Downtown Conservatives

The Next Edmonton Centre MLA...

2007-11-25T19:54:00.000-07:00

The Edmonton Centre Progressive Conservative Association welcomes Bill Donahue as their candidate in the next provincial election...

Come out and meet Bill...

Tuesday, November 27th
Basement of PC Headquarters
(9919-106 Street)

6:00pm - 7:00pm

NOMINATION!

2007-11-12T13:00:00.000-07:00

Edmonton Centre Nomination
Thursday, November 15th
5pm - 9pm
Polish Hall, Lower Banquet Room
10960-104 Street

What you need to vote:
- a 2007 PCAA membership
- two (2) pieces of identification, one of which shall be a photo I. D.

Both pieces of identification must indicate the same residency within the constituency Edmonton-Centre.

Memberships will be made available for purchase.

For more information contact Rochelle Marshall at 990-6585

Could I Have A Side Of Policy With That?

2006-11-06T19:25:00.000-07:00

Here we are, less than 20 days from our opportunity to choose the next Premier. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have a decision making feel to it as much as it’s got a Canadian Idol, high school student council election feel to it, with a dash of a Seinfeld episode for posterity and dissolution. I can understand how it can be frustrating for some…

The more I read the newspapers and columnist’s opinions on Alberta’s leadership race the more it becomes clear that there is no end in sight to the rainbows and teddy bears. As an example, on the weekend the Edmonton Journal reported on each Candidates favourite/least favourite food… as much as I want to know that Jim Dinning loves ice cream but dislikes brussels sprouts, or that Dave Hancock and Mark Norris couldn’t share dinner because cheeseburgers and filet mignon don’t go together that well, I would much rather hear their remedy for Alberta’s spiraling health care budget, or how they plan to fix the employment disaster so that we can get the “service” back in the service industry.

One of the main arguments I keep hearing to rationalize the lack of policy has something to do with the mindset that because we’re not in a general election policy isn’t necessary. Well then, when will policy be necessary? Once we convince party members to just roll the dice on who they think has the most appropriate appetite… someone told me that Martha and Henry really enjoy a good moose sausage, so I guess they be voting for Lyle Oberg?

How is anyone supposed to take the process seriously if they have nothing to believe in? A leader is supposed to lead, whether it’s a general election or a leadership election, throw us a bone, give us something to follow.

Some will argue that it’s best to be a little of everything to everyone. I’m more of the mindset that it’s best to stand for inspired ideals fraught with passion… you’d be surprised who would follow that.

We are less than 20 days away from deciding the next leader of the most prosperous jurisdiction in Canada, I expected more inspiration and ideas and a lot less rainbows and teddy bears.

Tax Breaks, Tax Breaks, Rolly Polly Tax Breaks

2006-10-18T11:34:00.000-06:00

Most of the leadership candidates, if not all, are promising tax breaks...tax breaks everywhere!

Jim Dinning was going to give a tax break to under 30 year olds but then changed his mind for some reason. Shouldn't have changed...I like guys who stick to their guns but whatever...it was flawed from the beginning but if you are going to bring it up stick to it, don't change on the fly...not yet anyhow.

Ed Stelmach today is saying that he wants to give a tax break to seniors...flawed, flawed policy but he better stick with it...he threw it out there.

We, as a government, removed Seniors from paying health care premiums...another flawed policy.

And here is why I think this is the case.

If you want to give a tax break, you should do so on the basis of what one pays on their income tax. There are some stinking rich under 30 year olds and there are some stinking rich seniors. Why should they be eliminated from paying a certain amount of taxes just because they fall into a certain age bracket? Should it not be the case that if you make a certain amount of money you get taxed a certain amount?

Same with the Health care premium thing. There are some wicked wealthy seniors out there who are not paying health care premiums but probably use the system far more than anybody under the age of 65. So would it not be better if everybody under a certain amount of income is relieved of paying premiums rather than an age? Grouping people by age and deciding what they pay based on their age is kind of ridiculous.

Instead of discriminating based on age, discriminate based on what you make. It is the Canadian way! I think a better option would be to say...if you make less than x amount, you do not have to pay premiums. If you make more...ding ding, pay up.

Instead of giving an under 30 year old a tax break how about we say that if you make under x amount (maybe 30K or something) you don't have to pay nearly as much tax.

But that was the way we had it before wasn't it? And then we moved to the flat tax...I like the flat tax, so how can we make the two work.

I think you just have to raise exemptions and the like. I know I am making this sound like an awfully simple way of doing it, but it is just my opinion on these policies. And I only pick Jim and Ed because they are the only two I thought of this morning...I am sure the other candidates fail or succeed in their own ways...the policies mentioned are what I thought of right off the top.

So that is how I think our tax policies should work in this province...don't be classifying tax payers based on age but rather do so based on income. And you may want to throw some incentives in there for students or something, but this is just my quick idea for now.

Go ahead, pick it apart...that is why I bring it up.

Two More Years of Pain and Wasted Public $’s

2006-10-03T12:25:00.000-06:00

I originally wasn’t going to post this story, but the rage and annoyance has been building since the spring and today it exploded.

Back in the late 60’s there wasn’t a lot of entertainment options for Canadians. If you had a TV the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) was status quo. I wasn’t alive then and I’m not going to pretend to know, but I will make an assumption… Canadians didn’t know any better, they had spent 30 years listening to publicly funded radio, why not embrace publicly funded television. Without the CBC many Canadians wouldn’t have had any broadcasting options.

You know what else was standard operating procedure in the late 60’s… Otis Redding was sittin’ on the Dock of the Bay, Simon and Garfunkel were getting busy with Mrs. Robinson, Trudeau was Prime Minister, Led Zepplin was putting out their first album, Americans and the Soviets were racing for space, Nixon was President, Stan Mikita was the NHL’s MVP.

As Bob Dylan penned, ironically in the 60’s, the times they are a changin’!

Let me begin by saying that the CBC has NEVER served a purpose in my life except for one thing, and one thing alone… Hockey Night in Canada (HNIC). Well, maybe two, that Log Driver’s Waltz cartoon that they broadcast to take up time between programs was pretty sweet. Without HNIC the CBC is dead to me!

My above average discontent with the CBC first started during the 2006 stanley cup playoffs, Bob Cole and Harry Neale are arguably the most useless announcers in the history of the NHL. They excel in lacking the ability to form complete comprehendible intelligent sentences.

You know what was a mainstay for CBC in the late 60’s? Bob Cole.

Dumb and Dumber have to go, the gig is up. Seriously, give them an office job and get Jim Houston the call up… give ANYONE the call up. I chose to watch playoff hockey on NBC, without the glowing puck thank you very much, just so my head didn’t explode listening to the idiot twins on CBC.

They’re back… Bob Cole and Harry Neale will again provide play-by-play for HNIC. That’s the thing with publicly funded Canadian corporations… they refuse to listen to the public (unless you live in Toronto, aka the centre of the universe) and they refuse to change and grow to compete with other corporations… IT'S BULLSHIT!

Today I took a look at the HNIC schedule… particularly the high definition (HD) broadcast schedule. If you haven’t watched a sporting event in HD you are missing out… it’s like watching a completely different game. I figured that considering the Oilers came in 2nd overall last year and the Flames the year before… Canada’s two best teams over the past two seasons, the CBC would embrace that record and show a couple of Flames and Oilers games in HD. Well, they are showing 3 Oilers games in HD (one of which is against Toronto), 3 Flames games in HD (one of which is against Toronto)… I know what you want to know, how many Maple Leaf games are going to be broadcast in HD? 24.

The Maple Leafs didn’t even make the playoffs last year. The last time they won a Stanley Cup was in 1967.

Hey, 1967, around the same time HNIC and Bob Cole came into play… here’s an idea, since Leaf fans are all about curses, quit broadcasting the Maple Leafs, get rid of Bob Cole and MAYBE Toronto might have a chance at not sucking ass!

Crown corporations are only necessary when there is no other option to provide a service for citizens. In 1967 there were no broadcasting options… in the 21st Century there is nothing but options!

I can’t wait for this to happen… finally, the end of HNIC being Hockey Night in Toronto and the end of the CBC. It’s 2006, not 1967!

Political Trickery?

2006-10-03T09:43:00.000-06:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20061002/bs_ibd_ibd/2006102issues01

Where am I going with this one?

2006-09-27T10:44:00.000-06:00

I could go many different ways on this link right here.

Most who will read this will think that the speaker has a problem with global warming and from those who have read my posts in the past know that I do have a problem with global warming...

I love it.

BUT that is not why I am posting this. I was more interested in his thoughts on the media in the past 100 odd years. That is really more up my alley.

The other point that caught my eye was the part about government making policy based on uncertainty. Basing policy decisions on uncertainty is, in my opinion, extremely short sighted and amateurish at best.

And I also totally agree that climate change should not be our focus...poverty, disease and hunger should be our focus if we are going to go all socialist! I would much rather help starving poor kids with aids in Africa rather than play the guilty card to the rich in North America and try to save our world from what...better weather in Edmonton?

I know, I know, you will jump all over me for that but it is true. The successful in the Western civilization are made to feel guilty for their success (by the left usually) and now they are trying to figure out ways to alleviate their guilt by fixing what...their climate exclusively? So the guilt is overwhelming. But there are better causes out there like starving poor children in Brazil or Mexico, or shoot, even the USA.

I believe our priorities are all screwed up. Won't somebody please think of the children??!??!!

We are moving towards a cleaner environment through technology and research and development. Why not keep using that and move forward even more? One day we will have zero emissions, I firmly believe it. But at the rate we are going, we may have zero emissions but what good is that if half the worlds children are DOA?

Why doesn't the media focus their energies on that first? It is extremely important. Is it because it is an issue that doesn't really affect rich North American? Is that what it is? Something doesn't fit.

We must not shy away from our success nor should be feel guilty for what we have accomplished. Why don't we use our experience and our knowledge to fix the main problems in the world: starving kids, disease, and poverty.

And yes I realize that it is literally impossible to alleviate poverty because it is a number that is created to show who is not as good as somebody else and therefore we always have somebody who is poor.

But hey, you bring real democracy to some of these places around the world and you will have success in a lot of those concerns.

Name me one country that is almost irreparable that is a true democracy? I can't think of one.

Get'r Done!

2006-09-20T14:57:00.000-06:00

All Candidate Forums:

Medicine Hat
October 30, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Medicine Hat Lodge
1051 Ross Glen Drive S.E.

