Joan Tintor

Some people just don’t respect democracy, do they?

2011-06-06T18:14:00.003-04:00

In 1995, I worked on the provincial election campaign for Mike Harris and the Progressive Conservatives. On the day after the election, I manned one of the two reception desks for a while to help answer the phones, which were pretty busy. Most of the calls were people offering congratulations, and urging the party to keep the promises it made during the election.

The reception area was directly across from the elevators. At one point, the elevator doors opened, and out came a few scruffy-looking young people. They ran up to the other reception desk and snatched the small stack of the party’s election platform document (the Common Sense Revolution – perhaps you’ve heard of it?) that was on the desk, ran back into the elevator, and disappeared.

It struck me as weird, but I forgot about the incident until I was watching the news later that night. Lo and behold, the same scruffians who had pulled off the daring snatch-and-dash at our HQ had been captured by a news camera, setting fire to the platform documents they had stolen. Now, I don’t wish to be unfair to them, but I am guessing that they hadn’t read it first. Again, this was one day after the election.

Alas, this is the sort of thing that Canadian conservatives of a certain age have become somewhat inured to. Whenever a conservative government is elected, or attempts to enact the promises it made to voters, its leaders, ministers and parliamentarians are compared to Hitler and portrayed as being bent on “destroying” education, health care, children, seniors, the disabled, and small pets. Ipso facto, they must be “stopped,” no matter how much rudeness, law-breaking, spectacle or street-clogging it takes. These accusations are generally accompanied by paranoid implications that said conservative government has all the legitimacy of a military coup, because they are only a minority government, or garnered less than 50% of the popular vote. (Though I believe that both Bob Rae and Liberal Jean Chrétien squeaked out majorities with less than 40% of the vote.)

So when I heard about Senate page Brigette DePape’s Code Pink style protest during the Throne Speech, I can’t say I was surprised. After all, it was earlier that very day that I spotted the charming graffito pictured above, equating Harper to Hitler, on a Bloor Street pedestrian underpass mere steps from my home.

As I tweeted on Friday night, Ms. DePape is the natural result of two decades of government "education" and self-esteem building, which taught her that every thought she has is profound, and everyone else should have to listen to it. In her interview on CBC’s Power and Politics she also displayed the audacity and entitlement common to her generation, announcing in a chipper manner that she is looking for “employment opportunities.” Naturally, PSAC, the union of federal government workers, soon offered her one. Well, PSAC is certainly the right place for her.

This sort of thing keeps happening because the media rewards it, and conservatives rarely call its perpetrators on their rank hypocrisy and tantrum-like intolerance, the shorthand for which is: anyone in power who is not simpatico with Brigette and her pals must be stopped by any means necessary, including vandalism, physical intimidation, and disrupting state occasions that they have been entrusted to support, not subvert.

What are workaday folks, who do not have the luxury or inclination to engage in such rule-breaking or vandalism, supposed to do in protest to such camera-friendly antics? How does one explain to the DePapes of the world that: (1) the people have spoken and (2) you’re not really a democrat if you don’t accept election results you don’t agree with? Generally, all their natures and upbringing will permit everyday people to do is vote or donate to the conservative party, and hope that their votes will be honoured.

Sometimes I wonder whether conservatives should get into the disruptive protest business, pulling up in our pick-ups and SUVs and blasting Carpenters and Barry Manilow at outdoor protests where people are demanding the “right” to more money from their neighbours. Or yanking some hippie’s guitar without warning and smashing it, a là John Belushi in "Animal House." Oh, if only we were cool with disrupting other groups’ organized events, and trashing other people’s property!

There is sometimes wild talk, especially in the US, about these days resembling the time portrayed in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, when government’s attempts to control the economy grew in size and reach, as their effectiveness steadily decreased. The eventual result, as in Rand’s working title for the novel, was the mother of all Strikes: productive and competent people eventually disappeared, leaving the country to collapse under the contradictions that could no longer be sustained without them.

But ex-page DePape and her ilk needn’t worry: such a movement is unlikely to take hold here, where the government and state-funded information and educational institutions are deeply entrenched and continually dispersing new platoons of DePapes. Canada’s productive and competent will keep working, providing her and her soon-to-be brothers and sisters of PSAC with the opportunities and retirement that the education system and left-of-centre politicians have told them they deserve.

Check me out at the Sisyphus Blog

2011-05-21T12:21:00.004-04:00

Some very kind and tolerant folks have invited me to be an author at the Sisyphus Blog. Please check it out at sisyphusblog.wordpress.com.

James Cameron: just another butt-kicking Canuck

2010-03-08T21:14:00.002-05:00

All of Hollywood seethes at kid from . . . Kapuskasing?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad Kathryn Bigelow won the Oscar for directing. Though I’m relieved she won only two Oscars: because had she won a third I’m afraid she would be thanking toll-booth attendants and airport security officers in her speech. And I am amazed that Barbra Streisand agreed to hand out the directing award, after the academy ostentatiously declined to nominate her for directing Prince of Tides years ago. (Who knew Babs was so forgiving?)

But I must admit to being tickled (though baffled) for some weeks now at the low-level hatred Hollywood seems to have for James Cameron, the director who spent his formative years in Kapuskasing and Niagara Falls (the good side).

It’s an odd hatred, because if there’s one thing Hollywood loves above all else, it’s financial success. Cameron has directed two of the highest-grossing films of all time, Titanic and Avatar.

Even if you are hooked on drugs, cheating on your wife and mistress at the same time, and a lousy parent, no matter: so long as you deliver at the box office – and can be insured – you will keep getting hired in Hollywood.

But it seemed to me last night that every time an Avatar nomination was announced, or the camera alit on its director James Cameron, there was a certain hostile quiet, a froideur, if you will, in the Kodak Theater.

Why is Cameron despised? Because he’s divorced four wives? I doubt it. Or maybe it’s because he’s an unrepentant, demanding a**hole on set, and because actors seem secondary or even tertiary in his films. But is Cameron the first SOB to fart in a director’s chair? Are the makers of animated films despised like Cameron is? Don’t think so.

Even if the reasons made sense, I’m not sure I would ever get over the fact that a kid from Northern Ontario can become the object of such resentment in one of the most competitive and wealthy industries in the world. Do you know what the main economic activities of Northern Ontario are? Scraping minerals out of the ground, cutting down then grinding up trees, and tourism centered around guns and fishing rods. Oh – and government.

Almost a century ago, the most successful Canadian in Hollywood was Mary Pickford, America’s sweetheart (born in Toronto). Today, it is James Cameron. I don’t quite get it: but I’m still tickled.

Earned Advertising

2010-02-16T20:23:00.000-05:00

Another communications game-changer from the Harper Conservatives?

“Earned media” is a concept familiar to anyone who has become involved enough in political campaigning to endure some basic communications reading and/or training. For the uninitiated, “earned media” is what a politician, party or government gets when a news story follows from a planned event or media release.

Earned media is highly prized and great efforts are put into getting it, because (1) it doesn’t cost the campaign/party/government much, and (2) being reported as a “news” item gives the initiative an imprimatur of credibility and/or truth, e.g. “Daycare tops Liberal agenda” on the front page of the Toronto Star (well, some earned media stories have more credibility than others, but you get the picture). Earned media is in contrast to paid media, i.e. advertising during or between campaigns.

What the Harper government has managed to achieve, however, is something I don’t recall ever seeing in my 25-plus years following politics: earned advertising.

It struck me as I walked by the Home Hardware in Creemore on Christmas Eve: In the window was a poster – designed, produced and displayed by Home Hardware – promoting the government’s Home Renovation tax Credit. “Holy Christmas,” I realized. A private company is using its own marketing resources to promote a government initiative. This is crazy. Like a fox.

We also saw this when many banks advertised the Tax-Free Savings Accounts enacted in a previous federal budget, through TV and other ads.

Maybe I’m late to the party on this, but to my knowledge, the media still hasn’t figured out the party is on. I’ve seen no acknowledgement of this phenomenon in the political press. It’s not like they’re blind. They’ve given grudging respect to Harper for his achievements as a strategist and communicator, particularly in the branding of Liberal leaders Dion and Ignatieff (which, not coincidentally, fits with the “mean Harper” narrative). But I have yet to see any pick-up on the earned advertising.

In a way, that the Harper government has implemented policies that attract consumer and hence business enthusiasm are not surprising. The folklore around the GST cut is that it was “inspired” by the Harris government’s generous 30% and 20% income tax cuts in Ontario. They were huge, but few voters noticed, meaning the Harris PCs got little credit for them. Harper, so the story goes, was not about to make the same mistake. If your tax cut is a tree that falls in the forest, no one hears it. Hence the very simple yet highly visible GST cut.

But the question with this advertising, as with any advertising, is: yes, it’s clever – but is it effective? Do consumers connect the advertising to a Harper government initiative? And does it improve their impressions of the Harper government and possibly influence their vote? Those are questions for the Muttarts, Brodies and Flanagans of the world, but I hope they are finding out.

Contrast this with the much-fetishized, big-ticket, public-sector initiatives of the Liberals, both federal and provincial. Dalton McGuinty is dropping a major chunk of our change implementing full-day Junior Kindergarten, which will keep teachers employed in an era of stagnant and declining pupil enrolment. (And put toddlers on school buses, something Mike Harris warned was a bad idea.)

Do you think the Elementary Teachers’ Federation is going to buy ads thanking McGuinty for his (read: our) generosity? Don’t hold your breath. The same goes for Ignatieff, should he ever manage to implement the Liberals’ now 17-year-old promise of government day care.

Public sector unions expect a continually expanding government, with greater employment, pay and benefits for their members. Look at the TTC union’s backlash against TTC customers for fingering their less conscientious (and less conscious) brothers and sisters. Why would unions waste their precious steakhouse and convention money thanking taxpayers and politicians for something that is theirs by right?

Well-chosen, appealing Conservative policies may leverage earned advertising from a business-hungry private sector, while the Liberals and New Democrats are left choking on the fart cloud of their insatiable, ungrateful, public-sector partners. Something to think about.

Remembrance Day Sunrise Service (Prospect Cemetery) Photos

2009-11-11T11:11:00.001-05:00

Service Sponsored by Earlscourt Branch 65, Royal Canadian Legion

This year was the 81st sunrise service organized by the Earlscourt Branch of the Royal Canadian Legion, at Prospect Cemetery near St. Clair Avenue West and Lansdowne Avenue in Toronto. The service actually begins at 8:00 a.m., though they used to hold it at sunrise in an attempt to hold it as close as possible to the "Eleventh Hour on the Eleventh Day of the Eleventh Month" the armistice was signed in France in 1918.

It is not a well-publicized ceremony, so is unfortunately not very well attended (usually well under 100 people). But there are always several news cameras, because it’s the only early service in Toronto and hence a good live event for morning television. CP24's "Camera" Woolley was covering the event. The service also attracts a number of west-end Toronto politicians. Today I spotted MP Alan Tonks, MPP Mike Colle, Councillors Bill Saundercook and Cesar Palacio and separate school trustee Rob Davis.

This year a gentleman handed me a lapel pin with explanatory card from Veterans Affairs, the pin comprised of two poppies sandwiching a gold maple leaf. I don’t think they were handed to everyone. Perhaps it was because I was taking pictures.

We were lucky to have sunshine today, as in other years it has been grey or even raining. Though when shivering from cold or damp I like to admonish myself by imagining what it was like in the trenches in World War I, with no prospect of a hot coffee or breakfast in less than an hour.

Update: speaking of cold, guess whose furnace wasn't working when she got home? Serves me right. Furnace guy is coming today though.

Prospect Cemetery is a going concern as a cemetery and mausoleum, so in recent years has taken the opportunity of the sunrise service to engage in some low-key promotion, i.e. offering free coffee and Timbits, pens, etc. and having their manager make some brief remarks during the program. I have no problem with it, but I don't like to take any of the freebies, just out of superstition!

Hope you all take the opportunity to remember today.

The parade waits to enter the cemetery from St. Clair Avenue West. FYI, they are standing on the concrete right-of-way built for the much-delayed and still-unfinished St. Clair light rail line.

Parade approaching the Cross of Sacrifice inside the cemetery

Guarding the Cross of Sacrifice

Retiring of old flag

Wreaths waiting to be placed on cross by representatives of veterans, Canadian Forces, police, fire and elected officials

Wreath laying

Dear God, will the Tories’ lust to stamp all of Canada with their logo never be sated?!

2009-10-09T11:11:00.000-04:00

This brazen example of the Conservatives' ruthless campaign to rebrand Liberal Canada was spotted in a shop window on Toronto's Yonge Street. Unbelievable.

I suspect the handcuffs are okay, but someone is going to be in deep s*** for that red sneaker.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

Settle down, National Post

2009-10-07T19:58:00.004-04:00

Like I'd ever get the Globe or Star.

Come on down Jean, your toaster oven awaits!

2009-07-06T10:10:00.002-04:00

Will Chrétien take the credit for CIBC having 15th highest losses worldwide?

With my Thursday Financial Post came news that the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce has posted the 15th highest losses worldwide for 2008. “CIBC has been heavily involved in capital markets in the U.S., which are high risk,” said Colin Cieszynski, an analyst with CMC Markets.

What is more deserving of a beating than the CIBC’s bottom line, however, is Jean Chrétien’s attitude of smug self-congratulation about refusing to allow bank mergers, an attitude that he paraded before the media like Adam Lambert in a silk suit more than once in the past year.

At the height of US bank failures and bailouts a few months ago, Chrétien reached out to CTV’s Bob Fife and granted a rare interview across his paper-free desk. The purpose of the interview? For Chrétien to once again crown himself the saviour of Canada’s banking system (sorry, could not find a clip or link). This echoed Chrétien’s braggadocio to the Globe and Mail last October:

“While everybody’s in turmoil, Canada is not in turmoil,” Mr. Chrétien explained in a brief interview.

“And the two big reasons are that we balanced the books in ‘95, and we said no to the merger of the banks.”
--Globe and Mail, October 8, 2008

Neither reporter noted that at the time, the Liberal government’s rationale for refusing the mergers was to ostensibly protect consumers, not to protect the banks themselves. In fact, the terms that then finance minister Paul Martin set out for allowing mergers betrayed no concern for the banks’ ongoing health, Instead, they were:

• A guarantee there will be no jobs lost.
• A reduction in consumer charges.
• An assurance that smaller businesses and towns will benefit from the merger.

Now I won’t hold my breath that Chrétien is going to summon Bob Fife, Joan Bryden or any of his other favourite reporters to his office for an explanation of how CIBC’s losses could have happened after he heroically stopped the bank mergers. Neither will I hold my breath for any reporter to hold him to account for CIBC’s losses after he was so eager to take credit for the entire industry’s health.

Implied by both Chrétien and Fife was the assumption that Canada’s newly-merged banks would have abandoned a century or so of business practices to risk their entire institutions on sub-prime mortgages and other high-risk ventures: an assumption that is not only dubious but entirely hypothetical. Not surprisingly, the former head of TD Bank did not share this assumption:

“If we had been allowed to merge, we might have thought that we were big characters and played more aggressively,” he said. “But I think it’s more likely we would have played by the same lending standards we have now.”
--Charles Baillie, Globe and Mail, October 8, 2008

Of course, Chrétien’s credit-taking is further undermined by the obvious fact that Canadian banks did not need to be merged to invest in risky US financial instruments, because that is exactly what the un-merged CIBC did. And it is what the un-merged Royal Bank did not do, having ranked number 10 of the 25 most-profitable banks in 2008.

Once Fife had entered the realm of the hypothetical, it would have been only fair to list other plausible hypotheticals that could have followed any bank mergers, such as this one: Canada might have had one or two huge, globally-competitive banks with the capacity to participate in huge deals, bringing that business and all its spinoffs to Toronto, Montreal and/or Vancouver.

But we will never know, because Jean Chrétien was steadfast in his determination that Canada’s banking industry remain a moss-covered rock in the rapids of globalization, to preserve the illusion of competition in storefront banking. No doubt Toronto’s underemployed lawyers and accountants regularly raise a glass to Chrétien for that service.

Chrétien’s crowing over stopping bank mergers points to a theme in his political career. As with his decision not to participate in the Iraq invasion, and refusal to allow a succession of disgraced ministers to resign, Jean Chrétien was at his most steadfast when his decision was to do nothing.

I suspect that CIBC will recover from 2008 and continue to be a strong bank (though of course this is hypothetical). And Canadian politicians will continue to learn from Jean Chrétien’s example: in politics it is usually better for one’s own career to be a caretaker than a risk taker. That’s how you keep your desk nice and clean.

Take back our public services

2009-06-22T09:20:00.000-04:00

With public workers on strike in Toronto, it’s that time again. Time to re-post my award-winning (from the Western Standard) column about why we need to taking back control of our public services by getting unions out of the public sector.

Allowing monopoly services to be arbitrarily shut down is an early 20th-century concept that needs to be left back there.

Take back our public services
first posted November 2005

In Toronto, police cruisers sit parked outside a downtown police station, the police union having decided to stop patrolling. In British Columbia, teachers continue their illegal strike into its second week, idling 600,000 students and precipitating countless child care crises.

Organized labour has some clever slogans about all the good it has done for society, such as “Unions: the people who brought you the weekend.” But what have they done for us lately?

Think of the state of our roads, the quality of our education and health care, the cleanliness of our streets. The overall tax burden has grown, but this has hardly been matched by an increase in the quality of government services. Yet the wages and benefits of public sector workers continue to rise. Of course they do: by their very nature, public sector unions tend to drive up the costs and size of government. Union dues – themselves a cost driver – go to employ officials whose full-time work consists of filing grievances, lobbying the government for more workers, coordinating with other unions and supporting sympathetic candidates.

Much of the impetus for contracting out the delivery of public services stems from roadblocks faced by politicians attempting to meet the demands of taxpayers or deliver on good-faith election promises. Since public servants began to unionize, the people have gradually lost control of their public services.

Some have argued for outlawing strikes by teachers and other public sector workers, but this would be mere tinkering. The only way for the public to take back control of the services it owns is by decertifying public sector unions and restoring a direct employment relationship between government workers and democratically elected governments. Here’s why it makes sense:

Once the public has decided that a particular service is to be provided by the government, then that service is, by definition, essential. Many try to make a distinction between services that relate to safety and other government services. But public schools, transit and most other public services are legally or effectively monopolies, in that most citizens have no practical alternative when those services are not available.

Public sector collective agreements take away the public’s democratic right to decide what public services are to be delivered and what terms of employment are to be offered, provided those terms accord with employment standards laws and the common law. The wages, benefits and working conditions of public sector workers should be open to the democratic process as are all other aspects of government. They should not be decided in backrooms in negotiations from which the public is barred and on which the public’s elected representatives are forbidden to comment.

It is not the role of government to engage in unfair labour competition with the private sector. Some people think it is noble for the government to “set an example” for the private sector through higher wages and benefits. Such people don’t understand economics. The increasing taxes that those business will have to pay to support the government’s “example” mean that they will be hard-pressed to pay the employees they already have, let alone pay them more.

Thousands of private firms have policies and procedures for dealing fairly with employees; so would a union-free public sector. If the public through their elected government provides wages, benefits and working conditions that can’t compare with private employers’, then it will find itself with fewer and less capable employees.

Let’s put the “public” back into the public sector, by putting citizens and their elected representatives back in charge of our public services.

What Conservatives could never get away with – and the truth Ignatieff can never admit

2009-05-25T16:40:00.000-04:00

Though I wish it were not necessary for the Conservative party to spend its money drawing to the public’s attention that which is most glaring about Michael Ignatieff, Lorne Gunter’s column in the National Post today makes a good case for why it is not only necessary, but just:

Now here’s where the Liberals are their most hypocritical about the Tories’ ads: Imagine their reaction if it were Mr. Harper who had spent 34 years outside the country, moved back only to take a shot at being PM, said the only thing he missed while away was a provincial park and referred to himself as an American many times.

Well, with greatest respect to Mr. Gunter, I don’t have to imagine. Because Conservatives would never elect someone with Ignatieff’s personal history. Oh, not because the Liberals would pummel him or her with ads – because the media would pummel him or her first, with their much greater and unanswerable firepower.

(While I’m at it, a Conservative leader would never ask for two do-overs in an election TV interview. Because he would know damn well that those outtakes would be aired. The Liberals’ desire to screw us is honed through continual competition with the mainstream media’s desire to screw us. But the Liberals have no difficulty demanding indulgences and Mulligans from the media, and are outraged when they are denied.)

As we well know, Conservatives start any political contest with one hand tied behind our backs and our shoelaces tied together. When we attempt to at least untie our shoelaces by telling voters things about our opponents that (1) our opponents would rather the voters not know and (2) the media are strangely uncurious about, we get called mean.

True to form, the Liberals have retreated to their favoured tactic: calling us racists. (I’ve long said that a Liberal is never happier than when he’s calling someone else a racist.) Ignatieff may never become much of a Canadian, but he has become enough of a Liberal to know when to throw the race card at Conservatives. I’m guessing, however, that this charge will fizzle with most persons not employed by Jim Karygiannis or Warren Kinsella.

Immigrants are people who were born somewhere else and chose to come to Canada because it was better than where they were. Ignatieff was born here and went elsewhere early in his career because Canada wasn’t big enough for what he wanted to achieve. So his lame diversions about immigrants, students and professionals are just that.

As Gunter notes, some rather prominent Liberals have drawn attention to Ignatieff’s weak attachment to the country of his birth:

Other Liberals were saying the same things the Tories are of Mr. Ignatieff just two-and-a-half years ago. While running against him for the Liberal leadership, Joe Volpe said no one who had been away for more than three decades could be an expert about his party or this country. Bob Rae complained "there are things about a country that you don’t learn from a book," that can only be learned by being here and being at the centre of tough constitutional or economic debates. In other words, someone should only seek to lead this country if he has "Canada in his bones."

Paul Wells has cleverly called this Ignatieff’s “pronoun problem.”

In the long term, it is probably to the Liberals’ disadvantage that they rose to the bait in response to the ads. That engagement has transformed the ads from a mean, unprovoked attack on a weakling, into the starting point of a conversation that Canadians otherwise would not have had.

Ignatieff knows the fact that he thought Canada too small a pond in which to make his name is a weakness and hence a political threat. That is why he rushed into print with True Patriot Love. I have not read the book, but based on reviews and excerpts it seems fair to say that the nub of it is “I never had much time for Canada, but some of my ancestors did (So vote for me!)”

And Ignatieff had never given any thought to returning to Canada permanently. Why would he, having been a success in the UK and then ensconced at Harvard? Not until emissaries from the Liberal party – concerned with maintaining their grip on this country’s rule after Paul Martin’s “jugger-not” delivered considerably fewer than 200 seats in the 2004 election -- visited him at Harvard with entreaties to come back and run in the next election. And after Martin was gone, well, who knows? Wink, wink.

This is Ignatieff’s other – and arguably bigger – problem. Ignatieff had little thought of coming back to Canada permanently, until a delegation of Liberal poobahs journeyed to Cambridge with the prospect – however distant – of the PMO in hand The Canadian professionals whom he speaks of typically intend to get some experience and make contacts in other countries, then employ that experience and network once back home.

Others, like Ignatieff, try to get out of Canada as soon as they can because the prestige, money, funding and/or action in their chosen fields are somewhere else. Most reasonable people understand that, and can deduce for themselves – based on the bare facts of Ignatieff’s history – that that is exactly what he did. Why won’t he just admit it?

Because he can’t. Because to admit that Canada wasn’t big enough for him would be to say that everything the Liberal party has been claiming and trying to prove about Canada for the last four decades is a lie.

