Obama/Gibbs lose bet to Harper/Soudas

Looks like there were a couple of bets on today's game... Obama will be sending a case of Molson beer to Prime Minister Harper, as the loser of their bet on the Men's Gold medal game.

But wait, it gets even better... White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs also had a bet with PMO spokesperson Dimitri Soudas. As the loser, he will wear a Team Canada jersey at one of his upcoming White House Press Briefings.

Can't WAIT to post the YouTube of that one... SWEET!!!

February 28, 2010 | 6:52 PM ET
Breaking: President Obama Loses Hockey Bet

Looks like President Obama will have to make good on a bet and send a case of Molson beer to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Team USA lost to Canada 3-2 in a rivalry match up that ended with Canada boasting the gold medal. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the President watched the overtime match in an office off the Oval.

Gibbs also lost a bed as a result of the hockey game. He will be wearing a Team Canada hockey jersey during one of his upcoming briefings in the next two weeks. Gibbs bet double-or-nothing with his Canadian counterpart, Dimitri Soudas, after the USA women's hockey team lost to Canada last week.

Raising airport security fees

I have a better idea... instead of now raising airline security fees, why not just forget about installing these full body scanning units, since there's a lot of people who don't want them anyway? (like me, for example...)

Let me get this straight... we install them in our airports, and there's a public outcry about them. We spin for weeks, and the outcry eventually subsides... at which point we turn around and say,
"Oh, by the way... HERE'S THE BILL."

Sorry guys... this one gets a FAIL from me. Glad I bought my tickets already.

Canada explained to Americans - by Tom Brokaw

Perhaps one of the best summaries of Canadian/US relations ever put forward by an American network!

UPDATE: Embedded video link changed due to NBC being idiots and trying to get the video pulled from YouTube... you'd think they'd be HAPPY with people promoting their stuff...

h/t to Darryl Wolk

May tries to solidify her grip on Green Party

You know the general rule... the more you try to tighten your grip on something mushy, the more of it will squirt out from between your fingers. Lizzy May is seeking to defer the Green Party's constitutionally mandated Leadership Review until after the next election.

Funny... aren't these guys the ones demanding "Electoral Reform" because our current system is "undemocratic"? So, how can they justify denying their membership of their democratic and Constitutional right for a Leadership Review? I'll tell you how... because she knows she's FINISHED in any review. With two losses under her belt, if she doesn't get a seat this time around, she's out on her keester.

She's already lost the support of many key players in her Party, and many Green members hold her directly responsible for their loss in Guelph in 2008, the one place they had an actual shot of winning with her last minute call for "strategic voting". Many believe that spooked just enough Liberals and Dippers to the Liberals, thus denying Mike Nagy of his hard fought near victory. Is it any wonder that he's not running again?

And I'll let you in on a little secret, based on rumblings I've heard from my sources over in Guelph... the local Greens told her to get lost when she approached them about running there in the next election. Why's that, you may ask, when Guelph is by far their best shot to win? The "official" reason is because they want a "local candidate", and "unofficially" because they don't want to take out a Liberal. But the REAL reason is because they WANT her to lose. That's right, they WANT to watch her go down in flames.

Now you may ask yourself why I think that, and the answer is simple. They want her to lose because they've got a solid frontrunner for her job waiting in the wings... the very same Mike Nagy. Mike Nagy, who as the next Leader of the Green Party, would have a solid chance of becoming their first elected Member of Parliament. Think about it... Leader of the Green Party, versus some no-name backbencher Liberal? I'd say that works out to an EASY 5,000 vote bloodletting, which could put the Greens well over the top.

Go ahead, quote me on this one... even though I'm not a betting man, I'm almost willing to put money on this one.

Once again, Lizzy May reminds us that she's just a tiny little fish in a very big political pond... and she's in way over her head.

CTV: "Anger is replacing Hope"

You don't say.

Barack Obama's challenge: Anger is replacing hope
The Associated Press
Date: Monday Feb. 15, 2010 11:45 AM ET

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama won the White House with a campaign message focused on hope. Now he is trying to get himself on the right side of a remarkably different national sentiment these days: anger.

