I'll say it again.. McGuinty's an idiot

So Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has rejected calls to defend the Alberta oil sands, saying the higher Canadian dollar has "knocked the wind" out of Ontario's manufacturing sector.

Hogwash.  Utter hogwash.

The American dollar is weak and would be weaker if the Euro wasn't as equally weak.  Canada's economy is stronger and more stable due to smart federal fiscal policy. 

So essentially, by not defending one of the key Canadian resource exports, you're wanting oil sands development to decline.

If that happened, where oh where, dear have-not province led by a failed fiscal manager, where oh where would all that federal money come from that you so want to balance your crappy books with?

Would it be from the billions of dollars that come out of the Alberta oil sands in federal transfers?

Oh sorry, that money already goes to Quebec.  Get in line, Dalton!

Alberta cannot afford Redford

She's going to raise taxes rather than cut wasteful spending in her own gov't. That's what a "review" is. Which taxes?-- Income, corporate and she'll reintroduce healthcare premiums which hurt lower income folks the most, right at a time when Alberta's economy and unemployment rate is tops. We have a job shortage and by raising corporate taxes, the only jobs saved will be gov't ones.

Premier Mom thinks people who work hard and long hours that make over $200k should pay a higher rate when that is the opposite reason why so many folks flock here to find good work.

We should look no further than Ontario and BC to witness the economic stagnation resulting from high taxes, yet that appears to be the model which Mom wishes to emulate.

She should look at our immediate neighbours East, who used to lag behind.

At her rate, Rider Nation will be stealing jobs and investment from us.

When former premier Ed Stemlach raised royalty rates and booze taxes, at least he realized how dumb that was and repelled them both, along with eliminating Health Care Premiums.

You'd think his successor and party would have learned something.

When Don Getty did the same, including raise spending, Klein had to undo all of those policies and put Alberta on the map of world fiscal envy.

With current gov't spending at a record rate, that envy will soon be gone.

This "anything but conservative" party is so entrenched into the gov't, they've proven that "absolute power corrupts absolutely". Fifty examples of illegal donations from school boards, municipalities, and other public groups have surfaced.

It is time to throw the bums out.

40 years is enough.

God Save The Queen!

To celebrate Her Majesty's 60th Diamond Jubilee, today I am flying to one of her little islands in the British West Indies. I'm on holidays for 2 weeks in Turks and Caicos, a British Overseas Territory, where 2 years ago, after dismissing the local gov't for theft and corruption and appointing an interim governor, I believe the British will be allowing the Islanders to hold elections. Proof why the British Monarchy system works.

Aren't you sick of the Alberta PCs yet?

Redford's PCs spent $70,000 of taxpayer money on a caucus retreat to Jasper Park Lodge.  A $100,000 province-wide tour campaign.  Fifty illegal donations to the PCAA. 

The election is supposedly coming.  When is that again?  Oh, right. We don't know.

40 years is enough.

NDP philosophical contradition

1. Jobs

• NDP support labour unions, and jobs with high wages, benefits and pensions.
• KeystoneXL pipeline would provide those jobs not just to build the pipeline but many more.
• NDP oppose the TransCanada KeystoneXL pipeline due to preventing expansion of the oil sands.

2. Health Care

• NDP want to expand social programs and have more money for health care.
• Oil and gas revenues provide billions to the government coffers to pay for social programs and health care.
• NDP oppose building the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and expanding our markets to Asia due to environmental reasons.

Yep, makes a lot of sense to me!

Coming soon to Alberta: Drinking age to 19 and ski helmets

Members of the Alberta PC caucus have continually tried to discuss raising the drinking age to 19 or 21 within caucus.  It's been shut down in the past.

But with Premier Mom at the helm, and her copy-cat policies, my gut tells me that when she wins the next election, and she will folks, that they will introduce two measures in 2012.

1.  Raise the drinking age to 19 to come in-line with our two neighbouring provinces.
2.  Make ski/snowboard helmets mandatory.

Both of which I'm vehemently against, as I believe it will make things worse.

Raising the drinking age will push fresh out of high school and freshman university students to take their booze underground.  They'll still easily obtain it.  The problem with booze hasn't been this neophyte age group, which statistics show, alcohol vehicular accidents are in the late 20's--likely because they have money and a new car.  We already have stringent laws for new drivers. 

I realize the link above shows that the Premier and the Sol Gen have just announced that they have no plans to raise the drinking age.  But as we know in Alberta, that could change.  And we also had no idea that Redford, once elected to the PC leadership and becoming premier, that she would plan to introduce .05 b.a.c. property seizure legislation either.  I simply don't trust her and I think her short record thus far shows that she shouldn't be trusted.

Onto ski helmets...

