February 28, 2007
Is Stephane Dion writing the headlines for the Liberal Party homepage too?
I only ask because it reads the way he would say it.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
05:51 PM
| Comments (28)
| Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Nice catch, Steve!
Posted by: Stephane Dion Says at February 28, 2007 07:00 PM (bIC9p)
2
still not changed, should we tell them?
Posted by: The Hammer or Thor at February 28, 2007 07:02 PM (jfI+S)
3
No, don't tell them.
Posted by: frmgrl at February 28, 2007 07:05 PM (VkWCV)
4
2 funny !
Posted by: Nbob at February 28, 2007 07:09 PM (S5y60)
5
He really wanted to say "espouse" ....
Posted by: Werner Patels at February 28, 2007 07:21 PM (/V2m6)
6
Was this checked through a French spellchecker?
Escellect catch, Steve!
Posted by: On-Tory-O at February 28, 2007 07:27 PM (slSoQ)
7
Its not just the spelling error, the grammar is terrible too. How does"economic" modify "record of dishonesty"? Are they describing a "record of dishonesty" that is efficient? I imagine they mean a "record of dishonesty" apropos the economy but it certainly doesn't read that way.
The more I see of of this particular Liberal team the more I am certain that Dion did not run to win the leadership. He is too unprepared for the job. He probably ran to enhance is reputation in the party. No-one who actually wanted to be leader and actually believed they could win could be so incompetent. No leadership, no organization, no platform, nothing at all. Kennedy took french lessons. Presumably so he could ask for Quebecois votes without looking like an idiot. Did Dion not understand he needed votes from English speakers?
Personally, the only Liberal that scares me is Ignatieff. He may have "foot in mouth" disease but the man has presence, intelligence, and might try and be a leader.
Posted by: Eric-Vancouver at February 28, 2007 07:29 PM (mbbdk)
8
Maybe Borat writes them.....
Posted by: pongo647 at February 28, 2007 07:31 PM (yXcTC)
9
Hey, geniuses -- ever think that they may be plotting this?
Headline: Conservatives make fun of Dion's English.
Now, where do you think that headline would be "not amusing"?
Let's see --- 75 ridings in Quebec, 25-30 ridings in Ontario, 10-15 ridings out West, and 2-5 ridings in Atlantic Canada.
In other words, just about every riding Harper doesn't have, and just about every voting group that traditionally does not vote for the Tories, would not be amused by a bunch of whitey-white-lardbutts making fun of nerdy-Dion.
So keep it up boys. Dig the hole a little deeper for poor ol' Harper.
Posted by: at February 28, 2007 07:43 PM (lLamV)
10
"whitey-white-lardbutts" ....Dats not funny!
Posted by: at February 28, 2007 08:06 PM (YuFsj)
11
Who was that racist flamewar starter? Last time I checked Dion was whitey-white too.
The worst part of the liberal party has taken over. At least with Martin you could guarantee that while they would talk about such nonsense terms like "social justice" they wouldn't do anything bad to the economy.
Just watch, with Dion at the Canadian helm Bob Rae is going to look like Milton Friedman.
Posted by: langmann at February 28, 2007 08:59 PM (wgqy4)
12
I think Dion must be writing the news at CTV.ca, too.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070228/libs_wappel_070228/20070228?hub=TopStories
1) "who are don't want to combat terrorism." ... that wasn't a quote. Ouch.
2) Love the Liberals taking offence at someone calling them "extreme." Hmmm... Is that worse than running commercials in which you declare that a political opponent, if elected, will turn the Canadian army against Canadian citizens? So much cred... not.
3) Wappel was the only Liberal with enough spine to actually show up and vote to extend the anti-terrorism measures that the LIBERALS crafted and passed just a few years ago. Tom Wappel is the only Liberal who isn't a nutter. The Liberals have officially moved to Bizarroland.
Posted by: gwgm at February 28, 2007 09:43 PM (4u+jq)
13
Is that worse than running commercials in which you declare that a political opponent, if elected, will turn the Canadian army against Canadian citizens?
My recollection is that the "Soldiers" ad never ran on TV - it was released onto the internet and then pulled when the Liberal brains trust realized just what a disaster it was. It was the bloggers / YouTubers who brought it into prominence.
Posted by: Deaner at February 28, 2007 10:58 PM (/iqb2)
14
See what you get after years of liberalism in the schools.. people that can't spell nor want to learn how to.
But now we got the poster boy (Dion) for da bad boy attitude, frig em' iffen dey cant understund me eh?
Posted by: Real Conservative at February 28, 2007 11:00 PM (EZLLA)
15
Espose = Bad Liberal grammar
Conservatives' = Bad Liberal punctuation
Dishonesty = Bad Liberal record
Dion = Bad Liberal leader
Posted by: Observer at February 28, 2007 11:24 PM (feuZK)
16
No comment on your fascist leader's rebuke by the Canadian Supreme Court, 9-ZIP, surely you must share the Supreme Court's opinion of the government's attempt to bastardize the notion of habaes corpus?
. . . then again . . . maybe not
. . . smells like a pig farm here . . .
Posted by: ryan at March 01, 2007 12:05 AM (oektW)
17
Uhh, Ryan, do a little research before you open your mouth. That law was in place since 1978, you moron, put in place by that fascist Pierre Trudeau.. Guess you should have stayed in that Ivy League school.
Posted by: Yukon Gold at March 01, 2007 01:58 AM (DiVcO)
18
Angry, thats cruel, simply CRUEL!
I LOVE IT!!!
Horny toad
Posted by: Horny Toad at March 01, 2007 03:04 AM (UZmPH)
19
I was shocked (ok..not really) when I flipped by their site and saw that yesterday.
As I mused on my blog, perhaps Dion is the Liberal mole! Would explain a lot!
--
Posted by: Le Politico at March 01, 2007 09:32 AM (nN09M)
20
We are all frogs in a pot that is slowing coming to a booil.
In a few years of being exposed to this style of writing and 24/7 facetime for Dion from the CTV, we'll all be speaking Dionglish and national unity will have been accomplished.
Posted by: molarmauler at March 01, 2007 10:20 AM (UyIW1)
21
If you wanna talk "whitey white" then just look at the top part of the picture Steve posted above. It doesn't get much "whitier" than that.
..so its ok to insult someone on the basis of their race?
Dollars for your doughnuts that was Blogging Dipper post.
Posted by: Eric-Vancouver at March 01, 2007 11:32 AM (wAU9K)
22
Not only is Stephane DionÂ’s grammar bad, he cannot even defend himself in parliament. Yesterday he tried to demonize PMSH and the Conservative party by accusing them of using their fiscal policy to attack the poor and vulnerable, but ended up getting royally smacked when the Prime Minister exposed the Liberal PartyÂ’s record. This is becoming a daily occurrence.
http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dip&pid=34938&tid=34938&eid=43&so=1&ps=0&sb=1
Posted by: Tony at March 01, 2007 11:33 AM (Em4tI)
23
Fixing the spelling error doesn't make the headline any less horrible.
Posted by: David Maclean at March 01, 2007 11:45 AM (bMofu)
24
Would it be fascistic to point out that it is spelled habeas corpus, Ryan? We will be charitable and call it a typo, yes?
Posted by: imethisguy at March 01, 2007 12:01 PM (BqPuU)
25
What is that wire running up Iggys arm, is that a cell phone or translation device in his ear. Why are so many libs using ear pieces, thought they were all totally bilingual. What are those liberals doing, reading, staring at when their great white leader is speaking. Notice the adoration of goodale looking in awe at dion. Is Iggy getting orders via a cell phone or something from some sp interest group. We need to know.
Posted by: maryT at March 01, 2007 05:00 PM (zm8/C)
26
The headliner on the liberal website reflects that observation Rona Ambrose made quite some time ago.
"old white guys"
Posted by: gimbol at March 02, 2007 07:04 AM (egH/E)
27
Lets encourage the Dion and the Thieving Party,( they steal ideas
and claim them as their own). They're on a roll, and its all
down hill, the end is nigh.
Their old white guys have lost it and their replacements
just don't have it.
Smart asses have a short shelf life.
Posted by: Liz J at March 04, 2007 09:14 AM (hZsts)
28
Your site is brought in a spam a list!!!! Write on mwodmurbwzcum@mailinator.com , what to remove your site from base
Posted by: Silth at April 26, 2007 05:42 PM (IjP+p)
David Suzuki vs a Terrorist: A difference of degree
In the debate over the environment, it is often a difference of degrees.
I'm not talking about the obvious -- is the earth warming by 5 degrees or 2 degrees or not at all.
I'm talking about something entirely different. But it also just a difference in degrees.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
01:02 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 626 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Dion is a Kyoto criminal because he did squat to reduce Canada's GHG emissions.
Suzuki is a Kyoto terrorists because he uses children as suicide candidates for his psychological war against Canadians,, trying to put everybody on a guilt trip that suggests Canadians are to blame for the entire global warming problem .... while we contribute an instignificant 2.1% in total, but that represents 100% of our economy.
Maybe that's why the Liberals trashed the ATA ... to protect the Sikhs, Tamils, Muslims AND Suzuki ... LOL
Posted by: Observer at February 28, 2007 01:57 PM (+2XWM)
2
It's similar to parents who pretend their children have organized fund-raising events and then call the TV news to show how the child is kind, generous and insightful. They really think we believe a child can orchestrate a charity fundraiser -- right from the concept to the co-ordinating,
Call me cynical, but I think it must be a form of Munchausen syndrome by proxy.
It's shameful that someone with Suzuki's influence would exploit that.
Posted by: canadianna at February 28, 2007 02:02 PM (RQr5K)
3
Dr. Fruit Fly is a moron . . . he's lost it, gone over to the dark side . . .
Posted by: Fred at February 28, 2007 02:23 PM (n2TMo)
4
Indoctrinating children with an ideology that they cannot understand is child abuse. That includes environmentalism, religion, and any political ideology.
Teach, don't indoctrinate!
Posted by: Jonny_eh at February 28, 2007 02:43 PM (ZQ7AG)
5
David Suzuki is a Solar Warming Denier.
Posted by: foobert at February 28, 2007 04:16 PM (Z/30C)
6
Gillian's father is a gutless twit.
Posted by: Larry at February 28, 2007 04:58 PM (aRIbx)
7
Steve..
I mean this in the kindest, possible way as reader who respects you and your opinions, and that I'm the kind of person that appreciates it when someone tells me I'm speaking nonsense...
but this is exactly that... nosense.... your talking out of your butt Steve.
comparing the slightly dispicable, (but cute) way parents and politicians use children to forward thier agenda, and the pure Evil of a terrorist using a child to kill is not a "degree of difference" it's several orders of magnitude.
your comparison, while I appreciate that your just using it to illustrate a point is pure crap and I think somewhere deep down you know that already.
Posted by: Sierra at February 28, 2007 05:33 PM (CHE53)
8
Suskookie is a real scam artist. He should not be given a free ride to go across
the Country and talk to all and sundry, including school children, running down
the present Conservative government.
He is working for the benefit of the Liberals who did nothing for 10 years
after signing the holy writ called Kyoto. Conservatives are taking flak for
Liberal inaction.
He has received and is receiving plenty of corporate funding for his cause .
If he's so damned Gung Ho about pollution why didn't he wait until Spring and
cycle across the country and set an example. No doubt he has the time and
stamina.
Never have we seen anything become so urgent as action on the
Environment since the Conservatives got into power.
Posted by: Liz J at February 28, 2007 06:54 PM (Eu5p0)
9
The real question to ask is, will the environmentalist father still be willing to have his child do the message if at the end, the child dies? I think that kind of father ight pause a moment to consider his answer.
Posted by: bernie at March 01, 2007 12:42 AM (O49HU)
10
Should we be discussing former Liberal Defence Minister Paul Hellyer,( of
screwing up the Military fame)?
This guy is now into UFOlogy. He thinks we should harness some extra-
terrestrial energy.
Geeze, he's right up there with current moonbats polluting our air with
bullshit.
Posted by: Liz J at March 01, 2007 09:39 AM (4Bi/Q)
Can you be the next Michael Ignatieff? Take the Sideshow test
Do you have what it takes to be the next Michael Ignatieff? Take this simple test and find out for yourself.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:50 AM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Iggy and Stephanie, are turning out to be Stephen Harper's best promoters...indirectly.
Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at February 28, 2007 08:13 AM (GN3Xe)
2
Iggy and Dijon are a gong show. Canada needs an election before these 2 improve.
Posted by: GrantK1 at February 28, 2007 08:58 AM (q9i0X)
3
Steve:
Bang on again!Give this man a standing ovation.
As for Iggy?...If you can go from expatriate neophyte politico to Dep.Leader(Leader?!!)in less than a year...What can one say...only in the LPC and sadly,only perhaps in Canada.
I'm sure Pearson and Trudeau are gleeful in their graves.
It is truly a sad day in Canada.
Posted by: Simon at February 28, 2007 09:12 AM (oQU+V)
4
Unfortunately, as was written in a post to another issue, the Canadian voter has a remarkably short attention span and this will be long forgotten when the next election becomes a reality. The only things that register in the average voter's mind is the latest bit of fear-mongering or outrageous promise made. No matter how ridiculous Ignatief and/or Dion appear to be now, it will have little or no impact on votes cast.
It makes me wonder what we are afraid of in the Terrorism legislation. No honest law-abiding CANADIAN citizen has anything to worry about by an extension of the powers to hold suspects for 3 days.
Posted by: conrad at February 28, 2007 09:28 AM (TyOYE)
5
I would kill for a cartoon of Garth Turner bent over Dion's knee
with Dion wearing a French beret and Turner being whipped!
Someone start drawing! lol
Posted by: John Gatti at February 28, 2007 09:58 AM (cg6ZS)
6
I cannot begin to express how enraged I am at Ignatieff's comment.
The victims of terror are the issue, not a sideshow. Its all about preventing terrorist from creating more victims. It is not about grandstanding in parliment. Does he also think that the lives of our soldiers spent helping the Afghan's is a side show? Ignatieff just does not get it.
This issue shows the true colours of the Liberals.
The refuse to protect Canadians from terror, won't protect our children from child porn, steal our money, spend our money like a drunken sailor (which is unfair because a sailor spends his own money) pander to special interests, promote their own welfare above the good of the country, patronise their friends, feign indignation at the slightest provocation yet slander all others. They have no moral grounding other than political expediency. They do not speak for me. They are completely unfit to govern.
Posted by: Chris at February 28, 2007 10:17 AM (J6Ji6)
7
"Iggy and Dijon are a gong show. Canada needs an election before these 2 improve."
Improve? Hahahah... i doubt it.. Don't forget about good old Garth...Its like watching the three stooges in a skit where they get hired as waiters in a fancy restaurant; sooner or later, no matter how hard they try, someones getting set on fire...
Oh well, I say, lay back and enjoy it -- it's a hell of a toboggan ride!
Posted by: at February 28, 2007 11:15 AM (cq02H)
8
"Iggy and Dijon are a gong show. Canada needs an election before these 2 improve."
Improve? Hahahah... i doubt it.. Don't forget about good old Garth...Its like watching the three stooges in a skit where they get hired as waiters in a fancy restaurant; sooner or later, no matter how hard they try, someones getting set on fire...
Oh well, I say, lay back and enjoy it -- it's a hell of a toboggan ride!
Posted by: troy at February 28, 2007 11:15 AM (cq02H)
9
You've heard of Murphy's Law (anything that can go wrong, will go wrong) and also the Peter Principle (when a person reaches his level of incompetence, etc.).
This pretty well describes the Liberal Party.
Peter Murphy Law:
When a man reaches his level of incompetence, anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
Posted by: Mike in White Rock at February 28, 2007 12:24 PM (fbFgo)
10
The last one is Edgar Bergen and Charlie McCarthy
Posted by: doug at February 28, 2007 12:51 PM (HlOec)
11
Ignatieff never said that the families were a sideshow. He said that Tory (false) claims that Liberals had not met with the families were a sideshow (Ignatieff HAS met with the families, and said that he would be honoured to do so again)
It's also useful to note that the whole context of the questioning in that scrum was NOT the nature of the provisions being discussed, but what consequences Liberal MPs voting to renew the provisions would face.
His point was simply that we shouldn't be wasting time talking about the Tories use of the 9/11 families as political props or the parliamentary consequences of defying a whipped vote, we should be talking about the provisions, their potential for abuse, their degradation of civil rights and due process, and that fact that in 5 years no one has ever though they were so essential to our security that they should be, you know, ACTUALLY USED. Everything else is just a sideshow.
The Tories on terrorism remind me of the Liberals on Kyoto. They're much more concerned about APPEARING to do something important, than actually doing something important.
Posted by: Lord Kitchener's Own at February 28, 2007 01:11 PM (3aZl7)
12
You mean "Iggy the Important" and ""Dion the Delusional? Have to go some to find a better sideshow. It is a good laugh when they get their heads bobbing pretending to understand what the other is saying. I have no idea what Dion is talking about half the time, but apparently Iggy with his "superior" ability does.
Posted by: Missy at February 28, 2007 04:15 PM (jwOJ+)
13
The Conservatives have just received more ammunition right from the Horses'
mouths for their next Ads.
That is really striking a low blow. People who have lost loved ones to
terror attacks are according to Dion, "EMOTIONAL" AND ACCORDING
TO HIS SECOND IN COMMAND, IGGY, THEY ARE A " SIDE SHOW".
UNBELIEVABLE!
It's enough to make a decent person physically ill.
Posted by: Liz J at February 28, 2007 06:37 PM (Eu5p0)
14
Okay, new slam of the week; "Sideshow Mikey".
Posted by: jgriffin at February 28, 2007 08:41 PM (GrnSc)
15
LKO
The families of Canada's 9-11 victims sure took Iggy's comments to mean Steve said they were. With respect to your accusation of the Tories using the 9-11 families as props, are you trying to say that those families have no right to appear with the Prime Minister? It sure as hell sounds like it.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 28, 2007 08:57 PM (g7gYB)
16
People are so bloody stupid they can't realize Harper is doing his duty as a
Prime Minister, people can meet with him in that capacity, it has nothing to
do with what Party he represents, it's his job.
HE LEADS THE BUSINESS OF THIS NATION.
The Liberals and other Opposition fools can't get past their narrow focus on
party politics, the petty stuff.
When people come to Ottawa with concerns it's the Prime Minister they wish
to see and it's his duty to see them.
The Liberals are so desperate to attack someone even the Chief of Defense
Staff Hillier, has said he was never so insulted being called a "prop of the
Conservative Government by none other than the Hooty little Blowfish
Denis Coderre.
An apology to the General is in order and he should thank all our Armed forces
for defending us and keeping us safe regardless of politics, including Coderre.
Posted by: Liz J at March 01, 2007 08:04 AM (YFyQa)
February 27, 2007
The National Post says the unspeakable -- Stephane Dion sold out Canada's security for personal power
In a stunning editorial by Jonathan Kay at the National Post, Stephane Dion stands accused of selling out our national security for a win at the Liberal Party convention.
It doesn't get much more serious than that! And the consequences might go far beyond Stephane Dion's place in the history books.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
08:24 PM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 601 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Liberal scandal #???
Posted by: Kevin at February 27, 2007 08:54 PM (ngW6k)
2
Lemme see now - you brought hundreds of thousands of people into your country from some of the most unstable, corrupt and violent places on earth, in a desperate attempt to overcome the inherent shortcomings of your pyramid-scheme welfare programs by adding more tax slaves to the bottom of the pyramid. And once they arrived here, some of those people figured out how to introduce corruption, violence and instability to your political system. And you're surprised and shocked that this happened, and you think that this corruption and violence is endangering your country because of the weak morals of a single politician in a single political party.
Now THAT is stunning.
Posted by: at February 27, 2007 08:55 PM (a0Sy/)
3
I loved the article too -- and have set out my own views:
http://www.wernerpatels.com/musings/2007/02/grits_are_putti.html
Posted by: Werner Patels at February 27, 2007 08:58 PM (/V2m6)
4
I hear that there are some liberal MP's demading that Pierre Polivier (sp?) apologize for his remarks that there are extremist elements in the liberal party.
They say its a smear against liberals.
Really....
Remember this?
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=99130818-bcae-4995-8226-883693331f43&k=98092
A flyer was circulated electronically among convention delegates denouncing Rae for having once delivered a speech to the Jewish National Fund, a group the flyer said was complicit in "war crimes and ethnic cleansing."
