V for Victory

In Memoriam: Those Lost on Cougar Helicopters Flight 91

2009-03-19T18:23:00.003-04:00

Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!

O Christ! Whose voice the waters heard
And hushed their raging at Thy word,
Who walkedst on the foaming deep,
And calm amidst its rage didst sleep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!

Most Holy Spirit! Who didst brood
Upon the chaos dark and rude,
And bid its angry tumult cease,
And give, for wild confusion, peace;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!

O Trinity of love and power!
Our brethren shield in danger's hour;
From rock and tempest, fire and foe,
Protect them wheresoe'er they go;
Thus evermore shall rise to Thee
Glad hymns of praise from land and sea.

- "Eternal Father, Strong to Save" (a/k/a "The Navy Hymn"),
William Whiting/John B. Dykes

The Magic Number is Now 161 ...

2007-04-02T18:32:00.000-04:00

It's that time of the year! Opening Day - when hope springs eternal, even for Blue Jays fans.

And not a bad way to kick things off: an extra-inning win over the defending AL champs.

Yes, there's a lot going on, and going wrong, in the world today - the crisis I mentioned in the post below this one is still festering, for instance.

But c'mon: even with more serious things going on, Day #1 of your team's season, in the only sport that I'm sure God approves of (per Stephen King, of all people, in Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption) - well, it's as good a sign as any that spring's here, and that you don't have to focus on what's wrong all the time.

Play ball!

More later

Trouble Brewing?

2007-03-23T10:19:00.000-04:00

This is rather disquieting news, isn't it?

Short version (in case the link doesn't work): 15 British navy personnel have been taken into custody, at gunpoint, by Iranian forces. It happened while the Brits were conducting an inspection of a vessel heading for Iraq.

Details are still sketchy, but needless to say, the British government is not happy about this, at all.

Apparently, something like this happened in '04 (check out the BBC story for more details), and it was resolved - but as noted in other media covering this story, the situation vis a vis Iran and "the west" (including the UK) is significantly more tense now.

Here's hoping that this is quickly remedied by the quick return of the British sailors (along with an apology, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one) - because if it isn't, the British, and perhaps others, will have to respond more directly.

More later.

Such a Shame - He Was Having Such a GOOD Campaign ...

2007-03-15T15:22:00.000-04:00

If there's a landmine, or even a cow-flop, out there, it seems Andre Boisclair is bound and determined to step on it.

But still, it's not as if leaders of the PQ have a history of saying really stupid things about people who don't fit the typical "pur laine" model of Quebec nationalist - right?

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (VI)

2007-03-11T21:46:00.001-04:00

Howard can maybe put the game out of reach with this shot ... Here we go .... Damnit. He made a super shot and is up by 4.

It was an amazing shot, and ON deserves its win, but damn, it shows how this game can turn on a dime. NL looked like it had the edge at the 1/2-way mark and had Gushue made that risky shot a few ends back ...

Oh well. Howard & co. earned their win, but Gushue's rink earned some respect that they didn't have coming in, despite the gold medals at the Olympics last year.

In the 10th now, and Newfoundland & Labrador has just run out of rocks. Congrats to ON (who lost in the final last year) and see ya next year for NL - hopefully they can do what ON did this year, and bounce back for a win.

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (V)

2007-03-11T21:20:00.001-04:00

Hard luck for NL in the 8th ... They really needed 2, but got stuck with a single. Ontario leads by 1 and has the hammer in the 9th.

Gushue & co. will need some luck, or a bad break for Ontario, here.

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (IV)

2007-03-11T21:00:00.001-04:00

BIG risky shot from Gushue - and he missed BIG. Ontario steals 2, and Ontario's in the driver's seat heading for the 8th, up by 2.

I dunno - NL can maybe score a couple here, but now the Gushue rink's really under the gun. Damnit!

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (III)

2007-03-11T20:41:00.001-04:00

Ontario grabs 2, as Brad Gushue misses a double-takeout with his last rock, leaving a relatively easy draw for Howard (though the boys had to sweep for it!). We're tied after 6 ends, with NL holding the hammer in the 7th.

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (II)

2007-03-11T20:35:00.001-04:00

Bad ice has been the story this week, and it has reared its ugly head this week. Both Ont and NL have had good-looking shots go south.

In the 6th end and Ontario's threatening....These are 2 fine rinks here.

Ont scored 1 in the first; NL got 2 in the second, and ON did the same in the 3rd. NL scored 2 in the 4th and stole 1 in the 5th.

More later.

Bloggin' the Brier (I)

2007-03-11T20:31:00.001-04:00

(Lord knows if this "remote blogging" will work this time - last time, during the '06 elections in the US, it screwed up 9 ways from Sunday - but it's worth a shot.)

Heck of a game going on today at the Brier in Hamilton. We're 1/2-way through, and NL has a 5-3 lead, but ON has the hammer in the 6th.

Great shooting from Nfld skip Brad Gushue, and not-quite-so-good shooting from Ontario's Howard, has been the diff so far in my uneducated opinion, but it's still very close. The ON rink can pick up 2 points easy, and maybe more.

More later.

The Demos Get More Interesting ...

2007-03-11T12:57:00.000-04:00

The NY Times had a bit of the glitch other day, but I have to say, I don't think the Dems have ever looked better.

More later.

Sometimes, a Story Can Be Summed Up In a Single Word...

2007-03-03T16:33:00.000-05:00

... and that word is disgusting.

More later.

Because Secret Ballots Are SO 20th Century ...

2007-03-01T19:23:00.000-05:00

Not that Canadian politics isn't enough fun, but an article from south of the border caught my attention.

The gist of it is that the Democrats, who are now running Capital Hill, plan on changing the existing rules governing how a workplace gets unionized. Instead of requiring a secret yes-or-no ballot, the Dems and their union-head allies want to impose an automatic "card certification" process, which means that once a simple majority of eligibile workers sign union cards, the union is automatically "certified", or officialy recognized, without having a follow-up election.

The problem is, an individual worker could be pressured into signing a card - or for that matter, could be pressured into not signing. A secret ballot lets that individual make up his or her own mind, and vote accordingly, without anyone being able to prove how he or she voted.

If the worker signed the card of his/her own free will, then great: he or she can vote accordingly. But if for any reason they want to express themselves differently without everone in their shop knowing about it, a secret ballot lets that happen.

Unions, it is said, exist in part because the power of the individual worker is nowhere near as strong as the power enjoyed by his or her employer. But if that logic is accepted, then it follows that there is also a "power imbalance" between that individual worker, and a union on an organizing drive. One way to protect those individual workers from that "imbalance" is to allow them to make a yes-or-no choice without having to inform their fellow workers, the union organizers, or their employers & managers. And that's done by a secret ballot.

The Liberal government in Ontario has gotten up to similar shenanigans, bringing back Bob Rae-era "card certification", with a 55% threshold, in the construction industry. The McGuinty Libs haven't gone the whole hog and introduced "card certification" throughout Ontario - so far. But they have brought in some other pro-union "reforms". The CFIB has mounted a PR campaign setting out these changes, which you can read about here (note: Adobe document).

Naturally, the CFIB isn't exactly an unbiased observer in all of this by a long shot (but then, neither are most bloggers ...), but they do set out some of the more troubling changes introduced by the Libs.

But of all the "reforms", it's the card certification one that bothers me the most. Protecting an individual by giving her or him a secret ballot is seen as a pretty important principle to me - but it looks as if it's a principle that some unions, and their allies north & south of the border, would rather see the back of.

More later.

Well Done

2007-02-23T15:35:00.000-05:00

Not that the "who's slandering who in the House of Commons" isn't fascinating, but as a slight diversion, and in the interests of putting up at lease one post a week, I thought I'd bring a "good news, job well done" sort of story to your attention. What is it? Click to see.

Not that it's a surprise to see a member of the Forces acting bravely even if he wasn't "on the job", but it's still a well-deserved recognition.

More later.

Don't Go Overboard

2007-02-16T10:14:00.000-05:00

The Libs, as you have probably heard, are poised to flip-flop on their support of certain anti-terror provisions that were introduced after 9/11. I know, I know: not exactly front-page news. Both sides of the House change their minds on various issues, sometimes for good reasons, and sometimes for not.

I think the grits are in the "not" catagory here. But that's not the point of this post.

Today, the PM dragged out the "soft-on-terror" meme. And I think doing so is a mistake.

First of all, it's not necessary. Calling the Libs on ratting on their previous support - expressed as recently as last December, if media reports are to be believed - is entirely fair ball. So is pointing out that this particular flip-flop is muddle-headed at best. I don't even object to Harper saying, as he has, that this is driven by a certain element of the Lib caucus that doesn't reflect opinion in the country. So there are other means for going after "Team" Dion on this issue.

Second, it detracts from the principled argument that can be made for these provisions. In other words, you're arguing a negative instead of a positive. Sometimes, "negative" works - but it doesn't move your own agenda as much as it pulls down the other guy. This is a policy issue that we should be trying to push "up".

Third, it really is going too far. The Libs can be, and in my opinion are, quite wrong. That doesn't mean that they're hangin' with Osama.

Is it fair ball to say that the effect of the grit flip-flop is to unnecessarily weaken our anti-terror arsenal? Of course it is. Dion and his crew should not be let off the hook on this one. Quite simply, in my own opinion of course, they are wrong to turn their backs on the policy that they introduced.

But the PM is sailing into more troubled waters when he drags out the whole "soft-on" thing.

More later.

Ocean Ranger, 25 Years On ...

2007-02-15T20:20:00.000-05:00

Now and then, you feel gobsmacked when you realize how much time has passed since a "big historical thing" (to use the technical term) happened.

In this case, unfortunately, the anniversary I'm referring to is of a tragedy for all Canadians, especially Newfoundlanders & Labradorians.

25 years ago today, the offshore oil drilling unit Ocean Ranger capsized and sank during a fierce North Altantic storm, with the loss of all 84 souls aboard her at the time.

