Stephen Harper does not love Quebec culture. Don't buy the B.S.
Here’s a video by Michel Rivard “Culture en peril” poking a stick at arts funding under an imagined gouvernemoo majoritaire Conservative. Shades of Kafka. Phoque!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnccaVAKLwI
Wake up Canada before it's too late.
Update: Link to the full song :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ6CSOLxbeM
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Dion wants to Decrease your Income Taxes
Stephane Dion wants to decrease your income taxes.
What???
I will say it again.
Stephane Dion wants to decrease your income taxes!
Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Ken Dryden, Scott Brison, Martha Hall-Findlay, Gerard Kennedy...
in short, the Liberal party wants to decrease your income taxes in a big way.
But who will pay for this big income tax decrease?
Polluters will. The more you pollute the more you pay.
There will be financial winners and losers in the new economy where energy costs are skyrocketing whether you believe in global warming or not. The losers will be those who decide to pollute more. And the Liberal Green Shift Plan budgets to help every Canadian who needs it, e.g. homeowners, fishers, truck drivers etc. to become a winner in the face of huge increases in energy costs.
Frankly, I think in the sense of personal responsibility anyone who does not care about the future environment of their children is an emotional "loser". Like the losers who dump their trash on the side of the road. They don't care about anyone else. Conservatives don't care. For them it is all about "ME" and now. They preach personal responsability, but it is just a mask for greed and an immature sense of entitlement.
Now these "losers" will have financial incentives to think about before throwing garbage into the air. It seems that is the only way to get through to some people. And God-bless-them, a Liberal government will help them to become more energy efficient, to save their money instead of giving it away to the oil companies, with incentives and income tax cuts.
It is visionary.
The Liberal party, like in the days of Chretien/Martin, are asking Canadians to exhibit some fiscal restraint and personal responsibility for the sake of the nation and the world. A message, which in my opinion, is well-crafted for the typical thoughtful and caring Canadian voter.
Let's decrease our income taxes. Vote Liberal!
What???
I will say it again.
Stephane Dion wants to decrease your income taxes!
Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Ken Dryden, Scott Brison, Martha Hall-Findlay, Gerard Kennedy...
in short, the Liberal party wants to decrease your income taxes in a big way.
But who will pay for this big income tax decrease?
Polluters will. The more you pollute the more you pay.
There will be financial winners and losers in the new economy where energy costs are skyrocketing whether you believe in global warming or not. The losers will be those who decide to pollute more. And the Liberal Green Shift Plan budgets to help every Canadian who needs it, e.g. homeowners, fishers, truck drivers etc. to become a winner in the face of huge increases in energy costs.
Frankly, I think in the sense of personal responsibility anyone who does not care about the future environment of their children is an emotional "loser". Like the losers who dump their trash on the side of the road. They don't care about anyone else. Conservatives don't care. For them it is all about "ME" and now. They preach personal responsability, but it is just a mask for greed and an immature sense of entitlement.
Now these "losers" will have financial incentives to think about before throwing garbage into the air. It seems that is the only way to get through to some people. And God-bless-them, a Liberal government will help them to become more energy efficient, to save their money instead of giving it away to the oil companies, with incentives and income tax cuts.
It is visionary.
The Liberal party, like in the days of Chretien/Martin, are asking Canadians to exhibit some fiscal restraint and personal responsibility for the sake of the nation and the world. A message, which in my opinion, is well-crafted for the typical thoughtful and caring Canadian voter.
Let's decrease our income taxes. Vote Liberal!
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Cool New Ads and an old Advertising Story
I saw this one on t.v. last night as I was eating a quick dinner.
also h/t m5slib
Grand'>http://www.liberal.ca/video_f.aspx?guid=35F5F885-3DEB-4E3B-B4AB-332CCA02AD6E">Grand Leader
In other news, a media release of the RCMP could play in the election as reported by LaPresse today. This sounds familiar doesn't it. The RCMP releasing information that casts a dark shadow on the Liberals during an election campaign which was called last week by Stephen Harper. During the last election, the RCMP announced a mid-campaign investigation into the dealings of then Finance Minister, the honorable Ralph Goodale. The polls shifted dramatically over the following week. The investigation was dropped after the election because the charges were unsubstantiated.
