The CBC and the Looney Left

You can't be more obvious (and idiotic) than the CBC's latest edition of "The Current".

As I was listening to "The Current" this morning, they had an interview with "maverick columnist" Heather Mallick, formerly of the Globe & Mail. Apparently, she quit the G&M, and for the moment, will be doing some work for the CBC. Surprise, surprise.

It was an interesting interview, to say the least. Boy, is she ever a lefty looney! Here's a piece of their chat... Anna Maria Tremonti - "So, in discussing which column writers you regularly read, you've just mentioned a whole bunch from the left of the spectrum... which right wing authors do you read?" Heather - "I don't read any right wing authors... most of them are lazy writers, and their columns are a place where they vent their anger... they don't contribute anything to the collective discussion, so no, I don't read anyone from the right." Actually, she was even more critical than that, but I don't recall it word for word.

Note to the CBC... try fulfilling your mandate of providing Canadians with a diversity of opinions, okay? I can think of a few on the right to help balance things out... try Kate at SDA, for example. I was surprised when they had her posting during the election, but was glad that there was at least one solid voice of reason.

Well, if Mallick is going to be a regular contributer, I'll make sure my voice of displeasure is more loudly voiced to the CBC.

Debate - Is Islam taking over the world?

Mark Steryn is asking that very question. What do you think? Is there any basis for the claim? Warren, if by chance you read this, I'd like your thoughts.

As a Christian, I obviously think that everyone should (and one day will) bow the knee to the Lord Jesus Christ... therefore, in that way alone, I'd have to be considered to be anti-Islamic. However, of course, I believe whole-heartedly that everyone is entitled to believe what they want... I just happen to disagree with them, without (I hope) being disagreable.

I believe that there are many "secular" Muslims who DON'T have a motive to take over the world... I think most of the Muslims we know and work with here in North America would be amongst the secular Muslim camp; therefore, they represent the "religion of peace" Islam that we hear about in the media. However, I do believe that there are forces throughout the world who are actively seeking to spread Islam by any means necessary... and that even secular Muslims will be unable to stem the tide. Ravi Zacheriah said "The question is not whether Islam will survive Western secularism... it's whether Western secularism will survive Islam."

I've heard from and spoken to several missionaries in Islamic nations who agree with this view... and some of our affiliated missionaries are having to work undercover, their identites and locations being kept secret to ensure their safety. Why would they have to do this if there truely was nothing to fear from Islam?

Before you comment, give Mark's article a read. And please keep all responses civil and respectful of everyone.

Federal Tories to cut programs!

Yep, you heard it here first... according to CTV, Stephen Harper's Tories are set to cut a massive Federal program which will save billions...

The Long Gun "Registry" (try fiasco)

The money saved is to be earmarked for REAL crime prevention measures.

Earthquake in Ottawa!

No, I'm not talking about a political earthquake... I'm talking about a real one... magnitude 4.5, to be exact, 45 km NE from the capital.

Sorry for the lack of posting, was away with our church youth group this weekend. Back to normal sometime this week... maybe.

Bourrie signs treaty with Warren

Well, not a treaty per say, but at least it appears the guns will be laid down. Mark Bourrie has posted a retraction of the comment in question. He says:

"The manner in which my January 14, 2006 blog entry was worded made it seem that Mr. Kinsella had been a party to illegal conduct when this was clearly not the case. I apology without reservation to Mr. Kinsella for that error on my part."

In all honesty, I don't see what all the fuss was about. I could see what Warren was getting at... the wording could easily be read to assume that Warren somehow connected to Adscam. If I was in his shoes, I too would want to make sure that millstone wasn't hung around my neck!

From the beginning, all I think Warren was looking for was a retraction, so had one been posted, or even a clarification of the comments, this fiasco could have been avoided. But, anywho, all now seems to be hunky-dory in the blogosphere, so I can go to bed and sleep easy.

My House prediction may be correct?

h/t to Political Staples and Angry.

Looks like this House of Commons will outlast the last one... likely until at least late 2007 or even 2008. The Globe and Mail is reporting that the BQ House Leader, Michel Gauthier, has indicated that he's willing to let Stephen Harper govern, at least for now. This should shut up the Liberals and the NDP for a bit. Look for PM Harper's first budget to pass easily.

I'm a "24" fan

I'm also a techie-geek... so, I know it's pathetic, but I set up my computer's "new mail" sound to sound like CTU's phones on 24... so when I get new mail, (or someone leaves a comment here) it feels like, for one brief moment, that I work for a super secret government organization...

You can go back to reality now. Maybe I'll join you shortly.

Comment 700!

The speed at which these comments are rolling in keeps going up!

Comment number 700 goes to "Sara"!

I called it... sort of

This Calgary Sun article says the same thing I said about the Liberal leadership... the one who takes it needs to be someone who is willing to never set foot in 24 Sussex. However, he also mentions rumours that 10-12 Liberal MP's are considering swapping sides, Emmerson style.

