or is this
it? That's Greg Craig, the White House counsel who represented the
father of Elian Gonzalez and Fidel Castro of Cuba. Also represented
Bill Clinton in the impeachment hearings. I didn't play this to once
again highlight Obama not knowing what's going on with his own
executive order. What I did was to illustrate it's not very FDR-like,
and I wanted to make mention of this for those in the Obama
administration monitoring this program. What you did today, purely
political, not oriented toward the security of this country. Do you
people in New York feel safer now? I mean you may like your country a
little more, but do you feel safer here? We're going to close a prison
for terrorists in the interests of national security and justice?
(laughing) And the foreign policy interests of the United States.
Anyway, FDR would not do this. Remember, FDR put Japanese citizens in
the internment camps! He did what he had to do in time of war to
protect this country. This is not FDR-like. And I had to make that
observation.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
Apparently, ladies and gentlemen, I was not the only one to notice that
Obama's executive orders that he signed today seemed to be executive
orders he hadn't seen yet. He's asking Greg Craig, (paraphrasing)
"What are we doing here, Greg?" Greg Craig says, "Here's what we're
doing," and Obama repeats it as though it's his own words. This
afternoon on Fox News Channel Jon Scott talked to Democrat strategist
Bob Beckel about Obama's signing of the executive orders today and the
confusion with the media. Now, I don't know what confusion with the
media there was, because I wasn't there, but here's the question that
Jon Scott asked: "If you were running the media show at the White
House, would you call somebody on the carpet? I mean you want the
president to look presidential, right?"

BECKEL: Yeah, I suspect
that this is gonna lead to a discussion here with a few people. Look,
for people who pulled off -- just think about what they pulled off at
the Democratic National Convention, I mean these are pros, and they're
gonna -- they can't make little mistakes, 'cause we're going to talk
about it. So I suspect that there's going to be a few heads that are
going to roll and I also suspect you're not going to see many missteps
after this.

RUSH: I'm not sure what he's talking about here. I
don't know what the misstep with the media was, unless it is Obama not
knowing what his executive orders said. But maybe media there was a
media screw-up in there, maybe people didn't get in there, I have no
clue what this is about. I hope to find out. It was a media issue
yesterday. This says it's about the executive order. (interruption)
Well, I know about that, the controversy yesterday was the White House
released photos of the finger and Rahm Emanuel in the Oval Office, and
the Drive-Bys are upset, they didn't run the picture because they want
their own photographers in there and they weren't allowed in their to
take their own. They had to run the White House picture. Of course the
Drive-Bys, occasionally they'll stand up for themselves, even when it's
Obama, "We're not going to run your propaganda. We didn't take the
picture. It's a White House picture. We want our own picture. We run
the propaganda around here. We want our cameras in there to record the
propaganda." Well, he cut his finger off, didn't he, or do something?
He cut his little finger off to show toughness or something. He cut it
and didn't get it looked at and it was getting ugly looking out there,
had to go chop it off, in a show of great toughness. Yeah, like the
Yakuza guys, like the Japanese Mafia. Exactly, Snerdley, exactly.

So
I don't think Beckel here is talking about -- I think we still are the
only ones talking about the fact that Obama had no idea what executive
orders he was signing and what they said.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
Now, the White House press briefing is still going on. Robert Gibbs,
this is the first official press briefing, and this guy, by the way,
the media sang this guy's praises during the campaign. "This Robert
Gibbs, whoa, he's going to be the best secretary of the press that
we've ever had up there, this guy knows his stuff, he knows what he's
doing." Here's just a sample of what's happened up there. Boiled down
Q&A, Major Garrett of Fox News to Robert Gibbs. Question: "So if
we capture Osama Bin Laden, we have to use only the Army Field Manual
guidelines for interrogations? Because when he announced the closing
of Gitmo today, the Army Field Manual will be the only source used for
interrogations." Robert Gibbs, who is said to run rings around every
other press secretary, said, well, let me check with Greg Craig for
guidance on that for you. That's a little bit of my pay grade. He
didn't say that, but here's the thing about that. That is a great
question. If, when we capture Osama Bin Laden, which Obama's vowed to
do, then where will we put him?

So many people wish they
were me. So many people talking in my ear in the midst of brilliant
analysis, forcing me to stop and make a point that was about to roll
off my tongue anyway. Obama has said in the past that capturing Bin
Laden was the only definition of success. However, after he won the
election and during the transition, he said, (paraphrasing) "Well, he's
sorta disfigured out there, he's not really that big a factor.
Capturing him is no longer our definition of success." I mentioned
that back when it happened, I did the sigh and the ho-hum and will any
of the human beings disguised as amoebas understand it? Point is, if
we have a chance to capture him, Snerdley, we're going to. If some
Meals on Wheels program in Afghanistan happened to run in to Osama,
we're going to capture him. Maybe the Meals on Wheels program won't
capture him, maybe the homeless outreach program -- I don't know.
Whoever captures him, if we capture him, where are we going to try
him? And where we going to put him? 'Cause all this stuff is being
shut down.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: No, Snerdley, Robert
Gibbs was not part of the Bee Gees. It was Gibb. It was Robin. It
was Maurice and Barry Gibb. No S on there. They lived in Miami for a
while, and they had a brother Andy who had a couple of hits. He
unfortunately died. Gibb. This guy does not look like a Bee Gee.
This is the best press secretary, this is the sharpest press secretary,
this guy is going to run rings around McClellan, he's going to run
rings around Tony Snow, this guy is going to run rings around Dana
Perino, this guy was sharp during the campaign. What about capturing
Obama? "Oh, gotta consult with Greg on that."

