Monday, May 30, 2005

Another Way to Deal With Those Christians.

I have been pondering in my heart what to do about Evangelical Christians and practising Catholics, now that they have emerged from their sanctuaries to threaten the public good by running for parliament. Recently, after the Globe & Mail made me aware of the threat, I recommended banning them for reasons of public safety, but now I'm not so sure that would work.

I mean, there seem to be rather a lot of them. Oh, I know the mainstream media is fond of saying that the churches are empty these days. No doubt this is true of those churches frequented by main stream Christian media types where vestal virgins dressed as Gaia are prancing to The Sound of Music played on didgeridoos, around altars shaped as pyramids, with scantily lads clad dancing the part of Molloch. You get the drift.

On the other hand, in those churches where people actually believe in something, as opposed to everything and anything, there is not a lot of room for additional derrieres in the pews, at least without stacking folks two deep, or adding additional services to the already crowded liturgical schedule.

So just banning Evangelicals and practising Catholics presents us with a logistical problem of considerable magnitude. We'd have to establish huge camps on Anticosti Island in the Gulf of St. Lawrence to house them all, and housing is not a federal responsibility under the Canadian Constitution.

I'm beginning to thing we need to think outside the box. Let me think like a real progressive for a change. I know. How about if we make them all register with the federal government? We could expand the gun registry program to include registration of Christians. Hell, we've already paid enough for the program to register the entire population of the Milky Way galaxy three times over. Surely we can reprogram the software to add a few million Christians to the lists. The fact that the computer program is not suitable for the task ought not to deter us. It isn't suitable for registering guns either.

We could force Christians to get permits and make them store their bibles in steel cupboards with thick chains wrapped around them for extra security. Rumours have it that Catholics already do that. Think how much more comfortable police will feel if they have to respond to a domestic recitation of the rosary if they know in advance that the scripture is locked away beyond the reach of proselytising laymen.

Mind you this will be of limited utility in the case of Evangelicals, because they have memorized the key passages and will be able to preach without scriptural texts at hand. But, to quote the motto of the Liberal gun registry, "No regulatory system is completely perfect."

Infants undergoing baptism will be forced to wear government approved life preservers and there would have to be a government certified baptismal lifeguard present. No one would be allowed to light votive candles without having taken and passed a fire safety course put on by the Boy Scouts.

I'm sure we can trust our federal bureaucrats with devising excruciating additional administrative burdens to discourage church membership and participation in Christian congregations. Did I mention charging a substantial amount for the permits? Make the user pay I say. It's all non-tax revenue, after all.

Per Ardua ad Ardua

Just when you think the stawdry saga of our Forces Sea King helicopters could not get any worse, it does. Damian Brooks at Babbling Brooks has said all that needs saying there. What a legacy Jean Chretien left.

Doctors are Dangerous

Most of us by now are aware of the grave danger that Evangelical Christians and practicing Catholics pose to society at large. If you aren't then please read my previous post. It may not be too late to save .... uh, .... protect .... yourselves.

What you have probably missed, however, is the fact that we ought to be more nervous about doctors than we are about guns or Christians. To obtain the real poop on this matter I encourage you to visit Kermit at Bubbasbog and view the May 28th post, "Please Read and Heed." Kermit has verified his assertion through the use of statistics, which as you know, never lie.

We can spot gun toters by the ominous bulge under the armpit and the relaxed look on their faces when in a dark, isolated parking lots at night. We can recognize Evangelicals by their glassy-eyed expressions and their bibles under their arm. Well, unless it's Bill Clinton, you can.
We can tell who is a practicing Catholic by taking note of who attends the local bingo hall on a Friday night.

But can you spot a doctor on the street, in a movie house or in a restaurant? Unless they are wearing their stethoscopes, I think not. Why is there a need to identify physicians you ask? Go find out.

Saturday, May 28, 2005

Will No One Do Anything to Stop Them?

Now that the Globe & Mail and other purveyors of main stream media have figured out that Christians are a danger to the nation we must seriously consider what to do about it.

It is simply not enough to print front page stories noting the dark plans and HIDDEN AGENDAS by which the Christians are plotting to seize political power. No, we must rouse ourselves from our secular stupor and execute a counter attack before it is too late. Did you know they are trying to take over the Conservative Party of Canada? I am serious.

They are actually running as candidates in some ridings as though this is their constitutional right. The nerve of it all. Have they not heard of the separation of bingo and patronage? We've even heard rumours that there are Christians in the Liberal Party, but the Prime Minister is vigilant in making sure they do not actually affect public policy, so that's okay, I guess.

What to do? You see the danger, don't you? If the Christians are successful we will have a government run in accordance with seditious doctrines like the ten commandments and the golden rule. Not that there is anything wrong with the commandments themselves. They are, after all, part of the Jewish canon of scripture and we don't want to be accused of anti-Semitism do we. Do we? Sure Israel can do no good and the Palestinians can do no wrong; we all know that. I don't mean that. It's just that anti-Semitism is so, .... déclassé. And did I mention that Seinfeld was a great sitcom.

The golden rule referred to above does not mean the way the Liberal party does business, though the misunderstanding is entirely excusable. It appears to have something to do with treating suckers with respect and dignity and acting honourably at all times! I agree it's rot, but that's what these people think.

Christians, of course, are not all alike. The main line Protestants are okay with guys getting it on and with deep sixing the unfortunate product of heterosexual congress, with divorce decrees granted on the basis of plantars warts and hangnails and with adding hemlock to the porridge of the old as an act of mercy. These are the decent Christians anyone can safely invite to participate in a wee bit of cocaine snorting.

It is the Evangelicals and Catholics we must fortify ourselves against, lest our way of life perish. The Evangelical Christians that have this weird look in their eyes. Don't take my word for it, look at what John Downing, a former naval officer no less, says about them on his blog, Mindless in Ottawa.
Here's the thing. Canadians are scared of Born Again Christians, that's just the way it is. Have you ever met a BC? Tell me, weren't you just a little scared? Be honest.

Unless you are a BC, in which case you are probably blowing a gasket as you read this, then you have at some point in your life been at least a little freaked out as you talked to a BC.

I personally know many BCs, some I like, and some I think are so stupid they would just as easily have joined a Kool Aid cult if it had free snacks with the drinks.

The Conservative Party is dominated by BCs.

Don't even bother to pretend this is not the case. I've been to the nominating meetings where 100 white guys with that glassy eyed look show up with their non liberated wives. Wives who look lobotomized and struggle to keep six kids under the age of six from killing each other while their pompous blow hard of a husband rails against "argent et le vote ethnic."
In my experience naval officers do not lie. They lack the cleverness necessary to pull it off. So it is clear I speak the truth. Downing tells the tale. Evangelicals are clearly two full shovels short of a load and cannot be trusted with political power.

Good Lord, if you believe there is a Lord, consider the impact on Parliament Hill subsidized daycare centres alone. They would go out of business if Evangelicals were elected in large numbers. What about all those snotty six kid families you ask? You won't believe it but Evangelicals like to raise their kids in their homes. Shocking I know, but true. The Stepford wives actually look after their own young. Yuck! How 1950's.

