Wow... looks like there are more problems with Fox

Looks like there's more dirt on this fellow too. Why am I not surprised...

Patronage Appointments

Time to make the Senate elected... enough with these patronage appointments. Two more Liberals? At least TRY to look fair. And then there's this, back from Elections Canada. Not as bad as that last guy he appointed though...

TOTAL LIBERAL PARTY DONATIONS, 1993-2003
Goldstein's (combined) - $4,541.00
Francis Fox - $9,678.63

Does money talk? Maybe. Or just being a good Liberal is enough.

Napolean Dynamite's School of Politics

I just realized that the Liberal Party playbook was finally exposed in a recent movie. The cover has been blown off. The Hon. Paul Martin was given this advice by Mr. Dynamite himself, and he has been following it almost flawlessly...

"Tell them that if they vote for you, all their wildest dreams will come true."

And Ontario keeps taking the bait... hook, line, and sinker. With 103 seats alone, along with a few here and there, it's all you need to stay in power. And if they see that you have nothing with which to back up that promise... they'll forgive you, and vote for you again. So long as you promise them their wildest dreams.

"Bringing Down the House" - A Prediction

Here's a quote from CTV's website here:

"The first of two Gomery commission reports into the sponsorship scandal will be tabled on Nov. 1, with the second one coming on Dec. 15."

Here's my prediction; the opposition parties will hold off until the first report comes out, then use the public outcry to band together and bring down the House a week later. The election is called, and the second report hits the fan DAYS before the vote. That's what you call "maximum effect", leaving them no time to spin or recover. (The only spin that will be occuring is a terminal tail spin...)

Who looks worse in a hat?

And the Liberals want to make fun of Harper for a silly hat?

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b239/amyleindecker/r469598374.jpg

("Hats off" to Tory Blue for that one)

The Trouble with Liberals

A friend said I could post this article of his, but asked to remain unknown:

The Trouble with Liberals: A Reflection

Political operatives from all sides can agree on one thing – D’Arcy McGee’s is the place to be on a Wednesday night in Ottawa. Weary, well-dressed, sharp-witted staffers and MPs alike congregate there with the ostensible goal of being social, although alcohol is on everyone’s minds and lips.

I went there earlier tonight. I finally did it! Seated at my table, was a member of Canada’s “natural governing party” – the Liberal Party. We began to chat. We began to argue. I drank beer.What began as a friendly chat over beer became much more. We discussed the high drama of a minority parliament, the dispositions of Martin and Harper, and the ideological underpinnings of the two major brokerage parties.

The Liberal said there were too many divisions in the Conservative Party. Supposed red-tories were being sidelined by social conservatives, and the fault lines were too apparent for the Conservative Party to ever be a truly national alternative.

I did not disagree with my Liberal friend completely. There are diverging opinions in the Conservative Party, but what mattered was our ability to accept conflicting viewpoints, and to allow free votes on issues of moral conscience. I made the argument that we were a party of social conservatives, for whom morality was an important part of the political discourse. A party of democratic conservatives wanting to reform national institutions and make the ordinary voter relevant again. A party of fiscal conservatives who want better management of taxpayer dollars and tax relief for a country that desperately needs it. And red conservatives for whom social justice and compassion are important.

The discussion, up to that point, had gone well. I was making progress. But I could not shut my mouth. The final point I made was that there is no more ideologically fragmented party in Canada, and arguably, in North America, than the Liberal Party of Canada. Scott Brison, the fiscally conservative East Coaster, sits near Ujjal Dosanjh, the former socialist Premier of British Columbia. And also in the mix is Paul Martin’s chief lieutenant in Quebec, Jean Lapierre, one of the founder’s of the Bloc Quebecois. Once a separatist, always a separatist.

But I offended my good Liberal friend. The fact that I, as a Conservative, and therefore someone who is obviously un-Canadian, dared to challenge the Liberals on their own internal divisions, seemed sacrilegious. She quickly admonished me that I was wrong. Her party was the Party of Canada, in tune with Canadians. I was supposed to accept it, and not question it. After all, this party has most often been in power throughout the history of the country, and my claims were silly. As for the divisions in the party – they were not divisions. They were the “lifeblood of the party” and resulted in consensus around common goals. But my Liberal friend could not answer what those goals were.

The goals, of course, are winning. Seeking power, attaining power, and maintaining power at all costs. It is easy to see why Liberals have fewer arguments over policy, since after all, never let ideas get in the way of holding power.

Hearing this tirade only reinforced my faith in Canadian Conservatism. A principled, united, and effective alternative to a Party that believes governing is the birthright of silver-spooned Liberals.