Even if they broke off to form a new centre party, a TRUELY centre party, that could also be a good thing for Canadian politics... and will keep us in the PMO for at least 6-12 years... also a good thing for Canada. ;-)

Rolling Stone Mocks Christ... TIME TO RIOT!!!

The Rolling Stone just put out a cover with Kayne West impersonating The Lord Jesus Christ... BLASPHEMY!!! Let's burn down their offices! Kill their editors! Protest in the streets until the world takes notice! Naaah...

WWJD? (What Would Jesus Do?) Instead, let's turn the other cheek. Go ahead, mock our Lord and Saviour... it's not us you are offending, but the Most High God Himself. Besides, we know that The Lord Himself will deal with them, in His own good time.

Our only responsibility, as Christians, is to proclaim the Good News of salvation, that can only be found in the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary so many years ago. He died that you might live.

To the editor's of the Rolling Stone, you should know better. With worldwide riots going on over this sort of thing, I have one question for you... what were you thinking?

However, we would like thank you for once again proving our point... OF THE HYPOCRISY OF THE MEDIA. You have no problem mocking the Lord Jesus Christ, yet, I highly doubt you'd dare to publish the cartoons causing the riots. (nor do I suggest you do publish them... I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy) Once again, Christianity is fair game, but Islam... the lefty media has taken the position of "not wanting to offend".

Hypocrits.

Longer lasting than the Energizer bunny

These protests are still going.

Today's tally... 1 McDonalds, 1 KFC, 1 Pizza Hut, four buildings housing a hotel, two banks, more than 200 cars, dozens of shops, two movie theatres, and the office of a Norwegian cellphone company, Telenor. At least two people were killed and 11 injured. Protesters outside the US and British Embassies chanting "Death to America!" (amm, wasn't this about Denmark?)

ANYONE WANT TO TRY AND JUSTIFY ANY OF THIS?

What's a good soldier to do after the war?

From Warren:

And, when you turn on your TV news tonight - after first celebrating the pair of silvers Canada won - watch for the stories about Mr. Harris. Take a good, hard look at him, and remember what it was like with his party in power - the social dislocation, the brutality, the complete disregard for anybody but their well-heeled friends. Remember Dudley George, too.

Yea, I remember the good old days... when my taxes were being reduced, there were no "Healthcare premiums", and when a party made promises during an election, and actually KEPT THEM. As for Mr. George, I don't think Mr. Harris was involved... I think Ipperwash could have been avoided from the get-go, but that's my opinion.

I was just thinking about this yesterday... now that Federal issues have slowed a bit, what's next? Time to look to Queen's Park... we already know that Warren will be working for Dalton. During the Federal election, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was a good description of how Warren could be viewed. Not this time. I still like ya Warren, and you're the only blog that's still on my daily list, but this time, he's clearly flying Dalton's red banner.

At present, I'm not a card carrying provincial Tory... and I don't know if I'll take out a membership, mainly due to the "Progressive" moniker... "Progressive" doesn't mean what it used to, and now typically has some negative connotations that I'd rather not be connected with... pro-SSM, anti-life, etc. (have at me Drew!) I'll likely do some local work though, but we'll see. I may still take out a membership just to have a say on who the candidate is. I'll be behind Mr. Tory, and it will be a close one overall... Dalton has broken 80-90% of his election promises, and maybe, just maybe, he's ticked off enough Ontarians to get himself ousted.

The last two times, our slogan has been "Dalton McGuinty... he's just not up to the job." It worked once, but not the second time. This time, how about this one... "Dalton McGunity... see? We told you he wasn't up to the job!"

Not posting much today

Way to busy the last couple of days to post much. Was busy getting ready to lead a Bible study last night, finished up reading "Ender's Game", and was meeting this morning with a group from my current church, getting ready to start a new church this coming September. (Blake, working on some of the "Third Way" ideas... Drew, it's a house church)

Back likely tomorrow or Monday.

Great... NDP wants an election

Yep, it's true... the NDP are planning to bring down the House IMMEDIATELY... we WON'T stand for this being passed, and if push comes to shove, it may prove to be a confidence issue.

Canada, do YOU want an election, AGAIN? NDP, back off.

A comment - reposted in full

Thanks for joining the debate "Sam". Here's his comment for all...

A lot of posturing and a lot of people upset over the appointments of two cabinet ministers. But is it duplicity and a sell out?

I won't attempt to justify Mr. Harper for his decisions. But being pragmatic, I can see the logic of what he did.

In the case of Emerson, he (Mr. Harper) approached Mr. Emerson to join his government and to represent the greater Vancouver area at the cabinet table. I do not know the motives of either men, but I do know that pragmatically, Mr. Harper felt he had few options in getting representation around the cabinet table from the three major cities in this country. He did what he felt was needed to have a broad based inclusive government.