Here is a link to an excellent archival site at cbc.ca, which contains a footage of news broadcasts and additional information about the tragedy.

And here is a link to a tremendous post from Simon Lono, who gives a personal - and deeply moving - account of the loss. Yes, Simon is a "Liblogger", but in case you couldn't guess, this has nothing to do with partisanship.

I was less than 11 years old at the time the Ocean Ranger sank, but I can still remember the shock and horror that almost everyone in St. John's experienced as the extent of the tragedy became apparent. I can't begin to imagine how the families of the victims felt on that day - or how they feel today.

As Simon's post pointed out, offshore oil has been, in some ways, a blessing for Newfoundland & Labrador. Many people see it as one of the best - if not last - chances for my home province to escape economic "have not" status. Debates have and will continue as to how "the offshore" should be developped, and on what terms. But very few would disagree that it has had a significant effect on Newfoundland & Labrador. But as Simon's post also reminds us, the boon of offshore oil has come at a heavy cost.

The only good thing I can say about the Ocean Ranger aftermath is that it resulted in much-needed changes to a host of regulations and procedures, especially as they relate to the safety of the crews of offshore oil rigs. It shouldn't have taken a disaster for these improvements to be made - some of them just scream "basic common sense" when it comes to working on the ocean, even to a decided non-mariner like me. But sometimes we just don't learn until the sea, or some other calamity, forces us to face up to our mistakes (Titanic and lifeboats - another example).

God rest the souls of the men who died that day, 25 years ago, and comfort their families. And God help us remember.

More later.

Now, Morale Has REALLY Improved

2007-02-13T08:52:00.000-05:00

So, when I posted last evening that the Newfoundland & Labrador Libs could take moral satisfaction from a near-win, it turns out that wasn't quite good enough for the oppo team back home.

No, it turns out that thanks to what the CBC calls a "ballot boo-boo" (yeesh), the Liberal candidate won after all.

So, it looks like the Williams PC crew will have to pay even closer attention to the message(s) sent last night.

Assuming that there isn't another mix-up, or a recount, and the result stands, this is the first time that the PCs lost a seat that they formerly held in a by-election since they swept to government in 2003. Provincial law requires that a general election be held this October (unless there's a vote of non-confidence in the House of Assembly, which given the Tories' still-huge majority, aint gonna happen).

Several fine members of the Newfoundland & Labrador blogroll can give you an even better analysis of what this means, by virtue of being "on the ground" - links to them are over there on the right.

More later.

Morale Has, Quite Likely, Improved

2007-02-12T19:33:00.000-05:00

Late last Thursday / early last Friday, I posted about the Newfoundland & Labrador PC's sweeping 3 by-elections.

I speculated that the PCs were the odds-on favourite to win the 4th by-election, held this evening. I also said that the Libs could do better in tonight's race.

Did they ever.

As tonight's results have it, the Tories have just barely held on to the Humber Valley district, located on the west side of the island. Subject to recounts, the PCs held on to this seat tonight by a whole heaping 12 - count 'em, 12 - votes out of 4,383 cast.

Why was this one so close? Well, like I said last time, keep in mind that this analysis comes from way far away in Toronto. But as near as I can tell, in no particular order:

1. Unlike most districts, this one was relatively close in the last general election in 2003. Whereas the PC's won almost 60% of the vote province-wide in '03, they won Humber Valley by a 52/48 margin (the NDP didn't field a candidate in the general election). So it wasn't as if the Libs were dealing with Tory strongholds, as were 2 of last week's districts.

2. Because this was a one-district night, the Libs were able to focus all of their attention on this one race. Of course, the same can be said for the Tories, so that explanation is probably a bit of a wash, at best.

3. There could very well be a whole host of local, district-only issues that I, I am ashamed to say, know nothing about (but then, NL by-elections don't exactly get lots of press in the national / Toronto media). What's more, for all I know, the Lib candidate - the same person who came in a close second in '03 - could be an excellent candidate and/or have run an excellent local campaign. I'll let more local commentators sound off on that.

4. Perhaps most importantly, the whole reason for this by-election was because the former MHA, Kathy Goudie, was personally implicated in a financial scandal, allegedly double-billing her expense claims (a police investigation is, apparently, underway).

So, put it all together and you get a victory-in-defeat moment for the NL Liberals. Whether it has any l0ng-term effect is hard to say, but after pointing out their electoral pratfall last week, their near-success should be noted as well. (Though you'll forgive me if I put my partisan hat on, and say that I hope it doesn't last!)

The real question is whether this represents, for Danny Williams and his crew, an aberration or a warning of trouble in this fall's scheduled election. For that, I'll have to cop out and say "wait and see" - but if the Tories needed a reminder not to rest on their laurels, this will hopefully do the trick.

More later.

PS: It's also worth noting that voter turn-out was significantly higher this evening in Humber Valley than it was in last week's races.

Now THAT'S Confidence!

2007-02-12T16:50:00.000-05:00

The very first paragraph from Chantel Hebert's column in the The Star today:

Word on Parliament Hill these days is that a handful of senior Liberal MPs have been hitting their French books with a vengeance. Stéphane Dion may have been on the job for only a few months, but the prospect that his successor will almost certainly not be from Quebec has convinced some of his ambitious colleagues to put energy in language training now, to avoid being left behind later.

No time like the present, I guess. But whatever could have unilingual MPs racing off to French class (or English class, as the case may be)? Maybe this survey from the blogosphere's favourite Canadian pollster can offer up a clue. Apparently, mean ol' Stephen is doing a lot better as a leader than his opponents give him credit for.

Now. If you go digging through the archives here, you'll see that I have cautioned that opinion polls - even from SES - should be taken with several bushels of salt. That is all the more so when we're not in the middle of an actual election campaign. If anyone - from my fellow Blogging Tories to the folks in charge at Conservative Party h.q. - were to assume that Team Harper's in like Flynn after the next election based on these sorts of surveys, they really do need to think twice. If the last few years have taught us anything, it should be that poll numbers ebb and flow, and that campaigns matter.

But still: the Liberals seemed to be banking on, amongst other things, an assumption that Harper's style would turn off the electorate. For now at least, that assumption should go back to the drawing boards, if not the rubbish bin.

More later.

You Heard It Here First - Curling Edition

2007-02-11T18:43:00.000-05:00

Brad Gushue - who in 2006, was the skip of the first Canadian men's rink to win a gold medal at a Winter Olympics - got his first big win several years before, when he won the Canadian Jr. Men's competition in 2001. He went on to win the World Junior Championship that same year.

Now, the Stacie Devereaux rink from St John's has become the first team from Newfoundland & Labrador to win the Canadian Junior Women's Champtionship. And they did in dramatic style, scoring 3 to come from behind in the 10th and final end against a game squad from Manitoba.

Congratulations to Stacie and her team. Here's hoping that history repeats itself, and we see her getting a gold medal placed 'round her neck not only at this year's World Championship, but 3 years from now in Vancouver!

More later.

For NL Liberals, the Beatings Will Continue Till Morale Improves ...

2007-02-09T00:19:00.000-05:00

Danny's crew went 3 for 3 tonight in by-elections back in my homeland. You can see the results here if you're interested.

Turnout was low in 2 out of the 3, and downright pathetic in the third. People will debate the meaning of that - here's a quite smart Liberal's analysis of the results.

I've (literally) got a train to catch, so I won't go into detail, but the short version, as I see it (from far-too-many-kilometres away, keep in mind) is that 2 of these seats were Tory strongholds - even when ol' Brian T. was at the top of his popularity, Kilbride and Ferryland went PC. The third, Port au Port, is a bit more of a swing riding, but I don't think too many of my compatriots were shocked to see it stay "blue".

What's more, the big money scandal going on back home - more details to follow, but almost any one of the fine NL blogrolls blogs to the right of this screen can give you details - has touched all 3 parties. So you probably had a bit of "plauge on all your houses" thinking going on.

But still and all: as at least one of the Ontario by-elections that were also held tonight demonstrates, people can toss elect an oppo member to a formerly-government-held seat in a by-election, if they're good-and-angry enough to do so.

At least for now, the Newfoundland & Labrador PC's haven't inspired that anger, and for sure, the NL Liberals and NDP (who were never expected to be a factor in these races - their strength is much more localized in a smaller # of districts) haven't found a way to either create that anger, or capitalize on whatever remnants of it that do exist.

An interesting question is that effect will this have on the 4th & final NL by-election, scheduled for next week. As Ed H. (the "Liblogger" I linked to above) suggests, tonight could help the Liberal candidate, in a roundabout way - but from all the way here in T.O., it looks like the Libs have a heck of a hill to climb.

More later.

Conditions For a Halton By-Election?

2007-02-08T14:24:00.000-05:00

I think Garth is now saying that if the PM promises to call a by-election right away, Turner will step down right away.

I say "I think" because I'm still not certain whether Garth is still insiting that at the very least, a by-election be called for W. Khan's riding as well. It depends what quote you read.

I've said it before: Garth should step down, without conditions, because he has made the whole issue of changing horses in mid-stream such a big deal.

But if Garth's not insisting on Khan, or anyone else, resigning before Garth agrees to live up to his own principles, then that's a much more interesting situation - and it puts the ball right back into the PM's court.

More later.

You Can't Fight City Hall ...

2007-02-07T15:58:00.000-05:00

... Or in this case, the New Brunswick legislature.

Buckle up, this may take a minute to get through, but it's an important principle.

The backstory: Since 1988, licensed premises in New Brunswick purchase their alcohol from the provincial liquor corporation’s retail stores and, in addition to the retail price, paid a so-called “user charge”, as prescribed by regulation. Finally, Kingstreet Investments, which operated a bunch of nightclubs in the province, challenged the constitutional validity of this “user charge”. Kingstreet was looking for reimbursement and interest of the amounts paid.

