Canada survived the election. Why not, we're certainly in practice, the third election in seven years, and the good news is that there will NOT be another Federal election for 4 years. Maybe that's the best news.
The Conservatives and Stephen Harper now have a majority government and a mandate to do with Canada as they will, not to be hindered, stymied, threatened or made ineffective as they so piously pleaded in their previous minority status whilst they ruled.
Throughout the campaign, with canned, planned rhetoric void of fire but hinting of brimstone, they attempted to instil fear in the hearts of the electorate at the possibility of yet another minority and potential coalition conspiracies galore. Mission accomplished. Please, now, with that majority, please do not repeat that canned speech one more time lest you drive us all around the bend, never to vote again.
The Bloc Quebecois was wiped out, left with four seats, having occupied those many fine leather chairs in the House of Commons for far too long --and what other destiny could be more appropriate for a naval-gazing, regional, separatist, non-representative Canada-destroying party? Gilles Duceppe, their fierce leader failed to survive the NDP onslaught in Quebec, and he is resigning. From what he is resigning we know not, for without party status, nothing remains but indignant whispers and a few crocodile tears.
Smiling Jack Layton, the upstart fiery cane-wielding New Democratic leader was the real story for the night; wounded or not, Jack and the NDP swept Quebec at the expense of the Liberals and Conservatives to become the 'official' opposition with over a hundred seats. Heady stuff for Jack. He gave a speech that was befitting a Prime Minister. Blew the Liberals and Michael Ignatieff out of the water like a surfacing whale. That was good news for him.
The bad news is that as official opposition facing a strong majority Conservative government across the floor, even with 104 seats he probably has less power now than he did when the government was a whining minority suffering the whims of aggravated opposition ---and Jack was often deal-maker of choice.
Hastily scribbled on the back cover of the Liberal Red Book is Michael Ignatieff's resignation; he will likely to return to academia---and Justin Trudeau, yes, the son of Pierre Elliott T. himself --is already considering acquisition of that broken leadership and it's broken toys. Go figure. That didn't take long.
Thing is, with the central-left Liberals it's either take on Justin and die or try to reinvent themselves, lick the wounds, and maintain silence and dignity if at all possible, without trying to alienate the electorate any further than they apparently already have .
Bottom line, left with only a paltry 35 seats, for the Liberals, it's either that or conjure up a leaderless merge with the Leftist NDP, Bob Rae seems to like that idea, visions of sugar plums at 24 Sussex Drive dance in his head, but the crabby old boy's Red Tie Power club has 4 years of vacation ahead of them to figure out how to politely remove Iggy from the seat of power and put Justin in charge without offending Bob anyway. Oh, tell them not to bother; Iggy resigned today. That was easy.
Way out in the greenest part of B.C, out on the Saanich-Gulf Islands , a place I always wanted to visit since it's always green on Saltspring, there's Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party, who made her own history by being the first Green member of Parliament, let's repeat that, the first elected member of the Green Party of Canada to be sent to Ottawa. Watch out, boys.
Listen up, Stephen. Now Elizabeth can storm the leader's debates without the stigma of being the only party leader without a seat. Now she has one. and it's a nice Green one just like the dozens conveniently vacated by the Bloc for this special occasion, and the point is, --shall we recall,-- she whupped a Conservative to get it too. Feisty girl. She is going to restore civility to the House of Commons single-handed.
That's good news. Canadians are tired of watching children at play, and by the way, Canadians are entering dangerous territory with a government that not only prorogued parliament twice, but was also ruled in contempt of parliament. How soon we forget? uh-uh...Will the majority status "improve" that marginal tendency to dictate? What shall we have, a majority anarchy?
So, that's the bad news? That's the pointed question. Maybe the bad news really is that we're just facing another 4 years of the same old political partisan gamesmanship.
As my brilliant friend John says, "We shall see what we shall see". Just don't hold your breath while you wait.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Showing posts with label Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
Campaign 2011: Off to the Races...and ( yawn.....)
After some minor distractions, we at Incoming Bytes are once again compelled to discover that the political campaigns in Canada's election are in full swing. The fact is, nothing exciting has happened. An election? Really??
The campaigns are already half over, so now what ? Nothing is new, or different, but should we expect it to be? The Canadian electorate has a right to be skeptical.
The glorious "Corporate-Approved" television debate was held sans Elizabeth May, the Green Party leader, but that didn't seem to make any difference; the one-on-one's were not exciting anyway, the counter-attacks were bland to non-existent, overall, it was dull and yawn-worthy; the participants performed much as were expected.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the Conservative (minority) leader now wants a majority and is offering the saving of Canada from the coalition and the separatists and other terrible probabilities, and is insisting a majority will result in better government too.
But will it? Not likely. Is anyone really convinced? Isn't that fear-mongering? It doesn't work.
Michael Ignatieff, the intellect PM wannabe poo-poos the idea of a Conservative majority, saying that Harper et al cannot be trusted. He's probably right, for although all politicians seem trustworthy while campaigning, no politicians can be trusted once they are ELECTED. There is a subtle difference. The Liberal fortunes in this election are questionable. Polls aren't being nice..that's it.