Appearances can deceive, and there are risks with what Mr. Harper has done, but he is not governed by appearances, but the grim realities of cities not being representented at the cabinet table. He did the pragmatic thing. He offered Mr. Emerson an olive branch in the name of inclusiveness and non-partisan politics. Both men stand to lose in the public eye, but they were elected to conduct politics and to govern.

There is more than enough blame being attributed to Mr. Harper for this "compromise", but how many people in the cities that did not elect a single Conservative would be screaming for attention, money and influence, if Mr. Harper had not reached this compromise? How many leftists and centrists, would have screamed bloody murder, and Mr. Harper could have played hard ball, and said, "Hey, you did not vote for any of our candidates, so tough luck! You made your choice, you are now left out in the cold! Scat! Leave us alone to govern!" He could have done that, but he didn't. It is not in his nature to do that, politically or ethically. He had to find a way to be inclusive. He made a tough choice, and as PM, he has to make those tough choices in order to govern well.

Did he "sell out" on his proposed "accountability" legislation? I don't believe so.

He invited someone in from the cold, so that could represent the interests of a region that without the invitation, would be left out in the political tundra and excluded from the decision making process, devoid of influence, and devoid of attention from the Feds in Ottawa.

Criticize if you must, but you cannot judge Mr. Harper for trying to govern with the best broad based cabinet as possible. He cannot be faulted for that. The ones who are complaining the most are the ones who voted Liberal.

These same people should look long and hard in the mirror, and ask themselves why they voted that way, guaranteeing exclusion from the table where decisions are made. They (the left) called it strategic voting, I call it strategic blunder. Mr. Harper has bitten the butllet to include the people of Vancouver at the table. They should give him a break.

As far as Mr. Fortier is concerned, Mr. Harper used the latitude allocated to him under the "current" system. He has violated nothing, although he prefers an elected Senate, currently no such beast exists. For people to lambaste him for going against that principle is lacking in couth and courtesy. Mr. Harper is using the existing system to bring about as broad and inclusive cabinet as possible, and as in the case with Vancouver, Montreal needs someone from the city at the table. Mr. Harper has used the options at his disposal, and as he stated, Mr. Fortier will run for election in the next election.

We need to remember that no one really knew that the Conservatives would do as well in Quebec as they did. Some projected 2 to 4 seats, and they got 10, but none from Montreal itself, which gave Mr. Harper the same problem as Vancouver.

Mr. Harper felt the city needed representation from someone who lives in the city. He laid out the condition that the position as a senator for Mr. Fortier is a temporary one. The bottom line is the creation of a broad based coalition to govern, constituted from small c conservatives, to social conservatives, to progressive conservatives, to fiscal conservatives, to centrist former liberals.

Mr. Harper has held together the diverse CPC, and will attempt to do the same with this cabinet. He made pragmatic choices, and in my mind necessary choices to include Vancouver and Montreal.

To the ones screaming...just stop long enough to think it through and take a big breath and relax.

We don't want or need an election any time soon. We need to see Mr. Harper govern for at least two years. Having the input of the major cities at the decision table is going to be crucial. There are a lot of urban issues that will need to be addressed. Having cabinet ministers from these regions is not only the only credible thing to do, but the necessary thing to do. All these urban areas need to have a voice, be it Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver. NOW, they have a voice.

Like I said, the electorate from these cities could have had direct influence, but they chose to resist change, and chose to be dogmatic and not embrace the opportunity afforded to them election night. They could have paid the price for it by having zero influence. Mr. Harper could have paid the same price. He chose to govern, and to govern with a non-partisan cabinet, with many viewpoints and opinions, and to be inclusive of those regions that rejected him and the CPC.

The very least these people could do is hold judgment, for at least the end of the year. Then, and only then, can we all discern and see the results and the effects of this government. Let's all give Mr. Harper a break!

Cheers,
Sam

I just don't get it

I'm just speechless. I've always heard of conservatives eating each other alive, but never had the displeasure of being the one eaten.

What Emerson did is allowed in our system... BUT, big but, I've ALREADY SAID that it's dishonest to his electors.

What would Jesus do, you have asked me? He wouldn't participate in our system, I'll tell you that much... He'd replace it. (coming to a world near you... any day now...)

That said, how does a Christian deal with things like this in Ottawa?

I'll just say that I'd personally never cross the floor.

To those who have replied here with venom... I was only pointing out a few things that were being missed in the debate. End of story. Bye for now.

Wow... feeling some negative vibes here!

To everyone who seems to think that I'm 100% behind the Emerson defection or the Fortier appointment, read my lips... I'M UNDECIDED, LET'S JUST SEE WHAT BECOMES OF IT ALL!!! I believe, in my reading up of Stephen Harper in the last few months, that he's got a bold plan in mind, one that will be to the benefit of all Canadians. I was the first to confess that these moves didn't appear to be a great start, but, with what I've learned about Mr. Harper, he's up to something, and usually, it's something that people LOOK BACK ON years later as being the right move to make.

