Saturday, December 31, 2011
votp.blogspot.com
.
BECOME PART OF 'THE VOICE'
JOIN IN
ALL "COMMENTS" ARE WELCOMED
BECOME PART OF 'THE VOICE'
JOIN IN
ALL "COMMENTS" ARE WELCOMED
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
SMILIN', "PM JACK LAYTON". IS THIS POSSIBLE?
A few hours ago, VOTP received the latest from 'the three day rolling average' of the Nanos Nightly Tracking conducted between April 21st and April 24th. VOTP has long considered that Nanos is the best and most accurate pollster in Canada.
Is this possible?
The "CTV News/Globe/Nanos Poll" blending April 23rd, April 24th and April 26th:
Leadership Index Scores:
Jack Layton 86.2 (+13.0)
Stephen Harper 82.7 (-23.0)
Michael Ignatieff 40.1 (-0.4)
Elizabeth May 12.0 (+1.7)
Gilles Duceppe 10.6 (+5.3)
The Most Trustworthy Leader:
Jack Layton 33.2% (+2.1)
Stephen Harper 24.5% (-5.7)
Michael Ignatieff 11.3% (+1.5)
Elizabeth May 3.8% (-0.4)
Gilles Duceppe 3.4% (+0.2)
None of them 14.5% (+1.4)
Undecided 9.3% (+0.9)
The Most Competent Leader:
Stephen Harper 30.7% (-10.3)
Jack Layton 23.9% (+5.0)
Michael Ignatieff 14.1% (-1.0)
Gilles Duceppe 4.6% (+3.1)
Elizabeth May 4.0% (+1.4)
None of them 9.6% (+0.2)
Undecided 13.0% (+1.6)
The Leader with the Best Vision for Canada's Future:
Jack Layton 29.1% (+5.2)
Stephen Harper 27.5% (-7.0)
Michael Ignatieff 14.7% (-0.9)
Elizabeth May 4.2% (+0.7)
Gilles Duceppe 2.6% (+2.0)
None of them 6.8% (-3.5)
Undecided 15.0% (+2.7)
Wow.
SIDEBAR: If most of Canadian voting is solely based on 'Leadership qualities', should we be prepared to learn to say "Prime Minister Jack Layton and his minority government"?
If so, Harper and Iggy are to be totally blamed for this phenominia happening by centering far too much on personalities, 'scary' backgrounds, etc.in their US-styled, attack ads.
Also, if so, it looks as though Smilin' Jack and his NDP socialists, with Karl Marx's 'Communist Manifesto', rewritten to Canadian standards and hidden firmly under their left arms, are coming up the centre.
"PM Jack Layton"?
Should we get used to it?
Can't believe that I'm writing this.
Is this possible?
The "CTV News/Globe/Nanos Poll" blending April 23rd, April 24th and April 26th:
Leadership Index Scores:
Jack Layton 86.2 (+13.0)
Stephen Harper 82.7 (-23.0)
Michael Ignatieff 40.1 (-0.4)
Elizabeth May 12.0 (+1.7)
Gilles Duceppe 10.6 (+5.3)
The Most Trustworthy Leader:
Jack Layton 33.2% (+2.1)
Stephen Harper 24.5% (-5.7)
Michael Ignatieff 11.3% (+1.5)
Elizabeth May 3.8% (-0.4)
Gilles Duceppe 3.4% (+0.2)
None of them 14.5% (+1.4)
Undecided 9.3% (+0.9)
The Most Competent Leader:
Stephen Harper 30.7% (-10.3)
Jack Layton 23.9% (+5.0)
Michael Ignatieff 14.1% (-1.0)
Gilles Duceppe 4.6% (+3.1)
Elizabeth May 4.0% (+1.4)
None of them 9.6% (+0.2)
Undecided 13.0% (+1.6)
The Leader with the Best Vision for Canada's Future:
Jack Layton 29.1% (+5.2)
Stephen Harper 27.5% (-7.0)
Michael Ignatieff 14.7% (-0.9)
Elizabeth May 4.2% (+0.7)
Gilles Duceppe 2.6% (+2.0)
None of them 6.8% (-3.5)
Undecided 15.0% (+2.7)
Wow.
SIDEBAR: If most of Canadian voting is solely based on 'Leadership qualities', should we be prepared to learn to say "Prime Minister Jack Layton and his minority government"?
If so, Harper and Iggy are to be totally blamed for this phenominia happening by centering far too much on personalities, 'scary' backgrounds, etc.in their US-styled, attack ads.
Also, if so, it looks as though Smilin' Jack and his NDP socialists, with Karl Marx's 'Communist Manifesto', rewritten to Canadian standards and hidden firmly under their left arms, are coming up the centre.
"PM Jack Layton"?
Should we get used to it?
Can't believe that I'm writing this.
Labels: LAYTON
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
OUR GDP'S NON-PRODUCTIVE, 'SILLY SERVANTS' ARE EATING US UP
VOTP saw this shock 'article of numbers' in The Toronto Sun and knew that it deserved more that a customary link (below) to wake us all up to what is truly happening.
"We're a nation of takers, not makers"
John Robson, QMI Agency
First posted: Monday, April 25, 2011 9:34:22 EDT AM
What do Canadians do for a living? Surely by now the world knows we’re not all lumberjacks. We’re factory workers and store owners and software engineers and advertising executives. Oh, and public servants. Lots and lots of them. In fact Statistics Canada says more than 3.5 million of us work for government, more than any other significant category. It seems we’ve turned into a land of hewers of memos and drawers of regulations.
Recently, Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal warned that nearly twice as many Americans work for government as in manufacturing. Worse, "More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers."
As Grampa Simpson once said, welcome to my world.
According to Statistics Canada’s latest labour force survey released on April 8, just over 17 million Canadians had jobs in March and 3.563 million were in the public sector, nearly twice the 1.786 million in manufacturing. True, our total figure for the "goods-producing sector" of agriculture, natural resources, utilities, construction and manufacturing is 3.841.5 million, more than a quarter-million bigger than government. But wait.
The survey doesn’t count the 65,000 full-time members of the Canadian Forces, so the gap shrinks to 217,000. Plus, of 148,900 people in utilities, 125,100 are public, bringing the gap down to 92,000. And detailed StatsCan numbers show 10,000 public employees in "forestry, fishing, mining, quarrying, oil and gas", 20,400 in construction and 1,900 in manufacturing. Bottom line: a mere 59,000 more Canadians still make stuff than work for the state. For now.
The labour survey also says more people work in government than in any category of services. More than "trade" (2,653.2 million), "professional, scientific and technical services" (1,296.9 million) or "accommodation and food services" (1,080.6 million), let alone minor areas such as "transportation and warehousing" (just 830,000) or once-mighty "agriculture," now only 310,000.
As Moore rightly says, shrinking employment in agriculture is primarily the result of staggering efficiency gains over time. In this country, one farmer can now feed 100 of his fellows.
Similar things have happened in manufacturing and to some extent even private services.
But where are the gains in government? Moore notes that real (inflation-adjusted) education spending per pupil in the U.S. doubled from1970-2005 but test scores didn’t budge. And here in Canada, infrastructure crumbles and garbage collection is cut back, our military shrinks and our deficit grows, as more and more people on the public dime are taking more and giving less every day.
Yes, it’s a fiscal problem too. As Moore went on to note about our southern neighbour: "Nearly half of the $2.2-trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1-trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?" And what about here?
Politicians promising a ruthless war on waste usually say they won’t cut programs or lay off staff. What else do they think government spends on?
Besides, there are fewer than a million classic "bureaucrats" in this country.
"Public administration" employs just 964,200 people - and that category, strangely, includes 84,500 police officers and 24,200 prison guards, hardly stereotypical pencil pushers.
All the rest are delivering programs, primarily health (965,200) and education (1.057 million) though 161,000 work in "transportation and warehousing," 120,000 in "information, culture and recreation" and 49,400 in "finance, insurance, real estate and leasing", with 165,000 scattered in other service industries.
Finally, this swollen public sector has political implications. Activists and advocates denounce industries lobbying government as vested interests - powerful, wealthy and not to be trusted. But government itself is now the largest vested interest in the country.
Every election, 3.5 million Canadians worry that cuts will affect their job.
They may share their neighbours’ concerns with high taxes and declining services or not. But they have a direct material interest in not cutting taxes, for their own sakes, for their families and for their colleagues.
And they make up more than one in seven eligible voters. Takers not makers, at work, at play and in the voting booth.
-30-
EDITOR: Non-lose to 50%?
Big Brother costing us a fortune and the biggest challenge to our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in all history.
Non-productive, "getting rid of budget at year end", silly servants are eating us up.
That 'budget' is our tax money or our debt that we are loading on our grandchildren.
Souce: http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/25/were-a-nation-of-takers-not-makers
READER "PJ" WRITES:
What a good article, full of facts and clear observations. Ronnie Reagan ran for Governor in California with the famous campaign promise to "Get The Government Off Your Back".
Through his years as Governor, the State Public Service increased over 30% and California approached bankrupcy. He went on to become President using the same campaign slogan. The result was similar for the nation.
All politicians promise to reduce costs... But it never happens. By the very nature of departmental structures, power struggles, endless public money (taxation), Union expectations, private sector expectations, new safety codes, and other factors, It Just Ain't Going To Happen. Not in California, Washington, Ottawa, Toronto or Belleville.
There is nothing in the structure to promote efficiency.
VOTP's recent chat with the Toronto Brass seemed to confirm this point. The idea of giving the department heads a "bonus" has possible merits. But, OH, what a tough sell that would be to the "taken-advantage-of" taxpayer.
EDITOR: It was a meeting that VOTP would rather forget. The political and silly servive 'tail' continues to wag 'the taxpayer dog'. VOTP had thought that, with Toronto's new Mayor, there was hope. Apparently, not.
"We're a nation of takers, not makers"
John Robson, QMI Agency
First posted: Monday, April 25, 2011 9:34:22 EDT AM
What do Canadians do for a living? Surely by now the world knows we’re not all lumberjacks. We’re factory workers and store owners and software engineers and advertising executives. Oh, and public servants. Lots and lots of them. In fact Statistics Canada says more than 3.5 million of us work for government, more than any other significant category. It seems we’ve turned into a land of hewers of memos and drawers of regulations.
Recently, Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal warned that nearly twice as many Americans work for government as in manufacturing. Worse, "More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers."
As Grampa Simpson once said, welcome to my world.
According to Statistics Canada’s latest labour force survey released on April 8, just over 17 million Canadians had jobs in March and 3.563 million were in the public sector, nearly twice the 1.786 million in manufacturing. True, our total figure for the "goods-producing sector" of agriculture, natural resources, utilities, construction and manufacturing is 3.841.5 million, more than a quarter-million bigger than government. But wait.
The survey doesn’t count the 65,000 full-time members of the Canadian Forces, so the gap shrinks to 217,000. Plus, of 148,900 people in utilities, 125,100 are public, bringing the gap down to 92,000. And detailed StatsCan numbers show 10,000 public employees in "forestry, fishing, mining, quarrying, oil and gas", 20,400 in construction and 1,900 in manufacturing. Bottom line: a mere 59,000 more Canadians still make stuff than work for the state. For now.
The labour survey also says more people work in government than in any category of services. More than "trade" (2,653.2 million), "professional, scientific and technical services" (1,296.9 million) or "accommodation and food services" (1,080.6 million), let alone minor areas such as "transportation and warehousing" (just 830,000) or once-mighty "agriculture," now only 310,000.
As Moore rightly says, shrinking employment in agriculture is primarily the result of staggering efficiency gains over time. In this country, one farmer can now feed 100 of his fellows.
Similar things have happened in manufacturing and to some extent even private services.
But where are the gains in government? Moore notes that real (inflation-adjusted) education spending per pupil in the U.S. doubled from1970-2005 but test scores didn’t budge. And here in Canada, infrastructure crumbles and garbage collection is cut back, our military shrinks and our deficit grows, as more and more people on the public dime are taking more and giving less every day.
Yes, it’s a fiscal problem too. As Moore went on to note about our southern neighbour: "Nearly half of the $2.2-trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1-trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?" And what about here?
Politicians promising a ruthless war on waste usually say they won’t cut programs or lay off staff. What else do they think government spends on?
Besides, there are fewer than a million classic "bureaucrats" in this country.
"Public administration" employs just 964,200 people - and that category, strangely, includes 84,500 police officers and 24,200 prison guards, hardly stereotypical pencil pushers.
All the rest are delivering programs, primarily health (965,200) and education (1.057 million) though 161,000 work in "transportation and warehousing," 120,000 in "information, culture and recreation" and 49,400 in "finance, insurance, real estate and leasing", with 165,000 scattered in other service industries.
Finally, this swollen public sector has political implications. Activists and advocates denounce industries lobbying government as vested interests - powerful, wealthy and not to be trusted. But government itself is now the largest vested interest in the country.
Every election, 3.5 million Canadians worry that cuts will affect their job.
They may share their neighbours’ concerns with high taxes and declining services or not. But they have a direct material interest in not cutting taxes, for their own sakes, for their families and for their colleagues.
And they make up more than one in seven eligible voters. Takers not makers, at work, at play and in the voting booth.
-30-
EDITOR: Non-lose to 50%?
Big Brother costing us a fortune and the biggest challenge to our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in all history.
Non-productive, "getting rid of budget at year end", silly servants are eating us up.
That 'budget' is our tax money or our debt that we are loading on our grandchildren.
Souce: http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/25/were-a-nation-of-takers-not-makers
READER "PJ" WRITES:
What a good article, full of facts and clear observations. Ronnie Reagan ran for Governor in California with the famous campaign promise to "Get The Government Off Your Back".