The question the electorate really should be asking is:
" WHO can be trusted?"
The answer must be " Nobody" ; --and certainly not a "Michael Ignatieff Liberal " government either.
Liberals promised to protect Canada's Universal Health Care system-- (well, doesn't EVERYBODY PROMISE ? ) --but previous Liberal Governments reportedly hijacked a stash of cash from health care and U I to help defeat the deficit back in Paul Martin /Chretien days, balance the budget, play games, fun for all was had, --downloading costs to the provincial governments. Private clinics seem to be encouraged, popping up here and there....how cute.
The thin edge of ( the USA private health care health-care-only for money system ) wedge was smacked into the skulls of Canadians ...imagine that. Shall we trust Iggy? No. Shall we trust Stephen, who is on record as being pro-private enterprise in the field of health ? No.
There is little wonder Gilles Duceppe and the BLOC Quebecois plunk themselves down in plush leather chairs located in our Federal House of Commons, the better to keep an eye on federal scoundrels.
Nice office.... C'mon, Gilles,,, you got into the debate as a special interest representative, throwing red herrings around left and right, confusing the issue, so why can't you spread candidates far and wide across Canada so you would be a REAL Federal political party, and some people might even be tempted to vote for you? What's the matter, you afraid of losing ? We think so, but in the Big Bloc book, it's better to sit and whine, isn't it, and NEVER have to actually prove you have a better idea, a better system. Right. Form your own country. Ever heard of:
"Those who flee oppression oft' flee to oppression of their own?"
Stranger things have happened. What if Gilles did win a majority?
Being on location in Ottawa all the time, the Bloc can complain, promote the removal of not only Federal funds, by blackmail or otherwise, but help malcontents, even encourage in-house traitors to remove the very Province of Quebec itself from Canada..
....*alas.. Gilles and Co. are always content to decorate debates, sit on comfy leather, complain, and threaten another referendum.
A few tries later later Gilles has discovered it's quite a lot of fun and more profitable to blackmail Ottawa for big bucks and keep milking the glorious and generous Canadian Cow.
Imagine that. No fear of majority a la Gilles.
It seems that Jack Layton, the New Democratic leader, unhindered by his recent surgery and EXCELLENT medical treatments via the Universal Canadian Health system has recovered quite nicely ---whether it was a real hip replacement or not.....or just a little bit of metal, they say, not a real hip replacement, no matter what sis said. Just a slight family misunderstanding, it was.
Everyone says Jack did very well in the "official debates" ....and he continues to travel the country, recovering, shaking hands, smiling and laughing...and progressing surprisingly well in the polls too. Go figure. The Liberals and Michael are nervous, not surprisingly.
As for Elizabeth May, being excluded from the debate doesn't seem to have harmed her positive attitude at all. She hasn't got any "seats" yet, but she's got lots of Green and a pretty green platform to stand upon while she watches with interest, deciding which of the parties she should really consider a full merge with. Go figure... "Only in Canada", you say? (Yawn......)
That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.
The campaigns are already half over, so now what ? Nothing is new, or different, but should we expect it to be? The Canadian electorate has a right to be skeptical.
The glorious "Corporate-Approved" television debate was held sans Elizabeth May, the Green Party leader, but that didn't seem to make any difference; the one-on-one's were not exciting anyway, the counter-attacks were bland to non-existent, overall, it was dull and yawn-worthy; the participants performed much as were expected.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the Conservative (minority) leader now wants a majority and is offering the saving of Canada from the coalition and the separatists and other terrible probabilities, and is insisting a majority will result in better government too.
But will it? Not likely. Is anyone really convinced? Isn't that fear-mongering? It doesn't work.
Michael Ignatieff, the intellect PM wannabe poo-poos the idea of a Conservative majority, saying that Harper et al cannot be trusted. He's probably right, for although all politicians seem trustworthy while campaigning, no politicians can be trusted once they are ELECTED. There is a subtle difference. The Liberal fortunes in this election are questionable. Polls aren't being nice..that's it.
The question the electorate really should be asking is:
" WHO can be trusted?"
The answer must be " Nobody" ; --and certainly not a "Michael Ignatieff Liberal " government either.
Liberals promised to protect Canada's Universal Health Care system-- (well, doesn't EVERYBODY PROMISE ? ) --but previous Liberal Governments reportedly hijacked a stash of cash from health care and U I to help defeat the deficit back in Paul Martin /Chretien days, balance the budget, play games, fun for all was had, --downloading costs to the provincial governments. Private clinics seem to be encouraged, popping up here and there....how cute.
The thin edge of ( the USA private health care health-care-only for money system ) wedge was smacked into the skulls of Canadians ...imagine that. Shall we trust Iggy? No. Shall we trust Stephen, who is on record as being pro-private enterprise in the field of health ? No.
There is little wonder Gilles Duceppe and the BLOC Quebecois plunk themselves down in plush leather chairs located in our Federal House of Commons, the better to keep an eye on federal scoundrels.
