Sunday 7 June 2015
Climate Change: 5 myths....and my Take on it
Interesting article in Toronto Sun today Climate Change : 5 myths that will be completely dismissed by the left wing whack a do crowd that blindly support all forms of climate change theory. Which is a shame as if they would just apply the same level requiring evidence and proof to climate change theories, as they do to rest of their lives, we might actually build bridges and move forward on real productive change and policies.
I will however take exception to numbers 2 and 3 in the list.
Myth 2: Wind and solar power are effective in lowering emissions.
Regarding solar and wind energy. There is a few real problems that surround solar and wind energy as a viable alternative that the left wingers refuse to accept as fact, despite the mounds and mounds and mounds of evidence (some by their very own scientists and "experts").
Solar and wind are positive concepts and ideals but the biggest hurdle facing them at this moment is COST. They are just not cost effective at this point in time. That's the simple truth. We all love pictures of some multi-millionaire going to the extreme in alternative energy. Visually it looks awesome and with out fail you will see someone put the worst picture of the Oil Sands against a field of solar panels and say "This (solar) is better then this (oil field).
What they NEVER seem to grasp is that (oil field that never looks as bad as what left wingers try to make it look) supplies power to millions and millions and millions.
Where as that huge arse area of solar panels supplies power for 100s (not a typo) and costs more to maintain then the oil field at this time in history.
Wind is much the same problem cost effectiveness wise, as it currently stands.
And none of that bothers to address the MASSIVE NEGATIVE Impact Wind and Solar have on the environment as well. Not carbon but WILDLIFE. Wind Turbines kill more birds in a single season then a massive oil spill ever will. Yet we rarely hear about that VERY REAL DISASTER coming from them. And Wind Turbines also have the added benefit of disrupting mating and territorial marking driving wildlife away from their constant buzz and hum of the turbines. Animals that were born in a turbine region are often born deft and die shortly after. Wind Turbines have a HUGE negative impact on wildlife that the left try to hide and cover up when they speak about wind turbines and their effect.
Solar is no better in that regard. What do people really think happens to a bird or animal that gets to close to a solar panel in full operation and heating up? its killed or even worse blinded. If you put them on the water you disrupt fish and water temperature levels massively killing (or driving away) entire regions of fish and underwater life as the panel farm heats up the water in that area.
Solar and wind are lofty goals that should be pursued, tinkered with, adapted to suit our demands and needs. But they are NOT a cure all solution right now. They are PROVEN financially irresponsible and present a whole host of disastrous environmental issues of their own.
I believe solar and wind will one day play a big roll in our energy production but that day is not here now or the foreseeable future. The technology is still in its relatively young form and needs to continued research and improvement. Rushing it only hurts the people, the animals, the environment. Which is ironic as if you listen to the left wing whack a dos about climate change, they claim we need to do solar and wind NOW because of the people, animals, and environment.
But as usually that crowd only looks at a small portion of the entire bigger picture.
Regarding Number 3,
Myth 3: Canada’s oilsands are a major source of emissions.
Oil is dirty and probably does affect the environment is some negative way. One only need look at the REAL pictures (not the crap the activist left wingers try to portray Oil Sands as) to see there is allot of things happening there and you have to be foolish to think that much upheaval will have no lasting effect on the environment
BUT that doesn't change the truth about why we need Oil still.
Its really the same argument as what I wrote above. I think the article did some creative math for part of its article on the oil sands. I think everyone knows Oil (not just Oil sands but drilling, Fraking, all of it) is messy.
But right now its the cheapest form of wide spread fuel / power source we have. And cost + supply size trumps emissions at this point in time.
In time I have no doubt some alternative form of energy will over take Oil and the world very well might be better for it. We will see when that time comes. But for now, financially Oil is the best option. Mass supply is also Oil as the best option.
Alternative energy is simply not ready yet.
Not fully developed yet
Alternative energy simply is not the best solution or best answer at this stage of the game
Interesting article in Toronto Sun today Climate Change : 5 myths that will be completely dismissed by the left wing whack a do crowd that blindly support all forms of climate change theory. Which is a shame as if they would just apply the same level requiring evidence and proof to climate change theories, as they do to rest of their lives, we might actually build bridges and move forward on real productive change and policies.
I will however take exception to numbers 2 and 3 in the list.
Myth 2: Wind and solar power are effective in lowering emissions.
Regarding solar and wind energy. There is a few real problems that surround solar and wind energy as a viable alternative that the left wingers refuse to accept as fact, despite the mounds and mounds and mounds of evidence (some by their very own scientists and "experts").
Solar and wind are positive concepts and ideals but the biggest hurdle facing them at this moment is COST. They are just not cost effective at this point in time. That's the simple truth. We all love pictures of some multi-millionaire going to the extreme in alternative energy. Visually it looks awesome and with out fail you will see someone put the worst picture of the Oil Sands against a field of solar panels and say "This (solar) is better then this (oil field).
What they NEVER seem to grasp is that (oil field that never looks as bad as what left wingers try to make it look) supplies power to millions and millions and millions.
Where as that huge arse area of solar panels supplies power for 100s (not a typo) and costs more to maintain then the oil field at this time in history.
Wind is much the same problem cost effectiveness wise, as it currently stands.
And none of that bothers to address the MASSIVE NEGATIVE Impact Wind and Solar have on the environment as well. Not carbon but WILDLIFE. Wind Turbines kill more birds in a single season then a massive oil spill ever will. Yet we rarely hear about that VERY REAL DISASTER coming from them. And Wind Turbines also have the added benefit of disrupting mating and territorial marking driving wildlife away from their constant buzz and hum of the turbines. Animals that were born in a turbine region are often born deft and die shortly after. Wind Turbines have a HUGE negative impact on wildlife that the left try to hide and cover up when they speak about wind turbines and their effect.
Solar is no better in that regard. What do people really think happens to a bird or animal that gets to close to a solar panel in full operation and heating up? its killed or even worse blinded. If you put them on the water you disrupt fish and water temperature levels massively killing (or driving away) entire regions of fish and underwater life as the panel farm heats up the water in that area.
Solar and wind are lofty goals that should be pursued, tinkered with, adapted to suit our demands and needs. But they are NOT a cure all solution right now. They are PROVEN financially irresponsible and present a whole host of disastrous environmental issues of their own.
I believe solar and wind will one day play a big roll in our energy production but that day is not here now or the foreseeable future. The technology is still in its relatively young form and needs to continued research and improvement. Rushing it only hurts the people, the animals, the environment. Which is ironic as if you listen to the left wing whack a dos about climate change, they claim we need to do solar and wind NOW because of the people, animals, and environment.
But as usually that crowd only looks at a small portion of the entire bigger picture.
Regarding Number 3,
Myth 3: Canada’s oilsands are a major source of emissions.
Oil is dirty and probably does affect the environment is some negative way. One only need look at the REAL pictures (not the crap the activist left wingers try to portray Oil Sands as) to see there is allot of things happening there and you have to be foolish to think that much upheaval will have no lasting effect on the environment
BUT that doesn't change the truth about why we need Oil still.
Its really the same argument as what I wrote above. I think the article did some creative math for part of its article on the oil sands. I think everyone knows Oil (not just Oil sands but drilling, Fraking, all of it) is messy.
But right now its the cheapest form of wide spread fuel / power source we have. And cost + supply size trumps emissions at this point in time.
In time I have no doubt some alternative form of energy will over take Oil and the world very well might be better for it. We will see when that time comes. But for now, financially Oil is the best option. Mass supply is also Oil as the best option.
Alternative energy is simply not ready yet.
Not fully developed yet
Alternative energy simply is not the best solution or best answer at this stage of the game
Thursday, 28 May 2015
Growing older and wiser? Depends who you ask I guess.
About a year ago one of those stupid Facebook threads that you comment on and then given a topic to share forward was going around. So against my better judgement I commented on it (normally I stay far away from those silly mindless things) and was given the letter P. So I posted it and a longtime friend replied with "Political" and then followed up saying I have become much more political since moving out East.
At first I was defensive because Rick and I had always spoken about politics over daily routine coffee sessions when I lived in Edmonton. Issues ranging from teachers unions to Provincial budget, to heritage Trust fund, to really anything in news that day. Really the only difference being now was that we had access to much much much more information happening around the world thanks to the internet. Back then, while we both were very active in computers in our own right, the internet still wasn't the sounding board it would turn into. So most of our information still came from The Edmonton Sun newspaper and what we heard on radio and word of mouth.
So with limited information coming in, the discussions were less focused and less defined on our part as we simply did not have the mounds of information available to us today.
So in that sense I still maintain I have not become more political then I was back then. I just have more issues regarding politics to speak about now. More access to greater amount of content always means greater time spent on content.
That was my initial response to the claim.
But its stuck in my head, back of my mind, nagging at me since then.
Had I become more political as I grow older and why?
And in truth I very well may have.
See in Alberta in the 60s, 70s, 80s, even 90s you lived in a bubble. You knew your opinions (speaking mass population generality here) were different then those of rest of Canada. What you did not know or perhaps did not understand is how much different they were. And THAT part might have been the big eye opener for me when I moved out East and very well might drive my recently fueled interest in politics.
I always tell this story to people out here when they ask me how different was Alberta compared to Toronto...
"My very first time ever in Toronto I was entering the now gone Worlds Biggest Book Store with my mother. I grabbed door and held open as my mother went through and right behind us were a elderly couple, so as I was raised to do in Alberta, I held the door open for them as well.
Well they stopped and stared and even glared at me, not moving through the door, I held for couple more seconds and since they made no attempt or movement towards the door I shrugged and went through myself. Later I asked my mother "what the hell was that all about" and she just shrugged it off and casually said "Probably thought you were going to mug them, people don't hold doors open for others out here"
Yes Toto, we are not in Kansas any more.
To me that one encounter was (until very recently) the best way to describe the difference between East and West,
Now you take that mindset and apply it to politics and suddenly you are dealing with a MUCH MUCH MUCH different beast. One I honestly had never seen before until I moved out East.
Take the most recent Alberta Election for example. Couple great examples come from that.
1) The NDP win in Alberta is misleading when you look at it from a east / west viewpoint. Truth is Notley wouldn't even be able to run that platform in the East as a NDP. Its far far far to moderate for Ontario or Federal NDP objectives and agendas. While they share a few common ground issues, Notley would have probably had to cross floor to Liberals (normally) to run on that platform. But with current state of Ontario and Federal liberal party she would have found much more in common with the Ontario PC party and Harpers conservatives.
Now I'm sure any NDP voter in Alberta is up in arms and calling me every word in book over that last statement. But its the truth. The Alberta NDP present themselves as more moderate in their nature on most topics (climate change and unions being the only 2 real sticking points where they continue to go hard leftist policy wise) then their federal and Ontario counter parts. And thus would find themselves siding currently with federal or Ontario conservatives because they are the only party even remotely close to the center right now politically. Now of course that's all a smoke screen to get elected out west. Truth is Notley and her followers are every bit as left wing as the rest of the party. They just couldn't say that until after the election.
Alberta residences (not those that moved there to get employment because the Liberal and NDP governments of their old provinces killed all the jobs and employment...which always makes me shake my head that they now AGAIN voting Liberal and NDP after moving their families across the country for employment because of the NDP and Liberals) do not understand this massive difference between west and east politics. What is left in Alberta very well might be viewed as a red conservative in Ontario or even a blue liberal.
2) Alberta had the backbone and dignity to do the right thing this past election. Lets forget the whole Left vrs Right, socialist vrs conservative stuff and focus in on the message sent by Alberta in this past election.
Redford had been caught red handed misusing public money. The amounts are actually very minor in the grand scope, it was the deceitful and corrupt manner in which it was done. And then when she was finally drove out for her actions, Prentice came in as an arrogant, obnoxious, no regret follow up.
Alberta said "NO WAY NO HOW" and rightfully tossed the Alberta PCs from power.
Well done, that's the way it should be done.
That's the West way.
Now lets look at Ontario provincial election.
Prior to Wynne we had Dalton McGuinty. The man broke his first political promise on day 2 of his first term raising taxes after campaigning on no tax increases for months. Under McGuinty there was endless broken promises, endless tax and cost increases, and the scandals were endless as well amounting to over 2 billion dollars (some eventually being criminally investigated).
FINALLY like Redford he resigns in shame and Wynne takes over
Exactly like Prentice Wynne is arrogant, obnoxious, no regrets (she goes so far as leading a Dalton Dalton, Dalton chant on multiple occasions) . The scandals dollar figures (and she has been tied to the 2 billion with McGuinty) rise to well over 3 BILLION dollars in corruption.
And Toronto (note, not Ontario, just Toronto) gives her a majority government anyways.
EXACTLY the opposite message that Alberta sent to their provincial political figures.
So one can only take away from that that in the west, accountability and integrity matter far more in politics then in the East (can say East because Wynne not the only eastern political figure under criminal investigations out here. Liberals wracking up quite the dirt sheet municipally and provincially out east, last number of years).
So that was the change in culture for me.
Out here politics is not so much about the message and what good you can do
Politics is about spinning the message and getting the media to lobby for you (which the Liberals out here are masterful at). What you actually do after being elected seems to matter little out here in Ontario. Its all about public image and the photo ops and NOT about who has the best ideas and is proven most trustworthy.
So for me, growing up as I did, this all flies in my face as unthinkable.
So when something is unthinkable, you speak out against it.
And as I explained at the start, now I just have so much more content to speak out against.
Take the media for example.
I could literally supply 10000s of links to showcase how the news out here is not reported. Its manufactured, designed, targeted.
The media in the east (though it does seem to have seeped into western media as well now as a few Alberta stations are very suspect in how they ignore one story but push another, rather then reporting both equally) is not interested in journalism, reporting, fact gathering.
those are things of the past which restricted them, in putting forth the articles they really wanted to write.
Out here now, the media no longer interested in people making up their own minds, they much more interested in making up the minds for the people.