Nor can those Catholics be trusted. By Catholics I don't mean the,"I'm personally opposed to evil, bad things but promise you I will do nothing while in public office to act in accordance with my religious convictions" kind of Catholic, of which Paul Martin is such an exemplar. They are no danger to us at all I assure you. No, it is the other kind of Catholic that is scary. They believe in something called DOGMAS, you see. Now DOGMAS are dreadful things. The Vatican is chock full of them I hear.

Why, just let a DOGMA get ahold of you and you're done. Next thing you know you're toting a rosary, worshipping statues, kneeling in a church, actually praying to a higher power that answers back and raising your eyebrows askance at sensitive lesbian parliamentary day care workers with coat hanger symbols on their t-shirts who are screaming profanities at pro-life marchers marching in front of the Morgentaler clinics providing those necessary therapeutic medical services. Additionally you will start to think Henry Morgentaler ought not to receive the Nobel prize for superior moral decency that he so clearly deserves. Haven't you read the Davinci Code, for God's sake? Catholics are one big plot. Read it and you'll not think them so benign.

So what do we do? I think we need to outlaw Christianity. This may sound extreme, but we must not (in the words of G.K. Chesterton) allow pestilence a place in the sun. Christians can't be trusted, multiply like rabbits, refuse to die with dignity, demand a high standard of moral behaviour from public figures, wear clothes from Walmart and plain embarrass the hell out of polite society. We need not legislate them out of existence. We'll just continue with judicious appointments to the judiciary and they will adjudicate the matter for us. Attacks Pope Benedict

From Joanne Laucius in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen we learn of the following:

A Catholic media monitoring group is furious over an animated cartoon that depicts Pope Benedict XVI giving a statue of the Virgin Mary a Nazi salute and muttering "Heil Mary!" in a slight German accent. The cartoon, a shot at the Pope's past as a member of the Hitler Youth, appears on the left-of-centre website, published by prominent Canadian feminist writer Judy Rebick.

"We don't think any group should be ridiculed in this way," said Joanne McGarry, executive director of the 5,000-member Catholic Civil Rights League.

The cartoon, by Toronto artist Mike Constable, is anti-Catholic and insulting, she said. "It's a slam to Catholicism and the Pope." But social crusader Rebick argues that the cartoon, titled A Creature of Habits, is funny.

Go have a look for yourself and you be the judge. Click on the cartoon figure of the pope in the top left hand corner. I think it more juvenile than funny.

The current cartoon is a reference to the Pope's past. As a 14-year-old, he was drafted "against his will" into the Hitler Youth in 1941, according to his memoirs. He served in the army from 1943 to 1945. He was never a member of the Nazi party. Last week, in a major address, the Pope condemned "the genocide of the Jews."

Ms. Rebick said the purpose of Mr. Constable's cartoons is to make people uncomfortable. "If he annoyed people, then he was successful."
Indeed he was. As for Ms. Rebick, that paragon of politically correct virtue, I am not surprised at her reaction. I simply note that if this were an attack on Muslims or Jews instead of the Pontiff we were considering, she'd be pontificating at length on the need for government mandated sensitivity training for cartoonists.

But those Christians and their HIDDEN AGENDAS .... well, that is another thing altogether. The leftist diversity shibboleths against "hurting other people's feelings" do not apply.


Friday, May 27, 2005

Give Us That Old Time Agenda

The Conservative Party of Canada HIDDEN AGENDA is once more on the front pages of a major daily newspaper. My morning Globe & Mail has exposed the AGENDA yet again. Frankly, as a HIDDEN AGENDA, I think this one is a total bust. I mean, from whom is it now hidden? Must be from someone. Anyone who reads a newspaper can harldly avoid it. Despite it's HIDDEN nature, main-stream pundits write about it constantly. I think they are obsessed with it's HIDDEN element. I don?t blame them. Let the truth run free, I say. Besides, I like seeing Upper Canadians quivering in fear from scary things. It is a very entertaining sight.

Perhaps the pundits mean the AGENDA is HIDDEN from the illiterate. If so, this is completely unacceptable and I think that we need a nationally funded public sponsorship program to get the word out. I understand there is unused capacity in Quebec based Liberal PR firms at the moment that could be employed in this cause. Why, we could have banners strategically placed at every Olympic stadium in Quebec. That would saturate every small town in that province.

The rest of the country could have HIDDEN AGENDA moments on the CBC. Of course, this would only reach 356 people, but it would be a start. I'm sure we can hire consultants to advise us on how to reach the rest.

I would not recommend that the federal government air HIDDEN AGENDA commercials over loudspeakers at the Calgary Stampede. We must find other ways. The shock might be too great for Calgarians to stand. They think the AGENDA is in the OPEN because they've been shouting it from the rooftops for two decades now. Really! Telling them you haven't been listening here in Upper Canada would truly disappoint them and we want everyone in Canada to be happy and serene, not disappointed. Right?

According to the Globe, the HIDDEN AGENDA is something cooked up by Evangelical Christians and conservative Catholics. Of the 307 ridings in Canada these devious Christians have now succeeded in nominating three conservative Conservative candidates. Clearly this cannot end well. Apparently these people believe that: babies should be aloud to survive their womb experience; the sick and elderly ought to be able to have confidence they won't be given hemlock with their hospital intravenous drip; and that wedlock is a heterosexist only preserve. In addition they want to hold an general election to let the people decide. Shocking I know. We can't have that in Parliament. Haven't these people heard of Canadian values?

Yes, we certainly need a federal sponsorship program to expose the HIDDEN AGENDA. The nation's future depends on it. I nominate Joe Morselli, the Gondolafather, to run it. Sure he has a reputation as a HIDDEN kind of guy but, on the positive side, I understand he really knows how to influence people. Morselli could report directly to Belinda the Betrayer. She knows a thing or two about HIDDEN AGENDAS.

Serenity now. Serenity now. Serenity now.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

A Week Later

I've not been posting much over the past week as I am attempting to recapture a measure of serenity amidst the meltdown of parliamentary democracy in Canada. Okay maybe serenity is too grand a word and too unreachable a condition for me. You may have noticed that I was foaming at the mouth and I suspect that is not a good thing for a gentleman to be doing. I think my colleagues and friends pity me for my ranting. Poor lad that old Mad. Gone over the edge on this one. Gets worked up over the strangest things.

About a week ago a good friend and interlocutor, Suancho Panza, Squire to the Knight of the Woeful Countenance, e-mailed me with a suggestion that I hated Liberals. This is simply untrue. I love and admire Liberals these days, particularly that well known Liberal Belinda the Beautiful. I must say she drives me mad with passion. Okay I admit that was a heterosexist comment. It's just that her legs, on which she walked those two sword lengths into history, are ... well ... clad in nylon ... walking ... walking ... I digress. She is a principled public person who ought not to be pilloried because of ... those legs. .... ahem.

In my view the federal political scene has now transitioned from being just plain disgusting into disgustingly absurd. The Liberal party in Ottawa is sinking deeper into the lower rungs of Dante's Purgatorio. Now they are suggesting that they will ignore future opposition confidence votes in the House of Commons. I suppose they are consistent in this regard, having ignored four votes indicating a lack of confidence earlier this month.