Nice office.... C'mon, Gilles,,, you got into the debate as a special interest representative, throwing red herrings around left and right, confusing the issue, so why can't you spread candidates far and wide across Canada so you would be a REAL Federal political party, and some people might even be tempted to vote for you? What's the matter, you afraid of losing ? We think so, but in the Big Bloc book, it's better to sit and whine, isn't it, and NEVER have to actually prove you have a better idea, a better system. Right. Form your own country. Ever heard of:
"Those who flee oppression oft' flee to oppression of their own?"
Stranger things have happened. What if Gilles did win a majority?
Being on location in Ottawa all the time, the Bloc can complain, promote the removal of not only Federal funds, by blackmail or otherwise, but help malcontents, even encourage in-house traitors to remove the very Province of Quebec itself from Canada..
....*alas.. Gilles and Co. are always content to decorate debates, sit on comfy leather, complain, and threaten another referendum.
A few tries later later Gilles has discovered it's quite a lot of fun and more profitable to blackmail Ottawa for big bucks and keep milking the glorious and generous Canadian Cow.
Imagine that. No fear of majority a la Gilles.
It seems that Jack Layton, the New Democratic leader, unhindered by his recent surgery and EXCELLENT medical treatments via the Universal Canadian Health system has recovered quite nicely ---whether it was a real hip replacement or not.....or just a little bit of metal, they say, not a real hip replacement, no matter what sis said. Just a slight family misunderstanding, it was.
Everyone says Jack did very well in the "official debates" ....and he continues to travel the country, recovering, shaking hands, smiling and laughing...and progressing surprisingly well in the polls too. Go figure. The Liberals and Michael are nervous, not surprisingly.
As for Elizabeth May, being excluded from the debate doesn't seem to have harmed her positive attitude at all. She hasn't got any "seats" yet, but she's got lots of Green and a pretty green platform to stand upon while she watches with interest, deciding which of the parties she should really consider a full merge with. Go figure... "Only in Canada", you say? (Yawn......)
That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Will a Federal Election stop Re-branding, and Improve the Entertainment Value of Government?
As a mildly-entertained observer of politics but a dedicated voter in Canada, a few days ago I was a tad annoyed to hear that the "Government of Canada" was making noises about re-branding itself as "the Harper Government".
My previous post expressed a certain dislike for such egotistical shenanigans by politicians, as older, honest generations might gently label them. Such tricks are also known as "creative embellishments" as the herd of "politically-correct" talking heads in Ottawa might so aptly name them. Not so fast, let's clean out the Rideau Canal, we have new stinkers going down fast.
Let us politely call the latest political tricks what they are; self-serving, opportunistic and distasteful symptoms of a disregard for democracy, and an abuse of power. "Quite natural, it is, since power corrupts; it seems we have quite a lot of that going around, in the world. " That's always added tongue-in-cheek by politicians just in case the next government that may be a different variety with cheek-to-cheek affiliations gets caught with it's fingers in the cookie jar next round.
That does sound like the opposition talking, doesn't it.... but no matter.
Time is of the essence; a major Federal budget is due in the house shortly. Would that be called a "Harper budget" now? A Harper election? An Ignatieff opportunity for a vote of non-confidence and a bold Layton Government agreement to prevent the precipitation of an immediate Harper election? Opinions vary, depending on who is blackmailing who, whether adequate political deals are made to please the "Duceppe Bloc" and other such "branded conditions" are met, shopping lists are filled, etc. etc.
Regardless, to make the question even more visible "in your portfolio", a.k.a. "in your face", now the non-partisan "Speaker of the House" presiding in the House of Commons, always dedicated, suitably generic and non-partisan, has politely ruled against the Conservative Government of Canada (a.k.a. the wannabe Harper Government) on two matters of protocol, which everyone knows is "the standard, supposed-to-be-correct, and generally-accepted " method of doing official Government things by official government people in official public office.
To wit, interpretation of the Speaker's announcement might be: "The dance is over, there shall be no altering of documents or last minute changes of committee recommendations on typed documents even if done by hand in black ballpoint pen or black marker, no misleading the house, and no diddling with electioneering funds via "In-Outs", "up-downs-down-towns" or any other transient transfer of funny-money.
The reaction off-camera to his speech may really have been wink -wink , "where's the money you were diddling with last time, you big tease, you did it too," wink- wink yadda, yadda ".
It really no longer matters what the details are. The real fact of the matter is that both rulings announced by the Honourable Speaker suggest that the "ruling" party may be no longer ruling by the rules of democracy, (to put it politely, as interpreted by the opposition ) but by personal preference, personal style, and personal edict. The spirit of democracy has been offended and sullied.
Here is the question of the day to ponder: Which government is doing those naughty things? How do we even know we have a government since we cannot trust the news? Choose one. Do we have a minority special-interests- big business government? An old -time "Government of Canada" like old Dief used to run? A new-fangled minority "Harper government" ? A minority dictatorship ? --Or is it just an out-of-control minority anarchy, a P.E.T. "fuddle duddle" moment --where each elected Minister does exactly what he or she wishes, once firmly ensconced in an oaken seat of power?