"Rae's wife is a vice-president of the CJC (Canadian Jewish Congress), a lobby group which supports Israeli apartheid," said the flyer in bold letters superimposed over a close-up of Rae's face.
Posted by: gimbol at February 27, 2007 08:59 PM (egH/E)
5
A smear against Liberals? The Liberal party leadership itself constitutes a smear against all decent, honourable Liberals. And, yes, Virginia, there still are some, Tom Wappel & Irwin Cotler for starters.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 27, 2007 09:18 PM (g7gYB)
6
Stephane Dion - Canada's answer to Neville Chamberlain?
Posted by: Steve M at February 27, 2007 09:25 PM (fuTJW)
7
I don't understand why the Liberals are demanding an apology for something that has been well documented and is actually common knowledge.
Posted by: Joanne (TB) at February 27, 2007 09:25 PM (G5Msa)
8
this is worse than adscam,
in adscam it was just our money that the libs traded for their power,
now they're trading our safety,
abhorrent.
Posted by: asadcanadian at February 27, 2007 09:29 PM (GN3Xe)
9
Stephan Dion - Canada's answer to Pee Wee Herman.
Jerking off along in a theater that shows skin flicks.
Posted by: John at February 27, 2007 09:34 PM (kMQ/N)
10
Mr. Stephane Dion has shown his true self. Today he demonstrated himself as a sellout, who is prepared to trade the safety of Canadians to satisfy the left-wing elements in his party.
Posted by: Marc at February 27, 2007 09:52 PM (Em4tI)
11
I have always wondered to what extent Canada was being run by criminals. I guess we will find out.
Posted by: at February 27, 2007 10:09 PM (lcfUm)
12
I truly don't expect anymore from them. They are only concerned about powerso taking an opposite view to the Conservatives is seen as another vote securing gesture. Unfortunately, our safety is in play and they should pay a heavy price for that.
Posted by: Daverbonz at February 27, 2007 10:16 PM (WZEY3)
13
I have always wondered to what extent Canada was being run by criminals.
If you knew anything at all about how federal schemes like EI, transfer payments, equalization, jobs creation, industry subsidies, fisheries and oceans, public works, citizenship and heritage, Indians and northern affairs, etc. are run then you would know that most of the federal government's operations are essentially criminal enterprises. By design. The only question is why so many of your are surprised to find out that the people running it tend to behave like criminals.
Posted by: at February 27, 2007 10:22 PM (a0Sy/)
14
I just talked about this with a couple of relatives.
Boy are they pissed.
I mean really pissed.
Dion ain't gonna like the outcome of this one.
Posted by: notahappycamper at February 27, 2007 10:54 PM (GN3Xe)
15
best we have an election....and the libs win a minority.....and then let them fall heavily on their own sword.....them naybe we can have a REAL election and a majority
Posted by: arctic_front at February 27, 2007 11:01 PM (qy5sm)
16
"in adscam it was just our money that the libs traded for their power,
now they're trading our safety,"
You got that backwards, they traded their power for some money.
Posted by: Jonny_eh at February 27, 2007 11:04 PM (8c990)
17
The question now is how to fix a political party that has become so corrupt, that it now is a state of normal and those in it don't have any notion of what corrupt is.
The liberals don't just go on with the practices; they seem to want to improve on them, forgetting the idea that when you are deep in the hole, it may be time to stop digging.
This is seriously unfortunate. This country needs a good opposition to lift the debate above political rhetoric that is kind of self aggrandizement to let everybody know, look I can turn a phrase, it needs an opposition that will make the governing party do better.
Right now the governing party can with confidence look and spit at what it sees and it has no incentive to do better.
This is a sad state of affairs
Posted by: Bolshevik at February 27, 2007 11:11 PM (YwNSG)
18
The libs are in free-fall.
Today on CPAC I heard Ralphie accuse our Prime Minister of outright slander in reading an article written by a Vancouver Sun columnist. As the libs have not, nor intend to accuse the newspaper of slander or libel because none occurred, I see Ralphie eating his liver almost daily because he knows he'll never get his hands on taxpayer money again.
Watching Question Period has become my tonic each morning. The slap-downs administered to the opposition after each inane question or accusation bring much joy to our house. Wonder if the back-stabbing rabble in the opposition benches will devour Citoyen Dijon before the next election is called?
Posted by: Alienated at February 27, 2007 11:44 PM (Br6Kh)
19
Sorry, I meant Citoyen Dion. Don't want to make any more fun of him than his own back-benchers do.
Posted by: Alienated at February 27, 2007 11:46 PM (Br6Kh)
20
The Liberals need to disband completely. They serve no useful function in Canadian politics.
Posted by: anonymous at February 27, 2007 11:55 PM (DO1b6)
21
Free falling, free falling.
Dang that song is stuck in my head now, who sang it?
Dion, has used up all his cards to support some radical elements in his party. Dead Duck walking.
Posted by: Hunter at February 27, 2007 11:56 PM (rp6r3)
22
Pathetic beyond desccription.
I'm wondering how my dyed-in-the-wool in-laws are going to spin this one. They always find a way, as I'm more and more convinced that is the case with almost all of the Ontario sheeple..
ps. Steve - this site is loading terribly slow, and in this (comments) window the text is going outside the black box and I can only see a sliver of the submit button on the bottom..
Posted by: The Hammer or Thor at February 27, 2007 11:57 PM (BnhTW)
23
Wow!!...just keep peeling back the layers...there's more to come.
Its very inspiring to watch a leaderless party with no direction internally hemhorage.
Why itssss history in the making!
Posted by: Simon at February 27, 2007 11:59 PM (oQU+V)
24
The operative word here is "if". "If" the media actually starts asking some hard questions. "If" the information actually makes it past one editorial in the National Post. If, if, if. I think if the Liberals were not so hell bent on an apology, the liberal media would have swept this under the rug, as they have done so many times before. I give Jonathan Kay ten thousand kudos for bringing this out.
Posted by: Don't Want To at February 28, 2007 12:35 AM (HI4Hj)
25
The Article in the National Post "National secrity vs. Liberal ethno-politics" should be sent to Fox News in care of Bill O'Reilly.
We need help in getting this out it's for darn sure our quisling reporters won't touch it.
jypsy ontario
Posted by: jypsy ontario at February 28, 2007 01:15 AM (7fvcI)
26
The Liberal party has been hijacked by the terrorist elements within their ranks. There can be no doubt about that, and all Canadians must be made aware that Dion accomodated these terrorists because he was beholden to them for their support in the leadership race.
A large number of Liberal MPs refused to be present at the travesty that was occuring in the HoCs, perhaps from shame but also for fear of being openly terrorized by the Dion cabal of extremists. The next Liberal caucus meeting may well decide the future of the Liberal party and that of it's despicable leader Dion. If Ignatieff had any gumption he would be challenging Dion instead of voting with Dion. As far as I am concerned, when Dion goes, so should that coward Ignatieff because he let down Canada.
There will be blood on the floor of the next Liberal caucus meeting, and since the extremist element within the Liberal party have been so successful we should see an internal takeover of the party by that cabal of terrorists in their midst, and bullying those Liberal MPs who broke rank and refusing to be part of the hijacking of the Liberal party.
Posted by: Observer at February 28, 2007 02:24 AM (O/KHg)
27
interesting Gamble on Dions part... I wonder if he's religous... Probably...
cause he's gotta be praying every night between now and the next election that Al'Queda doesn't manage to follow though on the promise and suceed in a terror attack on Canada...
or even worse... a terror attack on the US that was planned and executed in Canada.
either event would finish the liberal Party's chances of ever forming a government in the next couple decades... especially if it happens in Toronto...
Posted by: Sierra at February 28, 2007 02:38 AM (DRMX0)
28
It's pretty pathetic that Canadians have to get such important information from a bloody EDITORIAL COLUMN!!!
WHERE THE HELL ARE OUR REPORTERS IN THIS COUNTRY.
TOO BUSY COVERING WHETHER A PLAQUE WAS COVERED UP BY THE CONSERVATIVES.
TIME TO STOP READING LIBERAL TALKING POINTS AND START SOME BALANCED REPORTING.
Sorry for the rant. But our liberal media is pathetic.
Posted by: reader at February 28, 2007 03:08 AM (GN3Xe)
29
Where's my g'dam checkbook. I'm cutting the CPC some cash right now!
I'm thinkin I'm not alone. Everyone I talk to is steamed about this. Time to add to the warchest, get some ads out exposing this garbage (cuz you know the press will never do it) and get Harper a bloody majority.
Posted by: mark at February 28, 2007 03:36 AM (GN3Xe)
30
And Iggy calls the 911 terror victims a SIDESHOW!
Here:
http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1172617812896&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1112101662670
I'm so angry I can't sleep. Seriously.
Posted by: Todd at February 28, 2007 04:01 AM (GN3Xe)
31
Hey Todd - I too am up at this ungodly hour totally pissed about this situation.
And our media blindly goes on supporting this bunch of idiots.
The Leftie's are spewing about how it is only "fair" that bad people actually commit a crime before they are arrested. And it will be GWB's fault if we have a terrorist attack in Canada.
I tell you - I feel like I entered the twilight zone. This country is going to hell in handbasket and Dion is holding the handle.
Our only hope is to get Dion's deal making out so that the media have no option but to cover it.
Posted by: Alberta Girl at February 28, 2007 05:43 AM (nMd+I)
32
can I just say how impressed I was at Wappel and Cotler for choosing Canada over the pathetic LPC?
Come on over men. People with integrity are not welcome at the LPC
Posted by: tori at February 28, 2007 06:31 AM (wIk91)
33
"bad people only get arrested after they commit a crime"? Under the Liberals they don't even get arrested then, or if they do they are out on bail or given house arrest!
Speaking of terrorists--does no one remember the FLQ? Those were terrorists too. They were pardoned by the Liberals--and one made GG!
You are known by the friends you keep. The Liberals hae shown us time and time again who their 'friends' are--they should all be in jail.
Posted by: George at February 28, 2007 07:27 AM (x6hOD)
34
Time for PM Harper to quote another news paper today
in QP...How can one otherwise have the Lib MSM moving
on this?
Metalguru
Posted by: metalguru at February 28, 2007 08:58 AM (Mqv6V)
35
We, the dead, were sold out.
Posted by: dead at February 28, 2007 09:39 AM (y1u0J)
36
"The Article in the National Post "National secrity vs. Liberal ethno-politics" should be sent to Fox News in care of Bill O'Reilly.
We need help in getting this out it's for darn sure our quisling reporters won't touch it."
O'Reilly and Hannity & Colmes and FOX News Tips.
www.foxnews.com
The Liberal Party are more dangerous to Canada than the terrorists they want to let in and the world has to know.
I've sent the story to FOX and everybody here should do the same.
Posted by: On-Tory-O at February 28, 2007 10:11 AM (V9gyD)
37
There is no doubt that Dion and the Liberals will do ANYTHING to get into power. After all, they believe it is their God given right to govern Canada. Selling out Canadians' security is nothing to the Liberals in order to gain some Muslim and Sikh votes.
Posted by: Tim at February 28, 2007 10:24 AM (PElHQ)
38
Hunter......... The song was sung by Tom Petty.
The free fall should land in a jail cell some some of these crooks.
"Dare to dream Arnold"
Posted by: Colt at February 28, 2007 12:22 PM (lzJsi)
39
Thankyou On-Tory-O. We really do need help in getting this out.
The e-mail address is - Foxnewsonline@foxnews.com
I also sent this article with attention to Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity. I really pray they can help us out. This is such a dangerous scenario for our countr;y. I can't imagine extremists being aligned with anyone who is sitting in the House.
Thanks again
jypsy
Posted by: jypsy ontario at February 28, 2007 01:13 PM (vMyg9)
40
"The question now is how to fix a political party that has become so corrupt, that it now is a state of normal and those in it don't have any notion of what corrupt is." -- Bolshevik
Exactly. Remember when a senior Liberal -- can't remember who now, Bill Graham? -- accused the Conservatives of lying when they submitted expense claims that amounted to a mere fraction of those submitted by Liberals when they were in power?
It simply didn't occur to him that it was possible to not be extravagant and corrupt. In his world, corruption isn't corruption, and because of Steve's apalling comment box I can't see what Im typing anymore. Steve, for God's sake do something about this.
Posted by: Darrell at March 01, 2007 08:27 AM (O+DZE)
41
This comment box doesn't scroll (Firefox 2, WinXP SP2) and anything below a certain point is invisible.
This is a very cute web site but style without function is useless, and a clear sign of inferior Web design.
Posted by: Darrell at March 01, 2007 08:30 AM (O+DZE)
42
Irwin Cotler was the Minister of Justice and Attorney General before the Libs were trashed. He was also the self-appointed Minister of Gay Marriage - primo leftist and criminal apologist.
But he voted against his party on the terrorism bill. It absolutely terrifies me to think what information he was privy to and what knowledge of the terrorism threat he had in his prior job that would persuade him to turn against his own party.
Posted by: Irish at March 07, 2007 03:01 PM (IkNbC)
43
If the Hong Kong Chinese like me and my parents had realized that the Liberals party could be so easily bought off; we would have taken our money bought the Liberals and then turn ourselves into a market dominate minority who would run this country from behind the scenes. Just like in Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines or Burma...
Man I never realized that the Liberal were selling themselves for just a few delegate votes, that is such a low asking price...what a bargain the Chinese had missed out...
Posted by: JM at May 24, 2007 11:08 PM (909Qv)
Stephane Dion wins one -- and will likely lose big
Stephane Dion must face the consequences of a three-line whipped vote that was defied by two important Liberal MPs. Tom Wappel and Irwin Cotler did not follow the putative Liberal Party leader, and that makes Stephane Dion's leadership situation all the more precarious.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:57 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1163 words, total size 8 kb.
1
The already wobbly leadership of Stephane Dion has been struck another blow. This wasn't an advisable position to take because the downside to not supporting the fight against terrorism domestically could not only ruin Dion as a leader but the party as a whole if something were to happen. We all know th e possibilities of that given the Toronto arrests and what has happened in London and Madrid. Not good...
Posted by: Daverbonz at February 27, 2007 08:08 PM (WZEY3)
2
I am not sure this is an "if" question. I think it's more like a when. When the attack comes, i hope everyone remembers the "leadership" shown by Dion, Layton and Duceppe. Shameful.
Posted by: Brian Mallard at February 27, 2007 08:29 PM (RBipc)
3
What's with the new Liberal tactic of demanding an apology for anyhting a Conservative says, and even now threatening "legal action"? Or os Big Ralph Goodale, old "Mr. Bluster" really in charge now?
Posted by: Patrick B at February 27, 2007 08:35 PM (vvjrU)
4
"The proposal was voted down 159-124 on Tuesday in the House of Commons.
All Conservatives present, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper, voted for the extension. The Bloc, NDP present, and all but two Liberals voted against it."
Total votes = 283 votes cast in the House.
Number of members = 308.
Twenty-five (25) members were not present. Were they all Liberal members?
If this vote was a Three-Line Whipped vote for the Liberals, as Dion declared it to be, there are 27 Liberals subject to discipline by the Liberal Party.
What is to be their fate? A slap on the wrist by limp-noodle Dion?
Parliamentary democracy in Canada is on life support.
Can PM Stephen Harper prevent its death?
Posted by: maz2 at February 27, 2007 09:21 PM (/T5pj)
5
There were about 23 Libs who did not show up for the vote. They will probably portray their absence as a victory of sorts. Mr. Cotler is also being lauded for his abstention. Sorry, in my books, neither Mr. Cotler nor the absentees deserve accolades. MPs like Derek Lee, John Mackay & others deserve nothing but derision for not having had the courage of their so-called convictions. If they truly believed in the measures, they would have stood up for them. But I think I'm deluding myself - Liberals and convictions? Hah!
P.S. According to Stephen Taylor's research "France can hold terror suspects for 72 hours without access to a lawyer. Terror suspects can be held for up to four years (!) before being tried by a court."
Hear that, Mr. Dion? Your other mother country is not respecting human rights, according to your logic.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 27, 2007 10:06 PM (d7G43)
6
Steve
Wappel is definitely not welcome in the CPC. He is way extreme in his views, irrational in his thought processes, rude to constituents, but always re-elected.
In other words, a perfect FedLib.
He should rot in the independent chair that Garth left empty.
Posted by: Brian Lemon at February 27, 2007 10:26 PM (5Jy2p)
7
Brian
That is exactly what I was thinking.
Posted by: kelly at February 27, 2007 11:25 PM (uhaIL)
8
I actually think the Liberals position will help them more than hurt them. Unlike the United States, Canadians really don't believe we are at risk since we haven't been attacked and more importantly Harper's policy seems too Republican like, which is never politically smart in Canada.
As for Irwin Cotler, he abstained, so he will face no punishment from Dion. He may retire, but he won't quit the party.
As for Tom Wappel, you guys can take him. With an election around the corner I would love to see him jump to the Conservatives so we could kick his ass in the next election (His riding is in Toronto so even a monkey could win under the Liberal banner).
Posted by: Miles Lunn at February 28, 2007 12:09 AM (3LtES)
9
The true test for Dion comes now. If he doesn't punish Colter, and disown Wappel, plus meet out some sort of punishment to the other 27, he's screwed. Nobody will respect him afterwards. On the other hand, if he blows the "test" of leader, we don't have to worry about the stupid "No Scab" legislation getting passed.
Posted by: JoeCalgary at February 28, 2007 12:39 AM (dZoPc)
10
About 25% of the Liberal caucus did not support Dion's three-line whip vote, and surely that represents a significant visible opposition to Dion's leadership on the issue. I wonder how many more Liberal MPs dislike Dion's ethno-political capitulation but are too frightened to openly disagree for fear of retaliation from the 'extremist element' that obviously has hijacked the Liberal party with Dion complicit in that takeover.
PM Harper should drive the wedge between Dion and Ignatieff even more, as well as rub it into all the Liberal MPs that their party has been hijacked by terrorists in their very midst.
Posted by: Observer at February 28, 2007 02:00 AM (70drV)
11
note... Martin, and Graham were both Absentee's...
Posted by: Sierra at February 28, 2007 02:31 AM (DRMX0)
12
Don't give much credence to Martin or Graham not voting, they are not at all
brave, neither is running in the next election anyway, no punishment there.
However they made a statement against the leader.
This is a good example of winning the battle and losing the war in one exercise.
Poliviere has struck a nerve in the Adscam Party, they are so insulted, they are
going all out to have him apologize, why he may be jailed, they're sooooo
insulted. TRUTH HURTS.
Poor old Steffawn, he pointedly makes reference to Canada as
"my CONtry", he has to get the Liberals back to power to get the
CONtry back.
Back to what we don't know. Unfinished business?
Posted by: Liz J at March 01, 2007 08:30 AM (NhDqP)
February 26, 2007
Stephane Dion: Asking politely if it is his turn to be leader
Stephane Dion supporter, riding president, and leading Liberal Party blogger, Jason Cherniak, is calling on the Liberals to let Stephane Dion as more questions in Question Period.
But I thought that would be a decision for Stephane Dion to take. I mean, he is the leader, isn't he?
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
04:40 PM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
Post contains 578 words, total size 4 kb.
1
I don't know. There is something refreshing about a leader who is comfortable in his own skin, and is not afraid to share the limelight.
Most of the media interviews (all of them in French) are still being handled by Dion.
Cherniak was a Rae supporter, wasn't he?
Posted by: at February 26, 2007 05:43 PM (V5L5D)
2
Maybe if Dion threatens not to sign their nomination papers they'll let him talk.
Posted by: Joanne (TB) at February 26, 2007 07:09 PM (A6VDs)
3
Jason was in charge of Dion's internet/blog outreach ie. Dion's biggest propogandist on the internet.
Posted by: PlaidShirt at February 26, 2007 08:11 PM (MAU10)
4
Harper has been helping Iggy in all of this. Harper answers Iggy's questions directly in QP. Normally,I think,the PM would only answer questions directly from the other party leaders.
Dion is grossly mismatched in the HofC. He is getting hammered not only by Harper but by the "Nutty Professor" as well.
Posted by: David at February 26, 2007 08:37 PM (YuFsj)
5
For me personally, I wouldn't vote for Dion (not just because he's liberal and has no program/policy), but because he doesn't instill confidence. That's my take on it. I would want a leader to be strong, especially because there will be difficult issues coming down the pike that no one knows of.