Red Deer
November 1, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Red Deer Lodge
4311 49 Avenue

Fort McMurray
November 2, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Quality Hotel
424 Gregoire Drive

Vermilion
November 7, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Lakeland College-Vermilion Campus, Alumni Hall Theatre
5707 47 Avenue West

Grande Prairie
November 9, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Grande Prairie Inn
11633 Clairmont Road

Edmonton
November 13, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Mayfield Inn & Suites
16615 109 Avenue

Calgary
November 15, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Details TBA

Lethbridge
November 16, 2006 @ 7:00 PM
Lethbridge Lodge
320 Scenic Drive

Election Days:
Polls are to be held between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
1st Ballot : Saturday, 25 November 2006
2nd Ballot : Saturday, 2 December 2006 (if required)

Advance Polls:
Advance Polls are to be held between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.
1st Ballot : Wednesday, 20 November 2006
2nd Ballot : Wednesday, 29 November 2006 (if required)

Ummmm....what?

2006-08-24T12:11:00.000-06:00

Check this out here. I am not complaining to heavily on this because I know that the Conservatives, Liberals, and the NDP all get this as well, but it is just something that hurts just that much more. When the majority of the House is controlled by the Common Sense Party, the Conservatives, maybe some changes could be made to save this country some money. Changing this program might be a start.

After they get rid of the bigger problems...like the CBC.

"Laurie Blakeman Retirement Party"

2006-08-23T20:04:00.000-06:00

Dinning aims at win in '08
August 23, 2006
By DARCY HENTON, LEGISLATURE BUREAU

Tory leadership front-runner Jim Dinning says that if he wins the contest to replace Ralph Klein, he wants the party ready to fight an election by 2008.

The former provincial treasurer told the Edmonton Centre PC Association last night that if he takes over the reins in 2007 he will take cabinet and caucus on the road to restore confidence in the party.

He said he will encourage grassroots Tories to draft new policy and begin a vigorous recruitment of candidates "so we're ready for an election that will take place sometime after 2007."

"I want to make sure that we not only win the election, but we win it on a platform that we can defend ... and most importantly that we have fun doing it."

He wants to start by taking back the Edmonton Centre riding from Liberal Laurie Blakeman.

"That Laurie Blakeman retirement party will be the best party in the province," he told a standing-room only crowd at the Maverick Brewery.

Tory Neil Reid said the party renewal that Dinning is preaching is essential because the Tories took quite a hammering in the riding last election.

"What Jim Dinning is talking about is required in Edmonton Centre. If we sit on the status quo, we'll take another hammering."

Education Minister Gene Zwozdesky, a Dinning supporter, says he's gearing up for 2008.

"I'm delighted Jim has come out and said when the next election will be," he said.

Calgary West MLA Ron Liepert, another Dinning fan, said a 2008 election makes sense.

"Can the party rejuvenate itself? With this guy the leader? Absolutely."

ECPCA - In The News

2006-08-14T11:09:00.000-06:00

The Edmonton Centre PC Association got a shout-out in Saturday's Edmonton Journal.

More information on the ECPCA Summer Speaker Series can be found here.

Excerpt From:
Parades, Barbecues, with a Side of Politics
Edmonton Journal
August 12, 2006 - A17
Archie McLean and Jason Markusoff

"Why is Ed Stelmach seeking the leadership?" the candidate asks about himself, launching into his well-practised introductory speech. But this is not the usual Progressive Conservative crowd.

These urban, 20- and 30-something Tories may be a growing and increasingly relevant demographic in an ever-younger and rapidly urbanizing Alberta. About two dozen have come to the Maverick Brewery to size up Stelmach's leadership bona fides at a forum sponsored by the Edmonton Centre PC association.

As they sit with their beer and wine, Stelmach outlines his campaign principles and promises. They range from the vague -- improve Albertans' "quality of life" -- to specifics about setting up registries for government lobbyists and contractors to "remove perception of a one-party state."

During the question period, an audience member asks about environmental regulations, expressing worry that young people see the Tories as siding with industry. Stelmach, a one-time agriculture minister, suggests clean-burning biodiesel made from corn and other crops is a promising solution. Then, leaning on his recent experience as international affairs minister, he discusses imbalances caused by U.S. crop subsidies. Judging from the audience reaction, that may not have been the answer the young Edmontonians expected.

Another asks Stelmach about how he proposes to get more youth involved in politics. He replies by recalling that he became interested in politics when he was in school. So perhaps politicians should spend more time speaking to high-school classes, he reasons.

The crowd is fairly receptive, praising him as an honest, earnest candidate. Others react positively, too -- including a former cabinet minister and a former Liberal MLA, who both take him aside afterwards to offer some advice.

August 22, 2006

2006-08-09T09:15:00.000-06:00

The conspirator in me couldn't resist this.

In case you want more evidence that the end is near, check out The Rapture Index.
158? 158? You know how hard it is to find a contractor in Alberta? I need a bomb shelter, stat!

The Way of War...

2006-07-27T14:36:00.000-06:00

This is what Israel is up against. An entity that is not a state, not a people, but a faction that doesn't have the balls to fight with honour. Instead, Hezbollah is content hiding in public buildings amongst innocent men, women and children. Their strategy is to put these innocent individuals in harms way, to use them as a shield, so they can inflict their terror. There are people in this world that defend the actions of these honourless terrorists, these same people condemn Israel for attempting to stop it, for attempting to bring stability to a region controlled by men and women who don't have the integrity or honour to respect humanity and respect the lives of the innocent, a region not controlled by a government, a region "home" to 50,000 Canadians (when it's convenient).

Regardless if the above story is true, humanity will never stop fighting, conflict is entrenched in man's nature. War is a natural progression that we cannot escape, war has consequences, all I ask is that if we are going to go down that road, grab a set and do it with honour! Don't blame the aggressor for trying to rid the world of a parasite.

FINALLY...

2006-07-21T14:49:00.000-06:00

...someone has said what needs to be said, much better than I ever could! Listening to the bullshit complaining over the past few days makes me sick to my stomach.

Whiners: Find your own way out of Beirut: After being rescued from war zone, a little gratitude would be nice

The Edmonton Journal
Fri 21 Jul 2006
Page: A18 Section:
Opinion Byline: Lorne Gunter

Aw, the boat ride was too long, was it? And you say it was too hot? There was no doctor on board, either? And the departure was delayed. And the port was chaotic. And too little food and water had been laid in. And some of you had to sleep on the floor!?
Oh, the indignity of it.

To listen to the whining and carping of many of the 261 Canadians rescued from Beirut on the first day of the evacuation from Lebanon, you would think they had just been returned to port from an ocean cruise that went terribly wrong, instead of being saved from a war zone.
Tuesday, the Crown Princess, a Princess Cruises ship, suddenly listed to port in heavy seas off the coast of Florida. The promenade deck almost submerged. Stairwells "became waterfalls." The casino and gift shop below decks were flooded. The main dining room had to be turned into a triage ward as more than 200 of the 3,100 passengers on board were injured by the sudden tilt; 94 had to be taken off for hospitals on shore.

By contrast, no passengers on the first Canadian rescue ship were injured. The worst that happened was a few threw up.

And, yet, the grousing and moaning on the Crown Princess did not equal that of the evacuees from Lebanon when they reached Cyprus early Thursday morning. Some even cursed at the Canadian diplomats who greeted them.

One woman from Montreal described the trip as "hell;" not the war, but rather her tax-paid voyage to freedom. After all, it had taken 15 hours instead of seven. Twice their ship, the Blue Dawn, had been stopped by the Israeli navy to ensure it was not hostile.

Imagine that. Stopping a ship in a war zone to see whether it is friend or foe. How rude!
And the griping doesn't end with those Ottawa has already plucked from the suddenly very hot zone in south Lebanon. Others still awaiting evacuation complain that our embassy in Beirut has not dealt with them fast enough. Their e-mails have gone unanswered, their phone calls meet with a busy signal. If they present themselves in person, there are long lines in the hot sun to meet a Foreign Affairs official face-to-face.

There aren't hotel rooms for them all. The waiting rooms are inadequate for the numbers wanting to leave. Embassy staff will not give precise departure times.

No kidding. We're not talking about the returns desk at Wal-Mart the day after Christmas.
A staff of two dozen, who normally deal with a few thousand inquiries a year are suddenly swamped with 2,000 or 3,000 people demanding to be saved - Now! In a city that no longer has a functioning airport. Where fighter-bombers frequently scream overhead. Air raids do tend to disrupt the flow of things.

It's a wonder our government managed, at all, to find seven underused cruise ships it could lease on such short notice.

On the first day that any country was able to get its citizens out by boat, we managed to rescue 261. The British got out just 170 of their people. The French, who have a fleet of warships patrolling the Mediterranean, could manage just 180.

Thursday, we rescued another 1,375. And thereafter, we should be able to extract 700 to 1,000 swearing, muttering ingrates each day, either to Cyprus or Turkey.

But just wait until they get to safe ports and find out they have several-day waits ahead of them until they can be airlifted - again at taxpayers' expense - to Canada.

When told she might have to sit put in Cyprus for a few days until a jet ride could be arranged, and that while she waited she would have to find and pay for her own hotel and meals, one of the first evacuees complained that the government had not already taken care of such things.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? To simple gratefulness?

I don't expect the rescued Canadians to bow down and kiss the feet of our diplomats when they arrive on safe soil. But why is it too much to expect they might be thankful simply for being extracted from a danger zone, regardless of how uncomfortably?

They remind me of the Canadian and British antiwar activists extracted by commandos earlier this year from months of captivity in Iraq, who rather than saying thank you criticized the rescuers for using force to free them.

Wouldn't you be grateful to be rescued from Lebanon right now even if you and your family had to ride out in the fish hold of a trawler for a few days?

And yes it does matter that many of those complaining are Canadians of convenience. They hold Canadian passports, but have dual citizenship in Lebanon and have not been much interested in Canada for years until their real home country started getting dangerous.

There is a simple solution to this carping. The boats have to go back to Beirut for more evacuees. Anyone who profanes a Canadian worker or whines about conditions on the free boat gets put back on board and returned to Lebanon where they can find their own way out.

Whoa what?

2006-07-19T16:18:00.000-06:00

Holy crap readers...I don't think a Liberal PM would ever consider doing something like this. Whether you think it is a photo op or not, it doesn't matter...this is still being done. If it was nothing more than a media opportunity, I don't think he would have sent all the media personel that was with him home on commercial flights. I don't know how dangerous this would be, but at least 100 plus are getting out.