The Liberals have put forward a prodigal as the inheritor of Trudeau’s cape. But that mantle is, at the same time, too big and too small for Ignatieff.

Pierre Trudeau did a pirouette behind the Queen’s back. Brian Mulroney stood up to Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan on apartheid. Jean Chrétien announced Canada’s non-support of the Iraq invasion in the House of Commons – without even a heads-up courtesy call to George W. Bush (how they must have cheered for that in the Liberal caucus!).

Michael Ignatieff gave seminars to the US military, and published apologias for the Bush administration’s terrorism policies.

If Canada is an independent, confident country that is the equal of any first-tier nation – as the Liberals like to say we are (thanks to them, natch) – why would it want as its leader a man whose life story screams that we are a backwater?

The Liberals have no good answers to that question. And they know it.

Let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!*

2009-04-02T17:00:00.003-04:00

For those of you not lucky enough to live in the Greater Toronto Area, Dave Devall is the local CTV station’s longtime weatherman. His chief talents are: (1) writing backwards on a glass wall and (2) possessing more varieties of plaid than a used car lot full of Pintos and Chevettes.

Nearly two months ago it was announced that Devall is passing the umbrella and retiring after 48 years. Since then, CTV viewers have been subjected to an endless procession of pale, death-tinged figures reminiscent of the banquet scene in “Macbeth,” just not as funny.

More promos than for “American Idol.” Tribute videos from the likes of Peter Mansbridge. Mystery weathermen such as actor Eric Peterson (“Corner Gas”) and Argos’ CEO Pinball Clemons. A “60 Days of Dave” (why does it seem longer?) webpage at CTV Toronto’s website.

All to remind us – so we will never, ever forget – of Devall’s prowess and endurance in doing basically the same !@#$ story every day.

Yeah, I said it. The guy read the weather report, for God’s sake. From indoors.

Devall’s departure has turned into a triumphalist marathon of self-congratulation that makes the multi-continent Chinese Olympic torch relay look like a day care graduation ceremony.

Parenthetically, if there is one area in which we will never have to worry about being surpassed by the Chinese, it is subtlety. The relay, like the Beijing Olympics that followed, perspired more desperation than Paris Hilton, virtually screaming: “Look how rich and important we are! (And stop blaming us for SARS and the bird flu!”)

The International Olympic Committee recently announced that these extra-national relays will hence be banned (though Vancouver 2010 and London 2012 had already planned to keep their torch relays to within their own nation’s borders).

Sadly, this rare display of good taste and restraint from the IOC came too late for CTV to take the hint.

The Dave-alcade contrasts poorly with the manner in which longtime CFRB morning man (and now Toronto Sun columnist) Ted Woloshyn handled his departure from the airwaves a few years ago. Woloshyn announced he was leaving and left the same day (usually when that happens in radio, it’s because the host got fired – and someone else makes the "retirement" announcement while said host is being escorted out of the building by security).

The remaining hours of Ted’s final show made clear why: it was around three hours of weepy listeners and local celebrities calling in, begging him not to go, saying how much they would miss him, yadda yadda. The thought of weeks or months of “remember whens” and crying women to which he was not related, must have made Woloshyn cringe, and he knew it would be bad radio.

Ted Woloshyn is a man. And not just because he once referred to Dalton McGuinty as “a tool” on the air.

The Devall celebration is doubly unseemly, in light of the media layoffs and shutdowns that continue to explode like forgotten World War II ordnance.

CanWest is supposedly whiskers away from invoking creditor protection. Reporters at media outlets across the country are losing their jobs. Staff at CTV Toronto – who must not only feign excitement at the woefully drug-free Daveapalooza, but help package and promote it – are probably thinking that they may soon be vying for a job at the Weather Channel, while Dave is scratching his nether regions on a 19th hole somewhere.

Thankfully, this Splenda-soaked spectacle will be over Friday. Then it would be nice if Devall could get arrested soliciting a hooker, and give us at least one genuine laugh.

* Oliver Cromwell to the Rump Parliament in 1653

P.S. Serendipity! The movie "Cromwell" starring Richard Harris started on Turner Classic Movies minutes after I posted this.

Noblesse Oblige, R.I.P.

2009-03-09T08:00:00.000-04:00

John Tory departs the political scene, taking a vestige of old politics with him

As the official PC blogger on TVO’s “election battle blog” during the last provincial campaign, I would be remiss in allowing John Tory’s departure from the leadership of the Ontario PC party to go unremarked.

Needless to say, my opinion of Tory is higher than that of many Blogging Tories. Fair enough: people are entitled to their opinions, and I would rather be on a blog roll with people who speak their mind, however cruelly, than with careerists spouting party talking points.

Frankly, my regard for Tory is relatively fresh. Prior to his run for Toronto mayor in 2003, John Tory was not among the party figures I looked up to, though I was certainly aware of him. I counted him among the Bill Davis/Red Tory guard that seemed little acquainted with conservative principles.

But that changed with the 2003 Toronto mayoral election. I have never seen anyone go so smoothly and confidently from backroom advisor to candidate, as did Tory during that campaign (well, anyone since Tom Long when he ran for CA leader in 2000). As I recall, there were approximately 50 all-candidates’ debates, with Tory performing impressively at all of them. (His proposals to hire more cops and clean up Toronto’s filthy streets have since been adopted by David Miller.) So I happily volunteered, even venturing out on a dark and rainy night to drop flyers with two other friends, and then helping get out the vote on Election Day.

As PC leader, Tory brought an energy, work ethic, and – particularly after losing the 2007 election – commitment to listening that surpassed that of many leaders.

But his bids for public office struck me more as exercises in noblesse oblige, than the logical offshoot of a burning desire to fix particular problems or implement specific policies. As both mayoral candidate and PC leader, Tory had long lists of policy proposals and an impressive ability to speak authoritatively about every single one of them – plus any other issue that happened to come up. But other than the faith schools proposal, what policy could the average person identify with John Tory?

Even his plan to bring independent faith schools under the aegis of school boards came out of a sense of duty, not ideological fervour. The policy is probably not something that Tory would have proposed on his own. But the fact is that the Harris government’s independent schools tax credit addressed a genuine inequity in education. And the McGuinty government’s ugly and thuggish demonization (and reversal in the middle of school year) of a half-measure of fairness extended to fewer than 1 in 20 children could not be ignored, though a more ruthless leader might have done just that.

Tory put a lot of sincere effort into initiatives that the media are perpetually exhorting politicians to do: elect more women, appeal to ethnic communities, and raise the level of conduct in the Legislature. Fat lot of good it did him: the media were just Lucy Van Pelt to Tory’s Charlie Brown, yanking the football away as he came running to kick it. Perhaps the fact that the Queen’s Park Press Gallery has morphed into an internship program for government communications staff has something to do with it.

Noblesse oblige is an admirable impulse, and it can make for good premiers and prime ministers. But in this era of consumerist democracy and aggressively positioning one’s opponents, it makes for less-than-effective politicians. What possessed Tory to help David Miller retire his campaign debt – after Miller did everything he could during the mayoral campaign to tie Tory to the record of the Harris government (which Tory had less to do with than I did) – I will never understand. No surprise, Miller continues to milk the Harris scapegoat to this day.

In politics, noblesse oblige is the equivalent of sock garters. Oddballs like me find them attractive, but among most people, they evoke furtive sniggers. And they slow a man down.

So John Tory goes on to his next challenge with my respect and thanks. He also leaves conservatives with fresh reminders that (1) what the media say politicians should do, and the behaviour they reward, are two different things, and (2) leaders must be prepared to do what it takes to win. In 2011, Dalton McGuinty – or whoever is Liberal leader then – may wish that last week’s by-election had a different outcome.

Rock on, Single Girl!

2009-03-04T23:07:00.002-05:00

But don’t work with dogs, children or idiot Liberals

Contrarian that I am, I don’t agree that 22 Minutes actress Geri Hall’s ambush of the Guinster at the Ontario Legislature today was that much of a disaster. The only disaster I saw was the beyond-wooden-to-the-point-of-outright-petrified Premier Pinocchio. What do you say about someone so humourless that he can’t even be an effective straight man?

Proof yet again that Conservatives are funnier than Liberals. Stephen Harper’s mischievous query as to whether Hall was into handcuffs remains my favourite moment of the 2008 election.

On the other hand, the media’s spin on the supposed poor taste of CBC’s 22 Minutes trying to be funny during a recession, may provide some helpful cover for telling the CBC that the government can hardly be expected to insulate them from the tsunami of recession and imploding media business models that are decimating private media properties.

My view? There’s no such thing as an economy bad enough to preclude the ridiculing of politicians. In fact, when times are tough, we need it more than ever. But Geri should stick with Conservatives.

As for the indignation of reliable jackass Peter Kormos, wasn’t he posing for a Sunshine Boy photo in the middle of a recession that was being made worse by his own government?

‘Blessed, honored, grateful, humbled’

2009-02-16T13:35:00.001-05:00

That’s what you’ll feel after watching “Friday Night Lights” – so why aren’t you watching it?!

Feeling a little empty after the Super Bowl? Yeah, me too, and not just because I’m a Cowboys-then Ravens-then Cardinals fan. Luckily, there is solace in the Best Show on TV, “Friday Night Lights,” which continues to struggle in the ratings despite NBC’s promotion attempts before its return to network TV on January 16th. (The entire third season has already aired on DIRECTV in the U.S.)

The character of Brian “Smash” Williams left the show last week, having successfully gained a mid-season entry to college football after a late-season injury last year. The title quote of this item is from an article actor Gaius Charles wrote about his experience playing the character:

. . . it really didn’t hit me at all until I filmed my final scene with Kyle Chandler [who plays coach Eric Taylor]. Of course, it didn’t hurt that we filmed it on my final day on set and it was the last setup of the night. I remember sitting in my trailer, trying figure out: What exactly should I play? How much should I play it? All that “actor stuff” that goes out the window when you realize life has given you everything needed to capture the truth of those vulnerable moments.

The departure of Smash is a loss, but luckily all the young characters and actors on the show are really good. I have a soft spot for Landry, played by Jesse Plemons (can you imagine having no athletic ability and having to carry the name “Landry” around in Texas?) and, God help me, Tim Riggins (played by B.C. actor Taylor Kitsch).

This week’s show saw the return of paralyzed quarterback Jason Street. We haven’t seen Street since last season, when he made the completion of a lifetime, impregnating a waitress in a one-night stand despite being told that impregnating anyone was nearly impossible. The baby has since arrived, but the mother isn’t living with Street. He believes it’s because he doesn’t make enough money as a part-time car salesman, which is probably at least partly true.

Much of the episode is devoted to Street and Riggins’ scheme to flip a house in an attempt to put together some cash for Street to start a proper family life. Street tells the baby’s mother of the plan, which she promptly denounces as crazy, and informs him that she is moving back east to live with her parents, though he is welcome to visit his son at any time. After she leaves, Riggins comes out of the house and asks what she said. Watching Street swallow his pain and say “Great, she’s really excited” made me cry.

Still not enough? How ‘bout this endorsement:

Hot Imaginary Football Coach: Kyle Chandler

I think the power of Kyle Chandler is best understood via this story: My friend L and her husband Mr. L were in a bit of a sexual dry spell. Then they rented the first season of Friday Night Lights on DVD, and suddenly it was all sex, all the time. The turn-on was mutual. As L put it, “We were both just so aroused by Kyle Chandler’s incredible manliness. Maybe technically he was more ‘inspired’ than ‘aroused’—but hell, he was also a little aroused.”
--”10 Hot Valentines,” Jessi Klein, The Daily Beast

So that’s what you’re missing when you’re watching Larry King or worrying about paying your bills or whatever the heck you’re doing. Seriously, you must be watching 10 hours a week of crap. Why not dump one of those hours of Seinfeld reruns or lame politics shows and replace it with something truly amazing, touching, inspiring and – by the way – family- and faith-affirming?

Vancouver-based gossip blogger and ETalk contributor Elaine “Lainey” Lui is also an FNL booster. This is from her website Friday:

One day, one day they will look back, and they will finally see the brilliance of this show. And they will be sad that they neglected it. And we will say – we told you so.

Why look back, when you can watch it now? Now, now now!

"Friday Night Lights" airs Friday nights at 9:00 p.m. on NBC and E! in Ontario.

“I’ll come to YOUR house and chew gum”

2009-02-12T12:56:00.001-05:00

Ashes of Letterman rise from a Phoenix

I stopped watching Letterman years ago, because it seemed to me that he had become a cranky old desk jockey who couldn’t be bothered to make much of an effort to entertain the millions who inexplicably continued to tune in to him every night. He seemed bored, his comedy bits stank, and he had become a bitter Bush-hater to boot.

But Letterman’s brilliant handling of the monosyllabic Joaquin Phoenix last night has caused me to reconsider. I found it riveting from beginning to end. Even Phoenix had to repress himself from laughing at a few points.

Great Moments in Journalism Dept.

2009-02-10T19:37:00.002-05:00

Toronto Star-owned freebie now written by unpaid interns

In one of the more creative ways to save money, the Toronto Metro laid off all its staff writers and hired unpaid interns to replace them.

Union president, Brad Honywill, doesn't think this is such a good plan. "In this kind of environment, layoffs are inevitable," he said. "But we reject the notion they can fill jobs with interns hired three days beforehand."

Metro's group publisher for English Canada, Bill McDonald, has a different take: "We made a small adjustment to our staff. We're managing our business in these economic times." He also said that "content partnerships" will be responsible for providing some stories.

The news comes just a couple weeks after the Metro in Spain was shut down. Apparently, there are no interns in Europe.
--mediabistro.com

This is the same Metro that sold its entire front page to the Ontario Fiberals during the 2007 election. So the loss to “journalism” is probably not that great. But what would Holy Joe Atkinson think of exploiting unpaid labour to pad TorStar’s bottom line? Probably not much.

Rae’s Only Constant: Arrogance

2009-02-03T17:15:00.002-05:00

Why does a sexagenarian who is still figuring out who he is get to call Stephen Harper a hypocrite? Because he’s better than you

In exchange for the $1.50 I dished out for a paper copy of the National Post today, I was treated to a s***-eating screed addressed to the Prime Minister from Robert Keith Rae, aka He Who Will Never Be Prime Minister, accompanied by an approximately 15-year-old photo of Bob.

The piece bears all the marks of a man who thinks he is better, smarter, funnier and more musical than everyone around him. And to an extent, he is right. After all, how many plodding jingles have you recorded and performed on television that could compare to “We’re in the Same Boat Now?” I thought so.

As the song says “everything old is new again.” [well at least Bob resisted the temptation to quote one of his own ditties] I am no longer the Deficit Poster Boy and Punching Bag. You are. Wear it in the best of health. And rewrite all those speeches complaining about investing in small-craft harbours. Tear up those notes when Preston Manning told us all to “stop digging.” You’re shovel-ready and it looks good on you.

Now, a normal person who spent 30 years devoted to the promotion of democratic socialism before jumping to the most cynical, idea-free force in Canadian politics – for no apparent reason other than he thinks he is still the most capable, intelligent and wise person Canadian politics has to offer – might pause for a moment before accusing others of hypocrisy. Not Bob Rae. I guess that’s one of the reasons why He is Better than Us – no matter what party he is in.

That’s also no doubt why it was reported that, on the morning of the Liberal leadership in 2006, Rae admonished his supporters to remain “humble” when his expected victory came later that day. Except it never came. All the more reason we should be bloody grateful that Rae deigned to have the nomination in a reliably safe Liberal riding handed to him, and suffers the daily indignity of having to address the knuckle-dragging wrestling enthusiasts in the Harper cabinet as “minister.”

Anyhow, to Rae’s point, scarcely visible beneath the oozing scab of his own smugness. Stephen Harper is not the first politician who has found his attitudes, priorities or plans change over time.

Why, just the other day I saw Rae on TV, expressing concern about the buy-American clause in the U.S. stimulus package

“I don’t think either one of us can afford to go off on protectionist tangents,” Rae told Question Period. “We have created this integrated marketplace over several decades and there’s no going back.”
--CTV's Question Period, January 11

And this from the Toronto Star:

But Rae said Canada, which depends on trade, should not do anything to increase protectionist sentiment.

“The risk we run is that we end up offending not just the Americans but also the Europeans and all of our other trading partners,” he said.

“And you have to remember who we are. We’re a tiny country, 33 million in a big world, and it isn’t going to the same effect.

Is this the same Bob Rae who campaigned so vigorously against the original Canada-U.S. free trade agreement that was at the centre of the 1988 federal election, and the 1992 NAFTA agreement, both when he was still a devotee of democratic socialism? Alas, it was.

The Canada-U.S. free trade agreement will make rich companies richer and poor people poorer, says New Democratic Party leader Bob Rae.

Canadian and U.S. negotiators are still trying to define what constitutes unfair trade subsidies, and the Americans are sure to point to Canada’s social programs, Rae said.

Federal government representatives have repeatedly said Canada’s social programs are not threatened by the pact. But the members of yesterday’s panel oppose the pact and echoed Rae’s comments.
--Toronto Star, March 23, 1988 [from free abstract at TheStar.com]

An indication of the likely intensity of the coming storm was an exchange between Mr. Mulroney and Bob Rae, Premier of Ontario and a member of the Socialist-leaning New Democratic Party that opposes the Prime Minister’s Progressive Conservatives.

Alluding to American Presidential politics, Mr. Rae charged that the pact had “everything to do with the Republican convention next week and nothing to do with the interests of the Canadian economy or Canadian workers.”
--New York Times, August 13, 1992

The same boat, indeed. Start baling, Bob.

I must admit that I am little more enthused about the Harper government’s projected $60-plus billion in deficits over two years, than I was by Bob Rae’s $40-billion in deficits over four years.

When I see a news item about a tax credit to encourage home renovation, followed by commercials from banks and the government itself promoting the tax-free savings accounts implemented in the last budget, I am somewhat discom-Bob-ulated. And when I hear commentators saying that similarly unnerved conservative voters have nowhere else to go, I can’t help think: “I’m sure Brian Mulroney assumed the same thing even after the Reform party was founded.” But I am also sure that this last point has occurred to Stephen Harper who, while no saint, seems blessed with more self-awareness than Bob Rae is. (But then, who isn’t?)

Rae’s tribute to his own record conveniently leaves out Ontario’s fiscal circumstances prior to his becoming Ontario’s Worst Premier in History, circumstances for which he was directly responsible, thanks to the 1985 accord that catapulted the second-place Liberals into power. These conditions, just off the top of my head, included:

• 33 tax increases
• Massive hikes in government spending
• The hiring of approximately 10,000 additional civil servants
• Increases in welfare rates, leading to a massive increase in the welfare rolls, despite a booming economy

So when the recession came on Rae’s watch, Ontario’s government was very poorly positioned to respond. Now, there was a certain poetic justice in Rae having to clean up the mess he helped the Liberals make, but Rae proceeded to cripple Ontario further, by the implementation of 32 tax increases of his own, the aforementioned $40-billion in debt, and new burdens on job creation, such as pro-union labour legislation. He did everything short of posting signs at Ontario’s borders and airports telling investors to f*** off.

This contrasts with how the Harper regime governed prior to the current worldwide economic downturn: reducing taxes and paying down debt.

Unfortunately, Rae seems to have concluded that the Harris years vindicated both him and his policies. (Which makes you wonder why he had to switch parties if he was right along.) Bob Rae is the last person who is in a position to criticize Harper. But you will never convince him of that.

Return of the Trusty Tory has also commented on Bob’s op-ed.

Obam-ade: strong enough to strip that last, stubborn layer of perspective

2009-01-20T10:40:00.001-05:00

Media let their pom-poms obscure their objectivity

Warning: If you do not wish to be roused from any pro-bama reverie on which you may currently be levitating, then read no further.

It began shortly after the election, when I caught a promo on CNN that could have easily been produced by the Obama campaign itself, as a momentum ad for the final days of the campaign. But it was instead celebrating CNN’s coverage of the election that had ended, with stills of awed, glassy-eyed rally goers accompanied by soaring music.

At CNN’s T-shirt store, you can buy a shirt that reads: ‘Obama inspires historic victory.’ But, I seem to have spoken too soon: they also have a Bush T-Shirt. What’s on it? ‘The Google’ among top ‘Bushisms’

Then of course there are the commemorative books, from the same media outlets that are supposed to be telling Americans and the world the truth about Obama’s administration for the next four years.

At the New York Times’ online store, “Barack Obama” is the first category listed. There, you can purchase “OBAMA: The Historic Journey” or photo prints of Obama climbing the stairs of a plane or removing his suit jacket at a rainy rally (rear view!), starting at $199 for an 11 x 14 and topping out at $1,129 for a 20 x 24 signed and framed (signed by whom? The photographer, I would assume. Or, in light of recent events, maybe the pilot who flew Obama’s plane).

The erstwhile venerable Time magazine is selling framed copies of its inauguration edition cover for $94.95.

USA Today has been running quarter-page ads touting their “Welcome President Obama feature” that will include a special classified section of messages to the new administration, at a special ad rate of $15 per line. They have even helpfully provided a sample ad:

Dear President Obama, Congratulations and welcome to the Presidency. We trust in you to restore hope and America’s values, thereby ensuring a better future for our children. The Latassas – Cape Coral, FL

So it's just some financially-strained old media outlets trying to make a buck off giving the public what it wants, you say? Where's the harm? The harm is in abandoning the last vestiges of professionalism and objectivity they had, that still distinguished them from new media outlets.

But it goes beyond the profiteering of selling a few T-shirts and coffee table books. The days leading up to the inaugural have been characterized by media coverage that has been even more credulous than the coverage of Obama during the primaries and general election, which I hardly thought possible.

How else does one explain the swallowing – hook, line and sinker – of the dubious rationale that Defense Secretary Robert Gates will be at the back of the shop on Inauguration Day because he is the “designated successor” should something happen to Obama – and not because he is a Bush holdover who symbolizes the successful surge in Iraq that Obama opposed and said wouldn’t work.

Common sense would dictate that Vice President Joe Biden should be quarantined in an undisclosed location for the inaugural. (Actually, Joe Biden should be quarantined 24/7, but alas it is too late for that.)

Perhaps this mass self-hypnosis also explains why the media was scooped by "Entertainment Tonight" – a thinly disguised nightly infomercial for Paramount products —on Obama’s top secret dinner with Oprah Winfrey Sunday night.

On Monday night, I found myself, for the first time in memory, grateful for the snide anti-Americanism of the CBC’s Neil Macdonald, who observed that:

“No other country congratulates itself so effusively for transferring power peacefully. And the man who’s set to accept that power tomorrow has now moved beyond celebrity. This is saturation level fame. Barack Obama has become some sort of talisman for a worried, troubled nation.”

It almost made me take back my opinion that the CBC should have kept Patrick Brown, and fired Macdonald. Almost.

And I was especially grateful for the wise perspective of Rush Limbaugh on Monday afternoon (Limbaugh was not among the conservative journalists and commentators invited for the off-the-record evening with Obama at George Will’s house). Among other points, Limbaugh noted that not only did Clarence Thomas not enjoy any slack, much less celebration, when he became just the second black appointed to the Supreme Court: the Democrats and a good chunk of the mainstream media set out to destroy him.

I don’t think we have seen this kind of media overkill about an individual since the life and death of Princess Diana. Offensive as the coverage was at times, it was ultimately of limited harm, because Diana was not the leader of the free world with all the power and accountability that brings. There was little to fear in the media losing its head over her. What a pleasant surprise it was to see this perspective echoed by BBC reporter Katty Kay:

Why am I coming over all queasy this week? Oh, yes, it must be coronation—sorry, inauguration—week in the federation of the United States. So this is why you booted us out a couple of centuries ago. You simply replaced the pomp and ceremony of hereditary monarchy and with the pomp and ceremony of elected monarchy. OK, you didn't opt for the dynastic duo of Bush and Clinton, which really had us scratching our crowned European heads, but the fanfare with which Caroline Kennedy has entered the political picture suggests your infatuation with royal families is still not over.

