Recently I wrote a post complaining about Stephen Harper’s ignorance over our electoral process and his place in it. Now another far right idiot has joined him in the “just how stupid do you have to be, to be a far right daftie?” sweepstakes.
Enter Shayne Saskiw of the Alberta Tea party (Wildrose).
“Given prior precedent, it is our belief this ruling strengthens our democracy. In the last election, over 440,000 Albertans overwhelmingly voted for the Wildrose to be their voice in the legislature, a strong mandate neither the third nor the fourth parties received,”
440,000 Albertans did not vote for the Wildrose, they voted for candidates who proclaimed a Wildrose affiliation at that time. This is important to acknowledge. People elect MPs not parties. If you look in the Elections Act, there is no requirement to be affiliated with any party; if there was then independents could not run, and they can. People are confused when they think that they elect a party, and idiot party politicians love to encourage this confusion because they benefit from it.
If he had come out and said “as we are neck and neck with the Libs on seats the speaker decided to let the incumbent opposition remain as opposition,” then all would have been cool. But no. He had to go and try and guild the lily only to end up looking like a fool.
Posted in Politics
It has just come to my attention that WordPress have acted in as douchebaggy a nature as all the other pricks in the social media world. They are presently licking the salty nasty bits of some pretty sleazy gits the world over.
Andrew Jennings has more to say about this.. So WordPress start acting decently or quit pretending you give a crap about open, free and normal discussion.
I’m not surprised you sold out WordPress, but I think you should stop trying to project a free spirit image as you are just another bunch of corporate twats.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper disappeared into a caucus room closet during the Parliament Hill attack on Oct. 22 in order to ensure Canada had a functioning government in the event of a catastrophic attack.
The reason why the US President is whisked away by the Secret Service during trouble is because the president is one of the arms of US Government, the Executive Branch. Canada’s Prime Minister is not a separate branch of government, they are the leader of the group that has the confidence of the House. That’s it, nothing more. Should the Prime Minister get taken out by a gunman, then the group elects another Prime Minister and stuff continues on as before.
Ironically however, should enough members of his caucus get killed, then his group might be reduced in size to such an extent that they are no longer the majority group in the House. The Prime Minister will then lose his job and some other Party will take over and elect their own Prime Minister. At least until by-elections are held to replace the fallen MPs.
By hiding in the closet, Stephen Harper was not “ensuring Canada had a functioning government,” because he is not the Government. Parliament is the Government.
It is amazing that in his attempts to appear less of a coward he has to not only lie about the rationale behind his actions; but he has to show his ignorance about how our Parliamentary system works.
(h/t Boris for pointing out Harper’s irrational excuse making to me.)
Posted in Politics
In the past couple of days I have come across a few occasions where people have committed terrorist attacks, at least terrorist as the word is used by the extreme right when they justify their hatred of others.
Number one – USA
The white, middle-aged man fired at the consulate, the police headquarters and a courthouse early on Friday morning.
Police said it looked like an “anti-government” attack and pointed to the “heated” immigration debate.
It was political and it was designed to get people to change via violence (aka terror).
Number two – UK
A ‘self radicalised’ soldier who became an EDL fanatic while constructing a potentially lethal nail bomb in his bedroom is facing jail today.
Ryan McGee, 20, constructed a homemade bomb packed with 181 metal screws, bits of glass and explosives inside a pickle jar which could have killed or maimed if detonated.
McGee admitted that between May 31 2013 and November 29 2013 at Salford he possessed a document containing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.
But still no direct accusation of being a terrorist, still no general slandering of his entire religious group or even his politics.
Number three – Canada
The former member of the Canadian Armed Forces was arrested last January after he was found with weapons, explosives and detailed building plans that apparently targeted the Veterans Affairs office on the seventh floor of the Bantrel Tower at 700 Sixth Avenue S.W.
Again no mention of the “T” word.
But type in “Terror attack in Calgary” or “Terror attack in Austin” and you’ll see plenty of scares involving swarthy types with strange religious beliefs, but no mention of these incidents. The Manchester one is more varied, because of the history of terrorist activity in the UK.
That’s white privilege – when you commit a terror attack but you are not called a terrorist.
Apparently it’s a travesty that Trudeau suspended two of his MPs from caucus when he was made aware of their alleged transgressions involving sexual harassment etc. This has inflamed many right wing commenters on various reply boards to try and attach an “in over his head” tag to his actions.
But Trudeau did exactly what Stephen Harper did to Helena Guergis back in 2010. she resigned her cabinet post and was punted from caucus pending investigations by a PI and the RCMP. This is what was said about that then
But Baird insisted the government acted “quickly and appropriately” when the allegations first arose.