Obama's expansive domestic goals are largely the same, but his message is changing, now constructed around a concession that the public is disillusioned and wanting results. If he cannot show people that he understands their frustration and is working to fix it, the risks are real.

All that angst that Obama wants to harness as a force for change -- as he did in his campaign -- will turn against him. That means eroding public support for his agenda and potentially big losses for his party in congressional elections in November.

So it was telling when Obama offered this take on Republican Scott Brown's Senate win in Massachusetts last month, one that weakened the Democratic president's hand: "The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry, and they're frustrated."

A new White House talking point was born, and it was hardly hope and change.

Oh wait a sec... I believe I did say...

But I have several serious concerns today [Jan. 20, 2009], on what ought to be a great day.

Firstly, I think Mr. Obama essentially used the hype of "Hope" and "Change" to swoon the voters, and millions of people bought into it. Not that that's necessarily wrong, but I honestly think that he's raised expectations so high, that when people realize that he is indeed just a man, and not the "Omabassiah" some people think he is, there could end up being a whole lot of anger, and dashed dreams. While "Hope" is a tremendously positive thing, I think the inevitable letdown could be a whole lot worse than the euphoric feelings people have right now.

Secondly, I think a significant amount of the "positive" vibes he's getting out of people are not really "real". In fact, it's not genuine love and admiration for him that we're seeing today. I believe a large part of what we're seeing today is in fact a response, the flip-side if you will, of the virulent hatred that some people had for his predecessor, the 43rd President of the United States of America, George W. Bush. And "love" for one man, born out of the sheer hatred of another one, is a very dangerous thing indeed.

Now of course, I'm not saying that about the "common man" on the street. I've been watching the coverage, and watching the interviews of regular folks in the US, and I think their feelings are indeed genuine. The people I'm talking about are the partisans, the dyed-in-the-wool liberals. Their love for Obama, I suspect, is built largely on their hatred of Bush, and as such, is a truly dangerous house of cards for Obama to build his support upon. I actually fear somewhat for the guy, because they're liable to snap if he doesn't do things their way. Think of a jilted lover, running from the arms of one man into the arms of the first available passerby. That's what I think a lot of his "support" is predicated on.

And as such, I'm genuinely afraid for the American people today. That's why I'm not feeling very celebratory right now. I think he's used people's hopes and dreams to get elected, but built them up in such a manner that they're going to get let down really hard. And I think that the "love" of the man isn't so much love for him, but a result of the hatred of another man.

Either way, I think Obama has to walk very carefully.

"Schooled" - A new Olympic definition

"Schooled" - Verb, past tense. Definition - To educate with severe intensity, or to harshly impress your vast superiority upon a weaker opponent. Example: Canada vs. Norway, Feb. 16, 2010, 8-0. Nuff said.

Only one thing left to say... NEXT!!!

Liberal Ross Rebagliati: "Let's ditch the Queen"

LOL... man I'm so glad this joker's running for the Liberals... but I'm thinking Iffy's not enjoying his latest headache.

[Rebagliati] says that having Queen Elizabeth II as Canadian head of state is something of the past.

'Don't know what the official position is, but I think the Commonwealth is over. We have to move forward. To have the Queen apointing a governor general... I don't know'.

I'm guessing that before he signed up to be a Liberal candidate for the next election, someone should have shown him the Oath of Allegiance that he'd have to give upon taking office...

I, [name], do Solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors according to law, forever. So help me God.

I'm thinking he's never gonna make Minister of Foreign Affairs. Got a suggestion for you dude... maybe don't toke up before giving interviews, eh?

And here's the Liberal response where Iffy distances himself from Rebagliati's comments in three, two one...

Cracking a PDF password (I.T. post)

[LEGAL DISCLAIMER] According to various sites I've read, cracking the password of a PDF file that you have full rights to, such as one from within your own organization, is perfectly legal. For the record, I do not condone any illegal use of the software product recommeded here.
[END DISCLAIMER]

So, I got a call today from someone who'd created a secure PDF file, but had forgotten the password they'd set... and of course, they call their "miracle worker", hoping I could figure it out for them. GRRRR, since figured I didn't have a chance, I told them they were likely up the creek without a paddle... but send me the file anyway, and I'd take a "crack" (ha ha) at it.