Here, folks,
if you haven't it heard I'm sorry to belabor this, grab sound bite 31.
This sound bite is what has prevented me from getting to any other
sound bites today. I think I'm the only one here who has caught this.
I'm sure there will be others as the day goes on. This is Barack
Obama, this is the president of the United States announcing his --
capital H, capital I, capital S -- his executive order this morning.

OBAMA:
In order to effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently
detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly
to close the detention facility at Guantanamo consistent with the
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and
interests of justice, I hereby order. And we then we will then
provide, uh, the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later
than, uh, one year from now. We will be... Uhhh.... Ummm.... Is there
a separate executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to
dispose of the detainees? Is that it, eh, uh, what we're doing?

CRAIG: We'll set up a process!

OBAMA: We will be setting up a process, uh, whereby this is going to be taking place.

RUSH:
What am I supposed to do here? Am I supposed to pretend this isn't
happening, "Gee, I hope he figures this out and succeeds"? He's
reading his own executive order, and in the middle of it he stops to
ask his lawyer, Greg Craig, who represented Castro and the father of
Elian Gonzalez in Cuba, (doing Obama impression) "Greg, uh, how we
gonna handle the detainees here, what are we going to do?" "Oh, a
process is going to be worked out," and then Obama repeats it as though
nobody heard what Craig said. "We'll have a process, process going to
be worked out." The second executive order was basically the process,
which was a "we don't have a clue" executive order. Well, you know, I
think they probably think Greg Craig is so smart he could probably be
Treasury secretary, and he's paid his taxes. Look, play 32. It
happened again. It happened again in the next sound bite with the next
executive order. What am I supposed to do here?

OBAMA: What
we're doing here is to set up a special interagency task force on
detainee disposition. They are going to provide me with information in
terms of how we are able to deal in the disposition of some of the
detainees that may be currently in Guantanamo that we cannot transfer
to other countries, who could pose a serious danger to the United
States, uh, but we cannot try because of various problems related to
evidence, uh, in a Article 3 court. So this task force is going to
provide us with, uh, a series of recommendations on that. Is that
correct, Greg?

CRAIG: That's right. And detainee policy going forward.

OBAMA: And detainee policy going forward so that we don't find ourselves in these kinds of situations, uh, in the future.

CRAIG: And there is clear guidance for the military as well.

OBAMA: And that we are providing clear guidance to our military in terms of how to deal with it.

RUSH:
I'm speechless. I'm just dumbfounded. Two executive orders in a row,
he doesn't know what's in them, gotta turn to Craig Greg. Craig tells
him and Obama repeats it as though nobody can hear it. See, I thought
Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. He's supposed to be
smarter than Greg Craig. He taught constitutional law up there at the
University of Chicago, right next door to Bill Ayers. Yeah, you would
think he'd be pretty good at this legal stuff. He's an author. He
wrote his own books. Ahem. He didn't know what was in at least two of
his executive orders today. What am I supposed to do? Am I not
supposed to mention this? "Give him a chance, Rush. Wait 'til he
really screws up. Give him a chance. We all want the country to
succeed." Well, Obama's policies succeeding do not mean success for
the country, and that's the bottom line. I want Obama's policies to
fail. That will equal success for the country. So, see, the process
here, the process was always the issue, so they say they're going to
shut Guantanamo in a year, and they don't tell us the process, cause
they don't have a plan!

I'll believe they close it in a year
when they do anyway. But doesn't matter folks because I have adapted
as the epitome of capitalism, the government has thrown me a curveball
and I have adapted. I haven't asked for a bailout, I haven't gone to a
lawyer, I haven't filed suit. I have simply ordered my marketing
managers of the EIB merchandise store to come up with a new line of
Club Gitmo merchandise, a new logo, a swimming pool with a diving board
-- water and a board -- and a new tag line on each piece of
merchandise: "When America Was Safe." We're working on that new
merchandise line even now, a teachable moment.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:
Here it is, ladies and gentlemen, the question and answer. It was Major
Garrett, Fox News, talking with the new press secretary better than
anybody's ever done the job, Robert Gibbs.

GARRETT: Just so the
American people have an understanding: if, for example, US Forces were
to capture Osama Bin Laden or someone less well known but of
operational significance, are they to understand, the American people,
that the field manual only will be the interrogation method used to
interrogate a target as valuable potentially as Osama Bin Laden, or
someone of that operational significance?

GIBBS: Let me get some guidance from, uhhhhh, from Greg and members of the NSC.

RUSH:
Translation: "I don't know. They haven't told me. Obama doesn't know
either. I gotta go ask Greg Craig. We'll have Greg Craig get back to
you on this." I mean, Obama didn't even know. He had to ask Greg Craig
during the ceremony. "What you are asking me for? How do you expect me
to know if Obama didn't know?"

END TRANSCRIPT

A year to define The Process planning team.
A year to define The Process.
A year to get Congress to approve The Process.
A year to enact The Process.

Then Gitmo can be closed.

Obama will still be explaining in 2011 why Guantanamo is still open

Welcome to da 'hood!

2009-01-15T19:24:00.001-08:00

Where was Hillary Rodham born and raised?

2009-01-02T17:24:00.001-08:00

Climate scientists: it's time for 'Plan B' - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

To summarize, man-made attempts to reduce man-made CO2 are failing. So now man-made efforts to reduce natural CO2 must be developed.