Now it appears that the winged monkeys think what was done “quickly and appropriately” then is no longer appropriate.
Harper did go one step further and that was to deselect her from her riding’s nomination for the next election, even though she had been cleared by both sets of investigations. Kelly Leitch won the nomination instead, and she was responsible for blocking legislation that would have resulted in a process to deal with just this kind of thing.
“We recognize the value of improving awareness of the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace among parliamentary staff, however this recommendation deals with matters that are within the responsibility of the Parliament of Canada and, as such, not within the purview of Ministers to address,” replied Treasury Board President Tony Clement and Kellie Leitch, who is the minister of Labour and the minister responsible for Status of Women Canada.
Posted in Politics
John Manley is wringing his hands at the hardships that crooked and corrupt CEOs will endure if they are caught partaking in standard, but criminal business practices.
Apparently the effects will be long lasting and cost the companies that these crooks own and the Canadian economy dearly. That is bad, because the economy must be protected, “the spice must flow” etc.
The analysis explored possible scenarios, concluding that annual sales for a typical disqualified company would drop by $351 million and force it to fire more than 400 Canadian workers.
Other firms that stepped in to replace it would only partly fill the void, it argues.
On top of that, suspension of a single firm would result in a net loss of more than $1 billion to Canada over the 10-year period, said the report, co-authored by Ciuriak Consulting Inc. and Dawson Strategic.
In this era where companies are seeking the same rights as people and have achieved that status in the US, shouldn’t they be held to the same standards as people? If a person commits a corrupt crime they go to jail and have a permanent record showing that. So why shouldn’t a company? Hey if you want the right to buy politicians because you can afford it, then surely you want all the rights and responsibilities that go with that right..? Nah silly me.
I’m sure that exactly the same arguments could be made about imprisoning people for their crimes, so are they not a valid excuse for not imprisoning anybody?Manley’s would be better served by telling his members not to be a bunch of corrupt crooks in the first place?
But I’m guessing that might also impact the economy adversely… right?
I was absolutely stunned by the words our Prime Minister uttered today when trying to smarm up to Kiwis in N Zealand.
“We also have no history of colonialism. So we have all of the things that many people admire about the great powers but none of the things that threaten or bother them,” he said.
Well bugger me! I know the man lies incessantly, but has he really taken all leave of his senses and started to think that the truth is what he says it is? Apparently this isn’t the first time Il Dunce has made this patently ridiculous claim. He did so in 2009, when the PMO tried to spin his way out of this monumental “Dan Quayle” moment by waffling about corporate colonialism etc. It’ll be interesting to see how they spin it this time.
Aboriginal Perspectives say Colonialism occurred in Canada and it sure looks like they have a point.
It also appears that the Government think we were a colony or colonies too and not just once either.
A non-colonial colony…. hmmm
Angelic Upstarts were simply one of the best commentators on issues that affected ordinary folk back then.
This tune like “the murder of Liddle Towers” was poignant and prescient.
“Can you hear the mocking laughter from the ones that gain by it
They’re not in line for the bullets, they’re the ones who started it”
Back when he ran away from a debate with Ignatieff I came across this little gem.
The coat of arms for the modern Reformer.
Seems appropriate once more for the man who glorifies war, insists that others go and die for his glory, but then hides in a cupboard and behind his caucus when the war comes to his door.
This also pops into my head when I think of this incident.
There was a big deal made on CTV by Craig Oliver about requiring the military to not wear their uniforms in public. Craig declared this wrong and that soldiers should be proud of their uniforms. He is right they should be proud of their uniforms, but should also be aware that the public wearing of such uniforms not only identifies them as members of the military, but has knock on effects to those around them.
Back in the day I was a reservist in the British Army and we were forbidden to wear our uniforms off base. Not only because it made us easy to target, but because it easy for anyone observing us to identify us and also places where we tended to congregate – pubs, restaurants etc. This in turn would allow the bad boys to form a schedule of our activities and plan an attack carefully – bomb with remote, bomb with timer or just a hit and run shooting. But it wouldn’t just be us who would suffer, all the others in the area would suffer too and it was for the protection of those lives that the order not to wear uniforms in public was given and adhered to.
Our job was to protect our fellow country people, not put them in harms way because of our pride.
If terror attacks become as widespread here as they did doing the troubles in N Ireland era in the UK, then I would expect such an order to be given and obeyed for just the same reason me and my fellow soldiers obeyed it back then. Pride should not come into it when others are at risk.