In addition to being the most shrilly denounced and most thoroughly investigated scandal in Canadian history, adscam could break a whole new record: the longest lasting --three election cycles. That would be really incredible.
Duceppe's reaction to the news was interesting. Reader's are reminded that Jean Brault, a main actor in the federal ad scandal, also had some dubious transactions with Lucien Bouchard's provincial PQ government. "The Parti Quebecois knowingly took nearly $100,000 in illicit contributions from ad agency." -The Gazette June 22, 2006.
What has taken the RCMP so long?
The RCMP, I suppose, believe that their image with the Canadian public is so solid that they can withstand the potential perception of scandal during an election campaign. What? Maher Arar? Retirement Fund Scandal and Cover-up? Tasers? Honest people do not criticize the RCMP.
The Conservatives handpicked new chief of the RCMP, William Elliot is also unforunate in the sense of the potential for perception of bias on this particular matter of releasing information during an election. Unlike previous chiefs, Elliot was not a policemen before his appointment to this position.
"That would be the worst possible choice for the RCMP right now," said retired Staff Sgt. Ron Lewis, one of the five RCMP officers who led the campaign to reopen the investigation into the pension plan scandal."And that kind of an appointment would also put an end to an arms-length relationship with government. If the government wants to fully control the RCMP, then putting a bureaucrat in there is one step closer to shortening the arms-length."
Umm.... What I am trying to say is this: the RCMP, for the sake of its own effectiveness in providing public order, needs to manage its image. Since the ability to do their job properly is in part based upon public trust, they should at all costs avoid even the slightest appearance of impropreity.
Has the image of public institutions been enhanced or debased during the reign of Stephen Harper?
Elections Canada
Nuclear Safety Watchdog
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the court challenges program
Have I missed a few?
also h/t m5slib
Grand'>http://www.liberal.ca/video_f.aspx?guid=35F5F885-3DEB-4E3B-B4AB-332CCA02AD6E">Grand Leader
In other news, a media release of the RCMP could play in the election as reported by LaPresse today. This sounds familiar doesn't it. The RCMP releasing information that casts a dark shadow on the Liberals during an election campaign which was called last week by Stephen Harper. During the last election, the RCMP announced a mid-campaign investigation into the dealings of then Finance Minister, the honorable Ralph Goodale. The polls shifted dramatically over the following week. The investigation was dropped after the election because the charges were unsubstantiated.
In addition to being the most shrilly denounced and most thoroughly investigated scandal in Canadian history, adscam could break a whole new record: the longest lasting --three election cycles. That would be really incredible.
Duceppe's reaction to the news was interesting. Reader's are reminded that Jean Brault, a main actor in the federal ad scandal, also had some dubious transactions with Lucien Bouchard's provincial PQ government. "The Parti Quebecois knowingly took nearly $100,000 in illicit contributions from ad agency." -The Gazette June 22, 2006.
What has taken the RCMP so long?
The RCMP, I suppose, believe that their image with the Canadian public is so solid that they can withstand the potential perception of scandal during an election campaign. What? Maher Arar? Retirement Fund Scandal and Cover-up? Tasers? Honest people do not criticize the RCMP.
The Conservatives handpicked new chief of the RCMP, William Elliot is also unforunate in the sense of the potential for perception of bias on this particular matter of releasing information during an election. Unlike previous chiefs, Elliot was not a policemen before his appointment to this position.
"That would be the worst possible choice for the RCMP right now," said retired Staff Sgt. Ron Lewis, one of the five RCMP officers who led the campaign to reopen the investigation into the pension plan scandal."And that kind of an appointment would also put an end to an arms-length relationship with government. If the government wants to fully control the RCMP, then putting a bureaucrat in there is one step closer to shortening the arms-length."