Posted by: anonymous at February 26, 2007 09:46 PM (DO1b6)
6
"Do you think it's easy to make priorities?"
Posted by: Ace at February 26, 2007 09:57 PM (QhrOZ)
7
Steve, I would like to congratulate you on being able to maintain the high quality of blogging on this site, much like Kate at SDM. You are both to be thanked for keeping the rest of us abreast of the situation developing on other sites that most of us don't have the stomach to visit personally. Keep up the good work.
Posted by: Antenor at February 27, 2007 12:43 AM (Hpefv)
8
'we still need to convince people that Dion is the leader.'
And jason cherniak doesn't see anything embarassing about that fact...
Posted by: dean rune at February 27, 2007 06:58 AM (aLLzP)
9
Thanks Antenor, but I would suggest you visit Jason's blog yourself, and other blogs offering different points of view. Many of them are excellent blogs on a technical level, and in any case, you should convince yourself that I'm not quoting people out of context and that, in gneral, the arguments being put forth here are somehow more convincing than those of Jason and of others.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 27, 2007 07:08 AM (SGRj5)
10
Antenor, I totally support Steve's comments, Its an actual imperative that you surf more then one persons blog, and in all fact even thought he makes me scratch my head at time, Jason does run one of the better ones, way to hard to comment on though. I personally make a point of reading all parties blog with the exception of the bloq because my second language ablities are garbage and I haven't been able to find an English one. As to the topic of the post, I had to laugh at Jason suggestion that Iggy fade into the background, huge mistake until Dion steps up and or improves his english which he had better do in a hurry or Harper and Layton are going to have him for breakfast at the debates.
Posted by: Ken at February 27, 2007 08:24 AM (dfmT8)
11
Both Dion and the party brass (and obviously Jason is clipped out of the policy loop) feel that Dion is not cosmetically or audibly marketable to English Canada and they let Iggy field half the questions to remind us (the public) that there are literate people in the opposition benches. Besides I think they are shopping Iggy out to the public as a back-up leader if Dijon self destructs early.
My info has it that the Lib lever pullers have an "emergency" leadership installation plan in case they have to swap horses mid stream. Dijon's numbers (contrary public spin) suck and do not improve...that is the widest know best kept secret in Liberaldom these days..he's a no sale pony Jason...accept it...also accept the fact that massive sucking sound you hear is the leadership vacuum in the LPC.
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at February 27, 2007 08:28 AM (e1kRH)
12
Dion percieves himself as the "coach" standing behind the bench of his "DreamWhip Team"... who are the real players in the political ice areana.
If you notice, Dion always travels with some of his DreamWhip Team members whenever he is on a Western road trip ... taking Kennedy and Martha H-F with him recently to Saskatchewan.
Doofus Canadians voters may just take to this new approach to politics ... where the "leader" is just a facilitator, a coach, a front for those who pull the puppet strings from afar.
Posted by: Observer at February 27, 2007 10:04 AM (io+du)
13
Dion percieves himself as the "coach" standing behind the bench of his "DreamWhip Team"... who are the real players in the political ice areana.
If you notice, Dion always travels with some of his DreamWhip Team members whenever he is on a Western road trip ... taking Kennedy and Martha H-F with him recently to Saskatchewan.
Doofus Canadians voters may just take to this new approach to politics ... where the "leader" is just a facilitator, a coach, a front for those who pull the puppet strings from afar.
Posted by: Observer at February 27, 2007 10:06 AM (io+du)
14
Anyone want to place odds what Iggy's reaction will be when the Lib's lose next election and Dion stubbornly stays at the helm?
Here's my take:
Cross the Floor - 1-3
Go back to the states 1-1
Stay on and support Dion 1-20
Skål!
Posted by: The Hammer of Thor at February 27, 2007 10:41 AM (SdwQh)
15
Skal.
The Libs don't tolerate failure.Remember they feel they are entitled to govern so Dion "stubbornly staying at the helm" is a 0% chance.
So,if he senses a coronation for the leadership (like Martin had) then he may take the job. Otherwise, screw this, he'll go back to the US.
Posted by: David at February 27, 2007 11:32 AM (YuFsj)
16
Steve and Ken, I do visit other sites like Cherniak, and others from time to time my point was that I appreciate people like Steve and Kate at SDA having the time and ability to keep us all abreast of what is going on and being able to present other blog sites. On the other topic, Dion's future as head of the Liberal party, try looking at this point of view. Dion has a major health problem and has to step aside and appoints Iggy to eliminate the necessity of a leadership convention.
Posted by: Antenor at February 27, 2007 12:17 PM (Hpefv)
17
To Antenor
I think the Liberals could only get away with appointing a leader if an election campaign was actually under way, similar to what happened when Trudeau "unretired" after the fall of the Joe Clark minority government. If no election was on the horizon, then I think any attempt to eliminate the necessity of a leadership convention would likely lead to an all-out civil war within the LPC.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 27, 2007 12:26 PM (g7gYB)
18
Glad to hear it , Antenor. I always take the opportunity to encourage people to read widely. And hey, traffic for bloggers is their lifeblood. I like to think I help Jason out from time to time.
Posted by: Stephen Janke at February 27, 2007 12:52 PM (MW9zX)
19
I think the reaon Ignatieff answers questions in the House is because Dion is completely inarticulate - and - quite frankly, doesn't know the issues. Dion lives in a fictional world, the imaginary, where 'all you have to do is say it' - and it will happen, whether he says he is The Leader, or whether you MUST achieve Kyoto targets because he says so.
What is worrisome at the moment is the movement by the Liberals into the realm of 'lawsuits' against the Conservatives. There is talk now about several Liberals taking legal action against the CPC for remarks made by MPs against the Liberal refusal to continue the anti-terrorist clauses. This Liberal attempt to denigrate argument, to shut down debate - is disturbing. The Liberals are vote-buying; they are against the extension because they have made commitments to the Sikh, Tamil and Muslim communities to stop these clauses. Now, the Liberals are trying to prevent discussion about their reasons - by threatening lawsuits. What kind of democracy is this?
The Liberals are moving us out of freedom of speech, and moving the House outside of debate.
As for Dion - he can't debate, not merely because he can't speak English, but because he rejects facts and prefers rhetoric, fiction - a scenario outside of the realm of logic, and one where all that matters is authority.
And Dion is 'all about authority'. Either do as he says - or else.
Posted by: ET at February 27, 2007 04:46 PM (vPAev)
20
Comparing Janke to SDA is unfair to Janke, and unbelievably generous to the demagogue(s) at SDA.
Come on Antenor, get a grip.
Posted by: at February 27, 2007 05:52 PM (3O/L2)
21
Whoever it is bashing SDA doesn't want to leave a name.. is that you WK?
Posted by: The Hammer of Thor at February 27, 2007 06:01 PM (SdwQh)
22
Awhile ago, some anonomous commenter, a brilliant, in-the-know person he must be,
said that a "little birdy" told him about some willing to speak about a deal to kill the terrorism law among an "interested" voting bloc that got Dion into power.
Well, they're starting to chirp, from the National Post:
"Among veteran Liberal insiders, it is believed that the several hundred Sikh convention delegates Bains and his allies led into the Dion camp (via Gerard Kennedy) came with a price: an end to the investigative powers contained in the Anti-Terrorism Act, which was opposed for predictable reasons by various Sikh, Tamil and Muslim organizations.
Indeed, I am informed by a well-informed source that the critical deals were cut months in advance, and were driven by Bains -- and, in the case of Muslim delegates, by Arab-Canadian MP Omar Alghabra -- through Kennedy, who'd been staked out early by ethno-politicians as an empty vessel into which they could pour their parochial agendas.
These machinations should not be confined to history's footnotes: The Montreal Liberal convention was a close-fought thing, and the mass migration of hundreds of well-herded delegates along ethnic lines was likely the deciding factor. If more information comes out about unsavoury deals, Dion's image as a squeaky-clean enviro-wonk will erode, and traditional voter suspicion about sleazy Liberal ethno-politics will bubble to the surface. Given the high stakes -- we are, after all, talking about a law that could help us learn the truth about the greatest terrorist attack in Canadian history, as well as prevent even greater carnage in the future-- the issue could prove explosive."
Here:
http://tinyurl.com/2748xj
A "deal". Revealed by a "well informed source".
Oh, this is going to get big alright.
Posted by: intheknow at February 27, 2007 07:38 PM (GN3Xe)
23
Dream team indeed. lol
Posted by: jake114 at February 27, 2007 09:58 PM (5tYon)
24
Well it looks like Dion has got the Sikh, Tamil and Muslim vote tied down ... now for the rest of Canada...!!!
Posted by: adam at February 28, 2007 01:45 AM (70drV)
An article from 2005 makes a direct reference to Stephane Dion's pressure from lobbyists
I added some extra elements to my bromine timeline, and in doing so, stumbled across an article in The Walrus in which the author Paul Webster, makes an explicit reference to Stephane Dion's lack of action because of intense lobbying.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
03:40 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 463 words, total size 3 kb.
1
The MSM keeps telling us that Stephane Dion is a "good man", and someone who is very concerned about our environment. In light of what you have discovered about the complicity of the past Liberal government with the Bromine lobby, how can Dion's image be challenged now?
The ultimate judges of our politicians are the Canadian voters who have an incredibly short attention span and an amazing inability to connect events and issues from the past to the present. We are dealing with the collective intellect of a 10 year old when we refer to the Canadian voters. They only react to whatever floods their feeeeling at the time they are voting, and your excellect investigative blogging is I fear much too complicated for them.
Something one dimensional like SSM or global armaggedon is more relevant to the minds of the Canadian voters, where they can apply their feeeelings to the issue. Bromines, what are they ... something you take for a headache ?!
Posted by: Observer at February 26, 2007 04:41 PM (iXEHD)
2
I've said it several times before at various places on blogging tories, that the LPC avoided Kyoto because they did not want to piss off industry.
Further, the ultimate screw is to have the CPC have to put the screws to Canadian Industry who the MSM has painted as being in bed together for decades (even though they are not).
Posted by: Real Conservative at February 26, 2007 05:06 PM (EZLLA)
3
So far, Canadian politicians seem more interested in talking to the pbde-industry lobby than in taking immediate action to end what some researchers believe could become one of the worst toxic-contamination disasters in history.
Well, ok, I'm onside, as long as you're not flying off into hysteria and hyperbole.
Have the government pencilnecks who are whispering in the ear of the Magazine of the Tusked Seals also calculated how many lives have been saved or drastically improved due to people not being burned to a crisp in flammable pajamas, and subtracted those numbers from the frightening large (we are told) number of people suffering from the ill effects of fire retardants? I sure hope they have. Nothing good ever happens when we're only told half the story.
Posted by: at February 26, 2007 11:00 PM (a0Sy/)
4
The solution is obvious; Dion needs to get himself another dog, and name it "pdbe".
Posted by: SDC at February 27, 2007 08:11 AM (7TnOi)
A timeline of environmental (in)action
In doing to cleanup research on the question of bromine lobbying by key Liberals, I assembled an interesting timeline. It is revealing.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
02:38 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1820 words, total size 14 kb.
1
Is this some kind of joke?
What contortions the Liberals and their friends, who make a living in the
Environmental Quagmire , will go through to pass the buck,
lay the blame and demand action on something that was 'overlooked'
under Dion, the expert environmentalist.
Was it important to keep Duffy gainfully employed? Would he have sued if he
were terminated?
It's amazing what has crawled to the fore for urgent action since the
Conservatives took over.
Interesting timeline indeed.
Do the newsprint rags have this story?
Posted by: Liz J at February 26, 2007 08:07 AM (GEYno)
2
Wow! You are indeed better than a hundred bloodhounds - not that I have any experience in that line. Keep up your excellent work.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 26, 2007 12:56 PM (d7G43)
3
The lack of truthfulness on this subject is bewildering.
whether its the Ipcc saying sea levels will go up 1 foot while gore says 20. Now bromines.
Feel free to discount anything Suzuki says.
http://no-libs.com/?p=1458
Theres a reason he likes toyota hybrids they pay him to....
Posted by: DrWright at February 26, 2007 02:44 PM (rDV0s)
4
Not enough people read this blog.
No one in the MSM is touching this. Tis a pity.
Posted by: PlaidShirt at February 26, 2007 08:04 PM (MAU10)
5
Not enough people read this blog.
Posted by: PlaidShirt at February 26, 2007 08:06 PM (MAU10)
6
Awesome job, Steve!
Posted by: eBow at February 27, 2007 05:18 PM (FVy1L)
February 24, 2007
For five bucks you can be an environmental hero just like David Suzuki
I decided to figure out just how much it will cost uber-environmentalist David Suzuki to drive his monster bus across the country and still be carbon neutral.
The results were surprising, and frankly, they made me laugh at the whole Suzuki circus.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
09:12 AM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 804 words, total size 5 kb.
1
One guess is that their Co2 estimates include the GHG emissions from the creation of the fuel (the CO2's from the oilsands).This idea would suggest that the GHG from the oilsands are not the entire problem of the oil companies but rather the consumer,whether that is a nation or as in this case the owner of a bus.
In either case it is up to the poor to save the planet.The wealthy "Save the Planet"RV owner just has to cut a cheque.
The only doubt is how much.
Posted by: David at February 24, 2007 09:41 AM (YuFsj)
2
Mr. Suzuki gets on my nerves. He's got quite a schtick and he's going to ride his schtick-bus to the end of the trail, no matter what that might entail. Every time I see him pontificating on his cause du jour, I imagine huge amounts of bullshit wafting up into the ozone layer, turning it even browner.
He's got a good thing going for himself, having earned his reputation as on "honest" man during his tenure at the CBC. He's taken that and turned it into a pr bonfire of the vanities. I believe that he's so full of himself that he can't actually see his forest in front of him - trees notwithstanding.
Posted by: Twolane at February 24, 2007 10:01 AM (myuVS)
3
ahhh Dr. fruit Fly . . just another skanky enviro-socialist, heavy on the "Do as i say mantra". You know, same as "All pigs are created equal, but some are more equal than others"
Explains why he is best buds with "The Goreacle", one of the biggest users of private jets.
If the fruit fly guy was smart, he'd be buying those credits on the official Euro market, where the price has collapsed and is now < 1 euro.
http://www.euets.com/
Posted by: Fred at February 24, 2007 10:08 AM (1J6rs)
4
One guess is that their Co2 estimates include the GHG emissions from the creation of the fuel (the CO2's from the oilsands).
I have a problem with that because it dilutes dramatically the incentive to buy fuel efficient vehicles. The CO2 contribution from your engine is miniscule if you have to carry the CO2 contribution of the processing and refinement process too. The idea of being "green" is that you act locally. Your car or bus is your local element in the CO2 chain.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 24, 2007 10:20 AM (xAc/q)
5
I read that Bill Clinton made 40 million dollars in speaking fees. I wonder if money is a factor in traveling "save the planet" tours.
Michael Moore got 30,000 dollars per appearance for appearing at universities to promote his movie.
Posted by: ajkrik at February 24, 2007 12:13 PM (n/W7F)
6
OT, but big:
This is BIG,
Author of the Sun Story goes on Lib blog and says there was no leak!
Proves Ralphie knowingly engaged in a purely fabricated smear. (unlike, you know, the now true allegation that his office leaked).
Here's the statement:
''I wrote the story and there was no leak. It was very apparent from sitting through 19 months of the Air India trial who would be the obvious choices for investigative hearings - all the names came out during the evidence at the trial. After the trial, I wrote my book on Air India, called "Loss of Faith: How the Air India Bombers Got Away With Murder" and reviewed documents related to the one Supreme Court challenge of the investigative hearing provision, launched and lost by Satnam Reyat - the wife of the only man convicted.
I have covered this story since 1985 so there are few mysteries or secrets. I first interviewed Darshan SINgh Saini back in 1988. I have a copy of parts of his police statement that came out during the Air India trial. The reason I wrote the story this week is because I just learned (through Sikh community contacts, not POLICE) that Saini was the father-in-law of Bains. I did not know that until very recently. I called up Saini and Bains and they confirmed it. I thought it was relevant.
So don't always look for a political conspiracy. In this case, there isn't one.
Kim Bolan | 02.23.07 - 2:17 am''
http://pacificgazette.blogspot.com/2007/02/there-was-no-leak.html
Posted by: biff at February 24, 2007 12:31 PM (GN3Xe)
7
I checked out that euets.com site that Fred mentioned above. The spot price for a tonne of carbon credit is 0.85 euros. What is that, about the price of an extra large double-double?
Posted by: Ed Minchau at February 24, 2007 12:35 PM (pPVQ0)
8
i suppose all the people living along the great docs.tour route are breathing much easier knowing that its carbon credit air as opposed to dirty old fossil fuel air.way to go dr. dolittle.hbw
Posted by: harold at February 24, 2007 12:48 PM (NxnPh)
9
- Dion gets critical bloc of votes that put him over the top, from a group very interested in the Air India investigation (the greatest terroist event in Canadian history)
- once in power Dion does a 180 degree turn on the terrorism bill threatening the enquiry, even at the expense of fracturing his own party,
- a story comes out that a close relative of a sitting Lib MP (and presumably a member of the bloc referred to above) is a material witness in Air India,
- the Libs frantically try to silence Harper when he brings the above up,
- Goodale then makes up a false allegation of a "leak", smearing the PM, our intelligence, and the RCMP in the process,
- and that false allegation has now been made known, which allegation suggests the Liberals are panicked and frantically trying to cover on this issue.
Nope, no story there. Now, about that Pearson plaque that was covered up, now THAT'S a story!
Posted by: chuck at February 24, 2007 01:07 PM (GN3Xe)
10
What has disturbed me about Suzuki for years is how much attention he is given in the elementary school science programs, how his every word is taken to be gospel, rather than teaching the kids to think critically, which is what science is all about.
I wish that someone would do a study of the recent elementary science programs around the country, especially on the environmental angle.
Bill Nye, "the science guy" is sometimes the only science some kids will get....a video of his so-called "experiments."
What are kids being taught is a serious question that parents should be interested in finding out.
Posted by: anonymous at February 24, 2007 01:47 PM (DO1b6)
11
Steve..
I don't think I support the idea either. It was just a theory on the way they calculated the ghg emissions.I would however,say that the emissions created from the production of gas (oilsand CO2's)would be added to the cost of the barrel of gas at the pump.The credits would be then sorted out by this tax.
Look, why should we as Canadians, or as the Libs. prefer Albertans,be stuck with the cost of ghg emissions when we are not using the fuel.This cost should be transferred to the buyer.If they don't buy it then there are no emissions.
Clearly there should be incentives to use new technologies in the oilsands but ultimately the buyer should pay.
Posted by: David at February 24, 2007 03:02 PM (YuFsj)
12
"For five bucks you can be an environmentel hero just like David Suzuki."
And blogging is for free. So for nothing you can wear smelly PJ's like Janke, eat stale Dorito's and generally prove you're a right wing douche bag by stoning people who actually do something. Great life you got there, Steve.
Posted by: Don at February 24, 2007 05:48 PM (atnun)
13
"For five bucks you can be an environmentel hero just like David Suzuki."
And blogging is for free. So for nothing you can wear smelly PJ's like Janke, eat stale Dorito's and generally prove you're a right wing douche bag by stoning people who actually do something. Great life you got there, Steve.
Posted by: Don at February 24, 2007 05:48 PM (atnun)
14
Don...Do the environment a favour and oil your bicycle chain with canola oil.You're not doing anything else to help..
Posted by: David at February 24, 2007 06:24 PM (YuFsj)
15
Save your $5.00 - you might not get a receipt any longer. Check out this at Proud to be Canadian. If this is the basis of his "cross-country tour" - his charitable status should be revoked immediately!
"Suzuki violating Canada’s laws? Is he an environmentalist religion “war criminal”?
http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blog/
Posted by: Don't Want To at February 24, 2007 06:46 PM (HI4Hj)
16
Don, you are the perfect example of why Steve will always get under your skin... you can't take the truth and never will want to face the truth. All Steve has done is point out the simple facts and you decide to call him names and try and perpetuate the mainstream version of a blogger. Amazingly enough Steve has done more journalism in this "piece" then most, if not all, of the MSM. There are some very good reporters out there, but they seem hampered by the same brain cramps that you suffer from.