They are unilaterally changing unwritten, but vital, parliamentary conventions upon which the legitimacy of our parliamentary form of government depends. This is not the democratic renewal promised by Paul Martin. This is appalling and they are able to get away with it because the public does not understand the importance of these unwritten constitutional conventions and most of the media is either unwilling or too lazy, or both, to bother writing about it.

Do we march in the streets with orange scarves, as the Ukrainian people did? We do not, for we are Canadian. Because we are Canadians we do not march. We shamble on snowshoes and that makes for a very ineffective revolutionary movement let me tell you; particularly in the month of May.

The Toronto Star has pronounced that there is no "smoking gun?" because the sponsorship money was turned into cash and then stuffed into brown or yellow envelopes. The paper noted that a reputable forensic accounting firm told Judge Gomery that when that happens they can?t trace the money flow anymore. Oh yes, I nearly forgot. The same forensic auditors say the sponsorship scandal did not involve $255 million as claimed by the Liberals. No siree, it was actually $355 million. Don't think this was an attempt by the Liberals at deceit. They'll assure you they are out by far more than $100 million all the time. I can vouch for them on this point.

For the Toronto Star that no smoking gun means there is no proven link between the illegal sponsorship kickbacks and the bank accounts of the Liberal Party of Canada. There is a proven relationship, however, between smoking guns and barrel cancer, so I'm glad the Liberal party has gone smoke free. There is no magic bullet for barrel cancer.

For me, all this means that I left the Liberal party too soon. My stuffed envelope may have been ready to mail. You never know. Maybe Paul will take me back into the fold when Carolyn Parish returns to caucus. Please Paul. Send Tim Murphy to advise me on how these things are done and bring me in from the cold. It's darn scary out here guarding Stephen Harper's hidden agenda. I made a mistake. Trust me. I won't tape conversations with your people. I'd be a very good senator, really. I wouldn't even embarrass you by stomping on a George Bush doll in public. Did I tell you I think every day how the world would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still president of Iraq instead of being a famous underwear model? No? ... Well we would.

I now see dat, da proof is da proof is da proof and d'ere ain't none of da proof in d'is whole sorry tale. Judge Gomery told the inquiry there is no proof the money ever got to the Liberal party, so I guess it didn't because Paul Martin says, "Gomery, he's da man."

Then the Toronto Star ran a heart rending story about how the envelopes of cash were actually delivered to orphans and widows of war veterans, who were recovering from SARS and were marching for peace when they were stopped on the way home and illegally searched by Kingston traffic cops, who were unfairly targeting them just because the cops are old white male meanies.

And Giuseppe "Joe" Morseli says he (Joe) is just an ordinary caterer who helped the party raise $2.5 million from the goodness of his heart. I believe him. Don't you? As to the suggestions made by M. Dezainde that Joe was "the big boss" linked to the mob; here is Joe's answer:

I object to this title," he said.

"I was born in the northeast corner of Italy, in a corner next to Slovenia," said Morselli.

"There are no godfather-type groups originating from this region, nor any godfathers. I am a proud Venetian.
As if to drive this point home Mr. Morselli was last seen leaving the Gomery Commission hearing in a gondola punted by swarthy men in black suits and white socks. I kid you not. Someone ought to give that good man an official position in the Quebec wing of the party as a reward. He could be the Quebec wing's Gondolafather.

And I see the good people of Labrador reacted on cue and returned a Liberal to the Commons in a by-election. They can?t be blamed for this. All those low-level NATO jet fighter flights clearly have rattled them. But the NATO jets have now returned to their home countries. Folks in Labrador who don't live directly under the flight paths were very concerned until just before by-election day that the Goose Bay air force base would close its hangar doors, having lost its very raison d'etre.

Silly people. They underestimated the resolve of Prime Minister Dithers when faced with having to return to work as an office boy in his sons' shipping firm. When he announced that Goose Bay would be the home of the navy's new Upholder submarine fleet I understand there was great rejoicing and the Liberal victory was made certain. There was some quibbling in the local Legion hall that Goose Bay is not on the Atlantic coast, until the Toronto Star noted in an editorial that if they were needed the subs could be disassembled and transported to the ocean using chartered giant Russian Antonov transport aircraft - if they were available at the time. After that everyone relaxed.

Including yours truly. Repeat after me. Serenity now. Serenity now. Serenity now.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Mr. Murphy's Offer

I realize that there are lots and lots of people out there who believe that the Martin Liberals are ethically different from the Chretien Liberals, or that the revelations of criminal activity before the Gomery Commission refer to a past practice of the party and does not have a bearing on the current government.

If you are one of those people I defy you to read the transcript below of the conversation between the Chief of Staff to the current Prime Minister of Canada and a Conservative member of parliament, Germant Grewal. Once you have done that I defy you to retain your view that the Martin Liberals are ethically different than the Chretien mob.
Friday, May 20, 2005 Updated at 1:02 AM EDT
Gobe and Mail Update

This is a transcript from a taped meeting Wednesday between Conservative MP Germant Grewal and Tim Murphy, Prime Minister Paul Martin's chief of staff. The tape has been released by the Conservative Party. It is believed that Mr. Murphy was unaware that he was being taped. The tape is of poor quality and Mr. Grewal is almost entirely unintelligible.

The Conservatives have refused to release the rest of the tape, including a meeting with Minister of Health Ujjal Dosanjh, which they say is largely in Punjabi. Immigration Minister Joe Volpe has asked the RCMP and the Ethics Commissioner to investigate what he alleges are improper requests by Mr. Grewal of constituents who are seeking help from the MP in their immigration cases.

Murphy: [unintelligible] for you and best for us, in a way that allows everybody to feel comfortable, and also allows everybody to feel principled, and I think to be principled. Both.
So, I was kind of thinking about that and I talked to Ujjal last night and again this morning, just before I came, which is why I was a few minutes late.

I apologize.

Grewal: That's OK.

Murphy: What I think... what might be the easiest thing to do, and see what you think about this, because we have the vote tomorrow night, and if the government doesn't fall, it's not the only vote we may have to face.

My guess is that when you look at issues like supply, final votes on the budget, opposition days, there could be as many as eight votes between now and the end of the session which could bring the government down, right?

Obviously, each one of them will be a nail-biter right to the end, and obviously, the two votes that you and your wife represent are the way the House is made up now, matter a lot, or can matter.

There are, just to be honest, as I think I told you yesterday. There are other members of your current caucus who are facing the same dilemma that you face, and are musing, so -
Grewal: [unintelligible] many?

Murphy: I don't want to, in the he same way I don't want to do anything that, I don't want to- Grewal: [unintelligible]

Murphy: If I'm to honour your trust, I have to honour others.

Grewal: Definitely.

Murphy: So, I hope you don't take that wrongly.

Grewal: Absolutely not.

Murphy: So I think the way to make it work, and the way that allows us the freedom-as you can tell. Right? Just to be blunt, right?

I think it's a bad idea, truthfully, to have any kind of commitment that involves an explicit trade. Because I think anything that [unintelligible].

I don't think it's good if anybody lies. So if anybody asks the question well, was there a deal, you say, 'No.'

You want that to be the truth. And so that's what I want, is the truth to be told.

Secondly, though, I mean obviously it's an important decision for you and your wife and I understand that you want to ensure that you can continue to contribute. Both of you. So, I understand that.