In Britain, we invest the Queen with our ceremonial hopes which leaves us free to treat our prime minister as exactly what he is—an elected official, paid for by the taxpayers, and serving at the people's will. While George W. Bush was being asked patsy questions by a subdued White House press corps, Tony Blair was being drubbed by un-cowed political hacks. It is far easier to do when you don't stand the moment the man walks into the room.

Barack Obama has a four-year rental on the White House. We would do well to remember he doesn't possess the freehold.

America got rid of King George for good reason and it toyed recently with another dynastic George. Wasn't that enough? January 20 is indeed a day for celebration, as the world watches the peaceful transfer of power in Washington. I simply wish we could tone down the royal trappings just a smidge. Who really needs another coffee mug anyway?

The justification for all this hysteria, of course, is that Obama is America’s first black president. Yes, he is. But he is still the president. A president who wants to escalate America’s (and Canada's) military commitment in Afghanistan. A president who figuratively threw his grandmother and 20-year pastor under a bus when it became politically expedient to do so. A president whom people believe will be a unifier, but has chosen the most avidly partisan Democrat as his chief of staff, and appointed a handful of Clinton retreads to his cabinet. A president with a number two who has hair plugs and bleached teeth. (Okay, that was a cheap shot.)

Yes, it’s historic. But history, and the election, is about yesterday. The media is supposed to pay attention to what is happening now and its implications for the future. The media’s continual references to Martin Luther King Jr. usually leave out King’s best-known hope (has “hope” been copyrighted by Obama yet?): that he looked forward to the day when people would be judged not on the colour of their skin, but on the content of their character.

We have become so infantilized as citizens that the declaration “I’m scared” is routinely offered by educated people as thoughtful political opinion (and most frequently offered about conservative politicians such as George W. Bush and Stephen Harper). I refuse to sink to that level of childishness and non-cognition. But the media’s complete abandonment of the perspective, responsibility and detachment that is integral to their jobs has unnerved me more than a little.

Mark Steyn hosting for Limbaugh

2009-01-02T12:16:00.002-05:00

If you don't subscribe to Rush 24/7, you can listen to the stream of this Chattanooga station.

Georgian Bay, December 25

2008-12-31T20:03:00.012-05:00

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

A Cold but Enthusiastic Rally for Canada

2008-12-06T18:55:00.001-05:00

Photos from the Toronto rally

The crowd braves the below zero winds at Queen's Park

There were some great signs . . .

. . . and T-shirts

MPP Tim Hudak (right) was among the rally speakers. Also speaking were Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas) Peter Kent, MP Rick Dykstra, Ontario PC leader John Tory, MPP Frank Klees, Toronto councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong and Toronto Catholic trustee Rob Davis.

Conservative candidates Stella Ambler (Bramalea-Gore-Malton) and Theresa Rodrigues (Davenport)

Some young democrats

Tales from the Crypt

2008-11-29T12:46:00.005-05:00

The unelected undead plot (no pun intended) a coup

Mr. Chrétien was upset that legislation he introduced was being undone. And so the two men, who sat across the aisle of the House of Commons from one another for more than 30 years and battled each other in the chamber, talked it out.

“What do we do?” was one question they mulled over question, according to an inside source.

“If we decide to bring down the government is it by [forming a] coalition [government]” was another question they pondered.

Mr. Broadbent and Mr. Chrétien spoke several times on Thursday, but did not meet face to face. They were not tasked to negotiate a coalition but rather to with looking at the situation “from a higher level” to see where common ground might be found, according to a senior New Democrat.

The two men kept in touch with their camps, passing along their recommendations and advice.

As of late Friday, Mr. Chrétien had not spoken to Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion. Rather, the former prime minister, who was on his phone all day at his office, spoke to senior Dion staff [Joan: what staff?].
--"Ghosts of leaders past return for a political longshot," Globe and Mail, today

I caught some of the Hill scrums late yesterday afternoon. Liberals Scott Brison and John McCallum were at one mic talking over each other in front of a crush of reporters. How can a caucus that can't organize a two-man newser run a government? I hope we won't have to find out.

Some people can’t take a hint . . .

2008-10-11T20:39:00.003-04:00

Last Sunday, I tagged along with [Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada leader Liz] White as she canvassed in St. Jamestown, the apartment towers that rise above neighbouring Cabbagetown. This is one her strongholds, she jokes, where she received many of the 100 signatures necessary to run. She shows up with a backpack full of flyers, and recounts how the day before, while canvassing, she found an injured baby squirrel. She picked it up--it bit her four times --and put it in her backpack and biked down to the Humane Society to drop it off. This was after she had unsuccessfully chased after another hurt squirrel.
--“Who Are You Calling Fringe?,” Mark Medley, Toronto Magazine, National Post, October 11

Well, you can't accuse White of not knowing what her priorities are.

Did Wells decline to put his name forward for the Supreme nod?

2008-09-10T23:07:00.002-04:00

Well, in the all the election fooferaw I missed this:

[Newfoundland justice minister Jerome] Kennedy says he put forward three names and all three did not want their names listed. He says upon further consultation, the names of Justice Leo Barry and Justice Malcolm Rowe were put forward.
--VOCM Radio, September 6

Over the weekend, [fisheries minister Loyola] Hearn attempted to quell anger in his home province by saying: “Why didn’t Newfoundland get the Supreme Court judge? Because at least two of the top people didn’t want it.”
--Globe and Mail, September 10

So it’s possible that Clyde Wells was among those approached by the province’s justice minster, and declined to allow his name to go forward.

Why? Maybe his age (he's over 70 -- Supreme Court justices must retire at 75). Perhaps he didn't feel he had the energy for the gig. Perhaps he thought the Harper government would never name him (for the reason I suggested in my earlier post). Perhaps he didn't want to submit to the questioning of MPs. We may never know.

Good news for all you Heather Mallick fans!

2008-09-10T00:38:00.000-04:00

Teaching column-writing course at U of T

I notice that there has been some spirited commentary on the BT blog roll lately about the English stylings of ex-Toronto Sun, ex-Globe columnist Heather Mallick.

Well, try to stand erect and lissen up, fellow knuckle-draggers! Thanks to the magnanimity of her ladyship -- or the continuing decline of the media industry -- now we low foreheads have an opportunity to learn how to write just like her, and at a bargain price to boot:

The U of T offers a shiny new course this fall called How To Write A Column.

The outline: “Good column-writing is rare, and it isn’t easy.”

(Oh, baby.)

“Find your distinct voice and style, and write in a clear, persuasive way.”

(Damn straight.)

“You will be asked to write and polish one column per week.”

(Slackers!)

The prof is Heather Mallick, one of the finest writers I know, and I’m sure it’s worth every bit of $569 for the term.
--Mike Strobel, Toronto Sun, September 5

Sadly, I will not be participating, as I paid well in excess of that for my Ryerson journalism degree – and look where I ended up. But there's still hope for you young guys. So go forth and divide. Starting October 6th.

But seriously, those of you who think Mallick deserves to go to hell, take it from me: teaching retirees with $569 to blow will seem like hell for someone of her towering self-regard.

Now THIS is plagiarism!

2008-09-09T00:41:00.004-04:00

I caught Susan Ormiston’s “Ormiston Online” on CBC's The National earlier. Congrats to Steve Janke for his mention, but I thought the last video – a lame re-subtitling of a clip from the film "Downfall" intended to make Stepher Harper look like Hitler – looked strangely familiar . . .

(See below. This wasn't picked up by the BT aggregator for some reason . . .)

Now THIS is plagiarism!

2008-09-08T22:12:00.006-04:00

Liberal uses same clip from "Downfall" that was used in Hillary Clinton YouTube

I caught Susan Ormiston’s “Ormiston Online” on CBC's The National just now. Congrats to Steve Janke for his mention, but I thought the last video – a lame re-subtitling of a clip from the film "Downfall" intended to make Stepher Harper look like Hitler – looked strangely familiar . . . (Warning: language)

If there’s anything lamer than comparing Stephen Harper to Hitler, I guess it’s stealing somebody else’s lame YouTube. (If video link doesn't work, try here.)

P.S. Somebody even used this clip against Brett Favre, fer God's sake. I hope John Madden doesn't find out.

P.P.S. And Chelsea football club. And a bunch of other videos I can't be bothered to go through. Just search YouTube for "downfall."

Star publishes mockery of Finley's accent

2008-09-08T19:40:00.000-04:00

Why not? Everybody does it

I've long thought that the only two ethnic groups you can ridicule with impunity are the Irish and the Scots.

Recently, Conan O'Brien observed on his show that the only ethnic group they make fun of that never complains to the network is the Irish.

The Scots in particular have taken a beating: the entire Shrek series plus a number of other Mike Myers characters such as Stuart Mackenzie (pictured), the Extra chewing gum commercials with an animated, apparently Scottish stick of gum, the Keith's beer commercials starring the fellow recently convicted for possessing child pornography.

As Bill Bennett might say, where is the outrage?

Anyhow, that bastion of political correctness, the Toronto Star, ran a profile of Conservative national campaign manager Doug Finley on the weekend, a profile that portrayed him as ruthless in dispatching undesirable candidates, including this bit of colour:

Finley finally “lost it,” according to [former Conservative candidate Mark] Warner, a scene Warner says he can't forget, complete with heavy Scottish brogue soundtrack.

“Wheeerrrrrrrrr have you ever run before? Wheeerrrrrrrrr?

Tell me, wheeerrrrrrrrr? Wheeerrrrrrrrr?”

No ermine for Clyde Wells

2008-09-05T18:03:00.003-04:00

As I expected, the Atlantic seat on the Supreme Court being vacated by Michel Bastarache will not be filled by former Newfoundland and Labrador premier Clyde Wells (now Chief Justice of the Newfoundland Court of Appeal). Prime Minister Harper has nominated Nova Scotia judge Thomas Cromwell.

I am of course not privy to the government's deliberations on its nominee. But it would be politically tone deaf for Harper to go into an election in which Québec is a key battleground, by handing such an appointment to a figure who played a key role in killing the Meech Lake accord.

Given Wells’ age and the fact that there is but one “Atlantic” seat on the court, Wells is unlikely to ever be appointed.

I appreciate that many people – including many former Reformers – were deeply opposed to Meech Lake and believe that its defeat reflected the opposition of many Canadians (or at least their lack of understanding of the accord).

But Wells not only reneged on his promise to hold a vote in the Newfoundland legislature on the accord, he behaved in a regrettable manner, as shown in these excerpts from Brian Mulroney’s autobiography:

Quoting Wells: “I will honour the commitment to take the proposal [reached at the June 9-10 first ministers’ meeting] back to Newfoundland to place it before the cabinet and to ask for legislative approval in a free vote, or to put it to a referendum. I must say that a referendum now is almost out of the question.”
--page 781

After this conference [of Eastern premiers and governors], premiers Peterson, McKenna and Ghiz all called Lowell Murray and advised him that they did not believe Clyde Wells intended to hold a vote, They also told Murray that I should not go to Newfoundland, as it was a trap. And on June 20, Bill McNamara, an accomplished young lawyer who had become a strong Meech supporter, called his classmate and friend Deborah Coyne to suggest that, given the unanimous agreement, they bury they hatchet and join forces in supporting the initiative prior to the vote. “There is not going to be a vote,” Wells’s constitutional advisor told McNamara firmly.
--page 786

Just prior to leaving his [Wells’s] home to head for the airport (I had thanked Eleanor warmly and signed her guestbook “With gratitude for a delightful evening,” I recall), I said directly, “Clyde, this vote tomorrow is of great significance to Canada. On a scale of 1 to 10, can you indicate to me now how the vote will go?” He replied, that it will pass? A 5!”
--Mulroney’s Personal Journal, July 26, 1990, page 788

In a most illuminating exchange, Bill Cameron of The Journal in a CBC TV interview three times says to Wells, “But, Mr. Premier, you had the prime minister down to speak to your legislature and then you invited him to your home for dinner. Did you, Mr. Wells, at any time tell the prime minister of Canada during these hours you were together that you intended to cancel a historic vote the very next day?

And three times Premier Wells replies, “Honestly, Bill, I just don’t remember.”
--Mulroney’s Personal Journal, July 26, 1990, page 792

And that is exactly what Wells did. He walked into the Newfoundland Assembly and adjourned the House, thereby depriving the elected members of their right to vote on a major constitutional change that he himself and signed and sworn he would put to a vote.
--page 792

With that Meech Lake was killed off; it didn’t fail. I had three times succeeded in securing unanimous agreement. Yet Meech was suffocated in a cruel act of political infanticide by the premier of Newfoundland. With that accomplished, Wells flew off to the Liberal leadership convention in Calgary, where he was greeted by Jean Chrétien with the memorable words, “Merci, Clyde, pour ton beau travail,” (Thank you, Clyde, for your good work.)
--page 792

Dr. Roy has also posted on this.

Buzz Buzzes Off

2008-09-01T23:44:00.004-04:00

Celebrating a career spent defending inefficiency

The media noted that today was Buzz Hargrove’s last Labour Day parade as head of the Canadian Auto Workers. So, on Hargrove’s retirement, let’s look back at the incident that inspired him, as he related in his 1998 biography:

The sweeper’s name was Gino. He was a short, stout, bald-headed Italian guy [good colour, Buzz!] whose job was to keep a certain floor area clean of dust and debris. Gino could sweep his area in four hours out of an eight-hour shift. The rest of the time he would read pocketbooks. Well, given that he could get through his day’s work so quickly, management started pushing for him to sweep a larger area. But when they came with their stopwatches and clipboards, Gino would sweep exactly his area of responsibility and make it take eight hours.

Management knew he was capable of sweeping a larger area and was challenging their authority. They suspended him for a day. If he continued to ignore their order to sweep a larger floor area, they would continue to suspend him. In no time Ken Gerard was facing off with a big, tough-looking plant superintendent by the name of Ed Charette. These two had earlier had it out in a bar over another plant issue and Ken had beaten the stuffing out of Ed. [now there’s the CAW thuggery I remember from the 1996 OPSEU strike!]. So management now backed off. Under supervision, Gino swept his floor area for the next three nights in exactly eight hours. Ken stayed around and made sure Gino was not hassled by management. In a few days, Gino was again sweeping his area in his usual four hours [and presumably reading for the remainder of his shift]. Management was nowhere to be seen.

For a young buck like me who had never had anyone in any job come to his assistance, I was fascinated that the union could play that kind of role. I thought of that supervisor in the pipeline camp in Alberta. If there had been a union steward standing up for me at that creek in minus 30 weather, I would have been able to say “no way” and still keep my job.

I know people will jump on the Gino story to show how much boondoggle unions support, how lazy workers keep employer costs high. But that is not the point here [not until the company goes under, anyway]. What we are talking about is power. If you do not fight, you lose. The company holds the power [no, the consumer does]. The amount of power a union has depends solely on the extent to which we can build solidarity with our members. Gino’s fight was not over the size of the floor he would sweep. It was over who had the power to demand what a worker had to do.
--Labour of Love, Buzz Hargrove with Wayne Skene, pp. 54-55

A good student of Marxism would recognize Hargrove’s analysis as a lesson in indirectly “seizing the means of production.” But socialism failed to spread worldwide and CAW plants were hard-pressed to compete against automakers whose managers did not have to put up with such bull. Thanks to Buzz, there is a lot less floor-sweeping or other union work in the auto sector worldwide.

That must have been some trip!

2008-08-28T23:50:00.003-04:00

Junketeering Toronto councillor can’t remember where he slept or who he met on May trip to Quebec City (with audio link)

Yesterday the Toronto Sun reported that 17 Toronto city councillors and staffers participated in a $41,854 trip to Quebec City in May, for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' (FCM) 71st annual conference:

Turns out, during an era where there was fear of not making budget, the city fathers miraculously found $41,854 to cover expenses for 17 people to go to beautiful old Quebec. C'est bon.

"It's unacceptable," says Kevin Gaudet of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation who made the discovery though a Freedom of Information request. "It's just a waste of money."

According to Gaudet, with Miller were councillors -- mostly his pals -- Pam McConnell, Paula Fletcher, Joe Pantalone, Howard Moscoe, Suzan Hall, Shelley Carroll, Joe Mihevc, Michael Thompson, Adam Giambrone, Norm Kelly, Adam Vaughan and Janet Davis, who were accompanied by staffers Kevin Sack, Don Wanagas, Philip Abrahams and Barbara Sullivan.
--“Joke’s on us as mayor, 16 pals go on junket,” Joe Warmington, Toronto Sun, August 27

Today, the junket was the topic of tightwad councillor Rob Ford’s regular weekly appearance on John Oakley’s AM640 morning show in Toronto. One of the junketeers, councillor Norm Kelly (pictured, on a different occasion), got the bright idea to call in to defend himself and his fellow troughers.

The interview quickly degenerated into a gentle but embarrassing interrogation, during which Kelly offered as a reason for the trip, participation in Quebec’s 400th anniversary celebrations.

Kelly could not answer what hotel he stayed at, or the details of the “terrific” conversations he had with people about the “challenges facing urban Canada.” Oh, he did remember one, about geothermal heating, with some guy from Northern Ontario whose name he could not remember, but he did have his business card and was planning to visit this fall (I’ll bet!).

When pressed for details on what city budget the expenses were paid out of, Kelly suggested archly that Oakley make a freedom of information request.

Kelly was so inept, he made Rob Ford – considered by some a doppelganger for late comedian Chris Farley in both appearance and demeanour – look like Johnnie Cochran.

Enjoy the audio replay here, click on “Rob Ford with Norm Kelly.” It’s really quite unbelievable.

Toronto two years from now?

2008-08-25T01:07:00.004-04:00

Panhandling rampant in US cities with “a reputation for being liberal and tolerant”

Last week one of the big stories in Toronto was news that the Chinatown Business Improvement Area has hired a private security firm to patrol the Spadina Avenue district, to reduce theft and aggressive panhandling, starting with a three-week pilot project.

A new article by Steven Malanga in the City Journal, "The Professional Panhandling Plague," explains that New York’s vigilance in reducing panhandling and squeegee people has not been repeated in other American cities, with very unpleasant results:

But over the last several years, the urban resurgence has proved an irresistible draw to a new generation of spangers. And while New York City’s aggressive emphasis on quality-of-life policing under two successive mayors has kept them at bay, less vigilant cities have been overwhelmed. Indeed, panhandling is epidemic in many places—from cities like San Francisco, Seattle, Austin, Memphis, Orlando, and Albuquerque to smaller college towns like Berkeley. “People in New York would be shocked at what one encounters in other cities these days, where the panhandling can be very intimidating,” says Daniel Biederman, a cofounder of three business improvement districts in Manhattan, including the Grand Central Partnership, which grappled effectively with homelessness in the city’s historic train station in the early 1990s. “Panhandling has gotten especially bad in cities that have a reputation for being liberal and tolerant. They have tried to be open-minded, but now many of them see the problem as out of control.”

Like their counterparts back in the eighties, some spangers refuse to take no for an answer. Aggressive begging has grown so common in Memphis that a group of residents, members of an online forum called Handling-Panhandling, have begun photographing those who act in a threatening manner, seeking to help police catch those who violate the law. “One of the guys we photographed for the Handling-Panhandling group last summer was obviously a loose cannon,” forum host Paul Ryburn writes. “When employees of a Beale Street restaurant asked him to stop begging in front of their door, he threatened to stab them.”

Reports of similar incidents are on the increase in many cities. A pizzeria manager in Columbus, Ohio, told the Columbus Dispatch earlier this year that panhandlers were entering the store asking for money, then following women back to their cars to scare them into giving it. “One of the bums threatened to stab me when I asked them to leave two women alone,” the restaurateur added. In Orlando, panhandlers have started entering downtown offices and asking receptionists for money, prompting businesses to lock the doors. San Francisco police have identified 39 beggars who have received five or more citations for aggressive panhandling, racking up a total of 447 citations. Tourist guidebooks and online sites are replete with warnings from travelers. A business visitor to Nashville, sharing his experiences on Fodor.com, writes: “Every day I was there I was not just approached but grabbed or touched by folks asking for money.” A traveler to San Francisco, describing his trip on Virtualtourist.com, warns prospective tourists about the pervasiveness of persistent beggars: “If you come to San Francisco and are not hit up for change, you have spent too much time in your hotel room.”

The lengthy and very interesting article is here.

Justin Trudeau profiled in US fashion glossy

2008-08-20T20:11:00.000-04:00

“For all my history, I’m a political neophyte” but he couldn’t wait to run “until I’m 50 and have the gravitas and all that stuff.”

Story says Trudeau “purposely avoided a safe seat” for working-class Papineau

I think it’s safe to say that, even if he were to win three majorities, Stephen Harper is unlikely to ever receive a glowing profile in the oversize American fashion glossy W magazine, much less the September edition (the most important issue of the year for a fashion mag).

But, as the Canadian media have been telling us since Trudeau père died in 2000, Justin Trudeau is no mere mortal, no dull economist from a family of accountants. So in a way it’s no surprise that an American publication finally jumped on the bandwagon.

W's enthusiasm, was rewarded with some pretty good access. The profile titled “The Son also Rises” includes quotes not only from Trudeau, but also from his wife and mother. There's also a quote from pollster Michael Adams, who took a breather from telling us how different we are from Americans, to speak to a US magazine. Some excerpts:

While Canadians prefer understatement and scorn comparisons to their neighbor to the south, they are apt to compare the Trudeaus to the Kennedys—as close as it gets to Canadian royalty. Last year, when Justin won his party’s nomination to run for a seat in the House of Commons, 40 percent of Canadians polled said they’d like to see him as the next leader of the Liberal Party—even though he has yet to hold office. Now 36, he’s a rising political star and likely to become a member of Parliament when he runs in the next federal election, which is expected to take place in the coming months. Few doubt that he’ll make a bid at some point for the leadership of the Liberals—the party his father dominated for 16 years and, for now, the opposition.

To the party faithful in search of the lost Trudeau magic, Justin is the future, the one who can draw a younger generation into the political fold, much as Barack Obama has done. [Don’t speak too soon!] To his detractors he’s an inexperienced lightweight simply leveraging his father’s fame.

Handsome and boyish, his dark curls flopping into his blue eyes, he’s dressed in tidy jeans and a navy blazer. With his mother’s good looks and warmth and his father’s élan and idealism, he has an ease and buoyancy about him that makes it hard not to like him. “For all my history, I’m a political neophyte,” he says. “The actual mechanisms of politics are something that I’ve stayed away from all my life, deliberately.”

After studying English literature at McGill University, Trudeau became a schoolteacher and later earned a master’s degree in environmental geography [his official bio refers only to “graduate studies” – not a master’s]. A regular feature in local society pages, he chaired a national youth service program for four years and has also spoken out on winter-sports safety after his brother Michel, the youngest of the Trudeaus’ three sons, was killed while skiing in 1998 when an avalanche sent him into an icy lake in British Columbia. Increasingly, Justin felt that to effect change, he had to enter the fray, not “wait until I’m 50 and have the gravitas and all that stuff.”