And to all the critics who think that Canada is moving to slow on evacuating Canadians in the area we have to remember this -- there are a reported 50,000 Canadians over in Lebanon and to get that many people out takes some careful, careful planning. Unlike other countries who are trying to get out a couple of thousand here and there, Canada is responsible for 50,000. And with 50,000 over there, that increases the possibility of Canadians getting hit. 8 out of 50,000 is terrible but considering the numbers, that is not that bad. The number of dead could be much, much higher considering what is going on.

It is even more difficult when the previous government of ours (Liberal) were so terrible in funding our military that our ships do not have a presence in the region like many of the other countries do. So those countries get their people out quicker because they are already there...we have to get our ships there first. Think big picture people, big picture.

I know that many will disagree and many will blame everybody else for everything, but at least the PM is doing what he think will help. And that is more than what the Liberals ever did. They were never very vocal in their support for Israel, the only democracy in the entire region. And if you look at this, it seems they are afraid to voice support for the only democracy in the region

But I guess supporting a democratic country is not the most popular thing to do right now, is it.

Just for Fun

2006-07-06T15:43:00.000-06:00

Here is a little something on the President of the USofA turning 60. I know that most everybody hates the guy, but I think that is the popular thing to do these days. Lord knows that if you say you like the guy you are looked at strangely. Maybe I like him because he seems like a regular person...sure he used to snort coke and drink a lot. And I know that he has done some crazy ass things. And sure he is a wealthy man who may have more money than he needs. But he says things that make me chuckle. And that is why I like him... he has screwed up a lot but keeps on keepin' on and that will always get a big you bet in my books.

http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1210402,00.html

Because we are all experts

2006-06-21T16:33:00.000-06:00

I am really sick of global warming. And I am also sick of this. ABC wants us all to send our global warming stories. Why? So they can use it to instill more unecessary fear into the people? Give me a break. So there is flooding in Southern Alberta and I video tape it and now ABC will run it as a "global warming" story. Are you kidding me? It could be due to high spring run off, could be due to high rain levels, hell it could be due to a beaver blocking a freaken culvert and flooding a field. Do you think that ABC would do the proper check to ensure that the flooding is really caused by "climate change" or "global warming"? I freaken doubt it. This is what the world is coming to. Lazy ass media relying on everybody else to get them a story. Absolutely sickening.

If I am going to be told that "global warming" and "climate change" is so dangerous and is so very true, I want a REAL expert on climate to tell me. Not a biologist, not a physicist, not a geographer, not any other scientist and especially not some television station that knows zilch about the subject. I want those who really are experts on the climate and climate change. I believe they are called climatologists and I think they would have the best knowledge of "climate change."

Think for yourselves on this one.

Utterly ridiculous.

Leadership Season

2006-06-20T11:00:00.000-06:00

Now that the Stanley Cup Playoffs are over we can all get back to the business at hand. It's leadership season in Alberta... have you met the candidates? This may be the opportunity you're looking for. Also, this blog is dedicated to leadership discussion.

No matter what your decision is, ensure it is an informed decision!

Thank You OILERS!

2006-06-20T10:42:00.000-06:00

Thank you for 8 weeks of amazing hockey. That was incredible. From 8th place in the West to game 7 of the Stanley Cup final… that was quite a run, quite a story!

As much as I am amazed at the Oilers, and proud of what they have accomplished, I can’t help but feel utter disappointment. It’s not the angry disappointment or “never cheer for them again” disappointment… I will ALWAYS be an Oilers fan! The kind of disappointment I am plagued with is the pit in the bottom of the stomach kind, the kind that isn’t appeased by Conference Championship banners, or pats on the back, or participation ribbons.

This is what drives any competitor… I can assure you that every member of the Edmonton Oilers franchise has this same feeling of disappointment. It will consume their summer and get worse in training camp and pre-season play… game one of the 2006-2007 season will provide a little relief, but it won’t be satisfied until the opportunity that slipped away last night presents itself again.

I want the Oilers to be disappointed, I want them to spend the summer agonizing in it, I want that fire in their stomachs to grow to an unbearable level of discomfort… they know, as do you and I, the only cure is redemption.

As a fan I guess I am disappointed that I didn’t sit in the right chair, or eat the right meal, or watch the game with the right people, or wear the right jersey… that’s all I’ve got to blame for my role in the loss, but as a fan, I’ve got to take some responsibility.

For the players, there are NO excuses, this thing isn’t suppose to be easy… overcoming what the Oilers have had to… 8th place, the flu, losing their #1 goaltender… they did good, just not good enough!

The Western Conference Championship banner that will be raised in the rafters of Rexall Place is an accomplishment, something all fans, the city and the province should be proud of. It’s something the Oilers need to be proud of! Just don’t forget what could have been raised! And don’t forget what you felt at this moment…

Once again… THANK YOU OILERS!

I am not going to throw the ol' standby "we'll get 'em next year" out there, it's not the 80's, these opportunities are few and far between. What I will say though, is bring Lord Stanley HOME! You know you can do it, now GET 'ER DONE!

Is it really the end of the WORLD!?

2006-06-14T13:48:00.000-06:00

I was once told that you should never believe anything you read unless you have something else to back it up. Well I am going to go against that today and show you this article. I have to admit that I have read many things on Global Warming but never believed any of it because I distinctly remember being told early in grade school that we were headed for an ice age.

The other thing that makes me think that this Climate Change thing might be bunk is that I cannot imagine drastic, and they are calling for drastic, global change happening so quickly! Do you really think that if we continue to put CO2 into the atmosphere that we are going to destroy the planet overnight? I don't think so. That sounds way, way, way to convinient.

You see by telling people that they might die prematurely within their lifetime, will make them jump up and take action. It is a common ruse that lobbyists and alarmists use. For instance, if you do not stop riding that motorcycle, you may die before you reach the age of 30! Oh geez, is that true, wow, I should stop riding this bike then, oh my...bugger off!

I do not believe, nor have I ever believed that we are entering a phase of global warming because of destructive human activity. Just like the earth at one time was much warmer and then changed to become much colder, I believe there is a rational explanation.

Now, spewing toxins and chemicals into the ecosystem ain't a bright thing to do either, but let's be realistic about this. What people are advocating for right now is absolutely ridiculous. Think about it. Kyoto? Are you kidding me? That thing isn't worth the paper it is written on! What a waste of trees that thing was. None of the "strategies" aret thought out nor are they smart.

But then again, who says Al Gore is smart. I mean he did invent the internet right?

Everybody who reads this, please, use your own heads when you are making decisions.

A scary hissy fit

2006-06-09T09:03:00.000-06:00

Remember back in the federal election, Stephen Harper was supposed to be putting soldiers in our city streets? Haven't seen that yet...BUT, Edmonton city council was thinking, THINKING, about bringing in soldiers to help with Whyte Avenue...that will never happen but there was thoughts in that general direction. So who's scary now? Where is the Liberal outcry? Where or where? Oh I know where, it is that muffled screech you hear from under the bed because they are hiding because they know they have screwed this country up.

I mean how can this be a scary guy???

On another note, Ralph Klein has said that resource revenue should be left out of the equalization formula. I agree. My question is -- if that scary PM of ours decides to use resource revenue in the formula, what does Alberta do? We can't opt out of equalization so what are our options? Separation? Or do we just throw a hissy fit? There is very little that we can do I guess. Except threaten separation and I just cannot see that happening because that is just not our nature. But something to think about. Where do we go? This is the federal government that WE wanted and we got what we wanted. What are our options now? A hissy fit just doesn't fly anymore...

Most Political

2006-05-02T11:14:00.000-06:00

I know this has nothing to do with Conservatism or government or politics but I believe this is an ultimate truth that mankind should recognize:

Oilers Rule.

Flames Drool.

Heh...

End of an era

2006-04-04T13:20:00.000-06:00

Alberta Premier Ralph Klein issued the following statement on April 4, 2006.

"I've spent a lot of time these past few days reflecting on my future and what
would be best for the government and the province.
"Since the weekend, I've
received many expressions of support and encouragement from members of caucus.
Those kind words meant a lot to me, as has caucus' continued support through
this time. I've also received hundreds of kind messages from Albertans, and
these have touched me more than I can say.
"I can't tell you what this job
has meant to me, except to say that it has always been about the people of this
province. They are the reason I first entered politics and they're the reason
I've stayed. Having the opportunity to connect with Albertans as premier has
been a gift I will always treasure. And hearing people I've only just met - and
often people I've never met - call me "Ralph" tells me that Albertans feel that
connection too.
"Serving Albertans will remain a priority for me during the
time I have left as party leader and premier. So will working toward the
personal goals I've identified over the last few months. However, my term will
be shorter than I originally planned, given the results of the weekend's
vote.
"Last Friday, I received a show of support from party members - for
that, I'm truly grateful. However, that support was not what I had anticipated,
nor is it strong enough for me to stay on as long as I had intended. And I now
find myself in a position where even though Albertans gave our government a
majority mandate only 16 months ago, and a large percentage of Albertans
continue to support me as premier, the political realities will make it
increasingly difficult to do my job. They will only take away from what
government is trying to achieve.
"I have therefore decided that I will submit
a letter to the PC Party sometime in the month of September of this year. In
that letter, I will urge the party to convene a leadership race. The timing and
duration of that race is a matter for the party to decide. As soon as a
successor is chosen, I will resign my position as party leader and premier. I
will work with the party's new leader to facilitate a smooth transition for
government.
"In the time between now and then, I will focus my efforts on
continuing to build this province and leaving it in the best possible shape for
our children and grandchildren. Make no mistake: for over ten years, I've had a
vision for Alberta - a vision that would create a more prosperous province, a
better quality of life, and a confidence in the future. Carrying out that vision
is where my focus is going to be throughout the rest of my term."

What Happened?

2006-04-03T12:16:00.000-06:00

How does a Premier who received 97% on the same question 4 years ago, receive 55% this past weekend when PC Party delegates were asked: "Do you wish a Provincial Leadership election to be called?" 45.6% of the Party delegates answered yes.

Thoughts and comments from some of those who were there:

"I think the membership basically voted not to have a two-year leadership
campaign" -Lyle Oberg, MLA for Strathmore Brookes.

"I think there were a lot of individuals sending an individual message to
the premier, not realizing there are many others around them doing the same
thing, this was not orchestrated. I think a lot of people thought they were just
sending a gentle message, not realizing there were a lot of people sending the
very same message." - Thomas Lukaszuk, MLA for Edmonton-Castle Downs.