Here is some more truth for you Don. Dr. Suzuki is a hypocrite, pure and simple. Buying offsets instead of doing something concrete is not the solution. He could have found a better, greener, way to spread his message. How about leasing a Hybrid or two for himself and his entourage. Then again, why does he need an entourage anyway?
Steve, well done, and keep showing the MSM that if they really want to do their job, they can, and ordinary Canadians will appreciate it.
Posted by: Dwayne at February 24, 2007 06:49 PM (FtDgF)
17
Suspect the story of offsets is just for public consumption as we think Suzuki is too much of a businessman to be taken in by these offset scams but you never know.
http://tinyurl.com/3996pk
When we invest in a high risk enterprise we expect to at least get shares.
Reminds us of buying indulgences. Thought the reformation did away with that.
Posted by: Dubyadubya at February 24, 2007 07:19 PM (yzOzm)
18
Yeah, he could have chose other means of travel, but multiple hybrids would be less efficient than one bus I think. Also, air travel is vastly more damaging.
The offsets thing is not perfect but it it something until our society can improve transportation emissions on a larger scale. At the very least, it is raising awareness.
So what is your point and what do you propose as an alternative? It's easy to say that he's a hypocrite when you are starting from the do nothing approach. If you think he is alarmist, then you must be a climate change denier and in the minority of expert opinion on the climate of the planet.
Posted by: um ... okay at February 24, 2007 07:53 PM (C9qW/)
19
No-one has EVER said that this guy had any REAL brainpower, correct?
Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at February 24, 2007 08:39 PM (GN3Xe)
20
Had about enough coverage of the Fruit Fly Doc Suzkooky and the Fruit Bat
numb skull Gore with his gory details of the ever closer apocalypse .
Enough of the over-the-top preaching of pure hogwash and less than half
truths , especially to the children with permission of the Lefty 'educators'.
It's time parents get involved before it goes any further.
Posted by: Liz J at February 24, 2007 09:07 PM (1jHn8)
21
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!
Posted by: john at February 24, 2007 09:20 PM (3usbu)
22
The offsets thing is not perfect but it it something until our society can improve transportation emissions on a larger scale.
Why? There is no credible evidence that our emissions are doing anyone harm - and the warmth, transportation and manufacturing that we get from burning fuel is doing us a lot of good. Plus, the CO2 we produce enhances the entire world's agriculture and forestry industries. And if you start making fuel, automobiles and machinery more expensive ("for the children") it could easily backfire and cause people to revert to using cheaper, dirtier fuels like wood, low grade coal, etc. and buy older and dirtier cars, trucks, factory machinery, etc.
It's easy to say that "our society" should do this or that, but unless you can quantify the actual harm that is being done, with certainty, then it's probably better to keep your trap shut and keep your hands off other people's money and jobs.
Posted by: at February 24, 2007 09:29 PM (a0Sy/)
23
"Also, air travel is vastly more damaging."
Thats only IF you increase it. Kooky Suzuki should be traveling on a scheduled airline. No extra fule, unlike Gore. Even Prince Charlie understood that.
Suzuki is like the Hells Angels. Collect teddie bears for kids at Christmas to ofset the crimes you do all year long.
Horny Toad
Posted by: Horny Toad at February 25, 2007 01:20 AM (UZmPH)
24
Sure you can theoretically buy a $20 carbon credit to reduce your footprint, but on a national basis we are talking megatonnes and megabucks. Minister Dion's Project Green plan had an initial $5 billion worth of Kyoto Carbon Credits, and it is now estimated that the total cost would be somewhere around $20 billion at current carbon market prices. God only knows what the price would be is Canada suddenly came on the carbon trading market and was looking for billions of $$$$ worth of credits.
My question of Suzuki would be twofold .. Does he advocate that Canada buy billions of $$$$ worth of Kyoto Carbon Credits to meet it's targets by 2012 and beyond, and, does he trust the Dion Liberals to be the stewards of the environment considering how badly behind Canada is towards meeting it's Kyoto targets on time, which is all the fault of the Liberals ??
It seems to me that the Dion Liberals are Kyoto criminals for having neglected to reduce Canada's GHGs in a timely manner, and Suzuki should have no faith in them to actually reduce GHGs in Canada itself. If the Dion solution is to only offset our GHGs with carbon credits surely Suzuki cannot accept that either.
Posted by: Observer at February 25, 2007 03:20 AM (bzOoa)
25
Dr. Fruit Fly has been an annoying buzz in the collective public's ear for over a decade, but we by and large learned to ignore his hysterical rantings over every human activity on the planet from eating to farting causing a global catastrophe. Boiled down to its essence, Dr. Fruit Fly's theory is that simple human existance is an environmental threat...that type of species-quisling zealotry cannot be rationalized or reasoned with.
But this latest rash of insanity with Kyoto and his political schilling has tanked his credibility completely. When he is stood in the cold hard light of public scrutiny we see a wealthy fear monger who has been in bed with every low life political and corporate cartel there is...and gotten stinking rich evangelizing against the very people who pay his bills. Hypocrite, huckster, political hack, Junk scientist...that's the legacy he's courting.
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at February 25, 2007 09:48 AM (e1kRH)
26
"Kyoto" Scam Of The Century
I'm a global warming denier, and apparently so are the Countries of China and India.
China is building more than 550 new coal-fired energy plants over the next 5 years.
China is saying...global warming is a myth...
India is building more than 220 new coal-fired energy plants over the next 5 years.
India is saying...global warming is a myth...
The planet has been alot warmer in the past without any influence from man,
and China and India know it.
Why do you think Greenland is called Greenland?
Why, are the growing glaciers of Antartica not being reported?
If it warms just a little more, will grapes grow in England like they did during Roman times?
The only real truth about climate change is just that (climate does change).
...on the other side of the coin...
Dalton Mcguinty wants to close 4 coal-fired energy plants here in Ontario because we are destroying the planet!
David Susuki wants to shut down Alberta's oil-sands projects because we are destroying the planet!
Al Gore wants to shut down all aspects of our western democratic society, no-more plains, trains or cars...no-more factories...no-more electricity because we are destroying the planet!
Stephane Dion wants to use Kyoto regulations to make Canada pay for all the new
coal-fired power plants in China, India, Russia..
because we have already destroyed the planet!
Am I the only one to see the hypocracy comming from the socialists.
Do these people have an agenda or what?
Look at those numbers from China,India and tell me again
who and or what is destroying the planet?
When the weatherman can't tell me (consistently),
what the weather will be like..say..a week from next thursday.
One has to wonder, just what Dion,Gore,Susuki and Mcshiffty have been smoking!
Ps...there are links to everything I've said, I just don't have the time right now,
remember...(to quote Kate@SDA) Google is your friend!
Posted by: William at February 25, 2007 10:12 AM (W1+de)
27
Hey Willy: Guess what corporation is contracting the majority of those coal-fired Chinese power plants?...and who is their point man in China? And whose steam ship line is contracted to haul the power generating equipment into China? And who is directing Canadian Kyoto carbon credit $$ to China? And who did they all work for at one time (and still do)? And who exempted China from Kyoto regulation? An who is also China's official broker of carbon credits and western capital investment? What federal party are they all connected to?
For our Liberal lurkers: No it was not Haliburton and the Bushes amd GOP
Like Kate sez..Google is your friend. Google:
Power Pacific Corporation china
Side winder Report Chretien strong
asian triads and sidewinder
Maurice Strong China
Paul Demarais CITC
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at February 25, 2007 12:16 PM (e1kRH)
28
"So what is your point and what do you propose as an alternative?"
How about this: Suzuki could blog and reach (potentially) every person who has internet access, without adding a single gram of CO2 to the atmosphere.
Posted by: Ed Minchau at February 25, 2007 01:12 PM (pPVQ0)
29
HEY !! Lay off slagging Dr. Fruit Fly. It's Oscar night and we should be screaming for The Goreacle to win for his big lie mockumentary. Just proves how gullible so many people are to slick propaganda . . . but the truth is out there:
Inconvenient Truths
Novel science fiction on global warming.
By Patrick J. Michaels
This Sunday, Al Gore will probably win an Academy Award for his global-warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth, a riveting work of science fiction.
The main point of the movie is that, unless we do something very serious, very soon about carbon dioxide emissions, much of GreenlandÂ’s 630,000 cubic miles of ice is going to fall into the ocean, raising sea levels over twenty feet by the year 2100.
WhereÂ’s the scientific support for this claim? Certainly not in the recent PolicymakerÂ’s Summary from the United NationsÂ’ much anticipated compendium on climate change. Under the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeÂ’s medium-range emission scenario for greenhouse gases, a rise in sea level of between 8 and 17 inches is predicted by 2100. GoreÂ’s film exaggerates the rise by about 2,000 percent.
Even 17 inches is likely to be high, because it assumes that the concentration of methane, an important greenhouse gas, is growing rapidly. Atmospheric methane concentration hasn’t changed appreciably for seven years, and Nobel Laureate Sherwood Rowland recently pronounced the IPCC’s methane emissions scenarios as “quite unlikely.”
Nonetheless, the top end of the U.N.’s new projection is about 30-percent lower than it was in its last report in 2001. “The projections include a contribution due to increased ice flow from Greenland and Antarctica for the rates observed since 1993,” according to the IPCC, “but these flow rates could increase or decrease in the future.”
According to satellite data published in Science in November 2005, Greenland was losing about 25 cubic miles of ice per year. Dividing that by 630,000 yields the annual percentage of ice loss, which, when multiplied by 100, shows that Greenland was shedding ice at 0.4 percent per century.
“Was” is the operative word. In early February, Science published another paper showing that the recent acceleration of Greenland’s ice loss from its huge glaciers has suddenly reversed.
Nowhere in the traditionally refereed scientific literature do we find any support for Gore’s hypothesis. Instead, there’s an unrefereed editorial by NASA climate firebrand James E. Hansen, in the journal Climate Change — edited by Steven Schneider, of Stanford University, who said in 1989 that scientists had to choose “the right balance between being effective and honest” about global warming — and a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was only reviewed by one person, chosen by the author, again Dr. Hansen.
These are the sources for the notion that we have only ten years to “do” something immediately to prevent an institutionalized tsunami. And given that Gore only conceived of his movie about two years ago, the real clock must be down to eight years!
It would be nice if my colleagues would actually level with politicians about various “solutions” for climate change. The Kyoto Protocol, if fulfilled by every signatory, would reduce global warming by 0.07 degrees Celsius per half-century. That’s too small to measure, because the earth’s temperature varies by more than that from year to year.
The Bingaman-Domenici bill in the Senate does less than Kyoto — i.e., less than nothing — for decades, before mandating larger cuts, which themselves will have only a minor effect out past somewhere around 2075. (Imagine, as a thought experiment, if the Senate of 1925 were to dictate our energy policy for today).
Mendacity on global warming is bipartisan. President Bush proposes that we replace 20 percent of our current gasoline consumption with ethanol over the next decade. But itÂ’s well-known that even if we turned every kernel of American corn into ethanol, it would displace only 12 percent of our annual gasoline consumption. The effect on global warming, like Kyoto, would be too small to measure, though the U.S. would become the first nation in history to burn up its food supply to please a political mob.
And even if we figured out how to process cellulose into ethanol efficiently, only one-third of our greenhouse gas emissions come from transportation. Even the Pollyannish 20-percent displacement of gasoline would only reduce our total emissions by 7-percent below present levels — resulting in emissions about 20-percent higher than Kyoto allows.
And thereÂ’s other legislation out there, mandating, variously, emissions reductions of 50, 66, and 80 percent by 2050. How do we get there if we canÂ’t even do Kyoto?
When it comes to global warming, apparently the truth is inconvenient. And itÂ’s not just GoreÂ’s movie thatÂ’s fiction. ItÂ’s the rhetoric of the Congress and the chief executive, too.
— Patrick J. Michaels is senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute and author of Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media.
Posted by: Fred at February 25, 2007 01:33 PM (1J6rs)
30
That's just mean, intolerant and antireligious. Trying to confuse the matter with points of science such as open calculations, verifiable amounts of money and emissions. Who do you think you are, bigot? Why can't you respect people's right to worship as they see fit?
Posted by: civitatensis at February 25, 2007 04:37 PM (Nuub6)
31
Fred, do you have a link for that editorial?
Posted by: Ed Minchau at February 26, 2007 04:47 AM (pPVQ0)
32
The ultimate for me though was standing in the cold waiting for my bus to come in downtown Calgary while Mr. Suzuki's "rock tour bus" meandered through the downtown traffic. There's got to be some sort of sweet irony in that!
I think this also highlights one of my other concerns with the whole Kyoto/climate change political situation. Even if we were to grant him the label of carbon neutral, what about all the other nasties he is emitting that contribute to smog and real air pollution. It's like all the Kyoto crowd can see now is CO2.
Posted by: Denis at February 26, 2007 10:55 AM (SqX7o)
33
John, you asked: "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?"
Actually, carbon neutral is better than a 30% reduction of 1990 levels, the terminology just makes things confusing. For example, if I generated a net of 1 tonne of CO2 in 1990 a 30% reduction would be .7 tonnes. If I was able to be truly carbon neutral, I would generate a net of 0 tonnes of CO2.
Posted by: Denis at February 26, 2007 11:03 AM (SqX7o)
34
Three days ago I was a Conservative. Google Steve Tsuida and you'll probably find some of my old posts in Google's wayback machine. Well, I've done some thinking - I know that' not in vogue these days - on the issue and whether you like Suzuki or Gore or not, the point is, we are fouling up the planet and using the old argument that without an economy we can't care for the environment argument to excuse our blind eye.
Well. No environment, no economy.
The conservatism I used to believe in valued hard work, personal sacrifice, and, like the name suggests, conserving. By our practices in Canada we're liberal. We take take take, indulge indulge indulge, slam slam slam. We're howling monkeys decrying evolution. Thieves decrying immorality. Destroyers of the earth decrying godlessness. If Suzuki is a hypocrite -- and he may be -- then what are we? What are we conserving? What are we sacrificing? Why aren't we working harder? Why are we so lazy and fat and indulgent and arrogant?
It's why I'm ditching my politics in favor of creation. I'm going to get involved with the fledgling Creation Care movement inside the nonpolitical evangelical movement.
FWIW I live in Oakridge Calgary, and Stephen Harper is my MP. I'll be putting a reasonable amount of personal time & energy into unelecting him.
What I love is that I could just as easily have written this in Mandarin. Nothing I just said will make any sense to most of you. Just another lunatic talking out of his ass about throttling back the money machine and letting the Chinese and the Indians get ahead of us while we play eco-hippy and accomplish nothing.
Posted by: Steve Tsuida at February 26, 2007 11:40 AM (WSQzs)
35
Um...Steve Tsuida,
Let me be the first to wish you luck on your new venture. But if you're "ditching your politics" and getting involved with a "nonpolitical evangelical movement" won't it be somewhat of a conflict of interest for you to try to "unelect" Mr. Harper ?
Oh, never mind. I'm sure I'm just not smart enough to understand.
Posted by: up north at February 26, 2007 12:19 PM (Puvt5)
36
Steve Tsuida , I think the biggest issue I see now is societal, not nessesarily political.
I am a conservative, but I do care about environmental concerns and try to do what I can when I can. However the "greening" that many argue is needed now must come from the people - I don't believe it is something that can be driven effectively by the government.
No matter what the government does, until the people start working themselves to decrease their consumption there will be little real progress - at best I think what we'll see is a shift on where resources come from (for example, less Alberta oil, more imported).
I think this is similar in many ways to my (and some other conservatives) view on social welfare issues. Much of it is best left in the hands of the people.
You also said: "FWIW I live in Oakridge Calgary, and Stephen Harper is my MP. I'll be putting a reasonable amount of personal time & energy into unelecting him."
Out of curiosity, who would you have take his place. As near as I can see, no political party in Canada with any electoral prospects has a credible environmental plan.
Posted by: Denis at February 26, 2007 12:28 PM (SqX7o)
37
Denis is the only one here who's got it right... the problem is societal... not political or environmental.
Suzuki's point has never been that the only solution to fixing the planet is to remove all traces of humanity... his POINT is that our human society as it currenly operates is unsutainable... i.e. we, (particularly those of us lucky enough to live in "first world" consume resources faster than our planets eco-system can replace them... in addition in our constant drive to accumulate wealth and improve our "standard of living" we are in fact diretly threatening the planets ability to regenerate those resourses... and finally that currently there is no credible "plan" or technology that will change the current trends...
his warning is that if these issues aren't addressed at some point the solution will be forced on us probably is some cataclysmic event. (see Mayan civilization al la Jerod Diamond)
In all those points and assertations like it or not Suzuki is EXACTLY 100% CORRECT! the only uncertainly is WHEN... not IF.
Suzuki's support of Kyoto isn't about GHG reduction.. (he like me actually thinks Kyoto is a load of crap... but he does see Kyoto and global warming as a way to inform and hopefully galvanize understanding among the general populous to start doing something about the above issue...
Kyoto is a political document... Politicians, lawyers, lobbiests... (as they will do) took an environmental ideal and warped, corrupted, and mutiliated the idea of climate change into something that serves only 2 purposes... to get them elected, and to make them money. politicians, lawyers, and lobbiests don't really believe in global warming cause there is no politican on the planet who can see anything beyond the next 4 years... (buisnessmen are worse they can't see past the next quarterly report, and the media who can't see past the next news-day) the issue of climate change, society's use of resources etc... is a generation spanning issue. Alberta's oilsands is mere background noise to the real issue..
in summary... Suzuki - he's right... even if I disagree with his method for promoting it... he's still right.
Kyoto - is crap... it's a political document abused by persons with an agenda that has nothing to do with environmental sustainablility and everything to do with making millionaires out of those who understand it well enough to fool the public.
Posted by: Sierra at February 26, 2007 03:11 PM (eS69k)
38
Sorry I should add... the Anti- Kyoto crowd isn't all innocent either... there ARE things that the Oil-sands developers could do to make thier operations more efficnent and less poluting... it would cost them about and extra 15% in capital costs and actually reduces thier operating expense... but the accountants in control of those developers are even worse than the Politicans, buisinesmen, and media... they can't see past their economic indicators...
Posted by: Sierra at February 26, 2007 03:16 PM (eS69k)
39
Hypothetically if the Suzuki bus travelled for every minute of the 28 day tour at 100 k/hr. they would only have travelled 42,000 miles. That means that they could not stop to talk, sleep, eat or refuel and would still be 28,000 miles short of the necessary distance to meet their estimate. Kyoto math no doubt.
Posted by: Bernie at February 26, 2007 03:59 PM (9eRIZ)
40
Bernie Last time I drove from winnnipeg to connecticut it was a 3 day drive about 30 hours.
The thing is horkin,
http://no-libs.com/?p=1447
and david suzuki is a fascist.
http://www.dustmybroom.com/?p=5826
mp3 file,
: )
Posted by: DrWright at February 26, 2007 04:54 PM (rDV0s)
41
"How about this: Suzuki could blog and reach (potentially) every person who has
internet access, without adding a single gram of CO2 to the atmosphere."
Um ... yeah, that'll work. BTW he already blogs, but I hate to tell you this ... not everyone reads blogs. Not a real solution. If that is your solution let's keep the pols out of their campaign buses this spring too. Sure. that'll work.
Posted by: at February 26, 2007 11:41 PM (C9qW/)
42
Even blogging adds CO2.
You need electricity to run that computer you blog from (how many people posting here are using solar or wind electricity to power their computers or charge the batteries for their laptops ?).
Plus, somebody's gotta manufacture the computer -and manufacturing requires electricity too.
Did anyone else happen to catch Dr Suzuki and Stephen Lewis on CBC's "The Current" 2 weeks ago ? They gave this zoologist and this AIDS activist an uninterrupted half hour to cry gloom and doom about something they have no formal training in. There were no dissenting opinions aired. The host didn't even question anything they said.
I did notice that the both of them managed to take a few shots at conservatives (Canada and the US, past and present) for being the root cause of global warming and anything else that ails us. Not that this could possibly have anything to do with grinding political axes.
I'm sure it's just coincidence that Stephen Harper runs his campaign on set priorities -gets elected - stays focused on his priorities and -while not prefect- does well enough on them that the Canadian people aren't howling for his removal - - and now suddenly we have this media/Liberal driven frenzy shoving a whole new priority down his -and our- throats.