The trial court ruled that the user charge was an “unconstitutional indirect tax”, but that court refused to order the government to repay the money collected, as it applied the “passing-on” defence (which means, in somewhat clear English, that the bars were passing on the higher price to their customers, and therefore suffered no loss). The lower court also applied what it called a general rule against recovery of unconstitutional taxes.

(It's important to note that neither this Court, nor the two higher Courts that weighed in on this case ever said that the tax was constitutionally valid. Keep that in mind as we go on.)

Kingstreet took their case to the N.B. Court of Appeal, the highest Court in the province, which “allowed” Kingstreet’s appeal, and told the province to pay up, but not from the beginning of when the money was improperly collected, but only from from the time Kingstreet started its lawsuit against the province. The “user fees” paid before then were, according to the Court of Appeal, subject to that “passing‑on” defence I mentioned earlier.

So off both sides go to the Supreme Court of Canada, and last month, in a judgment you can read here if you’re interested, the S.C.C., in a unanimous decision, told the province, "no dice": all of the improperly-collected money had to go back to Kingstreet.

To quote from the S.C.C.’s “headnote” (a summary of its decision that appears at the beginning of the decision):

This case should be decided on the basis of constitutional principles rather than unjust enrichment as an unjust enrichment analysis is ill‑suited to deal with the issues raised by ultra vires taxes [that is, taxes that are beyond the scope of the government in question to impose – JH.]. The taxpayers in this case have recourse to a remedy as a matter of constitutional right. This remedy is the only appropriate one because it raises important constitutional principles which would be ignored by treating the claim under another category of restitution.

Restitution is generally available for the recovery of monies collected under legislation that is subsequently declared to be ultra vires. Such restitution is warranted to guarantee respect for constitutional principles, in particular, in this case, the principle that the Crown may not levy a tax except with authority of the Parliament or the Legislature. This principle of “no taxation without representation” is central to our conception of democracy and the rule of law. When the government collects and retains taxes pursuant to ultra vires legislation, it undermines the rule of law. To permit the Crown to retain an ultra vires tax would thus condone a breach of this most fundamental constitutional principle. As a result, a taxpayer who has made a payment pursuant to ultra vires legislation has a right to restitution. [emphasis added]

Now, that’s what you could call a thumbnail sketch of the Court’s decision, but you get the idea: to allow “the Crown” (i.e., the N.B. government) to retain its ill-gotten money undermines the rule of law.

So what’s the newly-elected (despite losing the popular vote, but that’s another story) government in N.B. going to do?

If you said “Pay back whatever unconstitutional taxes they collected over the years, and offer an apology”, then I’m sorry to say that you have to sit in the corner with the dunce hat on, becase that aint how governments tend to behave.

Nope, as this story (from the increasingly-indispensable Macleans.ca website) shows, the ward-heelers in New Brunswick plan on simply changing the law – retroactively. They’re going to be real sports about it and pay Kingstreet its money back, presumably for showing the gumption to take the government all the way to the S.C.C., and no doubt incurring hefty lawyers’ bills along the way.

But everyone else who was hosed by a “user fee” which was actually an unconstitutional tax, and who paid money that the Court said had to be returned at the risk of undermining the rule of law, can just go pound sand. The government is now calling this underhanded, unconstitutional user fee a “retroactive tax”, which is about a good example of doublespeak as I’ve heard all day.

N.B.’s Public Safety Minister – now there’s an ironic title for the job, under the circumstances – John Foran said they were just thinking of the children, for God’s sake – er, I mean, protecting the taxpayers’ interests and keeping roads and schools from imminent collapse, and of course, he dragged the rest of the N.B. populace into the act:

[Foran] says New Brunswickers would sooner see money spent on things like education and health care.

I don’t know if New Brunswickers will see it that way or not. But here’s the thing, and it’s a shame Foran doesn’t get this: the “rule of law” is not something that just ebbs and flows with public opinion. Quite the opposite: it’s one of those things that make civilized places, well, civilized because it ensures that nobody – from the Crown to a tavern-owner to the guy who buys a beer or three at said tavern – can escape the laws that are supposed to apply to us all.

If I take the government to Court, and win, then others who suffered exactly the same wrong should get exactly the same remedy. And just like any other loser in any other Court case, the government shouldn't get to play fast & loose with that principle just because the result may not be popular.

Now, what the N.B. government is going to do here may well pass constitutional muster – I’m a lawyer but I don’t practice in that area, so really, your guess is as good as mine. It may very well be that the taxpayers who ponied up for this bloody “user fee” for years may be out of luck, so that (presumably) another group of taxpayers can benefit.

But keep in mind what the S.C.C. said (at para. 14 of the decision I linked to above):

The Court’s central concern must be to guarantee respect for constitutional principles.

Ask yourself if what the N.B. government is doing lives up to that "central concern" or not. You can’t tell me that this doesn’t give a political, if not legal, thumb to the eye to the values that the Supreme Court of Canada went on about in its decision.

More later.

"Bring it On"

2007-02-06T17:44:00.000-05:00

Over at the blog of the newly-Liberal Garth Turner, Dion's latest (and to date, only) catch says that he'll be happy to run in a by-election if - and only if - by-elections are called in the seats currently held by Messrs. Emmerson and Khan.

Comments are not being accepted, or are being held pending review, at Garth's blog, so I'll say what I tried to say there, here:

Garth - unlike Khan, Emmerson, Fortier, or anyone else who Garth got upset about - made joining another team a huge issue. You want to be a Liberal, get elected as a Liberal, was Garth's message.

If Garth chooses to live down to the standard set by Emmerson and Khan, that's his choice to make. But he can't pretend that he's living up to the standard that he himself called for if he's saying "I'll do it if they do it".

More later.

On the Bright Side, We'll All Get to Hear What Goes On at Lib Caucus Meetings ...

2007-02-06T12:43:00.000-05:00

It looks like independence doesn't agree with Garth - which means, assuming this to be true, that "independence" joins the long list of things & people Garth doesn't end up getting along with.

And like I said in the "comments" Garth's place, it looks like Halton is Canada's party-switching capital:

1. Gary Carr goes from a Mike Harris-era Ontario PC to a Liberal, and gets beaten by ...

2. a Brian Mulroney-era PC who wins as a Harper-era Conservative before getting the gate, promising to raise hell as an indep before (apparently) joining the Dion Liberals.

I thought/knew Halton was a great place to live, but there must be something in the water they give to politicans.

More later.

Reason # 1,000,001

2007-01-23T13:15:00.000-05:00

I was at the movies the other night, and before the 12.5 hours of "coming attractions" began, the audience was treated - and I'm not being sarcastic when I say "treated" - to what I assume is a new video from the Beatles re-mixed Love album.

There's about a million reasons why the Beatles ruled the music world, and still kick the heck out of just about anyone else who's come down the pike since 1970. Here's another.

More later.

Good Show

2007-01-09T19:39:00.000-05:00

I hate stealing lines from Paul Martin of all people, and I'm not a fan of the "grocery list" approach in mid-mandate when it comes to election promises & policy items, where you check things off as you go.

Generally speaking - and there are exceptions to every rule - I think you should take a look at a government's record once the writ for the next campaign is dropped, when it comes to which pledges were kept, which ones were not, and why. In other words, for the most part governments should be judged on their overall record once the election has been called.

But still and all, allow me to say, even just this once:

Promise made, promise kept.

More later.

Don't Take Dion With You to the Horse Track...

2007-01-05T12:58:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year, very busy, more posts later ... you know the routine.

Lots of comment out there, on both sides of the fence, on the newest Tory MP. But whether or not Khan's floor-crossing is good or bad (in either the "strategic" or "moral" sense of the words), this is a story that just never should have been allowed to take root. And while it won't get as much attention, it doesn't show Dion's judgment in a good light.

Here's a hint for Stephane, not that he'll take my advice: when you hear rumours from a number of sources that one of your MPs is jumping ship, don't tell the CBC that there's simply no way it's going to happen. It makes you look a bit silly, especially when it does in fact happen a short time later.

More later.

Happy Christmas to All!

2006-12-24T23:02:00.000-05:00

Back in St John's, with the families (mine & Fiona's) ... It was worth the 13 hours (!) of aggravation - more on that later, but suffice to say I hope Air Canada as a whole gets a big lump of coal in its collective stocking this year - to be home in St John's at this time of the year.

Wherever you're reading this, and whatever you're doing on this day, and whatever your faith, belief or creed - I hope you're with the one(s) you love, and that you and yours have a safe and happy holiday.

Like the title says ... Happy Christmas to all!

More later.

Dogs and Cats,

2006-12-08T14:22:00.000-05:00

... Living together!

Man alive, talk about your strange bedfellows.

Well, I'll look at the bright side: if Tobin can be brought on board, there's hope for everyone!

More later.

Viva Las Vegas!

2006-12-01T20:06:00.000-05:00

Sorry for the lack of posts lately. I'm heading down to Lost Wages for a few days. I'll have more to say about the Lib carnival in Montreal when I get back.

When I get there, I'll see if they're taking bets on the Lib race. Depending on the odds, I may put a couple of bucks on Volpe ;)

More later.

On The List of Things Conn Smythe Wouldn't Have Done ...

2006-11-24T13:01:00.000-05:00

... I've got to figure that this is towards the top of the list.

As a libertarian kind of guy, I don't mind the plot (others may differ), though I have to wonder if describing anyone as a "budding queen" is all that flattering or politically correct.

I hear that they were going to add a scene showing the Leafs winning the Stanley Cup, but they figured that some things were just too outlandish, even for the movies.

More later.

Interesting To See Who's On Board ...

2006-11-23T21:03:00.000-05:00

... And who's not so sure.

Short version: the two Lib leadership front-runners who don't have seats in the House of Commons are the ones who appear to be the most reluctant to support the "Quebecois = nation" motion. Neither Rae nor Kennedy appear to be all that impressed with it, though it must be noted that neither one of them has said that they are strongly opposed, either.