Case in point: other day was a news story of a mother suing a airlinebecause it landed the plane to have her and her 15 year old autistic daughter removed for being unruly.
It was the news story of the day and I had read it on multiple different sources.
So imagine my surprise (not really) when I clicked on radio to hear "Toronto Talk show host" of certain radio station in Toronto trying to riled all his listeners up over this.
Only problem was he was intentionally leaving out half the FACTS to the story to make people side with mother and daughter.
He constantly stated the mother just wanted a hot meal for her daughter when in the radio show just before him (ON THE SAME STATION no less, and in clear print in any article you read) they told everyone that the airline did in fact get the girl a hot meal from the first class area (they were not in first class) in an attempt to calm her down.
He must have stated the hot meal thing 10 times despite it being in direct conflict with what the radio talk show host before him stated.
Where they reading different press clippings?
Doubtful
Or was this once again a case of Toronto media trying to control the message and direct public opinion in a certain direction?
Far more likely
He went on and on about how the staff was not trained for this and mishandled the incident. When in fact the staff did have minor training (not specific to autism which imo is completely out of whack to think they would get) in these types of situations and from most passenger reports afterwards the staff handled the situation beyond professionally and properly. There was a few who disagreed but mostly its reported the airline staff were very professional and tried their absolute best).
For almost a hour he continued to hammer away leaving out facts and reports so he could paint the picture the way he wanted to paint it.
And that's exactly how Toronto media handles politics, but they get even more bias and even more partisan.
Did you all hear about Trudeau in House of Commons stating "Helping everyone is NOT FAIR" the other day?
I'm betting unless you follow The Rebel on Facebook you never saw the quote even once. I know, despite following 10 different media outlets, The rebel was the ONLY ONE to report on this rather important statement by the would be country leader on that day. I saw couple more the next day but mainstream mostly ignored it.
How many of you saw the Australian Town Hall 4 years ago destroy Gore/Suzuki Climate Change theories with the same scientists that Gore and Suzuki point to, to this very day still, as evidence supporting THEIR THEORY of climate change.
None of the Canadian press carried it except Sun Media. And this wasn't some partisan group of conservatives attacking Suzuki and his "science", it was the very same political figures the endorsed his theories 8 years earlier but had come to see the folly of their ways.
Hey did you hear Obama, after rejecting Keystone Pipeline because of environmental concerns is expected to approve new drilling in the arctic which is projected to have massive negative environmental results that dwarf the projected "possible" environmental concerns over Keystone Pipeline?
Amazing how one can flip flop so massively on environmental concerns but ONLY part of the story hits the Eastern press rounds (I actually found out this one from a left wing American news station. Ontario press that ran almost daily anti keystone articles didn't even make a peep about this.....and still have not) .
But any way, those just a few of the reasons for my higher interest in politics.
I watch friends and acquaintances and strangers all jump through hoops to support the latest fad, the latest party, the latest personality in politics. "lets just give them a chance" they say .....because the media has neglected to report and inform them that these same ideals and policies have been tried numerous times before to disastrous results.
But for me its about the truth. I really don't care what party it is about, I want the truth. I want the story and the facts that the media will no longer inform us about.
I learned pretty quickly that I do not have much patience for political spin. Unfortunately in Canada the mainstream media is only going to give you spin, if they judge a story news worthy at all. So for myself, I read numerous different media outlets (though I must admit the Toronto Star and CBC are just way to pro left wing bias to read, just simply have no credibility in my eyes now. They might get a story here and there correct but that doesn't excuse the 100 other stories that are incomplete or out right lies) so you are forced to look at a number of different sources and try to piece together the full story. Some times its easy as they all basically agree. Other times its not so easy as many of them choose not to report that news story. But most of the time you read 10 articles and each article gives a tidbit of fact and its up to you to play scrabble with the facts until you have a full story.
And when you are bombarded daily with bias and incomplete media coverage. Well you either tune them out completely, or you get active to find the truth yourself.
Was a time, really not that long ago, when you turned on the news or picked up a newspaper and they presented the story, the whole story, they presented the facts and let the reader/viewer decide for themselves based off the facts.
Now a days a story from the mainstream media is more likely to have more facts omitted then it will have in the story. Or at worse the entire news story was pre-written by some union official or political party spin doctor.
And lets not even start on Anonymous sources. Woodward and Bernstein did it right with the Watergate Investigations. The got information from their source and then went out and proved that information independently before putting it in print. Now, you're more likely to see the anonymous source just be quoted as fact, with zero investigation into claims credibility, then you are to see a reporter actually do some homework and investigation.
Here is a case in point for people to see censorship, spin, lies at its very most obvious.
There is a Senate investigation going on. Numerous Senators have been questioned and charged. The most common one being Conservative Senator Mike Duffy. He misused $90,000 of taxpayer money in fraudulent expense claims. He deserves to be in jail.
BUT
A Liberal Senator Marc Harb is being charged for fraudulent expense claims of over $230,000 dating back years and years and years, long before Duffy even entered the Senate.
Yet if you were to look at the press coverage of these two figures there is easily over 100 articles on Duffy for every 1 article on Harb.
Personally I think both should be in prison but that still doesn't begin to explain the massively unbalanced coverage by the media.
In fact you will find Mike Duffy in print MORE OFTEN (again by easily 100-1 ratio) then you will read about Ontario Kathleen Wynne and her apparent ties to over 3 BILLION (thats 3,000,000,000.00) in politically motivated and wrongful spending.
But here is the really obvious one.
The biggest critic of both the Conservative and Liberal senator expense scandals is Thomas Mulcaire, Leader of the opposition NDP. He simply will not shut up about Duffy. Even to this day, while Duffy is in court on criminal charges, Mulcaire tries to make political hay outta this $90,000.00 fraud.
But until yesterday I never actually heard about a story where the NDP owe tax payers $4,000,000.00 for their own election fraud spending. With Mulcaire himself owing over $400,000.00 of that figure. Imagine the gall and arrogance to complain about a figure in a criminal trial happening at the same time while you use every dirty move and political side step to try and avoid paying back over $400,000.00 of fraudulent election expenses.
All those media outlets and not a peep from any of the mainstream media on this 4 million owed.
Thank god one outlet did run a story on it http://www.therebel.media/ndp_keep_spotlight_on_duffy_but_they_owe_taxpayers_nearly_4m
and apparently people saw it as the next day CTV ran a story on it (claiming they broke the story but no word why that break didnt seem to get much coverage by them or any of the other main stream media outlets) http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=622620&playlistId=1.2393920&binId=1.810401&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1
If you watch those two clips, I don't care what party you naturally support.
The NDP come off looking guilty, desperate, and really immature and arrogant
Why am I more political?
Because honestly I find the lack of ethics and morality displayed by the mainstream media and most of the political personalities in Canada to be beyond revolting.
About a year ago one of those stupid Facebook threads that you comment on and then given a topic to share forward was going around. So against my better judgement I commented on it (normally I stay far away from those silly mindless things) and was given the letter P. So I posted it and a longtime friend replied with "Political" and then followed up saying I have become much more political since moving out East.
At first I was defensive because Rick and I had always spoken about politics over daily routine coffee sessions when I lived in Edmonton. Issues ranging from teachers unions to Provincial budget, to heritage Trust fund, to really anything in news that day. Really the only difference being now was that we had access to much much much more information happening around the world thanks to the internet. Back then, while we both were very active in computers in our own right, the internet still wasn't the sounding board it would turn into. So most of our information still came from The Edmonton Sun newspaper and what we heard on radio and word of mouth.
So with limited information coming in, the discussions were less focused and less defined on our part as we simply did not have the mounds of information available to us today.
So in that sense I still maintain I have not become more political then I was back then. I just have more issues regarding politics to speak about now. More access to greater amount of content always means greater time spent on content.
That was my initial response to the claim.
But its stuck in my head, back of my mind, nagging at me since then.
Had I become more political as I grow older and why?
And in truth I very well may have.
See in Alberta in the 60s, 70s, 80s, even 90s you lived in a bubble. You knew your opinions (speaking mass population generality here) were different then those of rest of Canada. What you did not know or perhaps did not understand is how much different they were. And THAT part might have been the big eye opener for me when I moved out East and very well might drive my recently fueled interest in politics.
I always tell this story to people out here when they ask me how different was Alberta compared to Toronto...
"My very first time ever in Toronto I was entering the now gone Worlds Biggest Book Store with my mother. I grabbed door and held open as my mother went through and right behind us were a elderly couple, so as I was raised to do in Alberta, I held the door open for them as well.
Well they stopped and stared and even glared at me, not moving through the door, I held for couple more seconds and since they made no attempt or movement towards the door I shrugged and went through myself. Later I asked my mother "what the hell was that all about" and she just shrugged it off and casually said "Probably thought you were going to mug them, people don't hold doors open for others out here"
Yes Toto, we are not in Kansas any more.
To me that one encounter was (until very recently) the best way to describe the difference between East and West,
Now you take that mindset and apply it to politics and suddenly you are dealing with a MUCH MUCH MUCH different beast. One I honestly had never seen before until I moved out East.
Take the most recent Alberta Election for example. Couple great examples come from that.
1) The NDP win in Alberta is misleading when you look at it from a east / west viewpoint. Truth is Notley wouldn't even be able to run that platform in the East as a NDP. Its far far far to moderate for Ontario or Federal NDP objectives and agendas. While they share a few common ground issues, Notley would have probably had to cross floor to Liberals (normally) to run on that platform. But with current state of Ontario and Federal liberal party she would have found much more in common with the Ontario PC party and Harpers conservatives.
Now I'm sure any NDP voter in Alberta is up in arms and calling me every word in book over that last statement. But its the truth. The Alberta NDP present themselves as more moderate in their nature on most topics (climate change and unions being the only 2 real sticking points where they continue to go hard leftist policy wise) then their federal and Ontario counter parts. And thus would find themselves siding currently with federal or Ontario conservatives because they are the only party even remotely close to the center right now politically. Now of course that's all a smoke screen to get elected out west. Truth is Notley and her followers are every bit as left wing as the rest of the party. They just couldn't say that until after the election.
Alberta residences (not those that moved there to get employment because the Liberal and NDP governments of their old provinces killed all the jobs and employment...which always makes me shake my head that they now AGAIN voting Liberal and NDP after moving their families across the country for employment because of the NDP and Liberals) do not understand this massive difference between west and east politics. What is left in Alberta very well might be viewed as a red conservative in Ontario or even a blue liberal.
2) Alberta had the backbone and dignity to do the right thing this past election. Lets forget the whole Left vrs Right, socialist vrs conservative stuff and focus in on the message sent by Alberta in this past election.
Redford had been caught red handed misusing public money. The amounts are actually very minor in the grand scope, it was the deceitful and corrupt manner in which it was done. And then when she was finally drove out for her actions, Prentice came in as an arrogant, obnoxious, no regret follow up.
Alberta said "NO WAY NO HOW" and rightfully tossed the Alberta PCs from power.
Well done, that's the way it should be done.
That's the West way.
Now lets look at Ontario provincial election.
Prior to Wynne we had Dalton McGuinty. The man broke his first political promise on day 2 of his first term raising taxes after campaigning on no tax increases for months. Under McGuinty there was endless broken promises, endless tax and cost increases, and the scandals were endless as well amounting to over 2 billion dollars (some eventually being criminally investigated).
FINALLY like Redford he resigns in shame and Wynne takes over
Exactly like Prentice Wynne is arrogant, obnoxious, no regrets (she goes so far as leading a Dalton Dalton, Dalton chant on multiple occasions) . The scandals dollar figures (and she has been tied to the 2 billion with McGuinty) rise to well over 3 BILLION dollars in corruption.
And Toronto (note, not Ontario, just Toronto) gives her a majority government anyways.
EXACTLY the opposite message that Alberta sent to their provincial political figures.
So one can only take away from that that in the west, accountability and integrity matter far more in politics then in the East (can say East because Wynne not the only eastern political figure under criminal investigations out here. Liberals wracking up quite the dirt sheet municipally and provincially out east, last number of years).
So that was the change in culture for me.
Out here politics is not so much about the message and what good you can do
Politics is about spinning the message and getting the media to lobby for you (which the Liberals out here are masterful at). What you actually do after being elected seems to matter little out here in Ontario. Its all about public image and the photo ops and NOT about who has the best ideas and is proven most trustworthy.
So for me, growing up as I did, this all flies in my face as unthinkable.
So when something is unthinkable, you speak out against it.
And as I explained at the start, now I just have so much more content to speak out against.
Take the media for example.
I could literally supply 10000s of links to showcase how the news out here is not reported. Its manufactured, designed, targeted.
The media in the east (though it does seem to have seeped into western media as well now as a few Alberta stations are very suspect in how they ignore one story but push another, rather then reporting both equally) is not interested in journalism, reporting, fact gathering.
those are things of the past which restricted them, in putting forth the articles they really wanted to write.
Out here now, the media no longer interested in people making up their own minds, they much more interested in making up the minds for the people.
Case in point: other day was a news story of a mother suing a airlinebecause it landed the plane to have her and her 15 year old autistic daughter removed for being unruly.
It was the news story of the day and I had read it on multiple different sources.
So imagine my surprise (not really) when I clicked on radio to hear "Toronto Talk show host" of certain radio station in Toronto trying to riled all his listeners up over this.
Only problem was he was intentionally leaving out half the FACTS to the story to make people side with mother and daughter.
He constantly stated the mother just wanted a hot meal for her daughter when in the radio show just before him (ON THE SAME STATION no less, and in clear print in any article you read) they told everyone that the airline did in fact get the girl a hot meal from the first class area (they were not in first class) in an attempt to calm her down.
He must have stated the hot meal thing 10 times despite it being in direct conflict with what the radio talk show host before him stated.
Where they reading different press clippings?
Doubtful
Or was this once again a case of Toronto media trying to control the message and direct public opinion in a certain direction?