And, as I said, people who make decisions like this in a principled way are people who ought to and deserve to continue to contribute.

So how do we square that circle?

Grewal: Okay.

Murphy: So one of the proposals I have is this, that, tomorrow's vote is, let me phrase it in the abstract.

If two members of the Conservative Party abstain from that vote... don't vote against their own party, right? Don't have to.

But equally don't vote to bring it down tomorrow night on the two/ I think there's two key votes.

And that can be done on the basis... those members can do it, on the basis, well, you know.
Look, my riding doesn't want an election. Doesn't want one now. Thinks it's the wrong time to do it.

But equally, you know, to vote the opposite way is to vote against the party I'm a member of, the leader of the party, and I'm not prepared to do that.

But I don't think an election's the right thing - I don't want to say that won't create some...
[interjection by Grewal, unintelligible] ... some flak, but it keeps freedom, right? Allows someone to go back home in the right circumstance and it also allows someone an opportunity, right?

So if there is an abstention. If someone then, though, in my view, if someone then abstains in that environment, who has exercised a decision based on principle, it still gives the freedom to have negotiating room.

On both sides. Both going back home - then it's actually the freedom to have discussion is increased if someone has made a decision that doesn't preclude any options based on principle.
Then you can come and say, "Well look..." - then you can have an explicit discussion. And then in that environment, you know, a person can say, "Look, I obviously abstained, and that created some issues, and now I'm thinking hard about."

You can say, "I'm thinking hard about what's the right thing for my riding and the contribution that I could like to make."

Then we can have a discussion that welcomes someone to the party. And then in that environment we know if those two votes continue to vote, either the one vote switches, or one switches and one abstains, or both abstain, from now until the end of the session the government will survive, right?

We know that. And then we get through to the end of the session, right?,
And then, if one person wants to switch and make the contribution, then that makes a lot of sense.

If the other wants to switch and then serve until an election, or some time in advance of that, and then... and then... and then... you know, something would look to be done to ensure that that person...

Grewal: Oh shit. (It appears that Grewal's BlackBerry goes off, and the conversation is briefly interrupted.)

Murphy: That's quite all right. These things go off all the time.

Grewal: I have it switched off.

Murphy: All of which is to say, that in advance of that, explicit discussions about Senate. Not Senate. I don't think are very helpful, and I don't think frankly can be had, in advance of an abstention tomorrow.

And then we'll have much more detailed and finely hued discussions after that with some freedom. And I think what that allows is negotiating room for you, in either direction.

You can easily, say, "Look. Yeah, you know, if you don't like it, you can stay home, stay back with... where you are. And if you do like, we can make an arrangement that allows you to move.

Now look, I don't expect, you to react to that right now. Think about it. Please talk to Ujjal.
Ujjal knows this is the discussion I'm having with you. Please feel free, and say, you know, he knows. And then, if that proposal is of some interest to you, then I will talk to Volpe and get something happening.

(Pause. Grewal starts to speak. Murphy interrupts.)

Well, I have talked to Volpe, already. So -

Grewal: Is he manageable?

Murphy: Yes.

Grewal: What happens is?..[unintelligible] you know how we came together. There are some common friends. He approached me. [unintelligible]

Murphy: No, it's a bit... it's the same. I understand. Sorry.

Please accept, I understand completely. It's much like Belinda, where there is a third party who is independent of both sides. You didn't approach, we didn't approach.
Grewal: They did approach me.

Murphy: The independent party played the role, like we didn't approach, you didn't approach.
Grewal: [unintelligible] End of tape


Note the uncanny resemblance of language used by Chuck Cadman to Murphy's suggested spin to Grewal.

"I haven't been offered anything, believe me," he said. "Nothing offered. Nothing asked for."
He also attributed his vote to polls of his constituents indicating they didn't want an election. This may well be strictly true, Mr. Cadman. But one is left to wonder ......

The language also echoes that of David Peterson after facilitiating the great betrayal talking about Belinda's need to find a space where she could make a contribution.

The Grits are certainly on message.

Thursday, May 19, 2005

It is Done

It is done. The Socialist/Liberal government of Paul Dithers has escaped defeat today on its two budget bills by the slimmest of all possible margins. The speaker of the House of Commons (quite properly) cast two votes in favour of the Socialist/Liberal government after the members of the Commons tied on the two budget bills.

That the budget bills of the Liberal and the NDP parties required the extra-ordinary votes to be cast by the Speaker was in the end due to two factors:

1) The obscene $20 billion dollar post-Liberal budget "bribe" paid by the governing Liberals to the New Democrats to buy their votes; and

2) The offer of high political office to the Not-So-Honourable Belinda Stronach PC, to secure her betrayal of her Conservative parliamentary colleagues, her constituents, and her partner who was publicly dumped in the most thoroughly callous manner imaginable.

The manner by which the Grits managed to cling to political power - the offer of gifts of public money to the first and a patronage appointment to the second - is entirely consistent with the manner by which they manage to win elections in the first place. Why change a winning formula.

I admit they have modified their modus vivendi. This time they chose legal, if unethical, means to obtain their ends. Progress is measured in inch pebbles with our natural governing party, so I do applaud their using legal means this time round. Old fashioned political simony is much preferred (if testimony before the Gomery Commission is to be believed)over raw thuggery, fraud, kickbacks, fat brown envelopes stuffed with $100 bills, and elections to the House of Commons won by flouting laws governing elections to the Parliament of Canada.

The Oligarchs of the modern Liberal Family Compact have once again relied on the pleasantly passive nature of the Canadian people when it comes to Liberal party skulduggery and once again the Canadian people have not disappointed them. We the people are consistent in this matter. As the sordid spectacle unfolded day-by-day and slimed it way to its unholy apotheosis in the Commons this afternoon, the Grits actually rose in the polls. This benediction is at the heart of what that great Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien calls, "Da Canadian values."

We claim to be a people whose government is rooted not on those gauche principles of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" held dear by our much-mocked hegemons to the south, but on the more genteel and subtly sophisticated Westminister model of "peace, order and good government." The Yanks may pride themselves on having the world's largest military cojones, but we Canucks take greater pride in our leaders' golf balls. We really do think that our balls are better than their balls and that our form of government is less corrupt than their form of government.

We fool only ourselves on that score and we are entirely to blame for what has been wrought in our name. In truth, we resemble a battered housewife who desperately points out that her husband is really very kind to dogs as she covers her bruises with makeup.

We enable the Liberal Oligarchs, support them, confirm them and bless them in their way of governing. Being a polite people, of course, we want them to tone down their worst criminal excesses, but in the end we give them permission to continue to do what they do so well. So if you feel oddly queezy about what just transpired don't go blaming the Liberal Family Compact for your upset tummy. They are just living, "Da Canadian values."

And continue to govern us with those values they will. Enjoy.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Post Mortum Reflections

I have been absorbing the news of Belinda Stronach's defection to the Liberal party and trying to come to terms with what I witnessed today. It really is quite remarkable. The only comparator I can come up with is the defection of demagogue Lucien Bouchard from Brian Mulroney's government to the separatist cause. Perhaps that can be better expressed as the return of Lucien Bouchard from his federalist flirtation to his separatist roots.

