Monday, December 19, 2005

Biased Media: Who would've thunk it

Now this is pretty surprising...oh wait did I write surprising, I meant to write validating (if that is even a word, if not it should be).

Even though the article is about the US media, I would hazard a guess that it isn't much different in Canada.

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Hot Economy only good sometimes

I want you to read this article here and pay close attention to the comments by Dan MacLennan and Liberal MLA Dave Taylor.

As the article points out, yesterday, MLAs approved a pay increase. The news media is now trying to create a public storm over this. But why should there be? MLAs have no control over what they are paid because they follow the average weekly earnings index. If the economy is hot, then they will most likely be given a raise. If the economy is not hot, then their pay remains stagnant. What is always overlooked is that if the average weekly earnings is a negative number, the pay of MLAs would go down. Name me another job where this occurs!

Dan Mac remarked that the public sector will be expecting a greater pay increase because the MLAs have received such a large increase. I find this very interesting because the wage increase that is coming to the public sector was negotiated by Dan! But now that he sees the economy being hot, he says that this is not good enough. How can this be? It seemed good enough last year when this was negotiated through collective bargaining? I have no problem with the increases and Dan is doing good work for the AUPE...I hope he doesn't talk without ensuring he gots the straight goods!

And Dave Taylor remarked that the optics are never good when MLAs are putting in their own pay raises. Well Dave, just to clarify, MLAs do NOT put in their own pay raises…Statistics Canada puts in their pay raises and MLAs just follow the formula so that it is open to the public and the public will know what to expect. The reason the formula is followed is so that MLAs don’t “decide” to give themselves massive increases. And Dave also wants an independent body to determine pay raises. He must have forgotten what happened that one time, a couple of years ago, when the independent body gave judges a massive increase. But of course that would never happen again, would it? An independent body would always give low, politically justified increases? Having stable, predictable increases are just to outrageous for this province…right Dave?

Doug Griffiths, MLA Battle River-Wainwright, brought forward a motion that would have tied all public service employees wages to the average weekly earnings index effectively making them paid in the same way that MLAs are paid. Of course the Liberals, NDs, and even some Conservatives spoke out against motion although for different reasons. But one of the reasons given, especially by the NDs and the Libs, was that the motion takes away “the democratic right of collective bargaining.” In other words, everybody is allowed to participate in their democratic rights except MLAs? Oh I get it, MLAs are paid so well, any group that is treated the same would be above everybody else. Or maybe it’s because everybody knows that MLAs are not paid that great and nobody wants what they have…that would explain the attitude of Unions being against a move of this nature.

My hope is that everybody does some checking into this issue before they go stupid. And to help you out, check this right here…this might give you a start. And if you want to blame anything for this increase, blame the economy for being so good. It really is too bad when you have a province that is super successful I guess.

Wednesday, December 14, 2005


The NDP party, both federall and provincially always struggle with their inability to attract the "average" voter. Here are two examples why:

"You either want a single-payer system in this country or you want an American-style health system. And don't kid yourself that there's anything in between," - Shirley Douglas, daughter of Tommy Douglas.

2 thoughts come to mind on this quote, the first being, just because you say something, doesn't mean it is true. Apparently Ms Douglas is unaware of health care systems in countries like Sweden, Britain, and Australia. My second thought was how it reminded me of a good quote from The Simpsons, Homer once said "nothing is going to stop me in the middle of this rant, not the facts, not anything." How appropriate in this case.

But wait, it gets better, check out these beauties from Jack Layton:

  • "If you vote Liberal in Saskatchewan, you are voting to elect a Stephen Harper Conservative" . Apparently the NDP has uncovered a secret that could really help out the Conservatives in Ontario, but to bad it only works in Saskatchewan.
  • "This is unacceptable. It is made more unacceptable by repeated Liberal election promises to protect public health care....." . How can anyone do more than not accept something? I didn't realize there were levels of unacceptable.
  • "The Supreme Court has made a very unfortunate decision based on 10 year old facts." I guess the NDP would rather have them make decisions based on comments like the one from Ms. Douglas above. Personally, I prefer a court making their decisions on facts.

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Your List of Friends grows thin....

The list of groups being alienated by Paul Martin and the Liberal party continues to grow:

- offended parents , in their criticisms of the Conservative day care policy.
-the United States, in Paul Martin's climate change speech
- Quebec Improv Comedy clubs and Quebec Separtists
- Albertans, while apparently we're upset with all parties, we'll still vote Conservative, so don't bother showing up here Mr. Martin.

I'm sure this list will grow daily, and this is only since the start of the election campaign, lets not forget the largest group of all the Taxpayer, but we've been given the shaft from the Liberals for 12 years now. So I guess thats old news.

Monday, December 12, 2005


Anyone else confused, bemused, amused, abused, or just plain angry at the comments made by several union leaders across the country calling on Canadians to vote "strategically" (aka. Liberal) in the upcoming election?

Basically the thinking is this, if NDP supporters vote Liberal, then they can use the combined vote totals to defeat sitting Conservative MP's, and more importantly, in areas where a Liberal MP may be in trouble (see: Edmonton-Centre riding, McClellan, Anne) then the combined Liberal-NDP vote will allow the incumbant Liberal to get re-elected (see: election 2004 results).
In return, I presume the Liberals have offered to rule as a government from the left and support some NDP proposals.

According to Section 482 of the Canadian Elections Act: "Every person is guilty of an offence who
(a) by intimidation or duress, compels a person to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate at an election;"

I used to be a member of a union when I worked a summer job to pay for my university education. I once requested the right to opt out of the union and was refused. I once asked to be removed from the union and was refused. Furthermore, I was told that when we voted on our new contract that we had to vote "no". I won't make accusations, but lets say it was probably the first time I ever voted where I was actually concerned about not doing what was expected of me. Am I glad I am not a member of a union right now? You bet I am. While there is no doubt that the union leaders who have called out for "strategic voting" will never be prosecuted under the Elections Act, it makes you wonder if any union members may feel as awkward as I once did come election time.