Far more likely
He went on and on about how the staff was not trained for this and mishandled the incident. When in fact the staff did have minor training (not specific to autism which imo is completely out of whack to think they would get) in these types of situations and from most passenger reports afterwards the staff handled the situation beyond professionally and properly. There was a few who disagreed but mostly its reported the airline staff were very professional and tried their absolute best).
For almost a hour he continued to hammer away leaving out facts and reports so he could paint the picture the way he wanted to paint it.
And that's exactly how Toronto media handles politics, but they get even more bias and even more partisan.
Did you all hear about Trudeau in House of Commons stating "Helping everyone is NOT FAIR" the other day?
I'm betting unless you follow The Rebel on Facebook you never saw the quote even once. I know, despite following 10 different media outlets, The rebel was the ONLY ONE to report on this rather important statement by the would be country leader on that day. I saw couple more the next day but mainstream mostly ignored it.
How many of you saw the Australian Town Hall 4 years ago destroy Gore/Suzuki Climate Change theories with the same scientists that Gore and Suzuki point to, to this very day still, as evidence supporting THEIR THEORY of climate change.
None of the Canadian press carried it except Sun Media. And this wasn't some partisan group of conservatives attacking Suzuki and his "science", it was the very same political figures the endorsed his theories 8 years earlier but had come to see the folly of their ways.
Hey did you hear Obama, after rejecting Keystone Pipeline because of environmental concerns is expected to approve new drilling in the arctic which is projected to have massive negative environmental results that dwarf the projected "possible" environmental concerns over Keystone Pipeline?
Amazing how one can flip flop so massively on environmental concerns but ONLY part of the story hits the Eastern press rounds (I actually found out this one from a left wing American news station. Ontario press that ran almost daily anti keystone articles didn't even make a peep about this.....and still have not) .
But any way, those just a few of the reasons for my higher interest in politics.
I watch friends and acquaintances and strangers all jump through hoops to support the latest fad, the latest party, the latest personality in politics. "lets just give them a chance" they say .....because the media has neglected to report and inform them that these same ideals and policies have been tried numerous times before to disastrous results.
But for me its about the truth. I really don't care what party it is about, I want the truth. I want the story and the facts that the media will no longer inform us about.
I learned pretty quickly that I do not have much patience for political spin. Unfortunately in Canada the mainstream media is only going to give you spin, if they judge a story news worthy at all. So for myself, I read numerous different media outlets (though I must admit the Toronto Star and CBC are just way to pro left wing bias to read, just simply have no credibility in my eyes now. They might get a story here and there correct but that doesn't excuse the 100 other stories that are incomplete or out right lies) so you are forced to look at a number of different sources and try to piece together the full story. Some times its easy as they all basically agree. Other times its not so easy as many of them choose not to report that news story. But most of the time you read 10 articles and each article gives a tidbit of fact and its up to you to play scrabble with the facts until you have a full story.
And when you are bombarded daily with bias and incomplete media coverage. Well you either tune them out completely, or you get active to find the truth yourself.
Was a time, really not that long ago, when you turned on the news or picked up a newspaper and they presented the story, the whole story, they presented the facts and let the reader/viewer decide for themselves based off the facts.
Now a days a story from the mainstream media is more likely to have more facts omitted then it will have in the story. Or at worse the entire news story was pre-written by some union official or political party spin doctor.
And lets not even start on Anonymous sources. Woodward and Bernstein did it right with the Watergate Investigations. The got information from their source and then went out and proved that information independently before putting it in print. Now, you're more likely to see the anonymous source just be quoted as fact, with zero investigation into claims credibility, then you are to see a reporter actually do some homework and investigation.
Here is a case in point for people to see censorship, spin, lies at its very most obvious.
There is a Senate investigation going on. Numerous Senators have been questioned and charged. The most common one being Conservative Senator Mike Duffy. He misused $90,000 of taxpayer money in fraudulent expense claims. He deserves to be in jail.
BUT
A Liberal Senator Marc Harb is being charged for fraudulent expense claims of over $230,000 dating back years and years and years, long before Duffy even entered the Senate.
Yet if you were to look at the press coverage of these two figures there is easily over 100 articles on Duffy for every 1 article on Harb.
Personally I think both should be in prison but that still doesn't begin to explain the massively unbalanced coverage by the media.
In fact you will find Mike Duffy in print MORE OFTEN (again by easily 100-1 ratio) then you will read about Ontario Kathleen Wynne and her apparent ties to over 3 BILLION (thats 3,000,000,000.00) in politically motivated and wrongful spending.
But here is the really obvious one.
The biggest critic of both the Conservative and Liberal senator expense scandals is Thomas Mulcaire, Leader of the opposition NDP. He simply will not shut up about Duffy. Even to this day, while Duffy is in court on criminal charges, Mulcaire tries to make political hay outta this $90,000.00 fraud.
But until yesterday I never actually heard about a story where the NDP owe tax payers $4,000,000.00 for their own election fraud spending. With Mulcaire himself owing over $400,000.00 of that figure. Imagine the gall and arrogance to complain about a figure in a criminal trial happening at the same time while you use every dirty move and political side step to try and avoid paying back over $400,000.00 of fraudulent election expenses.
All those media outlets and not a peep from any of the mainstream media on this 4 million owed.
Thank god one outlet did run a story on it http://www.therebel.media/ndp_keep_spotlight_on_duffy_but_they_owe_taxpayers_nearly_4m
and apparently people saw it as the next day CTV ran a story on it (claiming they broke the story but no word why that break didnt seem to get much coverage by them or any of the other main stream media outlets) http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=622620&playlistId=1.2393920&binId=1.810401&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1
If you watch those two clips, I don't care what party you naturally support.
The NDP come off looking guilty, desperate, and really immature and arrogant
Why am I more political?
Because honestly I find the lack of ethics and morality displayed by the mainstream media and most of the political personalities in Canada to be beyond revolting.
At first I was defensive because Rick and I had always spoken about politics over daily routine coffee sessions when I lived in Edmonton. Issues ranging from teachers unions to Provincial budget, to heritage Trust fund, to really anything in news that day. Really the only difference being now was that we had access to much much much more information happening around the world thanks to the internet. Back then, while we both were very active in computers in our own right, the internet still wasn't the sounding board it would turn into. So most of our information still came from The Edmonton Sun newspaper and what we heard on radio and word of mouth.
So with limited information coming in, the discussions were less focused and less defined on our part as we simply did not have the mounds of information available to us today.
So in that sense I still maintain I have not become more political then I was back then. I just have more issues regarding politics to speak about now. More access to greater amount of content always means greater time spent on content.
That was my initial response to the claim.
But its stuck in my head, back of my mind, nagging at me since then.
Had I become more political as I grow older and why?
And in truth I very well may have.
See in Alberta in the 60s, 70s, 80s, even 90s you lived in a bubble. You knew your opinions (speaking mass population generality here) were different then those of rest of Canada. What you did not know or perhaps did not understand is how much different they were. And THAT part might have been the big eye opener for me when I moved out East and very well might drive my recently fueled interest in politics.
I always tell this story to people out here when they ask me how different was Alberta compared to Toronto...
"My very first time ever in Toronto I was entering the now gone Worlds Biggest Book Store with my mother. I grabbed door and held open as my mother went through and right behind us were a elderly couple, so as I was raised to do in Alberta, I held the door open for them as well.
Well they stopped and stared and even glared at me, not moving through the door, I held for couple more seconds and since they made no attempt or movement towards the door I shrugged and went through myself. Later I asked my mother "what the hell was that all about" and she just shrugged it off and casually said "Probably thought you were going to mug them, people don't hold doors open for others out here"
Yes Toto, we are not in Kansas any more.
To me that one encounter was (until very recently) the best way to describe the difference between East and West,
Now you take that mindset and apply it to politics and suddenly you are dealing with a MUCH MUCH MUCH different beast. One I honestly had never seen before until I moved out East.
Take the most recent Alberta Election for example. Couple great examples come from that.
1) The NDP win in Alberta is misleading when you look at it from a east / west viewpoint. Truth is Notley wouldn't even be able to run that platform in the East as a NDP. Its far far far to moderate for Ontario or Federal NDP objectives and agendas. While they share a few common ground issues, Notley would have probably had to cross floor to Liberals (normally) to run on that platform. But with current state of Ontario and Federal liberal party she would have found much more in common with the Ontario PC party and Harpers conservatives.
Now I'm sure any NDP voter in Alberta is up in arms and calling me every word in book over that last statement. But its the truth. The Alberta NDP present themselves as more moderate in their nature on most topics (climate change and unions being the only 2 real sticking points where they continue to go hard leftist policy wise) then their federal and Ontario counter parts. And thus would find themselves siding currently with federal or Ontario conservatives because they are the only party even remotely close to the center right now politically. Now of course that's all a smoke screen to get elected out west. Truth is Notley and her followers are every bit as left wing as the rest of the party. They just couldn't say that until after the election.
Alberta residences (not those that moved there to get employment because the Liberal and NDP governments of their old provinces killed all the jobs and employment...which always makes me shake my head that they now AGAIN voting Liberal and NDP after moving their families across the country for employment because of the NDP and Liberals) do not understand this massive difference between west and east politics. What is left in Alberta very well might be viewed as a red conservative in Ontario or even a blue liberal.
2) Alberta had the backbone and dignity to do the right thing this past election. Lets forget the whole Left vrs Right, socialist vrs conservative stuff and focus in on the message sent by Alberta in this past election.
Redford had been caught red handed misusing public money. The amounts are actually very minor in the grand scope, it was the deceitful and corrupt manner in which it was done. And then when she was finally drove out for her actions, Prentice came in as an arrogant, obnoxious, no regret follow up.
Alberta said "NO WAY NO HOW" and rightfully tossed the Alberta PCs from power.
Well done, that's the way it should be done.
That's the West way.
Now lets look at Ontario provincial election.
Prior to Wynne we had Dalton McGuinty. The man broke his first political promise on day 2 of his first term raising taxes after campaigning on no tax increases for months. Under McGuinty there was endless broken promises, endless tax and cost increases, and the scandals were endless as well amounting to over 2 billion dollars (some eventually being criminally investigated).
FINALLY like Redford he resigns in shame and Wynne takes over
Exactly like Prentice Wynne is arrogant, obnoxious, no regrets (she goes so far as leading a Dalton Dalton, Dalton chant on multiple occasions) . The scandals dollar figures (and she has been tied to the 2 billion with McGuinty) rise to well over 3 BILLION dollars in corruption.
And Toronto (note, not Ontario, just Toronto) gives her a majority government anyways.
EXACTLY the opposite message that Alberta sent to their provincial political figures.
So one can only take away from that that in the west, accountability and integrity matter far more in politics then in the East (can say East because Wynne not the only eastern political figure under criminal investigations out here. Liberals wracking up quite the dirt sheet municipally and provincially out east, last number of years).
So that was the change in culture for me.
Out here politics is not so much about the message and what good you can do
Politics is about spinning the message and getting the media to lobby for you (which the Liberals out here are masterful at). What you actually do after being elected seems to matter little out here in Ontario. Its all about public image and the photo ops and NOT about who has the best ideas and is proven most trustworthy.
So for me, growing up as I did, this all flies in my face as unthinkable.
So when something is unthinkable, you speak out against it.
And as I explained at the start, now I just have so much more content to speak out against.
Take the media for example.
I could literally supply 10000s of links to showcase how the news out here is not reported. Its manufactured, designed, targeted.
The media in the east (though it does seem to have seeped into western media as well now as a few Alberta stations are very suspect in how they ignore one story but push another, rather then reporting both equally) is not interested in journalism, reporting, fact gathering.
those are things of the past which restricted them, in putting forth the articles they really wanted to write.
Out here now, the media no longer interested in people making up their own minds, they much more interested in making up the minds for the people.
Case in point: other day was a news story of a mother suing a airlinebecause it landed the plane to have her and her 15 year old autistic daughter removed for being unruly.
It was the news story of the day and I had read it on multiple different sources.
So imagine my surprise (not really) when I clicked on radio to hear "Toronto Talk show host" of certain radio station in Toronto trying to riled all his listeners up over this.
Only problem was he was intentionally leaving out half the FACTS to the story to make people side with mother and daughter.
He constantly stated the mother just wanted a hot meal for her daughter when in the radio show just before him (ON THE SAME STATION no less, and in clear print in any article you read) they told everyone that the airline did in fact get the girl a hot meal from the first class area (they were not in first class) in an attempt to calm her down.
He must have stated the hot meal thing 10 times despite it being in direct conflict with what the radio talk show host before him stated.
Where they reading different press clippings?
Doubtful
Or was this once again a case of Toronto media trying to control the message and direct public opinion in a certain direction?
Far more likely
He went on and on about how the staff was not trained for this and mishandled the incident. When in fact the staff did have minor training (not specific to autism which imo is completely out of whack to think they would get) in these types of situations and from most passenger reports afterwards the staff handled the situation beyond professionally and properly. There was a few who disagreed but mostly its reported the airline staff were very professional and tried their absolute best).
For almost a hour he continued to hammer away leaving out facts and reports so he could paint the picture the way he wanted to paint it.
And that's exactly how Toronto media handles politics, but they get even more bias and even more partisan.
Did you all hear about Trudeau in House of Commons stating "Helping everyone is NOT FAIR" the other day?
I'm betting unless you follow The Rebel on Facebook you never saw the quote even once. I know, despite following 10 different media outlets, The rebel was the ONLY ONE to report on this rather important statement by the would be country leader on that day. I saw couple more the next day but mainstream mostly ignored it.
How many of you saw the Australian Town Hall 4 years ago destroy Gore/Suzuki Climate Change theories with the same scientists that Gore and Suzuki point to, to this very day still, as evidence supporting THEIR THEORY of climate change.