It makes me wonder - are these two:

(a) doing what Liberal MPs would like to do, but who feel that they can't do it (Jimmy the K aside); or

(b) are they doing this to appeal to the probably-not-inconsiquential number of Liberal leadership delegates who don't like this idea, and who are looking for a contender to say "non" (or at least, give a less-qualified "oui" than that given by Messrs Dion & Ignatieff); or

(c) a bit of both (a) and (b)?

More later.

Before We Panic, and/or Break Out the Champagne ...

2006-11-23T09:33:00.000-05:00

Still wrestling with "the motion", but in reaction to some of the passionate commentary working its way through the Canadian political "blogosphere" (ugh, I hate that term, but can't come up with another one...), I wanted to point something out.

I'm not best thrilled by this, although I may yet come to support it, reluctantly.

But before we all sail too far off into the deep end, we should remember that post-referendum in '95, the Chretien government of the day introduced at least one (maybe more - I honestly can't recall) motions, and I think even the dreaded words "distinct society" were used.

(My recollection may be false in that regard, but I'm sure others here can correct me if it is.)

The motion(s) passed at that time were not of constitutional force, and the Dominion didn't crumble. In fact, I doubt if anyone, including me, can recite what it/they said without looking it up.

That doesn't turn a bad idea into a good one, but it does mean that we shouldn't go too far into panic mode.

More later.

I'm Still Mulling It Over ...

2006-11-22T19:25:00.000-05:00

... And I may come to support it (of course, my support and a nickel will give you - well, a nickel).

But I'd be a bit too hypocritical by half if I didn't say that I'm not hugely thrilled with it, so far.

If you're interested, leave your own thoughts in the Comments, and I'll get back to you.

More later.

Quick Thoughts Before Work ...

2006-11-20T09:47:00.000-05:00

Some quick thoughts to start off your week:

Condolences to Ed Broadbent and family. Everything I've read about Lucille Broadbent indicates that she wasn't only a huge help to her husband, but a strong and dynamic individual.
On to happier news: As per usual, I enjoyed yesterday's real "fall classic", although it wasn't exactly a dream game. If the first half had been as competitive as the second half, it would have been a game for the ages. I can't wait to be there in person next year!
If Jane Pitfield had only thought of this policy, she may have done better last week!
On the one hand, Peter Lougheed's endorsement of Jim Dinning probably (it's hard to be definitive when you're commenting from T.O.!) carries some heft in the Alberta PC leadership race. On the other hand, it makes it all the easier for his opponents to paint him as "Mr. Establishment".
Back to the Grey Cup for a minute: As far as pop singers go, I don't mind Nelly Furtado. But come on: it's the Grey Cup, in November, in Winnipeg - where the heck were these guys?

That's it for now. Off to work!

More later.

More Milton Friedman

2006-11-16T20:22:00.000-05:00

Earlier, I noted that Milton Friedman, a truly influential economist and political thinker, passed away.

As I said in the earlier post, better minds than mine are going to pay tribute to him and his ideas. So rather than try to match their efforts this time, I'm going to link to an essay he wrote in 1978 called "Is Capitalism Humane?"

Give it a read. For me, the "money quote" is the following. It sums up how I think the "common good" can and should be obtained, even if it doesn't always work in an imperfect world:

I am saying only that a set of social institutions that stresses individual responsibility, that treats the individual—given the kind of person he is, the kind of society in which he operates—as responsible for and to himself, will lead to a higher and more desirable moral climate than a set of institutions that stresses the lack of responsibility of the individual for what happens to him and relieves him of blame or credit for what he does to his fellowmen.

Personal freedom and personal responsibility for a better world, baby. Perhaps it doesn't always work out that way in the real world, but it's got a good beat, and you can dance to it.

More later.

Lump of Coal In His Stocking

2006-11-16T20:13:00.000-05:00

Cross another promise off the list, it appears.

Now, as with the income trust thing on a federal level, I can accept - and I think most voters can accept - that circumstances can change, and not every promise in an election platform can be kept.

But that doesn't give the promise-breaker a free pass. If McGuinty knew, or ought to have known, that there was no way to keep his close-down-coal promise and he made it anyway, then he'll have to wear it. (And yes, that goes for the CPC on the income trust issue too, lest you think I'm being too partisan.)

Whether or not the coal promise was one McGuinty knew, or ought to have known, would be impossible to keep .... well, that's an exercise I'll leave up to the reader.

(Oh, and before I forget ... McGuinty was almost trapped in a "victim-of-bad-advice/it-wasn't-my-fault" example of passing the buck - which only makes the promise-breaker look even more like a political weasel. Obviously either McG or someone with better instincts realized that the strategy of blaming the unknown experts was a loser, and it would be best if he owned up to it.)

More later.

Open Question, For Your Consideration & Comment

2006-11-16T19:35:00.000-05:00

Mario Dumont, head of l'ADQ in Quebec, hasn't been heard from lately in the Anglo/ON media (I have no idea if he's getting more press in the Quebec/francophone/other media or not).

But a quick look at the G&M website reveals this story. Dumont is not impressed that he is unable to join his pregnant girlfriend at a (presumably, publicly-funded) daycare facility, because - he says - the sensibilities of Muslim, Sihk and Hindu women are offended by the presence of men at neonatal classes. He also isn't best pleased with the notion that female police officers turn cases involving Hasdic Jews over to male colleagues, for basically the same reason.

So, I'm tossing this "Open Question" out to anyone who wants to comment on it. Is Dumont going too far? Or does he have a good point? Is there some "mid-way point" solution that people could suggest, or is this an "either-or" situation?

Please note that I'm doing this "open question" thing as an experiment to encourage sane discussion from proponents of both sides of this issue. Wild accusations, actionable content and generally offensive remarks will almost certainly be deleted, and if it gets too out of hand, I'll end up deleting the whole thread. Express your opinions openly, but with some modicum of respect, please - I know you can!

And with that caution in mind - have at it.

More later.

A Great Loss

2006-11-16T14:37:00.000-05:00

Milton Friedman, R.I.P.

I'm at work, and aside from this quick note (and a snide joke about Toronto weather, in an earlier post), I can't blog for long. But Friedman was one of the most influential economists out there, and he deserves significant tributes, which I'm sure he will receive from worthier sources than me. I will try to put up a post about his influence later, if timing permits.

More later.

Maybe I Should Start Building an Ark

2006-11-16T14:28:00.000-05:00

Ok, so it's raining a bit here in Toronto, the Centre of the Universe(TM).

But surely to God, it hasn't come to this, has it?

Back home, this sort of weather would be called "some rain, with a bit of drizzle". In T.Dot, I have to start keeping an eye out for the four horsemen of the apocolypse (who apparently now consist of Death, War, Famine, and SomewhatHeavyShowers) making their way down Yonge Street.

(All of that said, if you're in Toronto, keep your kids away from the Don & Humber rivers - no foolin', it can be dangerous.)

More later.

Keith Martin, Prophet

2006-11-16T09:29:00.000-05:00

From the G&M:

“This snub by the Chinese is really in response to the new Conservative government's repeated snubs against China,” Liberal Foreign Affairs critic Keith Martin said in an interview Wednesday.

If anyone has the time & interest, it may be worth figuring out whether KM took a more principled approach on China before he crossed the floor. But in any event, it turns out Martin - and many others - jumped the gun a bit.

But as my last post hinted, even if the Chinese hadn't agreed to meet, Harper was and is taking the proper approach.

More later.

Not For All The Tea in China

2006-11-15T16:55:00.000-05:00

I'm at work, so I can't go on at length for now (I'll do so later if I can), but let me just say ...

Proper Bloody Thing.

More later.

Look Who's Back

2006-11-14T07:05:00.000-05:00

Mere days after I pointed out that one of the best damn bloggers in the business had sadly closed his doors .... Bob's back. 'Bout damned time, too.

More later.

Lest We Forget ....

2006-11-11T13:49:00.000-05:00

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.

Excerpted from For the Fallen, by Laurence Binyon.

More later.

Meanwhile, Back on the Home (& Away) Front ...

2006-11-10T18:46:00.000-05:00

Like some other Cdn political bloggers, I have been paying more attention to what has been going on south of the border.

But here's an interesting issue that may work its way onto the domestic agenda - even though it deals, in part, with "foreign affairs".

I'm one of those conservatives who believes that the federal government needs to focus on its areas of jurisdiction, and the provinces need to focus on theirs.

But here's a situation involving what the environment, which I understand is a shared area of jurisdiction. And Quebec wants the chance to express its views at an international forum, which appear to be at variance with Canada's.

How to square the circle? I think at the end of the day, Canada - i.e., the federal government - has to be the "one" to represent Canada's position at these sorts of events. However, it can and should take the views of provinces into account when the matter(s) under discussion are, pursuant to our Constitution, under shared jurisdiction. That goes even more so for matters that are under provincial jurisdiction. On the other hand, when dealing with matters that fall within the federal government's purview, the feds can certainly invite comments from the lower levels of government - but at the end of the day, the feds decide what the position will be.

What that means, in my opinion, is that the feds get to speak ... but depending on what's being discussed, they also have to listen. It can make things difficult to say the least, but that is part of the price we pay for living in a "federal", rather than unitary, system.

Now, I can anticipate at least some of the criticism of this approach: How will the feds ever sufficiently herd the provincial cats, when the item under discussion at the international event in question is a shared one, within Canada? That is a very good question, and I don't have a ready answer. But when the feds don't consult in those sort of situations, you get a result where "Canada" takes a "principled stand" at the international forum ... and then looks like a horse's rear end when it tries to impliment that stand, and the provinces don't go along.

Comments & suggestions are welcome!

More later.

Jokes Aside ...

2006-11-10T17:55:00.000-05:00

Jack Palance, R.I.P.

This is sad news. He was almost always a heck of a lot of fun to watch in almost any role he had.

More later.

Fookin' French?