I ski several times a year and have been skiing in the Alberta, BC and Montana mountains for over 30 years.  I have never once wore a helmet. Sure I've wiped out a bunch of times, but no damage.  I especially love Spring skiing and taking the toque off to enjoy the warmth of the sun.  My many friends who wear a helmet, mostly snowboarders I might add, swear by it.  Good for them.  I've never wore one, have never even come close to hitting a tree.  Running into someone, yes?  Snowboarders who turn quickly into their blind side.  But it's never happened.  Maybe it's because I'm responsible and careful.  If I began doing extreme stuff, I would definitely wear one.  But I'm not, so I don't see the point.  It's a choice.

Now notice that?  Are skiers and snowboarders willing to take MORE risks BECAUSE they think they are protected by their helmet?  Look at how some people drive 4x4s in the winter.  I never saw so many 4x4s in the highway ditch than last summer.  We should make 4x4 drivers wear helmets. 

This is a ridiculous law because people also die from walking and falling on ice.  Should we then mandate that if you go outside in the winter, you're required to wear snowshoes or spikes?   And do we even have laws for ATV and snowmobile drivers to wear helmets, yet?

Where does all this end?

I'll say it again and again and again. 

You can't fix stupid.

That is, unless you decide to vote this non-conservative PC government out come Spring.

40 years is enough.

Official bilingualism's failure

Why can't more people recognize that official bilingualism has failed and has been way too costly.

Hey, I took francais in high school but admittedly, have had to use it very, very little, if ever.  I'm more inclined to learn and have been slowly learning Spanish over the past few years due to my travels in the U.S., even though Spanish is not an official language.  In fact, businesses and governments just simply offer Spanish out of necessity, not based on some grand government vision.

The National Post's Kathryn Blaze-Carlson has noted that official bilingualism, essentially a federal program forced upon the provinces, costs taxpayers $2.4 BILLION per year--mostly in Ontario.

So a rough calculation ... 2011 - 1969 = 42 years x 2.4 billion = $100.8 billion total.

Wow, that sure is a lot to ensure 5% of the population (francophones) can understand what's going on.

So is it worth it?  We know it certainly costs companies to produce separate labels to have French.  I'd say in Vancouver, it is probably a better idea to have the labels also in Mandarin.

And that's the point here isn't it?  The main problems with bilingualism stem from one of the most simple aspects of human nature... our basic need to communicate and creating words to do so.

Forcing a language upon people can actually surpress that language.  Letting the people decide, a noble libertarian concept I might add, can actually help a language flourish.

Languages come and go.  But why is English so popular and the dominant international language, yet only comprises a fraction of the original speaking peoples of the world?

Even when French was the language used in the courts in England hundreds of years ago, the English language was the one on the tongue of the commoner.  And it varied, and continues to vary, twist and turn, morph, change, as people talk to another and mingle from different countries and within them as well.  There are numerous examples of words changing their meaning to the complete opposite of its original intention.

Some may say the Internet and computing, being originally an English-based concept, even unto computer languages themselves, but perhaps it is simply because of its lack of rigidness and rules, and multitude of free-flowing dialects that has allowed it to spread, endure and strengthen.

The stats show that Canadians in Quebec are leaving that province in droves to greater economic pastures in Alberta and Saskatchewan and that its remaining population is stagnant or decreasing, leaving behind a pocket of francophones.  But even those two provinces have small but continual communities within the cities and towns.


And the rest of the country should continue to pay billions per year to ensure a language few speak is maintained throughout the entire country by forced actions and doublestandards?  We all know the language police stories in Quebec.  It's hypocracy at its finest.  I don't mind that Parliament is bilingual, but forcing businesses and public sector hiring practices to be dictated by bureaucracy is social engineering at its worst.

Is this an attack on the French language?  Au contraire!  If francophones truly wanted to ensure the survival of their language within Canada, the best approach would have been continually to develop and grow their economy so people would be attracted to moving and working there and expanding businesses, not through government corporate welfare, or by forced bilingualism in government and crown corp positions.  Letting the market and people decide what languages should dominate, would have allowed French to flourish.  How many more folks from France would then migrate to Canada and grow the language?


It's much like the CBC.  People can claim that just one of hundreds of television stations that includes American programming brings the country together all they want, but they're out of touch with reality.  When the ratings are so low and few watch, it's hardly a case to continue spending over $1 BILLION on that when socialists and provinces themselves claim there's not enough money for health care, education, pensions, etc.  And $100 BILLION since 1969 would certainly have covered a lot of things like that, but maybe a lower debt and lower taxes that would have fueled the economy even more, even in Quebec and attracted investment and and people.

But I guess that won't happen any time soon, showing that essentially, bilingualism has failed to do what it was intended to.

Which is typical of anti-libertarian social-engineering state-run policies.

