Reuters reports Republican candidates battling eachother, trying to determine who's the most conservative and who's got the best conservative track record. I don't know what you people think, but I find this utterly childish. It'd be fine if they debated how conservative policies would be applied, thus sieving out the crazy ideas that can't be trumpeted as election material.
First they woo the religious right, then they lash out at eachother. Hasn't the GOP grown tired of being headed for a loss? Don't they want to put up a good fight? Most importantly, since Karl Rove seems to have quit the scene, haven't the candidates got brains working in their PR departments telling them this is a mistake after another?
Good Lord, their feet will soon lack flesh to shoot into. Or am I not getting something? Polls aside, I would be giving the Democrats higher odds anytime.
Sunday, 21 October 2007
Paedo should rot in jail
Alleged paedophile Chris Neil is not under charges in British Columbia, his home province. Well he should be. His crimes are heinous and as far as I know Canada should have a law permitting people to be prosecuted for such crimes committed abroad. And if it doesn't, it's about time it got one.
Overall this man should do his time in jail in every country where he committed his abuses. Surely spending the rest of his life in Thai, Vietnamese and Cambodian jails will be a deterrent for other similar perverts, and they'll think twice before engaging in their twisted fantasies.
And just in case he was still alive when he comes out of the last south Asian jail, there should be some good restraining orders waiting for him at home.
If this man is the one Interpol was looking for, he doesn't deserve to ever get out of jail!
Overall this man should do his time in jail in every country where he committed his abuses. Surely spending the rest of his life in Thai, Vietnamese and Cambodian jails will be a deterrent for other similar perverts, and they'll think twice before engaging in their twisted fantasies.
And just in case he was still alive when he comes out of the last south Asian jail, there should be some good restraining orders waiting for him at home.
If this man is the one Interpol was looking for, he doesn't deserve to ever get out of jail!
Saturday, 20 October 2007
Wooing radical Christians won't do GOP any good
Reuters reports Giuliani courting the religious right in the USA, just like Romney. Although this could be a good strategy to win votes in an upcoming election, it is doubtlessly a shot in the foot if long-term voter support is sought.
OK, so Giuliani got a lukewarm reception because those present couldn't face the fact he is for abortion rights, while Romney keeps getting bad looks because of his Mormon faith. It looks like the Republican candidates are trying to woo the nastiest and, among their ranks, dumbest people in the country. Despite the presence of intellectual people in the religious right galaxy it is beyond question that many of the nasties are probably unable to spot their brain from cow dung.
Although I recognize everyone's right to base their vote on whatever characteristic they deem of value in the candidate, I also advocate candidates shaping public opinion instead of just following. The extremes of the religious right's ideology do the country no good and will never do. If we followed their ideas we'd be living in caves. Fine with debating deeply rooted moral values, fine with disagreeing on them. But for Christ's sake sometimes the debate resembles two deaf men shouting at each other. Having these people's heads stuck in their backsides (here's the cause of the narrow vision or lack thereof) is of no help either. Many of them would gladly tread on universally cherished freedoms and rights. R.I.P America the land of freedoms if the religious right gets real power.
This courting of people who would love to impale anyone who differs from them leaves the centre ground open for the Democrats to conquer and secure. By the time Republicans awake to a series of defeats everywhere except their much-coveted Bible Belt it will be too late to recapture the centre.
I say the Republican candidates should take that stain on America's freedoms that is the religious right and try to wash it off by bringing it slowly towards accepting the notion of freedom and individual rights. These preachers should try to conquer people's minds rather than force their ideology on others through the government. And candidates should come across as strong and determined leaders rather than cihuahuas on a leash held by lobbies.
They should do it for the sake of their party's future.
OK, so Giuliani got a lukewarm reception because those present couldn't face the fact he is for abortion rights, while Romney keeps getting bad looks because of his Mormon faith. It looks like the Republican candidates are trying to woo the nastiest and, among their ranks, dumbest people in the country. Despite the presence of intellectual people in the religious right galaxy it is beyond question that many of the nasties are probably unable to spot their brain from cow dung.