Umm.... What I am trying to say is this: the RCMP, for the sake of its own effectiveness in providing public order, needs to manage its image. Since the ability to do their job properly is in part based upon public trust, they should at all costs avoid even the slightest appearance of impropreity.
Has the image of public institutions been enhanced or debased during the reign of Stephen Harper?
Elections Canada
Nuclear Safety Watchdog
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the court challenges program
Have I missed a few?
Friday, September 12, 2008
Environmental Crisis Meets Quebec Identity Politics
Linguistic and sociological tensions frequently mask the real challenges facing Quebec as I argued on this blog during the last provincial election. Competitivity, health care and now the environment have been reflected through the fun house mirror of Quebec identity politics to the detriment of actual debate on how to deal with these issues.
"I am more Quebecker than you..."
"Referemdum!" "No referendum"
These old slogans are a bit tired, as well as dangerous because of their obscurantism.
There is a certain interpretation of the unexpected rise of the ADQ in the last election which holds that the ADQ symbolized in the minds of many a turn away from the identity politics of the past. (Whether the policies of the ADQ truly involved such a turn is a separate subject that I will leave to subtler minds than myself). I too felt that appeal because, as I said, I think that most issues suffer from distortions of french/english tension.
Until recently, the Bloc were advancing a general line of reasoning that Quebecker's greater concern for the environmental crisis was another example of a distinct culture, and thus reason to separate. It is a weak argument that convinced only a few.
Now, Harper claims quite falsely that the Liberal Green shift plan will cause a recession, and thus will give Quebecker's a reason to separate. This is as weak an argument as the Bloc argument.
Unfortunately, both arguments mask the problem of what is the appropriate action to take on the environment. Conservative and Bloc politicians have been using linguistic tension to mask the fact that most economists and environmentalists agree that to deal effectively with the carbon emissions that cause global warming a price must be put on carbon. The fastest way to put a price on carbon is to tax it because, unlike a new bureaucratic investment in an unknown cap-and-trade system, we already have the infrastructure to tax carbon.
The Liberal Green Shift plan would use the money raised by the tax to decrease income tax and help Canadians become more energy efficient. Since, regardless of your beliefs about global warming, energy prices will continue to rise steeply, a more energy efficient economy will be a more competitive one.
You may or may not agree with my argument in favour of the Green Shift Plan, but Quebeckers on the whole ARE concerned about the environment. Responsible politicians and responsible members of the media would present voters with the facts about the options (and note how these facts may be distorted with identity politics by unworthy politicians).
Perhaps some would rather indulge in the old slogans: "I am more Nationalist than you." These latter individuals will be doing the greatest disservice to the nation.
"I am more Quebecker than you..."
"Referemdum!" "No referendum"
These old slogans are a bit tired, as well as dangerous because of their obscurantism.
There is a certain interpretation of the unexpected rise of the ADQ in the last election which holds that the ADQ symbolized in the minds of many a turn away from the identity politics of the past. (Whether the policies of the ADQ truly involved such a turn is a separate subject that I will leave to subtler minds than myself). I too felt that appeal because, as I said, I think that most issues suffer from distortions of french/english tension.
Until recently, the Bloc were advancing a general line of reasoning that Quebecker's greater concern for the environmental crisis was another example of a distinct culture, and thus reason to separate. It is a weak argument that convinced only a few.
Now, Harper claims quite falsely that the Liberal Green shift plan will cause a recession, and thus will give Quebecker's a reason to separate. This is as weak an argument as the Bloc argument.
Unfortunately, both arguments mask the problem of what is the appropriate action to take on the environment. Conservative and Bloc politicians have been using linguistic tension to mask the fact that most economists and environmentalists agree that to deal effectively with the carbon emissions that cause global warming a price must be put on carbon. The fastest way to put a price on carbon is to tax it because, unlike a new bureaucratic investment in an unknown cap-and-trade system, we already have the infrastructure to tax carbon.