That defection, like this one, happened at a critical moment in the political history of our country and was calculated to do the most political damage to the party and leader left behind. Perhaps the most laughable moment in this latest tawdry affair came when Ms. Stronach defended her betrayal of her constituents and her party by stating that she wanted to bring integrity into the political process. Pardon me, but that is just pure humbug.

Remember that too I am a turncoat and know something of crossing the River Stix. I left the Liberals and joined the Conservatives last December. The difference is that in doing so I was at least consistent with my public utterings and views on matter political before and after my admittedly inconsequential "defection." Belinda Stronach on the other hand was specific in condemning the very budget, party and leader for which and for whom she is now prepared and eager to vote.

She was very specific in denouncing Prime Minister Martin as a leader. She was very specific in denouncing the sponsorship scandal and denouncing Mr. Martin for either knowing about it and doing nothing, or not knowing about it and being incompetent. So with what are we left? Unlike politics, the first principle of philosophy is that something cannot both be, and not be, at the same time. Perhaps it is even the first principle of reason.

Is Belinda Stronach then a liar for denouncing the Liberals, Paul Martin, the sponsorship scandal and his current budget, or is she a liar for supporting all that now? The rules of logic and reason require us to believe one proposition or the other. Don't think that's true? Consider this. On February 24, 2004, in her bid to be leader of the Conservative party, she had this to say to the combined Canadian and Empire clubs of Canada:
The day the Auditor General released her findings on the public works scandal was a sad day for Canada. And Canadians right across the country are still angry. This was not just about management or waste ? although there's been plenty of that in Ottawa these past ten years.

It was about corruption and contempt for the Canadian taxpayer. It was about a lack of competence and a lack of leadership.

I do know this: as a former CEO of a major public corporation I was held to the high governance standards - and also had to make a profit. If I ran my company the way Paul Martin ran the finances of the country I would have been fired.

You cannot run away from your own record.

Paul Martin wants us to believe that he was a stowaway on the good ship Chretien when if fact he was the first mate. Canada deserves better. Canadians deserve better.
I heard on CFRB this morning that she attended the Conservative election war cabinet meeting last Saturday, where the confidential Conservative party election strategy and tactics were discussed. On the following Tuesday she emerged from her privileged Conservative vantage point to reveal herself as a full fledged midshipwoman on the corrupt ship HMCS Grit.

As I recall, the nickname for midshipmen in the navy is "Snotty," because of their habit of wiping the snot from their runny noses on the sleeves of their tunics. From now on I shall refer to Belinda Stronach as Snotty Stronach, cabin girl to Captain Paul Dithers.

Snotty won her prominent billet on the ship of state through betrayal and expediency. Remember that fact as she speaks to us of wanting to bring integrity back into our much abused political system. Snotty has a great deal to learn, and nothing to teach us, on that subject.

Stephen Harper Comments

Stephen Harper is commenting on Stronach's defection. His take on it is that her leadership ambitions were thwarted with the Conservatives and that he saw it coming. He said he is relieved. it is important during an election that all members are working as a team.

Asked why MPs are not crossing the floor to the Conservatives he says it is because they are not romancing MPs the way the Liberals are. They are ready to do anything. He said he has made no promise to keep the Liberals in power if the Grits win the vote on Thursday. He thinks the ultimate effect will be an adverse impact on Sronach's re-election bid.

He said she did not indicate to him that she was going to defect. Her sole reason for being in the party was to obtain the leadership. He said Peter MacKay is taking this matter pretty hard.

Harper said that Belinda called him just moments before her press conference to let him know. Noted that she had voted to defeat the Liberal government several times last week, so this is not a matter of principle.

Belinda Stonach Defects!

Belinda Stronach MP is at this moment giving a press conference. She is abandoning the Conservative Party under whose banner she was elected last year and has accepting a political bribe from Paul Martin to become the Human Resources Minister in his government. I guess if she can't be the Conservative leader she will take her act elsewhere.

Prime Minister Martin is calling her betrayal courageous. I have other descriptors in mind, but being a gentleman I shall not write them down. Ambition is a terrible thing.

She says that same-sex marriage is not the deciding factor, but is one of many for her betrayal. (Comment was unprompted, so must be on her mind.) She doesn't feel comfortable in lining herself up with the Bloc Quebecois to bring down the budget. She says that the corruption in Quebec isn't Liberals, just some individuals. She is being given an opportunity to make a public contribution, blah, blah, blah.

She has a lot of respect for her boyfriend Peter MacKay MP. She will not comment further on her relationship with him.

The Prime Minister, "... is proud to have Belinda Stonach as a member of my government and my Cabinet."

I bet.

Monday, May 16, 2005

Islamic Ecumenism in Action

While perusing the Lifesite site I came across this little gem from December 2004.

Christian Names Not Allowed on Azerbaijani Birth Certificates

Baku, Azerbaijan Dec. 2 ( - Authorities in Azerbaijan
are refusing to issue birth certificates for children with Christian names, the
Forum 18 News Service reports. Without birth certificates, the children are
unable to enroll in school, receive medical service, or obtain passports. Government officials claim that the public opposes the use of Christian names, preferring traditional Azerbaijani names. "We have letters from village residents and 98 percent are opposed to registering Christian names," local registration official Aybeniz Kalashova told Forum 18. Azerbaijan is more than 90 percent Muslim. When questioned by Forum 18 as to why parents should be denied the right to name their children, Kalashova shot back: "Why are you interfering in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan?" "This is ridiculous," remarked a member of a Christian community in the capital city of Baku. "You can call your child 'Communist' or 'Tractor'," she told Forum 18. "Why not a Christian name?"

If you call your child Tractor will he grow up to be a member of the Oxford movement, or end up joining the Oratory of Saint Philip Neri?

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Call an Election Now

CBC News 12May05

MONTREAL - A former director general of the Liberal party's Quebec wing says he requested police protection last month before testifying before the sponsorship inquiry. Daniel Dezainde told the inquiry on Thursday that he still fears a former party fundraiser, Joseph Morselli, after a nasty encounter with him four years ago.
He said Morselli flew into a rage when he found out that a friend, Beryl Wajsman, had been fired by Dezainde on allegations of illegal fundraising activities. Dezainde said Morselli pointed a finger in his face and said he was declaring "war" against him.

He was so rattled that he checked his insurance policy and told friends about the incident in case something happened to him, Dezainde said Thursday. He told the commission led by Justice John Gomery that he went to the RCMP three weeks ago to tell them he was going to testify.

When Gomery asked him whether that meant he was afraid of possible repercussions, Dezainde replied, "Yes." He said the police told him the best protection would be to tell his story in public. Dezainde didn't call the police at the time, but contacted his boss, Alfonso Gagliano, who was then Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's chief lieutenant in Quebec - and a close friend of Morselli. He said Gagliano advised him not to take the incident too seriously and described Morselli as a hothead.

When Morselli dropped out of sight in 2002 after Martin Cauchon replaced Gagliano, Dezainde said his "comfort level" increased.

The thuggish caterer who ran the Liberano operation in Quebec for Alfonso Gagliano without holding office, or being accountable in any way shape or form, threatened the Director General of the provincial wing of the party because he was attempting to assert control over the party finances. To this day Daniel Dezainde fears for his life. Is there no bottom to this Liberal sewer?