None of the Canadian press carried it except Sun Media. And this wasn't some partisan group of conservatives attacking Suzuki and his "science", it was the very same political figures the endorsed his theories 8 years earlier but had come to see the folly of their ways.
Hey did you hear Obama, after rejecting Keystone Pipeline because of environmental concerns is expected to approve new drilling in the arctic which is projected to have massive negative environmental results that dwarf the projected "possible" environmental concerns over Keystone Pipeline?
Amazing how one can flip flop so massively on environmental concerns but ONLY part of the story hits the Eastern press rounds (I actually found out this one from a left wing American news station. Ontario press that ran almost daily anti keystone articles didn't even make a peep about this.....and still have not) .
But any way, those just a few of the reasons for my higher interest in politics.
I watch friends and acquaintances and strangers all jump through hoops to support the latest fad, the latest party, the latest personality in politics. "lets just give them a chance" they say .....because the media has neglected to report and inform them that these same ideals and policies have been tried numerous times before to disastrous results.
But for me its about the truth. I really don't care what party it is about, I want the truth. I want the story and the facts that the media will no longer inform us about.
I learned pretty quickly that I do not have much patience for political spin. Unfortunately in Canada the mainstream media is only going to give you spin, if they judge a story news worthy at all. So for myself, I read numerous different media outlets (though I must admit the Toronto Star and CBC are just way to pro left wing bias to read, just simply have no credibility in my eyes now. They might get a story here and there correct but that doesn't excuse the 100 other stories that are incomplete or out right lies) so you are forced to look at a number of different sources and try to piece together the full story. Some times its easy as they all basically agree. Other times its not so easy as many of them choose not to report that news story. But most of the time you read 10 articles and each article gives a tidbit of fact and its up to you to play scrabble with the facts until you have a full story.
And when you are bombarded daily with bias and incomplete media coverage. Well you either tune them out completely, or you get active to find the truth yourself.
Was a time, really not that long ago, when you turned on the news or picked up a newspaper and they presented the story, the whole story, they presented the facts and let the reader/viewer decide for themselves based off the facts.
Now a days a story from the mainstream media is more likely to have more facts omitted then it will have in the story. Or at worse the entire news story was pre-written by some union official or political party spin doctor.
And lets not even start on Anonymous sources. Woodward and Bernstein did it right with the Watergate Investigations. The got information from their source and then went out and proved that information independently before putting it in print. Now, you're more likely to see the anonymous source just be quoted as fact, with zero investigation into claims credibility, then you are to see a reporter actually do some homework and investigation.
Here is a case in point for people to see censorship, spin, lies at its very most obvious.
There is a Senate investigation going on. Numerous Senators have been questioned and charged. The most common one being Conservative Senator Mike Duffy. He misused $90,000 of taxpayer money in fraudulent expense claims. He deserves to be in jail.
BUT
A Liberal Senator Marc Harb is being charged for fraudulent expense claims of over $230,000 dating back years and years and years, long before Duffy even entered the Senate.
Yet if you were to look at the press coverage of these two figures there is easily over 100 articles on Duffy for every 1 article on Harb.
Personally I think both should be in prison but that still doesn't begin to explain the massively unbalanced coverage by the media.
In fact you will find Mike Duffy in print MORE OFTEN (again by easily 100-1 ratio) then you will read about Ontario Kathleen Wynne and her apparent ties to over 3 BILLION (thats 3,000,000,000.00) in politically motivated and wrongful spending.
But here is the really obvious one.
The biggest critic of both the Conservative and Liberal senator expense scandals is Thomas Mulcaire, Leader of the opposition NDP. He simply will not shut up about Duffy. Even to this day, while Duffy is in court on criminal charges, Mulcaire tries to make political hay outta this $90,000.00 fraud.
But until yesterday I never actually heard about a story where the NDP owe tax payers $4,000,000.00 for their own election fraud spending. With Mulcaire himself owing over $400,000.00 of that figure. Imagine the gall and arrogance to complain about a figure in a criminal trial happening at the same time while you use every dirty move and political side step to try and avoid paying back over $400,000.00 of fraudulent election expenses.
All those media outlets and not a peep from any of the mainstream media on this 4 million owed.
Thank god one outlet did run a story on it http://www.therebel.media/ndp_keep_spotlight_on_duffy_but_they_owe_taxpayers_nearly_4m
and apparently people saw it as the next day CTV ran a story on it (claiming they broke the story but no word why that break didnt seem to get much coverage by them or any of the other main stream media outlets) http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=622620&playlistId=1.2393920&binId=1.810401&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1
If you watch those two clips, I don't care what party you naturally support.
The NDP come off looking guilty, desperate, and really immature and arrogant
Why am I more political?
Because honestly I find the lack of ethics and morality displayed by the mainstream media and most of the political personalities in Canada to be beyond revolting.
Wednesday, 6 May 2015
Toronto Stock Exchange drops nearly 200 points in early trading
Several of Canada's biggest oil and gas companies were down about four per cent in heavy trading
The Toronto stock market started Wednesday with a triple-digit drop, with energy stocks leading the decline.
The S&P/TSX composite index was down 198.46 points at 14,975.48 about half an hour after the market opened.
The market's energy sector was down the most, with a three per cent decline.
Several of Canada's biggest oil and gas companies were down about four per cent in heavy trading.
Colin Cieszynski, chief market strategist at CME Markets Canada, says investors are reacting to the uncertainty stemming from the change in government in Alberta, where the NDP won a majority.
The NDP campaigned on a number of promises including corporate tax hikes and a review of the province's royalty regime.
The Toronto stock market's decline Wednesday morning follows a 193.53 point plunge on Tuesday.
The loonie was doing much better, up more than half a U.S. cent Wednesday morning.
The Canadian dollar was worth 83.40 cents US, up 0.56 of a U.S. cent from Tuesday's close.
- See more at: http://www.newstalk1010.com/news/2015/05/06/toronto-stock-exchange-drops-nearly-200-points-in-early-trading#sthash.1y3Z9xZu.dpuf
Source Newstalk 1010
So that's interesting.
Federally business has faith in Harper and Cons and dollar rebounded with a strong rise but in that one area of Canada the market lost faith almost instantly over night
but yet the Left Wing media and NDP supporters will call this Right Wing scare tactics (which by teh way is why I am linking to a ultra left wing radio station report)
Tell me again how the NDP is going to help Alberta and no one really thinks they are anti business.
The Toronto stock market started Wednesday with a triple-digit drop, with energy stocks leading the decline.
The S&P/TSX composite index was down 198.46 points at 14,975.48 about half an hour after the market opened.
The market's energy sector was down the most, with a three per cent decline.
Several of Canada's biggest oil and gas companies were down about four per cent in heavy trading.
Colin Cieszynski, chief market strategist at CME Markets Canada, says investors are reacting to the uncertainty stemming from the change in government in Alberta, where the NDP won a majority.
The NDP campaigned on a number of promises including corporate tax hikes and a review of the province's royalty regime.
The Toronto stock market's decline Wednesday morning follows a 193.53 point plunge on Tuesday.
The loonie was doing much better, up more than half a U.S. cent Wednesday morning.
The Canadian dollar was worth 83.40 cents US, up 0.56 of a U.S. cent from Tuesday's close.
The S&P/TSX composite index was down 198.46 points at 14,975.48 about half an hour after the market opened.
The market's energy sector was down the most, with a three per cent decline.
Several of Canada's biggest oil and gas companies were down about four per cent in heavy trading.
Colin Cieszynski, chief market strategist at CME Markets Canada, says investors are reacting to the uncertainty stemming from the change in government in Alberta, where the NDP won a majority.
The NDP campaigned on a number of promises including corporate tax hikes and a review of the province's royalty regime.
The Toronto stock market's decline Wednesday morning follows a 193.53 point plunge on Tuesday.
The loonie was doing much better, up more than half a U.S. cent Wednesday morning.
The Canadian dollar was worth 83.40 cents US, up 0.56 of a U.S. cent from Tuesday's close.
Source Newstalk 1010
So that's interesting.
Federally business has faith in Harper and Cons and dollar rebounded with a strong rise but in that one area of Canada the market lost faith almost instantly over night
but yet the Left Wing media and NDP supporters will call this Right Wing scare tactics (which by teh way is why I am linking to a ultra left wing radio station report)
Tell me again how the NDP is going to help Alberta and no one really thinks they are anti business.
Wednesday, 6 May 2015
And you get money, and you get money, and you get money, and you get well er sorry were out of money, blame big business
So its no big surprise I think that I still follow Alberta politics and have a personal interest in the province doing well. I have family there. I have friends there. I even still to this day "had" planed to move back there at a certain point (this election might effect that in the long term but to early to tell on that front). Alberta has always been my home.
Until yesterday that is.
Now I am truly fearful of the future for my family, friends, even acquaintances because the REAL HISTORY regarding the consequences for the foolish actions of last nights election have been widely ignored by very ill informed (or out right uninformed) voters.
Alberta entered the election to RIGHTFULLY punish the PC Party who had maintained power there for 44 years. The PC party under Redford was at worst corrupt, or at best incompetent, either way she had to be removed. But when she was removed, what replaced her was arrogant, delusional, and also held no loyalty to the ideas and concepts of the past PC parties who grew and maintained the province so well.
Make no mistake, the Alberta PC party needed to be sent a message. A loud message. A clear message. A wake up call to get your house in order and stop with all the bullshit and self entitled corruption and arrogance that had been on display over the last number of years since Ralph Klein handed over the reigns of a very healthy and out of debt province.
But in sending that message the voters of Alberta seem to have lost their collective minds because they gave a majority to the very party who holds the least amount in common with Alberta traditions and values and whose federal Party Line has always been to destroy the very industry that allowed Alberta to profit and grow and become "A HAVE PROVINCE".
Personally I just do not get it. If I'm against Animal Cruelty, I don't protest a shelter becoming a kill shelter by going out and killing and abusing a bunch of animals. OF COURSE NOT. No sound mind would make that leap from one end to the other out of protest. I protest that shelter specifically while not abandoning my values and beliefs and Morales.
But in effect that's what Alberta did, they mortgaged their long term future and well being by electing the very party that wants to go out and abuse the very industries that allowed Alberta to become successful.
And they did so while FALSELY claiming they knew and understood what they were doing.
They might have thought they knew what they were doing (I read a ton of false, fictional, and outright misleading propaganda coming from NDP supporters over last little while, so maybe they thought this fantasy crap was legit, I really do not know), but they were very wrong.
And believing falsified propaganda does not make one educated or informed.
Sadly it makes them anything but educated and informed.
Anyways, that's not exactly what I wanted to talk about. There was a TON of chatter last night as blind NDP supports cheered the NDP win (seriously read some of the stupidest claims made last night by those cheering the NDP. ) and anytime anyone mentioned the predictable reaction of industry in Alberta. They all (like mindless lemmings all under one strange mind control spell) would arrogantly respond with how industry will not move from Alberta and NDP will not go after industry
Seriously people, did you even READ the NDP platform????? Part of their platform was
"Sharing a greater portion of the Oil revenues through higher corporate taxation and operating fees"
News flash folks, that's been tried before and failed spectacularly.
And not only did it fail, it drove industry out of that province until the leader and his party were completely removed from the equation causing economic disaster for the province during the duration.
But you would know this if you truly were INFORMED (as some claimed to be)
"In 1996, Tobin resigned from federal politics to succeed Clyde Wells as leader of the Liberal Party of Newfoundland. The Liberal Party won a large majority government later that year. During his time as premier Tobin pursued tough negotiations with out-of-province companies seeking to export resources for refining and smelting elsewhere. He insisted that the resources will never be mined unless Newfoundlanders received secondary manufacturing and tertiary service spin-offs. A similar tough stance was taken in seeking to develop the Lower Churchill River" Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Tobin
The Alberta NDP platform on how it will share the wealth and stick it to big business is almost word for word copy from the Brian Tobin Liberal era in Newfoundland.
and as mentioned, industry there just shrugged at his demands and closed up shop (or minimized to a point they were not a issue anymore) until he was out of the equation. At the cost of jobs, security, over all well being.
"Newfoundland ends Voisey's talks indefinitely
MICHELLE MACAFEE
TWILLINGATE, Nfld. (CP) - Premier Brian Tobin won't be sending his
negotiating team for further talks with Inco to develop the Voisey's Bay nickel
project, a move that could see the development shelved indefinitely.
Tobin said Thursday he has notified Inco chairman Michael Sopko that further
discussions are pointless until the company is willing to "bring a far more
progressive" package to the table.
"Quite frankly, Inco now needs to report in a full and forthright way to its
board of directors and receive a new mandate for negotiations to take place,
or take steps as a company to put the project on hold," Tobin said during a
tour of rural Newfoundland.
"There is no tolerance or acceptance within government, or outside it, for the
kind of proposal now on the table."
Inco's board of directors are scheduled to meet Monday.
Tobin said he wants to make sure the directors have a complete and accurate
picture of the project's status.
This latest move by Tobin is a stronger assertion of comments he made last
week that suggested an agreement could not be reached based on Inco's
current proposal.
It was also learned Thursday that the Newfoundland government is exploring
the legalities of taxing Inco based on a "fallow-field" principle - essentially
charging them for every year they leave the rich ore deposit untouched.
Confidentiality agreements have prevented either side from specifying what the
stumbling blocks to a deal are.
But Tobin said negotiations can't begin again until it's clear Inco sees a future
for itself in Newfoundland.
The province also refuses to budge on its pledge that 100 per cent of the
smeltering and refining be done in the province.
Inco, which is struggling with slumping nickel prices, has said it can no longer
afford such an option and would prefer to process at least part of the ore at its
existing facilities.
"In our view, it's time for a reality check," said Tobin.
"If this means the project is held up for one year, two years or 25 years, it's a
price the people of Newfoundland are willing to pay."
The news that talks could be suspended for such a time will be a blow to the
communities set to reap the employment and spinoff benefits of the mine and
mill in northern Labrador, and the smelter-refinery complex in Argentia, Nfld.