"What happened here is people still love Ralph Klein, they just said you
can't hang on for two years." - Calgary Ward 6 Alderman Craig Burrows.
"It's hurting me to find out 45 percent of delegates voted against
him...People want to change for the sake of change." -Moe Amery, MLA for
Calgary-East

"He didn't listen to the right people. He didn't take the right approach to
fourth-term governing as a lame-duck premier. He didn't know that being elected
in late 2004 actually meant leaving in mid-2006. He figured that keeping his
word, and governing for three years before retiring with dignity was the right
thing to do. He was wrong." - Don Martin, Calgary Herlad columnist.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on this, as is their entitlement. Emotions vary from shock, to anger, to sadness, to confusion.

Feel free to add your own thoughts....

Setting it straight

2006-03-30T11:37:00.000-07:00

In politics, truth is a matter of perception, it never ceases to amaze me how when people are confronted with irrefutable facts, they still refuse to accept something as true. I say this as a means to show that I am prepared to accept that people will not believe what I am about to write, however, you should know that it can all be proven with facts.

I have read many letters to the editor, and heard many comments during election campaigns and public forums, and they all contain the same untruth. They all claim that the only reason Alberta is in such good financial shape is because of high oil prices. They make this claim in an attempt to discredit the Government from taking credit for putting Alberta on the right "fiscal path." One person even claimed that it was so simple to move money from pot A to pot B that even a monkey could do it, and he thought himself very clever for such a weak moniker.

The truth is this people, if not for the fiscal restraints and change in policy brought in 1993-94, even with Oil and Gas prices at an all-time high, the Alberta Government would have a $65 Billion dollar debt today.

People should remember that before they so easily shrug off the work that Premier Klein and his government have done.

A Mockery Perhaps?

2006-03-24T13:31:00.000-07:00

On Thursday in Alberta's Legislature, amidst the excitement that was going on in the hallways of the illustrious Dome, this little tid bit almost slipped under the radar. Almost, but not quite. Here is something that the Speaker, Ken Kowalski, said which you can also find in Hansard on page 618 right here. But here is what Mr. Speaker said:

The Speaker: Well, hon. members, I want to raise a point this afternoon with respect to tablings. There’s a difficult situation that has developed and is starting to develop, and I’ve used by an example sessional paper 1972006 which was tabled in the House by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Invariably members stand up and say: “I’m tabling here a letter with respect to the provincial government plan for the future of daycare,” or something to the like, and a document is tabled which references the national child care program. In looking at some of these tablings, as the chair does from time to time, there’s absolutely nothing in the letter that has to do with the province of Alberta. But more importantly than that there is no signature on the letter, there is no identification who the letter might be from, and the letter that’s tabled is absolutely unreadable. You can see it as well as I can.
Now, if this is what we’re doing in tablings then I’m going to ask that the House leaders have a discussion and deal with this subject once and for all because if it’s simply a matter of a member going out and xeroxing 150 blank pieces of paper and then standing up and tabling them, our Hansard people are invariably spending a waste of time trying to identify who it is. When we come back on April 3, I’m going to give you some other examples where, in fact, the names mentioned in the House do not correspond with the documents tabled. This is not the honourable way to do things.

So let's take a look at this. What I read out of this is that the Liberals are standing up and tabling documents that aren't even true. They say they have support for, I don't know, pick an issue, and when they table their letters or emails or even petitions it is falsified. And that is so dishonourable. You are not elected to sit in the Assembly of Alberta to make a mockery of the process.

We just celebrated our 100th anniversary of democracy in this province the other day and have a look at what Kevin Taft said here on page 443. Here he talks about how the Members of the Assembly have to be accountable and wanting more change in democracy. Obviously his party is not practicing what it preaches. But should that surprise you? Chanadler wrote an excellent piece on the difference between a Liberal and a Conservative the other day and I think this is further fodder for that discussion.

On April 3rd the Speaker is going to say more about this subject and I hope that it is not shown that the Liberals have made a mockery of our democratic process because if so they should be kicked out of the Assembly for their absolute disregard to the traditions laid down to us from the past.

Edmonton Centre, you are represented by a Liberal. A Liberal who is a part of this. How does that make you feel?

The difference between a Liberal and a Conservative

2006-02-28T10:30:00.000-07:00

Taken from Alberta Hansard, Monday afternoon, February 27:

Mr. Taylor (Liberal): "...It seems that advanced education has gone from
the penthouse to the doghouse on this government's priority list in the past
year. Not one piece of legislation is scheduled from Advanced Education yet this
session."

Minister Hancock (Conservative): "Legislation is not the only way to create
a priority. In fact, if you don't need more laws, you ought not to make more
laws."

And there you have proof of why the Liberals will never form the government in Alberta, they simply do not get it.

Too cold to care

2006-02-16T09:42:00.000-07:00

Does anyone else see the humour in how today is the 1st Anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol being in effect, and so-called "environmentalists" all over the world are taking to ice rinks to demonstrate that we need to move on global warming? This morning it is -27 degrees outside in Edmonton, with a windchill of -40. Now, i'm not a scientist or any sort of expert on the subject, but i'm not too concerned with global warming this morning, i'm way too cold.

Legislating against "crossing the floor"

2006-02-13T11:52:00.000-07:00

Alot of anger this past week over the actions of David Emerson. I can understand why Liberals would be upset, and I can understand why Conservatives would be upset. There's even an online petition being set up to encourage the Canadian Government to force Mr. Emerson to stand in a byelection. What I most enjoyed however was the day-by-day update by Mr. Garth Turner, an Ontario Conservative MP. He probably received the most publicity for his outspoken comments against Mr. Emerson's move to the Conservative government. It was even hinted that Mr. Turner might leave the Conservative party in protest. All in all, I found his blog to be quite interesting.

What interested me most of all was the growing debate over whether their should be legislation which would force anyone who switches parties to immediately have to run in a by-election in their riding. Mr. Turner is 100% in favour of this, you can read his post right here. There is some serious momentum behind this proposed law, after all, many people of all political stripes are upset with Emerson, and there is no doubt of the lingering emotions that follow the defections of Belinda Stronach, Scott Brison, and Keith Martin. So with support seeming to come from all political parties, is it the right thing to do to introduce legislation effectively barring any MP from crossing the floor? I say no.

By forcing an elected official to stand for an immediate by-election in their riding, what you are effectively doing is convincing them not to switch parties at all. Why would any MP even think of crossing the floor when the repercussions would be facing an electorate when the only issue that will surface in the election is they switched parties. Not to mention how the party that the MP would switch too might not even want them, and therefore would not be willing to support them financially, and with volunteers. It would be very difficult to mount a campaign, let alone win, so why would anyone cross the floor? The answer is they wouldn't, hence, what this legislation does is ensure no one switches parties.

Is it a bad thing to ensure that floor crossing will never occur again in Canada? I say yes. What is the big wrong being committed by someone who crosses the floor to join another party? Other than hurting people's feelings, is there some key argument that can be made to explain how this is a fundamental breach of democracy? Of course there isn't. This anger emanating from the Liberal party is the same as existed from the Conservative party when Ms. Stronach defected to the Liberals, and that is people were hurt that they lost someone they considered a close friend and a member in good standing of their party. Of course it hurts when someone leaves, it hurts even more when they leave to join your bitter rival, its like if a girl-friend or boy-friend dumped you for your best friend, does it hurt? Oh yes, very much. Is it wrong? Maybe in your opinion, but the truth is that no rule was broken.

Let's break down Mr. Turner's arguments:
-"Everybody who makes up the government should be elected"- I agree, and Mr. Emerson is elected, so this point is unnecessary.

- "They should be elected as members of the party that forms the government" - This argument does not make any sense, after all, what about coalition governments? What about when the Liberals used the NDP to keep themselves in power in the last term? The people of Canada did not vote for an NDP government and yet the NDP were in a position to determine government policy. This argument is also very dangerous in that it insinuates that voters should vote for the government party if they want government representation.

-"Anybody who switches parties should go back to the people. To do otherwise is to place politicians above the people when, actually, it’s the other way around" - here is the core of the argument. And this statement is incorrect. You cannot pick and choose your democracy. You simply cannot say, "I like this in a democracy, but I don't like that, so lets change that." The rules of our electoral system may not be perfect, but they are better than those that anyone else has suggested to date. All MP's eventually face the people, its called an "election." To do so for the reasoning that someone disgrees with you and no longer wishes to sit in the same party is irresponsible. The second line is an extremely clever ploy to appeal to your emotion. Who doesn't read that and say "damn right, the people hold the power." Of course we hold the power, that is what democracy is all about. But remember this, we elect people to speak for us, by doing so, we give them the ability to speak for us in the best way that they know. If they believe that what they are doing is right, then I say, let them do it.

At the end of the day, when the heartbreak is over, and the hurt feelings have been mended, Mr. Emerson will again have to face the voters, it will be interesting to see what the people of Vanouver-Kingsway decide to do. I am sure many people will still be upset, which is their right, and perhaps many people will change their minds and see that he may have made the right decision after all. Maybe Mr. Emerson will be able to convince the electorate that he deserves another chance to serve them. If that happens, then not only will he need the Conservative voters, but he will also likely need many of his former Liberal voters as well. And if the people are allowed to change their support from Liberal to Conservative, MP's should be as well.

Spirit of Alberta will Prevail -- By Doug Griffiths

2006-02-10T10:48:00.000-07:00

This is an article that Doug Griffiths wrote for the Edmonton Journal and it ran on December 26. I hope you like it.
Simpsonite

Spirit of Alberta will Prevail

This year marked the 100th anniversary of the Province of Alberta. We are no longer a young province that can claim inexperience or naivete for mistakes made. We have come out of our teen years and into adulthood strong, wise and wealthy because of character-building choices made early on. We must not lose sight of that as we continue to grow and evolve as a mature province that has finally "come into its own."

The first innovative prospect I see for our province 20 years from now is an Alberta where geographical location is irrelevant to our way of life. It will not matter in the future whether you are from Peace River, Airdrie, Edmonton, Provost, Pincher Creek or Rainbow Lake because infrastructure like the SuperNet and private Internet service providers will ensure instant and unhindered communication to the world. It won't matter if you are practising law or specialized medicine, teaching a foreign language or are a business owner, you will be able to choose the type of life you want, where you want while still providing services to anyone in the province.