Through his years as Governor, the State Public Service increased over 30% and California approached bankrupcy. He went on to become President using the same campaign slogan. The result was similar for the nation.
All politicians promise to reduce costs... But it never happens. By the very nature of departmental structures, power struggles, endless public money (taxation), Union expectations, private sector expectations, new safety codes, and other factors, It Just Ain't Going To Happen. Not in California, Washington, Ottawa, Toronto or Belleville.
There is nothing in the structure to promote efficiency.
VOTP's recent chat with the Toronto Brass seemed to confirm this point. The idea of giving the department heads a "bonus" has possible merits. But, OH, what a tough sell that would be to the "taken-advantage-of" taxpayer.
EDITOR: It was a meeting that VOTP would rather forget. The political and silly servive 'tail' continues to wag 'the taxpayer dog'. VOTP had thought that, with Toronto's new Mayor, there was hope. Apparently, not.
Labels: CANADA DEBT CLOCK, OBSERVATIONS
Saturday, April 23, 2011
READER PH WRITES ABOUT 'WAR' (AND WHY)
Over the centuries war has taken on various iterations. It has been in turn a tribal thing, a territorial thing, a religious thing, a political thing, a recreational thing. Now it has become a financial thing.
War used to be a serious business. It required an Act of Congress. But the cult of deregulation has loosened the rules. Suitable nomenclature can now overcome this technicality. Counter terrorism. Peacekeeping. Regional conflict. Freedom fighting. Limited operation. Regime change. Logistical support. The list is endless.
It has actually become a marketable export. It can be transported rapidly to any promising area rather like a traveling circus. Certain people are offered inducements to foment unrest or incite violence which is then co-opted by other parties.
The ensuing chaos and financial dislocation are fertile ground for foreign ‘assistance’; everyone from bankers to construction companies, developers, security consultants and arms dealers. It is a common misconception that war is expensive. Only for certain people. For others it provides un-paralelled economic opportunity. It is effectively the maximization of conflict.
The chief beneficiaries are military contractors. These people do everything from supplying ammunition to wrapping sandwiches.
It is no longer important who wins. The participants are carefully selected to ensure a favourable outcome.
What is important is that everyone follow the blueprint in order to minimize unexpected events.
Independent reporting is frowned upon. The embedded journalist can guarantee a coherent perspective for the guy eating pizza in front of his television. He is the guy who is actually paying for this but as long as his pizza arrives on time he doesn’t know or care.
EDITOR: If 20% or more of the world's most powerful country in the history of the planet was not based on its Military-Industrial-Complex, I could argue, but I can't.
War used to be a serious business. It required an Act of Congress. But the cult of deregulation has loosened the rules. Suitable nomenclature can now overcome this technicality. Counter terrorism. Peacekeeping. Regional conflict. Freedom fighting. Limited operation. Regime change. Logistical support. The list is endless.
It has actually become a marketable export. It can be transported rapidly to any promising area rather like a traveling circus. Certain people are offered inducements to foment unrest or incite violence which is then co-opted by other parties.
The ensuing chaos and financial dislocation are fertile ground for foreign ‘assistance’; everyone from bankers to construction companies, developers, security consultants and arms dealers. It is a common misconception that war is expensive. Only for certain people. For others it provides un-paralelled economic opportunity. It is effectively the maximization of conflict.
The chief beneficiaries are military contractors. These people do everything from supplying ammunition to wrapping sandwiches.
It is no longer important who wins. The participants are carefully selected to ensure a favourable outcome.
What is important is that everyone follow the blueprint in order to minimize unexpected events.
Independent reporting is frowned upon. The embedded journalist can guarantee a coherent perspective for the guy eating pizza in front of his television. He is the guy who is actually paying for this but as long as his pizza arrives on time he doesn’t know or care.
EDITOR: If 20% or more of the world's most powerful country in the history of the planet was not based on its Military-Industrial-Complex, I could argue, but I can't.
Labels: MILITARY INDUSTIAL COMPLEX.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
PANIC-BUTTON TIME FOR IGGY
It is no small wonder why The Liberal Party has pushed the panic button and brought former PMs Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien out of the closet of their scandal-ladened pasts.
Their mission is to shadow and boost support for their ‘non-elected, appointed’ Leader, Michael Ignatieff in the last two weeks of the 2011 campaign.
He’s the guy who, of all people, strangely keeps yapping about ‘democracy’.
The latest, of VOTP’s most trusted poll, shows the reason:
CTV News/Globe/Nanos Tracking –
Tories 39.0,
Grits 28.3,
NDP 18.4,
BQ 9.6,
GP 3.4
(April 14 to 16)
These numbers are almost exactly the same as when the election campaign began.
Iggy and the several makeovers of Iggy just hasn’t worked or caught on.
Iggy’s ‘Leadership’ numbers also appear to be frozen in time, back to when the election campaign began, behind the NDP’s Smilin’ Jack Layton.
Here’s the latest from April 14
Leadership Index Scores:
Stephen Harper 103.3 (-19.5)
Jack Layton 60.4 (+3.1)
Michael Ignatieff 42.5 (-10.2)
Gilles Duceppe 19.0 (+5.2)
Elizabeth May 13.7 (+9.6)
The Most Trustworthy Leader:
Stephen Harper 30.8% (-3.9)
Jack Layton 20.1% (-1.2)
Michael Ignatieff 11.3% (-4.5)
Gilles Duceppe 8.5% (+2.5)
Elizabeth May 7.4% (+4.9)
None of them 15.8% (+2.2)
Undecided 6.0% (-0.2)
The Most Competent Leader:
Stephen Harper 37.3% (-10.8)
Jack Layton 15.6% (-0.3)
Michael Ignatieff 15.2% (-2.8)
Gilles Duceppe 8.3% (+3.8)
Elizabeth May 2.6% (+1.9)
None of them 10.1% (+3.4)
Undecided 10.9% (+4.7)
The Leader with the Best Vision for Canada's Future:
Stephen Harper 35.2% (-4.8)
Jack Layton 24.7% (+4.6)
Michael Ignatieff 16.0% (-2.9)
Gilles Duceppe 2.2% (-1.1)
Elizabeth May 3.7% (+2.8)
None of them 8.1% (+0.5)
Undecided 10.2% (+1.0)
Smilin’ Jack has continued to swamp the Liberal’s second professor-leader in a row, in almost every category.
CONCLUSIONS:
1) Canadians like Smilin’ Jack.
2) Canadians don’t like Smilin’ Jack’s ‘NDP Party’.
3) If Smilin’ Jack was Leader of the Liberal Party, the party of Stephen Harper could be facing a majority government, a Liberal government majority government.
4) Following whatever happens on May 2nd, a ‘Unite the Left’ movement, between the Liberals and NDP, is almost impossible to avoid.
Pulling out ‘yesterday’s men’ of the Liberal Party, to boost the electoral fortunes of Iggy, will turn out to be a last ditch effort which is doomed to fail. It could actually boomerang when people are reminded why they rejected the Liberals 5-years ago.
VOTP strongly suspects that Stephen Harper will be there to remind Canadians why they threw the Libs out in the first place.
The latest, of VOTP’s most trusted poll, shows the reason:
CTV News/Globe/Nanos Tracking –
Tories 39.0,
Grits 28.3,
NDP 18.4,
BQ 9.6,
GP 3.4
(April 14 to 16)
These numbers are almost exactly the same as when the election campaign began.
Iggy and the several makeovers of Iggy just hasn’t worked or caught on.
Iggy’s ‘Leadership’ numbers also appear to be frozen in time, back to when the election campaign began, behind the NDP’s Smilin’ Jack Layton.
Here’s the latest from April 14
Leadership Index Scores:
Stephen Harper 103.3 (-19.5)
Jack Layton 60.4 (+3.1)
Michael Ignatieff 42.5 (-10.2)
Gilles Duceppe 19.0 (+5.2)
Elizabeth May 13.7 (+9.6)
The Most Trustworthy Leader:
Stephen Harper 30.8% (-3.9)
Jack Layton 20.1% (-1.2)
Michael Ignatieff 11.3% (-4.5)
Gilles Duceppe 8.5% (+2.5)
Elizabeth May 7.4% (+4.9)
None of them 15.8% (+2.2)
Undecided 6.0% (-0.2)
The Most Competent Leader:
Stephen Harper 37.3% (-10.8)
Jack Layton 15.6% (-0.3)
Michael Ignatieff 15.2% (-2.8)
Gilles Duceppe 8.3% (+3.8)
Elizabeth May 2.6% (+1.9)
None of them 10.1% (+3.4)
Undecided 10.9% (+4.7)
The Leader with the Best Vision for Canada's Future:
Stephen Harper 35.2% (-4.8)
Jack Layton 24.7% (+4.6)
Michael Ignatieff 16.0% (-2.9)
Gilles Duceppe 2.2% (-1.1)
Elizabeth May 3.7% (+2.8)
None of them 8.1% (+0.5)
Undecided 10.2% (+1.0)
Smilin’ Jack has continued to swamp the Liberal’s second professor-leader in a row, in almost every category.
CONCLUSIONS:
1) Canadians like Smilin’ Jack.
2) Canadians don’t like Smilin’ Jack’s ‘NDP Party’.
3) If Smilin’ Jack was Leader of the Liberal Party, the party of Stephen Harper could be facing a majority government, a Liberal government majority government.
4) Following whatever happens on May 2nd, a ‘Unite the Left’ movement, between the Liberals and NDP, is almost impossible to avoid.
Pulling out ‘yesterday’s men’ of the Liberal Party, to boost the electoral fortunes of Iggy, will turn out to be a last ditch effort which is doomed to fail. It could actually boomerang when people are reminded why they rejected the Liberals 5-years ago.
VOTP strongly suspects that Stephen Harper will be there to remind Canadians why they threw the Libs out in the first place.
Labels: MICHAEL IGNATIEFF
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Do you remember the "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones"? The "who", do you ask? The one-hit-wonder, "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones". The band was from South Carolina and ranged from 14 to 17 years of age. If you were "alive" in '56-'57, you may remember their one-hit-wonder, 'Black Slacks'. Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones were even put on the Nat King Cole Show with a follow up record and and clearer-in-sound, updated (new band jackets) replay of 'Black Slacks'. But their 15-minutes of fame in the history of rock 'n roll was over. At my Hi-Y, YMCA/YWCA sock hops, fellow teens would 'half the beat' and actually dance to it. Not only 'dance to it', Black Slacks was a guarantee to get the real rockers ;up on the floor' in am instant. The song was later slowed down and 'covered' by a few others, a recognition of success that any recording band looks for. Like most 'covers', none went anywhere. There was only one "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones". Memories, huh? I wonder whatever happened to each of the band members.
A MISSING PIECE OF ROCK 'N ROLL NOSTALGIA
Do you remember the "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones"?
The "who", do you ask?
The one-hit-wonder, "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones"
The band was from South Carolina and ranged from 14 to 17 years of age.
If you were "alive" in '56-'57, you may remember their one-hit-wonder, 'Black Slacks'
.
Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones were even put on the Nat King Cole Show with a follow up record and and clearer-in-sound, updated (new band jackets) replay of 'Black Slacks', but their 15-minutes of fame in the history of rock 'n roll was over.
At my Hi-Y, YMCA/YWCA sock hops, fellow teens would 'half the beat' and actually dance to it. Not only 'dance to it', Black Slacks was a guarantee to get the real rockers ;up on the floor' in an instant.
The song was later slowed down and 'covered' by a few others, a recognition of success that any recording band looks for. Like most 'covers', none went anywhere.
There was only one "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones".
Memories, huh?
I wonder whatever happened to each of the band members.
The "who", do you ask?
The one-hit-wonder, "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones"
The band was from South Carolina and ranged from 14 to 17 years of age.
If you were "alive" in '56-'57, you may remember their one-hit-wonder, 'Black Slacks'
.
Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones were even put on the Nat King Cole Show with a follow up record and and clearer-in-sound, updated (new band jackets) replay of 'Black Slacks', but their 15-minutes of fame in the history of rock 'n roll was over.
At my Hi-Y, YMCA/YWCA sock hops, fellow teens would 'half the beat' and actually dance to it. Not only 'dance to it', Black Slacks was a guarantee to get the real rockers ;up on the floor' in an instant.
The song was later slowed down and 'covered' by a few others, a recognition of success that any recording band looks for. Like most 'covers', none went anywhere.
There was only one "Joe Bennett and the Sparkletones".
Memories, huh?
I wonder whatever happened to each of the band members.