Although I recognize everyone's right to base their vote on whatever characteristic they deem of value in the candidate, I also advocate candidates shaping public opinion instead of just following. The extremes of the religious right's ideology do the country no good and will never do. If we followed their ideas we'd be living in caves. Fine with debating deeply rooted moral values, fine with disagreeing on them. But for Christ's sake sometimes the debate resembles two deaf men shouting at each other. Having these people's heads stuck in their backsides (here's the cause of the narrow vision or lack thereof) is of no help either. Many of them would gladly tread on universally cherished freedoms and rights. R.I.P America the land of freedoms if the religious right gets real power.
This courting of people who would love to impale anyone who differs from them leaves the centre ground open for the Democrats to conquer and secure. By the time Republicans awake to a series of defeats everywhere except their much-coveted Bible Belt it will be too late to recapture the centre.
I say the Republican candidates should take that stain on America's freedoms that is the religious right and try to wash it off by bringing it slowly towards accepting the notion of freedom and individual rights. These preachers should try to conquer people's minds rather than force their ideology on others through the government. And candidates should come across as strong and determined leaders rather than cihuahuas on a leash held by lobbies.
They should do it for the sake of their party's future.
Parti Quebecois gone bananas
Outrageous, discriminatory, nuts as a squirrel's dinner: defining the recent Parti Quebecois proposal to create basically two tiers of citizenship requires no big effort.
Understandably, the PQ platform consists mainly of defending the French language and getting Quebec as close to independence from anglophone Canada. What makes their agenda unacceptable for anyone with a pinch of salt in their head is their aim to cut through people's rights with a chainsaw. From Laws 101 and 104 (if I remember correctly), which all but ban the right to choose an anglophone education, now the PQ goes to the lengths of creating a Quebec citizenship and barring non-francophones from any kind of political participation, including the tabling of petitions at the National Assembly.
Firstly, there is no such thing as a provincial citizenship: either you are a Canadian or not. If Quebec wants its citizenship then it has to leave the Federation, and it doesn't seem likely.
Secondly, if they are so heavy on Quebec values then equality must be among them. What they are proposing goes against their own platform, since discriminating on the basis of language is a form of racism.
Thirdly, if the PQ is so aiming to avoid the formation of ghettos and separate communities among immigrants by demanding they assimilate Quebec culture, proposing this nonsense law creates a government-sanctioned ghetto: non-francos denied every political right in their own country.
Although I doubt this will ever pass, it is a stain on the PQ and, thanks to the media attention, on the reputation of Quebec and Canada as a whole. In a country that prides itself of its multiculturalism, open-mindedness and excellent immigration record the existence of such proposals is an unacceptable offence. Pauline Marois offends me, decent Quebecers, Canada and anyone who places any kind of value on equality and rights. I hope she gets a nasty rash.
This reeks of racism, and I would be curious to see how well it would go down with Canadian and international courts and human rights watchdogs. I'd love to see the PQ investigated for this, it can't be legal!
I have a proposal. If the Federation applied the same rule for English anyone without a good knowledge of English would be denied election to the Parliament in Ottawa. This would rid us of Stephane Dion overnight. Who would we laugh at, then?
Understandably, the PQ platform consists mainly of defending the French language and getting Quebec as close to independence from anglophone Canada. What makes their agenda unacceptable for anyone with a pinch of salt in their head is their aim to cut through people's rights with a chainsaw. From Laws 101 and 104 (if I remember correctly), which all but ban the right to choose an anglophone education, now the PQ goes to the lengths of creating a Quebec citizenship and barring non-francophones from any kind of political participation, including the tabling of petitions at the National Assembly.
Firstly, there is no such thing as a provincial citizenship: either you are a Canadian or not. If Quebec wants its citizenship then it has to leave the Federation, and it doesn't seem likely.