Finally, there’s this:

In Canada candidates may choose where to run [clearly, the author Diane Solay has never met Doug Finlay], and [Trudeau] purposely avoided a safe seat in an affluent, mixed English-French area, selecting instead a working-class district of immigrants and Francophone professionals where his two rivals had long-standing ties. His against-the-odds win there and the fact that his former opponents are now cochairing his run for the House of Commons are all part of his personal campaign to “prove my chops in politics and work my way up from the grass roots,” he says. “I want to demonstrate that it’s all about what I bring, not the name and not the past.”

Hmm, I wonder where W got the idea that that’s how it played out As anyone who follows Canadian politics knows, Trudeau first set his sights on a nomination in the safe Liberal seat of Outremont, but Stéphane Dion had other ideas, thinking he could afford to run one of his professor pals there instead.

A movie with a big, juicy target

2008-08-17T00:28:00.003-04:00

"An American Carol" opens October 3rd

The holiday in An American Carol is not Christmas and the antagonist is not Ebenezer Scrooge. Instead, the film follows the exploits of a slovenly, anti-American filmmaker named Michael Malone, who has joined with a left-wing activist group (Moovealong.org) to ban the Fourth of July. Along the way, Malone is visited by the ghosts of three American heroes--George Washington, George S. Patton, and John F. Kennedy--who try to convince him he's got it all wrong. When terrorists from Afghanistan realize that they need to recruit more operatives to make up for the ever-diminishing supply of suicide bombers, they begin a search for just the right person to help produce a new propaganda video. "This will not be hard to find in Hollywood," says one. "They all hate America." When they settle on Malone, who is in need of work after his last film (Die You American Pigs) bombed at the box office, he unwittingly helps them with their plans to launch another attack on American soil.

The entire film is an extended rebuttal to the vacuous antiwar slogan that "War Is Not the Answer." Zucker's response, in effect: "It Depends on the Question."

Zucker had originally hoped to cast Dan Whitney (aka Larry the Cable Guy) as Malone, but a timing conflict kept him from getting it done. After briefly considering Frank Caliendo, a fellow Wisconsinite, a colleague passed him a reel from Kevin Farley, the younger brother of the late Chris Farley, and Zucker, who recalled seeing Kevin Farley in an episode of Larry David's Curb Your Enthusiasm, was interested.
--"Hollywood Takes on the Left," Weekly Standard, August 11

Ti-Dolt's Conditional Apology

2008-08-12T11:30:00.004-04:00

Read: "I'm sorry that partisan jerks deliberately misinterpreted my comments to make me look like a sexist, 'cause that's totally not who I am, but if you're not a partisan jerk who exploited my comments to serve your own agenda, and if you were really offended, then . . . I'm, uh, sorry."

Macleans' excellent Blog Central is reporting that Nova Scotia Liberal MP Robert Thibault is sort of apologizing for telling Marjory LeBreton to get back in the kitchen (or whatever he meant by his "figurative" reference to tea-making -- see update to post below).

“I would like to clarify my statement that appeared in the Hill Times this week. My comment was not meant to be gender-specific and I in no way intended it to be interpreted in that way. If anything I said can be interpreted as sexist, I unequivocally and wholeheartedly apologize and withdraw my comments. I have always been a strong supporter of women in politics and want to encourage not hinder their participation in the public sphere.”

Well, we've seen these kind of non-apologies before, and we'll probably see them again.

Ti-Dolt

2008-08-11T21:08:00.003-04:00

Thibault steeped in stupid

You know, I've always thought that Nova Scotia Liberal MP Robert Thibault had the voice of an educated thug. Turns out he has the attitudes of an uneducated one.

In a slam reminiscent of Eric Cartman’s faux-bravado towards imaginary women who should know their place, i.e. “bake me a pie!” or "knit me a sweater!" Thibault has tried to be John Crosbie to Senator Marjory LeBreton's Sheila Copps:

Three-term Liberal MP Robert Thibault has got into an angry and heated public war of words with Government Senate Leader Marjory LeBreton, saying that she took his "ageist" comments out of context and that the Senator "should go back to making tea for Brian Mulroney and stay out of serious people's business."

"Yes [I stand by] the comments that I made, but not the comments that are attributed to me," Mr. Thibault (West Nova, N.S.) told The Hill Times, laughing at the apparent incongruity of his statement. But he went on to explain: "[I do not stand by] the intent [or spin] that idiots like Marjory LeBreton would put onto my comments. Marjory should go back to making tea for Brian Mulroney and stay out of serious people's business."
--The Hill Times, today

This comes on the heels of Thibault's ill-advised shouldn't-you-be-in-a-rocking-chair? putdown of his Conservative opponent in the next election.

You know what they say. When you’re in a hole, the first thing you should do is stop digging. In doubling down on his ridicule of Greg Kerr, by demeaning a female senior (a key demographic in Atlantic Canada), Thibault seems determined to dig his political grave.

Update: The Halifax Chronicle-Herald was able to get ahold of Thibault for comment Monday:

Mr. Thibault said Monday that he does not plan to apologize.

"Tea, firstly, is figurative, not planning to be sexist in any way," he said. "Marjory LeBreton is a very partisan person who was appointed to the Senate by Brian Mulroney and has been seen as being Brian Mulroney’s proxy in cabinet."

Mr. Thibault said he thinks people will understand his comments weren’t sexist.

"I think people will understand that my comments about Marjory LeBreton are a reference to a very partisan Conservative who is looking for any opportunity whatsoever to get my goat," he said.

Really. Making tea is figurative? Does that mean it's a euphemism for some other act?

Anyhow, thanks to Thibault's intransigence, LeBreton has now been joined by women's groups not normally known for their Conservative sympathies, while female Liberal MPs are unavailable for comment:

"We do a lot of work to get women involved in the political process, and one of the things that keeps them out is disrespectful behaviour," said Brigitte Neumann, executive director of the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women. "Whatever your party affiliation, you shouldn’t have to put up with sexist comments."

Francoise Gagnon, executive director of Equal Voice, a group that works to get women involved in politics, said the comments are sexist.

"We always hold the line that it’s very unfortunate that these kinds of comments are made," she said. "They don’t reflect the hard work of all the members from all the different parties who contribute."

Ms. LeBreton challenged female Liberal MPs to respond to Mr. Thibault’s remarks, but two women who play a prominent role in the Liberal women’s caucus — Maria Minna and Belinda Stronach — did not return calls on Monday.

Neither did communications officers for Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.

Ms. LeBreton said Liberal women should speak out.

"If they sit there and say nothing, that says a lot about them, too," she said.

McCain: The grandpa who undermines your parents

2008-08-07T23:00:00.001-04:00

The King of Old Media, Barack Obama, must be puzzled over how old man John McCain is lately the King of YouTube:

Paris Hilton may think John McCain is just a “wrinkly white-haired guy,” but the Republican presidential candidate apparently has figured out the younger generation just fine. Over the past two weeks, his “celebrity” attacks have stomped Democratic presidential opponent Sen. Barack Obama in YouTube hits.

Mr. McCain has pumped out a series of brutal yet entertaining attack ads and Web videos mocking the press and Mr. Obama, and the combination of wit and insult has pushed his YouTube channel to the sixth most watched on the site this week. Mr. McCain has beat Mr. Obama's channel for seven straight days and 11 of the past 14 days, in a signal he intends to compete for the YouTube vote.
--“McCain takes lead on YouTube hits”, Washington Times, August 7

Now, just maybe, to some young people, McCain reminds them not of their hovering, boomer parents (like the Obamas with their over-scheduled daughters), but their grandparents.

McCain kind of reminds me of Cotton Hill, Hank Hill’s father on “King of the Hill.” Cotton slaps his much-younger second wife on the butt in public; he shouts at diner waitresses: “Hey missy! How ‘bout some sammidges?!” and talks about how he killed “fiddy Japs” in WWII, where he also lost his shins. He doesn't make Hank's son, Bobby Hill (whose life ambition is to be a prop comic, not a quarterback), feel like he is an ongoing disappointment.

Yes, he’s stubborn as a mule, and sometimes he’s an embarrassment. He addresses Peggy Hill to her face as “Hank’s wife.” But Cotton Hill is real. He doesn’t give a s*** what people think – the root of all genuine cool – and that makes him oddly compelling. Maybe that’s what McCain has tapped into.

McCain is the grandfather who lets you ride sans seatbelt and will lend you his car without your parents knowing. He shows you the war memorabilia that he isn’t officially supposed to have. He gives you cash on the sly (real cash, not $5 cheques on your birthday, like the writers on “Saturday Night Live” think). He lets you drink a beer at his house. He takes you hunting and teaches you how to shoot.

McCain wasn't the goody two-shoes who soared above his family's origins and has been running for president since the age of 25, like Obama. McCain was the screw-up of the McCain clan of naval officers, who finished at the bottom of his class at Annapolis. Come to think of it, he's kind of the black sheep of the Republican party, too.

And now, as if following some kind of TV script, along comes dad to kill the party:

Mr. Obama's campaign has studiously avoided talking about Mr. McCain's celebrity attacks, instead responding to the substance of the attacks included in most ads.

But Mr. Obama himself couldn't resist, telling voters last week that the Spears-Hilton references were demeaning to the election.

“Given the seriousness of the issues, you’d think we could have a serious debate,” he said in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. “But so far, all we’ve been hearing about is Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. I mean, I do have to ask my opponent, is that the best you can come up with? Is that really what this election is about? Is that what is worthy of the American people?”

Yup, that sure sounds like a parent lecturing a teenager.

Dion's leadership debt payoff still under review by Elections Canada

2008-07-28T15:22:00.005-04:00

UPDATE: CP has replaced the story below, with this one, that states Dion's debt as as $560,000, not $800,000. It also includes a comment from Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre:

"The fact that Stephane Dion cannot commit to paying off his debts promptly shows that he is a weak leader who can't be trusted with the nation's finances," Poilievre told The Canadian Press.

He challenged Dion to "commit to Canadians that he will pay off all of his debts before the next election."

"If Mr. Dion goes into the next election with these debts hanging over his head, then Canadians will wonder about his fiscal competence."

Former Liberal leadership candidates to repay debts; Dion plan under review

OTTAWA — Elections Canada has accepted debt paydown agreements totalling nearly $1.4 million from eight Liberals who ran for the party leadership in 2006.

But Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand is still reviewing a paydown plan submitted by party leader Stephane Dion. Dion, whose debt from the campaign was recently reported at more than $800,000, had the largest outstanding obligations from the campaign.

Toronto MP Ken Dryden was next, with $300,000 in loans to repay, all to himself as the lender, by June 3.

Deputy Leader Michael Ignatieff had a debt of $187,000.

Under federal election law, the candidates had 18 months to arrange paydown agreements acceptable to Elections Canada, or the debts would have been converted into campaign contributions.

It depends on what the definition of “public” is . . .

2008-07-28T14:12:00.001-04:00

Elections Canada says decisions on Liberal leadership loans are now public – but you have to ask for them

Media Advisory

Status of Decisions on Liberal Leadership Contestants’ Claims and Loans

OTTAWA, Monday, July 28, 2008 — The Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Marc Mayrand, has today made public the decisions made to date under the Canada Elections Act in regard to the authorization to make late payments on claims and loans of contestants for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada in 2006.

All documents related to the Chief Electoral Officer’s decisions are public and are now available by contacting Elections Canada.

Elections Canada is an independent body set up by Parliament.

Information:
Elections Canada Media Relations
1-877-877-9515
or at www.elections.ca

The decisions do not seem to be posted on Elections Canada’s website. Perhaps they want to keep track of which media outlets are requesting them and may be doing stories.

New Yorker Obama cartoonist is Canadian

2008-07-14T13:47:00.005-04:00

Says best work comes from “crazy emotional morass”

Canadian media: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

As of 1:30 p.m., there were no hits on Google News Canada mentioning that cartoonist Barry Blitt – who drew the July 21st New Yorker cover currently burning up the blogosphere – is (or at least was) a Canadian, who went to New York in 1989.

Here are some excerpts of an interview with Blitt, from an online profile in March of this year:

“I got a scholarship from Leo Burnett ad agency while I was at Ontario College of Art, between my third and fourth year. I didn’t even know what it was for, I just entered it and I got it and I worked at Leo Burnett as a visualizer for my fourth year at college. I hated advertising; it was demeaning. I mean, they’d ask me to draw lettuce and then ask me to make the lettuce look crispier. That wasn’t for me.

“After school ended I went to England. There was so much great work coming out of London at the time, and I thought I would go there and get inspired by that and maybe I’d find my style or my niche there. But when I brought my portfolio around, I stupidly went to Leo Burnett there, too. And they offered me a job doing the same thing I had done in Canada and I took it because I didn’t know anyone in England. So I was drawing crispy lettuce and stuff like that, and I hated it. I worked there for about a year and then came back to Canada and somehow started bringing my work around and just did my bit.

“I had one style that was sort of black and white charcoal that was serious and then there was the crazy stuff in pen and ink. More and more the pen and ink seemed to be favored and I could put some humor in that, but at first it was all little spots and Canadian Business Magazine and stuff that. Some of it was just so bad. I didn’t even care. Sometimes I just don’t care. I’ll work on something and I just won’t want to be doing it, and I’ll have a bad attitude. I’m trouble: you have to stay away from me.

“I don’t think I necessarily choose my assignments well. Sometimes it’s hard to say no. Some of these people, they don’t want you to say no. But it’s really important to choose the right things for yourself.

“Back then I had more time to do self-generated projects and stuff. I remember I was doing these crazy biographies of my heroes, just one page each, anyone from George Washington, to Gustav Mahler, to Stravinsky. I did a whole series of those and they were fun and I didn’t care. I think part of the not caring thing is I have to sort of fool myself into not caring about a drawing. I do my best work when I’m not thinking about it, when I’m not worried about it. So any New Yorker cover I do, it’s just a crazy emotional morass. I’ll draw it seven or eight times and I’ll start painting each one, and this one’s better than the other one, and then I’ll go back to the first one (the first one is always the best one). I still haven’t learned to let myself make mistakes and that’s where the best stuff comes in.

Blitt was named in a lawsuit by Conrad Black, over an illustration in Toronto Life magazine in 2004. The suit was later settled.

There is no mention of Blitt’s Canadian origins in the stories posted at The Star, the Globe, Maclean’s, the CBC, or CTV. To be fair, most are only posting the US-produced Associated Press copy. But they can add their own stuff to AP copy, and even I remembered Blitt’s name and that he is Canadian.

9:20 p.m. Update: Alison Smith just delivered CBC’s very Obama-friendly story on the National. No word on Blitt’s nationality.

11:27 p.m. Update: CTV National News ran their Obama-sympathetic story at the end of the broadcast. The lead-in and story mentioned the “Canadan-born artist” but did not name him.

Of all the Maclean’s issues in all the world . . .

2008-07-11T11:50:00.000-04:00

They have to publish one of my web comments in their Morgentaler edition

This was my comment on a recent Maclean’s Health Blog item by Alexandra Shimo, on how sitting down can make you fat:

So THAT’s why federal Liberal MPs are looking a little flabby lately. Not standing up to vote in the commons.

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

My wisecrack (no pun intended) has been republished on page 4 of the July 21st issue of Maclean’s as “Reader Comment of the Week” -- the one with Order of Canada recipient Henry Morgentaler on the cover. Good for me, I guess.

The ironic thing about this is that I myself am sadly a few dress sizes past “flabby.” But I’m sure my former client, the Government House Leader, would appreciate that I was on message vis à vis the Liberals’ habit of sitting down for Canada.

Bliss: Morgentaler’s OC file was reopened several times

2008-07-03T22:29:00.002-04:00

Whatever you think of abortion, this is yet another episode of "The Judiciary Knows Best"

What do I always tell you, kids? The most important parts of the newspaper are (1) the corrections, and (2) letters to the editor. Here’s historian Michael Bliss’ letter to the Post today on Morgentaler’s OC:

As a Member of the Order of Canada, I am deeply saddened by the way that our honours system is apparently being debased and cheapened by appointments such as the Henry Morgentaler one. Those of us who occasionally nominate worthy people for consideration for the Order have been told repeatedly that if they have been considered and rejected on an earlier occasion, the files are not normally reopened. I cannot understand why the Morgentaler file was apparently reopened on several occasions.

If the Order of Canada’s advisory committee, meeting behind closed doors, continues to make divisive, apparently political recommendations, it will undermine the integrity of the Order and further discourage those of us who tried to help make the system work. I am particularly distressed that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada is involved in a process the trustworthiness of which many of us now question.

Michael Bliss, Member of the Order of Canada, University Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto, Toronto.

This confirms what Order of Canada scholar Christopher McCreery hints at in this op-ed in the Globe:

Dr. Morgentaler has been nominated to receive the Order of Canada numerous times over the past 25 years, before supporters organized a nomination campaign earlier this year. But members of previous Advisory Councils – the committee of 11 people, chaired by the Chief Justice of Canada, advising governors-general on appointments – have steered clear of pushing his nomination forward because it was viewed as highly divisive and potentially damaging to the prestige associated with membership.
--"Does the Order of Canada stand for unity or recognition?," Christopher McCreery, Globe and Mail, July 2

Continuing with the fallout, a B.C. priest has returned his OC, and prominent Bay Street figure Thomas Caldwell (pictured) has reportedly removed his OC lapel pin:

A Catholic priest in British Columbia is returning his Order of Canada after Dr. Henry Morgentaler was named a member, calling the controversial abortion doctor’s induction into the Order “a terrible mistake.”

Father Lucien Larre, who was inducted into the nation’s highest order in 1983 for his work with troubled youth, said in a news release yesterday that he felt “compelled in conscience to return my Order of Canada.”

The priest, based in Coquitlam, B. C., said he did not want to show disrespect to the Governor-General or to condemn Dr. Morgentaler, but added, “I believe in my heart that he is horribly wrong and the advisory committee made a terrible mistake.”
--”B.C. priest gives back his Order over Morgentaler,” National Post, July 3

As the media have reported, Larre was pardoned for prior convictions of assault and offering a noxious substance:

He said the assault charge stemmed from an incident in 1974, when he slapped a 19-year-old woman trying to have an affair with a 14-year-old boy under his care. The other change came from an incident when he and a nurse told three teenagers to consume various unidentified vitamins, sugar pills and placebos in an effort to teach them about drugs.
--"Priest critical of Morgentaler has controversial past," CTV.ca

At my age, and with my middling skills, I have not been graced with the time or talent to have attained such a prestigious award. But if I had, and if the same folks who honoured me then chose to celebrate a man for snuffing out little lives, I like to think I would waste no time in telling them where to stick their snowflake. I was proud that my father removed his own hard-earned Order of Canada immediately upon hearing of Morgentaler’s accolade.
--”Every child a gift from God,” Theo Caldwell, National Post, July 3

Given that there are more than 5,000 OC members, we probably haven’t heard the last of these. McCreery makes the same prediction.

My own views on abortion are conflicted, and I’ve never blogged about them. My initial reaction was that Morgentaler’s OC is consistent with what the Order of Canada has become, and I was surprised he had not been recognized earlier.

Though Bliss’ comments above might fuel a paranoiac view that this was deliberately timed to occur during Stephen Harper’s tenure, it is more likely that Justice McLachlin cracked the whip due to Morgentaler's age and health:

The sources said Chief Justice McLachlin drove the nomination, which was opposed by the two government members on the nine-member committee, Privy Council Clerk Kevin Lynch and deputy heritage minister Judith LaRocque.

Dr. Morgentaler has been nominated for appointment to the order several times before, but was rejected.

But at 85, and having recently suffered a severe stroke, there are concerns about his health. The honours are not made posthumously.
--"Panel divided on crusader's nomination, vote suggests," Globe and Mail, July 3

Neverthless, I agree with the prime minister’s implication yesterday that this is a divisive decision. In that vein, McCreery poses this question:

Membership in the Order of Canada was never intended to be a source of controversy or discord. So we need to seriously consider the following question: At what point are we willing to sacrifice the unity of our national order so that recognition can be accorded to a single individual?

But McCreery's question is now moot. As on so many other occasions since Papa Trudeau granted us our court-proscribed rights in 1982, a judge has taken it upon herself to make our decision for us.

The Great Pumpkin has also posted on the OC.

So has Dr. Roy.

And Halls of Macadamia.

And Joanne (recommended).

The Anonymous and the Profane

2008-07-02T14:24:00.002-04:00

Last night on the Globe’s thread on Dr. Henry Morgentaler’s OC, someone questioned why departing CAW president Buzz Hargrove was so effusive in his praise for Morgentaler (“I’m absolutely thrilled to be on the list at the same time as Dr. Morgentaler. I supported him. I supported his efforts. I think he's done more for half the population in this country … in terms of fighting for women's reproductive rights”).

Remembering Hargrove’s own unplanned parenthood, disclosed in his autobiography, I posted the following comment:

Here's a clue from Buzz's bio as to why he's such a Morgentaler fan:

“I did not have a girlfriend at the time and we began a relationship that got pretty serious. She ended up getting pregnant [yes, he really wrote that] and in December 1964 my first daughter, Karen was born.

“At the time, there was no way I was getting married. I was barely nineteen. I had no sense at all about what I wanted to do with my life.”
--Labour of Love, p. 53

This morning I received the following comment submitted to my own blog, with the expletives spelled out (which is why I couldn’t approve it):

Nice of you to bring up Buzz Hargrove's girlfriend’s abortion in a public discussion at the Globe on the Order of Candaa [sic] award to Morgentaler.

F****** c***. How about you come clean on the payola from the Harper government?

Well, “Anonymous,” if you do come back:

1. Read the excerpt again. She had the baby.

2. What’s your problem with quoting it? It was published in Hargrove’s autobiography (that means he wrote it himself).

3. Nice language.

4. My contract with the democratic reform ministry – which was for writing, not blogging – has run its course. But thanks for caring.

McGuinty lets Phillips dump his portfolio but keep his cabinet lolly

2008-06-20T13:04:00.004-04:00

Cost for Gerry Phillips to chair cabinet meetings: $46,858 per year.

Less work for the same pay: priceless.

Well, if I were a Fiberal backbencher looking at three more years of having to pretend that George Smitherman is entertaining and Margarett Best is intelligent, while holding my breath in David Caplan’s fart cloud, I wouldn’t be too pleased about this:

Gerry Phillips will assume new responsibilities as Chair of Cabinet and remain in cabinet as a Minister Without Portfolio. This move was spurred by a request from Minister Phillips who wished to reduce his workload while continuing to contribute to the McGuinty government.
--McGuinty news release, today

The $46,858 minister's stipend (scroll to page 3 of the Estimates) is in addition to Phillips’ MPP salary of approximately $113,000.

But never mind Premier Pinocchio’s seething backbenches. Phillips’ sweetheart deal is, to say the least, an unfortunate message to send in an economy where people are routinely being asked to do more work for the same pay, or have to apply for jobs that pay considerably less after being laid off.

I’m wondering if Phillips gets to keep his car and driver, too, to make sure he gets to cabinet on time.

It’s not just me

2008-06-19T09:30:00.001-04:00

Even the Toronto Star says Dion’s English is getting worse

“It might be politically incorrect to say, but Dion's spoken English is bad – and may be getting worse. Because of it, he's turning off many English-speaking voters. While his command of the English language is excellent, his diction and cadence are so terrible that he is often harder to understand than Jean Chrétien. Dion should work with a speech language pathologist, some of whom make big dollars training recent immigrants to speak without an accent.”
--“A summer makeover for Stéphane,” Bob Hepburn, The Toronto Star, today

Over the past few months it seemed to me that Dion’s English in Question Period was actually deteriorating. And this was with material that he presumably had some time to reword and rehearse. I guess I wasn’t alone. Better spoken English is number one on Hepburn's ten-item makeover agenda for Dion.

What has Premier Pinocchio got against Canadians?