Tobin said Inco has grossly underestimated the patience of Newfoundlanders,
who have learned from past mega-projects that short-term job gains are not
worth long-term economic losses.
"We're getting on with life," said Tobin. "There are many other projects and
many other partners."
c The Canadian Press, 1998"Copied from http://www.siliconinvestor.com/
There seems to be this delusional mindset from NDP followers (and Tobin followers back in 1998) that private business in some way owes them money or some type of living increase, just for being successful. Its pure socialism Bullshit of course. The only people a private industry owes is its investors and stock holders. Beyond that its just got to operate under legal standards. And when those legal standards become to cumbersome and effect the business profit margin, they up and move to more friendly settings that will welcome them. You can see it playing out first hand in Ontario right now as the Auto sector, once a staple of the Ontario industry and overall health, closes up and moves back to USA and Mexico.
The Ontario Liberals and Unions have been hammering the auto sector for a decade + now with higher operating costs, higher taxes, forced unionization increases, and finally its hit its breaking point and Ontario auto industry is in shambles and a shell of what it once was. Alberta Oil and gas industries are now posed to follow the same direction.
Oh and I'm sure the NDP, like the Ontario Liberals, will blame everything on the federal government. And some weak minded souls will believe it probably. But for everyone else, we seen this routine before. We seen this dance before. It always plays out the same way.
To quote Albert EinsteinInsanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
At what point do people start to wake up to the economic cost of embracing far left wing socialism agenda? I mean the evidence is out there there if you just open your eyes and read it. The only partisan articles are the ones you all keep posting to defend the left wing socialists (and that's because THEY WROTE THE FREAKING ARTICLES YOU QUOTING)
A friend on Facebook recently said it best in regards to Alberta,
But personally I think it applies to politics in general
And hes bang on the money (In regards to Canada in general in my opinion)
But both the socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative need to both have one foot solid in the CENTER / MODERATION.
The NDP in Alberta, the Liberals in Ontario, the Tobin Liberals in 1990s could not even begin to spell the word CENTER or MODERATE, much less govern from there socially or financially.
And that's ALWAYS when problems occur.
The next 4 years will be hard on Alberta.
I hope my friends and family do not feel the effects to harshly
MICHELLE MACAFEE
TWILLINGATE, Nfld. (CP) - Premier Brian Tobin won't be sending his
negotiating team for further talks with Inco to develop the Voisey's Bay nickel
project, a move that could see the development shelved indefinitely.
Tobin said Thursday he has notified Inco chairman Michael Sopko that further
discussions are pointless until the company is willing to "bring a far more
progressive" package to the table.
"Quite frankly, Inco now needs to report in a full and forthright way to its
board of directors and receive a new mandate for negotiations to take place,
or take steps as a company to put the project on hold," Tobin said during a
tour of rural Newfoundland.
"There is no tolerance or acceptance within government, or outside it, for the
kind of proposal now on the table."
Inco's board of directors are scheduled to meet Monday.
Tobin said he wants to make sure the directors have a complete and accurate
picture of the project's status.
This latest move by Tobin is a stronger assertion of comments he made last
week that suggested an agreement could not be reached based on Inco's
current proposal.
It was also learned Thursday that the Newfoundland government is exploring
the legalities of taxing Inco based on a "fallow-field" principle - essentially
charging them for every year they leave the rich ore deposit untouched.
Confidentiality agreements have prevented either side from specifying what the
stumbling blocks to a deal are.
But Tobin said negotiations can't begin again until it's clear Inco sees a future
for itself in Newfoundland.
The province also refuses to budge on its pledge that 100 per cent of the
smeltering and refining be done in the province.
Inco, which is struggling with slumping nickel prices, has said it can no longer
afford such an option and would prefer to process at least part of the ore at its
existing facilities.
"In our view, it's time for a reality check," said Tobin.
"If this means the project is held up for one year, two years or 25 years, it's a
price the people of Newfoundland are willing to pay."
The news that talks could be suspended for such a time will be a blow to the
communities set to reap the employment and spinoff benefits of the mine and
mill in northern Labrador, and the smelter-refinery complex in Argentia, Nfld.
Tobin said Inco has grossly underestimated the patience of Newfoundlanders,
who have learned from past mega-projects that short-term job gains are not
worth long-term economic losses.
"We're getting on with life," said Tobin. "There are many other projects and
many other partners."
c The Canadian Press, 1998"Copied from http://www.siliconinvestor.com/
There seems to be this delusional mindset from NDP followers (and Tobin followers back in 1998) that private business in some way owes them money or some type of living increase, just for being successful. Its pure socialism Bullshit of course. The only people a private industry owes is its investors and stock holders. Beyond that its just got to operate under legal standards. And when those legal standards become to cumbersome and effect the business profit margin, they up and move to more friendly settings that will welcome them. You can see it playing out first hand in Ontario right now as the Auto sector, once a staple of the Ontario industry and overall health, closes up and moves back to USA and Mexico.
Friday, April 03, 2015
Gotta wonder about some people
I've heard the term anarchist before but don't think I ever truly understand the depth of these types delusion until having a political argument with one. Oh it started as a joke that trended into a discussion that trended into an argument when I refused to accept the philosophy that taxation was the act of committing violence on those being taxed (yes you did not misread that one, that's seriously what the person I was arguing with was claiming.
Or more exactly, if you refused to pay your taxes then you were violently threatened unreasonably.
Yeah I didn't buy what he was selling either and thus it became an argument because I am a educated person and understand you can not claim to be the victim when you yourself commit the infraction originally. A predictable and lawful response does not mean you were threatened violently. If they actually break down your door and beat you, THAT'S Violence upon you. Holding you responsible in a court of law (regardless if you recognize it or not) is not being mistreated in any way.
But this discussion went well beyond this.
Apparently (according to the anarchist) the Roman Empire had no governmental structure and ONLY achieved its highest accomplishments while there was no senate or structure in the civilization.
When I pointed out that written history outright refutes that claim, I was told I didn't understand real history and that mans greatest civilizations only achieved their pinnacles while their was no taxation, no laws, no structure.
But when I asked for a example of course he was unable and unwilling to produce the name of such a civilization.
Eventually I just left the chat room because the idiotic nature of the claims being made where just that, idiotic and beyond worth arguing over.
I just do not see how anyone in this day and age could believe this crap he was spewing forth. The evidence they are wrong is right in front of them. All they need do is look at the roads they drive on, look at the water they drink. All this and so much more is only maintained through the tax base we all pay.
Now I am no lover of taxation and truthfully it pisses me off to no end when tax dollars are used to promote some political figures personal agenda. But to try and claim that everything will just sort itself out and taxes are not required is beyond idiotic and boarder line moronic.
Here in Canada our taxes pay for our Universal Health Care Coverage.
And honestly I DO NOT want to live in a country that doesn't have full universal health care coverage. I have been told that the spinal disease I have would run into the millions for same level care if I lived in the states. Instead in Canada our taxes cover that.
The roads we all drive on are paid for and maintained by local, regional (State/province), and even federal dollars that all come from the tax base. With out a tax base the roads would be non existent or poorly maintained (if at all).
With out taxation we would not have clean drinking water for all.
There is a many important and justifiable items taxes need to be raised for.
There is equally many unjustifiable items political figures and lobbyists waste our money on.
What we need to do is remove the waste
not remove the tax
It just baffles me in today's day and age with our scientific advances and standards of living (all supported directly or indirectly through taxation) that someone would be so closed minded to promote a way of thinking that eliminates everything and promotes the rational or mentality of...
"Only the strongest shall survive"
And how does someone think they can rewrite the history books to suit their claims and expect anyone to belief them?
I just do not understand some people and their very short sighted and vastly incorrect belief systems that would hurt and punish the most fragile and weakest of our society.
Just so they can avoid paying taxes.
For shame
For for shame.
Or more exactly, if you refused to pay your taxes then you were violently threatened unreasonably.
Yeah I didn't buy what he was selling either and thus it became an argument because I am a educated person and understand you can not claim to be the victim when you yourself commit the infraction originally. A predictable and lawful response does not mean you were threatened violently. If they actually break down your door and beat you, THAT'S Violence upon you. Holding you responsible in a court of law (regardless if you recognize it or not) is not being mistreated in any way.
But this discussion went well beyond this.
Apparently (according to the anarchist) the Roman Empire had no governmental structure and ONLY achieved its highest accomplishments while there was no senate or structure in the civilization.
When I pointed out that written history outright refutes that claim, I was told I didn't understand real history and that mans greatest civilizations only achieved their pinnacles while their was no taxation, no laws, no structure.
But when I asked for a example of course he was unable and unwilling to produce the name of such a civilization.
Eventually I just left the chat room because the idiotic nature of the claims being made where just that, idiotic and beyond worth arguing over.
I just do not see how anyone in this day and age could believe this crap he was spewing forth. The evidence they are wrong is right in front of them. All they need do is look at the roads they drive on, look at the water they drink. All this and so much more is only maintained through the tax base we all pay.
Now I am no lover of taxation and truthfully it pisses me off to no end when tax dollars are used to promote some political figures personal agenda. But to try and claim that everything will just sort itself out and taxes are not required is beyond idiotic and boarder line moronic.
Here in Canada our taxes pay for our Universal Health Care Coverage.
And honestly I DO NOT want to live in a country that doesn't have full universal health care coverage. I have been told that the spinal disease I have would run into the millions for same level care if I lived in the states. Instead in Canada our taxes cover that.
The roads we all drive on are paid for and maintained by local, regional (State/province), and even federal dollars that all come from the tax base. With out a tax base the roads would be non existent or poorly maintained (if at all).
With out taxation we would not have clean drinking water for all.
There is a many important and justifiable items taxes need to be raised for.
There is equally many unjustifiable items political figures and lobbyists waste our money on.
What we need to do is remove the waste
not remove the tax
It just baffles me in today's day and age with our scientific advances and standards of living (all supported directly or indirectly through taxation) that someone would be so closed minded to promote a way of thinking that eliminates everything and promotes the rational or mentality of...
"Only the strongest shall survive"
And how does someone think they can rewrite the history books to suit their claims and expect anyone to belief them?
I just do not understand some people and their very short sighted and vastly incorrect belief systems that would hurt and punish the most fragile and weakest of our society.
Just so they can avoid paying taxes.
For shame
For for shame.
Tuesday, 24 February 2015
My personal take on Global Warming, climate change, carbon tax
So a while ago a person with ties to a friend of mine made one of the most stupid statements I ever read in regards to Global Warming (now renamed to Climate change when the original deadline came and passed with none of the predicted disasters occurring). He claimed the 97% of the worlds scientists agreed on Global Warming. NINETY SEVEN PERCENT.
Forget Global warming for a second and ask yourself if 97% of the world scientists have agreed on anything in the history of the Earth, much less a far more divisive topic as global warming was when Al Gore and other far left wing environmentalists started a world frenzy over apocalyptic predictions that never came to pass.
I guess before I get into this I should make my stance on the subject clear to all.
From all the evidence and material I have read (from all sides of the arguments) I believe our climate change in regions is because of the Earth shifting. So where as one region might be a desert now, in 100, 200, 300 years it might be experiencing hard precipitation weather patterns. And there is die hard scientific evidence to back up this belief from our history. Long before there was pollution and Carbon and what not. I do not disagree pollution needs to be controlled and I would love to see large stretches of wilderness and natural habitat left untouched and free from "development". But unlike many people who allow their political agendas to interrupt their environmental desires, I do not look for a boogie man to connects the two. If and when the scientific communities agree on a connection, I will revisit that stance I have made for myself. But right now its just a big us vrs them game of political agendas and maneuvers.
Why is it that a left wing whack a do can claim 97% of the science community agrees with Global Warming? He says it because he ignore the scientific findings of anyone, regardless how credible they are, that disagrees with his own opinion of the matter. That's all. Its not some amazing all inclusive coming together of the scientific community. He just ignores anyone who disagrees, regardless of what evidence and argument they may present. And the only reason its 97% is because it would sound to arrogant to claim 100%. That's really all it is in a nut shell.
Al Gores global disaster has come and gone, there is as much ice (in some cases more) today as there was when he predicted the global ice caps would be melted by 2014 (predicted in 2007). I could link article after article after article but why bother, we all know there is ice at the caps. Gore said "COMPLETELY GONE". Its a pretty easy prediction to complete discredit outright. Oh sure the alarmists spin and twist and re-design what Gore MEANT (what are we into science fiction and mind reading now?). The be all and end all is he said "COMPLETELY GONE BY 2014". Nothing else needs to be said on subject there.
The problem with pointing this out is as you do a Google search for a link you quickly find EVERY political agenda that agrees with Gore if funded and supported by the radical Left wing environmental movement. And every political agenda that disagrees is funded by the radically Right Wing US Republican/Tea Party movements. And on both sides you get to hear the *in best Huck Finn voice*
"well ummm 97% of all scientists agree (disagree) with global warming yuck yuck".
Its a con job on both sides and those of us in the middle who don't pick one side or the other end up wanting to strangle both sides for their stupidity.
Lets make it really simply for these people (both sides)
Pollution is bad for the environment
No pollution is bad for the economy
you need to find the happy medium where BOTH can survive and flourish equally
Go to far either way and then you really do have global issues that end up being equally as disastrous.
The original Global Warming scare was a fraud, simple as that
Even the scientists have recanted their earlier statements Forbes article and please note this 2013 article has the agreement percentage among scientists as low as 36% (far cry from 97% I might say, as claimed. This is Forbes magazine, NOT renown for their anti climate change platform.
Here is Worldnews NBCnews Article on RECANTING GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTIST
Listen I could go on and on with links and examples and FACTS but the simple truth is
Those who want to believe in global warming and push a radical left wing environmental agenda will always find some way to justify their beliefs. Usually by ensuring the literature they receive and read reinforces their beliefs and agendas. Anything counter to their beliefs will be titled Climate change deniers or some other monstrously evil sounding name in obvious attempts to silence them through social media bullying and intimidation.