Posted by: up north at February 27, 2007 11:57 AM (Zk8Qy)
43
Quote:
"But according to my numbers, I ought to be able to plop down my fifty bucks and be allowed to buy my gas-guzzling CO2-belching Hummer to drive back and forth to the grocery store for the next 5 years, and Suzuki and his friends can just shut the hell up."/Quote
Damn good line!
Suzuki, The Goracle, and all their pinko friends are discovering what we used to teach kids (like poor Gillian Wiley). Telling lies will only end up trapping you in a web of deceit. It's nice to see Dion and company repeating the BS, for it makes it easier to predict a CP majority when Harper finally puts this Parliament out of its misery and calls an election.
Posted by: Larry at February 28, 2007 05:34 PM (aRIbx)
Charles Rust-Tierney: This is a reason child pornogrpahy is just banned outright
The former chapter president of the Virgina branch of the American Civil Liberties Union has been arrested on charges of posessing child pornography.
Given the ACLU's position on child pornography, you have to wonder just what happened to Charles Rust-Tierney.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
03:48 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.
1
So then, by inference, I can become gay by spending too much time near gays? I can become an alcoholic by spending too much time near a drunk, or a bottle? I suspect you're being tongue-in-cheek. I hope.
Posted by: Twolane at February 24, 2007 10:06 AM (myuVS)
2
I couldn't agree more with you, Steve. Child porn is a cancer, and like all cancers it has the potential to metastasize if left unguarded. Still, lets not discount the possibility that the very reason for Mr. Rust-Tierney's involvement with the ACLU in the first place was the protection and promotion of the interests and activities of pedophiles of which he, as it turns out, is a part.
Posted by: Lee at February 24, 2007 10:38 PM (hS8YK)
3
Twolane: Spending time with gay people and with people who drink too much alcohol are not good analogies to watching kiddie porn. Kiddie porn works on the mind and like so many sexual addictions, one's attraction to it and tolerance for it increase with increased exposure.
'Could be that it's become an increasing problem because there are far too many people in positions of influence/power who are involved and who, for various reasons, aren't being detected or arrested. In other words, they're being protected. There's a lot of money in child porn, in making it available for viewing and in trafficking it.
I get the feeling that kiddie porn and the drug trade have a lot in common. Both could be greatly reduced, though probably not eradicated, if there was a political will to curtail both trades. But, I suspect, there are individuals in positions of power in our society, in the U.S. and Canada, who have far too much to lose--and far too much power to be outed. I think there are a lot of palms being greased to cover up who the king pins are.
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 26, 2007 06:02 PM (DsRYC)
4
Interestingly, the New York Times has elected to not run this story at all. I just checked the NYT website (fact-checking what I heard on FOX News) -no mention. Fox also pointed out that the Washington Post -for whom this would be a local story- buried it in the second section of their paper.
I wonder what sort of coverage it would have received had this guy been, say, a Republican politician, an evangelical Christian or a former NRA executive...?
Posted by: up north at February 27, 2007 12:30 PM (Zk8Qy)
5
It is so amazing how this story about Tierney has had
no coverage on any local news television stations.
As soon as the evangelical minister got caught it was
all over the news. Like usual the ultra liberals are
going to hush-hush this and play it down. It is also
not being told that this pornography was involving the
rape of little girls ages 5-9. It is just sick, sick
sick!
Posted by: Connie at February 28, 2007 09:50 PM (+gXMB)
6
Another fine example of liberal leftism at its core. Tierney is the perfect example of how the sick and perverted take advantage of there public positions. A hypocryte and scoundrel, this person fought to discribe child porn as a first amendment right and that it was ok to utilize public libraries to infiltrate this media. He along with the ACLU should be dismantled and left to burn. This is not a cancer, this is not a sickness, this is just sick and there is no cure but only for him to never see the light of day and rot in a cell so that he will not ever be able to see a child again or promote the underworld of child porn by purchasing its smut.
Posted by: nobody at March 01, 2007 10:28 PM (MOW/h)
February 22, 2007
Prominent Sikh Liberal resigns over Stephane Dion's position on anti-terror bill
Stephane Dion is attempting to face down a growing revolt over his insistence that two provisions in the anti-terror bill designed by Jean Chretien's government be allowed to lapse. Not only are his MPs grumbling, Liberals outside of the caucus are upset.
I have just received a copy of a letter from Sarwan Singh Randhawa, a prominent Sikh community member and member of the Liberal Party, resigning his membership with the party over this issue.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
04:47 PM
| Comments (45)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
1
He is probably the first of a growing list of party members and who knows, some MP's to resign.
Dion can do whatever he wants to do to force MP's to vote but it will cost him dearly in the long run.
Who knows - the Liberals may oust him for his ineffective leadership on this and any other issue anyone can name.
Posted by: On-Tory-O at February 22, 2007 06:01 PM (slSoQ)
2
I was wondering if the threat is not to sign nomination papers would any be considering the most prevalent option in this parliament and cross the floor. The thought is would we accept them.
Posted by: Tom at February 22, 2007 06:15 PM (TJ8Fk)
3
The Liberals are looking increasingly desperate in the House. I watched Ralph Goodale making all kinds of nasty comments about PM Stephen Harper and yet demanding an apology for what he perceived was the same done to his colleague by PM Harper yesterday.
I think that Iggy is sitting on the wrong side of the floor...but, I wouldn't trust him.
I did watch Garth Turner.....wonder if he thinks that he's chosen a greater evil than the one he left. Where else can he go now???
Posted by: anonymous at February 22, 2007 06:40 PM (DO1b6)
4
I believe the Libs are actually playing into Dion the weak so that Trudeau will look that much better by comparison, I believe they have written this election off and are already planning the next coronation.
We should be careful how low we allow Dion to take the Libs, the darker the past the brighter the future and the easier the sell.
A complete slaughter of the Libs will allow a new messiah to be created.
Posted by: Durward at February 22, 2007 06:42 PM (pdf5D)
5
Is it just me or is MP Randhawa illiterate?
Alan in Africa
Posted by: Alan in Africa at February 22, 2007 06:45 PM (EVK8I)
6
Randhawa is not an MP.
Posted by: Shawn at February 22, 2007 06:57 PM (lMTw7)
7
And English is not his first language. I'm not sure what the rules are for the use of the indefinite and definite articles is in Sikh, but sometimes people translate directly, and if the rules are different, it can look odd to native speakers.
And consider that he might have written this letter in some anger. Nothing brings out an accent (spoken or written) like strong emotion.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 22, 2007 07:13 PM (ji0Y4)
8
Well, my level of respect for Mr Randhawa just went up a couple of notches...
Posted by: Deaner at February 22, 2007 07:29 PM (NlY1X)
9
Sikhs speak Punjabi:
I agree with the contributors who feel that the definite article has
colonial overtones. To shift the debate to another continent, consider
India: "The Punjab" immediately suggests the days of the Raj, and
every Punjabi I know (i.e. not just Khalistani secessionists!) says
"I come from Punjab". But then, Punjabi doesn't have articles either,
definite or indefinite ...
From the Linguist Listserv message list.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 22, 2007 08:14 PM (ji0Y4)
10
Is it just me or is MP Randhawa illiterate?
Whether He is illiterate or not,doesn't really enter into this post.
Alan in Africa:
You couldn't possibly be one of those folks that would point out a physical defect in a handicapped person's life.
Such as OOOH,she's missing a leg or some such foolishness.
Naw...Not you!
Posted by: Simon at February 22, 2007 08:19 PM (oQU+V)
11
Don't give Alan a hard time. Maybe he wasn't being very sensitive, but it made me do some research, and I confirmed that Sikhs speak Punjabi, and Punjab does not use the definite or indefinite article, which speaks to the authenticity of the letter.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 22, 2007 08:48 PM (ji0Y4)
12
What I'm hoping with this kind of resignation--and kudos to Mr. Randhawa for standing on principle here--will lead to many more.
Finally, the Liberals are being exposed for the purely opportunistic power brokers they are. I'm hoping that as the Liberal-Good-Guy mask is stripped away by the principled governance of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the CPC--despite the MSM's doing everything they can to give the Libs cover--greater numbers of principled individuals who have until now voted Liberal will no longer vote Liberal but will move their votes across the aisle.
Here's hoping...
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 22, 2007 09:18 PM (MqXeJ)
13
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any Liberal MPs to cross the floor to the CPC. But, on the question as to whether we should accept any such defectors, my answer would be yes. Contrary to what some of our Liberal friends would have people believe, Mr Harper never condemned floor-crossing, never said he'd do away with it and would therefore not be a hypocrite (unlike Garth Turner).
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 22, 2007 09:26 PM (g7gYB)
14
You have to give Dion points for being decisive though. He made a decision and is sticking to it. From what I hear now, the Tories will cave and offer concessions (new provisions or a rewording of the clause as recommended by the Senate report) to ensure a strategic retreat. Dion may have won a game of brinksmanship on this one. Harper had a hand to play but he blew it when he went after Bains. Don Martin has a good article on the whole thing.
Posted by: Scott Blurton at February 22, 2007 09:36 PM (qUORm)
15
No wonder Ujjal Dosanjh had a heart attack he had to know this was coming. Say goodbye to your constituency Ujjal and the pension that you hoped you could double-dip from the Canadian taxpayers.
Hopefully Dee-Yawn will stick with this decision, it will easily cost him three or more seats in BC probably six or better across the country.
The Conservatives are playing these lying conniving Lieberals like a fiddle,
There is absolutely NO upside for Dee-Yawn here, Oh happy day.
Posted by: Cascadian at February 22, 2007 09:38 PM (1+Lce)
16
I hope more principled Sikhs join Sarwan Singh Randhawa in denouncing Dion and his obvious attempt to weaken the ATA and cripple the RCMP and CSIS in their work to defend Canada from terrorism in our midst.
Why would Dion want to destroy athe effectiveness of the ATA when Canadian soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan and alQaeda leaders are condemning Canada as an ally of the USA ? There is something we don't know about this Stephane Dion and his French citizenship.
Posted by: Observer 2 at February 22, 2007 09:41 PM (0sgMK)
17
If the Liberals are sincere, then why aren't they asking for an apology from the Vancouver Sun?
Posted by: Dennis (Second Thoughts) at February 22, 2007 09:43 PM (pjwZk)
18
Brian in Calgary: I wasn't anticipating Liberals crossing the floor to the CPC but, rather, Liberal VOTERS taking their VOTES across the aisle to the CPC.
That would be sweet.
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 22, 2007 10:02 PM (MqXeJ)
19
This blog has jumped the goldfish. You would think that the biggest (actually the only) problem anyone faces is "The Lieberals". The "lieberals", so I've been told, are not the government of Canada. And obviously they are unlikely to be the government of Canada anytime soon, given their noticeable lack of an intellectual or moral compass. Or a leader, or followers, or a clue.
So what do you have to say about the guys who currently have your pocketbook by the short and curlies? Is the best thing you can say about them, "Well the other guys are 'way worse, look how bad they are!!" ??? Mighty faint praise.
By failing to criticize (or even notice) the Conservative Party, and picking over the "Lieberal" organization with dental picks and a proctoscope, you'll help the latter to improve their strategy for a comeback and you'll allow the former to degenerate into lazy, corrupt, socialist slobs.
Posted by: at February 22, 2007 10:04 PM (a0Sy/)
20
Liberal dominated Senate... gives Dion a good spanking...
-- OTTAWA -- A Senate committee says controversial provisions in the anti-terror law should be extended for three years, but it has also suggested more safeguards for civil liberties be built into the Anti-Terrorism Act.
Posted by: neo at February 22, 2007 10:20 PM (2bdx3)
21
Hey anonymous (10:04pm), if you've got a patient with cancer, you don't just cut the tumour away and them hope for the best. You need to be damned sure it's gone.
And that's exactly what the LPC has become. A cancer on our society. Malignant. Deadly. And tenacious as hell.
Canadian soldiers died on peacekeeping missions because they wouldn't equip the military properly.
Canadians died on medical waiting lists while Liberals traded envelopes full of cash.
Canadians were raped and murdered by criminals who should have never been on the streets -while liberals congratulated themselves on how "progressive" their thinking is.
Liberals deliberately infuriated our biggest trading partner in order to look ...what ? Tough ? Decisive ?
When they weren't too busy outright stealing it, they pissed our national treasury away on worthless boondoggles that achieved absolutely nothing.
And if there was an election called tomorrow, we could go out and watch LPC signs sprout like mushrooms on people's lawns (a rather fitting analogy -if I do say so myself).
What this site does is drag as many of their depredations as possible into the light. Then it's the job of us readers to bludgeon this information into the empty heads of that horrifying number of voters who are completely absorbed with Anna Nicole Smith and Brittany Spears and simply AREN'T PAYING ATTENTION.
The Conservatives ? Sure we notice them.
As they try to re-equip the military.
As they actually show some spine on international affairs.
As they act like adults when dealing with the US.
As they try to funnel some desperately needed relief to Canadians who are still trying to make a go of raising their own families.
With a minority government.
The Conservatives are not above criticism, but the Liberals are still a threat to this nation. They need to be shoved into real obscurity for a long long time. There's no lack of leftist political parties to harp at the Conservatives. But if we give the Liberals a pass on all their antics over the last few decades and put them back into power then our country is well and truly screwed.
That's my theory anyways...
Deep, eh ?
Posted by: up north at February 22, 2007 10:46 PM (Vic5x)
22
If the Liberals ever get in again,there will be civil war in this country.So we will be fighting in aphganistan and in Canada.The corruption is still very very deep in this country so we must slap them and kick them and punch them to keep them down because we are in a war now and the only thing saving us is TRUTH & doing the right thing.Both of these are lacking on the liberal benches and with their followers.The one thing that they have a lot of is LIES & entitlements.Keep up the good fight PM Harper,they look like a bunch of deer in the headlights across the floor,so just turn on the high beams and zap them.
Posted by: bert at February 22, 2007 11:07 PM (jIXdB)
23
Good thread tonight and food for thought.
OK Steve;I will concede that I was a bit harsh with Alan and your right: more information did come out.
A good night to all.
Posted by: Simon at February 22, 2007 11:15 PM (oQU+V)
24
Perhaps "Harper blowing it" is more evidenced by liberal-leaning MSM spin than fact.
See today\'s National Post editorial.
mhb23re
[at gmail d0t calm]
Posted by: mhb at February 23, 2007 07:54 AM (2/Us5)
25
When you talk about the Liberals - the old adage - where there is smoke there is fire - comes to mind.
The recent polls showing SH becoming a leader in the minds of the majority of Canadians has thrown the Liberals and their MSM cronies into a Tizzy - they had to attempt to bring down those numbers.
Unfortunately, Canadians have been so attuned to the Liberals rewarding their friends, that articles like the V.S. just add fuel to that fire.
Great National Post article - thankfully there are logical journalists out there and between them, blogs and the Liberals just generally screwing up, Canadians will hopefully have their eyes opened.
Posted by: Alberta Girl at February 23, 2007 08:24 AM (nMd+I)
26
Don't need a "dental pick" or a" proctoscope" to scoop the poop on the
Lieberals. The crap has risen to the surface for all to see. They are now too
broke to cover it up.
Anyone who doesn't like the cleaning up process, which entails telling the truth
and cleaning things up, not criticizing the cleaners, TOUGH!
Posted by: Liz J at February 23, 2007 08:44 AM (BEeEf)
27
Steve is a little nerd.
This blog sucks.
Posted by: derrick at February 23, 2007 09:12 AM (+USvv)
28
The real deal
http://pichunter.com/
Posted by: dan at February 23, 2007 09:13 AM (+USvv)
29
Harper has been focusing on the Liberal caucus for weeks when it comes to the anti-terror provisions. He's been saying "extremist elements in the Liberal caucus" over and over again, even before this Bains story.
This leads me to believe that Bains is the beginning, not the end. We'll see.
Posted by: Dennis (Second Thoughts) at February 23, 2007 09:28 AM (pjwZk)
30
WE HAVE TO REALIZE WE ARE IN TROUBLE WHEN:
The Supreme Court, (Supreme What?), has struck down Security Certificates.
What tool was used? Why our Charter of course. The Document that has the
potential to take us down when applied by the clowns in the Supreme Court.
The challengers to our security law were from hotbeds of Terrorism, Morocco,
Syria and Algeria, those Dudes have succeeded in taking down our law and
probably at great expense TO WE THE PEOPLE.
We have to question WHY THEY DON'T LIKE OUR LAW.
WHY WOULD IT CONCERN THEM IF THEY ARE UPRIGHT, LAW
ABIDING CITIZENS, WITHOUT REASON TO SUSPECT THEM?
WHY DO THE Y WANT IT CHANGED? THEY CAN GO BACK WHERE
THEY CAME FROM AS A FIRST CHOICE UNDER THAT LAW.
WHO PAID FOR THEIR CHALLENGE? JUST WHAT HAVE THEY
CONTRIBUTED TO OUR COUNTRY?
Now we have the Liberals wanting to get softer on terrorism in general.
BRING ON AN ELECTION WHILE WE STILL HAVE A COUNTRY.
WE NEED A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY TO SAVE US.
Posted by: Liz J at February 23, 2007 11:03 AM (bdBPV)
31
Steve is a little nerd. This blog sucks.
Thanks for the feedback, Derrick,
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 23, 2007 11:06 AM (27ap9)
32
Furthermore, those dudes are NOT CANADIAN CITIZENS and they are
appealing our laws.
Have the Courts no concern for our country?
Posted by: Liz J at February 23, 2007 11:28 AM (CLKV3)
33
To Liz J
I'd like to think they do (call me naive). However, their rulings do tend to give the impression that they have more concern for criminals than for victims.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 23, 2007 12:04 PM (g7gYB)
34
It is certainly refreshing and reassuring that at
least some liberals Mp's are principled enough to
put their reputations, and even their jobs on the line
when it comes to where they draw the line.
Well done and my hat is off to you Sarwan Singh
Randhawa. The rest of the liberal caucas should
follow suit.
Posted by: WarHammer at February 23, 2007 12:45 PM (U9px3)
35
Sarwan Singh Randhawa is not an MP, he WAS a Liberal Party
supporter/member.
It is heartening to know there are such people of character taking
principled action on such a serious matter.
Sadly the Liberal caucus will follow the orders of their misguided leader and
vote nay. Our Country will be lesser for it. They can explain their actions to
the electorate in the soon to come election and pay the price.
Posted by: Liz J at February 23, 2007 01:38 PM (yXjYn)
36
The most entertaining thing about this is that the LPC will have a hell of a time trying to depose Dion as leader. Dion's stubborness will prove a frustrating obstacle, as he makes the case that his mandate comes from the LPC delegates, not the MPs, the Executive, or anyone else. I bet the Libs long for the good old days when leaders were chosen by the caucus, and could be dumped by the caucus.
Posted by: Calgary Junkie at February 23, 2007 02:08 PM (laCpO)
37
After seeing the photo of the spawn of Satan on the front page of the Post today, I'm surprised no one else commented on this:
"I believe the Libs are actually playing into Dion the weak so that Trudeau will look that much better by comparison, I believe they have written this election off and are already planning the next coronation.
We should be careful how low we allow Dion to take the Libs, the darker the past the brighter the future and the easier the sell.
A complete slaughter of the Libs will allow a new messiah to be created.
Posted by: Durward at February 22, 2007 06:42 PM"
Certainly a scary thought.
Posted by: Larry at February 23, 2007 03:05 PM (aRIbx)
38
Just wondering, if we get rid of all our anti terrorism laws, will they have a
carte blanch to set up terrorist groups and fund raise as well as encourage
immigration of such groups?
Seems if there are no laws with teeth to deal with them they'll surely be
empowered.
Posted by: Liz J at February 23, 2007 03:27 PM (cp0pi)
39
Steve,
You've been on a roll since you got the new lay out up and running. Now you're back to the good stuff.
Congratulations on the good catches.
Posted by: PlaidShirt at February 23, 2007 10:45 PM (yjtH2)
40
Your piffling security certificates were a pathetic failure against the awesome attractive power of the biggest, richest, most undemanding welfare state on earth. If you really want to protect your socialist paradise from undesirable outsiders, you'll have to go Joe Stalin and build a wall to keep them out. Until the country is broke and the dollar is worthless. Then, you can use the wall to keep people in.
'Course, you could always dismantle the welfare state and allow immigration to take place freely, with respect for private property and free enterprise ... Nah - too radical! Let's build the wall and destroy the currency instead.