I couldn't resist asking that question.
Now I have to ask another pointed question; Does that announcement and apparent confirmation of a breach of propriety on behalf of your elected representatives mean winter-weary Canadians all are duty-bound to hold another Federal election at a cost of $350Million which is going to come out of the pocket of financially-stressed taxpayers already fed up to the ears with elections first, politics second, and politicians third, regardless of order or lack thereof?
What is this "election" going to prove? That we can't allow crooked stuff (a.k.a. creative finagling, ) to go on in Ottawa? Really? Let us roll on the floor in laughter.
Will an election stop the re-branding of the Government of Canada entirely, and restore stiff-upper-lip dignity to Ottawa, or will it merely provoke a convenient "brand change" , sell tickets to a different circus, which will do little but waste time, money and energy better spent elsewhere?
Will an election result in a majority government? Not likely, especially now with the latest revelations, opposition accusations, and atmosphere of finger-pointing. Clearly the opposition has forgotten previous gaffes such as Ad Scam et al, but Canadians have long memories, and there are many dry skulls in many closets best left undisturbed by opposition types lest they come back to bite.
Maybe it's time to start thinking outside of the political ballot box instead.
With our "new improved " judicial system, how about a nice judicial "slap on the wrist", a resignation of the minister(s) responsible, withdrawal of their fat pensions, an apology by the Official Government of Canada, replacement of all and any missing funds, real jail time in some of those new penitentiaries if criminal activities are involved, and how about a Universal promise by all parties to never prorogue Parliament again, while we're at it, no matter who is found to be G.U. I. C.P. (Governing under the influence of corruption and power) -- and just get on with the business of good governance?
Will "good governance" happen just because we make Stephen sit on the other side of the House of Commons behind between Elizabeth and Jack, one row in front of Gilles, who will continue to whisper sweet nothings in his ear ? No.
Is the election of another batch of new, inexperienced, and equally foolish politicians in power the answer? Clearly not. Is the status quo acceptable? Clearly not. Will an election solve anything? NO.
Clearly, we need to rebuild our political system. It is broken. There can be no productive governance with a constant struggle for television air time to grandstand and a chance to show off, calling down political opponents in "polite language" to avoid offending the decorum of the House. Someone is always in opposition, causing problems, wasting time, and embarrassing whoever happens to be unfortunate enough to be leading or making decisions.
Is it a profitable and logical system of checks and balances? No. The existing system is more like a grade IV class studying earthworms. Dump them on the floor. "Worms, go east! " the leader yells.
The opposition points fingers and says "The Honorable member is incompetent, Mr. Speaker, they're going every which way!"
In other observations, there can be no majority government made up of politicians that do not honestly represent the people of Canada. Canadians have no desire for other forms of government such as a well-coiffed monarchy, fancy wedding-of-the-century coming up or not, and there is absolutely no desire for a branded fascist state, a branded dictatorship or a corrupt ideological American-style Republic, no matter how many banana trees may be promised to bloom.
There is also clearly no room in Canada's Parliament for self-serving political parties clearly bent on the destruction and fragmentation of Canada. The Bloc Quebecois offers NO representation to Canadians outside of the Province of Quebec, so what business do they have in the Federal House of Commons? Run candidates all across Canada like a real political party, or stop whining, and do not show up in Parliament demanding a seat. You are fragmenting the vote, get it? Surprise, surprise, you may even garner a few cross-Canada votes, considering the nature of the existing choices being displayed to date.
What are our ELECTED representatives thinking with? Perhaps the reader can ponder that question. If you come up with the inevitable answer "Not much", you win three more weeks of winter. Welcome to Canada.
The sad fact of the matter is, it is time to dump "Party Politics" entirely in favour of a system of elected representation from ALL Federal ridings, devoted individuals that can be replaced every four years by voters --or at any time if necessary, and fired just as quickly should they decide to misbehave, "alter documents", involve themselves in questionable stupidity, or try to remove parts of the Country known as Canada.
Gone immediately would be individuals attempting to blackmail OR commandeer The Government of Canada. The controlling factor for a representative House could be a similarly elected, non-partisan experienced Senate.
Gone immediately would be loose cannons attempting to gain fame and fortune by re-branding the Government of Canada as "the Argyle Sweater Team", or the "-I- won't-run-a closed Dictatorship " team.
Gone equally, would be behind-the-scenes manipulators, as "Jack's Improved Government, " and " Better Greenies " which would become even less relevant, and would certainly not be allowed to become "brands" of government. No government would be allowed to consume the meager pensions of the growing senior population.
We have a better idea, let's actually DO it. Let's get back to work, forget about childish, ideological political partisan gamesmanship, and for once and for all, be ADULT about the job at hand. We all know governing takes time, intelligence and dedication. Governing takes honesty. Government takes cooperation. How about let's actually try and surprise Canadians with real governing for a change?
If we MUST have an election, Lord, please grant us the wisdom to put MATURE people in Ottawa that actually care more about poverty and families and hard-working seniors than they do about Big Dirty Oil, Big Business, and the overly fat political pensions paid for a couple years of name-calling, disruptive childishness, and pointing fingers across the House floor. Let us not forget ravaging the free perk barrel in Ottawa.