Rural Alberta is too valuable a resource not to develop and nurture it like our other important resources. It offers a quality of life like no other in the world with little crime, immediate access to our beautiful environment, lower costs of living and excellent business opportunities. The intellectual infrastructure that we have built today will be extremely important in the development of the rural Alberta of tomorrow as quality health care and education, and new business opportunities continue to develop. It is the key to our future -- fully utilizing every part of Alberta for all Albertans.

I see a province where learning simply does not end when the classroom lights turn off. Our province is diverse and vibrant and has never shied away from seeking new knowledge. Twenty years from now the Campus Alberta approach will have achieved its full potential as any Albertan, anywhere in the province will be able to access any program from any institution anywhere in the province. There will come a time when you enter a learning centre in Sedgewick, Alberta, to learn from a professor in England, or an Edmontonian can learn from a paleontologist at the Royal Tyrrell Museum in Drumheller, or a teacher of Spanish can live in Whitecourt but reach and teach students from around the province.

The province of 2026 will be a leader in innovation in so many fields. Much like education, Alberta will also become a leader in delivering health care. Often it is said that with the technology that is developing it will be possible for a rural Albertan in a remote location to reach medical specialists in the city, perhaps all at once, and be remotely diagnosed and treated more quickly and effectively. I believe however, we will come to understand that the technology that is developing works both ways. We will see medical professionals choose where they want to live based on the quality of life they desire and that they will use the technology to provide services to all Albertans. We may see specialists living in rural Alberta and offering services remotely to urbanites.

Those innovations will lead to development of the entire province, ensuring that all Albertans enjoy the Alberta Advantage, but those innovations will lead to new innovations that are even more profound. Albertans will lead the world in attracting a capacity of thinkers, technicians, developers, inventors, entrepreneurs and investors because of the mindset of innovation that has developed and will continue to develop here. In fact, in 20 years Alberta will be known for its innovation in the same way that Wall Street is known for finance, because we will be epitomize the word in thought and deed.

We can see examples of the importance of research and development in our own story today that will provide us with clues for our future tomorrow. Alberta has been a leader in researching new and innovative ways of harnessing our energy potential. We see new energy sources like wind turbines in the south of the province that are providing us with new sources of energy that were not realistically available 30 years ago. Our past innovations are powering the homes of many Albertans today. This will only expand into the future as instruments like the Alberta Energy Research Institute and the Alberta Ingenuity Fund provide us with opportunities to limit our dependence on traditional non-renewable energy sources. Just as we are leaders in supplying energy to the world, in the future we will be the leaders in supplying clean energy and renewable energy technology to the world.

I want a province where the water is clean, the air is fresh and the soil is rich with nutrients and growth. I think that our province will move away from the attitude of entitlement to our lands and be more mindful that we are the caretakers of our natural inheritance. I believe we in this province will finally resolve for the world the great conflict that typically sees economic growth and environmental stability, business and environment, or blue conservatism and green environmentalism as mutually exclusive. We will resolve it in such a way that both business and the environment prosper.

I know we will see more of Alberta's raw materials being kept here to make goods and services. Albertans will continue to develop the can do attitude that is our strength, and we will find ways to add value to our own resources, idea, and ingenuity that will make us leaders around the globe. This will happen because of investments in education and technology, which will lead to innovation, which, in turn, will change the world, and Alberta will be the instigator for that change.

We have to remember that Albertans have never been afraid to expect the very best of themselves and of each other. Every Albertan must realize that this province is going to advance quickly because of this high expectation. To whom much is given, much is expected and Albertans have never been afraid to face the future with optimism and courage. Undoubtedly, over the next twenty years, unforeseen events and unintended consequences will shape our character and our direction. But through it all, we should remember the strength, wisdom and spirit that have brought us through all our problems will continually guide us over the next 20 years. And because of this, I think Alberta will be unmatched in its success.

Doug Griffiths is MLA for Battle River-Wainwright and chairman of Alberta's rural development strategy task force

Put me down for $1 on "I Don't Care"!

2006-02-09T09:42:00.000-07:00

I am puzzled that this or any other story pertaining to this is even a news story. I could see if they were betting on hockey like Pete Rose was betting on Baseball, than it may be a news story. But they weren't, and unless they discover they were I could personally care less.

You wanna bet? here's a bet... I bet Gretzky brings home the gold with Team Canada... and I'd feel even more confident if he threw down a couple million of his own on Team Canada bringing home the gold. Janet can place the bet.

Thoughts on the new Federal Cabinet

2006-02-06T17:07:00.000-07:00

Wow, some Liberals sure are upset with this new Cabinet. I guess that must mean that Harper did a pretty good job in his picks.

Here's the way I see it:

The only Cabinet Ministet open to criticism right now is Hon. David Emerson, not because he crossed the floor, but because he was a Minister before. He has a record as a Minister and so judgements can be made. The whole debate on "defecting" to another party are greatly exaggerated by opposition parties. Sure people voted for him as a Liberal, however I believe many of those votes came because they voted for their MP who was a Minister. Mr. Emerson will do more good for Vancouver, for BC, and for the 2010 Olympics in his current position than he would have as an opposition member. I predict in a future election that he does what Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach have done, he wins again. The difference between Mr. Emerson's defection and Ms. Stronach is that the Liberals needed Ms. Stronach in order to win a crucial vote and stay in power, in the case of Mr. Emerson, his 1 vote isn't crucial to the success of the CPC, but his portfolio is very important to the province of BC, he did it for his constituents, and he made the right decision.
The Liberals are very quick to try to create controversy, they mention all the Conservative MP's who were left out; ie. Diane Ablonczy and Jason Kenney, among others. What I find interesting is how they mention only Alberta MP's who were left out. The fact is everyone knew that Harper couldn't appoint more Alberta Ministers then he already did, and so tough choices had to be made.
Harper's Alberta Ministers were brilliant choices. Rona Ambrose as Environment Minister is excellent. The rest of Canada will soon learn what the polls have told us for years, that Albertans care more about the environment than most people give us credit for.

In summary, a smaller Cabinet, a more efficient government. Canadians have seen that the Conservatives are willing to do what is right for the country as a whole as opposed to what is right for themselves, unlike the Liberal party.

Lets reserve judgement on the Cabinet until we have actual issues to judge them on. For now however, the future looks bright for Conservatives in Canada, and for the country as a whole.

I'd be afraid too if I was a Liberal. They don't have a leader, no one seems to want to be their leader, and they will soon find themselves facing a popular government on track to be a majority in the next election.

Speaking of Gun Control.....

2006-02-02T08:49:00.000-07:00

An 11 year old boy was suspended twice for bringing a loaded hand-gun to school in the southern United States.

Listen to what his mother had to say about it. "I can't lock up his guns, they belong to him, and he has a right to use them whenever he wants to use them."

What's that old saying? You need a license to drive a car, but anyone can have children? This sort of thing scares me, and don't think of this as a "USA" thing either, I would bet there are people all over the world, including Canada, who would agree with this.

Disgusting

2006-01-30T17:07:00.000-07:00

This past weekend I saw a young lady walk by wearing a backpack with a cloth over it that had the following written on it:

"Conservatives are Nazis, Harper is Hitler, I'm ashamed to be Candian."

I was dumbfounded when I read this. I was shocked, offended, angry, and confused.

I was shocked because I could not believe that someone would be so ignorant to wear this. I understand that people are not Conservative supporters, but this was a little extreme.

I was offended because I am a proud Conservative and a proud Canadian. Is this person, and the person who came up with this material insinuating that I am of the same ilk as a dictator who committed horrible evils during his reign?

I was angry that someone would use the same freedom that was won for our country, and our entire world by defeating the very sane dictator and party that she compares the Conservative party to.

I was confused as to how anyone could actually believe that to be true.

Politics is all about differences, its about choosing a government most in line with what we believe in as citizens of this country. Living in a democratic country means accepting the outcome of an election, you do not always have to like it, but you better acknowledge the outcome of a system that you believe in. It is one thing to disagree with a government that you did not vote for, but to insult that party in this way is an insult to every single person who voted for that party. I disagree with Liberals and NDP policy, but I do not insult a person who votes for that party.

This person, and all who agree with that disgraceful view should be ashamed to be Canadian. I am ashamed for them.

A Speech to Build A Nation On!

2006-01-25T13:38:00.000-07:00

In case you missed it... here is Stephen Harper's speech from Monday night. As this was our new Prime Minister's first opportunity to address the nation it provided him the opportunity to set the base for his term as leader. I've heard a speech or two in my time, and it's my opinion that not only did Prime Minister Harper take full advantage of this opportunity... he delivered one of the best speeches I have heard from any Canadian politician in years. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was both inspiring and passionate, addressing everything that needs to be addressed. It was the perfect end to a fantastic election and the perfect beginning to a new Canada... Strong, United, Independent and Free!

You can watch the video at CTV.ca, its under the Election 2006 section in two parts.

The Big Man Weighs In...

2006-01-23T13:51:00.000-07:00

Doesn't Michael Moore have a "documentary" to work on? Or maybe things are a little slow these days for left-wing conspiracists in the United States so he's decided to invade Canada. Anyhoo... here's his thought's on today's election.

Why Proportional Representation is not the way to go

2006-01-23T12:44:00.000-07:00

There has been much discussion over the past few years over changing our electoral system in Canada. It happened in BC with the Citizens' Assembly, and most recently was brought up again during a federal election leaders debate when NDP leader Jack Layton actually stated that "Canadians want a system of Proportional Representation." Well, sorry Mr.Layton, but this Canadian doesn't.

Proportional Representation (PR) is a greatly misunderstood electoral system. The common misconception is that it is a superior system to our current first-past-the-post model because it more accurately distributes seats to the percentage of the popular vote. And at the basic level that is correct, however, the devil, as they say, is in the details, and that is where PR runs into trouble.

For this argument, imagine a Parliament with 100 seats. For starters, it is not as simple as giving a party with 30% of the vote 30 of the seats. First of all, has anyone ever seen a party get a full % of support? How do you distribute a seat to a party who got 30.4% of the vote and a party who got 29.6%? Do both parties get 30 seats even though one party got .8% more of the vote, which might translate into tens of thousands of votes. So do those votes count? How can you fairly distribute a number that is not whole? The short answer is that you can't, not without great difficulty and concession. I realize that this would only impact 1 or 2 seats for a party, but under a PR system, minority governments are the standard, and in a minority government, 1 or 2 seats may make a huge difference.