2006-11-10T17:10:00.000-05:00

Sensitivity Alert: Some folks may say I'm endorsing the following "point of view" as expressed by Oasis gee-tarist Noel Gallaghe by linking to it - not so. Of the things I would want to change about this country, official bilingualism is pretty darn low on the list - assuming it's on said "list" at all. I just think this is kinda funny, in an insensitive sort of way, and heck, it's *Friday*. But we know that un-PC thoughts of partisan bloggers like yours truly can sometimes be used as weapons of mass distraction by opponents, don't we?

So with that brave-hearted disclaimer on my part out of the way: On with the show ...

Used to be that Noel Gallagher was the relatively sane one of the Oasis Bros., but it seems as though the key word is "relatively".

On a recent swing through Canada, Noel took the time to share his thoughts with Canadian mag Exclaim, and in passing, had this to say about our bilingual nation:

Q. What do you think of when you think of Canada?

A. I think of being absolutely freezing fookin’ cold. And I also think of this fookin’ weird, weird French influence. What’s that all about? What business have they got over there? Why French? I was in a Dunkin Donuts in Canada, and the menu was in French — the whole thing, right. And I asked the woman for a coffee, and she only spoke French. Now, I’ve taken a lot of drugs in my time mate, but I’ve got to say that the single most frightening experience of my life was thinking, “I could have swore I was fookin’ in Canada when I got off that tour bus. And now I’m in… am I? No. I don’t know.” And then I said to the woman, “You can speak English, can’t you?” And I think she was getting annoyed that I was being a bit rude by that point, because she was only speaking French. I was going, “I know you can speak English. We’re in Canada. And I know you understand what I’m saying.” I may have brought up something about the war and then left.

Let's just say Noel doesn't look a heck of a lot better via the rest of his answers.

Michael Ignatieff really needs to give this man a good talking-to, dontcha think?

More later.

Sorry About the Mess ... and, Get Keen For Dean!

2006-11-10T11:40:00.000-05:00

I have no idea what went screwy with blogspot, but a whole pile of my "(almost) live blogging" posts from US Election Night re-appeared over the last 24 hours or so, making me look like I was providing savvy analysis of real-time election results ... 2 days after those results came in. Even for this blog, things aren't usually that bad!

Sorry about that. I think things are (relatively) back to normal now.

In the meantime, I can't spend much time on analysis now, but I would point out that the Libs have landed a whale of a speaker for their convention ....

YYYYYYYYEEEEEAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!

Of course, try and imagine the howls if the Tories brought in some big-wig Republican to fire up the troops, but that's the Liberals for ya ...

UPDATE: Canadian Cynic gives me some lumps. Don't bother trying to click on the post CC links to - it was one of the way out of date ones that I got rid of when I tried to clean things up. Oh well - thanks for the hits, CC!

More later.

A Long Montana Night - Plus, Wasn't Rove Supposed to Have Rigged Things?!?

2006-11-09T09:28:00.000-05:00

I am still going to post some thoughts on the big show the other night, but a combo of work + fatigue (the *hell* was I thinking, waiting up till God knows when so they could count an extra county or two in Montana?) means it'll be delayed a bit.

I would note that I've seen *significantly* fewer complaints about crooked voting machines from some of the left-leaning blogs out there than I did in '02 - funny, that :)

More later.

Say Goonight, the (Grand Old) Party's Over ... kind-of...

2006-11-08T00:41:00.000-05:00

Welln folks, this has been a first for me: blogging nearly-live for several hours now.

I HATE to leave while things in the Senate are still hanging in the balance, especially in the Senate. But it's just about time for me to pack it in, as duty calls for me tomorrow - or, to be precise, later today.

If anything super-big happens in the next 10 mins or so, I'll note it. Otherwise, I'll be back with a wrapup in a few hours.

Thanks to everyone - no matter how few! - who hung around this obscure corner of the internet tonight!

More later.

Kinky!

2006-11-08T00:34:00.000-05:00

"Kinky" Friedman - I can't post a link right now, but let's just say he's, um, a unique sort of guy - is getting about 12% of the vote in the Texas gubanatorial (sp?) race.

Gotta love the protest vote!

More later.

Joe-mentum

2006-11-08T00:29:00.000-05:00

A "little buddy" in the comments section noted that Clinton won big - no real surpise. False modest aside, I think I would've had a better chance of beating Hillary than the sacrificial lamb run by the Repubs in NY!

But "l.b." also noted Joe L. won as an indep in CT. The question, which I briefly noted earlier: will he caucus with the Dems?

All signs point to yes, as my Magic 8-ball would say. But even if he nominally aligns with the Dems, I wonder how steady a Democrat he'll be now, in light of the fact that most Dems endorsed his opponent. Will bygones, in fact, be bygones?

More later.

Still Deadlocked - Oh No!

2006-11-08T00:14:00.000-05:00

Good Lord: Larry King *and* Howard Dean, at once, on CNN.

I've had alls I can stands, I can't stands no more - almost. I'm gonna hang in there for another few mins, then that will be it for me, for tonight.

More later!

48-48

2006-11-08T00:00:00.000-05:00

Even-steven in the Senate right now. Man alive ....

The Wa Post has withdrawn its call for the Dems in Maryland, but CNN is hanging tough.

John Kyl (R) has held on in AZ. Still down to the last 4, but now, the Dem is leading by about 3,600 votes in VA - out of about 2.5 million votes in all!

More later.

Yikes!

2006-11-07T23:39:00.000-05:00

Allen (R) in VA is leading by a hair's breadth. And to think, he was supposed to be a contender for the Repub nomination. Now, not so much...

Still looking like the Reps will hold the Senate - but only just!

GWB to have a press conference tomorrow at 1pm. No comment from the Pres till then, or so CNN says.

More later.

Major Projection

2006-11-07T23:18:00.000-05:00

CNN is calling the House of Reps for the Dems.

This shouldn't be overstated ... but it IS *big*.

I remember when Pelosi was elected as Demo minority leader a few years ago. NOBODY thought she'd be much more than a place-holder.

Now, she'll be Speaker of the House of Reps, if all things break as CNN says. And there will be some fairly liberal (to say the least) Demo committee chairs.

Interesting times ahead, I say without enthusiasm....

More later.

Obama '08?

2006-11-07T23:11:00.001-05:00

Barack Obama is being interviewed on CNN. Last I heard, he was re-considering his previous refusal to run for the Demo nomination in '08.

I wonder how a Clinton-Obama race for the Demo nomination will play out?

CNN is making the point that there are a lot of "conservative Democrats" - what used to be called "Yellow Dogs" - being elected. If that's so, it means that there won't be as big a change in approach as you might have thought, even if the Demos win overall.

Personally, I think the members of the leadership of the Dems are so liberal that you could see splits within the new Demo caucus. We'll see!

More later.

And Yet, the Polls are Open ...

2006-11-07T23:11:00.000-05:00

One big diff in coverage between Canada & the USA: I'd be in handcuffs now (or at least, facing a fine!) for posting about results, if this was a Canadian election.

CNN (and, I presume, Fox, MSNBC, etc) have been on the air nation-wide with results, etc - and yet, polls are still open in much of the US.

If they had Canada-type rules, they wouldn't be able to report on NY till Hawaii closed! I figure that's one thing we can learn from the US: citizen-voters *don't* need to be "protected" by publication bans, etc.

Lieberman is now giving his victory speech...

More later.

Too Close...

2006-11-07T22:30:00.000-05:00

Still seems to close to call, but the Dems are making gains. This one's gonna be close!

More later.

All Quiet (sorta...)

2006-11-07T22:23:00.000-05:00

Nothing really new in the last 1/2 hour.

Lamont is conceding - and moonbats weep from coast to coast ....

More later.

Repub's Abroad

2006-11-07T21:48:00.000-05:00

I'm at the Republicans Abroad event in Toronto. Dinner was great .... but then again, I hear the food was pretty good on the Titanic, too ;)

Actually, the mood here is pretty good ... except for folks griping about having to watch CNN, since the restaurant I'm at doesn't get Fox News!

Oh oh ... Chafee has gone down for the GOP in Rhode Island. That means if - IF - CNN is right in its projections, the Dems have got 3 of the 6 seats they need to get control of the Senate.

More later!

GOP means ...

2006-11-07T21:30:00.000-05:00

In answer to a Q. asked earlier: GOP = Grand Old Party.

Nope, no clue where it came from!

More later.

Netkooks of the World, Revolt!

2006-11-07T21:24:00.000-05:00

Joe Lieb. wins in CT.

He says he'll caucus with the Dems ... though after the treatment he received from them, Lord knows why.

More later.

Lull

2006-11-07T20:47:00.000-05:00

Things are quiet while they wait for the next batch of states to close.

No huge surprises yet. Dems leading in the House, GOP in the Senate, but tonnes of races to come.

More later.

42-30 Senate...

2006-11-07T20:29:00.000-05:00

GOP holding for now...

But I'm noticing a lot of R incumb's trailing in the House.

Oh Great...

2006-11-07T20:26:00.000-05:00

Howard Dean on CNN. That'll improve my mood ...

More later.

No Big News Yet...

2006-11-07T20:23:00.000-05:00

I don't think any "big" races have been called yet. Allen (R) is leading by about 100 votes.

Oh wait - they called Ted Kennedy. Oh well - better luck next time :)

More later.

It's All OVER...

2006-11-07T19:55:00.000-05:00

... In about 3 races.

But seriously, right now in the House race, it's 5-4 Dems ... Out of about 500 or so.

One thing I've noticed, is that in some cases, the major candidates are running unopposed, except for some "fringe" candidates. What's up with that! If we can find NDPers to run in Alberta, surely they could've found some GOPers to run in New York (or Dems in Utah, or wherever).

More later.

(Somewhat) Live Election Blogging!

2006-11-07T19:31:00.000-05:00

Well, if this remote-blogging thing works, that is ... Details to follow!

More later.

A Very Worthy Cause ...