Friday, April 15, 2011
MID-ELECTION POLLING THE BY THE BEST, NANOS RESEARCH
The latest polling from the "CTV News/Globe/Nanos Poll" (The last numbers are the % changes from yesterday) BALLOT Conservative 38.7% -0.2 Liberal 28.8% -2.3 NDP 18.6% +0.3 BQ 9.0% +1.5 Green 3.7% +0.6 (3 days ending April 14) VOTE DRIVER Tradition 7.9% +0.9 Party Leader 23.4% +0.3 Party Policy 53.6% -0.9 Local Candidate 11.6% -0.9 Unsure 3.5% +0.6 (3 days ending April 14) LEADERSHIP INDEX Harper 103.3 -19.5 Layton 60.4 +3.1 Ignatieff 42.5 -10.2 Duceppe 19.0 +5.2 May 13.7 +9.6 ISSUE - Healthcare 31.5% -2.3 Jobs/economy 24.7% +2.9 High taxes 5.8% -0.9 Education 5.5% -0.3 Unsure 6.5% +0.2 (3 days ending April 14)
Labels: POLLS
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
IGGY'S QUESTIONABLE, 'FAMILY HERITAGE'
One must challenge 'the humble beginnings' of Michael Ignatieff's family, who Michael says 'got off the boat', implying that grandad barely had the shirt on his back, when he arrived in Canada to 'make something of himself'. Here are some interesting unchallenged enties in wikipedia ... Michael's grandad, Count Pavel Nikolayevich Ignatiev (Russian: Павел Николаевич Игнатьев, sometimes rendered in English as Paul Ignatieff) (June 30/July 12, 1870 Istanbul– August 12, 1945) was an Imperial Russian politician. Pavel's father Count Nikolay Pavlovich Ignatyev,was Russian Minister of the Interior under Tsar Alexander III of Russia. Count Ignatieff married Princess Natalya Meshcherskaya (1877-1944) in Nice, France on April 16, 1903. They would have seven children, all boys, two of whom died as infants. He was a graduate of the University of Kiev. Afterward he entered the Imperial Ministry of Agriculture eventually becoming a Director of one of its departments in 1909. He was appointed Assistant Minister of Agriculture in 1912. In 1915, during the First World War he was appointed Minister of Education. He held that position until 1916. As a result of the Bolshevik Revolution, Ignatieff and his family fled to France and later to England. (It has been stated that The Count had 25,000 (1919) British Pounds waiting for he and his family outside of Russia when they fled - a small fortune by today's standards) In 1925, the family emigrated to Canada, and settled permanently three years later in Upper Melbourne in Quebec where he died August 12, 1945. One of the Ignatieff's sons, George, was a prominent Canadian diplomat. One of his grandsons, Michael Ignatieff, is an author, former Harvard professor, a Canadian Member of Parliament since 2006 and leader of the Liberal Party of Canada since May 2009. Michaels's father, George Ignatieff, was born in Saint Petersburg, Russian Empire, the youngest of five sons, to a distinguished Russian family. His mother was Princess Natalia Nikolayevna Meshcherskaya and his father was Count Paul Ignatieff, a close advisor to Tsar Nicholas II serving as his last Minister of Education. In 1918, the year after the Russian Revolution, Count Ignatieff was imprisoned, but his release was negotiated by sympathetic supporters. The family fled to France, and later moved to Canada. George Ignatieff was educated at St Paul's School, London, Lower Canada College (having first been rejected by Selwyn House School), and the University of Trinity College,University of Toronto, before being awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to study at Oxford.
-30-
Four conclusions: 1. Michael's grandfather was hardly 'threadbare' like the other starving masses of immigrants when he arrived in Canada. 2. Upon escaping Russia, The Count, the 24th Education Minister of the Russian Empire, spent huge amounts of money in educating at least one of his children, if not all. 3. Had the Russian Revolution not occured and Michael's family had stayed in Russia, Michael would be a hereditary 'Count'. 4. Michael's family did not suffer 'the immigrant experience' when they arrived in Canada. Thanks, wikipedia. Labels: LIBERAL PARTY, MICHAEL IGNATIEFF
Friday, March 25, 2011
"A CONCERN FOR EVERYONE" (Toronto Sun)
(The following from VOTP appeared in The Toronto Sun, Friday, March 25, 2011.)
If our hearts keep beating, none of us can avoid becoming senior citizens.
According to the Canadian Association for Retired People, 460,000, or 10% of today’s Canadian seniors, have or are currently suffering from elder abuse.
Since we’ll all become seniors, shouldn’t everybody be demanding to know what our smiling candidates, their parties and leaders are planning to do to protect us against the threat of abuse in our later years?
SUN EDITOR COMMENT: "Put it on the list, then watch candidates hit ignore"
If our hearts keep beating, none of us can avoid becoming senior citizens.
According to the Canadian Association for Retired People, 460,000, or 10% of today’s Canadian seniors, have or are currently suffering from elder abuse.
Since we’ll all become seniors, shouldn’t everybody be demanding to know what our smiling candidates, their parties and leaders are planning to do to protect us against the threat of abuse in our later years?
SUN EDITOR COMMENT: "Put it on the list, then watch candidates hit ignore"
Labels: CARP
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
HOSNI MUBARAK IS "A DEAD MAN WALKING". TODAY IS "THE DAY"
Yesterday, Egypt's Mubarak lost the support of his military. They had said that they side with the democratic aspirations of their country's thousands and thousands of street demonstrators and will not fire on their own people.
Mubarak's torturous local police had already abandoned ship and gone home days ago.
As a result, dictator Mubarak has no base left to maintain power in the Land of the Pharaohs.
Technically, he is "a dead man walking".
One would think that the brain-trust inside Hillary Clinton's State Department would have had projections and option packages already figured out in the eventuality that the 82-year old Mubarak is taken out of the picture. No doubt, they do and have had them for a long time.
Today, Tuesday, February 1, 2011, is the day when we will either witness the resolve and mettle of US Prez, Barack Obama is an out-reaching support and siding with Egypt's people or, heaven help us.
Where there has not been even a trickle of anti-US or anti-Iraeli sentiment in the demonstrations, we can expect the infiltration of Egypt's leaderless, populace movement by the banned Muslim Brotherhood with their Hamas connection.
From Islam's activated mullah's and mosques, travelling through Egypt's Muslim military, down to the street level, the message will be clear and simple: "The USA is 'all talk' and continuing to support Mubarak, not us, 80-million, Egyptian people".
Overnight, we will begin to witness US flags and effigies of Obama being burnt in the streets of Egypt. US embassy and consulates will come under fire. The Muslim Brotherhood will have successfully hijacked and given leadership to the populace movement.
Avoiding realities and State Department recommendations, Obama will have successfully created another Islamic, terroristic, basket case.
If Israel thought that they had problems with their Muslim neighbours in the past, their worst nightmares would be about to begin.
Faced with "a dead man walking", unless the USA's Obama comes out today with immediate, full and unequivocal support for the Egyptian people, the results of the transition happening in the country may not be a pleasant ones.
In a smaller way, the same goes for Canada's Harper, the UK's Cameron and the rest of the free world's leaders.
Today is 'the day', boys.
Show your courage, vision and common sense.
Don't fumble it.
SIDEBAR: An analysis by "Family Security Matters" Contributing Editor, Ralph Peters, a retired US Army officer and the author of 26 books: "Denial On The Nile"
Mubarak's torturous local police had already abandoned ship and gone home days ago.
As a result, dictator Mubarak has no base left to maintain power in the Land of the Pharaohs.
Technically, he is "a dead man walking".
One would think that the brain-trust inside Hillary Clinton's State Department would have had projections and option packages already figured out in the eventuality that the 82-year old Mubarak is taken out of the picture. No doubt, they do and have had them for a long time.
Today, Tuesday, February 1, 2011, is the day when we will either witness the resolve and mettle of US Prez, Barack Obama is an out-reaching support and siding with Egypt's people or, heaven help us.
Where there has not been even a trickle of anti-US or anti-Iraeli sentiment in the demonstrations, we can expect the infiltration of Egypt's leaderless, populace movement by the banned Muslim Brotherhood with their Hamas connection.
From Islam's activated mullah's and mosques, travelling through Egypt's Muslim military, down to the street level, the message will be clear and simple: "The USA is 'all talk' and continuing to support Mubarak, not us, 80-million, Egyptian people".
Overnight, we will begin to witness US flags and effigies of Obama being burnt in the streets of Egypt. US embassy and consulates will come under fire. The Muslim Brotherhood will have successfully hijacked and given leadership to the populace movement.
Avoiding realities and State Department recommendations, Obama will have successfully created another Islamic, terroristic, basket case.
If Israel thought that they had problems with their Muslim neighbours in the past, their worst nightmares would be about to begin.
Faced with "a dead man walking", unless the USA's Obama comes out today with immediate, full and unequivocal support for the Egyptian people, the results of the transition happening in the country may not be a pleasant ones.
In a smaller way, the same goes for Canada's Harper, the UK's Cameron and the rest of the free world's leaders.
Today is 'the day', boys.
Show your courage, vision and common sense.
Don't fumble it.
SIDEBAR: An analysis by "Family Security Matters" Contributing Editor, Ralph Peters, a retired US Army officer and the author of 26 books: "Denial On The Nile"
Labels: BARACK, EGYPT, HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, HILLARY, OBSERVATIONS
Friday, January 28, 2011
OBAMA'S 2011 'STATE OF THE UNION' SPEECH?
“My fellow Americans, my presidency has sucked. Big time. My stint as your leader has been worse than the Matrix Revolution, and you know how awful that Keanu Reeves movie was.
"To the American public, I’m sorry.
"The job of being President has been above my experience. I had no idea what I was supposed to be doing, and I still don’t.
"I’ve screwed over so many generations of Americans with the debt I’ve been racking up. So for the good of the country and because I’m tired of Michelle forcing me to eat organic arugula from the White House garden, tonight I am resigning.
"Take care America, and please don’t ever say that Jimmy Carter was a better President than I was, because that would really sting.”
- Jason Mattera (Human Events)
"To the American public, I’m sorry.
"The job of being President has been above my experience. I had no idea what I was supposed to be doing, and I still don’t.
"I’ve screwed over so many generations of Americans with the debt I’ve been racking up. So for the good of the country and because I’m tired of Michelle forcing me to eat organic arugula from the White House garden, tonight I am resigning.
"Take care America, and please don’t ever say that Jimmy Carter was a better President than I was, because that would really sting.”
- Jason Mattera (Human Events)
Labels: BARACK
Monday, January 24, 2011
THE USA'S CHANGE IN FOREIGN POLICY
The proud, 26th President of the United States (1901 to 1909), Teddy Roosevelt's foreign policy style was to "Speak softly and carry a big stick".
My, my, how times have changed for today's greatest and only remaining 'superpower'.
Today, as a cowering, 44th President of the United States (2009 - ), Barack Obama's foreign policy style appears to be "Speak softly, bow deeply and apologize often".
Either, "times have changed" or the USA needs another 'Roosevelt'.
My, my, how times have changed for today's greatest and only remaining 'superpower'.
Today, as a cowering, 44th President of the United States (2009 - ), Barack Obama's foreign policy style appears to be "Speak softly, bow deeply and apologize often".
Either, "times have changed" or the USA needs another 'Roosevelt'.
Labels: BARACK, OBSERVATIONS, US DEMOCRATS
Sunday, January 23, 2011
A CANADIAN ‘WORKFORCE CRISIS?’
Is there something wrong with these optics?
Every year, Canadian birthrates fail to produce enough workers to maintain Canada's future, labour needs.
Every year, Canadian governments scour the planet for replacement workers.
Every year, hundreds of thousands of mature, healthy and productive Canadian workers are put ‘out to pasture’.
Every year, thousands and thousands of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled people immigrate to Canada to fill Canada's future, labour gap.
Every year, billions of taxpayer’s dollars are spent on resettlement, language and cultural training, education and skill development, housing, assistance payments and hundreds of Canada ’s social agencies.
Every day, following over forty years of productive work, many of Canada ’s experienced, competent and acclimatized citizens are missing a sense of personal value, contribution, productivty, interaction and a daily schedule that only comes from ‘going to work’.
Every day, these citizens are here, ready, willing and available for work, at no cost whatsoever, but for one reason, ‘age’.
Even though today's Canadians are living far longer their forefathers, (1910: 50+ years, 2010: close to 80 years) and mandatory retirement laws have been abolished in seven of Canada ’s thirteen, geographical jurisdictions, employer’s attitudes have not.
In most employer's thinking, "65' equals retirement", whether employees wish it or not.
http://www.efmoody.com/estate/lifeexpectancy.html
Strange, isn’t it?
While Canadian employers cry and beg for workers, they terminate some of their best.
Many of Canada’s “60-plus” workers face major difficulties in being considered for contracting or employment. They are the older 'Zoomers' of the country, a phrase coined to describe Canada's “45-plus” generations. (‘Boomers’ + ‘Zip’ = “Zoomers”)
Employers should be encouraged to boost their bottom-line profits with fully-trained, tried, tested and true, 'Zoomers'.
Definitely, we should be questioning the ‘short-sightedness’ in the thinking of Canadian governments in why, at next to no expense, they are not actively promoting employment from this pot of competent, fully-experienced, 'Zoomer gold'.
Conclusions:
1. Canadian governments will continue to search and steal ‘the best’ from impoverished countries that so desperately need to keep ‘their best’ at home.
2. The long term, direct result of this prolonged draining, is that ‘have-not’ countries will remain ‘have-nots’ and be forced to rely on Canadian taxpayer’s foreign aid, seemingly forever.
3. The solid experience, proven credentials, culture and language skills, productive backgrounds and strong ‘work ethics’ of many of Canada’s 'Zoomers' will continue to be put ‘out to pasture’. For some, this means that many of these workers, movers and shakers are sentenced to live at poverty levels for the next 15 to 20 years of their lives while they still have so much to contribute.
What a totally-needless loss.
These optics are not only wrong, they are blatantly stupid.
Every year, Canadian birthrates fail to produce enough workers to maintain Canada's future, labour needs.
Every year, Canadian governments scour the planet for replacement workers.
Every year, hundreds of thousands of mature, healthy and productive Canadian workers are put ‘out to pasture’.
Every year, thousands and thousands of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled people immigrate to Canada to fill Canada's future, labour gap.
Every year, billions of taxpayer’s dollars are spent on resettlement, language and cultural training, education and skill development, housing, assistance payments and hundreds of Canada ’s social agencies.
Every day, following over forty years of productive work, many of Canada ’s experienced, competent and acclimatized citizens are missing a sense of personal value, contribution, productivty, interaction and a daily schedule that only comes from ‘going to work’.
Every day, these citizens are here, ready, willing and available for work, at no cost whatsoever, but for one reason, ‘age’.
Even though today's Canadians are living far longer their forefathers, (1910: 50+ years, 2010: close to 80 years) and mandatory retirement laws have been abolished in seven of Canada ’s thirteen, geographical jurisdictions, employer’s attitudes have not.