The second problem stems from the first, but creates a broader issue. Does a party who gets 0.9% of the vote deserve a seat? If so, what about a party with 0.4%? or 0.3%? Where do we draw the line? What is the minimum percentage of popular support that a party must gain in order to gain a seat? This is a difficult question to answer for two reasons. One, Canada is made up of 10 very unique provinces, and so if we do creat a minimum threshold, do we make it a national threshold, or a provincial one? Consider the ramifications for the Bloc Quebecois, they stand at 45-50% support in Quebec, however, across Canada their support is only 18%. Therefore under PR would the Bloc be entitled to 50% of Quebec's seats or 18% of Canada's seats? The second problem lies with lesser known parties, it is common fact that a PR system leads to more political parties, and so by creating a minimum threshold (for example 5%) then you are effectively saying that voters for a party that only received 3% do not count, however those for parties who get over 5% do count. Again, this is a very complicated rule that needs to be clarified, and huge concessions would have to be made to get this done.

There is also a concern over the individual who gets elected under a PR system, because under PR you do not vote for the person, you vote only for the party. So it is the party who indicates who will assume the seats they have been awarded after an election. So who are we voting for? We don't know. Are they accountable to us? No, they are accountable to the party itself. Which MP would be considered my MP for my riding? There would not be traditional ridings, there would only be a set number of seats for the House to be distributed. I do not like any of these answers, and I'm sure I am not alone in that opinion.

Finally, Jack Layton would have us believe that his party is in support of PR because he wants what Canadians want, but he is mistaken in that. The primary reason that Mr. Layton wants a PR system is because his party has never represented what a majority of Canadians want. The truth is that parties with no hope of ever forming a government are always in favour of a PR system because they will fare better under that system. The NDP is very happy tipping the balance in a minority government parliament. Under PR, minority governments are the norm, and so under PR, the NDP will always have the balance of power in their hands. So why is this bad some of you may ask? The answer is that PR benefits parties like the NDP who have strong identified support in certain sectors, and who are unable to attract the mainstream or "average" voter. The NDP has never, and probably will never form a government in Canada because they do not speak for the average Canadian, their views do not represent those of a majority of Canadians. Because of this they want to change the rules so that they can reward themselves for only speaking for a certain group. So why should we reward parties who do not even attempt to attract the majority of Canadians with having the balance of power in a Parliament?

Our current system may not be perfect, but what it does is encourage political parties to represent all of Canada, and not only special interest groups (NDP), or one province (Bloc), or just one single issue (Green, Marijuana party). The reason this election is really just a two-horse race is because only the Liberals and Conservatives aim to represent all of Canada, and they do so by the rules of our current electoral system. We should not reward parties who do not want to play by the rules, we should not look to change our electoral system to Proportional Represenation.

Most Overused Quote of the Year

2006-01-23T12:33:00.000-07:00

"If you don't go out and vote, you can't complain about the government."

I woke up at 7:30 am, after listening to my radio alarm, and then shortly afterward my shower radio, the amount of times I had heard that quote was 14. I have now heard it more times than I could possibly hope to remember, but it would at least have to be over 50.

I understand that this one-liner seems to be the way for people on radio and tv to motivate people to go out and vote, but seriously, are you telling me that there isn't a better motivator? How about the rarely used "people died fighting in wars so that we could have the ability to vote for our leaders." I guess that just doesn't strike a chord anymore.

What really annoys me is how the quote itself, is incorrect. For starters, can someone complain if they don't vote? Of course they can. And what's more, starting tomorrow morning, do you think any elected politician is going to ask someone if they voted before they are willing to hear a complaint? Not if they like their position as elected they won't. Finally, for those who rally under the mantra of "its our right to vote", they must understand that in the true meaning of a "right", there is also within the right, the right not to do that selfsame thing. Freedom of speech also entails the freedom to say nothing at all. So, in truth, people not voting are actually demonstrating their right to vote as well. Thats why in Australia where voting is the law, there is no right to vote.

I am not trying to encourage anyone not to vote, I hope voter turnout is 100%, but for pete's sake people, stop using the quote above!

Sunshine Girl?

2006-01-22T18:49:00.000-07:00

I just didn't think it was fair that only people in Winnipeg got to see this gem. So enjoy!Too bad this picture isn't worth a thousand votes. Ah well, if you're going to go out, you might as well go out in a blaze of glory.

Remember, no matter who you vote for, go vote.

I Vote for Anne and I Live in a Storage Locker

2006-01-21T15:01:00.000-07:00

A large number of electoral irregularities have surfaced in the Edmonton-Centre campaign. Registered voters are claiming business offices, storage units and truck stops to be their registered place of residence. Check out the Conservative Party news release. The Small Dead Animals blog and the Edmonton Journal have reported on the electoral irregularities as well. This should make things interesting...

Election Predictor

2006-01-20T01:18:00.000-07:00

Here's a little somethin' somethin' to pass the time until Monday's results... compliments of the Downtown Conservatives and Hill & Knowlton!

Everyone's got Ads!

2006-01-16T18:17:00.000-07:00

I really like this new Conservative ad. Apparently the Liberals really don't. I can't imagine why, they were the pioneers of using quotes from other parties to help bury them. I haven't seen the ad attacking the NDP yet, but I hope its even better.

Yikes! Whats with Jack Layton telling Liberals to vote NDP "Just this once?" Sounds like Jack has been taking campaign lessons from the guy who peer pressures kids to try smoking. God help us if voting NDP turns out to be addictive.

Lastly, I wonder what it sounds like in Paul Martin's war room this week, I wonder if it sounds anything like this. (Warning: profane language) Just substitute "8-10 record" with "second in the polls", and "Purdue" with "Harper."

The Wrong Kind of "PR" - Part 1

2006-01-16T14:46:00.000-07:00

In an interesting and much unnoticed move, during the Leaders debate, NDP Leader Jack Layton took a moment to speak on behalf of "all Canadians" and declared that we all wanted a new electoral system of Proportional Representation (PR) , and the reason we all wanted a new electoral system is that voter turnout is so low in Canada. Despite the fact that he clearly DOES NOT speak on behalf of all Canadians, Mr. Layton's comments have been a week-long cause of pondering on my behalf. After all, whats wrong with a PR electoral system? (lots actually, but thats another column, which will be Part 2), Would PR answer the glaring issue of voter turnout in elections?

My answer is yes, however Mr. Layton got the wrong PR acronym. Proportional Representation does not necessarily lead to a higher voter turnout, in fact, it might lead to an even lower voter turnout (again, more on this to come)

Reading a column on voting among youths turned out the premise that because many students are busy with school and work, and because they have very little extra money for things like newspapers and television, they won't vote because they are not properly informed enough to make a decision. I laughed at this article when I read it because of how this columnist actually believed this farce that he was told, and whats more, he printed it for all to see. The truth is that he was duped by a clever student who did not want to appear in a negative light to someone who would put her comments in a newspaper. How can I be so sure of this conclusion? Because I myself once heard the exact same answer from a friend, a friend I considered both "politically-enlightened" and "politically-intuned." And, just like how I laughed at that silly column, I laughed even harder when the same answer was given to me in person by that friend.

After wiping the tears from eyes, and after shrugging off the weak attempt to back up the answer, I asker again what the real reason was, with a promise that I wouldn't laugh as long as they were honest with me. In response to this, I received the other common false explanation of "all the parties lie, so you can't believe whatthey say." Again, this was a standard response that led to my laughter, and I could tell that my friend quickly realized that repeating something that they read in the paper is not a good enough explanation. So I asked for more information on exactly what the parties have lied about? To this question my friend could not come up with a concrete answer. Many examples were given, but none of them were actual examples of the party lieing. Instead, what I heard was examples of what certain parties were saying about other parties. Upon further questioning, it seemed quite obvious to me, that the problem isn't that people don't believe what they hear, the actual problem is that many people believe EVERYTHING they hear. They take it all in.

Now, imagine hearing 3 sides to an issue (a,b,c), and all 3 sides tell you in such a convincing way that they are right and that the other is wrong, and so, instead of believing one side over the other, you assume that maybe all of them are partly correct, or upon further thought, they can't all be right and so perhaps they all must be wrong. And if someone were to ask you to make a choice between (a), (b), (c), or (d) none of the above, which one would you choose?

My money is on the fact that you all chose (d). And that premise is the real reason why voter turnout is so low.

Coming up in Part 2....why Proportional Representation isn't the answer people think it is......and finally in Part 3.......what is the solution? If there is one at all......

Who uses public health?

2006-01-13T09:12:00.000-07:00

This morning the story has broke that our most honest lefty Jack Layton has decided that private clinics are a-ok to him. I believe he has chastised Stephen Harper for saying that he would send a loved one to a private clinic if it is needed. I also believe that he has said that public money will not be able to go to private clinics. Jack has mentioned that he had no idea that the clinic was private but I find that hard to believe. It has a putting green. Don't believe me? It is a clinic that has a "country club appeal." Oh and the CBC has said it is a private clinic. Jack should have known.

But Jack defends going to this clinic because "Ontario health paid for it." Isn't that what Jack wants to stop? Public money going to private clinics? Maybe I misunderstood that part of his platform.

And we all know that Paul Martin loves his private health clinics. The person who says he is the biggest defender of public health sure doesn't practice what he preaches. So Paully Paul supports one.

Where has this left us? With this common knowledge. The Liberals and the NDs say one thing and do another. They say they are against private health but support it.

Harper, on the other hand, supports public health but realizes the important roll private health care plays in our system. Although Harper has never used a private health clinic. So he is the only one that actually uses the public system...hmmmmmm. I guess Harper is like the other two, say one thing do another. The difference, Harper says he would use a private system, except he never has.

Huh, to me this is so very, very scary because he uses the public health system when he says he will use the private.

I got three words for you:

Go Stephen, go!!

I'm fat AND ugly

2006-01-12T15:42:00.000-07:00

The CBC ran an interesting story on why campaigns go negative. Very simply, it breaks down to a quote by longtime (I never heard of him) Liberal strategist Keith Davey who said "if the other guy says, 'You're fat', don't say, 'I'm not', say 'You're ugly.'" I assume that is where you would insert the laughs.

I also enjoy CBC's article on potential Cabinet Ministers in a Conservative Government. I noticed they didn't have a date on the article, which I find interesting because didn't we see this article last election? Remember the whole news story surrounding Harper and his transition team? And do we all remember what happened? Soon after, the Liberals went negative, health care became the major issue, and voila, another Liberal government. So lets not count our negative ads before they are released, if in some way that makes sense.