Secondly, if they are so heavy on Quebec values then equality must be among them. What they are proposing goes against their own platform, since discriminating on the basis of language is a form of racism.
Thirdly, if the PQ is so aiming to avoid the formation of ghettos and separate communities among immigrants by demanding they assimilate Quebec culture, proposing this nonsense law creates a government-sanctioned ghetto: non-francos denied every political right in their own country.
Although I doubt this will ever pass, it is a stain on the PQ and, thanks to the media attention, on the reputation of Quebec and Canada as a whole. In a country that prides itself of its multiculturalism, open-mindedness and excellent immigration record the existence of such proposals is an unacceptable offence. Pauline Marois offends me, decent Quebecers, Canada and anyone who places any kind of value on equality and rights. I hope she gets a nasty rash.
This reeks of racism, and I would be curious to see how well it would go down with Canadian and international courts and human rights watchdogs. I'd love to see the PQ investigated for this, it can't be legal!
I have a proposal. If the Federation applied the same rule for English anyone without a good knowledge of English would be denied election to the Parliament in Ottawa. This would rid us of Stephane Dion overnight. Who would we laugh at, then?
Thursday, 18 October 2007
On mores and wasted wages
The BBC reports that protests in Bolivia involve the trashing of bars and brothels. The accusation: they sell alcohol to minors and distract the males of the community (not surprising).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7049155.stm
Am I the only one to be amused at the irony of all this? With our civilized societies having to frequently face underage drinking (and related health and safety problems) and overt prostitution, those we deem to be our own backyard (and bit*h) can sometimes show a little more mores, albeit not when it comes to protecting property.
On another note, the news of members of the new advisory panel on Afghanistan getting stupidly high wages (close to a grand a day) beggars belief. This is an unacceptable waste of money, considering also that these people likely have another job and another wage. With the course for Afghanistan mostly determined, what is the purpose of this panel? Possibly the purpose is to come up with the conclusion that Canada can't withdraw anytime soon. This is the harsh reality, despite the Liberals advocating the "run" tactic. But with such wages, I doubt the outcome could be different anyway.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7049155.stm
Am I the only one to be amused at the irony of all this? With our civilized societies having to frequently face underage drinking (and related health and safety problems) and overt prostitution, those we deem to be our own backyard (and bit*h) can sometimes show a little more mores, albeit not when it comes to protecting property.
On another note, the news of members of the new advisory panel on Afghanistan getting stupidly high wages (close to a grand a day) beggars belief. This is an unacceptable waste of money, considering also that these people likely have another job and another wage. With the course for Afghanistan mostly determined, what is the purpose of this panel? Possibly the purpose is to come up with the conclusion that Canada can't withdraw anytime soon. This is the harsh reality, despite the Liberals advocating the "run" tactic. But with such wages, I doubt the outcome could be different anyway.
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
Liberals are done with
Dion ordered his party to let the Throne Speech pass, signifying his downfall. His performance was dismally uninspiring. Following that, his statements such as "I want to become Prime Minister" and "it worked for [Harper], it will work for me", used to justify the Liberal's abstention just testify to his weakness and ultimate political ineptness.
Come on, I'm no politician and I know all too well that such phrases would make me the country's laughing stock. Poor Dion.
The Liberals want to bring the government down on a confidence issue, as my friend Tim aptly remarked, so that they can choose what the election will be fought about. This means the Conservative government now has the chance to bring in the legislation Canadians want and the Liberals can't stomach but can't vote down lest they completely lose people's trust.
The wall is broken, now send the right troops through the breach: the bills that the CPC and the people of Canada feel strongly positive about. Once those are through, go for the bills calling on Conservative principles but don't have such a broad approval, bills that should trigger an election, on issues the CPC can really shape public opinion on.
From today the Liberals will only get hammered more and more. Bring it on.
Come on, I'm no politician and I know all too well that such phrases would make me the country's laughing stock. Poor Dion.