A wise Conservative mentor of mine once said of Liberals “We have principles, and if you do not like them, we have other principles.” I could not have said it better myself.

Yippie!!! TV Ads!

Thanks to Victor ("What it takes to win") for posting this on his site.

The Tories just released 4 new TV spots. Watch for them on a tube near you... or view them here:

http://www.conservative.ca/index.php?section_copy_id=21257&section_id=2049

Playing with RSS, etc.

Hey all... since I'm working on setting up my site better, I'm reposting the link to my most recent article on Quebec and the 2006 (or 2005) election. (or scroll to see my posting on Quebec two down from this one)

http://canadaconservative.blogspot.com/2005/08/quebec-real-election-2006-question.html

The Honeymoon is Over

Jack says he wants a divorce from the Liberals...

http://www.cfra.com/headlines/index.asp?cat=2&nid=31132

Quebec - The REAL Election 2006 Question

We're going to be going into an election early next year. I've been doing some thinking lately, and I've come to realize something that I don't think anyone else has yet realized. There is going to be a much larger question posed to the Canadian people than the average federal election. This time, it's going to be a national referendum on a single, all important question. It's not simply going to be a choice of your preferred political party, be it NDP, Liberal, or Conservative. It's going to be a single, national question, that each of us will will be voting on.

And the single, unavoidable question will be this;

"Should Quebec seperate?"

Now, you are thinking, "Where on earth does he get that idea from?" And I don't blame you, because I've heard nothing of the sort either; I think I'm the first one to propse the question. But I've been thinking long and hard about it, and I'm convinced that when we go to the polls, that's the question that we will be answering that day. When we place our "X" on the ballot, we will be pronouncing our verdict on the makeup the nation of Canada.

And a vote for the Liberal Party will be a vote for Quebec soverignty.

When you take the time to truely consider what has been going on in politics these last few years, my last statement will make perfectly logical sense. It is Justice Gomery who has shed some light on this situation for us.

When the Sponsorship program was implemented in 1995, its stated goal was to raise the profile of Canada in the province of Quebec. While I think this was in fact a noble goal, as we're all well aware, something went awry. We all know how money was misused, and the fallout that has occured in the province of Quebec. But I want to propose to you a new train of thought that to me, will be the defining question of the next election.

First of all, the Liberal Party of Canada, in power as the Government of Canada, made the decision to fund the Sponsorship program. They, in essence, thought that the province of Quebec could be bought. And that's why there is such an outcry in that province, that's why there is so much anger against the Liberals. That's why some are predicting that the Liberal Party might even be wiped out in the province of Quebec, save for Paul Martin's seat in Montreal. (that may even be at risk... watch for him to run elsewhere, like Ontario)

Secondly, the stronghold of the Liberal Party of Canada has always been Ontario. With 106 seats, and the most urban areas of the nation, it is the Holy Grail of the federal parties. No party can form a government without vote rich Ontario. Each party leader spends more time here than any other region of the country. And it's Ontario that has the decades old love affair with the Liberal Party.

So, Ontario, the heart of central Canada, supports the Liberal Party. The very same Liberal Party that has slapped the face of the province of Quebec. If Ontario once again supports a corrupt party that has slapped them in the face, do you really think they will have any desire whatsoever stick around with the rest of us?

Make no mistake, there will be another referendum in the next 5-10 years. And if once again, Canadians have on mass displayed their support of the party that has insulted them, they will, without hesitation, vote "Oui" to the question of soverinty next time around. And it will be, in large part, because Ontario has supported the Liberal Party of Canada in the next election.

When you go to the ballot box in 2006, remember that you will be making a momentous choice regarding the future of Canada. Remember that you will be sending a message to the province of Quebec. Remember that you will be voting not only for a party, but for the very makeup of our nation as we know it today.

If you lean left, vote NDP. If you lean right, vote Conservative. If you are on the fence... don't vote. If you choose to vote Liberal, you are voting to destroy Canada as we know it.

"Christian Conservative"

It begins...

Mayor David Miller has stated that it's time to start collecting up all guns owned by the people of Toronto, registered or not.

Looks like all the gun owners that opposed the Gun Registry were right all along!
"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

What part of the Communist Manifesto was it that stated all guns should be confiscated?
http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/toronto/story.html?id=6bd4b477-9334-4132-8181-e5bafead1b47

Why not excommunicate the PM?

Ted Byfield in the Western Standard brings up an interesting point that I've raised here before... if the Catholic Church disfellowshiped two NDPer's over Same-Sex Marriage, why didn't they do the same the Prime Minister Paul Martin, a confessed Catholic?