In most employer's thinking, "65' equals retirement", whether employees wish it or not.
http://www.efmoody.com/estate/lifeexpectancy.html
Strange, isn’t it?
While Canadian employers cry and beg for workers, they terminate some of their best.
Many of Canada’s “60-plus” workers face major difficulties in being considered for contracting or employment. They are the older 'Zoomers' of the country, a phrase coined to describe Canada's “45-plus” generations. (‘Boomers’ + ‘Zip’ = “Zoomers”)
Employers should be encouraged to boost their bottom-line profits with fully-trained, tried, tested and true, 'Zoomers'.
Definitely, we should be questioning the ‘short-sightedness’ in the thinking of Canadian governments in why, at next to no expense, they are not actively promoting employment from this pot of competent, fully-experienced, 'Zoomer gold'.
Conclusions:
1. Canadian governments will continue to search and steal ‘the best’ from impoverished countries that so desperately need to keep ‘their best’ at home.
2. The long term, direct result of this prolonged draining, is that ‘have-not’ countries will remain ‘have-nots’ and be forced to rely on Canadian taxpayer’s foreign aid, seemingly forever.
3. The solid experience, proven credentials, culture and language skills, productive backgrounds and strong ‘work ethics’ of many of Canada’s 'Zoomers' will continue to be put ‘out to pasture’. For some, this means that many of these workers, movers and shakers are sentenced to live at poverty levels for the next 15 to 20 years of their lives while they still have so much to contribute.
What a totally-needless loss.
These optics are not only wrong, they are blatantly stupid.
Labels: HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, ZOOMERS
Thursday, January 13, 2011
'BIG BROTHER' IS ALIVE AND WELL IN OTTAWA
Never ever think that the days of Big Brother not censoring what you see, hear and read are gone.
Today's example is a banning from any air-play of a 1980's quasi-hit song, "Money for Nothing" by Dire Straights, because of a supposed, 'homophobic slur', hold your chair, in their using of the word "faggot".
This morning, on CBC-TV, the Canadian Broadcast Standard Council's Chairman, Ron Cohen, explained how the ban occured. Apparently, the CBSC 'beacon of morality' does not dig for profanity or anti-social material. It can only judge and rule on an actual complaint be it "one, ten or a hundred and fifty" as Ron put it.
I would judge that the esteemed 'Council' can also dismiss a complaint as being "frivilous, irrelevant and not deserving' of any consideration in today's Canada.
This did not happen here.
With the word "faggot' in the lyrics of "Money For Nothing", the Council found grounds for banning this Dire Straights song forever from Canada's holier-than-thou air waves.
Compared to today's 'rap' of 'f---ing' this, doing that or whatever to your mother, sister, dog or cat, plus 'killing the cops', etc., Money for Nothing's now-banned lyrics rate, at best. mild or next-to-zero.
I wonder how much Cohen and the Council's six-member board get paid to sit around reviewing and banning such 'nothing' by today's standards, 'their standards' since they make them up?
Apparently this arm of Big Brother doesn't like the word 'faggot', a word still jokingly used be members of our gay community.
SIDEBAR: I wonder if I lodged a complaint to the CBSC about the CBSC being 'obscene' and 'out-of-touch' in it's considerations and judgements in today's society, would it ban itself?
SIDEBAR II: If you have the time to read such garbage, as the CBSC appeared to have to write it, here is their "5,287" worded ruling.
Today's example is a banning from any air-play of a 1980's quasi-hit song, "Money for Nothing" by Dire Straights, because of a supposed, 'homophobic slur', hold your chair, in their using of the word "faggot".
This morning, on CBC-TV, the Canadian Broadcast Standard Council's Chairman, Ron Cohen, explained how the ban occured. Apparently, the CBSC 'beacon of morality' does not dig for profanity or anti-social material. It can only judge and rule on an actual complaint be it "one, ten or a hundred and fifty" as Ron put it.
I would judge that the esteemed 'Council' can also dismiss a complaint as being "frivilous, irrelevant and not deserving' of any consideration in today's Canada.
This did not happen here.
With the word "faggot' in the lyrics of "Money For Nothing", the Council found grounds for banning this Dire Straights song forever from Canada's holier-than-thou air waves.
Compared to today's 'rap' of 'f---ing' this, doing that or whatever to your mother, sister, dog or cat, plus 'killing the cops', etc., Money for Nothing's now-banned lyrics rate, at best. mild or next-to-zero.
I wonder how much Cohen and the Council's six-member board get paid to sit around reviewing and banning such 'nothing' by today's standards, 'their standards' since they make them up?
Apparently this arm of Big Brother doesn't like the word 'faggot', a word still jokingly used be members of our gay community.
SIDEBAR: I wonder if I lodged a complaint to the CBSC about the CBSC being 'obscene' and 'out-of-touch' in it's considerations and judgements in today's society, would it ban itself?
SIDEBAR II: If you have the time to read such garbage, as the CBSC appeared to have to write it, here is their "5,287" worded ruling.
Labels: OBSERVATIONS
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
MASS SHOOTINGS IN TUCSON, ARIZONA
Last week, twenty people were shot in a shooting spreee on a parking lot in Arizona. Six died. A true tragedy.
The 22-year old man who had shot them was an obvious deranged, ‘nut case’. The story should have ended there, but it certainly didn’t.
From the day of the shooting and on, ‘talking heads’ analyzed, dissected, spoke and wrote about every possible angle that could have played into creating this catastrophe.
What triggered the shooter to do such a crime?
The fighting words of politicians, a lack of gun control, the ease to purchase a semi-automatic rifle, a lack of background checks, safety nets for aggressive children, kid's 'toy guns', overly-hot talk shows, a society of violence and decay, the US ‘Tea Party’, flaky Sarah Pallin, the lack of reporting ‘early signs’ of violence in individuals, etc. The list was virtually endless.
For sure, each, every and all ‘placings of blame’ rose to the surface and were used.
I had even heard one ‘talking head’ yapping about the possibilities that genetics, as in ‘chromosomes’, had created such a monster.
Whoa. Whoa.
Could it be that the 22 year old was nothing, more or less, than ‘a simple, deranged, nut case’ who had gone over-the-edge for reasons that only he would know?
I recognize that that is not what you want to hear if you are filling air-time or selling newspapers, but that is what had happened, ‘triggers’ or ‘no triggers’.
A NOTE TO MEDIA: Please stop the near-insane barrage of ‘placing blame’ on everything except the insanity of the shooter.
The 22-year old man who had shot them was an obvious deranged, ‘nut case’. The story should have ended there, but it certainly didn’t.
From the day of the shooting and on, ‘talking heads’ analyzed, dissected, spoke and wrote about every possible angle that could have played into creating this catastrophe.
What triggered the shooter to do such a crime?
The fighting words of politicians, a lack of gun control, the ease to purchase a semi-automatic rifle, a lack of background checks, safety nets for aggressive children, kid's 'toy guns', overly-hot talk shows, a society of violence and decay, the US ‘Tea Party’, flaky Sarah Pallin, the lack of reporting ‘early signs’ of violence in individuals, etc. The list was virtually endless.
For sure, each, every and all ‘placings of blame’ rose to the surface and were used.
I had even heard one ‘talking head’ yapping about the possibilities that genetics, as in ‘chromosomes’, had created such a monster.
Whoa. Whoa.
Could it be that the 22 year old was nothing, more or less, than ‘a simple, deranged, nut case’ who had gone over-the-edge for reasons that only he would know?
I recognize that that is not what you want to hear if you are filling air-time or selling newspapers, but that is what had happened, ‘triggers’ or ‘no triggers’.
A NOTE TO MEDIA: Please stop the near-insane barrage of ‘placing blame’ on everything except the insanity of the shooter.
Labels: HANDGUNS, OBSERVATIONS
Monday, December 20, 2010
'LIKE FATHER, (NOT) LIKE SON"
Could you have pictured Pierre E. Trudeau lowering himself to be out hustling $250 sales of an MP's drawings and pitching $1,000 tickets to skate with some other MP?
Until this morning, neither could I until my eyes were blown out when I received the following email:
"Two gift ideas they will never forget"
Monday, December 20, 2010 10:10 AM
From: "Justin Trudeau"
If you’re still looking to find the perfect holiday gift for family and friends, look no further.
Gerard Kennedy and Ken Dryden have a couple of gift offers your friend or loved ones will never forget. What’s more, by giving one of these unique gifts, you’ll also be helping to retire the remaining leadership debt of two of my good friends and colleagues.
The first gift is a once in a lifetime experience – a skate with Ken Dryden and friends at the Bell Centre, Sunday February 20, 2011.
The only other time Ken Dryden skated at the Bell Centre was the night of the Canadiens’ 100th anniversary game – wearing Carey Price’s equipment! This ticket also includes admission for a child for what I’m sure will be a fun and memorable day. It begins with brunch, followed by the skating, and later a tour of the Canadiens’ Hall of Fame with lots of conversation along the way. Some of Ken’s former Canadiens teammates will be there for the skate, too!
One ticket costs $1,000, which, after your tax credit could cost you as little as $441.67.
Click here to donate and receive a ticket to a Skate with Ken Dryden and friends at the Bell Centre.
The second gift is a unique numbered, signed and personalized limited edition print of a pencil drawing that Gerard drew of Lester B. Pearson, one of his political inspirations. Gerard drew the picture while travelling in a car out of cell-phone range in La Mauricie federal national park in Quebec during the 2006 leadership contest (The original was auctioned to raise funds for the Liberal Party of Canada).
The contribution needed for the print is $250, but because political donations entitle you to a tax credit of up to 75 per cent, the after-tax net cost to you could be as little as $62.50.
Click here to donate and receive a limited edition print of Gerard’s pencil drawing of Lester B. Pearson.
With either of these memorable gifts, you will make this holiday season one your family and friends will never forget.
Justin Trudeau
-30-
Who's handling this heir-apparent, golden-spooned kid's PR?
Who put him up to it?
Iggy?
Until this morning, neither could I until my eyes were blown out when I received the following email:
"Two gift ideas they will never forget"
Monday, December 20, 2010 10:10 AM
From: "Justin Trudeau"
If you’re still looking to find the perfect holiday gift for family and friends, look no further.
Gerard Kennedy and Ken Dryden have a couple of gift offers your friend or loved ones will never forget. What’s more, by giving one of these unique gifts, you’ll also be helping to retire the remaining leadership debt of two of my good friends and colleagues.
The first gift is a once in a lifetime experience – a skate with Ken Dryden and friends at the Bell Centre, Sunday February 20, 2011.
The only other time Ken Dryden skated at the Bell Centre was the night of the Canadiens’ 100th anniversary game – wearing Carey Price’s equipment! This ticket also includes admission for a child for what I’m sure will be a fun and memorable day. It begins with brunch, followed by the skating, and later a tour of the Canadiens’ Hall of Fame with lots of conversation along the way. Some of Ken’s former Canadiens teammates will be there for the skate, too!
One ticket costs $1,000, which, after your tax credit could cost you as little as $441.67.
Click here to donate and receive a ticket to a Skate with Ken Dryden and friends at the Bell Centre.
The second gift is a unique numbered, signed and personalized limited edition print of a pencil drawing that Gerard drew of Lester B. Pearson, one of his political inspirations. Gerard drew the picture while travelling in a car out of cell-phone range in La Mauricie federal national park in Quebec during the 2006 leadership contest (The original was auctioned to raise funds for the Liberal Party of Canada).
The contribution needed for the print is $250, but because political donations entitle you to a tax credit of up to 75 per cent, the after-tax net cost to you could be as little as $62.50.
Click here to donate and receive a limited edition print of Gerard’s pencil drawing of Lester B. Pearson.
With either of these memorable gifts, you will make this holiday season one your family and friends will never forget.
Justin Trudeau
-30-
Unbelievable, isn't it?
Who's handling this heir-apparent, golden-spooned kid's PR?
Who put him up to it?
Iggy?
Labels: JUSTIN, LIBERAL PARTY, MICHAEL IGNATIEFF, PIERRE TRUDEAU
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
'WIKILEAKS' GOT ARRESTED FOR 'RAPE' ?
This 'alert' came across the internet:
“Tuesday, December 7, 2010 5:23 AM
From: "CNN Breaking News"
“WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in London, CNN confirms”.
Through a trumped-up charge of ‘rape’ and a few other relateds, a Swedish warrant for Assange’s arrest has been executed.
The embarrassed, US Government now has a chance to ‘shoot the messenger’.
Sweden was the country chosen to shut up Assange on a howdy-dowdy rape charge, because the USA has no laws that would make what Assange and his ‘WikiLeaks’ did ‘an illegal act’. Because of the nature of WikiLeaks, any such law would be in direct conflict with the First and possibly ‘most vital’ of the twenty-seven Amendments in the US Constitution.
Ratified on December 15th, 1791 and commonly referred to a ‘Freedom of the Press”, it was originally titled “Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression”, later to evolve into “Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press”.
It reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
It is that “the freedom of speech, or of the press” that would have guaranteed an eventual US Supreme Court hearing for Assange if he had been charged with anything close to WikiLeaks itself.
For the 'caught-in-the-cookie-jar', Obama Administration, Sweden's trumped up charges avoids all of this.
The charges has no media screaming about their ‘freedom of the press’.
The charges still and most effecitvely,‘shoots the messenger’ with no First Amendment protections ever coming into question.
How devious.
How effective
How totally unethical.
SIDEBAR: The date is interesting.
Unlike the USA Government declaring war on Japan following Pearl Harbour on a December 7th, this December 7th, Obama avoided declaring war on the US Constitution's 'Freedom of the Press' by having Sweden do some prior planting and dirty work.
How did the Obama Administration do it?
Now, there are some WikiLeaks that we'd all love to read.