I am well aware that not every Liberal is a crook, or a thug, or a fraudster. I knew and worked with some very fine people over my decades as a Liberal. The truth is that all parties have very good people within them. I know my local Member of Parliament, Dan McTeague is a conscientious MP and an honourable man. He works hard and serves his country to the best of his considerable ability. I expect he feels betrayed and angry over what is being revealed by the Gomery Commission. He should.

Because of the revelations of corruption, the Liberal party has lost the moral right to govern this nation. But my deep respect for MPs such as Dan McTeague is nothing compared to my utter disgust at what the Liberal Party as a whole has clearly become and my anger at the damage this party has done to our beloved Canada. Given the testimony at the Gomery Commission is it any wonder the opposition is completely fed up.

The opposition grabbed control of the House of Commons on Thursday, shut it down, and asked for Clarkson to help trigger an election. The one-day walkout was the boldest move yet by the Bloc Quebecois and the Tories to demonstrate that the minority Liberals no longer hold power. "We've now demonstrated three days in a row (that) the government does not have the confidence of the House," Harper said.

"It could go on until the government or the Governor General is forced to admit that the government has lost its mandate to govern the country." Although she can't force an election, the Governor General can advise the prime minister to dissolve Parliament and call a vote. He doesn't have to follow her advice.

A federal official said the prime minister called Clarkson this week but he wasn't aware of what they discussed. He also said she has consulted "well known and reputable" constitutional experts. The prime minister has promised two confidence votes on the federal budget next Thursday but the opposition wants a vote immediately. They're worried that a Tory MP with cancer - Darrel Stinson - won't make it to a late-week vote because he needs surgery.

A senior government official said the prime minister won't be taking any direction from Clarkson. "The Governor General receives advice from her first minister. She doesn't tender it," the official said.

Paul Martin must ignore the arrogant posturing of his flacks and go to the Governor General and ask her to end the life of this miserable, paralyzed parliament. Let us have a general election so that the people may determine the fate of his government. Give the matter over to the people and let us decide.

Uglier and Uglier - Liberanos Uncovered

Hard as it is to believe, the testimony at the Gomery Commission keeps on getting uglier. I’ve described the Liberal Party as a kleptocracy. When I wrote that I was thinking of a typical political patronage scheme run amok. It think now that it is worse than that. We are not just talking old fashion patronage with a few individuals getting rich off your tax dollars. As bad as that might be, what is emerging from testimony before the commission is much worse.

What is being revealed is a national political party run by a parallel shadowy organization without formal party status, engaging in kickbacks, fraud, looting of the public treasury, buying of influence, threats, intimidation, subverting of the electoral process; all with what may be ties to the mob.

The operational head of the liberal Party in Quebec was not the Director-General of the party, Daniel Dezainde, but a caterer and friend of Alfonso Gagliano (he whose alleged status as a made man with the mob is still unconfirmed as of this writing). Giuseppe (Joe) Morselli, the caterer, ran the Liberal show in Quebec. Dezainde was to have nothing to do with the money. News Staff (May 12, 2005)
The sponsorship inquiry heard Wednesday how the head of the Liberal Party's Quebec wing never really felt he was in charge because another man -- dubbed "the real boss" -- was working behind the scenes.

The bombshell came from Daniel Dezainde, who in May 2001 replaced Benoit Corbeil as Director-General of the Quebec wing of the Liberals. He said he wasn't in the job very long when he met Liberal fundraiser, Giuseppe (Joe) Morselli. Dezainde testified he went with Corbeil to meet Morselli at a north-end Montreal restaurant on May 14, 2001. At that meeting, he claims he was told by Corbeil that Morselli was "the real boss" of Liberal affairs in Quebec.

Dezainde also said Corbeil warned him not to antagonize Morselli, a friend of then-public works minister Alfonso Gagliano.He told the commission that, as a result, Morselli ended up running things, but completely off the record.

He also said he was told on another occasion by Gagliano that if he had any "needs" to give Morselli a call, or to call the minister's chief of staff, Jean-Marc Bard.

Dezainde said he understood that to mean financial needs. The question of financing became a pressing one, Dezainde said, because he quickly learned the Quebec wing had amassed a pile of unpaid bills -- as much as $2.8 million was owed. He told the commission that Morselli told him to send the bills to him "so he can determine what can be paid."

Dezainde said that troubled him. "Not only you didn't know where the money came from but you no longer had the ability to manage your organization," Dezainde told the Gomery inquiry. "So what's the point of being there?"

Dezainde said he could not understand how there was a parallel structure for the Liberals in Quebec with people who did not belong to the party, adding that it was as if the party had been taken hostage.

He said he began to question Morselli's tactics, and those of another man -- a fundraiser by the name of Beryl Wasjman. When Wasjman was eventually fired, Dezainde testified that Morselli came to see him in a rage.

"From now on, I declare war on you," Dezainde recalled Morselli saying to him, before breaking down on the stand. When Justice Gomery asked him if he considered that a threat of physical violence, Dezainde replied, "Yes."
Now if you believe that the corruption extends only to the sponsorship scandal, the subject of Judge Gomery's inquiry, you are more naive than Mr. Desainde. This affair is reeking to high heaven.

Do we have the political process of a whole province run by the mob? What other federal contracts are involved in this scam? The gun registry? Defence contracts? Judicial appointments? All goods and services purchased by the feds in Quebec (Gagliano was federal Minister of Public works)? What about the rest of Canada? Were/are the Liberals running rackets in Ontario? New Brunswick?

I haven't the answers to these questions and Judge Gomery's terms of reference don't cover this territory. But the extent of the corruption so far is breathtaking in magnitude and scope. It is not beyond the realm of possibilities that the corruption goes much further.

Still don't trust Stephen Harper, eh. Well, how much do you trust the mob?

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

The Crux of It All

Had enough yet folks? I write what follows as one who was a life-long Liberal until recently. I am a Liberal no longer. This is why.

I am quite sure that those of us who pay attention to the Gomery Commission are witnessing the destruction of the Liberal Party of Canada through self-inflicted wounds. But that collapse, important though it be, is not really the point. The Liberals by scrabbling in the most unscrupulous ways imaginable to obtain, and retain, the perquisites of office have corrupted a great national party, betrayed the trust of the Canadian people, fomented distrust about our parliament and played into the hands of the Quebec separatists, thereby placing in doubt the continuation of our nation. These greedy, political manipulators, with their envelopes stuffed with thousands of dollars of our public money, have done great damage to Canada. It is this I cannot forgive ... and nor should you.

Consider the import of what is being revealed by Mr. Justice Gomery? After Auditor General Sheila Fraser uncovered skullduggery in the sponsorship program, the Liberal party spin masters went into communications overdrive justifying the initiative on the grounds that it was a vital component of the Liberals national unity strategy, i.e., required to demonstrate a federal presence in a province ruled by the separatist Parti Quebecois provincial government.

One may or may not argue with this shaky premise, but one thing is clear. The criminal actions of so many Liberal party members become even more indefensible in light of their stated premise that this program was necessary to keep the country together. To engage in corrupt activities with a program they themselves said was vital to the survival of our nation places them beyond the pale.