Friday, December 09, 2005

Of Guns and Men

I'm not sure who said this quote, but its a gooder.

"If you make carrying guns illegal, then only criminals will carry guns."

I agree with Greg Watson's article here that Martin's hand gun "plan" is definitely a trap, one that Link Byfield seems to have fallen for completely in this article.

My opinion is exactly aligned with the above quote. If we make it illegal to carry guns, and criminals still carry guns, how is it that we are safer?

The Ultimate Hypocrisy

"There is such a thing as a Global conscience"
-Paul Martin's quote at the Global conference on Climate change in Montreal.

He makes this comment in his speech in reference to the United States stance on the Kyoto Protocol. But wouldn't the PM be better off taking his own advice? If there was such a thing as a "Global conscience", wouldn't the first rule of this conscience be to treat your neighbors, and BEST FRIENDS, with a little respect?

No wonder the White House is angry over the comments. If my best friend made a comment in front of the whole about how I needed to have a conscience, I'd be upset too.

I guess in the end, this is proof #3,987,567 of how its the Liberals who don't have a conscience. They'll sell out anyone and everyone to get elected.

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Can Paul Martin count?

Okay, I'm confused, please read and then answer this question:

If you reduce the GST (as the Conservatives are putting forward) you save money for ALL Canadians. If you reduce income tax for the middle class, you save money for only the middle class, so roughly 60% of Canadians.

So someone please tell me if the above is true, how can Paul Marin possibly claim that the Liberal plan of reducing income tax for the middle class will affect more Canadians?

I'm perplexed. Its simple math here, its basic addition. I mean, we all know elections are times for politicians to throw things at a wall and hope something sticks, but seriously, you can't just say whatever you want and then pretend it makes sense, can you?

Guest Column by Doug Griffiths, MLA Battle-River Wainwright

This was something that Doug sent to me the other day. I think it sums up what everybody around Alberta is, nay should, be thinking...

In the previous federal election Ralph Klein was berated for his comments about healthcare and the changes that were coming. In truth, Ralph said the same thing everyday for months . . . that the changes Alberta was bringing forward on an assigned date would be a ‘third way’ that would revolutionize healthcare for the better. The Alberta media reported it day in and day out and announced that Albertans should pay attention on that day because good or bad, the changes would be interesting. No fear mongering, and no affect on federal politics occurred, until . . . .

The day of the announcement, scheduled months before any election call, happened to be only a few days before the culmination of the federal election. A week before the announcement Ralph said the same thing he said for months in preparation for the big day . . . be ready, the changes will be interesting and may even contravene the Canada Health Act. However, on that particular day, would be Prime Minister Paul Martin jumped on the remarks and said that Ralph was in league with Mr. Harper to destroy Healthcare in Canada. Some people blamed the Premier outright for the federal Conservatives loss and wanted to see Ralph leave.

But you know what, if Ralph had said, “In the interest of the upcoming federal election I will not talk about what we are going to do,” or “No comment,” the headlines would have said, “Ralph keeps health changes secret.” Paul Martin would have still jumped on it saying, “See, Ralph and Steven are in league together. The Premier won’t comment because he knows it will hurt Steven since they have the same plans to destroy healthcare in this country.” The Premier was damned if he did, and damned if he didn’t. Paul Martin would have used it against conservatives either way.

So last week the Premier is around the country talking about how Alberta’s prosperity is good for the nation and it should not be raided. He was trying to build allegiances with the other provinces against the feds to ensure there was no such thing as another National Energy Program in any form. In one interview the Premier was asked what he thought the results of the federal election would be. His comments were . . . well, you know I don’t like it but I would likely bet on a Liberal minority, which is really unfortunate because Steven Harper is obviously an intelligent and thoughtful man, but you know, for some reason Ontario is still buying into the idea that Steven and the conservatives are too right wing, which just isn’t true. BUT, the headlines said, ‘Ralph bets on Liberals – Harper too far right’. I agree it would have been better not to comment, but every one of us knows how the federal LIBERAL media takes things out of proportion and twists words to make problems. Whatever the Premier said would have been twisted to look bad for conservatives in general. Don’t believe me? Did anyone else notice that every single one of the commentators for the CBC covering the non-confidence motion was wearing a red tie (Liberal color)! Ralph’s words were true and honest, and NOT what the media made them out to be.

Keep this in mind . . . the Federal Liberals have one election strategy that they have used effectively for 30 years – Divide and Conquer. They divide the natives against the white man, the French against the English, and the West against the East. They have done it time and time again, year after year, election after election. These days however they have a new target – conservatives. If the Liberals can successfully divide the federal conservatives against the provincial conservatives they will win again. And you must know, this election will be about attacking Alberta, our policies, our wealth, our values and our Premier . . . anything to make Ontario mad at conservatives in general in order to cause a conservative loss federally.

If we give in to that and act as the Liberals want we will get one result; the end of conservatism. We will look like we can’t lead and we won’t win the next election (yes, I said WE because I am a federal conservative and got my start in politics serving as a federal constituency president). It could also lead to further division of the right within this province, which could lead to a Liberal government here too! How would that make things better for any of us? I know we have improvements to make in this province to . . . we always will be improving . . . and I am working on it getting it done sooner than later.

I don’t normally get so political, but I want a federal conservative government and a conservative provincial government. I want everyone to know the Liberal tactics in doing this, and I want us to unite to eliminate the real bad guys.

Doug Griffiths