Did the research online, and that's why I'm writing this post today... found a GREAT tool from Elcomsoft, their Advanced PDF Password Recovery tool. Their "free" trial version doesn't have all the bells and whistles, but it had enough functionality for me to get the password I needed. It's a great looking tool, and if we ever need it again, I'm going to recommend buying the Pro license for my company.

FIRST CANADIAN GOLD!

Congrats to Alexandre Bilodeau, first Gold medal ever for a Canadian on Canadian soil. A name that will never be forgotten so long as this great nation stands.

Oh Canada!

Sent from my Blackberry

Coalition threat not dead yet

An interesting article from the Globe and Mail about an upcoming book entitled "How We Almost Gave the Tories the Boot", by Brian Topp, one of the coalition "insiders" from the NDP... think I'll have to pick up a copy myself.

Calgary West nomination issues

Rob Anders says "Liberals" are trying to take over his EDA Board. The woman who wants to run against him says she's not a Liberal, but DOES admit she was at "Joe Clark's leadership review".

Humm... was she a Joe Clark supporter? If so, then that somewhat lends credence to Rob's accusation... that "Progressives" are trying to cause trouble for a hard-right MP.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/mass-resignations-deepen-tory-riding-rift/article1465377/

Also of note is that most of the resigning Board members were part of the takeover that occurred last year... which means their resignation is no big loss.

Final note... I'm no fan of Anders, and thing he's a bit of an idiot, so don't think I'm trying to defend him. I just can't stand Liberal/Progressive trouble makers at the EDA level.

Sent from my Blackberry

Sweet new CPC Logo sweatshirts!

Hey everyone, take a look at the sweet new "Conservative Logo" sweatshirt I picked up at the mall the other day! I'm seeing people wearing them everywhere... I think we've got a guaranteed majority next time, what with all these shirts I'm seeing!


It looks like the Party has found a great new marketing venue for our swag, The Hudson's Bay Company! Get yours today, and show everyone that REAL Canadian patriots support the Conservative Party of Canada!

Liberals opposed to extending Session?

UPDATE: Darn G&M headline... "Liberals tie detainee committee to deal on break weeks" was somewhat misleading, the Liberals have NOT tied their support for the extension of Parliament to reconvining the Afghan committee... they've simply made some "suggestions".[END UPDATE]

Hang on a sec, what's this? After the Tories offer to make up for lost time with the extension of Parliament for an extra two weeks, all of a sudden Ignatieff has gotten all "iffy" about the idea, trying to attach conditions?

Hang on, didn't they tell Canadians that cutting the session short was an affront to democracy? I guess they really didn't care about those extra weeks after all... funny, after the huge fuss they were making about the whole prorogue thing.

Rush on CNN's bias: Coverage of Bush vs. Obama's approval numbers

Only one thing to say... BWAAA HA HA HA!!!

McGuinty Proroguing? That's an OUTRAGE!!!

In a blatantly undemocratic and partisan move, Dalton McGuinty says he will prorogue the Ontario Legislature sometime between now and the end of the Vancouver Olympics.

It's an outrage I tell you, an OUTRAGE!!! The people of Ontario should go out and protest in the streets! He's obviously just trying to change the channel, with all major the problems he's facing... you know, the wasted $1,000,000,000 at eHealth, the brewing scandal with the Samsung contract, his Ministers jumping ship left and right, etc.? Yea, that's gotta be it... I smell a major cover-up! What a disgusting abuse of power!

Oh, did I say "undemocratic" and "partisan" move? Actually, scratch all that... what I meant to say was that he's using his perfectly legal right via his democratically endowed powers as Premier to reset the agenda, and begin a fresh new Session at Queen's Park.

Yea, there's nothing to see here... move on.

Did the McGuinty Government quietly restore teacher's union right to strike?

I'm asking a serious question, because I can't make out what exactly they've done here in a small sub-section of the recently passed Bill 212, the "Good Government Act, 2009". Any guidance by any of you legal-beagles would be appreciated.