And finally, if you enjoy being dumbfounded as much as I do, you'll love this story. A Liberal candidate in Alberta, is ASHAMED of her party! In fact, she is soo ashamed, that she mentioned it at a school forum in front of kids! This follows another Liberal MP apologizing in Vancouver, and blaming the whole fiasco on an idiot. But who is the idiot? Didn't Paul Martin take responsibility for the adds? I think the biggest lie the Liberals have told so far in this campaign is where they say "we aren't making this up", I firmly disagree, I think its quite obvious that they have been making everything up as they go along.

IT BEGINS

2006-01-11T14:29:00.000-07:00

I saw this today and got a kick out of it...

From Paul Wells' site... January 11, 2006

It begins

Just now at the Subway on Bank St. I was buying my lunch and there... in line... standing in front of me... was a soldier.

In our cities.

In Canada.

A soldier.

He seemed to be ordering the six-inch ham and turkey.

With chipotle sauce.

In Canada.

We're not making this stuff up.

Support for Harper

2006-01-09T12:20:00.000-07:00

Hello!

Today at the Black Dog Pub there is an invite, to all who wish to go, to the Under Dog (that is the big room in the basement of the Pub) and watch tonights leader debate. For those that don't know, the Black Dog is on the South side of Whyte Avenue in between about 105 and 104 street (I think). The kicker to this is that this invite was in See Magazine and I would guess that our man Stephen is going to need supporters down there. If you can make it, head on down and have a pint and watch the left choke on their indecencies!

Corruption and Corruptability

2006-01-05T08:37:00.000-07:00

I found an article from the World Bank that is pretty good. You can read it here but I want you to pay attention to something written right under the heading, “Agenda for Further Research.”

The author drops this little nugget of gold, “If the costs of corruption are so high, why don't governments get rid of it? A possible answer is that once a corrupt system is in place, and a majority of people operate within that system, individuals have no incentive to try to change it or to refrain from taking part in it, even if everybody would be better off if corruption were to be eliminated.”

We look at our current Liberal Government. We could argue that there is a system of corruption in place. We cannot assume when this started. It may have started in the 90’s, it could’ve started in the 80’s and, really, it could have been at any time in our history when corruption began to creep into our institution. All it takes if for it to get in and it takes a while to remove.

I am not saying that the corruption talked about for the most part in the article is the same corruption in Canada. Nor I am saying, however, that the majority of those in our Federal Government – those in the Liberals especially – are corrupt. I don’t believe that to be the case. I think that all parties have MPs who are good or evil. However, when the top level leaders, those who are to be trusted by the people, do corrupt actions, the entire party must be brought to surrender because that is necessary for trust to remain in the institution.

Check out this article here. It is from the CBC but it has some very interesting points surrounding Canadian corruption. When you read it, think about what you read of Mr. Mauro – his conclusions – and look at how they are reflected with what Brian Stewart has written. The same themes seem to flow through both.

One of the other things that should be mentioned is another answer to the question in bold above. Why is there corruption in Canada if the costs are so high? I think we can answer this by saying, the costs, unfortunately, in Canada are not high. This has been proven many, many times. And if the Liberal Party of Canada is re-elected to another term, whether minority or otherwise, I think it will show that this country does not punish corruption.

My hope is that the people of the Great White North will realize that corruption should be punishable and there should be a cost. It is my hope, but failure is my fear.

Biased Media: Who would've thunk it

2005-12-19T11:18:00.000-07:00

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.

Hot Economy only good sometimes

2005-12-15T11:47:00.000-07:00

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.

NDPointless

2005-12-14T12:27:00.000-07:00

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.

Your List of Friends grows thin....

2005-12-13T11:48:00.000-07:00

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.

"Strategery"

2005-12-12T13:19:00.000-07:00

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.

Of Guns and Men

2005-12-09T15:40:00.000-07:00

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

2005-12-09T13:06:00.000-07:00

"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.

Can Paul Martin count?

2005-12-01T12:51:00.000-07:00

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

2005-12-01T10:26:00.000-07:00

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

Quote of the day

2005-11-30T18:34:00.000-07:00

"The real shock of the whole Canadian Government laundering scandal is the revelation that somewhere in the world there is actually a liberal government in power"

-Jon Stewart, from last nights episode of The Daily Show

The Canadian election made late night American pseudo-news last night when Jon Stewart mentioned the fall of the government. Check out the entire segment at http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/videos/headlines/index.jhtml
and click on the "hosed" icon on the page. Quite amusing.

Sidenote: nice to see that Canadians aren't the only ones who like to make obvious jokes about our close neighbours.

Frosty, the reception

2005-11-30T12:38:00.000-07:00

Many people seem to be angry at the timing of this Federal election, i've seen many cross-country interviews of citizens who don't plan to vote because they don't want another election, ah the joys of democracy! In fact, this issue is becoming large enough that it is turning into an election issue itself, with the Liberals blaming the opposition for the election, and so apparently thats a reason to vote Liberal. weird.

But, fear not dear friends, I am hear to cheer you up this holiday season. For I present to you reasons that a federal election campaign is a great idea this holiday season!

1. Just wait to shovel your driveway until you see a candidate come to knock on your door, at that precise moment, go outside to shovel it, and I guarantee you will not have to do the task alone!

2. The guilt trips and sob stories that you hear from the NDP candidates will make you realize that you really don't have it so bad.

3. Watching a Liberal lose is alot more joyful than getting a new pair of socks for christmas!

4. Encouraging a candidate that you don't intend to vote for to help you put up your christmas lights and wrap presents for your family is a great use of both your time, and theirs.

5. Political advertising on TV, and in Newspapers will make it harder for businesses to try to convince us how a gym membership and other useless items are actually decent christmas presents.

So cheer up Canada, vote, don't vote, its your right. But lets ensure complaining doesn't become another Canadian tradition at Christmas.

Anyone else have some good reasons for why a christmas/winter election could be fun?

Quote of the Week

2005-11-28T12:36:00.000-07:00

"Fine. But don't ask me the question if you don't want the answer."

-Premier Klein's response to the Peter MacKay suggestion that duct tape be used to keep him quiet.

I love it. In this one simple line, the Premier manages to tone down a verbal disupute with the Federal Conservatives (you can imagine how the federal media would have loved Ralph to take a shot back at MacKay) but he also takes a swipe at the media who love to create their own issues. And to top it off, he does it with humour.

Say what you want about the guy, but there are times where his political brilliance is unmatched.

A Shrug of the Shoulders

2005-11-24T13:18:00.000-07:00

Ok, so I am not a happy camper today. Today a vote of non-confidence is before the federal House and should be put to a vote. If it is supported the federal Liberals should fall.

But as I was listening to some of the debate today I heard one of the Liberal cabinet Ministers, I can’t remember who, stand up and say that this motion was because the Conservatives are in bed with the separatists, have been from day one, and want to rip this country apart with their right wing agenda.

Are you freaken kidding me? Who believes this garbage? Who in their right mind is going to believe that statement? And furthermore, who is responsible for the ripping apart of this country? If you guessed the federal Liberals then you hit the nail on the head, oh and it is because of their left wing agenda.

The Bloc in Quebec are more popular now because of the Feds and this should make every single citizen of this country more angry than they have ever been. Quebec nationalists are talking about separation again because their province has been embarrassed by a joke of a federal government and they are looking at this fervor throughout the province and are trying to capitalize. And if we re-elect a Liberal government, whether minority or majority, I think that will rip the country apart.

I cannot believe that there are people in this country who are so ridiculous that they would vote for a federal party who steals, lies, and cheats the Canadian people. Where are Canadians? When something like this happens in another country you get protests and mass civil disobedience! What do you get here? A shrug of the shoulders and this is why our Canadian society is the absolute laughing stock of the entire world.

Why is this motion coming forward today? It is coming forward because the Liberals waste our tax money, they steal our tax money, and then they lie about what they have done with said tax money. Everything they have done has had disgusting results. They are now trying to show their fiscal responsibility by spending money, OUR MONEY, on things that are not even their responsibility for the most part! They are continually wasting our tax dollars.

And have you listened to Scott Brison in the last little while? I mean read this. Brison spreads untruths about Stephen Harper and then stands to “clarify his remarks?” Give me a break! He outright lied about the activities of Stephen Harper by saying that his “past is littered with questionable if not illegal behaviour.” What? Prove it! Brison can’t because he is making it up. He is saying something that is untrue. That is lying. I know you are not supposed to accuse someone of lying but this seems like a pretty good slam dunk!

Canadians, don’t be daft, vote for somebody other than the Liberals. I don’t care who, just don’t make the same mistake again.

Attention 101

2005-11-23T12:50:00.000-07:00

Quick lecture on how anyone who would like attention, can make sure they are given it.

1. Find an issue, any issue will do, but the more attractive and attention-grabbing the better.
2. No matter what, take the exact opposite opinion of that issue. You will get even more attention if you come up with your own suggested course of action that is the polar-opposite of the one taken in said issue.
3. It helps to have a title, any title will do, if one is not already available to you, create one. Start by coming up with an organization that sounds impressive, like say "Ethical Politics Now" or EPN for short (the media loves acronyms!) Then, install yourself as director, that way when the headline is written, it can say something like "Director of EPN says...."
4. Humour tends to be the best format for what you have to say, the funnier you sound, the more you will be quoted, and should another person or group also be commenting on this same issue, be sure to be more clever than they are, that way you will get ahead of them in your quote. In fact, humour is more important than fact, remember that.
5. Find your nearest reporter, doesn't matter what type of media really, for if you get on TV, newspaper will likely follow, and vice versa.

There you have it! Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame. If that isn't enough for you, repeat steps 1 through 5. Don't worry if you contradict yourself by saying something that might be different to what you may have said in the past, the media has a brilliant way of looking the other way when facts get in the way of a good story!

Enjoy!

Now, any story can easily go along with this easy 5 step program. Particularly those featuring opposition parties all across the country. However, I particularly like this one. No, Premier Klein wasn't "asked" to consider something, he wasn't even "encouraged", nope, he was "told!"

Please pass more laws?

2005-11-16T12:32:00.000-07:00

Does anyone else see the humour in how the opposition parties, and certain Edmonton Journal columnists continue to complain at how the Alberta Legislature sits the fewest number of days out of all Legislatures in Canada?

Let me see if this makes sense, when a Legislature sits, they make laws, the longer they sit, the more laws they make. Now, I am not arguing that there isn't a need for certain new laws, however, once that needed legislation is passed, what further need is there for the Legislature to sit? The fact that the Alberta Legislature is only expected to sit 5o days this year should be seen as a success story. Its a GOOD NEWS story for the government.

Looks like once again the opposition has missed the point, this is beginning to be routine for them.