Aside from the natural intervention from the Law of Unintended Consequence, these proposals are politically brilliant. Consider that the earth appears to be currently undergoing a short period of natural cooling. By applying even superficial man-made efforts to cool the planet, credit can be taken for reducing the long term effects of warming.

Just because our efforts to cool a warming globe have not met with success should not deter us from reaping the rewards of cooling a cooling earth.

Wearing thick socks today is a small price to pay for the opportunity to wear socks in the future.

Masters of the Oblivious

2008-12-19T07:52:00.001-08:00

The moment the Grand Coalition Grandé© was announced, the Liberal polling numbers went south and stayed there. So much for parliamentary global warming.

The Liberals quickly changed leaders. They simply brought the existing process to conclusion, much to nobody's surprise. Professor Dion's late contribution to Canada's Worst Video Award demonstrated that everything the Conservative attack ads had insinuated about his lack of leadership ability was, well.... totally true.

Of the two primary challengers for the job, Bob Rae's expressed support for the coalition, his failure to attract new memberships, and deep memories in Ontario for his time as premier was combining for a not so successful leadership bid.

Seizing the moment, the party pushed the Tourist Ignatieff into the top spot. The penniless, led by the unknown; a Pied Piper redux.

Liberals have a new leader but an empty bank account. Their fund raising is pathetic. The ever increasing voter subsidy is rewarded with ever decreasing votes. Just the threat to eliminate the subsidy is enough to panic their bankers. Their enthusiasm for Unite-the-Left has been a popular disaster.

And for all of this it is Stephen Harper who is perceived to be weak. Party knives are out. The Conservatives have lost Quebec.
Their management on the economy is dismal. They have abused Parliament. Fluffy bunnies and tiny kittens are starving.

Santa Stephen will not bring me a pony for Christmas. Boohoohhoo!

If an election was held today, Harper and the Conservatives would emerge with a large majority.

Liberals would be wiped out, west of the ~~Manitoba~~ Quebec border.

Merry Christmas to Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party. May the coming year be as successful as this last year has turned out.

(Oh and Jack Layton, all that coal Santa was to put in your stocking was returned due to the immediate CO² threat. The elves replaced it with hot air, something they knew you and the media masters would appreciate.)

What's your Credit Score?

2008-12-13T06:10:00.001-08:00

The media has failed to notice a secondary impact on Liberal party funding from the economic update.

By simply by suggesting the elimination of the voter subsidy, Harper
has effectively stopped the Liberals from BORROWING. They now have to
convince their banker that they can WIN an election in order to use the
voter subsidy as collateral.

Bankers can read polls, too.

I Welcome Our Iggy Overlord

2008-12-11T04:51:00.001-08:00

Irrespective of all the bravado on his first day, the question that remains is: Can the Liberals afford an election?

Apparently they could not afford a leadership race. The parliament crisis became a convenient smokescreen to resolve that issue. The May convention will simply disappear.

Ignatieff will continue to talk tough; talk is free and the media will soak it up and it should improve party donations. But come January 27th, if the poll numbers are still south, Iggy will vote with the Conservatives knowing full well that the Liberals cannot fund a quick election or ever win a later one after being carried by the coalition for any period of time.

Oopps

2008-12-10T15:17:00.001-08:00

In my previous post I mistakenly transcribed an interview between Mike Duffy and Tom Clark. My bad, the actual interview was between Mike Duffy and Ken Shaw. My apologies to both tom Clark and Ken Shaw.

The Bottom Line: "Liberals couldn't fund it, even if they wanted to."

2008-12-09T19:28:00.001-08:00

Mike Duffy's comments on Bob Rae dropping out of the Liberal leadership race....

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip120231#clip120231

Tom Clark and Mike Duffy on CTV News at 6:00;

Tom Clark: I know Bob Rae did the math, he knew that he could not win, but when he believes in something he speaks so eloquently, so passionately about it, yesterday arguing so vociferously about the need for grassroots democracy, about the party members picking the party leader. Today, exit stage left?

Mike Duffy: The Nation executive said "OK, Bob, yes we'll have a vote of riding presidents and so on and we will do it next Wednesday or Thursday". So there was no time for Bob Rae to go out coast to coast and meet all kinds of grassroots liberals and bring them on side, no time to sell memberships; a big part of his winning strategy, had he had four or five months to do it, was bring new people in, environmentalists, social activists, trade unionists, to bring them into the Liberal tent because he is a popular figure with those people, and have them become Liberals and vote for him. He didn't have the time to do that, so he recognized today he better get out.

Clark: One of things he spoke to the media today about, and I'm sure you heard it before, but he reiterated that regardless of what is in the budget on Jan 26th, he wants it voted down. I've heard same thing from NDP, but is that really the message the coalition wants to put out because then it looks like it's only about grabbing power, and then, by the way, is there any point in the Government consulting the Oppositon for budget input, when that is the answer?

Duffy: Well, the Prime Minister said this afternoon he want to get input, particularly from Liberals, on the budget, and the reason Bob Rae is so hard in favour of getting in to this deal with the coalition, and he signed the paper, was that he was hoping some of those NDPers would come across and vote for him as Liberal party leader. Now that he is no longer in the leadership race I think you'll see Michael Ignatieff growing his own vote, and this whole thing about an election at the end of January, first of February, we've checked all the math: Liberals couldn't fund it, even if they wanted to. It's got to be at least six month down the road before they get their rebates from the federal government that they could consider going to an election.