Anyway, I was looking over the text of Bill 212, in the context of the changes related to the Municipal Elections Act. Anyway, while looking over the text, I found this section that intrigued me... and I'm not entirely sure of what it means, or of what potential consequences there are for parents here in Ontario.

Bill 212 - Good Government Act, 2009

SCHEDULE 20 - MINISTRY OF LABOUR

Repeals and Revocation
5. (1) The following are repealed:

1. Back to School Act, 1998 .

2. Back to School Act (Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board), 2000 .

3. Back to School Act (Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board), 2002 .

4. Back to School Act (Toronto and Windsor), 2001 .

5. Back to School (Toronto Catholic Elementary) and Education and Provincial Schools Negotiations Amendment Act, 2003 .

6. City of Toronto Labour Disputes Resolution Act, 2002 .

7. Sections 3, 7, 8 and 9 of the Fairness for Parents and Employees Act (Teachers' Withdrawal of Services), 1997 .

5. (2) Ontario Regulation 13/98 (Application Deadline), made under the Fairness for Parents and Employees Act (Teachers' Withdrawal of Services), 1997, is revoked.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those are pretty much ALL the Acts invoked to deal with the striking unions during the Harris era, right?

Now I know that Omnibus bills like Bill 212 are passed on a regular basis, in order to help expedite the clean up and streamlining of existing legislation. But I'm somewhat curious as to why the McGuinty government has gone and done this now... and what are the consequences of repealing these Acts now. Aren't we heading into a period of labour negotiations with these groups fairly soon?

Here's my theory... the Teachers Unions know that they've got a sweet deal under McGuinty's Liberals, and they don't want to harm them in the polls right now and put that sweet deal at risk. At the same time, the McGuinty Liberals know they've also got a sweet deal with the Teachers Unions, and they don't want to put that at risk either. So, I'm sure there's a little "wink-wink, nudge-nudge" stuff going on in the background, and there won't be any labour unrest with them this year, and the government will give in to the union's significantly reduced demands pretty much without question... though it will still be a deal that's far to rich in these tough economic times, mind you.

Therefore, it's my opinion that these moves (which assumes I'm reading it correctly, which I'll admit may well be off) aren't for this current set of negotiations, but for the next set... WHICH WILL OCCUR AFTER THE 2011 ONTARIO ELECTION.

You know, THAT 2011 Election... THE ONE THE LIBERALS FEAR THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOSE. Call me cynical, but I'm betting that this is a "Let's screw Tim Hudak post-2011, just in case he wins" move by the McGuinty Liberals.

As I said, this is all assuming that I've interpreted the removal of these other Acts correctly... and assuming that they're still in force, thereby limiting the Teacher's ability to strike. Again, a more learned person's perspective on this would be appreciated, but I just wanted to throw it out there so that SOMEONE who can figure it out will give it a look. Please tell me if I've got it all wrong... I'd actually be relieved to know that.

Newsboys "Born Again" hits stores June 8th!

WARNING - Blatantly religious post follows:

WOO HOO!!! Newsboys first album with new frontman Michael Tait, of dcTalk fame, hits store shelves on June 8th! They've realeased the title track for the album, entitled "Born Again"... give it a look and a listen below!



It looks like they're putting together an incredible works project too with the launch of this album... good on them! They filmed this new video on the Baja penninsula, an area hugely impoverished, and are seeking to put together a team to go down there and undertake a building project. Here's hoping this turns into a longer term effort that keeps working to spread the Gospel of the Lord Jesus to this needy region of the world... that's right on our doorstep.

It's very clearly got major influences from Michael, who's sound is the one I loved most from the good old dcTalk days. (Toby Mac's solo stuff is okay, but Kevin Max is just loony tunes, I never even bother with his far out there sounds) Yet it still retains something of the classic Newsboys influence, with their solid artistry and sound. With another new guy doing the bassline, it's obviously lost something, as I just LOVED Phil Joel's artistry on that front... though I wasn't a big fan of the hair! ;-) But there's still that same classic guitar work, and incredible drum talent that have helped solidify the Newsboys as a CCM icon for decades.