2006-11-07T11:00:00.000-05:00

More blogging in a bit, once work dies down somewhat.

In the meantime, word of this petition drive has made its way across the blogging community, and I'm happy to give it even a very modest push here.

Our veterans deserve as much recognition as we can afford to give - and then some. Not even a state funeral for the last veteran of WW I is enough, in my opinion, but it is an important gesture. I hope that you will sign the petition, and spread word of it along.

More later.

Trust Talk - Over There ...

2006-11-02T20:05:00.000-05:00

I was going to do a post about the income trust issue that's gotten, shall we say, a little bit of press over the last couple of days. But as he does so often, Liam O'B has beaten me to the punch by posting on it, and I ended up saying just about everything there that I would've said here. So if you're at all interested, there you go.

At Liam's place, you can also read about an interesting by-election result, which appears to have breathed new life into the provincial NDP.

(Not that I thought more than oh, one of you - hi, Mom! - was really anxious for my $0.02 on either topic, but just in case, there you go. Plus, I'm always happy to give Liam's blog a plug, even if typing in its url is a pain in the neck!)

More later.

Well, THAT'S a Relief!

2006-11-01T14:44:00.000-05:00

We still have Joe Volpe to entertain & enlighten us during the weeks ahead.

More later.

Speaking Of Non-Noteworthy News ...

2006-11-01T12:42:00.000-05:00

There's hope for me at last!

More later.

Stopped Clock Report: Alec Baldwin

2006-11-01T12:37:00.000-05:00

... As in, "even a stopped clock is right once a day" - or twice a day, I guess, if it's one of those old-timey non-digitial .... well, anyway, where was I ...

Oh, yeah, this. I'm not exactly in accord with most of the political opinions of the Baldwin Bros., but it's nice to see that Alec draws the line at comparing a politician he doesn't like with the Nazis. Good for him for doing so.

Of course, it's a pretty sad state of affairs when even that amount of class is deemed newsworthy.

Yeah, I know: not exactly top-of-the-headlines content, eh? I'll try to do better later today.

More later.

Instapundit Said It Best ...

2006-10-31T18:22:00.000-05:00

John Kerry: The Gift That Keeps on Giving ... to the Republicans.

But seriously: I didn't know Karl Rove was dressing up as Kerry for Halloween.

More later.

It Never Ends ...

2006-10-31T15:48:00.000-05:00

First, YouTube, now this.

I have no idea whether Google actually makes money. But in terms of its expansion alone, we may as well hand over the deed to the world-at-large now, because Google's going to end up owning it anyway. Good on them, especially if they are somehow turning a profit, which hasn't exactly been a common trend amongst internet outfits.

More later.

Bad Blogging News

2006-10-30T09:57:00.000-05:00

This was not a good way for me to greet a Monday morning.

The Carbuncle was on my list of "Blogs I Often If Not Always Check Out"* . It will be missed, by me and, I strongly suspect, by many others.

While I was on my last hiatus, one of the best damn blogs in the business shut down. Now the Carbuncle is leaving the scene. Not happy news. If you get a chance, check out OC before it's taken down.

(*note to self: I need to come up with better names for my lists ...)

More later.

If At First You Don't Succeed ...

2006-10-29T13:48:00.000-05:00

I guess this showed the McGuinty crew that Sandra Pupatello wasn't cutting the mustard on the "slash-and-burn-campaign" file.

As a result, I can only assume Premier McG et al decided that it was time to bring in the big guns.

More later.

Jack Layton, Call Your Office ...

2006-10-27T15:53:00.000-04:00

... 'Cos one of those relatively small number of NDP leaders who actually know something about winning elections is up to something interesting.

Anyone know if an election is in the offing in SK sooner than the fall of '07?

More later.

And You Thought By-Elections Were Boring ...

2006-10-27T12:49:00.000-04:00

Well, here's someone who could certainly be described as an interesting candidate.

Meanwhile, it looks like Iggy's former Toronto chair has found a new home. You can't read too much into this, but I have to wonder how excited Ontario Libs are at the thought of being led by Bob Rae, since that seems to be at least a strong possibility right around now.

More later.

Southern View

2006-10-24T17:07:00.001-04:00

My focus is usually on Canadian politics (federal & provincial), but every now and then I look elsewhere, especially south of the border.

The American mid-term elections have the potential for some dramatic shifts in power between the Democrats and the Republicans, especially when it comes to the House of Representatives. My friend Adam Daifallah, who has (amongst his other accomplishments) worked as a Washington DC-based reporter for the New York Sun, has been blogging about the campaign lately.

Pete DuPont has written an interesting article about what could happen if the Demo's do in fact take control of the House and/or the Senate. The article's sub-heading, "Republicans deserve to lose, but what happens if Democrats win", pretty much gives you an idea of where he's coming from. Check out the article (free registration may be required), but here's a "money quote":

Most Americans have not yet thought much about [the Democrats'] agenda, or the leaders who will set it. But they are tired of the Republican congressional performance. ...

No wonder: Republicans gave line-item veto power to the Democratic president in the 1990s, but refused to give it to the current Republican president. They haven't made the Bush tax cuts permanent. They wouldn't bring individual ownership of Social Security retirement accounts to a vote. They haven't done anything on health care. And they have raised federal spending by $750 billion since 2001 and for fiscal 2006 approved 10,000 earmarks costing $29 billion. Conservative principles seem to have faded away, and ethical principles have weakened--names like DeLay, Ney and Foley make the point. ...
In politics as in other jobs, there is a price to pay for poor performance.

Pierre "Pete" DuPont is an interesting guy, in that his ideas from when he was actively in politics now appear to have been ahead of their time. He was a US Congressman, and served a couple of terms as Governor of Delaware. He ran a long-shot campaign for the Republican nomination in '88, losing to GHWB. Back then, his ideas for the reform of Social Security and the welfare system were seen as way outside the mainstream; now, they have either been adopted in one form or another, and not always by Republicans (eg. Clinton's welfare-reform policies) or at the very least, are seen as debatable proposals in US mainstream political discussion (eg. Social Security).

Anyway, he makes a point that has been tumbling around in my thoughts, and in the thoughts of a number of conservatives in the USA, Canada and elsewhere: We aren't thrilled about the thought of the Demo's taking over all or part of Congress, but the Repub's are really acting like they need a timeout in the worst way.

Food for thought, as we get closer to the mid-terms over the next couple of weeks.

More later.

Fix the Date, Fix the Problem

2006-10-24T15:47:00.000-04:00

The Prime Minister has called by-elections for two Montreal and London area ridings. They are to be held on November 27 '06.

As you may have heard, the Liberals are up in arms about this, because November 27 is when the LPC's leadership convention opens.

Of course, as Don Martin points out in his column in today's National Post, the Libs are the last ones who should be complaining about this sort of thing. Not only did they call a general election shortly after Stockwell Day became leader of the CA, and shortly after he and Joe Clark (then-PC leader) were elected to the House of Commons; the Libs had no problem in scheduling a by-election during the Progressive Conservative Party's 2003 leadership race.

So, it's a little rich for Steve MacKinnon, the Libs' Executive Director, to call this "cynical". Steve, you guys wrote the book on this sort of thing.

But rather than go back-and-forth over this issue, or the issue of whether one or more of Michael Fortier, Bob Rae, Gerard Kennedy or Martha H-F should be running in one of the open seats - all of which are good questions to ask - I'm going to suggest something that will keep Steve's stomach from getting upset the next time there's a vacancy in the House of Commons.

Legislation has been introduced at the federal level to provide for fixed general election dates. If the Libs truly want to avoid the sort of situation that is now giving them the vapours, here's how: Support the current bill, but either propose an amendment to it, or introduce legislation on your own, that will specify when a by-election is to be held. (Right now, the legislation only says the by-election has to be called within a certain time - as the current situation shows, that still leaves a lot of leeway to the PM.)

For instance, you could say that the by-election has to be held within 90 days of the seat becoming vacant, or on the next Tuesday after the 90th day. It would be easy to add a provision saying that if that day was a holiday, the election would be postponed by a week or two. That will take the guess-work out of when a by-election will be held, and put everyone on the same footing.

Granted, proposing solutions isn't as much fun as complaining when the other guy does the exact same thing you used to do (and yes, that applies to both sides of the centre aisle of the H of C). But I'm sure Steve and the other Liberals complaining about the November 27 date can find time to do both.

More later.

It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Them Back

2006-10-23T13:23:00.000-04:00

So the LPC-Quebec has decided that the best way to recapture ground lost to both the BQ and the Conservatives over the past couple of years is ... more constitutional shenanigans. In particular, the call is out to recognise Quebec as a "nation" in the Constitution.

Some brief observations:

1. That rumbling you heard over the weeked was Pierre Trudeau doing a full-gainer in his grave.

2. Back in those long-ago days when I was just a young PCYFer, I fully supported both Meech and Charlottetown, and their calls for recognition of Quebec as a distinct society. I doubt that even the youngest of readers will need me to tell them that those campaigns didn't work out so well. But back then, I was gung-ho for it. I wasn't enthused with the idea of giving Quebec more powers per se, but I figured Quebec had a distinctive linguistic, cultural and legal tradition, and it made sense to enshrine recognition of same in the Constitution.

Guess what? That recognition was never enshrined, and yet, Quebec still has a distinctive linguistic, cultural and legal tradition.

The moral of the story: you don't always need special mention in the Constitution to keep what you have.

3. What's interesting is that even some of the non-IggyNation Liberals are not simply closing the door to this Venus flytrap of an idea. For instance, we have Bob Rae: Demonstrating the strategic smarts that led to his triumphant '95 re-election campaign, M. Rae has suggested that he could be persuaded to support the idea of Quebec being a "nation"... as long as it doesn't mean anything in practical terms. After all, says Rae, Canada's chock-a-block with nations. That sort of thing didn't exactly give pause to Lucien Bouchard in the '90s, and it's not going to solve too many problems now.