For example... the "Clarity Act"? Yea, it was Mr. Harper's idea... the Libs just took 5 years to climb on board. An appointed Senate? Yep, Mr. Harper supports that, which is why this first set of moves appears odd...

BUT, think about why he may be doing this... it's getting everyone riled up, so that when he proposes his Accountability Act, or by some other act soon thereafter, he'll put in his desired mandate for Senate elections? THEN what is the Opposition going to do? The bill is passed with ALL PARTY SUPPORT (except the BQ), since they're the ones crying the most about it! Then he'll pull the Senator and hold a vote for the seat... it's a win win situation. He'll have his Montreal rep. in cabinet in the interim, thus ensuring that "the BIG CITIES" have someone at the table, and he'll get his vision for an elected Senate pushed through!

All I've been saying all along is this... let's not call for his head just yet. Give him a couple of weeks to use that head of his, and THEN see what he's up to.

You know what? That's been the MAIN problem with the conservative movement for the last 20 years... we're to eager to eat our own young! GIVE THE GUY A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO GET THINGS SET IN MOTION, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

I'll make this statement and will stand by it... maybe Emerson should run in a byelection, but let him get settled and down to work first... get the softwood lumber deal hammered out ASAP... GET RESULTS, which is what we voted for this party to achieve! (at least, that's what I voted for!) As for Fortier, let him get to work on the skeletons in the PWGS, and see what Harper does on the elected Senate front in the next couple of months.

The new Minister of Public Works and Government Services

With all the hub-ub around Michael Fortier, perhaps people are missing the possible reason WHY Prime Minister Stephen Harper made the very risky move of appointing him to the Seneate and to Cabinet. I've just taken a look at his brief bio on the PM's website...

The Honourable Michael Fortier
Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Michael Fortier is a financier and lawyer in Montreal, Quebec.

As a partner at Ogilvy Renault, he specialized in securities, mergers and acquisitions. From 1992 to 1996, he managed Ogilvy Renault’s office in London, England. In 1999, he became the Managing Director and Senior Advisor (Eastern Canada) at Crédit Suisse First Boston, the largest business bank in the world. In 2004, Mr. Fortier became Corporate Financing Director (Quebec) for TD Securities.

Take a look at his background... HE'S A NUMBERS GUY, AND A LAWYER TO BOOT. A lawyer who's good with numbers, running the Public Works department?

Humm... with all the investigations that have come out of that office in the last 10 years, could it be that Mr. Harper is thinking LONG TERM? You can bet that he's gonna be digging up a whole lot of skeletons from in there!!! No WONDER the Libs are crying foul over the appointment... CAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE ABSOLUTELY DEVASTATING TO THEM POLITICALLY!!!

Did Harper know?

Wow... maybe there WAS a good reason to poach Emerson from the Liberals. Looks like he knew about a deal in the works regarding the solution of the softwood lumber issue... that was ready MONTHS AGO. Apparently, Emerson indicated that he felt the deal wasn't good enough, thus, it was delayed. Now, HE gets to "fix it", and the Tories get to solve one MAJOR issue right out of the gate!

Word is that the former PMO had reasons to have the deal delayed... REASONS THAT ONLY WOULD HELP THE LIBERAL PARTY, NOT CANADA. Can you imagine... the Liberal Party of Canada sitting on the softwood lumber issue, just so they could use the US and George W. Bush as a punching bag during an election?

Yea, I thought so, I can imagine them doing that too. Looks like it may have backfired HUGE, with Emerson taking it as a gift to PM Stephen Harper.

UPDATE: Looks like one reader of Small Dead Animals privately made this point to Kate:

Hey, the liberal supportors of Vancourver-Kingsway voted for the liberal (corrupt) party and voted in Mr. Emerson. Right. So why are they so upset that the person they voted in, who ran for a corrupt party, would double cross them by crossing the imaginary floor to serve as a CONSERVATIVE. Got what you deserved baby. Good for you!!!

They certainly double-crossed taxpayers often enough. It might have been a clue.

GREAT OBSERVATION! Now, therefore, you can think of Emerson's defection as an act of repentance!

Recall Emerson Petition - UPDATE

Thanks to everyone who went to the Recall Emerson petition. Looks like we've given the creator a headache! He/She's editing the list of signees, (a whole bunch of lines say "Line rejected" or "signature rejected") but some of my fun ones are still there!!! ;-) Yea, Belinda's signature is still there, Paul Martin, etc. And now he/she is having to "approve" all signatures... have fun!

Problem with the online petition is that people from EVERYWHERE can sign it... it's NOT limited to the residents of Vancouver-Kingsway. Therefore, THE PETITION IS BUNK.