So provoking a constitutional crisis really is all about the $1.95 subsidy, about returning to the government benches without spending any money, because the Liberals are broke. How desparate can you get?

Class Dismissed!

2008-12-08T18:13:00.001-08:00

So Liberals ditch one professor as leader but appear to be ready to hire another.

Academia rules.

They just have not got the tenure part sorted out quite yet.

The Liberal Dilemma

2008-12-07T18:07:00.001-08:00

They have no money to fight an election.

The coalition was a CHEAP solution. Roll right into government where the NDP and Bloc would quickly support stimulus to party funding. Elections are important, so all campaign expenses should be taxpayer funded. Of course. Leaders are important, so .......

They have a rigid set of rules to determine leadership.

The Liberals committed under their constitution to a leadership
convention in May. I read somewhere that the delegate list must be
closed four months prior to the convention. Thus any leadership
contender must be declared by the end of December. No one could foresee fighting an election and leadership race concurrently. Modifications to those rules in the middle of a leadership race become part of the battle.

The current leadership race has become a cage match between Ignatief and Rae.

Think poor Stephane is simply caught in the middle of the leadership
race?

Picture Iggy whispering in one ear "Go, for the love of all
saints, Go!" and Bob in the other "Stay, for the love of Canada, Stay!"

Wonder why he cannot get a video out on time? "Go!", "Stay!", "Go!", "Stay!"

Drives poor Kyoto crazy.

As long as the Liberals cannot decide how to end this race, Dion is going nowhere.

Fighting an election while conducting a leadership battle would be a divisive.

They face a budget vote in early February. Canadians are making it
perfectly clear that a coalition government is not an alternate option.
Defeating the current government will force an election.

If they
manage to pick an "interim" leader by January, then they face potential
election in March. Picture campaigning with one interim leader while
the official leaders are campaigning for a convention vote in May.The
media would have a field day bouncing every campaign promise of the
'other' three leaders. Voters would be understandably confused as to
who is actually speaking for the Liberals.

If they pick one of
the three current candidates, then that individual could be considered
to have the inside track. The other two would be irresistibly drawn to
spin every announcement. Do we think this would work any better?

Back
in October, none of this mattered. Dion was considered irrelevant to
the leadership process. When the coalition plan surfaced last week,
Dion became a big deal, primarily because Canadians stood up to
criticize the coalition. We had made it clear that Dion was not to be
trusted with the keys to 24 Sussex.

Layton's dance with the Devil.

As I have posted previously, the Magic 86 was toxic to Liberal ambitions. Slipping from Official Opposition to last place would create major image problems. They were drawn like moths to the flame.

All the Liberals would need to justify the coalition with the Bloc would be provocation from the Evil Conservatives. Harper's still 'Secret Agenda' always trumps the Bloc's open agenda, no?

Canadian are not happy with the coalition idea.

The media repeatedly tells us we do not want another election.

We are supposed to accept the Bloc because Quebecois are too sensitive to accept rejection.

We are told that the party leader who received the fewest voters ever for his party less than two month ago is now the right man for the job.

Who would predict that the bully who drove the Liberals into the arms of the socialists and separatists would be polling in majority territory never before seen. How fair is that?

Who would of guess ordinary Canadian would object so forcefully?

Mr Harper, my friend, on January 26th, feel free to introduce the most right wing budget ever imagined. A budget that would make Genghis Khan blush.

Then find me a Liberal that would have the guts to vote it down.

Memo To the ROC, from Ontario Part Deux

2008-12-05T11:17:00.000-08:00

COMPAS: CPC 51, LPC 20, NDP 10, BQ 8, GPC 6

48% have confidence in Stephen Harper as Prime Minister in the current economic climate compared to 14% for Michael Ignatieff in second place, 11% for NDP leader Jack Layton, 8% for Stephane Dion, 4% for Bob Rae, and 3% for Gilles Duceppe;

We remember

Feeling Lucky, Punks?

2008-12-05T11:12:00.001-08:00

New polls show huge Tory gains:

COMPAS: CPC 51, LPC 20, NDP 10, BQ 8, GPC 6

Ipsos: CPC 46, LPC 23, NDP 13, BQ 9, GPC 8

Ekos: CPC 44, LPC 24, NDP 15, BQ 9, GPC 8

Memo To the ROC, from Ontario

2008-12-05T08:09:00.001-08:00

There is a simple reason why the Conservatives currently poll 22 points ahead of the Liberals in Ontario.

It is not about Dion, who we just find irritating.

It is not really about the Bloc, who we dislike.

We remember Bob Rae.

Repeating the Mistakes of History....

2008-12-04T20:33:00.001-08:00

One message Canadians sent the Liberals on October 14th was they did not want Stephane Dion as
Prime Minister.

From Bourque

Ipsos: CPC 46, LPC 23, NDP 13, BQ 9, GPC 8

Ekos: CPC 44, LPC 24, NDP 15, BQ 9, GPC 8

Do we have to yell a little louder?

62 Percenter

2008-12-04T16:11:00.001-08:00

Jack Layton says 62% of Canadian did not vote for Stephen Harper.

Form Bourque

Ipsos: CPC 46, LPC 23, NDP 13, BQ 9, GPC 8

Ekos: CPC 44, LPC 24, NDP 15, BQ 9, GPC 8

Keep talking Jack.