Posted by: at February 24, 2007 12:11 AM (a0Sy/)
41
Well said, Liz. It's about time the people got our country back from the bleeding hearts and blinder-wearing do-gooders. It's a travesty when the constitution can be used to trash laws passed by parliament, especially when the initiators have no vested interest in keeping Canada a free society. Freedom does carry a price tag and hopefully we'll be able to afford it. Honest, law-abiding Canadians have nothing to fear from security certificates.
Posted by: conrad at February 24, 2007 10:19 AM (TyOYE)
42
If this keeps up the liberal party is going to be decimated in the next election! It just goes to show that people are waking up and smelling the liberal bullshit... and they are not liking the smell...
Posted by: Troy at February 24, 2007 07:17 PM (cq02H)
43
Does anyone here come to the conclusion I have lately re the Liberals and why they would like to make things more difficult for real defenders of this country and it's ecomomy? Trashing our armed forces, signing onto Kyoto. With Kyoto who benefits from an emasculated economy? Try thinking of them as shills for The People's Republic of China and join the dots. Why is Moe Strong on Suzuki's board? Where does Moe live? Why is Martin and Power Corp involved in China with CITIC, an arm of the People's Liberation Army? Why do the Liberals play soft with the Muslims and their organizations in Canada? Maybe because the muslims are the proxies of the Chinese via Syria and Iran. Be like Presto, think BIG. The Liberals are compromised, the shrillness of their attacks on anyone but themselves makes me wonder on whose payroll they really are on.
Posted by: joe-blow canuck at February 24, 2007 07:40 PM (P2HkJ)
44
The Conservatives have lots of ammunition to shoot at those hypocrites in the
Liberal seats tomorrow in QP. They had better be careful where they tread.
His reverence, Ralphy Goodale had better be careful where he steps, he
has lost a whole lot of room to maneuver. He and a few other stooges have
been caught out on their accusations.
Posted by: Liz J at February 25, 2007 05:24 PM (i1pFO)
45
cialis forum
Posted by: black@aol.com at May 22, 2007 09:06 PM (HlLIw)
Kyoto targets an unachievable fiction: Liberal insiders
By 2012, Canada's emissions must be 6% below 1990 levels in order to meet the Kyoto targets. Of course, we all know that in the years since the Liberals ratified the treaty in 2002, emissions have risen by over 30%. As Stephane Dion has plaintively cried, priorities were elsewhere. It wasn't his fault.
Actually, he's right. No one could meet the targets. Eddie Goldenberg, a senior Liberal advisor, has revealed today that the government of Jean Chretien always knew that the targets were unachievable. Worse yet, another source explains that the targets were set in a completely capricious manner, unconnected in any way to any kind of science.
It seems to me that the sooner Stephane Dion realigns his priorities, the better. He's a fool if he continues to carry the standard of Kyoto, now understood to be an utter fiction, and foisted upon him by his Liberal Party predecessors who no longer have to answer for their decisions.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
04:23 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 997 words, total size 7 kb.
1
Good post and interesting info, but I for one don't want Stephane to change his priorities one iota!
Just keep the holy mantle of Kyoto front and centre Stephane!
Skal!
Posted by: The Hammer of Thor at February 22, 2007 05:25 PM (SdwQh)
2
I would like to see the Liberal plan on how we can achieve Kyoto.
The lastest vote in the House of Commons forcing the Conservatives to achieve the Kyoto goals was rich. I think they were just curious to see a plan...any plan because they never had one.
I hope that Canadians are smart enough to know that there is more to environmental policy than signing a piece of paper and giving money away to buy carbon credits.
Posted by: greg at February 23, 2007 01:48 AM (7EBQa)
3
Don't worry. If the Lieberals were in power, they wouldn't send money away for carbon credits either.
They need all the money they can get, here in Canada - to fund Gun Control.
Posted by: Jim at February 23, 2007 06:51 AM (C3//l)
4
With carbon credits trading at about a penny a ton, seems like a great time to pay for a few million tons.
Posted by: Karbon at February 23, 2007 05:25 PM (BwJhh)
5
Dion is trying to come off as a firm decision maker, he made a decision on
the Kyoto file and by god he'll stick with it.
He made a decision to vote down the Terrorist Bill and by god he'll take out the
whip and stick to it.
He's acting like a stubborn bone head rather than a smart, decisive leader.
He is rapidly taking himself out of contention to lead his party long term, let
alone , GOD FORBID, lead the Country.
Posted by: Liz J at February 24, 2007 09:30 AM (XpIER)
6
So now we have Chretien's Little Eddie Goldenberg stating what has become
obvious, Kyoto is not achievable. Chretien either knew or didn't know and
didn't care.
The part he did like, sending money off to China and other polluters to
make big bucks for certain companies and friends. The rest he ignored for
ten years after signing. Dion took the mantle of Environment , kept promising
a plan but never delivered. Now he is trying to convey he is the expert with all
the right answers on the file. He's Mr. Kyoto and that's fine, he is not in
power and if he takes the government out by collaborating with Blocheads
and Dippers, they're all done like dinner.
Posted by: Liz J at February 25, 2007 09:51 AM (dCEb9)
7
" Karbon"
the ONLY reason market credits are so low... is cause there IS no market yet... no-one actually has to comply with ANYTHING untill next year. you have to look at the FORCASTED price... which is somewhere between $15 and $50/tonne depending on who you ask. You actually can't buy CDM credits untill the compliance period starts which is 2008.
as for the liberal target being made out of the blue... tell me something I didn't know... anyone who's worked on the file in the last 13 years... including Bramley... knows that the target Canada set was about Legasy... not science..
sas for the liberal plan? their plan was to use the outrage at buying offshore credits to set up a Slush budget that liberal friendly ridings could draw from to fund all sorts of fuzzy GHG reducing scams, and in effect replace the sponsorship fund they lost.
Posted by: Sierra at February 26, 2007 02:38 PM (eS69k)
8
hello
Posted by: tonny@gmail.com at May 05, 2007 05:04 PM (V7Hot)
Stephane Dion: Dim bulb
Australia, not a signatory to Kyoto, takes concrete action under its Liberal government.
Canada, signatory to Kyoto, achieved nothing in a dozen years of its Liberal government.
But remember, the Liberal Party of Australia is centre-right, that is, conservative. Canada's Liberal Party is centre-left, that is, ineffective.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
02:14 PM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 447 words, total size 3 kb.
1
I disagree. The best way to deal with products that are harmful to the environment (such as incandescents and petrol) is to apply externalities to the products. If 1 bulb costs society $0.05 cents worth of damage, then that 5 cents should be passed onto the consumer. The extra fee will help deter them away from it, and towards a more eco friendly alternative. The fee can be used to pay for projects that help the environment, such as planting trees. This allows people the free will to choose what is worth it for them. If someone deems incandescents worthy to buy at a higher cost (because they produce a warmer light), and are therefore willing to pay for damage caused by using the said product, who are we to say no?
If we outright ban a product like this, then it will just spawn a blackmarket (see drugs for an example).
For a good example, see London's downtown driving fee.
Posted by: Jonny_eh at February 22, 2007 03:28 PM (ZQ7AG)
2
You do know, Your Jankiness, that the main reason Canada has failed to be on Kyoto track is the Oilsands project.
What exactly do you propose we do about that messy elephant in the room?
Posted by: Not-Angry at February 22, 2007 04:04 PM (3wKo9)
3
I hate flourescent bulbs. They're not as bright.
Posted by: Dennis (Second Thoughts) at February 22, 2007 04:09 PM (51pzt)
4
"More meaningful? Just how stupid do you have to be before you can qualify to be an environmentalist?"
Ahem, I guess the no name-calling policy does not extend to environmentalists.
That aside, look at the word itself: environ (to form a circle or ring around) mentalists (a mind reader, psychic, or fortune teller).
Instead of trying to paint a doomsday scenario, why don't those young able-bodied & idealistic environmentalists go to third world countries to offer their services to plant trees, dig wells, show people how to compost, how to recycle, show them how to rid their cities & villages of raw garbage, etc. A sort of Peace Corps for the environment, instead of showing up at demonstrations here dressed up like polar bears.
Another aside: I miss the preview function.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 22, 2007 04:13 PM (d7G43)
5
.."What exactly do you propose we do about that messy elephant in the room?"
The Libs should have answered that before signing Kyoto.
Posted by: David at February 22, 2007 04:24 PM (YuFsj)
6
To top it all off, the Polar Bears are thriving.
It would be kind to say the Enviro-Cultists are spreading a myth but I prefer to
call them what they are, FLAMING LIARS AND SCAREMONGERS, they've
crossed the line into the realm of brainwashing our children.
It may take a generation to correct when the real truth is revealed.
No one denies we need to decrease pollution. It might start in places that still
dump raw sewage into our oceans on both coasts. Halifax, Montreal and
Victoria. It's not a pretty picture to imagine Dolphins and other beautiful
marine life being hit with crap form Humans who are supposed to be superior
and thus know better.
NO BLOODY EXCUSES!
Anyway, as light bulbs go, Dion does not shine TOO BRIGHTLY.
Posted by: Liz J at February 22, 2007 04:41 PM (2aZqH)
7
Charge more for bulbs to stop people from buying them? Just like cigarettes? Just another useless tax that would be.
Posted by: Jon at February 22, 2007 05:25 PM (ncggm)
8
Low hanging fruit, people. We could work for decades on the oil sands and still not make much progress. But we can tackle some easy problems, with little downside to the economy, and make some progress. Eventually you run out of low hanging fruit, of course. But to go the other direction is to invite paralysis, and the job doesn't get done, even a little bit.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 22, 2007 06:04 PM (ji0Y4)
9
Why does every environmentalist bash the oilsands? Unless you walk everywhere and live in cold and darkness you are supporting the oilsands in one way or another (oh yeah and when you are sleeping in the cold, you better not be wearing any of those polyester fibres either).
When you put that nozzle in your gas tank, you don't get to choose what comes from the oilsands and what does not even if you are putting that nozzle in your Prius or Smart Car.
If everyone who claims to support Kyoto would live without the 'fruits' of the oilsands, then we would have no problem meeting Kyoto. The problem is that people are willing to talk the talk, but not willing to walk the walk.
Posted by: greg at February 23, 2007 01:39 AM (7EBQa)
10
Steve:
What about the environmental concerns over the "dead" lmini-florescents, which have mercury in the. They are hazardous waste which in my community means they go into the landfill.
Posted by: Fergy at February 23, 2007 12:37 PM (EZWC9)
11
sorry for the bad post but your comment box is wonky.
Posted by: Fergy at February 23, 2007 12:38 PM (EZWC9)
12
Hey Not_Angry,
How is it possible to blame the Oilsands projects as the "main reason" for failure to meet Kyoto?
The oilsands are currently responsible for producing 34 MT of CO2 per annum, (growing yes) but as out total output is 550-600MT, this amounts to only 6% of emissions and we're over the targets by more than 30%.
Posted by: Mikey at February 23, 2007 11:38 PM (X+zgO)
13
Er - I used the target rather than the current emissions level - emissions are 760MT - so oilsands production is 34/760 4.5%.
Posted by: Mikey at February 23, 2007 11:46 PM (X+zgO)
14
"the idea of swapping out lightbulbs, which of course through away 95% of the energy put into them as useless heat."
Ok, I'll protest this one. My house is electrically heated so I run my lightbulbs for free since the heat they create reduces the amount of heat my forced air electric furnace must produce. Even better, the heat from lightbulbs tends to be in the rooms I'm in (as opposed to the furnace that heats the whole house at once.)
I do have lots of lights on timers, and each of those are CFbulbs since they'll come on even when I'm not home. Again, though, the amount of heat they produce reduces my furnace heating requirements.
The only time this is not true is in the summer. But then, we hardly use electric lights at all, since the days are longer.
And while CFbulbs may use less energy, why are they overpackaged in plastic. Not just around the bulb but huge packaging that creates wasted space in the shipping cartons. It seems to me that regular lightbulbs are much more environmentally friendly in their packaging and since they are lighter, will cost much less to ship to market.
I'd like to see full disclosure on all the energy that goes into a CFbulb compared to a regular light bulb. I'm sure the savings are not as great as they say.
Posted by: CanadianKate at February 24, 2007 07:44 PM (Ywuqi)
15
The biggest problem with the Oilsands is they are located in the West.
We all know that is NOT Liberal territory. Now if it were located in say,
Queeeebec, or even Ontariareeeo, there would be no holds barred.
No questions of pollution either, it would be all about the Ecomomy stupid.
Those yippy little terriors called Dippers would be yipping away of course, to
deaf ears. There would be no Heros called Gore or Suzuki, they'd be scorned.
Posted by: Liz J at February 25, 2007 07:28 PM (HXH0M)
16
I agree with Dennis- fluorescent light is NOT friendly to human eyes, but if eyestrain is your thing, go for it. I also agree with CanadianKate that the packaging for these new bulbs is incredibly wasteful.
Steve, I'd say bravo to the Aussies if their initiative was voluntary and not simply the iron fist of Big Brother with yet another prohibition on human activity. Cripes, if there was a law written and enforced every time someone said "there ought to be a law", or "they should just ban xxx", we'd all be in bloody jail.
Posted by: Larry at February 28, 2007 05:51 PM (aRIbx)
Malaysia to recruit spies to help enforce Islamic law and custom
George Orwell's nightmarish world of 1984 is taking a step closer to reality in Malaysia, where Islamic forces are taking their cues from the most purely atheistic society ever described in literature.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
01:44 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 368 words, total size 3 kb.
February 21, 2007
Letter from the Canadian Coalition Against Terror takes aim at potential Liberal Party rebels
National Newswatch is reporting that Stephane Dion is preparing to withold his signature from the nomination papers of Liberal MPs who bolt and vote in favour of extending the provisions of Canada's anti-terrorism bill.
Those same Liberal MPs have received a letter from the Canadian Coalition Against Terror imploring them to vote in favour of extending the provisions, as many have said they are inclined to do. What these MPs have to consider is whether the threat to withold his signature, if real, is also likely to happen. That is, Stephane Dion can only follow through with a threat like that if he is actually the leader when an election comes. If Liberal caucus members have reason to doubt that, or to think that as an unpopular party leader, Stephane Dion is likely to cost them their seats, then they might just bolt after all.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
11:48 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1948 words, total size 13 kb.
1
Just who or what are the Liberals trying to protect anyway? Opposing the extension of their own bill seems curiously, well, Daft!
I, as well as many Canadians of all political flavours must surely realize that this law is not, nor has ever, negatively impacted any Canadian's civil liberties to date. As was said on another blog: "I have a hammer and a tape measure....but I don't currently plan to build a house" How appripriate as an analogy... Who doesn't have a few basic tools around the house for simple repairs? A few good anti-terrorism laws on the books gives our police the 'basic' tools we need to prefent a tragedy like Air India.
I fear the future holds events far worse than Air Indias, however. There is no place on earth immune to the threat of terrible terrorist agression. When we dis-arm ourselves with weak laws and lack of will to fight terrorism, we invite those same attacks on our country because we make ourselves 'soft' targets.
The best defense is a strong and robust defense.
Liberals: For shame. you disgust me.
Posted by: arctic_front at February 22, 2007 02:40 AM (s4xSY)
2
And to think that all of this manufactured outrage is for votes. Dion is either pandering to factions within that put him where he is, or he is pandering to those who think there is no "so-called" war on terror. (Borrowing the perpetual "so-called" from the CBC). Either way, he is not worried about Canada or Canadians in general, which was very evident in his impassioned "We must get back to power as soon as possible" statement. He is out for votes, and nothing less than votes, all at the expense of Canadians.
Posted by: Don't Want To at February 22, 2007 03:15 AM (HI4Hj)
3
Man this site is slow to load now. It is painful.
Posted by: Bob at February 22, 2007 05:36 AM (meAes)
4
What about Iggy?
His silence speaks volumes.
He knows better.
Posted by: Road Hammer at February 22, 2007 07:05 AM (rt1jD)
5
Does this make Stephane Dion a "terrorism denier"?
Posted by: Anonymous at February 22, 2007 07:48 AM (f1BnB)
6
The only good thing about Dion's antics here--and they are brazenly shameful, for votes only--is that Canadians are getting to see him and his LPC as they really are: self-centred, power-at-any-cost mongers.
As for the safety and security of all Canadians: the LPC could care less. They just want their hands back in the public coffers and will use their "multicultural" connections to do just that. In the past, that is how the LPC kept getting back in power: playing to the immigrants they allowed into the country, without proper screening or follow up.
The mask is being stripped away and one can only hope that enough Canadians are watching and paying attention to notice it.
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 22, 2007 07:51 AM (FXnCd)
7
Well, if Dion doesn't want to sign their nomination papers, you have to wonder if there are other parties out there that would be willing to sign those papers instead. An open revolt could turn to a full blown run-away, and that would be the ultimate torpedo to Dion's leadership.
Posted by: Surecure at February 22, 2007 09:26 AM (cb3SR)
8
I wouldn't count on Liberals 'rebelling' against their leader, particularly with the uproar in the House over the PM's alleged slur against MP Bains during yesterday's QP.
Regardless of how much bluster they may show before the cameras, I'm sure the MPs named (Irwin Cotler may be one exception) will either back down & vote with the leader, or not show up for the vote.
Situations like this is one reason why I believe there should be some system of penalties, fining MPs for absences. Why should MPs continue to draw their generous salaries if they don't show up for debates - which they clamour they want - or else they don't show up for votes for fear their constituents will disapprove their decision.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 22, 2007 10:05 AM (d7G43)
9
gabby - you have a valid point (I think Paul Martin rarely comes anymore) but with this vote, Dion is 'whipping it'. That means that ALL MPs must show up and must vote for his decision. The word is, in addition to what is called a 'two-whipped vote' (must show up and must vote only one way) is that it's 'three whipped'. Dion won't sign your nomination papers if you don't obey. Hey- didn't he call Harper a 'control-freak'???
Posted by: ET at February 22, 2007 02:24 PM (wwPlp)
10
ET, thank you for the clarification, but just as I don't believe all the negative things the MSM tells me about the Conservatives, I don't necessarily believe what Mike Duffy speculated upon re: Dion's refusal to sign nomination papers.
And even if Dion were to make it a three-whip vote, what would prevent some MPs from developing "parliamentary flu"?
I still maintain that there should be a system of fines instituted for absenteeism, as well as heavy fines for raucous behaviour during QP, imposed upon individual members & parties as well. It is interesting to compare the Brits' QP (available weekends on CPAC) to our own. They may also get raucous at times, but theirs is usually much more civilized.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 22, 2007 02:47 PM (d7G43)
11
I agree with you Gabby - and the member who chose to use profanity in the house yesterday should be fined heavily also. As to being docked for absenteeism, doesn't that mean that Paul Martin owes Canadians a lot of money?
Posted by: Don't Want To at February 22, 2007 03:14 PM (DFwV1)
12
" ... doesn't that mean that Paul Martin owes Canadians a lot of money?"
As does Ms. Stronach, among others.
The Speaker has a difficult task, trying to control all the unruly children - excuse me - the Honourable Members. But more of an effort should definitely be made to try to control the behaviour of MPs.
I find it particularly embarrassing when QP is over & the Speaker recognizes some esteemed guest in the gallery, particularly some foreign dignitary.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 22, 2007 03:27 PM (d7G43)
13
Robert Fife reported the same thing about nomination papers later on Mike Duffy's show. I provide the clip on my blog here.
Posted by: Dennis (Second Thoughts) at February 22, 2007 03:28 PM (51pzt)
14
Like Gabby in QC, I wouldn't count on any Liberal MPs quitting (although just one would be a blow to Dion, even if (s)he were to sit as an Independent). However, this whole issue could be a poison pill that comes back to haunt Dion right in the middle of the election.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 22, 2007 09:08 PM (g7gYB)
Is Stephane Dion surrounded by anti-Kyoto Liberals?
When confronted by Michael Ignatieff on the fact that the previous Liberal governments, despite signing on to Kyoto in December of 2002 had failed to make any movement toward getting Canadians to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and had in fact watched them increase significantly, Liberal Party leadership candidate Stephane Dion whined mightily. Mewling, he cried, "That's unfair! Do you think it's easy to set priorities?"
Amazingly, this person was elected leader!
What is even more amazing is that I continue to find evidence that the Liberals are simply not serious about Kyoto. This is not about whether the targets are easily met or priorities are easily set. This is about how, when you scratch below the green sheen that the Liberal Party has put on itself, there is nothing but twisted links and ties to organizations that, right or wrong, are dead set against Kyoto.