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.cfm?page=article&article_id=951

Harper - "Reduce Gas Taxes NOW"

Stephen Harper has proposed once again that the Federal government remove the "double" GST tax on gasoline... this would result in a 0.02-0.05 cent reduction in the pump price. Though it's not much, every little bit helps, IMHO.

http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=e8ae0331-a35f-4be1-b2ee-1ce4e4562aa9

And on the note of gas problems... we don't have it near as bad as it could be... http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-08/18/content_470149.htm

Charles Adler posted a copy of an article printed in the National Post. Seems there are many who are still not satisfied with Mme. Jean's "commitment" to Canada.

http://www.charlesadler.com/index.php?p=global&action=view_story&id=1999

Comment on the next GG's statement

This guy, a fairly well known blogger, broke a month long hiatus to comment on the statement issued by Mme. Jean, the next GG. And I'm glad he broke the silence, because I think he summed it up well.

We asked a simple question, and we demand an answer... did you vote "Oui", or "Non"? Yes, we have the right to a secret ballot... but if you want to hold such a great office, you'd better be willing to give up that right and tell us where you stand.

http://andrewcoyne.com/2005/08/not-separatist-just-unqualified.php

And on a related note... why was her statement posted on the Liberal Party website?

http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?site=news&id=1005

And now, why was it suddenly removed? Isn't the Liberal Party website for partisan party propoganda? Oops, sorry, my mistake... it was Party propoganda...

My goodness... did the Liberals oops again on this one?

UPDATE: Another Blogging Tory managed to snag a screenshot before they pulled it:
http://conservativehipster.blogspot.com/2005/08/politics-as-usual-partisan-g-g.html

What's your I.Q.? (Joke)

Not sure where this came from originally... picked it up in the comments section of another blog I read:

A popular bar had a new robotic bartender installed.

A fellow came in for a drink and the robot asked him, "What's your I.Q.?"
The man replied, "150."

The robot then proceeded to make conversation about Quantum physics, string theory, atomic chemistry and so on.

The man listened intently and thought, "This is really cool." The man decided to test the robot. He walked out of the bar, turned around, and came back in for another drink.

Again the robot asked him, "What's your I.Q.?"

The man responded, "100." So the robot started talking about football, baseball, and so on. The man thought to himself, "Wow, this is really cool." The man went out and came back in a third time.

As before the robot asked him, "What's your I.Q.?"

The man replied, "50."

The robot then said, "So, you gonna vote Liberal again?"

Ouch

Jack and the NDP Crew took a huge swipe at the PM... I didn't hear about this one in the media! They're asking a legit question... why do the ships of your old company NOT fly the Canadian Flag?

http://www.flyourflag.ca/

Will Canada Survive into 2007?

I read an article which basically asked the question, "What are we doing lumped in with a bunch of other people who we don't really like and calling ourself a nation?" I had to stop and ponder the question, and ask myself, "What are we doing together? What is Canada anyway?"

I'll tell you this much... I think the Canada we know is on the verge of collapsing. I never really thought about it before until recently. The Liberal Party has insulted Quebec, and Ontario, by default, votes Liberal. Thus, if we support the party that insulted Quebec... why would they want to stick with us? Next vote for independence, and they're out of here. And if they go, don't expect Alberta to stick around while we try and mop up the mess.

Personally, I think Quebec would be in rough shape economically should they split, but then they'd be too proud to re-enter Confederation.

So, I ask you the question... what is our identity? Who are we as Canadians? Why are we together? What is it worth to you to keep this nation of ours together? And the final question... is Canada so important to you that you be willing to consider voting Conservative in order to hold it together? That's really what this next election is going to be about. Forget what the media says. It's going to be about saving Canada as we know it.

I love Canada. To me, it is the best place on earth to live. Which is why I'm sounding the alarm bells. I love this country, and I so very much want to keep it alive. But I know that we are doomed if we don't make some RADICAL changes NOW.

What are your thoughts?

Why I Want to...

... enter politics as a Conservative Member of Parliament.

Shocked? Most who come here (which for the most part are a small group of friends) won't be all that surprised. But I've been mulling the question over in my mind for the last week, and after a visit to Ottawa, and a tour of Parliament, I think the question has been settled in my mind.

I've talked to a few people, and I've thus far only received positive feedback. Most of it is generally in the context of "I'm not surprised, go for it, our country could use more people like you in Ottawa".