Looking forward to hearing more as June 8th approaches. I've loved Newsboys for years, and loved dcTalk when they were together, and stuck with Michael Tait during the Tait Band years... I'm looking forward to hearing what this merging of the classic and iconinc styles will end up sounding like!

Someone trying to bury issues in Carleton's CUSA elections?

Some interesting, and somewhat disturbing, things going on in Carleton's CUSA Elections. Nick Bergamini, a candidate for CSUA President, was accused of operating a website that redirects to a CBC report on the fiasco that ensued with the CUSA in 2008.

If you recall, members of the CUSA voted almost unanimously to cut funding for cystic fibrosis research and treatment. Why? Because, in their words, cystic fibrosis "has been recently revealed to only affect white people, and primarily men".

Anyway, the CUSA Elections Office has charged anti-CFS candidate Nick Bergamini with an "Election Offence"... because, get this, and I quote, "The article [to which this third-party website redirects to] is supportive of your campaign". ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

No, they're not kidding... read the letter for yourself...

Nicholas Bergamini

The Chief Electoral Officer has been alerted to the domain name “Cusaonline.ca” which
links to a CBC Article dated November 25, 2009 entitled “Students drop Shinerama
fundraiser for illness targeting Caucasians” in which you are named and quoted.

This article has obviously been posted in an effort to reach students that mistakenly type in cusaonline.ca instead of going to the cusaonline.com website. The article is supportive of your campaign and as such the Chief Electoral Officer deems it as a form of campaigning.

Even if you did not personally post the article or purchase the domain name, you are
responsible for ensuring your election campaign is done in a fair and respectful manner. Under the CUSA Electoral Code, as a candidate, you are responsible for your workers' actions concerning your campaign.

So let me get this straight... someone registers a domain name, forwards it to a CBC article that quotes Nick, and sheds him in a postive and rational light, AND HE GETS IN TROUBLE FOR IT?!?!?! If you're wondering why I tagged this article with "loony lefties", wonder no more.

It's OUTRAGEOUS for the CUSA Elections Office to hold a candidate responsible for actions over which they have absolutely no control. I mean, think about it... are they going to charge Nick responsible for THIS BLOG POST HERE? I've never met Nick, never even heard his name prior to today... but with this fiasco, I've already added him to my "Friends" list on Facebook!

Once again, there seem to be forces at work seeking to rig the outcome of the Carleton CUSA Elections. AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME. The winner of last years Presidental Election was actually denied his victory after the fact, and a second Presidential candiadacy was also rejected, leaving only the pro-CFS "establishment" candidate standing. Things that make you go humm... humm?

So I suppose there's a serious question we should be asking here, and I know I'm going to be doing some more digging on this front... just who was it that filed this allegation with the CUSA Elections Office? Was it someone from rival Alex Sirois' camp? Using the CUSA Election Office's standards for "evidence", I think we can safely assume that it was indeed someone from his camp.

Which then raises an even bigger question... just what is it someone's trying to hide? Are there members of the Sirois slate that were involved in the idiotic Cystic Fibrosis decision, and are now seeking to cover up their involvement? Well you guys just broke the Golden Rule of political scandal... "It's never the break in, it's always the COVER UP."

Of course, I guess I should give my apologies to Nick right now... as I'm sure he'll be getting another "Election Violation" notice for my blog post today.

Ignatieff's abortion plank changes the channel, and earns him more critisim

We all are aware of Iggy's crass partisan move(*) this week, a move that was intended to smear Prime Minister Harper and paint him into a box on the divisive issue of abortion.

Well, it looks like this one's really gotten away from him and blown up in his face, first with one of his own MP's rebuking him, and now with several Catholic leaders publicly condemning him for playing politics with the important issue of women's and children's health abroad.

And they don't mince their words either...

Calgary Bishop Fred Henry yesterday called Mr. Ignatieff's proposal "pathetic," while on Thursday Archbishop Thomas Collins of Toronto labelled the Liberal leader's position on abortion and the developing world "sad."

"In light of the many positive contributions that Canada can make to the improvement of maternal and child health, it is astonishing that the leader of the Opposition has issued an official statement advocating contraception and abortion as fundamental elements in addressing this important issue," said Archbishop Collins. "Even those who think that abortion should be allowed do not, however, propose it as a positive contribution to the good of society."