The Liberals want to bring the government down on a confidence issue, as my friend Tim aptly remarked, so that they can choose what the election will be fought about. This means the Conservative government now has the chance to bring in the legislation Canadians want and the Liberals can't stomach but can't vote down lest they completely lose people's trust.
The wall is broken, now send the right troops through the breach: the bills that the CPC and the people of Canada feel strongly positive about. Once those are through, go for the bills calling on Conservative principles but don't have such a broad approval, bills that should trigger an election, on issues the CPC can really shape public opinion on.
From today the Liberals will only get hammered more and more. Bring it on.
Father of DNA loses his marbles
James Watson has come out with scandalous assertions that black people are less intelligent than whites. He's not new to scandal, having at some point said that if genetic analysis revealed the homosexual nature of the soon-to-be-born baby the mother should have the right to abort, among others.
If this guy ever claimed to have discovered DNA on his own I would know he stole someone else's notes. Intelligence comes from nurture, and predisposition to have more white matter than others is just a small added bonus. Same goes for other character traits such as music skills or political leaning. This kind of nonsense reeks of prejudice and ignorance, and if he knew half of what we expect him to know he would be the first in line advocating racial equality.
Thank God Watson isn't a graduate of my alma mater, UCL, otherwise I would be very ashamed to share something with this man. On the other hand, he might be the proof that in old age we tend to lose our marbles.
If this guy ever claimed to have discovered DNA on his own I would know he stole someone else's notes. Intelligence comes from nurture, and predisposition to have more white matter than others is just a small added bonus. Same goes for other character traits such as music skills or political leaning. This kind of nonsense reeks of prejudice and ignorance, and if he knew half of what we expect him to know he would be the first in line advocating racial equality.
Thank God Watson isn't a graduate of my alma mater, UCL, otherwise I would be very ashamed to share something with this man. On the other hand, he might be the proof that in old age we tend to lose our marbles.
Tuesday, 16 October 2007
Throne speech - some big gambles
A very good Throne speech, with points on arctic sovereignty, continuing the effort in Afghanistan, watching over the use of aid, a strong focus on federalism, fostering Canadian unity through free trade and government funding for healthcare and social services.
Visual identification of voters - Harper got quite a rap on the topic, why did he bring it up again?
The focus on the middle class is a core Tory value, but the concern about rising higher education costs and affordable housing left me quite bewildered, especially the former.
One single crime bill is a daring move, possibly trying to cash in on the momentum if the Liberals vote in favor of the speech - those measures would die off if introduced one by one. However Harper here is really rolling the dice. The mention of youth crime will definitely anger the Liberals.
Security certificates are another big hot potato and I disagree that such measures should be introduced, terrorism can't be fought by lowering ourselves to that level.
Kyoto is dead and no amount of wishful thinking can bring it back, but the cuts envisioned by the speech are a commendable target. If the Liberals criticize the speech for ditching Kyoto, in the face of more ambitious targets and the introduction of real measures to tackle climate change, such as the free trade in emissions, they will shoot themselves in the foot.
The water strategy will have to take into account the contribution of the USA to the pollution of the Great Lakes, which isn't a small problem!
As for the product quality and safety standards, I say "About blipping time!". No-one advocates the health&safety madness the UK has, but jeez there has to be some benchmark high enough, and safeguards for consumer safety.
So much focus on First Nations. Is this really the courting of traditionally Liberal voters?
The debate will be interesting, Harper is playing with fire imho. The speech is very Conservative, and it really testifies for Harper's political and ideological integrity. Whether this will win him an election is another matter.
Visual identification of voters - Harper got quite a rap on the topic, why did he bring it up again?
The focus on the middle class is a core Tory value, but the concern about rising higher education costs and affordable housing left me quite bewildered, especially the former.
One single crime bill is a daring move, possibly trying to cash in on the momentum if the Liberals vote in favor of the speech - those measures would die off if introduced one by one. However Harper here is really rolling the dice. The mention of youth crime will definitely anger the Liberals.