Oh and in case your interested, I have some great swamp for sale.

Bwahahahaha!

Yes, There is a God

2008-12-04T09:46:00.001-08:00

Somewhere, Liberals are saying, Yes, there is a God!

Expect Dion to take a quick cold walk.

The Liberals will find an adult as interim leader.

They have six weeks to purge to mess they have created.

The rest of us will enjoy a politics free holiday season.

All I want for Christmas.....

2008-12-04T09:31:00.001-08:00

Weeee....no politics till January. Thank You Stephen Harper. Merry Christmas.

Any bets Stephane will take the cold Christmas walk?

Lights! Camera! Actio...err...where's Dion?

2008-12-03T18:52:00.001-08:00

Transcript of missing footage from Dions address to the Nation, found on the CTV studio floor

Anounce: Citizens, the Rt. Honourable Stephanie Dion, Ready to Leed!

"wait...lets start over..."

Honourable Citizens, the Rt. Honourable Stephanie Dion,Ready to lede!

"no, no, start over"

Fellow Citizens, the Rt. Honourable Stephanie Dion,Ready to Lead!

"wait, wait, what do you mean lead? Like tomorrow, or next year, or last week? When do I start?"

Citizens, the Rt. Honourable Stephanie Dion,Ready to Lead Now!

"now? do you mean now today, or next week now?"

Magic 86

2008-12-02T16:28:00.001-08:00

The current constitutional challenge is all in the math.

As Parliament currently stands, the Liberals have 77 sitting members.

Combined, the NDP and Bloc total 86. If they unite, they become Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

Stornoway, baby!

Liberals cannot let that happen. At. any. cost.

Natural Governing Party. Bad being Official Opposition. Badder being also ran. All the perks, privileges, media attention, points of order gone.

Apparently the NDP/Bloc talks have been going on for awhile. Makes a good marriage to my mind. Seperatism is dead, Charest is cruising to a federalist majority, and Duceppe has been tagged to replace Marois at the helm of the PQ. The Bloc needs a new opportunity. Layton, on the other hand, would sell his grandmother to the devil for his 15 minutes. A match made in Heav, er, Hell.

But Liberals panicked when they realized the implication of these nuptuals.

Memo to the Governor General

2008-12-02T16:11:00.001-08:00

Governor General Jean,

You need to stop this government charade.

Seven weeks ago the country voted on a new Parliament. We elected a
minority Conservative government. You only delivered the Throne Speech
a few days ago. Your Loyal Opposition approved of that speech and the
plans contained within. Suddenly and without warning, the Opposition
has decided to withhold their confidence.

The country has not had an opportunity to evaluate the political,
economic, and social impact of the current goverment, or that of the
new coalition.

We face serious economic troubles. Serious trouble requires serious
decisions. Instead we have the clear losers of the peoples confidence
playing political gamesmanship.

No doubt under constitutional law you can let them form a government.
But is was only seven short weeks ago when the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc
had the opportunity to present their program and the votors turned it
down. Now, collectively and without the will of the people, they have
decided to impose their ideas on the country. The people deserve to
evaluate the implications of this imposed change.

Send this charade back to the people. If we agree that this sudden
coalition has merit to deal with issues the country faces, then let the
people elect this new government.

Audrey Naylor

2007-05-21T04:44:00.001-07:00

I am in Montreal, visiting my Mother who is ebbing away at the Lakeshore General. She is 83 years old. Cancer is not easy. The mind is sharp, the body fails.

Audrey was born in Wakefield, Yorkshire and married Frank Hare. They moved to Montreal in 1949 and raised four children, John, Linda, Martin, and Alan, in a God serving family. Frank passed away in 1986.

Dear Lord,

Take her quietly, quickly, as she has been your quiet and faithful servant for many years.

amen.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Ask and Ye Shall Receive

2007-04-16T16:40:00.001-07:00

In my last post, I asked the question of Garth Turner based on his admission " he has know about the Dion-May deal for awhile".

Does 'awhile' mean prior to joining the Liberal caucus?

Since the question was somewhat rhetorical, in that nobody but I reads this little ol' blog, it was a shock to get an response directly from the man himself.

No. 'Awhile', according to Garth, is only a few days.

The Red Green Show is therefore a recent work in process. Where it goes from here may or may not suggest anything about Liberal Party leadership direction. I will leave it for my only reader to enlighten me.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Red Green Show

2007-04-16T09:44:00.001-07:00

Remember that when Garth Turner was bounced from the CPC caucus, the buzz was he was going to join the Green Party? Well, he apparently did, via the Liberals. Turns out he has know about the Dion-May deal for awhile.

Does 'awhile' mean prior to joining the Liberal caucus?

So here is my prediction...that Ms. May will announce there will be no Green candidate in Halton next election.

I'm guessing that once the furor over Central Nova has subsided, Dion/May will announce additional "deals" to maximize the voting efforts of "environmentalists" in the coming election. Some ridings will get Green Liberals (May) and some will get Liberal Greens (Dion, perhaps Turner).

Dion has to turn his abysmal leadership position (strong negative) into a environmental coalition (strong positive) if he is to survive much longer.

All of this may hinge on whether the Liberal Party will follow or desert. Dion was not the choice of the party hierarchy in the first place, so whether they pull the plug or let this "Unite the Left" hijack continue is open speculation.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Red, White, or 649

2007-04-03T15:02:00.001-07:00

What McGuinty has actually done is accuse the convenience store owners of being criminals. Since the OLC, and by extension the Ontario Government, cannot be held responsible for a system that tolerates ticket theft, the problem must be thieves they signed up to steal, er, distribute tickets.