And those that think everything is A OK and we need to push forward with out ever looking backwards will be just as pig headed and un-flexible and equally pushy through intimidation.
Personally I would love to live in a world where we created no pollution, no CO 2, no impact on nature. But the truth is our technology has not reached that level to achieve that goal. Here in Ontario we pay more to buy wind and solar energy then we charge the people to use it. Because technology simply is not to a level that wind and solar energy are viable sources of energy for the masses.
or
or
and finally
I wish it was different. I would gladly put solar panels on my roof and become self sufficient while causing no pollution.
BUT THE FACTS DO NOT SUPPORT THE LEFT WING ENVIRONMENTALISM AGENDA.
The honest truth is Global Warming (now refereed to as climate change) is a means to an end politically and financially. It takes a fundamentally honest ideal and principle of less pollution, cleaner air and politicizes it into a abomination and cash cow for individuals and left wing governments. Gore and Suzuki have made millions off of the global warming scare, while they jet setted across the world in their private planes, leaving far greater carbon footprints then any 1000 Americans or Canadians ever will.
Left wing governments love to throw out the carbon tax concept (despite other countries like Australia reversing and removing carbon taxes after suffering financial destruction because of it Senate votes to dump carbon tax that voters wanted scrapped
or worse forcing countries to go back to obsolete energy mechanics via a loop hole in the carbon tax structures carbon tax failure leaves uk relying on old coal
And as we all know, if there is a loop hole to be found, someone will utilize it.
Personally rather then pushing in agendas and flawed formats like Carbon taxation that will leave people scrambling to find ulterior mechanics that allow them to cheaply skirt the tax concepts. Why don't we put into place laws that EVERYONE can agree on so EVERYONE is working towards the same goal and target, rather then looking for ways to cheat the system.
Or least that's what 97% of the people who agree with me say!
Friday, 23 January 2015
So the end of another great TV series has come.
The Newsroom was a really smart and entertaining Semi political drama by Aaron Sorkin. The mastermind behind amazing series like The West Wing and Movies like The American President, A Few Good Men, and much much more.
The basic premise of the show was a bored but highly educated and intelligent TV anchor (moderate politically with right wing leanings) who has made a career of being liked rather then being about substance has his world woken up and shaken by a liberal (democrat) activist who steps in as his shows producer.
In the real world now a days that would most likely end up as a bitter name calling yelling match (and to Sorkins credit he did add abit of that in to make it more realistic) but mostly you are met with characters who are passionate about what they believe in and are willing to out think you to make their point (I know I know, you will not find that in modern journalism anymore. Its a TV show, you gotta suspend some disbelief).
The show wasn't perfect mind you. After an amazing first season they devolved into the 2nd season being very preachy and sadly very one sided politically as it attacked the Republican Tea Party. Now I'm not going to sit here and stick up for the Republican Tea Party as even here in Canada we get to hear some really wacky stuff coming from them.
I often liken the Republican Tea Party is to the Right what the Liberals (federal and provincial) are to the left in Canada. Both go way to far to their ideological extreme.
And I know far to well that Aaron Sorkin writes stuff based in facts so its pretty easy to believe much of the demonizing is true and well deserved. But I also pay attention to daily news and know he passed up allot of flub's on the left during that time to focus solely on The Tea Party. So while his second season may be factually correct (in a artistic way of writing), its also very narrow minded and that's probably why the 2nd season was not as well received over all. The mastery of his work on The West Wing was always that he could write for his democratic characters while never really attacking their republican counter parts.
In season 2 of The Newsroom he lost that balance and the work suffered for it.
But that was just the stuff about the Tea Party, otherwise his writing even in season 2 was masterful.
As was his writing in Season 1 along with the greatest 8 minutes ever for opening a series (Take a look, you will not be disappointed).
But for me it was episodes 5 and 6 of season 3 that really hit home for me.
I live outside Toronto, Ontario, Canada and I also am politically moderate with right leanings.
So for the last 4 years I have watched the left wing media and political figures attack Toronto's old mayor (Rob Ford) with accusations after accusations after accusations. Every single day it was something new. Some eventually stuck and brought Rob Ford down. Many how ever failed to stick and were dropped for a new accusation the next day and so on and so on and so on. And I watched from outside Toronto with horror and disgust as the Left Wing media of Toronto worked togather to bring down a man they disagreed with politically.
90% of those accusations came from "anonymous sources", which to me means "someone with an ax to grind". Oh the Left Wing media would try to justify their "anonymous sources" but comparing them to Watergate and how Deep Throat played a huge role in Nixon being brought down. But what they always refused to accept or admit is Deep Throats accusations were never taken as biblical fact. He gave the lead and then Woodward and Bernstein would independently VERIFY the information before reporting it.
The Toronto Left Wing Media forgot about that little bit and just ran the gossip as fact. When it was disproven they didn't recant or apologize, they just moved onto the next "anonymous source" gossip.
And this went on for roughly 4.5 years until Ford withdrew from running for re-election due to health issues (cancer) and had his brother take over.
So I'm watching the final 2 episodes of The Newsroom and one of their opening scenes is the journalists are arguing in a room about how they report on celebrities and gossip rather then news. Specifically saying "We spent 30 minutes reporting on Toronto Mayor Rob Ford rumors and only 2 minutes reporting on the financial collapse of Detroit as they ran out of money and entered bankruptcy" (sorry could not find clip of scene) and WOW did that hit home. Everything I had been complaining about regarding media ignoring news to present unchecked gossip.
But The Newroom was not finished there. The followed that scene up with an amazing remake of a famous Jimmy Kimmel (sitting in for Larry King) interview with Gawker (sorry no link as I refuse to link to that trash site).
The Newsroom Interview (fictional)
The Gawker/Kimmel Interview (really happened)
There just is not writing of that degree on TV anymore.
Aaron Sorkin has that rare ability to look at both sides of a issue and understand both sides.
And when something is clearly wrong (as is modern journalism/media and these gossip rag sites) hes not afraid to call them out on their BS.
Its so refreshing in a modern landscape of over political correctness BS.
Great series.
Not as good as The West Wing
But still great in its own right.
PS: And WTF was Jeff Daniels thinking in not resigning to do this role in this series but instead doing garbage like Dumb and Dumber 2 (again no link because it simply doesn't deserve a link).
It was a role of a lifetime and he tossed it away to ... well honestly I'm not even sure what to call his next role with Jim Carey.
What a waste of talent.
And I know far to well that Aaron Sorkin writes stuff based in facts so its pretty easy to believe much of the demonizing is true and well deserved. But I also pay attention to daily news and know he passed up allot of flub's on the left during that time to focus solely on The Tea Party. So while his second season may be factually correct (in a artistic way of writing), its also very narrow minded and that's probably why the 2nd season was not as well received over all. The mastery of his work on The West Wing was always that he could write for his democratic characters while never really attacking their republican counter parts.
Tuesday, 15 July 2014
Toronto Mayor Debate July 15, 2014 Recap
Well that was an interesting debate I just watched
More debates I watch regarding upcoming Toronto Election, the Happier I am I don't live in Toronto. Cause that city is majorly FUBAR if anyone but Ford gets elected. And Im not convinced Ford can actually get his platform through facing the city councils agendas that Toronto normally elect.
Lets run through the answers in short version
Scarborough wants Subways, what do you support
Ford : Subways
Everyone else: Scarborough residents to stupid to understand whats best for them, we will do LRTs and residents will just have to accept it (sorry thats really how it came off to me)
Managing city money and council spending
Tory: Long winded answer that really amounts to "I was head guy at Rogers. I understand money" (Forget that Rogers is the most expensive cable in North America and lets not even start on cell phone charges)
Stinz: I will fix transit (sadly Im not joking here)
Sodnaki: Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah (actually he really said nothing on this topic)
Chow: Rob Ford is a drunk (again sadly I'm not joking, she opened comment saying "Rob Ford, Even when your clean and sober you cant tell the truth". Insulting Ford was her go to answer all debate. You gotta be very very VERY partisan left wing extremist to think Chow wasn't tied with Sodnaki in last place at end of this debate)
Ford: Went over his numbers again and then pointed out Chows and Torys massive spending expenses in city and provincial governments when in previous office . Not a sexy answer but was easily the most on topic and relevant answer.
Poor section of Toronto and low cost housing
Chow: Will beg Province for money. And Ford is a drunk (seeing a pattern here yet? She came off very unprofessional and mean spirited and very nasty. )
Tory: City cant fix it so will have to ask feds and province for money (called partnership but begging is begging and if your reliant on begging, you have no plan at all)
Sodnaki: Wants to build parks (seriously, I didn't get it either)
Stinz : Actually very good response by her here and only time in debate she didnt spin question back to transit issue. Spoke about schools selling off their play grounds and feilds for income and that schools dont need more money, they need to spend the money they have smarter. LOVED THAT QUOTE. Wont get her any votes and will probably cost her votes in long run but her answer still was very well thought out and educated.
Ford: Went over list of community centers opened and being built under his watch as mayor. All night Tory and Chow tried to dismiss these facts of achievements under Fords leadership but truth is, when the after hour stuff removed from issue, Fords got a very impressive resume' as a city councilor and then as mayor.
All I learned today watching this is what I already knew
I'd NEVER vote for
Tory (far left tax and spend liberal pretending to be a small c conservative),
Chow (just a nasty nasty nasty woman with a laundry list of wasting tax payer dollars at every level of government and no clue how to pay for all this stuff she claims she will just magically bring in)
Sodnaki: Honestly think hes already admitted defeat and now just there for the ego boost of running. Hes clearly not resonating with any of the voters out there and has no clue what hes going on about.
Stinz: Shame shes a one topic candidate. If she put even 50% of her effort into all the other issues in the Toronto election she could probably do fairly well in the election and possibly even win. But sadly with her its all about transit and she hasn't put the thought or research into those other issues. And that's what will eliminate her in the near future.
Ford: Fresh outta rehab and finding his stride again (not there yet) but hes got the resume' and experience for the job. Of all the candidate hes THE ONLY ONE Id trust with my money if I lived in Toronto. The man may be flawed personally but professionally he knows what he is doing and what he wants to do. And was easily the most prepared of all the candidates in the debate to truly debate the issues on the facts and not sink to personal insults and attacks.
Well that was an interesting debate I just watched
More debates I watch regarding upcoming Toronto Election, the Happier I am I don't live in Toronto. Cause that city is majorly FUBAR if anyone but Ford gets elected. And Im not convinced Ford can actually get his platform through facing the city councils agendas that Toronto normally elect.
Lets run through the answers in short version
Scarborough wants Subways, what do you support
Ford : Subways
Everyone else: Scarborough residents to stupid to understand whats best for them, we will do LRTs and residents will just have to accept it (sorry thats really how it came off to me)
Managing city money and council spending
Tory: Long winded answer that really amounts to "I was head guy at Rogers. I understand money" (Forget that Rogers is the most expensive cable in North America and lets not even start on cell phone charges)
Stinz: I will fix transit (sadly Im not joking here)
Sodnaki: Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah (actually he really said nothing on this topic)
Chow: Rob Ford is a drunk (again sadly I'm not joking, she opened comment saying "Rob Ford, Even when your clean and sober you cant tell the truth". Insulting Ford was her go to answer all debate. You gotta be very very VERY partisan left wing extremist to think Chow wasn't tied with Sodnaki in last place at end of this debate)
Ford: Went over his numbers again and then pointed out Chows and Torys massive spending expenses in city and provincial governments when in previous office . Not a sexy answer but was easily the most on topic and relevant answer.
Poor section of Toronto and low cost housing
Chow: Will beg Province for money. And Ford is a drunk (seeing a pattern here yet? She came off very unprofessional and mean spirited and very nasty. )
Tory: City cant fix it so will have to ask feds and province for money (called partnership but begging is begging and if your reliant on begging, you have no plan at all)
Sodnaki: Wants to build parks (seriously, I didn't get it either)
Stinz : Actually very good response by her here and only time in debate she didnt spin question back to transit issue. Spoke about schools selling off their play grounds and feilds for income and that schools dont need more money, they need to spend the money they have smarter. LOVED THAT QUOTE. Wont get her any votes and will probably cost her votes in long run but her answer still was very well thought out and educated.
Ford: Went over list of community centers opened and being built under his watch as mayor. All night Tory and Chow tried to dismiss these facts of achievements under Fords leadership but truth is, when the after hour stuff removed from issue, Fords got a very impressive resume' as a city councilor and then as mayor.
All I learned today watching this is what I already knew
I'd NEVER vote for
Tory (far left tax and spend liberal pretending to be a small c conservative),
Chow (just a nasty nasty nasty woman with a laundry list of wasting tax payer dollars at every level of government and no clue how to pay for all this stuff she claims she will just magically bring in)
Sodnaki: Honestly think hes already admitted defeat and now just there for the ego boost of running. Hes clearly not resonating with any of the voters out there and has no clue what hes going on about.
Stinz: Shame shes a one topic candidate. If she put even 50% of her effort into all the other issues in the Toronto election she could probably do fairly well in the election and possibly even win. But sadly with her its all about transit and she hasn't put the thought or research into those other issues. And that's what will eliminate her in the near future.
Ford: Fresh outta rehab and finding his stride again (not there yet) but hes got the resume' and experience for the job. Of all the candidate hes THE ONLY ONE Id trust with my money if I lived in Toronto. The man may be flawed personally but professionally he knows what he is doing and what he wants to do. And was easily the most prepared of all the candidates in the debate to truly debate the issues on the facts and not sink to personal insults and attacks.
More debates I watch regarding upcoming Toronto Election, the Happier I am I don't live in Toronto. Cause that city is majorly FUBAR if anyone but Ford gets elected. And Im not convinced Ford can actually get his platform through facing the city councils agendas that Toronto normally elect.