So there. Have a nice day.


UPDATE: LOL...

"1419. Ujal Dosanj - Get over it. I did it and it was wondeful!"

And how about THIS LOSER...

"1390. Christopher Scott - This type of Political Fraud is far more damaging than the 250 Million wasted on the Sponsorship scandle."

Excuse me? Worse than wasting $250 MILLION DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER'S MONEY!?!?!?!?!? Man, talk about a MOONBAT!!!

But I like this guy...

1339. You are all hypocrites - How come none of you asked for Belinda's recall?

"Potted Plant" Returns!

That guy, "Potted Plant", keeps showing up in Canadian politics... PQ leadership votes, Green party debate petitions, and now, the "Recall Emerson" petition! Check out signer number 879:

879. Potted Plant - EMERSON RULES!!!

Apparently, Donald Duck also signed.

TONS of NON-Vancouver-Kingsway moonbats have signed it... so, just to keep things even, go and sign yourself, and remember... have fun!!!

Let's get a few things straight here... ALL YOU LEFT WING MOONBATS THOUGHT THAT RECALLING MP'S WAS A DUMB IDEA, remember? Ah, yea, the Reform Party suggested it 10 years ago, and you said you didn't want it... sorry, to late now! Secondly, ALL YOU MOONBATS WERE FINE WITH BELINDA CROSSING THE FLOOR!

Thirdly, Mr. Harper is NOT being a hypocrite... he NEVER supported a ban on MP's crossing the floor. It's a part of our system... always has been. The DIFFERENCE between this and Belinda is that she SOLD her vote for a cabinet post, but Mr. Harper APPROACHED Mr. Emerson to take this post, in an effort to ensure that ALL CANADIANS were represented in his cabinet. I think he's made a GREAT MOVE, at great risk to himself, in an effort to effectively govern this great country of ours.

Humm, let's see... a PM who's willing to "take one for the team" and do what needs to be done to fix the problems our nation is facing... WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU COULD SAY THAT ABOUT A CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER?

UPDATE: LOL... here's another signature:

978. A former Reform Party Member - Amm, we suggested a recall mechanism years ago... AND ALL YOU LEFTY MOONBATS SAID IT WAS A DUMB IDEA! You're about 10 years too late to do anything about it. Now, go home and live with your short-sightedness. Thanks for coming out!

600th Comment

Wow... VF, you're the man! (or woman? I don't know!)

My thoughts on the Emerson defection

Well, I'll admit, I was initially thrilled, but then wary of the news. So, rather than posting immediately, I chose to wait and see, then comment after chewing on some thoughts. So to those who were wondering where I stood (thanks for caring), here's my answer...

I initially thought that he should step down and hold a byelection, but now, I'm not so sure. After a lot of thought, and a look at what the media is saying, and the Blogging Tories, I'm going to take a fairly unpopular stand... I DON'T think he needs to hold a byelection. True, I think the optics look bad, with PM Harper running on a platform of cleaning up how Ottawa works, but I think that this defection doesn't in reality violate that principled stand.

I went over my thoughts about the Belinda affair, and I still stand by them... there was a critical vote of confidence coming up in a couple of days, and we had a PM who was desperate to cling to power by any means necessary (ie - the Grewal affiar). And, being having the business mind that she has, managed to negotiate the price for her vote... an immediate cabinet post.

Many will say that Emerson did the same thing, but I disagree. There are several factors that make this situation totally different. One, this is a NEW Government, that has not even sit in the House yet... the agenda has not yet been set, and there are no votes of confidence waiting on the horizon. Two, his defection does NOT shift the balance of power like it did with Belinda.

The right of an MP to defect, switch parties, or sit independatly, has always been a part of the system upon which our nation is built. Now, he'll have to live with, in the next election, any fallout from his own consitiuents, whenever that may be. And the fact that he did so right now has both positive and negative aspects. He was elected as a Liberal, and some people in his riding may be ticked about that, and rightly so, I think. I would have been ticked had Belinda been my rep, as I'm a Tory through and through! But when Belinda switched, I was ticked mostly for when and why she did it, not the fact that she did it. Acutally, when Kilgor left the Liberals shortly afterwards, I was hoping he would join the Tories! But, he didn't, likely due to the uproar regarding Belinda's swap, and was effectively an independent conservative anyway.

Back to Emerson. If anything, PM Harper taking on this MP is an extremely risky move... but one that could have extremely positive benfits to Canadians in many ways. One, there are now TWO representatives in Harper's Cabinet that represent the major cities... Montreal and Vancouver. And there are several others, who though are not from Toronto, understand a great deal regarding the GTA and Toronto... three of them being from Queen's Park. EVEN LIBERAL TORONTO MAYOR DAVID MILLER SAID THAT HE THINKS HARPER MADE GOOD PICKS to represent Toronto!