Gay marriages indeed valid - Liberals screwed up on divorce

Today, Justice Minister Nicholson diffused the left-wing spin by ensuring all same-sex marriages in Canada are indeed valid.  And further to that, a loophole left open by the previous Liberal government, didn't allow for same-sex divorces!  Shame on you Irwin Cotler!  Well, that's changing now.


But the CBC wouldn't make you believe that.  Power & Politics host Evan Solomon has an online poll question asking if you think the Conservatives are trying to reopen the debate.  And of course, the majority of the answers are yes.  Pathetic.  Sad really.

So no, Harper is not re-opening the gay marriage debate.  The Conservative government is in fact, making gay marriages even more equal.

Typical left-wing untruthiness on social issues.  Unfortunately, the only loophole that the Conservatives left open was a whole day of spin to the left.

Alberta PC corruption

Ten Alberta PC riding associations are currently being investigated by Elections Alberta into illegal riding donations and now we have learned the PC Association of Alberta received $15,000 from the University of Lethbridge, which is illegal.

Blogger Alberta Ardvark has more on it here.

People, listen.  This is democracy at its worst.  For years, conservatives and reformers in Alberta were furious over similar things happening to the federal Liberals and now the Alberta PCs are doing the same thing. 

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and 40 years can certainly make any government, no matter which party, complacent, tired, and how do I say this eloquently ... with its head so far up its own ass the shit just cycles itself.

For the sake of Alberta, don't vote PC in the next election.  I will do my best to spread the word about this terrible, nanny-state, corrupt government and encourage you to vote Wildrose, Liberal, NDP, or Alberta Party.  We deserve better. 

Floor crossing

I am completely against any floor crossing prevention legislation.  In fact, there should be a resolution that to have such legislation as being out of order.

Sometimes I wonder if NDP members and supporters really understand how a parliamentary democracy actually works.

Wait, I don't think they do at all, whatsoever.

We could go through pages and pages of historical records on the parliamentary website to show all the MPs who've switched caucuses since 1867.

There is no need for the MP to sit as an independent or step down and run in a byelection.  That would mean, when the Conservative Party was created, dozens of former Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative MPs would have to have run in a byelection, rather than just run in the next election.  There are numerous examples.  How much would that have cost?

And voters already have a chance to decide if they agree in regular elections, keeping in mind it is a person's name on the ballot in large print with the party affiliation in small print. We legally elect people to become a Member of Parliament and sit amongst a caucus, not party, otherwise, only the party name would be printed on the ballot.

I am also against recall.  In fact, I believe it's a dangerous notion where a small minority of people (or whatever the percentage is, I've heard 5%, 10%) can petition to recall an MP.  So really, a third-party organization or lobby group can organize themselves and get people to sign a petition to have a vote to remove the MP.  There are many other mechanisms already in place to do that--media, public, and party pressure to name a few, let alone the next election itself.  If an MP (or Senator for that matter) really screwed up, like say convicted of a criminal act, there should be a resolution in place that they must step down immediately and a byelection would ensue.

Anyway, it is a fundamental aspect of our democracy that an MP can change party affiliation, create a new caucus (remember the Democratic Representative Caucus (DRC)?), or become an independent if he or she feels the caucus they are a part of no longer represents their views or is ineffective. 

Why do Dippers want to prevent that?  Voters have the right to switch allegiences between elections, MPs must have that freedom to be able to decide how to best represent his or her constituents, not just for those who voted for him or her.   My guess is that it is rooted in the fact that they simply fear the Liberals and are afraid of their MPs jumping ship to a party that has historically been in power.

Just like this one.

And what to the NDP have to say?

"But the NDP made it perfectly clear they were not going to let St-Denis' defection go unchallenged.

Commenting at a press conference convened shortly after the floor-crossing announcement, NDP Quebec Caucus Chair Guy Caron was blunt in his party's response.

"Recruiting elected members from other parties is clearly the old way of politics," Caron said, characterizing the recent votes for his party as a signal Canadians "have had enough of cynicism, cronyism, separatism and partisanship.

"Changing political affiliation is a blatant lack of respect for democracy that encourages cynicism toward politicians," he continued, before issuing the Grits a challenge.

"If the Liberals think it's what the voters of the riding want, we challenge them to run Madam St-Denis in a byelection," he said.

Actually Guy, recruiting elected members from other parties is clearly not the old way of politics--it's part of our traditional, tried and true, Westminster British Parliamentary System.  You know, the one that got you elected?  It's not a "blatant lack of respect for democracy".  Your lack of patience is.  She'll run in the next election as a Liberal and we'll see if she wins.  Is that so difficult?

The NDP are a party about control and controlling MPs to prevent them from floor crossing is a direct attack against our democracy.  For shame.