Lets run through the answers in short version
Scarborough wants Subways, what do you support
Ford : Subways
Everyone else: Scarborough residents to stupid to understand whats best for them, we will do LRTs and residents will just have to accept it (sorry thats really how it came off to me)
Managing city money and council spending
Tory: Long winded answer that really amounts to "I was head guy at Rogers. I understand money" (Forget that Rogers is the most expensive cable in North America and lets not even start on cell phone charges)
Stinz: I will fix transit (sadly Im not joking here)
Sodnaki: Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah (actually he really said nothing on this topic)
Chow: Rob Ford is a drunk (again sadly I'm not joking, she opened comment saying "Rob Ford, Even when your clean and sober you cant tell the truth". Insulting Ford was her go to answer all debate. You gotta be very very VERY partisan left wing extremist to think Chow wasn't tied with Sodnaki in last place at end of this debate)
Ford: Went over his numbers again and then pointed out Chows and Torys massive spending expenses in city and provincial governments when in previous office . Not a sexy answer but was easily the most on topic and relevant answer.
Poor section of Toronto and low cost housing
Chow: Will beg Province for money. And Ford is a drunk (seeing a pattern here yet? She came off very unprofessional and mean spirited and very nasty. )
Tory: City cant fix it so will have to ask feds and province for money (called partnership but begging is begging and if your reliant on begging, you have no plan at all)
Sodnaki: Wants to build parks (seriously, I didn't get it either)
Stinz : Actually very good response by her here and only time in debate she didnt spin question back to transit issue. Spoke about schools selling off their play grounds and feilds for income and that schools dont need more money, they need to spend the money they have smarter. LOVED THAT QUOTE. Wont get her any votes and will probably cost her votes in long run but her answer still was very well thought out and educated.
Ford: Went over list of community centers opened and being built under his watch as mayor. All night Tory and Chow tried to dismiss these facts of achievements under Fords leadership but truth is, when the after hour stuff removed from issue, Fords got a very impressive resume' as a city councilor and then as mayor.
All I learned today watching this is what I already knew
I'd NEVER vote for
Tory (far left tax and spend liberal pretending to be a small c conservative),
Sodnaki: Honestly think hes already admitted defeat and now just there for the ego boost of running. Hes clearly not resonating with any of the voters out there and has no clue what hes going on about.
Stinz: Shame shes a one topic candidate. If she put even 50% of her effort into all the other issues in the Toronto election she could probably do fairly well in the election and possibly even win. But sadly with her its all about transit and she hasn't put the thought or research into those other issues. And that's what will eliminate her in the near future.
Ford: Fresh outta rehab and finding his stride again (not there yet) but hes got the resume' and experience for the job. Of all the candidate hes THE ONLY ONE Id trust with my money if I lived in Toronto. The man may be flawed personally but professionally he knows what he is doing and what he wants to do. And was easily the most prepared of all the candidates in the debate to truly debate the issues on the facts and not sink to personal insults and attacks.
Tuesday, 24 June 2014
Oh look, another meaningless apology from the media, what a shock
Ottawa Citizen apologizes to David Bowie for not making one Phone Call to fact check their story before printing it falsely accusing him
Here is the problem with this
How many people see (or read) this retraction by the Ottawa Citizen
compared to how many will continue to falsely accuse and belittle David Bowie for something he had no control over and had done everything he could do to promote and support Chris Hatfield version of Space Oddity.
How about instead of writing an apology the media in Canada (Toronto Ontario specifically, even though this one about an Ottawa paper) start acting like REAL REPORTERS and FINDING OUT ALL THE FACTS before publishing.
Media in Canada and USA has become a #%$@!#% disgrace to the once proud profession. Now they rather be first to press (online or print) and to hell with the fact or evidence to support their false claims.
This story about a song.
Couple weeks ago it was about blatant false coverage in politics where the media acted and behaved more like paid lobbyists, then responsible journalists.
Time and time and time again we see the media screw up, print errors and falsehoods, or just write outright fantasy to push their agenda or (as was this) try and rally public outrage to pressure or punish someone or something they disagree with.
When did we the people STOP asking for actual factual information from our media?
One phone call to Bowie publicist would have stopped this error filled article from going to print. ONE PHONE CALL. Is that really to much to ask for?
2 weeks ago, a reporter reading the actual platforms before reporting would have drastically changed the coverage of the Ontario election where journalists could have actually reported the fact rather then promote misinformation and flat out lies.
When did we the people decide it was OK for our media to be so uninformed, unreliable, uneducated, and so flat out partisan and bias in the media coverage of any given event?
Personally I think we deserve more and require more of our media and frankly I think the laws should change that ALL MEDIA be held to a much higher standard then they are now. The media use to hold itself to that standard but clearly no longer does and is not willing to.
This was a nothing issue that at worst did some damage to David Bowie's reputation.
But this is not the only time we see these unforgivable mistakes of pure laziness and unprofessional behavior by the media.
What if the next false report is about something that truly does matter.
Would a self serving and disingenuous apology be good enough then?
Do we not deserve honest, truthful, investigated, and fact checked articles from our media?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, 22 June 2014
Ottawa Citizen apologizes to David Bowie for not making one Phone Call to fact check their story before printing it falsely accusing him
Here is the problem with this
How many people see (or read) this retraction by the Ottawa Citizen
compared to how many will continue to falsely accuse and belittle David Bowie for something he had no control over and had done everything he could do to promote and support Chris Hatfield version of Space Oddity.
How about instead of writing an apology the media in Canada (Toronto Ontario specifically, even though this one about an Ottawa paper) start acting like REAL REPORTERS and FINDING OUT ALL THE FACTS before publishing.
Media in Canada and USA has become a #%$@!#% disgrace to the once proud profession. Now they rather be first to press (online or print) and to hell with the fact or evidence to support their false claims.
This story about a song.
Couple weeks ago it was about blatant false coverage in politics where the media acted and behaved more like paid lobbyists, then responsible journalists.
Time and time and time again we see the media screw up, print errors and falsehoods, or just write outright fantasy to push their agenda or (as was this) try and rally public outrage to pressure or punish someone or something they disagree with.
When did we the people STOP asking for actual factual information from our media?
One phone call to Bowie publicist would have stopped this error filled article from going to print. ONE PHONE CALL. Is that really to much to ask for?
2 weeks ago, a reporter reading the actual platforms before reporting would have drastically changed the coverage of the Ontario election where journalists could have actually reported the fact rather then promote misinformation and flat out lies.
When did we the people decide it was OK for our media to be so uninformed, unreliable, uneducated, and so flat out partisan and bias in the media coverage of any given event?
Personally I think we deserve more and require more of our media and frankly I think the laws should change that ALL MEDIA be held to a much higher standard then they are now. The media use to hold itself to that standard but clearly no longer does and is not willing to.
This was a nothing issue that at worst did some damage to David Bowie's reputation.
But this is not the only time we see these unforgivable mistakes of pure laziness and unprofessional behavior by the media.
What if the next false report is about something that truly does matter.
Would a self serving and disingenuous apology be good enough then?
Do we not deserve honest, truthful, investigated, and fact checked articles from our media?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the problem with this
How many people see (or read) this retraction by the Ottawa Citizen
compared to how many will continue to falsely accuse and belittle David Bowie for something he had no control over and had done everything he could do to promote and support Chris Hatfield version of Space Oddity.
How about instead of writing an apology the media in Canada (Toronto Ontario specifically, even though this one about an Ottawa paper) start acting like REAL REPORTERS and FINDING OUT ALL THE FACTS before publishing.
Media in Canada and USA has become a #%$@!#% disgrace to the once proud profession. Now they rather be first to press (online or print) and to hell with the fact or evidence to support their false claims.
This story about a song.
Couple weeks ago it was about blatant false coverage in politics where the media acted and behaved more like paid lobbyists, then responsible journalists.
Time and time and time again we see the media screw up, print errors and falsehoods, or just write outright fantasy to push their agenda or (as was this) try and rally public outrage to pressure or punish someone or something they disagree with.
When did we the people STOP asking for actual factual information from our media?
One phone call to Bowie publicist would have stopped this error filled article from going to print. ONE PHONE CALL. Is that really to much to ask for?
2 weeks ago, a reporter reading the actual platforms before reporting would have drastically changed the coverage of the Ontario election where journalists could have actually reported the fact rather then promote misinformation and flat out lies.
When did we the people decide it was OK for our media to be so uninformed, unreliable, uneducated, and so flat out partisan and bias in the media coverage of any given event?
Personally I think we deserve more and require more of our media and frankly I think the laws should change that ALL MEDIA be held to a much higher standard then they are now. The media use to hold itself to that standard but clearly no longer does and is not willing to.
This was a nothing issue that at worst did some damage to David Bowie's reputation.
But this is not the only time we see these unforgivable mistakes of pure laziness and unprofessional behavior by the media.
What if the next false report is about something that truly does matter.
Would a self serving and disingenuous apology be good enough then?
Do we not deserve honest, truthful, investigated, and fact checked articles from our media?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to Politics Archaeology
August 27, 2013
Partisanship Runeth Amok
Partisanship Runeth Amok
Anyone (those of you that follow Ontario/Federal politics) ever
notice that the Toronto/Ontario left just LOVE to throw Duffy/Wallin
in your face (even if you have said 1000 times already they should
be in jail for fraud) but get right bent outta shape when you say
all the other Senators and MPs (and provincial leaders here in
Ontario) who also defrauded the system and/or stole even more money
then Duffy and Wallin did should join them in jail?
Why do they think they making some sort of point by constantly
complaining about Duffy and Wallin (who again should be brought up
on criminal fraud charges and sent to jail for their crimes IMO)
but don't see how big of a hypocrite they are when they don't add in:
Marc Harb (liberal Senator who was making false financial claims
longer and for more money then Duffy or Wallin),
The Liberal MPs who have refused to pay back their election loans
(that Revenue Canada now lists as noncollectable),
McGuinty/Wynne who used almost a Billion dollars of tax payer money
(all the scandals added together) to buy votes last election
(that's proven fact, not opinion btw).
Gas Plant Scandal
E Health Scandal
Orange Helicopter Scandal
and more...
And that doesn't even include the
Justin Trudeau public speaking issue where he charged Charities
(him and 2 other liberals ONLY MPs to ever charge a charity as a
guest speaker. No other party ever done it in reported time frame),
his highly suspect change of vote on a contentious union issue
vote days after
collecting insanely high public speaking money from same union
who benefited in vote.
And yet time and time and time again all you hear is "Duffy and
Wallin" from these left wingnut posters.
Whats so wrong about just wanting ALL THE PROVEN CROOKS, regardless
of party affiliation to get punished.
Why do these types insist it only be those from parties they
don't like.
Shouldn't the goal of any Canadian, be them Liberal, Conservative,
Green, NDP, Rhino, Communist, who ever, be having a completely
transparent and accountable government at all levels of
government, no matter what party the accused represents?
Doesn't that sound like the most common sense approach on these
corruption issues?
Thats not to suggest some Conservative, NDP, and Green supporters
don't also push their parties agendas as well. But it does seem in
the Toronto and Eastern Ontario region its the self described
Lefties (I assume by their exclusion of all things Liberal they
truly just liberal supporters but I say Lefties as that's what they
mostly claim they are) are the WORST offenders out there.
Whats funny is it seems they always call me a Conservative when I
call them on their hypocrisy.
I'm actually not Conservative, I'm a moderate that leans slightly
to the right for the fiscal nature, but slightly to left for some
animal/enviromental issues (please dont confuse that with
environmental whack a do's that think are Environmental Extremists.
I understand fully there has to be a balance between industry and
nature right now. Maybe in the future solar/wind power will be
viable to replace oil and coal and hydro but we are not there yet,
not even close yet.)
As I said, I'm a moderate, I tend to support the candidate closest
to the center. It doesn't matter if they are center right or center
left, long as they are center first! Which makes it really easy for
me to tell if someone a far left/far right extremist. They will
100% of time proclaim in conservative or liberal depending on
their extremist view point.
Anyways, back to topic. In Ontario the most bias and hypocritical I
find are the lefties. They just refuse to look at the whole
picture. Heck some of the media in Ontario just flat out makes
up stories to promote their left wing agenda.
Look at the Rob Ford crack cocaine story.
- no video ever presented (and the excuse the Sun had for not buying
the elusive (and imaginary) video upfront was laughable for any REAL
news agency)
-no sources willing to step forward and speak on the record (there was
sources willing to step forward and speak on record in Rob Fords
Defense however)
- Not a single shred of physical or reliable (sources that could be
vetted for legitimacy) evidence was ever brought forward
Yet the story ran hot and heavy for 3-4 weeks and still comes up
now 2.5 months later in a couple of the Far left media tabloids.
In fact now the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star are being
investigated by the Journalistic Press Council.
Whens the last time you heard of a media outlet, any media outlet
in Canada (Sun media included) be investigated for what amounts to
breach of ethics in Canadian Journalism?
I gotta admit I can't think of a single example EVER, off top of
my head.
I won't lie, I think the CBC should be routinely investigated for
their insanely bias and one sided writing (can't really call it
reporting) when it comes to Canadian politics.
Outside Canada they great.
Outside politics they great (unless Suzuki or some far left
activist involved).
But you add in politics and all legitimacy flies out the window
and they become the Far left cheerleaders of Canada. Heck they
even attacked Martin and Chrétien for not being far left enough
during their eras as Prime Minister. And they were through and
through Liberals all the way.
I don't know, guess I just wish there was a balance in Canada and
people and media could drop their obvious bias.
If your candidate has solid ideas,
can hold complete discussions on important matters,
stay consistent day to day on those matters,
That should be enough.
You shouldn't have to try and set hypocritical standards on one
party but give the other party a free pass, even though they are
even bigger crooks and more corrupt then the party you going
after.