Apparently, it was not Emerson shopping for a new job... it was the Conservatives coming to him looking to build a bigger and better coalition from which to govern this nation more effectively... at great personal risk to themselves.

In many ways, don't you think that actually shows that this new government means business?

I was the first to admit that this didn't look to great... the optics were troublesome; having campaigned on cleaning up government, this was not the greatest way to start. But upon 24 hours of reflection, it may turn out to be a gutsy and good move for the nation. I say that this story will fall off the radar of Canadians within three to four days. The blogs will talk about it off and on for a couple of weeks, and then we won't hear about it again until the next election. As many have been saying, PM Harper is a strategist, and he's just attempted a daring manouver that could either hurt or help him both in the short and long term.

As a Christian, I agree that lying is unacceptable, but I don't know if you can say Emerson has actually been lying about anything. You could say it was dishonest, however, in what way, exactly, was he dishonest? (other than flying one set of colours, then switching) In terms of where he stands on issues, I don't think he's changed at all... he has always been a small-c conservative. The people who voted for him still have him as who he is... he has indicated that he feels he can better represent his people under PM Harper, than from the Opposition benches. (then again, so did Belinda...)

We REALLY don't know how this one will play out... we'll have to see how the history books write it. And despite everything postive I've said here about this affair, for the record, I'm not 100% decided on how I feel about this one. I just figured I'd try to broaden the discussion with a few points that I've been mulling in my head.

UPDATE: Looks like I'm not alone in my thoughts. Read Kate's post after I made mine... it's nice to be in good company.

UPDATE II: Nope, I'm not alone. (check the list)

PM's Website Update

It's official, the PM's Offical Website has been updated... though some bugs need to be worked out...

www.pm.gc.ca

The Cabinet

Here's some of the postings, live as it happens...

11:20 - GG approves list of Cabinet members... 28 to be announced

11:21 - Here we go!

Robert Nicholson - House Leader/Democratic Reform (a surprise)

DAVID EMERSON - the surprise House floor crossing this morning... audio cut out, has some sort of Foreign portfolio, and the 2010 Games portfolio

11:24 - NO!!! Connection went down!!!

11:26 - Okay, audio from CBC Radio One... better than nothing... likely missed a few things.

11:29 - Have CPAC back... just missed the name of the guy just sworn in.

11:30 - Marjorie LaBreton... longtime Tory Senator.

11:32 - MONTE GETS IN!!! Monte Solberg, Minister of Immigration.

11:34 - Chuck Strahl, Agriculture

11:35 - Gary Lunn, Nat. Resources

11:39 - Peter Mackay - Foreign Affairs and ACOA, not Dep. PM. (I think bad move)

11:42 - Loyla Herne (spelling?) - Fisheries.

11:44 - Stocky Boy! - Public Safety

11:48 - Carol Skelton - National Revenue and Western something... who is she? Wow, high profile post, I don't know her name.

11:49 - Vic Taves, Justice

11:51 - Rona got Enviornment

11:54 - WOO HOO!!! MIKE CHONG MAKES CABINET!!! Privy Council Pres., Minister of Governmental Affairs, and Sport. He's a local guy, in the riding next door! We have a local rep! Forget Brenda... all my questions are going right to Mike!!!

11:57 - Diane Finley - Human Resources and Social Services

12:00 - Gordon O'Conner, missed his post

12:03 - Bev Oda - missed her post too, talking to my boss

12:05 - Jim Prentice - Indian/Northern Affairs

12:08 - John Baird - He got the Treasury Board President post - former Ontario Cabinet Minister

12:10 - Maxime Bernier (spelling?) - Industry

12:13 - Lawrence Canon - Transport, Infrastructure

12:15 - Tony Clement, Minister of Health... there's gonna be a stink about that, to be sure! I thought he did a GREAT job in that post in Ontario, but the nursing unions are gonna cry about him!

12:18 - WOW... Jim Flaherty, MINISTER OF FINANCE... there may be an even BIGGER outcry about this one! People are going to start crying that we're going to have Mike Harris style cuts... just you wait and see. I personally think it's GREAT!!! No better way to give the nod to Ontario than to give two of the biggest portfolios to two of the biggest names

12: 20 - Josee Verner - International Co-operation, Francophone affairs. No surprise that she made Cabinet, she was part of the shadow cabinet before, as a non-MP member.

12:23 - Mike Fortier, Public Works and Gov. Services... Scott Brison's old gig

And that appears to be it. Let the games begin!!!

IT'S DONE! PRIME MINISTER HARPER

He's JUST been sworn in!

LIBERAL MP DEFECTS???

David Emerson, Liberal MP, has just entered Riedu Hall WITH THE TORIES... to be part of the Cabinet?

More to come!

I've got a song stuck in my head

Yea, there's this tune that I can't get out of my head today... but it's alright, I don't mind it being there, because it's so fitting...

"Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, GOODBYE!"

Sometimes, I HATE being right

Yesterday, while reading about all the fury worldwide regarding the cartoons, I said, "Blood will be spilt over this."

For the record, sometimes I HATE being right.

Priest killed as fury grows
Gunman shouts, 'God is great,' then pulls trigger

Italian priest Andrea Santoro, 59, was shot twice in the entrance to the Santa Maria Catholic Church in the northern city of Trabzon.

The Vatican's ambassador to Turkey said the gunman shouted, "Allahu Akhbar!" as he fired his pistol.

Amm, it's a cartoon folks...

Someone publishes a bunch of cartoons, and you threaten and injure people, and torch buildings in response... seems a reasonable response to me... NOT! I don't know, what do you all think... do you think their INTENT was JUST to injure them? Not likely.

So, then let's call it like it is... a MURDEROUS MOB on a RAMPAGE. Sure, it was lead by extremists, to be sure, and I know you can't paint all of Islam with that same brush, but we're talking THOUSANDS of people. We're talking about rioting in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and large protests in Germany, Denmark, France, London, and HALIFAX, for crying out loud! Now, you want to tell me that these are just extremists? Right... 200 Muslim extremists live in Nova Scotia. And in London, there were signs calling for the execution of the cartoonists! Front page of the National Post... that one's going in the scrapbook.

Back to what's going on in the Mid-East. Let's not forget, as another blogger pointed out, that the attacks on these embassies is, according to international law, an act of WAR.

Hey Europe... could Bush and Blair have been right that terrorists within the Muslim world pose a 'clear and present danger'? (I love that Clancy flick...) Well, anyway, hope you have fun dealing with your new found mess.

And do us all a favour? Try not to let this turn into World War III, if you wouldn't mind? Thanks.

UPDATE: This is getting out of hand folks... 50,000 at one rally? Give them guns, and you've got a couple of battalions right there...

"FOUR MORE YEARS!" - Reposted

REPOSTED due to Blogger downtime yesterday: I posted earlier that it will be FOUR YEARS until the next election. You laugh?

With each passing day, it's looking more and more like the Tories will be able to stay in office for a good long while. The Liberal leadership... right now, it's like a hot potato... no one wants a Kim Campbell-like, crash and burn term, relegated to the Opposition benches. The people who typically want the post are people who want to be the Prime Minister one day. The person who takes the job right now will likely NEVER get to move into 24 Sussex, thus, no one wants it.

What the Liberal Party needs is someone who can rebuild the party, lose the next election graciously, and then hand over the reigns to someone who's been building support and momentum during these next five years, who can win BIG the next time around. (Look at me here... advising my opponents)

But that's the ONLY way the Liberal Party will be able to pull this off, at least, with any sucess, is to, as many have said, go out to the woodshed and deal with their problems. Not kicking and screaming, trying to resist and plotting to win back power sooner, but to just tuck tail and get it over with.

Any attempts to win back the reigns of power sooner, rather than later, will wind them up in a WEAK monority, IF THEY WIN AT ALL. By focusing their resources on winning, rather than renewing itself, they will have missed their golden opportunity, and will suffer for it. Canadians will be INCENSED if we end up having an election within two to three years, therefore, since they have the time, why not take advantage of it? WARNING TO ATHEISTS, BIBLICAL ANALOGY AHEAD:Some one who can steer the party well should take over, lead them like Moses through the wilderness, and then pass the mantle over to Joshua, who will lead them into victory. During the years of Moses, "Josh" could be working in the wings, helping to foster the renewal just beyond the shadow of the leader... all the while, the party membership can be talking in hushed tones about "The One" in the background, preparing for a coronation after the next election loss. They need a leader who can live with that One in his/her shadow, and not turn it into another battle.

Now, things could just blow up for PM Harper, and this could all be moot. However, I don't think he's going to slip up drasticly, if at all, therefore, the Liberals should plan on long-term rebuilding, and leave the country to us for a while.

Of course, I would MUCH RATHER that they DON'T listen to me... then come 2018, we can instead be chanting "TWELVE MORE YEARS! TWELVE MORE YEARS!" (Wow... I'd be 40 years old by then!)

"FOUR MORE YEARS!"

I posted earlier that it will be FOUR YEARS until the next election. You laugh?

With each passing day, it's looking more and more like the Tories will be able to stay in office for a good long while. The Liberal leadership... right now, it's like a hot potato... no one wants a Kim Campbell-like, crash and burn term, relegated to the Opposition benches. The people who typically want the post are people who want to be the Prime Minister one day. The person who takes the job right now will likely NEVER get to move into 24 Sussex, thus, no one wants it.