The Liberal Green Shift plan would use the money raised by the tax to decrease income tax and help Canadians become more energy efficient. Since, regardless of your beliefs about global warming, energy prices will continue to rise steeply, a more energy efficient economy will be a more competitive one.
You may or may not agree with my argument in favour of the Green Shift Plan, but Quebeckers on the whole ARE concerned about the environment. Responsible politicians and responsible members of the media would present voters with the facts about the options (and note how these facts may be distorted with identity politics by unworthy politicians).
Perhaps some would rather indulge in the old slogans: "I am more Nationalist than you." These latter individuals will be doing the greatest disservice to the nation.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Harper Government Lied about Torture
The editorial in the Globe and Mail today leads one to believe that even they do not believe Harper is sincere about his sudden promise to withdraw from Afghanistan in 2011.
"But further decisions about our future role in that country must be made in a sober fashion, removed – as much as possible – from the partisan pressure cooker of a federal election campaign."
That is, wink wink nudge nudge, we'll see about this again later after the election.
It was, in fact, the Conservatives with their "don't cut and run" "scumbags" "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" "global war on terror" language that really politicized the debate here in Canada. Harper thought it was a vote getter. But it was not. It was dumb both politically and in terms of finding a way forward in a minority parliament because it poisoned the discussion with infantilism.
Given Harper's past statements, his history of abrupt flip-flops and broken promises, and his devotion to secrecy, I think any reasonable Canadian would have doubts about what his real intentions are. In other words, I don't think many people believe that if he gets a majority we will be pulling out of Afghanistan in 20011.
The conservatives have demonstrated time again their inability to deal with this complex file. The most highly reported example is the torture allegations. Not only did the Conservatives lie about the Afghan detainee issue, about torture, listen as Harper and his ministers deflect the issue with cheap jingosim and chest thumping.
http://www.youtube.com/v/R2cAKZlonM8&hl=en&fs=1
Can Harper be trusted to tell us the truth?
"But further decisions about our future role in that country must be made in a sober fashion, removed – as much as possible – from the partisan pressure cooker of a federal election campaign."
That is, wink wink nudge nudge, we'll see about this again later after the election.
It was, in fact, the Conservatives with their "don't cut and run" "scumbags" "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" "global war on terror" language that really politicized the debate here in Canada. Harper thought it was a vote getter. But it was not. It was dumb both politically and in terms of finding a way forward in a minority parliament because it poisoned the discussion with infantilism.
Given Harper's past statements, his history of abrupt flip-flops and broken promises, and his devotion to secrecy, I think any reasonable Canadian would have doubts about what his real intentions are. In other words, I don't think many people believe that if he gets a majority we will be pulling out of Afghanistan in 20011.
The conservatives have demonstrated time again their inability to deal with this complex file. The most highly reported example is the torture allegations. Not only did the Conservatives lie about the Afghan detainee issue, about torture, listen as Harper and his ministers deflect the issue with cheap jingosim and chest thumping.
http://www.youtube.com/v/R2cAKZlonM8&hl=en&fs=1
Can Harper be trusted to tell us the truth?
Harper lying about Afghanistan?
In the following video, Stephane Dion clearly details the Harper government lies on the Afghanistan issue. (The video starts after 16 seconds)
Is Stephen Harper a Liar?
"If you cannot believe them on something as important as torture, when can you believe them?"
-Dion
Is Stephen Harper a Liar?
"If you cannot believe them on something as important as torture, when can you believe them?"
-Dion
Is Stephen Harper a Liar?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeUGhSgWIy8
Is Stephen Harper a Liar?
In my last post, I said how surprised I was that angry man Stephen Harper, who has run a constant negative campaign of childish ads against Stephane Dion since the day he was elected Leader, this same Stephen Harper was now concerned that the Liberals would run a negative election campaign against him. Poor baby.
As if to demonstrate definitively that he thinks he can fool everyone. This morning at 6:00AM he released even more attack ads on Stephane Dion. In the afternoons, he pretends he is a warm fuzzy family man (at least this week).