This time I'm talking about senior Liberal strategist Randy Pettipas.
One the one hand, the Liberal Party insists that Kyoto must be implemented. On the other hand, senior Liberals are being paid to lobby against implementing Kyoto. Which is it? Maybe Stephane Dion's first priority is to get this sorted out.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
10:47 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1364 words, total size 10 kb.
1
Mewlng
intr.v. mewled, mewl·ing, mewls
to cry weakly; whimper.
Well, if the shoe fits .... and BTW, this is really exceptional
Posted by: HS at February 22, 2007 12:48 AM (TRDu4)
2
outstanding research, Kudos!
about time somebody connected some dots on this issue.
If it looks like a skunk, acts like a skunk, and more importantly, SMELLS like a skunk........well, it must be a duck(liberal)
Posted by: arctic_front at February 22, 2007 02:55 AM (s4xSY)
3
Another excellent post, Steve! It was only a little over a year ago that Buzz Hargrove and the NDP cut a deal with the Liberals on the budget; why on earth didn't Kyoto - and the Liberals' lack of implementation thereof - come up at that time? If global warming is the most important issue then why didn't the NDP force the Liberals to implement Kyoto when they had a chance?
Posted by: EBow at February 22, 2007 07:00 AM (D1QVx)
4
Didn't the Liberals near the end of their regime give a 250 million grant to the auto industry to help bring the biggest gas guzzler production car to Canada? Camaro?
Posted by: ian at February 22, 2007 11:20 AM (KqGpk)
5
from sitting in on the Industry consultations both the liberals and conservatives have been holding on GHG legislation I can tell you the Liberals were much more willing to compramize. Harpers conservative are being much tougher on industry than the liberals ever where.
Posted by: Sierra at February 22, 2007 01:46 PM (CHE53)
John Duffy knows my name
Stephen Taylor has an amazing video that I haven't seen before. Taken at the Liberal leadership convention, John Duffy is confronted by a camera held by the Blogging Tories. When he finds out, imagine my surprise at the name that pops out of his mouth.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
06:34 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 461 words, total size 4 kb.
1
He may know your name, but he loves me!
Posted by: Adam Daifallah at February 21, 2007 09:27 PM (nnDXU)
2
WARNING: Have a big bar of soap ready before watching this YouTube video... cause you're gonna need a shower to wash the slime off your body after that guy speaks.
That should be the Tories' next TV commercial!!!
It's kind of sad when the putz is the only person who doesn't know he's a putz.
Unless he's a smarmy, smug, arrogant Liberal. In that case, it's hilarious.
Posted by: gwgm at February 21, 2007 09:29 PM (4u+jq)
3
Adam, what's not to love? LOL
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 09:48 PM (27ap9)
4
"Hi" back, John (we were at U of T at the same time).
Posted by: Joan Tintor at February 21, 2007 10:26 PM (Ky0jt)
5
hello
Posted by: gorge@gmail.com at May 06, 2007 06:17 AM (bBtDU)
February 20, 2007
Bromines, Ozone and the Greenhouse Effect, Lobbyists, and Liberals
Bromines? Who's afraid of bromines? Who's even heard of bromines?
I had to look them up, and it turns out bromines are an environmentalist's nightmare. Bromine compounds in the atmosphere are far more destructive to the ozone layer than chlorine, and at the same time trap heat like carbon dioxide.
So it came as a surprise to note that two high profile Canadian political figures with close Liberal ties are on the one hand running a pro Liberal, pro Stephane Dion website devoted to promoting the Liberal Party as the party to save the environment, and on the other hand have been for years lobbying on behalf of the industry organization that promotes the continued use of bromine-compounds and aggressively fights attempts to regulate bromine use.
I wonder if John Duffy and Robert Asselin will face questions from Liberal Party members who are legitimate environmentalists about what role the two might have played in the lack of action shown by the Liberals on just about anything to do with the environment during their 13 years in power.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
11:11 PM
| Comments (51)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1795 words, total size 15 kb.
1
You are making it extremely difficult to refrain from using alternative names for the Liberal party.
Posted by: platty at February 21, 2007 12:17 AM (W1rC1)
2
LOL
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 12:33 AM (ji0Y4)
3
Solid work, Steve.
Posted by: pheenster at February 21, 2007 12:43 AM (vvMwo)
4
Gee, i find it hard to believe the intense, sincere man in that photo could do such a thing.(sarc)
This is the kind of research that makes reading a blog worthwhile. Good stuff.
Posted by: dean rune at February 21, 2007 07:09 AM (XQxFn)
5
Outstanding post, Steve!
Posted by: EBow at February 21, 2007 07:30 AM (v+W6j)
6
Great catch! National Newswatch has picked it up.
John Duffy exposed. Awesome work.
Posted by: Joanne (TB) at February 21, 2007 07:50 AM (5Btzd)
7
I checked out that sham of a website - good for you for bringing it to the forefront and exposing that idiot.
Posted by: Alberta Girl at February 21, 2007 08:12 AM (nMd+I)
8
Good work, Steve.
Bad boy, John Duffy.
Now, what will be the consequences of Duffy's two-faced vocation? What bothers me is that we have hard-working sleuths like Steve Janke uncovering all sorts of skullduggery and the rogues and scoundrels like Duffy and Asselin continue in the spotlight with n'ery, it seems, a blemish on their CV.
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 21, 2007 08:13 AM (3Q/as)
9
This should be "required reading" for all political science students.
damn good work
Posted by: at February 21, 2007 08:56 AM (M2c3Y)
10
Thanks for making my day.
For decades, Liberal slime were able to carry on like this, sucking and blowing, because none of their media buddies with Senate aspirations would shine a light on the cockroaches.
Apparently, those days are over.
Haven't heard anything about that weasel since the famous "Duffy Vs. Duffy" slapdown during the last election when the Puffster lost his mind, on air, saying he would not be bullied by John Duffy (after an off-air threat).
Thank goodness for Steve Janke and others like him.
It would be a cold day in Hell before any of the Liberal-friendly MSM would ever dig up or publish anything like this.
Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful.
Very nice work.
Posted by: gwgm at February 21, 2007 09:37 AM (b6MYK)
11
Bromides, Bromines (Janke calls the BS off)
(with apologies to Ira Gershwin)
Duffy spews bromides
Steve calls bromines!
Liberals woof “Kyoto!”
Steve finds theyÂ’re not green!
Bromides!
Bromines!
Kyoto!
NOT green!
LetÂ’s let the voters decide!
Posted by: Joan Tintor at February 21, 2007 10:14 AM (zlBlM)
12
Pardon my English, please, but - holy fuck.
This is top of the line investigative work, Mr. Janke. I'm amazed. I didn't much like Duffy after that last election, but this seals the deal. I do believe Dion is sincere on the environment (but terribly misguided with Kyoto) but this is purely devious on Duffy's half.
Great, great, great work. I'm going to have to visit this site more.
Posted by: Jason Bo Green at February 21, 2007 10:20 AM (Dghu2)
13
very well researched... now we need someone to do some research on McDonalds...
I'm serious...
Cattle are not an animal that is suppose to exist in anywhere near the numbers they do today. They exist in these numbers because we need them for beef...
Cows manuerfacture from eating hay and oats all day that smelly stuff that comes out the south end of a north bound cow... great for the soil and growing plants...not so great for the nose...
It's also not so great for the upper atmosphere and there are more cows chewing their cudd and farting in the factory and field today then there are cars on our streets, In Canada!!!
basically what am I getting at???? The climate changers that are pushing this stuff on everyone, including now children in elementary schools, are as full of sh!t as the cows if they're not looking at everything... They need to focus on polution reduction as a factor of Health care cost and stop chasing after clouds and claiming if we stop climate change that is the answer. Start looking at dead lakes and rivers in the Canadian Shield, cancer stats in big city's or down wind of factory's that don't treat their emissions, birth defects and autism which has over trippled in the last 15 years...not because it's being diagnosed more often but because of all the preservatives/additives in our food, the chemicals, antibiotics and growth hormones in our food, and all the other crap we're pouring into the food chain...
We've only been looking into this stuff for a generation and we've flip flopped on it both ways in under 30 years... they don't know and can't prove what's happenning is because of green house gasses... for all they know it's the cows...
Posted by: Mr Ed at February 21, 2007 10:22 AM (63T31)
14
Thanks for visiting Steve
http://tinyurl.com/2rznke
PS look at their members list page 6
BTW There is a campaign out there to attack links to "inconvenient" truths. Our links on past posts have been tampered with - redirection virus? There's a story if you can find out who is doing it.
Posted by: dubyadubya at February 21, 2007 10:26 AM (yzOzm)
15
I should have put up a link to Wolfville Watch, and to Proud to be Canadian (for the original Duffy-v-Duffy video). That has been addressed in the main post.
Sorry guys -- I hit your sites during Google searches, Though I didn't use material directly from your sites (I had grabbed the information directly from the lobbyist database and from ClimateLiberal.ca) clearly you've deserved the callout for the research on these subjects.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 10:54 AM (27ap9)
16
Solid work Steve
Posted by: Tenebris at February 21, 2007 11:20 AM (kAqaK)
17
Funny how I need to find this stuff out by reading blogs. If something like this were uncovered about a Conservative Cabinet Minister, it would be front page of the Globe & Mail tomorrow morning.
Posted by: PoppinBoners at February 21, 2007 11:27 AM (hkwnD)
18
Some very good investigative work Steve. Outstanding!
Posted by: RJ at February 21, 2007 11:45 AM (FoU8t)
19
Hey Steve! No sweat. Just keep visiting! And we learn a LOT from you!
We are not sure what is happening to our links though. We've had strange things happening. Have an enquiry into blogharbor. Seems SDA had a lot of strange redirects too which is why we are suspicious although technically we can't figure how it could be done.
Posted by: dubyadubya at February 21, 2007 11:50 AM (yzOzm)
20
An excellant and well researched post.
The revelations should make the front pages of the
Torstar and Glub & Mule but don't hold your breath.
Posted by: bobjane at February 21, 2007 12:10 PM (xz7bh)
21
nice work Steve...
couple points to make...
Bromines... in indeed pretty much all the halocarbons relatively benign and labeling them as "Toxic" soley due to adverse environmental effects isn't as clear cut as you imply Steve. Paragraph 64A was intended for substances such as DDT that have direct toxic effects to fauna and flora... the indirect global warming/ozone depletion is a bit of a streach... in fact 64a was the same clause the Dion environment ministry tried to label Co2 as "toxic" which is cleary idiodic. Dion's only reason for even attempting to label GHG's as "toxic" was avoid the minefield the conservatives are experincing with he "Clean Air Act" by tabeling an actual climate change legislation act. Dion instead tried sneak his "Green Plan" without a parlimentarly vote by merely "amending" CEPA.
as far as the "needed" use of Halocarbons... from my experince the lobby is mere "damage control" there are legitimate uses for Halocarbons where replacement with alternatives introduce a severe safety risk... (i.e. Halocarbon fire retardands are commonly used in electrical/computer gear where they effectivly suppress fires without damaging the equipment... the only effective replacement is a fine water mist suppressant... and I'm sure you Steve as a computer guy is currently haveing shudders of horror at the idea of using fine water mist in a computer core. anyway... bromide I'm sure has it's uses... agricultural nessecity is just ridiculous... there are alternatives out there... all the lobby is trying to protect is thier ability to sell existing inventories...
Posted by: Sierra at February 21, 2007 12:13 PM (CHE53)
22
I'm not actually passing judgement on the science. I'm not knowledgeable enough. I also suspect that some of the criticisms against bromines border on alarmist. But I can spot a person playing both sides of the fence and hoping no one will notice. Even if bromine is as safe as mother's milk, it doesn't change the fact that the Liberals are playing themselves up as friends of the Sierra Club and such, while at the same time enriching themselves by lobbying for the people who don't want the Liberals to do what they've promised.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 12:22 PM (27ap9)
23
Dave Rutherford is talking about your blog....good work.
As for John Duffy, I never trust(ed) him.
Posted by: anonymous at February 21, 2007 12:50 PM (DO1b6)
24
I noticed a whole raft of Google hits with "Angry in the Great White North" as the search terms. That usually happens if I'm mentioned in the media by blog name, and people decide to check me out.
So what did Dave say?
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 12:59 PM (27ap9)
25
He basically mentioned the gist of what you wrote, using Duffy's and Asselin's names and their connection to the Liberal party. It was all kudos to you for exposing this story.
He started out by saying that by searching the blogs today he came across your story, and he mentioned your blog.
That's how I knew to check it out.
Posted by: anonymous at February 21, 2007 01:12 PM (DO1b6)
26
I'd like to see Mike Duffy to after John Duffy on this, just like he did during the last election. Great post, Steve.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 21, 2007 01:20 PM (g7gYB)
27
Yes, the entire Liberal party and all of its members are bad becuase of these two guys. Brilliant work. BTW, is it true that tthe CPC is feeding you this stuff?
Posted by: at February 21, 2007 01:22 PM (BX3iS)
28
I can look in my local business journal and see what personal and corporate actions are before the courts. I don't see why municipal/provincial/federal lobbyists couldn't be listed in the business pages of our newspapers (at least we would have access to info re possible conflict of interest). Why should we have MSM researchers/columnists selectively expose COI when it arises?
gwgm- Saw the Duffy vs Duffy flare-up too. Immediately fired-off a congratulatory e-mail to MD for standing up for his personal and professional integrity. Imagine my shock the next program when John Duffy is again a guest on the show and Mike is again stating that he likes to call John his smart cousin and then...promoting John's latest book to the camera! Comments from on high?
Also, John Duffy has since guested on Steve Paikin's The Agenda on TVO.
Posted by: at February 21, 2007 01:27 PM (6lc5o)
29
"Brilliant work. BTW, is it true that tthe CPC is feeding you this stuff?"
Not at all. This story is 100% Steve Janke -- discovered, researched, and written. Complete surprise to the CPC when they logged in this morning.
You just have to take me on my word on that.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 21, 2007 01:29 PM (27ap9)
30
Thank you so much for confirming what many of us Green Conservatives thought - that Paul Martin, Jean Poutine and the rest of the Librano$ were Marie Antoinette-ing their greenhouse gas position.
Your post rivals the work being done by Claudia Rossett on the Oil-for-Food scandal and the absolutely horrendous leadership at the UN for the last 10 years or so.
I mention her work because, like yours, it exists despite big media.
Posted by: green tory at February 21, 2007 01:47 PM (ZhbJd)
31
These are lobbyists... not elected officials. Who cares about this? Bloggers and people within throwing distance of the Hill.
Posted by: Wow.... you caught those lobbyists... at February 21, 2007 02:01 PM (tFTfY)
32
Suddenly I feel like popcorn.
Posted by: Dan at February 21, 2007 02:10 PM (8Bgav)
33
This is news? You've been spending too much time looking for needles in haystacks.
Posted by: Big Whoop at February 21, 2007 02:11 PM (QOXlS)
34
re: "BTW, is it true that the CPC is feeding you this stuff?"
Our 'host' has taken credit for his work. There is no reason not to believe him.
However, if the CPC is digging stuff up on these clowns... good for them!
Our MSM has totally abdicated their responsibilities. Someone has to do it.
To the Liberal hacks in the press gallery, a scandal is only scandalous if it's the Tories doing it.
The Liberals have gotten a free pass from theese slugs for years.
Hopefully, some of them will tire of being scooped by the likes of Mr. Janke and they'll grow some integrity and start doing their jobs the way they're should have been all along.
Nothing against 'Angry', but IMO it's a statement on the abilities and bias of our MSM that they were scooped on this. These same scribes turn into pit bulls whenever there's a whif of a story about Harper being less than 'green'.
Funny how the news outlets know John Duffy's job and phone number when they need someone to come on the air and slag the Tories for things like killing the planet and such.... but we're to believe that they had no clue about his other lobbying gigs.
Riiiiiiiiight.
Posted by: gwgm at February 21, 2007 02:16 PM (b6MYK)
35
Shades of "Thank You For Smoking".
Posted by: Joesph Bagadonitz at February 21, 2007 02:29 PM (1yvpX)
36
Librano hypocrisy is as certain as death and taxes.
Posted by: Fred at February 21, 2007 02:30 PM (TsEN3)
37
Just another example of why the Libreals need to be flushed down the toilet for a few years in the wilderness.
To those of you who think Janke is a Tory plant, and/or the theory that Duffy and his pal pushing Bromine are not factors of influence, lets really examine the reality that the Lib's play Green but don't actually do anything to help the cause. Putting out commericals with Rick Mercer asking us poor schleps to do reduce green house gas emissions was NOT public policy. Nor was not putting Bromine on the toxic no-no list when it clearly IS.
Lets face it, the Libreals are the party of "do as I say, not as I do" and the MSM seems to be very comfortable with that reality.
Nothing like the truth to set us free...good work Steve.
Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at February 21, 2007 03:00 PM (D8C2o)
38
Steve -
Forget the needle in a haystack - it looks like you've found a needle in a stack of needles.
Good thing you implemented the "no Lieberal" rule. I've been racking my brain trying to make something out of "Liberal', "bromine" and "hypocrisy" and have come up with exactly nothing.
I'm not quite sure why the Liberals keep dead-weight like John Duffy and Scott Reid around their halls to speak on behalf of the party. Looks like they're gluttons for punishment.
Posted by: Alan at February 21, 2007 04:07 PM (jKnBu)
39
Oh no... Bromines is quite a bad GHG... its' also a pretty minor one as in terms of total volume compared to the primaries... H2O vapor, Co2, Methane... it's miniscule...
even eliminating all bromine from exisitance would make less that a drop if impact in the Global warming equation.. it's basicly less than the rounding errors...
but your right... it's somewhat distasteful for a liberal lobbiest to be doing one thing and saying another... but unfortunately thats what lobbiests do... they are paid to take the position of thier employer.
unfortunately for the credibilty of their employer lobbiests don't make great spokesmen...
Posted by: Sierra at February 21, 2007 04:29 PM (CHE53)
40
Bromine, in pure diatomic molecular form, is indeed quite nasty stuff. There are also a number of compounds containing Bromine that are nasty too. But, there are also a number that aren't very nasty at all. If I was in a chemical plant (I sometimes go to meetings at them) that had hazardous or toxic forms of Bromine or compounds containing it in its processes, I would certainly want it to be considered hazardous and toxic, for my safety and everyone downwind.
The trick with dangerous chemicals is to only use them where they are the best possible solution, all things considered. And when a compound containing Bromine meets that criteria, then it should be used. This is where proper risk analysis has to come in to play; overstating dangers is less than optimal in that case.
We saw this with CFCs, DDT, and asbestos. All were being used in cases that were not the best possible solution. Removing those uses solved all the major problems associated with limited continued use. But because of risk fear-mongering, we also removed them from a number of cases where they were the best possible solution.
Bromine is less active that Chlorine or Fluorine, but more active than Iodine. It may be that atmospheric Bromine concentrations have a strong effect on ozone. It may be that it has a much higher heat-trapping coefficient than CO2. But to use those values, you have to multiply them by the actual concentrations.
Water vapor is the greatest green-house gas because it occurs in very high concentration and produces significant heat-trapping. Human-produced CO2 runs in the neighbourhood of 25,000,000 kilo-tonnes per year. A quoted article above says the critical use exemption is for about 17 kilo-tonnes per year. So even with the heat-trapping coefficient included, even if we dissipated ten times as much, and even if all of the critical use of it got into the atmosphere, I don't see how it could possibly be a major green-house gas.
So I think that an argument can be made for lobbying against Bromine alarmism. And reasonable people have one foot on each side of many issues. What alarms me about the behaviour of the supposedly safety and environmentally conscious miscreants in this case is that they were, as you put it Steve, "Liberals enriching themselves by lobbying for people who don't want the Liberals to do what they've promised".
To me, that is unconscionable.
Posted by: Vitruvius at February 21, 2007 04:30 PM (I852p)
41
Geeze, did you really need to include his picture? If we keep watching it will it
squirm?
Too much information...........for him!
Posted by: Liz J at February 21, 2007 04:51 PM (LUO5X)
42
If the Liberal's platform was to be reasonable on matters of the environment, then it would not be the case that we would have here "Liberals enriching themselves by lobbying for people who don't want the Liberals to do what they've promised", because they wouldn't have promised to be unreasonable. But after the absurdity of bill C-288, we know that is not the case.