"Only in Canada."
"Good grief".
My previous post expressed a certain dislike for such egotistical shenanigans by politicians, as older, honest generations might gently label them. Such tricks are also known as "creative embellishments" as the herd of "politically-correct" talking heads in Ottawa might so aptly name them. Not so fast, let's clean out the Rideau Canal, we have new stinkers going down fast.
Let us politely call the latest political tricks what they are; self-serving, opportunistic and distasteful symptoms of a disregard for democracy, and an abuse of power. "Quite natural, it is, since power corrupts; it seems we have quite a lot of that going around, in the world. " That's always added tongue-in-cheek by politicians just in case the next government that may be a different variety with cheek-to-cheek affiliations gets caught with it's fingers in the cookie jar next round.
That does sound like the opposition talking, doesn't it.... but no matter.
Time is of the essence; a major Federal budget is due in the house shortly. Would that be called a "Harper budget" now? A Harper election? An Ignatieff opportunity for a vote of non-confidence and a bold Layton Government agreement to prevent the precipitation of an immediate Harper election? Opinions vary, depending on who is blackmailing who, whether adequate political deals are made to please the "Duceppe Bloc" and other such "branded conditions" are met, shopping lists are filled, etc. etc.
Regardless, to make the question even more visible "in your portfolio", a.k.a. "in your face", now the non-partisan "Speaker of the House" presiding in the House of Commons, always dedicated, suitably generic and non-partisan, has politely ruled against the Conservative Government of Canada (a.k.a. the wannabe Harper Government) on two matters of protocol, which everyone knows is "the standard, supposed-to-be-correct, and generally-accepted " method of doing official Government things by official government people in official public office.
To wit, interpretation of the Speaker's announcement might be: "The dance is over, there shall be no altering of documents or last minute changes of committee recommendations on typed documents even if done by hand in black ballpoint pen or black marker, no misleading the house, and no diddling with electioneering funds via "In-Outs", "up-downs-down-towns" or any other transient transfer of funny-money.
The reaction off-camera to his speech may really have been wink -wink , "where's the money you were diddling with last time, you big tease, you did it too," wink- wink yadda, yadda ".
It really no longer matters what the details are. The real fact of the matter is that both rulings announced by the Honourable Speaker suggest that the "ruling" party may be no longer ruling by the rules of democracy, (to put it politely, as interpreted by the opposition ) but by personal preference, personal style, and personal edict. The spirit of democracy has been offended and sullied.
Here is the question of the day to ponder: Which government is doing those naughty things? How do we even know we have a government since we cannot trust the news? Choose one. Do we have a minority special-interests- big business government? An old -time "Government of Canada" like old Dief used to run? A new-fangled minority "Harper government" ? A minority dictatorship ? --Or is it just an out-of-control minority anarchy, a P.E.T. "fuddle duddle" moment --where each elected Minister does exactly what he or she wishes, once firmly ensconced in an oaken seat of power?
I couldn't resist asking that question.
Now I have to ask another pointed question; Does that announcement and apparent confirmation of a breach of propriety on behalf of your elected representatives mean winter-weary Canadians all are duty-bound to hold another Federal election at a cost of $350Million which is going to come out of the pocket of financially-stressed taxpayers already fed up to the ears with elections first, politics second, and politicians third, regardless of order or lack thereof?
What is this "election" going to prove? That we can't allow crooked stuff (a.k.a. creative finagling, ) to go on in Ottawa? Really? Let us roll on the floor in laughter.
Will an election stop the re-branding of the Government of Canada entirely, and restore stiff-upper-lip dignity to Ottawa, or will it merely provoke a convenient "brand change" , sell tickets to a different circus, which will do little but waste time, money and energy better spent elsewhere?
Will an election result in a majority government? Not likely, especially now with the latest revelations, opposition accusations, and atmosphere of finger-pointing. Clearly the opposition has forgotten previous gaffes such as Ad Scam et al, but Canadians have long memories, and there are many dry skulls in many closets best left undisturbed by opposition types lest they come back to bite.
Maybe it's time to start thinking outside of the political ballot box instead.
With our "new improved " judicial system, how about a nice judicial "slap on the wrist", a resignation of the minister(s) responsible, withdrawal of their fat pensions, an apology by the Official Government of Canada, replacement of all and any missing funds, real jail time in some of those new penitentiaries if criminal activities are involved, and how about a Universal promise by all parties to never prorogue Parliament again, while we're at it, no matter who is found to be G.U. I. C.P. (Governing under the influence of corruption and power) -- and just get on with the business of good governance?
Will "good governance" happen just because we make Stephen sit on the other side of the House of Commons behind between Elizabeth and Jack, one row in front of Gilles, who will continue to whisper sweet nothings in his ear ? No.
Is the election of another batch of new, inexperienced, and equally foolish politicians in power the answer? Clearly not. Is the status quo acceptable? Clearly not. Will an election solve anything? NO.