“Tuesday, December 7, 2010 5:23 AM
From: "CNN Breaking News"
“WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in London, CNN confirms”.
Through a trumped-up charge of ‘rape’ and a few other relateds, a Swedish warrant for Assange’s arrest has been executed.
The embarrassed, US Government now has a chance to ‘shoot the messenger’.
Sweden was the country chosen to shut up Assange on a howdy-dowdy rape charge, because the USA has no laws that would make what Assange and his ‘WikiLeaks’ did ‘an illegal act’. Because of the nature of WikiLeaks, any such law would be in direct conflict with the First and possibly ‘most vital’ of the twenty-seven Amendments in the US Constitution.
Ratified on December 15th, 1791 and commonly referred to a ‘Freedom of the Press”, it was originally titled “Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression”, later to evolve into “Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press”.
It reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
It is that “the freedom of speech, or of the press” that would have guaranteed an eventual US Supreme Court hearing for Assange if he had been charged with anything close to WikiLeaks itself.
For the 'caught-in-the-cookie-jar', Obama Administration, Sweden's trumped up charges avoids all of this.
The charges has no media screaming about their ‘freedom of the press’.
The charges still and most effecitvely,‘shoots the messenger’ with no First Amendment protections ever coming into question.
How devious.
How effective
How totally unethical.
SIDEBAR: The date is interesting.
Unlike the USA Government declaring war on Japan following Pearl Harbour on a December 7th, this December 7th, Obama avoided declaring war on the US Constitution's 'Freedom of the Press' by having Sweden do some prior planting and dirty work.
How did the Obama Administration do it?
Now, there are some WikiLeaks that we'd all love to read.
Labels: BARACK
Thursday, November 18, 2010
THREE YEARS TO TRAIN AFGHAN SOLDIERS?
As Canada's Harper government commits to keeping Canadian troopers in the war in Afghanistan for three more years to train the country's military and police, here's one, simple, stupid question that nobody has asked:
Why will it take three years of training to put together a local army in Afghanistan ?
In wartime, it has never taken 'three years' to train and prepare an army to fight an enemy. If so, in the 1930's and 40's, NATO's soldiers would never have been ready in time to face Hitler’s forces- and we would all be speaking 'German'.
In Canada’s army of today, the basic training of recruits takes 13-weeks with another 13 to 18 weeks for a specialization in a trade. The total is, give or take, of around six-plus months.
That's not 'three years'.
According to "United States Army Basic Training Operating Instructions", the final, "Phase III” of basic training is even shorter, It "begins at the start of the seventh week and continues to the end of "the ninth week" of training, or upon completion of Phase II until graduation.
That's 'nine weeks', before any trade specializations, not ‘three years’.
Why will it take ‘three years’ or maybe even longer, to train Afghans to defend their country against insurgents?
Nobody has ever asked.
Why will it take three years of training to put together a local army in Afghanistan ?
In wartime, it has never taken 'three years' to train and prepare an army to fight an enemy. If so, in the 1930's and 40's, NATO's soldiers would never have been ready in time to face Hitler’s forces- and we would all be speaking 'German'.
In Canada’s army of today, the basic training of recruits takes 13-weeks with another 13 to 18 weeks for a specialization in a trade. The total is, give or take, of around six-plus months.
That's not 'three years'.
According to "United States Army Basic Training Operating Instructions", the final, "Phase III” of basic training is even shorter, It "begins at the start of the seventh week and continues to the end of "the ninth week" of training, or upon completion of Phase II until graduation.
That's 'nine weeks', before any trade specializations, not ‘three years’.
Why will it take ‘three years’ or maybe even longer, to train Afghans to defend their country against insurgents?
Nobody has ever asked.
Labels: AFGHANISTAN, DUCEPPE, HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, LAYTON, MICHAEL IGNATIEFF
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
"IGGY. GOT'CA ON AFGHANISTAN".
And the (war) beat goes on…
In January of 2010, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper had said: “We will continue to maintain humanitarian and development missions, as well as important diplomatic activity in Afghanistan. But we will not be undertaking any activities that require any kind of military presence, 'other than the odd guard guarding an embassy.”
“I think the reality is that all actors over the past few years have been downgrading their expectations of what can be achieved in Afghanistan” Harper said.
Not being a stupid politician who would paint himself into a corner, Harper had added, “but it is still important that we have a viable, functioning state in Afghanistan that has some acceptable democratic and rule of law norms. If we don’t, we run the serious risk of returning in Afghanistan to what we had before.
"No matter what differences people have on the mission, everybody agrees that the mission has the purpose to ensure that Afghanistan does not return to being a failed state that is an incubator of terrorism.”
Harper had added 'an impossible' for any activities by foreigners (invaders) in Afghanistan. “We will not be undertaking any kind of activity that requires a significant military force protection, so it will become a strictly civilian mission".
Apparently, Prime Minister Harper's promise, to leave only "the odd guard guarding an embassy" has changed over the past 10-months.
Over the last two days, a test trial balloon has be flown. It would leave 1,000 Canadian troopers in Afghanistan to train the country’s police and military. On graduation, in this backward, corrupt cesspool, as to 'who' would be controlling and directing them against 'who', is anybody's guess. But, be assured that, during the daytime, Canadians will pay them and train them well.
Likewise, you can be semi-assured that at nightfall, many of the trainees will be working 'their second jobs' with the insurgents, but that's another story
With a Machiavellian, political kiss of death, Harper, the master of strategy, has maneuvered and labeled the naive and gullible Bob Rae, foreign affairs critic for Canada’s Liberal Party, with originating the idea. Even better, Rae loves the media adulation with 'the Rae alternative'.
Meanwhile, the Liberal's wretchedly hapless and hopeless party leader, Michael Ignatieff, has been left on the sidelines in the ashes, playing second fiddle to his former, party leadership rival, exactly where Harper wants to keep him.
So, Mr.and Mrs. Canada, surprise, surprise.
After June of 2011, the body bags of Canadian soldiers will still continue traveling down the 401’s 'Highway of Heros' and well into the foreseeable future.
The new 'heros' will be joining the other 152 Canadian troopers who were causalities of a war in which, as Harper had told Fareed Zakaria of CNN on March 1st of 2009, "we're not going to ever defeat the insurgency. My reading of Afghanistan in history is that it's probably had an insurgency forever of some kind"
Having the power to direct and use the foreign-based lives of Canada’s proud, military men and women as local, political tools to achieve 'your own, political ends', can have it’s advantages, can't it?
SIDEBAR: On this issue, Smilin' Jack Layton of the NDP and the seditious, Gilles Duceppe of the Block Quebecois have it right. “Get out” and ‘get out now”. Of course, they are 'not in power'.
In January of 2010, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper had said: “We will continue to maintain humanitarian and development missions, as well as important diplomatic activity in Afghanistan. But we will not be undertaking any activities that require any kind of military presence, 'other than the odd guard guarding an embassy.”
“I think the reality is that all actors over the past few years have been downgrading their expectations of what can be achieved in Afghanistan” Harper said.
Not being a stupid politician who would paint himself into a corner, Harper had added, “but it is still important that we have a viable, functioning state in Afghanistan that has some acceptable democratic and rule of law norms. If we don’t, we run the serious risk of returning in Afghanistan to what we had before.
"No matter what differences people have on the mission, everybody agrees that the mission has the purpose to ensure that Afghanistan does not return to being a failed state that is an incubator of terrorism.”
Harper had added 'an impossible' for any activities by foreigners (invaders) in Afghanistan. “We will not be undertaking any kind of activity that requires a significant military force protection, so it will become a strictly civilian mission".
Apparently, Prime Minister Harper's promise, to leave only "the odd guard guarding an embassy" has changed over the past 10-months.
Over the last two days, a test trial balloon has be flown. It would leave 1,000 Canadian troopers in Afghanistan to train the country’s police and military. On graduation, in this backward, corrupt cesspool, as to 'who' would be controlling and directing them against 'who', is anybody's guess. But, be assured that, during the daytime, Canadians will pay them and train them well.
Likewise, you can be semi-assured that at nightfall, many of the trainees will be working 'their second jobs' with the insurgents, but that's another story
With a Machiavellian, political kiss of death, Harper, the master of strategy, has maneuvered and labeled the naive and gullible Bob Rae, foreign affairs critic for Canada’s Liberal Party, with originating the idea. Even better, Rae loves the media adulation with 'the Rae alternative'.
Meanwhile, the Liberal's wretchedly hapless and hopeless party leader, Michael Ignatieff, has been left on the sidelines in the ashes, playing second fiddle to his former, party leadership rival, exactly where Harper wants to keep him.
So, Mr.and Mrs. Canada, surprise, surprise.
After June of 2011, the body bags of Canadian soldiers will still continue traveling down the 401’s 'Highway of Heros' and well into the foreseeable future.
The new 'heros' will be joining the other 152 Canadian troopers who were causalities of a war in which, as Harper had told Fareed Zakaria of CNN on March 1st of 2009, "we're not going to ever defeat the insurgency. My reading of Afghanistan in history is that it's probably had an insurgency forever of some kind"
Having the power to direct and use the foreign-based lives of Canada’s proud, military men and women as local, political tools to achieve 'your own, political ends', can have it’s advantages, can't it?
SIDEBAR: On this issue, Smilin' Jack Layton of the NDP and the seditious, Gilles Duceppe of the Block Quebecois have it right. “Get out” and ‘get out now”. Of course, they are 'not in power'.
Labels: HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, LIBERAL PARTY, MICHAEL IGNATIEFF, OBSERVATIONS, RAE
Sunday, November 07, 2010
READER P.H. WRITES, "WHAT OBAMA NOW NEEDS IS CREDIBILITY"
What Obama needs now is some credibility.
1/ He needs to cut out the crap and show that he is serious about leading the country.
2/ He can fiddle around with the economy for the next 2 years or he can pull all U.S. forces out of any place they don’t belong and immediately save $1 billion a day.
3/ He can forget about all this bi-partisan b.s. and put the blame back where everyone knows it belongs.
4/ He can orchestrate the prosecution of any one in the Bush administration involved in torture or treason.
5/ He can give the EPA back their original mandate which is to keep big business from destroying what’s left of the goddamn planet.
6/ He can take a real good look at the big banks and level criminal charges where necessary.
7/ He can open a serious investigation into 9/11.
He doesn’t even have to actually DO these things but he can still TALK about them. And if there is one thing Obama knows how to do it is talk.
He can open his mouth and tell the world the way it really is.
The truth won’t always set you free but it will sure as hell wake you up.
The down side is it could cost him his life but if he gets a backbone he can still save his soul.
Asking a man to give his life for his country is asking a lot but throughout history that has been the difference between great men and the rest of us. If Obama does this he will become the greatest of all time.
EDITOR: Body bags return weekly to the USA and Canada from the corrupt, backward rat hole of Afghanistan filled with the truly, 'great men' of this decade. Aside from families and friends, few of us even know their names.
Meanwhile, with a very few exceptions, politicians who are called 'great' are only heroes of 'circumstance and time'. Some are only labeled 'great' through premature death and the misdirected nostalgia of the masses. i.e. JFK
Yes, Obama is a great speaker. He is likely one of the best in today's political arena. But with his mammoth failures and totally-insane 'overexposure', most Americans aren't buying his product anymore. This was proved in the results of last week's US, mid-term elections.
1/ He needs to cut out the crap and show that he is serious about leading the country.
2/ He can fiddle around with the economy for the next 2 years or he can pull all U.S. forces out of any place they don’t belong and immediately save $1 billion a day.
3/ He can forget about all this bi-partisan b.s. and put the blame back where everyone knows it belongs.
4/ He can orchestrate the prosecution of any one in the Bush administration involved in torture or treason.
5/ He can give the EPA back their original mandate which is to keep big business from destroying what’s left of the goddamn planet.
6/ He can take a real good look at the big banks and level criminal charges where necessary.
7/ He can open a serious investigation into 9/11.
He doesn’t even have to actually DO these things but he can still TALK about them. And if there is one thing Obama knows how to do it is talk.
He can open his mouth and tell the world the way it really is.
The truth won’t always set you free but it will sure as hell wake you up.
The down side is it could cost him his life but if he gets a backbone he can still save his soul.
Asking a man to give his life for his country is asking a lot but throughout history that has been the difference between great men and the rest of us. If Obama does this he will become the greatest of all time.
EDITOR: Body bags return weekly to the USA and Canada from the corrupt, backward rat hole of Afghanistan filled with the truly, 'great men' of this decade. Aside from families and friends, few of us even know their names.
Meanwhile, with a very few exceptions, politicians who are called 'great' are only heroes of 'circumstance and time'. Some are only labeled 'great' through premature death and the misdirected nostalgia of the masses. i.e. JFK
Yes, Obama is a great speaker. He is likely one of the best in today's political arena. But with his mammoth failures and totally-insane 'overexposure', most Americans aren't buying his product anymore. This was proved in the results of last week's US, mid-term elections.
Labels: AFGHANISTAN, BARACK, READER WRITES
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
ANOTHER HISTORIC, "CANADIAN FIRST"
The first, elected “cut government spending” winners were not the USA’s Tea Party-endorsed candidates in yesterday’s US mid-term elections.
Under a singular, ‘stop the gravy train’ campaign plank, the citizens of Toronto had beat the Americans ‘by eight days’ at the ballot box, expressing this wish through their election of Mayor-elect, Rob Ford.
Across North America, the liberal/socialist ‘tax ‘n spend’ era could well be speeding to an abrupt halt, much faster than anyone could have predicted.
Politicos and media on both sides of the border should take heed.
Both peoples are beginning to appear that they are simply ‘not going to take it anymore’ with out-of-control spending, borrowing and taxation.