Of course, if you plan on doing such a preposterous thing, you have to have a platform. An agenda, and not allow the other guy to tell everyone else what "scary/bad things" you want to do to the country. So I figure if I set the agenda now, I should be good to go in 5-9 years.This country is in a mess. And our biggest problem is that most of us, mainly in Ontario, don't have a clue that there is a problem. We have some major problems, and if they don't get taken care of NOW, this great country of ours will become but a blip on the world stage, and this great country of Canada, as we know it today, will cease to exist.


Here are the issues that I intend to raise and deal with in Ottawa, in no particular order:

1) Health Care
I DO NOT SUPPORT A TWO TIERED SYSTEM. The Canadian Health Care system should be kept Universal, no matter if you have the money to "jump the queue" or not.

I DO SUPPORT SOME PRIVATE DELIVERY OF SOME HEALTH CARE SERVICES. If some company in the private sector can do the same job sooner and at equal OR LESS cost, why on earth would anyone in Canada want to prevent that? In Ontario, we already use some private delivery of services... when your doctor writes a requisition to have blood work done, you often get directed to the local MDS Lab; a PRIVATE company that performs the services at NO COST TO YOU, and then bills the government a government SET FEE. MDS wants to keep their costs down, so they ensure that they do so in a cost effective manor. And my longest wait at an MDS Lab was less than HALF my average wait time at a local hospital... not to mention the wait time I had to get an appointment. At MDS? You can just walk in, any time, with your doctor's requisition in hand.

2) National Unity
A VOTE FOR THE LIBERAL PARTY IS A VOTE AGAINST CONFEDERATION.

a) The Liberal Party has been disgraced in Quebec, and is offensive to most Quebecers. The very program designed to make Canada more appealing ended up insulting the people of Quebec by implying that they could be "bought". Sovereignty has never had more support, and if Canada sends a Liberal government to Ottawa, it will be the final slap in the face. This country is for the first time, really in danger of being broken apart. The people of Quebec will not stand by as the rest of Canada insults them by returning the corrupt Liberal Party to Ottawa. A referendum will be held, and the result will be a resounding "OUI".

b) The Liberal Party has no interest in addressing Western issues, unless you live in one of the three major cites. A recent poll indicated that 43% of Albertans are now willing to talk about the concept of separation. They don't need Canada, and are now willing to talk about it, as the Liberal Party has no interest in dealing with their issues.

c) The Liberal Party does not care about issues relating to rural Ontario because...

d) The Liberal Party only cares about the cities, because that's where the votes are. And they will say anything to make cities happy, at any cost, (say, $4.6 billion dollars or so...) yet they will continue to do nothing unless it happens to look good for the media.

e) The Liberal Party is more interested in giving hand outs to the Maritimes in order to buy their votes than it is in actually solving the employment issues of seasonal workers and the under or un-employed. The fisheries will continue to close, and nothing will be done about it until a new party is sent to Ottawa.

f) The Liberal Party is CORRUPT. The Party's top echelons still contain many of the same corrupt people responsible for sponsorship, who have not been purged, and who cannot be trusted with your money.

3) The Economy
More to come

4) Our First Nations

How long have they been waiting for Ottawa to address their legitimate concerns? In the last 12 years, can you tell me that the lives of Native Canadians have gotten better? True, we now have Nunavut, with a mainly aboriginal government; however, more needs to be done. Land claims need to be settled, use of natural resources need to be addressed, (hunting, fishing, forestry) the issues of unemployment need to be addressed. Native Canadians need to be given the tools to solve most of these problems in their own ways, and not simply have more money thrown at them. (though more money may and likely will be needed) I desire to correct as many of the misdeeds of past generations as can be corrected, and help our First Nations to rebuild their ancestral nations within our own.

5) Crime and Justice

Guns - I used to live in TO. Many friends still do. One of my best friends lives and works with youth in Malvern; home of the "Malvern Crew". 44 dead, 34 in gun related crimes, THIS YEAR ALONE. And what has the Gun Registry gotten us? More paperwork and costs to our farmers, and NO REDUCTIONS IN GUNS ON THE STREETS. How about a mandatory 10 years added to any sentence for using a gun in a crime? Yes, there are root causes to crime, and they need to be addressed, but the DECADES needed to change things is far too long. So, let’s start making the changes, and in the mean time, make sure that everyone knows that even CARRYING A GUN will land them in jail for a good and LONG time.

Sexual Offenders - Lock them up. Register them, including via DNA. Keep tabs on them for the rest of their lives. Make sure the police knows where they are, and in RARE instances when warranted, the public. Make sure that everyone who considers committing a sexual offence knows that though perhaps they will one day live outside the walls of prison, that any sexual crime WILL HAVE repercussions ON THEM FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.

Consecutive Sentences - Make criminals actually accountable for their actions. Kill three people? Three sentences - 75 to life.