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Crybaby Harper
After a year of ugly attacks on the character of Stephane Dion, after calling the opposition parties Taliban-sympathisers, attempting ludicrously to link a Liberal MP to the Air India bombing, and creating an idiotic website, conservative.ca (now cleaned up a bit for the elections) that was almost entirely devoted to attacking the Liberals and their Leader in the most childish of terms.... After all that and more, Harper is afraid that the opposition parties might hurt his feelings by going negative, i.e. talk about his poor management of the economy and mean spirited narrow ideological views.
Poor Harper. And such an unbelievable hypocrite.
"To be really honest, I anticipate a very nasty, kind of personal-attack campaign," he told Lloyd Robertson, CTV's chief news anchor and senior news editor, at Harrington Lake.
"That's just what I'm anticipating; that's what the opposition's done in the past. I think that whether Canadians agree with what we're doing or not, I don't think they're going to believe the kind of personal attacks and scare tactics that we've seen in the past."
Tell us again Harper about how the Liberal Green Shift Plan, which will lower income taxes by increasing taxes on pollution, is, in your trashy words, going to "Screw Canadians."
What a hypocrite.
What a whiner.
Poor Harper. And such an unbelievable hypocrite.
"To be really honest, I anticipate a very nasty, kind of personal-attack campaign," he told Lloyd Robertson, CTV's chief news anchor and senior news editor, at Harrington Lake.
"That's just what I'm anticipating; that's what the opposition's done in the past. I think that whether Canadians agree with what we're doing or not, I don't think they're going to believe the kind of personal attacks and scare tactics that we've seen in the past."
Tell us again Harper about how the Liberal Green Shift Plan, which will lower income taxes by increasing taxes on pollution, is, in your trashy words, going to "Screw Canadians."
What a hypocrite.
What a whiner.
Friday, September 05, 2008
Harper breaks his word AGAIN
Well where to start?
Harper breaks his promises once again. There is no honesty in this governement. Its like the old days but worse because Harper is a lying, scheming hypocrite.
Harper breaks his promises once again. There is no honesty in this governement. Its like the old days but worse because Harper is a lying, scheming hypocrite.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Harper and the Cadman Scandal
The family of former MP Chuck Cadman claims that, before he died of terminal cancer, the conservatives offered him a 1 million dollar insurance policy to help defeat the previous Liberal government.
http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip89011#clip89011
If the allegation is true, it would affect the decision of a large number of voters. It speaks directly to the issue of ethics in the Conservative party.
Harper is in a position to find out. An honest person would explain the discrepancy. If not, Canadians will need to decide with their votes who they believe.
http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip35176#clip35176
Who is telling the truth: the Cadman family or the Conservative party?
http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip89011#clip89011
If the allegation is true, it would affect the decision of a large number of voters. It speaks directly to the issue of ethics in the Conservative party.
Harper is in a position to find out. An honest person would explain the discrepancy. If not, Canadians will need to decide with their votes who they believe.
http://watch.ctv.ca/news/clip35176#clip35176
Who is telling the truth: the Cadman family or the Conservative party?
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Harper testifies under oath
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper has testified that he personally authorized an offer made to late MP Chuck Cadman in 2005 for help defeating the Liberal government."
"It was Mr. Harper's first detailed account of his role in the so-called Cadman affair and, during four hours of testimony, he offered two different versions of when he first learned about Cadman's financial troubles."
So now I am confused. There was a life insurance policy offered to Chuck Cadman?
Is that not illegal?
Update: The article from the first link has been changed. The above direct quotes were reworded.
"It was Mr. Harper's first detailed account of his role in the so-called Cadman affair and, during four hours of testimony, he offered two different versions of when he first learned about Cadman's financial troubles."
So now I am confused. There was a life insurance policy offered to Chuck Cadman?
Is that not illegal?
Update: The article from the first link has been changed. The above direct quotes were reworded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)