Of course, when you look at the ethnic background of the average convenience store operator, suggesting they are not honest businessmen is akin to racism.

One may surmise that if John Tory or Stephen Harper made those same comments, the MSM reaction would not be so neutral.

powered by performancing firefox

2007-03-06T09:03:00.000-08:00

Big Jim goes soft on banks

By KEVIN CONNOR, SUN MEDIA

Ottawa has gone soft in its pledge to end automated teller machine fees for Canadians, critics say. Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty met privately yesterday with the country's six top banks yesterday and asked them to consider reducing the service fees for low-income seniors, students and the disabled when they use a competing bank's ATM.

"(Flaherty) wimped out. I thought he was the tough guy ... the minister with all the power who was going to cut the fees across the board," said NDP finance c ritic Judy Wasylycia-Leis. "He said these fees were not tolerable or acceptable and were gouging Canadians. We expected him to give the banks a clear demand or say he was going to legislate change. I guess he isn't that committed to what he says."

Flaherty has said his goal is to ensure competition and choice, after the issue was keyed up last month by NDP Leader Jack Layton. Layton launched a scathing criticism of fees imposed on clients who withdraw money from their bank accounts at machines of other institutions, calling the levy of between $1.50 to $2.50 "very, very high -- and unfair." The NDP chief estimated the big banks rake in $420 million per year in ABM fees, as they accumulated a record $19 billion in total profit last year.

"I brought the concerns (to the six banks) that I expressed in Parliament, and I expect a response from some of the banks," the finance minister said yesterday in Toronto, adding that he didn't want to get involved in day-to-day policy making with the banks.

Right. Notice how the NDP generated this as an issue, but the Conservatives have co-opted the plan. What Jack Layton and Company planned to use as a campaign platform plank "Looking after the Little Guy" is now all about Jim Flaherty and the Conservatives. Ooops.

Flaherty has been getting all the press. When the banks give him even just a little concession, he and Stephen Harper will get all the credit. Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis can only cry "very, very high -- and unfair".

Politics is so unfair is it not?

powered by performancing firefox

Prediction Updates

2007-02-24T06:04:00.000-08:00
I made five predictions at the end of the Liberal Leadership Convention in December:

So here are some predictions as I suspect more than a few Liberals will be contemplating their futures over the Christmas Holiday:

Bob Rae will not run. Arlene will put a stop to it.

Bill Graham will be pushed aside to give Gerrard a safe seat.

Michael Ignatieff will not run. He lost the leadership this time around, and would have to compete with Justin next time.

Justin will run. duh!

Belinda will run. Daddy owns Aurora.

Bill Graham is not running.

Justin is running.

I love my crystal Ball!

powered by performancing firefox

Do As I Say

2007-02-24T05:51:00.000-08:00

David Suzuki says his Climate Tour is "Carbon Neutral"

That's right. They keep track of all the greenhouse gases they emit, put a dollar value on it and invest in a corresponding amount of "clean power" -- like windmills -- in developing countries.

With all due respect to Dr. Suzuki and his “carbon neutral” activity, that is not what he and his Kyoto message is about. Canada’s commitment to Kyoto requires a 30% reduction in green-house gas emissions from 1990 levels.

Is Suzuki suggesting that it is acceptable for him to pursue carbon “neutral” activities, but the rest of us will be required to meet significant carbon “reduction” targets, including additional targets that cover his “neutral” stand as part of the reduction?

How very noble of him!

powered by performancing firefox

When Two Plus Two Equals Three

2007-02-12T20:54:00.000-08:00

The Valentine's Day bouquet — the gift that every woman in Britain will be waiting for next week — has become the latest bête noire among environmental campaigners.

Latest Government figures show that the flowers that make up the average bunch have flown 33,800 miles to reach Britain. In the past three years, the amount of flowers imported from the Netherlands has fallen by 47 per cent to 94,000 tons, while those from Africa have risen 39 per cent to 17,000 tons.
Environmentalists warned that "flower miles" could have serious implications on climate change in terms of carbon dioxide emissions from aeroplanes. Andrew Sims, the policy director of the New Economics Foundation, said: "There are plenty of flowers that grow in Britain in the winter and don't need to be hothoused.

"Air freighting flowers half way round the world contributes to global warming.

"You can argue the planes would be flying anyway but the amount of greenhouse gases pumped out depends on the weight of the cargo."

Vicky Hird, of Friends of the Earth, said: "We don't want to be killjoys because receiving flowers can be lovely but why not grow your own gift?"

The figures also revealed that imports of roses from Ethiopia have grown from zero to 130 tons a year since 2003. Kenya is the second biggest exporter of flowers after the Netherlands, followed by Colombia and Spain.

In total, Britain imports more than £315 million of flowers, with the typical Briton spending £39 a year on them. "That's very little when you think what we spend on CDs, coffee and even lipstick," said a spokesman for the Flowers and Plants Association. He said the boom in Third World flowers would help poorer countries to build schools and boost the economy.

First they came for the DDT. Now they want the flowers. What is a poor African to do?

Someone made a simple mileage mistake. Nirobi to Heathrow would be closer to 3380 miles, not 33800.

Even with an almost 50% drop in Dutch imports, African imports, Kenya included, are still less than 20% of the Netherlands. The largest importer remains to be identified, or people in Britain have actually stopped buying imported flowers. That would be without this Green-Guilt® message.