Bishop Henry was even more blunt.

"I thought it was pathetic for a political leader to suggest that abortion is somehow tied to the health of women and children," said Bishop Henry. "It was a particularly crass remark in light of all the orphaned children we now see in Haiti. It was absolutely incredible that he would say that and he is alienating religious people with these comments. This will not win him votes."

Opening up this "Pandora's Box" has also had the effect of forcing him off message for the last few days, because instead of being able to answer questions about other Liberal issues while on the road, he keeps getting hammered with questions from the media about abortion, and about the fallout he's getting over it. He's been forced to react for two days now, instead of being able to put forward the ideas being generated from the various round tables the Liberals are hosting in various cities.

Rule number one... when your opponent is on the ropes, and you have control of the agenda, you DON'T do anything to change the channel. And that's what Ignatieff has gone and done with this one. In trying to score a political cheap shot on Harper, he cleanly missed, and has ended up taking a few blows himself. What's more, is that he's gone and changed the channel for Harper... without Harper even having to say a word on the issue. His caucus has been smart and not put their foot in their mouth, and left Iggy on the stage all by himself on this one... where he's started a fire that he can't seem to put out.

And on that note, I'll say this... thanks for the helping hand Iggy! Oh, don't worry... we'll be surely making use of your remarks in some of those ridings where we were losing support, and where you were starting to make headway. As this one will fire up some of our base that was starting to become apathetic, you just reminded many Canadians of faith why they DON'T want you to become Prime Minister... with an issue that we could never talk about. But you did that for us, so thanks again!


* So much for not using "the politics of division" there guys... wasn't that supposed to be one of you hallmarks Iggy?

A prophetic photo from the "CC Archives"

Was looking for info from an old post of mine, and came across this prophetic pic from October 2007...
Yep, looks like we called that one pretty accurately... although at least Ignatieff waited long enough to let him have one kick at the can. Anyone remember playing "CLUE" when they were a kid?

"The murderer was Professor Iffy, with the knife, in the House of Commons... I WAS RIGHT, I WIN!!!"

JACK JUMPING SHIP?!?!?UPDATE - It's prostate cancer, get well soon Jack!

WOHA... The National Post is reporting via Twitter that, NDP Leader Jack Layton to "make an announcement about his personal status and his immediate future as NDP leader".

THIS COULD BE HUGE, stay tuned, press conference at 2PM EST

UPDATE: Rumour is via Kady O'Malley that he's just announcing a temporary stepping down for health reasons.

UPDATE II: Consensus seems to be growing that he's going in for back surgery... which means there's NO WAY we're going into a Spring election, as the NDP will be more than reluctant to jump into the fray without their leader. Which is likely why he's doing it now... perhaps he's got some good intel that says Iggy won't change his mind about forcing an election, and therefore Jack wants to get it done now to be ready for a Fall or 2011 campaign.

UPDATE III: Layton announced that it's prostate cancer, and that he will be remain as Toronto-Danforth's MP, and Leader of the NDP, during his treatment. All Canadians wish him well, and I know I will pray for a speedy recovery.

Those "Non-Partisan" rallies? Organizers get BUSTED

Sorry to all of the genuine "non-partisans" who participated in last month's anti-prorogue rallies... but it looks like you've been sold a very partisan bill of goods.


Someone has done a very thorough investigation into the partisan political links of rally organizers, and has come up with the hard evidence that most of us BTers have suspected all along... that the VAST majority of these rallies were in fact organized by hard-core Liberal and NDP partisans, with a not so "hidden agenda" of attacking the Harper government.

That's right folks... these rallies weren't about "democracy" or "non-partisanship". Turns out that they were nothing more than a partisanly organized political stunt to score points. AND THEY DELIBERATELY USED YOU MANY OF YOU TO DO IT.

Humm, Liberals and Dippers, working together in an effort to attack the Conservatives. Is this just another pre-cursor to what Mr. Harper warned us about... are they trying to revive the coalition?

h/t to Alberta Ardvark

Left trying to frep the CTV poll

Heads up everyone, the anti-Prorogue folks are telling all their supporters to frep the CTV poll about Harper's decision to extend the sitting days for Parliament. Let's make sure we keep things honest and even, eh?