I routinely read and hear derogatory remarks out here in Ontario
about the West (Alberta in specific), but I got to say, even though
Alberta is most definately Right Wing country, they never shied
away from calling out their political leaders and parties when they
stopped working for the people and started working for themselves.
Corruption was not tolerated.
Regardless of party.
And you didn't pick and choose your targets based on political
ideology
-I would love to see all the Senators and MPs who owe money
forced to pay it back (with interest).
-I would lave to see those who break election promises (with out
exterior happenings/components causeing it, like a world wide
financial crisis) held in purgery for their lies (and election
promise should be akin to swearing an oath in a court of law )
-I would love to see a independant agency whose sole job is to
investigate Senators and MPs finances (who is completely non partisan
and away from government intervention/abuse) monitor ALL our
elected officials
-I would love to see mandatory RANDOM drug tests (multiple every
year, little as 2, as many as 10, completely unpredictable) on ALL
Federal and Provincial employees (not just elected but ALL that work
in government employment). I am tested for drugs as im on
disability and take narcotic pain killers (prescribed and closely
monitored). I agree fully with being tested but fail to see why
I should be held to a higher standard then the people that
represent our government.
I promise, do those 4 steps and 90% of the corruption and abuse
in provincial government and Federal government disappears with in
a couple years (some idiots will still test the systems and need
to be made examples of).
Maybe when our elected officials start to walk a higher degree of
standards, maybe then the supporters of each party can also
improve and stop being so all fired hypocritical all the time.
I gotta admit I'm baffled at times by the responses of some
people, even friends.
There recently was an article here in local paper blasting the
Conservatives for calling paper up and trying to plant a story
blasting Justin Trudeau on the vote selling to unions story.
Now parties calling up papers to plant one sided stories is
common place and all parties do it, so I didn't really think
there was much to this honestly. Just a politically left paper
trying to create a story out of spin.
Then I watched a interview with a liberal strategist, where he
reaffirmed my thoughts on matter that there was nothing unusual
and admitted to doing it himself (but obviously planting a pro
Liberal piece) and even laughed about the local paper taking the
pro Conservative intern to town over this. *note hes since changed
tune and written one sided attacks on Cons (which is why I
neither name him or link him with out the Original TV link to
showcase his hypocrisy on issue now) for this but that doesn't
erase his original reaction on TV over the topic*
So when I saw a friend congratulating that paper for standing up
to the mean ol conservatives I openly questioned why.
I wasn't rude, aggressive, obnoxious in any manner. Just laid out
the FACTS of the case and asked how he could applaud obvious
partisan spinning by the paper while bad mouthing the Cons for
attempting to do the exact same thing as what the Liberals and
NDP also do regularly.
I got yelled at for my political agenda (Again they were suggesting
far right conservative which is far far far off the mark), got
called a asshole by a couple of other people I didn't know and
have never met (but were in friends acquaintance circle) before I
just stopped bothering to read replies. Was crystal clear no one
was going to answer the very real and very honestly asked question
by me. Was once again the left piling on the moderate with false
accusations and what not, but no answers being given.
Just suppose to go
"bad conservative, good liberal, pat my head now"
Sorry kiddies, I'm not made that way. When I see something wrong
I speak up. Even if its someone I normally support.
I just don't get it.
I really don't.
Have a little self respect and pride people.
When I disagree with Harper, I speak out in disagreement
It doesn't matter to me what political stripe he is (hes Right
Center, more right then center but far from the evil republican
conservative the left here likes to try and paint him as), I only
care about what hes doing.
When the disagreement list is bigger then the agreement list (or
when the Liberals finally get a leader whose again based in center
rather then extreme left) I will start looking at alternatives to
him.
But for me, Center is important. Being flexible to do the correct
choice while not being blinded by strike unbending extremist
agendas (or either side).
I just do not get this blind partisanship so many people out here
follow and subscribe to.
My motto is easy
Jail the crooks
stay in middle and lead from a strong base thats flexible enough to
go the correct direction when its required
And KEEP YOUR ELECTION PROMISES
And try to set an example (our elected officials) by obeying our laws,
even the ones you might not agree with
But apparently that's makes me a far right extremist out here in
the fictional center of the Canadian Universe.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 27, 2011
Good Bye Jane Taber
So just a quick update, later ill bring Tuesdays cat story for this week.Just wanted to make mention that Jane Taber’s last day on CTV’s weekly political round up show Question Period was yesterday June 26, 2011.Now I didn’t always agree with Jane Taber on the topics and that’s how it should be a for a reporter. They report the news in a open and unbiased manner and you make your own choice. Question Period being part journalism, part editorial meant Mrs. Taber had to have opinions of her own and sometimes those opinions ran into her interviews. But never to the point you thought she was trying to drive a agenda or trap a person being interviewed, no matter how much at time I wish she had trapped the likes of Jack Layton and the NDPers doing their weekly spin.So I wish her well. In the past few years a number of more respectable CTV journalists have left. Mike Duffy was one and his show (now called Power Play) has never recovered from his absence. The newest replacement Don Martin is clearly left wing bias and allows the NDP to spin and lie and misquote with out ever being challenged while he cracks “jokes” at the Liberals and Conservatives, demeaning them IMO.Jane Taber never did this, she let people have their say, she treated them ALL with the respect and dignity that their positions deserve, even if the person did not.And for that reason I will miss her on Question Period and occasionally on Power Play journalist panels.Its sad that so few “Respectable” Journalists remain out there. CBC is so left wing its unwatchable unless you support the far left policies of the NDP and Liberals. CTV has always been balanced in the past for the most part but Duffy’s departure left a hole unfilled and we have yet to see who replaces Jane Taber. Hopefully CTV can maintain its integrity and dignity as Canada deserves to have at least one unbiased source for reporting on our politics and the decisions by our elected leaders that effect us so much.Thank you Jane Taber for giving me the news and letting me use my own mind, after hearing the facts, to decide where I stand on each issue.CBC specifically and others i general could learn allot from your resume of work!
---------------------------------------------------------------
June 21, 2011
Welcome to the NEW NDP, We are not what you thought we were, least not today, maybe tommorrow
So I’m watching Powerplay and they are discussing the NDP convention that just happened and it struck me how bitter many of its voters from this last election must be with whats on the table for this traditional left wing socialist party.Now of course the Fan boys (also called faithful) will whine, moan, and groan that its all spin and Jack is the most wonderful leader Canada’s ever seen and blah blah blah.Its the new to the NDP and long time supporters of what the party stands for rather then just blindly supporting the man that may be rather disappointed with whats being delivered so soon after the election.Some of the topics are:
- Dropping the “S” word (Socialism) from the party description.
- Moving more to the right to be more moderate and centralist in policies and ideas
- Being told to be quiet and polite in House of Commons
- Supporting open separatist agendas while “claiming” to maintain a federalist base
- merger between the NDP and Liberals
That’s but a snap shot of the problems facing the NDP after their astounding seat grab this past election.
1) Dropping the “S” word is funny to me and really hi lites what Ive always maintained about this party. Its willing to do and say anything to get elected. Socialism is the FOUNDING IDEA AND CONCEPT for the NDP. Its literally what the NDP has claimed to be based on. So removing it to appear less scary and more moderate is such a blatant and rather insulting tactic, just to get a few more seats in the next election. Like they going to maintain their Quebec base anyways, but we will get to that. I’m sorry but I find a political party, ANY political party willing to drop (or even discuss dropping in this case) a founding principle and core belief to be rather distasteful and I don’t see how anyone could take that party serious going forward if they willing to redesign their base belief system on the chance it will get them a few more seats in 4 years.
Much as I dislike the left leaning liberals, I at least know what the liberals stand for at any given time. Their core beleifs dont change from election to election.
2) Moving more to the right to be more centralist. Hey, I should be thrilled by this because I myself support the party closest to the center at any given election. Unlike some people I know, I don’t subscribe to one party fits all mentality and will move my vote to the party that I feel honestly embraces my beliefs. Unfortunately, its that exact point “that I honestly feel embraces my beliefs” is why I will never vote NDP as long as Slippery Jack is at the helm. I don’t believe a word that come out of this guys mouth. He says one thing and does another. When caught red handed, he lies. And its not even good lies that any moderately educated Canadian could believe!
*when caught in a Toronto Rub and Tug brothel* Jacks stated “I was here for a legit massage”. LOL as someone that suffers from cronic muscle spasms and inflamation and (when I can afford it) is a frequent customer of LEGIT MASSAGE I can say with no hesitation, you don’t go to a “Rub and Tug” outfit for a therapeutic massage and only a first time customer makes the mistake of mixing the two up! Jack knew EXACTLY what “services” he was there for (he was there to get a “leg rubbed” all right, just not the one that required the cane to walk one) and had the police just waited till he entered the back room, we would not be talking about Jackie boy today, as he would have resigned in disgrace while being the blunt end of many jokes.
But back to moving to the right/center. Id imagine many of the long time left leaning socialist members that followed the NDP through the many slim picking years are not thrilled to hear the party talking about going to the center because they WANT the far left. If they wanted center left they would support the Liberals, it was the NDPs far left stance that attracted “these people” in the first place. I mean its not a hard topic to understand
- Conservatives are Center Right,
- Liberals are Center Left,
- Bloq was Separatist right,
- NDP “was” Socialist left,
- Green is Enviromental left
- Communist is Socialist left
- Hemp is,
well Hemp party just wants to get stoned is all
Id think the core base of any party would be upset if that party tried to shift its core base! In fact its that shifting that is why we tend to switch between Conservatives and Liberals.
Liberals for the longest time were called Canada’s natural governing party but when ever they tried to move from center left for far left (as Martin at the end tried, Dion tried, Iggy tried in recent memory) the party faithful revolted and voted the Cons in who were always ready to slide from the Right to Center Right and form government.
But Jack is power hungry, he will campaign on central/left ideas but if Canada ever gave him the mandate, he would rule from FAR FAR FAR LEFT.
Thank god Canada will never vote this wacko into power.
3) Being quiet in house! Seemed like a good idea but for once I gotta agree with liberals, when is the NDP going to show signs of life and core beliefs? Right now they just come off as powder puff push overs scared to get into a real conversation and debate the issues at hand. They rather read crafted press statements to the media!
They might get some brownie points for behavior (if they all can manage to stay awake in the house that is), but that’s short term political gain at best and will soon be forgotten, like them.
4) Quebec. LOL, I gotta wonder WTF WAS LAYTON THINKING????Telling Quebec he’d reopen the charter and give them special privileges if they voted for him? Is power THAT IMPORTANT to this man? Scary!
Thank god he cant open up the charter as be it Conservative, Liberal, who ever. Opening the Charter brings NOTHING but harm to the country!
And on the off off off chance the charter was opened, it wouldn’t be to give Quebec EVEN MORE POWER, it would be to peel back some of that power. The seat count for the province of Quebec is CRAZY OUT OF LINE and the seat numbers need to be reduced to proper levels. Layton always going on and on about proportional representation, well lets see if he gets behind a bill that would diminish the number of seats in Quebec and move them to Alberta and BC. Somehow I think we all know he wouldn’t because right now the Quebec seats strengthen him. In 4 years when the Quebec protest vote over and hes back to no representation there, then I’m sure he will be up for a seat deduction and reduction.
So how is his Quebec followers who took his talk as quasi separatist talk going to react when he fails to deliver on anything at all? They going to move their vote to the Liberals or newest political movement in Quebec. Don’t expect NDP Quebec seats to be there next term. Though anyone that understands politics has already said they don’t! Even some retired NDPers (who know free to speak openly and freely) have said this will not last.
5) And the funniest one of them all. The Liberal and NDP merger. Just a short year ago Jack refused any and all talk of merger as it would mean losing the NDP identity (and his power as leader) . Short year later and all Jack can talk about is merger merger merger. Come join us Liberals and we will beat those vile and nasty Conservatives and their financial conservatism. Join us and we can spend 70 billion dollars in the first year under the leadership of Used Car Jack.
Amazing how times change in a short year!
I don’t see a merger happening to be honest. Liberals in a hard spot but rebuilding on the predictable collapse of the NDP next election is not impossible to do.
So after all this, I gotta wonder, Who exactly are the NDP of this generation and what on earth do they stand for? As it all seems to be changing on a weekly basis.
Some common sense and truth regarding the ”new” NDP
Listen, the NDP are never going to get elected beyond the official opposition and even that is unlikely next election and Jack knows it.
Canada will never vote in a far right Conservative party
Canada will never vote in a far left Liberal party
and Canada will never vote in a far left NDP party
Canada is a country of centralist. Slightly to the right or left doesn’t matter to most of us, central is where we want to be.
Jack has finally figured this out and realizes the NDP as it currently is can never grab a minority or majority government position so hes looking for ways to make the party less radical, less scary, less head strong and unbending. But its the radical, scary, headstrong and unbending policies that built his base for the NDP. Turn your head on them and you very well could alienate the rest of the party and rather then merge with Liberals you find yourself split into 2 more parties and vote splitting even more on the federal ballots.
The future is going to be very interesting for political junkies like myself!
I don’t like Jack Layton, I would NEVER vote for Jack Layton, I was terrified this election before Harper got a majority that Layton might be a difference maker this past election.
But doesn’t mean I cant enjoy the show and laugh at the spin.
In closing, ill quote a NDPer who was on a political panel with a conservative from Toronto and a Liberal from Nova Scotia who was asked “who will win game 7 of the Stanley Cup play offs”
The Conservative said: “Really don’t care, I’m from Toronto and a Maple Leaf fan through and through”
The Liberal said: “Well we do allot of business with Boston down the coast line and there is a couple of Atlantic boys playing for the Bruins so I’m cheering for Boston to win”
The NDP said: “Im cheering for the Canadian Team or the Canadian players on the American team”
LOL, that spin just says it all about the NDP, Jack, and how they make everything into a political discussion rather then just answer the question truthfully and honestly!
No comments:
Post a Comment