Under a singular, ‘stop the gravy train’ campaign plank, the citizens of Toronto had beat the Americans ‘by eight days’ at the ballot box, expressing this wish through their election of Mayor-elect, Rob Ford.
Across North America, the liberal/socialist ‘tax ‘n spend’ era could well be speeding to an abrupt halt, much faster than anyone could have predicted.
Politicos and media on both sides of the border should take heed.
Both peoples are beginning to appear that they are simply ‘not going to take it anymore’ with out-of-control spending, borrowing and taxation.
Labels: ROB FORD, TAXPAYERS, Toronto
Thursday, October 28, 2010
WELCOME HOME, KHADR
If all things go well for Omar Khadr, Canadians may soon be able to welcome home, as a respected, forensic psychiatrist, Prof. Dr Michael Welnar, had testified as “an unrepentant, dangerous, Islamic extremist who has been ‘marinated in the radical jihadism' at Guantanamo”, back to the loving arms of his mom and sister’s home in Scarborough, Ontario.
Canada's weak, '1/3 of sentence served', parole elegibility will see to that.
It’s a shame that the US medic, Sergeant First Class, medic Christopher Speer, a U.S. special forces soldier, who Omar has confessed to killing, won’t be returning to the loving arms of his wife Tabitha, two small children, Taryn and Tanner and brother Todd in Pinehurst, North Carolina.
Dr.Welnar had further descibed Khadr as being "devout, angry and identifies with his family, which is radical and jihadist".
One wonders if this Canadian pop star of many, Canadian bleeding hearts, now a fully developed, 'unrepentant, dangerous, Islamic extremist', will be taking up a new trade.
Canadians may find out around 2014.
Canada's weak, '1/3 of sentence served', parole elegibility will see to that.
It’s a shame that the US medic, Sergeant First Class, medic Christopher Speer, a U.S. special forces soldier, who Omar has confessed to killing, won’t be returning to the loving arms of his wife Tabitha, two small children, Taryn and Tanner and brother Todd in Pinehurst, North Carolina.
Dr.Welnar had further descibed Khadr as being "devout, angry and identifies with his family, which is radical and jihadist".
One wonders if this Canadian pop star of many, Canadian bleeding hearts, now a fully developed, 'unrepentant, dangerous, Islamic extremist', will be taking up a new trade.
Canadians may find out around 2014.
Labels: KHADR
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
THE BIGGEST STORY IN TORONTO’S 2010 MUNICIPAL ELECTION
The biggest story in Toronto’s 2010 municipal election was not Rob Ford being elected as mayor. It was the monumental disservice to the public by portions of Toronto’s medIa.
Up to the final voting results, Toronto’s left-wing-slanted, broadcast media had mislead and misdirected viewers by telling them that the Ford-Smitherman race was ‘neck ‘n neck’.
Leading up to 'the count', even though reported by one of their own, this media sector had conveniently set aside the final EKOS poll that had been released a few days earlier.
EKOS had shown an 8.4% spread in favour of Rob Ford.
“43.9 per cent of respondents said they would support Ford, while 35.6 per cent said they would vote for Smitherman”.
The final results had proven to be even better for Rob Ford with 47.1% of voters (383,501) supporting him while Smitherman held at 35.6% (289,832), an '11.5% spread'.
If anything, the relentlessly pounding out of “a neck ‘n neck race”, combined with snide, off-hand, on-air comments and remarks about Ford, had totally boomeranged. A grassroots ‘tea party’ had occurred.
In the aftermath, much of Toronto’s sour-graped, broadcast media have switched into a Doomsday mode, pitching a line that the 'stop-the-gravy-train' Ford will not be able to perform or deliver his promises.
I suppose that they’ll never give up or grow up to accept Bob Dylan’s famous line from a different era and context, "the times they are a-changin' ".
Up to the final voting results, Toronto’s left-wing-slanted, broadcast media had mislead and misdirected viewers by telling them that the Ford-Smitherman race was ‘neck ‘n neck’.
Leading up to 'the count', even though reported by one of their own, this media sector had conveniently set aside the final EKOS poll that had been released a few days earlier.
EKOS had shown an 8.4% spread in favour of Rob Ford.
“43.9 per cent of respondents said they would support Ford, while 35.6 per cent said they would vote for Smitherman”.
The final results had proven to be even better for Rob Ford with 47.1% of voters (383,501) supporting him while Smitherman held at 35.6% (289,832), an '11.5% spread'.
If anything, the relentlessly pounding out of “a neck ‘n neck race”, combined with snide, off-hand, on-air comments and remarks about Ford, had totally boomeranged. A grassroots ‘tea party’ had occurred.
In the aftermath, much of Toronto’s sour-graped, broadcast media have switched into a Doomsday mode, pitching a line that the 'stop-the-gravy-train' Ford will not be able to perform or deliver his promises.
I suppose that they’ll never give up or grow up to accept Bob Dylan’s famous line from a different era and context, "the times they are a-changin' ".
Monday, October 25, 2010
"SHOULD MUSLIM VOTE FOR HIM WHO MARRIED A MAN?"
In the last, waning hours of Toronto’s mayoralty campaign, homophobic signs with the above message, appeared along Danforth Avenue, near Victoria Park and radio ads began running on the 'Canadian Tamil Broadcasting Corporation' radio station and appeared online.
The ads were targeted towards Toronto’s ‘unenlightened’ immigrant populations whose religious (Muslim) and cultural ‘value systems’ do not include or embrace ‘homosexuality’ as being acceptable. In some of their home countries, they go so far as stoning ‘gays’ to death.
Funny, isn’t it?
Could George Smitherman’s previous, election ‘strength’ in his geographically-narrow, provincial riding of ‘Toronto Centre’ become his foremost ‘weakness’ when spread completely across Toronto's multicultural city.
Smitherman’s past provincial riding, election victories in 1999, 2003 and 2007 were, for most part, through the overwhelming support from his most-natural constituency, the solid, voting-block of ‘Toronto’s gays’.
Yesterday, with no time or forum in which to respond, George’s 'same-sex marriage' to Christopher Peloso, instantly became a potential, unpredicted nightmare. He may have never dreamed about this when planning to face ballot boxes across today’s 'complete Toronto' from his narrow, 'gay-voting fortress'.
Even if Smitherman’s lifestyle had been raised earlier, which it respectfully was not by any candidate, how could George have possibly handled it against the ‘belief systems’ of unenlightened, homophobic Torontonians?
If this past weekend’s signs and radio spots had appeared earlier in the campaign, would Torontonians have been witnessing major fights between the polls two, campaign leaders, Rob Ford vs. Joe Pantalone, Rob Ford vs. Rocco Rossi, Rob Ford vs. Sarah Thomson, Rob Ford vs. Adam Giambrone or Rob Ford vs. Giorgio Mammoliti?
One wonders.
Tonight’s election results may tell a lot.
Will Ford's "neck 'n neck", but still polled 'lead' over Smitherman be translated into a major victory for the penny-pinching, "end the gravy train", Councilor from Etobicoke through rejections of George by the 'last-minute-reminded, Muslim community'?
Ref's:
CTV: Smitherman the target of 'homophobic' ads
680 News: Homophobic advertisements target Smitherman
The ads were targeted towards Toronto’s ‘unenlightened’ immigrant populations whose religious (Muslim) and cultural ‘value systems’ do not include or embrace ‘homosexuality’ as being acceptable. In some of their home countries, they go so far as stoning ‘gays’ to death.
Funny, isn’t it?
Could George Smitherman’s previous, election ‘strength’ in his geographically-narrow, provincial riding of ‘Toronto Centre’ become his foremost ‘weakness’ when spread completely across Toronto's multicultural city.
Smitherman’s past provincial riding, election victories in 1999, 2003 and 2007 were, for most part, through the overwhelming support from his most-natural constituency, the solid, voting-block of ‘Toronto’s gays’.
Yesterday, with no time or forum in which to respond, George’s 'same-sex marriage' to Christopher Peloso, instantly became a potential, unpredicted nightmare. He may have never dreamed about this when planning to face ballot boxes across today’s 'complete Toronto' from his narrow, 'gay-voting fortress'.
Even if Smitherman’s lifestyle had been raised earlier, which it respectfully was not by any candidate, how could George have possibly handled it against the ‘belief systems’ of unenlightened, homophobic Torontonians?
If this past weekend’s signs and radio spots had appeared earlier in the campaign, would Torontonians have been witnessing major fights between the polls two, campaign leaders, Rob Ford vs. Joe Pantalone, Rob Ford vs. Rocco Rossi, Rob Ford vs. Sarah Thomson, Rob Ford vs. Adam Giambrone or Rob Ford vs. Giorgio Mammoliti?
One wonders.
Tonight’s election results may tell a lot.
Will Ford's "neck 'n neck", but still polled 'lead' over Smitherman be translated into a major victory for the penny-pinching, "end the gravy train", Councilor from Etobicoke through rejections of George by the 'last-minute-reminded, Muslim community'?
Ref's:
CTV: Smitherman the target of 'homophobic' ads
680 News: Homophobic advertisements target Smitherman
Sunday, October 24, 2010
BILL C-48. THE SERVING OF CONCURRENT SENTENCES
The hand-cuffing and shackling of judges, in being limited to awarding criminals 'concurrent' sentences, may be removed.
The sentencing of criminals to serve 'consecutive' terms is in the works.
"Williams could have faced tougher parole terms" (cbc)
The sentencing of criminals to serve 'consecutive' terms is in the works.
"Williams could have faced tougher parole terms" (cbc)
Thursday, October 21, 2010
WHERE "LIFE" IS NOT 'LIFE': THE SENTENCING OF COL. WILLIAMS
After two life sentences were given to Col. Russell Williams of CFB Trenton, Andy Lloyd, brother of murdered Jessica Lloyd said, “So long as he dies in jail I'm happy".
Mr. Lloyd should not be overly “happy”.
Williams was not sentenced to spending ‘the rest of his life’ or 'two' in prison. He received two, 25-year sentences to be served ‘concurrently’. This means that Williams, now 47, can apply for parole at 72 years of age.
This is one heck of lot different from having two, 25-year sentences to be served ‘consecutively’ where parole would not be available until he reaches 97.
Canada’s weak-kneed, milquetoast laws and handcuffed, judicial system have rewarded this perverted, murderous animal a ‘glimmer of hope’, which murdered Jessica Lloyd and Marie-France Comeau were not given. Even as slight as it may seem to be today, Williams may not die in prison.
As the police-integrator of confessed-murderer Russell Williams was open to produce a map to locate the terrorized, raped and suffocated body of a victim, I am equally open to produce a rope that would neatly fit around Williams’ neck, before a trap door opens below.
To even ‘think’ that Russell Williams has been given the slightest ‘glimmer of hope’ to apply for ‘parole’ at 72, is a judicial atrocity.
EDITOR: Of interest, it was just announced on CBC TV that all physical evidence against Williams will now 'be destroyed'. That'll cancel any potential, other 'unknown' murder cases or break and enters against the animal if he is ever released on parole.
Mr. Lloyd should not be overly “happy”.
Williams was not sentenced to spending ‘the rest of his life’ or 'two' in prison. He received two, 25-year sentences to be served ‘concurrently’. This means that Williams, now 47, can apply for parole at 72 years of age.
This is one heck of lot different from having two, 25-year sentences to be served ‘consecutively’ where parole would not be available until he reaches 97.
Canada’s weak-kneed, milquetoast laws and handcuffed, judicial system have rewarded this perverted, murderous animal a ‘glimmer of hope’, which murdered Jessica Lloyd and Marie-France Comeau were not given. Even as slight as it may seem to be today, Williams may not die in prison.
As the police-integrator of confessed-murderer Russell Williams was open to produce a map to locate the terrorized, raped and suffocated body of a victim, I am equally open to produce a rope that would neatly fit around Williams’ neck, before a trap door opens below.
To even ‘think’ that Russell Williams has been given the slightest ‘glimmer of hope’ to apply for ‘parole’ at 72, is a judicial atrocity.
EDITOR: Of interest, it was just announced on CBC TV that all physical evidence against Williams will now 'be destroyed'. That'll cancel any potential, other 'unknown' murder cases or break and enters against the animal if he is ever released on parole.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
CANADA LOOSES SEAT AT THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL
For the first time in it’s history, Canada was not elected to sit as a non-permanent member of the UN’s Security Council even though Canada was reported to be this 3rd-world, debating society’s ‘5th largest contributor’.
Now, it’s ‘blame-game’ time.
Canada’s Conservative-Harper government initially attributed this failure to the previous words of the Leader of the Opposition, the polled, personally ‘low ranking’, the Liberal’s second-in-a-row, un-saleable professor, Michael Grant Ignatieff.
While ‘Iggy’ may have done his job as ‘opposition’ and questioned Harper’s foreign policies, this flimsy excuse ‘just didn’t have legs’, no matter how much the Conservative’s talking heads pumped it out. There was a second and third shoe to drop.
The next day, out came information which may have been closer to the truth.
The Harper government had shifted it focus and foreign aid to Central and South America to the detriment and loss of Africa.
With no gratitude for the past decades of filling corrupt, African leaders’ Swiss bank accounts; the African countries appeared to be together in voting against Canada.
This was joined by the suspicion of secret, ‘block voting’ by the European Union for one of their own, Portugal or Germany.
In the Middle East, Canada’s backing of Israel turned-off votes from its freedom-loving, Muslim paradises. This was followed up with their (supposed) criticism for Canada not getting an alleged child-terrorist and killer of a US medic out of Gitmo.
On this latter excuse, I’ve got 'a slight problem'. It is coming from countries where short-justice, uncivilized lashings, stonings-to-death and the chopping off or hands is still practiced.