Clearly, we need to rebuild our political system. It is broken. There can be no productive governance with a constant struggle for television air time to grandstand and a chance to show off, calling down political opponents in "polite language" to avoid offending the decorum of the House. Someone is always in opposition, causing problems, wasting time, and embarrassing whoever happens to be unfortunate enough to be leading or making decisions.
Is it a profitable and logical system of checks and balances? No. The existing system is more like a grade IV class studying earthworms. Dump them on the floor. "Worms, go east! " the leader yells.
The opposition points fingers and says "The Honorable member is incompetent, Mr. Speaker, they're going every which way!"
In other observations, there can be no majority government made up of politicians that do not honestly represent the people of Canada. Canadians have no desire for other forms of government such as a well-coiffed monarchy, fancy wedding-of-the-century coming up or not, and there is absolutely no desire for a branded fascist state, a branded dictatorship or a corrupt ideological American-style Republic, no matter how many banana trees may be promised to bloom.
There is also clearly no room in Canada's Parliament for self-serving political parties clearly bent on the destruction and fragmentation of Canada. The Bloc Quebecois offers NO representation to Canadians outside of the Province of Quebec, so what business do they have in the Federal House of Commons? Run candidates all across Canada like a real political party, or stop whining, and do not show up in Parliament demanding a seat. You are fragmenting the vote, get it? Surprise, surprise, you may even garner a few cross-Canada votes, considering the nature of the existing choices being displayed to date.
What are our ELECTED representatives thinking with? Perhaps the reader can ponder that question. If you come up with the inevitable answer "Not much", you win three more weeks of winter. Welcome to Canada.
The sad fact of the matter is, it is time to dump "Party Politics" entirely in favour of a system of elected representation from ALL Federal ridings, devoted individuals that can be replaced every four years by voters --or at any time if necessary, and fired just as quickly should they decide to misbehave, "alter documents", involve themselves in questionable stupidity, or try to remove parts of the Country known as Canada.
Gone immediately would be individuals attempting to blackmail OR commandeer The Government of Canada. The controlling factor for a representative House could be a similarly elected, non-partisan experienced Senate.
Gone immediately would be loose cannons attempting to gain fame and fortune by re-branding the Government of Canada as "the Argyle Sweater Team", or the "-I- won't-run-a closed Dictatorship " team.
Gone equally, would be behind-the-scenes manipulators, as "Jack's Improved Government, " and " Better Greenies " which would become even less relevant, and would certainly not be allowed to become "brands" of government. No government would be allowed to consume the meager pensions of the growing senior population.
We have a better idea, let's actually DO it. Let's get back to work, forget about childish, ideological political partisan gamesmanship, and for once and for all, be ADULT about the job at hand. We all know governing takes time, intelligence and dedication. Governing takes honesty. Government takes cooperation. How about let's actually try and surprise Canadians with real governing for a change?
If we MUST have an election, Lord, please grant us the wisdom to put MATURE people in Ottawa that actually care more about poverty and families and hard-working seniors than they do about Big Dirty Oil, Big Business, and the overly fat political pensions paid for a couple years of name-calling, disruptive childishness, and pointing fingers across the House floor. Let us not forget ravaging the free perk barrel in Ottawa.
"Only in Canada."
"Good grief".
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Red Herring INspection Fee: Tempest in a Teapot or Manufactured Distraction?
Prime Minister Stephen Harper reportedly 'fired back' snappily at President Obama's latest plan to charge Canadian visitors by air or sea a $5.50 "inspection fee".
Who thought up that tempest in a teapot? We must wonder how long it took Mr. Harper and Mr. Obama to cobble that brilliant idea together after lunch in an effort to manufacture a distraction from the huge corporate "security merger" recently announced that will, in the long run, give away sovereignty of perhaps 400 million people, but benefit only corporations, their activity and profitability.
We might be too busy rolling on the floor laughing like lunatics to understand the indignation and "significance" of an "inspection fee" -- "Your privates are hereby inspected, Madame, pay the $5.50" , or equally, we could be hungry as we await that fine bag of inter-flight peanuts. Maybe we're just day-dreaming about warmer climes in the annual fit of Canadian cabin-fever as we shiver in February, huddled in igloos and quaint log cabins, waiting for the sun to shine kindly upon us. Perhaps we are waiting for directions to Nirvana.
Do we really believe Prime Minister Harper is indignant about this "fee", as he quaintly suggests there are better ways for the "extremely somewhat" distraught US economy to raise money? Make no mistake about it, the US economy needs help and guidance too, after spending all of it's sauce, energy and goodies on endless warfare. The US economy offers it's sweating taxpayers an annual deficit of a TRILLION dollars or more.
But does anyone, Canadian or American alike, really think that --$5.50 per visit, although admittedly being totally annoying and somewhat idiotic, is really going to help with the ballooning US deficit? There are about 16,000,000 Canadians flying into the US annually, and at $5.50 per, that translates to a "inspection fee" of about $88,000,000 dollars. Not exactly chump change, and yes, we must admit, annoying, but why bother with trivial details? The paltry sum of $ 88 million is not much after all, since we wasted more than 1 Billion dollars on fake lakes, snacks and security for the G20 leader's summit held in Toronto. Perhaps we must show solidarity with US citizens.... after all, we're Canadian. We're nice.