It is clear the New Economics Foundation cannot add, subtract, divide, or multiply. If they cannot do basic math, why would we trust them for environmental science.

That , of course, assumes that the errors in question here belong to the Foundation. The assumption is based on well accepted scientific evidence that journalists and mathematicians are twins separated at birth.

h/t to Rantburg

powered by performancing firefox

Tequila Watching

2007-02-11T09:30:00.000-08:00
Sheila Copps complains today about Bev Oda and indirectly Stephen Harper not supporting the Canadian Television Fund

As the Conservatives work to attract new support, they cannot afford random alienation of existing interest groups. While Harper is priming the election pump, his heritage minister, Bev Oda, seems to be doing her best to derail him.

When cash is flush, why is his minister balking at the rules governing the Canadian Television Fund?

Oda’s first mistake was agreeing to review fund “problems” raised at a private meeting with major cable providers Shaw and Videotron (a subsidiary of Quebecor, which owns Sun Media). Both are resisting making their longstanding annual payments — together more than $70 million a year — to the fund. That contribution initially replaced most of the CRTC-approved community cable television funding required from both monopolies.

Combined public/private investments, including $90 million from other private providers and the government’s annual $100 million commitment, lever about $700 million into Canadian television programming every year. A seven to one return on government investment is unheard of. So what does Oda want to fix?

With the exception of HNinC, I'm guessing, Sheila, that about as many folks are watching Canadian television as read this blog. Maybe less. On a scale of issues affecting Canadians, this one rates down with snow in winter. The cable companies are tired of being charged for programming nobody watches. Bev Oda wants to stop spending taxpayers money to produce programming that nobody watches.

Besides, her return on investment arguement is a false. The taxpayer gets nothing back. This is a subsidy, pure and simple, to program producers who resell the product to TV distribution through advertising.

Apparently nothing good in Canada can survive on it's own. Back to the Margeritas.

powered by performancing firefox

Waste Not Want Not

2007-02-11T08:34:00.000-08:00
In response to the Christina Bizzard article regarding liquor bottle deposits in todays Toronto Sun, I sent her this email:

You are perfectly correct in your tax grab assesment. This is environmental optics at it's best.

Is this a "return" or a "recyle" program?

I always though the purpose of the blue box was to "recycle" products of economic value. If aluminum, steel, glass, or plastic could be reused at a cheaper cost than obtaining the raw material.

The current BRI bottle program is "return" program that requires several components:

1. Centralized return facilities
2. High volume
3. A 2-way transportation system
4. Reprocessing (bottle cleaning & inspection) facilities at the production point.

The liquor bottle program appears to have been established with only step #1.

The sheer variety of spirit and wine bottles makes step #2 questionable.

Virtually all alcohol, especially the offshore brands, only ship one way.

Nobody in the alchohol production business is set up to handle bottle returns. While some of the larger companies may be able to consider new washing lines, the little wineries all over the world will not.

Alcohol is sold not directly to the LCBO by the producers, but generally through brokers, who negotiate pricing. Raise your price to cover return shipping and processing, and your product is no longer brokered.

So do we "return" liquor bottles so that the Beer Store "recycles" them?

How are they more efficient in this than the original blue box? I now have to return the bottles to the nearest Beer Store instead of the end of my driveway. That alone, in my rural experience, costs more than the deposit value. If you start taking recyclable product out of that program, you also reduce the economic value of what is left.

I await the introduction of the pop container "return" program. One that I would think holds far greater ecological and economic promise. Outside of downtown Toronto, I suspect the volume of soft drink containers far exceeds that of liquor bottles.

Brewers Retail must see they can make money on all the bottles will end up in the Blue Box as usual.

powered by performancing firefox

U.K. annual parking fee penalizes gas guzzler owners

2007-02-06T19:01:00.000-08:00

Suburban Londoners to pay emissions fees
LONDON (AP) - Residents of a suburban London district will soon pay annual parking fees based on how much carbon dioxide their cars emit, penalizing owners of gas guzzlers.
Richmond council west of the capital agreed on Monday to levy a sliding scale of charges based on emissions, meaning the biggest polluters will pay 300 pounds (almost C$700) a year for the privilege of parking outside their homes.
Do they not realise that a parked car emits no emissions? Whether you own a Hummer or a Prius, they both emit the same level of pollutants when parked. Zero.

The best way to reduce emissions would be to encourage the owner of the Hummer to stay parked. Pushing him with a regressive tax to trade it off only results in someone else driving the Hummer. Now you have just doubled the number of emitting vehicles.

Secondly, you are penalizing the owners of large vehicles retroactively. Parking fee increases were probably not a factor in the original purchase decision.

Eventually though, the amount of emission from either the Hummer or the Prius is entirely dependent on the number of miles each vehicle is driven. Every three miles on a Prius will be the same as one mile in a Hummer. We need to encourage the owner of the Hummer to keep it parked whenever possible.

When you understand this, you realize opportunistic politicians are only using Green-Guilt® to raise taxes.

Coming soon: You will have to justify your need for a specific vehicle to the local review committee before you can purchase. Thank you, komrade.

powered by performancing firefox

Retirement

2007-02-02T03:39:00.000-08:00

Retirement looks good on me, don't you think?

powered by performancing firefox

Chicken Little

2007-02-02T02:57:00.000-08:00
Panel: Global Warming 'Very Likely' Caused by Humans

PARIS — International scientists and officials hailed a report Friday saying that global warming is "very likely" caused by man, and that hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries" no matter how much humans control their pollution.