Much of the money sloshing around Liberal party circles was being spent to circumvent legislated electoral spending limits the Liberals themselves introduced and passed into law. While they fully expected the opposition to have to abide by the electoral spending law (spending limits and disallowing corporate and union financing), and the citizenry to have to abide by the electoral spending law (the limits on third party advertising), they themselves were above such petty considerations.

How many Liberals in this current minority parliament won their parliamentary seats because they were able to call on the unlawful support of what Mr. Corbeil told Judge Gomery were the "fake volunteers" in the "undeclared section?" What would the current parliamentary balance of power look like had fair elections been held in Quebec? We know this. In the 2000 general election:
Mr. Corbeil, the Quebec wing's director general from 1998 to 2001, told the inquiry that during the 2000 election there was a parallel campaign operation that focused on some key ridings, flooding them with extra campaign workers and resources.

The Liberal Party of Canada has subverted the very process by which we Canadians elect representatives to our parliament. This is nothing less than an attack on our democratic rights as citizens. The same Liberal politicians and party workers who love to mock the Americans for the "hanging chads" of the 2000 Florida vote count were busy at the time committing criminal acts to circumvent our most central right as citizens; the right to elect those who govern our country.

The next time you are tempted to dismiss the Gomery testimony as not really important, think about what the Liberals were doing (and would be doing yet if they weren't caught red handed).

Answering questions from his lawyer, Guy Bertrand, Mr. Corbeil said the Liberal strategy of visibility in Quebec was aimed at eliminating their Conservative rivals and making voters associate the Liberal Party with Canada.
One of the great moments in Western civilization took place in England, the home of our parliamentary traditions. This was the signing of Magna Carta by King John at Runnymede on June 15, 1215 AD.

63. Wherefore we will and firmly decree that the English church shall be free, and that the subjects of our realm shall have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights and concessions, duly and in peace, freely and quietly, fully and entirely, for themselves and their heirs from us and our heirs, in all matters and in all places, forever, as has been said. Moreover it has been sworn, on our part as well as on the part of the barons, that all these above mentioned provisions shall observed with good faith and without evil intent. The witnesses being the above mentioned and many others. Given through our hand, in the plain called Runnymede between Windsor and Stanes, on the fifteenth day of June, in the seventeenth year of our reign. [emphasis is mine]
At Runnemede was born the idea that even the King must obey and respect the law. From that crucial day has developed and flowed the democratic liberties and institutions of the English-speaking peoples ... our great political gift to the world.

The Liberals were knowingly taking away your right to the aforesaid "liberties and rights" which are central to a democracy (as our American cousins would say) of the people, by the people and for the people. And they were doing it, not to save the country, but to eliminate their Conservative rivals, and to buy political power and influence, so as to enrich themselves with your money.

If our Sovereign is so constrained, so must be the Liberal Party of Canada. The House of Commons last night passed a motion demanding this corrupt government resign. Mr. Martin says he doesn't have to obey the expressed will of our parliament because the opposition motion was on a procedural matter rather than on a confidence measure such as his now grossly bloated and much amended budget bill. This same Mr. Martin a couple of weeks ago refused the opposition their scheduled opposition days in the House of Commons in which they could bring forward a vote of confidence. Parliament has now ceased to function in any reasonable manner. It is up to us, the people, to demand a remedy this ugly impasse.

Dwell on these thoughts ... and cast your next vote accordingly.

It Just gets Worse

From today?s Globe & Mail by Tu Thanh Ha

MONTREAL -- Marc-Yvan Côté, the Liberals' top organizer for eastern Quebec, distributed $60,000 in cash to several party candidates gathered in Shawinigan for the launch of Jean Chrétien's riding campaign in the 1997 election, the Gomery inquiry heard yesterday.

Mr. Côté's testimony came after another Liberal executive, Benoît Corbeil, testified that the $50,000 cash payments he gave to eight election workers in the 2000 election paled next to broader, illicit operations that the party routinely deployed during federal votes.

Mr. Corbeil said that during the 2000 election, 30 people he called "fake volunteers" ran a parallel campaign, working in a special area of the Quebec wing's Montreal headquarters that he referred to as "the undeclared section."

Mr. Chrétien's riding was among those that benefited from special attention in that campaign, Mr. Corbeil said, as were those of eventual cabinet ministers Denis Coderre and Hélène Scherrer. All the ridings were won by Liberals.

? Earlier yesterday, Mr. Corbeil, the Quebec wing's director general from 1998 to 2001, told the inquiry that during the 2000 election there was a parallel campaign operation that focused on some key ridings, flooding them with extra campaign workers and resources.

The ridings that he mentioned included Saint-Maurice (won by Mr. Chrétien), Bourassa (won by Mr. Coderre), Verdun (won by Raymond Lavigne) and Louis-Hébert (won by Ms. Scherrer). Mr. Corbeil had previously said he distributed $50,000 in cash to pay eight party officials during that election.

"I'm convinced everyone knew because of the way the office was set up," Mr. Corbeil said."There were two sections. There was the declared section where I worked. There was the undeclared section. There was an influx of several, about 30, false volunteers."

Among them, he said, were several aides and even the receptionist of public works minister of the time, Alfonso Gagliano, the party's chief organizer in Quebec.
Answering questions from his lawyer, Guy Bertrand, Mr. Corbeil said the Liberal strategy of visibility in Quebec was aimed at eliminating their Conservative rivals and making voters associate the Liberal Party with Canada.

But Judge Gomery and other lawyers curtailed Mr. Bertrand's line of questioning, saying he was getting out of the inquiry's focus on sponsorships and advertising contracts.

Meanwhile, a senior official in Premier Jean Charest's government, resigned yesterday over allegations that money from the controversial sponsorship program was funnelled into the Quebec Liberal's 1998 provincial election campaign.

Luc Bastien, who was chief of staff for provincial Justice Minister Yvon Marcoux, resigned over reports that he received $10,000 from Bernard Thiboutot's firm Commando Marketing to help prepare Mr. Charest's election campaign.

Liberal Support Declines

Can it be that the sponsorship scandal is finally having an impact on Canadians' attitudes towards the Liberals? Be still my beating heart. From my morning Globe & Mail:

Ottawa - The federal Conservatives have edged back in front of the Liberals in a startling new poll that finds Canadians questioning Paul Martin's honesty and ready to make the sponsorship scandal the foremost election issue.

The poll, conducted for The Globe and Mail and CTV, finds that 31 per cent of voters would opt for the Conservatives if an election were held today, while 27 per cent would back the Liberals. The Tories are up three percentage points from late April; the Liberals are down three.

But perhaps the most stunning finding shows that 61 per cent of Canadians surveyed believe the prime minister is the federal political leader most likely to tell a lie if it would help him politically. Only 26 per cent believe that of Conservative Leader Stephen Harper.

The poll also found that the sponsorship scandal dominates voters' thinking, with 23 per cent saying it is the most important issue in the next election, outstripping even health care by three points.
This is not good news for Mr. Martin. Even in seat rich Ontario the Liberals support is dropping. Grits now have 34% of the voters while the Tories have 35%. It is good news for "Prime Minister" Jack Layton whose NDP has risen three percentage points to 20%.