Security certificates are another big hot potato and I disagree that such measures should be introduced, terrorism can't be fought by lowering ourselves to that level.
Kyoto is dead and no amount of wishful thinking can bring it back, but the cuts envisioned by the speech are a commendable target. If the Liberals criticize the speech for ditching Kyoto, in the face of more ambitious targets and the introduction of real measures to tackle climate change, such as the free trade in emissions, they will shoot themselves in the foot.
The water strategy will have to take into account the contribution of the USA to the pollution of the Great Lakes, which isn't a small problem!
As for the product quality and safety standards, I say "About blipping time!". No-one advocates the health&safety madness the UK has, but jeez there has to be some benchmark high enough, and safeguards for consumer safety.
So much focus on First Nations. Is this really the courting of traditionally Liberal voters?
The debate will be interesting, Harper is playing with fire imho. The speech is very Conservative, and it really testifies for Harper's political and ideological integrity. Whether this will win him an election is another matter.
Greens make me laugh
A good morning laugh is the right start for the day, and today was Liz May's turn. She self-righteously proclaims that Canadians want to oust Harper and that they want a leader who keeps his promises. The Green party then goes on to unveil their humongous policy document, which can be summarized in just a few words: the Government will take over your lives and you will have to like it.
As per textbook statist behavior, not only the Greens allege that the Government needs to take over everything and tell people how to live and how to behave (anyone disagreeing make some noise!) but they also arrogantly assume they can read people's minds or impose their own ideology.
FYI Liz, polls show the Tories on the rise, and the fact that a minority government has managed to function for nearly two years is a sign of democracy. As a matter of fact, this Government did get things done. You say "I have faith in democracy". I have it too, and I happen to admire Harper for ensuring real democracy, where a really heterogenous majority agrees policy.
This is democracy, and people will realize it. But keep the comments coming, Liz, I need morning laughs.
As per textbook statist behavior, not only the Greens allege that the Government needs to take over everything and tell people how to live and how to behave (anyone disagreeing make some noise!) but they also arrogantly assume they can read people's minds or impose their own ideology.
FYI Liz, polls show the Tories on the rise, and the fact that a minority government has managed to function for nearly two years is a sign of democracy. As a matter of fact, this Government did get things done. You say "I have faith in democracy". I have it too, and I happen to admire Harper for ensuring real democracy, where a really heterogenous majority agrees policy.
This is democracy, and people will realize it. But keep the comments coming, Liz, I need morning laughs.
Monday, 15 October 2007
Leave Casey alone
Whatever we might think of Stephen Harper, his behavior over the Bill Casey matter hasn't been very appropriate. The news of Casey's CPC riding association wanting to field him as a Conservative candidate further fuels the debate about Harper being a controlling person.
Rebels have always existed and will always exist. Their integrity frequently goes unappreciated. As the Leader of the Party, Harper had the right to take action against a rebel, which can also include not allowing him to stand in his riding as a Tory. However, Harper didn't need to keep hammering it in.
Now that the local association is rebelling as a whole, Harper has a tough choice. Backing down would imply weakness and scarce control of the party, not good on the eve of a delicate Throne Speech debate and several important bills coming through Parliament. The alternative would be to say openly that Casey should run as an independent if he is confident of winning the riding, leaving the choice of Conservative candidate (or lack thereof) entirely to the riding association.
As many have remarked, Harper should have been smarter.
Rebels have always existed and will always exist. Their integrity frequently goes unappreciated. As the Leader of the Party, Harper had the right to take action against a rebel, which can also include not allowing him to stand in his riding as a Tory. However, Harper didn't need to keep hammering it in.
Now that the local association is rebelling as a whole, Harper has a tough choice. Backing down would imply weakness and scarce control of the party, not good on the eve of a delicate Throne Speech debate and several important bills coming through Parliament. The alternative would be to say openly that Casey should run as an independent if he is confident of winning the riding, leaving the choice of Conservative candidate (or lack thereof) entirely to the riding association.
As many have remarked, Harper should have been smarter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)