2008-06-11T22:55:00.000-04:00

Clintons’ fartcatcher addressed Fiberals in 2006, this year it’s Blair’s fahtcatcher

Pull of foreign gurus not new to McGuinty

The Ontario Liberal newsletter arrived today to remind me that the star attraction at the Ontario Liberal party’s AGM this weekend is Tony Blair’s communications guru Alastair Campbell.

If you are a member of the “Red Trillium Club” (minimum donation: $1,000), however, you will have an opportunity to attend an exclusive reception with Campbell and have Campbell’s book, The Blair Years, signed by Campbell himself. This is in addition to your personally signed photo of Dalton McGuinty. (No, really!)

This comes less than two years after the McGuintyites hosted Clinton stalwart James Carville at their meeting in October of 2006.

The blurb in the Liberal newsletter describes Alastair Campbell thus:

Alastair Campbell is best known as a journalist and former Director of Communications and Strategy for former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. He was a key figure behind Mr. Blair’s rise to power and was often described as “the real Deputy Prime Minister.” With the Labour election victory in 1997, he became the Prime Minister’s chief press secretary, setting up a formidable Whitehall communications machine.

Here’s a reminder of what that “formidable communications machine” was capable of:

On September 11th, just an hour after those planes slammed into the World Trade Center, Jo Moore, a senior adviser to Britain’s Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, turned away from the TV and composed an e-mail for departmental circulation:

It’s now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury.
--Mark Steyn, National Post, October 11, 2001 (republished in The Face of the Tiger)

On 9/11, I happened to be working (briefly) for then Ontario health minister Tony Clement. Our executive assistant’s first thought was not along the lines above, but that he should ask the deputy minister to make some calls to ensure that our hospitals were ready to handle American victims, or patients diverted from northeastern US hospitals.

But back to McGuinty, who has long sought the advice of foreigners to a degree that conservatives would be crucified for. (Frankly we've been crucified for less, such as consulting Mike Murphy during the 1995 election.)

McGuinty travelled to the U.K. for education ideas prior to the 2003 election, and hired Michael Fullan as an education adviser. He then spent $25,000 to travel to Chicago for advice from Obama fixer David Axelrod.

Play Tax Tag – it’s fun!

2008-06-10T21:52:00.004-04:00

If you haven’t checked out the Conservative Party’s “Will You be Tricked?” website about Stéphane Dion’s will-he-or-won’t-he carbon tax, I recommend you do so and click on the “Tax Tag” button.

This leads you to a page of various people and characters, and when you click on them the site tells you whether they will or will not pay Dion’s carbon tax.

The cast of characters includes: Liberal/Green candidate Elizabeth May, caucus stinkbomb Garth Turner, and even Liberal blogger Jason “Britney” Cherniak. Congratulations, Jason!

Clark unveils his inner Elvis on Parliament Hill

2008-05-28T00:27:00.001-04:00

In an act of vanity on par with Barbara Walters’ lighting and Americans choosing the “thin Elvis” postage stamp, Joe Clark unveiled a portrait of himself – circa 1975 – on Parliament Hill Tuesday.

If only the Sex and the City movie (opening this Friday, in case you hadn’t heard) could have been rendered entirely in CGI by Patrick Douglass Cox, who has given us Joe: Portrait of a Young Fogey, now adorning the halls of Parliament like a still from Austin Powers: The Spy Who Retouched Me: imagine the Botox and light filters that might have been saved.

On the other hand, perhaps we should be grateful that Clark resisted the urge to ask that Cox depict him dressed as Evel Knievel jumping a Harley-Davidson over Pierre Trudeau’s cabinet, while Ann-Margret waits just beyond the landing ramp with arms outstretched.

In his remarks, Clark urged greater respect in public life:

“We are a country of immense diversity. We are going to have our clashes. We have to try to understand the origins, the point of views of others. We have to show them a sense of respect that’s based on the sense of worth that they bring,” he said, drawing applause from the audience.

But that was the thing about Joe, wasn’t it? He had respect for the views of everyone except the citizens of the province that elected him to Parliament in 1972, 1974, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1988 and 2000. When it came to the “others” of Alberta, Joe’s attitude seemed to alternate between disgust and embarrassment.

But you didn’t have to go as far as Alberta to find people whose opinions Clark had little time for. As Clark would be well aware, many members of his own caucus on his first go-round as leader found themselves sidelined and ignored. Luckily Brian Mulroney was always happy to take their calls and sympathize with their frustrations. Or maybe Clark remains blissfully oblivious to this still: given his conduct in recent years, that seems quite possible.

Clark’s paean to r-e-s-p-e-c-t came less than 24 hours after he took the opportunity of an appearance on "Mike Duffy Live" to take another kick at Stephen Harper’s goolies (coincidentally, another Albertan), a kick that was better aimed than most of Joe’s tactics or strategies as leader:

“I’ve not had a prime minister before whom I didn’t think I knew where he really was, what his real concerns were. I didn’t always agree with him, but that’s the situation I’m in ...,” the former prime minister said yesterday in an interview with CTV Newsnet’s Mike Duffy.

“Even the Afghanistan mission it seems to me is, in effect, a reflection of the interest of working with the U.S., which is a good thing but not alone,” he said. “And Canada’s reputation internationally, which is an immense asset to the country, depends upon using both sides of the Canadian coin ... I don’t think he [Mr. Harper] is inclined to that and I don’t think his government has given a leadership to an excellent public service to be able to do that.”

Sadly, Duffy did not interject to remind Clark that the Afghanistan mission is NATO-led, and was initiated and extended by two Liberal prime ministers, one of whom – Paul Martin – Clark endorsed as “the devil we know” in the 2004 election. Now why would Clark urge Canadians to re-elect a corrupt Liberal government, instead of a Conservative one led by a man who had succeeded where he had failed?

And, yes, I am going to say it, because I always have to: my vote for Joe in the 1998 PC leadership is the only vote I wish I could take back.

Mike McGuire has also posted on this.

Little to lose

2008-05-23T19:18:00.001-04:00

Dion’s early days not unlike Chrétien’s last

At first blush, one would be hard-pressed to identify many similarities between Jean Chrétien and Stéphane Dion, other than they are both Québec federalists. Chrétien is a gregarious, instinctual, lifelong politician who prized winning elections and a clean desk, and was so relaxed that he went home for lunch every day while Parliament was sitting. Dion is a quiet professor who probably toted his own lunch in his backpack, and brought thoughtful letter-writing back to politics.

But as I see Dion rush headlong into his roll-the-dice carbon tax election, I can’t help but be reminded of the last days of Jean Chrétien’s tenure, characterized by his declaration to the effect of “I am not running again. I can do what I want.” (Not much of an endorsement for consulting voters before acting – i.e. democracy – but never mind.)

After Chrétien announced in the summer of 2002 that he would not run for a fourth term, he unleashed a whirlwind of hard-left initiatives, including the legalization of marijuana (or de-criminalization, if you prefer) and political finance reforms, including banning corporate and union donations to parties (later on, the Harper government extended the ban to ridings and candidates also).

It is debatable whether Chrétien did these things because (1) he really believed in them, or (2) he wanted to damage Paul Martin, whose leadership he was now powerless to prevent. Either way, he was indifferent to the effects these policies would have on the Liberal party. “Après moi le deluge,” as they say. As Elections Canada’s quarterly financial returns show, banning corporate donations continues to harm the Liberal party to this day.

In the case of Dion, despite reports that he is deaf to most advice, I suspect that he has at least figured out this much: the Liberal party is going to give him but one chance to win an election. After the next election, Stéphane Dion will either be Prime Minister, or an unemployed professor.

In the leadership, Dion was the first-ballot choice of just 18% of Liberal delegates. He has few supporters in caucus. He has little base in the party and has been unable to build one (which is near-impossible while you're leader, anyway). He has a limited personal fundraising capacity, evidenced by his stubborn leadership debt. The party’s overall fundraising has continued to suffer. Liberals fared worse than they should have in the by-elections that have occurred on Dion’s watch, partly because of Dion’s insistence on hand-picking two of the candidates.

There were rumblings about somehow getting rid of Dion last fall, after the disastrous Outremont by-election, but Liberals realized that there is simply no legal or practical way to force out a leader before he’s fought his first election. And so the Liberal caucus became quietly resigned to the notion that Dion would be allowed his one grab at the brass ring.

But surely Dion has deduced that many in the caucus have little enthusiasm for him, and are concerned mainly with keeping their own seats. And Michael Ignatieff’s and Bob Rae’s supporters have made little secret of their readiness and desire to see their guy run for leader again. Soon.

Should Dion be foolish enough to contest a leadership review after a losing election, the Ignatieff and Rae camps would likely make short work of him. (The more likely scenario is that a group of eminent Liberals would approach Dion and, in exchange for retiring his remaining leadership debt, secure his resignation.)

But instead of making Dion more cautious, these intramural heel-nippings seem to have made him less so. The stark reality of what awaits him post-election is actually a bizarre incentive for Dion to use his one chance to “do what he wants,” whether it’s carbon taxes, reviving a national day care scheme, or even raising the GST. If he wins, he may get to implement a platform he believes in. If he loses, any fallout for the Liberal party will be someone else’s problem.

Short memories at the Globe

2008-05-17T22:32:00.003-04:00

Mark MacGuigan went straight from Minister of Justice to Federal Court judge after losing Liberal leadership in 1984

Perhaps no one at the Winnipeg Free Press or the Globe and Enquirer is old enough to remember the late Mark MacGuigan, who went straight from being Liberal Minister of Justice to a seat on the Federal Court of Canada, after losing the Liberal leadership in 1984.

Then again, maybe the Globe is aware of this history, but thinks that Mrs. Toews’ monthly household expenses, as disclosed in her divorce filings, are a more pressing matter of public interest. And of course, they had to include in their "news" story their oh-so-informed speculation about what Toews' Christian constituents must think about his marriage ending. 'Cause if anybody knows how Christians think, it's the Globe.

Well, for the benefit of you younger kids: according to MacGuigan’s parliamentary bio and this page at the website of the Federal Court of Canada, MacGuigan’s appointment to the court occurred on the same day as his resignation as MP and Minister of Justice: June 29, 1984.

MacGuigan had run and placed poorly in the Liberal leadership contest that elected John Turner earlier that year, winning just 135 votes.

I don’t recall any cries of conflict of interest at the time, though MacGuigan’s appointment was certainly part of the orgy of patronage appointments made by the exiting Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, appointments that dogged new leader John Turner in the election campaign that began on July 9 and ended on September 4.

MacGuigan served as a judge until his death in January, 1998. He was eulogized in the House of Commons the following month by Liberal minister Herb Gray, Reform MP Randy White (!), NDP MP Bill Blaikie and Bloc MP Louis Plamondon.

I acknowledge that a judicial appointment for Vic Toews -- should one occur -- would raise uncomfortable yet fair questions for Toews and the government but, you know, a little bit of context from major news organizations would be nice. For a change.

Update: Oh, speaking of context . . .

Here’s a lovely story from the Toronto Star’s reliable Richard Brennan, on Bob Rae’s question in the House yesterday about Maxime Bernier’s air fare to Laos for a Francophonie summit:

Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier has to travel first class to "stand tall" on the world stage, Conservative government House leader Peter Van Loan says.

Van Loan was defending Bernier, who has been dogged by criticism since taking on the portfolio last August, including over his relationship with a Quebec woman who had close ties to biker gang figures.

The latest has to do with his spending $22,573 on return airfare to Laos for a Francophonie conference, when one of his own staff made the same trip for $2,676.

"I wonder if that makes the government House leader blush, just for once," Liberal MP Bob Rae (Toronto Centre) said to Van Loan.

Well, why should Van Loan or anyone else blush? Rae certainly wasn’t blushing in 1992 when he used an OPP helicopter to visit his family cottage. He explained to reporters that he was entitled to his entitlements:

Premier Bob Rae used a government helicopter to fly him to and from his family cottage during the Victoria Day weekend.

"I had not seen my children for about eight days," said Rae, who has three daughters. The Rae family cottage is on an island in Big Rideau Lake, near the town of Portland in eastern Ontario, about 350 kilometres (220 miles) east of Metro.

Rae said he had no apologies to make, since he is eligible to use the OPP helicopter as part of his security package as Premier.
--Toronto Star, May 26, 1992 (you can look at the excerpt for free in the Star archives).

I believe the seasoned Brennan was even a member of the Queen’s Park press gallery then. Funny how he didn’t remember this to put it in today’s story. It certainly would have put Rae’s feigned outrage into – what’s that word? – context.

Happy Victoria Day, everybody.

Charles Caccia: career ended by Martin, life ended by stroke

2008-05-05T00:16:00.003-04:00

I’m guessing there will be some throat-clearing and dagger looks amongst former and current Liberal MPs when they attend the visitation and funeral of their former colleague, Liberal MP Charles Caccia, who died this weekend from the complications of a stroke.

Caccia was one of the lower-profile victims of the Paul Martin steamroller. In 2004 he was the longest-serving Member of Parliament, having been MP for Davenport since 1968. He lost the nomination, however, to then Toronto city councillor Mario Silva. This occurred thanks to Paul Martin’s opening of nominations after finally wresting the Liberal leadership from Jean Chrétien’s vise grip in 2003. Unlike Sheila Copps – who put up a spirited fight against Tony Valeri in Hamilton East-Stoney Creek – Caccia had no chance against the ambitious Silva, who had been signing up new members for months.

I happened to be president of the Davenport Conservative association when all this was going down. The head of our candidate selection committee thought we should, as a courtesy, approach the defenestrated Caccia and inquire whether he would be interested in running for the Conservatives. Caccia agreed to meet with us at his constituency office, and cordially informed us that he intended to run as an independent. In the end, he decided to retire quietly from Parliament.

Update: Nicol DuMoulin also has a post, on his experiences as Caccia's constituent.

If you want more money, Ralph, you’ll have to ask the voters

2008-05-01T23:15:00.003-04:00

Goodale thinks Stephen Harper drank his milkshake

Liberal hothead Ralph Goodale gamely attempts in the National Post today to frame the next election around the notion that the federal government is being rendered into a deficit-burdened weakling under Stephen Harper (actually, that sounds like the Liberal party under Stephane Dion, but never mind).

This is to distract from the frame that the Liberals have already hung around themselves: namely that they would have to raise taxes to pay for their yet-to-be-revealed social and environmental schemes, currently being wordsmithed by Bob Rae (aka “$40 Billion Deficit Man”).

Ralph writes of his glory days as Paul Martin’s finance minister, before it all came crashing down on him: “the government of Canada was working on its 10th consecutive balanced budget.” Translation: “After years of waiting for Jean Chrétien to retire, I was in my robe and slippers writing my second kick-ass budget, and then out of nowhere that f***er Jack Layton pulled the rug out from under me, and the RCMP wrapped me in it!!”

The inflamed gum at the root of Ralph’s latest tantrum is that the only way a Liberal government would have enough cash to launch massive, new social or environmental programs (like the day care program the Liberals promised for 13 years and never got off the ground, despite having blown $250 million, or the $250 million they spent on Kyoto, while our CO emissions increased by 30%) is by . . . raising taxes.

Ralph feels personally betrayed that the surplus he dreamed of spending himself has gone into things such as restoring the military after the Liberals’ dark decade, and Arctic sovereignty. What do these things have in common? They’re national responsibilities (more on that later). And here’s something you don’t hear too much about: federal transfers to the provinces are increasing under the Conservatives. Federal transfers to Ontario are budgeted to increase by $1.2 billion over the next two years (Ontario Budget Papers, p. 93). And that number is assuming Ontario stays a “have” province.

Admittedly, some of the surplus that Ralph believes is the rightful property of the Natural Spending Party, has also gone into the taxpayers’ pockets whence it came: horrible, horrible taxpayers who blow their cash on big screen TVs, World of Warcraft, and memberships in Liberal riding associations where Dion ends up appointing the candidate.

Unfortunately, Ralph’s claim that the GST cut “does nothing to improve tax fairness, disposable incomes, household savings, productivity or competitiveness,” is flat wrong.

In terms of fairness, it is widely accepted that consumption taxes have the greatest impact on low-income individuals, who spend most of their disposable income and likely do not qualify for income tax cuts. That’s certainly what I remember from back when the GST was introduced (to replace the Manufacturers’ Sales Tax), because that is what all the GST’s opponents were screaming at the time. And that’s why the Liberals under Jean Chrétien said they’d “axe the tax.” So by reducing a tax that hits hardest at the poor, the Conservatives have increased tax fairness.

And I think even Ralph can figure out that if you pay less tax, you have more disposable income. But then Ralph’s concern for people’s disposable income seems a little suspect, given his membership in a government that increased CPP deductions, and kept EI premiums higher than they needed to be. Yes, there was good reason to increase CPP premiums, and the Liberals obviously believed they outweighed the impact on people’s take-home pay.

As for savings, well, you’d be surprised how many people put aside their loonies and/or toonies and deposit them in the bank at the end of the month. Surely a 28% cut in the GST adds up to a few more loonies? One notable exception to this habit, of course, is Jean Chrétien. Chrétien kept giving his spare change to his legion of homeless pals. Why do you think he had to go home for lunch every day like a five-year-old? By the time he got to work, all he had left in his wallet were fifties and hundreds.

What Ralph’s beef boils down to is this: Liberals think that giving citizens more than a little taste of their own money is a really bad idea. Instead, the federal government should take that money, keep some for itself, hire consultants to research and write papers on day care or global warming (keeping some money for themselves), set up pilot projects (those need money, too), and give some money to the provinces that are going to play ball with the Liberals (there goes some more money). Then if the Liberals happen to lose power (“God d*** you Layton and Zaccardelli!”), they blame the Conservatives for destroying their brilliant, about-to-be-rolled-out program.

But seriously, Conservatives are not opposed to government. We are opposed to incompetent, unfocussed government that majors in inserting itself into the provincial sphere, while minoring in (1) letting national responsibilities slide, and (2) demonizing conservative governments in Alberta and Ontario.

Provincial governments already run the big social programs (health, education, welfare), they are closer to the people than the federal government, and they have the income tax, sales tax and business tax revenue to pay for social programs. Federal equalization helps poorer provinces offer similar social programs. In the Liberals’ eyes, Stephen Harper’s sin is that he respects federal/provincial jurisdiction. This is what Ralph calls an “ideological obsession to stop the federal government from being an instrument for good in the lives of ordinary Canadians.”

Canadians seem pretty happy with their GST cut, so I guess if the Liberals want another massive program that will be an “instrument for good,” then during the next campaign they will just have to tell Canadians (1) they will raise taxes if elected, and (2) what they want to use the money for. Good luck, Ralph.

Or, they could just try to do what Dalton McGuinty did: promise they aren’t going to raise taxes and then raise them anyway. Liberals seem to be able to get away with that.

Whose system is it, anyway?

2008-04-26T13:43:00.003-04:00

Yes, it’s that time again. Time to re-post my award-winning (no, really!) op-ed from 2005, arguing why we should take our public services back from unions.

An interesting wrinkle to the TTC situation is that, in addition to the TTC being a statutorily-protected monopoly, in recent years the City of Toronto has been implementing land use and other policies that are heavily biased against car ownership. So not only do Toronto residents have no other public transit options, they are increasingly unlikely to have their own private transit options (i.e. a car). Thanks, union bosses and socialist politicians!

Take back our public services

Organized labour has some clever slogans about all the good it has done for society, such as “Unions: the people who brought you the weekend.” But what have they done for us lately?

Think of the state of our roads, the quality of our education and health care, the cleanliness of our streets. The overall tax burden has grown, but this has hardly been matched by an increase in the quality of government services. Yet the wages and benefits of public sector workers continue to rise. Of course they do: by their very nature, public sector unions tend to drive up the costs and size of government. Union dues – themselves a cost driver – go to employ officials whose full-time work consists of filing grievances, lobbying the government for more workers, coordinating with other unions and supporting sympathetic candidates.

Much of the impetus for contracting out the delivery of public services stems from roadblocks faced by politicians attempting to meet the demands of taxpayers or deliver on good-faith election promises. Unions label such activity "privatization," but it's not. From their point of view, it's de-unionization. Scratch the surface of any of the recent campaigns against health care reform, and you will find that most are organized and funded by unions. They oppose health care reform because they are afraid it will result in new services or facilities outside the current unionized health care sphere.

Of course, nothing is preventing unions from attempting to organize workers in non-unionized facilities, but after 30-odd years of public sector unionization, a sense of entitlement takes hold. And it's easier to protect existing union turf by holding citizens and politicians hostage through work-to-rule and illegal strikes, than to convince non-unionized workers it's worth handing over part of their paycheques to Sid Ryan et al.

Since public servants began to unionize, the public has gradually lost control of its public services. Some have argued for outlawing strikes by teachers and other public sector workers, but this would be mere tinkering. The only way for the public to take back control of the services it owns is by decertifying public sector unions and restoring a direct employment relationship between government workers and democratically elected governments. Here’s why it makes sense:

Once the public has decided that a particular service is to be provided by the government, then that service is, by definition, essential. Many try to make a distinction between services that relate to safety and other government services. But public schools, transit and most other public services are legally or effectively monopolies, in that most citizens have no practical alternative when those services are not available.

Public sector collective agreements take away the public’s democratic right to decide what public services are to be delivered and what terms of employment are to be offered (provided those terms comply with employment standards laws and the common law). The wages, benefits and working conditions of public sector workers should be open to the democratic process as are all other aspects of government. They should not be decided in backrooms in negotiations from which the public is barred and on which the public’s elected representatives are forbidden to comment.

It is not the role of government to engage in unfair labour competition with the private sector. Some people think it is noble for the government to “set an example” for the private sector through higher wages and benefits. Such people don’t understand economics. The increasing taxes that those business will have to pay to support the government’s “example” mean that they will be hard-pressed to pay the employees they already have, let alone pay them more.

Thousands of private firms have policies and procedures for dealing fairly with employees; so would a union-free public sector. If the public through their elected government provides wages, benefits and working conditions that can’t compare with private employers’, then it will find itself with fewer and less capable employees.

Public sector workers would continue to be free to advocate for themselves through the democratic process. But those who interfere with the provision of government services will, like private sector workers, be subject to the appropriate civil or criminal sanctions. Those who fail to show up for work will not be "on strike," they will have quit.

Let’s put the “public” back into the public sector, by putting citizens and their elected representatives back in charge of our public services.

Never mind: Gorbachev insists he's still an atheist

2008-03-26T22:50:00.002-04:00

Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev made clear this past weekend that he is an atheist after European news agencies last week claimed that he had confirmed his Christian faith during a visit to the tomb of St. Francis of Assisi in Italy.

Gorbachev, the last communist leader of the Soviet Union, confronted speculations that he had been a closeted Christian during an interview with the Russian news agency Interfax.

"Over the last few days some media have been disseminating fantasies – I can't use any other word – about my secret Catholicism, citing my visit to the Sacro Convento friary, where the remains of St. Francis of Assisi lie," Gorbachev said, according to an Interfax article posted Friday.

"To sum up and avoid any misunderstandings, let me say that I have been and remain an atheist,” he stated.
--The Christian Post, March 24

Well, okay, then.

Gorbachev comes out

2008-03-21T14:28:00.002-04:00

Reagan suspected Soviet leader was a closet believer

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Communist leader of the Soviet Union, has acknowledged his Christian faith for the first time, paying a surprise visit to pray at the tomb of St Francis of Assisi.

Accompanied by his daughter Irina, Mr Gorbachev spent half an hour on his knees in silent prayer at the tomb.

His arrival in Assisi was described as “spiritual perestroika” by La Stampa, the Italian newspaper.