Now there's irony for you... these folks get mad at Harper for cutting the number of days Parliament sits short... then they get mad at him for trying to make up for some of those lost days. Just proves that these characters are just "Harper Haters", despite their efforts to appear "non-partisan" and "pro-democracy".

Oh, and don't forget to join the group... Vote for Rod!

Ignatieff DEMANDS funding for murdering foreign babies

As a staunchly pro-life individual, there's really no other way I can "spin" Ignatieff's demands. Who knew the Liberals would sink so low as to advocate the murder of innocents to further their own "political ideology"... which is, ironically, exactly what he was accusing Harper of considering.

Include abortion in maternal-health pledge,
Michael Ignatieff tells PM
Jane Taber - Tuesday, February 2, 2010 3:57 PM

Michael Ignatieff warned Stephen Harper today not to play “ideological games” with women’s health, suggesting the Prime Minister’s new commitment should extend to abortion programs.

“Let’s keep the ideology out of this and move forward,” said the Liberal leader at an afternoon press conference.

On an interesting note, Mr. Ignatieff better watch where he steps on this file... as some members of his own Party will break ranks with him if it comes down to a vote, that much is sure.


UPDATE: One commenter had a very good point, mentioning how Iggy never actually uses the "A" word in his statement. Notice that? Looks like he's trying to take a political shot at Harper, while keeping his hands clean.

Which got me to thinking that once again, Iggy may end up with egg on his face with this stunt. By opening this Pandora's Box within his own ranks, some Liberal MP's are already distancing themselves from Ignatieff on this file.

Mr. Harper now has the golden opportunity of coming out with a stellar overall health aid package... one that addresses some of the more immediate needs of children and mothers around the world like food, water, medicine, and access to health care workers. With the massive scope of issues there are to deal with, all Harper has to do is address urgent and real needs, and avoid reproductive issues altogether. How can the Liberals oppose that?

Of course, that will hopefully leave the media to question why Iffy tried to play the old abortion "fear" card to score cheap points. Hopefully, they'll rightly take him to task for trying to play politics and score points with such a serious international health issue. (if they even bother, mind you... though I'm not holding my breath)

Yep, it looks like Iggy tried moving his rook, and left his Queen WIDE OPEN for Prime Minister "Chessmaster".

UPDATE II: My level of respect for Liberal MP Paul Szabo just went up a few notches...

LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) contacted several pro-life Liberal members for their comments. Liberal MP Paul Szabo says he was caught off guard by the announcement, noting that the subject was not even raised during the caucus meeting

“The full day was on CIDA issues,” he said. “I sat there all day long, the subject wasn’t discussed.”

Disputing Ignatieff’s claim of consensus, Szabo said, “I am a pro-life MP and there are many of my colleagues in the Liberal caucus who will protect the unborn in their decisions as Parliamentarians, and should matters come before the House they will continue to act accordingly.”

Szabo said it was “opportunistic” of the Women’s Caucus of the Liberals to use something as important as maternal health to push their pro-abortion agenda.

“I don’t think this is Liberal Party position,” he concluded, “it was never discussed with the caucus and the caucus never had an opportunity to express its views.”

A memo to the Conservative National Council... our candidate in Missassauga South better be pro-life, cause if you're planning to take this guy out in the next election, I might personally back Szabo. Just food for thought.

"National Childcare is Liberal's top priority"

Who said it? Well first it was Chretien (1993). Then it was Chretien again (1997). Then, well, it was Chretien one last time (2000). Then next time it was Martin (2004). Then Martin again, with the help of Scott "Beer and Popcorn" Reid (2005). Then of course, last time around, it was Dion (2008).

Are you sensing a theme here?

Now, it's Iggy's turn to take the pledge. Not necessarily to deliver, mind you, but to at least say the words.

You'd think the left would get it by now. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

So what about "Fool me six times, and... well, I guess I'll vote for you again anyways"?

Why the current polls don't concern me

It's really funny watching all the media speculation right now about how there's a "seismic" shift in voter intentions, and that Mr. Harper and the Conservatives have lost "the Big Mo".