C-288 binds our Government to reducing Canada's human-effected (HE) output of CO2, by 2012, to 6 % less than it was in 1990. Since 1990, Canada's HE-CO2 output has increased some 30-odd percent, almost all of it under the watch of Liberal Governments, which means that C-288 now requires Canada's Conservative Government to reduce our HE-CO2 output by about 38 % over five years, even though previous Liberal governments have achieved quite the opposite of any reduction during their dozen-odd years at the helm.
In yesterday's National Post, columnist Don Martin noted that in order to meet the requirements of bill C-288, "Canada would have to shut down all the power generation in Canada. Twice over. Or, it would have to eliminate all gasoline-fueled cars and trucks. Three times over. It could shut down the manufacturing sector. Six times over." This means that if Canada shuts down all its power generation, and all gasoline-fueled cars and trucks, and all manufacturing, then we can, just barely, meet the requirements of bill C-288.
Assume that whatever measures are necessary are taken to achieve the goal of reducing Canada's output of HE-CO2 by 38 ± 2 %. The portion of global HE-CO2 output produced by Canada is 3 ± 1 %, so the reduction of global HE-CO2 achieved by Canada would be about 38 × 3 ÷ 100 or 1.14 %. The proportion of global CO2 that is human-effected is 3 ± 1 %, so the reduction in total global CO2 achieved by Canada would be about 1.14 × 3 ÷ 100 or 0.0342 %.
The portion of green-house gas effect produced by CO2 in relation to other green-house gases, such as water vapor, which exists in greater concentration than CO2 and has a greater heat-trapping capacity, is, let's say, 10 %. I'm least sure about this estimate, so for the variability calculations below I'll consider the margins to be from 1 % to 50 %, but as I understand it there is a large consideration in play here. The reduction, then, in global green- house gas effect achieved by Canada would be 0.0342 × 10 ÷ 100 or about 0.00342 %.
In other words, if Canada shuts down all its power generation, and all gasoline-fueled cars and trucks, and all manufacturing, then we can reduce the global green-house gas effect by about 34 millionths (999,966 millionths of it would still go on). Based on the possible variations of values I have indicated, this value could be as high as 300 millionths, or as low as 1.5 millionths.
But what if, you say, we are just doing our part, and if everyone does the same (ignoring for now the problems regarding China and India not being committed to any such behaviour), then the effect would be larger? Yes it would. The 3 % Canadian portion of HE-CO2 would go to 100 % across all humans. So, the maximum effect, if everybody reduced their HE-CO2 output by about 40 %, would be a reduction of global green-house gas effects from 1,000 thousandths to 992 thousandths.
Also, recall that the putative purpose of this exercise is to get rid of a projected temperature increase of a few degrees over the next century, and that under previous cases where the Earth was a few degrees warmer, it did just fine.
Now, hands up, how many Canadians think it's a good idea for us to shut down all our power generation, and all our gasoline-fueled cars and trucks, and all our manufacturing, in order to reduce the global green-house gas effect (whatever it may be, good, bad, or neutral) from 1,000,000 millionths to (best case) 999,700 millionths, in five years?
So you can see, I hope, that bill C-288 shows that the Liberals are promising the absurd, while at the same time we have "Liberals enriching themselves by lobbying for people who don't want the Liberals to do what they've promised". We saw the same sort of thing earlier today when Dr. Suzuki's public anti-business grandstanding was exposed as hypocritical in light of the donors to his foundation. That's why we can't trust people like the Liberals, or anyone else who voted for C-288, on matters as important as the environment.
Posted by: Vitruvius at February 21, 2007 04:56 PM (I852p)
43
That the other parties are a bunch of power-hungry hypocrites who go around pimping fake environmental crises (and then selectively ignoring them) so they get their hands on my pocketbook, I get. What I don't get is why conservatives would go around pimping slightly different, but still fake, environmental crises in order to replace the Liberals' hands on my pocketbook with their own.
Posted by: at February 21, 2007 07:21 PM (a0Sy/)
44
Is it just me or does anyone remember when the NDP was propping up the Liberals, did the words Kyoto ever come up? Wasn't an issue with the Liberals either. Kyoto wasn't an issue for the Liberals since the day they signed the accord.
Posted by: Fiumara at February 21, 2007 07:26 PM (zqcvv)
45
Actually the Liberals, (and most environmentalists except for a few real whackos) arn't proposing to shut down cars, manufacturing and electrical generation...
they are proposing for Canada to spend billions of dollars per year to purchase international credits from 3rd world corrupt, despotic dictators, or russian mobsters who have "created" credits by shutting down thier own industries via mismanagement.
Posted by: Sierra at February 21, 2007 08:03 PM (CHE53)
46
Good post Vitruvius
Actaully the liberals Policy is NOT to shut down cars, electricity, or manufacturing...
Their Polciy is for Canada to spend $4 billion /yr in purchasing credits for legitimately verified CDM activities in 3rd world countries... but unfortunately there arn't enough of those to go around so likely they will end up purchasing "hot-air" credits from Russian mobsters, and 3 world tin-pot dictators who's "credits" result from thier own industries falling apart...
Ok thats a little cynical... what the Liberal POLICY actualy is, is to somehow defeat the conservatives and win a majority government over the Kyoto issue and set up a $4 billion/yr slush fund from which liberal MP's can draw from to create "greenhouse gas reducing" megaprojects in their ridings thereby ensuring that patronage kickbacks and political donations will continue into perpetuity.
Posted by: Sierra at February 21, 2007 08:12 PM (CHE53)
47
Here's another example of the dangers of innumeracy, environmental or otherwise. In March, 2004, the Edmonton Champagne Socialists, Limousine Liberals, Mastercard Marxists, and Welfare Wankers Journal pandered to the innumerate by ululating about industry's desire to use 330,000,000 liters of water a year from the Red Deer River. Sounds scary, right? After all, Alberta is a semi-arid region in the Rocky Mountain rain shadow. It really is not a good idea for us to piss away water, if you'll pardon my being a bit droll.
The Red Deer river flow rate varies from 10 to 100 cubic meters per second. Assuming only 10 cubic meters per second, that's still 10,000 liters per second. Which means that industry proposed using 33,000 seconds, or about 9 hours, or about 0.1 % of the river's annual flow.
The question we have to ask ourselves is, why aren't the extremists complaining about industry wanting to use 0.1 % of the river flow? Why do they say 330,000,000 liters instead? Are they trying to hide a fraudulent agenda behind big numbers?
We saw the same sort of problem with the long gun registry. People just don't understand how much 2,000,000,000 dollars is, until you put it in terms of things like concentration of man-power: it's 20,000 man years! I discussed this example at some length in my Mark Steyn's Letter of the Week award winning essay available at tinyurl.com/ybnozb
This brings us back to the matter of atmospheric concentrations of various vapor-state fluids. Some people say, oh woe, oh woe, Canadians are producing 700 megatonnes of CO2 per annum. That's a big number, right? Compared to what?
Do you remember when your science teachers tried to impress upon you that when photographing objects, you needed to put something of known size into the frame in order to be able to reconstruct the scale of the object? Why is it that issue extremists never provide you with a scale for their measures?
Posted by: Vitruvius at February 21, 2007 09:40 PM (I852p)
48
Canadians are producing 700 megatonnes of CO2 per annum. That's a big number, right?
Subtract from that number the amount of carbon sequestered each year in Canada's forests and I think you'll find that Canadians are net producers of very little carbon.
Posted by: at February 21, 2007 10:27 PM (a0Sy/)
49
Don't get me started. So far, above, I've only discussed the debit side of the ledger. Once we haul out the credit side, we find that Canadians have an awful lot of atmosphere to contribute to the denominator of global concentration values. If people are going to suggest trading credits for production of CO2, then shouldn't the credits also be based on our ability to decrease concentrations by providing large volumes in which to disperse the moles? Canada's really good at that, all by itself it owns about 7 % of Earth's over-land atmosphere.
If I may provide a simplified example. Say A owns, solely on A's property, a lake that contains 1 km³ of water. Say B owns a lake solely on B's property that contains 10 km³ of water. Say we agree that we don't want the concentration of Y in lakes to be greater than Z %. Is it not the case that B gets to put ten times as much Y into his lake as A, while still maintaining a concentration of no more than Z?
Posted by: Vitruvius at February 21, 2007 11:00 PM (I852p)
50
Excellent, Mr. Janke, truly excellent!!! The only way we seem to get the truth is not through the MSM but through the blogs which are as well written and more informative on any day of the week than the MSM.
Vitruvius, please don't forget that along the Pacific Coast and into Alberta there is a fallout of pollutants from Chinese industry as well as pollutants being scooped up with the sand by sandstorms on the Gobi Desert. These too are carried by the Jet Stream across the Pacific and dumped on Western Canada (as well as the Pacific states in the U.S., including Alaska). While China pays nothing to clean up their pollutants, we Canadians will pay to clean up major pollutants, including arsenic and mercury, in our soil and in the air we breath.
Posted by: Phil at February 22, 2007 02:03 AM (/qMKe)
51
hello
Posted by: jenny@gmail.com at May 05, 2007 07:49 PM (nBZEf)
Lieberals? Let's grow up
Something that has been bothering me for some time is the debasement of political dialogue. I, for one, would like to see that change.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
07:17 PM
| Comments (28)
| Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Hear hear
Posted by: JD at February 20, 2007 07:43 PM (GIzdf)
2
I agree, both with "Lieberal" ("Fiberal," etc) and with "Right Whinger" or "Right Whiner." It was clever (sort of) the first time - but it got old fast.
Posted by: Deaner at February 20, 2007 07:51 PM (NlY1X)
3
Wholeheartedly agree. I've always made it a point to avoid using any of those type of terms. While we all may be partisan bloggers, using such base terminology will only generate the same sort of base response and continue in a never-ending circle. For the most part, I tend to only visit blogs that follow the same general thought.
Posted by: BBS at February 20, 2007 08:04 PM (MIsZI)
4
Well really it's easy just refer to the Liberals as the LPC, which depending on your point of view could be interchanged with Lying Party of Canada but if you use the LPC label - it means many things to different people yet refers to the same thing. Ya know kinda like Ford - Fixed or Repaired Daily. Same with NDP, I don't know who they have in mind to pay the bills, so to me it's the National Debt Party - not dippers or left wingnuts. I'm sure if someone's creative enough they can think on an acronym for the Climate Procrastinating Crowd - but really that title belongs to the LPC, since they sat on the Kyoto file for a decade.
Just my thoughts - we can keep it civil with the guile of the ol' double entendre.
Posted by: the bear at February 20, 2007 08:18 PM (96ogl)
5
I agree - I've stayed away from using terms like that and would like to see others do the same.
I do confess however, to using the term "teeth-gnashing lefties" and "hand wringing lefties" on occasion.. (couldn't help it)
Posted by: The Hammer or Thor at February 20, 2007 08:25 PM (FQs/S)
6
Why doesn't everyone just start calling them "Grits", after all the Conservatives get "Tories" incessantly.
Posted by: Barb at February 20, 2007 08:31 PM (abeJp)
7
What about Citoyen Dion and Taliban Jack?
Posted by: Robert McClelland at February 20, 2007 08:36 PM (LGMUg)
8
I tend to agree with your line of reasoning, Steve, but NOT ALL THE TIME. There is a time and place to use a zinger, like Librano$ for instance, but not as a general rule should language like this be used on a blog when one is referring to one's political enemies or opponents.
There has to be room, however, for creative irony, black humour, and poetic license every once in awhile or we may as well throw in the towel when it comes to political commentary. Can you imagine how dull political writing would be if we never use a play on words?
My general rule is not to call others names, but every once in awhile it's just too tempting--and satisfying! Having said that, Steve, I understand the spirit of what you're saying. The level of political discourse in Canada could use an elevation--starting, maybe, with Tory bloggers?
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 20, 2007 08:49 PM (92p3B)
9
I agree with you Steve. Let's do what we can to raise the level of political dialogue. Robert McClelland, you make a good point. While I haven't used the first of your examples, I have the second. As of now, no more.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at February 20, 2007 08:53 PM (g7gYB)
10
I think that Taliban Jack and Citoyen Dion are perfectly acceptable on certain threads, but not all the time. Let's not get become totalitarians when it comes to the "purity" of our political discourse. We have to be able to use humour intelligently--which is what plays on words often are. We also need to know when to hang it up.
But let's not become prissy puritans when it comes to political punditry. OK?
Posted by: 'been around the block at February 20, 2007 08:59 PM (92p3B)
11
Yep. It does more damage than it does good. Robert McClelland is proof of that. Keep up the good work McClelland!!!
Posted by: ferrethouse at February 20, 2007 09:04 PM (WESRb)
12
Well, I'm McGuilty as charged.
Posted by: Joanne (TB) at February 20, 2007 09:43 PM (B64Lh)
13
I agree and though I visit various blogs where they really go nuts with that kind of discourse generally don't comment on those threads.
Posted by: Fergy at February 20, 2007 10:16 PM (EZWC9)
14
Wise counsel, to be sure. There is little to be gained by hurling epithets at one's foes. And it's far easier on the blood pressure!
Posted by: strider at February 20, 2007 10:25 PM (/v17x)
15
Agreed...Libranos should suffice...
Posted by: Paul Hansen at February 20, 2007 10:48 PM (0bZ1y)
16
I agree completely. However, whenever I've tried to point out
that conservatives should not stoop to using the same tactics
that some other partisans use, I've been accused of wanting
to "stifle debate" (particularly in one popular blog that shall
remain nameless). Go figure.
Posted by: Gabby in QC at February 20, 2007 11:45 PM (d7G43)
17
I do confess to using "Taliban Jack" on occasion, but not lightly, only when the nick was in context with what I was talking about. When Jacko (oops!) is talking about "negotiating" with such a band of thugs I think it fits. However, I will try and refrain unless the situation warrents it.
ps. I remember now, I used "Talijack" in one of my postings - but it was in context..
I don't think nicks like "Smilin' Jack" or "Grinnin' Jack" are that bad though, and don't carry as negative a connotation that "Lieberals" does..
my .02
Skal!
Posted by: The Hammer or Thor at February 21, 2007 01:14 AM (BnhTW)
18
I understand what you're saying but I appreciate Canadians getting the reminder. I believe Canadians' memories are a little too short and they get too big a pass by the MSM in this country. Lieberals and Libranos may trigger a memory of days past for some Canadians out there....
Posted by: Lanny at February 21, 2007 01:55 AM (5MWmZ)
19
I've never used the term "Lie-berals" or "Fiberals," for that matter. I've always thought they were a little cutesy.
I do, however, happen to like the term "Librano." Its efficacy doesn't depend on the absence of honesty in personality, but an understated streak of malice tinged with a dollop of incompetence.
When a Liberal behaves in a serious, good fashion, I will call same a Liberal. If behaviour is stupid, on the other hand, I'll use "Librano." It's as simple as that.
Posted by: PhantomObserver at February 21, 2007 01:57 PM (+kFf8)
20
I'm glad someone said this.
I have never used the term and it gets awfully tiresome to read bloggers that do. It basically undercuts any argument that the writer who uses it might have.
I will be glad to see the expression disappear.
Posted by: Steve at February 21, 2007 02:50 PM (reI78)
21
Lets raise the debate and not stoop the the level of the left, who will of course call every right wing politician in this nation at some point a "Nazi", a far worse slur with little basis. At least we know that the Libreals have lied early and often, whereas I know Stephen Harper hasn't worn a brown shirt for a long time and there are no camps being built to exterminate anyone......
Lets just raise the level of debate, and let intelligent dialogue, logic and the facts carry the day.
Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at February 21, 2007 03:40 PM (D8C2o)
22
It's about time someone came out and said this. Well done.
Posted by: Micmmic at February 21, 2007 03:56 PM (/p10I)
23
It's my observation that the better the blog (e.g. this one ) the better the class of comments. Bloggers who use names, be it Nazi or Liebral, don't seem to be interested in advancing political discourse or making a strong argument for this or that partisan position. All they do is create " echo chambers " . Their comments are chock full o' back slappers, name callers and trolls.They are a blight on the bloggosphere.
Posted by: Nbob at February 21, 2007 05:15 PM (S5y60)
24
Actually, the bear, NDP stands for No Damn Platform
Posted by: Conrad at February 22, 2007 08:40 AM (nhWLk)
25
I disagree. LIEberal and CONservative both have history, and both have been roundly earned.
LIEberal? Jean Chretien standing-up in Parliament and BOASTING about keeping 84% of his Red Book promises! "Read my lips - no GST" - what about that one, Jean? That was the promise we were all waiting for.
CONservative? I recall sitting in a deadly-dull classroom; so dull, they brought-in a radio to keep us awake. And it was on that radio I heard Brian Mulroney personally state that the Conservative Party of Canada was considering a motion to re-introduce the death penalty. Mulroney was ~9% in the polls at the time, and plummetting; and a contemporary poll asserted that 70% of Canadians supported the death penalty - so what's lyin' Brian saying, in as many words? "We will KILL to get re-elected!" I vowed that day I'd never again vote CONservative, and I still haven't - nowadays I place my vote against the LIEberals.
Bottom line - they've multiply earned their labels over decades, so I will happily continue to stick it to them. And the NDP? Never paid them enough attention to invent a label for them...
Posted by: Jim at February 23, 2007 07:10 AM (C3//l)
26
Wouldnt it be simpler to just take the word liberal out of the dictionary.After all it is a very cruel word and anyone connected to this word seems to become obsessed with power and then becomes tainted and starts screaming and yelling and pointing at the good people and calling them names.Yes get rid of the liberals,make it illegal to be liberal.Yes thats it make a liberal a dirty thing.Oh thats what it is now eh!Well give me some more time to think about this.In the meantime use Lieberal,but only when speaking about the liberals.
Posted by: BERT at February 25, 2007 03:07 PM (jIXdB)
Posted by: romac at May 30, 2007 06:32 PM (ewj9a)
Posted by: hicaq at June 02, 2007 06:13 PM (HyxBd)
Ajax loads of home page content and a quick survey
Some more news on the new design, as well as a request for an opinion on a specific design element.
more...
Posted by: Steve Janke at
04:30 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Poll Answer: 1
But you should shift the video box, news feed, etc to the narrow left column (below the existing stuff) and make the main center screen (of maybe 600 px) your prime content, which is the first few paragraphs or your latest few articles. On my 1024x768 screen, your prime content (which is the only thing I ever look at) makes up about 15% of the screen -- you could assign 20% to navigation, and 20% to advertising, but then give us the last 60% for your prime content. All the blog-lists, news feeds, etc, etc should he shifted to the sides or the bottom -- they are lower value uses of screen real estate.
Posted by: Frank at February 20, 2007 06:04 PM (cOI3v)
2
Thanks Frank. I'm looking at something like this, or even user-configurable layout.
Posted by: Steve Janke at February 20, 2007 06:14 PM (ji0Y4)
3
I'm thinking that you're never going to satisfy everyone, Steve. One possibility as far as a user-configurable layout goes is to allow the user to select among several skins, sort of like the way that Captain's Quarters does. That way the user can pick the template that looks best on their monitor.
You do need to fix the Add Comment box though, it's all kattywampus.
Posted by: Ed Minchau at February 20, 2007 07:08 PM (pPVQ0)
4
This does look better than the old site. 800 pixels fixed get my vote, I think variable sizes can run into flow problems.
ditto on the comment box. F/F 2.0.0.1 The text area overflows on the right and the submit button is obscured on the bottom of the page. All I can see is the top of the submit button. Also, it's mighty small font.
Posted by: the bear at February 20, 2007 08:45 PM (96ogl)
5
Definitely go with the variable width centre column. Do you have the ability to track what things are clicked the most often? Use that to rearrange your screen. A 2 up would give you a lot more space.
I also vote for fixing the comments box.
Posted by: jgriffin at February 20, 2007 09:06 PM (GrnSc)
6
I'd give my vote to a liquid layout over fixed. An example of a nice looking blog site using this format is: http://www.jmarkbertrand.com/
Posted by: Denis at February 21, 2007 10:54 AM (SqX7o)
<< Page 1 of 2 >>
285kb generated in CPU 0.1007, elapsed 0.1642 seconds.
112 queries taking 0.118 seconds, 633 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
112 queries taking 0.118 seconds, 633 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