What the Liberal Party needs is someone who can rebuild the party, lose the next election graciously, and then hand over the reigns to someone who's been building support and momentum during these next five years, who can win BIG the next time around. (Look at me here... advising my opponents)

But that's the ONLY way the Liberal Party will be able to pull this off, at least, with any sucess, is to, as many have said, go out to the woodshed and deal with their problems. Not kicking and screaming, trying to resist and plotting to win back power sooner, but to just tuck tail and get it over with.

Any attempts to win back the reigns of power sooner, rather than later, will wind them up in a WEAK monority, IF THEY WIN AT ALL. By focusing their resources on winning, rather than renewing itself, they will have missed their golden opportunity, and will suffer for it. Canadians will be INCENSED if we end up having an election within two to three years, therefore, since they have the time, why not take advantage of it? WARNING TO ATHEISTS, BIBLICAL ANALOGY AHEAD:Some one who can steer the party well should take over, lead them like Moses through the wilderness, and then pass the mantle over to Joshua, who will lead them into victory. During the years of Moses, "Josh" could be working in the wings, helping to foster the renewal just beyond the shadow of the leader... all the while, the party membership can be talking in hushed tones about "The One" in the background, preparing for a coronation after the next election loss. They need a leader who can live with that One in his/her shadow, and not turn it into another battle.

Now, things could just blow up for PM Harper, and this could all be moot. However, I don't think he's going to slip up drasticly, if at all, therefore, the Liberals should plan on long-term rebuilding, and leave the country to us for a while.

Of course, I would MUCH RATHER that they DON'T listen to me... then come 2018, we can instead be chanting "TWELVE MORE YEARS! TWELVE MORE YEARS!" (Wow... I'd be 40 years old by then!)

PM Harper - The "Evangelical"

The "Red Star" has an article today about Stephen Harper. The headline says, "Stephen Harper just can't quit his inner-Evangelical", which will grab peoples attention, but then the article, in actual fact, is really good! It starts out like this...

Stephen Harper, our newest Prime Minister, is an evangelical Christian. Over the course of the election campaign, certain media outlets, Liberal Party supporters, and members of Canada's intelligentsia have suggested that that makes him different from the rest of us ... us being "average Canadians."

So, of course, I'm thinking, "Here we go, the scare mongering continues..." But then, it ends like this... "

The implications of these findings are staggering: it could mean that for the first time in decades Canadians might have a Prime Minister who doesn't lie to them.

Skeptical? I understand. It may be easy for evangelicals, but for the rest of us ... it's hard to believe in miracles.

Amm, I think I can live with press like that!

They've said the same things that I've been saying about PM Harper all along... he's a "moderate" evangelical. For non-evangelicals out there, trust me on that one, he's just a moderate... I heard him say "Oh my g**" on the Rick Mercer Report... and that's really revealing to me on where he actually stands. (to my friends who read this, namely BK and DC, I know what you're thinking already... some phrases I can ignore, but not THAT one, or someone saying "J.C.") As a Christian, things like lying, stealing, etc, are "anathema" to him. (Blake, care to define? Did I use that right? ;-) )

I REALLY respect PM Harper, and I look forward to seeing him change this nation. To those on the left, RELAX, he's not going to try and make Ottawa the "Vatican" for evangelical church. He's just a regular guy who wants to make a difference. He's not in it for the glory or the power in and of itself, but he got into this to obtain the power to make a difference.

And IF he gets the chance to pass his current agenda, I REALLY believe that next time around, there's a REALLY good chance that our NEXT election result could be a Conservative majority... but I say that's a good FOUR YEARS away. (that oughta stir the pot a little...)

The world gets a wake up call

Okay, so I've been somewhat remiss in posting lately, so here goes... a summary of what's going on.

And I start by asking "WHAT IS GOING ON?!" Could it be that the world is waking up to how Islam views the world? I think most on the left are getting a genuine wake up call... "NOTE TO LEFT: Islam does NOT support freedom of speech. You have now been warned."

Ravi Zacharias had a really good answer to a question regarding Islam's spread throughout the world. He was asked, "Mr. Zacharias, how do you think that Islam will be able to survive in the secularism of the West?" His answer was this; "Your question shows that you don't understand the first thing about Islam... it is not 'How will Islam survive in the West?'... the question we should be asking is 'How will the West survive Islam?'"

I remember hearing a story about some multi-faith conference held somewhere in Europe. (yes, I know, you ask where's the proof... sorry) In an attepmt to display the unity of faiths, a preist and imam got together for a photo op, where in a gesture of good faith, the imam gave the preist a copy of the Quran. The preist gladly accepted with smiles, and then proceeded to hand a copy of the Bible to the imam. He refused to accept it... because as a Muslim, why would he take another faith's holy book? No, their goal is to CONVERT us, by any means.

As a Christian, I too want to convert you, but NOT "by any means". I have no fear of reasoned discussion... but that's another story!

I like it...

Oh, lookie what I found on the Liberal Party website... a link to the "Leader of the Opposition". Sweet.