Yesterday, another ‘closer to the truth’ was updated with blame falling on Canada’s largest trading partner, the USA and their ‘lack of lobbying’ for their northern neighbour. Apparently, the Obama administration had felt the Canada’s election to the Security Council was ‘in the bag’ and done nothing to make it happen.
What’s next?
The Harper Conservative government is quickly running out of threads to explain this monumental, historic failure.
No matter what is the next ‘blame installment’ is thought up, VOTP’s initial ‘bull-in-a-china-shop’ approach would be to immediately and grossly reduce contributions to the UN and cut off all foreign and humanitarian aid to anything ‘African’. The closure of all of Canada’s military bases in Europe would be next in line, reducing the EU’s defences against the potential of a rising of the Russian Bear.
As for the new, USA whipping boy, a polite, ‘we also thought that we had it in the bag’ would be sufficient.
More realistically and back to Earth, the Harper government should face ‘the dead-on truth’, do an internal self-assessment and discover where the true ‘blame’ falls.
If anything, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister and all of his silly servants, who handled the Security Council campaign file, should be sent to Purgatory to contemplate their politically-inept misjudgments and sins.
The final buck stops with Canada’s Foreign Affairs incompetencies, plus those of their ‘ultimate boss’, who led Canada to lose its historic, customary seat on the UN Security Council.
History will not be recording that it was Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon or some departmental ‘sillies’ who had failed in winning the position, history will write that it was ‘the Harper Government’ who accomplished this ‘near-impossible feat’.
Now, it’s ‘blame-game’ time.
Canada’s Conservative-Harper government initially attributed this failure to the previous words of the Leader of the Opposition, the polled, personally ‘low ranking’, the Liberal’s second-in-a-row, un-saleable professor, Michael Grant Ignatieff.
While ‘Iggy’ may have done his job as ‘opposition’ and questioned Harper’s foreign policies, this flimsy excuse ‘just didn’t have legs’, no matter how much the Conservative’s talking heads pumped it out. There was a second and third shoe to drop.
The next day, out came information which may have been closer to the truth.
The Harper government had shifted it focus and foreign aid to Central and South America to the detriment and loss of Africa.
With no gratitude for the past decades of filling corrupt, African leaders’ Swiss bank accounts; the African countries appeared to be together in voting against Canada.
This was joined by the suspicion of secret, ‘block voting’ by the European Union for one of their own, Portugal or Germany.
In the Middle East, Canada’s backing of Israel turned-off votes from its freedom-loving, Muslim paradises. This was followed up with their (supposed) criticism for Canada not getting an alleged child-terrorist and killer of a US medic out of Gitmo.
On this latter excuse, I’ve got 'a slight problem'. It is coming from countries where short-justice, uncivilized lashings, stonings-to-death and the chopping off or hands is still practiced.
Yesterday, another ‘closer to the truth’ was updated with blame falling on Canada’s largest trading partner, the USA and their ‘lack of lobbying’ for their northern neighbour. Apparently, the Obama administration had felt the Canada’s election to the Security Council was ‘in the bag’ and done nothing to make it happen.
What’s next?
The Harper Conservative government is quickly running out of threads to explain this monumental, historic failure.
No matter what is the next ‘blame installment’ is thought up, VOTP’s initial ‘bull-in-a-china-shop’ approach would be to immediately and grossly reduce contributions to the UN and cut off all foreign and humanitarian aid to anything ‘African’. The closure of all of Canada’s military bases in Europe would be next in line, reducing the EU’s defences against the potential of a rising of the Russian Bear.
As for the new, USA whipping boy, a polite, ‘we also thought that we had it in the bag’ would be sufficient.
More realistically and back to Earth, the Harper government should face ‘the dead-on truth’, do an internal self-assessment and discover where the true ‘blame’ falls.
If anything, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister and all of his silly servants, who handled the Security Council campaign file, should be sent to Purgatory to contemplate their politically-inept misjudgments and sins.
The final buck stops with Canada’s Foreign Affairs incompetencies, plus those of their ‘ultimate boss’, who led Canada to lose its historic, customary seat on the UN Security Council.
History will not be recording that it was Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon or some departmental ‘sillies’ who had failed in winning the position, history will write that it was ‘the Harper Government’ who accomplished this ‘near-impossible feat’.
Labels: HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, ISRAEL, MICHAEL IGNATIEFF
THE USA'S 'DRAFT DODGERS' OF 2010?
Soldiers from the USA’s military are going AWOL, “Absent With Out Leave", crossing into Canada and declaring ‘refugee status’.
Nostalgic and reminiscent of 'the draft dodgers' of the late 60’s and early 70’s, AWOLs are being embraced by the Canadian sons and daughter of that era’s anti-nuke, commie-duped peaceniks. The only problem in optics is that these new groups of Americans are 180 degrees different for yesteryears.
1/ They were not drafted directly out of the graduation classes from the 60’s high schools of the United States.
2/ They did not receive draft notices, since there is no more ‘military draft’ in the USA.
3/ Of their own 'free will', these ‘war resisters’ had signed up, sworn allegiance and joined the USA's military forces with a commitment to kill or be killed in the name of 'freedom', the United States of America and to be cannon fodder for it's Military-Industrial-Complex.
There is one hell of a difference between yesterday’s ‘draft dodgers’ who had no choice and today’s ‘war resisters’ who had freely applied for the job.
One question should be asked of each ‘resister’: “Did you not sign a term contact with the US military to kill or be killed”?
Since the answer can only be a resounding ‘yes’, “go home and complete your commitment. Canada does not need people who apply for jobs and then quit, breaking contractual obligations that were freely agreed upon”.
As with our Canadian military forces' men and women, if you never pictured yourself ending up in a body bag, then you should never have joined. Sorry to tell you but 'the odd, body bag' goes with the job and territory that both of you 'freely' joined.
Wit due respect for Canada’s largest trading partner, with this group of contract-breakers, ‘Yankee, Go Home’. This is not the 1960’s.
Nostalgic and reminiscent of 'the draft dodgers' of the late 60’s and early 70’s, AWOLs are being embraced by the Canadian sons and daughter of that era’s anti-nuke, commie-duped peaceniks. The only problem in optics is that these new groups of Americans are 180 degrees different for yesteryears.
1/ They were not drafted directly out of the graduation classes from the 60’s high schools of the United States.
2/ They did not receive draft notices, since there is no more ‘military draft’ in the USA.
3/ Of their own 'free will', these ‘war resisters’ had signed up, sworn allegiance and joined the USA's military forces with a commitment to kill or be killed in the name of 'freedom', the United States of America and to be cannon fodder for it's Military-Industrial-Complex.
There is one hell of a difference between yesterday’s ‘draft dodgers’ who had no choice and today’s ‘war resisters’ who had freely applied for the job.
One question should be asked of each ‘resister’: “Did you not sign a term contact with the US military to kill or be killed”?
Since the answer can only be a resounding ‘yes’, “go home and complete your commitment. Canada does not need people who apply for jobs and then quit, breaking contractual obligations that were freely agreed upon”.
As with our Canadian military forces' men and women, if you never pictured yourself ending up in a body bag, then you should never have joined. Sorry to tell you but 'the odd, body bag' goes with the job and territory that both of you 'freely' joined.
Wit due respect for Canada’s largest trading partner, with this group of contract-breakers, ‘Yankee, Go Home’. This is not the 1960’s.
Labels: HARPER/CONSERVATIVES, IMMIGRATION, MILITARY INDUSTIAL COMPLEX., OBSERVATIONS
Thursday, October 14, 2010
"HAVE A BREAK TODAY" AND LIVE FOREVER
(NOTE: For the full story, please open and use the links)
Where science has failed, it looks as if McDonald's has discovered the secret to eternal life?
Now you can “have a break today” and tomorrow and next week and next month, even a half a year from now, all with ‘the same’ burger and chips.
Where science has failed, it looks as if McDonald's has discovered the secret to eternal life?
Now you can “have a break today” and tomorrow and next week and next month, even a half a year from now, all with ‘the same’ burger and chips.
Pictures released this week show absolutely no decompostion of a 'Happy Meal', even after sitting for over 180-days. It is exactly the same as when it was purchase.
Wow, what possibilities.
Since 'we are what we eat', if we stick to a diet, totally of 'Happy Meals', we may be able to never age and live forever just like this Happy Meal.
What a golden opportunity for the marketing-slogan geniuses at McDonalds. I can hear it now. “Have a break today and live forever”.
There is the added bonus that, unlike today's religions which require 'belief', McDonald's promise has actual, photographic proof.
Soon, across the entire world, children could be badgering and begging, “Mommy, take me to McDonalds. I never want to ever get old and look like you”.
If marketed well, the ‘golden arches’ could become the main symbol of the next religion for ‘eternal life’, much like ‘The Cross’ is to Christians.
If sold exceedingly well to today’s world, Ray Croc and the two McDonald brothers could be revered as ‘the second comings’ of Moses, Jesus and Mohammed.
Under the guidance and diets of the golden arches, religious strife, conflict and terrorism would cease.
In the names of ‘world peace’, ‘eternal tranquility’, 'churches without pedophiles' and only 'one happy clown' named Ronald, have a break today with 'a Happy Meal' and many, many, many more.
Special 'thanks' should go to 'our protectors', the federal, health regulators of Canada and the United States, for allowing McDonalds to create and sell such 'wonderful, safe and life-extending products' for ingestion by the public.
May Croc and the McDonald brothers blessings fall upon all of us.
I'll be seeing you under those golden arches - potential golden roads to Heaven itself.
(204 words)
Saturday, October 09, 2010
"GETTING RID OF BUDGETS" (TAXPAYER'S MONEY)
Each federal budget reminds me of the annual, ‘almost-ritualized’, spending frenzy of Canadian taxpayer’s dollars. This takes place at the end of each fiscal year by the taxpayer’s “Government of Canada’s civil service’” “Spend, spend, spend” becomes each civil servant manager’s focus.
The reason for the ‘shell-out’ is based on the misguided advancement criteria for each public service manager’ salary and designation, They are enhanced with every boost in his/her ‘signing authority’. “The more one can sign for, the more are the rewards”. The mechanism appears to be ‘the fastest way’ to advance up the ranks of the civil service.
Add the “getting rid of budgets” (taxpayer’s money) to support renowned, civil service ‘empire-building’ and you have a volatile model that continues to suck Canadian taxpayers dry.
Elected representatives turn ‘blind eyes’ on the almost-incestuous, budget-draining practice.
Never wishing to ruffle the feathers of the civil service, they become ‘part of the problem’, definitely not ‘the solution’.
For both, getting rid of budgets” appears as an annual, monetary rape and reckless squandering of taxpayers’ money. But nobody has ever said anything. Shamefully, it is viewed as being ‘business as usual’.
Some years ago, a buddy and retiring, senior civil service manager, ‘Gil’, explained the civil service mindset to me. It goes this way: Once a government budget has been approved and allocated, each civil servant manager considers that “it belongs to him or she”, “to do with it what they may”. This includes spending every last cent, even if estimated programmes are cancelled, or interim adjustments and reductions did not require it.
My retiring pal further explained that departmental estimates, delivered to politicians, are ‘naturally inflated’ to protect the validity of the projections of civil service managers. “We would never wish to be looking stupid, be embarrassed and have to go back for interim funding”.
Gil added: “Politicians and governments come and go. They are only momentary. We are here forever. We take care of ourselves”.
Just how bad for taxpayers is ‘getting rid of budgets’?
One year, in the late 1970’s, the twelve monthly figures of the annual budget of the USA’s federal government came to light. The monthly figures demonstrated that spending was ‘six-times higher’ during the last month of their fiscal year than on the average of the previous eleven. Since then, the USA has stopped releasing these monthly numbers. At that time, monthly figures for the Canadian government were not available as they still remain today.
With civil servants being ‘civil servants’, systems being ‘systems, coupled with my personal experiences, reaching the conclusion is that each government’s “servants” and ‘systems’ operate in much the same way, is not difficult to reach.
Today, facing this year’s $50+ Billion deficit, to add to Canada’s $500 Billion debt, one would think that, of all governments, Harper’s business-minded ‘conservatives’ would have monthly expenditure figures readily available. Every private sector business does. They are vital in running any business, private or public.
Think again.
They don’t.
Statistics Canada does not possess the monthly figures and the Ministry of Finance either does not, will not or can not respond to requests for them. Does it take a genious to figure out what they would expose and why they won't?
So, here we are in March, 2010 with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty wincing over a $50+ Billion deficit and doing a cross-country, selling tour of his Harper government’s budget.
If any politician had any control over their civil servants, dealing with a deficit and constantly reducing Canada’s accumulated ($500 Billion) debt would be bloodless and easy. But, maybe that is it. It is too obvious and too simple. It would mean having a ‘responsible government’ who, for the taxpayers, had the guts to take control and end the yearly, repugnant, ‘getting-rid-of-budget’ dance. It would also mean ‘a major change’ to the career pathways, rankings and rewards of the civil service.
The retiring, civil servant manager ‘Gil’ had added, “We are untouchable. Just keep paying your taxes. You can never change it.”
If we could “change it” and if the 6-times spending figure is applicable today and not larger, Canada’s yearly, federal expenditure of taxpayer’s money could be reduced by 29% without any programme cancellations, provincial transfer reductions, salary reductions, freezes, additional taxes, etc.
To put this into perspective, for every $100 Billion in current federal spending, 29 Billion, Canadian taxpayer dollars would not be blown away on ’getting-rid-of-budgets.
In February and March of next year, the ritualized, spending frenzy of getting rid of Canadian taxpayer’s dollars will continue.
Meanwhile, by doing nothing, fellow Canadians should stand proud, be smiling and happy for loading much of their Liberal of Conservative government’s yearly deficits and gross debt on their children, grandchildren and their babies.
It not, they should demand that monthly expenditure figures be released by their Ministry of Finance, Stats Canada and, after vomiting, raise hell.