Early Parole - A joke, but not to the families of victims of repeat offenders who were "out for good behavior". Just ask the Shaw family. Overcrowded prisons? Build more, and hire more guards.

Cannabis - I support the MEDICAL use of marijuana; I DO NOT support the "recreational" use of it. I am in favour of granting permits to those who have a legitimate (doctor controlled and monitored) medical need for it. I support the eventual establishment of a government grow-op, regulation and distribution, though most recent attempts have been complete failures. I support stiffer penalties for those who traffic it, and seizure of their product for medical use until a reliable supply is available.

I have a friend who was a daily user for 8 years. He once said he had "an eight year hole in my life". I have seen the effects of it in young people's lives... wasted time, money, poor performance in school, committing crimes to get money to buy the drug, etc. It's a drug of young people, the very people who are too immature to deal with it. (I say that being a young person myself) And yes, it CAN be a gateway drug, though that admittedly applies only to a very small percentage of users. It should remain a controlled substance.

My Conservative Agenda - An MP in Training
1st Draft - Aug 16, 2005

Next GG Toasts to Quebec Independance

The tape never lies...

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTemplate/!ctvVideo/CTVNews/GG_sovereignty_050815/20050816/?hub=Canada&video_link_high=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2005/08/15/ctvvideologger2_143kbps_2005_08_15_1124157062.wmv&video_link_low=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2005/08/15/ctvvideologger2_45kbps_2005_08_15_1124159140.wmv&clip_start=00:13:13.09&clip_end=00:00:56.05&clip_caption=CTV%20News%3A%20Jean%20in%20film%20with%20former%20FLQ%20members&clip_id=ctvnews.20050815.00109000-00109446-clip5&subhub=video

She MUST step aside, there is no other option now. Anything less is a bloody nose to Canada courtesy of the Liberal Party.

UPDATE: It must be really bad when a well known Liberal (Calgary Grit) is also now adding his voice to those who want an answer to this mess...
http://calgarygrit.blogspot.com/2005/08/rising-storm.html

Garth Turner says it best... again

Check this out... the second half of it is a really good summary of the Liberal "accomplishments" over the last 12 years...

http://www.garth.ca/2005/08/14/a-fine-example/

Why the Polls look bad

A good summary of the state of Canadian politics:

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=2b52c748-875e-41eb-9502-0b2d8add5cbb&page=1

Give the media what they want... and they'll kill you anyway

Wow... is this ever bang on the money. If anyone can read this with an open mind, they'll see once and for all that the media is completely biased toward the Liberal Party of Canada. It's an article written by Ed Mazer, and reposted on Garth Turner's website:

http://www.garth.ca/2005/08/07/the-scary-thing/

Liberal Money Woes

Wow... looks like the Liberals are having their own financial troubles... do we want them running the public purse? They may have to declare bankrupcy! (unfortunately, they'll likely hang on until at least after the next election... can you imagine if they went broke before?)

http://www.conservative.ca/EN/news_releases/sponsorship_scandal_plagues_liberal_fundraising_efforts/?&PHPSESSID=103c82603e5f8c7eb8db9c5e3bf89230

Denni$ Daw$on - $enator

OUR NEW LIBERAL SENATOR, Dennis Dawson

I was tipped off to this by Toronto Tory, and decided to follow up with some research of my own.
http://torontotory.blogspot.com/2005/08/canadian-senate-and-democratic-deficit.html

The information posted below was personally gathered directly from the Elections Canada website, http://www.elections.ca/scripts/ecfiscals2/Default.asp?L=E&Page=ChooseElection
So, here are his political contributions over a 10 year period...

2001
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $1,000

2000
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $2,049

1999
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $3, 070.60

1998
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $1, 521

1997
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $ 673

1996
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $ 502
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $2,234

1994
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $1,511

1993
Dawson, Dennis Liberal Party of Canada Individuals $ 284

TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS - $ 12,844.60

A SEAT IN THE SENATE - PRICELESS

Note: these numbers do not include dollars donated to leadership races, such as Paul Martin's, as those did not have to be reported before 2004... so the total dollars MAY BE HIGHER

Being a Liberal has its Rewards

Talk about a patronage appointment...

http://torontotory.blogspot.com/2005/08/canadian-senate-and-democratic-deficit.html

Why Harper Looks Bad...

How can you win when the media roasts you for every move you make? This guy is BANG ON exposing the Liberal bias against him in the media...

http://www.brandonsun.com/story.php?story_id=427

Your Taxes for Liberal Propoganda

Exposed...

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=9aaa630d-1c5d-4a38-abeb-6d1cce728bc6