Lovely--so let us all agreeably get on the bandwagon and share the Prime Minister's rousing objections for a moment while we're at it, show how much we love our Prime Minister, national unity and all that, and not complain too loudly.
Perhaps we should even be mature and creative and contemplative instead of overly critical.
We could gently put Michael Ignatieff's Liberals in charge of the State of Canada instead, since that election choice would avoid the necessity of fabricating further stories, or doing anything other than being "politically correct" when our largest neighbour wants to arbitrarily tax members of the traveling public every time they want to cross the border. That includes penalizing little old grandmothers wanting to go south to see their grandchildren and who must fly, because they cannot drive. It includes the children themselves. $5.50 per.
As an aside, for Iggy, here's a sure opportunity to overthrow the minority Conservative government, how about arguing the Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms which insists that all Canadians be treated equally in the handling of this issue? Iggy could use that argument to advantage and win feel-good points with Barack at the same time, tax all travelers, get greater income for the bankrupt US treasury, and achieve "fee equality" for Canadians all. Regardless, it all ends up in Corporate piggy-banks anyway.
How about that? There's a win-win. Of course we know that the Bloc Quebequois would find some devious way to blackmail away their share of the plunder to hire more language police and further the separation of Quebec. No matter. " We are the Borg, resistance is futile, you shall be assimilated" comes to mind.
Let us return to the subject at hand and be candid; in the meantime, Big Corporate Trucks hauling Big Corporate Profits and unknown goods will still travel across the "border", for "security" purposes virtually without inspection, and special security-card holders will have special lines to zip through unhindered and uninspected with great speed. Hundreds of thousands of shipping containers will continue to arrive unexpected and without inspection annually, and thousands of aliens from Mexico and shiploads of refugees from other countries will continue to enter both countries illegally, but to be politically correct, we don't want to pay any attention to those trifling details, we'll distract ourselves and seek happiness by applying Obama's "$5.50 security inspection fee instead.
Will that be $5.50 USD or Canuckbucks, President Obama?
We also plead guilty, we forgot to point out it is ludicrous to charge only people entering by "air or sea" while conveniently ignoring where the REAL dollars are...the average poor Joe taxpayer and single moms that drive across the border on 15-year-old wheels every day in hoards to shop incessantly for shoddy Chinese goods so they can pay duty on them at the border of Free Trading countries which are merging economically. Why not screw them some more in the process too, boys? Venerable leaders, are you not missing a goldmine of potential income by overlooking poor people on wheels?
Either way, the REAL point is, drive, sail or fly, we must admire how clever, manufactured and smelly red herrings are dropped in front of the unsuspecting North American public to distract them from the real issues of the day, like that previous announcement of a merged security agreement between Canada and the U.S. and the resulting "new border" which voluntarily and arbitrarily gives away sovereignty of both Canadians and Americans without so much as a vote, referendum, or chat over a double-double with frosted doughnut at Timmy's.
Who said Canadians want to share a security arrangement? Who said Americans wish to agree to such an arrangement? Don't ask, because we don't know when the dialogue was held. We don't know where the dialogue was held. We don't know IF a dialogue was held.
The fact is, most sadly, Corporate North America has decided such agreements should take place in confidential meetings, undoubtedly with all the perks at taxpayer expense,,, and therefore as the official talking heads, President Obama and Prime Minister Harper, with the help of minions all, must quickly make it so.
Isn't that the way democracy works? All Egyptians know " we support democracy" , after all. We don't really practice it, but we support it.
Readers of Incoming BYTES are encouraged to think for themselves. A few good questions to start with might be " why would we need "security inspections and fees" at all if the new, unified, merged border that gives away our sovereignty is so effective and "necessary" ? -- and of course.... "Is the flying public already not taxed enough for the existing security arrangements at airports that include invasive body searches, X-rays of the physical privates of free, innocent persons, and endless lineups for the privilege of being body searched, X-rayed, and endlessly lined up?
Good questions, but no matter, we're distracted by the red herrings, and suffering from cabin fever WE do hope, however, that someone has answers, especially with a Federal Election coming up.
Who thought up that tempest in a teapot? We must wonder how long it took Mr. Harper and Mr. Obama to cobble that brilliant idea together after lunch in an effort to manufacture a distraction from the huge corporate "security merger" recently announced that will, in the long run, give away sovereignty of perhaps 400 million people, but benefit only corporations, their activity and profitability.
We might be too busy rolling on the floor laughing like lunatics to understand the indignation and "significance" of an "inspection fee" -- "Your privates are hereby inspected, Madame, pay the $5.50" , or equally, we could be hungry as we await that fine bag of inter-flight peanuts. Maybe we're just day-dreaming about warmer climes in the annual fit of Canadian cabin-fever as we shiver in February, huddled in igloos and quaint log cabins, waiting for the sun to shine kindly upon us. Perhaps we are waiting for directions to Nirvana.