Forgetting to Remember

2005-11-10T00:29:00.000-07:00

Three years after Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae penned the famed poem In Flanders Fields, which immortalized the scarlet poppy as the symbol of soldiers who died in battle, an American, Moina Michael wore a poppy in memory of those soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice. Then, during a 1920 visit to the United States a French woman, Madame Guerin, learned of the custom. Upon her return to France she decided to use handmade poppies to raise money for the destitute children in war-torn areas of the country. This is the history of the poppy, a tradition born in America and one which continues to be embraced here in Canada.

I was channel surfing the other night and caught the tail end of a news program, they were answering a viewers email question. The question was – Can you please tell me why Americans don't wear poppies as a symbol of Remembrance Day like we do here in Canada? You can watch a video which answers that question here.

I came across another news story on the topic of poppies, you can read it here.

With these stories in mind I think it’s more important than ever that each of us make certain that at the 11th hour on the 11th day of the 11th month we reflect on everything we have – our freedoms, our safety, our family, our friends and we take that moment to remember those who sacrificed their freedoms, their safety, their families and their friends so that we wouldn’t have to. We need to remember before we all forget what it is we are suppose to remembering.

In Flanders Fields
by John McCrae
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Time and a place

2005-11-08T19:10:00.000-07:00

The most overused joke this week has to be the "google" reference that seems to turn up in every single article about the AON contract recently announced by Alberta Health and Wellness. Okay, we might admit that the comment by the opposition that all you had to do was search for the company on the internet and you would find out this information was mildy clever, however is it news? I mean, why is a joke about a serious matter news? Why has every journalist taken that one-liner and made it a part of their story? is "google" the real story here? Do people even remember what the real story is anymore? I could give you links to all the stories that reference "google" and the AON story but there would not be enough space on this site for it. Have we let humour become a part of every news story now?

I'm sorry, I cannot stand it anymore. Making a joke isn't being a reponsible opposition, its trying to get your name in the paper. I'm tired of it, and I hope others are too. There's a time and a place for humour, but it shouldn't be part of our daily news. In fact, what happens to kids in school known as the "class clown?" They end up in detention. Everyone knows that humour is a way of getting attention. So well done opposition parties! You got some much needed attention. Now can we please get back to the real story?

The Institution is Overwhelmed

2005-11-07T21:46:00.000-07:00

Well, I got to reading an article and I would like you to read it as well. It is a bit of a long read, but as you read through it, think about as it would apply to your local, provincial and federal government. The article is http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110007460 there...check it out.

So as I was reading this, it struck me how this can apply to every government at seemingly every level. Government is continuing to grow at a very quick rate. Each level, or order, of government are trying to deal with issues that are not their own. Each is trying to leave their mark or do their best to be everything to everybody from local couselors to the Prime Minister. My worry is that this is creating a society whose expectations will prove to be unsustainable in the long run. For instance, let's look at our Canadian federal government, or as I like to call them...the dumb dumbs.

The question we must ask is, what are the priorities of our federal government and do they line up with their proper role? We can talk about things like the gun registry and ad scam; but instead of their bogus spending/extra-responsibilities bringing them down, the NDP say it is because they will not protect public health care, a roll that the Feds inserted themselves into 30 years ago. My question is, why should they protect public health care? It is not even their responsibility. The problem is that society has to come expect so much for so little that there is no way that any government can do what is expected of them.

How can a province, like Newfoundland and Labrador for example, be expected to curb their spending to get themselves out of debt when the people of this province, and all provinces for that matter, expect quick and instant access to the health care system? People are increasingly turning to the government to fix their problems and they are consistently disappointed when those problems go unsolved.

As Ms. Noonan states, it is not the individuals in government that are overwhelmed, but the institutions. The institutions have taken on so much that they are crumbling under their own weight. The question now that is posed is, what do you do to fix it? Or better, is it possible to fix the system without radical change?

One of the ways to start change is in the next federal election. What will you do when this vote comes? Will vote for a party that is so hell bent on keeping power they neglect their responsibilities in their quest to hold that power? Or do you vote for a party that is so intent on enacting their agenda that they uphold a government which is morally corrupt and who they can blackmail? Or do you vote for a party who takes a stand against all of this and tries to do what they feel is best for a country as a whole and not delve into every single, solitary problem? Why wouldn’t you vote for a party that takes a stand against lofty expectations? Are Canadians scared of a government being run responsibly?

The difference between the conservatives and liberals (right vs. left) is that conservatives seem to have the courage of their convictions and are willing to shift responsibility back to the individual, from the institution. That is the only way that a government can survive. By allowing the individual to be what it is, an individual and providing every opportunity for that individual to succeed. It is not equality of outcomes but rather equality of opportunity that is important. Our problems in this country cannot be fixed over night, or even in a four year term, but why would you allow the same problem to continue? Why wouldn’t you take a chance on a new direction? I think Abba wrote a gooder about that…

Or maybe I’m just off my rocker…

Get out of our town!

2005-10-19T15:39:00.000-06:00

We may have a new contender for the quote of the week:

"Basically our community did what the judicial system wouldn't," said Mayor David Laird. "We said, 'You have no rights. Get out of town.'"

Check out this story . A town in BC was successful in getting a convicted sex offender to move out of their town.

Alberta Health Care on Right Track

2005-10-19T00:12:00.000-06:00

Does Alberta's health care system work? Yes. Does it need tweaking? Yes. Is it time to start thinking outside the box and continue to forge ahead with a Made-in-Alberta health plan that will serve Albertans... all Albertans? Absolutely!

In a September 29, 2005 article in the Calgary Herald, Laurie Blakeman commented on the provinces plan to forge ahead with a Made-in-Alberta approach to wait time concerns. "The province always seems to stubbornly want to go it alone," said Laurie Blakeman, the Alberta Liberal health critic. "It doesn't serve Albertans the best."

Well Laurie, once again you're wrong! The Fraser Institute just released a study on wait times across Canada, read about it here.

A Made-in-Alberta approach will serve Albertans the best!

Check out the details on the recently announced increase to health funding. Albertans will benefit from improved access to health care and reduced wait times with an investment of $1.4 billion from the provincial surplus for 20 capital projects.

The new buildings, renovations and expansion of existing facilities will increase bed capacity across the province and provide at least 657 new and upgraded acute care beds and 85 new long-term care beds.

The province is investing in our future the right way... the Alberta way!

Teaching the teachers...

2005-10-18T15:28:00.000-06:00

Possible child-parent discussion taking place in BC at this moment:

Child: "Mom, why am I not at school?"
Parent: "well, you see the teachers are on strike, and so there is no one to teach you?"
Child: "why are the teachers on strike?"
Parent: "because they don't agree with the government"
Child: "is going on strike illegal?"
Parent: "in this instance yes it is"
Child: "why are the teachers breaking the law?"
Parent: "because they feel like they are doing the right thing"
Child: "isn't breaking the law bad?"
Parent: "yes it is"
Child: "will they be punished?"
Parent: "ummm....."

And here is where all those parents now have an answer.

Quote of the Week

2005-10-18T09:33:00.000-06:00

Senator Orrin Hatch, one of the most influential Republicans on Capitol Hill, said Monday that Canada is poised to surpass Saudi Arabia as "the world's oil giant" and warned energy-hungry America can't afford to alienate its northern neighbour over trade disputes like softwood lumber.

"Neither of us can afford to kick the other one in the teeth," the Utah senator said after a speech to government and oil industry officials at the Canadian Embassy.

Which leads to our quote of the week.....

"This country is not going to kick Canada in the teeth. And we know that Canada isn't going to kick us in the teeth either."

Let this be a lesson to all of us, friends are to valuable to be kicked in the teeth.

Polluting the truth

2005-10-13T20:54:00.000-06:00

Remember the Kyoto Protocol? Looks like the Americans were correct when they claimed they didn't need it, chech out this article

While we Canadians talk and talk about how noble we are in our bid to reduce greenhouse gases, the Americans are actually doing it.

Hmmm...maybe the Alberta government was on to something when they said that Kyoto has nothing to do with reducing greenhouse gases. Perhaps the rumours are true, maybe politics is the greatest threat to our environment. The sad thing is this isn't an issue that we can look back on and say "I told you so" to the Liberal government in Ottawa.

Signing a document doesn't make our country more environmentally friendly. Just another example of actions speaking louder than words.

Downtown conservatives? They exist?

2005-10-13T15:18:00.000-06:00

I've seen the statistics, and I've heard the stories, and while not one to spread false rumours (or false hope) I'm of the opinion that not only do downtown conservative minded people exist, but they are a growing group.

"But then how come we don't see many urban downtown Conservative elected officials?" people ask. Great question. One that can't easily be answered, nor is it one where the answer is obvious, and once found will guarantee success for all Conservative hopefuls (my sincere apologies if you fall under that category, for now anyway!)

I believe the answer is found with every person who lives downtown and firmly believes in the basic personal principles of less government, lower taxes, and human freedoms.

Of course, if we have some fun on the way to personal downtown conservative enlightenment, then that will be just jim dandy too right?

To Donate or Not To Donate

2005-10-13T14:51:00.000-06:00

That seems to be the question. The Edmonon Sun ran an interesting article this morning.

Now, I understand that public opinion is split pretty even on whether or not the Government should be giving out a $400.00 cheque to all Albertans at all, but since when should we even feel slightly guilty if we decide to keep that money and put it to a use that we would like? There seems to be more and more articles appearing in the provincial press about how Albertans who don't want or need this resource rebate should simply send it to a charity. I've read articles on how people intend to donate theirs to a political party, a University they attended, or to the worthy causes of Hurricane Rita/Katrina relief and the recent Pakistan earthquake relief funds.
While all of those causes seem worthy, I have this lingering opinion that they have opened the door now for any and all would be people looking to raise money for whatever noble cause to begin their search with this $400.00 cheque we'll all be getting in January.

I donate money that I earn from working a job, and I feel good about it. I support many causes from MS to Cancer, and my favourite charity, the Special Olympics. However, am I going to donate my resource rebate, or any part of my resource rebate? No. Should I feel guilty about it? No. And i'll tell you why, I didn't earn this resource rebate. It is exactly what it is referred to as, a "resource rebate."

If a charity wants to call me or knock on my door looking for a small amount of my hard earned money, then by all means ask away. I may even decide to give them some. But under no circumstances should any of us feel any sort of inclination to donate their resource rebate. The Premier himself said it is a gift to all Albertans. I, for one, don't plan on being a re-gifter.