It is better news for Stephen Harper, of course .... and for Canadian democracy.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Thoughts on the Grotesque

The Gomery Commission continues to issue its daily revelations into the criminal grotesquerie known as the Liberal Party of Canada. Lawyers at the inquiry are spending time disputing whether the envelopes stuffed with illegal cash/kickbacks were brown or yellow (billable hours must be maximized, after all). There are disputes over who exactly got the cash, or how much, or whether it was for past or future services, .... or any services at all. But no one seriously questions the existence of the illegal kickbacks. It is the distribution mechanism that is at issue.

Current political staff to prominent Liberal cabinet ministers are denying they were recipients, ..... my goodness not them! A witness to the commission is "pressured"a couple of weeks before he testifies, by a former Grit Cabinet Minister at the heart of the scandal. Just friendly advice, we are told. This same former Cabinet Minister was named by a stool pidgeon last year as a made man for the mob during a U.S. Congressional committee hearing looking into organized crime in the United States. His actual status as a member, or non-member, of the mob is unconfirmed as of this writing.

Prime Minister Paul Dithers continues to hand out to your hard earned tax money to any political leader who whines at length. The Premier of Ontario was just bought off, although there is a controversy over the amount of your tax moola being given to Upper Canada.

It was, or was not $5.6 billion in new money over five years. It was, or was not, mostly money extorted by Smiling Jack Layton in his political heist of the federal treasury a couple of weeks ago. It was, or was not, a lot of new money, depending on which Liberal you listen to.

The Premier of Ontario says it is a lot, by golly, but he has a credibility problem respecting taxes ever since he promised "pinky swear" not to raise our taxes by one single penny. The $900 per year new health tax was admittedly more than a penny, proving he is a man of his word. The federal Finance Minister says the new money for Ontario is all smoke and mirrors and anyways the agreement doesn't flow much revenue for a few years. Relax.

Prime Minister Dithers had no time to comment as he was very late for a parade in Holland. Something about honouring those old guys who liberated the Dutch in a war so long ago when we actually had an army. The PM was late for the war parade because he was closeted with the Ontario Premier over the weekend trying to buy political peace on his provincial flank. Grits, you see, believe in making peace, not war. And anyway the four political party leaders made a quick deal on the Prime Ministerial jet trip back to Canuckland for a billion dollars in increased unplanned benefits for the vets. This is to show they all really really care for the old guys after all, even if they did miss the parade. It has nothing at all to do with the current unsettled political conditions in parliament. Nope, it is all about their compassion.

Saskatchewan appears to be next in the queue for your tax dollars. The line forms to the left of Jack Layton folks. Stay calm. There's enough tax money in the Liberal Party re-election slush fund known as the federal treasury to buy off everyone and ensure a Liberal victory in an election. It is a good cause. They are the saviours of the nation, you know.

If you don't believe me look at how well they have crushed the separatists in Quebec and at their standing in the polls there ...... oh .... ok, we'll move on to other things. Speaking of polls, I see that the Liberals are riding high in the polls in Ontario. It appears that Stephen Harper, that dastardly Conservative, can't be trusted. He has a hidden agenda to grab power, which is quite different from the transparent Liberal agenda to cling to it. I say it is time to out the hidden agenda. Here it is.

"We will put the matter to the people in a general election and let them decide."

That's it. Scary, huh. Hello out there! Anyone awake?

Friday, May 06, 2005

Grits at 44% in Ontario !!!

I see from the Toronto Sun today that the Grits have rebounded further in the polls. Here in Upper Canada they sit just shy of 44%.

Beliveau said a few weeks prior to the launch of the 1997 federal election, Corriveau handed him about $100,000 in $20 and $100 bills after he told him that the party needed $300,000 to mobilize troops in Quebec. "I thought he'd be able to get that money and he did," he said.

Beliveau testified that in late 1997 he asked Corriveau for another $8,000 to pay off a business that was owed money by failed Quebec City Liberal candidate Helene Sherrer, who is now PM Paul Martin's principal secretary.
Beliveau said he got a total of $121,500 in cash from Brault after asking Liberal organizer Renaud, who was also a Groupaction subcontractor, to lobby his boss for donations.

Beliveau, who broke down and wept into a handkerchief before leaving the stand, said he handed the envelopes of cash to former Liberal executive member Benoit Corbeil, admitting that they were never registered in the party books and broke financing laws.
Who says crime doesn't pay?

I'm off to scout camp this weekend with Liam the Mad.

Thursday, May 05, 2005

The Heart of the Matter

I received the following email today.

Dear Mr. the Mad,
We are not being bribed with our own money, rather public money is being
spent on worthy social programs. The budget will not go into deficit
because of this. The current liberals have cleaned up the fiscal mess left by PET and made worse during the reign of the JAW, whose dirty linen may yet be reached if this inquiry goes to the heart of the matter.

Sancho Panza,
Squire to the Knight of the Woeful Countenance
My answer is as follows.

My dear Squire Sancho:

It is a bribe. O' yes it is. And it is done with our hard earned money.

As a policy wanker I know how long and arduous is the route to proper program funding approval within the bowels of HM creaky ships of state. It is a route peppered with great despair for the originators of programs, a deep longing for sanity, and the certain recognition that progress, if achieved at all, will be measured in inch pebbles, not mile stones. While I often long for a policy machete sharp enough to cut the bureaucratic Gordian knot, I also know a back alley crapshoot when I see it.

Enter Paul Dithers and Smiley Jack. No due diligence in that back alley summit. $4.6 billion of public money was coughed up in a snap of the fingers. No analysis, no consultation, no appraisal of options and alternatives. No review of how to implement, or what might be problematical. No plunge into deficit? Maybe not, maybe so, but what are the opportunity costs involved?

Let us be clear. This is expediency-in-action-writ large, not good governance. The sole motive force for this deal was a desperate bid for survival by the Grit kleptocracy until next spring, when the electorate (they fervently hope) will have moved on to other more mundane matters.

The disgusting trail of corruption may well lead all the way back to Brian the Jaw. As I recall, we the people reduced his successor (Kim the Pink) to two seats in our
House of Commons for lesser crimes and misdemeanors. Have some consistency here. Let us reduce the successor of The Chicoutimi Strangler to a pair of votes in parliament for a term. Fair is fair.

Have we no pride as a people? The Liberal Party has been squeezing our golf balls on a grand scale. It is clear that the looting has been systematic and endemic in the Quebec wing of that party. They have lost the right to govern us. Away with them.

Your friend,

John the Mad

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Advance by Retreating

Sorry, but the time for posting is quite limited these days.

I attended a Jesuit retreat on the weekend at Manresa, in Pickering Ontario. Father Phillip Chircop SJ, a priest originally from Malta, was our retreat master. He was excellent. I found he challenged my views (admittedly a tidge conservative) on the Church and what constitutes sin, while remaining wholly faithful to scripture and Church teaching.

I'm now spiritually primed and ready. It was an excellent retreat and I highly recommend you visit their web site and sign up for one.

You not only get to renew your spirit, you get to join the international papal conspiracy to take over the world. Forget Opus Dei conspiracy theories. This is the real thing. .... Really.