Do we really believe Prime Minister Harper is indignant about this "fee", as he quaintly suggests there are better ways for the "extremely somewhat" distraught US economy to raise money? Make no mistake about it, the US economy needs help and guidance too, after spending all of it's sauce, energy and goodies on endless warfare. The US economy offers it's sweating taxpayers an annual deficit of a TRILLION dollars or more.
But does anyone, Canadian or American alike, really think that --$5.50 per visit, although admittedly being totally annoying and somewhat idiotic, is really going to help with the ballooning US deficit? There are about 16,000,000 Canadians flying into the US annually, and at $5.50 per, that translates to a "inspection fee" of about $88,000,000 dollars. Not exactly chump change, and yes, we must admit, annoying, but why bother with trivial details? The paltry sum of $ 88 million is not much after all, since we wasted more than 1 Billion dollars on fake lakes, snacks and security for the G20 leader's summit held in Toronto. Perhaps we must show solidarity with US citizens.... after all, we're Canadian. We're nice.
Lovely--so let us all agreeably get on the bandwagon and share the Prime Minister's rousing objections for a moment while we're at it, show how much we love our Prime Minister, national unity and all that, and not complain too loudly.
Perhaps we should even be mature and creative and contemplative instead of overly critical.
We could gently put Michael Ignatieff's Liberals in charge of the State of Canada instead, since that election choice would avoid the necessity of fabricating further stories, or doing anything other than being "politically correct" when our largest neighbour wants to arbitrarily tax members of the traveling public every time they want to cross the border. That includes penalizing little old grandmothers wanting to go south to see their grandchildren and who must fly, because they cannot drive. It includes the children themselves. $5.50 per.
As an aside, for Iggy, here's a sure opportunity to overthrow the minority Conservative government, how about arguing the Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms which insists that all Canadians be treated equally in the handling of this issue? Iggy could use that argument to advantage and win feel-good points with Barack at the same time, tax all travelers, get greater income for the bankrupt US treasury, and achieve "fee equality" for Canadians all. Regardless, it all ends up in Corporate piggy-banks anyway.
How about that? There's a win-win. Of course we know that the Bloc Quebequois would find some devious way to blackmail away their share of the plunder to hire more language police and further the separation of Quebec. No matter. " We are the Borg, resistance is futile, you shall be assimilated" comes to mind.
Let us return to the subject at hand and be candid; in the meantime, Big Corporate Trucks hauling Big Corporate Profits and unknown goods will still travel across the "border", for "security" purposes virtually without inspection, and special security-card holders will have special lines to zip through unhindered and uninspected with great speed. Hundreds of thousands of shipping containers will continue to arrive unexpected and without inspection annually, and thousands of aliens from Mexico and shiploads of refugees from other countries will continue to enter both countries illegally, but to be politically correct, we don't want to pay any attention to those trifling details, we'll distract ourselves and seek happiness by applying Obama's "$5.50 security inspection fee instead.
Will that be $5.50 USD or Canuckbucks, President Obama?
We also plead guilty, we forgot to point out it is ludicrous to charge only people entering by "air or sea" while conveniently ignoring where the REAL dollars are...the average poor Joe taxpayer and single moms that drive across the border on 15-year-old wheels every day in hoards to shop incessantly for shoddy Chinese goods so they can pay duty on them at the border of Free Trading countries which are merging economically. Why not screw them some more in the process too, boys? Venerable leaders, are you not missing a goldmine of potential income by overlooking poor people on wheels?
Either way, the REAL point is, drive, sail or fly, we must admire how clever, manufactured and smelly red herrings are dropped in front of the unsuspecting North American public to distract them from the real issues of the day, like that previous announcement of a merged security agreement between Canada and the U.S. and the resulting "new border" which voluntarily and arbitrarily gives away sovereignty of both Canadians and Americans without so much as a vote, referendum, or chat over a double-double with frosted doughnut at Timmy's.
Who said Canadians want to share a security arrangement? Who said Americans wish to agree to such an arrangement? Don't ask, because we don't know when the dialogue was held. We don't know where the dialogue was held. We don't know IF a dialogue was held.
The fact is, most sadly, Corporate North America has decided such agreements should take place in confidential meetings, undoubtedly with all the perks at taxpayer expense,,, and therefore as the official talking heads, President Obama and Prime Minister Harper, with the help of minions all, must quickly make it so.
Isn't that the way democracy works? All Egyptians know " we support democracy" , after all. We don't really practice it, but we support it.
Readers of Incoming BYTES are encouraged to think for themselves. A few good questions to start with might be " why would we need "security inspections and fees" at all if the new, unified, merged border that gives away our sovereignty is so effective and "necessary" ? -- and of course.... "Is the flying public already not taxed enough for the existing security arrangements at airports that include invasive body searches, X-rays of the physical privates of free, innocent persons, and endless lineups for the privilege of being body searched, X-rayed, and endlessly lined up?
Good questions, but no matter, we're distracted by the red herrings, and suffering from cabin fever WE do hope, however, that someone has answers, especially with a Federal Election coming up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)