“St Francis is, for me, the alter Christus, the other Christ,” said Mr Gorbachev. “His story fascinates me and has played a fundamental role in my life,” he added.

Mr Gorbachev’s surprise visit confirmed decades of rumours that, although he was forced to publicly pronounce himself an atheist, he was in fact a Christian, and casts a meeting with Pope John Paul II in 1989 in a new light.

Mr Gorbachev, 77, was baptised into the Russian Orthodox Church and his parents were Christians.

In addition, the parents of his wife Raisa were deeply religious and were killed during the Second World War for having religious icons in their home.

Ronald Reagan, the former United States president, allegedly told his close aides on a number of occasions that he felt his opponent during the Cold War was a “closet believer”.

Mr Reagan held deep religious convictions himself. However, until now Mr Gorbachev has allowed himself to express only pantheistic views, saying in one interview “nature is my god”.
--London Telegraph, March 19

Gorbachev’s coming-out reminds me of a short story that appeared in Toronto Life magazine many years ago. Set in the future, it describes the last hours – prior to execution – of a man who is unnamed, but clearly the “last” pope. Grim and shocking as the story was, it seemed terribly plausible at the time. What was implausible then was the fall of the Soviet empire, aided in part by an historic pope.

Those of us conservatives who tend more towards despair than happy warriordom should take note.

The Jerk

2008-03-17T23:18:00.004-04:00

Candidate Franken ridicules conservative student’s facial tic, then refuses to shake his hand:

According to Fritz, things started out fine with him taking photos of fellow Carls (that's what students call themselves) with Franken. Then Franken's curiosity was raised about why Fritz didn't want to be in a pic.

He's a conservative, another Carl yelled out by way of explanation.

At that point, Franken reportedly began peppering Fritz with questions about supporting President George W. Bush and former President Ronald Reagan's tax hikes. Fritz told me he got tense and, as he does in those situations, started chewing the inside of his mouth, a gesture he said was mimicked by Franken; Fritz also thought his style of speech was mocked by Franken.

An aide eventually interrupted Franken's act, Fritz said, by announcing to the candidate that it was time to go.

Fritz told me Monday that he then stuck out his hand to shake Franken's. "Well, at least it's nice to meet you," the GOPer said he told Franken, who reportedly replied, I can't say the same.

There was no handshake, said Fritz.

***********************************************

Fritz told me Wednesday he was stunned by Franken's behavior: "I usually expect politicians to, at least, pretend as though, even in that kind of interaction, that they can convince me or have some kind of reasonable dialogue -- the whole Minnesota Nice thing, at least."

Fritz's version of the encounter was backed up by Pablo Kenney, prez of the Carleton Dems.
--Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, January 23, 2008

Somehow, I don't think Stuart Smalley would approve.

Hell freezes over

2008-03-11T23:20:00.001-04:00

David Mamet explains "Why I Am No Longer a 'Brain-Dead Liberal'" in the Village Voice

Mamet is acknowledged to be one of the greatest dramatists of our time:

I wrote a play about politics (November, Barrymore Theater, Broadway, some seats still available). And as part of the "writing process," as I believe it's called, I started thinking about politics. This comment is not actually as jejune as it might seem. Porgy and Bess is a buncha good songs but has nothing to do with race relations, which is the flag of convenience under which it sailed.

But my play, it turned out, was actually about politics, which is to say, about the polemic between persons of two opposing views. The argument in my play is between a president who is self-interested, corrupt, suborned, and realistic, and his leftish, lesbian, utopian-socialist speechwriter.

The play, while being a laugh a minute, is, when it's at home, a disputation between reason and faith, or perhaps between the conservative (or tragic) view and the liberal (or perfectionist) view. The conservative president in the piece holds that people are each out to make a living, and the best way for government to facilitate that is to stay out of the way, as the inevitable abuses and failures of this system (free-market economics) are less than those of government intervention.

**********************

And I realized that the time had come for me to avow my participation in that America in which I chose to live, and that that country was not a schoolroom teaching values, but a marketplace.

"Aha," you will say, and you are right. I began reading not only the economics of Thomas Sowell (our greatest contemporary philosopher) but Milton Friedman, Paul Johnson, and Shelby Steele, and a host of conservative writers, and found that I agreed with them: a free-market understanding of the world meshes more perfectly with my experience than that idealistic vision I called liberalism.

Continue reading here. And be sure to share this with all your friends studying drama or screenwriting.

H/t: NRO's The Corner.

A New York politician’s presidential ambitions may be finished (but not the one you think)

2008-03-10T14:10:00.004-04:00

Spitzer makes brief appearance at delayed news conference: apologizes but makes no announcement about his future

A news alert from the New York Times:

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring
By Danny Hakim

ALBANY - Gov. Eliot Spitzer has informed his most senior administration officials that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, an administration official said this morning.

Mr. Spitzer, who was huddled with his top aides early this afternoon, had hours earlier abruptly canceled his scheduled public events for the day. He is set to make an announcement about 2:15 this afternoon at his Manhattan office.

Mr. Spitzer, a first-term Democrat who pledged to bring ethics reform and end the often seamy ways of Albany, is married with three children.

Just last week, federal prosecutors arrested four people in connection with an expensive prostitution operation. Administration officials would not say that this was the ring with which the governor had become involved.

He had a difficult first year in office, rocked by a mix of scandal and legislative setbacks. In recent weeks, however, Mr. Spitzer seemed to have rebounded, with his Democratic party poised to perhaps gain control of the state Senate for the first time in four decades.

Mr. Spitzer gained national attention when he served as attorney general with his relentless pursuit of Wall Street wrongdoing. As attorney general, he also had prosecuted at least two prostitution rings as head of the state’s organized crime task force.

In one such case in 2004, Mr. Spitzer spoke with revulsion and anger after announcing the arrest of 16 people for operating a high-end prostitution ring out of Staten Island.

“”This was a sophisticated and lucrative operation with a multitiered management structure,” Mr. Spitzer said at the time. ”It was, however, nothing more than a prostitution ring.”

Albany for months been roiled by bitter fighting and accusations of dirty tricks. The Albany County district attorney is set to issue in the coming days the results of his investigation into Mr. Spitzer’s first scandal, his aides’ involvement in an effort to tarnish Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, the state’s top Republican.

Would Obama ask Parliament to reverse its decision on Afghanistan?

2008-03-06T15:43:00.002-05:00

Foreign policy adviser promises additional US troops, but expects Canada to maintain its combat role “as long as it possibly can”

N.B. This post has been corrected.

In case anyone missed Leslie McKinnon’s long piece on Barack Obama on last night’s "National," here’s what one of his foreign affairs advisers, Susan Rice, said about Obama’s hope that Canada would extend its combat mission in Afghanistan:

Rice: Barack Obama has also said that he would add at least two additional combat brigades to the American contribution in Afghanistan.

Reporter voiceover: this would add 15,000 troops: a gift to the Canadian military effort. But Parliament has all but agreed to withdraw from combat in Afghanistan in 2011. This doesn’t sit well with the Obama team.

Rice: And we will look to our allies in NATO to step up their contributions. In Canada’s case, we’d hope very much that Canada would continue and sustain its very important contribution.

Reporter: Continuous combat role?

Rice: Yes.

Reporter: Really. Because you know there’s a big a debate.

Rice: Yes, I understand. I think it’s fair to say that an Obama administration would hope very much and work in partnership with Canada to encourage Canada to continue and maintain its contribution for as long as it possibly can. This is crunch time in Afghanistan

These comments start at about 43:00 min.

Now, I don’t know when this interview was filmed, but by now all the US presidential candidates should know that the House of Commons has passed a motion to end Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan in 2011. Correction: the motion is expected to be voted on this week. My apologies.

Unfortunately, in recent days NDP leader Jack “troops out now” Layton seems focussed on auditioning for an internship in an Obama White House. So I doubt he will be raising the fact that his hero wears combat boots, and would like Canadian soldiers to keep wearing theirs indefinitely.

“Friday Night Lights” reportedly coming back for a third season

2008-03-06T13:46:00.000-05:00

Nikke Finke’s Hollywood Diary is reporting that the high-quality, low-rated NBC drama “Friday Night Lights” has a deal for a third season, after several weeks on the bubble:

I’m told that Jeff Zucker, Marc Graboff and Ben Silverman had been searching for a way to renew the critically acclaimed but low-rated Friday Night Lights for a 3rd season so that it would still make financial sense. The answer came in a deal with DirecTV, now owned by John Malone’s Liberty Media. Clearly Malone is looking to distinguish DirecTV from its rivals on a content as well as price basis. “It’s an innovative deal where NBC found a partner who will share costs and exhibition windows,” an insider explained to me. So both NBC and DirecTV will be airing Friday Night Lights across multipurpose platforms.

My back is sore from shovelling snow, so I am doing the end zone dance in my mind. Woo hoo!

For those who haven’t seen it, FNL is a brilliantly written, cast and acted drama about marriage, family and growing up, with less football than you might think. NBC is not airing episodes at the moment (and will not be doing any more new episodes this season), but Global has just started showing reruns on Wednesdays at 10:00.

h/t: Lainey’s Entertainment Update.

McGuinty took nine months to provide details for “fast-tracked” jobs fund

2008-03-05T17:08:00.000-05:00

Qualifying industries have also been changed twice

Imagine my surprise yesterday when I received a news release from Premier Pinocchio announcing that his nine-month old “Next Generation of Jobs Fund” (originally titled "Next Generation Jobs Fund") is now accepting applications.

Now, why would such an announcement need to be made at this time? Could it be because (1) McGuinty is in a bun fight with federal finance minister Jim Flaherty over McGuinty’s crappy management of Ontario’s economy, and (2) next to nothing has happened on this file since the fund was announced last June?

As I wrote last September on the “Election Battle Blog” sponsored by TVO’s “The Agenda (I was the Ontario PC party’s designated blogger):

With the election looming, McGuinty announced something called the “Next Generation Jobs Fund” in June. Here’s what its web page says today: “Program details to follow.”

But there have been a couple of interesting changes to the “fund” since September, all while it was impossible to actually apply to the fund for a grant. Eligible investments were expanded from clean automotive and other “green” technology, to encompass health and biotech R&D, creative industries, and pharmaceutical research and manufacturing. Here's what the web page said last September:

The fund will invest in:

- The manufacture of green cars and auto parts
- The development of clean fuels, and
- The creation of clean technologies and products.

At some point since then, this was expanded. Here's what the site said on February 20:

- Clean automotive and other green technology,
- Health and biotechnology research and development,
- Creative industries (digital media and ICT), and
- Pharmaceutical research and manufacturing.

Now, the eligible industries appear to have expanded yet again, to include:

- financial services that involve global or North American mandates and the establishment of new, discrete operating units
- anchor investments to support cluster development, including in the services sector
- opportunity based or unique investments.

Yup, the McGuintyites really have a handle on this thing.

Hillary's campaign puts reporters where it all goes down

2008-03-04T22:22:00.005-05:00

Think Harper disrespects journalists? Well, he hasn't forced them to cover his events from a public toilet like Hillary Clinton did.

Reporters work on their laptops in a men's bathroom as Democratic presidential hopeful US Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) speaks during a campaign rally at the Burger Activity Center, March 3, in Austin, Texas.(AFP/Getty Images/Justin Sullivan)

H/t: NRO's Media Blog.

P.S. Mmmm . . . burger.

Will the real pornographers please stand up? (don’t worry – it’s not a confidence vote)

2008-02-29T19:05:00.004-05:00

Cherniak sets off wet firecracker on Conservatives; forgets Liberal thongs and rubbers

Undaunted by the fact that his last attempt at nailing the Conservatives blew up in his face, Britney Cherniak is at it again, claiming the Tory yout’ have borrowed an image from a porn site.

Of course, burned from his most recent fiasco, Britney is careful to insert this blanket caveat:

. . . please note that I do not take credit for the research. Somebody else sent me the information and I wrote the post.

Unfortunately for Cherniak, the Liberals hardly qualify for membership in the anti-sex league described in George Orwell’s 1984:

Politics isn’t sexy? Tell that to the thousands of delegates at the Liberal convention.

Forget the hunt for undecided delegates, people here want to get their hands on the sought-after “I’m Liberal” thong underwear.

Five hundred pairs were ordered, in both official languages, and already size medium is sold out in French and English.

The $16 underwear has generated a lot of interest from delegates stopping by the Liberal merchandise table.

“I should get one of those,” retired senator Marian Maloney said when she spotted the mini black cotton underwear.

Ms. Maloney, who is 82, bought a pair. They’re for her daughter-in-law, she said, after playfully posing for a picture.

Condoms are also being distributed at the convention. More than 2,000 bright red contraceptives bearing the Young Liberals of Canada logo will be given out throughout the weekend.
--CanWest News Service, December 1, 2006

Well, it looks like the condoms were a good idea. Here's a tale told by an anonymous commenter on Big City Lib's blog:

My longtime "friend" who I accompanied to the convention went out to "vote" friday evening and although she made it back to the hotel alright she must have had a little too much of the free, cheap wine because she ended up in the wrong room, in the wrong bed!

It was her first convention and I guess she must have known that liberals go to get laid so didn't want to let the party down. This inciddent has now started in motion a chain of events that will ultimately reflect very poorly on her and her riding. But on the up side the sex was apparently great and she did get a free scarf!

Bush takes Hillary fishing on Lake Tahoe

2008-02-27T21:34:00.002-05:00

White House clarifies that it’s Hillary who’s holding up release of her records as first lady (as if there were ever any doubt)

The White House on Wednesday blamed the Clintons for a month-long delay in the release of some 11,000 pages of records relating to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's years as first lady, despite Sen. Clinton's contention at Tuesday night's debate that she has "urged that the process [of releasing documents] be as quick as possible."

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said that Clinton representatives have known since Jan. 31 that the documents -- Hillary Clinton's daily public schedule during her husband's presidency -- have been deemed ready for public release by the National Archives.

But under a November 2001 executive order, the White House can't make them available to the public until approval is given by a designated representative of former President Bill Clinton.

"Presently, we have not received notice that the Clinton representative has reached a decision on the release or withholding of any of Mrs. Clinton's schedules," Perino said, adding that the White House has not objected to approval of any of the more than 550,000 pages of documents released so far from the Clinton years.

"It is our intent and has been the practice to act on any requests as quickly as possible," Perino said.
--ABC News, today

Perhaps George W. Bush had finally had enough of Hillary’s stump speech line that refers to Bill having to “clean up” after Bush 41, and her expecting to do the same after Bush 43.

Hillary Rodham Stalin

2008-02-06T22:02:00.000-05:00

Democrat lawyer recalls Hillary’s attempts to turn Watergate into a show trial

From an article by Jerry Zeifman for Accuracy in Media (h/t: NRO’s The Corner):

At the time of Watergate I had overall supervisory authority over the House Judiciary Committee's Impeachment Inquiry staff that included Hillary Rodham-who was later to become First Lady in the Clinton White House.

During that period I kept a private diary of the behind the scenes congressional activities. My original tape recordings of the diary and other materials related to the Nixon impeachment provided the basis for my prior book Without Honor and are now available for inspection in the George Washington University Library.

. . .

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader Tip O'Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O'Neill's statement that: "To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series."

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee's then-most-recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff-where they were no longer accessible to the public.

Hillary had also made other ethically flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with-or take depositions of-any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Department's special Watergate prosecutor.

Only a few far-left Democrats supported Hillary's recommendations. A majority of the committee agreed to allow President Nixon to be represented by counsel and to hold hearings with live witnesses. Hillary then advocated that the official rules of the House be amended to deny members of the committee the right to question witnesses. This recommendation was voted down by the full House. The committee also rejected her proposal that we leave the drafting of the articles of impeachment to her and her fellow impeachment-inquiry staffers.

You know, some people like to refer to Hillary as “Hillary Milhous Clinton” but I think that’s unfair. To Nixon.

Update: Commenter Dennis Prouse suggests that this video provides a more apt comparison:

Dump Tory group shoots itself in the grassroots

2008-01-30T18:24:00.000-05:00

Bizarre news release helps McGuinty, discredits pro-review forces

I have not weighed in publicly on the John Tory leadership review (for the record, I helped out on the campaign and am against review), but this release, issued by the “Grassroots PC” group headed by former party president Rueben Devlin and former MPP Bart Maves, needs to be cited for its clumsiness, in both ideation and execution.

The release attacks Tory’s recent speech to the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario. Below are some excerpts, followed by the response of Tory supporter John Ratchford:

Grassroots PC: [Tory] called for new initiatives to attract and retain nurses – a great idea. The slightly embarrassing fact, though, is that the Liberal government has already implemented each one of the great new ideas he suggested.

Grassroots PC: Great New Idea #1: “Implementing the creation of 70 per cent full-time employment for nurses”
Slightly Embarrassing Fact #1: Every hospital in Ontario is already required to have 70 per cent fulltime employed nurses…it’s government policy.

Ratchford: Fact: Ontario’s nurses say the Liberals haven’t kept their promise. Doris Grinspun, Executive Director of the RNAO, said: “Targeted funding is crucial if the government is going to achieve its goals of increasing Ontario’s nursing workforce by 9,000 and having 70 percent of nurses working full-time.” (RNAO press release, January 22, 2008)

Grassroots PC: Great New Idea #3: “Establishing nurse-led clinics that would allow nurses to take a lead role in areas such as chronic disease management.”
Slightly Embarrassing Fact #3: On November 30, 2005 the Liberal government announced $15 million for the creation of 69 new diabetes education and care teams.

Ratchford: The error-ridden news release also declares that the Liberals have kept their promise and created nurse-led clinics, pointing to an extremely small $15 million program as proof of the accomplishment.
Fact: Here’s what the RNAO said in their January 22 news release: “RNAO says the need to immediately improve the public’s access to primary health is why the association wants to see 12 of the 25 nurse-led clinics, promised during the election campaign, up and running in 2008.”

***********************************************************

Well, to point out the obvious, the fact that something is “government policy,” doesn’t mean it’s actually happening. For example, it’s “government policy” that class sizes from grades JK to 3 are capped at 20. But the McGuinty Fiberals have failed to achieve that, despite spending a couple billion and having four years to do it.

And giving the Liberals credit by citing a two-year-old funding announcement that equates to maybe 20% of the full clinic idea Tory proposes? Talk about apples and oranges. Or more like the way teachers are being encouraged to mark these days: no marks off for incomplete or late assignments.

I respect the right of the dump Tory crowd to get their messages out. But I fail to see the “strategery” in putting out a release that credits McGuinty with things he hasn’t achieved. It doesn’t advance their cause; it just hurts our caucus and whoever might succeed Tory, should these guys achieve their goal at the review in London.

In addition to serving as unpaid water-carriers for McGuinty, “Grassroots PC” have ceded the high ground they tried to claim with Devlin’s introductory comment on their website: “while we respect John Tory and appreciate his service to the party, he is not the leader our party and Ontario need to succeed in the future.” Issuing a release that could have come from the Liberal war room falls rather short of showing respect for Tory.

I grant that opposing the leader while supporting the party can be a tough wire to walk. But these guys have deliberately dived off that wire headfirst – without a net.

Endnote: Hugh MacIntyre has a different view.

Absent Liberals leave Dion red-faced

2008-01-30T16:03:00.000-05:00

30 Liberal MPs AWOL on Monday, caucus sporting scarlet scarves on Wednesday. Coincidence?

These days, it is not always clear that the official opposition has the fire in the belly to acquit itself of some of its most basic parliamentary duties. On Monday, the first day back in Parliament after a six-week break, more than 30 Liberal MPs were missing in action for question period.
--Chantal Hébert, Toronto Star, today

Mike Duffy also noted the thin Liberal ranks to Liberal whip Karen Redman on his program Monday. The clip is titled "Party whips discuss the stance on Afghanistan" and Duffy refers to the absent Liberals at about 4:20. Redman defends the absentees at about 8:00.

As some politician once said: "You can fake that you care, but you can't fake being there."

Perhaps Monday's embarassing attendance is why Liberal MPs were wearing red scarves in the House today (after this morning's caucus): a public gesture of solidarity.

But maybe it's Dion who needs the warm garments. If I were a leader possibly facing an election in a matter of weeks, and 30 of my MPs couldn't be bothered to show up to support me during the first question period after the winter break, I'd be feeling pretty chilled.

Update: According to commenter Jason, the red scarves had to do with a charitable initiative, and not Dion's caucus support. My apologies.

Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Blackstrap, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, January 31, is National Red Scarf Day. Twelve year old Miss Hannah Taylor initiated this campaign. As a young child, she witnessed a person homeless and hungry and was moved to take action to combat homelessness in Canada.

The Minister of Human Resources and Social Development and I met with this charming young lady this morning to express our government's support for her great work.

We recognize that a safe and stable home is an important first step on the path out of poverty. Our new homelessness partnering strategy works with other levels of government, the private sector and community organizations like Hannah's Ladybug Foundation to implement solutions that address local problems. Together, our work is delivering results.

We recognize National Red Scarf Day. On behalf of the government, I am pleased to acknowledge the valuable work of Hannah Taylor, the Ladybug Foundation and the Canadians who support this worthy cause. We thank Hannah.
--Hansard, Wednesday

May too Liberal with her punctuation

2008-01-22T00:08:00.000-05:00

Harper never used Keen’s given name, nor the word “waiting” in the Commons

Taking a break from her rantings about Adolf Hitler, Green Party supremo Elizabeth May turns to another old lib-left chestnut, Stephen Harper’s supposed sexism. Unfortunately, she relied upon some invented facts to make her case:

And now I turn to an unexamined aspect of the Harper abuse: sexism. The ways he spit out the name “Linda Keen” day after day in Question Period, suggested he felt he could make hay out of the fact the President of the CNSC was a woman. If CNSC member Dr. Christopher Barnes, with both an Order of Canada and membership in the Royal Society of Canada, had been its President, I simply cannot imagine the Prime Minister rounding on Michael Ignatieff, as he did in the House, demanding if he was prepared to wait for “Dr. Christopher Barnes” with the scorn in his voice he emoted for “waiting for Ms. Keen!”.
--Elizabeth May, guest-posting at Scott’s DiaTribes, January 21, 2008

Just for a lark, I checked Hansard. Harper referred to Keen by name a grand total of five times: once on December 12, and four times on December 13. On every occasion, he referred to her as “Ms. Keen,” not “Linda Keen.”

And he never used the word “waiting” in reference to her in the Commons. In fact, if you search the entire Parliament site for the phrase “waiting for Ms. Keen” you get 0 results.

Well, as some say, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Or perhaps May just doesn’t understand what quotation marks mean.

I checked the video too. You can view the December 12 clip here (Harper starts at about 21:00) and the December 13 clip here (Harper starts at about 04:19:30). I guess if May wants to describe Harper as spitting that's her prerogative, but he struck me as more bewildered and bemused at the Liberals' flip-flopping.

Delacourt: Keen coverage is payback for Harper’s treatment of press gallery

2008-01-19T14:42:00.000-05:00

Media are making a point – about themselves

In case anyone missed Friday’s “Politics” broaaadcast on Newsworld, Toronto Star columnist Susan Delacourt provided a rare moment of insight into the media’s attitudes (or at least her own). Her comment starts at about 49:30:

Delacourt: This is where, I’ve been thinking about this for the last couple of days, their media strategy – I know it sounds like we’re fixed on this – but remember, that we here in the media, one of the things that we’re supposed to be is independent as well.

And for the last two years, this government has sort of shown, sort of, the back of the hand to that whole idea of independence, or sort of distance, and I think this is where it catches up with them.