Now don't you feel guilty? Because you are the cause and it is too late to do anything about it. So give us your money, because we are the only ones who can fix your problem.

The old joke about the New York Times headline rings true: World Ends Tomorrow, Women and Children Hit Hardest

See, whether you are a climate heretic or not, stand behind Kyoto or not, climate change is Inevitable and because you are "very likely"the reason, we will have to spend your money to mitigate the problem. (We are talking to you, George Bush!) Of course, only the UN can rescue you from the disaster that you in the decadent West has perpetrated on the World. You are so chained to "Big Carbon LLC (Division Of Haliburton Inc)" that you will never be able to see above the problem.

We even know better than the Creator:

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

powered by performancing firefox

Poker Face

2006-12-11T18:04:00.000-08:00
If I was George Bush, which I'm not, but if I was, I would be getting pretty tired of the political mudslinging and general mental derangement on the part of Democrats and the Loony Tunes Left in the middle of a war. No matter what I do, it is wrong, stupid, and criminal. Not because it is wrong, stupid, and criminal, but because I'm George Bush.

So if James Carter Baker and Lee Harvey Hamilton and the rest of the Incredibly Senile Geezers got together, they could produce a report that would precis everything wrong, stupid, and criminal that I had undertaken in Iraq, with a solution to fix everything wrong, stupid, and criminal. This Illustrated Stupid George would contain every criticism made of me, all in one place, to which all the Illuminati Smarter Globalists could wave in their International Sercle Gerk.

But the more they wave it around, the more it starts to look like Inedible Smelly Garbage.

Could I, George Bush, be smart enough to create Indefensible Stinking Guidelines that actually make my original Invade Saddam Game appear less wrong, less stupid, and less criminal?

Poker.

powered by performancing firefox

Convention Flyers

2006-12-11T17:07:00.000-08:00
Remember back a few months ago when other prominent Jewish Canadians parted ways with the Liberal Party: Heather Reisman, Gerry Schwartz and Ariella Cotler? This anti-semetic ideology has been festering in the LPC for a while. This flyer is just the latest eruption.

Kudos to Dion for calling it out but he is unlikely to stop the rot. From where did his delegates come? They were not supporting Rae(his wife)or Ignatieff (Iraq). So he owes them, principles or citizenship notwithstanding.

Would it be a shock if Arlene followed her friend Ariella?

So here are some predictions as I suspect more than a few Liberals will be contemplating their futures over the Christmas Holiday:

Bob Rae will not run. Arlene will put a stop to it.

Bill Graham will be pushed aside to give Gerrard a safe seat.

Michael Ignatieff will not run. He lost the leadership this time around, and would have to compete with Justin next time.

Justin will run. duh!

Belinda will run. Daddy owns Aurora.

You're welcome.

Merry Christmas everyone.

powered by performancing firefox

Liberal Children

2006-11-24T18:52:00.000-08:00
Remember the old Bill Cosby sketch, Bill and his brother Russell in bed in the projects, with Dad Downstairs. The kids start playing, and the father yells from below "go to sleep or the belt is goin' to wail tonight!"

Welcome to the bed of Mike and Bob, can't keep quiet and final father Stephen has to yell upstairs "go to sleep or my belt will wail"

powered by performancing firefox

The Politics of Science

2006-11-21T16:30:00.000-08:00
One would suppose that Jack might take a page from Dalton: close all the coal fired utilities in Ontario by 2007. But Jack, like Mr. McGuinty, is playing to the political base, which requires being greener than May or Harper. And unlike McGuinty, Jack knows he will never have to say "I'm sorry".

When his union base is supporting Liberals, and the academic base is leaning Green, Jack has a tough future.

powered by performancing firefox

Retirement

2006-10-25T12:10:00.000-07:00
Today I signed for my retirement. 38 years and counting.
Good bye work. (around Jan 18th 2007)

Hello new job. Why do I do this? Because I CAN

powered by performancing firefox

Firefox 2.0

2006-10-24T20:08:00.000-07:00

Just downloaded 2.0 to see what its all about. I like the add-ins Foxytunes and Performancing. Testing testing...

Uh B, you are a dog.

powered by performancing firefox

2006-10-14T17:14:00.000-07:00
Saturday night, watching NEXTEL and doing laundry. This is not Buffalo or Ft. Erie but the weather has the cold west wind with lake effect precip from Georgian Bay. Today we had rain, hail, sleet, and snow.

Trucked our 5 year old mare down the road so I could ride inside. She learns to travel and see new places and I get to stay dry.

2006-10-12T09:11:00.000-07:00
From Wilkipedia:

"He (Jimmy Carter) attended Georgia Southwestern College and Georgia Institute of Technology and received a Bachelor of Science degree from the United States Naval Academy in 1946. Carter was a gifted student and finished 59th out of his Academy class of 820. Carter did some post-graduate work, studying nuclear physics and reactor technology for several months at Union College until his father's death after which he resigned his commission."

Based on that piece of biography, Mr Carter would be the first to appreciate the difference between plutonium or enriched uranium based bomb development processes. Even if he was not aware of the AQ Khan meanderings while he was negotiating in North Korea, it would be clear to him now that he and the Clinton administration were duped. So anything he writes today that does not recognise this actuality, even in hindsight, is but political revisionism. He was played and he would know that better than anyone.