What I've learned, as my thinking evolved from the days when I went door-to-door during the '92 referendum campaign (and there are some good stories from that experience that I should share sometime) to now, is that when you start screwing around with the Constitution simply to send a "symbolic" message, you open Pandora's Box. Bob Rae, who was burned as much as any premier by the Charlottetown campaign, and who is not exactly lacking in the brains department, should have figured that out, and indeed, he also used the "Pandora's Box" analogy as a way of beating on Ignatieff - without promising to nail that damn box's lid shut.

4. Finally, the reason for the title of this post: At least some Libs seem to think this will outflank Harper in Quebec. The thinking seems to be that since Harper has promised to fix the "fiscal imbalance", the Libs need something even better to top him - so let's get out the Crayolas and go to work on the Constitution.

But here's the thing: Harper's promise was related to a dollars-and-cents, chicken-in-the-provincial-pot kind of issue. Whether you think the fiscal imbalance is real, or hooey, it deals with the ability of governments to fund programmes that (one would hope) deliver actual services to people, and that make a difference to their daily lives.

Yes, I know that in practice, such programmes usually don't quite hit the mark in that regard - to say the least - and even when they do make a difference, I often wish they didn't. But the point is, the whole fiscal (im)balance debate can at least be seen as something that could affect the real-life concerns of Quebeckers, and other Canadians: health care, roads, schools, that kind of thing. Aside from Constitutional lawyers, scholars and politicans, nobody's paycheque is going to move upwards from adding in the "Quebec = nation" clause to the Constitution.

So, whether they follow the Ignatieff whole-hog approach, or even Rae's more symbolic version, the Libs are just begging for trouble in Quebec and elsewhere by going down this road. What is seen as a way of making headway in Quebec risks throwing the Libs - and the rest of us - backwards.

More later.

Only Nearly Dead.

2006-10-20T12:04:00.000-04:00

This seems to fit things around here ...

Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!

Mr. Praline: The plumage don't enter into it. It's stone dead.

Owner: Nononono, no, no! 'E's resting!

But yes, there'll be more later. Wake the neighbours!

More Soon

2006-02-24T19:40:00.000-05:00

My apologies for the lack of activity 'round here. Lots of reasons why, but no need to bore you with them now. There will be more commentatin' to come, so stay tuned.

In the meantime ... Viva Gushue and the rest of the Canadian Olymptic curling team! How I wish I was in St John's now ...

More later.

Super-Bonus-Western-Alienation-From-Non-Westerner Post

2006-01-30T10:39:00.000-05:00

So the conventional wisdom says this guy can't be Minister of Finance, because he comes from the same province as this guy.

Funny, I don't remember anyone squawking about the whole "same province" issue when this guy was named Minister of Finance in this guy's government, do you?

(Ed. note: I actually won't pitch a fit if Monte gets some other post in cabinet, nor will I object if the Min. of Fin. job goes to some other well-qualified person. I just find the notion of people getting the vapours over 2 guys from the same province having rather important jobs kind of amusing - and a bit depressing. As you were.)

More later.

See? I'm Not The Only One

2006-01-26T13:50:00.000-05:00

Not to say that I only feel warm inside when a well-known pundit agrees with me, but John Ibbitson's column in today's Globe and Mail (which can be found here if you're a subscriber … and if you're not, there's some Google-trick you can use to read it, but I don't know what it is, sorry) makes the point that I was trying to make when last I posted. A few excerpts:

Could we please remember something? Stephen Harper actually won this election.
…
[I]t is ludicrous to presume that this government will be weak, ineffectual and short-lived. Mr. Harper, his caucus and their advisers possess considerable strengths, and will be able to use the levers of power to build on those strengths.
…
… Mr. Harper must meet the House as soon as he can, and get on with the job. He can do so knowing that his mandate is more robust and his prospects more promising than his critics are willing to concede.

Ibbitson makes some other points, not the least of which is that Conservatives should not fall into the trap of blaming voters in Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver for their poor results in those cities. Instead, he suggests that "Mr. Harper and his supporters must retool the party to appeal to these voters."

To a large extent, I agree. I've always believed that if somebody doesn't vote for us, the first place we should look to assign blame is in the mirror (absent fraud, of course). If the CPC didn't appeal to voters in those cities, the Party should ask itself why.

However, I would not go as far as what is suggested in Ibbitson's column. The CPC should try to make itself more attractive to those mega-urban(*) voters, but it should not do so by twisting itself into nothing more than a Lib-lite pretzel. A thoughtful, detailed policy-development process can, I believe, find ideas that fit inside the tent of small-c conservatism and which appeal to voters in those cities in sufficient numbers to win at least a few seats. More on this policy-development process later.

(* "Mega-urban" is my shorthand for Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver. To say that the Tories didn't win seats in or near "urban Canada" as a whole is demonstrably false: the CPC won seats in or near Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Regina, London (in the areas surrounding it, if not in the city itself), Ottawa (ditto), Quebec City and St. John's, and that's just a list off the top of my head. Despite what some Torontonians may think, none of these places can be defined as "rural".)

The issue of winning in mega-urban Canada is one of the issues that the CPC will have to deal with, and not in the too-distant future. But honestly: I would rather grapple with these issues in the context of figuring out how the Tories can win a majority next time, rather than figuring out why my Party lost again.

More later.

Very Bad News From The Middle East

2006-01-26T13:24:00.000-05:00

Anyone with a grain of common sense would, I expect, have to be concerned about this.

I'm no expert in the internal workings (or lack thereof) of the Palestinian power structure, but unless Hamas quickly and convincingly renounces terrorism and recognises Isreal's right to exist, I really have to wonder how anything that remotely resembles an effective peace process can go forward.

More later.

Brief Thoughts - Smile, We Won!

2006-01-25T15:42:00.000-05:00

The following is the text of an e-mail I sent to an old friend of mine on election night. It has been slightly edited to (a) take out some personal stuff, and (b) make it more coherent than it was when I wrote it, at about 2:30 a.m. on 24 January:

Well, look:

It's a win. A win beats the holy hell out of a loss. A few months ago it was quite reasonable to assume, based on the opinion polls (not that we should listen to them …) that we'd lose this thing.

The way some people are carrying on, you'd think Paul Martin was just handed a majority. On the one hand, that's a good thing: Conservatives (small- and big-"c") shouldn't necessarily be satisfied with the final results, in the sense that there is always room to improve, and always room to do better. But once again, the (conservative) folks who are glum now should remember that it is ok to celebrate your victories, even if (a) there's more work to do, and (b) the celebrations shouldn't go overboard.

The Tory win didn't go far enough - not many good things do - but it went further than it could have. The Libs won't be able to freeze us out of the cities forever; and if you think your ol'buddy Jason is being too optimistic on our ability to win in places like Toronto and Vancouver, I suggest we take a look at Quebec: nobody expected us to do that well when this thing started.

So chin up: at the end of the day, you and I can now say that we have, for the first time since reaching the age of majority (ed. note: I realize that doesn't mean much to most of you young whippersnappers on the internet these days, but for me, it's been a bit longer) have been a part of a winning campaign on the national level. And that aint bad.

- Jason.

More comments on the results, locally and nationally, are to follow. For now, I have some work to catch up on.

More later.

Goldstein - Yes; Blogspot - No

2006-01-22T21:31:00.000-05:00

So I spend quite a while writing up a post about my local candidate, Sam Goldstein here in Trinity-Spadina (Toronto).

I explain why he and his team have run a dedicated, active campaign when the temptation exists, in a riding like Trin-Spad which is notoriously tough on Tories, to simply be a paper candidate. (I, by the way, am honoured to be on that team ... I just wish that work et al. had not prevented me from doing even more.)

I talk about who Sam is, and why any conservative living in Trinity-Spadina should give him their vote, and not try and be cute by voting for Olivia Chow in the hopes of defeating Tony Ianno, the Liberal incumbent (who, make no mistake, does deserve a good ol' fashioned whuppin' at the polls tomorrow).

And I go on to say how important it is to get behind candidates who are running for the CPC in places like Toronto, so that we can remove the stranglehold that the Libs (and perhaps, in some areas after tomorrow, the NDP) have on ridings in Toronto, even if it is a slow and, at times, frustrating process.

I do all of that, and more ....

.... and then the Goddamned Blogspot crashes on my machine. My post is gone and it aint coming back.

So here it is: it may take time. It will take effort. And in the short term, it may not be as "fun" as working for Tory candidates in ridings that are seen as more winable. But even if the Tories are as successful as I hope they are tomorrow night, we need to keep building, and keep working, in this riding and across the "416", until the Libs and NDP are forced to stop taking Toronto for granted.

And in my own corner of Toronto, Trinity-Spadina, that means supporting Sam Goldstein.

More later.

It's Probably Just Me ...

2006-01-20T12:15:00.000-05:00

Maybe I'm just too punchy from lack of sleep and/or the mild anxiety I'm feeling when I try and figure out what the heck is going to happen on Monday night ...

But this post from Lorne Gunter, and in particular, his "description" of the telephone call between Liberal Head Office and their now-I'm-quitting, now-I'm-not sacrifical lamb in the Quebec riding of Jonquiere-Alma had me in stiches.

Anyway, go read the whole thing (and read the rest of Gunter's posts as well ... he took some time off during & following the Western Standard cruise, but he's back with a vengeance).

More later.

Gilles Duceppe is Feeling a Buzz

2006-01-18T10:47:00.000-05:00

I was at the Stephen Harper rally in Toronto this morning - or I should say, I was in a room off to the side of the rally, where the overflow crowd had to be parked. Not bad at all, having a pretty big crowd out for a Conservative rally in the heart of the "416", with less then a week to go.

Anyway, while I was waiting, I saw Senator Buzz Hargrove and Paul Martin at a campaign event. The sound was off, so I didn't get to hear what Buzz was going on about, but it probably wasn't as interesting as what he had to say in this story:

[Hargorve] said Quebec voters should choose the Bloc Quebecois over the Conservatives.