The media is gonna tell this story from the experience they know which is – we don’t know what it’s like to get someone on your doorstep firing you at ten o’clock at night – but we certainly know what it feels like to be trifled with and to be played around with and bullied.

And I think that’s where, if these guys had had a little more of a farsighted media strategy, that maybe this story would be being told a different way. But I’ve been very surprised watching the way this story has been reported. And how else would we report it? It’s what we know here.

While it’s indisputable that the Harper government has imposed a strict discipline on government communications and spokespersons (an understandable policy for a conservative government), this can hardly be described as giving reporters the “back of the hand.” What it has given the back of its hand to is the old style of media relations under the Liberals.

Under that style, Hill reporters were not treated with independence or distance; they were treated as pets to be cultivated and – if deemed sympathetic – rewarded with leaks from inside government, weekly caucus meetings, and not-so-underground leadership campaigns. (Sounds like trifling and playing to me.)

Delacourt’s comments suggest that reporters have decided to take a stand on their independence – by sabotaging it (“How dare Harper treat us like we’re biased, we’ll show him – by being biased!”). Which seems rather like cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face.

This is why Kimmel rules my late night

2008-01-10T13:27:00.000-05:00

Check out this YouTube of Jimmy Kimmel’s interview Monday night with two guys from Louisiana, who had been thrown out of their (former) favourite all-you-can-eat Chinese buffet. (You may have heard about this incident in the news.)

Unfortunately, the video has a one-minute gap starting just before 6:00, but if you skip ahead to about 7:00, you will get a last laugh.

I think Letterman still does interviews like this too, but his are painfully unfunny. Like the rest of his show.

This just in . . .

2008-01-08T21:02:00.000-05:00

CP figures out that February holiday won’t come cheap and wasn't thought through – four months after it was announced

The Liberal government's plan to give Ontario workers a new holiday next month will cost municipal taxpayers millions of dollars, and Premier Dalton McGuinty admitted Tuesday there are still "wrinkles" to be ironed out regarding Family Day.

There are also fears the new statutory holiday will mean increased costs to clear roads if it snows on Feb. 18 because towns and cities would have to pay a premium to anyone called in to work due to a storm or other emergency such as a broken water main.
--“Family Day to cost Ontario municipal taxpayers millions of dollars,” Canadian Press, today

But CP saved the best for the end of the story:

"We're going to have to find a way to iron out some of the wrinkles that develop as we bring in place the very first Family Day," McGuinty said. "Undoubtedly there were wrinkles of this nature when they first put in place the original eight statutory holidays."

Damn you, Jesus!

The sound of selective science

2008-01-03T13:14:00.000-05:00

(With apologies to Kate)

From the New York Times’ John Tierney (h/t: Andrew Potter):

Today’s interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.

A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the hottest year on record. At year’s end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record — it was actually lower than any year since 2001 — the BBC confidently proclaimed, “2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.”

When the Arctic sea ice last year hit the lowest level ever recorded by satellites, it was big news and heralded as a sign that the whole planet was warming. When the Antarctic sea ice last year reached the highest level ever recorded by satellites, it was pretty much ignored. A large part of Antarctica has been cooling recently, but most coverage of that continent has focused on one small part that has warmed.

When Hurricane Katrina flooded New Orleans in 2005, it was supposed to be a harbinger of the stormier world predicted by some climate modelers. When the next two hurricane seasons were fairly calm — by some measures, last season in the Northern Hemisphere was the calmest in three decades — the availability entrepreneurs changed the subject. Droughts in California and Australia became the new harbingers of climate change (never mind that a warmer planet is projected to have more, not less, precipitation over all).
--John Tierney, New York Times, January 1

Telegraph names General Petraeus its first Person of the Year

2007-12-31T20:15:00.000-05:00

Nuts to you, Time!

From today’s Telegraph:

Today, we put him in the spotlight again by naming Gen Petraeus as The Sunday Telegraph's Person of the Year, a new annual accolade to recognise outstanding individual achievement.

He has been the man behind the US troop surge over the past 10 months, the last-ditch effort to end Iraq's escalating civil war by putting an extra 28,000 American troops on the ground.

So far, it has achieved what many feared was impossible. Sectarian killings are down. Al-Qaeda is on the run. And the two million Iraqis who fled the country are slowly returning. Progress in Iraq is relative - 538 civilians died last month. But compared with the 3,000 peak of December last year, it offers at least a glimmer of hope.

To appreciate the scale of the task Gen Petraeus took on, it is necessary to go back to February 22, 2006. Or, as Iraqis now refer to it, their own September 11. That was when Sunni-led terrorists from al-Qaeda blew up the Shia shrine in the city of Samarra, an act of provocation that finally achieved their goal of igniting sectarian civil war.

A year on, an estimated 34,000 people had been killed on either side - some of them members of the warring Sunni and Shia militias, but most innocents tortured and killed at random. US casualties continued to rise, too, but increasingly American troops became the bystanders in a religious conflict that many believed they could no longer tame.

Things are far from perfect but, after four years in which events did nothing but get worse, the sight of a souk re-opening, or a Shia family being welcomed back home by their Sunni neighbours, has remarkable morale-boosting power.

Where once Iraqis saw the glass as virtually empty, now they can see a day when it might at least be half full.

Hat tip: NRO's Web Briefing.

The most hated person in Dallas since J.R. Ewing

2007-12-16T21:12:00.000-05:00

If that's not what they're calling Jessica Simpson in Dallas tonight -- they should.

The tuna enthusiast and champion hair flipper was in attendance today at Texas Stadium in Dallas to watch her latest boyfriend/prey, Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo. Romo played his worst game of the year, which was only Dallas’ second loss of the season (to the Philadelphia Eagles, 10-6):

Romo was 13-of-36 for 214 yards. All three pickoffs came on balls forced to Owens. He also was sacked four times, all on the final two drives, when his banged-up hand bothered him so much he dropped a ball while cocking to throw.

His quarterback rating of 22.2 was easily the worst of his career. His previous worst was at home against Philadelphia last December, another game attended by a starlet love interest. It was Carrie Underwood then, Jessica Simpson now. When cameras spotted Simpson in the first half, she tugged the front of her pink No. 9 jersey, then mouthed the word “Romo!”

Well, at least she didn't have to spell it.

Now, in fairness, Jessica Simpson does have loads of beauty and talent. Compared to her sister.

But she is a painfully transparent starf***er, having unsuccessfully pursued Maroon 5 frontman Adam Levine, before latching onto sensitive singer-songwriter John Mayer. (But he eventually wised up.) Both "relationships" were punctuated by media leaks that obviously came from Simpson's camp.

Now, I don’t really care if Jessica Simpson ruins John Mayer’s career. But my Cowboys? Time to hit the road, Jess.

Update: Chelsea Handler agrees with me:

"Jessica Simpson attended boyfriend Tony Romo's football game. The Cowboys quarterback had the worst game of his career. It's a bad year for the name Simpson. Even O.J. is pissed, he feels like they're making his name look bad."

By the way, I recommend Handler's nighly show on the E! Network, seen in southern Ontario on CH at 12:00 midnight. Her topical panel at the top of the show is very funny, and she has continued to have new shows throughout the writers' strike. (I also recommend E!'s "Talk Soup," which is like three Kimmel monologues in a row.)

Well, Chrétien did publish two ghostwritten memoirs . . .

2007-12-14T00:03:00.000-05:00

Allegations that someone at the CBC is the Wayland Flowers to the Liberals’ Madame (ask your grandparents) bring to mind this clip from last week:

Steve Paikin: They wanna call you. Are you prepared for that?

“Fifth Estate” producer Harvey Cashore: Well, I’ve gotta, you know, think about what that means. My job as a journalist is not to go speaking to, you know, to be a function or an arm of a committee like that. My stories speak for themselves. So I would say what I’m excited about is they have the power to subpoena people who I couldn’t talk to. Let’s hear what they have to say.
--“The Agenda,” TVO, December 6

Video here. The above excerpt is about three-quarters through.

Now, of course I’m not saying that Cashore himself had anything to do with ghosting or suggesting Liberal questions to Brian Mulroney (and if they were the questions about the wireless spectrum decision, I very much doubt he did). But it will be interesting to see if there’s any response from the CBC.

Update: The Conservative Party has complained to the CBC, and the CBC is investigating. (h/t: Stephen Taylor)

Liberals tried to delay Mulroney’s appearance until after David Johnston’s report

2007-12-07T15:50:00.000-05:00

Afraid Mulroney’s testimony will weaken case for public inquiry.

CBC's Cashore suggests he would not testify voluntarily.

This little nugget, reported on TV yesterday by CTV’s Bob Fife and Globe and Mail reporter Brian Laghi, appears to have flown under the radar:

“Actually Lloyd, the Liberals tried to block Mr. Mulroney’s appearance until late January, after the independent investigator sets the terms of reference for a public inquiry. They were afraid that if he shows up Thursday and he shows he didn’t do anything illegal, that the public inquiry wouldn’t be held. The NDP wouldn’t go along with this.”
--Bob Fife, CTV News, December 6

Presumably, this discussion took place at the in-camera meeting of the committee’s steering committee, after Karlheinz Schreiber gave his testimony Thursday.

Video of Fife’s report is here (titled “CTV News: Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife reports 3:21”). The above comment starts around the 2:40 mark.

The Globe’s Laghi also mentioned the Liberals’ attempt to delay Mulroney’s testimony, on “Mike Duffy Live,” but video is not available.

Interesting. The party that insisted on having the ethics committee conduct hearings and got Schreiber out of jail with a rarely-used Speaker’s warrant – all while knowing that a public inquiry is coming – tried to delay the appearance of one of the key witnesses after only three days of hearings.

Another interesting shoe yet to drop in this story is whether the journalists of interest, such as Stevie Cameron and “Fifth Estate” journalists Linden MacIntyre and Harvey Cashore, will testify before the committee or a public inquiry.

Cashore appeared on TVO’s “The Agenda” last night, and suggested he would not testify voluntarily, but demurred when host Steve Paikin asked him what he would do if served with a Speaker’s warrant:

Paikin: You know who else they [the committee] wanna call (points to Cashore).

Cashore: Uhm, me. Yeah. (laughs)

Paikin: They wanna call you. Are you prepared for that?

Cashore: Well, I’ve gotta, you know, think about what that means. My job as a journalist is not to go speaking to, you know, to be a function or an arm of a committee like that. My stories speak for themselves. So I would say what I’m excited about is they have the power to subpoena people who I couldn’t talk to. Let’s hear what they have to say.

Paikin: I’m sure you’re thrilled about that. But what happens when the Speaker issues his warrant to get you and put your butt in that chair? You gonna go?

Cashore: Well, we’ll have to see what happens. We’ll have to see.

Paikin: We’ll have to see what happens? What kind of answer is that?

Cashore: (laughs) I’m being a politician!

A link to video of the December 6th show is here. The above exchange is about three-quarters through (there is no time counter on the video).

My guess is that no reporter will appear voluntarily before the committee or inquiry, and would fight a Speaker’s warrant in court.

But it would be interesting to see whether the committee would even take steps to obtain Speaker’s warrants for journalists. Stay tuned.

Lend me your vote – and some binoculars

2007-12-05T23:53:00.000-05:00

Rae veteran Irene Mathyssen didn’t see what she thought she did on Moore’s computer

As an unjustly-persecuted American politician once asked, “Where do I go to get my reputation back?”

Perhaps that would be making too much of the swiftly-evaporated voyeurism charge, levelled by rookie Ontario New Democrat MP Irene Mathyssen against BC Conservative MP James Moore (for which she has now apologized). But there are few allegations that can be made against a male politician that are more damaging than that he might enjoy pictures of attractive, nearly nude women.

What’s interesting here is that Mathyssen went beyond saying it was inappropriate to view such material on the floor of the House of Commons. She argued that such material is inappropriate anywhere:

“It reflects an attitude of objectifying women and we know that when women and other human beings are objectified and dehumanized, they become the object of violence and abuse.”

As it turned out, however, Mathyssen was more Mr. Magoo than Sherlock Holmes: Moore soon realized that the photo Mathyssen had spotted from several desks away was of Moore’s dog and former girlfriend, who was committing the secular sin of wearing a bikini more than 100 metres away from a gay pride parade (the girlfriend, not the dog).

So, if you’ll forgive me, I couldn’t help but think that Moore could have easily deflected the allegations by saying that he was looking for information about the gay, bi-sexual, lesbian and transgendered communities. Or that he was looking at photos from the 2007 London Pride festival. Mathyssen marched in the parade, and placed an ad in its directory (page 52).

Irene Mathyssen was a cabinet minister in the late-and-unlamented, one-term government of one Robert K. Rae, now carefully drafting the Liberal policy platform for the next general election, which must be just good enough to allow Stéphane Dion to finish second in a minority Parliament. Tonight, he must be grateful that at least he doesn’t have to deal with the likes of Irene Mathyssen anymore. She was Rae’s minister without portfolio for culture, tourism and recreation from October 1994 to June 1995.

Mathyssen’s sputtering outrage over girlie pictures is typical of the attitude that prevailed in the Rae government and still prevails among Old Democrats and Liberals. The Rae government published the notorious Words that Count Women In, a painfully silly “guide to eliminating gender bias in writing and speech” (no, really). Also on its watch, Ontarians witnessed the absurdity of a sex scandal in which a minister had to resign, even though there had been no actual sex performed.

Today, the Liberals were quick to demonstrate that they could still give as good as the Dippers, with MP Karen Redman recklessly piling onto Moore, based solely on Mathyssen’s assertions.

You’d think the Dion Liberals would be more careful these days, having lately been embarrassed that their game of Six Degrees of Schreiber is not turning out how they had hoped. Oh, I forgot: the capacity for embarrassment is unnecessary ballast, to be shed early on the way to becoming a successful Liberal politician.

And now even Mark “Nancy Drew” Holland is pleading that an inquiry, not the ethics committee, is the place to question Schreiber. Um, yeah, that’s what the government said. But in fairness to his suggestion, the benefit now would be that the committee would be free to turn its attention to simpler but more pertinent matters, such as requiring all male Conservative MPs to submit to lie detector tests to determine whether they watched all or part of the "Victoria’s Secret" fashion show on TV last night.

Vote for Schreibergelder!

2007-12-03T16:37:00.000-05:00

(But only if you really want to)

My recommendation – “Schreibergelder” – is in the running at Andrew Coyne’s “Name That Scandal” vote. The final four:

Airbust
Schreibergelder
Airbucks
Schreiberbriber

Frankly, I’m surprised I made it this far, as I got little support at the original post. But hey, I’ll take it!

Vote here.

“Me fail English? That’s unpossible!”

2007-12-03T15:38:00.000-05:00

More bad spelling* from the Liberals

A federal Liberal Party mailing from leader Stephane Dion into a Vancouver riding about the controversial InSite safe drug injection site is under attack as "fear mongering" by the Conservatives, while the New Democratic Party calls it a "waste."

And the mailing, which misspells the word "minister" in referring to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, is a "rush job" and "confusing," say the two parties.
--24 hours Vancouver, today

* see also the post below

Bad timing for glad tidings

2007-11-28T20:24:00.000-05:00

McGuinty Fiberals holding fundraising "celebration" on anniversary of Montreal Massacre

Well, I guess this is par for the course for a Premier whose advisers make misogynistic comments about female MPPs. Below is the graphic and text from an e-mail I received from the Ontario Liberal Party.

Also, their graphics people can't seem to spell "holiday."

Join us for the
Ontario Liberal Party
Holiday Celebration!

Celebrate the holiday season with fellow Liberals, including caucus members, Party President Gord Phaneuf and the Premier, at the 2007 Ontario Liberal Party Holiday Celebration.

This year's celebration takes place Thursday, Dec. 6 at the Intercontinental Hotel 225 Front Street West, in Toronto.

Tickets are $75 each or $750 for a table of ten.

To find out more, please call 416-961-3800 or 1-800-268-7250 or holidayparty2007@ontarioliberal.ca

You can click here for a form and fax it to 416-323-9425. Tickets are limited, so hurry.

Have a happy holiday season and a tremendous 2008!

Kindly resume sorting your recyclables

2007-11-19T22:38:00.000-05:00

Halifax rejects Celine Dion, and vice versa

I’m a Celine Dion fan. I admit it. I went to Las Vegas solely for the purpose of seeing her show (and didn’t gamble a dime). I bought a program, a mug, and a keychain.

Of course, I am well aware that some people don’t like Dion’s music and/or her. They find her saccharine, bombastic, irritating, etc. They find her husband creepy. Whatever. It doesn’t bother me that other people don’t like her.

Frankly, it irritates me that Bill Clinton seems to come to Toronto every six months or so to speak at some event (for a fee in the neighbourhood of $100,000, I hear). Clinton is a narcissist who embodies everything that is wrong with his generation, plus he bombed my relatives in Serbia. So I really don’t have time for the guy.

But if a ballroom full of fools wants to pay $500 or $1,000 to have Bill Clinton look down their wives’ dresses, I really don’t care. So why should a few reporters in Halifax care whether people want to see a Celine Dion concert?

Celine Dion has never encountered such a negative reaction to a proposed concert as she did from Halifax, her husband-manager has told a Montreal journalist.

In response to a question from La Presse reporter Alain De Repentigny about the cancelled show on the Halifax Common, Rene Angelil said in French: If we’re not welcome in Halifax, we won’t go.

“Si nous ne sommes pas les bienvenus à Halifax, on n’ira pas,” Angelil said in the article posted Sunday on the Cyberpresse website.

This contradicts promoter Gillett Entertainment Group, which said the concert was cancelled Friday because the venue was not suited to the show’s elaborate production needs.

Gillett couldn’t be reached for comment yesterday, but the promoter confirmed to a Halifax newspaper last week that Dion will play a free show on the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City for its 400th anniversary celebration Aug. 22, the day before she was scheduled to play on the Common.

Angelil saw negative stories about Dion’s Halifax concert from two different journalists, he said.

“I asked him, ‘Well, maybe two journalists expressed their opinions; it doesn’t mean that the people wouldn’t go and see her sing,’” Repentigny said.

“He said, ‘If it sparks controversy there, if it’s a problem, we won’t go.’”
--Halifax Daily News, today

“Chuck Norris doesn’t endorse. He tells America how it’s gonna be.”

2007-11-19T12:53:00.000-05:00

Mike Huckabee has launched his first campaign ad, which premiered on yesterday’s “Fox News Sunday.” It is inspired by the Chuck Norris “facts” that have been around for a few years now, and features the man himself.

British Legion bars wounded soldiers from Remembrance Day parade

2007-11-11T18:50:00.000-05:00

Government policy does not permit serving soldiers to march

From The Guardian:

Serving soldiers horrifically injured in the Iraq and Afghan conflicts have been refused permission to join today’s main Remembrance Day parade, prompting angry accusations that the government is ‘ashamed’ to have them seen in public.

Jamie Cooper, 19, the youngest Briton seriously injured in Basra, had hoped to join the march past at the Cenotaph in Whitehall. He is one of a number of young soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan the Royal British Legion had wanted to include in Britain’s centrepiece remembrance ceremony.

But last week, the head of the Legion contacted Jamie’s father, Phillip, to say that government rules for participating in the parade stipulated that only veterans, not ‘serving soldiers’, could take part. Last year 1,500 civilians were among the 9,500 allowed by the government to participate in the official march past. ‘I am absolutely outraged,’ Cooper said. ‘I would not have made an issue of it. But Jamie, who is thankfully recovering well from his latest major operation, said to me: “Dad, do you remember how we always used to go to Remembrance Day when I was younger? Do you think we could go this year?” He feels strongly about it, because he has lost friends on the battlefield and wants to pay tribute to them.’

It is also understood that several soldiers currently recuperating from serious injuries at Headley Court, the military rehabilitation centre near Epsom in Surrey, had wanted to attend, but were also not able to join the official parade.

Cooper said that when he raised the possibility with the Legion, the veterans’ organisation was very supportive and initially suggested that he join the main ceremony at the Cenotaph.

But Peter Cleminson, chairman of the Legion, later phoned ‘apologetically’. Cooper added: ‘He said that he wished he could have arranged for Jamie to take part, as well as some of the others who are recuperating at Headley Court. But he said that the government is in charge of the parade guidelines, and the policy is that no serving soldiers can participate.

The Royal British Legion is running an Honour the Covenant campaign to improve support for British soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It said that Jamie Cooper had been offered, as an alternative, a vantage point to watch the march past on a specially raised viewing platform.

‘Participation in the march past is subject to ticketing in order to maintain the dignity of the event and keep numbers within the bounds of safety,’ a spokesman said.

Two treats for Carroll

2007-10-31T12:21:00.000-04:00

Between salary and pension, Barrie cabmin to collect over $200K per annum -- more than the premier

Premier Pinocchio has appointed newly-elected Barrie MPP Aileen Carroll as minister of culture and seniors’ minister. A former MP and Paul Martin minister, Carroll was defeated in the 2006 federal election. Accordingly, she is entitled to the following payments:

MPP plus cabinet salary: $161,000
MP pension: $49,573

Total: $210,573

This is more than the premier's salary of $196,620.

This issue did come up in the local campaign, at one of the all-candidates’ meetings. I could not find a local news article, but here is an account from an October 2nd letter to the Barrie Examiner:

At last week’s candidate debate at Barrie City Hall, Ms. Carroll, with a face as red as her party’s colours, defended her federal pension by saying she gets a “small” amount.
--Marv Breault, Barrie

Another letter was published on October 9th:

Aileen is collecting a pension from the federal government, reportedly in the range of $49,000.

She apparently considers that that is only a “small” pension, although I would doubt many of the pensioners in this riding would agree.
--Ian J. Rowe, Barrie

A photo caption in the October 9th edition read “Some Barrie residents question why Carroll, a former Liberal MP in the area, is running for a seat in Queen’s Park when she already has a “small” pension from her years of service in the federal ranks.”

But the editors of the Examiner did not agree with their correspondents (who may, in fairness, have been PC partisans). In an October 5th editorial, they implied that Carroll’s pension was not a major issue:

The same goes for the city hall meeting, where Liberal candidate Aileen Carroll had to answer questions about her federal pension - which she is entitled to because she served as this area’s MP.

It resulted in shouting and accusations involving most of the candidates at the debate. What it didn’t result in was non-partisan, undecided voters finding out anything they needed to know about the candidates that might help them decide how to cast their ballot on Oct. 10.
--“Focus on the real issues,” editorial, Barrie Examiner, October 5, 2007

No doubt comparisons will be made to the Harris-era MPPs currently sitting in the Harper cabinet. All three of them were first elected to the Ontario Legislature in 1995. The following year, Mike Harris kept his promise to abolish MPPs’ indexed pensions for those first elected in 1995 and replace them with RRSP contributions equivalent to 5% of MPPs’ salaries, locked in until age 55. Further to the pay increase introduced by the McGuinty regime last year, this has now been doubled to 10%.

On account of a boil, 85 million were lost

2007-10-30T16:32:00.000-04:00

“The bourgeoisie will remember my carbuncles until their dying day,” Marx wrote to Engels

In case there were any who still doubt that the compassion purported to be at the base of communism is a flaming lie, here’s a dermatologist to present Karl Marx’s flaming boils:

Karl Marx, who complained of excruciating boils, actually suffered from a chronic skin disease with known psychological effects that may well have influenced his writings, a British expert said on Tuesday.

Sam Shuster, professor of dermatology at the University of East Anglia, believes the revolutionary thinker had hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) in which the apocrine sweat glands – found mainly in the armpits and groin – become blocked and inflamed.

“In addition to reducing his ability to work, which contributed to his depressing poverty, hidradenitis greatly reduced his self-esteem,” said Dr. Shuster, who published his findings in the British Journal of Dermatology.