Do I look concerned? Not in the least. Iffy's already said he's not going to pull the trigger, and Liberal MP's across the country have been repeating the talking points... "Now's not the time." And besides all that, I turn your attention to some historical figures...

2009.06.09 - EKOS
BQ - 9.2
CPC - 30.3
GRN - 10.4
LIB - 35.0
NDP - 15.1

2009.06.01 - Nanos Research
BQ - 8.0
CPC - 31.8
GRN - 7.4
LIB - 37.2
NDP - 15.7

2009.05.29 - Angus Reid Strategies
BQ - 9
CPC - 31
GRN - 7
LIB - 33
NDP - 17

2009.05.10 - Strategic Counsel
BQ - 9
CPC - 30
GRN - 11
LIB - 35
NDP - 16

2009.05.03 - Harris-Decima
BQ - 9
CPC - 29
GRN - 11
LIB - 34
NDP - 15

2009.04.30 - Nanos Research
BQ - 9
CPC - 33
GRN - 7
LIB - 36
NDP - 15

2009.03.23 - Leger Marketing
BQ - 9
CPC - 34
GRN - 6
LIB - 35
NDP - 14

Polls... they ebb and they flow, come and they go. Right now, it's still all about the prorogue. Soon, everyone's attention will turn to the Olympics. Then, it will be all about the Throne Speech and the Budget. And you know what Canadians are going to shrug and say?

"I think I liked them better when they were prorogued."

UPDATE: Of course, the Q4 Party fund raising numbers also put a smile on my face. Yea, we pulled in two and a half times what they did... AGAIN.

"Liberals, NDP 'testing the ground' on..."

...a new coalition? Who knows, perhaps this is just the first baby-step towards that ultimate goal of the left.

Liberals, NDP 'testing the ground' on joint anti-prorogation legislation
Jane Taber - Monday, February 1, 2010 1:13 PM

1. Plotting prorogation strategy. Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale and his NDP counterpart Libby Davies met for more than an hour last week. They were trying to determine if they could put together a joint strategy on limiting the Prime Minister’s powers of prorogation.

The meeting was characterized as at the “discussion” phase with no decisions taken. Indeed, whether the parties will be able to agree on a joint proposal to take to the House when it returns in March is not yet clear.

“The idea of a joint bill was not discussed,” a senior Liberal official says. “So in short, [we were] testing the ground to see if they would support us – and the feeling is they might, at least for some elements.”

McGuinty's chickens coming home to roost?

Unions to McGuinty: "It's time to pay the piper"

The various unions that delivered Queen's Park to the Liberals in the last two elections (in part via some ethically questionable arms-length third party attack ads) have delivered an ultimatum to the McGuinty Liberals... they're cashing in their chips for their upcoming contract negotiations, and making it clear to him that if he doesn't pay up, the Liberals might not be able to count on union support come the 2011 elections.

The unions are demanding, can you believe it, WAGE INCREASES during these tough economic times. And while tens of thousands of people are losing their jobs, they're also demanding that none of their public sector members face job losses. For example, the first set of major negotiations between Ontario's colleges and OPSEU... WHERE THE UNION REJECTED A 5.9% WAGE INCREASE!!! At a time when folks in the private sector are taking WAGE CUTS to keep their jobs, the union is still demanding wage increases? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!? And this is just the beginning... there are a number of major negotiations to take place this year.

Well this oughta be fun to watch. My guess? Mr. McGuinty will fold like a cheap suit, and give the unions pretty much everything they ask for... after making a "show" of standing up to them, of course. They'll let one or two of the unions strike for a few weeks, and then make a big show of reaching a deal... a deal which will spend a whole lot more money than we have, and keep us in deficit for years to come.

I mean, just look at the recent Samsung deal... at least the media has clued in, and things are starting to get ugly for the McGuinty Liberals on that front, with even his own caucus starting to revolt. I'm guessing some of them are starting to fear losing their seats come next year.

With these upcoming union negotiations, they should be worried... if they cave and give in to the unions, and run up the deficit like there's no tomorrow, there's going to be a whole lot of angry people in this province.