"Anything to stop the Tories."

It's great to see that Buzz is not only a voice for the working man/woman --- he's a great Canadian patriot, too.

I wonder what the guys on the assembly line in Oshawa or Oakville think of that particular endorsement?

Heck, according to the story, Paul Martin was with Buzz when he did his bit for national unity ... I wonder what he thought of it?

{h/t to the incomperable Andrew Coyne}

More later.

Oh, The Good Ol' Hockey Game ...

2006-01-17T16:35:00.000-05:00

... It's the best game you can name.

Wonder what Ken Dryden thinks of all this?

More later.

Our Neighbours Are Noticing ...

2006-01-17T10:41:00.000-05:00

The Great Canadian Race has attracted the attention of journalists from the U.K. and the U.S.A. (free registration may be required)

Assuming that current trends continue - and anyone working on a CPC campaign, including me, is hereby reminded, again, not to rely on that assumption, but rather to make it happen - I expect that we'll see more of these reports over the next few days.

I remember on the day of the '84 election, one American network (I can't recall if it was ABC, CBS or NBC) ran a story about how John Turner had just provided a guide on how to lose an election. Here's hoping a 1,000 similar flowers bloom this coming Monday.

{h/t for the Telegraph piece: Warren K.}

More later.

The NDP Turns the Knife ...

2006-01-16T17:57:00.000-05:00

This is a brand-new ad from the NDP.

I'm not exactly cheering for more New Democrats in the House after next Monday to say the least, but to give credit where credit is due, this new advert of theirs may help keep their current "soft Liberal" supporters from leaking back ... and it may attract more of them, too.

I can't imagine the Libs will be too thrilled to see it on the air, however.

{h/t to Sinister Thoughts}

More later.

"I Approved Those Ad's..."

2006-01-15T10:41:00.000-05:00

I considered myself too partisan to determine whether the Lib attack ad's would work ... After all, I thought they were awful and could quite possibly backfire, but would less partisan Canadian voters see it that way?

So far, so good, although I add - once again - that this campaign is NOT over. Not one CPC MP has been elected as of yet. Please repeat that message as often as you can till the polls close on the 23rd. Thank you.

Now, where was I? Oh, right, the attack ad's. The Tories have posted what appeares to my tired, biased eyes to be one hell of a good counter-punch. You can watch it and judge for yourself here.

I haven't seen it on TV yet, but I'll be watching for it ...

{h/t}

More later.

The Kentucky-Fried Candidate

2006-01-13T15:08:00.000-05:00

{Extra-Crispy Update below!}

Just when things couldn't get bad enough for Team Martin, along comes this.

According to the NDP - and please, keep the fact that this is our source in mind - their candidate in Abbotsford, Jeffrey Hansen-Carlson, was offered two things one night at the campaign office of Liberal candidate Dave Oliver:

1. A KFC dinner (hence the title above), and

2. Lots of help in winning a bid for town council.

And in return? According to Mr. H-C, he was asked to issue a "directive to suport the Liberals out of fear of what the Conservatives will do to our community and our country, based on the assumption that the NDP is not a big player in this riding."

Now, let me say that I am usually reluctant to take NDP press releases at face value ... and that reluctance applies here. In fact, I find it nigh-on impossible to believe that any candidate or campaign manager for any political party would be that out-and-out stupid.

Indeed, I was initially reluctant to even mention this, as it sounds so damn bizarre. But the fact is, as the link above indicates, the NDP has gone more than public with this, and has asked Elections Canada to step in.

Of course, a complaint to EC does not equal "proven". But if - if - the Libs in Abbotsford were dumb and/or desperate enough to pull a stunt like this ... well, honestly, there are no words.

Update: Good Lord, looks like I was too cautious. Check this release from the LPC out. The Libs are pulling a "Zeisman-plus" on this one. Not only will David Oliver not be allowed to sit with the Lib caucus if elected (fat chance - ed.), the Libs are going to act as if they had 307 candidates, return whatever money they get from the $1.75-per-vote in that riding, etc. Considering that's what they demanded of the Tories, it's the least they could do.

More later.

See The Idiot(s) Walk ...

2006-01-12T12:22:00.000-05:00

Keith Martin, who may just be re-considering his career-advancing hop across the aisle a little while back, has weighed in with his $0.02 on the Liberal attack ad's:

"Some idiot went and sent it out with the other 11 ads, and it was never sanctioned by the party, never approved, and we are completely appalled that this went out. We apologize to the men and women in the uniform," [K. Martin] said.

As a public service, herewith, the identity of said idiot:

In an interview Thursday morning on CTV's Canada AM, [Paul] Martin [not Keith] said he approved every one of the harshly critical ads -- including one that suggested the Tory Leader would use the military to occupy Canadian cities.

Keith, other folks may be bitter, but as far as your old friend (whom you've never met) Jason is concerned, there's a light in the window for you if you want to come home ... well, maybe after you give the appropriate apologies.

On another front, Angry in the GWN advises that Keith M. isn't the only Liberal candidate ducking for cover from the Lib ad's.

Not to date myself, but I remember the '93 campaign (despite years of therapy), and you know when I really knew, for sure, that the wheels were off the PC wagon that year? Not when the infamous Chretien ad came on; not even when it was pulled - I was younger and dumber/more optimistic back then. No, it was when PC candidates openly dumped all over the ad, and ran for the hills.

Now, let me repeat what I said below - THIS ELECTION IS NOT OVER. Until the polls close on the 23rd, we haven't won one lousy seat. I swear, I'll keep saying that till then as often as I have to, to anyone I have to.

But when you've got your own teammates saying your ad campaign sucks (in so many words), trust me - it aint going well for you.

More later.

Smuggler's Blues

2006-01-12T11:34:00.000-05:00

I was initially a bit concerned when I heard about one Derek Zeisman, a CPC candidate in British Columbia. Mr Zeisman is in a spot of trouble with the law, standing accused of smuggling a car (!?!) and a few bottles of liquor across the border.

Initially, I was curious as to how the Party would respond, and I was concerned that the CPC would try to "lawyer" its way out of this one (and I say that as a lawyer m'self): "innocent till proven guilty", and all that, which is true, but which kind of takes the shine off of the Tories' strong stand on political accountability.

Thankfully, Harper & Co. dealt with this about as best as they could by announcing that Zeisman will not be allowed to sit in the Tory caucus if he wins (which appears to be a pretty remote prospect from where I sit), unless and until his charges are favourably resolved.

It is, apparently, too late to take Zeisman's name off of the ballot and/or to officially remove him as the CPC candidate. So Harper did the next best thing. And he did it within 24 hours.

The race is NOT over. Things can and will go wrong. Any Tory reading this who is distracted by thoughts of getting invited to the swearing-in ceremony at Rideau Hall better give his/her head a good hard shake. There are 11 more days, and we haven't won a single seat yet - and we won't until the polls close.

But I've got to admit, when the Party deals with things like this quickly & decisively, it helps - a lot.

More later.

V for Victory

In Memoriam: Those Lost on Cougar Helicopters Flight 91

The Magic Number is Now 161 ...

Trouble Brewing?

Such a Shame - He Was Having Such a GOOD Campaign ...

Bloggin' the Brier (VI)

Bloggin' the Brier (V)

Bloggin' the Brier (IV)

Bloggin' the Brier (III)

Bloggin' the Brier (II)

Bloggin' the Brier (I)

The Demos Get More Interesting ...

Sometimes, a Story Can Be Summed Up In a Single Word...

Because Secret Ballots Are *SO* 20th Century ...

Well Done

Don't Go Overboard

Ocean Ranger, 25 Years On ...

Now, Morale Has REALLY Improved

Morale Has, Quite Likely, Improved

Now THAT'S Confidence!

You Heard It Here First - Curling Edition

For NL Liberals, the Beatings Will Continue Till Morale Improves ...

Conditions For a Halton By-Election?

You Can't Fight City Hall ...

"Bring it On"

On the Bright Side, We'll All Get to Hear What Goes On at Lib Caucus Meetings ...

Reason # 1,000,001

Good Show

Don't Take Dion With You to the Horse Track...

Happy Christmas to All!

Dogs and Cats,

Viva Las Vegas!

On The List of Things Conn Smythe *Wouldn't* Have Done ...

Interesting To See Who's On Board ...

Before We Panic, and/or Break Out the Champagne ...

I'm Still Mulling It Over ...

Quick Thoughts Before Work ...

More Milton Friedman

Lump of Coal In His Stocking

Open Question, For Your Consideration & Comment

A Great Loss

Maybe I Should Start Building an Ark

Keith Martin, Prophet

Not For All The Tea in China

Look Who's Back

Lest We Forget ....

Meanwhile, Back on the Home (& Away) Front ...

Jokes Aside ...

Fookin' French?

Sorry About the Mess ... and, Get Keen For Dean!

A Long Montana Night - Plus, Wasn't Rove Supposed to Have Rigged Things?!?

Say Goonight, the (Grand Old) Party's Over ... kind-of...

Kinky!

Joe-mentum

Still Deadlocked - Oh No!

48-48

Yikes!

Major Projection

Obama '08?

And Yet, the Polls are Open ...

Too Close...

All Quiet (sorta...)

Repub's Abroad

GOP means ...

Netkooks of the World, Revolt!

Lull

42-30 Senate...

Oh Great...

No Big News Yet...

It's All OVER...

(Somewhat) Live Election Blogging!

A Very Worthy Cause ...

Trust Talk - Over There ...

Well, THAT'S a Relief!

Speaking Of Non-Noteworthy News ...

Stopped Clock Report: Alec Baldwin

Instapundit Said It Best ...

It Never Ends ...

Bad Blogging News

If At First You Don't Succeed ...

Because Secret Ballots Are SO 20th Century ...

On The List of Things Conn Smythe Wouldn't Have Done ...