“This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing.”

Dr. Shuster based his diagnosis on an analysis of Marx’s extensive correspondence, in which he wrote to friends about his health and described his skin lesions as “curs” and “swine.”

“The bourgeoisie will remember my carbuncles until their dying day,” Marx told Friedrich Engels in a letter from 1867.

Now, normally I would not endorse a dermatologist extrapolating the diagnosis of a skin condition to a psychological condition, but that last quote would seem to confirm that Marx was gonna make somebody pay for his pain. According to the Black Book of Communism, between 85 and 100 million paid with their lives.

Luca Manfredi has also blogged on this.

Jimmy Kimmel banned from “Monday Night Football”

2007-10-22T20:03:00.000-04:00

Jokes about Theismann’s departure and sports betting not appreciated by ESPN suits, but Theismann seems unfazed

This is a story from last week, but I didn’t twig to it until Terry Bradshaw showed up on Kimmel last Friday (I should really start reading the sports section and not just, you know, watch the actual games).

Unfortunately I didn’t see the original incident because when “Monday Night Football” moved from ABC to ESPN (TSN in Canada), I got out of the habit of watching it, and now I’m down to basic cable so I don’t even get it. The story broke in the New York Times, of all places (free registration required):

Jimmy Kimmel’s appearance on ESPN’s “Monday Night Football” was his last.

Kimmel, the host of ABC’s late-night talk show, was put on early in the third quarter with the Giants leading the Atlanta Falcons, 21-10, ostensibly to enliven a rout.

He joked about where Joe Theismann was (fired and replaced by Ron Jaworski); cracked that it was Tony Kornheiser who got Theismann axed; asked Kornheiser and Jaworski if they bet on games (they played along); and said, “I’d also like to welcome Joe Theismann, watching from his living room with steam coming from his ears.”

The last remark was ignored by Kornheiser, Jaworski and Mike Tirico.

Jay Rothman, ESPN’s “Monday Night” producer, called Kimmel’s comments “classless and disappointing. It was cheap. The more he went on, the worse he got.”

Kimmel will not be invited back, Rothman said.

Coincidentally, yesterday’s Times carried a profile piece about Kimmel’s show. There was also a good piece about the “Monday Night Football” incident on SI.com, featuring comments from Kimmel:

For a man banned from the most famous sports television property in history, Jimmy Kimmel seemed to be holding up fine Wednesday afternoon. “Technically, couldn’t you say Joe Theismann has also been banned from Monday Night Football?” Kimmel told SI.com in a phone interview from Los Angeles. “If he showed up, they probably would not let him in. I was hoping to get banned from a casino first, but I suppose it’s satisfying in a way to be banned from any television show. I don’t know what I did exactly but apparently it was horrific.”

“As far as sports journalism on television goes, there are so many parties attached to so many other parties that everything you say has major ramifications. When I was at Fox it was the same way. You can’t make fun of Jerry Jones because he’s the head of the committee that decides which network gets the NFL. There are sacred cows and that’s just not honest broadcasting. There really isn’t a place for honesty. That’s why everyone goes so crazy when somebody like Mike Vick does something that is universally reviled. That’s when everyone gets up on their high horse and lambastes him because they know that they can. Everybody is so careful the rest of the time. God forbid, you say something that is not part of the script. It might be the most politically correct of all arenas.”

Opinion on Kimmel’s appearance seemed to split along old and new media lines. Mainstream outlets from Newsday (“a tad obnoxious and overbearing, tossing out cringe-inducing cracks about Joe Theismann and Mormons, among other targets”) and the Orlando Sentinel (“cheap shots were not funny but were cowardly”) took the comic to task. The sports blogsphere seemed unfazed. If anything, Kimmel is guilty of doing what he has always done: cracking jokes and causing trouble.

Speaking of causing trouble, when Terry Bradshaw came out on Kimmel’s couch Friday (that doesn’t sound right, but never mind), he immediately began needling Kimmel about the ban, then presented him with a framed photo of Joe Theismann, inscribed by Theismann with: “Thanks for having my back – love your show.”

This morning, Kimmel made the first stop in his week-long suicide mission of co-hosting “Regis & Kelly” in New York, then flying to Los Angeles the same day to tape his late night show.

I guess that Kimmel is not to everyone’s taste, but I am a huge fan, especially of his monologue and comedy bits.

Maybe this is why "Monday Night Football" avoided Buffalo for 13 years . . .

2007-10-16T23:35:00.000-04:00

From a fascinating piece at OpinionJournal.com, about drunkenness and other bad behaviour at NFL games, and how teams are addressing it:

Walking through the parking lot before the game, I witnessed a scene all too common at NFL tailgates: home fans taunting the visitors with four-letter expletives. What made the scene here particularly appalling was the target--a family of Cowboys fans with two small children. And the taunt, repeated throughout the stadium by Bills fans, questioned Dallas quarterback Tony Romo’s sexual orientation (think of what rhymes with “Romo”). I wonder how the parents explained that one.

So what was the tally at the end of the first “Monday Night Football” game in Buffalo in 13 years? There were 58 arrests, 111 ejections and 46 turnarounds at the gate. The charges included three for assault, six for obstructing governmental administration, 17 for resisting arrest, two for criminal mischief, 31 for disorderly conduct, two for exposure, 14 for harassment, 19 for criminal trespass, one for criminal possession of marijuana, and one for unlawful possession of alcohol (underage drinking).

I saw no evidence of this on the game's broadcast, which I watched in its entirety. But reading about this behaviour makes me feel a little less guilty about the Bills' last-minute loss to my favourite team. I attended a Bills game last fall, at which I did not witness any rowdy or illegal behaviour. But then I wasn’t wearing any gear of the opposing team.

Dang, Dang and Double Dang

2007-10-05T19:21:00.000-04:00

Western Standard to cease publishing print magazine

From publisher Ezra Levant at the Shotgun (h/t: SDA):

To my deep regret, the Western Standard has decided to stop publishing our print edition.

It's a purely financial decision. Even though our advertising revenues were stronger than ever, with marquee brands like GM, Mazda, BMW and Air Canada filling our pages, and even though we had the most loyal subscribers in the business, with an unheard-of 80% renewal rate, we just weren't close enough to profit.

Over the course of those 82 issues we printed 150 million pages of great conservative news and views, plus 40 million page views on our website, plus hundreds of hours on our various radio shows. We were also truly national -- with 20% of our readers in Ontario, and 19% in B.C. Those are impressive numbers, but it was the independent, tell-it-like-it-is quality that I'll remember.

Thank you to our entire extended family -- staff, subscribers and investors for an amazing project, the effects of which will continue to echo for years to come.

Another classic SNL digital short

2007-10-05T17:48:00.000-04:00

Samberg has Ahmadinijad’s number. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

This was the highlight of Saturday Night Live’s season premiere.

Friday Night Lights

2007-10-05T11:35:00.000-04:00

Powerful NBC series debuts its second season tonight

Tonight at 9:00 p.m., season two of this beautifully written and acted series, about high school football in Texas, premieres on NBC and Global. Its themes and values run counter to what usually prevails on commercial television, and they are woven into the scripts in ways that are subtle yet genuine.

If you missed the first season, the DVD was released in August and should be available in rental and retail outlets, and online.

Update: Rebecca Cusey has a piece about the show on National Review Online today. An excerpt:

And this respectful treatment of Christianity is intentionally done. Executive Producer and Director Jeffrey Reiner, a self proclaimed New Yorker, announced that the producers went to Texas and met many people as research for the show, saying:

One of the characters is going to find God. And I think a lot of shows would use that to kind of poke fun at it, but I find that I meet the preachers, and I meet people somebody might call kind of weird or zealous. But they're not, you know, and we just end up meeting them as people.

Maybe it’s a revelation into the mind of many people in Hollywood that Mr. Reiner was surprised to find Texas Evangelicals normal, but hats off to him. He was willing to go, to explore, and to create an excellent show that addresses and respects Christianity. Moreover, he created a show that realistically depicts the struggle and the beauty of family life, as well as the toil of high school years lived without parental love and support. In doing so he glorifies what others shows scoff at, and in doing so he offers something remarkably fresh and original. Hollywood would be a better and more interesting place if others followed his example.

“Whoop-dee-damn-doo”*

2007-09-29T20:47:00.000-04:00

Clarence Thomas’ autobiography sounds like a corker

The Washington Post got its hands on US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ memoir, My Grandfather’s Son, which goes on sale Monday. (No doubt Indigo will display it as prominently as the Clintons’ doorstops.)

Thomas is appearing on “60 Minutes” Sunday night, and on Rush Limbaugh’s syndicated radio show Monday (noon to 3:00 p.m. Eastern). You can hear a live stream courtesy of Detroit radio station WJR. From the Post’s preview:

After the death of his grandfather and grandmother in 1983 and with his first marriage on the rocks, Thomas says he had a fleeting thought of suicide. “I’d actually reached the point where I wondered whether there was any reason for me to go on,” he writes. “The mad thought of taking my own life fleetingly crossed my mind. Of course, I didn’t consider it seriously, if only because I knew I couldn’t abandon [my son] Jamal as I had been abandoned by C,” which is how he refers to his father, M.C. Thomas.

Racial imagery abounds in “My Grandfather’s Son,” a continuation of his description of the Senate hearings as a “high-tech lynching.”

“As a child in the Deep South, I’d grown up fearing the lynch mobs of the Ku Klux Klan; as an adult, I was starting to wonder if I’d been afraid of the wrong white people all along,” he writes. “My worst fears had come to pass not in Georgia, but in Washington, D.C., where I was being pursued not by bigots in white robes but by left-wing zealots draped in flowing sanctimony.”

Thomas writes that he did not watch Hill’s televised testimony against him at his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, and so he does not respond in detail to her charges except to call them lies. He describes Hill as “touchy and apt to overreact” and says: “If I or anyone else had done the slightest thing to offend her, she would have complained loudly and instantly, not waited for a decade to make her displeasure known.”

He writes that Hill did a “mediocre” job at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, where he was chairman, and misrepresented herself at the time of the hearings as a “devoutly religious Reagan-administration employee.” “In fact, she was a left-winger who’d never expressed any religious sentiments” and had a job in the administration “because I’d given it to her.”

*“Whoop-dee-damn-doo” was Thomas’ private reaction to the 52-48 Senate vote to confirm his appointment, after bruising confirmation hearings that he famously described as a “high-tech lynching.”

The outlier poll?

2007-09-29T17:59:00.000-04:00

Is McGuinty going to lose only 2% of the votes he got last time? I doubt it

A few people seem to think that the provincial vote on October 10th is a forgone conclusion, based on a poll with a 3.5% margin of error that shows the McGuinty Fiberals have increased their support by . . . 3%, to 43%.

I find it hard to believe that the Fiberals are going to lose just 2% of the vote that they had in 2003, when they got 45%. This poll may well be the one in 20 poll results that is, er, wrong.

Ask yourselves this: what has Dalton McGuinty done in the last week that would result in a spike in support? Er, coldly brushing off a terminal cancer patient? Yeah, that was a real leadership moment.

When I saw that, I couldn’t help but think of how John Tory used to get the odd call at home from customers when he was Rogers Cable president, or how he spends an hour a day personally responding to e-mail.

McGuinty’s haughty “That’s not true” -- aimed at a cancer patient without McGuinty even breaking stride -- was staggering in its dismissiveness. Even poor Terri McGuinty was looking at her shoes. I bet Premier Pinocchio had to read her an extra poem in bed that night. (Full disclosure: I am helping out the PC campaign and several candidates.)

Finally, for those still in thrall to this poll, you might want to note that it also found that 74% of Conservative supporters say they are “absolutely certain” to vote on election day, compared to 68% of intended Liberal voters. Telegraphing to PC voters that they needn’t bother voting is a pretty good way to ensure that they won’t.

Footnote: This poll – and all election polling, for that matter – also provides an interesting lesson in one of the phenomena not addressed by MMP: people who don’t bother to vote because cocky pollsters and media outlets have told them how it’s all going to turn out before the fact.

Watson refuses to apologize for false smear on PC candidate Mike Patton

2007-09-27T10:56:00.000-04:00

Claimed Patton wasn’t communications director in Nepean, Patton proves he was

Ottawa-area Liberal MPP and Minister of Finger Wagging Jim Watson is in trouble in his riding, so it’s not surprising that he came out last week with an attack on his PC challenger, Mike Patton. Watson claimed that Patton had misrepresented a position he had held with the City of Nepean on his campaign literature. The mayor of Nepean at the time, now a Watson supporter, told the Ottawa Citizen:

“It’s a false statement,” Ms. [Mary] Pitt said yesterday of Mr. Patton’s claim. “He was never, ever hired as director of corporate communications.” She said that Mr. Patton was retained on contract as a special consultant to fight amalgamation.

“He was terminated by council after a very short time. It did not last very long, it wasn’t working out,” she said.

Last week, Ms. Pitt, who has publicly endorsed Mr. Watson’s campaign, confirmed with the former chief administrative officer Robert Letourneau and the then-director of human resources, Grant Armstrong, that her recollections were correct, she said.

Mr. Watson said yesterday that Mr. Patton should correct the biography.

“It is obviously a serious offence to embellish one’s résumé. In this case, Mr. Patton and the PC party should correct the situation right away,” the Liberal candidate said. Mr. Watson said that campaigning for office was like applying for a job, which requires a résumé to be 100-per-cent accurate.

“Otherwise, it’s not fair to the employer,” he said.

Patton has now produced unbiased evidence that he held the position. As the Citizen reports today:

One of Mr. Patton’s volunteers found a Nepean Clarion article on microfiche that highlights the hiring and appointment to the position, replacing the outdoing director, Andrea McCormick, Mr. Patton said in a statement.

Nepean’s then-mayor Mary Pitt has supported Mr. Watson’s claim, saying Mr. Patton was hired on contract as a special consultant to fight amalgamation and was shortly thereafter “terminated” by council.

“I remember, as if it was yesterday, Mary Pitt ... offering me the position of director of corporate communications, and accepting the job on a contract basis,” Mr. Patton said.

“If her memories of the event are less clear than mine, perhaps it’s because it wasn’t as important to her as it was me.”

Ms. Pitt has publicly endorsed Mr. Watson.

Mr. Patton claims his rival has fought an ugly campaign, adding his supporters have felt harassed and intimidated by Mr. Watson when he appeared at their doors.

“I was extremely hurt by these allegations because my word and my integrity mean everything to me,” he said.

Despite this evidence, Watson refuses to apologize for his smear against Patton.

McGuinty hits iceberg named Kwinter

2007-09-26T12:53:00.000-04:00

Liberal cabmin says he would be a “hypocrite” to say that he is against faith funding after he supported it

Today, Globe and Mail Queen’s Park columnist Murray Campbell discusses the McGuinty campaign’s blasé attitude in the face of stagnant polls:

Dalton McGuinty’s suggestion yesterday that he’s comfortable with voters handing him a minority government is interesting enough. But the Liberal Leader’s admission that he has no intention of changing his campaign style in the face of such a verdict is astonishing.

It’s another indication that the Liberals are, in effect, navigating without instruments in the Ontario election campaign by ignoring the unpopularity of their leader.

This is an uncomfortable truth for the Liberal Leader’s loyal coterie, but the fact is that he is disliked by lots of people who voted for him last time. Perhaps it’s his health tax, perhaps it’s the way he comes across on television, but it’s undeniable.

Mike Harris was widely disliked, too, but he had a reputation for doing what he said he would do and he won a second mandate. Mr. McGuinty’s record means that many voters simply don’t believe him when he makes pledges for the next four years. And yet the Liberals have put him front and centre in this campaign. He alone is featured in party ads and his cabinet team, which is as strong as they come, is rarely called upon for support.

Campbell finishes off by saying, “Unless he finds a second gear for his campaign, Mr. McGuinty could be encountering that iceberg on his own.”

That iceberg may have come in the guise of long-time Toronto Liberal MPP and community safety minister Monte Kwinter, who has reiterated his support for funding faith-based schools. Kwinter was quoted yesterday in the North York Mirror:

…Kwinter was the only member of the Liberal caucus to vote with the last conservative government for a tax credit for faith-based schools. “Constituents in my riding supported it, and I’m their representative so I supported it,” he said. “Certainly I would be a hypocrite to say that suddenly I don’t think that it’s something that should be done.” Kwinter noted he has six grandchildren in faith-based schools.

Kwinter’s words are exceedingly careful, but they are analogous to PC MPP Bill Murdoch’s statement earlier this week that, based on his constituents views, he could not vote for faith funding at this time. Over to you, Premier Pinocchio.

Antiques, real and virtual

2007-09-23T15:59:00.000-04:00

This is funny on so many levels:

“Appearing at the St. Lawrence Antique Market, [George] Smitherman said . . . .”
--Liberal campaign health care release, today

Whether it’s antique Liberal ideology on health care, or an older gay gentleman at an antique show, never let it be said that Fiberal foghorn George Smitherman is afraid of looking like a stereotype.

And by the by, Smitherman is the health minister who gave the green light to two privately financed and built hospital projects in Ottawa and Brampton.

And John Tory's war room has quickly put out a release, quoting an Ontario government health official:

FACT CHECK: IMPROVING ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE

(Toronto, ON) – Dalton McGuinty and George Smitherman aren’t being honest when they say that allowing private facilities to provide publicly funded, single-tier health care is a bad thing for patients.

Fortunately, there’s John Leatherby of Ontario’s Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, who offers an honest assessment of the situation in this article from the Halifax Daily News:

“Other provinces - Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta, for example - have been paying private centres to do day surgeries and diagnostic tests for years.

“Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care spokesman John Leatherby says using private clinics for simple procedures lets hospitals spend their operating-room time on more complex surgeries. That way, a hospital OR is used only for the surgeries that need the full emergency capabilities the hospital can provide.

“Does that mean it's any cheaper? Or faster?

“Leatherby says it's hard to tell. The newly opened Kensington Eye Institute, which does only cataract surgeries, has a faster turnaround time than hospitals, but isn't cheaper. Ontario pays private MRI operators less than it pays for the same service in hospitals, but Leatherby can't say how much. Diagnostic radiology, however, costs seven per cent more in a private facility than in a hospital.

“Ontario has never studied the cost of doing surgeries outside a hospital instead of in it. Leatherby says that's not the point.

“‘It allows simple surgical services to be moved outside hospital to community-based facilities, providing easier access for the patient, closer to home,’ Leatherby says.” (July 23, 2006)

Dalton McGuinty and George Smitherman will say anything to win this election – even if it means denying their own record.

What did I tell you? McGuinty loses debate, ads go more negative

2007-09-22T14:42:00.000-04:00

As I predicted below, Dalton McGuinty’s poor debate performance would lead to Liberal ads turning more negative.

I’ve just seen a new ad on Global TV, from McGuinty proxy group “Working Families.” It is a harsh attack ad, comparing John Tory to Mike Harris. It’s not even up on their website yet.

This is at odds with Greg Sorbara’s claim yesterday that McGuinty is on track for another majority. As they say on Saturday Night Live’s “Weekend Update,” Really?!! And, as Liberal warhorse Gerry Phillips likes to say, "listen to what they say, but watch what they do."

Liberals didn’t lower expectations enough

2007-09-20T20:31:00.000-04:00

Look for McGuinty’s ads to turn more negative – soon

Wow. I just watched the Ontario leaders’ debate, and Dalton McGuinty came off even worse than the carefully-lowered expectations set by his spinners. He was defensive, shrill, and looked like he was about to cry most of the time. He frequently “turtled” – looked down at his own chest to avoid the gaze of his opponents and the cameras. Even in the post-debate newser, McGuinty was nervous. It was not his night.

John Wright of Ipsos-Reid was on CP24 for the post-mortem, and all but said John Tory won the debate, though he may have gone over the top near the end. If Tory came off that way, it was primarily because McGuinty looked so weak and kept backing away from debating him. Wright also commended Tory for using his post-debate newser to keep driving his campaign messages.

Of course, much will depend on how the media spins the night, but I don’t see how McGuinty can salvage much from this. If they drop below the 40% poll figure they’ve managed to sustain thus far, they will start running ads that are more overtly negative than McGuinty’s current passive-aggressive sermons. When that happens, they will cede the moral high ground they’ve claimed for themselves. Then the real descent will begin.

Miller Days: city workers get paid, but don’t have to deal with annoying citizens

2007-09-12T23:42:00.000-04:00

About a month ago someone suggested to Toronto mayor David Miller that he could help Toronto’s budget problems by instituting the equivalent of Rae Days – forced, unpaid vacation days for city staff, to reduce payroll costs. Miller scoffed at the idea.

But with his brilliant scheme to shut down community centres one day a week, Miller has managed to implement something worse. Community centre staff still get paid for working Mondays, and have to show up, but they lock the doors behind them. These staff are all members of the Miller-boosting Canadian Union of Public Employees. The “savings” in shutting the centres down comes from laying off part-time staff who provide programs on Mondays.

Update @ 10:45 a.m. Thursday: Miller is having a newser where he has just announced that the centres will be open Mondays for activities that are run by outside groups.

Glass Houses

2007-09-11T17:08:00.000-04:00

McGuinty’s mouthpiece has stones, and should be careful where he throws them

Former journalist and failed by-election candidate Ben Chin called in to CITY-TV’s lunchtime news show today to attack Toronto councillor David Shiner. Shiner appeared on the call-in segment to discuss David Miller’s failed attempt to hike taxes and subsequent slashing of services (a politically dumb gambit aimed at punishing the councillors who opposed his tax hikes, but puts zero pressure on the province – but never mind).

Chin’s beef seemed to be that Shiner is a candidate for Ontario PC leader John Tory (in the Willowdale riding) in the October 10th provincial election while continuing to do his job as a city councillor. Shiner wore a tiny “PC” lapel pin during his appearance, but did not – that I saw – mention his candidacy.

A brief scan of the Liberals’ MPP and candidate list, however, reveals a tidy handful of Liberals who held municipal or school board positions while running on Premier Pinocchio’s slate in 2003:

Kathleen Wynne
Donna Cansfield
Wayne Arthurs
Brad Duguid
Lorenzo Berardinetti
Bill Mauro
Mario Racco

Oh, and what about McGuinty’s current “star” candidate in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock, Rick Johnson? Johnson is the current vice chair of the Trillium Lakelands District school board, and president of the Ontario Public School Boards Association. How’s he managing to cover those duties while on the campaign trail?

A final note on the low-profile Mario Racco, who ran several times for federal and provincial nominations while a Vaughan city councillor. His behaviour in 1994 was particularly egregious: Racco ran for re-election to Vaughan council in the 1994 municipal election, while simultaneously running for the provincial Liberal nomination in York Centre. He was re-elected to council in November, then continued to run for the nomination that was scheduled for December. He lost the nomination to Mario Ferri, who lost in the general election to Al Palladini (who I worked for when he was Mike Harris’ transportation minister).

Update: According to today's release from the Fiberal campaign, Rick Johnson has resigned as head of the Ontario Public School Boards' Association, a post to which he was acclaimed just three months ago (er, thanks for all your hard work!). Oddly, the OPSBA's website does not mention his resignation.

“Here Charlie Brown, I’ll hold the football, and you come running and kick it!”

2007-09-11T13:25:00.000-04:00

McGuinty hoping voters will be fooled again by another no-tax hike pledge

Four years to the day after he signed a pledge not to raise taxes, Premier Dalton McGuinty is promising the same thing again.

“We won’t have to increase taxes on a go-forward basis,” he said while campaigning for the Oct. 10 election today at an Ottawa elementary school.
--Toronto Star online, today