-30-
BACKGROUND: Before running for Parliament in 1988, from 1969 to ’75, I had been an Ottawa-based supplier of contract engineering personnel to both industry and the Government of Canada. I had been a happy, appreciative, annual, non-bidding receiver of the annual ‘getting-rid-of-budget’ and taxpayer dollars. It did not matter how non-productive, insensible and ridiculous the civil servants’ ‘instant projects’ may have been.
(After becoming active in politics, I became focused on this annual exercise and wrote a brief paper on this monumental rip-off and wastage of taxpayer’s dollars with ‘recommendations’ on how to change it. These were implemented and being tested in two departments by the brief, 1979 government of Prime Minister, Joe Clark before they were immediately cancelled with Trudeau’s return to power).
The reason for the ‘shell-out’ is based on the misguided advancement criteria for each public service manager’ salary and designation, They are enhanced with every boost in his/her ‘signing authority’. “The more one can sign for, the more are the rewards”. The mechanism appears to be ‘the fastest way’ to advance up the ranks of the civil service.
Add the “getting rid of budgets” (taxpayer’s money) to support renowned, civil service ‘empire-building’ and you have a volatile model that continues to suck Canadian taxpayers dry.
Elected representatives turn ‘blind eyes’ on the almost-incestuous, budget-draining practice.
Never wishing to ruffle the feathers of the civil service, they become ‘part of the problem’, definitely not ‘the solution’.
For both, getting rid of budgets” appears as an annual, monetary rape and reckless squandering of taxpayers’ money. But nobody has ever said anything. Shamefully, it is viewed as being ‘business as usual’.
Some years ago, a buddy and retiring, senior civil service manager, ‘Gil’, explained the civil service mindset to me. It goes this way: Once a government budget has been approved and allocated, each civil servant manager considers that “it belongs to him or she”, “to do with it what they may”. This includes spending every last cent, even if estimated programmes are cancelled, or interim adjustments and reductions did not require it.
My retiring pal further explained that departmental estimates, delivered to politicians, are ‘naturally inflated’ to protect the validity of the projections of civil service managers. “We would never wish to be looking stupid, be embarrassed and have to go back for interim funding”.
Gil added: “Politicians and governments come and go. They are only momentary. We are here forever. We take care of ourselves”.
Just how bad for taxpayers is ‘getting rid of budgets’?
One year, in the late 1970’s, the twelve monthly figures of the annual budget of the USA’s federal government came to light. The monthly figures demonstrated that spending was ‘six-times higher’ during the last month of their fiscal year than on the average of the previous eleven. Since then, the USA has stopped releasing these monthly numbers. At that time, monthly figures for the Canadian government were not available as they still remain today.
With civil servants being ‘civil servants’, systems being ‘systems, coupled with my personal experiences, reaching the conclusion is that each government’s “servants” and ‘systems’ operate in much the same way, is not difficult to reach.
Today, facing this year’s $50+ Billion deficit, to add to Canada’s $500 Billion debt, one would think that, of all governments, Harper’s business-minded ‘conservatives’ would have monthly expenditure figures readily available. Every private sector business does. They are vital in running any business, private or public.
Think again.
They don’t.
Statistics Canada does not possess the monthly figures and the Ministry of Finance either does not, will not or can not respond to requests for them. Does it take a genious to figure out what they would expose and why they won't?
So, here we are in March, 2010 with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty wincing over a $50+ Billion deficit and doing a cross-country, selling tour of his Harper government’s budget.
If any politician had any control over their civil servants, dealing with a deficit and constantly reducing Canada’s accumulated ($500 Billion) debt would be bloodless and easy. But, maybe that is it. It is too obvious and too simple. It would mean having a ‘responsible government’ who, for the taxpayers, had the guts to take control and end the yearly, repugnant, ‘getting-rid-of-budget’ dance. It would also mean ‘a major change’ to the career pathways, rankings and rewards of the civil service.
The retiring, civil servant manager ‘Gil’ had added, “We are untouchable. Just keep paying your taxes. You can never change it.”
If we could “change it” and if the 6-times spending figure is applicable today and not larger, Canada’s yearly, federal expenditure of taxpayer’s money could be reduced by 29% without any programme cancellations, provincial transfer reductions, salary reductions, freezes, additional taxes, etc.
To put this into perspective, for every $100 Billion in current federal spending, 29 Billion, Canadian taxpayer dollars would not be blown away on ’getting-rid-of-budgets.
In February and March of next year, the ritualized, spending frenzy of getting rid of Canadian taxpayer’s dollars will continue.
Meanwhile, by doing nothing, fellow Canadians should stand proud, be smiling and happy for loading much of their Liberal of Conservative government’s yearly deficits and gross debt on their children, grandchildren and their babies.
It not, they should demand that monthly expenditure figures be released by their Ministry of Finance, Stats Canada and, after vomiting, raise hell.
-30-
BACKGROUND: Before running for Parliament in 1988, from 1969 to ’75, I had been an Ottawa-based supplier of contract engineering personnel to both industry and the Government of Canada. I had been a happy, appreciative, annual, non-bidding receiver of the annual ‘getting-rid-of-budget’ and taxpayer dollars. It did not matter how non-productive, insensible and ridiculous the civil servants’ ‘instant projects’ may have been.
(After becoming active in politics, I became focused on this annual exercise and wrote a brief paper on this monumental rip-off and wastage of taxpayer’s dollars with ‘recommendations’ on how to change it. These were implemented and being tested in two departments by the brief, 1979 government of Prime Minister, Joe Clark before they were immediately cancelled with Trudeau’s return to power).
Thursday, October 07, 2010
THE USA: "A MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX"?
Here’s a pie chart of the USA budget for 2008. Much of the spending was 'locked-in' as part of on-going programmes such as social security.
Outside of the 'locked-in' programmes where Congress can has control over spending, one must ask, 'does a Military Industrial Complex exist in "The Land of the Free, Home of The Brave"?
Is the Pope a Roman Catholic?
For the United States of America, from a congressional and economic standpoint, ‘Defence’ is the overwhelming leading sector in discretionary spending.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower coined a phase as a warning about what he saw as the USA’s largest threat, the “Military Industrial Complex”.
Since 'Ike', the MIC, with it’s presidential and congressional patsies, has fed off the USA being in a state of ‘almost continuous’ conflict and war.
How many conflicts and wars have actually been created to feed the unquenchable thirst of these major employers and campaign donors?
Iraq and Afghaistan immediately to mind.
"War" has become 'the norm'.
Outside of the 'locked-in' programmes where Congress can has control over spending, one must ask, 'does a Military Industrial Complex exist in "The Land of the Free, Home of The Brave"?
Is the Pope a Roman Catholic?
Here's what the USA congress has 'actual control' over in spending.
For the United States of America, from a congressional and economic standpoint, ‘Defence’ is the overwhelming leading sector in discretionary spending.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower coined a phase as a warning about what he saw as the USA’s largest threat, the “Military Industrial Complex”.
Since 'Ike', the MIC, with it’s presidential and congressional patsies, has fed off the USA being in a state of ‘almost continuous’ conflict and war.
How many conflicts and wars have actually been created to feed the unquenchable thirst of these major employers and campaign donors?
Iraq and Afghaistan immediately to mind.
"War" has become 'the norm'.
Labels: BARACK, OBSERVATIONS, US DEMOCRATS, US REPUBLICAN PARTY
Wednesday, October 06, 2010
THE POPULATION BOMB - BY THE BILLIONS
When Columbus discovered America, the world's population was less than a half of a billion people
In 1650, 500-million people were breathing and consuming all at the same time.
154 years later, in 1804, the number doubled to 1-billion people.
124-years later, in 1927, the number doubled again: 2-billion human hearts were pumping.
33 short years later, in 1960, 3-billion.
15 even-shorter years later, in 1975, 4-billion.
1990 saw 5.3-billion.
In 1999, the 6-billion gunnel mark was reached.
12-years later, in 2011, another billion will sneak in, taking us to 7 billion people.
It is predicted that in 2025, 8-billion.
If predictions are correct, by 2050, an illustrious 9.4-billion will be breathing and consuming all at the same time.
Through procreation and longer life spans, the inmates are running the asylum.
World Population by Year
1000: 275 million
1500: 450 million
1650: 500 million
1750: 700 million
1804: 1 billion
1850: 1.2 billion
1900: 1.6 billion
1927: 2 billion
1950: 2.55 billion
1955: 2.8 billion
1960: 3 billion
1965: 3.3 billion
1970: 3.7 billion
1975: 4 billion
1980: 4.5 billion
1985: 4.85 billion
1990: 5.3 billion
1995: 5.7 billion
1999: 6 billion
2006: 6.5 billion
2009: 6.8 billion
2011: 7 billion
2025: 8 billion
2050: 9.4 billion
In 1650, 500-million people were breathing and consuming all at the same time.
154 years later, in 1804, the number doubled to 1-billion people.
124-years later, in 1927, the number doubled again: 2-billion human hearts were pumping.
33 short years later, in 1960, 3-billion.
15 even-shorter years later, in 1975, 4-billion.
1990 saw 5.3-billion.
In 1999, the 6-billion gunnel mark was reached.
12-years later, in 2011, another billion will sneak in, taking us to 7 billion people.
It is predicted that in 2025, 8-billion.
If predictions are correct, by 2050, an illustrious 9.4-billion will be breathing and consuming all at the same time.
Through procreation and longer life spans, the inmates are running the asylum.
World Population by Year
1000: 275 million
1500: 450 million
1650: 500 million
1750: 700 million
1804: 1 billion
1850: 1.2 billion
1900: 1.6 billion
1927: 2 billion
1950: 2.55 billion
1955: 2.8 billion
1960: 3 billion
1965: 3.3 billion
1970: 3.7 billion
1975: 4 billion
1980: 4.5 billion
1985: 4.85 billion
1990: 5.3 billion
1995: 5.7 billion
1999: 6 billion
2006: 6.5 billion
2009: 6.8 billion
2011: 7 billion
2025: 8 billion
2050: 9.4 billion
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
HEALTHCARE PULLS AWAY FROM ECONOMY AS TOP NATIONAL ISSUE
Strange, isn't it?
While holier-that-thou Canadians with their socialized, birth-to-death, health-care system, smugly look south at the chaos in USA health-care, they still do not appear to be 'the happy campers' that they should be, not by a long shot.
("Nanos Poll" below)
Canada's 'single-tier system', only shared with the two other 'health-care paradises' of North Korea and Cuba, seems to have Canucks concerned, very concerned, as a matter of fact, 'concerned' far above all other national issues such as "jobs/economy' or "the environment":
The opportunity to be 'a white knight' riding to the rescue of Canadians, clearly exists
With an upcoming, federal election looming in the background, which political party will 'bite the bullet', address and revamp Canada's health-care delivery system, or at least, its perception by the public at large?
While heath-care is under provincial jurisdiction, the feds have their hands on much of the funding through fed/prov transfer payments and the administration of the "Canada Health Act"
This Act "specifies the conditions and criteria with which the provincial and territorial health insurance programs must conform in order to receive federal transfer payments under the Canada Health Transfer". Ottawa, definitely, has clout.
It is predictable that all federal political parties will attempt to run away from dealing with this 'sacred cow', but they certainly can't hide. Thanks to the polling of Nanos Research, the figures of 'concern' are there, screaming,out, in glaring black and white.
In brief, here's the polling from the Nanos Poll ...
Top Issue Question: What is your most important NATIONAL issue of concern? [Unprompted]
The numbers in parenthesis denote the change from the last Nanos National Omnibus survey completed June 3rd, 2010.
Top Five Issues:
Healthcare: 34.9% (+11.8)
Jobs/economy: 18.8% (-0.4)
The environment: 6.6% (-6.0)
High taxes: 5.0% (-0.3)
Education: 3.7% (+1.2)
Unsure: 10.2% (-3.1)
(Polling details are at http://www.nanosresearch.com/main.asp )
While holier-that-thou Canadians with their socialized, birth-to-death, health-care system, smugly look south at the chaos in USA health-care, they still do not appear to be 'the happy campers' that they should be, not by a long shot.
("Nanos Poll" below)
Canada's 'single-tier system', only shared with the two other 'health-care paradises' of North Korea and Cuba, seems to have Canucks concerned, very concerned, as a matter of fact, 'concerned' far above all other national issues such as "jobs/economy' or "the environment":
The opportunity to be 'a white knight' riding to the rescue of Canadians, clearly exists
With an upcoming, federal election looming in the background, which political party will 'bite the bullet', address and revamp Canada's health-care delivery system, or at least, its perception by the public at large?
While heath-care is under provincial jurisdiction, the feds have their hands on much of the funding through fed/prov transfer payments and the administration of the "Canada Health Act"
This Act "specifies the conditions and criteria with which the provincial and territorial health insurance programs must conform in order to receive federal transfer payments under the Canada Health Transfer". Ottawa, definitely, has clout.
It is predictable that all federal political parties will attempt to run away from dealing with this 'sacred cow', but they certainly can't hide. Thanks to the polling of Nanos Research, the figures of 'concern' are there, screaming,out, in glaring black and white.
In brief, here's the polling from the Nanos Poll ...
Top Issue Question: What is your most important NATIONAL issue of concern? [Unprompted]
The numbers in parenthesis denote the change from the last Nanos National Omnibus survey completed June 3rd, 2010.
Top Five Issues:
Healthcare: 34.9% (+11.8)
Jobs/economy: 18.8% (-0.4)
The environment: 6.6% (-6.0)
High taxes: 5.0% (-0.3)
Education: 3.7% (+1.2)
Unsure: 10.2% (-3.1)
(Polling details are at http://www.nanosresearch.com/main.asp )
